Best cyclocross bike under £1000 and other CX chat

right - I sent a fairly comprehensive email of all the questions raised so far.

I'll let you know when he gets back to me.

I might start a thread of its own

130 is the Civilian?

If so that's a disappointment.

Why? 135 will go in without a fight I'd wager.

I run both in my 'dale, no problems.

You are quite right, that's a disapointment then- makes much more sense to be able to use 29er wheels with a 135mm rear spacing in my opinion.

Any chance that it's just a typo on their site? I thought that the new disc cross wheelsets coming out were all 135mm spaced. !30mm spacing only makes sense for those using existing road bike wheels, none of which are disc ready :-/

That's suck egg's testicle, 2.5 each way is just about tolerated for a steel frame, but what about the disc rotor? will it make any difference?

^^ There are some road/disc hubs that are spaced at 130mm.

I'm confused though - in my experience a 135mm hub will go straight in a 130mm spacing anyway. Unless I'm missing something a 130mm spacing doesn't rule out any 135mm wheelset. Or does it?

I can see however that 130mm might not be the best choice.

FWIW Van Dessel and the new Litespeed disc frames are specced to take both 130 and 135mm hubs - it's pretty common just to squeeze em in.

^ Do they use a 132.5 spacing to allow this. Much like Soma & Surly do?

but what about the disc rotor? will it make any difference?

Might possibly mean using a smaller rotor? Depending on the maximum they allow to start with. ( assuming a 160mm )

^^ There are some road/disc hubs that are spaced at 130mm.

I recall that there were some about. I was under the impression that most were moving to 135mm, now that discs were becoming more widely accepted in cross.

Still, bicycle "standards" are a constantly shifting platform nowadays it seems.

So are you saying that with a 135 hub the rotor might foul the chainstay?

AFAIK there's no exact standard for horizontal rotor placement on the hub anyway so I'd have thought the frame would have quite a bit of tolerance in that regard.

But it's a good question for Civillian - can I slot a 135mm 29er wheelset in and ride off?

^ Do they use a 132.5 spacing to allow this. Much like Soma & Surly do?

I thought this was becoming standard for CX/roadies with discs.

A 130mm hub with a cassette on one side and a disc on the other is going to have small spoke bracing angles. Which means weaker wheels. I would have thought we'd be moving towards 135mm. I'm applying logic to a money fueled industry though.

A 130mm hub with a cassette on one side and a disc on the other is going to have small spoke bracing angles. Which means weaker wheels.

Probably explains the large NDS flanges on my 130mm disc hubs then.

It would seem simpler to go to 135, thus allowing you to simply use the existing disc hubs.

My Halfords BSO is 135mm at the back, which meant that I could use a standard Hope ProII Evo hub.

All the most popular disc hub options that come to mind. Shimano, DT, Mavic ( excluding speedcity ), Hope, come in mtb spacing. I do think it's a bit of an oversight to not take this into consideration when releasing a new frame.

There is a thread about the Civilian bike
on weighweenies. Frame is over 2.2kg
and complete bike over 10kg in singlespeed mode

The thread is here

Would be interesting to know what size he weighed. Similar frames, i.e. surly, pompino are around the 2.2kg mark.

For contrast, the Van Dessel G&T, an Alu & Carbon mix racing frame is around the 1400g mark (claimed), frame only.

The Cannondale SuperX is 1400g, frame & fork - one of the lightest CX framesets (claimed).

10.3kg sound about right, only 700g lighter than my Genesis CdF* which is a bit odd.

*weighted at 11kg with NoTube Crest/Hope wheelset, SKS mudguard, Brooks B17 Special otherwise standard.

^ The larger headtube & sliders might account for some extra weight ( as mentioned on weightweenies ). Your wheelset must be pretty light in comparison too ed.

Do you reckon the sliders could be modified/swapped for 135mm clearance?

phew glad we got that sorted (sort of)
that way I won't feel as bad about the heavy pompetamine at 2451g (large)

Could also be interested in frame set... depending on price

So do they actually lie about weights? I mean 100 grams off is fine i guess, you can blame it on size measured or whatever. But 800 grams difference from advertised to actual weight is a joke. Thats more than half of the claimed weight extra..

I doubt anyone thought a 4130 frame would be 1400 grams even in size 48 but still its very missleading. Hopefully just a poor communication or a typo rather than just a made up number out of the blue. In the end theres nothing but unsatisfied customers to gain from not putting a real weight out there imo.

So do they actually lie about weights?

Yes. A lot.

Hehe yeah i phrased that badly. Meant, was this really a lie?
its of by more than 50%. Hope its just a misscommunication..

Frame weight could be small frame with no paint no braze-ons, derailleur hanger etc. definitely seen that used as an explanation of how manufacturers stretch the weight thing.