Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - RDY

Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6 7 ... 34
61
Component Deals & Selection / Re: yuananbike forged gravel wheels
« on: November 08, 2023, 06:17:34 AM »
That's a purely cosmetic layer on top of the UD rim.  Forged carbon is a stupid marketing term anyway, it just refers to a molded (instead of laminated layers) thermoplastic composite with bits of carbon in it.

It adds weight.  In this case it's just a few large strands of UD carbon suspended in what looks like a pretty thick coat of gloss finish resin.  I'd guess it adds minimum 30g and perhaps as much as 40g per rim.  Looks cool though.

62
You are right. Anyway 50mm tyres is No problems. This is 45 and margin is big.

What rim and what tire though?

63
Road Bike Frames, Wheels & Components / Re: Manufacturing brand
« on: November 07, 2023, 02:33:35 PM »
Unless something's changed, Winspace didn't used to manufacture anything.  The most they do AFAIK is wheel assembly.

64
Cyclocross Frames, Wheels & Components / Re: Yishun G055-D
« on: November 05, 2023, 02:20:03 PM »
I was thinking the same exact thing, such a bummer. Its interesting how some frame designs have the HTA steepen in the larger sizes.

It's a thing carried over from decades (or centuries) of cost savings - keeping the wheelbase and size of the frame down keeps costs down.  Material cost is less relevant now with carbon as it costs practically nothing in its raw state, but shipping size and mold size are something they want to pinch pennies on.  The industry pretends that generally taller, longer legged riders need slacker STA and steeper HTA.  But it's the absolute opposite.  Like so many other things in cycling, it's just a fat lie for profit.  Conversely smaller riders would benefit from having a slightly steeper head angle and in some cases slacker seat angle, but since the industry cost saves by putting the same wheel size on all frame sizes, they have to use slack head angle on small frames to get the front wheel far away enough from the down tube, and rear wheel far enough away from the seat tube ...

66
Cyclocross Frames, Wheels & Components / Re: Yishun G055-D
« on: November 04, 2023, 01:20:50 PM »
If they'd kept the 74.5 / 70 STA/HTA of the 470 throughout the sizes I'd have bought it.  73.5/72.5 in my size is no good for a gravel bike ... especially one clearly designed for the rougher stuff with a pivot and flex stays.

67
Cyclocross Frames, Wheels & Components / Re: SLACK Gravel Frame
« on: November 02, 2023, 07:21:31 AM »
I wouldn't touch that TopCarbon / Lexon frame with a barge pole. 

I suspect there will be some copies of the new Merida geo as it won worlds.  But hopefully they add greater than 50mm clearance - that was a big fail on Merida's part.  Doing 69.5HTA 75STA in bigger sizes and then having 45mm on the rear being max, and maybe being able to squeeze a 48 in at the front.

I'd love something with that geo and the ability to fit 2.1" Thunder Burts - which whilst not quite as aero as some smaller gravel tires, roll significantly faster than any of them and handle rough stuff much better.

68
Cyclocross Frames, Wheels & Components / Re: SLACK Gravel Frame
« on: October 31, 2023, 07:07:55 AM »
https://www.speedercycling.com/Carbon-Adventure-Bikepacking-Fork-SC-ADV09-_p375.html

They make a number of different forks. That on has flip chips mounts dynamo routing and clears 55s

Thanks.  Hadn't realized it was Speeder.  Shame they do a fork like that and no similarly progressive geo frames to match it to ...

69
Cyclocross Frames, Wheels & Components / Re: SLACK Gravel Frame
« on: October 28, 2023, 05:19:56 PM »
I have a Carbonda 696 size 56 I've been using for the last 3 years. It has served me well and is a good bike, but for a lot of the gravel I riding here in SoCal I definitely want something longer and slacker. I really like the geometry of the new Santa Cruz Stigmata, but it is kind of a rarity with only a few others sharing a similar design. Does anyone know of a chinese frame that is 69-70 degrees headtube angle and 1060-1090mm wheelbase in a size large? Ive looked at all the usual suspects and they are all kind of the same old gravel geometry.

The new Lightcarbon LCG073-D with rear suspension sounds very interesting, but seems unproven at this point.

Does anyone know who the maker / original supplier of this fork is?  Variable rake and 700x54.  Must be one of the larger Chinese suppliers to the OEM market.

https://nordestcycles.com/producto/albarda-carbon-horquilla   -- this one.  I'm seeing quite a few brands using it now.

70
I really like that the frame has short chainstays and slack headtube angle. Just don't understand why it has such a short reach and tt. I am 187 and looking at geo chart I would need size XL with 110 stem I think. The stack is reall high at this size. And size L with 556 TT would be to small. That would be a really short tube for fast gravel or singletracks
Seems strange to me. Or am I missing something?

You're not missing anything, it's just not got a long TT and doesn't need one, since it clearly wasn't designed with that in mind (long reach).  Indeed you can 'correct' it for your fit with a longer stem.  But they should have used a longer fork offset to extend the FC and wheelbase since TT is relatively short, and also should have kept the same HTA / STA from the size XS all the way to XL.  You can't correct that.

If they'd gone 70HTA and 74.5STA (as in the XS) with a 60mm fork offset, this thing would be great descending and on gnarly offroad.  As is, FC and WB are way too short in L and XL IMO.

Peak Torque tangentially touched on this in his Yoeleo gravel bike review recently - complaining about toe overlap.

71
If have send you a pm, which has not been answered...
when and were are samples available? please reach out to me..

Greetings..
Armin

He left his email in the first post.

72
Road Bike Frames, Wheels & Components / Re: dcrf26 frame - Scott Foil?
« on: September 30, 2023, 06:32:07 AM »
BTW, TanTan claimed on instagram that they tested this frame with 32c tyres .

Lol.  Continental recommend 22-24mm and 21-25mm is the official compatibility IIRC.

They must have really had to search around for a 15.5mm ID rim to shrink the tire width enough to claim 32 compatibility.

73
Lexon reverse? Even Shorter reach, higher stack, more vertical steerer tube.

I have had mine for about 2 years and it is a really nice frame. I currently use it with the zniino surly corner knock off h-bar, but I am really tempted to build a gravel out of it.

Thanks for the suggestion.  2x, road width BB shell, 142 rear option and 2.4" clearance is great ... but the HTA and STA are not ideal.  Unless touring, I don't really see the point of having a big clearance gravel bike to complement my normal one if its geo is *less* rather than more progressive.  It won't be great for descending or climbing with that geo.  OG Evkin also do this frame, albeit they sell only the 148 option.

74
Sounds like things have gone badly wrong with them, then.  They were always really helpful with me and numerous acquaintances ... we bought lots of bars, seatposts and bottle cages.

Point still stands though .. it would be good to find a suitable replacement for a 2x 1306.

75
IMO this could be an excellent high tire clearance gravel frame with the addition of an FD mount and either a 100mm suspension fork or rigid alternative.  Reach isn't crazy long, head tube is relatively slack but not too far gone for rolling hardpack or tarmac, and nice steep STA (little steeper than most gravel frames) for the lung bursters.  Seat tube is just long enough.  It's also very light and generally speaking OG Evkin stuff is good quality and customer service also decent. 

https://ogevkinbike.com/products/og-evkin-cf-056-mtb-carbon-mountain-bike-frame

Oh and the custom paint jobs (which they usually don't show on AliExpress) look good.

They currently don't do one with an FD mount, but I asked them about one with compatibility for GRX 46/30 or similar, and they said they're considering it.  Potentially it would be better if they switched to PF30 or BSA73 though, as BB92 might cause crankset compatibility issues (too wide) as it does on the Salsa Cutthroat which is nominally GRX 2x compatible but can run a sum total of one RaceFace crankset for the purpose, which is heavy as balls, not very good and has poor quality proprietary BBs.

Hoping it happens.  It was a real disappointment when the Carbonda / Fly Bike 1306 lost its FD mount.  There are a bunch of Ti and steel monster-gravel bikes, but they tend to be very heavy if steel, and heavy and very expensive if Ti.

Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6 7 ... 34