 You don't need to be an 'investor' to invest in Singletrack: 6 days left: 95% of target - Find out more
Last year I built up two dropped bar bikes - my first "proper" builds that weren't some sort of bastardised 29er monster cross build.
First was a Sonder Camino:
The second a Genesis Day One:
The Sonder is an XL (IIRC a 57cm ST) and the Genesis is a 58.
I'm currently using a 90mm Redshift stem (not pictured above) on the Sonder and have just bought a 120mm stem to replace the 110mm pictured above on the Genesis. I have 44cm bars on the Sonder & 46cm on the Genesis. Both run a layback post.
I've ridden the Sonder a lot more than the Genesis but I'm leaning towards the fit of the Genesis that has a shorter reach but longer stem. The Genesis has a slightly lower stack. This seems counter intuitive to the MTBer in me who still thinks the 500mm reach on my Signal is a little short!
In terms of average TT length does it go (short to long) Road, CX, gravel?
As I understand the above the Sonder falls into the gravel category and the Genesis is a cross between a road and and CX????
I'd like to try a new frame this spring #bikecaine but to get close to the reach of the Genesis I'd need a 59 (for this brand) and to get close to the reach of the Sonder a 130mm stem (I'm not still in the 90s am I).
Why isn't non MTB sizing simple 🙂
Hard to answer I think.
I'm not sure about gravel, I would say you'd want the same as for CX, the difference as far as I was aware came from steeper head angles in CX if anything. From memory the difference in the Scott range is the colour.
Reach as I understand it is from the bottom bracket, so may not be that helpful on a dropped bar bike that you sit down on most of the time. Effective top tube is likely the better measurement.
Stack also affects things. My experience is a lower stack makes the bike feel longer as you are reaching down and away to the bars. My newest bike is almost identical to my old roadie except the stack is 10mm greater. Feels noticeably shorter.
For CX I tend to operate around 100mm stem +/- bit shorter than the road where I'd put 120mm on the same top tube length. But again, the CX bike also has higher bars.
130mm stem isn't ridiculous for a big road bike. It might help to know the bikes and see side by side geometry. To make sure you are comparing the same measurements. The only certainty is that Seat tube is probably the least useful way of measuring a bikes size
The problem may be just the two different bike makes and as you say sizing I have Trek cx bikes and gravel both 52cm Cx bike has shorter top tube not much in it Cx is 2016 gravel 2021 not much help I expect.
The trend for gravel bikes has to go for longer TT, shorter stem compensated by a slacker HTA in comparison to a CX/road geometry. I set up my gravel/CX bikes with more saddle layback (rearward weight for grip and engage glutes + quads for getting the power down in the saddle. I see a lot of gravel bikes fitted with inline posts and saddle slammed forward, more like an MTB which can over-load the front and cause wash-out. Worth experimenting with your set-up to see what works for you. Also, less need for a big saddle to bar drop as there's less benefit from aero if you're riding at a slower pace - also makes life easier for longer days in the saddle.
I always thought CX bikes were meant to have TTs that were on the shorter side. Some gravel bikes (Whyte inparticular) started pushing out TT measurements on their early cx/gravel bikes (Saxon Cross then Friston) to accomodate shorter stems, with slacker headangles. Dont know if thats a trend in all gravel bike geo though - I think they are a bit like mtbs in that you can find a range of different geos to suit your requirements.
What was the question?