Gravel / Gravé / Gnarmac / Groad / ATB

Hmm i like this a lot, didn't know it was a Crust until I googled it. Bit strange with the 'mullet' set-up though. Why would you want 42c in front and 35c rear??

You can replace the jockey wheel cage and/or jockey wheels on Di2 RD though.

Imagine if everyday riders never had to adjust limit screws again.

Everyday riders never touch limit screws. They're set in the shop and not touched again until the bike is in a skip (except by another shop). Or did you mean every day riders like us lot that ride "every day" :)

Speaking about RD protection, have we had this yet? Or is it only for the MTB thread?

https://www.pinkbike.com/news/nicolai-unveils-first-production-bike-with-lal-bikes-supre-drivetrain.html

I presume it was mentioned somewhere (Innovations thread?) but it appeared somewhere I was reading recently so seems topical to this SRAM chat. Maybe that's why it reappeared.

Akose owners, all of you amiright?

Anyone with the most recent model with internal rear routing... does it require any special tools? or is the internal routing quite agricultural like the downtube..

Some pics from Jeroboam Mallorca

5 Attachments

wow! now thats loooking fukin awesome!
reminds me of this:

Nice!

Someone please justify this mullet thing with some loose haphazard reasoning so I have a reason to do this on my bike. I have all the bits ready.

Haha! I had a mullet set up on my race BMX, more grip on the front wheel. Guess it's the same reasoning here... Maybe more comfort for the wrists because of the extra damping.
Think the real reason is just to be different though

You want grippy tyre on the front and faster/slicker on the rear, since rear grip matters less than front and speed always matters :)

#shred #gravelbro

Because I'm a unique fucking snowflake, I have a reverse mullet - 45mm front and 50mm rear.

That's mostly due to the fork not taking a bigger tyre and me worried about mud clearance in Scotland. I'm want to change the rear to something slicker/faster but I also have a bunch of 27.5 MTB tyres to get rid of...

See this makes more sense because of faster accelleration in the rear (smaller wheel) and better rollover in the front. At least in MTB.

Either way would make no difference whatsoever on road(ish), wouldn't it? I wouldn't have noticed the Crust's wheels at all from just the photo.

It might not change the feel but if you're putting a measureably faster tyre on then it will reduce your rolling resistance so you will go faster for same energy. If you only use one fast tyre, sure you only get half the benefit, but it's still a benefit and if your aim is to ride fast you might need that front grip still.

Another consideration, if you're racing, on the road, aerodynamics plays more of a part than rolling resistance usually, so I would run a skinnier front tyre for better aero and a fatter rear tyre for better rolling resistance (and because the rear tyre is hidden by the frame and make less difference to aero)

By 'only one fast' you mean fast and slippy in the back and slow and grippy in the front?

I knew my old slick tyred 69er wasn’t just for the cool points.

I wouldn't have noticed the Crust's wheels at all from just the photo.

Wheels and tyres are the same size in the photo. @kjlem was talking about the stated tyre clearance.

It is odd. The only thing I can think of is that they wanted a tucked rear end, and the front is a result of the fork crown and legs choice. But I don’t know enough about frame building to prove that.

Also lugs. Doesn’t that limit your geo freedom?

Yeah

Yes that's right, this is what is written in the article

Before installing so much as a seat post, I knew I wanted even more tire clearance than the frame allowed. To do this I had the brake bridge removed and re-brazed to match the clearance of the fork, which enabled me to run a 700×42 tire front and rear.

Would've made more sense if it was like this from the beginning no?

this sounds absurd but i'm on a bike slack with some crust adjascent people and it was earnestly a mistake between the protoype and the production, it comes up every week or two there

it's believed the difference is caused/ assumed to be, having mis match brakes with varying drops, so when they calculated the numbers on adjustment between the run and the prototype, how much space they added between the tyre and the caliper was different

or to that effect

it's a mistake, but they've never addressed it, some say because it doesn't matter, some say it's because they do not care

The only thing I can think of is that they wanted a tucked rear end, and the front is a result of the fork crown and legs choice

It will be this. Tyre/chainring compromise

Brexit Crust!

1 Attachment

The worst goggle brand of all time?