# Nashbar X Cross Frame-Any user opinions?



## jordan (Feb 2, 2002)

I have seen this frame on sale.It is all black with a huge downtube.Has anyone ridden one that can review build up and ride quality?I have already searched the net and this forum for info. and have found little.Thanks for any reply-Jim.


----------



## KWillets (Feb 28, 2006)

I ordered one last week, but haven't received it or gotten close to building it up. There doesn't seem to be a lot of information out there on the frame, but it seems workable. It looks a lot like an MTB frame, with slack head tube and compact geometry.


----------



## Pigtire (May 26, 2004)

Here is a guy who built one from another site. He seems to like it.

http://www.bikeforums.net/showthread.php?t=171506&highlight=nashbar


----------



## KWillets (Feb 28, 2006)

That's similar to what I'm thinking; cheap frame with decent wheels and parts. I commute on the train and the bike gets scratched a lot.

I ride that Shimergo combination on my road bike, although one doesn't need a shiftmate to get 10sp Ergo/9sp Shimano RD to work. As he notes, that's the only way to get Ergo and disc, unless you go front-disc only.

I just got some campy-hub wheels and RD for the shimergo bike, so I'll move my current 105 RD to the new frame. I have some moustache bars and barcons to try on the front end, or I'll move to drops and shimergo.


----------



## jordan (Feb 2, 2002)

Pigtire-Thanks for the great link on the X frame.I went ahead and ordered one for $104 after the 20% coupon code.My only worry is that it may ride harshly.It looks like it is made in the same factory as Performance Access MTB frames which are actually very well made.I will post a review after I build mine up.I find it hard to believe the Nashbar geometry table with every size having the same 70.5 degree HT angle and with the XL size having identical actual and effective TT lengths[59.5cm].I ordered an XL and I am in suspense waiting to see how the frame geometry turns out.Thanks to the Posters-Jim.


----------



## Pigtire (May 26, 2004)

jordan said:


> Pigtire-Thanks for the great link on the X frame.I went ahead and ordered one for $104 after the 20% coupon code.My only worry is that it may ride harshly.It looks like it is made in the same factory as Performance Access MTB frames which are actually very well made.I will post a review after I build mine up.I find it hard to believe the Nashbar geometry table with every size having the same 70.5 degree HT angle and with the XL size having identical actual and effective TT lengths[59.5cm].I ordered an XL and I am in suspense waiting to see how the frame geometry turns out.Thanks to the Posters-Jim.


No problem. You sure got an awesome deal on that frame. Post pics when you are done.


----------



## KWillets (Feb 28, 2006)

The frame arrived today and I looked it over. It looks fairly well made inside and out. The box says it's from "Ramiko/Sun Rise" in Taiwan. It's an eggshell black finish, with an "X" sticker on the head tube. One detail I hadn't noticed is that there are rack screw rivnuts actually in the seat stays. The cable stops on the downtube are also threaded and toothed for those spring loaded adjuster barrels. They stand off quite a bit to make it past the weirdly-shaped downtube.

The dropouts really are deep, close to 1/2". The derailleur hanger sits in a recess in the dropout that surrounds it on three sides.

Overall, it does have a lot of details similar to a mountain frame. The clearances look huge, and it should be a very versatile bike.

I also got the cheap CrMo cross fork, which comes in a gloss, not eggshell, black. That also looks very robust, close to 1" diameter tube, and heavy. 

Tomorrow I'm going to get the headset mounted and start putting on the bars. I'll post some pics once I've made some progress.


----------



## kannas (Feb 7, 2004)

Doesent low tire pressure negate any ride character the frame may offer? Under road/ higher psi, I can tell little differences between my three bikes, the Pinarello Opera is the better 50m+ bike ans the other two are 'crossers, for training and racing. I ride at the same speed w/ typically same people and a variant of the same route. What really changes my performance are conditions and mood.

I dont know but it seems like most shop for brand and brand rep. If the nashabar bike was labled "NYS superprestige" it would cost $1000+ and people would buy it.
Digressing it seems to be good deal to commute, train and race on. I highly doubt it will break or offer such a terrible ride that would make it recycling material. For two, three seasons then to be retired and only costing $100, seems like people who are sticking to a budget cant go wrong. I may opt for a lighter fork fyi.

Here a pic of my orbea, cost $1600 (minus wheels that I share on two other bikes, figure into cost $200 for OP/centar train& race clinchers).


----------



## KWillets (Feb 28, 2006)

Today I had someone put the headset on (no luck with ghetto cup press, although I whacked the crown race on fairly easily). 

With the fork on and some wheels in the dropouts, I measured horizontal distances. The effective horizontal TT (medium size) is just under 56 cm near the seat cluster, which is even with the bottom of the head tube, but with the 2.5 deg. angle difference it drops a cm or so up near the stem. Altogether I'm seeing an inch less from post to stem clamp, with almost the same stem length/angle, compared to a 56x56 road frame. 

Lining them up next to each other, the front hubs are within 5mm, but the angle difference (70.5 vs. 72.5-73 deg.) in the head puts everything back about an inch on the tops.

At this point it looks like I need to go to a longer (135mm) stem. That's a bit frustrating, as I had expected the effective TT to be measured back from the top of the head tube.


----------



## cantdog (Apr 29, 2005)

The frame looks really similar to the Soul Cycles Monk cyclocross bike.

If it is indeed the same, its fine. Does what its supposed to do, doesnt complain, and is cheap. Nothing special, just a bike you ride and dont think about.


----------



## KWillets (Feb 28, 2006)

It took me a month, but I finally got this thing built up and rode it a few miles on the road. It feels pretty good; it's stiff as heck, and I like the acceleration. When I get a chance I'll upload some photos.

I'm still adjusting a few things from the build, and getting my position positioned, but it's been smooth so far. The only problem I've noticed is occasionally clipping my heels on the chainstays, since they're wider than my road bike, and I wear wide sneaker-type MTB shoes for commuting. The chainstay width is definitely maxed out, with only a few mm clearance to the chainring on the Nashbar 50/34 cranks that I put on.

As a joke, I'm thinking of calling Nashbar and asking for touch-up paint.


----------



## KWillets (Feb 28, 2006)

Here are some photos:


----------



## quattrotom (Jul 15, 2006)

KWillets said:


> Here are some photos:


Are you using a 135mm rear hub like they suggest or standard road 130mm? Do you think it's feasible to pinch down to a 130mm?

Thanks.


----------



## KWillets (Feb 28, 2006)

It's a 135 with the Nashbar Open Pro/LX cyclocross wheels. I haven't tried pushing the stays together, but I can say it's a stiff frame overall. It would probably be difficult.


----------



## weltyed (Feb 6, 2004)

i have been toyin with the idea of buyin one of these frames. you nabbed a medium. how tall are you and what size bike do you normally ride?

and what was the retail you paid. i have seen this frame go from 179 to 139...


----------



## KWillets (Feb 28, 2006)

I'm 6' 0 3/4" and ride a 56 road frame with something like a 120mm stem. The medium seemed close on paper, although as I've noted the effective TT is a bit shorter at the stem level. To double check you could compare wheelbase or wheelbase minus chainstay length and see if they're close at the hub level, and then lengthen the stem to accommodate the slack fork (each degree in head angle difference translates to about 1cm in cockpit length).

I bought everything during that huge sale at $130 with a 20% discount code, so it was 104. The whole bike came in under $500, at least until I ordered ergo's (the current levers are temporary).

One other thing that came up was that the big ring was rubbing the chainstay if I torqued the left crank. After I tightened the BB the problem went away, but it's still closer than I would want it. Try a 48 or smaller ring, or jigger the BB to get the ring farther out.


----------



## bm (Mar 10, 2002)

*very cool*

Very cool!

What is the final weight? ... I'm just curious.


----------



## KWillets (Feb 28, 2006)

Heck, our bathroom scale looks like it's ready for the dump. I couldn't get a direct weight, but I went through the parts list and got around 21.5 pounds.

frame: Nashbar X 3.63 lbs (small)
fork: Nashbar steel cross/touring fork 1332g (almost 3lbs.)
crank Nashbar compact 680g
bb Nashbar isis 108 250g
post Nashbar 300mm 230g
seat Nashbar 331g
stem Nashbar alloy 155g
bars Nashbar 7075 242g
headset ritchey cheapest 1 1/8 153.5g
cassette Nashbar 9s 300g (? est.)
chain Nashbar KMC 9s 300g
pedals ritchey v4 340g
wheels Nashbar OP/LX disc 1900 g (?)
tires Conti top touring 28 (heavy) 980g/pr.
tubes med. 276g/pr.
brakes Nashbar deluxe canti ?g
brake levers 260g
barcon 9s ?g
Rear Derailleur 105 229g

The known items add up to 20.52 lbs., so I'm guessing 21.5 for the whole thing.

That fork really is heavy. The bike took a nose dive the first time I picked it up. Obviously I can drop a few pounds by getting a carbon fork and new tires. I'm planning on Ritchey Speedmax's for the tires, but I haven't found an LBS that sells them, and I'm too lazy to mail-order any more stuff.


----------



## jhowell (Dec 19, 2005)

quattrotom said:


> Are you using a 135mm rear hub like they suggest or standard road 130mm? Do you think it's feasible to pinch down to a 130mm?
> 
> Thanks.


I wouldn't pinch aluminum down at all. Steel can be done with no problem, but aluminum acts a little differently under stress and would not be a good idea. I'm no expert - maybe a metallurgist can explain better?


----------



## Ramjm_2000 (Jan 29, 2005)

cantdog said:


> The frame looks really similar to the Soul Cycles Monk cyclocross bike.
> 
> If it is indeed the same, its fine. Does what its supposed to do, doesnt complain, and is cheap. Nothing special, just a bike you ride and dont think about.


Looks very similiar in design to a Soul Cycles but the Monks don't have rack mounts and the geo is very different (ie..not compact like the Nashbar frame).


----------



## black cross (May 15, 2006)

I have been thinking/putting off getting one of these frames. Maybe waiting for another 15-20% off from Nashbar. Their new flyer came in the mail yesterday, and just my luck, the price has gone up another $10. Their other frames seemed to have taken another drop in price though.


----------



## KWillets (Feb 28, 2006)

A few more pics from the blurry cell cam. That last one shows the chainring clearance. You can see where the paint is scraped from when it was rubbing. I sent Nashbar a note about the issue.

I've been riding it all week on the road, and still no worries. I've dropped the chain a couple of times due to the lack of an FD, and fixed a few rattles, but any worries about being slow on pavement have been allayed. I don't know how I'd feel after 100 miles on this frame, but if I need to beat a stoplight this is the tool for me.


----------



## jeremyb (Jun 16, 2004)

Look like you need a wider BB----like one built for a triple, to get more clearance.


----------



## bassmannate (Aug 31, 2008)

Hello, all!

I'm thinking about building on this frame set. I was wondering how it's held up over the past couple years? What about the components? Other than the chainring rubbing on the stays have you had any trouble with any parts as they've worn in?

Edit: What would you/have you changed from the original build and why?


----------



## outofshape (Apr 30, 2009)

*Nashbar X w/ Neuvation M28 Aeros*

I put a set of older (M28 Aero 2) Neuvation wheels, on the Nashbar X frame, and the result is one heck of a commuter - the ultimate urban assault vehicle. Here's my build and ending weight (Most parts except crank rings, chain, tires and wheels, were used parts)

Nashbar X frame (medium for me - I'm 5'11", 215 lbs, long arms, short (30") inseam.
Neuvation M28 Aero 2 black wheelset (rear = $80 scratch and dent yearend special , front = $50refurbished - great service!). If you can get the M20 Aero3's or R28 Aero 4's that's even better! But i'm satisfied with my older model Aero 2's.
front tire - Vittoria Open Corsa CX black, 700x20c (max is 150, but I ride using 130psi)
rear tire - Vredestein TriComp Fortessa 700x23c (max 175, but ride 140psi)
XT long-cage rear der,
XT M770 9-sp 11-34 tooth cassette, Deore 9sp shifters, 
Sugino AT triple crankset (50-36-24)
deore v-brakes
Carbon touring fork - aluminum steerer.

Weight: 20.5 lbs

Despite the aero wheels and stiff frame aluminum frame, the ride is quite smooth (it could be because of the tires which have high TPI's). I had tried several wheel/tire sets, but this wheel/tire set REALLY rolls freely. Nothing is flat in Vancouver with some really steep hills, hence the "granny gears".

The Nash X frame has good power transfer (very wide downtube connection with BB). I also like the lack of graphics and matte black paint because it suits the role of being a commuter bike, yet with the lightness and speed of a high-end road bike.


----------

