frameset options?

hey folks,  i recently participated in my first official gravel event (though i've certainly hit my fair share of dusty roads over the years) and i'm totally hooked.  I'm looking to build up a gravel frame, but am struggling to find something that meets all my qualifications.  I'm hoping you can a) let me know your thoughts on the following frames and b) let me know if there are any out there i overlooked

here is what i'm looking for, in (rough) order of importance.  not everything is mandatory, but the further down the list the check marks go, the better.

- sold as a frame/fork only (no full builds)
- all-day riding position - my bars need to be roughly level with my saddle or higher (without 8 miles of spacers), no cx geometry
- reasonably lightweight - i don't beat up my bikes and i'm not planning any heavy touring across the continental divide
- steel or carbon (sorry aluminum, you jarred me one too many times)
- under $1k with fork
- no thru-axles (i have plenty of good QR wheels already lying around)
- clearance for 40+ tires (ideally 45+)
- mounts for rear rack and fenders (i can always use p-clips, but it's not as pretty)

within these criteria, i have come up with a few contenders:

BMC Monster Cross http://blackmtncycles.com/shop/frames/monster-cross-v5-2/
+ huge tire clearance, well regarded, v-brake mounts (which i actually like)
- potentially too low of a handlebar position without a high rise stem (based on photos i've seen)

Raleigh Tamland 2 https://www.raleighusa.com/tamland-2-frameset-1329#
+ GREAT price, well regarded, reynolds 631
- on the lower end of tire size accommodation and geometry may be a little to aggressive

Penhale Gypsy http://www.penhalebicycleco.com/shop/gypsy-frameset
+ relaxed geometry, nice looking frame, huge tire clearance
- smaller unknown brand and "Custom Japanese cromoly tubeset" probably means heavy AF.

Specialized AWOL Expert https://www.specialized.com/us/en/bikes/road/adventure/awol-expert-frameset/115626
+ very relaxed geometry, reynolds 725 tubing, huge tire clearance
- ugly color and top of my price range (though i can get it on discount) i also fear it will be super heavy, though i haven't found the weight anywhere online

there are many others that i have written off because they don't check off enough boxes, but are there any others i should consider?  thanks!

I had similar ideas as you. I wasn't as anxious to get tires in the 40+ width though. The Ritchey Swiss Cross Canti was my choice, and I haven't regretted it so far. But I too have been considering the Monster Cross for some of the more challenging unmaintained farm roads in my area. On your list, the BMC Monster Cross would be my first choice. But if you can live with up to 40mm, then the Swiss Cross Canti, which you can sometimes get on sale for around $1,000 is another frame set to check out. I run mine with Paul's Minimoto linear pull brakes instead of Canti's.

yeah i looked at the swiss cross, but did nix it because of tire size.  i don't want to run fatties all the time, but i really like the option if i want to.  i'm always swapping stuff out on my bikes and really want a frame that can be configured for numerous different purposes. (plus i have a set of 45's i picked up at a swap years ago and no bike to put them on) 

Advocate Sand County. Short reach with quite a tall stack height.

Steel frame/fork; probably not that light.

Specs mention 40mm tire fit.

Just watch that low seat tube angle 

-When you say you want the bars fairly high, minimum stack and maximum reach are you aiming for?\n\n-Are you sure none of your wheels can convert to through axle?\n\n- Have you though of getting a complete? A frame and fork for less than $1000 is pretty cheap, you can usually get that same frame as a complete for only a tiny bit more. Swap out the bits you prefer and it might still be cheaper.

- i was measured for stack and reach once, but i don't think the guy got it right.  i want my bars at least as high as my saddle, as stated.  the exact stack and reach can be worked out with stems and spacers after the fact.

- yes, none of my wheels can convert to thru axle.

mmmm i'm not sure what your definition of "a tiny bit more" is.

the AWOL expert frame is $1000, complete is $2500
the Tamland 2 is $600 (though currently on sale), complete $1800
the BMC is $595, full builds are all over $2000

i think it is very rare to find a full build where the complete bike is less than double the price of the frame/fork.

Positive reviews here on this one a ways back. Had my eye on one for awhile.  https://www.twinsix.com/collections/bikes-bits/products/standard-rando-frameset-black?variant=6044881539

tim.bikeparty wrote:yeah i looked at the swiss cross, but did nix it because of tire size.  i don't want to run fatties all the time, but i really like the option if i want to.  i'm always swapping stuff out on my bikes and really want a frame that can be configured for numerous different purposes. (plus i have a set of 45's i picked up at a swap years ago and no bike to put them on) 

A friend of mine has a Tamland. I'm told that the bike was designed by Guitar Ted for Raleigh. Nice bike for all around use and can take fairly wide tires. Although the Monster Cross would still be my first choice for wider tires, the Tamland is a first rate choice for a do everything steel bike. Tamland may also perform a bit better than the Monster Cross when riding narrower tires on easier terrain - either dirt or paved. 

I know you said no alloy, but the Trek Crockett ticks off most of those boxes fairly easily. An addition to that question - have you ridden any new alloy or just old stuff?

Also - the AWOL is a tank. Like over 6lbs for a frame.

PoolBoyMatt wrote:I know you said no alloy, but the Trek Crockett ticks off most of those boxes fairly easily. An addition to that question - have you ridden any new alloy or just old stuff?

Also - the AWOL is a tank. Like over 6lbs for a frame.

Good point on modern Alu alloy frames. Hydro forming technology has allowed manufacturers to produce high quality Alu frames almost as light weight as carbon at very competitive prices. My Haanjo Comp is a good example of a mass produced Alu alloy frame. While I still prefer steel - partly for aesthetic reasons - certainly good Alu frames shouldn't be totally ignored. There is a very good series on Youtube produced by GCN, which discusses the virtues of various frame materials. I'm sticking with steel for the time being; but I wouldn't dismiss a good Alu product like the Crockett. 

point taken, i have ridden some very high-end aluminum, but not anything made recently beyond around town.  but actually in my searches i didn't see many frame-only options in alum.  i did look at the crockett, but crossed it off for a) cx race geo and b) according to Trek, 4.76 lbs  if i am going to go alum for weight savings it better be competitive with carbon.

also note there is the AWOL and the AWOL expert, which are built out of different steels (the expert being the one sold as a frameset).  it doesn't seem light though, and thus is at the bottom of the list.

tim.bikeparty wrote:point taken, i have ridden some very high-end aluminum, but not anything made recently beyond around town.  but actually in my searches i didn't see many frame-only options in alum.  i did look at the crockett, but crossed it off for a) cx race geo and b) according to Trek, 4.76 lbs  if i am going to go alum for weight savings it better be competitive with carbon.

also note there is the AWOL and the AWOL expert, which are built out of different steels (the expert being the one sold as a frameset).  it doesn't seem light though, and thus is at the bottom of the list.

Not sure of what the difference between CX, Gravel, Adventure style  frames really is. And if the difference really effects comfort for long rides. For example my 57mm Swiss Cross, a purebred CX race design, has more front wheel toe clearance than my 58cm Lemond Washoe road bike. The Swiss Cross soaks up bumps, corners beautifully and descends at 40mph without a ripple. I also find the Swiss Cross more comfortable than the Washoe on longer rides; but that may be due to the wider tires at lower pressure, than to the frame geometry. These are subjective observations -- both the Swiss Cross and the Washoe are both very comfortable and great handling. In summary, I wouldn't dismiss a bike just because it was designed for racing. Bike fit and position, the right saddle and tires, may be more important for comfort. Racers need comfort too!

bobknh wrote:
Not sure of the difference between CX, Gravel, Adventure style  frames really is.

Most of the newer Gravel frames have slacker head angles, taller headtubes, lower BB and sometimes other geometry tweaks like longer wheelbase.  Basically making them more stable, less "twitchy" and more comfortable.

Have you considered the Salsa Vaya? It is steel, room for 50c tires, $799 for frameset. Seems like a good choice for your needs and wants.

ljsmith wrote:

Most of the newer Gravel frames have slacker head angles, taller headtubes, lower BB and sometimes other geometry tweaks like longer wheelbase.  Basically making them more stable, less "twitchy" and more comfortable.

Thanks for the tech. details. But do these design changes really improve comfort and bike stability? Maybe. My only experience with this is my Ritchey Swiss Cross - a CX race design; and my DB Haanjo Comp.- a purpose built modern gravel grinder. Both are good bikes. I'm running 35mm Panracer GK's or 35 mm Compass Bon Jon's on my Swiss Cross, and 40mm tubeless Ramblers on the Haanjo. Similar cockpits, saddle height and saddles, and effective top tube. Both ride and handle well; but for me, the Swiss Cross is somewhat more comfortable - especially on longer rides. I don't know why; but I suspect that the Swiss Cross just fits me better.

bobknh wrote:

Thanks for the tech. details. But do these design changes really improve comfort and bike stability? Maybe. My only experience with this is my Ritchey Swiss Cross - a CX race design; and my DB Haanjo Comp.- a purpose built modern gravel grinder. Both are good bikes. I'm running 35mm Panracer GK's or 35 mm Compass Bon Jon's on my Swiss Cross, and 40mm tubeless Ramblers on the Haanjo. Similar cockpits, saddle height and saddles, and effective top tube. Both ride and handle well; but for me, the Swiss Cross is somewhat more comfortable - especially on longer rides. I don't know why; but I suspect that the Swiss Cross just fits me better.

The geometry tweaks do make a difference, but as always they are just one variable in the equation.  Your Ritchey is steel, its hard to beat the ride quality of a steel frame.  

Tim - Below is a link with some additional ideas.  I'm looking for a CF gravel bike with lots of the same thoughts as you.  Unfortunately the CF bikes seem to either be CX thoroughbreds or gravel bikes with the latest/greatest technology such as through axles and hydraulic disks.  I've got lots of 700c rim brake wheel sets which could be repurposed for a new bike but alas none can be converted to through axles.  In addition to the bikes in the link, the Salsa Warbird is available in CF and claims clearance for 44mm tires (without fenders). But the Warbird is only available as a complete bike and smashes the bank (least expensive build with the CF frame is $3k).

http://road.cc/content/buyers-guide/217893-16-best-2017-gravel-adventure-bikes-%E2%80%94-super-versatile-bikes-are-home

Cheers,
Greg

NoCoGreg wrote:I'm looking for a CF gravel bike with lots of the same thoughts as you.  Unfortunately the CF bikes seem to either be CX thoroughbreds or gravel bikes with the latest/greatest technology such as through axles and hydraulic disks.  I've got lots of 700c rim brake wheel sets which could be repurposed for a new bike but alas none can be converted to through axles.
Greg

yeah i was looking at the Pedal Force CX2, which is really appealing as a CF frame with canti mounts etc, but the 38mm max tire was a deal breaker for me personally :-/

also i have seen the warbird sold online as just a frameset, but for $2k.  at that price i might as well get the full bike for $3k

tim.bikeparty wrote:also i have seen the warbird sold online as just a frameset, but for $2k.  at that price i might as well get the full bike for $3k

Tim - just an FYI in case you didn't see this thread.  I pasted a couple links with a lot of info and perspective on selecting a gravel bike frame.  What really got me thinking was how the author showed how one could put 650b wheels onto a 700c CX bike and drop the bottom bracket for a more stable ride.  The smaller wheels will also reduce trail a bit (less wheel flop) and the wider heavier wheels should counter any increase in steering quickness caused by reduced trail.  The effects on handling are truly speculation on my part, but it seems like an interesting experiment.  This however would mean I'd end up with three sets of wheels: skinny 28c road, 38c gravel, 45c heavy duty gravel.  Hmmmm...

http://ridinggravel.forumchitchat.com/post/theoria-how-to-choose-a-gravel-bike-parts-1-2-8464527?pid=1295272770

IMHO the differences in geometry between CF CX and Gravel framesets are not very significant.  Chainstays for CX range from 420 to 425mm while gravel bikes I'm looking at are built with 425 to 430 mm stays.  Similarly the steering geometry overlaps with a typical 71.5 to 72.5 degree head angle for larger frames and rake/offset in the 45mm range.   However when one gets into the more touring like aluminum and steel frames (Salsa Vaya for example) the chainstays do get longer 450mm (to fit wider tires and longer wheelbase), steering offset increases and headtube angle decreases - but trail stays in the 60mm to 65mm range which seems to be typical for gravel bikes while CX bikes will be a bit lower if for no other reason than the smaller tire.