Newest member of the Nashbar Cyclocross Frame Club- Mtbr.com
Results 1 to 70 of 70
  1. #1
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    363

    Newest member of the Nashbar Cyclocross Frame Club

    I know that this post is a little premature without pictures, but I’m pretty excited about finally receiving my Cyclocross Frame and Carbon Fork from Nashbar. I plan on putting everything together over the weekend so look for pictures soon. I’m not sure if I’m going to be able to get my drive train completely installed because I’m still waiting on a Bottom Bracket. I may be able to “borrow” a BB from one of my other bikes until the one I’m waiting on gets here.

    Update:
    After pulling an all nighter, here are the first photos of my build.








    Final Update:
    Finished Photos




    Last edited by Solomon76; 03-21-2010 at 06:31 AM.
    ↑ ↑ ↓ ↓ ← → ← → В А

  2. #2
    mtbr member
    Reputation: BrianMc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    4,386
    OP a tease no longer but the bike remains one!
    Last edited by BrianMc; 03-23-2010 at 05:11 AM.

  3. #3
    Bedwards Of The West
    Reputation: CommuterBoy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    5,451
    Nice, another convert

    I'm just wondering what took you people so long... I've been bragging about mine for 3 years, and now all of a sudden everyone jumps on board.

    Looking forward to another version of this thing built up.
    You have no excuse for driving to work
    (unless you don't have studded tires)
    (no excuse for that either)

  4. #4
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    363
    For me, it was a long boring winter without being able to ride because of icy roads. Plus the fact that the frame was only 100 bucks. I figured that I would build up a new commuter and be riding it by the time it warmed up. It almost worked out that way, but I will definitely be on it before it really warms up.
    ↑ ↑ ↓ ↓ ← → ← → В А

  5. #5
    weirdo
    Reputation: rodar y rodar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    6,223
    RBR has quite a thread with different members` Nashbar touring frames, mostly built into commuters. Between you N-bar CXers and the rbr guys, you could just about have your own forum.

    Solomon, you came up in another post recently. Are you still running your daily morning race with that anonymous German?
    Recalculating....

  6. #6
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    363
    Quote Originally Posted by rodar y rodar
    Solomon, you came up in another post recently. Are you still running your daily morning race with that anonymous German?
    I see that German guy at least once a week. We don't really race one another like we used too. I think that we've figured out that we are pretty evenly matched when we're both are having good days. Once it warms up some more, I should have plenty of new 'fresh meat' to race on the trail to work.
    ↑ ↑ ↓ ↓ ← → ← → В А

  7. #7
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    363
    *Photos added*

    I still have to:
    - Run the rear brake cable.
    - Bleed both brakes.
    - Run cables for cycle computer.
    - Install Rear Pannier Rack.

    I'll take better photos once I'm done.
    Last edited by Solomon76; 03-20-2010 at 04:58 AM.

  8. #8
    Eff U Gee Em
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    159
    What's the rear hub spacing on this? 135? Or did you find a 130 hub with a disc mount?

    Thanks

  9. #9
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    363
    It's probably 130 because I had to use some muscle to get the rear wheel on. But everything fits, the rear brake doesn't rub, and there is plenty of space for the chain when it is on the smallest cog. Maybe someone else can tell you the measurement with more certainty.
    ↑ ↑ ↓ ↓ ← → ← → В А

  10. #10
    No-Brakes Cougar
    Reputation: Gary the No-Trash Cougar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    1,143
    Nice. I've been itching to build up a bike lately, but I want to build a fixed-gear bike and don't want to pop for an eccentric hub so that frame is probably out. I really do like the flat black paint job though.
    R.I.P. Ronnie James Dio ~ July 10, 1942 May 16, 2010

  11. #11
    I got nothin'
    Reputation: hydrogeek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    738

    Very Nice...

    It's cool to see all of the different build-up versions of the same frame.

    For anyone who is interested, Nashbar is selling them for $99.99 and now there is a 10% off coupon on the Nashbar front page header.
    I ride at ludicrous speed

  12. #12
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    363
    I've completely finished the build. Now I get to test it out to and from work tomorrow. I can already see a detour on my way home. I thought about adding some custom stickers to the frame, but I couldn't settle on anything. So I decided to add some DOT relective tape that I had laying around.
    ↑ ↑ ↓ ↓ ← → ← → В А

  13. #13
    I got nothin'
    Reputation: hydrogeek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    738

    Ok...

    So I was tinkering with my build today and figured something out that has been bugging me. I had the rear derailleur cable plumbed to the right side of the bike at the head tube and the front derailleur on the left side. The problem is that the cable housings then rub the head tube. The magic that I found was that the plastic cable guide on the bottom of the bottom bracket shell has the rear derailleur path offset at a high/lower elevation than the front. If you switch the cable path at the head tube, i.e. plumb the rear on the left and the front on the right, cross them over/by one another along the down tube (rear over front) then send the cables to their correct sides of the guide at the bottom bracket then the curvature of the cable housing pulls them away from the head tube instead of into it. The offset in elevation of the cable guide allows the cables to cross one another without touching. I just think this is the coolest thing, and I bet most of you probably already know this, but I am geeking out anyway.
    I ride at ludicrous speed

  14. #14
    Bedwards Of The West
    Reputation: CommuterBoy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    5,451
    ^^ I thought I was brilliant because I crossed the rear derailleur cable over like that when I did my build...it looked like a more direct line into the guide under the BB...but I'm not running a front derailleur, so I just assumed I was taking the front D's spot up at the top of the down tube. Cool that they dont' contact each other if you run them both that way. Definitely smooth shifting out back when it's crossed over like that for me.


    It's probably 130 because I had to use some muscle to get the rear wheel on. But everything fits, the rear brake doesn't rub, and there is plenty of space for the chain when it is on the smallest cog. Maybe someone else can tell you the measurement with more certainty.
    Yikes! That rear spacing is definitely 130. They USED to be 135 (I bought mine a couple years ago and it's spaced at 135...I'm running 29er wheels). They changed the rear spacing sometime pretty recently to road spacing (130), which I think is kind of a bummer, especially for people who want to run discs and have more hub options.

    But I have to go on record as saying that I would NOT stuff a 135mm hub into a 130 frame made of aluminum. That's scary territory for me...steel, I'd probably do it, but aluminum...that's scary. I'd be paying really close attention to the welds where the chainstays meet the BB shell if I were you... Curious to see how well it works for you long term running it that way.

    I like your build though! looks like a tough urban assault bike.
    You have no excuse for driving to work
    (unless you don't have studded tires)
    (no excuse for that either)

  15. #15
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    363
    I'll keep you all posted on how the welds hold up. I have a few more months in Germany before I come back to the U.S., which means that I should be able to log well over 1,000 miles on this bike (along with a few hundred miles on each of my other two bikes).

    I rode it for the first time today and I'm loving it. It is definitely faster than my mountain bike, although my mountain bike is a much cushier ride due to the suspension fork and suspension seat post. It is not quite as fast as my road bike but I'm not as nearly reluctant to take this bike off of the pavement. Overall, I'm pretty happy with the selection of bikes that I have now. I think as far as strictly commuting goes, this bike will get the most use by far.
    ↑ ↑ ↓ ↓ ← → ← → В А

  16. #16
    weirdo
    Reputation: rodar y rodar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    6,223
    I route cables on a bike by bike basis, sometimes cross them and sometimes not. I think that`s just what you have to do- try holding the cables this way and that until you fiind something that works, then go ahead and cut/install/wrap.

    Solomon, I hear the same thing about forcing aluminmum frames. There are a lot of wives` tales involved with bike mechanics and some are just that, but anytime you break one of those "rules" you have to be prepared for the possibility of failure. Does it really doom an aluminum frame to rapid failure to stretch the dropouts? I dunno, but I wouldn`t tempt fate, personally. At least a rear end failure isn`t likely to know any teeth out.
    Recalculating....

  17. #17
    jrm
    jrm is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation: jrm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    11,396

    Is that a Nashbar CX fork?

    I have a Kona CF fork that was a take off now. But i dont like the feel of it when descending fast.

    So how do you like it?

  18. #18
    Bedwards Of The West
    Reputation: CommuterBoy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    5,451
    I have the Nashbar CX fork...that looks like it to me. I like it. What don't you like about the feel of the Kona?
    You have no excuse for driving to work
    (unless you don't have studded tires)
    (no excuse for that either)

  19. #19
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    363
    It is a Nashbar CX fork. I've only ridden it for a day, but so far I like it a lot. The only con I can see so far is that you are kind of limited as to fender selection. But the fork looks great and rides nice.
    ↑ ↑ ↓ ↓ ← → ← → В А

  20. #20
    Bedwards Of The West
    Reputation: CommuterBoy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    5,451
    ^^ Does yours not have threaded fender mounts on the dropouts? I'm running Planet Bike Freddy Fenders on mine using the hole in the crown and the threaded holes at the dropouts. You can't run a full coverage mountain bike fender because of width...I tried an SKS beavertail, and couldn't make it work without narrowing it a bit at the crown area.
    You have no excuse for driving to work
    (unless you don't have studded tires)
    (no excuse for that either)

  21. #21
    jrm
    jrm is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation: jrm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    11,396

    No disc tabs

    Quote Originally Posted by CommuterBoy
    I have the Nashbar CX fork...that looks like it to me. I like it. What don't you like about the feel of the Kona?
    the flex under braking and the way it absorbs-tracks at speed. I like the nashbar fork looks alot beefier..heavier who cares

  22. #22
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    39
    You've got me excited. I got all of my parts ordered last weekend. I'm not going with discs (Avid shorties instead) and I had trouble finding a fork (Nashbar was out of the 1 1/8 version) so I decided to go with an aluminum Kinesis fork instead.

    I wish the post office guy would get here - I've got deliveries scheduled for the 23rd, 24th, and 25th and am still waiting for my last delivery confirmation from Jenson.

    The coolest thing about these bikes - they look like the Mad Max version of a road bike once they're built up

  23. #23
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    363
    Quote Originally Posted by CommuterBoy
    ^^ Does yours not have threaded fender mounts on the dropouts? I'm running Planet Bike Freddy Fenders on mine using the hole in the crown and the threaded holes at the dropouts. You can't run a full coverage mountain bike fender because of width...I tried an SKS beavertail, and couldn't make it work without narrowing it a bit at the crown area.
    Mine does have threaded mounts at the dropouts. I'm going to look around at some local bike shops and see if I find something I like that I can make work.

    *My next project is to rebuild the road bike that I "chopped" down to finish this build.
    ↑ ↑ ↓ ↓ ← → ← → В А

  24. #24
    Bedwards Of The West
    Reputation: CommuterBoy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    5,451
    Quote Originally Posted by jrm
    the flex under braking and the way it absorbs-tracks at speed. I like the nashbar fork looks alot beefier..heavier who cares

    Those both sound like flex issues...I have not noticed ANY flex under braking or noticable squish or steering issues at speed. I've done a few pretty big (paved) decents on it. I have always had a disc brake on it and get on my front brakes pretty hard as a habit. No issues with this fork whatsoever due to braking forces, etc. I also have LOTS of dirt road use on mine. Estimating 1200 miles on dirt in the last 4 years. It's not crazy light, but you can put it on your bike and forget about it. Does the job nicely.
    You have no excuse for driving to work
    (unless you don't have studded tires)
    (no excuse for that either)

  25. #25
    Bedwards Of The West
    Reputation: CommuterBoy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    5,451
    I just spent my REI dividend on a new cassette, derailleur, and chain for the Nashbike...thanks for the inspiration.
    I'm going to go monstercross with it this summer i think... gonna try to cram 2.0's on there.
    You have no excuse for driving to work
    (unless you don't have studded tires)
    (no excuse for that either)

  26. #26
    Bedwards Of The West
    Reputation: CommuterBoy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    5,451
    Just got the latest Nashbar promotion...an additional 15% discount on any one item... use code PLANET2 @ checkout. Good through 4/5

    Everybody buy a bike! I want to see more of these builds.
    You have no excuse for driving to work
    (unless you don't have studded tires)
    (no excuse for that either)

  27. #27
    Fat-tired Roadie
    Reputation: AndrwSwitch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    18,453
    Quote Originally Posted by CommuterBoy
    Yikes! That rear spacing is definitely 130. They USED to be 135 (I bought mine a couple years ago and it's spaced at 135...I'm running 29er wheels). They changed the rear spacing sometime pretty recently to road spacing (130), which I think is kind of a bummer, especially for people who want to run discs and have more hub options.
    I just rebuilt my rear hub on my mountain bike - a Shimano M-475 - and noticed that the washers between the lock nuts and the cones are really chunky. Maybe 2.5mm each? It didn't occur to me to get out my calipers. Anyway, one could replace them with a very thin stainless steel or synthetic washer (or just omit them) and make a much narrower hub. Not sure if there's enough adjustment range on a BB7 mounting bracket to get the caliper in the right place, either, although I guess with access to a machine shop, all things become possible.

    Anyway, respacing a hub a little bit is not an uncommon mod, and while it would make for pretty tight clearance around the cassette, it can certainly be done. If I were doing a 130mm disc build and couldn't find a hub that's 130mm out of the box, I'd probably want to see one in a shop before spending money.
    "Don't buy upgrades; ride up grades." -Eddy Merckx

  28. #28
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    363
    I have close to 200 miles on it so far and haven't noticed any issues (I rode 50 miles this past Saturday). A good portion of my ride has even been on cobblestone roads and bumpy trails. It isn't like I had to dramatically pull the dropouts apart to get the rear wheel in and I honestly don't think that it is going to be an issue (I've had a frame fail on me before). If any problems develop, I promise to keep you all posted.

    I also modified some fenders to fit, which came in handy for my ride on Saturday.
    ↑ ↑ ↓ ↓ ← → ← → В А

  29. #29
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    187
    I'm thinking about building one of these Nashbar bikes - it looks like it could be exactly the bike I'm looking for. A couple of questions to anyone who has built up one of these frames - 1. is the widest tire that will fit really 38mm, and 2. is 48t actually the largest chainring that will fit? I was hoping to run a fatter tire like a Schwalbe Big Apple (2.0) and potentially to use a road triple crankset I already have.

  30. #30
    Bedwards Of The West
    Reputation: CommuterBoy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    5,451
    I am mounting up some 2.0's as soon as I remove my fenders. That is the plan for the fire road bomber incarnation of this bike for this summer. I am pretty sure they will fit but I haven't done it yet. You can go way bigger than 38's, for sure. I have run 38's with full coverage fenders with no issues. I'll post up when I try the 2.0's.

    I currently have a road double FSA crankset with a 50 tooth big ring. I am running one spacer on the drive side, but I could remove it without the big ring hitting the chainstay.

    Keep in mind that mine is the older frame with 135mm rear spacing...not positive about what else might have changed, but I'd think there would be MORE clearance for a big chainring with the 130mm rear spacing. The smaller rear spacing might cut into tire clearance though, not sure.
    You have no excuse for driving to work
    (unless you don't have studded tires)
    (no excuse for that either)

  31. #31
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    187
    Thanks, CB. I'm envisioning a monstercross kind of bike, so 2.0's would be ideal. I've read about the change from 135mm to 130mm spacing on the X frame - I wonder why they did that?

    The road triple I have is either 52t or 53t, so maybe too big regardless. I can deal with getting a new crankset - I'm thinking I may sell the entire bike it is currently mounted on.

  32. #32
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    179
    I had a nashbar touring frame, while it was a good solid frame the headtube was way too short (145mm for a 58cm) and I didn't want to go up to 80mm of spacers (had 60 and a 4d stem still was too low for me).

    So I ordered this frame, should be here tomorrow. I am reusing the parts from the touring frame, I respaced and redished the rear wheel yesterday. No discs for now but I plan on getting bb7 road calipers once I get a disc wheelset for it. Frame should be here tomorrow

  33. #33
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    7

    Good Crankset for a Nashbar X?

    I got my Nashbar X frame and the Nashbar steel cross disc fork a couple of weeks ago. The deal was 20% off - $80 for the frame, $32 for the fork, and $16 for a set of their Tektro Oryx knockoff cantilevers!

    I want this bike to be a drop bar all-rounder for commuting, family, and fitness rides, but with enough top and bottom end for group rides and mountain rides. I had hoped to use a FSA Vero 52/42/30 crank and a Shimano UN72 113mm BB I have on hand, but the clearance was too tight. So I've been driving myself nuts trying to pick a crank/BB. I have a Shimano BB-ES71, 113mm, and I'd love to find a Deore XT FC-M752 with 48/36/26 rings to go with it, but that ain't happenin' so far. I'll be running an 8 speed rear, and I think I'd like a 3x8 setup rather than a 2x8.

    What do y'all suggest?
    50/39/30?
    48/38/28?
    48/36/26?
    50/36 or 50/34 double?
    Get a longer BB and use the 52/42/30? This might cause chainline problems.

    Any replies will be greatly appreciated.

    Thanks,

    tcpasley

    Reduce, Reuse, Rebicycle

  34. #34
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    363
    I'm running a 50/39/30 road crank with a 126mm BB with no issues. For me, that is way more climbing gears than I will probably ever need even though it is very hilly in Southern Germany. And very rarely do I find myself wanting to push something harder than 50-11 (keep in mind that my build is a flat bar though).
    ↑ ↑ ↓ ↓ ← → ← → В А

  35. #35
    Fat-tired Roadie
    Reputation: AndrwSwitch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    18,453
    I'd go with the 48/36/26. Having a few fewer teeth makes a lot more difference at the bottom end than the top end. There are a few people in this world who can actually use a 55:11 ratio on 700C wheels, but for most of us, 48:11 is more than enough.

    I realize I'm not sure if "mountain rides" means off-road, or climbing mountains on pavement. I was assuming off-road, in which case lower ratios are always good to have. If you're planning to use it only on pavement, I agree with the above poster.
    "Don't buy upgrades; ride up grades." -Eddy Merckx

  36. #36
    I got nothin'
    Reputation: hydrogeek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    738
    I have a 50-36 Truvativ 2-pc crankset with the gigapipe external bearing bb. No issues at all with clearance. I am also running 8 spds outback for a 2x8. But I am using a MTB 11-30 cassette for the hills.
    I ride at ludicrous speed

  37. #37
    Bedwards Of The West
    Reputation: CommuterBoy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    5,451
    I'm running a FSA road double... 50/36 same as hydrogeek, 8 speed out back. Just got a new 11-32 rear cassette that I haven't put on yet. Currently running 11-30 out back. I have no front derailleur and I keep it in the big ring 99% of the time...I can't imagine ever using the small ring of a triple set up. If I wanted bigger range, a derailleur up front allowing me to access the 36 easier would be plenty. Just my 2 cents.

    I have done a century on it, by the way... never wished for the granny, but I did use the 36 on the big climbs.


    By the way, I'm picking up some spare speed disc 29er wheels with WTB 2.0 tires on them this weekend (craigslist), and I am going to mount them up on the nashbike for some monstercross action...if they fit.
    You have no excuse for driving to work
    (unless you don't have studded tires)
    (no excuse for that either)

  38. #38
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    187
    Thanks everyone for the input on the cranksets.

    CB - Be sure to let us know next week how/whether those 2.0's fit.

  39. #39
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    363
    I'm running a 9 speed 11-26 cassette in the rear, but once it's time to replace it I'll end up going with a 11-32 cassette. I never use the 30t chainring of my triple crank, but I don't feel like going through the trouble of taking it off. My shifters are 3x9 anyway.

    Updated photos:
    I've added fenders and went with a frame bag instead of the saddle bag I had.



    ↑ ↑ ↓ ↓ ← → ← → В А

  40. #40
    Bedwards Of The West
    Reputation: CommuterBoy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    5,451
    What's the zip tie/rubber band thing on the left crank arm for?
    You have no excuse for driving to work
    (unless you don't have studded tires)
    (no excuse for that either)

  41. #41
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    363
    Quote Originally Posted by CommuterBoy
    What's the zip tie/rubber band thing on the left crank arm for?
    It's holding the cadence magnet. Sometimes when I'm being lazy or don't feel like riding hard, I use the cadence reading to push myself a little harder (try to stay above a certain cadence).
    Last edited by Solomon76; 04-01-2010 at 09:17 PM.
    ↑ ↑ ↓ ↓ ← → ← → В А

  42. #42
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    7
    Thanks a million for all the suggestions. I agree that a 50-11 combo is useful only for downhills and tailwinds. I think my old $20 Mongoose D60r has a 48/38/28 crank I can try on the X frame along with a 12-30 cassette. With 700cx35 tires a 48-12 combo should give about 109 gear inches or 26 mph @ 80 rpm. The "mountain rides" I mentioned would be paved or dirt roads in the NC mountains, so I might actually use the small ring.

    BTW - I found a deal on a Shimano Acera M361 crank with 48/38/28 rings and 175mm arms for less than $20 shipped. Granted, it's not as cool as a Sugino XD600, but is there any reason I should pass it up (weight, durability,?)?

    Thanks again,

    tcpasley

    Reduce, Reuse, Rebicycle

  43. #43
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    363
    Quote Originally Posted by tcpasley
    BTW - I found a deal on a Shimano Acera M361 crank with 48/38/28 rings and 175mm arms for less than $20 shipped. Granted, it's not as cool as a Sugino XD600, but is there any reason I should pass it up (weight, durability,?)?

    Thanks again,

    tcpasley

    Reduce, Reuse, Rebicycle
    The Acera will be a little on the heavy side, but if you aren't a weight weenie you might not mind. Keep in mind that the chainrings on the Acera aren't replaceable. On the other hand, I don't see any high quality trekking cranks (48/38/28) available without modification.
    ↑ ↑ ↓ ↓ ← → ← → В А

  44. #44
    Fat-tired Roadie
    Reputation: AndrwSwitch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    18,453
    For less than the cost of a chainring for a more expensive crankset, I say pull the trigger.
    "Don't buy upgrades; ride up grades." -Eddy Merckx

  45. #45
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    7
    Quote Originally Posted by Solomon76
    The Acera will be a little on the heavy side, but if you aren't a weight weenie you might not mind. Keep in mind that the chainrings on the Acera aren't replaceable. On the other hand, I don't see any high quality trekking cranks (48/38/28) available without modification.
    I found these 48/38/28 cranks, but I'm trying to go cheap for now:
    Sugino XD600 (nice), $115 => http://www.velo-orange.com/suoldlotr.html
    Origin8 Trekking Crankset, ~$65 on Amazon => http://www.origin-8.com/product_deta...+ARMS+%26+SETS

    Regards,

    tcpasley

    Reduce, Reuse, Rebicycle

  46. #46
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    179
    my frame came yesterday. I am using a deore lx 48/36/26 crankset (external bb)

    I ordered a set of kenda 700x40 and there is plenty of clearance to the frame but the front derailleur is tight

    anyone know of a 36h 130mm disc hub?

  47. #47
    I got nothin'
    Reputation: hydrogeek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    738
    Quote Originally Posted by AndrewJL
    anyone know of a 36h 130mm disc hub?
    ??? I have only seen 28 or 32 hole hubs.
    I ride at ludicrous speed

  48. #48
    Bedwards Of The West
    Reputation: CommuterBoy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    5,451
    Quote Originally Posted by SAWS
    CB - Be sure to let us know next week how/whether those 2.0's fit.
    Well I scored a wheelset with tires already mounted on Craigslist, so I thought I'd give them a shot... 29x2.1 WTB Prowler tires on WTB speed disc 29er wheels. I tried these tires, and I also threw on the wheels off of my 29er (Michelin AT's, 2.0 width) The 2.1's hit everything...would never work. The 2.0's rub on the frame in the back, but they wouldn't have to be much smaller to work...a 1.75 would probably clear the frame fine. On the Nashbar fork, the 2.0's hit so hard they wouldn't rotate, just like the 2.1's. A 1.75 might be pushing it on the fork...might clear, but might not.

    ... They look sweet though! I'm gonna find me some 1.75's after seeing this thing in monstercross shoes. These are the 2.1's:
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails Newest member of the Nashbar Cyclocross Frame Club-monster.jpg  

    You have no excuse for driving to work
    (unless you don't have studded tires)
    (no excuse for that either)

  49. #49
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    187
    That does look sweet with the fat tires. Thanks for letting us know about what sizes work.
    I like the flames and the bullhorn bars, too. Where is your shifter for the rear?

  50. #50
    Bedwards Of The West
    Reputation: CommuterBoy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    5,451
    Thanks. The rear shifter is an old LX 8 speed trigger shift, mounted way inboard next to the stem on the right side. It's that black lump under the bars in the pic. I run an 8 speed cassette...that's a Surly single speed cog that I scored along with those wheels...might go SS one day, but not today Flames are from Electra Bikes, Bars are TransX Bullhorns from PricePoint.
    You have no excuse for driving to work
    (unless you don't have studded tires)
    (no excuse for that either)

  51. #51
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    187
    I thought that's where the shifter was. How does that setup work for you? I had considered doing something similar, but I hadn't thought through the issues with brakes yet. Drop bars with trigger shifters and MTB brake levers would be weird. I suppose I could do road style drop bar brake levers plus some in-line cyclocross style brakes on the top of the bars, along with trigger shifters. I'm thinking I'm going to rob my road bike for parts, though, and use the brifters I have at least to begin with.

  52. #52
    Bedwards Of The West
    Reputation: CommuterBoy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    5,451
    I used road drops with that same shifter set up for a couple of years on this bike. I never had a problem with it. It was hard to get installed...I had to bend the shifter clamp and use a long bent bolt to mount it up after getting it past the bend in the drop bars...but I was using an oversize 31.8mm bar which made it a little trickier.

    I have never had a problem with the location compared to the brake levers. Think about how often you brake and shift at the same time...it's pretty rare. I don't even think about it anymore...like anything, you just get used to it.
    You have no excuse for driving to work
    (unless you don't have studded tires)
    (no excuse for that either)

  53. #53
    No-Brakes Cougar
    Reputation: Gary the No-Trash Cougar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    1,143
    CB, have you thought of running those 700x45 Marathons? That would look sweet.
    R.I.P. Ronnie James Dio ~ July 10, 1942 May 16, 2010

  54. #54
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    179
    im having some issues with the rear canti's and need to do some clean up and adjust the saddle tilt, but here is the one I just built. Nearly all the parts came off of my nashbar touring frame that I couldn't get to work out. Fork is from bike island (steel) tires are $5 ones nashbar had on sale when I bought the frame, kenda 700cx40
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails Newest member of the Nashbar Cyclocross Frame Club-0406101604.jpg  

    Newest member of the Nashbar Cyclocross Frame Club-0406101605b.jpg  


  55. #55
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    187
    Looks good, Andrew. Do you concur that 45's would fit in back? How's the ride - or did you walk it out the to railroad tracks for the photo shoot?

  56. #56
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    179
    I rode it on the roads around my house for 15 or so min. It handles much better then the touring frame, is more stable and feels alot more comfy. For 45's fitting im pretty sure they can, the 40's have room to spare, imo the tire would hit the derailleur on my setup before the frame. You would def need disc however, its a squeeze to get the 40 past the prake pads mine

  57. #57
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    7
    AndrewJL - your bike looks good. Is that the XL frame?
    Also, what bar is that, and how do you like it? I'm thinking of getting some type of flared bar (Salsa Bell Lap MotoAce or Woodchipper, On One Midge, Origin 8 Gary II, Nitto Randonneur), but I can't seem to decide which one to try.

    Cheers,

    tcpasley

    Reduce, Reuse, Rebicycle

  58. #58
    mtbr member
    Reputation: BrianMc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    4,386
    Quote Originally Posted by tcpasley
    AndrewJL - your bike looks good. Is that the XL frame?
    Also, what bar is that, and how do you like it? I'm thinking of getting some type of flared bar (Salsa Bell Lap MotoAce or Woodchipper, On One Midge, Origin 8 Gary II, Nitto Randonneur), but I can't seem to decide which one to try.
    +1 Looks great!

    Bar: My guess I think I see a little upsweep before they go forward - Nitto Randonneur?

    I too, am curious about your thoughts on it. The Randonneur is on my short list, too.
    Last edited by BrianMc; 04-13-2010 at 06:34 AM.

  59. #59
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    179
    bar is a salsa bell lap, the bar is nice I like the long area in the drops for your hands. I am getting numb right hand but I think that is due more to the shifter, they are microshift units. I have a set of used tiagra 9speeds on the way along with just brake levers (already have bar end shifters that I can try)

    frame is an xl it handles pretty well (im used to the nashbar touring frame for the road) I wish the headtube was taller however.

    as for the tire questions before I looked at the seatube/tire clearance and I have ~9mm of clearance between the 2. I don't know if 45's will fit. Specialized makes an armadillo city tire in a 42 size it may fit, I used the 32 size of the same tire and liked it, really wide but short profile.

  60. #60
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    4
    Interesting thread - I too am a big fan of the Nashbar X frame. Pictures of my build (completed about this time last year) are below.

    It's got a mix of Shimano 105 / Ultegra / Dura Ace, so the total cost was a little bit higher than I had originally planned. In order to save costs, I got a steel fork. Should have went with CF, because the entire bike is just a little too heavy. I'm also running 29" wheels, which I don't particularly care for even after a year of riding. They just make the bike seem so unstable in low-speed cornering...
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails Newest member of the Nashbar Cyclocross Frame Club-01.jpg  

    Newest member of the Nashbar Cyclocross Frame Club-02.jpg  


  61. #61
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    363
    I see that a lot of people choose to fit this frame with disc brakes.
    ↑ ↑ ↓ ↓ ← → ← → В А

  62. #62
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    179
    Quote Originally Posted by SAN_man
    Interesting thread - I too am a big fan of the Nashbar X frame. Pictures of my build (completed about this time last year) are below.

    It's got a mix of Shimano 105 / Ultegra / Dura Ace, so the total cost was a little bit higher than I had originally planned. In order to save costs, I got a steel fork. Should have went with CF, because the entire bike is just a little too heavy. I'm also running 29" wheels, which I don't particularly care for even after a year of riding. They just make the bike seem so unstable in low-speed cornering...
    are you running vuelta xrp wheels? if so how durable are they? I was looking at the cross ones but was concerned with the 28/32 spoke wheels

  63. #63
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    179
    non cellphone pic of it.. and the brooks saddle is gone as of today I did some climbing yesterday and the nose was just painfull, im running a wtb power v until I get something else
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails Newest member of the Nashbar Cyclocross Frame Club-26994_1424630899688_1350234178_31187293_2972815_n.jpg  


  64. #64
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    179
    Quote Originally Posted by Solomon76
    I see that a lot of people choose to fit this frame with disc brakes.
    I have canti's myself but plan on getting discs for ease of maintenance and peace of mind on hills (brake fade egh)

    I have tektro 720's on it now and they have decent power, if im going downhill and pull hard on the brakes I get jerked forward

  65. #65
    Bedwards Of The West
    Reputation: CommuterBoy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    5,451
    Looks good SAN_man...racy.

    Andrew, I would describe yours as 'stately'. Tall stem, whitewalls...rolls royce. Especially with the Brooks.
    You have no excuse for driving to work
    (unless you don't have studded tires)
    (no excuse for that either)

  66. #66
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    4
    Quote Originally Posted by AndrewJL
    are you running vuelta xrp wheels? if so how durable are they? I was looking at the cross ones but was concerned with the 28/32 spoke wheels
    Yes, they are Vuelta XRP's - durable enough for me, but I'm only about 140lbs. I haven't had any issues in the year that I've had them, and I do ride some very pot-holed roads.

  67. #67
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    179
    I ordered this http://bikeisland.com/cgi-bin/BKTK_S...ls&ProdID=1167
    the site says the rims should be 18mm wide

    however when I mounted my 35mm tire it looked odd (bloated) and I looked at the rim, the rim states it is a 700cx13mm rim (the 18 may be outer width?
    anyone else planning to use this wheelset may want to watch out for this, imo there isn't much point to running discs on something with a sub 28mm tire

  68. #68
    mtbr member
    Reputation: zanq's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    430
    My apologies for posting in an old thread but wanted to hear some long-term feedback and post some information I have found.

    So first question - can anyone comment on their ownership experience? Likes/dislikes?

    I'm mulling a cheap gravel bike build. The Nashbar aluminum CX frame (former "X" frame) is a prime candidate but a lot of very conflicting info on this frame is causing me to pause. I'm hoping to get a bit more updated info here

    I find comments on a few forums that the dropout spacing seems to vary between 130mm, 132.5mm, and 135mm. The published spec. is 130mm which makes using a disc hub a bit harder/more expensive. Does this still seem to be the case or were earlier frames spaced wider, then they switched?

    I've also read mixed info on what tires will fit. Nashbar has told me 700x38 was tested. A recent review of the frame states that they were using 700x42 AND 27.5x2.0". Others has said that clearances have been reduced compared to the "old version" of this frame, so I have no/little confidence in what actually fits now.

    Also, it sounds like they narrowed the current Nashbar carbon CX disc fork and will no longer accept wider tires. A friend who's dad has the frame/carbon fork said the fork MIGHT clear 32c but nothing larger. What width tires are owners using with this fork?

    So I would love to continue this conversation to clear up some conflicting info regarding the frame and carbon fork.

    Thanks!
    Ventana El Rey - 3x9
    Schwinn High Plains w/ drop bars - 3x8
    Surly Ogre - Alfine 8/SS

  69. #69
    Cycologist
    Reputation: chazpat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    6,157
    I'm not really up on hub standards but *OneSpeed* was just complaining about his cross frame having 130 spacing and it being difficult to find a decent hub that fits. His frame is steel so he shoved a 135 in. The Nashbar carbon is 135 (not suggesting you should buy it, just for reference).

    So I would definitely do some research on that.

    http://forums.mtbr.com/general-discu...l#post13118622.
    This post is a natural product. Variances in spelling & grammar should be appreciated as part of its character & beauty.

  70. #70
    Fat-tired Roadie
    Reputation: AndrwSwitch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    18,453
    I shoved a 135 mm hub into a 130 mm-spaced aluminum frame. I didn't try to cold set it or anything. Taking the wheel in and out is a little harder but otherwise it works fine. 2.5 mm is just not that far to move the end of something as long as a chainstay.

    Sent from my E5803 using Tapatalk
    "Don't buy upgrades; ride up grades." -Eddy Merckx

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
  •  

THE SITE

ABOUT MTBR

VISIT US AT

© Copyright 2020 VerticalScope Inc. All rights reserved.