Author Topic: CS-496 Build / 27.5+  (Read 5990 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: 349
    • 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: 349
    • 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: 36
    • 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: 349
    • 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: 36
    • 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: 2
    • 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: 1811
    • 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: 2
    • 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 »