[freeheelwilly]

[ghostofcarl]

[climbhoser]

[mel]

Polemonium - you couldn't have said better about trading in on an old established name. I remember the Motobecane Team Champion in Merckx orange, all Campy, I was envious of guys riding those machines.

[jonesinski]

Other than the few I know (surly, all city, salsa) what other small(ish) bike manufacturers are making quality steel cx bikes, not just frames, for less than 15k?

[James]

I think you meant 1.5 k??

[James]

I would be curious what percent of cross bike purchasers are looking to race and train to race because I don't think many of these types would want a steel frame.

[James]

I have not followed this thread that much and these are more race style cross bikes but Excel Sports has big cross department.

http://www.excelsports.com/main.asp?page=7&major=8&minor=1

They have a couple full bikes for well under 2 k and a few frames you could build up with their SRAM build kit for under 2K.

[jonesinski]

[James]

I think what you say makes sense. The only thing I might add is if you can't find what you want an aluminum bike might make sense.

I generally can't stand aluminum bikes and how they ride but with 35 c tires I don't notice how harsh my cross bike frame is.

I don't understand how swapping wheels will matter on a steel or aluminum bike unless you mean you will be running narrow road tires and then my above point would be moot.

After rereading more of your posts I see that you want a 58 frame and none of the bikes I posted come in that size. Excel is good source for future cross parts.

[Pinnah]

[jonesinski]

[jonesinski]

[jonesinski]

Alright, so fuji and and jamis only seem to make aluminum cx bikes based on what I saw on their websites and what I really want is steel. The port townsend looks like an awesome touring bike, but not really what I have in mind for my needs: a mixture of singletrack and fast group road rides. Not that the masi will be perfect for either of those, but it will be a better happy medium IMO.

[Pinnah]

Joneski,

If you like the way the Masi rides, you should get it. It will do everything you're looking for and nothing I'm going to write here should change that. I'm only writing as you've asked for alternatives.

RE: the Volpe, like the CX, it retails for around $1200. I must be missing a part of the story on price.

RE: the Port Townsend, it's not a real touring bike.

Take off the cheesy front rack, which is a marketing ploy to make the bike attractive to subscribers of BQ. And take off of the fenders and send to a TTips bro in Seattle who needs them. Then look at the frame specs of the PT compared to the frame specs of the CX. You'll see bikes that are very close.

Given the choice for a bike for fast group rides, I would pick the PT over the Masi. It's geometry is sort of like a steel version of the Specialized Roubaix or C'dale Synapse.

Here's what's going on....

As you've seen in looking at cross bikes, you have extreme dedicated cross bikes (carbon, no eyelets, sometimes higher BBs) and you have cross bikes that are more like all rounders (steel, eyelets, normal BBs).

The same is true with "touring" bikes. Extreme dedicated touring bikes are optimized for carrying heavy loads. Traditionally this means heavier, stiffer tubing and triple cranks. It could be argued that the PT is an updated version of what we used to call a "sport touring" or "light touring" bike back in the 70s and 80s. Note that the gearing is built around a club ride double chainring, not a triple. The frame is butted Reynolds 520.

This means that once you toss off the rack and fenders, the only difference between the PT and CX is really going to be: slight diffs in the geometry (I think the PT wins here), slight diffs in the stock components (toss up) and different derailler cable routing.

<mini rant and some speculation>
Back in the day when all tubing was narrow, we would pick frames based on different butting and tubing wall thicknesses. Reynold 531 use 8/5/8 buttings, while Columbus SL and Ishiwata 022 used a slightly thicker 9/6/9. SP was even thicker and some touring bikes used thicker, heavier straight gauge tubing. These specs used to be findable and they were things you thought about when getting a bike, say, circa 1980.

Also back then, it was more commonly accepted that a frame could be too stiff for a rider. Light, whippy frames like the Alan Aluminum or many bikes made from 531 and 019 were favored by spinners, while stiff bikes made from SP were favored by sprinters. 9/6/9 frames like those made from SL and 022 were in the middle.

Today, it's almost impossible to find tubing specs and for most of buying public who believes that stiffer is always better it doesn't much matter.

Here's some speculation on my part.... I deeply suspect that the tubing on the Trek 520 and Bruce Gordon touring bike is quite heavy and stiff. These bikes are true dedicated touring bikes.

I also suspect that the Reynolds 520 used on the Jamis Aurora is the same spec as the Reynolds 520 used on the Raleigh road bikes. If I'm right about this (it's speculative and no way I know to prove it), then the Jamis Aurora is really a light touring bike. Again, drop the racks and fenders and you'll see a bike very closely speced to the Masi CX, only with a triple crank.
</rant>

In any event, I think you are right to stay away from true extreme dedicated touring bikes. They're heavy and ride like tanks unless you have a full load on them.

But, I think that light touring bikes (Raleigh Port Townsend, possibly the Jamis Aurora, Soma Casseroll) are nearly identical to all'rounder 'cross designs (e.g. Masi CX). Remember, you're buying a frame with parts on it. The frames are very, very close.
_________________
Dave "Pinnah" Mann
========================
"It is impossible, or not easy, to do noble acts without the proper equipment."
Aristotle, <<Politics>>, 1323a-b, trans Jowett