This £11,500 Carbon Gravel Bike Is A Terrible Idea
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 26 окт 2023
- This clip is a section from episode 17 of the Wild Ones Podcast. You can view the full video here: • Shimano’s Crank Disast...
Or listen to all episodes here: podfollow.com/the-wild-ones/view
SUPPORT Francis Cade and Cade Media directly:
Via Patreon: / franciscade
Via our clothing brand WILD: wearethewildones.co.uk/collec...
AFFILIATE LINKS
GoPro GRILL Mount: www.prostandard.com/?ref=0Wo1...
GoPro Hero 11: prf.hn/l/ryjmwQn
Tiny Insta360: www.insta360.com/sal/go_2?ins...
Bigger Insta360: www.insta360.com/sal/one_x2?i…
Styrkr: 25% off your first order with FCADE25 bit.ly/36WrFyn
Thanks to our CHANNEL SPONSORS:
Attacus Cycling
SCOTT
Garmin
Fidlock
Parcours Wheels
Tailfin
Hutchinson Tyres
Sungod
Styrkr
GT85
#cycling #bikes #bicycle
It's great to see people online talking about the financial cost of thrashing a carbon frame. Bikes are marketed via people who don't have to pay for their own material. Lesser mortals have different needs. If you never race the bike at the highest level, would you prefer a slightly heavier but robust bike or a fragile bike that is slightly lighter? Imagine snapping your €5,500 frame. For most people that would be a total disaster. A pro just gets another one off the car and keeps going. That's a huge reason why a pro level bike is not the right choice for you or me.
there are still brands with CX specific bikes out there: Canyon, Cube, Stevens, Ridley are the big ones from Germany and Belgium.
I have a Crux, and it’s brilliant. I race it for gravel and CX. The only things I have broken are a wheel, Roval carbon bars (which sucked) and a saddle during CX races, the frame has been fine
Canyon just released the updated Inflite, a cyclocross specific bike.
I don't understand the argument that aero doesn't matter in gravel. If he won that race averaging 34 kph, it's unlikely he just sat on that speed all day. Did that race have single track sections? If so, I bet he was way under that average speed there and then way over that speed in other places. I just did the non elite mass start of Big Sugar, and we averaged over 35 kph for the first 15K, half of which was road and half gravel. The elites were up the road probably pushing 45 kph. Air resistance is going to matter at either speed.
I think it's the confusion on what gravel is. Gravel is supposed to do both road and off-road, to me aero does make sense when doing the road part, just not the priority perhaps.
But well I feel some are more "gravel" than others anyways.
Yeah, I guess it all comes down to the course. You might sometimes be better off on a cross country MTB, one size down with really narrow bars instead of the ridiculous super wide ones
You’ve nailed it and it’s what a few of the comments below haven’t acknowledged. It’s a racing bike where you are looking for any advantage you can get for some specific conditions. Would you ride it as your only bike in really tough conditions? Probably depends on if you can afford to replace it. Would I buy it…..no, but with the sales on, I’d definitely look at a mid range crux or diverge.
The pod comments on if you buy it you still need to pay more to dial it in with potential changes seemed out of context as I listened to the full 1hr and I think they acknowledged that most dealers would make changes as required. I know when I bought a low range Aethos they changed the stem, seat and tyres for equivalent or better which is my primary reason in going to a dealer/Lbrs.
@@gavanconroy8453 I agree with everything you said as well, but I wasn't necessarily defending the S Works Crux. I don't understand what anyone would have against it, but, so many people discount performance aspects of bikes in the context of gravel racing. If I had $14K, I'd have that bike. But I don't, so I don't.lol To the point about light frame fragility, I'd point someone to look at the races Russel Finsterwald has done on the bike. They get pretty gnarly.
Yea I was just there too at Big Sugar. Talking to the HED wheel developer. He too was saying just like road bike went thru the transition of going aero as riders get stronger and faster. He views the same happening to gravel scence. These guys are just slow and don’t understand going fast on gravel 😂
So aero and weight doesn’t make a difference but instead just the feeling of the frame breaking slows you down 😂😂 I don’t think I can tell a bike that’s 500g heavier but 1kg, 2kg more you can notice and it’s mainly in the handling of the bike as well as on the hills. Gravel bikes seem to vary greatly in their weights/aero efficiency. Lightweight for me is important as I live on a hill in a very hilly/ mountainous area but if you ride more flat then aero of course becomes more important/ noticeable. Marketing depts of course overstate the importance of aero/weight but the idea that neither make a difference is a fallacy.
Got Crux AXS for half of that price. The bike is excellent and it's my "do it all bike". With road wheels and its like "Atheos" and on 650b wheels its another type of ride altogether. Just done 100k Gravel race and no issues. I am not professionals nor light and have Grizl SLX AXS too... completely different bikes and 99% go on Crux. The price and title is a bit clickbait as every manufacturer have different tiers... if you can afford or justify the spending go it. This vid is bashing it for the sake of bashing it, but neither says its bad or good... though in the end people still want it. For me its 100% sit and ride, easy to maintain and I don't need all that fluff to choose this or that... every bike will live to see upgraded saddles, stems etc. eventually even if you pick these at the start... its great package with the top tier costing top dollar, fact.
I’m with Jimmy on this-for me weight doesn’t matter on gravel-my gravel bike has a Ti frame and weighs about 10kg before I stick a toolpack, water bottle, frame pump etc on it. In fact when I weighed it with mudguards on it was just over 11kg-this is with 43mm tyres setup tubeless…….
I said this elsewhere, but Specialized is trying cut down on the number of different bicycles they sell. I expect the Diverge to end this year and a gravel/cyclocross Crux will replace it. Probably not enough sales of either bike style to justify the existence of both.
I work at a high volume bike shop and this is completely wrong. We sell 20/1 Diverge over Crux. The Diverge is a much more rider friendly bike with the head shock, longer wheelbase, and more mounting points if you want to go bike packing. The Crux is a race oriented model and would never replace the Diverge as a one model fits all platform. It is much more likely that the Diverge and Roubaix could be merged in the future into one model, as the new Roubaix can fits 40 mil tires and has really blurred the line between endurance road and gravel bike.
@@prasad530 First, I agree the target audiences for both brands should be different. However, look at Specialized adverts to the cycling public. I get them weekly. They are advertising the Crux as a faster gravel bike. The Cyclocross audience is way smaller here in the United States than the gravel one. So, advert the Crux as a faster gravel bike that you want race with to increase sales and get your name out there.
As to which bike I've seen here, I see more Crux labels under the guys and gals who race or want to go fast. I see Diverges under those who want to enjoy the scenery. I know someone who has both bikes and he routinely rides the Crux on fast days and the Diverge on slow ones.
As to my statement, it's based on what Specialized is telling their owners/former owners through advertising. Now, will I buy a Crux? No. I have no need for one.
@@jamesmckenzie3532 Big companies make decisions on sales and consumer demand, period. Ferrari said for a long time they would never make and SUV, and yet here we are. The market for racers is tiny compared to the average rider, and the Crux will never be their main seller, regardless of what they internally desire.
@@prasad530 And creating consumer demand is the main purpose of advertising. Business Management 101. Watch the movie "A Beautiful Mind".
is this video old? or is there a new crux model? am i missing something?
Except for climbing, I'd think you'd want a little weight on your gravel rig to hold speed and for better tracking, but people really do seem to like the Crux across the board.
For 11k I'd keep it on the road, too scared to drag it in the dirt, so it'd basically just end up being an Aethos
Last point was quite important: You can actually afford something (as an extra, not talking about bare necessities here) if you can not only buy it, but also replace it if it gets damaged / stolen / whatever. And if I were to buy an 11,5k bike from a bike shop (which I won't), I'd darn well expect them to set me up with my preferred tires, saddle and so on. I know LBS who do this for much less pricey bikes.
What gets me is that almost no manufacturer states weight limits on their equipment.
They will break - I've seen my friend break his Specialized Crux! The chainstay basically snapped after riding a harsh muddy mountain path (not a steep downhill)... And Specialized had been giving him a hard time when he was asking for warranty replacement! I have no idea to date, if Specialized honored the warranty.
Just sounds like even less carbon for the mud to wear through
Gravel is smoking hot in the States.
A Ferrari can cost £2m, you got the money fill your boots. It’s good marketing to get people talking about the brand.
10:26, that’s exactly what I’d do.
For Gravel, I love a Steel bike, or any metal bike, because it just gives you a feeling of security knowing if you crash or accidentally hit the bike on something, it won’t do any significant damage to it- where as Carbon, you will be wondering if there is any damage you can’t see- and it just makes you worry, and maybe not ride as freely and have as much fun….
The article below will reinforce your argument!!
Some of my gravel races have over 150 ft per mile of elevation, this would be sweet.
I'm more worried about my road bike for crashes, road crashes are way worse impacts. I've crashed my carbon gravel bike 4 or 5 times and was never worried about anything more than the hanger
Spend £11.5k on one then, see how you enjoy it.
I weigh 50kg and I wouldn't ride it!
Nailed it. The Crux is so tempting in every aspect but its the frame weight that stops me pulling the trigger. I would consider it perfect if each level frame was 200g heavier, as this could presumably add (who knows) 20-30% more crash protection insurance- as a side benefit it could then be more affordable too with less fancy modulus layup. Even this 'pro level frame is lighter than my top tier full road frame from a decade ago, why would I want to invest in something that might crack like an eggshell if and when it gets dropped.
"Who knows" exactly.
You don't, and neither do the bicycle mechanic and clothing company owner.
It's as durable as all other gravel bikes. You cannot apply this monkey brain "feels heavier, it's stronger" to cutting edge technologies.
@@shimona500 Thanks, not monkey brain. Worked in the industry long enough to have a handle on what tends to break or not, have seen enough broken carbon tubes to have a good sense of it. I don't see 'cutting edge' technology here, I see thin walled brittle high modulus fibres with an optimised shaping and layup - very susceptible to impact damage and very similar to things I've ridden and broken over decades, even designed by the same guy.... to want this liability in a gravel bike is a very specific use case.
It's so easy to hate on halo products especially without trying them. Why not ride a Comp/Expert level Crux and then give us your review?
Maybe brands should disclose what proportion of the purchase price is marketing costs.
Comments about weight vary with the wind. One day it matters and the next it doesn't. This is silliness. Lighter bikes will always feel better. In many cases they perform better. In many cases it's good to trade weight for aero or frame strength. Yada yada. There's a lot of nuance. But never should it be said that "weight doesn't matter". Am I wrong?
£11k for a bike, people are so gullible. They'd pay a fortune for shit if it had the right name on it.
can't afford one, can you?
@@user-db8rm2cz1nand you are probably another all the gear no idea tw#t
My colnago cyclocross bike would beat it on or off the road. Grovel bikes what a joke
If your Colnago is a Prestige, it is lighter than your Prestige, but just as responsive. If you have the new Colnago G3X, it is a bit better in and out of corners, and lighter. Both Colnago’s are great bike BTW.
This is a throw away bike for sponsored riders and idiots with too much money. If you crash that thing, it's toast. You'll probably crack the frame when it gets hit with a rock bigger than a marble...
So far, 2 years gravel and CX races, the bike is pretty awesome, and it’s a great road bike too. No cracks, no broken frames…and I ride it in the sierras here in California. Truth be told, if I could only have 1 bike, this would be it.
@@CarbonRider1it is heavy crap
@@Tarmaccyclocross a gravel bike that is 6.8kg is heavy? Okaaayyy. Crap, not by my measure, it really is a great CX and gravel bike, and I’ve had Dogmas, Tarmacs, SuperSix, Colnago, Trek, BMC…it is one of my favorite bikes.