Chinertown
Chinese Carbon MTB => 29er => Topic started by: B-town on May 13, 2015, 11:14:41 AM
-
First I am new here (UTAH). Vipsanna your build post was awesome. I am ready to pull the trigger on a 256… but I just saw the CS-041 I am thinking of waiting and picking up the new frame. Any opinions on the new frame? I don't need to order immediately because I have a bike right now should I wait and be a Guinea pig on the new frame?
-
Interesting! I've never seen that design before. It must be brand new.
It appears to be the same weight as the 256. I'd be curious to see some different views of the frame, but it looks like this might solve the high-stress problems they had on some 256 frames at the junction of the right and left seat stays before they go to the seat tube.
I hope they improved the cable routing a bit as well.
I still love my 256 and feel no need to replace it, but if it was damaged, I might look into this frame depending on how the reviews pan out.
-
The CS-041 does appear to be brand new, the picture on www.xmcarbonspeed.com is a CAD model, not an true life picture. Look forward to seeing some of these built up.
-
Frame does look interesting.
Its got a short reach and a really low stack compared to other frames of the same size (medium). Its got an AM bike reach with a XC bike stack height...or am I missing something? Also...are 442mm chainstays considered long these days? I wonder what travel fork the stack and reach was measured with.
-
Comparing the geometry of the CS-041 to the CS-057 (the frame I have) and I see the numbers are nearly the same. Even though the CS-041 frame appears to be totally different, the dimensions are within a few millimeters of at least one of the existing designs.
-
not trying to derail, but I just purchased a frame (so no actual riding experience yet) but i did choose WCB-M-062 over this CS-041 in part due to the shorter chainstay's on the 62. Something to consider, its basically a carbon copy of the stumpjumper world cup it seems.
-
not trying to derail, but I just purchased a frame (so no actual riding experience yet) but i did choose WCB-M-062 over this CS-041 in part due to the shorter chainstay's on the 62. Something to consider, its basically a carbon copy of the stumpjumper world cup it seems.
I don't think you can go wrong with either one.
The difference in CS length between those two frames is only 10mm, not sure if anyone would even be able to notice such a small difference.
-
The characteristics of a frame is measured in mm's. A couple here and there can make a difference in the way a bike handles. If you look at frame designs withing a certain discipline...the things that vary are mere millimeters. The stack, reach, headtube angles...all within a few mm's of each other....but they will all handle different in some way.
The stack and reach on the 062 with a 100mm fork is pretty much spot on to my Carve...but the 062 has 12mm shorter chainstays. The 062 feels twitchier and is easier to lift off the ground.
-
Here are some pictures of CS-041 in 17''. there is no connecting braze between top tube and seat tube on 15'' frames
-
Just when I had my mind made up on the 057 they go and release a new frame. Peter have these been produced yet or would there be an extended wait time?
-
I am also interested. Is the price comparable to the 256? Do you know of BB30 will be available?
-
Just when I had my mind made up on the 057 they go and release a new frame. Peter have these been produced yet or would there be an extended wait time?
Sizes 15''/17'' will be available in 10 days, size 19'' will be available in 25 days.
-
I am also interested. Is the price comparable to the 256? Do you know of BB30 will be available?
Yes, comparable to 256 SL frame, sorry, only BB92 option
-
Here are some pictures of CS-041 in 17''. there is no connecting braze between top tube and seat tube
The pictures shows a connection bridge between the top and seat tube. Do you have real pictures of a 17"version without ?
-
Here are some pictures of CS-041 in 17''. there is no connecting braze between top tube and seat tube
The pictures shows a connection bridge between the top and seat tube. Do you have real pictures of a 17"version without ?
Sorry, I meant 15'' frame, not 17''
-
Here are some pictures of CS-041 in 17''. there is no connecting braze between top tube and seat tube
The pictures shows a connection bridge between the top and seat tube. Do you have real pictures of a 17"version without ?
Hi Peter, do you have some comment on the new frame compared to the 256, in what it is better?
-
To which A-brand frame is the CS-41 frame similar to ?
-
Here are some pictures of CS-041 in 17''. there is no connecting braze between top tube and seat tube
The pictures shows a connection bridge between the top and seat tube. Do you have real pictures of a 17"version without ?
Hi Peter, do you have some comment on the new frame compared to the 256, in what it is better?
This frame is super light but same stiff even stiffer than 256 SL frame. one of my customers won first prize on his CS-041 bike.
Here are some pictures, for some reasons I have to cover up his brand.
-
I saw this guy riding in Nové Město at the UCI World Cup in the U23, Lars Forster. Great guy! Nice he won his race on a chiner!
(http://cdn.media.cyclingnews.com/2015/05/25/2/nmwcu23m_xdsc5252_670.jpg)
-
Well done Peter, now my 256 looks all of a sudden outdated :)
Thanks for the information!
-
So it looks like the 041 will be the new popular chiner hardtail frame. Good looking frame, I really like the the split top tube area at the seat tube junction.
-
Hey Peter.. Edited your post because you could see the name of his brand in the reflection in the water. Blacked that out for you.
-
I really want to try this frame. The cost of the frame doesn't really deter me, but having to buy a new crank system for BB92 keeps me from doing this. My 256 is still doing really great. The bike is so damn fast on and off road.
-
Exactly my thoughts, are there going to be other BB options available Peter ? BSA would be great
-
Whats wrong with the BB92 BB? I've had the same BB with a SLX crank in my Pivot for almost 5 years. No issues with it. Is it hard to install the BB?
There are bottom brackets available to fit both 25mm and 30mm spindles.
-
I just didn't want to have to drop another 300+ on a crankset. Can you run a BB30 crack in a BB92 frame somehow??
-
There are BB30 to 92 "adapters"...but your crank spindle has to be long enough. :-\
-
I recently built up a FS frame that uses a BB92 - I bought the removal tool and the press adapters to use with a DIY bearing press (threaded rod, nuts and washers). I found the installation and removal of the BB to very easy - easier than BSA. I've only been riding it for ~1 month, but so far no trouble with creaks. As long as no major problems develop, I could easily live with this style of BB. Both standard Sram (GXP) and Shimano cranks have BB's to fit these frames, and the extra width makes stiffer frames possible.
Personally, though I have no experience with them, I would skip BB30 and PF30, and choose between BSA and BB92, which I do have experience with.
Ted
-
I'm currently trying to decide between the FM057, this frame (CS041), and the Dengfu FM218, which has nearly identical geometry.
The FM218, I believe, takes a 27.2 seatpost, which matches my current frame, and costs slightly less ($525 vs $550).
Any thoughts on these two?
Ted
-
The CS-041 is much cheaper than the other two.
-
Really? That would make the decision easier! What price have you seen on the CS-041? The prices I've been given so far put the FM057 at ~$400, the CS-041 at$550 and the FM218 at $525.
Ted
-
Sorry, made a mistake, the CS-MB01 is much cheaper, but that's not the one you want ...
-
Also wondering about comparisons of the following:
- tire clearance
frame compliance
I've read that the 256 is pretty stiff. Is it less comfortable than the 057? How does the 041 compare? Can a 29x2.35 Maxxis Ikon fit in these frames?
-
How much is the CS-MB01?
-
Peter said on mtbr that tire clearance was 2.35
If this is true I want one!
-
That's good to know - I was told 2.3" for the FM218 by Wendy at Dengfu. Hmmm - maybe leaning towards the CS-041 out of these two.
Anyone want to weigh in on whether or not these are worth the ~$150 premium over the FM057??
Ted
-
Anyone want to weigh in on whether or not these are worth the ~$150 premium over the FM057??
Didn't realize the 057 was that much cheaper. I'd say it just depends on your budget and how much of a weight weenie you are at heart. In actuality, it's probably not worth the extra $150, but I personally would probably pay it because I think the 041 is a way cooler looking frame that's also a bit lighter. One would probably enjoy the 057 just as much as you would the 041 though, so it's basically like everything else in expensive hobbies/sports.. No, it's probably not worth it you should probably do it anyways so you don't end up with a tinge of buyer's remorse for not getting the frame you really wanted lol.
-
That's a big reason I went with the 256 over the 057, to me it looks sleeker and faster. It was nice that it was lighter too. To me the thin seatstays and thinner downtube made it look lighter and faster. I know that sounds silly. I like the 041 because the rear dropouts are so minimalist.
Also, I was building a $3000+ bike... $150 extra to get the higher level frame seemed like a minor upgrade by comparison. Which is a DANGEROUS mindset to have if you need to sick to a build budget! ;D
-
Ok - so I took the plunge and ordered a large CS-041 from Peter, along with headset, adapter for my straight steerer fork, rear axle, seatpost and clamp. Total with shipping was just under $750.
I'll be adding a new rear wheel and crank, and moving the rest over from my old bike (upgraded 2010 Gary Fisher X-Cal). Will post updates later.
Ted
-
TedS123, I look forward to see your build!
-
Oh, sweet. I can't wait to see it. I think I'll probably order one after all my races in August and September.
Please keep us up to speed with pictures and all.
What size did you end up getting?
-
Ok - so I took the plunge and ordered a large CS-041 from Peter, along with headset, adapter for my straight steerer fork, rear axle, seatpost and clamp. Total with shipping was just under $750.
I'll be adding a new rear wheel and crank, and moving the rest over from my old bike (upgraded 2010 Gary Fisher X-Cal). Will post updates later.
Ted
Look forward to seeing your build. Please plan on posting lots of pictures.
-
I went with a large, since the geometry is similar to my Gary Fisher X-Cal: same TT, HTA, STA, similar reach, etc. I'm 5'11" and got really dialed in on my large X-Cal.
I'll be sure to post pictures when everything arrives - trying to be patient...
-
Yes, def need lots of good pics of this frame/build.
Does anyone know exactly what the weight differences (actual, not seller estimates) are between the 057, 256, and 041??
-
Peter, any info on the max chainring for xx1 use?
-
OK - so I'm overdue for an update. I ordered the CS-041 from Peter on 6/23, and it arrived on 6/29 - less than a week from China to Virginia! Unfortunately, I wasn't home when USPS tried to deliver, so I didn't get it until Wednesday.
Here are some shots of the packaging:
-
And here are some shots of the frame, noting the interesting shapes, the cable routing, etc.
-
And some more...
-
And a few more...:)
-
And the last few...
-
OK - so here's a run down of some of the highlights and initial impressions:
1) 1st off, the website is incorrect on the seatpost size: This frame takes a 27.2 mm post, not 31.6. I'm actually glad, since I can use my existing post and take advantage of the added flexibility of the smaller post.
2) The frame feels very light and looks pretty good overall. The seat stays and top tube have a very distinctive flat shape that is pretty cool looking.
3) There were a few imperfections on the inside of the BB shell, but a little very light sandpaper seems to have taken care of it. I'll report any issues with BB installation.
4) The cable routing is pretty neat:
a) Rear brake - You can see the orange liner for the rear brake hose that runs on the left side of the frame.
b) FD - There are interchangeable inserts for the front derailleur - it came installed with cable stop inserts and process aid for running bare cable internal. These can be swapped with another set of inserts that has a larger opening for running full-length housing, or plugs if running 1X.
c) RD - There is also a cable guide for the rear derailleur cable. At first I didn't see it until I pulled out the cable stop insert near the head tube. The cable guide is actually molded into the carbon fiber/resin - I took another shot at the inside of the BB where you can see the cable bulge running under the gray surface.
These seem a like a pretty slick system - we'll see how well it all works as I build it up. I'll be taking the frame to work tomorrow to get a weight, before I start hanging parts on it.
Ted
-
Very nice!
Sooo...when do you start building? ;D ;D
-
Great pics, thanks for sharing.
I agree that this area of the frame looks really cool. A lot "flatter" than I thought it would be. I dig it.
(http://i.imgur.com/5ovAQTC.jpg)
-
Weight of the frame (19") came in at 1041.1g on a calibrated scale at work. That includes the plastic seatpost plug, the plastic rear axle spacer, and the cable guide for the front derailleur - basically just as it appears in the photos.
Once I finish building the rear wheel, I'll begin assembling the new frame.
-
Hi TedS123
this CS-041 looks pretty good ;) and light (I thought it was a little heavier)
as per your pics - the finishing looks perfect
-
Thanks for the pictures! Now I really want one once I have some more money and I finish a road bike.
That's really light for a 19" frame. My 256 was 1080g without the plastic parts. I'd guess yours would be right around 1000g without those parts?
-
Yes, a thousand grams for a 19 inch frame is pretty awesome. I'm definitely wanting this frame now!
Thanks for sharing the pics and info.
-
The plastic axle and seat-tube cap weighed 22.8g, leaving the frame at 1018.3 g (still has the front derailleur cable guide).
The 12x142 axle that Peter provided weighs 79.0g.
-
Good luck, will be an attention getter on the trails. Me personally not my cup o tea, other than the weight! But it's not my bike so it doesn't matter.
-
Looks good, what are the axles like? are they're replaced with a lighter option from carbon-ti or similar?
-
Looks good, what are the axles like? are they're replaced with a lighter option from carbon-ti or similar?
Someone posted this link on MTBR: http://www.extralite.com/Products/Black%20Lock.htm
The China frames typically use the Shimano E-Thru rear axle.
-
Have you put any parts on this frame? I'm curious to see it being built up.
-
It's coming along slowly...
-
Looking good TedS123, I like the general design of the CS-041. The junction between the top tube, seat stays, and seat tube looks like a robust design. I also like the curved reinforcing tube at the top of the seat tube, which allows for a lower top tube while still providing good strength.
-
Looks good, what are the axles like? are they're replaced with a lighter option from carbon-ti or similar?
Someone posted this link on MTBR: http://www.extralite.com/Products/Black%20Lock.htm
The China frames typically use the Shimano E-Thru rear axle.
I was going to get one of these for my wife's bike to save some weight, and since we rarely pull the front wheel off. (bike fits in the Element fully assembled) and then found out they're ~$100 for what is a large aluminum bolt. Yikes.
-
^^Fox and Rock Shox have a lightweight front axle. Fox has the Kabolt and RS has the Maxle Stealth. Both are around 45usd. No quick realease. You'll have to use a 6mm hex wrench.
-
^^Fox and Rock Shox have a lightweight front axle. Fox has the Kabolt and RS has the Maxle Stealth. Both are around 45usd. No quick realease. You'll have to use a 6mm hex wrench.
Oh cool, good info, thank you! Didn't know about that one.
-
Can u give us an update? I'm realy curious ;-)
-
Sorry - work, family, and vacation have kept the progress slow. I've gotten all the cables routed, now (F & R derailleurs, rear brake), and the internal routing worked well. There's a tight bend in the housing run to the rear derailleur, but it should be ok. Also had to find fittings for my rear brake, since I had to disconnect the line to route it through the frame. I'll try to post another picture soon.
Ted
-
Finally just about finished. Need to have the rear brake bled after running the line through the frame. Also need to add some oil to the air chamber of the fork after adjusting the travel from 80 to100 mm. This isn't a super low-weight build - most of the parts were moved over from my old Gary Fisher X-Cal. The crank, rear hub & spokes, and shift cables are really the only new parts. Pics to follow...
-
Pics...
-
It looks very nice!
How does it ride compared to your previous bike?
-
I haven't had it outside yet - just finished last night. Hopefully this weekend I'll get a chance to try it out.
-
Looking good. Sure makes the 29 wheels look extra big.
-
Looking good. Sure makes the 29 wheels look extra big.
Totally agree with that!
-
Well, I took the bike to my LBS to have the rear brake bled (one of the few things I don't do myself), but they had a week's worth backlog of repairs. So I took the bike home and did a few more finishing touches - wrapped the drive-side chainstay with an old inner-tube, attached a bottle holder, put some clear stickers on the headtube to protect from cable rub, and installed my speed/cadence sensor.
I rode it once around the yard, and the initial impression is that the handling seems very similar to my old GF X-Cal (it should based on geometry numbers). But it will definitely need more seat time to sort out a comparison and ride report.
Here are a bunch more pics. These show ample tire clearance around a WTB Bronson 29x2.2. Ultimately want to put an Ikon 29x2.3 back there - should be fine. :
Tried uploading pics, but kept getting error messages. Will try again later.
-
More pics: Again with the upload errors...
These were going to show the derailleur cable housing. The rear derailleur housing makes a pretty tight bend after popping out of the frame, but seems to work OK. For the front derailleur housing, I couldn't get the ferrule to fit inside the lower cable stop on the seat tube - the rivet holding it to the frame stuck out too far to let the ferrule drop all the way to the bottom of the stop. So I just bypassed it altogether and ran the housing from the top tube directly to the derailleur, which has a cable stop built into it. That also seems to be working fine.
-
Do you get a sizing error?
The images must be below 512kb each, and below 1024kb in total.
I look forward for the pics.
-
Do you get a sizing error?
The images must be below 512kb each, and below 1024kb in total.
I look forward for the pics.
Or you can use my method described in - How to post a picture - (http://chinertown.com/index.php/topic,196.msg1594.html#msg1594)
-
Definitely considering one of these for a lightweight xc style build, how much did it cost if you don't mind me asking?
-
I keep getting a message saying the uploader is full. The pics I'm trying to upload are only ~200kb each, and I'm only attaching a couple (2-4) to each post.
-
Definitely considering one of these for a lightweight xc style build, how much did it cost if you don't mind me asking?
Frame was ~$550. I added a few accessories ($15 for rear thru-axle, $15 for headset, etc.). Shipping was $80, and there was the 4% Paypal fee on top of everything else.
-
Another attempt at posting pics:
(http://s4.postimg.org/5ug3g6nal/0810152153a_resized.jpg/)
(http://s14.postimg.org/y1wncsash/0810152154a_resized.jpg)
-
(http://s4.postimg.org/5ug3g6nal/0810152153a_resized.jpg)
-
(http://s2.postimg.org/s4q2bgmrt/0810152156a_resized.jpg)
(http://s29.postimg.org/laxtjp5rb/0810152157_resized.jpg)
(http://s18.postimg.org/vlj5wsak9/0810152157a_resized.jpg)
-
(http://s29.postimg.org/gl7vv3eqv/0810152157b_resized.jpg)
(http://s13.postimg.org/tk6c8cd5z/0810152158_resized.jpg)
(http://s9.postimg.org/3jso671j3/0810152158a_resized.jpg)
-
That attempt at posting pics seems to have worked! The bike is currently at the LBS getting the brakes bled. When I get it back in a couple days it will be ready to ride in earnest. I did take it for a quick shake-down ride last week. My initial impressions are that it does indeed seem to handle very similarly to my old bike (2010 GF X-Cal), which is what I wanted. The geometry is very similar, and I was able to set up the cockpit just like the old bike. Some more trail time will tell if the carbon rides smoother than the old aluminum.
You can see in the pics the cable routing. I have two recommendations for Peter (or whoever designs this frame):
- Move the exit point of the rear derailleur internal cable routing forward on the chainstay an inch or two, so that the housing doesn't have to make such a tight bend to reach the derailleur.
- Improve the rivet or screw on the front derailleur cable stop on the seat tube. The rivet that holds the cable stop to the seat tube blocks the cable stop such that a ferrule cannot be inserted into it, making it unusable (at least on my frame).
What does everyone else do for chain-suck protection on these frames? I've got an old tube wrapped to prevent chain-slap, but don't expect a tube to help much against chainsuck.
-
Thanks for the update TedS123, bike looks really good.
For chain-suck protection, I use a SRAM XX1 drivetrain. Between the clutched derailleur and the X-sync ring, the chain never leaves the chainring. At that point all I needed is a little frame protection on top of the chain stay, for when you are in the smallest rear cog and bombing down some rough stuff, and I get little chainslap on top of the chainstay.
-
You can see in the pics the cable routing. I have two recommendations for Peter (or whoever designs this frame):
- Move the exit point of the rear derailleur internal cable routing forward on the chainstay an inch or two, so that the housing doesn't have to make such a tight bend to reach the derailleur.
Funny, that was one of the things I noticed looking at the photos. Maybe they designed it based on Shimano derailleurs? This isn't the first frame I've seen where the rear derailleur cable routing seems like it was optimized for something other than what was installed.
- Improve the rivet or screw on the front derailleur cable stop on the seat tube. The rivet that holds the cable stop to the seat tube blocks the cable stop such that a ferrule cannot be inserted into it, making it unusable (at least on my frame).
At least you've got the option to route straight to the front derailleur!
I'm also assuming that you are using 4mm linear cable housing for the front derailleur, right, not 5mm coiled brake housing?
What does everyone else do for chain-suck protection on these frames? I've got an old tube wrapped to prevent chain-slap, but don't expect a tube to help much against chainsuck.
With modern cranks and chains, chain suck doesn't seem to be as much of an issue as it used to be - at least, in my experience, although I did manage to get some just the other day, which surprised me, since I haven't for a long time, I mean, like - years.
I think many of these frames come with small metal plates adhered to the drive-side chainstay behind the chainrings. If yours doesn't have, then there are some options... you could fabricate something yourself, or a quick search found this: http://www.chainsuckprotector.com/ (http://www.chainsuckprotector.com/)
-
I'm overdue for an update here. I've been waiting until I had a little bit of seat time to give a ride report, and it took until now. Work was really busy for a while, then when I was ready to go for my first long ride on the bike, a branch took out my rear derailleur at the start of the ride, so had to wait for a new one to arrive, etc.
Anyway, I've now had several short rides and one somewhat longer ride over my normal trails, plus one long gravel and paved road ride when the trails were wet. First, I can say that the bike seems like a great carbon drop-in upgrade from my old bike (2010 Gary Fisher X-Cal). The geometry is very similar, and I'm using the same G2 fork (51 mm offset), but with travel extended from 80 mm to 100 mm. I've adjusted the cockpit to match my old setup as close as possible, so the handling feels very natural - a slam dunk. The chinese frames that share this geometry should be a safe bet for a lot of folks.
Second, the stiffness and lightness of the carbon frame are noticeable - it feels very efficient and responsive to pedaling input.
Third, the carbon does seem to have some vibration damping on rough asphalt and gravel. It may also take a little edge off of larger bumps, but it in no way feels like anything but a hardtail.
I just built my first FS bike this spring - a Devinci Atlas Carbon with 120/110 front/rear travel - so I now have a comparison between suspension and hardtail. They both have their place, and I can ride either on our local trails, but the FS is more comfortable on the extended rooty sections in our trails. On rocky, rooty technical climbs the FS is easier to keep pedaling, letting the suspension sort out the bumps and keep the wheel on the ground. The hardtail takes more technique to keep from getting hung up, but it's lightness and efficiency are apparent.
For short, high-intensity workouts or races, easier trails, or for long gravel rides, I'll go for the CS-041. For longer or rougher rides, I'll go with the Atlas. But it's a luxury to have such nice options. For anyone looking for a very light, raceworthy, carbon hardtail with decent comfort (as hardtails go) and proven geometry, I think the CS-041 fits the bill. I'll try to post back periodically with any updates on the long-term reliability.
Ted
-
Good to hear that your frame is holding up. I just got mine - of the frames I've bought from far east this is the nicest one by far in terms of finish. Can't wait to build it up, will probably post some pictures once it's finished.
A couple things so far.
a) I noticed the same as you with the cable stop for the front derailleur. The rivets are too big, this is with Shimano SP41 housing with standard plastic end caps. Not a big deal for me as I'll build it as 1x, probably not a problem 2x either with some sand paper and patience. This would be an easy fix at the factory though.
b) Cool that the frame comes with inserts for 1x or full length housing.
c) There is a large-ish hole right above the right side bottom bracket - anyone know what that's for? A rubber cap that fits snugly into the hole comes with the frame.
-
Nice write up. Thanks for sharing Ted.
-
Any news one the 041? How does it ride and how comfortable is it?
I'm considering to give it a shot, although there are a few other nice frames around like the CS-MB01 or WCB-M-062 which are considerably less expensive. But every frame has its weak point. So it hard to decide. I would like to use a side swing front derailleur since it's supposed to be superior to the classic ones. Unfortunately few frames are designed for side swing. The 041 has a hole close to the BB as TedS123 has shown in post #48. What is it for? For a side swing opening it seems too close to the seat stay. Maybe someone of you has the answer...
-
I think the hole on the BB could be for a DI2 electric cable. Not for something mechanical.
The cable stop for the front derailleur is half way on the seat tube, coming on top of it.
-
DI2. That makes sense. But there should be also an inlet for the electric cable, right? Couldn't I use the inlet for a side swing cable and drill a hole at the right place as outlet?
Btw. has anyone experience with a side swing? Is it really that much better than classic derailleurs?
-
Hi all,
Here's an overdue update, which is pretty uneventful. I've been riding my CS-041 on and off in rotation with my Devinci Atlas. I'm up to about 300 miles and have nothing to report. I've ridden rocky, rooty singletrack, gravel and asphalt, and it's done fine. I still appreciate the light weight, stiffness, handling, etc.
-
Unless something goes wrong, I'll be able to give secondhand reports on the 041 vs. the Scott Scale - ordered up one for my wife!