Atsuico

Hello all, I'm new so I hope this is the correct section for this question. I'm a tall rider, almost 6'6" (198cm) and am looking into purchasing a new "gravel" bike. Right now I ride an old 63cm hand lugged Trek (which I love) and I have a 62cm Raleigh (which feels small at times). We take a lot of trips out west and ride a mix of road/dirt/gravel trails leading me to want a newer bike that kinda does it all but is still quick (thinking of trying a gravel race one day).

So I've been looking at the Ridley X-Trail Carbon 105 because it comes in an XL that they list as 194cm and larger fit. Though after going to some local shops, one of my favorite places for parts recommended the Giant TCX Advanced SX. My issue is the Giant lists the size max at 194cm. However when I look at the specs it seems the Giant's geometry is larger in many areas.

So do any riders have any input on this? My other concern is for $2000 I feel like the Ridley is a better deal. Isn't the SRAM Apex an entry level groupset, while the Ridley comes with a Shimano 105? Plus I heard Giant's wheels and other components are not very good quality. So if both sizes fit would the Ridley still be a better choice?

Thanks in advance for any help.

Atsuico

Also wanted to add that it is nigh impossible for me to test any of these because no one stocks sizes that big. All the shops say they would have to specially order one in requiring a deposit and such. I'm not sure how to go about this situation.

tyrion

Comparing this:
https://www.competitivecyclist.com/r...lete-bike-2017
and this:
https://www.giant-bicycles.com/us/tc...sx--2017--2016

the main difference I see is the Ridley has a 2.3cm higher stack but 0.7cm shorter reach. All in all I'd characterize the Ridley as slightly "bigger".

mstateglfr 

I am 6'5. As a comparison, reference the 64cm frame geometry in the link. This is the frame i use(mine is actually an older 65cm, but the geometry is the same as the current 64cm)
Monster Cross Frames - Black Mountain Cycles

This will hopefully give you decent reference to then compare to the frames you are considering.
Mine fits perfect with a 100mm +7deg rise stem and there is about 3/4" drop from thebsaddle to bars.
Not super aggressive, but also not bars above the saddle relaxed.

I feel your pain on buying sight unseen.

As for the 2 bikes you reference...
The giant is underwhelming to me. 1x drivetrain is gimmicky to me. It just doesnt seem to be significant weight saving when it needs a dinner plate sized cassette. Thats a super aggressive rider position.
Carbon frame is cool, i guess.
Geometry is super small and compact. Really compact.

The ridley is certainly closer to what i ride in terms of geometry, so thats a positive if i were riding. Even still, its on the small side for stack and reach.
The drivetrain is better suited for me, but i would still want changes. Drop the 50t chainring to a 46 and swap the cassette for an 11-34t or 11-36t.


I dont get 50t chainrings on gravel bikes. Needing that 50t is just so rare on gravel/dirt when even 46/11 combo is stronger than most can handle for extended time and gets me moving so fast on gravel that its faster than i am often times able to handle. 46/11 means i am going 30mph on gravel at 90rpm.

Sorry for the side-rant.

Good luck on the search too.

Atsuico

Thanks for the feedback, i'll check that link. While i've ridden a lot over the years i'm a noob when referencing sizing numbers. I agree on the 1x drivetrain, I actually feel like i'd be missing more high gear. Totally get what you're saying with the gears on gravel, however i'd do a fair amount of road riding with this. Currently I have 42/53 chainrings and 21-13 sprocket so i do appreciate the higher gears for long downhill stretches.

FBinNY 

Keep in mind that today's sloping top tubes makes straight across comparison of frame size more difficult. Many makers include the "effective" top and seat tube lengths, which are what the dimensions would have been if the frame had a horizontal top tube. Knowing that makes direct comparison possible.

shoota 

I couldn't agree any more with everything here. The Giant is small, the Ridley's reach is crazy short, and 50T rings are crazy (I'm looking at you Jamis grr).

shoota 

50T makes sense here then.

mstateglfr 

Ok, couple things.

1- with road riding too, I get the 50t ring. And you would for sure miss gearing on that Giant since you would use it for paved riding too.
2- that mentioned gearing = you are a beast. <---meant in the most complimentary of ways.

Atsuico

You know i actually ran numbers through a gear calculator and had no idea how much of a difference an 11 tooth was compared to a 13. A 46/11 would be almost equal to a 53/13! Like i said i'm not a numbers guy but that's good to know now. Yes though, not having anything lower than the 42/21 is downright painful at times, especially being a 200lb rider.

Jeez this whole geometry thing is a mess, Giant is small, Ridley doesn't have enough reach, this is why I've been riding my 85 Trek 90% of time. I just really would like to enjoy some newer technology, friction shifting is great and all, but the lack of gears, and flexible frame that likes to twist and go into auto gear changing mode when i get on it hard has gotten old.

shoota 

Haha. If you like your trek you could always put a new group on it. But if you're itching for a new bike then only that will suffice.

mstateglfr 

So some options to consider

- Specialized Diverge series. Ill never suggest to anyone to buy this brand, but hey, take a look. the largest size has a stack height of 658mm and a reach of 409mm. Pretty solid sizing. Downsides are(besides the brand)- tires limited to 36-38mm and a higher bottom bracket than whats trendy. The tire size would be the bigger issue of the two to me. if that size max works for you though, then perfect.
The elite dsw is a lot under your budget. There are a few other models over the $2k price.

- Black Mountain Cycles Monstercross frame. $600 for the frame and fork. 64cm frame gives you 652mm stack height and 404mm reach. high quality double butted steel tubing. can fit up to 50mm tires and the frame has road dropout spacing. potential downside is cantilever brakes only.
The shop owner, Mike Varley, will build a bike for you. He is a wealth of knowledge and experience, is on the taller side of things and can relate to your frustration, and his builds are quality. I ended up building my own frame as it cost many hundreds less, but I also got machine built wheels(identical spec'd to ones he handbuilds) which are less expensive.
Monster Cross Bikes - Black Mountain Cycles At least one of the builds is about $2k.

- Gunnar Cycles Crosshairs frame. Their 64, 66, and 68cm frames have good stack and reach heights. $1300-1450 for the frame and fork(depends on what fork you choose- steel or carbon).

- Soma Double Cross Disc frame. 66cm, quality Tange Prestige tubing, fits up to 45mm tire. 673mm stack height and 408mm reach. You could pair it with a lugged steel curved fork, a straight blade steel fork, or a carbon fork. $470 for the frame and $160-300 for the fork depending on what you get.


They all have their positives and negatives. Whether its limited tire clearance(relative to others), brake style, component selection, price, or having to build- there are potential drawbacks.
I will say that with building the bike on your own(or a shop), you get exactly what you want. You get the drivetrain you want, the wheels you want, the cockpit setup you want. Buying this stuff across the pond from Europe will save hundreds compared to buying from a shop.
I also listed 3 of the 4 as steel because its what I ride so I am most familiar(having done this dance last year), and because you said you like your mid80s Trek so much. You already accept steel as a legitimate frame material and the 3 largest stock frames I know of are steel.

Atsuico

Great advice, thanks guys. I've thought about building my own, it's just that i would really like to get a lighter stiffer frame. I have a lot of steel bikes and when they get that big, even high end ones like the Bianchi seem to twist under stress.

I too have a distaste for specialized but i think i'll give that a look. Though i agree that the tire limit will probably be a negating factor.

Atsuico

After thinking things though and running through every LBS (which has been a bunch) I haven't been able to try anything that would fit me, and I don't feel like any of the salesman gave two craps about what I wanted.

So looking though those links mstateglfr gave me I am considering contacting Gunnar. I've thought previously about getting a custom steel frame, my only concern was flex and it appears that I shouldn't have any problem if I explain my concerns. So before when I thought about a custom frame I was looking into Clockwork bikes. Since I'm here in SE Minnesota I have a lot of options between here and Wisconsin. Does anyone have any input on Clockwork compared to Gunnar they'd care to share?

mstateglfr 

So i am no use on the gunnar or clockwork question, but wanted to confirm your new confidence in the frame not flexing.

I think that between oversize steel tubes and slightly sloping top tubes, a lot of the flex issues have gone away.
I am 230# and dont find the modern steel frame to be limiting terms of twisting flex even when climbing out of the saddle.
I am sure it flexes more than some absurdly oversized carbon bottom bracket shell, i am just not strong enough for it to be a noticable negative issue. No ghost shifting or anything like that.
Itll for sure be stiffer than your mid-80s trek. I own a lot of 80s steel bikes and the Black Mountain frame flexes less. A lugged reynolds531 Trek is beautiful and still more than worthy to ride, but new OS tubing will twist less.


Time to read about clockwork!
Eta- yup, totally seen clockwork's site before. The drawn components was a quick reminder. Sweet looking road and cross frames!

Kwe4130

Just curious what you ended up buying. I am the same size and in the same situation...