Cutthroat: 29 x 2.4" officially — roughly 61 mm of measured clearance. A handful of reviewers report fitting 2.8" tires in the fork.

Warbird: 700c x 45 mm, or 650b x 2.1" on the smaller-wheel setup. Roughly 45 mm of measured clearance.

That 15–20 mm gap is the single biggest difference between these bikes. It's the line between "gravel bike" and "drop-bar XC bike."

The Warbird, not close. Its top build comes in at 19 lb 1 oz (56 cm) vs the Cutthroat's 23 lb 13 oz — roughly 4.5 lb between comparable Rival-tier builds. The head tube is 1.75 degrees steeper, the reach is longer-and-lower, and the tires roll faster. Reviewers consistently call the Warbird "lively and quick" on tarmac; the Cutthroat is described as "prefers taking things easy when you accelerate."

If more than half your riding is on maintained roads, the Warbird is the right bike.

The Cutthroat, by a wide margin. The slack 69-degree head angle, long 445 mm chainstays, 29 x 2.2" stock tires, and suspension-corrected fork give it real singletrack capability. Bikepacking.com's reviewer reported popping over eight-to-twelve-inch logs "as well as any rigid XC racer."

The Warbird has gotten more capable in v4 — slacker geometry, more stable at speed — but its 45 mm tire ceiling puts a hard limit on what it'll absorb. Reviewers describe it as a gravel bike that dabbles in singletrack, not a bike that's at home there.

Road Boost is Salsa's name for running mountain-bike hub spacing (110x15 mm front, 148x12 mm rear) on a drop-bar bike. It lets the Cutthroat share wheels and drivetrain parts with a 29er hardtail — including direct-mount MTB derailleurs and full-size MTB cassettes (like the 10-52T paired with a 34T chainring on the top build).

The Warbird uses standard road boost (100x12 front / 142x12 rear) and road-style drivetrains, so its wheel options and drivetrains don't cross over with mountain bikes.

Yes — it has rack mounts, fender mounts, three bottle mounts on larger sizes, toptube and downtube accessory mounts, and triple fork mounts. Reviewers like Bikepacking.com have taken the 650b build on multi-day trips and found it comfortable.

But the Cutthroat is purpose-built for it. The direct-mount frame bag alone — bolts straight to the frame without straps — is a feature the Warbird can't match. If bikepacking is the primary use case, the Cutthroat is the answer. If it's an occasional use case, the Warbird is enough.

Neither is the value pick of the gravel segment, and reviewers flag both for component compromises at their price points. On the Warbird specifically, Cycling Weekly and BikeRadar independently called out "stingy" spec choices — alloy steerers, lower-spec hubs, mid-tier brakes on bikes over $3,000. Cycling Weekly's explicit advice was "buy the frameset for $2,199 and build it how you like."

The Cutthroat runs into the same issue at the mid-range: narrower rims, house-brand parts. Carbon wheels and better contact points don't show up until the Force-tier builds.

Both bikes use a BB92 press-fit bottom bracket, and yes, several reviewers flag it as a durability concern — Road.cc, Bicycling, and GearJunkie all noted the general reputation for creaking and harder serviceability.

In practice, Bikepacking.com's reviewer logged 1,400+ miles on the Cutthroat V1 and additional testing on the V2 with no issues. Salsa defends the choice for tire clearance and chainstay length gains. A real concern worth knowing about, but rarely a dealbreaker.

At size 56, the Cutthroat has 34.7 mm more stack than the Warbird (619.5 vs 584.9 mm) with nearly identical reach. That's the difference between a classic endurance-gravel posture and an almost-MTB upright position.

If you have back or neck issues, or you just prefer seeing the road over your stem instead of down your arms, the Cutthroat is the clear winner. If you want to tuck into a paceline, the Warbird fits the job description.