Bike Reviews
You are looking at: Home : Bike Reviews

Specialized Tricross

Specialized calls the Tricross a "freeroad" bike. Can it really do it all?


Posted: 23 February 2006
by Mike Davis

spec06_tricross_action_lo (53K)
  • Specialized Tricross
  • £699
  • It's "freeroad", innit?
  • Versatility in bicycle form

Pushed for time? Skip straight to the verdict.

We know what you're thinking - this isn't a mountain bike. So what's it doing here? Specialized describe the Tricross as a "Freeroad" bike. It's designed to do a whole bunch of stuff: "From paved road, to dirt road, to no road at all, the wide array of settings allows a wide array of rider motivations: urban/transportation, adventure riding/touring, and even cyclo-cross racing." Mention of dirt roads, no roads and 'cross racing makes this enough of an off-road bike for us. But can it really hack it in the dirt?

spec06_tricross_side_lo (11K)

Mostly black

spec06_tricross_post_lo (6K)

Carbon seatpost "not designed for off-road use"

spec06_tricross_bars_lo (7K)

44cm drops carry Sora STI and extra flat-bar levers

spec06_tricross_cranks_lo (10K)

Cranks spin on reliable square-taper bottom bracket

spec06_tricross_fork_lo (9K)

Carbon fork features vibration-damping inserts

Frame

Over the last few years Specialized has been working hard to bring some distinctive styling to its road (and road-style) bikes, and the Freecross continues the trend. Nearly every tube is manipulated or shaped in some way - you get the feeling that the designers only grudgingly left the seat tube alone because you have to put a seat post in it.

It's made of double-butted "A1" aluminium in a "semi-compact" shape. For those not familiar with the way of road bikes, traditional road bikes have a completely level top tube. Compact ones have a very low sloping top tube. Semi-compact ones fit somewhere in the middle. The Tricross's frame may feel tall to those used to low-slung mountain bikes, but it's pretty low by road bike standards.

Up front there's a flared headtube that takes an integrated headset. Attached to the back of that are the top and down tubes. The down tube features various changes in cross-section and a gentle curve on its way to the bottom bracket, while the top tube has a shoulder-friendly flattened section in the middle for those 'cross races.

At the back, the stays are fairly conventional, while the dropouts feature cunningly-concealed rack eyes. You also get low-rider rack mounts on the FACT carbon fibre fork. It's described as a cyclocross fork, which means that it's got plenty of room for tyres and mud, cantilever bosses and "Speed Zertz" vibration-damping inserts. These cunning gizmos are found on lots of Specialized road bikes. The rubbery inserts are claimed to absorb up to 85% of road vibration before it reaches the handlebars, reducing rider fatigue. It's a similar idea to the inserts found in squash rackets and so on.

The whole thing's held together with really smart double-pass welds, lending a kind of old-school fillet-brazed look to all the joints. You can't help but be impressed by the amount of work that's gone into the frame of what is, after all, not a crazily expensive bike.

Components

At first glance the Tricross's component spec is pure cyclo-cross. 34/48 double chainset (running on a trusty Shimano square-taper bottom bracket), 12-25 cassette, 44cm drop bars, Shimano Sora STI levers, Tektro cantilever brakes, extra "sissy levers" so you can brake from the flats, all that stuff.

We wouldn't recommend that you try a 'cross race on it out of the box, though. There are two main reasons. First, the Specialized Borough tyres supplied are perfectly adequate for roads, lanes, even towpaths or hard-packed dirt. But your typical 'cross race involves grass and mud, and the Boroughs don't really have anything that you'd call a tread. We fitted some Maxxis CX knobblies for the dirt.

Second, there's a big disclaimer in the instruction manual about the carbon fibre seatpost, which "is not designed for off-road use". We're told that that's largely to dissuade people from doing jumps or drops on it, but it's not a confidence-booster. That said, we used it off-road lots and the bike even left the ground a few times. If it was our bike we'd probably change it for something else, though. Better safe than sorry, and all that.

The whole thing comes in at 10.9kg (24lb) - pretty hefty for a road bike, pretty light for an off-road bike.

Ride

Seeing as this bike's meant to do just about anything, we tried lots of different things on it. The first thing it proved rather suitable for was road riding. Not all that surprising, but it felt a lot more at home on the sorts of roads around BM HQ than posher, racier road bikes. There's something about roads surfaced with a combination of broken Tarmac, grit, grass and cow dung that's a little off-putting on something svelte, shiny and Italian shod with 20mm tyres. The Tricross just feels solid and confident, with the added bonus that it's already black so it doesn't matter that it'll come back black.

It's not as sprightly as a pure road bike, though, largely on account of the weight and chunky tyres. Your speed is also somewhat limited by the gearing - a 48/12 top end isn't much of a gear on the road. If you just want to ride and you're not in any particular hurry, then it's fine. And it's nice to know that you can amble off down a farm track or towpath without too much difficulty.

The riding position and solid feel make the Tricross fairly adept at fast commuting or lightweight touring, too, applications for which the rack eyes will prove useful. You get two sets of bottle bosses too, something that pure CX frames often do without.

As for off-road, it's a hoot. If you want to seriously race cyclo-cross then you'll probably want something a bit lighter, a bit shorter at the back and possibly fractionally less steep at the front, but for recreational trail riding it's surprisingly capable - if you're feeling sufficiently in the groove it'll keep up with pretty much anything else on even quite nadgery singletrack. Obviously the cantilever brakes and skinny tyres mean that you'll have to rethink your braking distances a bit if you're used to 180mm hydraulic discs and 2.35in tyres, but it's a lot less of a handful than you'd think. It's quite a confidence-booster in a strange sort of way - if you can ride a trail on a bike like this then you should have no problem at all on a mountain bike.

The gearing that feels a bit low on the road feels a bit tall off it, with the 34/25 bottom gear being some way shy of the sorts of wall-climbing ratios that you'll probably be used to. But to be honest there's not really the grip to make the most of really low gears. You can muscle it up most things with the aid of the powerful on-the-hoods hand position. And if you get it on a medium grade fire-road climb you'll be doing a lot of thumb-twiddling at the top while you wait for the MTBs to catch up...

Versatile, tidy frame, comfortable, pretty good at all sorts of things

Inevitably compromised, needs new tyres and seatpost to be truly capable off-road, slightly sluggish on-road


Verdict

In this era of purist, specialist machines it's quite refreshing to hop on a bit of a mongrel. The Tricross may not shine in any particular area, but it puts up a respectable showing in most. If you're not sure whether you want an entertaining off-road bike or a 'cross race bike or a commuter or a tourer or a recreational road bike, this is a great choice. If you know exactly what you want, you'll probably be able to find something more suitable in each niche. We like the fact that it'll turn its hand to nearly anything, though.


Performance Value Overall


Previous article Previous article:
Team News: Kona Les Gets, Rocky Mountain UK
Next article:Next article
Mountain Bike Racing for Virgins!

Discuss this story

Nice looking bike - it fills the same brief that my audax bike has evolved into, but with more panache.

How do the 'Speed Zertz' work, i.e. what form do the fork blades take where they pass through the (presumably) elastomers?

Why cantis rather than Vs? Is it still the case that you're very limited when it comes to V-compatible drop levers? What V-options (if any) exist for the levers that wouldn't require bodging on bar end shifters?
Posted: 24/02/2006 08:10

Great bike for Winter training and pootling about on if you ask me.
Posted: 24/02/2006 08:25

I think bikes like this ought to be more popular. I picked up a Cannondale Cyclecross disk brake version at reduced price 3 years ago. Needed to get the gearing a bit lower than cyclecross standard so I just stuck a 34 tooth dinner plate on it and fitted race blades as the disks mean no room for full guards

I never intend to ride cross on it but find it ideal for winter commuting on the rutted tarmac and potholes that Sheffield council call roads. It gets me home on the odd day of snow. I can save my best road bike yet still keep up with the winter road rides on it and I can join in with my off road mates as well.

Sure the really serious stuff is beyond it but mostly we ride woodland trails and tracks where it’s actually quicker then the rest anyway.



Ian

Posted: 24/02/2006 09:42


J D
Monty Wick,canti's work better with road sti due to the amount of cable they pull. Using V's would have resulted in long lever travel and little modulation unless you used a cable gismo that adjust the cable pull.
Speed Zerts as opposed to full on zerts,sit on the outside of the fork,but are still effect in taking out the buzz.

Mike D it actually has 3 bolt mounts,there is one on the down tube.I also found it fine for CC racing ending my first year of CC racing ranked 212th in the country !!!!!! ;¬) I have to admit i've not raced a specific CC bike though. Weight can be easily and cheaply saved on this bike as well.Got to agree that it is scarily do-able of road. I had to remind myself i was on road wheels on a stone singletrack section as i shot along dropping some of the mtb boys.
Posted: 24/02/2006 11:10

Yeah, I know that JD, but I also know there's at least one set of drop levers on the market configured for Vs. It's just a question of jigging the lever geometry, same as it was canti levers when Vs first came out. Given that many tourers use Vs and drops, I would've thought Shimano had at least one set of compatible lever/shifter combos, but not being the kinda guy who pores over catalogues, I'm not familiar with the ranges available.

I much prefer reviews of quirky bikes like this, as opposed to yet another 5" 'all-mountain' blah blah, which the Nicolai man effectively admitted in the MBR thread are all the feckin' same anyway to all intents and purposes.
Posted: 24/02/2006 11:19


J D
Maybe its because canti's offer better mud clearance than V brakes ?!?!
Posted: 24/02/2006 12:09

I love mine, put Ultegra 10 speed on it straight off, couldn't be doing with the nasty 8 speed stuff!

Friend of mine who has one does truly insane stuff on it, ironically the only thing he changed was the seatpost- to an Alien Titanium and snapped the head in half last time we were out!

Think I'll put some mid range Bontrager wheels on it too, then she'll fly!
Posted: 24/02/2006 12:09

And sadly Montgomery, Shimano don't do any STIs that are V-Brake compatible, as they're all ultimately designed for calliper brakes, they don't feel amazing with cantis IMO and they feel down right shite with V-Brakes. I've put some Avid jobbies on there and they're surprisingly handy really.
Posted: 24/02/2006 12:11


J D
I can't see 10spd working in the mud as well as 9,if at all, yet alone as well as my luuurrvvveee 8spd.
Posted: 24/02/2006 12:44

Been ok so far, it was mainly so I could swap my 'turbo trainer' wheel around between my road bike, and because I've been spoiled by the Dura Ace 10 speed shifters!
Posted: 24/02/2006 12:48

If you want to run V brakes with road levers, use a Travel Agent (got mine from the LBS but I thnk CRC or Wiggle do em).

I swapped my front Avid Shorty 6 (canti brake)for an Avid vee and find it loads better. The bike is used for commuting mainly, but has done some Cross races too. Mud clearance isn't an issue - Vees are fine.
Posted: 24/02/2006 14:08

No mention of the ill fated trip on the SPC with it then, Mike?
Posted: 24/02/2006 16:34

No mention of the ill fated trip on the SPC with it then, Mike?

I don't think it's terribly relevant - it was far from the only bike to shed a hanger that day ;-)
Posted: 27/02/2006 13:57

Too true!

Was just wondering how it had fared before the mechanical. Especially as I do a fair amount of riding on the Plain all year round, and thought it might be one to add to the new toy list!
Posted: 27/02/2006 14:18

Those Travel Agents look interesting, ta.
Posted: 27/02/2006 14:38

Was just wondering how it had fared before the mechanical.

It was fine. Not enough grip on the steeper chalky climbs, but again, certainly not alone in that. Rocketship on the Tarmac bits :-)

I don't like Travel Agents etc, they're fiddly and usually spongy. You can get mini Vs that don't need different levers, or get Dia Compe 287V levers and old-school bar-end levers and use normal Vs.
Posted: 27/02/2006 17:20

Grip? On that terrain? You are joking, Mike, yes?

There was no grip for anyone!

HAd a good look over and a test spin on one at the weekend. Tempted. Very tempted. Thing is, a Pompino might offer better value, even without the gears.
Posted: 27/02/2006 20:43

I had a look at one of these as an all-round road bike. Very nice, and would have taken a rack etc very well, but the limited gearing just knocked it on the head for me - not high enough, not low enough. Bought myself a Kona Sutra instead - also very MTB-like in geometry, but has Avid BB7 disks too.
Posted: 27/02/2006 22:00


J D
I'm just addressing the gearing for a customer at the moment. Its going out with a 105 long cage mech to take a 11-30 cassette and the 34 inner ring is dropping to a 33, not much of a drop but a bit better. I feel and so does the new owner that a 48/11 will allow him to go plenty fast enough. On mine i have the 48/12 it comes with and don't spin out till about 30mph which is ok for everything except a road race imo. I found the gearing ok for all i've done off road and road,but this customer is touring fairly loaded i wanted to get lower gears.

Discs would be nice in terms of rim wear,but the added weight for no better braking due to the small contact patch of the tyres,there not worth it on this bike. Also i'm running 2 different wheel sets at the moment and hopefully by next winters CC race season will have another set of race wheels. Its just easier/cheaper to have rim brakes when swapping wheels than disc wheels and all those extra rotors or rotor swapping.
Posted: 27/02/2006 22:40

The Travel Agent on my bike is fine - set up carefully it seems positive abd direct, not spongy at all. It does require a bit of care when replacing cables, it only adds 5 minutes to the job though.
Posted: 28/02/2006 08:07

Nowt wrong with cantis when set up properly. In fact there never was. The only real issue is they do take more care to set up properly than Vs. Got Avid Shortys on the tandem (as well as the x-bike), and they stop 24 stones on that just fine. I'd ceetainly rather use them than faff with a travel agent or bar ends.

What on earth's wrong with a 48/12 top gear though? I used to road race with a 52/13 top - which is the same ratio - and never got dropped for lack of a high enough gear. 48/13 would actually be plenty high enough for most folks in most everyday use!
Posted: 01/03/2006 15:47


J D
Yeah you could race with the gears it comes with but I would change to higher gear as i don't like spinning,and i have had experience of a streched out group doing 40+ with a tailwind in a race i don't think i would have held on with a 48. also i have had to try and get back on the main group, after a climb, on a descent again pedalling the decent flatout would have been hard on a 48.
Posted: 02/03/2006 12:44

I use 48x12 on my roadbike and its fine, I certainly dont tend to be dropped on flat or downhill bits!
Posted: 02/03/2006 12:45

That's because you've not been riding with me, you southern pouf...

Pete (46x11) Jones
Posted: 02/03/2006 14:50

has anyone tried it as a touring bike? I'm planning a self-supported trip to China and was wondering if it would be suitable... anyone?
Posted: 17/02/2010 20:50

I have a Tricross as well. I would rate it as "okay." As a tourer, you could do a lot better though. For a bike that is billed as a crossover between CX racing and commuting, I'd put the Tricross further toward the CX side of the spectrum because it does have some issues as a commuter: toe-clip overlap is significant. I'm a female with girl-sized shoes and I have experienced the overlap at very inconvenient times. And before anyone starts flaming, I've been a bike commuter for about 20 years so it's not like I don't know how to ride, lol. For some people, they may not notice it so much if they have always ridden CX bikes or track bikes, but it's an issue for me. Another negative side of this bike is the fact that I cannot find any chain-guard to fit. I've taken it to the LBS three times now, and have gone so far as to order a single chainring for the front (to replace the triple that came stock), and also tried to have an SKS Chainboard installed, but it wouldn't work with the FSA crankarms on it. Yeah, I guess I could buy a whole new bottom bracket, crank arms, chainring, all of it to match so it would work with an after-market chain-guard, but seriously, it's too much hassle. The Tricross is a good bike- plenty of clearance for large tires, fenders, even my Schwalbe Marathon Winter studded snow tires fit fine. I love the way the bike looks too. But I wanted to put out there that the issues might be a deal-breaker for some buyers.  


Posted: 13/04/2010 18:37

Talkback: Specialized Tricross

First Name:
Last Name:
Nickname:
Email:
Security Image:
Enter the code shown:

I agree to the site's Terms and Conditions & Code of Conduct:


Offers, Competitions and Promotions

Win a Garmin Oregon 450T GPS
With accessories & worth £640 courtesy of Loving Outdoors