Author Topic: Velobuild VB-R-177  (Read 56626 times)

pearl

Re: Velobuild VB-R-177
« Reply #60 on: December 30, 2021, 12:12:19 PM »
Can anyone compare what the geo is like? Is this the SL7 clone?
Hoping this is my answer for a fast road racer but with clearance for 32s!

Liter

Re: Velobuild VB-R-177
« Reply #61 on: December 30, 2021, 02:38:15 PM »
Thanks for the feedback. Looking at the stack in the 177 geometry chart I reckon most tall people will have to order extra spacers if they are building this as an endurance / comfort kinda build. Roughly measuring from the floor to handlebars I foresee needing extra spacers to replicate my current stack on the 099/TT-X21 frame.

The front end is very low/agressive. On my VB99 frame I had one 2MM spacer, with the 177 I'm riding a 5MM and 2MM.

Liter

Re: Velobuild VB-R-177
« Reply #62 on: December 30, 2021, 02:41:28 PM »
. One thing to note with the separate handlebar/stem, is that getting the compression plug and expander bolt to properly take up all the slack/play in the fork has been tricky. Perhaps I just need to cut the steerer a little shorter to allow the dust cap to further compress without crushing it.


The cap doesn't sit flush with the stem, thats why its hard. I was considering buying a Deda Superbox stem because of that. Just waiting for the new fork to decide what to do.

patliean1

Re: Velobuild VB-R-177
« Reply #63 on: December 30, 2021, 03:08:31 PM »
Hey Everyone,

My intentions are not to spam this thread with my photos. However, I finally received my VeloBuild 38mm wheels after a two week delay courtesy of my local postal service  :( . The Hyper 65s I originally had on the 177 are for my Winspace T1500 which I will be building up this weekend.

1. They are pretty heavy. 1778g for the pair. For comparison sake, my Winspace Hyper 65s weigh 1610g. Lighter yet significantly deeper wheels, but also significantly more expensive. You could buy three pairs of VB wheels for the price of Hypers. Just something to consider...

2. Specs are tubeless clinchers with the tubeless tape already installed. 25mm external, 19mm internal. The wheels come with valve extenders, but sadly no extra spokes or tubeless valves. Standard Novatec hubs. I've used these hubs on my Yoeleo wheels and they are perfectly fine.

3. This is the final "form" for the build. Without power meter pedals, carbon bottle cage, or Garmin mount...final weight is 8kg

I'm working on my official video review of the build, but for the price and weight I have to say it's a lovely deal. The light weight carbon of the 177 offsets the heavy wheels in my opinion, so basically you're getting a big-brand quality frameset, handlebars, and wheels for under $1000. Add your favorite groupset and you're looking at a setup that would probably cost almost double in price from one the main brands out there.

PS - the gold chain is from OG-Evkin. I probably own about 8-10 different components from them. They offer solid value for the price.
« Last Edit: December 30, 2021, 03:11:17 PM by patliean1 »

Zoc

Re: Velobuild VB-R-177
« Reply #64 on: December 31, 2021, 02:04:15 AM »
Wau really nice colour
and the golden chain looks awesome

Irideslowly

Re: Velobuild VB-R-177
« Reply #65 on: January 13, 2022, 06:03:21 AM »
Hey Everyone,

My intentions are not to spam this thread with my photos. However, I finally received my VeloBuild 38mm wheels after a two week delay courtesy of my local postal service  :( . The Hyper 65s I originally had on the 177 are for my Winspace T1500 which I will be building up this weekend.

1. They are pretty heavy. 1778g for the pair. For comparison sake, my Winspace Hyper 65s weigh 1610g. Lighter yet significantly deeper wheels, but also significantly more expensive. You could buy three pairs of VB wheels for the price of Hypers. Just something to consider...

2. Specs are tubeless clinchers with the tubeless tape already installed. 25mm external, 19mm internal. The wheels come with valve extenders, but sadly no extra spokes or tubeless valves. Standard Novatec hubs. I've used these hubs on my Yoeleo wheels and they are perfectly fine.

3. This is the final "form" for the build. Without power meter pedals, carbon bottle cage, or Garmin mount...final weight is 8kg

I'm working on my official video review of the build, but for the price and weight I have to say it's a lovely deal. The light weight carbon of the 177 offsets the heavy wheels in my opinion, so basically you're getting a big-brand quality frameset, handlebars, and wheels for under $1000. Add your favorite groupset and you're looking at a setup that would probably cost almost double in price from one the main brands out there.

PS - the gold chain is from OG-Evkin. I probably own about 8-10 different components from them. They offer solid value for the price.


What bar and stem setup are you running?

patliean1

Re: Velobuild VB-R-177
« Reply #66 on: January 13, 2022, 09:19:19 AM »

What bar and stem setup are you running?

VB's separate handlebar and stem. 400mm and 120mm

slosada

Re: Velobuild VB-R-177
« Reply #67 on: January 15, 2022, 05:38:29 PM »
@patliean1

You mentioned you are 6ft and you picked M.  I'd like your input since I'm 5'11" and Chris says L. 
I know this goes person by person, with more measures like arm length, trunk, flexibility, intended usage, but I don't have a bike fit and I can't get that in the short term

My inseam is 83cm (32.7")
I guess I'm between sizes:  I have ridden 54 and 56.  I think I feel more comfy in my 54 (I notice it when I swap my bikes in the trainer, that the 56's reach is longer, ~17mm). However, I don't use the 54 outside anymore, and the geometry is definitely different.
I only have access to the 54cm geometry and, compared to the VR--R-177 (Large) the stack is 4mm higher and the reach 4mm shorter.

I don't race, I ride alone or in group rides, anywhere between 30-37KPH (19-24MPH). Mostly flat or short hills and 95% asphalt

Irideslowly

Re: Velobuild VB-R-177
« Reply #68 on: January 15, 2022, 06:07:52 PM »
Take the smaller frame. Its impossible to make a larger bine fit smaller. You can always get a longer stem.

patliean1

Re: Velobuild VB-R-177
« Reply #69 on: January 15, 2022, 06:13:20 PM »
If you haven’t had a professional bike, then a size L makes the most sense. I’m 6ft tall with a 6’3” wingspan and a short torso. Not sure of my inseam but long legs too.

Because I’m trying to maximize being low and aero for racing purposes, although the 177 will be for CX not road racing, taking a smaller frame with a longer stem is pretty typical. That’s why I chose the separate handlebar and stem combo versus the integrated. I needed the reach.

Now in your case it sounds like a size L will be best. I’m sure Chris has recommended hundreds of customers so I tend to believe he has your best interest in mind based on the limited info provided. And if you still aren’t sure the you essentially have two options:

Option #1 - Bike Geometry Comparison Chart
Option #2 - Bike Fit :)

Let me know what you decide

Irideslowly

Re: Velobuild VB-R-177
« Reply #70 on: January 16, 2022, 10:58:02 AM »
If you have not had a bike fit, take the 54. You can always ride a bike that's too small. A bike that's too big will have too much reach. It will be uncomfortable andbmost likely cause pain.take the 54.

slosada

Re: Velobuild VB-R-177
« Reply #71 on: January 16, 2022, 10:56:13 PM »
Thank you guys for your input.

I'm doing the geometry check and I find the L very close to the "54" bike I had previously.

All lower measurements are almost identical:
Same chainstay (410), 2mm shorter Front-Centre (596 vs 598 in VBR177), BB drop is 69.5 vs 70,  same fork offset (45mm)

Angles are very similar: Head tube (73 both), Seat tube (73.5 vs 73.3)

Reach in my "54" bike is 391mm vs 395mm

The main difference is the head tube (170mm vs 155mm in VBR177) which yields to a higher stack in my old bike (570 vs 556) and explains the 4mm reach difference.
Am I wrong saying that the difference here comes down to one spacer?
---------------
Regarding the other bike (I don't have the geometry), I took manual measurements, giving longer seat tube, but slacker angle (~72)... Plus a shorter Head tube (160) gives a longer reach (I remeasured today at 405mm), The stack is actually 560mm.
I have ridden this 56 bike for 4 years.  I have played with the saddle position, it feels more aggressive, and have had 7hour rides on it.  But yeah, upon changing one to the other I feel the difference on the reach

----
The VB-R-177 M has significantly lower stack (536 vs 556), Reach is not compromised (392), so it has a smaller head tube (135mm) and the wheelbase is reduced.  The seat tube is also 20mm shorter.
Here I'm afraid I need more flexibility.

I'm going with the L

Velovelo

Re: Velobuild VB-R-177
« Reply #72 on: January 17, 2022, 05:24:24 AM »
Thank you guys for your input.

I'm doing the geometry check and I find the L very close to the "54" bike I had previously.

All lower measurements are almost identical:
Same chainstay (410), 2mm shorter Front-Centre (596 vs 598 in VBR177), BB drop is 69.5 vs 70,  same fork offset (45mm)

Angles are very similar: Head tube (73 both), Seat tube (73.5 vs 73.3)

Reach in my "54" bike is 391mm vs 395mm

The main difference is the head tube (170mm vs 155mm in VBR177) which yields to a higher stack in my old bike (570 vs 556) and explains the 4mm reach difference.
Am I wrong saying that the difference here comes down to one spacer?
---------------
Regarding the other bike (I don't have the geometry), I took manual measurements, giving longer seat tube, but slacker angle (~72)... Plus a shorter Head tube (160) gives a longer reach (I remeasured today at 405mm), The stack is actually 560mm.
I have ridden this 56 bike for 4 years.  I have played with the saddle position, it feels more aggressive, and have had 7hour rides on it.  But yeah, upon changing one to the other I feel the difference on the reach

----
The VB-R-177 M has significantly lower stack (536 vs 556), Reach is not compromised (392), so it has a smaller head tube (135mm) and the wheelbase is reduced.  The seat tube is also 20mm shorter.
Here I'm afraid I need more flexibility.

I'm going with the L

L sounds like the right choice for you if you previously ride a size 56. You can probably request for a zero setback seatpost if you are concerned about the reach. Additional 20mm or 30mm spacers may be helpful too since the 177 has a relatively lower stack in all sizes. If the handlebar stem you choose is at a negative angle (e.g. the HB011) it will cancel out the spacers and lower the stack, so watch out for that too.


patliean1

Re: Velobuild VB-R-177
« Reply #73 on: January 17, 2022, 10:47:27 AM »
Personally, I'm happy the Far East brands are hopping on the bandwagon to produce more "long and low" bikes. Granted I know this geometry does not work for everyone, but having to run a 130mm or even a 140mm stem just to achieve the optimal bike fit (while being low/aero enough) is not ideal.

It's getting to the point that 54cm frames are almost more so traditional 56cm.

pearl

Re: Velobuild VB-R-177
« Reply #74 on: January 17, 2022, 08:05:33 PM »
Man, This hits home. Im currently running a 140mm stem on a bike with 393 reach. I typically ride a 55/56, but after looking at the geometry charts it makes me feel like I need to get the XL as it’s -10mm shorter. Id still need a 130mm that they don’t offer :(