Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 100 of 101
  1. #1
    mtbr member
    Reputation: salimoneus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    1,888

    Motobecane Phantom Cross Pro Ti Sizing

    Not being too familiar with the ins and outs of road bike sizing, I recently went into a local Performance to ride some cross bikes around the store to test the fit (and to see what this SRAM double tap stuff is all about, not too bad).

    I settled on the 56 Fuji Cross frame as being a fairly decent fit (I'm 5'11" with 32" inseam) even though the stand over still seemed a bit tall.

    Then I start comparing the size charts with the Motobecane that I would like to order, and I'm seeing some seemingly large differences between the two:
    <br>
    <img src="http://salimon.ddns.net/images/moto_fuji.png"></img>
    <br>
    Most noticeably the wheel base and stand over seem shortened a fair amount compared to the Fuji. I haven't looked around at other brands, but do the Motobecane Ti frames run on the small side, and do riders typically move to the next size up?

    It's just that ordering from BD you're basically ordering blind, and there are no shops that carry Motobecane frames anywhere near here. So I'm at a bit of a loss as to which direction I should go. Being right in the middle of sizes isn't helping much either. Any thoughts appreciated.
    Last edited by salimoneus; 01-20-2015 at 07:56 PM.

  2. #2
    mtbr member
    Reputation: rallymaniac's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Posts
    178

    Re: Motobecane Phantom Cross Pro Ti Sizing

    Looks like you are same size as me. L on MTB and 58cm on road bike. Since cross bikes should be at least one size smaller than your road bike you should be good to go with a 56cm Moto

    Sent from my MB525 using Tapatalk 2

  3. #3
    mtbr member
    Reputation: salimoneus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    1,888
    I was leaning towards the 56 as well, since it has the same effective top tube as the Fuji I was on, and has a lower stand-over which seems like a plus. The wheelbase just seems a bit short at 38.7. I guess the wheelbase isn't as much of a big deal in comparison though.

  4. #4
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Eric Malcolm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    1,003
    This a hard to follow comparison.

    Firstly, on the 56cm frame, wheelbase variation of 41mm. The Chainstays are of equal length as is the EFF TT. Both forks have 45mm offset. Only the head tube angle is different by 1 degree. This does not equal a 41mm variance. You might like to obtain actual drawings of each to more accurately nail this issue down. Also, the Fuji has a common 72 degree head tube angle for a CX bike whereas the Motobecane is road bike steep. Beware and get some owner feedback if possible on the quick steering that this will give and also, check the toe overlap as a short wheel base - short front centre specifically - may also be a problem.

    I would recommend to you to look at Strawberry Cycles (Google it) and use the fitting chart to get a better look of yourself and your proportions to size correctly.

    Thirdly, do not worry about head tube length. The Motobecane will be shorter in the steerer stem which means you can position lower down to the h/bars, or fit a riser stem to sit more upright. You can play with your position on Strawberry's site.

    More study, details, mere details.....pun intended.

    Happy hunting.

    Eric
    If I don't make an attempt, how will I know if it will work?

  5. #5
    mtbr member
    Reputation: salimoneus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    1,888
    I found some images of each that appear to be near the same scale (about the same wheel size and wheel base in pixels, not sure about frame sizes). I did a quick skeleton overlay of the Moto on top of the Fuji:
    <br>
    <img src="http://salimon.dnsd.info/images/compare.png"></img>
    <br>
    It looks as though the top tube angle and head tube seem to be the large contributing factors in the difference in wheel base and stand over. Good point about the head tube angle, I wasn't really considering that. I'll check out Strawberry as well, thanks.

  6. #6
    mtbr member
    Reputation: salimoneus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    1,888
    Hmm, in that pic the Moto fork appears to have more of a bend in it, resulting in the fork angle being almost identical to that of the Fuji. Perhaps the difference in HTA isn't as bad as it seems.

  7. #7
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Eric Malcolm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    1,003
    Very well done. The overlay is revealing. It does appear that the Moto spec sheet is not as true to reality as the visual seems much more clear. The numbers do not match, so one is wrong. The picture tells a different story, so we will call it that they are essentially similar. My point about the head tube length is correct so up to you on which size you want to go for.

    Eric
    If I don't make an attempt, how will I know if it will work?

  8. #8
    mtbr member
    Reputation: salimoneus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    1,888
    I am still concerned about the short head tube. Although the lower hand position appears to be about the same between the two due to the shorter drop of the MotoB bars, the upper hand position seems quite a bit lower on the MotoB. I'm sure a different or flipped stem and spacers could remedy that to a degree, but it still seems like an excessively short head tube.

    I'm also not crazy about the rear hub being 130mm, it seems like 135mm is pretty standard now, and I'm concerned about getting stuck with limited disc wheel options down the road.

    Still though, at under $2k it's pretty hard if not impossible to beat for a decently specced Ti cross bike.

  9. #9
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Eric Malcolm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    1,003
    In terms of head tube length in isolation, Mountain bikes are regularly this size and take more punishment, so don't beat yourself up on that one. Stems can be worked out for ride position, remember that Motobecane is an old European brand and they are still following traditional design themes. The argument is in favour of 135mm spacing for the rear wheel - mixes well with the MTB brethren. It is not too hard however to spread the rear end a little, but squaring up the brake adaptor could be a problem, remember, we are talking 5mm total, 2.5mm each side of centre. Or, 130mm will have some form of wheel support, as there are existing bikes out there in this configuration, and if road bikes come on stream with Disc's, we just have to wait and see which way they will go.

    Eric
    If I don't make an attempt, how will I know if it will work?

  10. #10
    mtbr member
    Reputation: salimoneus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    1,888
    Good points, it does seem like any apparent shortcomings can be compensated for and aren't necessarily deal breakers. This bike is definitely worthy of consideration. Thanks for the input!

  11. #11
    mtbr member
    Reputation: salimoneus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    1,888
    For those interested, BD has opened up pre-orders on 2015 models of both the Pro (Rival) and Team (Ultegra) versions of the Fantom Cross Ti, with a ship date around mid-August this year. If you're interested I would get in now, these don't seem to last very long.

  12. #12
    mtbr member
    Reputation: salimoneus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    1,888
    These are shipping now, a whole month ahead of schedule, and it looks like there are still some available. I received mine today and can't wait to get it setup.

    Just a word of warning: the 2015 model comes with an 11 speed drive train, not a 10 speed as indicated on the website. I had already built up a wheel set for the road in advance with a 10 speed cassette, but that's going to have to change now. Not a huge deal but worth mentioning.

  13. #13
    mtbr member
    Reputation: salimoneus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    1,888
    Have been riding this bike a bit, and overall it is extremely impressive, especially considering the new Rival 22 was thrown in essentially as a free upgrade. The front shifting with the new Rival components is cleaner than any other mid-level SRAM setup I've ever tried. I think they finally got it right with this 22 release.

    My only complaint thus far is the wheelset. The Vuelta XRP Pro wheels seem to be having some clearance issues. I tried a PG-1170 11-28T cassette and the rivets on the inside of the cassette made contact with the outer spokes. The bike comes with a PG-1130 11-32T, and it appears that the spider design on the 1130 series is a bit different and offers more spoke clearance. I am hoping the smaller sizes in that series will work as well. A bit disappointing but considering that this is a fairly low end wheelset to begin with, not a major ding.

  14. #14
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    3

    Motobecane Ti Fantom

    Hi salimoneus, I too am looking at this bike and wondering how it has been going for you. I love everything I've seen about it so far, but am a little wary of the short head tube. I'm old and carrying some belly luggage, so I like to go with saddle and bars at pretty similar height. Were there spacers available? Is the head tube uncut, or is a riser stem the only answer? Thanks.

  15. #15
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    3
    Quote Originally Posted by shawnriffhard View Post
    Hi salimoneus, I too am looking at this bike and wondering how it has been going for you. I love everything I've seen about it so far, but am a little wary of the short head tube. I'm old and carrying some belly luggage, so I like to go with saddle and bars at pretty similar height. Were there spacers available? Is the head tube uncut, or is a riser stem the only answer? Thanks.
    Bump.
    Any new reviews of your MB Ti?

  16. #16
    mtbr member
    Reputation: salimoneus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    1,888
    Hi Shawn,

    Sorry did not see your previous post.

    The short head tube has not really been noticeable to me, and I did end up flipping the stem to give me a rise on the bars. The fork steer tube was already cut with star nut installed, but it was cut fairly long and came with 1.5" of spacers installed. I kept all the spacers under the stem and overall it fits great and I am really enjoying the bike.

    I noticed that they are now shipping the same model year bike with WTB wheels instead of the XRPs, so I would expect the cassette fitment issues I had to be non existent with the updated version. The updated version is also $100 cheaper than what I paid for mine so it's an even better buy at just $1599. At that price you really can't go wrong for a Ti frame with a lifetime warranty and Rival 22 setup.

    Hope this helps.

  17. #17
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    107
    Is the ti fantom a decently built ti frame? Been thinking about one of these or the cheaper aluminum version.

  18. #18
    mtbr member
    Reputation: mojoB's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2014
    Posts
    22
    There doesn't seem to be much information about these bikes around, so I'm going to add my mini-review here.

    Sizing-wise, I have the 61cm Fantom Cross Pro TI and myself am 6'3", 34" inseam. My other cross bike/commuter is a 58cm Masi CX. Most of the geometry lined up about the same as the Masi, except the top tube is 15mm longer. To counteract that I've put a 100mm stem in place of the stock 110 and flipped it. I'm kicking myself a little as I totally missed the standover height, It's not a dealbreaker but it is a very close fit, perhaps the 59cm would have been a better choice at the end of the day.

    The bike itself is excellent. The ride is feels fast and buttery smooth at 55 PSI. The BB7s with 160mm rotors have plenty of stopping power, and the shifting on the Rival 22 is excellent. A nice touch that they don't mention is that all of the cables are Jagwire. The double-tap rear shifter can downshift 2-3 gears at once.

    I'll add some pictures, but the frame quality seems to be top notch. The welds are all neatly finished, and there's a nicely integrated chainstay protector. All of the decals (except the ones on the fork) look like they will peel off nicely. Most of them are tasteful but the rim decals are definitely going.

    Assembly is straightforward. Attach the handlebars to the stem, install the front brake, front rotor, insert the seat, inflate the tires and setup the derailleurs. I used my A520 pedals and MTB shoes, but it does ship with SPD-SL pedals and cleats in the box.

    For my commute, I'm going to add some fenders and probably tubeless 28mm road tires.

    Overall I'm stoaked, this is a very nice bike, especially for the price. I can't fault anything about it, and I'm surprised there's not more chatter about them (at least that I can find).
    Aussie in Chicagoland (what's all this white stuff?)

  19. #19
    mtbr member
    Reputation: salimoneus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    1,888
    Quote Originally Posted by timsmcm View Post
    Is the ti fantom a decently built ti frame? Been thinking about one of these or the cheaper aluminum version.
    Yes I would absolutely say that the Ti frame on this bike is of very good quality. I recall reading that it is manufactured by the same factory who makes the Ritchey break-apart Ti frame and several other top of the line frames. As mojoB said the welds are very clean, and the ride quality is very good on even 23c road tires.

    I have not ridden the aluminum version but I'm personally not a big fan of using an aluminum frame on a fully rigid bike, be it a mountain or road bike. For a cross bike I would only consider steel or Ti due to the extra flex in those materials, as well as increased durability out on the trail.

  20. #20
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    107
    Does anyone know how long it usually takes them to come back into stock? Been checking for a while, don't see any sizes to order.

  21. #21
    mtbr member
    Reputation: salimoneus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    1,888
    Quote Originally Posted by timsmcm View Post
    Does anyone know how long it usually takes them to come back into stock? Been checking for a while, don't see any sizes to order.
    It appears they have plenty of stock at this time, I would try the link that mojoB posted, or you can find them here Cyclocross bikes @ BikesDirect

  22. #22
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    107
    Went to both those links. When I try to put a size in to order nothing comes up on any of the ti frames

  23. #23
    mtbr member
    Reputation: mojoB's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2014
    Posts
    22
    Quote Originally Posted by timsmcm View Post
    Went to both those links. When I try to put a size in to order nothing comes up on any of the ti frames
    Seems ok to me, you put in your size and add to cart:

    Aussie in Chicagoland (what's all this white stuff?)

  24. #24
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    107
    Thanks much. The computer I was on would not work with that site. Tried another, golden.

  25. #25
    mtbr member
    Reputation: mojoB's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2014
    Posts
    22
    Here's my pictures, click through for more. Sorry for the quality, not much room to work in. I'm happy to answer any questions.

    Aussie in Chicagoland (what's all this white stuff?)

  26. #26
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    107
    Man that looks like a merlin build quality back in the day. I know picts are not the same as in person but that bike looks the business. How do you like the build parts? Trying to decide between that kit and the ultrega kit.

  27. #27
    mtbr member
    Reputation: mojoB's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2014
    Posts
    22
    Quote Originally Posted by timsmcm View Post
    How do you like the build parts? Trying to decide between that kit and the ultrega kit.
    No complaints at all on the Rival, though full Ultegra was a bit tempting. In the end I decided to keep the extra $200 in the kitty, and so far no regrets.
    Aussie in Chicagoland (what's all this white stuff?)

  28. #28
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Posts
    8
    Quote Originally Posted by mojoB View Post
    There doesn't seem to be much information about these bikes around, so I'm going to add my mini-review here.

    Sizing-wise, I have the 61cm Fantom Cross Pro TI and myself am 6'3", 34" inseam. My other cross bike/commuter is a 58cm Masi CX. Most of the geometry lined up about the same as the Masi, except the top tube is 15mm longer. To counteract that I've put a 100mm stem in place of the stock 110 and flipped it. I'm kicking myself a little as I totally missed the standover height, It's not a dealbreaker but it is a very close fit, perhaps the 59cm would have been a better choice at the end of the day.

    The bike itself is excellent. The ride is feels fast and buttery smooth at 55 PSI. The BB7s with 160mm rotors have plenty of stopping power, and the shifting on the Rival 22 is excellent. A nice touch that they don't mention is that all of the cables are Jagwire. The double-tap rear shifter can downshift 2-3 gears at once.

    I'll add some pictures, but the frame quality seems to be top notch. The welds are all neatly finished, and there's a nicely integrated chainstay protector. All of the decals (except the ones on the fork) look like they will peel off nicely. Most of them are tasteful but the rim decals are definitely going.

    Assembly is straightforward. Attach the handlebars to the stem, install the front brake, front rotor, insert the seat, inflate the tires and setup the derailleurs. I used my A520 pedals and MTB shoes, but it does ship with SPD-SL pedals and cleats in the box.

    For my commute, I'm going to add some fenders and probably tubeless 28mm road tires.

    Overall I'm stoaked, this is a very nice bike, especially for the price. I can't fault anything about it, and I'm surprised there's not more chatter about them (at least that I can find).
    I have the Ti in 61cm as well. I like the build, looks nice with the logos removed (though it apparently voids the warranty).
    The only thing I don't like about it is the weight, Mine is roughly 29 pounds (including bottle cages, etc). I don't plan on racing it but it is something to consider if others are concerned about the weight.
    I understand it is a TI frame and not aluminum but it just seems quite heavy. I even have some lighter carbon fiber wheels on it and the weight is 29lbs.

    I would definitely consider going with an aluminum version for racing if it would lower the weight substantially since I am very pleased with the build of the TI version.

  29. #29
    mtbr member
    Reputation: rex615's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Posts
    427
    Quote Originally Posted by AristoNYC View Post
    The only thing I don't like about it is the weight, Mine is roughly 29 pounds (including bottle cages, etc). I don't plan on racing it but it is something to consider if others are concerned about the weight.
    I understand it is a TI frame and not aluminum but it just seems quite heavy. I even have some lighter carbon fiber wheels on it and the weight is 29lbs.
    Wow, that seems really heavy for that bike, on the Motobecane website they list the weight of the Ultegra version as 19.5 lbs, approx. for the 49cm (no pedals/reflectors).

    I have this bike on my short list, but that weight is disappointing.

  30. #30
    mtbr member
    Reputation: salimoneus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    1,888
    Not sure where anyone came up with 29lbs (I have a feeling it was a typo) but my 2015 56cm with Rival is 20.8lbs with the heavy Vuelta wheels and large 28mm road tires.

  31. #31
    mtbr member
    Reputation: salimoneus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    1,888
    It's quite possible that in the 61 (size quoted at 29lbs) they went with much thicker titanium tubing to handle the increased required load capacity, which would increase overall weight significantly more than if the tubing was the same thickness between the sizes. Even with thicker tubing that just seems like too big a difference to me though, but I'm not a bicycle frame engineer so it's really hard to say for sure.

    All I know is I triple checked my 56, and with just my fat ass on the digital scale I weigh ~199, holding the bike ~220 including pedals.

  32. #32
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Eric Malcolm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    1,003
    Heavier walled tube would add less than a lb. This is a typo error.

    Eric
    If I don't make an attempt, how will I know if it will work?

  33. #33
    mtbr member
    Reputation: mojoB's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2014
    Posts
    22
    Quote Originally Posted by Eric Malcolm View Post
    Heavier walled tube would add less than a lb. This is a typo error.
    This was bugging me too. My 61cm SRAM Rival with fenders and heavy tires (830grams each) is 11.4kg. With normal tires it would be closer to 10.4kg, or 23lbs.
    Aussie in Chicagoland (what's all this white stuff?)

  34. #34
    mtbr member
    Reputation: rex615's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Posts
    427
    Thanks for all who responded.

    The weight isn't really that important to me, and the idea of heavier walled tubes for the larger frame is actually appealing to me. I am just hoping it is going to be lighter than my fatbike

  35. #35
    Just hit it with speed
    Reputation: GFisher2001's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    479
    I got one of the Motobecane Fantom Ti - Shimano 105, 11 spd versions. 53cm, maybe a hair on the large side. I swapped the 100mm stem to a 90mm and it helped a bit. I am 5'7ish.

    Weighs 22ish lbs. The wheels are anchors 2000+ grams by my calculation and estimates. I think mostly in hubs and spokes, the rims are the cheaper i19 chriscross with brake tracks, even though it's disc equipped.

    Prior to me swapping out some of the stock parts with items from my parts bin I think this bike would have been in the low 23 lb range.

    Really solid build quality on the frame, looks high end, excellent price, but......I wish it didn't come with 11 speed and I wish I did a bit more homework before buying. None of my mtb wheel hubs will fit the 11 spd road stuff, sigh. I have mtb wheels with 1000's of miles on them that are in the 1600 gram range that I would have loved to use on this bike.

    I'd still do it all over again, but would probably consider maybe the next step up, to get nicer or lighter wheels (that are 11 spd compatiable) or I would have saved the cash and gotten a 10 spd Rival equipped bike and bought a nice set of "slippers."
    Don't hate on the minivan!!!!!!!

  36. #36
    mtbr member
    Reputation: rex615's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Posts
    427
    Can anyone with one of these bikes please give me an idea of how much clearance for a larger tire or a guess at how large a tire could fit on it. The rear triangle is usually the limiting factor.

    I am also curious how wide the stock tire is on the stock rims (or any rim really).

    I would love to fit a 40 or a 42mm tire and am wondering if that is possible.

    Thanks in advance for your help.

  37. #37
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Posts
    219
    Quote Originally Posted by rex615 View Post
    Can anyone with one of these bikes please give me an idea of how much clearance for a larger tire or a guess at how large a tire could fit on it. The rear triangle is usually the limiting factor.

    I am also curious how wide the stock tire is on the stock rims (or any rim really).

    I would love to fit a 40 or a 42mm tire and am wondering if that is possible.

    Thanks in advance for your help.
    I've run 40c Happy Mediums with the stock wheels. Slight fork rub. Carbon hoops would help for sure, but it can be done either way.

  38. #38
    Just hit it with speed
    Reputation: GFisher2001's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    479

    Tried my best to get frame clearance info.

    Motobecane Phantom Cross Pro Ti Sizing-img_20150213_122110670.jpgMotobecane Phantom Cross Pro Ti Sizing-img_20150213_122058917.jpgMotobecane Phantom Cross Pro Ti Sizing-img_20150213_121916962.jpgMotobecane Phantom Cross Pro Ti Sizing-img_20150213_121807370.jpg

    For reference, rims are ChrisCross i19s with 35c Continental Race tires. Tire pressure about about 45ish.

    FYI the stock combo on the bike has had a difficult time of sealing up tubeless.

    Frame is dirty, don't hold it against me.

    Edit: Frame size is a 53. Stock fork.
    Don't hate on the minivan!!!!!!!

  39. #39
    mtbr member
    Reputation: rex615's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Posts
    427
    Thanks Sleeveless, very useful information.

    Thanks GFisher for taking the time to shoot those pics. Great documentation. Also want to mention that the fact that your bike is dirty, just adds to your credibility.

    I want to be able to run Schwalbe Little Big Bens (40mm) for day tours on tarmac and it looks like they should fit since they mike out close to 40mm.

  40. #40
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Bugout Bikes's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Posts
    186

    Motobecane Phantom Cross Pro Ti Sizing

    Anyone have a weight on the TI?

    EDIT: never mind. Found it


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  41. #41
    mtbr member
    Reputation: salimoneus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    1,888
    Thanks for the pics. I tried to upload some, but the MTBR "pic uploader" doesn't work in Firefox apparently and I refuse to use IE.

  42. #42
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Bugout Bikes's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Posts
    186

    Motobecane Phantom Cross Pro Ti Sizing

    Is the titanium worth the extra $ or should I just go for the cross team aluminum (ultegra). I already placed my order but am wondering how much better the Ti version is? My understanding is that titanium is heavier but stronger and has some more shock absorption.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  43. #43
    mtbr member
    Reputation: rex615's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Posts
    427
    Quote Originally Posted by Bugout Bikes View Post
    Is the titanium worth the extra $ or should I just go for the cross team aluminum (ultegra). I already placed my order but am wondering how much better the Ti version is? My understanding is that titanium is heavier but stronger and has some more shock absorption.

    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    I think you have answered your own question in the technical sense. But I guess there is also the philosophical sense. You can't go wrong with either material, both will be great bikes with only subtle differences, however there is a certain appeal that one material has over an other.

    I want a Ti bike, because it is made of titanium, not really because it will perform any better, I am just not that aggressive a rider.

    I like steel frames and Ti frames. I prefer them over aluminium and carbon.

    What size are you getting?

  44. #44
    mtbr member
    Reputation: salimoneus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    1,888
    I don't think there is a significant difference between Ti and aluminum as far as weight is concerned, typically aluminum is thicker to achieve the same "strength" as Ti or steel, so in the end they are usually fairly close in weight. The main differences in my opinion aside from cost are shelf life, frame flex, and their ability to take stress.

    Anything you want to last for a long time, you would prefer Ti or steel over aluminum, as aluminum breaks down faster, is less flexible, and is more prone to failure after constant prolonged use. I would not trust a 20 year old aluminum frame, but Ti or steel can easily achieve those ages and then some and still perform at a high level.

    There is also the fact that aluminum is quite stiff compared to Ti or steel, and on a fully rigid bike like a cross or road bike, you would prefer more "flex" to make the ride more comfortable and easier on your joints.

    On say a full suspension mountain bike, you want the suspension doing all the work, so a more rigid aluminum frame is usually preferred. Also due to how quickly the full suspension designs evolve, and damage due to crashes, most people aren't going to keep a frame long enough for fatigue to be a factor with aluminum.

    Just my $.02.

  45. #45
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Bugout Bikes's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Posts
    186

    Motobecane Phantom Cross Pro Ti Sizing

    Thanks for your input! So, here's the question.

    I ordered the aluminum ultegra bike (with intent to possibly upgrade the frame and wheels). The groupset is awesome for the price. ($1699)

    But, I can get the TI bike (with rival components for $100 less). I'm torn because I wanted the ultegra Titanium but, they dont have my size (56 - I'm 5.11 and 32" inseam).

    So, If you had to chose between ultegra aluminum or rival with titanium, which would you choose and why?


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  46. #46
    z1r
    z1r is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    270
    I have the AL with Apex and love it. Only upgrade in the works is BB7&'s to replace the BB5's.

    Me, I think I'd get the Ti Rival if it was my size. I like the way the SRAM shifters work a little better than the Shimano. Both work great.

    But my AL is stiff and over washboard you feel it, otherwise, the ride is super. I think the Ti bike would be a little nicer.
    Last edited by z1r; 02-16-2015 at 09:53 AM.

  47. #47
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Posts
    219
    Quote Originally Posted by Bugout Bikes View Post
    Thanks for your input! So, here's the question.

    I ordered the aluminum ultegra bike (with intent to possibly upgrade the frame and wheels). The groupset is awesome for the price. ($1699)

    But, I can get the TI bike (with rival components for $100 less). I'm torn because I wanted the ultegra Titanium but, they dont have my size (56 - I'm 5.11 and 32" inseam).

    So, If you had to chose between ultegra aluminum or rival with titanium, which would you choose and why?


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    I would choose and did choose the Ti Rival bike. I think the frame makes more of a difference, and you would be saving money on top of it.

  48. #48
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Bugout Bikes's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Posts
    186

    Motobecane Phantom Cross Pro Ti Sizing

    Thanks for the help everyone! I emailed BD to change my order to the Pro (rival) TI version! Anyone have an out of the box weight on this bike?


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  49. #49
    z1r
    z1r is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    270
    I'd like to know the weight too. My 56cm Apex/Disc version weighs 22 lbs with Shimano 520 SPD pedals. It was a hair over 21 lbs sans pedals out of the box. If I set it up tubeless I can drop another 1/2 lb.

    I'd like a Ti version for commuting and gravel rides.

  50. #50
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Bugout Bikes's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Posts
    186

    Motobecane Phantom Cross Pro Ti Sizing

    Z1r, how tall are you and what's your inseam?

    I'm 5.11 / 32" inseam and in thinking 56 will be the right size. Is that about your size as well?

    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  51. #51
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Posts
    219
    Quote Originally Posted by Bugout Bikes View Post
    Z1r, how tall are you and what's your inseam?

    I'm 5.11 / 32" inseam and in thinking 56 will be the right size. Is that about your size as well?

    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    I'm 6' and ride a 58. I think you would be fine on a 56, depending on your sensitivity to toe overlap.

  52. #52
    z1r
    z1r is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    270
    I'm the same. Maybe a 32.5" with a book jammed up hard like your supposed to, lol. Plenty of clearance. The C-C measurement is more like 54 cm. The Geometry is about perfect. Quick yet stable for racing and comfy enough for long rides.

  53. #53
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Bugout Bikes's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Posts
    186

    Motobecane Phantom Cross Pro Ti Sizing

    Awesome! Does anyone know the best place to get a second wheelset for these bikes? I plan on having a road wheelset for easy (and less time consuming) swaps for when it warms up


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  54. #54
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Bugout Bikes's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Posts
    186

    Motobecane Phantom Cross Pro Ti Sizing

    Looks like bikes direct doesn't offer a road wheelset for 135mm am I missing something?


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  55. #55
    mtbr member
    Reputation: salimoneus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    1,888
    I can tell you that neither BikesDirect nor Motobecane will be able to sell you an extra compatible wheel set for this bike, I tried multiple times over the last several months. This situation may have changed since then I don't know for sure though.

    The problem is that there just aren't that many 11 speed disc rear wheels with 130mm spacing. Sure the titanium rear triangle can flex to fit a 135mm hub, but it certainly wouldn't be my first choice. Then you end up with brakes not being exactly square and other possible alignment issues, in addition to more stress on the frame. And yes this frame has a 130mm rear, not 135mm as suggested in the last post.

    If you are on a budget and want to stay true to what the frame was designed for, I would suggest finding a set of the newer 11-speed Vuelta wheels on the secondary market which were made specifically for this frame with 130mm rear dropouts.

    I solved this issue by sourcing an older NOS set of the 10-speed Vuelta XRP wheels off ebay, and then changed out the hub body to an 11-speed. Vuelta USA does offer just the hub body on their parts site. For me this was very cost effective as my total for the wheels and the upgraded hub body was less than $150 shipped.

    If money is less of a concern, have someone build you a set of custom wheels. It won't be cheap but in the end you will end up with a much lighter and higher quality set of wheels than the stock wheels. The Vuelta wheels are of good quality (sturdy, decent Japanese bearings, etc) but they are pigs on the scale.

    As one extra bit of info, the WTB wheels that now come with this bike are actually 135mm, again not my first choice for a 130mm rear. As I had stated in an earlier post, the wheel situation with this bike is clearly the biggest ding against it's overall score. Certainly not a deal breaker, but it is an issue none the less.

  56. #56
    mtbr member
    Reputation: rex615's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Posts
    427
    Quote Originally Posted by salimoneus View Post
    And yes this frame has a 130mm rear, not 135mm as suggested in the last post.

    As one extra bit of info, the WTB wheels that now come with this bike are actually 135mm, again not my first choice for a 130mm rear.
    I am confused.

  57. #57
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Bugout Bikes's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Posts
    186

    Motobecane Phantom Cross Pro Ti Sizing

    Lol.

    Solimoneus, the website says 135 rear?
    See attached pic

    Can anyone else verify this?




    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  58. #58
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Bugout Bikes's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Posts
    186

    Motobecane Phantom Cross Pro Ti Sizing

    All,

    BD just verified it's 135 rear spacing.

    Fysa


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  59. #59
    mtbr member
    Reputation: salimoneus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    1,888
    My 2015 pre-order version was and still is listed as 130 on the original product page, the version with the Vuelta Wheels:

    Save Up to 60% Off Titanium Cyclocross Bicycles | Road Bikes - Motobecane Fantom Cross Team Titanium | Cross Bikes

    and it's also listed as 130 on the manufacturer website:

    Motobecane USA | Cyclocross Bicycles | Track Bicycles | Cross Bicycles

    I measured mine and it came to 130.5.

    Maybe they have made a change since then, but I don't know. BD is known for not having all the correct info on their website, as I pointed out early in this thread when they still listed the bike as being a 10-speed, and they shipped me an 11-speed.

    I suspect it's the same frame, but they just changed the frame size listed on the website to match the new WTB wheels to avoid any issues. I would like to see someone measure and get back with more definitive results.

  60. #60
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Posts
    219
    Quote Originally Posted by salimoneus View Post
    My 2015 pre-order version was and still is listed as 130 on the original product page, the version with the Vuelta Wheels:

    Save Up to 60% Off Titanium Cyclocross Bicycles | Road Bikes - Motobecane Fantom Cross Team Titanium | Cross Bikes

    and it's also listed as 130 on the manufacturer website:

    Motobecane USA | Cyclocross Bicycles | Track Bicycles | Cross Bicycles

    I measured mine and it came to 130.5.

    Maybe they have made a change since then, but I don't know. BD is known for not having all the correct info on their website, as I pointed out early in this thread when they still listed the bike as being a 10-speed, and they shipped me an 11-speed.

    I suspect it's the same frame, but they just changed the frame size listed on the website to match the new WTB wheels to avoid any issues. I would like to see someone measure and get back with more definitive results.
    I bought mine in 2010, and it was 130mm rear spaced for sure. I thought the 135mm was updated this year. I guess having a picture with a ruler on a new one would be valuable.

  61. #61
    mtbr member
    Reputation: salimoneus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    1,888
    I would also suggest someone call Motobecane and get proper info straight from the manufacturer, as I would not count on anything on the BD website being accurate. If Motobecane indeed has an updated version of this frame in 135mm, then great, I hope they do as it will surely make life a lot easier for many people buying this bike in the future. I'm just saying, don't count on that being the case just because it's on the BD website or someone from there made that claim.

  62. #62
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    3,323
    Quote Originally Posted by salimoneus View Post
    I would also suggest someone call Motobecane and get proper info straight from the manufacturer
    You need to understand that there is no such thing as "Motobecane". The rights to the name were purchased by BD, so BD is Motobecane. Motobecane/BD do not design or build the bikes. They often don't get the specs right because in many cases no one from BD ever even sees the bikes. They are designed and manufactured in some Chinese or other Asian factory then shipped to BD. BD probably never opens the boxes and then just ships them to you. So any running changes made at the factory, BD is going to be unaware of. Because Motobecane is not a "real" company with any employees, their website is not going to be updated often. This is just one of the reasons the bikes are such a great deal, you don't have to pay the salary of some guy to update the website regularly.
    2015 Niner Jet 9 Carbon
    2014 Focus Raven 27R
    2017 Lynskey GR250
    2016 Niner BSB
    1987 Haro RS1

  63. #63
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Bugout Bikes's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Posts
    186

    Motobecane Phantom Cross Pro Ti Sizing

    Maybe this will help you believe me






    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  64. #64
    mtbr member
    Reputation: salimoneus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    1,888
    Quote Originally Posted by "Bugout Bikes
    Maybe this will help you believe me
    It's not you I don't believe, it's the information on the BD website that I'm questioning, and any information provided by those who work there. I too have been in correspondence with them in the past, and I've been less than impressed with their lack of knowledge about the bike's specifications. I could somewhat understand this if they never even open the factory boxes as ljsmith suggests.

    Also the email you posted does not make any claims of the frame being a 135, it only talks about wheels.

    Until solid information is available that proves a new version of this frame has just been made available that indeed has a 135mm rear end, I will remain skeptical.

    Believe me I would like nothing more than to be proven wrong, because IMO the 130mm rear is really the only gripe I have about the bike. If and when that happens I will be happy to stand corrected, and hell I may even sell mine and buy the newer version. All I know is that my 2015 measured out to 130.5, which is definitely not 135.

  65. #65
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Bugout Bikes's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Posts
    186

    Motobecane Phantom Cross Pro Ti Sizing

    When did you get your bike?


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  66. #66
    mtbr member
    Reputation: salimoneus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    1,888
    I received my 2015 this past July, I pre-ordered as soon as it appeared on the site so I think it was in the first batch to ship.

  67. #67
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Posts
    219
    Quote Originally Posted by salimoneus View Post
    I received my 2015 this past July, I pre-ordered as soon as it appeared on the site so I think it was in the first batch to ship.
    If you want 135mm spacing, and I certainly think you should, why haven't you contacted BD for an exchange? The bike you purchased was clearly advertised as 135mm spaced, correct? I would not accept a 130mm frame at this point. Mine is 130mm, but this was 5 years ago before the standard was really settled for disc road and cross bikes.

  68. #68
    mtbr member
    Reputation: salimoneus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    1,888
    I emailed Motobecane yesterday and received this reply, so it does sound promising that they may have just released a new version of this frame:


    Thanks for your email
    the very newest Disc Brake equipped Cross Ti have 135mm rear spacing

    Best regards,
    Jay

    ----- Original Message -----
    From: salimoneus
    To: info@motobecane
    Sent: Wednesday, February 18, 2015 6:26 PM
    Subject: Fantom Cross Pro Ti

    Hello,

    I just have a quick question, does Motobecane have an updated version of this frame for 2015 that has 135mm rear hub spacing, or does this bike only come in 130mm size?

    I see that your website lists 130mm but I have seen another website list the bike at 135mm so I'm a bit confused.
    --

    Thanks,

    Sal

  69. #69
    mtbr member
    Reputation: salimoneus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    1,888
    Quote Originally Posted by Sleeveless
    If you want 135mm spacing, and I certainly think you should, why haven't you contacted BD for an exchange? The bike you purchased was clearly advertised as 135mm spaced, correct? I would not accept a 130mm frame at this point. Mine is 130mm, but this was 5 years ago before the standard was really settled for disc road and cross bikes.
    When I ordered (from the original product page which I posted above) it did list the frame as 130mm. When they came out with the updated model with the WTB wheels, the new product page (I think I posted that as well on the first page of this thread) also listed 130mm as the frame size. Basically it was just a copy of the first but listed the Rival 11 speed and WTB wheels. Other than that they were exactly the same.

    Out of curiosity I emailed Larry and he stated the only difference between the bikes was the wheels, no mention of a change in frame size. I had him send me the specs of the new WTB wheels, and I asked why they were putting a 135mm wheel on the same 130mm frame. He did not have an answer for me at the time but had me measure my 2015 frame. At that time I just assumed that they were using the same frame based on all the information I could gather at the time.

    So in summary I actually received the bike I thought I was purchasing, with the added bonus of the new 11 speed drive train. I have no issues with what I received, it was as advertised and then some (the new Rival).

    The product page for the newer version must have been very recently updated to reflect the change to 135mm, if that is indeed the case.

    I hope this clarifies things a bit more. I apologize for any confusion I may have caused, it was certainly not my intent.

  70. #70
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Bugout Bikes's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Posts
    186

    Motobecane Phantom Cross Pro Ti Sizing

    No worries brother! Im getting my bike today and I'll measure and post a few pics.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  71. #71
    mtbr member
    Reputation: rex615's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Posts
    427
    Quote Originally Posted by salimoneus View Post
    I hope this clarifies things a bit more. I apologize for any confusion I may have caused, it was certainly not my intent.
    I was confused , but confused is not all bad, it helps us learn.
    Your input has definitely been helpful.

    Quote Originally Posted by Bugout Bikes View Post
    No worries brother! Im getting my bike today and I'll measure and post a few pics.
    Yes please, this would be most appreciated.

  72. #72
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Bugout Bikes's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Posts
    186

    Motobecane Phantom Cross Pro Ti Sizing

    Bikes here!

    Took a quick measurement and it seems rear spacing is 135. I'll take a pic of it tomorrow

    In the meanwhile, here's some pics of the bike

















    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  73. #73
    mtbr member
    Reputation: salimoneus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    1,888
    Cool beans, thanks for the report!

  74. #74
    mtbr member
    Reputation: rex615's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Posts
    427
    Very nice! Congrats.

  75. #75
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Bugout Bikes's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Posts
    186

    Motobecane Phantom Cross Pro Ti Sizing

    Does anyone know if this is tapered or a straight headset?


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  76. #76
    mtbr member
    Reputation: salimoneus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    1,888
    Quote Originally Posted by Bugout Bikes
    Took a quick measurement and it seems rear spacing is 135. I'll take a pic of it tomorrow
    Have you confirmed for certainty that the rear is 135? To me "seems" sorta leaves the door open for the possibility that it isn't

  77. #77
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Bugout Bikes's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Posts
    186

    Motobecane Phantom Cross Pro Ti Sizing

    It is. Just didn't feel like taking the rear wheel off and snapping a pic. I'll try to do it first chance I get.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  78. #78
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Bugout Bikes's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Posts
    186

    Motobecane Phantom Cross Pro Ti Sizing








    Here Ya go! The great rear spacing conspiracy theory of 2015 has been solved


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  79. #79
    mtbr member
    Reputation: rex615's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Posts
    427
    Quote Originally Posted by Bugout Bikes View Post

    Here Ya go! The great rear spacing conspiracy theory of 2015 has been solved
    Thank you sir, I really appreciate you taking the time (and work) to document that for us.

  80. #80
    mtbr member
    Reputation: salimoneus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    1,888
    Sweet, thanks for the pics Bug!

  81. #81
    mtbr member
    Reputation: salimoneus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    1,888
    Okay so I figured I'd snag a 56 while they are still in stock, she is currently en route. It's a pain knowing how much trouble it was to get a second 130mm wheel set together for my old 2015, but doing the hub body upgrade was another feather in my bike mechanic's cap, so in the end I guess it was worth the trouble. I plan on having this bike for some time, and with a 135mm rear it should be a much easier task finding wheels down the road.

    Thanks again Bug for getting those pics up for us!

  82. #82
    mtbr member
    Reputation: rex615's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Posts
    427
    I just pulled the trigger on one myself, a 61.
    You guys were very helpful in the research process.

    I got the Shimano 105 version because as much as I like Sram, i don't like double tap. I don't even like double click.

  83. #83
    mtbr member
    Reputation: salimoneus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    1,888
    Nice Rex, you are going to enjoy this bike fasho

    Just a side note, I've been doing some research into a second set of 135mm wheels on a budget, and it seems that it's quite difficult to find anything with the WTB Frequency CX Team i19 as they are so new.

    The DT Swiss R24 also look like a decent set of wheels for the money, but those are very difficult to find as well.

    I do have a little secret to share: the regular WTB Frequency i19 (marketed as a 29er MTB "race lite" rim) are the same exact rims as the CX version, just with different labeling. That might help open up some more options for those looking around.
    Last edited by salimoneus; 02-23-2015 at 04:05 PM.

  84. #84
    mtbr member
    Reputation: salimoneus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    1,888
    The WTB ChrisCross i19 TCS 700c, which come on the Comp version of this bike, are also a decent option. They differ from the Frequency by having machined sidewalls for rim brakes, and lack the i-beam support, but come in at pretty much the same weight. Still a quality rim and would work well for a budget road wheel set if you can find some new take-offs on ebay or something.

    Something like this set of Shimano WH-RX31 might be a good option as well, assuming a brake adapter would work: Shimano WH RX31 Cyclocross 700c 11 Speed Disc

  85. #85
    mtbr member
    Reputation: rex615's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Posts
    427
    New wheels are always a great upgrade, but I was planning on running the stock wheels a while since i am not going to race it. This bike will see gravel, some mild off road and rough chipseal. I have a fatbike for mud and gnar .

  86. #86
    mtbr member
    Reputation: salimoneus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    1,888
    Since this is basically going to be my road bike as well, the second set of wheels will be dedicated for road use with the 28c slicks I already have. Ideally both sets would be the same exact wheels so I could just hot swap without worrying about having to make brake or derailleur adjustments between swaps. I won't be racing either so being able to hot swap is a much higher priority for me than having a super light set of road wheels. Easier said than done though

  87. #87
    mtbr member
    Reputation: salimoneus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    1,888
    Got mine in today, looks exactly like my early 2015 model but verified with a 135mm rear and the new WTB wheelset. The Frequency is actually a decent rim, not sure about the Gravity hubs but I think those are just re-branded Formulas, probably lower to mid range.

    I was able to score a set of wheels off ebay for road use, they are the CrissCross rims laced to the same exact Gravity hubs so I'm pretty sure they were taken off a 2015 Phantom Ti Comp. Can't really beat them for $125 shipped and I should be able to hot swap with no adjustments. Pretty much completely satisfied with this bike now, assuming everything works as well as on my early 2015 model.

    Not trying to sell anything here, but with the new 135mm rear and at just $1,599 I don't know if anything else can even come close to this kind of value.

  88. #88
    mtbr member
    Reputation: rex615's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Posts
    427
    Mine arrived yesterday afternoon, beautiful bike. I am very, very pleased.

    I was only able to go for a quick ride in the melting snow/mud, it is a lot of fun. Unfortunately, early this morning I had to travel for work and won't be home much for the next few weeks. I will try to get some pics of it and post some comments about it, as I plan to make some changes to it.

  89. #89
    mtbr member
    Reputation: salimoneus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    1,888
    New bike is coming in slightly heavier at 21.2, compared to 20.8, with all my parts swapped over (in "road" form as previously weighed):

    Thomson Elite post
    Crankbrothers Candy pedals
    Continental Gatorskins 28c
    Specialized Avatar Expert Ti saddle
    Alloy seat post quick release

    I'd guess most of that is coming from the additional spokes and Formula hubs as the hubs do seem a bit beefier than the Vueltas, likely because they are MTB hubs. Not sure if there is really a need for 32 spokes on a cross bike, but the weight really doesn't bother me.

    I would normally also go Thomson stem but the Ritchey stem is perfect for me at 100mm with a moderate angle, is a 4-bolt design and seems to be decent quality. The Ritchey seat post however is definitely junk and should be tossed immediately.

  90. #90
    mtbr member
    Reputation: rex615's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Posts
    427
    Quote Originally Posted by salimoneus View Post
    New bike is coming in slightly heavier at 21.2, compared to 20.8, with all my parts swapped over (in "road" form as previously weighed):
    I haven't weighed mine with anything reliable, (used a cheap luggage scale) but it is quite a bit heavier than yours. On top of that I have already mounted heavier tires.

    By the way, the "tubeless ready" rims with their inner bead lip, require more attention and a bit of lube to get the tire to seat. Might not be so much fun for roadside repairs.

    Quote Originally Posted by salimoneus View Post
    The Ritchey seat post however is definitely junk and should be tossed immediately.
    What is the issue with the seat post. Naively I thought it was a decent unit, what with its two bolt system which is useful for fine tuning the angle on a Brooks.

  91. #91
    mtbr member
    Reputation: salimoneus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    1,888
    Quote Originally Posted by rex615
    What is the issue with the seat post. Naively I thought it was a decent unit, what with its two bolt system which is useful for fine tuning the angle on a Brooks.
    The problem is the angle adjustment, the seat may eventually work itself loose and rotate because of the poor design. Just look at a Thomson and see the difference, there is no way a Thomson can rotate because the amount the bolts are threaded in on each side determines the angle, due to the orientation of the bolts along the axis of rotation.

    On the other hand the Ritchey post uses basic clamping force to prevent the seat from rotating. Add to that the smooth mating surface between parts and it just compounds the problem. If they had used a textured or ribbed surface between the contact parts it may have alleviated the issue some but unfortunately they did not.

    I'm not saying it's going to fall apart after a ride or two, but for heavier or harder riders it would not surprise me if that post needed frequent re-tightening.

    A clamp design may work well for stems/bars and such, but a seat post takes significantly more abuse and weight load in comparison.

  92. #92
    mtbr member
    Reputation: rex615's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Posts
    427
    Quote Originally Posted by salimoneus View Post
    The problem is the angle adjustment, the seat may eventually work itself loose and rotate because of the poor design. Just look at a Thomson and see the difference, there is no way a Thomson can rotate because the amount the bolts are threaded in on each side determines the angle, due to the orientation of the bolts along the axis of rotation.

    On the other hand the Ritchey post uses basic clamping force to prevent the seat from rotating. Add to that the smooth mating surface between parts and it just compounds the problem. If they had used a textured or ribbed surface between the contact parts it may have alleviated the issue some but unfortunately they did not.

    I'm not saying it's going to fall apart after a ride or two, but for heavier or harder riders it would not surprise me if that post needed frequent re-tightening.

    A clamp design may work well for stems/bars and such, but a seat post takes significantly more abuse and weight load in comparison.
    Thanks, makes sense, I will keep an eye on it. A seat coming loose on a ride a long way from home, can ruin the day.

  93. #93
    mtbr member
    Reputation: rex615's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Posts
    427
    Here is a shot of mine, taken this afternoon before a ride.

    Motobecane Phantom Cross Pro Ti Sizing-green-ti.jpg

  94. #94
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    34
    rex: what size are those tires?

    based on the previous image it looks like the rear has more clearance than the fork and that tops out at about 40mm?

    i'd love to fit a set of bruce gordon rock & roads but that doesn't look possible.

  95. #95
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Posts
    219
    Quote Originally Posted by zcmack View Post
    rex: what size are those tires?

    based on the previous image it looks like the rear has more clearance than the fork and that tops out at about 40mm?

    i'd love to fit a set of bruce gordon rock & roads but that doesn't look possible.
    Rock and Roads are out unfortunately. It seems like the perfect rear tire. The 40c Happy Medium was max for clearance in the rear, and even had a bit of fork rub on the front.

    BTW, I have a set of the original 130mm rim/disc wheels for sale. I know they can be hard to find so I figured someone here with a pre-2015 model might want them.

  96. #96
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    34
    i suppose i could stick to the clement mso's. they have a less aggressive edge than the happy mediums so i assume they'd work... hmm.

  97. #97
    mtbr member
    Reputation: rex615's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Posts
    427
    Quote Originally Posted by zcmack View Post
    rex: what size are those tires?

    based on the previous image it looks like the rear has more clearance than the fork and that tops out at about 40mm?

    i'd love to fit a set of bruce gordon rock & roads but that doesn't look possible.
    The green tires are 38s.

    Right now I have 40mm Schwalbe Little Big Bens. They mike out at 38mm on the stock wheels, so they fit just fine.

  98. #98
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Posts
    3
    Quote Originally Posted by rex615 View Post
    I just pulled the trigger on one myself, a 61.
    You guys were very helpful in the research process.

    I got the Shimano 105 version because as much as I like Sram, i don't like double tap. I don't even like double click.
    Sorry for reviving a dead thread, but rex, what are your measurements (height and inseam)? I'm considering one of these bikes, and I'm not sure if I should go for the 58 or 61cm. I'm a hair under 6'2", with a 34" inseam.

    Thanks!

  99. #99
    z1r
    z1r is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    270
    FWIW, I'm 5'10" with a 32.5" inseam. I got the 56cm and it is perfect for me. Maybe the point of reference will help.

  100. #100
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Posts
    3
    Thanks for that! Sounds like a 58 is probably the way to go for me.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. 2012 Motobecane Fantom Cross CX
    By getagrip in forum Cyclocross
    Replies: 30
    Last Post: 05-07-2013, 09:32 AM
  2. Motobecane sizing
    By rapurk in forum 29er Bikes
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 09-29-2012, 01:36 PM
  3. Motobecane Cross Team/ Pro Titanium
    By gixxerflier in forum Cyclocross
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 12-27-2011, 07:44 AM
  4. Replies: 6
    Last Post: 12-06-2011, 07:31 AM
  5. Best motobecane for good cross country riding
    By chrishall in forum Motobecane
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 06-06-2011, 05:41 PM

Members who have read this thread: 2

Posting Permissions

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