Checkpoint SLR Vs Crux S-works frameset

[FlatlandClimber]

questions is how important are 200-300 grams gains on frameset in gravel road...more understandable the aethos that is a bike for mountains

As always, it depends on where you ride. Where I live, all steep roads are gravel and all paved roads are flat.

My problem is rather, that it sounds like bike X is completely capable off-road, while the Crux just snaps in half. Since there is absolutely zero evidence for this, I stand by my previous statements,

A lighter, non-aero bike might actually make more sense off-road than on-road with average speeds usually significantly lower and climbs being very steep.

[texano999]

i agree but where i live in italy we have long medium steep tarmac roads and short very steep gravel roads...so lighter gravel bike for short steep is fine but not essential

[jfranci3]

Outside of the fit, these are different bikes. The Crux is going to fell like a performance road bike and the Checkpoint feels like an endurance/gravel bike - its bigger and has a longer front end. I have an Emonda ALR and a Checkpoint (gen 1), the Checkpoint is a great road bike but it doesn't ever feel like a scaple and you wouldn't feel 'racey' on it. It's probably just as fast though.

On the technical side


Tour Int put a Crux on their frame jig. If you're gointg to be running road tires, the Crux is going to rride decently firm. The CP in their test rides like an endurance bike (90n/mm - ish) ; the Aethos (stock seatpost) 125n/mm -ish (IIRC); and the Crux is around 155 range; the old crux was about 200; an Allez Sprint (an example worst case) is about 240n/mm.

The Crux has a firmer rear ride, which will translate to cornering, traction, and bumpy decending speed losses.

Keep in mind - you're stacking springs, so the Crux will ride about roughly 25% harsher in the rear

Bunch of math:

If you're running 25c road tires - 90psi tire ~ 130n/mm ; 70psi ~110n/mm over a small bump (air spring rates are non-linear)
Fat road - 115n/mm at 65psi
Groad tires - 38c @40psi is about 90n/mm
(Bigger tires don't actually ride as much better as you'd expect because of the way air works as a spring and the type of sidewall you put on the bigger tire, but they do run softer - https://www.sram.com/globalassets/publi ... ained2.pdf P14 on Zipps whitepaper. )

Stacking Spring Equation:
Top Spring Rate x Bottom Spring Rate = RATE
Top Spring Rate + Bottom Spring Rate

Crux
155 x 90 = 40,000 (Top Spring Rate X Bottom Spring Rate)
155 + 90 = 400 (Top Spring Rate + Bottom Spring Rate)
13,950 ÷ 245 = 57n/mm

CP
90 x 90 = 8100
90 + 90 = 180 = 45 n/mm

Allez Sprint (ex worst case)
240 * 130 = 31200 / 370 = 84n/mm

[boots2000]

I did my 1st ride on my Checkpoint SLR- I would say that those who feel like the Checkpoint will ride like an "endurance" bike vs. a high performance bike may be misinformed.
Honestly, It just rode like a really well balanced bike. It did not feel like the straight ahead bike that I expected. Felt fairly nimble. I did not notice the extra chainstay length.
Front end handled well- It is steeper in the head angle than my last bike by .8 degrees 71.8 vs 71.0). To be fair, a logn top tube is good for me and even with a long toptube I still need a 100mm stem.

Hope to have the Crux going soon for comparsion- But the SLR was really good! Back on it today-

https://www.instagram.com/p/CZLHIHRpgDr/

[texano999]

I did my 1st ride on my Checkpoint SLR- I would say that those who feel like the Checkpoint will ride like an "endurance" bike vs. a high performance bike may be misinformed.
Honestly, It just rode like a really well balanced bike. It did not feel like the straight ahead bike that I expected. Felt fairly nimble. I did not notice the extra chainstay length.
Front end handled well- It is steeper in the head angle than my last bike by .8 degrees 71.8 vs 71.0). To be fair, a logn top tube is good for me and even with a long toptube I still need a 100mm stem.

Hope to have the Crux going soon for comparsion- But the SLR was really good! Back on it today-

https://www.instagram.com/p/CZLHIHRpgDr/

with my checkpoint slr i have the same feeling you have descirbed here...very stable also on long descent on gravel road....still doubt if i will change with crux....

how much is the weight of the complete bike with pedal and bottle cages, mine is 8.15

[Cattiy]

I did my 1st ride on my Checkpoint SLR- I would say that those who feel like the Checkpoint will ride like an "endurance" bike vs. a high performance bike may be misinformed.
Honestly, It just rode like a really well balanced bike. It did not feel like the straight ahead bike that I expected. Felt fairly nimble. I did not notice the extra chainstay length.
Front end handled well- It is steeper in the head angle than my last bike by .8 degrees 71.8 vs 71.0). To be fair, a logn top tube is good for me and even with a long toptube I still need a 100mm stem.

Hope to have the Crux going soon for comparsion- But the SLR was really good! Back on it today-

https://www.instagram.com/p/CZLHIHRpgDr/

I also have a Checkpoint SL 2022. My road setup is a 45 deep wheelset and Conti 5000 TL tyres. The frontend is agile, but the long chainstays are obvious in the handling.

[boots2000]

Can you describe what you are feeling the longer stays do?

I did my 1st ride on my Checkpoint SLR- I would say that those who feel like the Checkpoint will ride like an "endurance" bike vs. a high performance bike may be misinformed.
Honestly, It just rode like a really well balanced bike. It did not feel like the straight ahead bike that I expected. Felt fairly nimble. I did not notice the extra chainstay length.
Front end handled well- It is steeper in the head angle than my last bike by .8 degrees 71.8 vs 71.0). To be fair, a logn top tube is good for me and even with a long toptube I still need a 100mm stem.

Hope to have the Crux going soon for comparsion- But the SLR was really good! Back on it today-

https://www.instagram.com/p/CZLHIHRpgDr/

I also have a Checkpoint SL 2022. My road setup is a 45 deep wheelset and Conti 5000 TL tyres. The frontend is agile, but the long chainstays are obvious in the handling.

[NealH]

Usually longer chainstays will remove some agility in bike handling. I guess it could be said that longer chainstays give a bike a more "truck-ish" feel. The bike tends to resist quick nimble movements. It doesn't feel quite as homoogenous with your body when you are climbing out of the saddle and swaying or dancing back and forth on the pedals. As well, on faster descents a longer chainstay bike doesn't carve through turns with agility and a great amount of ease. I purchased an S-Works Tarmac and an S-Works Roubaix a number of years ago and, while I liked both of them, and each had strengths, the handling of the Roubaix with it's longer chainstays just did not feel as lively and nimble when pushing the bike. For relaxed riding, long endurance riding, gravel riding, puttering about, the longer chainstays (primarily longer wheelbase) and slacker headtube make the jouney more enjoyable. The longer wheelbase bikes don't feel like they require quite as much attention - and typically this is even more so on bikes with slack headtubes.

I think as a generalization one could say, if you're not racing the chainstay length probably makes no difference. You just take the turns on a descent slightly slower, which for most of us is wiser anyway. If it's endurance racing, cobblestones or rought roads, you will probably prefer a bike with longer chainstays or wheelbase.

[texano999]

Finally I have tested both bike with the same components and same size...so comparison is very real. Checkpoint slr more rigid and stable at high speed, this feeling is more effective on the gravel discence in the front fork, checkpoint win also at high speed on flat road but there is no game on the ripid ascence where the crux win easily.
Over all the crux is more confortable and the ride is definitelly more enjoyable. So Looking only the enjoy to ride, the crux win.
Obviously if I use the bike for long ride with bikepacking I choose the checkpoint.For my needs i keep the Crux!

[rjich]

I wouldn't bother with the S works given how light and capable the regular frame Crux is. It's the weight delta of a bit of mud on a tire.
Of course it doesn't say s works either which I thought a positive after bring branded the past few years on a bike! I appreciate some folks would prefer that though.

[texano999]

i deem it is more a feeling sensation than a real time reduction...but this feeling is fine

[jfranci3]

The Checkpoint is a much bulkier bike than the Crux. They can do the same job, but the Checkpoint is more utilitarian

Tour Int just did a test of the new Checkpoint in their latest. Interestingly, the new frame tested twice as complaint as the prior one. I think they are using an offset Isospeed post with that cutout at the bottom of the frame, similar to the Procaliber; the prior had the axle centered.

Code: Select all

             Rear        Front
Old          92            89n/mm
New         45            41n/mm  (these are the lowest numbers I've seen; these might be a misprint based on the score given. )
ALR         192       97 (same fork, but with AL steerer?  stiffest seatpost known to man)    
Crux        155           80n/mm 

2021 prior


2022



I was pretty dubious on the Isospeed on my gen1 Checkpoint relative to just a good seatpost on the AL frame, and these numbers back that up. I hadn't noticed the difference here. The new unit looks to be legit if Tour's numbers are consistent with this type of device and if they're using the same seatpost height/frame.

As everyone mentioned, my gen1 feels the same as my Emonda ALR if I run the same wheelset. The fit is relaxed, but the new frame is a bit longer, but you can find a racier fit by sizing down a size. The new one is a bit longer, but that won't radically change anything.

[boots2000]

I will say that my 2022 Checkpoint is a comfortable bike-

[boots2000]

I finally got my 2022 Crux up and running.
That said,I have lots of miles on a 2022 checkpoint.
They are very different bikes and muc that is already written here is true.
Crux feels tighter and more chattery. I actually had to drop the pressure in my tires. Running 28/30 on 40mm tires.
Other things I noticed.
1.) Crux has toe overlap. Checkpoint does not.
2.) on the Crux I have to get my weight back more on steep climbs. Back wheel can slip more easily. I think it is part power transfer and part technique. I would say that I am used to the longer stays of the Checkpoint.
3.) Checkpoint feels like a more substantial bike. So I guess choice depends on how you will use the bike.
Checkpoint will be a better all arounder. For long hauls. Crux is more like a "fast day" bike.

[Pyotrump]

I wouldn't ride the Crux at all if you're going to do anything even remotely serious offroad. It's an Aethos in disguise. It won't survive.

What does this mean "remotely serious"? Airtime?
Any reason to claim this?

Anything with lumps and bumps - i.e. not pancake smooth fire roads.

The weight of the frame doesn't lie. There's nothing exotic in it to keep it from cracking or falling apart (Dyneema for example).

Nobody else has built a gravel / CX frame remotely this light, not because they can't, but because it's a stupid idea. Specialized are counting on most of the product they sell being barely ridden, and serious riders being wary enough not to make the mistake of taking one of these offroad.

DurianRider is finally on this forum!
Why has no one built a disc brake bike as light as the Aethos?
I see no proof in what you say. I ride the Crux as hard as I rode the Open.
So do many others, including world tour pros.

One of my acquaintances had his Aethos shatterd to 5 pieces of carbon tubes by her mistake. It was just a touch to the ground! Even the speed was not that fast maybe 19mph. I thought his frame could handle it but hers failed.

After that incident, local riders call Aethos "Sugar cane tubed frame"..