Road Bike, Cycling Forums banner

The "Quiver Killers"

95K views 368 replies 49 participants last post by  mtnbkr80015 
#1 · (Edited)
I think this is an interesting segment of bikes. They are not being marketed as gravel bikes and they clearly are not cyclocross bikes. They tend to be in the style of your traditional endurance bike, but they have room for much wider wheels and tires, which makes them ideal for riding faster on all types of terrain. I don't know that I buy the argument that they provide anything that a good cx or gravel bike doesn't, but I really like the "new" features that a few of them bring to the table. I am interested in hearing others' thoughts:

1) The BMC Roadmachine:

 
#6 · (Edited)
All things considered, I think I like the BMC Roadmachine the most. It seems like it has a little racier geometry, appears to be more aero, but doesn't give up much in the weight or ride quality departments. The Focus Paralane is the most affordable by a significant margin and yet it is still one the lightest bikes in this group. The Trek Domane adds compliance features without much of a weight penalty. The greatest thing about these bikes in my opinion though is the ability to add a super wide wheelset like the new Enve 4.5 AR wheels. Here's a side by side comparison of three of the bikes and more on the wheels:

https://cyclingtips.com/2016/06/bmc...d-focus-paralane-birds-of-a-feather-all-road/

 
#9 ·
I see no reason that the 'endurance' bikes should not have clearance for 38c tires. In the real world, this opens the bikes up to much more use cases and has a very insignificant penalty in the aero department due to the extra clearance for what amounts to 1cm of extra room on the fork bridge.

I could go with a cx bike, but I dont need the geo designed for short, sprinty races. I want a 'road bike' that can also be used off-road on a gravel/towpath as well. I get that a 25c tire can be used on crushed stone, but a 35c would be better for 99% of riders.
 
#10 ·
I think it's far less than 99% but I pretty much agree with what you're saying.

My gravel/cx/whatever you call it has room for 40mm tires. When I bought it I thought at 145 pounds there's no way in heck I'd ever use something that big but there was no down side to having that room so why not. Well, a couple rides though the woods with all the roots and protruding rocks made it pretty clear I could definitely benefit from 40mm tires for those type rides.
What's great about this type of frame is I can do those type of rides with 40s then thrown on 25s and have a bike fully capable of fast road riding. It's like having two completely different bikes for the price of two sets of tires.
 
#11 ·
Before all the dominantly road bike companies jump on the cx/gravel scene, there was Niner making their BSB cx bike. If I were to get a gravel/cx/endurance bike, which is essentially what this topic is about, I would fancy getting the Niner BSB.

However, living in Socal, there is nowhere to use a gravel/cx bike, other than to use them in a cx event, and even in these cx events, the courses are often man made and not a natural terrain. Same with gravel around here, there is no gravel roads.

now, mountain biking, on the other hand, is very popular here and there are lots of mtb trail around here. Lately, I've seen some of the hippity-hip roadies wanting to get into "dirt" and so they bring out their cx/gravel bikes onto the dirt... but really, all these bikes are good for is fireroads. There is no way these bike would make for a good singletrack tool. Guess my point is, for Socal market, these bikes are not practical, it's like they're average at many things but good at nothing for the Socal road and mtb scenes.
 
#14 ·
I have only spent a little bit of time in SoCal, so I definitely can't disagree with your assessment. I will only point out that the bikes listed above have been designed for pure road riding not gravel roads at all. That's part of what makes them interesting in my opinion. It seems to be pure road road riders that are raving above the new Enve AR 4.5 wheels the most as well. The benefits of running wider wheels and tires is just as present on the road (less rolling resistance, larger contact patch, etc.) and that is of value regardless of where you ride.
 
#20 ·
I agree. When you start adding in a few aero and race oriented features, these suddenly become the ideal choice for many recreational riders in my opinion. They are built for going fast for lots of miles over all kinds of terrain. Lots to like.
 
#21 · (Edited)
I came across a new addition to the Quiver Killer club. Here's the Eddy Merckx 525 Disc. It has pretty legit aero features, clearance for 30mm tires, two geometry options, and still might be the lightest bike in this group. It's pretty pricey, but very cool.

6.) Eddy Merckx 525 Disc



More info:

2017 Eddy Merckx EM525 Disc Performance first look - BikeRadar USA
 
#34 ·
This thread is timely. I've been in quiver reduction mode since I saw the press release for the BMC Road Machine.

I sold an SLR-01, a carbon "Endurance" bike, and a 29'er that were sitting in my garage mostly unridden.

I have a couple of other bikes I'm considering selling to get my current quiver down to 1 before I buy the road machine.

If the road machine could take about 37mm gravel tire, I could reduce the quiver of bikes to ONE (with two sets of tires) which would be ideal.

As it is, I'll be keeping my gravel bike with 37mm tubeless gravel tires, and the Road Machine (once I convince myself to pull the trigger). This is all the bike I really need, at least until they come out with a bike similar to the Road Machine that I can swap the gravel wheels to. :)

My heart is set on the RM-01 with Ultegra Di2 and Enve 4.5 AR Disc wheels. My brain hasn't quite made the leap yet though. One thing I'm really kind of struggling with is the Seatpost retention system. Being a 'SuperClyde', I have some concerns that it might be a problem down the road. I'm really wanting to see of others have issues with them before I fork over that kind of money. Especially after reading about the issues with the new Tarmacs. I'm also not 100% sold on the proprietary stem business. I still need to figure out the fit details before I know if the thing will even fit, although I did test ride an RM-02 in 61cm and it felt great fit-wise.
 
#39 ·
My heart is set on the RM-01 with Ultegra Di2 and Enve 4.5 AR Disc wheels. .... Being a 'SuperClyde'
Last bike i built i went with an oversized (steel) tube set, properly stiff custom 28 spoke wheels, a sprinter's cockpit, and the stiffest premium fork i could find. Also set it up with a drivetrain that could run a 1:1 low gear if necessary- multi day rides, dirt, bikepacking. I'm barely a clyde, but this bike is AWESOME. Easily the fastest descending/cornering/sprinting bike i've owned, surprisingly the most comfortable, and i haven't had to do anything but brake pads/cables/chain in 10k of riding and lots of trialsy/dirt screwing around; i feel like it's indestructible. The ~300g weight penalty is nothing.

Seriously, a bike set up for your physique kicks the pants off a mass production bike designed for someone 50-100lbs smaller.
 
#37 ·
Mostly they just made up categories, names and all that. In 1975 I bought an Eisentraut sport/touring bike and it would ride road, gravel, hardpack no problem. I always liked an all around bike myself that I could pretty much go wherever I felt like within limits of the ride of course. I still do the same thing after all this time. Just a couple of bikes later.

.
 
#38 ·
BikeLayne" said:
Mostly they just made up categories, names and all that. In 1975 I bought an Eisentraut sport/touring bike and it would ride road, gravel, hardpack no problem. I always liked an all around bike myself that I could pretty much go wherever I felt like within limits of the ride of course. I still do the same thing after all this time. Just a couple of bikes later.


No is claiming to have invented anything. You can ride any bike you want anywhere you want. And you can call your bike anything you want. I had a nice rigid 29'er that made a great adventure/gravel bike, and if I wanted to, I could surely ride it on the road all day long. I would never compare it to anything mentioned in this thread in any meaningful way.

Can we please not turn every thread into 'my steel bike does all that' conversation? It's getting kinda tired.

If you don't want a fancy new carbon gravel/adventure/all road bike, that's fine. I don't hold any hard feelings about it, I promise.
 
#40 · (Edited)
My post had nothing to do with carbon vs steel. It had to do with giving names to different bike styles. In 75 an all around bike was called a sport touring bike. Now it's adventure bikes.. From my perspective I think Adventure bike has a better ring to it.

We have a nice gravel road close to the house. It's a tough ride due to some severe pitches. In the history of Strava there are only 9 names on the segment going East. The gravel segment is just to the summit and I am 9 out of 9. The easier way is going West as you do most of the climbing on pavement before the gravel section. There are 24 names on that list and I am 20th.

Country ride in the mountains. No signals and very few cars. No bike riders however except a few of us locals. People from the city come out every weekend to ride but they always stick to the pavement. I think people from San Jose like to come out and do Cienaga Valley which is a beautiful loop of hills, ranches, some wineries, or climb Freemont Peak which is a challenge.
 
#55 · (Edited)
At least here in the US, I have a very hard time believing these bikes are selling well. My reasoning:

1) The mountain bike market is dead. This would appeal more to that crowd than roadies.
2) This would be great for dirt trails that are found in the SouthWest and Rockies. Not so much on the East Coast, where a significant chunk of the high end bike market is. The market is therefore more limited.
3) Existing bike owners are more reticent to buy equipment that is not backward compatible. The need for new wheels specifically will drive the take-up rate down. Combine this with the fact that millennials mostly ride fixie and ride in cities and the market becomes very limited for newer, affluent buyers.
4) The younger generation either doesn't bike, is obese and sedentary, or lusts after Teslas, and is therefore more interested in electric bikes than bikes that get you healthy.

Can any of the shop owners comment on how well these bikes are selling?
 
#69 ·
2) This would be great for dirt trails that are found in the SouthWest and Rockies. Not so much on the East Coast, where a significant chunk of the high end bike market is. The market is therefore more limited.
I can only speak for New England and into Quebec not the rest of the East Coast but you're completely wrong. Just about every 'roadie' I know also has a gravel/trail bike and there is ample places to ride them.
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top