The cyclo-cross vs gravel conundrum: understanding the differences
 

I couple of years ago, I was struggling to understand the differences between CX and Gravel bikes. Its easy to see how the specs are different, but I wanted to know how do they really ride.

This article does the best job I've seen summing it up (quoted below).
https://www.cyclingnews.com/features...e-differences/

I'll add that if you are not a beginner, CX is somewhat more fun - specifically in urban riding, commuting, pavement, and single track.

The agility, tight turning radius, amazing hill climbing ability (short punchy hills), and out of the saddle acceleration can put a smile on your face.

If you like all day rides or fast loose downhills, you definitely want the stability of a gravel bike (longer/lower/slacker). If you are the type to stay seated (vs out of the saddle acceleration), you'll likely be happier on the more endurance focused gravel geometry.

That and of course, "gravel" is more versatile with slightly larger tire clearance, lower gearing, and of course many more mount points for carrying gear.

What do you think?

key thoughts from the article:

I think the difference is mostly marketing horse**** intended to sell more bikes. Most people would do fine on either.

When you actually compare the geometry of gravel and cross bikes the differences in mm are quite small. The biggest noticeable difference I suspect is from tires. I have two cross bikes a Boardman CXR and an older S-Works Tri-Cross. The Tri-Cross is probably closer to a modern gravel bike and accepts bigger tires. They're both fine on gravel. If I need 2" tires I prefer to use a MTB with proper suspension.

If I look at the head tube angle for example a large CXR (cross) is the same as a large Open UP (Gravel)

+1. It doesn't help that "cross" bikes were always kind of a nebulous market anyway. Sometimes they were legitimate cyclocross racing bikes, sometimes they were cyclocross-ish try-to-do-anything bikes, sometimes they were just warmed-over hybrids.

While some of the hardware changes are lost on me, I think "gravel" bikes generally suit recreational gravel riders a lot better than pretend cyclocross bikes did.

Loosely-defined categories with lots of crossover and internal variance. Broad generalizations about them can be made, but are not overly useful when choosing what particular bicycle to buy.

I’m not most people then, lol. And certainly, if you are not pushing it, it doesn’t really matter much. Humans are very adaptable and will adapt to a different bike typically in about 10 minutes. And, if you know what you want, this isn't the thread for you.

Still, If I want stability at speed on loose surfaces, I struggle a little on a CX bike and get frustrated. If I want to maneuver in tight spaces, corner hard, or power out of turns, I struggle a little on a gravel bike and get frustrated. I could go on, but it’s in the first post. When purchasing a bike I would rather understand the differences and not feel I need to trade in my bike in a year for something that works better for me (nope, you’ve never seen those posts, have ya?)

Certainly, I’ll agree with you that the Open UP’s geometry isn’t much difference than my cross bike. But the Open is at the extreme “road bike like” end of the gravel spectrum.

My opinion is that the best gravel bike is my rigid 29-Plus bike. Your mileage may vary, but at the proper psi inflation, the grip and handling ability of plus tires on loose surfaces simply cannot be beat.

I'm just sick of people saying they need a gravel bike not a CX bike, like CX bikes can't go off road. THEY BOTH GO OFF ROAD WELL AND ARE LOADS OF FUN.

I don’t believe they’re saying that because they believe CX cannot go off-road. I believe they’re saying that because CX bikes are typically more race focused so their geometry will reflect that. People who don’t race much or at all might be more comfortable with stability of a typical gravel bike.

No disrespect, but I read that comment from your first post and discount pretty much anything else you have to say. I've never been on a non-electric bike that had 'amazing' hill climbing ability. I've had power meters on many different types of bikes and have never seen any differences in the power output for any of them (other than my sprint power is gradually deteriorating with time :( )

I have a raleigh CX bike (appears similar in geometry to the specialized crux which I know is a true CX bike) and I did gravel riding on it this summer (including 150mile gravel event). It was fine. I'm not an expert by any means, but I believe common wisdom says if you're doing CX get a CX bike and it'll work just fine as a gravel bike, whereas a gravel bike is not super compatible to doing CX races.

Ha, Im not sure how that couldnt be viewed as disrespectful. Not saying you are wrong to discount pretty much everything, I just laugh when I see 'no disrespect' or 'no offense' before totally discounting and ripping on a view.

One of my kids constantly says 'no offense' to begin comments that are hurtful and the other interrupts with 'you cant just say that before being insulting!'.
Good stuff.

Yeah, that's up there with "I'm not a racist, buuuut..." ;)

This is how I read it. I ride my CX bike on gravel all the time and it's great. It may not be as long and stable as a purpose-built gravel bike, but it's still longer than my road bike and feels perfectly fine on gravel to me.

For sure CX bikes can be used for gravel bike. Many people do it.

I think this is an interesting topic. I've always seen CX bikes as race-specific, and gravel bikes were for long hours of endurance type riding. CX bikes have the most aggressive geometry possible (while still accommodating the UCI max 33mm tires) and are built as light as possible, with 1x drivetrains. Gravel bikes are heavier, more relaxed, lower and had either 2x or really big range 1x setups.

That said, it's been interesting to track what kind of bikes are being used at big gravel races It used to just be CX bikes becuase there was no such thing as a "gravel bike", then around 2016 Ted King won Dirty Kanza on a Cannondale Slate with a suspension fork. A true gravel bike.
In 2017 the men's winner was on a 3T Exploro, billed as an "aero gravel" bike.
Then, in 2018, both Kaitie Keough and Ted King won Dirty Kanza on CX race bikes.

This year, both Colin Strickland and Amity Rockwell won the race riding a gravel-race specific Allied Able bike. The Allied Able is marketed as having a short and aggressive wheelbase and 1x gearing, which sounds a lot like a CX bike.

The gravel bike segment has definitely evolved to include a large range of bikes and some of them seem to overlap with CX bikes. Bikes billed as CX seem to be narrowly focused on racing. It wouldn't surprise me to see manufacturers moving away from entry-level CX bikes (like the CAADX), and instead relying on some of their more all-around gravel bikes that can be occasionally raced in CX.

Likewise I see people race CX on gravel and mountain bikes all the time too.

Of course racing MTB on a CX would just be bonkers.

https://cimg8.ibsrv.net/gimg/bikefor...d2ffdcd43c.jpg

Touché

Please know I'm also totally joking around and really think nothing of that wording. I totally get the point you mean in using it and I use that too sometimes.

Internet doesnt express joking around too well sometimes.

Am I wrong in thinking that GRAVEL bikes are just a more comfortable CX bike with usually more tire clearance? And the two categories are mere marketing talk to sell more bikes?

Both are drop bar bikes with larger tire clearance. Some more aggressive than others, some larger tire clearance than others.

I don't think you're wrong in thinking that, but it's also a broad generalization. There are definitely some race oriented "gravel bikes" that have very similar tire clearance and geometry as some CX race bikes. There are also some more casual recreational CX bikes that would fit well into a "gravel bike" category that didn't exist a few years ago. Also, using this same generalization, CX bikes are really just more comfortable road bikes with more tire clearance and less aggressive geometry, etc.

Road Race - Road Endurance - Road Touring
CX Race - Gravel Race - Gravel Adventure

Now that disc brakes are everywhere, the differences between these bikes really comes down to frame geometry, tire clearance and gearing. To take it a step further, the differences between gravel adventure bikes and XC mountain bikes are getting pretty blurry too. There are several gravel bikes out there that are essentially hard tail XC mountain bikes with drop bars and rigid forks, running MTB rear components and hub spacing. Several manufactures are making gravel bikes with suspensions as well.

I think the bigger question I have is "what attributes make a good gravel bike?". This involves answering an even bigger question of defining what "gravel riding" even is. Is it flat and fast racing on gravel roads across open plains? Is it climbing a rugged two track twisting up into the mountains where you want to bring lunch and a few beers? Is it cross-country traversing over cobbled farm roads in northern France? Is it cruising a twisty singletrack trail along the shore? Each of these situations will favor a slightly different type of bike, but does that matter? Unless you're racing, it seems like your style of riding would dictate which type of bike works best for you, similar to deciding between road race and endurance styles of bikes.

Of course the bike industry is interested in selling more bikes, but also there's only a small segment of people who feel the need to own a specific bike for every purpose. I think there are just as many people out there that are finding they can use a single bike for all of those situations, plus more. Unless you're really into fast group rides or road racing, a CX or gravel bike with a second set of wheels makes a pretty good road bike for solo riding, touring, commuting, occasional CX racing, etc. Heck, there's a guy in my local CX series that is on the podium every weekend in the masters series while riding a flat bar rigid fork XC mountain bike.

owning more bikes can be fun regardless of whether it’s necessary. But I agree, unless you’re racing a CX or Gravel bike with a 2nd set of wheels can do most, if not all that most people need outside of more mountain bike type riding. I’ve seen many people do well in gravel bike events on mountain bikes where the terrain benefits that style bike more.

GCN, gravel v CX

CX bikes have traditionally had higher bottom brackets, but that isn't so universal anymore.