Neo Cross vs Neo Carbon

[Brad]

I posted this yesterday in the General category but have not had any responses. I thought I would try this section instead.

I have an opportunity to purchase a Neo (basic) Cross for $2500 or a very lightly used (~20mi) Carbon for $3500. I rode them both and thought the Carbon better looking and better component quality. but maybe i am being influenced by crafty marketing. I understand the differences between the two bikes what I am looking for is someone who has experience with one or both bikes to weigh in on if the Carbon is worth the extra grand.
Thanks!

 

[Undercover Brother]

I posted this yesterday in the General category but have not had any responses. I thought I would try this section instead.

I have an opportunity to purchase a Neo (basic) Cross for $2500 or a very lightly used (~20mi) Carbon for $3500. I rode them both and thought the Carbon better looking and better component quality. but maybe i am being influenced by crafty marketing. I understand the differences between the two bikes what I am looking for is someone who has experience with one or both bikes to weigh in on if the Carbon is worth the extra grand.
Thanks!

Brad, more than happy to reply. No crafty marketing here, just a super well designed carbon ebike frame from a company that builds some of the best road, mountain, tri, and cross bikes on on the market. Is it worth the additional $1,000, you will have to decide.

Yes, the Carbon has an Shimano XT rear derailleur, a step up from the Deore unit on the Cross. It is a bit better but you will likely not notice much difference in shifting or longevity. Other than the much lighter weight of the Carbon (7lbs), I haven't found a large difference between the two bikes in performance. Though I have ridden both extensively and the geometry is very similar, the Carbon has is a bit more nimble feel due to the lower weight and how the carbon dampens better road vibrations. Is the $1,000 price difference buying the Cross over the Carbon? From a practical standpoint, yes!

Is the Carbon worth $3,500, I believe so. My personal choice of the two is the Carbon and I would buy it if I wasn't too concerned about the $1,000 difference in cost and wanted one of the coolest ebikes out there, otherwise the Cross would get my nod. I hope this helps.

 

[Peter]

The carbon gear is not perfect. I have ridden a short test ride on one. It has the same issue as my BH Race. You cannot ride all gears. When you are in the middle front ring and the smallest back ring the chain doesn't go around. Also the bike has troubles when you want to ride in the lowest front ring and the smallest back ring. My BH Jumper rides perfect in all gears. I have not ridden the cross. You will not get higher top speed on the carbon. My BH Jumper is faster than the carbon .

 

[Brad]

Thank you very much for the thoughtful replays!

 

[Craig Morrison]

I

The carbon gear is not perfect. I have ridden a short test ride on one. It has the same issue as my BH Race. You cannot ride all gears. When you are in the middle front ring and the smallest back ring the chain doesn't go around. Also the bike has troubles when you want to ride in the lowest front ring and the smallest back ring. My BH Jumper rides perfect in all gears. I have not ridden the cross. You will not get higher top speed on the carbon. My BH Jumper is faster than the carbon .

It really depends on what you're using the bike for. You will likely always be in the highest gear if you're just commuting, so I wouldn't worry too much about this. The Carbon is much lighter than the Jumper and in my tests is faster commuting (over 1,000km on a Carbon). That said, the Jumper is a better all-round MTB than the Carbon.

 

[Peter]

I

It really depends on what you're using the bike for. You will likely always be in the highest gear if you're just commuting, so I wouldn't worry too much about this. The Carbon is much lighter than the Jumper and in my tests is faster commuting (over 1,000km on a Carbon). That said, the Jumper is a better all-round MTB than the Carbon.

No. I am never in the highest gear when I commute on my Race.
It has a total different gearing than the Jumper.
On my Race I can go much faster uphill when using the two lowest rings in the front, therefore it is quite annoying I cant use all rings behind when going in these two gears. .
He he. And my Jumper is a faster commuter than my Race. The Jumper has higher assisted top speed.
I have tried a Carbon and it is not faster than the Jumper .
Remember both my bikes are euro versions..

 

[Craig Morrison]

That's weird, must be something to do with the specific country config (I'm in Australia where, according to the distributor all Neos stop assisting at 30kmh - around 20mph, and are detuned to 250W to be legal). So in Australia at least, my Carbon is much quicker (both acceleration and top speed) than the Jumpers I've ridden here as they are heavier, have wide MTB tires and gearing not as suitable for commuting). Either way I'm sure we both agree that with either Jumper or Carbon, it's just the best way to get from A to B with a permanent smile on your dial

 

[Peter]

My Race cute out between 29-31. The Jumper cuts out between 31-33.
The Jumper is a 2013 model.
Above cut off the Carbon off course is faster.
The other day I rode with my brother on my Race and he was on a regular carbon race bike.
When I slip streamed him I could actually keep up with him at 40 kmh. That woul have been a no go on the Jumper .

I agree about the Jumpers gearing but if you don't go above cut off its ok for commuting.
Actually if you like a soft ride it is excellent for commuting. My son has done 3000 km in 6 month commuting on the Jumper.