Dunno – I’ve been riding CX bikes since 95/96 when I had a custom islabike made for me by Andy and Isla. I’ve ridden it everywhere – road, commuting, cx racing, touring, south downs, closed road training circuit, north downs/ Surrey Hills, tow paths, shopping. And even though its over 20 years old, I can still fit 40mm tyres on it and will probably be riding Paris-Roubaix on it in a month, or I might ride my carbon Argon 18 cx which only takes 33mm tyres but is very light and responsive.
then if I want to hit some bigger stuff I’ll ride my Fargo which has funny bars.
I like the versatility of cx bikes, but there’s always some other style of riding that doesn’t quite work with one bike….

I don’t want a CX bike, but I do really want a Genesis Vagabond
Me too! I don’t even really know why either. It just looks right for the type of riding I now do.

It’s not light (12-13kg?)
It looks like a bit of a wrong-un
It can grab air and shrug potholes, but drop-bars, verts and rigid forks can make for messy shorts
It is supremely comfortable (IMO) all day long on most terrain excepting endless claggy ruts and mountainsides
It’s ideal for mincing and carrying cake/tent/camera gear/spring lambs down a very long farm track
It doesn’t do mudguards with stock (2.1) tyres
It has mid-fork fixing points for regular touring racks
It goes faster than me

Is that the type of riding you do? 🙂

i’ve been told off for saying this before. But I dont really see the point of CX bikes (except for maybe CX racing). In my opinion a 29er flat bar rigid is about 1000 times better off road (Even with say 1.9″ tyres) and not that much slower on road.

But I suppose its horses for courses.

My “CX” bike is my tourer. I still hanker after something a bit more sprightly/nimble/edgy though.

Is that the type of riding you do?

I do different kinds of riding. That’s why I have more than one bike 🙂

as mentioned above to me the main issue is the drop bar.

Coming from a mtb background I dont get it.

What i want in a CX bike is something that is decently fast on road but u can do a bit offroad on.

To that end it the bars have a narrow low position for getting in a more aero comfortable position for road and a wider higher position giving more control offroad.

If i was design the bars for a bike of this type, They would be a bit like the jones bars but narrower (say 600mm) and longer at the front.

maybe something like this but not so narrow.

or even bull horn bars with extensions to the side.

inboard bar ends sould do the trick.

Until December I had never ridden drop bars and was really quite sceptical about whether I would get in with them or not, even on road. In reality my fears were totally unfounded. Like I said previously, I won’t be taking it to trail centers but round my local woods it’s a blast!

I don’t get that. Those aero extensions with no ability to brake on them are potentially lethal. It’s the limitations of a CX bike that make it a stimulating ride. That is the point.

People (like me and some of my friends) are riding steep rocky stuff on cross bikes because we like to cover a lot of ground at decent speed. We like to ride out of the front door and maybe ride some road sections to get to remote offroad loops.

You can ride a CX bike – especially a modern one with disc brakes, tubeless tyres, slightly slacker geometry – most places and where you can’t ride you can easily carry.

It’s the same idea with the spring classics on the road. Clearly riding a road bike on cobbles isn’t going to be comfortable. It is great sport though.

It’s the limitations of a CX bike that make it a stimulating ride.

I disagree with this, for a lot of riding a cx bike has no limitations beyond the user, and is faster and more/equally fun compared to a mtb. Focussing on the limitations misses the point. Mud plugging, easier and faster on a cx bike as the tyres sink through the mud. Easy singletrack, less rolling resistance so faster for less effort and I personally find you can really rail corners. The body position can feel more engaging too.

Something I’ve noticed recently, after spending a lot of time on the cx bike, is I feel so slow on my mtb, even though I’m actually setting Strava PB’s on some trails (which are more technical than I’d take a cx biek down). I’ve come to the conclusion its because I’ve got used to being so much faster for the same effort on a cx bike on less tech areas.

I think it depends where you ride.

The stuff I enjoy on my mountain bike would be horrible on a CX bike. Limitations for me are just frustrations.

Pick the right tool for the job.

for a lot of riding a cx bike has no limitations beyond the user,

This is obvious, people citing limitations are clearly talking about rougher trails than the bike can handle. Much of upland Britain is pretty rocky.

People (like me and some of my friends) are riding steep rocky stuff on cross bikes because we like to cover a lot of ground at decent speed. We like to ride out of the front door and maybe ride some road sections to get to remote offroad loops.

Same here, but for me skinny tyres are more of a limitation off road than fat ones are on it. I’ve got 2.35s on my rigid 29er for these kinds of rides. I’m a little slower with the fat tyres, but because the riding position is stretched and low, it still feels good on road, better than modern MTB, and that matters more than 10 extra mins on the home leg.

Plus the 29er has the added advantage that I can fit drops and 2.0s if I want to make a monstercross, or I can put a suspension fork on and have a capable MTB.

This is obvious, people citing limitations are clearly talking about rougher trails than the bike can handle. Much of upland Britain is pretty rocky.

The guy I quoted, and a few others, were saying its the limitation that is the fun, I’m just saying to just focus on the limitations is misleading.

Personally I’m just pleased I have two bikes though 😆

This thread makes me want to fit the knobblies to my Amazon and take it for a spin. Shame there’s still a lot of ice around.

Surprised you don’t own studded tyres scotroutes.

I do – Marathon Winters. Not ideal off road though. They’re a hangover from my commuting days.

Here ya go

Surely you mean rougher trails than the rider can handle on the bike?

A lot of this sounds like badly set up CX bikes, relatively low and long is ideal for CX racing, crap for normal riding (unless you have the flexibility), get some flared bars and a shorter higher stem if you want to use the bike like that. Move the hoods/bars round slightly so you can actually get hold of them properly, many CX bikes look like the owners have double jointed wrists, or even two wrists per arm. Often set up as they think a road bike should be set up (possibly following “the rules” rather than doing it properly?).

Surely you mean rougher trails than the rider can handle on the bike?

Not exactly.

Narrower tyres force you to go slower on rocky trails – whoever you are. Of course a better rider can go faster than a worse one, but that doesn’t invalidate that statement.

So with thin enough tyres and rough enough trails you are forced to go so slow that it stops being fun. At least it does for me. I don’t enjoy mincing particularly.

So with thin enough tyres and rough enough trails you are forced to go so slow that it stops being fun

Agree. Where I ride that makes up about 1% and that 1% could not be described as fun, I just endure it to get past it.

If you ride on a mix of road, canal paths, fire-roads and smooth singletrack then a CX bike, track bike, road bike etc,. if fine for the conditions.

Anything rougher, more challenging then it won’t be fun.

That’s my view also 🙂

I did the Bronte Big K charity event a couple of years ago. It was about a week before the Three Peaks so there were quite a few on CX bikes using it as final training. It’s an interesting course being about half on-road and half off (might have got the proportions slightly wrong) but most of the off-road is old tracks – Stairs Lane and along by the House of Shit towards Hebden Bridge then over to catch the Mary Towneley Loop around Widdop and back. There was an even spread of CX and MTB throughout the top twenty. The only bit I wouldn’t have liked on a CX would have been the descent of Stairs Lane. (I rode a rigid MTB)

As others have said, right tool for the job. I wouldn’t use a CX to head round a trail centre nor would I use a full DH bike for my commute. Drop bars? Fine when you get used to them though I’d consider flared bars like the Woodchipper and Cowchipper which are a little wider as well as having the flare.

one question I would ask or CX enthusiasts is have any of you ridden a lightweight 29er rigid with lightweight tyres (preferably tubeless) something like a 1.9″ or maybe 1.8″ ? (say with narrowish bars 640mm or so)

Is there anyone who says they prefer a CX after riding this set up ?

I’m not sure where the straw man that CX bikes are not as good off road as mountain bike wandered in from. I mean, no shit Sherlock, you mean a fully rigid bike with drop bars and 35mm tyres isn’t going to be as fast as a mountain bike on rocky trails…

I’ve ridden 29er rigid with 1.75″ tyres and narrow-ish bars (sub 700). It’s nothing like a CX/gravel/adventure bike

one question I would ask or CX enthusiasts is have any of you ridden a lightweight 29er rigid with lightweight tyres (preferably tubeless) something like a 1.9″ or maybe 1.8″ ? (say with narrowish bars 640mm or so)

Is there anyone who says they prefer a CX after riding this set up ?

Yes. What’s your point?

scu98rkr – Member
one question I would ask or CX enthusiasts is have any of you ridden a lightweight 29er rigid with lightweight tyres (preferably tubeless) something like a 1.9″ or maybe 1.8″ ? (say with narrowish bars 640mm or so)
Is there anyone who says they prefer a CX after riding this set up ?

Yup, I’ve got a niner air9 Carbon with rigid forks and (medium-wide) bars.
They do different things – its good for more technical trails, bigger tyres allow more to be ridden.
I don’t ride it as much as my carbon cx, but its still a good bike to ride.

I’ve ridden 29er rigid with 1.75″ tyres and narrow-ish bars (sub 700). It’s nothing like a CX/gravel/adventure bike

For CX get the bars down to at least 400, fit thinner tyres, choose flat stem (no spacers) so your back is angled < 45 deg.

And fit the brake levers facing vertically down, maybe on bar-ends

For ‘adventure’ fit a higher stem, weighty saddle, attach 5 bottle cages to frame and forks and hang a few kilos of weights off newly-developing facial hair 😉

I don’t do any racing but I love my CX bike. Have done since I first rode one about 9 years ago.

For me, it does everything well enough – no, it’s not an mtb, it’s not a road bike but I can ride pretty much anything on it without it feeling slow/horrible and it makes trails that are dull/too easy on an mtb fun and conveniently I have loads of those around here (ie bridleways). The only thing I’d avoid on my cx is very rocky/rooty trails which are fine for a short time but I’ll admit not fun for long distances.

As to drop bars, I find they’re spot on – tops for climbing, drops for fast road descents, hoods for non technical offroad and tops plus chicken levers (there’s a contentious topic…) for technical offroad.

YMMV particularly if you like to be flattered by long travel FS so that you can ride more hardcore trails faster for the same skill level 😉

For me, it does everything well enough – no, it’s not an mtb, it’s not a road bike but I can ride pretty much anything on it without it feeling slow/horrible and it makes trails that are dull/too easy on an mtb fun and conveniently I have loads of those around here (ie bridleways).

On in pithier terms, better than a road bike off road, better than a mountain bike on road, better overall than either when you mix it all up in roughly equal parts?

Yeah, probably so. Wholly unsuitable and yet amazingly capable. I took my CX out on my local club mtb ride (after some fb ‘bantz’…) and people were shocked that I managed everything without too much trouble – reality is though that it’s much more capable than they think (or I’m just a riding god 😉 )

We need a set of rules to enable the correct bike to be chosen.

> 50% road / cycle paths / muddy fields = CX bike
> 50% off-road inc. rocks, & steep sections = mtb bike

That’s actually pretty close to how I choose which route to take depending on which bike I want to ride… 😉

(though a slight caveat that steep is fine on CX so long as it’s not too rocky/rooty too)

one question I would ask or CX enthusiasts is have any of you ridden a lightweight 29er rigid with lightweight tyres (preferably tubeless) something like a 1.9″ or maybe 1.8″ ? (say with narrowish bars 640mm or so)

Is there anyone who says they prefer a CX after riding this set up ?

Yes and yes (some of the time)

I had a planet x dirty harry built up with kinesis rigid forks, bars just under 700 (can’t remember exactly) and lightweight wheels with lightweight ‘2.0 if you’re feeling generous’ tyres. It was lighter than the CX bike, especially running it ss in the winter.

It was hilarious- insanely fast acceleration and nimble. Still didn’t feel as ‘attack attack attack’ or nimble as the cross bike, even though it was certainly faster. The behaviour on rougher rockier trails was pretty much exactly the same as the cross bike- get faster until you get rattled, get scared and back off, smash a rim into a rock and back off or get a puncture. It just happened at a higher speed! So did I prefer a CX? I liked them both, just a bit different.

Replaced the dirty harry frame with a highball as I wanted a proper singlespeed and I’ve put some chunkier tyres on for a bit more float and it’s a better mountain bike really. What I would say on reflection is, built like that the dirty harry felt like a compromised mountain bike whereas the cross bike feels like a balanced all-rounder, if that makes sense?

I like long xc trips on it. Did one off road from Edinburgh, over the Pentlands and then across to Peebles.

Perfect terrain for it (33c knobblies)

rigid skinny tyred bike not as easy to ride technical stuff as a proper mtb shocker!
All cycling is a compromise, road bikes are shit on cx courses, cx are a bit of a handful on rockier/techier mtb trails, cx not awful on road and will handle smoother xc routes. Compromise (or balance as I think Ben said)

It always strikes me on threads like this that most people would be happier with a touring bike

still haven’t heard the details as to what makes a tourer better for “most people”.

I got a day one disc as it looked pretty much like the pompino I had but with discs and better suited to the offroad commute route I had started to use. It was brilliant! When that got written off by a driver I got a pro6, a “proper” cx afaik. It never has more than a bottle and a saddle pack loaded onto it. full guards for commuting duties, 44cm drop bars good for multi hand position and tucking in on road/offroad, also good for ncn A frame gates. Brilliant on flowy singletrack, can be a right laugh on slithery muddy rooty sections, but yeah can be a right handful on rocky downhills. If I need to replace it I’ll probably look for something that can also take 650b and bigger tyres as I think that option might be worth exploring – would still have bigger wheels and skinny rubber as default tho. Unfortunately skinny tyres at fun/grippy pressures put you at high puncture risk. On the right route it’s fast and makes a lot of sense, on the wrong route it can feel very compromised, horses for courses.

I’m not sure where the straw man that CX bikes are not as good off road as mountain bike wandered in from. I mean, no shit Sherlock, you mean a fully rigid bike with drop bars and 35mm tyres isn’t going to be as fast as a mountain bike on rocky trails…

I’ve ridden 29er rigid with 1.75″ tyres and narrow-ish bars (sub 700). It’s nothing like a CX/gravel/adventure bike

Your missing my point completely both of you.

Yup, I’ve got a niner air9 Carbon with rigid forks and (medium-wide) bars.
They do different things – its good for more technical trails, bigger tyres allow more to be ridden.
I don’t ride it as much as my carbon cx, but its still a good bike to ride.

Fairnuff I’m honestly surprised by this answer, although it does show some people do want CX bikes.

To me I don’t get why they do different things, and the rigid 29er(with narrow bars + tyres) is much much much much better offroad and similar on road.

Maybe it shows that people live places where CX is useful?
Or that they’ve set them up well for the sort of riding they do?
Or maybe they are just better at riding stuff or choosing lines?

Or maybe they are just better at riding stuff

I was nt very good at riding my CX bike I admit that.

Maybe it shows that people live places where CX is useful?
Or that they’ve set them up well for the sort of riding they do?

I still cant see how a lightweight rigid 29er will not offer a better compromise between a MTB and road bike. (excluding CX races I know nothing of these).

As I say I think most of my complaints would be answered if they just worked out some new bars for the discipline instead of sticking on road bars which dont make sense. (PS I like my road bars on my road bike)

More hand positions, less weight, different weight distribution, different body position?

Unless you are expecting a cheap CX bike to be comparable to an MTB that costs 5x as much (you wouldn’t be the first!)