It would be nice if that protection was there. Plenty of pics from unbound 2023 of carbon frames with holes from the mud grinding against the frame. I use 3m tape but I don’t know that it would hold up for long against the sticky unbound mud. A few people mentioned they used aluminum tape for unbound.
Wear plates would be non-structural, so would reduce width available for the chain stays themselves. Cramming 50mm+ tires onto a bike that can run drivetrains with relatively standard 45-47mm chainlines means every mm across the cranks/chainstays/tires axis is super precious. Lauf for example uses a drive side chain stay that is fully solid but very narrow to maximize tire clearance.
So we’d presume he’s running 2.1 up front and “as big as I can cram in” out back. This seems to confirm that the new Checkpoint is already behind the curve in terms of tire widths preferred by pros, no? I bet he’d have run the same 2.1 out back if he could….
1 Like
Just a quick check of SBT GRVL results for the last three years because I wanted to check if Keegan went faster this year on the larger tires. I have no idea how similar or not the course has been over those three years. He won all three. In 22, he went 22.65 mph. Last year was 23.85. And this year was 22.06. Is that because the tires were slower and too big or did the course get harder or did he just chill more because he could do so and still win? At some point, larger and larger tires will be slower, especially on a climby course.
Course wasn’t comparable this year. Substantially chunkier and more climbing. My friend racing said he wished he’d been running larger tires and he had some 45 terra speeds
2 Likes
True and good point. This is why I want STATED clearance of at least 2.1. Otherwise I am sure warranty is voided for us non pros…
yea my understanding is this year was a completely different course. apples to oranges
1 Like
More climbing, chunkier gravel, miles of moon dust, and 88% dirt instead of 50%.
The 3T Extrema Italia is another interesting contender. 700c x 57mm clearance, aero frame and a UDH. Major caveats are it’s made-in-Italy and therefore pricey (similar to ENVE for the frameset with stem/bars/post) and custom order only.
For me, the geometry is a no-go, with quite short reach and taller stack for a given size. But I expect this combo of big clearance and aero tube shapes will become more common going forward. I wonder if 3T will offer an Asia-made version of this frame soon, as they will definitely need to update their whole line to UDH…
2 Likes
Yeah, I always disagreed with 3Ts geometry. I don’t want really low trail for my gravel bike. Don’t even want it for road
750d anyone?
The trail range is the same as common road bikes. The Extrema Italia has about the same trail range as a Trek Madone.
3T did a disservice to themselves by listing the offset as a range that’s backwards. It makes it seem like the smaller sizes have less offset and the larger more. When in reality the smaller sizes have more offset and the larger less, so the trail figure stays around 60mm.
The geometry makes sense as a fast handling “road bike” that happens to take 29x2.25 tires, which is against the grain of how many riders are perceiving the geometry they prefer for gravel.
1 Like
Yes, I don’t like that. I like my bikes to have more trail, particularly for off road. My gravel bike has a trail in the mid 70s, and I prefer road bikes to be closer to that range as well. I think that road bikes don’t handle that at well, and much prefer my gravel bike on road tires.
I also like it better with up to 2.0 phatties
Funny, I prefer my gravel bike to have low trail - high 50s. I like the lower wheel flop, and find with with bigger tires, that increases the stability and bike feels quite balanced. I’ve tried higher trails gravel setups and just don’t like the feel at all.
My main issue with 3T geometry is the quite short reach; I think many bikes have been moving toward longer reach/shorter stem, which gives longer wheelbases for stability, particularly on techy descents. With the Extrema Italia I’d probably need a 120-130mm stem, which is not my preference off-road.
Hopefully we will get some independent teating of the Speed and Endurance Chips from https://zerofrictioncycling.com.au/
Some good shots of stuff beyond spec
3 Likes
So many ways to skin the cat. 
My guess here is that the geometry of this bike was designed for the rider’s CG to be further back than a road bike which has been the standard for gravel bikes up until a few years ago.
The gnarlier the terrain, typically the less weight on the front wheel. Obviously, there is a limit, but the range is as big as the road pro’s bikes in mountain stages with a F/R balance of close to 50/50, all the way to XC bikes which continue to have longer front centers and shorter stems.
Longer rides with little sustained time climbing usually work better with a position slightly further back relative to the BB and a little less weight on the hands. I’m sure we can all find examples of athletes going the other direction, but I think the trend of all cyclists pushing their saddles forward to be more aero and weight the front wheel will start to find its place which is mostly sustained climbing and races with really high average speeds.
Bikes like the Extrema with tires that are capable of more are probably designed to be ridden closer to a fast XC hardtail than a road bike in terms of fit preferences and CG.
What would the typical weight distribution of a modern XC full suspension look like, roughly?