Looking to upgrade my current cross bike - it’s about 10 years old and would be great to have things like disc brakes and carbon over aluminum for some better comfort. Size-wise I am in between 54 and 56 (am 5’10" or so 155 lb). Currently I am on more of a 54 which feels very responsive, but I do get some toe rub on my front wheel which has caused some issues in races. I’ve had 56 before, and it just felt a little big (in particular with stand-over height), but didn’t have my foot hitting my front wheel (that a recall, it was > 10 years ago) when doing up-hill hard turns. According to the sizing of the bike I am looking at, the “suggested” size is 56, but just barely.
Is there any cyclocross wisdom that says it’s better to be on a smaller or larger frame for racing? I am thinking of getting the smaller size but maybe using 170 cranks to minimize toe rub so I get to keep a more agile feel overall but minimize the toe rub that is getting increasingly annoying. Any thoughts?
I’d go for the smaller frame for a shorter wheelbase and better cornering. But check the geometry first.
Toe overlap on a cross bike sounds a bit weird, but might also have to do with the head angle and “front centre” length. See if you can compare that to your current bike.
Dunno about shorter cranks, I like having more torque, but seems very individual.
While I don’t have a cross bike, my road bike is 10 years old and geometry has change a lot in the last decade. It’s almost not even fair to compare today’s geometry to those from that long ago. My 2010 “56” measures closer to a 58 or 59 in today’s standards.
The website below is very useful for comparing geometries of multiple bikes, but definitely do a test ride.
As someone who’s been a bit down the sizing/bike-fit rabbit hole lately, I must say I keep coming back to Dave Moulton’s now quite old advice: if your limbs are broadly proportionate in length to your height, go with 2/3 of your inseam, and see if the manufacturer’s height/size recommendations align with that. If it does, that’s your frame size. If it doesn’t, it’s trickier, especially if you have long legs and a short body, but remember it’s generally easier to make a bike fit bigger than it is smaller.
For CX, though, I’d be inclined to size up to minimise toe overlap and for easier shouldering.
Thanks everyone for your responses. I checked out some of the geometry and yes - the current head tube angles are more slack, fork rake higher, and wheelbase a little bit longer than what I have now.
So - I have some test riding to do, it looks like!
As followup - I ended up getting the slightly smaller size. Talked to the frame designer who said that the cross bikes these days are a longer wheelbase in general and a little more “gravelly” then they used to be. Went with that (a size MD) and true to his word, it’s a little bit longer and no issues with toe rub and overall good feel.
Not really planning on gravel rides, but got the XPLR rear derailleur - so I upgraded from an aluminum frame, cantilever brakes, and 2x (12-28 - never adjusted the B-screw to work with my 12-33 cassette) drive train to a carbon disc brake AXS 12 speed 1x with 40t front and 10-44 in back. Might be able to ride up some of the hills in cross this year Should be fun!
LOL.