Author Topic: Carbonda fm936 Thoughts  (Read 499367 times)

Flo7

Re: Carbonda fm936 Thoughts
« Reply #420 on: May 25, 2020, 12:27:42 AM »
Nice looking bike.  I knew that frame looked familiar.  Similar to BMC fourstroke

Not really...

JohnnyNT

Re: Carbonda fm936 Thoughts
« Reply #421 on: May 25, 2020, 06:31:14 PM »
So this is pretty cool, they're a Brazillian brand selling the FM936 under their own name! I came across it on instagram by accident.
Some cool paint jobs and build specs! The brand offers a lifetime warranty and custom painting.

Link to the bike 9.8kg!
https://edrobikes.com.br/site/produto/range1/

Instagram
https://www.instagram.com/p/B7E1lPJHi70/
brand's instagram: https://www.instagram.com/edrobikes/


Some youtube videos:
Code: [Select]
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TwXSu02RtQo
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5WiWhrInXrQ&
something about geo https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gzZlKOA32JU
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SWGHWU--gZk
a race on the bike - great video!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7uTtYi2o3b8

^ I dont know why my youtube links arnt showing  without code mode, sorry if this is against rules.

The prices are pretty steep though I'd say.

dhengen

Re: Carbonda fm936 Thoughts
« Reply #422 on: June 02, 2020, 10:09:36 AM »
Hi All, Looking to buy one of these frames in a few months and build it up over the Canadian winter... one thing that I don't understand is how I know what crankset will work with these. Q factor/chainline are something I don't understand fully - can anyone tell me what I would need to run 10, 11 or 12 speed? Does the speed on the back affect the q factor/chainline? If anyone has a link to a good reading source where I can educate myself on how to make sure I buy the right crankset. Any help is appreciated, thanks

Zdrenka89

Re: Carbonda fm936 Thoughts
« Reply #423 on: June 03, 2020, 02:13:15 AM »
148mm Boost hubs moves the whole cassette out by 3mm compared 142mm hubs. therefore the Crankset chainline also needs to move out 3mm. Ideal chainline is considered to be 52mm.

This article explains the matter into more depth :) 
https://enduro-mtb.com/en/tech-talk-whats-the-boost-standard-all-about/

The amount of gears that the cassette have doesnt affect chainline, however most older systems that use 10 or 11 speeds were'nt made with boost spacing in mind. Therefore you might need a new crankset or a new boost correcting chainring that adds 3mm of chainline to get proper shifting performance across the whole cassette.

Q Factor describes the distance from outside crankarm to outside crankarm and is not directly related to shifting performance or boost spacing. However a bike with boost spacing might have slightly wider Q factor to make sure your heels dont hit the chainstays.
https://rideissi.com/files/product/iSSi_StanceWidth_Graphic_1.jpg
« Last Edit: June 03, 2020, 02:19:21 AM by Zdrenka89 »

dhengen

Re: Carbonda fm936 Thoughts
« Reply #424 on: June 06, 2020, 10:02:20 AM »
148mm Boost hubs moves the whole cassette out by 3mm compared 142mm hubs. therefore the Crankset chainline also needs to move out 3mm. Ideal chainline is considered to be 52mm.

This article explains the matter into more depth :) 
https://enduro-mtb.com/en/tech-talk-whats-the-boost-standard-all-about/

The amount of gears that the cassette have doesnt affect chainline, however most older systems that use 10 or 11 speeds were'nt made with boost spacing in mind. Therefore you might need a new crankset or a new boost correcting chainring that adds 3mm of chainline to get proper shifting performance across the whole cassette.

Q Factor describes the distance from outside crankarm to outside crankarm and is not directly related to shifting performance or boost spacing. However a bike with boost spacing might have slightly wider Q factor to make sure your heels dont hit the chainstays.
https://rideissi.com/files/product/iSSi_StanceWidth_Graphic_1.jpg

Excellent reply and links to articles, thanks a ton!

zilcho

Re: Carbonda fm936 Thoughts
« Reply #425 on: June 07, 2020, 06:24:37 PM »
For the dropper cable, did yall run it in front or beyond the lower pivot bolt? Above or below the BB shell?  The supplied cable housing with my OneUp dropper seems a little short for my size large frame, currently behind pivot bolt and above BB shell.

brex

Re: Carbonda fm936 Thoughts
« Reply #426 on: June 07, 2020, 07:30:18 PM »
I went in front and above, but I also ran SP 41 housing that I had rather than what came with my dropper.

zilcho

Re: Carbonda fm936 Thoughts
« Reply #427 on: June 07, 2020, 11:56:52 PM »
I went in front and above, but I also ran SP 41 housing that I had rather than what came with my dropper.

Thanks, seems like a slightly easier feed through on the front of the pivot. 

Next question:  Rear brake line and shifter housing, above or below shock?  NS seems to run both (TR/RC1 under, TR/RC2 over) and the builds in this thread are mixed too.

wfl3

Re: Carbonda fm936 Thoughts
« Reply #428 on: June 08, 2020, 08:01:10 AM »
I went in front and above, but I also ran SP 41 housing that I had rather than what came with my dropper.

Thanks, seems like a slightly easier feed through on the front of the pivot. 

Next question:  Rear brake line and shifter housing, above or below shock?  NS seems to run both (TR/RC1 under, TR/RC2 over) and the builds in this thread are mixed too.

Feeding that dropper cable up the seat tube was a major PITA for me (above BB, in front of pivot).

I preferred the way the brake/shifter housing below shock looked, but in the end I went with over because it produces a straighter line for the der cable which should give a little better shift performance IMO.

brex

Re: Carbonda fm936 Thoughts
« Reply #429 on: June 08, 2020, 01:41:36 PM »
I routed the cable and hose above the shock bolts as well, going under just seemed wrong to me for the shift performance/shorter run reasons.

adroitrider

Re: Carbonda fm936 Thoughts
« Reply #430 on: June 16, 2020, 01:17:41 PM »
@Schoobang: Very nice build! Love that stem and now I want one :)

I think the 1.3kg difference in weight between our builds is mostly in the fork (yours is approx 600 lighter!) and tires. I dare not run those Schwalbes where I ride, though! I think I might rip them on the first ride out :)

What do you weigh and what pressure are you running in your shock?

The stem is really nice. Weights exactly as spec says. I was a bit worried it might flex too much but it seems solid enough for this kind of bike.

I weigh about 79kg and I run the shock at 220 psi if I remember correctly.

I am 188cm with an 88cm inseam. Do you think the L or XL is right for me?

Anyone else go with the XL who is on the border of sizes?

Thanks!!! Starting the order process now. Already have:
Sram X01 shifter, derailleur, cassette, and chain
Light Bicycle rims laced to American Classic hubs
SID RCT3 fork

dhengen

Re: Carbonda fm936 Thoughts
« Reply #431 on: June 16, 2020, 11:45:34 PM »
@Schoobang: Very nice build! Love that stem and now I want one :)

I think the 1.3kg difference in weight between our builds is mostly in the fork (yours is approx 600 lighter!) and tires. I dare not run those Schwalbes where I ride, though! I think I might rip them on the first ride out :)

What do you weigh and what pressure are you running in your shock?

The stem is really nice. Weights exactly as spec says. I was a bit worried it might flex too much but it seems solid enough for this kind of bike.

I weigh about 79kg and I run the shock at 220 psi if I remember correctly.

I am 188cm with an 88cm inseam. Do you think the L or XL is right for me?

Anyone else go with the XL who is on the border of sizes?

Thanks!!! Starting the order process now. Already have:
Sram X01 shifter, derailleur, cassette, and chain
Light Bicycle rims laced to American Classic hubs
SID RCT3 fork

Same height as you (not sure on my inseam), but have been wondering the exact same thing. Currently riding a 2019 Commencal Meta TR 29 XL that is 500mm reach with 76 degree seattube angle. Doesn't feel too long. I'm leaning towards XL on this frame due to seat tube angle (will sag less being a short travel bike as well), but still undecided. Might be nice to have this bike in L and have it be a bit more whippy/maneuverable as it's not like I'll need the extra length for going mach speeds due to the shorter travel. Curious what you think as well.

adroitrider

Re: Carbonda fm936 Thoughts
« Reply #432 on: June 17, 2020, 09:04:51 AM »
I’ve always liked a shorter wheelbase and have gone size L my last three frames. I regret it on two of them. My last XL I still own and ride occasionally, 1996 Klein Adroit.

The Fuel EX puts me on a XL. I’m leaning XL. Shipping for $210 is a bit redic. I’m going to get a quote from BikeFlights to see if it is similar.

Zdrenka89

Re: Carbonda fm936 Thoughts
« Reply #433 on: June 18, 2020, 12:52:55 AM »
I'm 190cm and have gone with a L. I was also split between L and XL. I actually initially ordered an XL but changed the order just in time before paint.

I drew some sketches in CAD to compare reach with my existing bikes and combined with other input online i found that XL is probably too long for what i want.

I could see myself ride an XL if:
- my trails were steeper (front wheel further out)
- my trails were less snaky (long wheelbase will be slightly harder to manouvre)
- i didnt want a more aggressive riding position.

That said this bike is still long(low & slack) compared to other brands XL sizes even so its great.

maettu99

Re: Carbonda fm936 Thoughts
« Reply #434 on: June 18, 2020, 02:48:21 AM »
I planned to buy such a frame but I‘m out.

If someone likes to buy my Fox Re-Activ shock that I planned to add to this frame, send me a PM.
It‘s a 165x40 Trunnion shock with remote.