Author Topic: Velobuild VB-R-168 Frame  (Read 267245 times)

Nickk2000

Re: Velobuild VB-R-168 Frame
« Reply #270 on: July 18, 2021, 03:30:49 PM »
just at a curiosity, why is everyone picking the 168 over the 177? the 177 is lighter and they almost look identical. is the 168 marketed as aero while the 177 is lightweight? i mean putting the two together they look ALMOST IDENTICAL so im curious what everyones thought is. the geometry numbers are all within .5 degrees and under 10 degrees. stacks 5mm shorter. both come with an integrated bar and the only noticeable difference is the cutout for the rear wheel.

1Sigma

Re: Velobuild VB-R-168 Frame
« Reply #271 on: July 18, 2021, 05:05:56 PM »
just at a curiosity, why is everyone picking the 168 over the 177? the 177 is lighter and they almost look identical. is the 168 marketed as aero while the 177 is lightweight? i mean putting the two together they look ALMOST IDENTICAL so im curious what everyones thought is. the geometry numbers are all within .5 degrees and under 10 degrees. stacks 5mm shorter. both come with an integrated bar and the only noticeable difference is the cutout for the rear wheel.

It is aero vs climb (according to Chris) but just marginally so. 
Presumably part of the weight gain comes from aero shaped tubes.  The seat tube appears narrower from front, with a elongated profile resulting in the cut-out.
The stack is slightly lower, and reach slightly longer for a more aggressive riding position. 
The smaller rear triangle contributes to better aerodynamics from airflow passing over the rear wheel.

In the end, marginal aerodynamics are harder to achieve than than marginal weight losses (unless you are already optimal weight for the sport).  And let's face it, most of us (not all) who can afford this hobby could always lose a pound or two. Instant watts!

Reality: I kinda liked the look of the 168 a bit more. I was sold when I found out the geometry is exactly the same as the Tarmac SL7. Also, I could put the $50 saved towards a fancy schmancy chameleon Paint job. 


Better than average - Extra Average

Nickk2000

Re: Velobuild VB-R-168 Frame
« Reply #272 on: July 18, 2021, 05:48:09 PM »
It is aero vs climb (according to Chris) but just marginally so. 
Presumably part of the weight gain comes from aero shaped tubes.  The seat tube appears narrower from front, with a elongated profile resulting in the cut-out.
The stack is slightly lower, and reach slightly longer for a more aggressive riding position. 
The smaller rear triangle contributes to better aerodynamics from airflow passing over the rear wheel.

In the end, marginal aerodynamics are harder to achieve than than marginal weight losses (unless you are already optimal weight for the sport).  And let's face it, most of us (not all) who can afford this hobby could always lose a pound or two. Instant watts!

Reality: I kinda liked the look of the 168 a bit more. I was sold when I found out the geometry is exactly the same as the Tarmac SL7. Also, I could put the $50 saved towards a fancy schmancy chameleon Paint job.
i do agree, the bike looks identical to an sl7.

a non chiner friendly person wouldnt be able to tell the difference if you slapped an s-works logo and shimano on the chainstay. only tell tale sign is the headset, the sl7 has that "dip" that the 168 doesnt have.
The 177 shaves like maybe 250-300g when all is said and done, which is less than a lb, and for me thatd be less than half a percentage point in weight. id probably take aerodynamics over that. both of them dont look overly aerodynamic though. We dont have a wind tunnel to test them but i bet a yoeleo r12 or r21 or ican a9 would be more aero than the 168. my dengfu r12 looks slightly more aero than that. I mean, specialized definitely has done something with the sl7 since they literally got rid of their aero bike, so it is somewhat aero, just not the most aero. a madone would smoke it in a wind tunnel.

jokage

Re: Velobuild VB-R-168 Frame
« Reply #273 on: July 18, 2021, 09:56:07 PM »
just at a curiosity, why is everyone picking the 168 over the 177? the 177 is lighter and they almost look identical. is the 168 marketed as aero while the 177 is lightweight? i mean putting the two together they look ALMOST IDENTICAL so im curious what everyones thought is. the geometry numbers are all within .5 degrees and under 10 degrees. stacks 5mm shorter. both come with an integrated bar and the only noticeable difference is the cutout for the rear wheel.

For me, it's all about the size. From the geo, the XS 177 is about a size up of the XS 168, and I am not quite sure about my size yet, and I am being totally safe. My logic is that I can fix a frame that's 'a bit too small' but not with a frame that's 'a bit too big'. And it's good thing that 168 comes with a lower bet price.

On the looks department, I personally prefer the 177. I can't resist those sexy Addicts and Filantes.

Nickk2000

Re: Velobuild VB-R-168 Frame
« Reply #274 on: July 18, 2021, 10:14:54 PM »
For me, it's all about the size. From the geo, the XS 177 is about a size up of the XS 168, and I am not quite sure about my size yet, and I am being totally safe. My logic is that I can fix a frame that's 'a bit too small' but not with a frame that's 'a bit too big'. And it's good thing that 168 comes with a lower bet price.

On the looks department, I personally prefer the 177. I can't resist those sexy Addicts and Filantes.

SAFA brian makes the addict look so sexy. i do like the 177 more personally.
Chris only has 58's in stock so the 177 has closer geometry to a 61 with about 25mm lower stack, which i can handle.

so if i were to buy from velobuild, it'd be a 177.

This has been visited before, but assuming theres a difference in quality, what does ican or yoeleo give you that velobuild doesnt? guarantee, warranty, and customer service? I was watching oz cycle's video of the r12 and that clearcoat is glossy and shiny as lebrons head.
« Last Edit: July 18, 2021, 10:29:36 PM by Nickk2000 »

braincore

Re: Velobuild VB-R-168 Frame
« Reply #275 on: July 18, 2021, 10:26:11 PM »
Anyone else having trouble adjusting their seatpost? I've had it in for a month, and I want to raise it by 1cm--unclear whether it slipped by 1cm since I didn't add a marker.

Even after undoing the fastener, the seatpost doesn't budge. I've tried twisting the seatpost gently and knocking it sideways to no avail. I haven't tried pushing the seatpost in primarily because I'm worried the seatpost is already resting on the seattube. Any tips?

vasnd

Re: Velobuild VB-R-168 Frame
« Reply #276 on: July 19, 2021, 02:23:21 AM »
Did anyone manage to route their front brake cable through the top of the steerer? It looks like the fork has a side hole with a liner, but the FSA headset adapter ring doesn't leave much space for a fourth cable.

OlieSimpson

Re: Velobuild VB-R-168 Frame
« Reply #277 on: July 19, 2021, 08:44:23 AM »
Has anyone successfully fit post mount brakes (specifically TRP HY/RD) to their 168 with a flat mount to post mount adapter?

My current bike has post mount TRP HY/RD callipers which are in perfect working order and ideally I'd like to use them on my 168 frame when it arrives, however am not sure if there is space on the rear for the adapter + calliper, and if there will be too much of a kink in the front cable given where it exists on the lower of the fork.

Thanks in advance!

kjfekfrekgnr

Re: Velobuild VB-R-168 Frame
« Reply #278 on: July 21, 2021, 04:18:33 AM »
Did anyone manage to route their front brake cable through the top of the steerer? It looks like the fork has a side hole with a liner, but the FSA headset adapter ring doesn't leave much space for a fourth cable.

It's quite tight but having 4 cables past the steerer is possible. I set mine up with the rear brake on the right shifter, standard in the UK, and that made it easier as the cable just keeps right into the fork. I'm also using Jagwire compressionless so the cables are quite stiff.

Did you manage to sort out the FD cable too? I ended up using a cable ferrule similar to this https://www.wiggle.co.uk/token-tk680-alloy-gear-nose, to clip inside the exit hole and position the outer cable inside. But it doesn't full clip into velobuild port so the cable tension is keeping it together. It's fine for now but in the future re-cabling with the BB installed is going to be a nightmare.

wijmaar

Re: Velobuild VB-R-168 Frame
« Reply #279 on: July 21, 2021, 05:44:47 AM »
Finally received my frame today, just got this picture from my neighbour who accepted the package because I'm not at home today. I'm a bit shocked by the state of the packaging to be honest:



Anybody else experienced something similar? Really anxious to see what it looks like when I open it tonight.

Nickk2000

Re: Velobuild VB-R-168 Frame
« Reply #280 on: July 21, 2021, 09:01:15 AM »
Finally received my frame today, just got this picture from my neighbour who accepted the package because I'm not at home today. I'm a bit shocked by the state of the packaging to be honest:



Anybody else experienced something similar? Really anxious to see what it looks like when I open it tonight.

Fwiw my dengfu bike box came beat up like that too. Took pics and videos, frames fine.

Hopefully velo packaged it well, dengfu packaged mine well as well. I think the sellers know the boxes get thrown around so they package them very securely with wraps and stuff. That dent is probably because it got pushed up against a conveyer belt entrance or somethingn, but i bet its fine. Let us know :)

vasnd

Re: Velobuild VB-R-168 Frame
« Reply #281 on: July 21, 2021, 09:30:58 AM »
It's quite tight but having 4 cables past the steerer is possible. I set mine up with the rear brake on the right shifter, standard in the UK, and that made it easier as the cable just keeps right into the fork. I'm also using Jagwire compressionless so the cables are quite stiff.

Did you manage to sort out the FD cable too? I ended up using a cable ferrule similar to this https://www.wiggle.co.uk/token-tk680-alloy-gear-nose, to clip inside the exit hole and position the outer cable inside. But it doesn't full clip into velobuild port so the cable tension is keeping it together. It's fine for now but in the future re-cabling with the BB installed is going to be a nightmare.
I did manage to route all four cables into the tiny ACR hole. Looks to be a bit of friction when turning the steering, but I need to test it better later.
The FD cable solution will be similar to yours I guess. I also considered drilling out the small hole so the outer cable will be able to pass through, but it leaves no place to hook the cable end.. Dilemma..
« Last Edit: July 21, 2021, 01:08:43 PM by vasnd »

FHS

Re: Velobuild VB-R-168 Frame
« Reply #282 on: July 21, 2021, 09:44:22 AM »
It is aero vs climb (according to Chris) but just marginally so. 
Presumably part of the weight gain comes from aero shaped tubes.  The seat tube appears narrower from front, with a elongated profile resulting in the cut-out.
The stack is slightly lower, and reach slightly longer for a more aggressive riding position. 
The smaller rear triangle contributes to better aerodynamics from airflow passing over the rear wheel.

In the end, marginal aerodynamics are harder to achieve than than marginal weight losses (unless you are already optimal weight for the sport).  And let's face it, most of us (not all) who can afford this hobby could always lose a pound or two. Instant watts!

Reality: I kinda liked the look of the 168 a bit more. I was sold when I found out the geometry is exactly the same as the Tarmac SL7. Also, I could put the $50 saved towards a fancy schmancy chameleon Paint job.

I would choose the 168 as well. I'm a huge Venge fan boy and the fact that Specialized killed the Venge in favor of the redesigned SL7 and one all around instead of two competing bike designs says a lot about how they feel about the SL7 aero ability. The 168 geometry is identical to the SL 7.

That being said, I don't think we really expect SL 7 performance from the 168. The payoff is in the lay up, etc. I would just be happy with a stiff decently aero f4ame.

Nickk2000

Re: Velobuild VB-R-168 Frame
« Reply #283 on: July 21, 2021, 11:16:17 AM »
Ive never ridden an sl7 but im genuinely curious if you put a 168 and an sl7 next to each other, would you feel the difference? You could say the sl7 is stiffer due to layup, but i have a hard time distinguishing that. I think the price comes from name and weight, to which the weight part comes from a better layup. I think theres more to the comfort of a bike than just the frame. Handlebars, wheels, seatpost, tires, etc etc

wijmaar

Re: Velobuild VB-R-168 Frame
« Reply #284 on: July 21, 2021, 02:24:07 PM »
Fwiw my dengfu bike box came beat up like that too. Took pics and videos, frames fine.

Hopefully velo packaged it well, dengfu packaged mine well as well. I think the sellers know the boxes get thrown around so they package them very securely with wraps and stuff. That dent is probably because it got pushed up against a conveyer belt entrance or somethingn, but i bet its fine. Let us know :)

Thanks! All seems to be okay on first sight, I checked with Chris and he asked to unpack and make pictures. Have checked and all seems okay, frame was packed really well indeed.

They did send me the wrong headset bearings... Anybody knows the correct size?

So far really happy with the paintjob and the quality of the frame. Will do a more thorough check in daylight tomorrow. Some first pictures: