Cycling UK Forum

Lovely as it is, the CdF has a real shortcoming -- the tyre/mudguard clearances are too tight. R2 pointed out this shortcoming at the start of this thread. 700 x 32mm with mudguards is the limit. There are better designed bikes these days that have greater clearances like the Spa 725 Tourer if you want rim brakes or R2's Vaya if you prefer discs. However, the bike does look very cool in Smut's pix, especially with those knobbly Smart Sams for light off-road duties.

Re heel clipping:-
I have a similar veeerrryy minor problem on my Kona Dew Drop,I can can juuusstt feel a sliigghhtt brush of my heel on the right side on occasion,wearing big winter MTB shoes with wide heels, and overshoes on.I wear 47's shoes and ride 175mm cranks.
The Vaya has no such issues.

Jezrant wrote:Lovely as it is, the CdF has a real shortcoming -- the tyre/mudguard clearances are too tight. R2 pointed out this shortcoming at the start of this thread. 700 x 32mm with mudguards is the limit. There are better designed bikes these days that have greater clearances like the Spa 725 Tourer if you want rim brakes or R2's Vaya if you prefer discs. However, the bike does look very cool in Smut's pix, especially with those knobbly Smart Sams for light off-road duties.

Yeah I did actually consider the Decade Tripster as well, it came quite close but I wanted a bike which had lowrider mounts on the fork. The tripster apparently does up to 37mm with guards. I would have liked a little bit more clearance on the CDF, but I think the tightest point is actually on the fork which you could theoretically swap, as the chainstays/seatstays have more clearance.

Your pix nicely show the tight clearances of the fork with the knobblies and the better clearances in the back. When you get bored with the CdF, get yourself a 725 Spa Tourer and see what a really well-designed touring frame with a proper raked fork is like.

the tyre clearance is the only reason why I haven't ordered one yet. Any idea what the clearance on the chainstays/seatstays is? Or in other words, what is the maximum tyre size you could theoretically fit on the Croix de Fer if you would swap the fork? And how difficult and/or expensive is such an undertaking? I guess not all forks fit all frames?

I suppose 700x32 is fine for when I go touring in Europe (mostly paved), but since I'm a big guy (192 cm and +- 88/90 kg), I might need some bigger tyres for touring in Central Asia in the future, where oftentimes you encounter gravel roads or worse. Not sure which tyre size I would need for such an adventure

The Spa tourer seems nice, as well as some other things out there (Surly, Kona and Salsa bikes), but I'm still drawn to the Croix de Fer by its sheer beauty I guess it might be rather foolish to buy a Croix de Fer and then after a few years having to buy another bike because I need bigger tyres for a specific trip

Tis weird. I rule out Genesis bikes specifically because I don't like the looks! Far preferring Surly, Salsa, and to some extent, Kona... But wouldn't the world be a dull place if we all did not differ like this?

Forks are fairly cheap, so if you found some the right length and so on, you'd be laughing. Very easy to mount too, but you'd need to get the headset fitted if you are new to this, I guess. And the steerer cut. And the silly star wangler fandangler whotsit...

I wasn't really after a full tourer; more like a road bike with discs that can fit fatter tyres for the occasional off-road ride, more like a modern version of a Randonneur if that makes sense?

Genesis says max 37mm without guards, I'd guess that it's probably about right. There might be a little bit more clearance at the back, but probably not a whole lot more. There's a few pics of the chainstays with tyres mounted in my last post http://smutpedaller.blogspot.co.uk/2013/12/project-phil-part-5-tyres.html

I understood that SKS P50 mudguards will allow 35mm tyres on the Croix de Fer.
I run mine on SKS P45 with 32mm tyres.

I have only done 100 miles or so on mine but in reference to the OP talking about weight, I happily hammered through Pembrey Forest on its fire track roads, some of which were really quite rutted. The Croix de Fer felt great on the paths. I think I weight 100kg ish.

Are the differences between a 32/35 and a 38/40/42mm tyre that big/significant? Are you going to get that much more flats or discomfort when doing some on and off-road touring?

Because the differences seem rather subtle to me? Please do correct me if I'm wrong

Croix de Fer 32/35mm with fenders
Salsa Vaya 38mm with fenders
Surly Disc Trucker 42mm with fenders
Spa cycles steel tourer 35/37mm with fenders
Kona Sutra 40mm with fenders
Cinelli Hobo 38/40mm with fenders

Smut Pedaller wrote:I wasn't really after a full tourer; more like a road bike with discs that can fit fatter tyres for the occasional off-road ride, more like a modern version of a Randonneur if that makes sense?

Genesis says max 37mm without guards, I'd guess that it's probably about right. There might be a little bit more clearance at the back, but probably not a whole lot more. There's a few pics of the chainstays with tyres mounted in my last post http://smutpedaller.blogspot.co.uk/2013/12/project-phil-part-5-tyres.html

I was just joking, but it's curious this modern cross bike phenomenon. A good tourer is just as versatile as these cross-inspired do-it-all bikes and in some ways a lot better, but they have a terrible image problem. Hopefully somebody will do a blog like yours for the Spa 725 tourer. Maybe Spa should also find a more inspired name, maybe playing on the heritage business and call it a Dalesman. Take some moody black and white shots of it done like a Rapha advert or something with a youthful athletic bearded guy powering up the road out of Malham, then rumbling down Mastiles Lane, then hanging out with his mates at the pub enjoying a pint of Black Sheep.

SamSam wrote:Are the differences between a 32/35 and a 38/40/42mm tyre that big/significant? Are you going to get that much more flats or discomfort when doing some on and off-road touring?

Because the differences seem rather subtle to me? Please do correct me if I'm wrong

Croix de Fer 32/35mm with fenders
Salsa Vaya 38mm with fenders
Surly Disc Trucker 42mm with fenders
Spa cycles steel tourer 35/37mm with fenders
Kona Sutra 40mm with fenders
Cinelli Hobo 38/40mm with fenders

Since tyre volume goes up roughly by the square of radius a 42mm tyre will have around 70% more volume than a 32mm. So not too subtle.

Or putting it another way when I took the 35mm tyres of my bike and replaced them with 42s they looked HUGE!

That said I find 35s OK for just about anything as far as towpaths, gravel roads etc goes. I was using the 42s on the Corrieyairick Pass where surfaces vary from decent to loose fist sized rocks.

irc wrote: ...........I find 35s OK for just about anything as far as towpaths, gravel roads etc goes......

That's my experience too,that is a true 35x35 tyre which are often marked up as 700x37c,slick in that size ride surprisingly quick and they're very comfortable (much more than any 32s I've ridden and I've tried a few),they handle unsurfaced tracks,paths and roads very well indeed,it's only when things get sticky they,well err, become unstuck!
As a fast durable everyday tyre I'm a fan of Vittoria Voyager Hypers(in case anyone is in any doubt )but for really heavy loaded touring,Panaracer Ribmo's are an extremely tough comfortable tyre and they roll very well.We've been using them on the tandem for about six or seven years now and only punctured twice in all that time.
Something that really impressed me about Ribmo's was a huge slash across 2/3rds(about 25mm) of the tread down to the kevlar casing,it was by far the biggest cut in a bike tyre I'd ever seen,the casing remained intact and the tyre didn't puncture,I had to scrap the tyre though as I couldn't trust it with such a gash.

irc wrote:
Since tyre volume goes up roughly by the square of radius a 42mm tyre will have around 70% more volume than a 32mm. So not too subtle...

They take a lot longer to pump up to any given pressure (not that they need as much mind) and of course they lose pressure less quickly too.

But the volume per se makes very little difference to the ride quality; it is the width of the tyre that does this. The tyre pressure increases when a tyre is deformed, and whilst the pressure does increase because of this and the amount is related to the tyre volume, the amount is insignificant in any case; less than 5% even if the tyre is flattened against a ~27" rim IIRC.

cheers

Very interesting information guys, learning a lot here!

A bike that seems to be comparable to the Croix de Fer in terms of geometry (based on a first look) might be the Cinelli Hobo, so that may be an alternative to the Croix de Fer for me, since the Hobo can take 40mm tyres with fenders, and comes with lower gearing (I think) and a few other specific features for loaded touring.

Going to place an order within the next 3/4 weeks, for the Croix de F or something else

I suspect the Hobo is another that nobody has ever seen, let alone ridden. Except hipster-hero Luis Bunuelle(?) on his advertising junket for it.

I think a large number of manufacturers now do a model that fits this genre (marketing target), so you've a lot of choice out there. If you're thinking of adapting over time (or building yourself to get right from the off), it's worth looking beyond stuff that could be changed easily when preparing for your big trip, gearing being one thing, especially as touring gearing, depending on how/where you tour, is likely to be different to commuting gearing (again depending on how/where you commute). Also, as time nears for your adventure, your knowledge, views and desires will change, so a bare-bones machine may make more sense. Or even a currently commute/day-to-day use oriented bike (as most of the models really are, I think).