Author Topic: CS-496 Build / 27.5+  (Read 9149 times)

tybiker25

  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 10
    • View Profile
Re: CS-496 Build / 27.5+
« Reply #60 on: January 24, 2017, 12:46:33 PM »
Hello
I have been following this forum for a while, and I am ready to order my own 496, so I can share and swap wheels back and forth with my full suspension 29/27.5+ depending on the kind of riding.
Now, i am confused, the Peter everybody says is so good, is he at carbonspeedbikes or at xmcarbonspeed?  Or both?
And the other question is about the bottom bracket, many say that they had to go with the press fit, but I see carbonspeedbikes and somebody in aliexpress offer the option for different ones (but not xmcarbonspeed) .  I would try to go with the threaded BSA 73
Thanks,
Ale

Peter is the same for both websites. Carbonspeedbikes.com is the new website where you can order directly. xmcarbonspeed.com doesn't have that capability.

Looks like the BB option is the BB92 press fit option.

http://www.carbonspeedbikes.com/shop/mountain/cs-496-27-529-plus-frameset/
http://xmcarbonspeed.com/Productinfo.asp?f=1460

Peter is on Holiday until February 10, but will still probably reply to emails. Just nothing will ship until after the Chinese New Year.

Ale

  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 2
    • View Profile
Re: CS-496 Build / 27.5+
« Reply #61 on: January 24, 2017, 02:04:07 PM »
Thank you!

SportingGoods

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 360
    • View Profile
Re: CS-496 Build / 27.5+
« Reply #62 on: January 25, 2017, 02:44:02 AM »
The quality of the bottom bracket of the 496 frame is very good. I did not have the option to select anything else but BB92, but now that I've seen how nice it is I would select it over a BSA BB. It is a BB with no aluminum shell and I believe that it is a better design. I've had the aluminum shell move on my previous frame.
CS-496 BB92 really feels solid. It's a great frame overall. The only other frame I would consider today is a full sus.

SportingGoods

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 360
    • View Profile
Re: CS-496 Build / 27.5+
« Reply #63 on: February 28, 2017, 11:48:30 AM »
A quick update here. I want to mention that Peter has replaced (free of charge) the rear axle that was too long. He has slipped it in an order I had placed recently (Spokes for my road bike carbon wheels), so that even the shipping was kind of free. The new axle fits nicely, with no shim, and is 24g lighter then the previous axle+shims.

This is a good example of high quality of service from CarbonSpeed!

exzos

  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 43
    • View Profile
Re: CS-496 Build / 27.5+
« Reply #64 on: February 28, 2017, 12:46:38 PM »
How did you mount the bottom bracket, with grease, loctite or nothing?

SportingGoods

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 360
    • View Profile
Re: CS-496 Build / 27.5+
« Reply #65 on: March 01, 2017, 02:57:52 AM »
Nothing a very thin layer of Cu grease (I almost forgot about it, I always add Cu grease to non rotating assemblies), but I've used a proper pressfit tool to get a good alignment.

No creaking so far. As I mentioned in an earlier post, I like the design of the SRAM product: the cranks provide a nice compression over the BB. It feels like the cranks keep the BB secure. Again, I would select this BB92 over a BSA now I see how nice it is.
« Last Edit: March 01, 2017, 02:59:59 AM by SportingGoods »

exzos

  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 43
    • View Profile
Re: CS-496 Build / 27.5+
« Reply #66 on: March 01, 2017, 03:15:24 AM »
Nothing a very thin layer of Cu grease (I almost forgot about it, I always add Cu grease to non rotating assemblies), but I've used a proper pressfit tool to get a good alignment.

No creaking so far. As I mentioned in an earlier post, I like the design of the SRAM product: the cranks provide a nice compression over the BB. It feels like the cranks keep the BB secure. Again, I would select this BB92 over a BSA now I see how nice it is.
Never had any experience with pressfit BB only BSA
I will mount with a very thin layer of grease too, thanks :)

ro7939

  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 3
    • View Profile
Re: CS-496 Build / 27.5+
« Reply #67 on: April 02, 2017, 06:35:17 PM »
Looks nice!  I wonder how it would look/ride with 29+ wheels & tires.  As you know, I like the combination of 29+ on a hardtail and 27+ on a FS bike.

Do you own both 29+ HT and 27+ FS?  I ask because I'm a single bike person (HT), and find it very difficult to chose between 27+ and 29+. 

Currently riding a 2016 Trek Stache 5 29+, offset chain stay, HT, rigid carbon fork, 10 spd, full XTR group, Thompson seat post, carbon handlebar, TL, etc.  I need a suspension fork and 11 spd.  I am pretty firm about most items.  Strong lean toward 27+, but I am 6-3 and there appears a strong consensus that the taller the rider the more suitable is 29+. 

Carbon_Dude

  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1832
    • View Profile
Re: CS-496 Build / 27.5+
« Reply #68 on: April 02, 2017, 06:55:55 PM »
Yes, I currently have a Stache 9 (which I have for sale), a Stache 9.8, and a Specialized Stumpjumper Carbon 6Fattie 27+.

I would recommend a Rockshox Pike for a suspension fork, that's what is on the Stache 9.8, it's probably the best forks I've ridden.  As for your 11-spd, I'm a big fan for SRAM 1x but Shimano is good too.

I agree with you on taller people preferring 29+, that's been my general experience.  I don't think Trek sells as many small or med sized Stache bikes as they do large and XL.
« Last Edit: April 02, 2017, 06:58:59 PM by Carbon_Dude »
2017 Trek Stache 9.8 (29+)
2016 Specialized Stumpjumper FSR Carbon Comp 6Fattie (27.5+)
2016 Trek Stache 9 (29+) w/upgrades (Sold)
2014 -036 Full Suspension Chiner (Sold)
2013 -057 Hardtail Carbon Chiner (Sold)
Atlanta, GA

ro7939

  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 3
    • View Profile
Re: CS-496 Build / 27.5+
« Reply #69 on: April 03, 2017, 03:38:12 PM »
I appreciate the congenial and collegiate atmosphere here. 

So far I owned, in ascending time line:
Alloy FS 26 x 2.2"
Carbon FS 26 x 2.2"
Alloy HT/front susp 29 x 2.2
Alloy rigid 26 x 4.0
Alloy rigid/carbon fork 29 x 3.0

Maxxis and likely other tire makers plan to release, if you can believe it, another tire size format called "Wide Trail," between standard width and Plus, e.g. 2.4 to 2.8 inches.  I suspect my favorite bike is a carbon HT/front suspension, 29 x about 2.7.

Suppose in the not too distant future exist handsome tire/carbon wheel sets for 29 x 2.7.  27 x 3.00 has radius about +5mm vs. 29 x 2.2, so I presume 29 x 2.7 and 27 x 3.0 have almost identical radius.  If correct, then installing the 496 rear axle at the 27 x 3.00 height provides proper BB height above the ground for 29 x 2.7.  Further, a 27 x 3.00 fork provides almost perfect ride height for 29 x 2.7.     

Comments appreciated.   

« Last Edit: April 03, 2017, 03:49:59 PM by ro7939 »

SportingGoods

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 360
    • View Profile
Re: CS-496 Build / 27.5+
« Reply #70 on: June 06, 2017, 02:43:40 AM »
One more feedback on my CS-496 MTB.

I just did a XC Marathon last Saturday with the CS-496 mounted with 27.5x2.8. The bike was fantastic. Really solid frame, perfect geometry for the task, nice design of the chainstay (never catch any mud into the drivetrain). I even crashed once (not too badly) and the frame is still just as new, not even scratched (and I want to thank Evoc for their nice Protector backpacks!).

That being said, my initial plan before I win this frame (thanks again Peter and Chinertown!!) was to buy a full sus 27.5+. I still believe this is what I need. Despite 27.5x2.8 tire there were sections where I was obviously slower then a full-sus. It won't be in the next 12 month but my next frame will be a full-sus.

carbonazza

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 726
    • View Profile
Re: CS-496 Build / 27.5+
« Reply #71 on: June 06, 2017, 03:35:38 AM »
We've built a 496 with a friend a couple of months ago.
I was a bit lazy to start a post about it, and time has passed  :-\

He rides full rigid, with 29x3.0 because he's tall and strong, liked the idea and he's very happy.
This is to ride mostly XC around here in Belgium.

As usual, dealing with Peter for the frame/fork was smooth and easy.
There was no problem during the build either.
@sportinggoods, the rear brake hose was a bit of a fiddle to get out from at the head tube, but there was nothing clogging the rear to the bottom bracket.

Here are some pictures of the build:


The connoisseurs will recognize the 42mm rims cmh won at the lottery here =)
They arrived in Europe by a rather improbable route.
The lacing was easy and the offset I was so afraid of, wasn't an issue at all obviously.


The shifter hose enters the frame on the left, and crosses there.
Not pretty, but not a problem either.






Here is a picture of the finished bike:

SportingGoods

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 360
    • View Profile
Re: CS-496 Build / 27.5+
« Reply #72 on: June 06, 2017, 04:15:25 AM »
I like the look of a full rigid 29+, but I don't want to ride it :)

For the rear derailleur cable, indeed you have 2 options. Neither is perfect. I did the other way: cleaner above the BB (more direct out and in), but tighter bend of the cable at the shifter.

Carbon_Dude

  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1832
    • View Profile
Re: CS-496 Build / 27.5+
« Reply #73 on: June 06, 2017, 06:33:11 AM »
Nice looking +bike!
2017 Trek Stache 9.8 (29+)
2016 Specialized Stumpjumper FSR Carbon Comp 6Fattie (27.5+)
2016 Trek Stache 9 (29+) w/upgrades (Sold)
2014 -036 Full Suspension Chiner (Sold)
2013 -057 Hardtail Carbon Chiner (Sold)
Atlanta, GA

carbonazza

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 726
    • View Profile
Re: CS-496 Build / 27.5+
« Reply #74 on: June 06, 2017, 08:24:05 AM »
The rigid fork is the backup and maybe for winter rides.
If it works... fine. Here we don't have that much steep and hard rocks.

If not, as advised by carbon_dude and others, we'll put a RockShox Pike on it.
I've put a Pike DJ on the dirt bike I'm building, it is a really nice fork indeed.