He deleted your comment.

You posted to help people to be careful because he may not be legitimate.

I'm saying it would be great to know his own reasoning for deleting your comment.

The 1056 or R12 will be much better built.  But you've also chosen 3 different bikes with different geo and tube profiles so you might want to think about that.

I highly doubt the 177 layup uses any T1000.  And to call it T1000 as they do is misleading anyway, as even if it did, it'd probably be less than 10%.  Chinese outfits (typically the low quality ones) use the T1000/1100 term interchangeably with high modulus / light weight.  The 177 is relatively light weight.   I'd be skeptical that VB or similar price point frames are using genuine Toray stuff anymore anyway (that's not to say Chinese equivalents are bad), given price rises.

An update on dust cap and headtube gap. Copying my response from GF002 thread -

————

Also an update on C ring and dust cap fitting about 1.7mm above the top of head tube - from a machinist friend I got my dust cap/base sanded off by a 0.6-0.7mm on the inside (outer part is untouched but the part that rests on C ring is now deeper by 0.7mm) this has solved the problem of unnecessarily large gap.

The dust cap now sits just about 1mm above head tube. Since it rotates, I didn’t want go any more deeper or add spacers. There is no headset play after tightening the top cap.

Anyone having same issue - this something that I won’t recommend doing at home with Dremel (like I originally thought and quickly abandoned ship).

————

This last part, thanks to Eucalyptus.

I received such a frame from a friend of mine. One of the aluminium BB inserts de-bonded from the frame and since he wasn't too happy about the stiffness of the frame either, he decided not to use it anymore. I could do whatever I wanted with it (I build and repair carbon parts on an amateur level). So I cut it in half.

I will post some pictures later, but a few comments first:
The frame was incredibly light, 728g for a size 54 to be exact (no typo). Since I highly doubt that HM fibers are used in such a frame, I suspect that they simply reduced the amount of stiffness layers to achieve such a low weight. Or some precut pieces fell to the floor and the person laminating the frame decided not to use them anymore That's also in line with the owner's feedback who said the bike felt pretty noodly.

The good: The frame is surprisingly well built, the inside in general looks very clean. No wrinkles and almost no voids.

The bad: The rear dropout for the derailleur hanger I find horrible, it is so thin. This was mentioned in this thread already. The connection where front and rear triangle is glued together is done poorly too. You'll see why on the pics. The integration of the seatpost shape in the seattube isn't a showpiece either (an OEM SL7 seatpost doesn't fit, BTW). The BB area is pretty thin compared to other frames that I cut and honestly, I'm not surprised that one insert decided to part ways.

Would I recommend buying such a frame from a manufacturing/engineering perspective? Absolutely not. I'm not squeamish when it comes to carbon parts but IMHO I'd stay clear from such a frame.