Results 1 to 15 of 15
  1. #1
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Posts
    224

    Foundary Auger vs Ridley X-Fire

    I will be in the market for a CX bike this year for the first time. I dipped my toes into CX last year after the XC season finished and LOVED it. Budget it a bit tight though so my LBS recommended the Foundry Auger over the Ridley X-Fire. Both are Carbon fiber frames, so I could build it up a bit more when I had more funds. The Ridley has 105 components and the Auger has SRAM Force. The Auger would be a bit cheaper through the door for me too ($100 less).
    I know very little about CX bikes and components so I need your expertise guys (does that mean I am screwed ?). What would be the smarter pick-up for a guy in my situation?
    I plan to do "a lot" of races; but it won't rule my lifestyle right now. I'm still a guy with a career and a young family who needs my time. But I would like something that I'm not going to hate and want to replace next year. Thoughts please?

  2. #2
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    587
    don't most/all of the Foundry bikes come with the 15mm axle forks (or is that an option). Something to think about is resale, especially if this is your first cx bike. I really believe that you're likely to buy the "wrong" bike (too racy/not racy enough...) at first. Ridleys cost more but "generally" hold their price well in the secondary market. Foundry hasn't really been around enough to garner the sort of fanbase/following Ridley has.

    Most Ridley's don't have rack mounts (and it - on the web - doesn't look like the foundry does either but maybe the one in your shop does?). they look similar geometry wise...

    I'd recommend buying used since the disc technology hasn't quite been ironed out yet. If you're patient, you can pick up good conditioned stuff from last year for pennies on the dollar.

  3. #3
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Posts
    113
    Quote Originally Posted by criscobike View Post
    I plan to do "a lot" of races; but it won't rule my lifestyle right now.
    I find myself questioning the latter part of this claim, but if you really think it's true then I'd say either of the bikes you're considering is more than you really need. That's not to say they aren't great bikes, but I would claim that if you've got the legs and the skills for it you could win your local races on a bike at half the price. And if you don't have the legs or the skills for that, then you could have just as much fun on a bike at half the price.

    I've done 66 races over the last three years on a 2008 Kona Major Jake that I picked up used for $900. Cyclocross kind of does rule my lifestyle in the fall, and I'm not even slightly tempted to upgrade to another bike.

    If budget is tight, get something with a cheaper base price (either a nice used bike or a decent new mid-level race bike) and save the rest of your money for a tubular wheelset and tires.

    I don't think he's got any more available, but check out this link to read about a custom Jake the Snake build that Erik Tonkin put together:

    From the mind of Erik Tonkin: The JtS SCR! – Sellwood Cycle Repair

    Under 19 pounds for $1200 -- those are serious bikes!

  4. #4
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    204
    Check out the Foundry Harrow, it's more of the CX race bike as opposed to the Auger which is gravel if you want apples to apples with the X-fire. I have a harrow and wouldn't do it differently.

    Biggest thing is check the geometry. They are VASTLY different between those two bikes. You can get the B3 level of the Harrow for a cheaper price and still get the 105 level (better than force I had on my specialized). Lots of bikes join 15mm axle now, and IMHO it is really nice.

  5. #5
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Posts
    224
    Quote Originally Posted by khardrunner14 View Post
    Check out the Foundry Harrow, it's more of the CX race bike as opposed to the Auger which is gravel if you want apples to apples with the X-fire. I have a harrow and wouldn't do it differently.

    Biggest thing is check the geometry. They are VASTLY different between those two bikes. You can get the B3 level of the Harrow for a cheaper price and still get the 105 level (better than force I had on my specialized). Lots of bikes join 15mm axle now, and IMHO it is really nice.
    Of course I would rather get the Harrow. Two of my bus's have the Harrow and I know it would be an incredible bike. But the budget is what it is. I did test ride each today and the Auger blew away the X-Fire IMO. I check a tons of reviews, including one from CX Magazine. I learned that the online description doesn't really do it great justice. It is intended to be a lower level, yet still appropriate carbon CX race bike that has a little more relaxed set up. I saw multiple good reviews that expressed pretty much what I wanted to hear: that it was a solid race bike after a couple upgrades and great frame for the price. So it looks like I am going that way.

  6. #6
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    204
    No complaints on the Auger, in fact it is just as "high end" as a harrow. The difference is mostly in geometry with the Auger more "gravel" oriented (whatever that is) and the harrow more "race". If it fits, the Auger is an awesome machine

  7. #7
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Posts
    224
    Quote Originally Posted by khardrunner14 View Post
    No complaints on the Auger, in fact it is just as "high end" as a harrow...If it fits, the Auger is an awesome machine
    That's what I was hoping for. In my little test ride, the Auger fell WAY more stiff and responsive than the X-Fire. It just took off when I pushed on the pedal. Felt nimble and quick in turns and soaked up the bumps quite well. I also tried a barrier or two and had zero problems. The X-Fire was advertised as, and felt altogether, shorter top tube wise. I felt uncomfortable. But the Auger felt perfect in the same frame size. Plus it has the added benefit of being about a pound lighter to start in factory weight...I'm feel pretty confident with my choice of the Auger at this point. Thanks for the input guys.

  8. #8
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    89
    Auger isn't gravel-oriented, it's just more of a utility bike. You can think of the Auger as a fast hatchback while the X-Fire is a dedicated track car. The X-Fire will be faster but you won't want to commute on it, you can't really slap fenders on it, and the warranty isn't nearly as good. The Auger, since it's not a CX-race geometry, will ride fine on the road or for commuting duties (or gravel racing) and it has fender mounts for off season training. Lastly it has a ten year warranty.

  9. #9
    mtbr member
    Reputation: mudge's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    1,156
    Quote Originally Posted by khardrunner14 View Post
    Check out the Foundry Harrow, it's more of the CX race bike as opposed to the Auger which is gravel if you want apples to apples with the X-fire. I have a harrow and wouldn't do it differently.

    Biggest thing is check the geometry. They are VASTLY different between those two bikes. You can get the B3 level of the Harrow for a cheaper price and still get the 105 level (better than force I had on my specialized). Lots of bikes join 15mm axle now, and IMHO it is really nice.
    When you say "vastly different between those two bikes" are you referring to the Auger and the X-Fire, or the Auger and the Harrow? Surely you must be referring to the former, not the latter. The Auger and the Harrow are for all intents and purposes identical in geometry, at least in the areas that matter (HT angle, BB drop, CS length).

    I've got a bud who, along with his teammates, race on Foundry Harrows. They were given the choice of the Harrow or the Auger, and all of them chose the Harrow. Not for geometry, but for ride characteristics/stiffness/weight/etc. Foundry needs to differentiate between the two bikes on something other than parts spec/price, so they tell us one is better for racing and the other is better for gravel grinding. Reality is, one is just a simpler layup of carbon fiber and tube-to-tube construction (iow, less expensive) whereas the other is monocoque (and therefore more expensive).

    Not saying you can't get a great riding bike using tube-to-tube construction techniques (lots of great bikes out there that do) but what you can do is make a good bike very inexpensively that way.

    The only meaningful distinctions between the Auger and the Harrow that would make the Auger better suited for gravel are tire clearance and price.

  10. #10
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    204
    I was speaking of the foundry vs the ridley.

    As for the Harrow vs. Auger, HT height is different as are the available sizes and ETT's. HT height is pretty important for long legged fellows like myself.

  11. #11
    mtbr member
    Reputation: mudge's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    1,156
    Quote Originally Posted by khardrunner14 View Post
    I was speaking of the foundry vs the ridley.

    As for the Harrow vs. Auger, HT height is different as are the available sizes and ETT's. HT height is pretty important for long legged fellows like myself.
    The HT heights are different, but surprisingly they're taller on the Harrow vs the Auger for the same relative size. Sure, they offer one more size (a really small one) for the Harrow, but across the rest of the range the size differences/ETT lengths can easily be accommodated by minor stem length changes. For the two largest sizes, the differences are inconsequential. Hell, for the largest size, they are My Cousin Vinny Identical - YouTube

  12. #12
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    204
    Stem length can accommodate a lot of ETT differences. My only point is that the two bike are, in fact, different.

  13. #13
    mtbr member
    Reputation: mudge's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    1,156
    Quote Originally Posted by khardrunner14 View Post
    Stem length can accommodate a lot of ETT differences. My only point is that the two bike are, in fact, different.
    No one would argue they're not different. It's just that geometry isn't significantly different. And for tall guys, they aren't different at all. Geometry-wise, that is.

  14. #14
    jrm
    jrm is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation: jrm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    10,260
    Auger b/c it would fit me and i like the tall HT.

  15. #15
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    64
    Frame vs Frame the major differences are the bb height and the brake mount location.
    The Ridley has a slightly higher bottom bracket (6mm) and the brake is mounted on the seat stay (less chance of hitting your heal). I have been on a X-Fire Disc with a Sram/Hayes group for two years its bulletproof and accelerates like a dragcar out of turns. Ride whatever inspires you to go fast.

Similar Threads

  1. Auger Falls Map
    By gartenmeister in forum Idaho, Montana, Wyoming
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 05-04-2014, 05:12 AM
  2. Auger Falls-Dec 15 - Great Riding.
    By centershot in forum Idaho, Montana, Wyoming
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 01-15-2014, 11:37 AM
  3. 2012 Ridley X-Fire or 2014 Jake the snake
    By farmergeall in forum Cyclocross
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 08-18-2013, 02:35 PM
  4. Foundry Auger First Ride
    By lawfarm in forum Cyclocross
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 05-30-2012, 07:27 AM
  5. 2010 Ridley X Fire?
    By macming in forum Cyclocross
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 03-15-2012, 11:08 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •