I just got a new gravel bike for the purpose of starting to do some races(including unbound and big sugar this year.) I had a grail that I was previously riding and was a lot of fun, but my daughter took it over. I ended up going with an orbea Terra. But I dont see it mentioned here. Thoughts?
Watching all the You Tube videos of The Traka gravel race in Spain, there were a lot of Orbea gravel bikes there. My friend has one of their road bikes and loves it.
A slightly niche one, but I recently bought a Propain Terrel CF. Couple of training rides so far and she can move. First āraceā this weekend so will see how she compares.
5 Likes
Review of new Seigla after first race -
I raced Rule of 3 (117 mile course) on the Seigla yesterday in Bentonville. The race is an ideal test for any bike since it mixes lots of single track, smooth gravel, chunky loose gravel, and road. My setup was conti race king 2.2ās on 303 FCās, SRAM transmission and 42t chainring. Profile design aero bars. Lauf suspension fork and Ergon suspension seat post (same seat post Canyon uses on some of their gravel bikes). I did the same race on my Gen2 checkpoint running 47 pathfinder pros last year with a redshift suspension stem, so thatās my primary point of comparison. My main reason for switching bikes was to get more tire clearance, but I also liked the idea of proper suspension (vs. the redshift stem Iāve been running).
On the road sections, I feel the 2.2ās dragging a bit, but there wasnāt that much road. In every other situation, the Seigla felt faster. Maybe just a little faster on the smooth gravel, but dramatically faster on chunky gravel and noticeably faster (or at least less scary and fatiguing) on the single track. For anyone who hasnāt raced around Bentonville, it has a bunch of really chunky/loose/fast gravel descents, often with corners at the bottom. Mostly in tree canopy with spotty lighting and heavy dust when in a pack. Super dangerous and Iāve always seen high speed wrecks when Iāve raced out there (big sugar and rule of 3). This is where the larger tire volume really shined compared to normal gravel tires. Not as stable as when I raced my full suspension XC bike at Big Sugar last year, but still much better than skinny tires. Iām not sure how much the Lauf fork was contributing to the descending stability, but the overall setup was night and day better than my Checkpoint on the fast/loose descents.
I think the place the fork really shines is on the flatter heavy gravel when pushing hard. There is a bunch of that around bentonville and I was riding people off my wheel whenever we hit the gravel. Some of that I attribute to the aerobars on the smoother sections, but the bike really allowed me to put down power while soaking up all the chatter and bumps. The rougher it got, the quicker I was dropping people (even when not in the aerobars). I think this is primarily a tire volume story, but I also think the fork and seat post are keeping the bike planted and stable when pushing power. The fork didnāt surprise me, itās basically soaking up bumps the same way a bigger tire would. The big surprise is the rear end of the bike with the Ergon seat post. Iām still getting used to it, but itās got a crazy amount of compliance when it gets rough. I canāt tell if itās maybe too compliant, it is a weird sensation but I donāt feel like Iām losing power. Anyway, the bike gets an A++ on pushing hard/fast over rough gravel without beating up the driver. When Iām less beat up, I tend to push more power for a lot longer.
As far as handling, Iām not too picky on that and it really only mattered on the single track at rule of 3. Iām not great navigating singletrack on my gravel bike, but the Seigla certainly inspired more confidence compared to my checkpoint. And more confident = more relaxed = less fatigue. I felt way, way better at the end this year. I think thatās almost all in the bigger tires. The fork might have contributed a little on the singletrack, but for me itās mostly about the extra tire volume for cornering confidence, the smoother ride isnāt as critical there. A few spots where the bigger tires also helped with climbing traction on loose terrain.
Anyways, Iām super happy I decided on the last minute swap to the Seigla before Unbound. Iām hoping to have this bike on the podium if I can hold up my end of the deal. The North course has a lot of chunky gravel and thatās where the Seigla w/2.2ās really seems to shine. If anyone has any questions on the Seigla, donāt hesitate to ask. Iām a bit of a Lauf fanboy at the moment, TBD how much of that is new bike placebo or if itās as big of an improvement as I perceived yesterday. Drinking the big tire coolaid by the gallon right nowā¦
19 Likes
Great review and I love that bike. But what Iām also hearing is that I would hate riding gravel around BV. Haha. Thanks for the heads up.
1 Like
Glad you like it. I rode my Lauf last year at Big Sugar and it was like I was riding on roads the whole time. I found the fork lets me not worry at all about the line I choose and it makes washboard a non-issue. I was way less beat up by the end on the Lauf vs Crux.
I feel like I could just reply in all of these threads ājust buy a Laufā. 
5 Likes
Yeah, Iām still debating how much is the bigger tires vs. the fork and seat post, but itās a completely different (better/faster) riding experience. Iām kicking myself for not making a switch sooner. I saw quite a few Laufās at Rule of 3 yesterday, but it is still pretty rare compared to some of the big brands. And they were really ahead of their time launching the Seigla over 3 years ago with clearance for 57ās. I think the fork might be too weird for some buyers, but they offer a rigid fork version as well.
2 Likes
Thanks but I want to like the look of my bike. 
2 Likes
Iāve never been able to wrap my head around prioritizing looks over speed for a race bike, but I certainly respect the opinion and wish more people had it.
3 Likes
I have never goten along with the Seigla suspension fork. I always felt the lack of rebound damping on rocky descents was sketchy. But I do agree it provides a lot of comfort over flat non-technical gravel, so maybe I will switch back to it for Unbound.
I tried the 2.2 Race Kings last week, I just felt they were way too slow everywhere. I also didnāt notice any more confidence or comfort over the Tufo Thundero 48s. Maybe my pressures were just wrong. I went with what Silca recommended for my weight (155lbs 17f/19r). What pressure are you running? I am almost convinced I am just going to run the Thunderos.
1 Like
Iām obviously new to the fork, so time will tell. Itās a far cry from racing gravel on my FS 120/120 XC bike, but it feels like a good middle ground so far. My initial impressions is that the fork suspension dynamics are very similar to a tire (with all the good and bad that comes along). Zero dampening with some bounce in certain situations. The travel dynamic almost feels like Iām running a ~2.6-2.8 front tire. Which makes sense with the ~3cm of extra travel the fork provides. A rigid fork setup running 2.2ās would have ~6-7cm of travel (between tires and fork/frame deflection) and the lauf fork is basically adding another ~50%. I guess the one difference I sense is that the fork suspension is stiffer than a low pressure tire, so itās not deflecting at the same rate and makes the entire front end feel a bit more progressive (good or bad). I know the fork is working a bit, but I havenāt noticed it ever bottoming out and I suspect it will be rare when running MTB tires (basically a pinch flat situation where the tire and the fork both run out of travel). I also donāt notice any significant bobbing when climbing out of the saddle like I had with my redshift suspension stem, so thatās a nice bonus.
Iām not saying you are wrong, but you might do some head to head segment testing to confirm actual speeds (if you havenāt already done it). I did some head to head a while back between a pathfinder 47 vs. race king 2.2 (front tire only since I couldnāt fit the rear) and the results were pretty clear. RCās were slower on pavement, but faster even on smooth gravel/dirt. And much faster on loose gravel. The pathfinder isnāt the fastest tire out there, so maybe the thundero would be better/faster for you, but maybe worth some testing. Faster/slower can be tough to determine based on feel.
Iām about 170 lbs and running 20/19 on saturday. Iāve also done some testing at a few PSI higher and they felt better at 20/19. Same pressure I run them for with MTB racing, so it might just be what Iām used to.
1 Like
I was in the same boat back when I had a Salsa Cutthroat. Ran the Race King 2.2 a few years ago because I could easily fit them and theyāre fast on BRR. Lots of my gravel rides have plenty of pavement and they felt buzzier and slower than the Thunderos.
Not doubting that folks find the RKās faster! I didnāt do enough A/B testing to say 100% which was faster so take all that as you will. I will say though people on their 40mm tires thought I was crazy to run 2.2ās on gravel a few years ago and look where we ended up 
Thanks for the feedback. I may just bring both to Kansas and try them out Wednesday and Thursday and then decide before race day. I am pretty sure I will put the Lauf Grit fork back on.
Easy. 90% of my time on the bike isnāt racing. If I had enough money for a dedicated, race only bike, then yea. But I have one gravel bike and the vast majority of the time itās not spent racing. So I want to like how it rides and looks. Now if the looks are costing me 100W, thatās a different story. But a handful of watts for an ugly bike. Easiest decision ever, Iāll take the good looking bike.
4 Likes
Me, who sold my Tarmac SL8 almost solely because I thought it was ugly, āyea who would do that?ā
In my defense, I bought a SuperSix Evo after which is a faster bike according to Tour Magazine.
4 Likes
I think people underestimate the free watts of a nice looking bike. Look good, feel good, race good.
10 Likes
There is certainly a huge mental component to cycling. In my head, the dirty and weird ugly duckling running a rival groupset is always faster than the high end āprettyā frame running red. Whatever lights your personal fire is always the right answer. Iām personally pretty negative about the emphasis on style and conformity in the cycling community, so anything that flies in the face of that is motivational to me.
All good, cool to have different priorities. Iād ride the bicycle equivalent of a Pontiac aztec with the aero tent option if I gave me 5 extra watts. But for me, a race bike is a plastic tool, not art. I like custom ti and old steel frames for the workmanship and artistic style, but I honestly donāt see the visual appeal of modern carbon bikes. They are all honda accords as far as Iām concerned. There are modern bikes I love from a capabilities/engineering standpoint, but none of them light a fire for me visually.
3 Likes
My Diverge vs Checkpoint decision was 100% decided by the colorways of the two bikes.
3 Likes
Yea man, whatever motivates you. I totally get that everybody is going to have different goals, different motivators, different priorities. To your point about the ugly duckling, there is no better motivation to me than somebody passing me on an āoutdatedā or āslowā bike. There is no way in hell Iām going to let the guy on a rim brake round tube steel bike beat me. So in a way, racing the nice bike gives me more motivation to make sure Iām āearning it.ā Ride on!
2 Likes
Absolutely. And my mindset of bikes probably carries over from my personal appearance. When folks look at my bike with fred-style aero bars and my physical appearance (old skinny-fat dude who looks nothing like an athlete), Iām not exactly intimidating my competition at the starting line. Quite to opposite, Iāve gotten some hilarious comments when I line up near the front. And then the crushing of souls beginsā¦
8 Likes