My Genesis Croix de Fer

I saw one on a Pashley or something equally big/heavy recently, kept the wheel and bars from swinging it while being carried down a set of stairs just fine...

nice, I might give it a go.

Its designed to stop exactly that

I have a wheel stabiliser. Look for the filmer one on amazon it is cheaper than the hebie.

@thedopeghost - thats exactly what its for! it stops the front wheel moving around when locking up. it also will pull back the front wheel to a centre position when riding but this doesnt work as well if you have a lot of weight on your rack.

awesome, Ill check that filmer one out, I'm not too fussed about when I'm moving, but keeping the rack still while I'm loading up would be a god send.

cheers,

sorry for derailing the thread there.

No not at all, I'll llook that one up too JV, cheers

Filmer Steering Damper: Amazon.co.uk: Sports & Outdoors

here you go. If you have caliper brakes with a recessed nut you will need a problem solvers sheldon nut or similar work around to mount it.

Hey spotter, I looked throught the first couple of pages and couldnt find (or missed) the answer to this;

How tall are you / what is your inside leg measurement, and what size is your croix? I'm finding my 56cm a bit big...

I'm 6'4/192cm mine is the 60cm frame, no idea what my inseam is.

I have tried a 60 and I am just under 6ft. I find genesis sizing a bit weird, there is hardly any difference in the stack and reach between a 58 and 60.

Not sure that really helps you though

The 60cm isn't want if call a generous 60

I think I'm just adjusting to touring geometry and the longer wheelbase after touring on a cross bike with a touring fork for 4 years. Have you weighed yours?

How tall are you William?

5'10 - 5'11", 32" inside leg.

Was very happy on my 56cm genesis vapour, am very happy on my 56cm roadbike. Also happy on my 54cm langster, but have never ridden more than 20 miles on it.

Having seen Tommmmmmm's brakes using Ultegra CX77 and Yokozuna brake housing i'm very tempted to ditch my twin V and get the same housing and some TRP HY/RD instead

Go for it, but give my TRP Spyres a try first, it's better than the CX77.

I can get the HY/RD's for only £20 more than a pair of Spyres, surely the self adjustment is worth that?

I reckon so, the Spyres already is a piece of piss to install as well.

They're not even CX77, it's something crapper than that, but I still rate them. Definitely better than when I set them up anyway.

They're BR-R505s, 105 level.

I like big boxes and I cannot lie...

Thanks to the Kinoko sale, people behind me can enjoy being dry now too

CX usually have 65mm trails, road's 57mm, and low trail's 35mm.
Your CdF I estimate have 62mm trail, with the 52mm fork, it'll have 55mm trail, but less wheel flop which is an advantage with a front load.

Question on this; @edscoble @spotter

I've been looking at my CDF geo recently, I measured the rake as 45 and trail as 62 on a 60cm frame.

I've found the CDF to feel a bit 'dead' in the handling aspect. Is this due to the large trail? Possibly the weight...
I understand the large trail is for stability. If I moved to a more rake fork would this help to liven up the bike and make it a bit more fun/nice to ride? How would this compromise the stability with front panniers?

EDIT: I did just read this

So if we take a typical rando geometry as espoused by Peter Weigle and practiced here at HampCo - 72HTA with 55mm of rake - we get good handling, the front bag is behind the hub, and yes, the result is a lower trail number. But the HTA, rake, and bag location are the important factors here and the trail is simply a result, not an end in itself.

Did you move to a smaller trail fork spotter?

I've found the CDF to feel a bit 'dead' in the handling aspect. Is this due to the large trail? Possibly the weight...
I understand the large trail is for stability. If I moved to a more rake fork would this help to liven up the bike and make it a bit more fun/nice to ride? How would this compromise the stability with front panniers?

The CdF is more or less a CX bike, it's design to be stable and easy to ride when going off road, which usually translate into a very stable and dead ride when on the road, despite your computer saying you're going at a good lick.

Increase the rake will make the bike feel more nimble, closer to a road bike than a CX, it'll likely to feel easier to ride with a front load with less input required in cornering (pothole become easier to avoid mid-cornering), the best part is that you get a less pronounced effect of the cross wind which was problematic with high trail bike.

You already went touring, you got a good idea of what you'll take next time, and what to ditch/bring, a bikepack set-up mean a huge amount of weight from the panniers and rack is removed replaced by a big dry bag designed to strap onto your bike.

I would wait a bit, we're getting more road bike with full hydraulic brakes and 11 speed that'll be very useful for touring, if you're handy with a spanner and able to look after a 10 speed chains, no reason why a 11 speed would not be idea.

I post this in another topic;

Trail = distance between axle and headtube;

Track bike typically have 65mm trail, quite a high trail for high speed stability but feel crap at low speed (ever wonder why people like putting higher pressure tyres on their track bike on the road? now you know).

Road bike typically have 57mm trail, not as high as a track, but still give you a nimble ride with a bit of stability, this is the de facto choice of trail.

Rando bike have a much lower trail, around 35mm, they're much quicker than road bike and can feel extremely nimble at high speed without a front load.

Add a front load, it slower the steering, but enough to make it more like a road bike but with the additional benefit of being able to micro-correct your steering more while cornering (hence handle better).

Jan Heine wrote it well in his blog about the discovery of the front-end geometries;

Then I started riding an old Alex Singer randonneur bike (see above) once in a while. The Singer surprised me: “Tricky” corners suddenly were less difficult. When I noticed a pothole too late, and thought that I would not be able to steer around it, I braced myself for the impact. To my surprise, the bike responded quickly enough to avoid the pothole. When I got tired, the Singer was easier to keep on a straight line – in fact, I could ride on the white painted “fog line” for miles with little concentration (see photo at the top of the post). Riding no-hands at moderate speeds was easier, too. This confused me: The Singer had “quicker,” more precise steering, yet it was more stable.

When I switched back to my normal bike after a single ride on the Singer, I found myself running wide in corners. I hit potholes that I thought I would miss. And the bike sometimes weaved unexpectedly when I was getting tired. Both bikes had a similar positions, both had handlebar bags, but something was different. To my surprise, the bike I rode all the time felt less intuitive than the new-to-me Singer.

That is when we started measuring geometries. We realized that the Singer’s geometry was anything but the “relaxed” geometry we had expected. The bike had a steep head angle and less trail than was common at the time.

Thanks scobs!! Well of knowledge!

So more rake sounds the right think if I want to improve the ride of the CDF on the road. I wonder if spotter did change fork to thorn?

I don't mind touring with the extra bike weight, it's not an issue really. It's a tour not a race!