See likes

See likes given/taken


Your posts liked by others

Pages: [1] 2
Post info No. of Likes
Re: LCFS947 - 160mm 4-bar 27+/29 Posting pictures of my build.
Thanks to the carbon wheels, GX groupset etc, it turned out quite light, 13.3kg.
I will eventually pain it.

 
April 15, 2021, 03:27:49 PM 		2
Re: LCFS947 - 160mm 4-bar 27+/29 I've put 150 / 200 miles on this bike.
Some technical stuff, some fast bumpy trails, rock gardens, a couple of minor crashes.
No big jumps/drops, I can't do that :)
Please consider that I'm quite light: 65kg / 144lb

All is fine so far.
May 05, 2021, 12:58:11 PM 		1
Re: LCFS947 - 160mm 4-bar 27+/29 SimonPeaime: the chainstay protector that you are using seems to fit the frame perfectly.

Are you happy with it and do you mind sharing model/brand and where you got it?

BTW, my frame now has about 1k miles on it with not issue. I'm a happy camper!
July 23, 2021, 02:16:36 AM 		2
Re: The Shiny New AM831 Group Buy (A) Thread! OK, everything is fine: sorry for the noise!  :(
My brand new GX derailleur had a metal chip stuck in one of the hinges which prevented it from returning to the end position!

This would teach me to do bike work late at night and then post my mistakes to a forum!
In the process, I also checked the design of the hanger against SRAM specs (https://www.sram.com/globalassets/document-hierarchy/frame-fit-specifications/mtb/2021-mtb-frame-fit-specifications.pdf), and it is totally in spec!

sorry everybody!
August 29, 2021, 11:01:11 AM 		4
Re: The Shiny New AM831 Group Buy (A) Thread! Attaching a picture of my finished build. This frame size is "S".
Only the bottom cage is missing and I haven ridden it yet, apart up and down the street to tune suspension and saddle height.

Some interesting parts of my build:
  • assembling the lower pin of the rear shock was challenging, as I could not find any position of the rear triangle that gave me enough clearance to remove the bolt. I ended up unscrewing the top hinge form the frame (removing the 2 bolts just under the saddle). Not sure if that was the best choice because repositioning the hinge wasn't easy, but it worked
  • my mounting hardware for the shock was M8x30 and M8x22.199. The x30 (top) fit perfectly, the x22.199 was loose: i measured 22.86mm for the opening. Rather than ordering a new one, I 3d printed 2 spacers, which seem to work well
  • My shock is a Fox dpx2. It fits pretty well, but the access to the air valve is tight, I can barely connect my pump to the valve.
  • I used a Fox36 fork, that barely clears the frame, after using the 0.5 degree angle spacer from Reverse, which is about 10mm tall. BTW, jham asked about installing the angle spacer: it is an "interference fit", just like a standard crown race. I used a piece of PVC pipe with id of about 1.5" to push it down, with the help of a rubber mallet

As for my component list, most of them are reused form other builds or both 2nd hand:
  • fork: Fox36 w/ GRIP2 damper. The damper adjustments barely clear the frame even after adding the angle spacer
  • rear shock: Fox dpx2, see my comments above for the mounting hardware
  • drivetrain: SRAM Eagle GX, with SRAM DUB 89/92 pressfit bottom bracket
  • wheelset: Lightcarbon 350MB-AD938-Race, shared with my other frame
  • breakset: Shimano M8200, which I got new at a good price form a seller on Pinkbike. The rotors are generic from Amazon (https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B082NVF3TD/ref=ppx_yo_dt_b_search_asin_image?ie=UTF8&psc=1)
  • dropper post: and old Tranzx 31.6x140. I pushed it all the way down the downtube.. and it still might be too high, I need to double check it, but I have not measured the insertion depth
  • saddle: a SDG Radar.. I have no idea of how good or comfortable it is, I got it at a discount because my other SGB Bel Air failed, but I have to say that I like a lot my WTB Volt on the other bike
  • stem and Carbon Handlebar: inexpensive from Amazon (https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B0916YJ81R/ref=ppx_yo_dt_b_search_asin_image?ie=UTF8&psc=1 and https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B07JPF4T71/ref=ppx_yo_dt_b_search_asin_image?ie=UTF8&psc=1)
  • headset and Sitclamp: I used the one that came with the frame. The frame also came with 4 cable hole plugs, for the larger holes by the bottom of the downtube. They are rubber, not easy to install. Not sure if they will hold
  • missing: chainstay (and maybe downtube) protection. I have something that might work, but I haven't tried to install it yet.

I hope this is helpful to others..
August 29, 2021, 09:25:32 PM 		10
Re: The Shiny New AM831 Group Buy (A) Thread!
Quote from: Confused on September 02, 2021, 07:52:17 PM
Short answer - 22.2 and have some shims.  We don't have multiple samples of the linkage reporting dimensions...yet.  Also, one person will test the Santa Cruz linkage - if it works the 30mm front and rear roller bearings become options.

If going the 22.2 option BK5864 is a part that has a needle bearing.  Bikeinn had some in stock at the time of this posting.

My measurement was 22.86, which you can find, for example here https://www.amazon.com/Shock-Mount-Hardware-Washer-M8x22-86mm/dp/B08HR4YLMY
I used 22.2 + shims, because that's what I had.
September 02, 2021, 08:01:09 PM 		2
Re: The Shiny New AM831 Group Buy (A) Thread! Anybody else posting their build pictures?
Somebody else must have built by now!

BTW, I did a couple of rides on this bike (40km, 1200m of elevation in total) and I'm pretty impressed:
  - relatively efficient on the way up
  - handles well on steep downhill
  - it is easier to handle in tight spots than my LCFS947 (Lightcarbon), even though the geometries are very close.
September 02, 2021, 08:12:21 PM 		2
Re: The Shiny New AM831 Group Buy (A) Thread! Somebody asked about sitpost insertion length: my "S" frame only had about 13.5cm, measured from the edge of the sitpost's tube, not from the actuator.

Looking down the sit tube, it appeared as if the insertion should have been much longer: the tube was open all the way down to the shock mount.
Upon further inspection, I noticed what was stopping the sitpost: the top part of the sit tube has an inner carbon tube, which is the one where the sitpost slides, the same that is squeezed by the clamp.
This inner tube is somehow epoxied to the outer tube, which is part of the frame. The epoxy a the bottom of the inner tube bulged out in a few spots, reducing the diameter.

I decided that this was an unintended side effect of the assembly process and that it was not structural, hence I proceeded to painstakingly file down the bulging epoxy. This resulted into close-to-infinite insertion length :)

You should probably not try to do the same, unless you are sure that my "it is non structural" assumption is correct..
..but if you do, the best way I found to get it done is to tape some sandpaper to the bottom of a tube with a smaller outer diameter than the sitpost, say 25mm.
It is also useful to mark the "sanding tube" at the proper insertion length, to prevent sanding away anything else by the protruding epoxy: enlarging the sit tube diameter would probably be quite bad.
September 02, 2021, 09:59:40 PM 		2
Re: LCFS947 - 160mm 4-bar 27+/29 [Edit: I sold the frame]

Hi,

I'm considering selling my LCFS947 (M, matte black), please message me, if interested.

I love this frame, but I also joined the AM831 group buy and the 2 frames are really quite similar.
In my opinion the 947 is stiffer and more robust (also does not have the triangle linkage problem).
I'm short and light (5'7", 144) and the 831 is a tad easier to manage in tight corners, that's why I settled on that (plus it came in a flashy baby-blue color :)

The frame is in very good condition ridden less than 300 miles, with few cosmetic scratches and no major crashes on it.
I have Fox Float DPS Evol shock on it, which I can also sell with the frame.
February 09, 2022, 10:44:00 PM 		2
Re: LCFS947 - 160mm 4-bar 27+/29
Quote from: JJJ on February 10, 2022, 02:34:37 AM
What makes you say the 831 is easier to manage? Did you try an 831 in the same conditions? The chainstays are about the same length, just 2 mm less for the 831 (would that make the difference?).

Hard to say: yes I did ride both in the same trail/condition, but my fitness level could have been different.
I only noticed a small difference, if any.
I also thought that the 947 climbed a little better, but again not sure why.

.. as I was writing this, I just remember that I was initially running a 5mm longer stem in the 947, which could account for both.
February 10, 2022, 09:54:55 AM 		1