Rohloff Gravel bike recommendations?

[pakcyclist]

I have 2 Rohloff bikes:  a custom Spectrum Ti road bike, with about 100,000 miles (!) -- but I did have to spend $600 for repairs when the seatstay cracked in 2; so much for "lasting a lifetime," but I digress.  Also have an MTB, built from a single-speed hardtail with sliding dropouts.  This spring, I got a Breezer gravel bike.  Since I mostly ride the road bike, I didn't want to spend the money -- or effort -- getting a Rohloff setup.  Boy, do I now regret that!  After just 8 months -- not much more than 1,000 miles -- I already had to spend $200 for a new Shimano GPX shifter!  What freaking garbage!  So, any ideas for a Rohloff equipped gravel bike?  A search I did only came up with a couple UK builders/shops, with prices well over $5,000, NOT including shipping and tariffs.  Since I don't do gravel too often, I'm not spending that much.  Guess I would have to build it up from scratch.  (Unless I found something used.)  Any ideas on a suitable frame?  A SS with sliding dropouts would obviously be the most ideal, but I suspect that doesn't exist. Don't want to spend the money for a custom.

[RonS]

As a courtesy to Thorn Cycles, who generously provide us with this forum, it is generally accepted that recommending bikes other than Thorn is something that's avoided.

Lots of us on the forum have non Thorn bikes, and we do mention them if it is relevant to the thread, usually when regarding the Rohloff, but we don't suggest they're "better".

The Mercury takes 650b X 48 tires. It would make a fine gravel bike.

[mickeg]

Your $200 shifter was not replaced under warranty when less than a year old?

[pandanroll]

As a courtesy to Thorn Cycles, who generously provide us with this forum, it is generally accepted that recommending bikes other than Thorn is something that's avoided.

Lots of us on the forum have non Thorn bikes, and we do mention them if it is relevant to the thread, usually when regarding the Rohloff, but we don't suggest they're "better".

The Mercury takes 650b X 48 tires. It would make a fine gravel bike.

SJS fund the forum, but they are not doing so out of charity -- maintaining a space for people who are fans of the brand also benefit them, through the generated user content.

Thorn bikes can stand for themselves without having to adhere to some form of 'code of honour'. In fact, doing so would probably be beneficial to them.

[Andyb1]

What is a gravel bike?

IMHO Thorn were building gravel bikes before the term was in use.   Bikes like my 20 year old Raven Tour will happily ride on tracks and roads, carry gear if required, and have a Rohloff gear train.  They may not have drop handlebars as standard or disc brakes but do have front fork lugs (for front panniers but no doubt also OK for fork mounted bags etc).

So perhaps you need to decide exactly what you want, and then you could use a Raven or similar frame which is designed for Rohloff gears as a starting point?

 

[Danneaux]

What is a gravel bike?

Andy asks a very good question here!

For my (somewhat cynical) money, much of the "push" for gravel bikes as a niche was initially for product differentiation and a way to sell more bikes, as with other increasingly thin slices of the pie to goose sales when the market goes a bit flat. Cynicism aside, a drop-bar road bike that has greater versatility to handle a wider variety of surfaces turns out to have a lot of appeal to many people and may come closer to being a "quiver-killer"/all-'rounder than other kinds of bikes currently on the market. I predict gravel bikes will become more specialized as have other niche-bikes. It won't be too long before we see more widespread use of front or front/rear suspension and then we'll have something akin to a full-sus 26in/650B MTB but with fat 700C tires and road/flared drop handlebars. Several makers have recently floated bikes with just that configuration, well received in recent cycling press.

All of my bikes (one from 1938, but mostly made 1970-2012) have been ridden on gravel, from back in late 1970s/early '80s America when tire sizing and marketing was driven by advertised weight. Some of the Specialized brand tires I rode at that time measured 1-2 (later) ETRTO sizes narrower than marked. Tires much arrower than labeled meant an automatic reduction in weight if you could believe the label and many did, thanks to marketing. I used them anyway, as there was a shortage of quality touring tires available in my area at a time when special-ordered Wolbers in true 27 x 1-1/4 could easily take 6-8 weeks' time to arrive in my locale.

A lot of my bikes are "old/er", made when more generous clearances were common, so really fit the more modern general ideal for gravel bikes: A road-bike frame with more relaxed road-bike geometry and larger 700C wheels shod with wider tires, typically starting at about 34mm and going upward (mine range from 32mm to 38mm and these have worked well for me on most gravel). If you find an older frame designed around 27in wheels, you can gain 4mm in tire/mudguard clearance by converting to 700C and longer-reach brakes.

A good question to also ask is "what kind of gravel?", for it ranges from what I regard as benign (finer than pea-gravel, tamped well into car tire-track ruts) to malign (fresh-pour in what we here call "three-quarter minus" to full-on ballast). For the latter, I prefer my bikes built with clearances to accommodate my 26x2.0 Schwalbe Duremes, as on my Nomad, tandem, and repurposed MTB née Enduro-Allroad (1987 Diamondback Transporter). While all my bikes "will" traverse gravel of one sort or another (including my 1970 Windsor Professional-based fixie on 25mm Continental road slicks), I am most "comfortable" doing so on those with wider tires. A fave for the more benign sort of gravel is my 41 year-old tourer, closest to Thorn's old Club Tour. It will happily accommodate 38mm tires with adequate, safe clearance for mudguards and run rackless and with short-reach/shallow-drop handlebars, gives a good impression of most modern steel-based gravel bikes. For the bad stuff, the lighter deraileur Transporter does as well as the Nomad for unladen or lighter loads when the advantages of a Rohloff drivetrain and/or expedition-grade carrying capacity is not essential.

I'll be a heretic here and suggest -- based on my own experience -- buying an older road bike with generous clearance for wider tires is a good way to test the waters before splashing out for an all-new bike. A lot of fun can be had at low cost while you learn and refine priorities and preferences on a budget now such bikes are going for peanuts at yard and boot sales. My 2012 Nomad is my latest bike, but might not have been had I not learned what I needed for a specific task -- extended, self-supported long-distance touring with expedition loads on the roughest of roads and tracks. It is also possible to retrofit an older bike with a Rohloff drivetrain, then swap components over if you later find a frame that better suits your needs.

Just some thoughts to ponder.

Best, Dan (...who always looks forward to members' "New Bike Day")

[martinf]

If looking for a (relatively) inexpensive bike, maybe consider a used bike with Rohloff hub.

My gravel-bike equivalent is a Raven Sport Tour with drop bars and lightweight 42 mm tyres. I could also use my Raven Tour with drop bars and 50 mm tyres, a bit heavier but better on more challenging surfaces. One disadvantage of these two older models is that they are for 26" tyres, and good tyres in 26" are getting rarer nowadays. The more recent Thorn Raven is fairly close to the Raven Tour and still has 26" tyres.

In the Thorn range, the  modern equivalents to my two are the Mercury and Nomad, which have the advantage that they can use 700C or 27.5 (= 650B) tyres.

All these Thorn models turn up second-hand from time to time.

[mickeg]

What is a gravel bike?
...

Andy, I assume you have heard the term gravel bikes before and also pretty much know what it means.

I mostly agree with Dan, the manufacturers needed another marketing idea for a pretty stagnant market. 

My thoughts on "what is a gravel bike", below.

In USA there has been a lot of growth in gravel bike trails over the past decade or two, I suspect more people wanted a bike that had tires wider than the common 25mm tires on road bikes a decade ago for such trails.  And presumably some people were tired of rough riding skinny tire road bikes on rough pavement.

From what I have seen, a "gravel" bike has to have a wide range really big and expensive cassette on a 1X drive train. 

• A lot of people did not like being confused by two shifters, wanted a 1X shifter to make life easier.  (Similar to a Rohloff.)
• Retailers found it was much faster to assemble a bike from the box if the front derailleur did not need any adjustments, because it did not exist.
• They could charge as much for a 1X bike as a 2X or 3X bike, that is fewer components, thus a bit more profitable.
• When the owner needs to replace a giant cassette like that, it is pretty profitable for the shop. 
• The giant wide range cassette was a newer concept, thus the latest fad.  If you had that, you were automatically cool.

A friend of mine had to buy a new gravel bike about five or six years ago.  His carbon bike had developed a fatal crack in the frame, and the gravel bike being a new fad showed he was cool to own the latest thing.  Within a year, two of my other friends saw that bike and they had to be even cooler, one bought the same model bike but with a carbon frame.  And the other bought the same model but with both carbon frame and carbon wheels.  I found it interesting that after a few years two of these three started riding their older bikes more often.

My light touring bike is not a Thorn, it has a titanium frame.  I built it up in 2017.  Has a 3X8 drive train, crankset has square taper crank (decades old tech), a pair of shifters that I first put into service in 2004, and a rear derailleur from the 1990s (but fitted with newer ball bearing jockey wheels).  Has disc rear and rim brake on front because I had an older rim brake fork in storage that had the correct crown race to axle length and rake (or offset), thus I did not need to buy a new fork for the frame, saved roughly $400 (USD).  Fitted with 37mm 700c tires.  But other than the drive train the only other difference between my light touring bike and a gravel bike is that I have fitted fenders to it, and since it was built for touring it has longer chainstays.  (Most gravel bikes have chainstays almost as short as a road bike.)

When I built up my light touring bike, why did I choose a 3X8 drive train?  It is robust, reliable, easy to replace parts, easy to adjust and repair.  Last time I bought a new cassette and chain, paid about $35 or $40 (USD).  It has more gears than a 1X and a wider range.  It is a half step plus granny system, which is an acquired taste, most people would not choose that but I like it.  When I avoid the two most cross-chained gears for each chainring, that gives me 18 usable gears, 558 percent range.  Compare that to a 10 or 11 or 12 speed drivetrain that at most is 520 percent on the 1X.  (Campy has a 13 speed, but it is rare.)

First photo, my light touring bike.  Strip off the fenders and luggage, and what you have is a gravel bike with longer (roughly 20mm longer) chainstays.  (It was early spring, the lake in the background had not yet thawed, was ice and snow covered.)

Second photo, my light touring bike being used for what it was designed for.

I could have put a Rohloff on that bike instead of a 3X8 drivetrain.  I have nothing against the Rohloff on my decade old heavy touring bike (Nomad Mk II), but there are both advantages and disadvantages to a Rohloff compared to a 3X8 drivetrain.  The trips that I anticipate using my light touring bike, I felt I would prefer the 3X8 system over the Rohloff 1X14 system.  I put new fenders (mudguards) on my Nomad this year, but they are a bit dusty in the third photo. 

[Andyb1]

Surprisingly I do have some idea of what a ‘Gravel Bike’ is, or at least I think I do, but it may be different to that of the OP.  Hence my question.  It might be useful for them to define better what they want their ‘gravel bike’ to do and be (as well as having Rohloff gears).

My rather simplistic definition is that a Gravel Bike is a rigid framed MTB, often with drop handlebars, that is suitable to carry luggage on road and trail.

Of course that definition is not 100% accurate (some gravel bikes now have suspension) but it is the OP’s requirements which I was trying to find out.

[pakcyclist]

For me, a true "gravel" bike should have clearance for a minimum 45C tires (preferably more).  Definitely don't want carbon!  (As mentioned, even a Ti frame doesn't last me a "lifetime!")  So, steel for me.  Just came across a Surly Ogre frame, it even has the Rohloff axle plate mounting slot.  That looks like something that would work.  Not sure I want to go through the hassle and expense of building up a bike that I'm not using too often.  Probably keep searching for something used between now and spring time.

[PH]

My idea of a Gravel bike is something pretty close to a drop bar road bike with larger tyre clearance, which then usually leads to disc brakes whether you want them or not.  If I were in the market for such a bike, I don't think anything in the current Thorn range, or a Rohloff, would be on my wishlist. I'd probably choose derailleurs, shifters only lasting 8 months isn't the norm, decades is more common. If you wanted more robust, I'd look at the CUES range of components, designed for longevity, partly with E-bikes in mind, the concept seems to be more function than fashion, though I have no experience.
If you still want a Rohloff, you could just stick a tensioner on your current bike, not as good as a purpose made frame, but not much of a disadvantage either. If you want a more Rohloff friendly frame, here's some you might look at - Surly Straggler* (Or  CrossCheck for rim brakes), SOMA Wolvarine, Salsa Fargo or Marrakesh, Singular Peregrine, I'm sure there's others, but those are models I've considered in the past.  You could add the Thorn Mercury to the list, though you'd need 650B wheels to get the tyre width, and I'm not sure it would be the best choice in that role.  One question is what are you hoping to do on it that you can't do on the MTB? 
* It might need to be a previous version of the Straggler, the new one might have thru axle dropouts.

Just came across a Surly Ogre frame, it even has the Rohloff axle plate mounting slot

I had an Ogre, it isn't in any shape or form what I would consider a Gravel bike, fine for what it is, which IMO is a MTB tourer.  It also has a long top tube, you'd need to be careful with sizing if you wanted to use it with drops.

 

[Andyb1]

Obviously just me, but I can still not understand why drop bars are used when riding off road.  But then I have never tried.

On motorbikes, lower handlebars (eg clip ons) are used on faster naked road bikes while higher and wider bars are used on off road bikes.  A lot is to do with getting the ‘best’ riding position.  Lower clip ons work well at speed as the airflow supports the rider’s weight on their chest.   More upright bars off road allow the rider the move their weight around and stand up on the pegs if required.

Maybe most ‘gravel’ bikes are only used on fairly fast trails and roads?  I can think of some steep tracks that I sometimes ride on where my expectation would be that drop bars would put too much of my weight forwards……and braking would be more difficult.  My personal favourite road / trail bars are something like the Thorn Touring bar which is cranked and fairly wide.  Obviously not as aero as a dropped bar, but they give good control in all situations.

[UKTony]

A SS with sliding dropouts would obviously be the most ideal, but I suspect that doesn't exist. Don't want to spend the money for a custom.

Another possibility is the Kona Unit

https://konaworld.com/collections/unit

There are a couple (in Unit X form (derailleur ) on the S American ripio at the moment. See link below. The last photo on the journal page indicates that hard tail 29er mountain bikes, 1x12,,  big tyres (2.4 maybe 2.6), straight bars, are flavour of the month for bike packers in these conditions.


Villa O Higgins 2 - 11,878 K AWAY - CycleBlaze

[mickeg]

Obviously just me, but I can still not understand why drop bars are used when riding off road.  But then I have never tried.

On motorbikes, lower handlebars (eg clip ons) are used on faster naked road bikes while higher and wider bars are used on off road bikes.  A lot is to do with getting the ‘best’ riding position.  Lower clip ons work well at speed as the airflow supports the rider’s weight on their chest.   More upright bars off road allow the rider the move their weight around and stand up on the pegs if required.

Maybe most ‘gravel’ bikes are only used on fairly fast trails and roads?  I can think of some steep tracks that I sometimes ride on where my expectation would be that drop bars would put too much of my weight forwards……and braking would be more difficult.  My personal favourite road / trail bars are something like the Thorn Touring bar which is cranked and fairly wide.  Obviously not as aero as a dropped bar, but they give good control in all situations.

Drop bars on gravel bikes, I am sure some of that is a regional thing.  In USA, drop bars are more often the norm for bikes that are intended to go fast.  Most riders never use the drops, but they need drops to look like everybody else.  (I use the drops about a third of the time, but I am not normal in that regard.)  I think a lot of the riders that actually use drop bars want to fit time trial bars to their bikes instead of using the drops, as time trial bars are even more aero than using the drops. 

Gravel bikes, the drop bars are usually much wider in the drops, for the extra width and leverage for steering that you were talking about.

A couple of times I fitted a suspension fork to my Nomad Mk II, used that like a mountain bike.  The narrower drop bars did not bother me at all.  But I am not an aggressive rider.  That said, when I am pedaling into a headwind, I want the drops no matter what the road surface is.  I have used the drops on single track.

When I think of a gravel bike, I think of a bike like used on the Trail Divide Race.  Two links, one for drop bar bikes and one for flat bar bikes if you want to check them out.
https://bikepacking.com/bikes/2025-tour-divide-rigs-part-1/
https://bikepacking.com/bikes/2025-tour-divide-rigs-part-2/
https://bikepacking.com/bikes/rigs-of-the-2025-tour-divide-stats/

The above bikes clearly were used for competition, not an afternoon ride on a bike trail or tow path.  But still you see a huge variation in personal preference in those bikes.

I think most gravel bikes are sold with tires about 40mm wide, plus or minus 5mm.  But almost no bikes shown in the above links have tires that narrow.  That is a race so they want what they think is best for the conditions, not afternoon tow path conditions.

In my previous post, I showed some photos of my light touring bike.  But for my 2024 tour, I chose to add suspension, Redshift suspension seatpost and Kinekt suspension stem.  Attached photos.  The Redshift seatpost was not compatible with my Conquest saddle, I swapped in a Brooks Pro off my road bike instead, the Conquest went to the road bike.

I would never consider my Nomad Mk II to be a gravel bike, but maybe some would think so, third attached photo.  I had 57mm Extremes on the wheels, which I learned were not as grippy as the more knobby mountain bike tires.

[martinf]

Since I mostly ride the road bike, I didn't want to spend the money -- or effort -- getting a Rohloff setup.  Boy, do I now regret that!  After just 8 months -- not much more than 1,000 miles -- I already had to spend $200 for a new Shimano GPX shifter!  What freaking garbage!  So, any ideas for a Rohloff equipped gravel bike?

The gravel bikes I see advertised are generally drop bar bikes with moderately wide tyres, no mudguards and derailleur gears. In my opinion, drop bars depend on personal preference, at 69 years old I still prefer them for longish rides, even off road. Fairly wide tyres are sensible.

The other two features may be OK in a mostly dry climate but are not suitable where I live (near the coast in South Brittany) for what I reckon is the purpose of a "gravel" bike - riding on both tarmac roads and unsurfaced tracks and paths that aren't quite rough enough to warrant a mountain bike.

In the 1970's, when I lived either in Devon or Lancashire, we called it "rough stuff" and used touring bikes with 27" tyres in the 32 mm which was the widest easily available at the time. And derailleur gears, because the only reliable hub gear readily available was the Sturmey Archer 3-speed.

Then and now, for that kind of riding, I need mudguards, as if I want to use the bike reasonably often I am not going to wait until the rain stops and the road surface dries out.

The same goes for derailleur gears now that medium and wide range hub gears are availble. I don't want to have to clean the drivetrain after every other ride just because the track was wet. So a Rohloff and Chainglider works well for me. For most of my rides a Shimano Alfine or Nexus Premium eight speed hub would be sufficient, but it is nice to have the very low gears of the Rohloff for the occasional very steep hill.

I suppose a belt drive would be just as good, but none of my existing bikes are belt compatible, so not worth trying unless/until I need to get a purpose-built electric bike with advancing age.