jadmt

so I am 64yoa and used to be a serious rider ie raced on a team and did tri's and did double centuries, some state 40K time trial medals etc. My last bike before getting out of it was a 1994 ritchey road logic, I stopped for 20 years or so and this past July decided to get a bike just to piddle around on. I ended up getting hooked again and did around 3000 miles from July to Jan and since Jan 1 this year have done about 2400 miles (I live in Montana) most out doors. been doing a lot of 50-60 mile rides and thinking I am on the wrong bike for putting bigger miles on. I have a handsome xoxo with mustache bars 26" wheels etc (copy of a bridgestone xo1) so probably not the ultimate bike for wanting to do centuries on. My buddy says Canyon is about the best value going. the two mentioned in the title have kind of peaked my interest. Anybody have any comments on the two bikes mentioned? Lots of gravel roads around where I live so the grizl kind seems like a good choice but I also think maybe the endurance is a better choice.

Polaris OBark

Get the Grizl. It won't hold you back on road, and it is more versatile.

PeteHski

I have an Endurace and it is great for fast century road rides. But if you intend to ride those gravel roads then I would get the Grizl and maybe a second wheelset for dedicated road rides. I do think Canyon produce excellent bikes and are very good value compared to most other major brands. The Endurace can also handle a bit of gravel on the right tyres, but you would be limited to around 32 mm tyre width, maybe a tad more. I think there is now a slightly more gravel oriented variant of the Endurace available too, which could be a great option.

Edit: Just had a look on the Canyon website and the Endurace CF7 All-Road is the new version I mentioned above and comes with 35 mm tyres. That could be a great choice for 50/50 road/gravel use.

Iride01 

Canyon's of similar size tend to stretch you out more than other bikes. Not that that is bad or good. But if you get one, you should probably talk to Canyon and others about the fit and what will really be the correct size for you. Don't just assume that because your Ritchey Logic was a particular size that a Canyon in the equivalent size of either model will be the size you need.

I'd like to try a Canyon since I liked being stretched out on the old over size vintage bikes I used to ride, but since I haven't got any friends that have one around here to try one and Canyon only seems to sell online. So I'm a little hard pressed to want to buy a bike that I can't ride first. Maybe that'll change one day.

jadmt

yes they can fit 35mm it is funny they come with a 30mm up front and a 32mm in back. I definitely will be more pavement than gravel probably 70/30 and when I say gravel I am talking about this type of roads..

jadmt

yes the sizing are not even in the same ball park. I fit a small canyon. I am 175cm with 82cm standover inseam. my ritchey was a 54 and my handsome a 56.

Polaris OBark

Unless it is much rougher than the photograph makes it look, you would be absolutely fine with the endurance bike and ~35 mm ± tires.

The Grizl is a nice bike, so you can't go wrong either way.

jadmt

some stuff might be a little more washboard than this but not going to be dodging baby head size rocks.

Eric F 

IMO, you can't make a wrong decision between those 2 bikes, for the use you have described. Picking the right tires for your conditions will make more difference for your rides than the differences between the frames.

PeteHski

I would probably lean toward the Endurace for a 70/30 road/gravel split on those roads. The 45 mm tyres on the Grizl will slow you down a bit on the road, but you could always change them for 35 mm or less. In that way the Grizl is more versatile, but unless you have some much rougher gravel paths it may be overkill. Either way I think you will be happy.

Polaris OBark

The Grizl fit me fine (I test rode it last summer).

I think the endurance would not. Canyon has some unusual sizing, so make sure it will fit.

Eric F 

Reviewing the charts at BRR, comparing road vs. gravel tires, I was surprised to find that careful tire selection can really narrow the difference...

Continental GP5000 TL 25mm @ 80psi = 9.9W
Schwalbe G-One RS Super Race 40mm @ 45psi = 14.5W.

Less than 10W (total for both tires) rolling resistance penalty on smooth surfaces. There are more factors than just laboratory RR results, but it's still closer than I expected. If you're not in a competitive situation, or otherwise concerned about maximum efficiency, the difference might not even matter to you.

PeteHski

There's also an aero and weight penalty to add for the much wider tyres, but I agree it is not a huge difference, especially in a non-competitive situation. I did a Sportive event a few weeks ago on mixed roads (a few similar or slightly rougher than the gravel road the OP posted) and there was one guy riding on gravel tyres in a group I was with. He was rolling ok, but I was glad to be on 30 mm GP5000S TR. There were no roads where I felt he would have had an advantage. But the versatility of a gravel bike is hard to ignore IF you intend to make use of it. Otherwise a bike like the Endurace is perfect for what the OP described straight out of the box.

Guff

I went with the Endurace since I'm 75% on chip-seal pavement, 25% on gravel. No regrets and would have been happy with either

jadmt

I ended up going with an endurace cf 8. showed up today. I ordered it Wednesday so pretty impressed with how fast it got sent out. I think I am going to like it...a lot...

Guff

Beautiful bike!