>>2079890
Tire clearance and geometry.
You didn't need to make a whole thread for this there's a bike question general. Atleast you killed an equally stupid thread.

>>2079891
But those two bikes have the same tire clearance and very similar geometry ?

>>2079890
tires? tire clearance? geometry? gearing? compliance?
No one is saying the lines aren't arvitrary and blurred but that's just how marketing works and that customer want.
Someone goes to buy a bike with a particular use case in mind and guess what, they don't want to spend half an hour explaining to the dude in the bikeshop what they want because there's bo word for it. It's simply popular enough to make it a category of it's own and give it a label.

>>2079892
I can't speak for those 2 exactly but generally speaking a gravel bike will be able to take bigger tires than a road counterpart. And yes the geo is slightly different and that slightly is all it needs. I won't bother with saying handlebar width and tires since none of this is inherent to the bike and can all by changed. What's inherent to it is the frame and the frames, generally speaking, have clearance for larger tires and slacker geometry. That's it.

File: what-do-you-guys-think-of(...).png (474 KB, 1080x1106)

474 KB PNG

Hijacking thread. What do you guys think of Crit Bikes? XC hardtails being turned into essentially flatbar gravelbikes. Really what the gravel bike should have been.

>>2079890
tire clearance
fork rake
chainstay length
bb height
bb drop
wheelbase
etc etc

It's a stability vs agility thing

>>2079899
>Crit bikes
Who calls them that? A crit bike is a snappy racing road bike for criterium races. I've heard them called rigid MTB's...

Anyways, it's the same thing coming from the other direction. Put drop bars on it and now you're only a few headtube angle degrees away from most gravel bikes.

>>2079903
Idk i just found out about this. Apparently it's a huge thing in the Philippines.

>>2079903
>now you're only a few headtube angle degrees away from most gravel bikes.

if you ignore the 10cm of additional stack and the fact that your can't put a big chainring on most XC bikes...

>>2079893
>tires? tire clearance? geometry? gearing? compliance?
they're the same between both those bikes in the op though

>>2079906
Stop being intentionally obtuse

>>2079906
>they're the same
I highly doubt it
why would they redesign a frame to create one that behaves exactly the same? Aero? Looks?
Or maybe u full of shit.
Also read the rest of my earlier answer. It's there: Marketing, convention, demand.

>>2079899
hows that a crit bike, did I miss recent developments somewhere?

>>2079917
Idk man honestly I'm just repeating something I just learned about. They call em that in the Philippines.

>>2079918
Well in my book a crit bike is a road racing bike but usually for crits you wamt something tighter, maybe as twitchy as a parallel 75. There are meme crits being held where the rules call for fixed, which is when you at least wont have any isyues finding something tight enough.
Lastly the most important thing on a crit bike:
Outrageous paintjob

>>2079919
I think what I posted it comes from a place of necessity. People wanting something to race and repurposing what they have. I guess I should call it a philipino crit bike. Funny enough this is what I have been wanting to do with an easton tubing Kona Kula Deluxe frame I have. Looking to get a carver carbon xc fork, convert it to 650b and make it a lightweight steer ripper. Maybe even use it for a company triathlon thing we're doing at my job.

>>2079920
It's bot the first time that I read an opinion which implies filipino (or thai or south anerican or or or...) racers were poor / could not afford a bike and I've even seen this culminate in a claim whereby all the pinarellos and bianchis must be fake or something.
Shocker but in the last few decades the world changed a bit and people outside of europe / north america can afford stuff.
Just thinking that this general idea is where this comes from? Because let's be honest:
No one happens to accidentially have a real nice MTB but actually being a road racer they want a road bike which somehow again they can not afford and the result is some mental gymnastics where flat bars on a longer stem and a varbon saddle make it a road bike.

Anyways apparently KAPADYAK KOOL BIKERS are showing their coverage of what is generally underatood as a crit race here:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=24PslbYGmdU
Thats what you expect to see at a normal crit race (except the being slow part).
But apparently there is something going on in philipines that does have funny bikes... I guess they just like doing that or something:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oF92IRdVPbw
>Moto

>>2079921
You're going to pretend everyone in the Philippines has tons of money and that it's absolutely impossible that some people are making things work with what they have? Oh wow there's people everywhere on the planet with money what a shocker. There's also tons of people who don't have money and make due with what they have. You don't need to act like such a self righteous prick about this. You want to look up this trend feel free to do so, it's not like I just decided to make this up for absolutely no reason.

Longer wheelbase raked out fork more bb drop more tire clearance sloping top tube flared bars

>>2079924
>You're going to pretend everyone in the Philippines has tons of money
Is your misunderstanding misunderstanding feigned? You know that this is neither what I said nor is it anything but a pointless attempt at diversion.
Look at the second video. Look at the picture (You) posted. And then explain how it happens that someone can afford to put together that, or just somehow happens to have that, but was unable to get the road bike they really wanted instead.
It's pretty obvious from the second video those guys simply have a nack for racing exactly those bikes.
>prick
You're the raging fag here retarded lonely lunatic.

>>2079923
>yeah dude im riding a $10,000 hardtail because i cant afford a road bike

File: 1787068143172.jpg (252 KB, 2000x2409)

252 KB JPG

>>2079890
I don't know and don't care. but fuck these bars im not riding bent double.

File: images (84).jpg (40 KB, 479x640)

40 KB JPG

This thread peaked my curiosity in these. Does it look like they're putting non suspension corrected forks on these bikes essentially modifying the geometry to have a steeper head tube angle and lower Bb? Because from everything I have seen, it looks like they're doing exactly that.

>>2080015
That is almost always a bad idea, just like running a 650C fork and front wheel on a bike that was designed for 700C.
But I am also not sure if this is the case, didn't have a MTB since childhood but I would be drawing it first to not encounter suprises with the DT clearance.

>>2080016
I looked it up and yeah they run 27.5 and 26 forks with 700 wheels. I checked with a bike mechanic friend of mine and he told me it was a bad idea as well. I guess a twitchy bike is good for a crit race?

>>2080018
A twitchy bike is never good but sometimes optimization leads to where you have to incur the twitchiness.

>>2080015
Why not just buy a road bike and throw grabble tyres in the first place if you're going to sink money and effort into turning an okay mtb into a bad road bike with still wildly inappropriate tires/wheels for either gravel or tarmac?

>>2080020
Idk why they do it. Just doing it to do it I guess. They look pretty cool.

>>2080016
But they're already slack MTBs right? Wouldn't this geometry change just bring them closer to a road bike with the steeper headtube angle and lower bb. Yeah we can claim it ruins the bike but if the geo works what's the problem?

>>2080038
No it wouldn't.
>if the geo works
That is true, if it works it works.

>>2080040
>No it wouldn't
It would. Wtf are you talking about.

>>2080038
It doesn't work though. That extra degree of head tube angle makes the bike completely unrideable.

>>2080051
I mean you say that but it doesn't make sense. You lower the front you get a slightly shorter wheel base, steeper headtube angle, shorter trail, and lower Bb. Mountain bikes have a longer wheelbase, slacker headtube angle, longer trail, and higher bottom bracket. So what about this wouldn't work. These guys are riding these bikes and they're very clearly doing exactly that, putting a shorter fork and altering geometry and they're racing them, so clearly they're not completely unrideable. Are you just parroting that you should never alter bike geometry or do you know something me and all the Filipinos are missing here?

>>2080049
This is so typical for /n/.
No it would not >>2080038
>just bring them closer to a road bike
since road bike geometry is not 'hard tail geometry 'with steeper HT and lower BB' besides that not being the only changes brought about here. The ST ends up steeper too for example.

>>2080056
>If poorfag flips are riding it, surely it must be good!!!
your brain is damaged from eating too much spaghetti with onions sauce and sugar

>>2079890
If you can't tell the difference between those two pictures you're either blind, retarded, or an e-moto nigger.

File: WolfTooth_GeoShift2DegAng(...).jpg (319 KB, 2048x1365)

319 KB JPG

>>2080015
All these fucking haters, shit is rad as fuck. I bet it's a hoot to rip around city streets, way more usable than a fixie with 23mm tires.

>>2080018
I mean they're starting at a really slack head angle to begin with, probably like 65-70 degrees? Where your typical road bike is like 73

>>2080051
See picrel, changes your headtube angle by 2 degrees. And yes, people do use it to steepen headtubes angles.
Also, so many people throw a 650b rear wheel into their MTBs and that doesn't fuck anything up. I get it isn't the same as steepening the front, but "completely unrideable" is obviously an overstatement. Especially given the fact that they race these "unrideable" bikes through Philippine streets.

File: 1773701105598487.png (87 KB, 174x302)

87 KB PNG

>>2080059
>>2080061
NTA but you make exactly 0 good points as to why it would make a bike "unrideable". Sad because this is genuinely an interesting conversation.

>>2080059
Oh wow guess what. Mtbs also have a slacker st geometry. So rotating it would actually also make it closer to roadbike geo. Seriously you make fucking zero good points about why this won't work. Is it road bike geo? No. Does it make the bike have unrideable geo? Also no because comparably it's within the geometry of bikes you could buy.
>>2080061
Excellent point. I hadn't considered that.

File: Quill-Stem-Definition.jpg (184 KB, 1100x953)

184 KB JPG

>>2080071
real question, why did picrel go out of style? super easy to adjust height, and ones that weren't cheap as fuck usually had a second pivot point to angle the stem to fine tune distance away from you

>>2080075
To me nothing scream crap bike like a quill stem with adjustable height but that's just my perception. There's nothing inherently expensive about an adjustable quill stem and that mainly came with hybrid bikes. You would never see anything actually expensive and nice with one.

>>2080059
>>2080061
What is it with cyclists and being completely unable to think for themselves? You heard once that you should never mess with bike geometry and now you just repeat it like a broken record without even thinking about anything anyone says to you.

>>2080078
You're wrong. I did never hear this and I have 'messed' with plenty of bicycle geometry, naturally including that of frames and forks I build.
Your 'argument' meanwhile completely misses the issue that is being debated.
Retard.

>>2080072
Where have I claimed it would make an unrideable or even bad bike?
>>2080074
So you're admitting that changing fork blade length will most likely not have the effect of an MTBs geometry to change to that of a roadbike.
>inb4 cherry picked example of one specific MTB that, when the front is lowered, exactly mirrors the geometry of one specific road bike.
Two more retards who can not read.

>>2080075
threadless became the standard because more reliable stiffer cockpit

File: ph-11134201-23030-gnxb42n(...).jpg (84 KB, 800x800)

84 KB JPG

>>2080088
>threadless stem
>look inside

>threads

>>2080077
>larger mating surface
>more room for good bearings
>easier to seal against the elements
>can be adjusted if you fuck up the initial install
>can replace stem without replacing fork (or vice versa) in case of total failure

>NOOO ITS SO HECKIN UNRELIABLE CUZ ITS NOT ON LE 18,000$ TREK!!!

cyclists are all so fucking retarded i stg

>i changed the angle of the top tube by 3 degrees without changing wheelbase, rake angle, seat position, handlebar height, or any aspect of the drivetrain
t. ALLEGED contributor to human progress

>>2080089
My suspicion is that lot of this has to do with the move to fully crabon forks.
>inb4
Yes yes that shit predates this but still.

>>2080095
Carbon forks don't use a starnut but they use an expansion/compression plug which is basically a quill but without the stem

>>2080097
This >>2080095 pertains to threadless steerers, not star nuts.

>>2080098
You could say the same about alloy steerers

>>2080081
>exactly mirrors the geometry of one specific road bike.
Where did I say it mirrors exactly the geometry of a road bike.
Fucking retard can't read

>>2080080
>Your 'argument' meanwhile completely misses the issue that is being debated.
Your contributions to this debate amount to nothing more than
>Nuh-uh

>>2080090
I didn't say I didn't like quill stems dumb ass. I said I perceive bikes with adjustable quill stems to be cheap because guess what, they mostly came on old people hybrid bikes. I actually like quill stems, they're very aesthetically pleasing and I don't think they're inherently worse than threadless stems, especially for road purposes. Anyway, you're a fucking retard. Kill yourself.

>>2080075
threadless lends itself to bigger diameter steerer, stiffer, potentially lighter, bigger and therefore more durable bearings. Threadless headsets are arguably easier and more accurate to adjust too. So it is realistically better. But yeah I still like quill, once the headset is set it is trivially easy to adjust bar height and if the stem has an open face plate you can swap stems all day which is nice when you're fucking with fit. Threadless headsets also helped get us to where we are now with no universal standards and companies doing whatever the fuck they want up there, fake and gay world, and such like.

File: Screenshot_20260814_11464(...).jpg (618 KB, 720x1600)

618 KB JPG

So it happened.
/n/ discovered the joys of pinoy and malay street bikes, crit bikes and all the wonders below the southeast asian sun
We need a thread for those asap
Dont forget the illegal fixed gear drag racing

>>2080124
i will give it to em, they love to fuck around and mod vehicles down there, it's like, nifty.

>>2080081
Nigga right fucking here>>2080051 unless this isn’t you. In which case my bad. Either way you’re not fucking contributing shit to the convo you’re just saying “its a bad idea” and not elaborating. I don’t doubt that theres better ways technically but for what it is, its neat.

>>2080129
He's actually worse than that. He's arguing something I never said which is that it makes the MTB have road bike geo. I said it brings it closer to road bike geo, which is to say the geometry won't be altered in such a way that it would make the bike unrideable as similar geometry already exists out on the market. He's a pedantic moron.

>>2080075
Your so fucking poor It's insane.

>>2080124
I'm gonna build my take on a crit bike soon. Already ordered a negative tild stem. Just need to get my hands on a carbon fork.

>>2080142
Oh look it's the boring troll who can't get a new script

I really wonder what the riding characteristics of one of those mtb crit bikes is like. Anyone who says they're unrideable is a moron since they're clearly being raced, but what would it actually be comparable to? Cyclocross bike since it has a higher bb?

>>2080078
>What is it with cyclists and being completely unable to think for themselves?
they're ignorant wrenchlets and out of shape. instead of learning how to adjust or repair things or actually working out they get a 35 grand tr*k to place 112th at their local autism clinic's charity fun ride

>>2079890
Which one is the gravel bike

>>2080270
Isnt it obvious?

File: noh.jpg (123 KB, 970x720)

123 KB JPG

>>2080324
noh

>>2080326
The tires with knobs on them didn't give it away?

>>2080329
Where the knobs, chef? Where hte knobs

>>2080339
Damn nigga you either blind as fuck or just plain stupid

Well, I ran some numbers through 3 different AIs and came up with rideable geometry for my mtb to Philipino Crit bike inspired build.
~72.5° HTA
~74.5° STA
~65 mm trail
~290 mm BB height
~1071 mm wheelbase
~443 mm reach
~575 mm stack.
I've already started purchasing the components. I have a test fork with similar geo to the carbon fork I want to get. If it rides like shit with this fork I'll give up the dream and just get the correct suspension adjusted fork and ride it that way. Already bought a vintage 110mm Modolo oxo stem with a negative rise. Waiting for Continental Contact Urban tires and the 700mm handlebar Should be a fun project. Will post it when it's in test configuration.

>>2080367
>I ran some numbers through AI
Why are cyclists incapable of thinking for themselves?

>>2080375
If you can do all that math by yourself I commend you but I know you can't and you're just trolling.

>>2080378
i permanently live in nineteen ninety never so i simply adjust my quill stem and clamped seatpost to the desired lengths until my arms and legs stop hurting, and do not give a fuck about rake angle because i'm not a manlet incapable of turning (or holding steady) a merely 5kg fork and wheel

also i can magically turn any bike into a gravel bike by simply riding it on gravel

>>2080379
Ok?

>>2080379
You alright there buddy? Got something to prove to everyone?

File: Screenshot_20260822_23320(...).jpg (212 KB, 720x1199)

212 KB JPG

>>2080367
Do it anon
Ignore the haters, bring the crit mtb to the west and make a thread about it (i'll sooner or later)
I might assemble one too

File: Screenshot_20260822_23481(...).jpg (539 KB, 720x1600)

539 KB JPG

Real pilipinas boys cut useless pieces of their frame for the lopro looks

>>2080392
I'm already dead set on it but it won't be exactly what they're doing. They take 29ers and make them race machines. I'm going to turn a 26 mtb into a 650b aggressive commuter. I've been wanting to make a build for this frame for a while but making another high rise bar reddit bike just didn't seem interesting to me. Going to give it some bar end horns mounted on the inner side of the bar for an aero position and it's going to be a 2x since I can't fit a big ring in the correct chainline on this frame. Still debating going 9 speed with an xtr 952 derailleur or taking off the derailleur off one of my other bikes and using an XT m8000. I already have all the parts to run the xtr but only missing the cassette to run the m8000 in 2x. I already mocked up a rolling chassis in my living room and I actually think it looks really sick so now I really want to get it done.

>>2080393
Too intense for me. I already feel like my stack height is too low for this.

File: 1779229786065.jpg (1.16 MB, 1920x1440)

1.16 MB JPG

"Gravel" will go in a direction where 50mm mtb tires will be the norm, see what they are riding at unbound. All my serious cycling friends now ride flatbar "gravel" bikes with tires like that. My drop bar bike can only fit 40mm and I cant keep up with them anymore.
For next seasons gravel bikepacking trips I'll get a used XC hardtail with suspension fork, we will go full circle. Clicks and aerobars for speedy sections.
I used to have Kona Unit rigid (pic rel) but sold it since I prefer front suspension for gravel.

>>2079899
>>2080015
>>2080124
>>2080392
Manlet sizes. Also putting rigid fork in a mtb is nothing new. (Trek Stache etc)

"gravel bike" is just a gcn pushed marketing phrase because people stopped buying enough "hybrids"

>>2080404
>Also putting rigid fork in a mtb is nothing new.
Ffs you're so stupid

>>2080408
I don't need anybody to school me on the differences because I know what they are. But yeah true. I remember when I started hearing 'gravel' thrown around a lot in the 2010's I was kind of baffled because it seemed like that's what my dick brake hybrid already was. I still believed in the magic of geo because I didn't understand it (I'm not saying geometry isn't a thing mind you) but after learning about it it was even more confusing because the numbers just weren't all that different either. 'Hybrid'= mediocre spec, 'Grabbel'= ~serious~ spec. And don't even start with 'CX' bikes

I suppose I should be happy that everybody came to their senses and realized riding back roads is the best thing there is but I am kind of burnt tendies over the fake and gay way it happened. How could it have been any other way though right? I was a bit nervous that suddenly I'd see loads of people on my lonely roads but while I do see loads of people on grabbel bikes around here, they're almost never actually on gravel (I DO see way more MTB'ers in the woods but they mostly stay segregated to their trail areas.) Anecdotally gravel riding people I know are approaching it almost the same way as MTB, where they hear about "rides" and drive to them rather than explore. Dumb but good for me and the homies really, don't have to share shit.

And yeah it's real weird to see the gravel bike trend converging towards something more resembling ye olde ATB. Nothing new under the sun, no exceptions