Frame req? (Aero, dropped SS, high stack, short reach)

[PeterXu]

You had me up until the tire size. Personally I would like a min of 35. TBH if the GR01 had 35) road bike tire clearance it would be right up my ally.

Carbon weave instead of UD would be nice as well for the outermost layer.

Any plans going bigger?

Yes, we can do 700*35C, but the chainstay would be thinner than it is for 700*32C. UD carbon is the lightest carbon weave option we can keep the frame with original carbon weave instead of black matt or gloss paint.

[Daviddavieboy]

Yes, we can do 700*35C, but the chainstay would be thinner than it is for 700*32C. UD carbon is the lightest carbon weave option we can keep the frame with original carbon weave instead of black matt or gloss paint.

 You are the professional, I only assumed where the stays are almost as long as your GR01 and using a (~86mm) gravel/MTB spec BB going a little wider would not be a problem.

 I do notice the Pina X frame lists a max of 35mm tires as well.

 My preference is not light weight but I realize you have to make what would sell.

[Nkearb]

The ideal frame
- aero big fat bladed fork and aero headtube
- relaxed geometry like the bike peter posted. So regular people can run a long stem slammed and maintain aero position.
- round seatpost (aero seatpost saves 0 watts)
- 32c/35c tire clearance is fine
- Pressfit BB cause I like to use the Shimano bb
- ACR headset system would be convenient

[jeffrey]

Since we're down with our wishlists, what I'm currently after is:

- high stack, short reach
- BSA/T47 bottom bracket
- aeroish looking, dropped seatstays, integrated seat clamp
- 35c-38c tire clearance
- fully internal cable routing for mechanical derailleurs too
- bonuses: round seatpost, no weird gimmicks (e.g. Longteng extra wide downtube)

[sync1]

What I would like:
-high stack, short reach
-aero design
-35mm-38mm tire clearance
-73.5-74STA, 72-72.5HTA, around 75mm BB drop, 420mm max chainstays
-27.2mm seatpost
-1100g for Large would be nice

[Dragos]

What do you think about this 56cm size design? T47 85.5mm bottom bracket, max tire size 700*32C, UDH

I think the design looks good, I like that it is UDH, but as others have said the tire clearance is the biggest drawback.

The market is lacking a bike similar to the Dogma X that can run 40mm tires. I think there need to be a bike in line with the Enve Fray, Ridley Grifn RS, or BMC Roadmachine which all have a head tube angle of ~72, similar endurance geometry and the ability to run 40mm tires.

Even the Dogma X can technically run 40mm tires as seen in the 2024 gravel championships:

https://www.bikeradar.com/features/tech/2024-gravel-world-championship-tech-trends

[rasch]

What do you think about this 56cm size design? T47 85.5mm bottom bracket, max tire size 700*32C, UDH

Thanks for proposing sth.

As others mentioned, 32 seems a bit short. 35/38 sounds more universal.
Also I think headtube seems a bit too long and the 72.5 angle is a bit tricky.
I really like this frame from hongfu http://www.hongfu-bikes.com/products/76.html. It's a bit too expensive because it doesn't include the handlebar and is 32 only. But maybe is a good inspiration. I like that it is simple and has perfect endurance geometry (though fork shape is weird)

I have not tried it yet because at this price my clients prefer western brands (which I can understand and also end up recommending)

[jfcb]

Personal opinion, I find it certain requirements listed here remarkable for an aero road bike. They are contradicting.
If you want a aero road bike, you want to go fast and save watts, not just "look fast".
Features of an aero bike are: low frontal area (contradicted if you want large tires), extended head tube (cfr SL8), airfoil shaped tubes (not a round seat post), dropped seat stays, horizontal top tube (limited sloping), integrated handlebar....
- A need for 35mm+ tires? I would question if your target bike is still an aero road bike, it's better to look at some allroad/gravel bikes. In addition,placing large chainrings might become an issue: i.e. the airwolf might be what you're looking for. Patrick Lino made a review about the frame sold by rinascalta. https://airwolfcarbonbike.com/product/airwolf-t1100-carbon-fiber-frame-cycling-cyclocross-bicycle-frames-aero-disc-bike-road-70038c-max-tire-thru-axle-carbon-customize-painting-climbing-bike-frame/
- I never understand the desire for a round seatpost, especially on a road bike. For me this is something you install and forget about. For weight savings: If you have a good manufacturer, the weight of the seatpost will be in line with the weight of the frame. Also if you want a fast, aero bike, an airfoil seatpost will save you some watt(s).
- Weight: this might not be an issue, but with the trend of the sub 900g frames, copying Pinarello shaped frames might not be ideal. Their frame shapes make it difficult to produce a lightweight frame. Personally I rather have a form follows function approach.
- A note on geometry: It starts to become more and more common knowlegde dat a longer, higher front setup can save you more watts than a slammed stem position as you can see with time trial bikes. While aero bikes tend to have a low,aggressive geometry, I hope bike manufactures accommodate to this knowledge and increase their stack.

Anyway, that's the opinion of someone who races bikes and likes to ride fast bikes. The audience here might be looking more for a comfortable, but trendy looking bike.

[jeffrey]

I think almost everyone here is just asking for a aero-looking frame, that you might describe also as a "modern-looking" endurance frame. Real aero features I believe aren't really needed by anybody looking into this kind of bike.
As for the seatpost, round is useful to have wider options for seat offset and saddle rails, as the proprietary ones often come in only one version.

[neobiker]

I also concur that when I mean aero looking bike, I want the look of a modern race bike (thin but deep headtube).

This is why the Pinarello X is a good example, you could mistake the Pinarello X for the Pinarello F/Dogma MY2023 if you don’t compare them next to each other.

[Daviddavieboy]

  As for the seatpost, round is useful to have wider options for seat offset and saddle rails, as the proprietary ones often come in only one version.

 A round seat post is more compliant as well. Also, there has been wind tunnel testing that shows a round seat post has little if any affect due to disturbing the trailing turbulence behind the rider.

 As far as tires it has already been shown the trend is getting bigger. Some are already using 35mm racing on the cobbles. (ie 2024 Paris-Roubaix). Paired with the right wheels 30-32 seems the fastest on most roads though.

[janp]

The requirements are contradicting because of the difference between people need’s and what they want.
I’m in need of a frame with endurance or gravel geometry too.
But I want a frame that is not as boring as the typical endurance/gravel frames.
So frames with oversized tubes and other “specialties” are welcome. Therefore a round seat tube is not my favorite.
Regarding the look I doubt that the advice to make something inspired by the Pinarello frames will work. I would prefer some more generic aero-look like the canyon aerorad or the spcycle  R065 and many others.
In addition I like to introduce the idea to make a “retro” design, for example a reincarnation of the Cannondale CAAD 3 from 1997.
And on my wish list is to bundle such a frame with handlebars with low drop (100mm) and large flair. The low drop because I’m missing the flexibility and the large flair because my shoulders are good for a 360/380 handlebar but in crosswind conditions, I like to have the option for a wider grip to have more control of wide rims (large depth)

[PeterXu]

OK. So here is our goal to do this new frame, same standard as Faxxxx on headtube and bottom bracket testing.
One piece mold and latex molding
High stack, short reach, more aggressive geometry than Factor but less than Pina X
700*35C max tire clearance, UDH, T47 85.5mm bottom bracket, both top and down 52mm headtube
aero seat post but with two types seat clamps for either 7*7 or 7*9 saddle rails
dropped seat stay, aero design
Size 54cm weight would be around 895+/-30g after painted and with front and rear derailleur hanger mounted.
Here is my only question now: which position do you like the battery located ? Seat post or low side of bottom bracket ?

[Daviddavieboy]

size 54cm weight would be around 895+/-30g after painted and with front and rear derailleur hanger mounted.

 Going to be a nice bike for sure but not for me unless I loose some weight. Kudos though on listening to your customers on many of the attributes !

[jeffrey]

OK. So here is our goal to do this new frame, same standard as Faxxxx on headtube and bottom bracket testing.
One piece mold and latex molding
High stack, short reach, more aggressive geometry than Factor but less than Pina X
700*35C max tire clearance, UDH, T47 85.5mm bottom bracket, both top and down 52mm headtube
aero seat post but with two types seat clamps for either 7*7 or 7*9 saddle rails
dropped seat stay, aero design
Size 54cm weight would be around 895+/-30g after painted and with front and rear derailleur hanger mounted.
Here is my only question now: which position do you like the battery located ? Seat post or low side of bottom bracket ?

Would that still be compatible with mechanical derailleurs?