I’m new to gravel and coming from a road background. I live in NW Arkansas where the gravel roads can be quite chunky. I’m hoping to race at gravel events such as Unbound, Big Sugar, and Mid South. I am NOT going to podium at any of these races but I still want to do my best and not be limited by my bike choice so I am looking for an aggressive bike with wide tire clearance.
I have found two options that seem to fit most of my needs and budget. The first is the Specialized Crux Comp for $3200 with GRX 820 12-speed, 10-45 cassette, weighing in at 18 lbs. I like the way this bike looks, its light, and it’s simple. What I am not sure about is if this bike is right for long and rough gravel races (100-200 miles)? It says that it can clear 47 mm tires but I doubt that leaves much space for mud - I’m guessing 45mm is more realistic.
The other option is the Lauf Seigla Rigid. I’m not a huge fan of how this bike looks but the value is very enticing. The price is comparable to the Crux. The mid range option comes with a power meter, Sram rival axs, a 10-52 cassette, race alloy wheels and weights apx 19.24 lbs. It also has plenty of tire clearance and comes with a 30 day return policy.
Have any of you used either of these bikes for races like Unbound or Big sugar? What worked well and what didn’t? Is a 45mm tire clearance really a limiting factor for these races?
Howdy, I have been racing gravel on a crux since the current model came out. I have done big sugar and unbound on this bike. I also looked very heavily into the Seigla for my wife. I ended up talking to a few people who ride/race on them. Here are my opinions:
I have ridden 50mm tires on the crux and usually run 48s. I agree that if things got muddy I would cut back to 45s. In the muddy year of unbound, I ran 45s and caked the frame pretty hard. I was NOT nice to the bike and kept riding. It took some paint off, but the frame held up.
The Crux has a lower bottom bracket and I think you will really like this for events like Big Sugar. This is actually why my wife decided to stay away from the Seigla - super high BB. They say its for the suspension fork.
I agree the Seigla doesn’t look good, but the value is great
People (the two that I talked to) say they can feel the high bottom bracket affect handling
For Big Sugar - if it is dry 48s that are heavy/reinforced with inserts will be plenty.
Lots in the news about going with bigger tires for these events and it makes 47mm tires feel small. BUT, it must be noted that these pros need bigger tires than the average folk, they are flying at 25-35mph through super rough sections, they need bigger tires for this.
Dont worry too much, both bikes are great and you can’t make a bad decision.
I am currently running the Crux with Tufo Gravel Thunderos in 48 (measure 47.5) and there is still plenty of clearance. Remember that CPSC requirements call for a certain amount of clearance between tires and the frame, hence the reason you see people easily running wider tires than what a frame is spec’d for. I have also run 650b 2.1 Thunderburts and, again, there was ample clearance. I have ridden the Crux down in Bentonville with both the 650b’s and 47mm Pathfinders (measured closer to 45mm) and both have been sufficient. (The year I did Big Sugar, I rode an Aspero with 45’s and inserts and had no issues, either)
@PiperPrincess makes an excellent point re: the Lauf and BB height. It is really high, with only a 65mm BB drop. The Crux is ~5mm lower and, to me, it makes a significant difference in handling. Getting a lower center of gravity helps make a bike more stable, which based on my experience riding around Bentonville, is a big factor with the chunky, off camber descents.
I raced Unbound this year on the Crux with the 47mm Pathfinders and I thought they were a great option.
Both bikes will give you sufficient tire clearance for your needs, but the Lauf will give you that little bit more. But for me, I’ll take the tradeoff of a lower BB for enhanced stability vs. another few mm in tire width.
I was speccing a new gravel bike this summer and the decision came down to these two bikes. I ended up with a crux for a couple of reasons:
Where I live, the gravel isn’t that chunky (mainly smooth dirt roads with well maintained forest paths here and there) so I did’t feel the need for mtb-level tire clearance. I have an xc full-sus also, so I’ll just ride that if I want to go really off road.
Crux feels light, snappy and agile. While these are purely subjective metrics, for me the playfulness is more exciting than all-out speed and/or comfort. I’m sure the Lauf rides really good but I wasn’t sure if I’d like 50+ mm tires and suspension fork on my gravel bike.
Lauf has a slack seat tube angle and high’ish bb whereas crux is nearly identical to my road bike. This makes swapping bikes easier for me and I don’t need to adjust to the new position and handling. Not a big deal if you ride mainly one bike but I do roughly 50/50 road and gravel so I want them both to always feel familiar.
I have a Crux and honestly can’t say enough great things about it. It was flawless at unbound and flawless during a 240mile race I just did and also flawless on my chill 20 mile road rides. Specialized can get a lot of hate but they make damn good bikes. I think the Crux is a better overall bike but if you really are just looking for huge tire clearance the Lauf is the answer. Otherwise I have a very tough time finding any negatives about the Crux. Lmk if you have any specific questions about the Crux!
I can’t speak to the Crux or compare the two but I’ve had a Seigla with Grit fork for 2 years and have done the Highlands Gravel Classic in NWA twice. The first time was on 40s with an 11-42, the second time was on 2.2 Race Kings with a 10-52 Transmission. I’m not at the pointy end but having the big tires gave me a lot more confidence on the sketchy descents (I’m not a mountain biker). Much more forgiving of a bad line choice. Last year I had to walk some of the steeper loose climbs; this year I rode past the walkers. This year with roughly the same fitness I was about 6% faster. I appreciate the bigger tires on the Forest Service roads that make up a lot of the gravel I ride. And I don’t take them off for the tamer stuff. My 2 cents.
I have the seigla and love it. I’d need to ride bikes back to back with the different BB height to notice the difference. It’s not something I personally notice with the Seigla.
I love the fork and the tire clearance. I put on Vittoria mezcal 2.1s a few months back and it makes for a cushy ride and super stable on descent.
I rode the seigla at unbound with pathfinder pro 48s and it was great.
Ive ridden NWA gravel a few times and raced Rule of 3 twice. All on 45 tires on a specialized diverge, it was fine. I will be back at Rule of 3 next year and i will be on a Lauf.
So crux vs Lauf. I think your gravel is fine on the tire size the crux can handle, but if you want to ride any of the fine singletrack you have (and you should), then a lauf with bigger tires is gonna be more fun….i promise.
Either bike will do the job, but id get a lauf. I dont think 5 mm higher BB matters much.
The geometry of it, like @PiperPrincess mentioned, has a lower bottom bracket, and has been the only cross/gravel bike that I’ve needed to adaptation time. Meaning, when I rode it for the first time the geometry made me feel super comfortable to the point I didn’t have to get “used to it” when cornering, and going down fast descents. Very stable.
I recommend, however, that you try both bikes. You may be able to tell right away which you feel most comfortable in.
There’s a lot of focus on the BB height here. No focus on the trail difference though. The Seigla has about 10-14mm more trail (depending on which sizes you’re comparing) which should make the Lauf more “stable” at higher speeds.
I’ve not ridden either bike, but have been told by a Crux owner, that the bike is noodle-y. He says that the light weight is great, but part of the drawback of that is that the fork especially and the frame are pretty flexy and don’t feel stable. Any of you Crux owners have opinions on that?
The Seigla is a great bike. Way ahead of its time in terms of tire clearance, and probably the best value out there. Online bike purchases are a bit of a roll of the dice, but my experiences with Lauf have been fantastic, and I haven’t heard any reports of Seiglas breaking anyway. I’m a solid home mechanic so not having a local dealer doesn’t really bother me.
As far as ride characteristics, I personally think the focus on BB height is a bit overblown. My Assioma PM pedals add about 5mm of stack height vs. XTRs, and I don’t find that swapping between these substantially alters my ride experience. Unless you’re very sensitive to this, other aspects of the geometry and tire choice are likely to make a bigger difference.
I originally purchased the Seigla with the Grit suspension fork, and subsequently got a JAF rigid fork. I find that for nearly everything I prefer the rigid setup. It’s lighter and feels more stable on anything but the most chunky gravel or rough single track. Running 2.2 RaceKings the rigid Seigla works great, and big tires PLUS the suspension fork is just overkill for most of my rides. FWIW cables are fully external, so swapping between forks is a ~10 minute job.
The Crux is a solid option for sure, but given increased tire clearance and exceptional value I would 100% pick the Seigla again if I were buying today.
Appreciate this comment on the JAF as I just picked up a rigid Seigla and thus helps justify the rigid choice!
My experience is also that the BB height should not be a deal-breaker without riding it to try it. My previous “gravel” bike was a 2016 Stigmata which had a 4mm lower BB than the Seigla. I haven’t felt like I’m too high on the Lauf yet - as also noted above, I think the trail figure is equally impactful.
My first impressions of the Seigla are very positive, and I’ll echo the Lauf support. I had a tech question at 4:45 PM on a Friday and I was able to call and get a Lauf-specific answer right away. I was a little unsure about buying a bike without riding it first, but it worked out for me.
I haven’t been on a Crux, so cannot make comparisons to a Seigla, and only recently gotten a Seigla myself. However I’d post some of the reasons for going with the Seigla.
I currently also have a Checkpoint SLR. I had wanted to put a Lauf Grit 3rd Gen gravel fork on it, but due to some differences in the bearing sizes it would have voided any warranty on both the Checkpoint and the Lauf fork. I then waited for the launch of the Checkmate as a possible replacement bike but wasn’t disappointed to see it launch with the same 45mm tire clearance the Checkpoint SLR had, so started looking at other options.
I ended up choosing the Seigla. The “Ultimate” spec with 13 speed SRAM XPLR groupset and dual sided power meter is nearly half the cost of the Checkmate. I bought a Medium after having been on a large Checkpoint to then swapped to a longer stem which helped give the bike a little racier feel. It’s a little early for me to comment on the BB height, but in the first few short rides I’ve done it felt fine. I’ll get some 5 hour gravel rides in this weekend to better assess it.
I ordered the Rigid bike as I already have the 3rd Gen Grit fork. As mentioned, it’s super easy to swap back and forth, so that adds a ton of versatility.
With the money I saved, I ordered a SRAM Eagle XX Transmission rear derailleur and a 10-52 Transmission cassette, a transmission XO chain, and a 42T and 44T chain rings. With Transmission its super easy to change the set up, so I now have the options of running the 13 speed XPLR group with 10-46 cassette, or switching to the Mullet setup with Eagle T-Type 10-52.
I also picked up a 38cm ENVE SES AR handlebar to help dial in an aero set up. I also have an ENVE 42cm gravel bar to swap on if it going to be more of a trail/single track technical day on the bike. I have two sets of ENVE wheels dedicated to the bike, one set are 4.5 ARs and function as the “aero” set up and then the G23s for more climbing/technical days. The carbon E13 wheels that came on the Seigla look fine but I took them off before riding and plan to sell them.
At the end of the day, with the money I saved and the parts I already had, the Seigla is now going to be a super versatile bike with a ton of options to dial it in for the riding I plan to do without much hassle. Being able to ride tires all the way up to 2.2 without having any concerns about voiding warranties or rubbing the frame ultimately became an important part in making the decision,
Interesting. I was curious about this. My seigla has the grit fork but recently putting on mezcal 2.1s was a pretty big difference in comfort. I’ve definitely considered getting the rigid fork
Funny enough my experience is almost the same. I just got the Seigla frame since I had the fork and was riding it on my Crux (frame damaged beyond repair). I decided to go with Seigla due to the tire clearance (and $)
I did get the rigid fork with the frame set but will have it built with the sus fork. Wouldn’t switching out the forks be a PITA due to the disc brake cabling?
In any case, will see how it rides vs the Crux. I can say the white Seigla frame set paint job is outstanding and the frame seems really high quality.
Not at all. The brake routes externally so you just have to move the caliper and snip the zipties and redo them.
I got the white as well and agree it looks really sharp. I put on a ceramic coating (Adam's Polishes Ceramic Graphene Coating™) before riding it to give it some extra protection.
I 100% understand that not everyone is sensitive to it, but I can absolutely feel the difference in bottom bracket height and in slack/steep angles. I also completely understand why someone would choose both the Lauf and the Spesh, but if you’re not familiar with the differences, I also think it’s important to ride something similar before you order to see if it’s what you’re looking for. My personal opinion is that it’s something like “if you want a more “drop bar mtb” type experience go with the Lauf and if you’re looking for more of a “roadies gravel bike” go with the Spesh”.
