# Saddle to handlebar drop: Cx vs Road



## Cx CruXxer (Nov 30, 2012)

Longtime reader, but first post here.

I've recently purchased a new Cx bike and it has me rethinking my current saddle to handlebar drop. One of the reasons is my new bike has a significantly shorter headtube (ridley xnight 10.5cm vs crux of 14cm). I didn't put alot of thought into the headtube when choosing size because I was focused on stack and reach. I might have bought a bike that is a hair too small, but at this point I'm not going to change it. 

I ride about 6cm of drop on my road bike and previously had my cx bike at 3cm drop, but I'm considering riding 4 or 5cm on the new xnight because my hoods sit higher on my handlebars on the xnight vs my road position. 

This has me interested in what the "normal" difference is between Road and CX saddle to handlebar drop. If anyone could post there actual difference that would be helpful.


----------



## Corndog (Jan 18, 2006)

Something else to think about it the face your crux had a relatively low BB and the Ridley has a high to very high BB (depending on size). That will make the head tube on the Ridley effectively even shorter once you get your saddle in the same position, relative to the BB. 

What size of each bike do you own and I can tell you the differences to expect?

As for saddle/bar drop. I've seen people all over the map on that one. I ride a pretty low setup on my road bike. On the CX bikes I run a good bit higher because of that, but still have several cm of drop. 

I've found trial and errors work good there... you'll know when you've gone too low


----------



## Cx CruXxer (Nov 30, 2012)

Thanks, that was a helpful reply. 

The Crux was a 54 and the 2014 x-night is 50 (the LBS recommended going down 2 sizes). The 2014 xnight geometry is hard to find, so I have included it below.

ett 53.0 cm
Seat tube c-t	54.0 cm
HT 10.5 cm
BBdrop 6.0 cm	
Wheelbase	99.9 cm	
Chainstay	42.5 cm	
HT angle	72	
ST angle	74.0


----------



## Corndog (Jan 18, 2006)

You're lucky the bike is a 2014! The previous model had an even higher BB. The Crux has a 9mm lower bb. So that is going to automatically raise your saddle 9mm higher in relation to the front end on the ridley (both bikes have very close to the same axle to crown length on the fork). 

So, you're looking at a head tube that is going to feel about 44mm shorter than your crux. 

If you X-night is a canti model, you've got a bit of luck though. As the headset top cap/cable stop is much taller than the top cap on the specialized. Probably 10-15mm higher. If it's a disc... not so much 

Given the seat tube angle and head tube angle differences, your x-night is going to have 15mm less reach. This is assuming you have your saddle in the same position relative to the BB and are using the same stem/bars. This also assumes a matching amount of saddle to bar drop. 

As you increase the drop, you're also going to slightly increase the reach as well. 

Some people like a a shorter and slightly lower setup for cx racing. It lets you weight the front wheel easier. 

You might end up wanting a 10mm longer stem in the end though (and you might have to run it flipped up).

I always tell people that head tube length is critical in picking out a bike. Unfortunately, it's often overlooked as people aren't familiar with how much an effect it can have on bike fit and how BB height and fork length factor in. 

In a lot of road bikes (and cx bikes for that matter) the only real difference between 3 adjacent frame sizes is the head tube length. People see the ETT differences, but fail to take into account that most of the time all of those bikes have different seat tube angles, that when taken into account mean the bikes are really within 2-3mm of each other in reach. So, it's easy to buy a bike that is too short or too tall in the front end.


----------



## jrm (Dec 23, 2001)

The LBS told you to size down 2 sizes? Can you change out the 50 for a 54? b/c that frames too small and no matter what you do it's still not going to fit you. Your reach should be the same as the road bike. I like a stack height that levels my bar/seat.


----------



## Corndog (Jan 18, 2006)

Myself and lots of others prefer to have a setup where the reach is shorter on their cx bike than the road bike. 

I would have probably recommenced a 52 tot he OP, *if* his crux fit properly.


----------



## pretender (Sep 18, 2007)

Cx CruXxer said:


> I didn't put alot of thought into the headtube when choosing size because I was focused on stack and reach.


I don't understand this. If you chose a frame with the same stack and reach as your old bike, you should be golden, because these dimensions take everything else (BB drop, HT length, STA, etc) into account.

That said, it seems weird that the shop would sell you a 50 X-Night if you are happy with the fit of your 54 Crux. I would guess the 52 X-Night would have been correct (because Ridley bike sizes are based on seattube C-C while almost everyone else's is based on seattube C-T).

A "normal" CX setup would be if you duplicated the road setup, and then flipped over the stem. And maybe chopped 5-10mm off the stem length. And maybe drop your saddle by 5mm.

But it's all individual. Francis Mourey has a very road-like setup. Other guys choose a very relaxed setup. You can always bend your arms more or less depending on circumstances.


----------



## Corndog (Jan 18, 2006)

I think the problem is when someone just compares stack and reach numbers that are published by various brands, on their websites. Those are fine for comparing a given frame across sizes, but often don't work when comparing one companies frame to another. (As companies don't calculate these in the same manner). 

If the OP had calculated them on his/her own, they should have been valid.


----------



## ejprez (Nov 9, 2006)

Actually the ridley sizing is offset quite a bit. In a trek or specialized i ride the 58. in the ridley x-night I now use now is a 56cm. I did take into account the stack and reach to get the same fit.


----------



## simonaway427 (Jul 12, 2010)

Much more drop on my road bike.

But that said, the drops on my cross bike are much deeper....so it probably balances out (i race in the drops)


----------



## Thom H (Aug 25, 2009)

You also have to factor in that your fork height is a tad taller on the cross frame as well. Sometimes that will offset the higher BB or the short front tube. My cross bikes are a couple few cm taller bars to ground than my road bikes, and I end up with less saddle /bars drop on the cx rigs..


----------



## Cx CruXxer (Nov 30, 2012)

jrm said:


> The LBS told you to size down 2 sizes? Can you change out the 50 for a 54? b/c that frames too small and no matter what you do it's still not going to fit you. Your reach should be the same as the road bike. I like a stack height that levels my bar/seat.


The LBS said I was between a 50 and 52 and recommended the 50. 

After reading some of the comments, flipping the stem is going to allow me to achieve the position I need. Now I love the handling and power transfer (coming from an aluminum crux), but need to get used to slight toe overlap. Which would happen on this bike if I had a 52 cm. 

Thanks for all of the comments.


----------



## pretender (Sep 18, 2007)

Sometimes it helps just to see a side-view photo of the bike, with the saddle at the correct height, to get a feel for how the bike fits.

I'm still curious why anyone thought the 50 would be a better fit than the 52 or 54.

According to this:
Specialized Bicycle Components
and this:
Cyclocross: X-NIGHT 1402A

the 54 Crux has stack/reach of 567/378 and 54 XNight is 568/377. Seems like a pretty damn good match, if you were happy with the Crux fit. I also think an extra 15mm of top tube might help with that toe overlap. Maybe I'm missing something.


----------



## adam_mac84 (Sep 22, 2010)

those must be calculated differently... Higher BB, shorter HT will be shorter stack... every time vs lower BB and taller HT assuming somewhat similar geometry and fork lengths


----------



## Corndog (Jan 18, 2006)

adam_mac84 said:


> those must be calculated differently... Higher BB, shorter HT will be shorter stack... every time vs lower BB and taller HT assuming somewhat similar geometry and fork lengths


Actually the 54 X-night has a quoted 158mm HT, which is 18mm taller than the Crux, while having only an 8mm taller BB. So, it's actually higher in the front end. 

Ridley is saying on that page that the 50 X-night has a 120mm HT. Can the OP measure his HT and tell us what it really is? 

I think the numbers on the Ridley page are actually from last years models, as I thought the new X-nights had a lower BB than before (and the webpage is saying 61mm drop... same as last year).


----------



## Corndog (Jan 18, 2006)

Just looked on Competitive Cyclist, they seem to have the correct X-night geometry for 2014. 

For a 54:

54.5cm	55.4cm	38.0cm	14.0cm	72.0o	73.5o	6.4cm	42.5cm	100.9cm

So, Pretender's comments are valid.


----------

