Author Topic: Considering M7007-II build  (Read 5698 times)

trouble

Considering M7007-II build
« on: February 12, 2019, 03:25:20 AM »
Hi,

I've been searching through this forum and mtbr for some time and finally decided to commit to the idea of a CN carbon FS. I look here for advise on my build, and will post updates regarding the outcome of it. I have no previous background in building my own bikes, so this will a first.

The bike will be used for XC and some light trail in the Danish forrests. I plan to do this on a low budget, and focus on having a stable platform for future upgrades. I have taken inspiration from Sissypants and temporarily decided upon the Pro-mance 7007-II 29" boost as the frame best suited for my needs (unless you can convince me otherwise). As for the build, these are the spare parts that will be used:
  • Crank: Raceface Aeffect
  • Shiftet: XT m8000
  • Brakes: XT m8000 with 180mm disc front/rear
  • Rear derailleur: SLX m8000
  • Dropper: BrandX 120mm with random seat
  • MAYBE Cassette: SLX 11spd (Considering Sunrace mx8 11spd black

Im a looking for advise regarding what to buy, and what i will miss. I've been looking at the following:

I seek advise regarding the BB, stem and chainring. I've found this BB that i consider: https://www.aliexpress.com/item/ZTTO-CERAMIC-BB209-BB92-BB90-BB86-Press-Fit-Bottom-Brackets-for-Road-Mountain-bike-Shimano-24mm/32829137185.html?spm=2114.search0204.3.12.50d81f39ErRVXC&ws_ab_test=searchweb0_0,searchweb201602_2_10065_10068_319_317_10696_10084_453_10083_454_10618_10304_10307_10820_10821_537_10302_536_10902_10059_10884_10887_321_322_10103,searchweb201603_56,ppcSwitch_0&algo_expid=460d443b-3e45-49c2-bdce-2f427f5a83ba-1&algo_pvid=460d443b-3e45-49c2-bdce-2f427f5a83ba for 19 euro. As for the stem i have no clue yet. I'm also a bit confused regarding the chainring and offset to compensate for boost - hope to get some clarification on the matter.

Any comments regarding the build is welcome (especially if i've forgotten anything), but please bear in mind that this is intended to be low budget no weight weenie build but serve as a great platform for some years to come. I will most likely post some questions within this post if the internet does not hold an explicit answer :)

Have a great day!



carbonazza

Re: Considering M7007-II build
« Reply #1 on: February 12, 2019, 04:18:48 AM »
...I have no previous background in building my own bikes, so this will a first...
No worries. Most of us started like this, it is a learning process ;)

For the components, Aliexpress is quite good for some parts: BB, headsets, flat pedals, cables, bearings,...
For seatposts and bars, I prefer to buy from a known seller like Peter, as they are critical contact points, and it gives me a bit more confidence if they come from him than an anonymous Aliexpress seller.
I don't buy carbon stems anymore, I had one cracking, they are usually bulky, and weight more than some alloy ones.

Boost put the cassette 3mm outward, moving the chainline from ~49 to ~52mm.
So you need to choose a chainring that offer a 3mm offset version for a direct mount.
On a spider crank, you may need some shims or not to get a 52mm chainline.

sclyde2

Re: Considering M7007-II build
« Reply #2 on: February 12, 2019, 04:45:49 AM »
For a stem, I reckon you can't go past a kalloy uno.  Cheap, very light, seems stiff enough for me.  I got the 7, but they also do others, such as a 6 - different alloy, dunno what the practical difference is.  Plenty of sellers on eBay.

I see that you have a cheap second hand shock in mind. If that doesn't work out,I highly recommend a manitou MacLeod on that frame.  I have one on pretty much the same frame (a fm058, which only differs in rear brake location), and I am impressed with the MacLeod.

Given the high main pivot on this frame, make sure you run at least a 32t chainring on that bike.  34t is probably even more optimal.  There have been some with this frame running a 30t chainring, and some get weird suspension movement, which sounds like extreme anti-squat.  The bigger the chainring, the more active the suspension will be under power (go too far, and you'll get more Bob though, needing a remote lockout).

Before you build, make sure you get some capgo noise protection, to slip on the rear brake hose and derailleur cables, at least over the span within the downtube.  I regretted not doing it at the start, and it cost me a lot of time mucking around with it (to get rid of annoying cable rattle).

trouble

Re: Considering M7007-II build
« Reply #3 on: February 12, 2019, 06:30:39 AM »
...I have no previous background in building my own bikes, so this will a first...
No worries. Most of us started like this, it is a learning process ;)

Definitely. I hope to better my knowhow of bike maintenance and in general bike engineering.

Seatpost is settled at a brandx 120m dropper, but i will definitely take bars into consideration. I am a bit sceptical regarding the listed BB and headset - simply because it is so cheap and reviews seems too good to be true  ::) Yet it sounds that you have had great experience with BB's and headsets from ali?

Boost put the cassette 3mm outward, moving the chainline from ~49 to ~52mm.
So you need to choose a chainring that offer a 3mm offset version for a direct mount.
On a spider crank, you may need some shims or not to get a 52mm chainline.

So, i will need a chainring with a likewise outward increase of 3mm to achieve the 52mm chainline? Otherwise a 3mm shim placed between the chainring and BB to shift entire crank 3mm to the drivechain side?

For a stem, I reckon you can't go past a kalloy uno.  Cheap, very light, seems stiff enough for me.  I got the 7, but they also do others, such as a 6 - different alloy, dunno what the practical difference is.  Plenty of sellers on eBay.

I see that you have a cheap second hand shock in mind. If that doesn't work out,I highly recommend a manitou MacLeod on that frame.  I have one on pretty much the same frame (a fm058, which only differs in rear brake location), and I am impressed with the MacLeod.

Given the high main pivot on this frame, make sure you run at least a 32t chainring on that bike.  34t is probably even more optimal.  There have been some with this frame running a 30t chainring, and some get weird suspension movement, which sounds like extreme anti-squat.  The bigger the chainring, the more active the suspension will be under power (go too far, and you'll get more Bob though, needing a remote lockout).

Before you build, make sure you get some capgo noise protection, to slip on the rear brake hose and derailleur cables, at least over the span within the downtube.  I regretted not doing it at the start, and it cost me a lot of time mucking around with it (to get rid of annoying cable rattle).

Kalloy uno seems like a good safe choice. I'll do some research about the mcleod and perhaps swap mine for it. I read your reply to a guy experiencing the bob issue on the mtbr site and therefore assumed i should be going for a 34t chainring, yet i've got a 32t laying around so probably trying it out first (unless i need boost specific chainring).

Great advise regarding the capgo noise protection. I will definitely buy this.

trouble

Re: Considering M7007-II build
« Reply #4 on: February 12, 2019, 06:35:35 AM »
I see that you have a cheap second hand shock in mind. If that doesn't work out,I highly recommend a manitou MacLeod on that frame.  I have one on pretty much the same frame (a fm058, which only differs in rear brake location), and I am impressed with the MacLeod.

I forgot to ask if there is any incentive to choose the frame model with 190x44 vs 165x38? In terms of performance / futureproofing etc. It seems to me that the majority is using 165x38.

lRaphl

Re: Considering M7007-II build
« Reply #5 on: February 12, 2019, 10:32:45 AM »
For the chain line, if the Race Face Aeffect is like the Turbine, you only need to flip the chainring to get the right chain line. this way, it will curve outside instead of inside.

sclyde2

Re: Considering M7007-II build
« Reply #6 on: February 12, 2019, 08:28:01 PM »
I see that you have a cheap second hand shock in mind. If that doesn't work out,I highly recommend a manitou MacLeod on that frame.  I have one on pretty much the same frame (a fm058, which only differs in rear brake location), and I am impressed with the MacLeod.

I forgot to ask if there is any incentive to choose the frame model with 190x44 vs 165x38? In terms of performance / futureproofing etc. It seems to me that the majority is using 165x38.

I am not sure.  I notice that the drawings indicate a different lower shock mount for the 190mm shock compatible frame.  Unless that frame has a different rocker/link (than the frame for the 165mm shock), it will have more travel, as the 190mm shock has a longer stroke.  I also notice that promance quotes travel at 110mm instead of the usual 100mm - maybe the 110 is the travel for the 190 frame?

Maybe ask the vendor about it?  I vaguely recall that someone did ask about the 190mm frame, and the vendor said that it wasn't available.

The only real downside of the 190 frame is probably the availability of shocks in that size.  The 165 is very common.  Given that you plan to run a longer fork, you should probably ask about the 190 frame.

sclyde2

Re: Considering M7007-II build
« Reply #7 on: February 12, 2019, 08:42:51 PM »
As for chainline, 49mm should work on boost with 11 speed.  From what I've read, it is only 12 speed eagle that won't tolerate a chainline much less than 51-52 on a boost setup, as the tolerances are so tight that the chain grabs onto the next bigger cog when running in the very smallest cogs.
In fact, the centre of a boost cassette is closer to 49 than 52, so you'll be better off with 49, if you don't have any catching issues in the small cogs

trouble

Re: Considering M7007-II build
« Reply #8 on: February 13, 2019, 06:06:54 AM »
I see that you have a cheap second hand shock in mind. If that doesn't work out,I highly recommend a manitou MacLeod on that frame.  I have one on pretty much the same frame (a fm058, which only differs in rear brake location), and I am impressed with the MacLeod.

I forgot to ask if there is any incentive to choose the frame model with 190x44 vs 165x38? In terms of performance / futureproofing etc. It seems to me that the majority is using 165x38.

I am not sure.  I notice that the drawings indicate a different lower shock mount for the 190mm shock compatible frame.  Unless that frame has a different rocker/link (than the frame for the 165mm shock), it will have more travel, as the 190mm shock has a longer stroke.  I also notice that promance quotes travel at 110mm instead of the usual 100mm - maybe the 110 is the travel for the 190 frame?

Maybe ask the vendor about it?  I vaguely recall that someone did ask about the 190mm frame, and the vendor said that it wasn't available.

The only real downside of the 190 frame is probably the availability of shocks in that size.  The 165 is very common.  Given that you plan to run a longer fork, you should probably ask about the 190 frame.

Interesting - i will ask the vendor. A 44mm travel on the shock does come in somewhere close in the region of 110mm, if comparing the ratio of 100/38 (and taking leverage ratio into consideration). Do you think that the geometry will take any serious damage from a larger front fork (120mm) and a 100mm rear compared to the recommended 110mm?

Also thanks for your reply regarding chainline. In fact, just thanks in general for these replies - i appreciate it alot.

sclyde2

Re: Considering M7007-II build
« Reply #9 on: February 13, 2019, 08:53:45 PM »
Is it 40mm or 44mm stroke for the 190mm shock?  The website is inconsistent.  Ask them.  Keep in mind that there has been cases of new chiner frames having bottom out issues, where the cross member between the seat stay contacts the seat tube before the shock bottoms out.  As we haven't yet seen any of these frames with 190mm shocks yet, I'd be checking the measurement between top and bottom shock mounts when the cross member touches the seatstay (i.e. the eye to eye at max bottom out) before buying everything.

I don't think running 120 front with 100 rear is an issue, but there might be a warranty issue if you have a problem with the frame and admit you used a longer fork.  Do they specify 100mm fork?

I am actually on the market for a mid travel trail bike.  I already have a 130mm pike.  I haven't found a frame that quite ticks all the boxes, so I am seriously considering getting another of these frames, putting the longer fork on, another MacLeod, wider rims and heavier tyres and a dropper post.  Haven't decided yet though - slightly more rear travel would be more ideal for intended trail riding.

trouble

Re: Considering M7007-II build
« Reply #10 on: February 14, 2019, 05:04:36 AM »
Is it 40mm or 44mm stroke for the 190mm shock?  The website is inconsistent.  Ask them.  Keep in mind that there has been cases of new chiner frames having bottom out issues, where the cross member between the seat stay contacts the seat tube before the shock bottoms out.  As we haven't yet seen any of these frames with 190mm shocks yet, I'd be checking the measurement between top and bottom shock mounts when the cross member touches the seatstay (i.e. the eye to eye at max bottom out) before buying everything.

I don't think running 120 front with 100 rear is an issue, but there might be a warranty issue if you have a problem with the frame and admit you used a longer fork.  Do they specify 100mm fork?

I am actually on the market for a mid travel trail bike.  I already have a 130mm pike.  I haven't found a frame that quite ticks all the boxes, so I am seriously considering getting another of these frames, putting the longer fork on, another MacLeod, wider rims and heavier tyres and a dropper post.  Haven't decided yet though - slightly more rear travel would be more ideal for intended trail riding.

I sent Steven mail - it turns out that the only available size is 165x38, and they have now removed other 'options' to avoid future misunderstandings. According to him, the blueprints shown are from end-users who apparently made the blueprints for pro-mance site, and where the end-user used a 100mm shock and 100mm fork. The actual recommended travel is 110mm.

He further writes that he does not suggest a 120mm fork due to high risk of damaging 'it' (i expect he means the frame) on so-called 'special mountain conditions'. No mention of warranty. I wouldn't place anything in Denmark as a special mountain condition (highest natural point is 170 MAMSL), but i am quite worried about how fragile he describes the frame.

trouble

Re: Considering M7007-II build
« Reply #11 on: March 07, 2019, 12:29:20 AM »
I eventually decided to order the Ican P1. Frame is on the way looking very crisp! Can’t wait to get it.

https://imgur.com/6P9x76T

https://imgur.com/NusK51r

Couldn’t embed pictures on phone, sorry.