Why Gravel Bike Geometry Sucks
Vložit
- čas přidán 23. 07. 2024
- In this video I discuss why gravel bike geometries suck and what should be done about it.
Many companies will put longer chainstays on a bike and just claim that it will add stability. While it does add stability in a straight line, it does cause an imbalance between the weight on the front tire and the weight on the rear tire. It can cause a bike to become twitchy and less stable in turns and descents.
www.blackwaterbicycles.com/ - Sport
Wonderful! Just exactly the stuff I needed to know! Thank you!
This is fantastic video. Gravel bike geometry evolution has been hampered by design parameters to not scare traditionalists away. This was the same with the evolution of MTB geometry between 2012-2020.
Thankfully there are a new breed of proper gravel geometry bikes on the market which meet the balance you're describing: the Lauf Seigla, BMC URS, 2023 Rocky Mountain Solo. Proper 425mm chainstays with a much longer front end than usual to keep front wheel traction on corners, nippy demeanor when ridden in anger but stable on loose surfaces.
How about the wheel flop effect? And the head tube angle? Mine is at 65 degrees and is pretty unstable at low speeds.
Wheel flop is definitely an issue when you go slacker up front. The best way to combat this is with more offset on the fork which means a new fork for you. The more offset you have, the less wheel flop will be an issue. I have 65 degree on my MTB and I went with a lefty fork because it has 55mm offset where most forks have 44mm. It definitely helped at slow speeds. I have found I prefer around 67 degrees to help with the wheel flop issue.
Problem with a shorter chainstay of course is tire clearance to the rear of the seat tube and then not running too upright a seat tube angle which places the rider's weight more over the crank center resulting on more weight on the hands which is the kiss of death when riding off road on a dropbar bike with handlebar height beneath the saddle.
That said, for an uber fit, strong rider, a rider with the body of an acrobat can pretty much ride anything including underbiking a gravel bike on knarley terrain. But not so much for an average rider.
I do appreciate the discussion but I believe bike geometry to be very much rider specific. A lot of riders do better with more weight over the rear of the bike.
That looks like a sweet bike! I don't have enough experience on short vs long chainstays, but I certainly support the move to a longer front center + shorter stem - Adds a lot of stability and also reduces toe overlap (I run mid cleat position). I'd love to give super short chainstay a try, but I'm at 425mm on my current bike (I can run a 700x50mm tire however ;)
Yeah 425 is decent for gravel bikes today. I really dislike the ones that go up to 430+. My 3 Notch can actually clear up to 47c with 395mm chainstays. I should have mentioned it in the video but increasing front center and keeping a long chainstay will make the bike feel sluggish on the road if you planned to use it for both gravel and road rides.
@@BlackWaterCyclist that's pretty amazing clearance for 395mm! I did look for super short chainstays but best I found was like 405 and 700x30c clearance (or 47x650). It sounds like you have a winner on your hands. I'm carbon now, but last bike was titanium, I love the material.
@@jeffreythompson6282 oh yeah carbon is definitely the way to go when it comes to stiffness to weight ratio. I love Ti as a gravel bike just because it can take side impacts better than carbon, even though that is a rare occurrence. I would love to eventually be able to make a carbon 3 Notch if there was enough interest.
I believe in your theory. I was just wondering what is your BB to front wheel measurement?
My Ritchey Outback has pretty long chain stays, its one of the most comfortable bikes I've ever ridden!
It seems to me that the short chainstays can't be too good for the 1x chain angles. How is your experience with the drivetrain performance?
Hi Christian, it is actually way better than I expected it to be. I thought it was going to be all loud and crunchy like it is when you do major cross chaining. Surprisingly it is just as quiet as all the other gears. I think it has something to do with the flat top chain being narrower and easier to bend to different angles. Many chain manufacturers are making chains easier to bend because of the popularity of 1x in gravel. You also have to remember that a 1x chainring sits in between the outer and inner chainrings of a 2x system so it isn't as much of a cross chain as if you cross your regular 2x system.
Your BlackWater 3 Notch looks like a sweet bike!
Thanks Carl! I am really enjoying it. I'll have a link in the description soon about details on it.
How about the specialized diverge i could drift on that my old 1 got stolen I ride a top stone 4 and a state all road 6061 now ima getting a new bike soon tho going to spend at least 4k maybe a specialized or a cannondale
The Diverge does have good Geometry with the short rear and long front. The Cannondale Topstone Carbon has very short chainstays at 415mm which is great. The bikes that I know of with shorter chainstays is the 3T Exploro (415mm) Open Up (420mm), Cervelo Aspero (420mm), Rodeo Labs Flannimal (415mm), Rondo Ruut (420mm). Mine is 395mm which is crazy short but I absolutely love the way it handles.
longer front end meaning slacker head tube angle? longer fork taller stack?
for your custom build Titanium frame 395mm chainstay, what's the frame maximum tyre clearance, maximum chainring size for 1x and 2x? What's the seat tube and head tube angle? also stack and reach?
You can achieve longer front end a few ways, by slacking the headtube angle putting the wheel further out in front. If you want to keep a steeper head tube angle then you can lengthen the reach of the bike to achieve that. So either way works. I went with steeper Headtube with longer reach bc I wanted a more aggressive geo for gravel racing and road riding.
I have a lot of the info you are asking on my website for the bike which I will link below but it is designed specifically around a 1x system, although you could run 2x on it but it would limit your tire clearance. It can clear up to a 700x47c tire, It can clear up to a 54t chainring up front. Head tube angle is 72.5, seat tube angle is 76 degrees (although it is a kinked seat tube so that 76 degrees is from the BB to the top of the seat tube so the higher your saddle, the slacker the virtual seat tube angle. Where my saddle it located, it is about a 74 degree seat tube angle. This is an XL frame so Stack is 609mm and Reach is 420mm but all the sizes are on the link here: www.blackwatercyclist.com/store/p/blackwater-3-notch-gravel-frameset
@@BlackWaterCyclist is the spec list right on your website? Rear non-boost 142 spacing and front boost 110 spacing?
@@michiganstate149 hey buddy. It is 142x12 in the rear but It's actually 100x12 up front. I'll double check my stats sheet to make sure it is right on the site. Thanks for the heads up.
I am a bit surprised you can fit wide gravel tyres with 395mm chainstay ?
My road race bike specialized amira 44cm (XS ) is a woman bike , i am X small man it fits good , yet chainstays are 405 fitted with carbon wheels and 25mm tyres 28mm would be a very tight fit right up against the BB . How is it possible to fit wide gravel tyres within 395mm chainstays ? What magic did you perform . Are you on 650b /27.5 inch wheels ?
Or is my bulky carbon Hollowtech eating up clearance ? As a 61 year old i value always learning . Tks .
Hi Rob! No we did not use 27.5/650b. Many companies feel they have to have a 2x system. With a 1x system, you can actually make the chainstays much shorter since you are not competing with a front derailleur. With the 3 Notch, we have used a titanium yoke plate on the drive side to allow for more room. We are also using a T47 BB with 86.5mm width which gives more room for welding the tubes wider behind the bottom bracket which allows for the rear tire to tuck up right behind the BB. Some MTBs such as Santa Cruz Highball can clear 29x2.4 tires with a 426mm chainstay. As a shorter rider, you would benefit greatly from shorter chainstays and a bike actually designed around a 1x system.
@@BlackWaterCyclist Thanks for that explanation. That makes sence. Thanks for your reply and time.
www.blackwaterbicycles.com/
Subscribe: tinyurl.com/yyd6vb6k
Follow me on:
Instagram: instagram.com/blackwatercyclist
Facebook: facebook.com/BlackWaterCyclist1
Strava: www.strava.com/athletes/179615
I'm a shorter rider and have always preferred short stays and steep seat tube. I really like what you've done with the exception of one tiny detail. I would have liked to see a higher b/b so that switching to 650b wouldn't cause pedal strikes as easily. I do have a couple of questions. What's the head tube length and bearing size for a regular version (size small frame). Asking because I have a fork that will probably work, but it has been cut down already. If I was to try this with 650b, how wide rubber will fit? Thanks!
Great question Todd! I will get you the exact measurement of the headtube length tomorrow and I will also measure the width for 650b for you. I can guarantee you that it will easily fit a 47mm and probably up to a 55mm. I have some 650x47 WTB Horizons mounted on a wheelset so I will measure the clearance on each side for you.
Yeah the frame is designed around a 395mm Axle to Crown fork which is pretty normal for gravel forks. So this ACR Headset system runs a 1.5 lower bearing and 1.5 upper bearing but fits your normal 1.5 lower and 1 1/8 upper tapered steerer tubes. So your fork should not be an issue if it is long enough and it is 1.5 lower and 1 1/8 upper tapered.
Yeah I wanted the lower BB for those times when you are running 700x45 or 47 tires and you won't feel like you are sitting super high on the bike. I really didn't make it with the intention of running 650b wheels and tires but there really is no reason you could not. You could possibly clear some 650x2.1 inch tires in it. I also prefer shorter cranks for my height (170mm) so I prefer a lower BB since my cranks give me 5mm more clearance than a 175mm.
@@BlackWaterCyclist Thanks for the quick reply.
@@toddmcdonough Ok the size small will have a 126mm Head Tube length.
@@BlackWaterCyclist Thanks!
Gday from Australia, thanks for your videos. They are great. I'm considering buying a Giant Revolt 1 or 2 or a Giant Contend ar1. I do a lot of road riding but i would love to be able to hit the gravel roads as well.
My priorities for the bike are:
1. Comfort
2. Versatile (tar and gravel roads)
3. Fit biggish tyres.
Would you recomend a revolt or a contend?
Thanks very much.
Hi Steven, I really preferred the Contend AR over the Revolt because it was a little better on the road compared to the Revolt and I prefer a more aggressive handling gravel bike. They both are comfortable but if I would say that the Revolt is more comfy than the AR. The Revolt can clear up to 45mm tires while the Contend can only clear up to 41mm so that also can add more comfort as well. I would recommend the Revolt based on your priorities.
@@BlackWaterCyclist thanks for your help!!!
@@BlackWaterCyclist just an update, 2022 Revolt is updated design that fits up to 53mm tires and also accepts a 30.9 round seatpost if the D-post wedge is removed, I also believe it's slightly slacker than the prior model.
I've been reading about trail length lately. Kinda suspecting that in some gravel bike, front biased position is meant to adds effective trails or maneuverability. It exactly complements a new trend: putting pannier and loads on front section of the bike.
In general, your takes on current gravel bike are nailed it. A newer trends for adding weight on frontal area and reducing fork offset for gravel bike setup just proving that these frame just sucks at stability/ trail length to begin with.
What's your thoughts about the Ribble cgr vs the Ribble gravel bike geometry? They look essentially the same but the gravel one allows for more of the seattube to stick out. Let me know thanks
Honestly, In my opinion their geo is one of the worse. They have chainstays that are 435mm (most are 425mm) and then a normal front center so you are going to have even more weight on the front wheel compared to other gravel bikes. When I first saw the RIBBLE Gravel and CGR bikes I was super excited because they look awesome and price looked good but the geometry is a deal breaker for me.
@@BlackWaterCyclist thanks for the information. I was looking at the geo for the giant content. It's chain stay is fairly long as well but is it better because of the front center is better?
@@NoGattsuNoGlory The Giant Contend AR has 422mm chainstays while most Gravel bikes are 425-430 so it is on the shorter end of most gravel bikes but still long in my opinion, hence designing my own frame with 395mm chainstays. A few brands have shorter chainstays like the 3T Exploro, Open UP and UPPER, Cervelo Aspero which all have around 415mm chainstays with the Pivot Vault, RUUT, and Marin Headlands at 420mm. We are splitting hairs with all of these chainstay lengths but 415 to 435 is significant and my 395 to 435 is even more significant. I hope that helps.
@@BlackWaterCyclist I only looked at the cgr because of the ti affordability aspect. I wish up open was in ti. Looking for that forever bike
@@NoGattsuNoGlory You can check out my frame on my website and I can work out a deal with you if you are interested. Just contact me through the website and we can do some small changes to the design if you would like. My frame is made in the same factory as Ribble and a few others. www.blackwatercyclist.com/store/p/blackwater-3-notch-gravel-ti-frameset
Canyon grizl Geo ? thoughts ?
What about seat tube angle? A bike with long chainstays and a slack seat tube angle might have the same fore/aft balance as a bike with short chainstays and a steep seat angle.
What about bottom bracket drop? A bike with a lower bottom bracket will have longer chainstays, but this will have minimal effect on the fore/aft balance.
It will help with the balance of weight if you are more prone to sit behind the BB instead of closer to the front of the bike so yes the balance in weight will be the same. Where it will suffer is when you are putting weight forward when turning into turns and also if you decide to stand up while climbing. A longer chainstay will always make a bike less nimble, no matter where you are in the wheelbase.
The major issue with a longer chainstay being used to add stability, is that it is fixed, where with a longer front, you can use the leaning of the bike along with turning the wheel to make the front turn quicker or slower, even if it is a longer wheelbase.
As far as BB drop. If it is lower, you don't technically have to have longer chainstays. The distance can be the same as any drop. The biggest change the BB drop will have as far as handling is that the center of gravity will be lower, which would mean more stability.
Love your questions and insight.
And that is what Kona did with the sutra: that hunk of steel is super long, 445cs, high reach, high trail. So that thing is slow and heavy but boy it is also put on tracks and eats holes for diner
Having 2 bikes with similar wheel base, I prefer the tracking of the bike with longer chain stays. The bike with longer chain stays has a slacker seat tube angle which puts me back more. The weight distribution of both bikes is similar 60/40.
did you do your own welding on the Blackwater frame?
No, I outsourced it. I'm going to eventually learn how to weld titanium so I can actually start making my own but right now, time doesn't allow it.
@@BlackWaterCyclist
I have heard that ti welding is very challenging... should only be attempted by master welders and history buffs...
Oh yeah I don't plan on just trying to pick it up, I'll have to do some proper training. I have done a little welding with my dad when I was younger but nothing like ti.
A lot of good points here, especially the relationship between the front center and rear center as a balance. Bike industry marketing tends to isolate 1 measurement and ascribe characteristics to it when its really how the whole set works together. Stability has a lot more factors like fork rake, head angle and stem/handlebar setup.
I made a long wheelbase gravel bike from a modern XC MTB hardtail, and swapped out the stock 29" fork for a 27.5" one that was 30mm shorter. I think ive achieved a similar weight balance to your 3-notch, even though its still got 430mm chainstays, with the longer front center. And i have a nice long 91mm trail thanks to the 69⁰ head angle for good stability offroad.
For reference, my gravel bike is a BMC 2Stroke AL, with a 27.5" Rock shox Sid WC in 100mm travel. Geometry with that fork is 69⁰ HA, 42mm fork offset, 750mm FC, 430mm CS, and the BB drop is 70-75mm depending on sag.
Wheelbase is 1150mm
I got that frame because the chainstays fit a road crank (with a +5mm axle) and 44t chainring.
@@galenkehler You are exactly on the right path with your build. I love that you can fit your road crank with a slightly wider axle on the MTB frame. What crank are you using to do that? I have done it with the previous SRAM Carbon cranks in the past. I used a Giant XTC 27.5 for a few years as my gravel and road bike until a car hit me and destroyed the bike.
@@BlackWaterCyclist I used the Rotor Aldhu crankset, it's wonderfully modular. The combination with the Road Aldhu arms is +5mm axle (just to fit the 73mm bb shell) and a 104bcd MTB spider from Power2Max.
The non-power spider wouldn't work as it has too much material and fouled on the chainstay, but a direct mount chainring would probably fit. We just didn't have one to try, and its all out of spec, tight tolerance fitment so just went with what could work on hand 😆
This is good stuff! I installed an angled headset on my 26 mtb/gravel cruiser to change it from 70 to 68.5 degrees and it totally transformed the down hill stability, it moved the wheel base about 20mm.
Oh yeah that is brilliant! I did that to my Giant Anthem and LOVE IT!!!
What's the wheelbase on these two?
Hi Lance, great question. The Contend AR is 1031mm. The 3 Notch is 1032mm. So the wheelbases are almost identical.
Great video.
Got myself Contend AR2 few days ago , no issues so far with any kind of balance or twitching.
That is awesome! Honestly the Contend AR is one of the better balanced bikes out there. I probably should have compared it with a Giant Revolt or Salsa Warbird but I'm not a bike shop so I had to use what I had built up in the garage. Congrats on your new bike!!!
I got an AR1 last year, thing is awesome. Ive taken it on some singletrack and seems to handle well even on that
The Contend AR is more of an endurance road bike than an explicit gravel bike tbh
I just don't understand why 76* STA?
Great video. Now I just have to find a gb with good balance.
Thanks Saleem! I first look at chainstay length and then look at front center. Chainstay length is usually the same on all sizes in a company so that will tell you right off the bat if the bike can have a good balance. Unfortunately the bikes with the shortest chainstays are usually the most expensive. 3T Exploro, Cervelo Aspero, OPEN U.P., Pivot Vault are a few that have shorter chainstays but they are still in the 415-420 area. The best balanced gravel bike that is budget oriented I have found is the Giant Contend AR which I compare my BlackWater 3 Notch to in this video. Some of the Norco bikes have shorter chainstays as well. The cheapest Carbon option I have found is the Marin Headlands which has 420mm chainstays. After finding a short chainstay, you can then find a good front center on a bike based on the REACH. I hope that helps.
Heya, g'day mate from Sydney! Is it possible for us to have a chat? I just wanted to know how you got a custom titanium bike made. I'm planning to create a new bicycle brand and would greatly appreciate any tips. P.S. The bike you've designed looks much better than the Giant bike, and it seems it rides better too...
Thanks for the comments. Send me a DM on Instagram and we can chat.
@@BlackWaterCyclist Hey, no worries! I'll do that. I haven't had insta since 5-6 years. Haha.
@@Monsieur.Nobody. I gotcha, you can email me through my site.
@@BlackWaterCyclist I'll do that. Thanks!
Duuuude, everything points me to the contend AR, I want an allroad bike made from alloy- thing is that I'd really like to have the GRX levers for gravelriding. How large would you consider the difference between the GRX and the 105?
In my honest opinion, I would not pick a bike based on GRX or 105. They are both very reliable, great groupsets but not different enough to be a deciding factor. The 105 rear derailleur may not have the clutch but I have never had an issue running a non clutch rear derailleur on a 2x bike, even on rough gravel.
@@BlackWaterCyclist heyyyy, thank you very much for the response, that really helps. How about the levers? Actually the gearing might be better for my usecase with the contend.
@@BlackWaterCyclist that'd actually be an amazing video which doesn't exist on CZcams: a comparison between 105 and grx. Also interesting: how do the sram groups compare...? Pleeeeaaase ;)
I think it's a great idea! Nice vid!
Thanks Michael!
@@BlackWaterCyclist you're welcome! Billy? Lol my memory is shit 🤣
I know you said it in the video
@@michaelrowe5896 lol that is right. 😂😂😂
@@BlackWaterCyclist 🤣🤣 nice to meet you Billy lol
Thank you
That Black Water bike looks outstanding! I was looking for the Contend AR everywhere but it was like an unicorn and still is by the date. I end up getting a 3T Exploro. Good video and what you said had a lot of sense.
The 3T has nice short chainstays compared to many Gravel bikes out there and should have good balance. Did you get the Exploro used or find one brand new? I actually was going to get one of those before I got the Contend AR but was so happy with the Contend I stayed with it. How do you like the 3T?
@@BlackWaterCyclist I get my Exploro brand new just only two days of use. I’ve been using the bike for roas group rides and it actually performs pretty good. I get the The Team Speed Force1and I really like it. I can’t wait to ride on gravel.
You ever read All Road Revolution by Jan Heine?
I have not, I will have to look into it and give it a read.
Interesting. I watched another going in the complete opposite direction with much longer chainstay a then standard. Guess it really depends on the situation.
That is very interesting. What was their argument for long chainstays? Adds more comfort and more stability? It does add stability by lengthening the wheelbase but like I said it throws off the balance.
@@BlackWaterCyclist from their experience with longer chainstays there was improved stability and comfort. The bike was also running 27.5 plus tires, and the bikes weren’t really designed for racing so idk how that comes into play either
@@BlackWaterCyclist personally I do prefer a longer chainstay but the front ends of my bikes are also pretty long. I have two gravel bikes but one is really a drop bar MTB and they have 450mm and 440mm stays respectively. I also run a shorter stem with wider bars which I think helps unweight the front tire but still gives me good control.
¡Totalmente de acuerdo!. 👍👍
Thanks! Maybe some geometries will improve in the future.
I think that there is an ideal chain stay length for bikes, and for curly bar bikes 415-425 seems to be my preference. I think what is more important is having a balanced characteristic so that the front end and the rear end work well together. I’m also not a huge fan of low trail. Having run old school cx bikes quite extensively, they just don’t handle how I want above 15-20mph. The best handling gravel bikes I’ve ridden have trail figures in the high 60s. I tried some of these longer front end bikes and isn’t think that they handled as nicely.
Your analysis is spot on. It’s exactly what is happening with gravel bike geo - more frames are being made with slacker head tubes and shorter chain stays, just like in the MTB world as you pointed out. It’s a migration, evolution away from the road/cyclocross origins of gravel bikes to the MTB world, making the bikes more versatile and fun, IMO.
I am glad to see companies going to this type of Geometry. I should have done the weight balance with my TCX which has even longer chainstays at 130mm. I don't have it built up so that is why I was unable to compare but I am sure the numbers would have been even more exaggerated.
I would never buy a gravel bike. Off road I want flat bars. Cross country bikes are much easier for me, much more relaxed and enjoyable to ride. With a drop bar bike I feel like I am fighting to control the bike all the time. Having a cross country bike also opens up my options to a lot more different types of terrains, it's the one bike that does more so I don't need two bikes. I'm not that rich either.
I ride on fixed gear bikes and I always like my rear wheel slammed.
A fellow forward geometry cyclist! I could not agree more.
New stigmata addresses some of these issues
most mountain bikes are moving to longer chainstays and longer reach....... The Salsa Warbird does this as well....
I am not sure of any mountain bike where they are moving to longer chainstays. When 29ers were first gaining popularity they had chainstays in the length of 445-460 but all the latest mountain bikes are around 438 and shorter. You are right in the Warbird has long chainstays (430mm) and long reach for a super stable ride and that is exactly what the Warbird is made for. They at least lengthened both with the warbird but it will feel more sluggish on the road compared to bikes like the 3T Exploro.
I ride and race on the Salsa Warbird, it is super comfortable and stable but is very sluggish. I'm considering the 3 notch. Would you even consider a fast paced gravel race on the Warbird?
I think gravel biking sucks. But I think your idea is bad. To make the geometry good you should A. Change the chainstay per size B. Increase front Center with a longer reach and slacker head angle and shorter stems. “Long” chainstays work well with long front Centers. A slacker head angle slows down the steering and a steeper seat angle would keep the top tube in check with a shorter stem as well.
Yes but I'm going for a more aggressive gravel bike that still has great balance. I'm not opposed to longer chainstays per size but as you go larger, your wheelbase is already longer with the longer each so adding more to the rear slows the handling of the bike more so I'm not a huge fan of that concept unless you are already much shorter than the current offerings.
I did lengthen the reach on this bike but love I said, kept the angles steep for aggressive racing. Great input there.
Gravel is not as fun as MTB but it's way better than road. 😁
Princess pedal stroke. Drop that heel
LoL, you called me out and you're right. I do try to drop my heel more now but I broke both ankles when younger so range of motion is greatly limited.
You confuse many aspects on your idea of stability. At least there are 4 or 5 main things to take into account around stability on gravel biking, things like the relationships of trail with bb drop or headtube angle and later the chainstay length, you just mentioned the relationship between chainstay length and reach. Your option is good for flat terrain. But to go uphill or downhill you need longer chainstay and trail and upper bb drops. When you go uphill the force vector of your weight have to fall in front of your rear axle to avoid spontaneous up pulling of your front end, so longer chainstay helps. Downhill if your chainstay is too short the stability is bad despite you can move easily the rear end of your gravel, in parallel onto downhill you face the terrain curves too fast but as your stability is bad you can't control properly inside the curve, here the balance among trail + bb drop & chainstay is so important. Aside, it is better define your front end of your bike with aspect like the relationship between angles, bb drop and trail, instead of using just the reach concept. I totally agree the gravel bikes geometry sucks, only brands like Kona are doing well, giving the gravel you need for sort of terrain you ride. To balance all this stuff my ideal gravel is one with enough chainstay to deal good down and uphill, with longer wheelbase thanks to a proper trail and CX bbdrops and everything compensate with 650b tires to rise acceleration.
Thank you so much for your input here Marco. I did over simplify the video to just focus on balance and not the details of trail, head tube angle, bb drop. Reach is definitely not the best for knowing how a bike will handle but it will give some indication of the front end being further in front of you.
I tend to disagree with this idea that you need long chainstays for descending. If that were true, all mountain bikes would have super long chainstays but they are all going for shorter chainstays to prevent OTB incidents. If you have a long chainstay when descending, it will push your front end more in turns and it will also cause your rear tire to try to tip you over the bars when hitting an obstacle. So tuck the rear and have more front center because you are putting more weight on the front naturally when you are descending.
Long chainstays on climbing can be good if you sit really far back in your wheelbase (behind your cranks), then your front wheel will pop up on you and lose traction. I prefer a shorter chainstay when climbing (and yes I do travel to mountains to climb) because I do sit further forward in the wheelbase so my front is already weighted more and the shorter chainstay keeps my rear wheel planted. When racing with a regular gravel bike, I am constantly losing traction in the rear.
Honestly it all really depends on where you sit in your wheelbase to distribute the weight as evenly as possibly in all situations. The body of a person will have the most impact on balance so if they set further back, they would prefer their rear wheel further back and the front wheel closer and vice versa with someone who sits further forward.
Once again, thank you for the great comment!
@@BlackWaterCyclist I didn't say "long chainstay", I only talked about longer chainstays because a 395mm chainstay for a gravel bike is not for all riders, depending on the turning capacity and stability you'd like, people need to balance properly the chainstay lenght regarding bb drop + trail + angles + WB. A long chainstay has only sense in uphill motorcycling. Regarding traction on climbing there are many ways to get it apart from a good geometry.
About what you mention upon mtb forward geometry tendency, it is in its tiping point, if you compare the new geometries with prior years that trend tends to change with a bit more longer chainstays, so certain brands are changing their mindset. And in gravel is the same, compare the new ritchey outback with its last year geometry, bikerumor said about it: “STABLE AND EASY TO MANAGE FOR EVERYTHING FROM ASPHALT TO GRAVEL TO DIRT SINGLETRACK.” “WITH A DESIGN THAT BUCKS THE CURRENT TREND IN GRAVEL BIKES IT PROVIDES AN INCREDIBLY SMOOTH RIDE THAT CRUISES OVER HARD PACK 'HERO GRAVEL' AND DOESN'T FLINCH OVER A FIELD OF BABYHEADS.”
Pretty sure that blue bike hanging on the wall is much less stable than a gravel bike :p
LOL!!! That's a great observation. You really get a feel for sucky long chainstays riding solo on the front of that beast.
425mm CS are way to long. 410 -415 will be better.
"do you think this is stupid" 🤣 Is that what the kids call it nowadays... like being sick, bad, and wicked 👍
LOL Nah I am not with the times, it just means what it means: Dumb, Not Smart, Lack of intelligence or common sense.
They always blames it on geometry.
🤣🤣🤣
But Florida is kinda flat, isn't it? How about riding uphils in real mountains, when you have more weight on the rear? Nevertheles, pure CX bikes for life!
Hey Chris! Great to hear from you. Yeah our biggest climb is 200ft. We do have some steep pitches in North Florida in all these creek valleys but like you said, nothing like the real mountains. When climbing on gravel or dirt, a shorter chainstay allows you to keep more traction compared to a longer chainstay. Also when climbing, you aren't as worried about how the bike is handling up front, as long as the front end isnt popping up off the ground (which is why I made my seat tube angle steeper to get more weight over the front when climbing). CX bikes are awesome, I cannot agree more.
Who needs a "gravel bike" anyway?
Road bike for asphalt, full suspension MTB for everything else.
This two bikes is all the bikes you'll ever need.
Want to go faster on mixed surfaces? Install XC tires on your full suspension bike.
Continental Race King is a very good choice.
Yes I've used those race kings and they are great. I prefer the Schwalbe G one 29x2.3 for gravel. They are so fast!
My opinion is that manufacturers can make a gravel bike like a road bike but they won't because they want you to buy 5 different bikes. I have a gravel bike that is as fast as a road bike but can clear 47c tires and I have a mountain bike for everything else. Great input, I appreciate it.