Style or Geometry?

[Mariner]

Anyone got any insights regarding what the difference in geometry between a ‘mountain bike’ and a ‘gravel grinder’ means? I could spend hours comparing the tables but doesn’t really mean that much to me so just wondered if the combined sum of knowledge at BB can shed some light? This is for use as a bikepacker not flinging downhill (because I am not allowed to do that anymore without my knee and elbow pads and who carries those just on the off chance?) So where is the split point between the GG and the MTB or is it more to do with the rider?
Really taken by the new Salsa (Greatful) Deadwood or Genesis Vagabond but from a practical point of view how far off road could you comfortably go? Can see me riding down EV1 to Spain and Camino across northern Spain but would you want to do say CG Loop on GG style of bike? This will be my last bike as can see myself ‘retiring’ from long distance riding in the next four or five years but got a growing list of rides I want to do first.
I would use a variable layout with either OE bars or Jones Loops depending on use. Spec wise the Deadwood seems best but Vagabond wins on price even with carbon forks added.

[HaYWiRe]

From a glance, I find stand over height and overall size

A gravel grinder tends to have very road touring esque geometry, albeit with higher tolerance for the rough stuff, but is generally built for long days in the saddle up a mountain

Mountain bikes are now mostly compact geo with a,nice low stand over height making it easier to bail or manoeuvre rough trails with hobbit legs, have shorter arms reach and generally built for fast days hovering above the saddle

Although both can be useful for bikepacking I put it down to how you ride, and could be the difference between "singletrack bikepacking" and "off road ultralight touring"

You then have this odd hybrid you see at the TDR, compact XC geometry, short reach and chainstays, low stand over. but rigid forks and TT style cockpit and aerobars

[Bearbonesnorm]

My own opinion is that things like bars will have a much greater effect on how / where you ride the bike than the angle of the headtube. I don't see there's much real world difference between something like an Inbred 29er and those you've listed once you remove bars from the equation. Obviously, the numbers will make a difference to how a bike feels but I do think some people have become a little obsessed. In reality most couldn't tell the difference between a 68 and 69 degree head angle although to hear them talk one will render a bike unridable

[jameso]

Good Q .. Huge differences between MTBs and 'gravel' type drop bar bikes imo/e. Mainly in how able the bike is at speed over the rough or on technical climbs off-road and also the road pace they can maintain - though that's mabe not that important especially with a load or after a week's riding.

I've read a few reviews talking about the off-road capability of GG style bikes, some even comparing them to a light 29er, and it makes me question the reviewer's perspective at least. A drop-bar bike on 30-40c tyres, relatively short wheelbase, common weight distribution, all the things that make up typical drop-bar bikes, gets out of it's depth at speed on anything more than a fairly smooth / level bridleway. Add a load and it's even more noticeable. Of course it'll depend on how 'flat out' you want to go or how fast you want to ride, what I'm getting at is that both (most) CX courses and typical 'gravel grinder' roads in the States are nothing like a rocky track or natural dirt trail that tend to be much less uniform and the GG bike is harder to let loose and doesn't handle the bumps anywhere near as well. And as soon as you venture offroad it's a real shame to have to limit yourself to the smoothest of tracks when offroad does vary so much.
I've been playing around with road-offroad crossover bikes a lot more again in recent years, I'd say that a bike that uses drop bars set up to be used in the more conventional way is never going to be that good at speed off-road, and anything less than a 2" tyre is also pretty hopeless if it gets a bit rougher. It's ok for a while but not a longer day or 3. I love my 40C tyred Arkose for weekend bikepacking all the same, still I do get fed up of having to back off so soon on descents that I can ride as fast/fun as my skills allow on my rigid 29er.

For routes like the Camino a vagabond or fargo would be great on ~85% of it and either needs a lot of care or acceptance that it'll be overwhelmed by a rider with average ability wanting to go quick on the rest. The moment you start looking at drop bars offroad it all gets tricky. For me drops mean I want to ride fast (relatively) on the road ands I accept the lower pace off-road. Having just done 8 days of mixed dirt and rocky tracks and road cols on a 1-off bike designed to bridge these gaps in a different way to most I'm still puzzling over how to resolve the compromises best, just learning how truly difficult it is to balance it all out .. and it just comes down to the individual, as touring bikes always do.

There's the 29er drop bar bike which bridges the gaps pretty well but is also a jack, master of none in many ways. If your riding is in a range that suits something like a Fargo or Jones then they're as great a bike as a bike can be, ie if you want a bike that handles road miles well + goes off road confidently. Just pick a bike based on the weighting of road/offroad or fun/plodder, etc.

A lot of waffle on my favourite subject .. sorry. Basically I think the 'on-offroad compromise bike, perfected' has a lot of appeal and it's an interesting area of bike design but tbh I think a lot of brands promise a lot there and the reality is almost never quite as 'all-round' as we'd like. It's a strong sales message but very hard to deliver.

[Charliecres]

I've been riding my rigid, geared Swift with 2.3 tyres around steep twisty Cornwall back roads and the occasional "bridleway" on hols over the past couple of days and yet again I've been struck by how well it does this stuff. It rides everything like a bike should. Yes, it's clearly a compromise on everything but it feels like a very natural one (to me).

[Bearbonesnorm]

I don't think I made myself very clear before ... my point was that, a Vagabond with 2.1" tyres and Jones bars probably won't feel an awful lot different to my Inbred or Charlies Swift with similar tyres and bars.

Something like an Arkrose with drops and 38c tyres will feel very different and a little more thought will be required concerning where and how hard it'll be ridden ...The lines are becoming very blurred

[benp1]

I genuinely wish we had more gravel tracks my way so I could make the most of these style of bikes, but my riding is mainly commuting so my arkose with 32c marathon pluses is ridden on roads

I'd love an off road and gravel track commute for some variety

Just saying

[jay91]

I ride a on one pompetamine with Stan's iron cross wheels 35c cx comp tyres its not a cx/gg bike more of a fixie/ss but seems to ride good off/on road for what i can tell anyway

[HaYWiRe]

GG type bikes are something id like, I love CX bikes too, road bikes...for offroad, the idea seems great, I mean I'm a roadie at heart, but I reality there's nowhere local id use one

Its either windy country roads,where I use 23c road bike, or rough as hell NCN Routes and bridleways where fatter tyres and mtb geometry is needed to have any enjoyable ride.

Dont get me wrong, I love the idea of gravel grinding away a nice tour on drops and a light bike, but where I ride, I just cant do it on anything less than an XC bike, maybe its my ability, or I'm a wimp, but if it means I enjoy the trip, and don't have to worry where I can ride, so be it.....is that not why fatbikes exist?

[Mariner]

Thanks for your thoughts on this but just want to play devils advocate a bit.
Is the Deadwood a bit of a game changer? Its 29+ with carbon forks with a change of bars it could be the crossover from GG to MTB in generic terms.
There seems to be a lot of designs designated GG but the 29+ must increase capability to handle rougher terrain.
This is only speculation as never ridden one and probably never will but I like the idea behind it.

[jameso]

Thanks for your thoughts on this but just want to play devils advocate a bit.
Is the Deadwood a bit of a game changer? Its 29+ with carbon forks with a change of bars it could be the crossover from GG to MTB in generic terms.
There seems to be a lot of designs designated GG but the 29+ must increase capability to handle rougher terrain.
This is only speculation as never ridden one and probably never will but I like the idea behind it.

It could be, certainly interesting for it's drop bar + fairly light + tyre-chunk combo. To accommodate 29+ you have a geometry that will be sluggish/stable/slow to respond or however you may describe it when compared to a typical GG with geometry that's closer to a lower-BB CX bike, so it's still compromises to gain in other areas. It looks to be to gravel-grinding what a Bluto-equipped fat bike is to an average trail hardtail. There are a lot of 'GG' designs around but I think you could take anything that's raced the TDR and call it a gravel grinder, as well as all the 32-40C tyred all-road bikes out there. It's great how many genre-less bikes are coming out of this crossover now.