Should I get the 057 or 256??

[brmeyer135]

BertZhong is his name.  He works for XMIPlay.  We just don't hear of many people dealing with him directly like Peter.
It would be easy to follow if the vendors had one login(like Sitar said) and they used that.
No one is charging anything here that I know of to not use your companies name.

[Sitar_Ned]

BertZhong is his name.  He works for XMIPlay.  We just don't hear of many people dealing with him directly like Peter.
It would be easy to follow if the vendors had one login(like Sitar said) and they used that.
No one is charging anything here that I know of to not use your companies name.

Yes.. this exactly, brmeyer. I think they are just used to being somewhat "undercover" over at mtbr, or something.  Also, due to the language and cultural barrier, it may be more difficult for many of them than it is for Peter who is fairly affluent in English. I'm just guessing here.. really not sure.

That said.. If I owned Hongfu, Carbonality, or Iplay.. I'd have an account named Carbonality Bikes and I'd answer every stupid repetitive question that was asked about these carbon frames.. then I'd upload videos of thorough product strength and quality testing and of manufacturing processes. Have a link to Carbonality.com in my sig.. Chinertown membership is still small so maybe they think it's not worth the time and effort... but they are missing the point... people would seek them out simply for information they can't find elsewhere.

[Patrick C.]

After going back and forth for a couple of days I ordered the -057.  The biggest reason is that I didn't want to wait 45 days (or more), but it also seems that the weight difference is not as much as advertised.  Some posters in the mtbr thread are reporting total weights around 1060 g; per Peter the 890 g weight does not include any of the alloy parts.  It's still around 200 g lighter, but I decided that wasn't worth the extra $160 or the extra 45 days.  So now I need to find some lighter tires with that money. 

[Carbon_Dude]

See how you like the IP-057 frame and in six months when the IP-256 becomes more available, order one of those, move your components over, and sell your IP-057.  I'm sure it won't be difficult to sell.

[Izzy]

After going back and forth for a couple of days I ordered the -057.  The biggest reason is that I didn't want to wait 45 days (or more), but it also seems that the weight difference is not as much as advertised.  Some posters in the mtbr thread are reporting total weights around 1060 g; per Peter the 890 g weight does not include any of the alloy parts.  It's still around 200 g lighter, but I decided that wasn't worth the extra $160 or the extra 45 days.  So now I need to find some lighter tires with that money. 

I think I'm with you. $160 is quite a difference considering the frame's price tag. An increase of 30% or more.

No way. I hope these Chinese carbon guys realize the only reason that we're here is the low price. As demand goes up, an increase in price usually follows but there will be a limit on that effect in this particular market. Will be interesting to see how it all plays out.

[MTB2223]

I ordered my IP-256SL frame on the 24th of April. Today I got the message that the frame won't be shipped before 22th of June. At ordering-time, I knew there were some production issue's and that they're working on it. I'm not in a hurry, but this is very long. 

I made the decision for this frame because:
- Nice direct mount for the front derailleur, E-type2. Going for 2x10.
- Pull down system
- Weights (1040 gr for 19")
- The looks

This frame is more expensive than the IP-057, but I think it's really worth it.

[Carbon_Dude]

It will be interesting t see everyone's build when the receive their frame.  i was one of the first to order a Large IP-057 last year and waited about 6 weeks for my frame to arrive, totally worth the wait.

[Sitar_Ned]

I ordered my IP-256SL frame on the 24th of April. Today I got the message that the frame won't be shipped before 22th of June. At ordering-time, I knew there were some production issue's and that they're working on it. I'm not in a hurry, but this is very long. 

I made the decision for this frame because:
- Nice direct mount for the front derailleur, E-type2. Going for 2x10.
- Pull down system
- Weights (1040 gr for 19")
- The looks

This frame is more expensive than the IP-057, but I think it's really worth it.

That is a pretty long wait, but if you currently have a bike and that's the frame you want then I say wait it out.

The lighter weight would be the main thing that would convince me to go for the 256. When I was shopping for my frame, I hesitant to consider the 256 bc I assumed heavier equals stronger and being new to not only the carbon mtb scene, but also the Chinese carbon scene.. I think I was illogically concerned with the strength of the lighter frame. The more I ride mine and trust it.. The more I feel like I would have absolutely no hesitations going for the lighter 256.

I say if you don't mind the delay.. You made the right decision. The 256 is still very good price for a carbon frame that barely breaks the 1000 gram mark.

[Carbon_Dude]

I am surprised this thread has no pictures, I can fix that:

IP-256



IP-057



The two frames look very similar, however, the junction of the seat stays at the seat tube is very different as well as the diameter of the top tube and down tube appears to be smaller on the IP-256.  I'd be very interesting in riding a bike that has the new frame to see how differently the IP-256 rides.  If I were buying a new frame today, I'd seriously consider the IP-256 if I was not in a hurry to build a new bike.

[MTB2223]

I've got some more pictures of the IP-256
(please ignore all cable bolts, this frame was previous in two flavour, one with external cable routing and one with internal cable routing. Only the last one, with all internal cable routing, is available):

[Carbon_Dude]

Looking at the frame design with a mechanical engineer's eye, I would not think the "Y "or wishbone design of the seat stay junction with the seat tube would be the strongest way to make that connection.  I much prefer the IP-057 or other frames that allow the seat stays to flow into the junction for added strength. 

However, this design could allow for more flex in the frame, the shape is almost a tuning fork design.  Now I want to look around and see if there are any big brands that have a similar frame design in that area.

Since I don't run a front derailleur the direct mount that the IP-256 would not be needed for me.  I've asked Peter when I ordered my IP-036 if they could delete the FD mounting and I was told they needed to put it on all frames they have manufactured, too bad for me I guess but it would be nice if I could specify things like that and deletion of the cable routing tabs on the underside of the down tube that are on my IP-036.

[Izzy]

Hmmm. Interesting observation Carbon_Dude, and I appreciate having the view point of a mechanical engineer.

I agree that the more "tuning fork" design of the 256 could either be a positive or a negative. Negative if it's weaker, positive if it provides some compliance.

One thing is for sure, I think the 256 has cleaner lines, and just has better overall aesthetics than the 057 (sorry SN and CD  ) especially in the headtube area.

[Sitar_Ned]

One thing is for sure, I think the 256 has cleaner lines, and just has better overall aesthetics than the 057 (sorry SN and CD  ) especially in the headtube area.

How dare you speak of my chiner like that! 

Yeah.. I'd have to reluctantly agree. The headtube looks less "bulbous" or something... More streamlined, for sure.

I do agree with CD though in that i think I def prefer the seat stay design of the 057. I too am interested in how it would affect compliance of the rear end.

[Carbon_Dude]

I agree, other than the different junction at the seat post, it's a very good looking frame.

[Jake]

Is it possible to use a 2.35 Racing Ralf in the 256?
If so I will order a Rear wheel with 30 mm ID, if not I will get one with a smaller ID.
In either case I will get a 30 mm ID front wheel.

I don't understand that you will have more exposed seat post on the 256 than on the 57.
I looked at the drawing of both bikes and don't get it...