Chadvdw67 Posted September 17, 2020 Share Good evening hubbers, I am looking at getting a gravel bike, the roadie is just a bit too harsh on my pansy ass. But my question is this, there are 4 bikes I am keen on, 2 Alloy frame, 1 Steel frame, and 1 Carbon, but I am confused as to which is the better, more comfortable choice? I have seen a lot of people saying Steel gives the best ride, but does it really make that big a difference? Bikes I am looking at are Norco Search XR S2 (Steel)Cannondale Topstone (Alloy)Giant Revolt (Alloy)Giant Revolt advanced (Carbon) Any advice, tips or pointers would be greatly appreciated. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BaGearA Posted September 17, 2020 Share I read steel and skiiped to reply STEEL IS REAL! Frosty 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DR ◣◢ Posted September 17, 2020 Share I read steel and skiiped to reply STEEL IS REAL!+1 for steel. Once you go steel you don’t want anything else. I miss my Singular so much. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jewbacca Posted September 17, 2020 Share I would also say steel. If you aren't racing the front of the field and every 50g is important, you will be faster on a comfortable bike. Steel it the only answer. If you need marginal gains to beat Matt Beers up Swartberg pass near Prins Albert to take the win, carbon. BUT be aware that the one with hydro brakes is better..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NickGM Posted September 17, 2020 Share To answer your question about "feel" and ride quality.... I recently built up a my own steel framed gravel bike and I personally think it does feel a lot nicer to ride than carbon or Alu. I haven't stopped riding it since it was finished. Shocks just don't seem to propagate up the frame and into your wrists and backside as much on a steel bike. But (unpopular opinion coming) that could all be BS: The bloke who made the video above has built up a reputation for providing thorough and honest reviews of bike products. But then... he is also sponsored by a company that make alu touring bikes. Did he choose them because this is what the data says? Or is he making the data say this because that is what his sponsors want to hear? I hope the former. Honestly, I don't know though. I'm not sure why I started this post with "To answer your question..." Maybe we have subscribed to a mass delusion that steel frames feel nicer. Maybe we just like to say "steel is real" because it rhymes. Even though this is deeply prejudiced to carbon and alu, which are equally real at an atomic level, but sadly have nothing to rhyme with them. Alu is value.... anyone? No? If you want to decide for yourself, take one for a spin. But despite all that, if it were me, I'd still choose the norco. I think it looks nicer than the other options. And if gravel riding leads to bikepacking, the norco has a number of mounts for racks that the others don't. I have that exact GRX groupset on my bike and I love it. Also, there are other benefits to steel, even if "suppleness" and "compliance" don't exist. (Haters: I'm not saying they don't, I drank the cool-aide). Most notably, they are much easier to repair or modify than alu and carbon. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chadvdw67 Posted September 17, 2020 Share I would also say steel. If you aren't racing the front of the field and every 50g is important, you will be faster on a comfortable bike. Steel it the only answer. If you need marginal gains to beat Matt Beers up Swartberg pass near Prins Albert to take the win, carbon. BUT be aware that the one with hydro brakes is better.....They all have hydro brakes The Norco is GRX 400 Topstone is 105 Revolt is Tiagra (cable to hyd disc's) Revolt advanced is 105 I think Jewbacca 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chadvdw67 Posted September 17, 2020 Share To answer your question about "feel" and ride quality.... I recently built up a my own steel framed gravel bike and I personally think it does feel a lot nicer to ride than carbon or Alu. I haven't stopped riding it since it was finished. Shocks just don't seem to propagate up the frame and into your wrists and backside as much on a steel bike. But (unpopular opinion coming) that could all be BS:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lb4ktAbmr_4&t=127s The bloke who made the video above has built up a reputation for providing thorough and honest reviews of bike products. But then... he is also sponsored by a company that make alu touring bikes. Did he choose them because this is what the data says? Or is he making the data say this because that is what his sponsors want to hear? I hope the former. Honestly, I don't know though. I'm not sure why I started this post with "To answer your question..." Maybe we have subscribed to a mass delusion that steel frames feel nicer. Maybe we just like to say "steel is real" because it rhymes. Even though this is deeply prejudiced to carbon and alu, which are equally real at an atomic level, but sadly have nothing to rhyme with them. Alu is value.... anyone? No? If you want to decide for yourself, take one for a spin. But despite all that, if it were me, I'd still choose the norco. I think it looks nicer than the other options. And if gravel riding leads to bikepacking, the norco has a number of mounts for racks that the others don't. I have that exact GRX groupset on my bike and I love it. Also, there are other benefits to steel, even if "suppleness" and "compliance" don't exist. (Haters: I'm not saying they don't, I drank the cool-aide). Most notably, they are much easier to repair or modify than alu and carbon.See that is my thinking, is it REALLY better, or it just better because you want it to be better? Hard thing to quantify. If I am 100% honest, the bike will spend most of its time on the tar, with just occasional off the beaten track rides. The Norco and the Topstone are definitely my favorites, but the Revolts is also quite a lot cheaper, so that plays a big part in why it is on my list. I am no racer, just a hacker that likes spending time on a bike, wherever and whenever that is... Jewbacca 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jonesy Posted September 17, 2020 Share Built a steel frame gravel bike which is pretty relaxed and comfortable. Then I tried a 2020 Trek Domane SL6... It was simply next level in every way. I don't think I'd buy another steel bike. IsoSpeed front and rearWide rims Fat tyresJust awesome However I don't think all steel frames are equal and may offer better value than the latest carbon offerings. Edited September 17, 2020 by Jonesy Sepia 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NotSoBigBen Posted September 17, 2020 Share If as you say the bike will spend most of it's time on the tar I'd get a carbon bike ... I have a steel and carbon framed gravel bike, I take the carbon if there's more tar. I'm not like the 'touchy feely' expert riders on the hub but the steel gravel bike does seem to beat me up less on very long off road rides. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monark Posted September 17, 2020 Share I have a very relaxed geo steel gravel bike with 47c tyres... I love it. I am slow and ride for fun. Carbon will be faster. New tech is cooler. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baracuda Posted September 18, 2020 Share In general, steel should be more comfortable than carbon, but it really depends on the bike. Have a look at: https://granfondo-cycling.com/the-best-gravel-bike/ as well as their 2019 test. I tried a few before buying an alu bike (Kinesis Tripster). The top end carbon bikes can be comfy (e.g. Trek, Canondale), the cheaper carbon bikes are not so comfortable. But one can also add stems (Redshift) and saddles (e.g. https://www.koobi.com/road-mountain-saddles/prsalpha) that iron out alot of the bumps. I have a Koobi saddle and it is the best thing I have owned. It takes care of all minor road noise. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pietas Posted September 18, 2020 Share There are lots of aspects at play when choosing a bike. Just take the frame and fork because the components are fairly generic and can easily be changed. (Might cost money though) Regardless of the type of material, the design, geometry and quality of the material will make the biggest difference. Cheap steel will not be the same as very expensive steel. Expensive carbon frame cost more because of the carbon layup and work needed to do so. You can feel the difference.Does the bike have a carbon, steel, titanium fork.? What are the characteristics of it. I have owned various cyclo-cross bikes. All alu. Cheap as chips Schwinn rides far better to me than the Giant I had. Just didn't gell with the geometry. Go and ride the bike. I know what I would buy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chadvdw67 Posted September 18, 2020 Share There are lots of aspects at play when choosing a bike. Just take the frame and fork because the components are fairly generic and can easily be changed. (Might cost money though) Regardless of the type of material, the design, geometry and quality of the material will make the biggest difference. Cheap steel will not be the same as very expensive steel. Expensive carbon frame cost more because of the carbon layup and work needed to do so. You can feel the difference.Does the bike have a carbon, steel, titanium fork.? What are the characteristics of it. I have owned various cyclo-cross bikes. All alu. Cheap as chips Schwinn rides far better to me than the Giant I had. Just didn't gell with the geometry. Go and ride the bike. I know what I would buy.As a matter of interest, what would you buy? I have also added the Momsen R355 to the the list Wayne pudding Mol 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pietas Posted September 18, 2020 Share A steel frame with carbon fork. Can't afford a custom titanium. My mtb is steel. The cyclo-cross is alu. Forgot to mention but look at the size and width of tire you would like to ride. A lot of the bikes has limited width. The Norco in 700c is only 42mm The Momson is value for money Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wayne pudding Mol Posted September 18, 2020 Share As a matter of interest, what would you buy? I have also added the Momsen R355 to the the listthat Momsen is great value and a very comfy bike The Norco will pit panaracer 43s and that is plenty wide enough Some will argue, but for me, 1x is the answer for gravel bikes - nothing wrong with a front derailleur but the simplicity of 1 x is lovely and most of my gravel rides have at least 30 percent tar so that's not an issue to me Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GhostSixFour Posted September 18, 2020 Share They all have hydro brakes The Norco is GRX 400 Topstone is 105 Revolt is Tiagra (cable to hyd disc's) Revolt advanced is 105 I thinkWhat do they use for this? Any names or part name I can google? Looking at building a monstercross Found it: https://www.giant-bicycles.com/global/showcase/conduct Don't think it'll really make a cost difference over just buying Shimano 105 or similar. Edited September 18, 2020 by GhostSixFour Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now