 |
| Image courtesy of Specialized Bicycles |
Marketing is often blamed for a lot of 'cloak and dagger' theories proffered up by internet pundits and keyboard warriors. Sometimes there is something to these mostly crackpot theories. Sometimes there is nothing worth mentioning.
While I could be accused of being one of those aforementioned internet "opinionaters of doom and destruction", I have actually been a part of a successful bike design and I have ridden a lot of takes on what works well on unpaved surfaces in regards to 700c based bicycles. So, it isn't as though I don't have any expertise. That all said, this is still just my opinion on this Crux DSW. Okay? With that all said, here we go...
This is Specialized's take on a bicycle that could do several things. It could be a road bike, it could be a gravel bike, and they claim it can do cyclo cross too. It is made with hydro-formed aluminum sections welded together in a special process they call 'DSW' , Specialized claims this process can allow for the lightest alloy frame ever made for this type of bicycle and that it has similar attributes and ride qualities as carbon fiber. Note that Giant Bicycles has claimed that their hydro-forming could also rival what carbon does and have been saying so for several years now. It isn't just a 'Specialized thing'.
 |
| My Tamland Two in 2014. |
Since my bike is a 58cm, we will compare this to the 58cm Crux DSW. Keep in mind that the geometry changes slightly in smaller sizes and with the largest sized Crux DSW.
Specialized makes a big deal about tire clearances. They said that the Crux DSW has 700 X 47mm tire clearance. They also claim that the bike will handle a 650B X 2.1" tire. Compare this to the ten year old Raleigh. I can barely squeeze a 700c X 2.0" tire in that bike, but a 47mm tire is no big deal. The Raleigh handles the 650B X 47mm "Road Plus" WTB tires handily, but I doubt a 2.1"er is going in there. That said, while Specialized can hang their hat on the two-way tire use, 650B is quickly on its way to extinction as a general use gravel wheel size. It won't die off completely because smaller sized people will make good use of that wheel diameter, but 650B in my size is dead.
Now, let's talk about general geometry. The big numbers for me back ten, twelve years ago, were head angle, bottom bracket drop, and fork offset. Specialized's Crux DSW in a 58cm has a 72.25° head tube angle, a 72mm bottom bracket drop, and a fork offset of 50mm. The Raleigh Tamland Two has a head tube angle of 71.5°, a bottom bracket drop of 72.5mm, and a fork offset of 50mm.
Chain stay length runs 425mm for the Crux DSW and on my Tamland Two it is 430mm. The seat tube angle is 73.5° on the Crux DSW and it is 72° on the Tamland Two.
 |
| The Tamland Two as it sits today. |
Interestingly, as I have the Tamland Two set up now, the seat tube angle is 71° and the head tube angle is just a tad under 70°. Of course, I changed out the fork years ago for this Fyxation carbon fork, and that switched things up a bit.
My Take: Again - Specialized markets this mainly as a "gravel" category bike. So, taking them on their word, I'd say this bike is solidly in the "first generation gravel" category. There really isn't anything here that tells me that Specialized went out of their way to push the gravel bike into new territory, or "innovate" anything here other than maybe that hydro-formed aluminum frame. But - I mean - take a look at what Giant has been doing for years in this area. What is so "new" about this Crux frame, really?
Spec: My Tamland Two came with a full Ultegra drive train and Tektro Spyre mechanical disc brakes. I believe retail was something like sub - 25 hundred bucks. Maybe $2,400.00? The Crux DSW is $2,600.00 and comes with SRAM Apex 12 speed. The cassette bottoms out at a 44T cog while being driven by a 40T chain wheel. The Tamland had a 50T/36T double with an 11 - 34T cassette.
Currently I run 46T/36T crank with an 11 - 36T cassette. So, the gearing is not as deep on the Tamland, but it could be, easily, if I went with a 34T/33T inner ring. Basically the same set up I have on the Standard Rando v2. But that's another entire discussion....
The point is that for today's money, the Tamland Two would have cost you $3,100.00. So, the kit on the Crux DSW doesn't look quite so pedestrian.
My Take, Part 2: So, the Specialized Crux does present a good value. Especially when you consider that the frame is really pretty cool and that you get a decent kit bolted to that. The bike only fails when it comes to Specialized's "most capable gravel bike" marketing hooha. It's obvious that when you look at the details that this bike is "okay", but it is in no way "most capable" when it comes to gravel bikes. I mean, even the Tamland Two had rack and fender mounts, a chain peg, and later Tamland models had a third bottle mount under the downtube. The Crux DSW? I don't see mention of any of that, but I did spy a third bottle mount in the photos of the bike. Finally, the bike was designed with a sub-600mm stack height in my size. That's probably a little short for riders in the category that this bike is marketed to who, generally speaking, are going to want a bit more upright position. There will be a lot of riser stems sold aftermarket for Crux DSW's, in my opinion.
Conclusions: So when you see a mass intro via several cycling online sites, it usually means that you are going to get some pretty glowing reviews, because these folks have relationships to nurture between the marketing departments and journos. That's just human nature. Me? I don't make my money doing this, and I don't necessarily have anyone to please either, so this is my take on things. Specialized isn't the only company I could have picked on either, but they are the latest to market with a gravel bike that has some pretty debatable claims.
4 comments:
650B may be going extinct for gravel but I hope we never lose the the 650B x 38 size for road. If anything needs to go extinct it's the 700C x 23-28 wheel size for road bikes. Converting to 650B x 38 transforms a nervous twitchy crit bike into a comfortable mile gobbling machine. Overall wheel diameters are about the same so geometry is preserved and the bottom bracket is usually lowered a few mm. On some of these conversions you would swear the bike was originally designed for 650B. Now you have enough tire to check out that bit of two track dirt road that catches your eye while riding out in the country.
@Phillip Cowan - This reminds me of the early internet days when I came across a few sites that specialized in the conversion of older road bikes to 650B. I think they were using 42mm tires then though.
Hi Mr Guitar Ted! This kind of independence post with a critic vision based on data comparison and experience, is what gives level to a Blog or magazine article. We used to have an engineer, PhD, journalist (everything), in Spain. César Agüi (RIP). He wrote in “La Moto” and his articles were like this post. Clear and excellent explained so everyone can understand it.
Related to the bike, I see it as a nice competitor to the Trek Checkpoint Alr for example here in Spain.
Personally I like this posts.
One question. Do you think that a series like the already wrote by you about gravel evolution, but comparing the evolution of technology canti, v-brakes, disc, thread- ahead headsets, cranksets…. Focus in the valid application in gravel, can be interesting?
All the best!
@Pedro - Thank you for your comments. I regret that I did not have the chance to experience Mr. Agui's wisdom.
An article about the evolution of cycling technology as it applies to gravel? I do think that may be interesting. Thank you for this suggestion!
Post a Comment