The Riding Gravel Forum
Sign up Calendar Latest Topics
 
 
 


Reply
  Author   Comment   Page 7 of 9     «   Prev   4   5   6   7   8   9   Next
Dave_UK

Member
Registered:
Posts: 31
Reply with quote  #151 
Quote:
Originally Posted by AmericanTemplar
I’d spend the extra £350 for the Carbon Ultegra, if for no other reason than for the hydros which are much better than cable actuation, which require constant adjustment if you want a consistent feel and good modulation.

Thanks American Templar
0
AmericanTemplar

Member
Registered:
Posts: 30
Reply with quote  #152 
I've been on the X-trail for almost 2 years now and if for some reason it broke or if it were stolen, I'd buy another.  It's great on all surfaces.  I race this bike and do huge mixed terrain rides with singletrack and fire roads and battered country road and I always love the X-trail.  I met a guy at Grinduro last year that was the editor of some bike magazine in Scandinavia and he said that they tested all of the "gravel bikes" and that the X-trail was the best.  I'm very happy with it as my only road bike, but one that can be used for the exact type of riding that I like doing (mixed terrain endurance).  
0
Dave_UK

Member
Registered:
Posts: 31
Reply with quote  #153 
Quote:
Originally Posted by cpark
Too bad you are in UK, I would've sold my X-trail to you, as I have listed it on eBay.... IMG_1057.jpg 


Thanks cpark
Yeah that's nice bike

0
alembical

Member
Registered:
Posts: 56
Reply with quote  #154 

Cpark,

Why are you parting with the Ridley and what are you riding in its place?  I have always thought yours was a great looking example. 

0
Dave_UK

Member
Registered:
Posts: 31
Reply with quote  #155 
Quote:
Originally Posted by AmericanTemplar
I've been on the X-trail for almost 2 years now and if for some reason it broke or if it were stolen, I'd buy another.  It's great on all surfaces.  I race this bike and do huge mixed terrain rides with singletrack and fire roads and battered country road and I always love the X-trail.  I met a guy at Grinduro last year that was the editor of some bike magazine in Scandinavia and he said that they tested all of the "gravel bikes" and that the X-trail was the best.  I'm very happy with it as my only road bike, but one that can be used for the exact type of riding that I like doing (mixed terrain endurance).  

Well that kind of sells it !
0
cpark

Starter
Registered:
Posts: 13
Reply with quote  #156 
I started working for a company that has an affiliation with Specialized.
I'm currently building a Specialized S-Works Diverge with 1X drive with Easton/Dura Ace 9170/XTR components.
I like my Ridley a lot and I hate to part away, but I just don't need 2 gravel bikes....

0
Dave_UK

Member
Registered:
Posts: 31
Reply with quote  #157 
Quote:
Originally Posted by cpark
I started working for a company that has an affiliation with Specialized.
I'm currently building a Specialized S-Works Diverge with 1X drive with Easton/Dura Ace 9170/XTR components.
I like my Ridley a lot and I hate to part away, but I just don't need 2 gravel bikes....



Interestingly.....the Diverge was my first thought 🤔
0
GHC

Senior Member
Registered:
Posts: 102
Reply with quote  #158 
If my xtrail carbon was stolen....I would cry...and also replace it with another one.

Buddy has a warbird, while it’s nice, I think mine rides better.

The widest tubeless tires I need for the gravel riding I do are 35’s and 36’s, which swell to 38 or under. This is max on my bike for the conditions I encounter. . If someone wants a bigger tire (I don’t), the carbon xtrail is not the bike for you.

I am very very happy with the xtrail carbon. Mine sees a ton of gravel.

0
AmericanTemplar

Member
Registered:
Posts: 30
Reply with quote  #159 
Quote:
Originally Posted by GHC


The widest tubeless tires I need for the gravel riding I do are 35’s and 36’s, which swell to 38 or under. This is max on my bike for the conditions I encounter. . If someone wants a bigger tire (I don’t), the carbon xtrail is not the bike for you.

I am very very happy with the xtrail carbon. Mine sees a ton of gravel.



Bigger tire clearance means longer chainstays, which generally means less racey, so I agree that I'm happy with 38's on the X-trail.  Also, personally I would rather fill the 38mm of space with air volume than knobs.  Now that I've managed to get the Gravel King Slick 38's set up tubeless, I am very happy with my current setup in every scenario that I've encountered.  Last weekend I did 75 miles and 7500 ft of mixed terrain that included road, gravel and singletrack and the bike was fast and comfortable the whole time.

34962760_10157399476064692_6988155993842515968_o.jpg 
0
GHC

Senior Member
Registered:
Posts: 102
Reply with quote  #160 
Cool Trail (and nice ride)
0
Dave_UK

Member
Registered:
Posts: 31
Reply with quote  #161 
Quote:
Originally Posted by GHC
If my xtrail carbon was stolen....I would cry...and also replace it with another one.

Buddy has a warbird, while it’s nice, I think mine rides better.

The widest tubeless tires I need for the gravel riding I do are 35’s and 36’s, which swell to 38 or under. This is max on my bike for the conditions I encounter. . If someone wants a bigger tire (I don’t), the carbon xtrail is not the bike for you.

I am very very happy with the xtrail carbon. Mine sees a ton of gravel.


Hi GHC....I missed this one.....another vote for the x-trail.
0
Dave_UK

Member
Registered:
Posts: 31
Reply with quote  #162 
So....I have another question.
I tried the X-trail alloy in size large.
I'm 1.88m or 6 ft 2 slightly longer in the back.
It felt pretty comfortable to me but guy at shop suggested I could potentially go down a size to medium.
Any opinions welcome.

I also assuming that if I enjoyed the alloy to ride....the carbon would even better ?
0
AmericanTemplar

Member
Registered:
Posts: 30
Reply with quote  #163 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dave_UK
So....I have another question.
I tried the X-trail alloy in size large.
I'm 1.88m or 6 ft 2 slightly longer in the back.
It felt pretty comfortable to me but guy at shop suggested I could potentially go down a size to medium.
Any opinions welcome.

I also assuming that if I enjoyed the alloy to ride....the carbon would even better ?


I'm also 6'2" and went with the Large but I had to change the stock stem for a 90mm stem and I also have my saddle pushed all the way forward (within the limits) on the stock setback post.  I probably could have gone with the medium as well but I am comfortable on the large.  I guess the positive of going with a large is that you can slam the stem all the way down, which looks better IMO.  If you have the option of trying both sizes, you could see what you think?
0
GHC

Senior Member
Registered:
Posts: 102
Reply with quote  #164 
I'm 1/2 inch shorter then you two.  I went with the large and I am happy with it, am riding it stock stem and seat tube. and would buy this size again.   I have just under 7 inches of seat tube showing (riding spd pedals, not that pedals should matter much).  So all that typed, if I had to choose a size other than a large, I would go to an XL before I went down.  but this is me, ymmv 

fwiw....as mentioned by AmericanT above, my 2017 large also shipped with a rear offset carbon saddle tube, and a longish front stem stock, both as mentioned above.   Meaning imo, if for whatever reason the large is a touch too big for what you like ..... both of these can be relatively easily swapped to get your knees and/or front angle/balance/handling where you like to be. In terms of standover, which admittedly can be misleading these days.....at 6-2 you will be able to stand over the Large bike and slide it back to the stem and still have clearance to spare...but sounds like you have been on a large so you already know all that.   

My attempt at suggesting....be careful about going down to the medium without riding that size first.   My more direct response would be ... no way I'd go with the medium, particularly when the large felt good to you, get the large (but the right thing for you is a bike you like for what you plan to do with it that fits you...could be the medium), so I'd get on one before handing them the CC for the medium, also per AmericanT's suggestion if you can.  Large is a safe bet imo.

Last tidbit ... if the shop you are at is more used to sizing road racers, that could be impacting their size down suggestion (not trying to start a range fire with that, just saying)

hopefully there is a nugget in here that helps out.

0
Mr CRUD

Starter
Registered:
Posts: 3
Reply with quote  #165 
6'2" here, Large, slammed stem, seat allthewayback, fits like a glove. Single 34 front as well. DSC_7419.jpg
0
chas

Avatar / Picture

Senior Member
Registered:
Posts: 456
Reply with quote  #166 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dave_UK
So....I have another question.
I tried the X-trail alloy in size large.
I'm 1.88m or 6 ft 2 slightly longer in the back.
It felt pretty comfortable to me but guy at shop suggested I could potentially go down a size to medium.
Any opinions welcome.

I also assuming that if I enjoyed the alloy to ride....the carbon would even better ?


Typically, I go for cockpit length, not frame size.  Reach, top tube length – they all mean nothing; it’s how far my arms are from my body (i.e. where are my handlebars).  That is top tube + stem (although you could add setback to it I guess).

For gravel, I like larger as the longer top tube and wheelbase give me more stability.  But for non gravel riding I like smaller as that makes the bike more agile.  So – depends on what you want and how you will use the bike.

0
AmericanTemplar

Member
Registered:
Posts: 30
Reply with quote  #167 
I also find the X-Trail to be a very stable bike, and would be concerned about it losing some of that if I were to downsize. Also, I like my cleats all the way back, which is why my saddle is so far forward. I’d “run” a straight post, but figure the extra bit of flex on a setback post isn’t a bad thing for a little added comfort.
0
GHC

Senior Member
Registered:
Posts: 102
Reply with quote  #168 
Am with you on that AT
0
Dave_UK

Member
Registered:
Posts: 31
Reply with quote  #169 
Quote:
Originally Posted by AmericanTemplar


I'm also 6'2" and went with the Large but I had to change the stock stem for a 90mm stem and I also have my saddle pushed all the way forward (within the limits) on the stock setback post.  I probably could have gone with the medium as well but I am comfortable on the large.  I guess the positive of going with a large is that you can slam the stem all the way down, which looks better IMO.  If you have the option of trying both sizes, you could see what you think?


Thank AT - I must admit when he asked if I was happy with the size - I asked if he thought I should go XL.
But he said medium possibly.

I guess that suggests large is about right.

Forgot to mention inside leg is 31 - trousers - not whatever the cycling version is.

I'm riding an extra large on my specialized sirrus - so the large on this felt a little shorter - was also surprised how much difference the drop bars made versus flats to speed of turn - felt quite twitchy after what I'm used to.

Need to get it right as the best deal (Ultegra spec) involves ordering online.




0
Dave_UK

Member
Registered:
Posts: 31
Reply with quote  #170 
Quote:
Originally Posted by GHC
I'm 1/2 inch shorter then you two.  I went with the large and I am happy with it, am riding it stock stem and seat tube. and would buy this size again.   I have just under 7 inches of seat tube showing (riding spd pedals, not that pedals should matter much).  So all that typed, if I had to choose a size other than a large, I would go to an XL before I went down.  but this is me, ymmv 

fwiw....as mentioned by AmericanT above, my 2017 large also shipped with a rear offset carbon saddle tube, and a longish front stem stock, both as mentioned above.   Meaning imo, if for whatever reason the large is a touch too big for what you like ..... both of these can be relatively easily swapped to get your knees and/or front angle/balance/handling where you like to be. In terms of standover, which admittedly can be misleading these days.....at 6-2 you will be able to stand over the Large bike and slide it back to the stem and still have clearance to spare...but sounds like you have been on a large so you already know all that.   

My attempt at suggesting....be careful about going down to the medium without riding that size first.   My more direct response would be ... no way I'd go with the medium, particularly when the large felt good to you, get the large (but the right thing for you is a bike you like for what you plan to do with it that fits you...could be the medium), so I'd get on one before handing them the CC for the medium, also per AmericanT's suggestion if you can.  Large is a safe bet imo.

Last tidbit ... if the shop you are at is more used to sizing road racers, that could be impacting their size down suggestion (not trying to start a range fire with that, just saying)

hopefully there is a nugget in here that helps out.



GHC many nuggets in there thanks.
This is all new to me - so have had to google a few expressions . Definitely noticed that road racers seem to be smaller.
Definitely wouldn't go down to medium - XL would be my only route other than large.



0
Dave_UK

Member
Registered:
Posts: 31
Reply with quote  #171 
Quote:
Originally Posted by chas


Typically, I go for cockpit length, not frame size.  Reach, top tube length – they all mean nothing; it’s how far my arms are from my body (i.e. where are my handlebars).  That is top tube + stem (although you could add setback to it I guess).

For gravel, I like larger as the longer top tube and wheelbase give me more stability.  But for non gravel riding I like smaller as that makes the bike more agile.  So – depends on what you want and how you will use the bike.



Chas - thanks - to be honest I'll be mainly on the road - but want the option to trail when the chance presents itself.

Was considering a hardtail 29er until I realised it makes no sense for what is around me.
0
Dave_UK

Member
Registered:
Posts: 31
Reply with quote  #172 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr CRUD
6'2" here, Large, slammed stem, seat allthewayback, fits like a glove. Single 34 front as well. DSC_7419.jpg


MR Crud

Thanks for the confirmation.
I'm thinking twin up front for my use, not so experienced and want flexibility.

Have to say that looks smart!!

0
AmericanTemplar

Member
Registered:
Posts: 30
Reply with quote  #173 
I wear pants with a 32” inseam. You can see how much seatpost I’m showing in the photos of my bike in this thread. Would seem that a large would probably be the best option for you.
0
Dave_UK

Member
Registered:
Posts: 31
Reply with quote  #174 
Thanks AT....that's very useful.
0
Dave_UK

Member
Registered:
Posts: 31
Reply with quote  #175 
Gents,

I have another question regarding the X-trail ...

Can you tell me if there are any major differences between the 2017 C30 carbon and the 2018 Carbon framed model - I notice the wheels and tyres are different, but I'm wondering if the frame geometries are similar or not?

I notice the 2017 is described as a cyclocross bike.

I'm guessing the guys who have replied already recommending are likely to be on the earlier models.

Thanks in advance for any feedback -

Just noticed - it might be a 2016 - whilst it states Ultegra mix it looks as if the shifters are Shimano ST-RS505, front derailleur Shimano 105 2s and brakes Shimano BR-RS505 Hydraulic Disc, Flatmount, F160/R140.

Ulimately I could save about £200 but the more expensive one would get the 6800 Ultegra kit and the bright blue and yellow paint scheme.
Specs are not always clear!!

0
Previous Topic | Next Topic
Print
Reply

Quick Navigation:

Easily create a Forum Website with Website Toolbox.