didnthurt

Full Member

Always fancied a Surly as they look great plus can take big tyres along with lots of bags etc. But they’re too agricultural for me.

They’re really not. Don’t believe the marketing bollocks.
If you have a close look at the frames they have had an extraordinary amount of thought put into them. The quality of the finishing, inside the tubes, the welding, the geometry, tube sizing etc is just lovely.
None of the tubes are bog standard. They’ve all been very carefully thought through.

Sorry, but I’m not a fan of the CdF, at least in the smaller sizes.
The Spa mentioned above is an infinitely better frame.
The designer posts regularly on the CTC forum (now Cycling Today) and having ridden quite a few Spas designed by him I can confirm that they are genuinely inspirational.

WRT the 853 and 725 frames. Only the TT and DT are higher grade, the rest is standard.

From what I read at the time, the Day-one (2008 ish) had a stiffer downtube to cope with the twisting forces from riding out the saddle

They were the same tube spec, likely still are. 34.9 OD Vs the 31.8 that many inc Surly and Spa mentioned above use.

Early CdF was relatively stiff tubes as it was meant for panniers as well as lanes and byway riding,

This is where Genesis confuses me. The TdF is built for loaded touring. The CdF is built for???

I know it predates the gravel/downcountry/upcountry etc trend but it seems neither fish nor foul.

I rode a Masi Giramindo that I borrowed for a while. It was designed for loaded touring so the steering was a bit odd when unloaded and it certainly wasn’t light but I wouldn’t have described it as dull or lifeless. The Escapade is praised for it’s lively feel in reviews but seems designed to accept some load. I’m guessing it is not simply geo and tube diameter/butting.

This is where Genesis confuses me. The TdF is built for loaded touring. The CdF is built for???

Marketing to N+1 and the people who genuinely believe that 0.5* steeper head angle or last year’s 97.2% stiffness would ruin the ride and slow them down…

Tdf is a cdf with a few more bosses and a triple. It makes a good tourer if your not just looking for something to ride to work on and look like you might do some touring one day.

Where as the cdf is all about appealing to the trendies who need the single who need the posh disks etc

For all the comments about the CDF being a bit portly and ‘dead’ to ride.

One of the reasons they’re so chunky is that Genesis build them to pass the MTB CEN test standard, hence why they’re not the lightest but also why, despite the huge numbers of them out there, you very rarely hear of one failing.

If, like me, you’re a gentleman of the larger persuasion this is rather comforting as you’re hooning about off road with full bikepacking kit.

Horses for courses though, I can see how a lighter rider may not get on with one.

Tdf is a cdf with a few more bosses and a triple.

To be fair, the TdF does have slightly different geo. The head and seat angles are the same, which is odd but the stack is different, the TdF has longer chainstays etc.

If you want a bargain gravel bike. The Marin Nicasio in one of it’s guides is very affordable and seems to hit the fin to ride and nice feel boxes. Given what it goes for, replacing any under-specced components won’t hurt much.

This is where Genesis confuses me. The TdF is built for loaded touring. The CdF is built for???

I know it predates the gravel/downcountry/upcountry etc trend but it seems neither fish nor foul.

The CdF was neither fish nor fowl in the way many gravel bikes still are, I suppose. Plus there wasn’t a TdF back then.

I’ve had mine since 2013 (it’s the dark grey one). Built it from a frame with mavic/hope wheels and, originally, a 105 double groupset. Changed it last year to 1 x 11 and fitted flat carbon bars with a slightly longer stem (120mm). I weigh 3/5ths of **** all and I think it rides lovely and smoothly on 35mm tyres. So there. It’s my only road bike, gets used fairly regularly on the crappy tarmac round here and the occasional gentle off road foray. I love it. Can’t think of any reason to change.

The CdF was neither fish nor fowl in the way many gravel bikes still are, I suppose.

Fair enough. The Ribble CGR 725 is a very similar bike, but reviews suggest it’s a much nicer ride. I’d have one if the frames ever went on sale but it’s a bit spendy at full price.

Plus there wasn’t a TdF back then.

True. Although when they introduced it they could have moved the CdF more towards a gravel/day out/towpath type thing.

I weigh 3/5ths of **** all and I think it rides lovely and smoothly on 35mm tyres.

That’s the other side. Seems owners are at one of 2 extremes. I’d love to know what makes it so love/hate

This is the Day One I had

https://road.cc/content/review/11847-genesis-day-one-cross

And this is the Croix de fer I had

https://www.rutlandcycling.com/296284/products/genesis-2015-croix-de-fer-10-cyclocross-adventure-bike.aspx

I must admit the 853 in blue is beautiful IMO

https://www.balfesbikes.co.uk/dpt/pgr/frame-gn-20-croix-de-fer-853-frameset__7237

My Croix de fer was like a Volvo estate. Just brilliant at just bimbling along, easy handling and can carry a shed load of stuff plus will put up with a load of abuse without complaint.

My Trek Crockett that replaced it is more like a 2 seater sports car. Not as practical, more fragile but so much more fun to be aboard.

Strangely their geometries aren’t a million miles apart.

My old Croix de fer was the best “bike” I ever owned. It never missed a beat but it dictated the pace. I’m honest about the fact that my bikes are toys or if I’m being generous, gym equipment so I want fun toys not functional toys.

I reckon if every person on here who loves their Croix rode my Richey Logic (or any other quality steel frame) then they’d never look at their Croix the same again.

Bit like comparing the old On-one Inbred to a Cotic Soul (old school 26″ ones). Nothing wrong the Inbred but the Soul was/is in a different class.

The CdF 10 is just regular cromo, isn’t it? Don’t know if that makes a difference to the feel, or how much. Or if the 853 feels better than the 725, come to that. The CdF do some nice colours, you’ve got to give them that.

@didnthurt
You’re probably correct, but i reckon it could just as easily work the other way if you were to ride your bike back to back with a cdf, but they were both fully loaded.
It’s all about what you’re used to.

They’re really not. Don’t believe the marketing bollocks.
If you have a close look at the frames they have had an extraordinary amount of thought put into them. The quality of the finishing, inside the tubes, the welding, the geometry, tube sizing etc is just lovely.
None of the tubes are bog standard. They’ve all been very carefully thought through.

Maybe so but they still break, saw a belter the other day, cracked right across the seat tube and down tube via the BB. For the money (we pay) they ain’t all that.