# Nashbar Steel Cyclocross



## tfinator

Hey all,
I think I want to give in to the cross bug. I am looking at bikes on a college budget. The Nashbar steel is a great price with excellent components for the dough, but I am wondering if having a steel bike (most quote it at around 24 lbs) might be cumbersome. I am also looking at Performance and Bikesdirect (i would like an LBS bike but I just don't have the money for that, maybe next year if I end up liking cross.
I would like to know what you all think about that bike in specific but also about what you find to be most important in a cross bike (I already know what kind of fit I like and how to change a bike to suit me, yes i knows thats #1  ).
Thanks!


----------



## krisdrum

The Nashbar looks nice (as does the GT and Diamondback they have listed on the site). In that price range I am not sure you are going to see alot of difference in the weight of the bikes. I'd say the same about the Performance and BD stuff in the same price range. So I'd take a detailed look at the specs and geo charts, and then go for the bike that spoke to me and/or was cheapest and put my money towards other stuff I might need.


----------



## OnTheRivet

For a bit more money this is the deal of the century. 

Diamondback Steilacoom RCX Bike 2011 at JensonUSA.com


----------



## foofighter

i got one of the nashbar steel cx bike recently. I've ridden it a few times now (mainly road and a part of my road ride on dirt) and really like the feel and ride of steel. It's definitely not a light bike. I swapped out my wheelset and dropped a bit over 2# in the process. So with my wheels the bike weighs in at 23.5# but for the price $704 shipped to my house it's worth it as it's more like my beater bike during the wet months


----------



## cs1

OnTheRivet said:


> For a bit more money this is the deal of the century.
> 
> Diamondback Steilacoom RCX Bike 2011 at JensonUSA.com


Lighter for sure but the components seem comparable to the Nashbar. IMO the person who buys the Nashbar is doing it because it's steel not in spite of it.


----------



## foofighter

cs1 said:


> Lighter for sure but the components seem comparable to the Nashbar. IMO the person who buys the Nashbar is doing it *because it's steel not in spite of it.*


bingo


----------



## Harley-Dale

You may also consider eBay or another site for a used bike. You would have more options to choose from, and likely better parts package. You could get into a good bike if you go used. Not sayin the BN isnt a good ride. Just another option.

I got my (used) 2011 C'dale CAADX 105 for just over $900.00 shipped. There are good deals out there if you look.


----------



## tfinator

Thanks, I have looked ebay and Amazon, but currently not much under 2k in my size. But if any of ya'll want to get rid of a 50cm cyclocross bike, you just let me know.
I stopeed by a few shops today to see if I'd get lucky. One guy had such a nice Bianchi in a 52 with Sram. Drooltastic, but at 1399 I dont think its gonna happen


----------



## OnTheRivet

cs1 said:


> Lighter for sure but the components seem comparable to the Nashbar. IMO the person who buys the Nashbar is doing it because it's steel not in spite of it.


The Nashbar frame and fork is probably 2 lbs heavier (steel frame, steel steerer fork) than the Diamondback. The OP seemed concerned with the weight.


----------



## krisdrum

tfinator said:


> Thanks, I have looked ebay and Amazon, but currently not much under 2k in my size. But if any of ya'll want to get rid of a 50cm cyclocross bike, you just let me know.
> I stopeed by a few shops today to see if I'd get lucky. One guy had such a nice Bianchi in a 52 with Sram. Drooltastic, but at 1399 I dont think its gonna happen


it is tough to find a deal once the season starts or begins to approach. The best time to buy is immediately after the season, as that is typically when everyone is dumping their stuff to upgrade in the "off season". I sold 2 frames earlier this year that probably would have fit you.


----------



## tfinator

Dude, what were you thinking not saving them for me!?!? 
I might end up with the GT GTR CX2 that they have. It uses Tiagra, which is a downgrade, but to be honest i absolutely cannot stand the feel of the new 105/Ult/DA levers in my hands. Its 20% off, so not a bad deal still I'd say.


----------



## Harley-Dale

That GT looks pretty well equiped for the money, IMO. Great price on it too. Carbon leg fork should feel nice on that frame. Go for it! Let us know how it rides, and congrats on the new bike, whichever you buy.


----------



## cs1

OnTheRivet said:


> The Nashbar frame and fork is probably 2 lbs heavier (steel frame, steel steerer fork) than the Diamondback. The OP seemed concerned with the weight.


Somehow steel and saving weight just don't seem to go together. This is from a guy with a dozen bikes, all steel.


----------



## foofighter

I rode in my local gran fondo today and did 62 miles and I decided to take the budget bucket instead of the carbon bike...you know how good it is to pass guys with carbon race bikes worth 10x more than this bike...priceless. I really love the ride of this bike I'm seriously thinking of selling my dogma frame and getting a speedvagen


----------



## OnTheRivet

foofighter said:


> .you know how good it is to pass guys with carbon race bikes worth 10x more than this bike...priceless.


Why? Do you really think anybody gives a crap what you're riding? The bigger question is why you didn't sack up and do the full 102mi?


----------



## foofighter

Time constraints restricted that...and yes some of the riders down here in south oc are like that they size you up by your bike. There were a lot of high dollar zoot riding around today too...droolfest


----------



## climbinthebigring

That's cool. I love dropping people on my beater MTB. Nothing like the looks you get after a race when you win on a bike that cost less than second place's rear wheel. People are always super cool though and when I tell them I have a nice road bike they get it instantly.


----------



## climbinthebigring

I'm a shop rat at the lbs so I get bikes at cost plus tax but if I didn't I would be all over that diamondback steel is cool and all but I like a stiff bike not a comfortable one so for me it's aluminum every time.


----------



## tfinator

Thanks for all of your input guys. I am going to make a decision tomorrow morning. I am torn between the steilcoom ccx, which I can get for $600 and the Steel Nashbar, for $150 more. Rack mounts are nice because it will be used as a commuter during the week and gives the bike more long term usage. Here is what I feel about the bikes:

nashbar
heavier (steel)
105 shifters feel uncomfortable 
$750

diamondback
weak wheels (20 and 24 spoke)
not sure if it has rack mounts
shifting performance of sora?
$600

Let me know if ya'll have any further input


----------



## foofighter

seems Nashbar caught on to all the discussion because they raised the price of the bike from 799 to 849 now


----------



## WP Local

*So what did you buy?*

I just ordered the Nashbar Steel w/ 105's... I agree with the poster who says people buy steel because it is steel.... also the Nashbar has a carbon fork and 105 is a GREAT spec at this price range...

I will post pic's after it is built up...


----------



## cs1

WP Local said:


> I just ordered the Nashbar Steel w/ 105's... I agree with the poster who says people buy steel because it is steel.... also the Nashbar has a carbon fork and 105 is a GREAT spec at this price range...
> 
> I will post pic's after it is built up...


Whether it's steel or AL, a 105 equipped bike for $799 or $849 is a deal.


----------



## foofighter

it's a steal at $704 shipped to your door


----------



## tfinator

I pulled the trigger on the Nashbar. I think I will be able to tolerate the 105 shifters, might put some bar wrap on the shifter housing under the hoods. 
But for long term dependability, and to not have to worry about wheels breaking or necessary upgrades, the Nashbar was the call.
I'll post when I receive it. With 20% off it came out to around $750.


----------



## foto

Is that frame even butted? Straight - gauge steel should have a nice feel and be pretty light. Just asking, cause there probably is a reason those bikes are so cheap.


----------



## tfinator

foto said:


> Is that frame even butted? Straight - gauge steel should have a nice feel and be pretty light. Just asking, cause there probably is a reason those bikes are so cheap.


Wait, explain yourself. I thought butted steel was lighter as its thinner in the middle of the tube? I didn't think anyone had made a non-butted steel frame in decades...

I feel that a non-butted frame would be heavy and dead feeling.


----------



## tfinator

*Pull the trigger = right call*

Hey all, 
Thanks for your input. The bike is awesome. Had to trim the derailers and gave the wheels 2 or 3 minutes of truing and started riding. Did my first race this week and it was a dream. Cross is a ridiculous amount of fun. I definitely am happy with my purchase and will have this bike for a long time.


----------



## Chriscycles

Don't forget to pin your number the correct side up next time


----------



## weltyed

Seats too high

How heavy does it feel? Any noodling when you stand to power up.


----------



## foto

Is the frame butted?


----------



## tfinator

*'s good*



Chriscycles said:


> Don't forget to pin your number the correct side up next time


Hahaha I know, Right? Super noob mistake... but it wouldn't have been right without it. Also way too forward on my torso... next time!

Sorry all I don't know how to do multiple quotes. But, the seat feels fine, it's slightly lower than my road bike but with the seat a little bit further back. I feel zero discomfort. I think most of the threads on fit say how impossible it is to do over the internet, no?

Foto I think the frame is butted, I replied to your earlier post. I didn't weight it, When i get to it I'll let you know but other have quoted larger sizes at ~24#.

I think the wheels are super heavy, upgrading those (tubtime), seatpost, bars/stem could probably bring it closer to 20. I had a 54cm steel schwinn that was down to 21.5# so with some nice stuff I bet it could get there. That will definitely wait until next season though.


----------



## gobes

tfinator said:


> But, the seat feels fine, it's slightly lower than my road bike but with the seat a little bit further back. I feel zero discomfort. I think most of the threads on fit say how impossible it is to do over the internet, no?


Nope. Seat's too high.


----------



## nightfend

Maybe it is just the angle of the photo, but your seat looks so high that you knee looks like it is locked out. You should have a little bend in your knee at the bottom of the stroke. In fact, it looks so high that you are forced to pedal toe down.


----------



## cs1

nightfend said:


> Maybe it is just the angle of the photo, but your seat looks so high that you knee looks like it is locked out. You should have a little bend in your knee at the bottom of the stroke. In fact, it looks so high that you are forced to pedal toe down.


This thread is about a steel cross bike not his knees. Seriously, why is it so easy to get off track?

The real important question was asked above. Is it butted tubing or not? I went online and couldn't find out. Anyone know or care?


----------



## weltyed

cs1 said:


> This thread is about a steel cross bike not his knees. Seriously, why is it so easy to get off track?
> 
> The real important question was asked above. Is it butted tubing or not? I went online and couldn't find out. Anyone know or care?


i was half joking about the seat being too high (lounge thing). 

i am interseted in knowing the butting/weight of the frame. i kinda surprised they arent selling through performance, either. if they were, i would try one out down the street.


----------



## nayr497

WOW! This is just the thread I was looking for!

I picked up a cx bike last spring, used from a friend. A really, really nice race-ready bike. Love riding it around on trails, running my dog on trails, being able to cut across grass, mulch, etc. when needed. And it's a great changeup for me from road riding. Raced it for the first time this past weekend and loved racing, though the driving to-from plus waiting around was something I could do without

So here is my situation: I ride year-round and currently my winter training/rain/around town/lock up bike is a pretty nice Italian steel road bike. The CONS: I have full fenders on it, but need to use p-clamps AND the clearance is so tight can only fit 23s. That's just too narrow for winter/around town riding, for me. (I'm not that big, just 140 pounds, but after riding 32s on my cx bike, 23s are just silly, in my opinion, unless you are doing pure road riding.)

The nashbar cx has fenders eyelets, right?

I also LOVE the relaxed, upright geometry of my cx bike when I ride it on the road.

I'm really considering just swapping out my 105 9-speed equipped road bike for this nashbar cross bike, taking the 105 hub/CXP33s from the road bike, swapping them with the stock wheels on the nashbar, throwing on some fenders...and trading my road race bike for a solid cx bike as my winter/around town/lock up bike.

PROS - I would just about break even on the deal, selling off the road bike for around what I paid for it. I'd have a second cross bike to use as a pit bike during races. I'd have a second cross bike to let my gal use so that we could do trail rides! I've been wanting to take her on some fun trail rides since I got a cx bike, but haven't been able too (she has a road bike, I only had road bikes until the spring).

The only real drawback I can see is that I'd be losing a nice Italian road bike. BUT, it's kind of a shame to have fenders on such a race-y bike...and I do have two other Italian road bikes...

I'd appreciate any feedback, any Yea/Nays or anything else you can think of.

With fender eyelets, the price, and the lack of much labeling, makes it perfect for what I'm after. Plus, riding a cx bike in the rain/winter/etc. just seems to make WAY more sense to me over a road race bike now that I've done. And the weather isn't even that bad around here in the winter so I can still pull out one of my road bikes and ride that should I have the need for speed. And I've been averaging about one new bike/bike swap per year, and it's been 11 months...

And heck, it's selling for about half price. Very hard to pass up.


----------



## nayr497

Hmm, just dug this up...

I wonder about the pros/cons of lighter Al versus better riding steel. (I've ridden nice Al but I'm guessing at this price point, it's not nice Al...)

So the steel nashbar vs. the Al bikesdirect. Look to be nearly the same exact component spec.

Save up to 60% off Cyclocross | Cross Bikes - Motobecane Fantom Cross


----------



## foto

Easy to know if it is butted. Tap with your finger along the tube. If it makes the same pitched "ting ting ting" from the middle to the end, its straight gauge. if it goes "tong tang ting" as you go from the middle to the end its butted.

Although I would guess a frame like that isn't exactly going to ring out like a bell...


----------



## HEMIjer

Anyone know the widest tire this frame can accept?


----------



## tfinator

I dont know how wide a tire it could accept. It came with 30mm, the kwicker cross by kenda, which doesnt have side tread and it has ALOT of room. The pinch point would be the chain stays, for sure though. I would think if you put a slick tire on, it could do a 40mm easy, so definitely a 35mm cx tire with tread. This is untested though.

As for the Motobecane, I previously havent liked their build quality, but that was for a cheaper bike. I ended up with the steel to save a little money, and also because I plan on having this bike for a long time, maybe just one or two years of racing, and then as a commuter / do-all. 

I think the steel helps as I took it out on MTB trails last week (Penasquitos Canyon for those in the SD area) and everyone kept stopping me, impressed that I was using a cx bike for all those rocks, maybe the steel helped? I also knew by sight I would hate the bars on the moto-bacon and wanted to try the shape on the nashbar. I also knew I didn't want cross-top levers, and would have to take them off and re-do cables and maybe bar tape.

Also, I just went out and tapped on the frame. If what I understand from Foto is correct, it is butted. About 3" away form each joint the sound goes from a resonating 'ting ting ting' to a tinny 'tap tap tap'. +Man points to Foto for that trick, I should have thought of it myself!

Sorry for the long winded post, just trying to answer all the questions out there. Oh! and yes, it has all necessary fender/rack mounts (except from front lowrider, obviously)


----------



## PedalDriven

Going to a LBS that has a 'one year same as cash' program is an excellent way of getting a much better equipped bike when you planned on buying a lesser equipped bike because of your budget. 

For example, if you have a budget of $1,000 for a bike you may now jump to a $1,700 or higher because you have 12 months to pay for it WITHOUT interest. You can put down your $1,000 as a down payment and pay the balance in 12 months or keep the cash in the bank and make payments on the full balance of the bike. The catch is to make sure you pay whatever the balance may be in full by the due date 12 months later or else pay interest for the whole year. I find this program an excellent way of upgrading to a higher end bike when you originally thought you couldn't afford a higher/better bike . Just a thought!

-Cheers.


----------



## billjank

*Makes a sweet commuter*

I picked up one of the Nashbar bikes in September, and am 4 months into commuting on it. Happy as a clam with it - taiwanese steel, no decals, rack bosses. $650 delivered, took less than an hour to put together and tune.

With fenders on it (forget which brand), there's still a LOT of room if I wanted to go up a couple of tire sizes. The one downside is that there's not a chainstay bridge to screw the full fender to; but a couple of zipties around the seat tube and chainstay have worked like a champ. There is a seatstay bridge for fenders, and the fork is drilled both at the crown and at the dropouts, so that was a no brainer. Fenders are awesome on moist days - no road spray. 

105/5700 is excellent - had a week or so of trimming the rear deraileur as the cable stretched, but such is life. 

With the rear rack and 'cross gearing, it's not often that I need the car, even when I'm picking up groceries on the way home or carrying in a week's clothes on Monday. 

Swapped out the stock wheels for a set of Mavic Aksiums ($130 on Bonktown). Took about 5 minutes off of my 30-ish minute commute. The stock wheels, while appearing bulletproof, definately weigh as if they are armored.

The ride quality is excellent, but some of that's probably just due to inertia - 24.5 lbs for size 54 out of the box, plus fenders, rack, and bag, and minus wheels plus the extra 20 lbs I'm carrying - lots of mass to smooth out the bumps.

Handlebars are comfy; cork on the grips very nicely wrapped. 

All-in-all, I'm pretty happy with the bike as a commuter. 105 shifts extremely well, the frame's attractive with the matte green finish, and it's getting me on the bike instead of in the car. If I've got extra time, AM or PM, it's a great bike to ride, and if I get a chance to drop onto the fire roads at Bluff Point state park, so much the better - I'm only about 10% slower on this bike, loaded with standard work stuff, on the road than on my road bike, and it handles pretty rugged two-track thanks to the carbon fork and big(ish) tires.


----------



## nayr497

Nice setup, Bill!

Here's my report:
I went for the steel 'bar CX bike. I've had it for a few weeks now and it's been GREAT.

I pulled off the stock wheelset for a pretty nice Shimano 105 hub/Mavic CXP 33 rim set. Replace the post, saddle, bars, stem with some nicer (lighter) stuff I had around. Put some Continental Four Season tires on it in 28 mms.

It is the perfect match for what I was looking for. Love the plain paint, doesn't attract much attention when locked up. It's a nice bike, but not too nice, so I don't mind locking it up, riding it in the rain, leaning it against poles to lock up.

Oh yeah, also put on some Planet Bike full fenders. Very nice, very useful for winter commuting/road riding.

The other benefit is that I now have two cross bikes so the gal and I can run our dog in the woods together. We're nearly the same size as well, so no adjustments either.

Considering what I pay for parts on some of my nice bikes, $650 for this full bike is a serious steel. Er, steal!

The 105 groupset has shifted flawless right out of the box for me. Love that I now have 10 speed on all my road/cross bikes. I don't like the ergonomics of the shifters, they have a sharp edge that is uncomfortable when shifting. I've had to make sure to place my fingers lower on the lever, not a huge deal, but seems like it could be rounded and redesigned.

Overall a great do-it-all bike at an excellent price.

Thanks for any feedback prior to my pick-up. 

Hey Bill - to solve the lack of chainstay bridge I actually took the bolt out of the FD routing donut and just screwed my fender right to it there. Might be a bit nicer than zip ties. Hasn't cased any shifting problems and doesn't seem like it would.

I'm using the Planet Bike Cascadia fenders in 35mm. I'm running 28 mm Continental Four Season tires.

And yeah, the ride is super smooth! I agree. Could be all that weight...


----------



## RussellS

Recently overhauled a Nashbar steel cyclocross bike. 60cm bike weighs 25.8 pounds. Overall well built with good components. 46-36 chainrings. Will take 35mm tires with fenders. Hubs needed grease. I pity the fools who buy this bike and do not overhaul it. Won't last long. Wheels are normal 32 spoke rims and hubs. Not factory prebuilt wheels. Hubs have loose ball bearings with threaded axles.


----------



## beaker

RussellS said:


> Recently overhauled a Nashbar steel cyclocross bike. 60cm bike weighs 25.8 pounds.


25.8 lbs is pretty beefy even for a large frame. The 105 kit shouldn't be the cause, and some of the usual suspects (tires, cranks) don't look too bad either. I'm betting that frame is pretty heavy, and the fork is probably over 800 gms as well (steel steerer). I thought about picking one of these up to replace my ~11yr old GT, but I"m thinking I'll keep looking.


----------



## tfinator

beaker said:


> 25.8 lbs is pretty beefy even for a large frame. The 105 kit shouldn't be the cause, and some of the usual suspects (tires, cranks) don't look too bad either. I'm betting that frame is pretty heavy, and the fork is probably over 800 gms as well (steel steerer). I thought about picking one of these up to replace my ~11yr old GT, but I"m thinking I'll keep looking.


The wheels are a big problem in the weight, as i hear it. I believe it, too. Also the frame is pretty heavy duty, so I expect the difference between his 60cm and my 50 cm is significant. The stem, seatpost, saddle, and bars are all weighty I think. They are unbranded. I took the seat off and replaced with a Specialized Romin, man! I swear the Romin weighed 1/2 as much. 
If you're looking for light and super racy in this price range, I think something Aluminum from BD or Performance is for you. FWIW, with nice components I think my 50cm would go down to about 20-21 lbs.


----------



## Jay1

Hi folks, I am seriously considering buying this Nashbar steel cross bike. Sounds like a great deal. I want to be sure about the size though. I'm 5-11.5 (71.5 inches). Today I rode a Surly Cross Check (nice bike), it was a 58, and may have been a little big. I rode a Jamis Satellite 56 and it felt good. Do you think I would fit the 56 for the Nashbar ? My torso is a little longer than my legs, if that makes sense. My wingspan is 70.5 inches (slightly shorter than my height). Sorry I don't know bike measurements and geometry. Anyhow I just want to make sure, because I know different bikes can vary, and when you're mail ordering that's the last thing you want to do is get the wrong size. Thanks !


----------



## haikalah

Jay1 said:


> Hi folks, I am seriously considering buying this Nashbar steel cross bike. Sounds like a great deal. I want to be sure about the size though. I'm 5-11.5 (71.5 inches). Today I rode a Surly Cross Check (nice bike), it was a 58, and may have been a little big. I rode a Jamis Satellite 56 and it felt good. Do you think I would fit the 56 for the Nashbar ? My torso is a little longer than my legs, if that makes sense. My wingspan is 70.5 inches (slightly shorter than my height). Sorry I don't know bike measurements and geometry. Anyhow I just want to make sure, because I know different bikes can vary, and when you're mail ordering that's the last thing you want to do is get the wrong size. Thanks !


Jay, I'm an inch shorter than you. Got my young son the 54. I can ride it, but it is small. 56 will work for you, but can't promise it won't be small. Surly is bad size check as their frames are sized large IIRC. Go to Jamis website and look at geometry and compare it to nashbar.


----------



## stevedodds

*Hello community, check out the new Ritchey swiss cross*

Just got the new Ritchey swiss cross frameset, If your looking for a top of the line steel CX check them out at bicycledoctorusa . com , you will like the roadbike review discount price.
steve


----------



## m_s

wow, like many people, I'm sure, I was going to spend 600 dollars on a budget bike from nashbar, but this fine piece of spam has convinced me to quadruple my budget. Thanks!


----------



## Jay1

haikalah said:


> Jay, I'm an inch shorter than you. Got my young son the 54. I can ride it, but it is small. 56 will work for you, but can't promise it won't be small. Surly is bad size check as their frames are sized large IIRC. Go to Jamis website and look at geometry and compare it to nashbar.


Hi Haikalah,

Thanks for the reply. Well I'm looking at the geometry on the Jamis and Nashbar, and it's pretty difficult to compare, as the Jamis Satellite has the top tube that slopes down, making it shorter, and of course the seat tube is shorter.

Probably better to compare to the Surly, more similar frame geometry. The 58 Surly was a little big, so for it I'd probably want a 56 or in between 56 and 58. Approximating, comparing top tube lengths and seat tube lengths, makes me think I might be more of a 58 on the Nashbar. Although, the head tube length is quite a bit longer on the Nashbar (not sure if that really matters or not).

Also the fact that the Nashbar also comes in 60 and 64, whereas the Surly has 60 and 62, makes me think the Nashbars are smaller, so a 58 is probably not really a "big bike".

Any other thoughts appreciated. Thanks !


----------



## foto

Jay1 said:


> Hi Haikalah,
> 
> Thanks for the reply. Well I'm looking at the geometry on the Jamis and Nashbar, and it's pretty difficult to compare, as the Jamis Satellite has the top tube that slopes down, making it shorter, and of course the seat tube is shorter.
> 
> Probably better to compare to the Surly, more similar frame geometry. The 58 Surly was a little big, so for it I'd probably want a 56 or in between 56 and 58. Approximating, comparing top tube lengths and seat tube lengths, makes me think I might be more of a 58 on the Nashbar. Although, the head tube length is quite a bit longer on the Nashbar (not sure if that really matters or not).
> 
> Also the fact that the Nashbar also comes in 60 and 64, whereas the Surly has 60 and 62, makes me think the Nashbars are smaller, so a 58 is probably not really a "big bike".
> 
> Any other thoughts appreciated. Thanks !


you're doomed.


----------



## Jay1

foto said:


> you're doomed.


Ha. If I get the wrong size I'm jumping off a bridge.

Seriously though, do you think I'm going about this the wrong way ? I'm here to learn. Thanks.


----------



## haikalah

Jay1 said:


> Hi Haikalah,
> 
> Thanks for the reply. Well I'm looking at the geometry on the Jamis and Nashbar, and it's pretty difficult to compare, as the Jamis Satellite has the top tube that slopes down, making it shorter, and of course the seat tube is shorter.
> 
> Probably better to compare to the Surly, more similar frame geometry. The 58 Surly was a little big, so for it I'd probably want a 56 or in between 56 and 58. Approximating, comparing top tube lengths and seat tube lengths, makes me think I might be more of a 58 on the Nashbar. Although, the head tube length is quite a bit longer on the Nashbar (not sure if that really matters or not).
> 
> Also the fact that the Nashbar also comes in 60 and 64, whereas the Surly has 60 and 62, makes me think the Nashbars are smaller, so a 58 is probably not really a "big bike".
> 
> Any other thoughts appreciated. Thanks !


- i don't know if you need 56 or 58 nashbar (but pretty sure it is one of those two}

- i got lucky by sizing my surly based on what i read here (i did a search) on this forum

- head tube height probably not too big a deal -- but could be if you need or like to get you bars down much lower than the saddle

- two main variables for sizing are (1) inseam height and (2) torso length (approx = height minus inseam)

- most folks can be fit based on inseam but some folks have exceptionally long or short torso or arms which can make fitting hard

consider starting a new thread asking for fitting help and give you inseam length (google how to measure), height, and the nashbar 56 and 58 geometry (also if you have very long arms specify such). maybe some of the fitting gurus would be willing to help.

good luck

ps: my sons 54 steel nashbar weighs 25 pounds. switching to velomax circuits (about 1600 grams bare) brought weight to 23.5. saddle, seatpost, stem offer further (but smaller) opportunity to reduce weight.


----------



## Jay1

haikalah said:


> - i don't know if you need 56 or 58 nashbar (but pretty sure it is one of those two}
> 
> - i got lucky by sizing my surly based on what i read here (i did a search) on this forum
> 
> - head tube height probably not too big a deal -- but could be if you need or like to get you bars down much lower than the saddle
> 
> - two main variables for sizing are (1) inseam height and (2) torso length (approx = height minus inseam)
> 
> - most folks can be fit based on inseam but some folks have exceptionally long or short torso or arms which can make fitting hard
> 
> consider starting a new thread asking for fitting help and give you inseam length (google how to measure), height, and the nashbar 56 and 58 geometry (also if you have very long arms specify such). maybe some of the fitting gurus would be willing to help.
> 
> good luck
> 
> ps: my sons 54 steel nashbar weighs 25 pounds. switching to velomax circuits (about 1600 grams bare) brought weight to 23.5. saddle, seatpost, stem offer further (but smaller) opportunity to reduce weight.


I think I have a long torso, but short arms lol. Good idea on the thread, I may do that. I do like a bike that I can stand over easily. That was part of why I liked the Jamis Satellite so much. It felt great.

I will also call the Nashbar customer service and get their suggestion before ordering.

Yeah it is a little heavy, but from the buyers' reviews, that does not seem to be a very big issue. They say the bike performs well and is fast. I have been riding a heavy mountain bike for the last 14 years (34.5 lbs with lock attached), so I think anything lighter will feel great.

Thanks.


----------



## cs1

The Nashbar is much better equipped stock than an out of the box Cross Check. But Surly has an almost cult like following. Prices of used CC's on ebay is pretty high. Now that Surly has banned their dealers from internet sales used prices should be on the rise. That's good news for sellers but bad news for buyers.


----------



## RussellS

Jay1 said:


> I am seriously considering buying this Nashbar steel cross bike. I'm 5-11.5 (71.5 inches). My torso is a little longer than my legs, if that makes sense.


I'm 5'11" tall and I would ride the 58cm Nashbar cyclocross bike. It has a 57.5cm top tube. I use 57-57.5cm top tubes on most of my bikes. And 12cm stems and offset seatposts. The Nashbar 58cm frame comes with a 11cm stem. Too short for me. The 56cm Nashbar frame has a 56cm top tube and 10cm stem. WAY too short for someone 5'11" tall. On a 56cm bike you will be sitting bolt upright.


----------

