Yeah! I personally way prefer riding any substantial distance (>50mi) on drop bars. Aero + flat bars with suspension was neat, but I didn’t feel like that XC frame fit any riding I was doing out here. I could see something that has long sections of singletrack like the Oregon Timber Trail fitting perfectly with that frame, but it was just overkill for any local gravel events.
But that is a very personal opinion! When out riding Grinduro, I got the fastest women’s time on the technical singletrack descent on that drop-bar bike which I attribute partially to the geo/tire size, but more likely it’s just the fact that I was a mountain biker before I was ever a roadie.
It seems like this is what it all boils down to. Luckily there’s a good supply of custom builders to fit every niche
Late to this conversation but I’ll do the old guy rant.
I don’t like the monicker “gravel bike” like most of us but I don’t know what else to call these new versions of a very old idea. For bikes I make that people use in this way I usually call them what Grant Petersen called one of the first Rivendells: Allrounder. Pretty much the same as a Bridgestone X0-1. I also remember the one of the more drool worthy creations that @jimg posted a photo of already, the Cunningham Indian Fire Road.
Potts made the WTB Phoenix with WTB dirt drop bars.
The wheel diameter was different but they were also using a 1.9-2-1” width tire. Being from the same area where these bikes all were developed they make a ton of sense for doing long rides with a mix of pavement, fire roads (dirt roads), and occasional mellow singletrack. It’s what most people will be able to ride from their houses since not everyone lives in the mountains with single track out their back door, and doesn’t want to drive to a trailhead every time they want to ride a bike. I loathe riding a mtb on the road, any type of road, especially if it has trail geometry. It’s funner to underbike than overbike IMO.
But I waffle back and forth and dress up my bikes more than I actually ride them especially now when there are so many damn tire sizes.
Is the Evil Chamois Hagar the future? Nope.
Dropper posts: do they belong on a gravel bike? Depends how you ride and how good you are going over the back of the seat. I don’t think they’re needed but that’s just me. I like less stuff that’ll possibly break.
Is gravel suspension worth it? No. 30-40mm travel? Lower your PSI and steer.
What tires too big for gravel riding? 2.3 and up. I think 2.2’s are pretty big for gravel but I like the tread pattern and weight offerings available in that size.
What tires are too small for mountain biking? 2.2. Anything under a 2.4 actually.
Why does the Salsa Cutthroat look so bad? The fork is suspension corrected for a 100mm suspension fork even tho nobody ever uses one. Same with the Fargo. Why they need to fit a 29x3 and be 483 axle to crown is beyond me.
Drop bars with suspension - friends or foes? Goes along with the dropper question. If you have a suspension fork with drop bars I’d use a dropper but I prefer to use neither on a gravel type bike but I do like dropbars.
Are mullet drivetrains here to stay? I think they’re catching up to what people want now so, no.
What is the ideal head tube angle and why is it 69º? Isn’t it weird?! It’s a good place to start at least.
dropper - depends on your definition of gravel. gravel roads? nah. single track? sure, but not for me personally.
susp - i had one of the fox taper casts, and it was pretty neat but the weight wasn’t worth it for me.
too big for gravel - 45mm or 2.4 depending on use
too small for mtb - 2.25 for xc, 2.4 for enduro
cutty - all that head tube with the slope and that swoop
drop bar + susp - see above
mullets - it’s they’re world and we’re just living in it.
hta - again depends on your definition of gravel. 72 for gravel, 69 for single track
around these parts at least there are two distinct styles of gravel.
we’ve got our winter road / pea gravel / mellow gravel road. a production bike that you see all the time for gravel riding like this is the cervelo aspero - 700x40 slicks plus road bike fit and geo.
then we’ve got back country logging roads / single track / whatever else is in between you and that trail that totally connects. we’ll see a lot of 650x2.2 or even 29x2.25 on these bikes.
the second category is mostly what I build for customers, and usually build them around 29x2.25 xc race tires like aspens or rekon races.
for myself though i have evolved past the gravel bike - i’ve got my super commuter on 700x35s that plays double duty as my winter road bike and my rail trail / pea gravel bike. i really enjoy the more off-road / back country style of gravel and for that i just ride my xc race bike - 100mm remote lockout fork, springy titanium seat post, fast tires and most importantly ergo grips to keep the wrists happy. if the rides over 100km i’ll throw some bar ends on.
Era-ism!!!
This is a very post -Y2K point of view. The prior 100 years didn’t conform to this. Look at early Cannondales (or the Kliens they stole from!).
I hate what carbon (and a lesser extent Alu) has done to rider perceptions of what a bicycle should look like. Riders are accustomed to the bulky headtubes that come with tapered 1-1/2" steerers and huge downtubes. The same strength and stiffness can be achieved with steel using a normal 1-1/8" steerer. They expect all of this oversized stuff and unfortunately it usually rides very stiff and unforgiving. And because we’ve sold ‘stiff is efficient’, they think it’s better.
I also have a conflict with the requirements of discs and what they do to steel forks/bikes (ride quality, weight, bulk and complexity mainly).
To be clear, as a material, I love carbon. I have several carbon bikes in my stable, I raced and trained on carbon and believe it’s an amazing material for bike building. However, for 94%* of riders, carbon doesn’t offer any real-world advantage.
All my frames come with a custom steel fork designed along with the attached frameset. They share a serial number.
I tend to differentiate “gravel bikes” (fat-tyre road bikes) from “adventure bikes” (off-road/mixed touring bike). The former being more focussed on speed and riding predominantly roads or unpaved (but at least semi-maintained) tracks; the latter being more like drop-bar MTBs with less focus on covering miles fast and more on doing a better job of handling challenging terrain.
It was an interesting bike. I wouldn’t be surprised if we look back in 10 years and recognise it as an important moment in bike design, even if it ends up being an evolutionary dead end.
Yes, but mainly to allow you to stand over the saddle with your feet planted more firmly on the ground
I don’t think so. By the time you set up for sag, there’s hardly any travel worth speaking about. Also, the extra weight and complexity suck - you’d be better off with either fatter tyres or an elastomer-based flexy stem and seatpost IMHO.
No such thing!
< 2.4"
It’s the ugly bend at the DT to BB junction combined with the short reach. Just looks completely wrong!
I ran road drops on my old MTB back in the 90s when Tomac was doing his thing. They sucked for everything I did on that bike. I now run PNW Coast 520mm drops on my adventure bike and love 'em for that kind of riding but would never choose them for MTBing.
Alfine Di2 11-spd hub; 27.5x3" G-One tyres; aforementioned PNW 520mm drop bars; 35mm stem; dropper post (drop TBD, but probably 75-100mm). Designed for long, slow and steady dayrides over mixed terrain from road to rocky singletrack. Our local “gravel” is the size of your fist!
What a fun topic, Eva - and so to the point of some of the bikes I am trying to build! Very late to the discussion, but that’s not holding others back. Here goes.
In summary, I am a mountain biker and do not like how a traditional road bike handles, so I designed myself a gravel bike that I like to ride. It’s not unlike a Chamois Hagar or PVD’s Bird of Prey, but I took it in my own direction. Drop bars, yes. I maximize front center and use a 35mm stem and wide bars to counter any flop tendencies at low speed. The flip side is a bike that is so confident at speed or in the rough stuff. Room for a 160mm dropper or more is a must. I have tried to maximize tire clearance within the world of road components/dimensions, but I can’t justify using a yoke. Rather than suffer a 45 mm chainline I prefer to use a ~49 mm and more comfortably fit a chain stay, chainring, and tire into that space. For this chainline I am experimenting with a boost rear end, as I like to use the Eagle drivetrain in a mullet configuration. Better? To be determined
“The name’s cut me own throat dibbler and might I interest you in this here fine carbon gravelbike sir?”
Clearly the answer to everything is the monstercross bike, sexy dropbar and comfortable tires!
But from a more practical point I really like my monstercrosser with loads of stack since I can ride it (quite) comfortably for two weeks for a touring vacation without neck and shoulder pain, despite rarely riding the rest of the year.
Aero is also appreciated for those times where I have to pedal against 50kph of head winds (e.g. norway). I found it to be a helpful mental relief to be able to duck out of the wind in the drops.
Big tires (2.35") for suspension since I don’t really ride anything technical and for those passages on washboard or sand it helps a lot.
Sure I wish it would be a lot lighter for the times I have to carry it, or more aero with slimmer tires when the tarmac is excellent. But last year I rode my warroad and my neck was trying to kill me after a few days… (all the while thinking how amazingly light and agile my bike is )
I feel with everyone who is unhappy with the marketing term gravel and selling the fantasy of owning a thusly labeled bike would make advertising promises come true for you.
I have a similar gripe with “bikepacking” which sometimes seems to only be able to exist as an antagonist of touring.
A thumbs up for me for mullet drivetrains, and a thumbs down for the price. A few years ago before 1x was a common thing I had a bike with a 1x10 Zee 36/11-36 setup with NW-chainring which was admittedly a bit too limited for touring and joyriding but it was very cheap to setup for amazing shifting quality. 10-50 now is more than I need after looking at the data from last tour, but since so much 11/12 speed stuff is evily incompatible I won’t change it.
Replying to this year old topic I stumbled upon as my first post here (and a bit intimidated by the firepower of the audience).
We are working on a small batch D2C frame that seems to sit right at the heart of this crossover from gravel/monstercross/adventure rig/drop bar MTB, which is an outgrowth of being a road cyclist and MTBer for decades and an inability to find something that efficiently (meaning comfortably and quickly) rides on pavement, fireroads with fist sized rocks, and rocky singletrack found in SoCal. I wonder if I were only a road biker first I might be happy with a rigid drop bar bike with 2.1 tires but as a mountain biker I know the joy of flying down those rocky fireroads or technical singletrack and not having my teeth feel like falling out. Maybe if I was a mountain biker only I would be happy with the increased efficiency of that same rigid drop bar bike with 2.1 tires, but knowing both worlds so well I wanted something that would blend both worlds well and allow for monster days covering all surfaces. The closest I came was with a Black Mountain Cycles BMC with 2.1" tires but the fireroad descents at speed or rocky singletrack was just too punishing. We’ve designed a drop bar bike around a 100mm fork and 29x2.4" tires, boost spacing, and 73mm BB. A recent 80 mile, 11K day on road, fireroad, and singletrack shows to me there is something in this.
Is the Evil Chamois Hagar the future?
No clue
Dropper posts: do they belong on a gravel bike?
Our frame will support internal dropper cable routing because the market demands it. My prototype has a dropper installed but I never use it. I guess I’m a bit like Whit at Meriwether in that I grew up in a time before droppers and learned to get off the back of the saddle if needed. I’m more confident riding with the saddle at full height.
Is gravel suspension worth it?
Gravel suspension, no. 100mm of travel, yes. To me gravel suspension is a rehashing of the early gen elastomer suspension of the mid to late 90’s. I feel like we’ve done this before but back then we did it because the tech wasn’t there to do anything better in the cycling world. But now the tech is here and as soon as folks see the benefits of gravel suspension (for those that do find benefit) and they will want more suspension. That’s my hypothesis at least. Time will tell if my hypothesis or null hypothesis is proven correct.
What tires too big for gravel riding?
Totally depends on where you ride IMO. Seems hard to find “gravel” around me that is not bone jarring on anything less than 2.1" - yet people do it and more power to them. I’ve also ridden on some super smooth “gravel” in Switzerland on 38mm slicks and been totally fine.
What tires are too small for mountain biking?
Agree with the general consensus of 2.4.
Why does the Salsa Cutthroat look so bad?
I agree with the issue being the s-curve downtube. I think the bend around the BB isn’t needed at least aesthetically.
Drop bars with suspension - friends or foes?
Hell yeah!
Are mullet drivetrains here to stay?
Yeah until it’s mainstream enough to have a fancy marketing name bestowed
What is the ideal head tube angle and why is it 69º?
69.5 is the right answer.
“I want Shimano to make a DA/XTR level cable actuated disc brake that works with acoustic shifters.”
I don’t have much to add to this convo that hasn’t already been said. But I do have input on this little point. I agree, I wish Shimano got into this area because I bet they could do some good. I have 9 speed XT on my drop bar commuter with disc brakes. Tried pretty much all the cable pull caliper options because I don’t want to spend 1500$+ to go full GRX just to get drop bar hydraulic brakes. My 9 speed is bomb proof and gives me a wider gear range. I tried BB7’s (fine), SPYRE (fine), and HY/RD (fine+) and was pretty underwhelmed by all of them. Finally after tons of people recommending them I finally broke down and bought Paul Klampers. I never wanted to spend Paul $ but HOLY SHIT the klampers are amazing. Easily 2-3x as powerful as any of the other options with good modulation, even with my old 9 speed brifters. Honestly I would say even more powerful than the Deore level hydraulic brakes I have on my mountain bike. They are wildly expensive, but if you want to use cable pull disc brakes I highly recommend them.
Going to disagree here a bit as I am sure you know there are (700x)50-55mm XC tires that are the same weight or at least close the weight of 40-45mm gravel tires while rolling just as fast. It’s why every gravel ride is clamoring after the 50mm Continental RaceKings and the long discontinued Schwalbe Furious Freds(saw one in a recently GCN bike check and the owner claimed it was under 400g per tire for the 50mm version, just bonkers).
Also something to remember the Cutthroat is the most popular bike on the Tour Divide every year. It’s like the poster child of that event. I always see the Cutty on the list of bikes of the TD, but less common is Sala’s own Fargo, which I think looks cooler and oddly has more clearance(more so in the rear) the the Cutty. Salsa/QBP must be doing something right there.
I think bikes like the Santa Cruz Stigmata, BMC URS LT(integrated custom front suspension is a money maker for brands when it comes time to servicing) and Merida Silex are more likely to be the future of gravel bikes, but with clearance for at least 55mm tires(10mm more than URS and Silex). When I browse Bikepacking I see more and more gravel bikes coming out with hta of 70.5° or slacker, higher stack and the ability to now fit 2.4 in any size, but more so 29er size, like Cotic Cascade, which BP really liked.
One thing I did not see mentioned really with the hta talk is, what fork offset with talkin about with 69° hta? A traditional 43–47mm rake? 52–55mm or even higher like some of those British drop bar and atb type bikes? There is that one brand that does like 65mm fork rakes on a drop bar bike with a 67 or was it 68° hta. Name slips my mind.
This is my experience with Klampers too. Own 3 pairs and happy to use them for anything but the most hectic of MTB rides. Amazing brakes on a drop bar bike. I prefer the short pull version even on flat bar builds since you can swap them to other bikes and the cable has slightly smoother routing at the caliper. I’d also say they’re good value even considering the purchase price. Yy can get every little spare part so they’ll really last forever. I just wouldn’t recommend them to anyone that doesn’t like BB7’s. So defo try them first. You don’t have to love them but if you don’t like them then Paul’s are essentially a (much) nicer version.
Good perspective. I do love BB7’s. Darn good brake for the price, easy to adjust, and totally adequate for most riding. The Klampers are really on another level though
I found out that most manufacturers calculate their gravel geometries based on a 40mm tire. (If you’re trying to make some comparisons with the trail measurements) But I think 50mm rake with 69 angle is sublime.
This is juicy. I’m in. Droppers on gravel. All day everyday. You know how descending out in the pnw is hella wild and the dropper makes it a bit better.
Suspension. I tried it. I don’t care for it that much. I swapped back to a carbon fork and haven’t looked back. I think a redshift stem is actually better than the suspension fork
Really? Does that include the models that can fit 2.25 too? I’m also starting to see more gravel bikes being able to fit 27.5x2.6/2.8 tires like the Stooge Ramble, Strayer OG+ and Pipedream A.L.I.C.E., which is excellent for those who live in the desert or sandy areas.
I don’t know for sure. I was mostly comparing against Carbon Drop Bar Gravel bikes that had clearance up to 50-55. This was also a year ago. I found out this little tidbit while trying to reconcile the posted fork offset, head angle and trail measurements. Using math I realized they all used 40mm tires as a “standard”. Oddly enough, I’m pretty sure that almost all road bikes from big brands have their geometry charts modeled after 25mm tires (or at least they did a few years ago when I was doing the research).
Maybe now road bike manufactures are using 26mm as their base. lol. Speaking of aero does having an aero frame but 55mm tires have any advantages for gravel? Is there aero tubing even an option?
I know this crowd is more interested in handbuilt frames, but the analysis that Dylan Johnson did in This Video surrounding his Unbound Gravel race bike is quite interesting. There are definitely aero advantages to some designs and disadvantages to others, so over some speed threshold, it is always beneficial to consider aerodynamics as long as it does not impede on any other important features.
