Author Topic: Carbonda Gravel Carbon frame CFR707  (Read 53021 times)

FullCarbonAlchemist

Re: Carbonda Gravel Carbon frame CFR707
« Reply #225 on: February 22, 2024, 10:34:58 PM »
You can specify the routing you want when you order. You can probably request a port on one side only if you want to commit to 1x.

Thanks for clarifying that. I just sent the basics of my order request to Wing so she can issue me an invoice, but haven’t specified the size or external routing yet. I figured it would save me a step (with the usual day or so email turnaround time) to ask here first.

FullCarbonAlchemist

Re: Carbonda Gravel Carbon frame CFR707
« Reply #226 on: February 23, 2024, 04:21:53 AM »
Order is in for a large 707 with external routing, and I’m planning to run it with a SR Suntour GVX suspension fork for a very upright setup. Obviously for a frame design that’s a few years old now this presents some geometry challenges but I think I can live with them.

Gravel (and a bit of road when there’s no choice) fills a big part of my riding year, particularly in spring so that I can stay fit to do the enduro/DH riding I’m really passionate about. But I have injuries and a nasty autoimmune disease that have done a lot of damage to pretty much all my bones — spine and neck in particular — so even with a short high rise stem I run into a lot of back problems. This build aims to be as capable as possible for trail and steep backcountry dirt roads but as gentle on my back as drop bars will allow.
« Last Edit: February 23, 2024, 01:42:35 PM by FullCarbonAlchemist »

FullCarbonAlchemist

Re: Carbonda Gravel Carbon frame CFR707
« Reply #227 on: February 23, 2024, 04:22:14 AM »
The stem will be short with rise, but less than on my 56cm 2016 GT Grade this will be replacing. current 46cm Salsa Cowbell bars will be replaced with something a little narrower (44-45cm) that ideally has rise, mild flare, and shallow drop but I’m having trouble finding an alloy bar that has all three. Might have to just try something like the Surly Truck Stop or Ritchey Corraltos, and keep experimenting if I’m not happy with the results.

I’ll be using a pair of MTB hubs (Hope Pro 4 rear and Industry Nine Torch front) rebuilt with DT Swiss GR531 rims, and probably try out the Schwalbe Thunder Burt 2.1 (50mm on those 24mm internal rims) as my first tires.

Other parts will mostly carry over from my old bike for now, but I do need better cable actuated brakes. The current TRP Spyres are not confidence inspiring. Was thinking about State Bicycle Co cable actuated hydraulics but am still looking around and need to refresh my memory on all the AliExpress type options like Onirii before deciding.

This will be my third Carbonda build, and it’s a big relief to finally be getting it started.
« Last Edit: February 23, 2024, 01:38:20 PM by FullCarbonAlchemist »

Daniel86EU

Re: Carbonda Gravel Carbon frame CFR707
« Reply #228 on: February 25, 2024, 01:23:06 PM »
Hello everyone,
I have a few questions for you regarding my 707 purchase.
I would like to install the following components and hope to avoid any errors:

SRAM XPLR AXS
DUB WIDE Bottom bracket
400mm handlebars
Elitewheels wheelset https://de.aliexpress.com/item/1005...!12000031695144266!sh!!!&gatewayAdapt=glo2deu
 40mm tires


Now to the part that's a bit confusing for me:
Is the FSA NO. 55R all i need, to avoid issues with the carbonda bearings? I´d like to go internal routing with https://www.bike-discount.de/de/fsa-non-series-smr-60-vorbau
Do i need more sealings, bearings or somewhat? I read several problems and with very many different parts. Super low bearings from acros and so on...

https://shop.fullspeedahead.com/de/prodotti_1/steuersatze-ersatzteile/no-55r-1-5-acr

Maybe someone can help me.

Many thanks and best regards


Sakizashi

Re: Carbonda Gravel Carbon frame CFR707
« Reply #229 on: February 25, 2024, 03:05:06 PM »
I don't have this frame, but I have that stem and have a lot of familiarity with headset bearings.

If the frame is ACR spec, all you should need is the No. 55R headset. The SMR stem will come with split spacers and both that hose guide pictured and if you want to go full internal, a transition spacer that is designed for routing through the stem.

FullCarbonAlchemist

Re: Carbonda Gravel Carbon frame CFR707
« Reply #230 on: March 02, 2024, 01:35:24 AM »
Just thinking ahead here to try to shorten the process of getting my 707 dialed when it arrives….

I’m installing a Suntour GVX suspension fork, which can be adjusted 40-60mm travel but I ordered a 60mm setting from the factory which will obviously be MUCH taller than the 400mm stock carbon fork. I will have it adjusted down in travel if this proves to be too much. But in the meantime, I know this will result in both major angles (head tube and seat tube) slackening by multiple degrees.

It’s the slack seat tube that concerns me, since I’ve discovered I really like steep ones on my MTBs — also Carbonda frames — which are both ~78 degrees. Can I cancel out some of this effect by switching from the stock offset seatpost to a zero-offset? I’d be doing that anyway in the future when I get around to trying a dropper post, and it seems like a sensible solution. Whereas I have my saddle a bit forward on the rails on my current bike with an offset post, I would probably run the new bike with zero offset and the saddle a bit back on the rails.

Drop bars and road/gravel geometry are not really my wheelhouse, so I’m hoping for some experience and advice on this.

2old2mould

Re: Carbonda Gravel Carbon frame CFR707
« Reply #231 on: March 02, 2024, 02:57:55 AM »
The question you are asking is whether moving your seat forward will offset the additional front end height you'll getting from having a longer fork.

When you get the bike you will set it up with your normal bike fit. This will give you your usual saddle height and reach to your bars.

Moving the saddle forward in this case changes your fundamental position, moving you closer to the bars which impacts your balance and handling.

If you think about it a higher front in this case is a bit like going uphill on a normal bike. Your position doesn't change, it just tilts back.

You may need to move your saddle forward and down a small amount, and also tilt the nose down, but any changes at the back will need to be replicated at the front to maintain your fit (lower bars, more reach, bars tilted down).

I suspect any changes at the back will be small compared to the changes at the front. Bear in mind though that these cheers may need to be compromises if you intend to ride a lot over rough terrain with the suspension working as this will constantly change your position as you ride. However getting your saddle height and set back dialed in on the flat would be the best place to start and then you can tweak from there.

TLDR: Set the same height/setback as normal to start and see how you get on. You'll probably make more changes to the front than to the rear.

acedeuce802

Re: Carbonda Gravel Carbon frame CFR707
« Reply #232 on: March 02, 2024, 08:14:22 AM »
Yes you can use a zero-offset post, nothing wrong with that.  I will also add onto 2old2mould's reply that full suspension bikes sag more in the rear when you're going uphill, since the weight balance shifts rearward.  MTB seat tube angles are getting very steep because the terrain is often steep, which geometrically rotates the bike back and puts the saddle more rearward, and the additional rear suspension sag causes the saddle to shift rearward as well.  So it's not that 78deg STA is typically a good pedaling position, it's that 78deg STA ends up being more like 74, 75, 76deg when climbing. 

I'll add my experience, that I also like the steep STA of my FM936.  I also have a CFR707, and run the saddle in the middle of the offset post.  It's STA is still steeper than a traditional road bike, but not near MTB steepness.  But for me, it works very well.  Seatposts are cheap though, nothing wrong with trying out both kinds.  You can also just slam the saddle all the way forward on the offset post, and even though it's not safe to run on rough stuff, it'll give you an idea of what a zero-offset post would feel like.

gf

Re: Carbonda Gravel Carbon frame CFR707
« Reply #233 on: March 07, 2024, 03:30:01 AM »
Dear all, considering this frame, I have just few questions:
- is carbonda overall quality better than other brand, such as Spcycle or velobuild frame? Because the price is little bit higher
- on cfr707 without side holes, is possible to use standard stem and handlebar (no integrated models) with cables throught headset?
- For owners, do you think size m is ok for 170 cm tall and 80 cm insteam?
thanks

numberzero

Re: Carbonda Gravel Carbon frame CFR707
« Reply #234 on: March 07, 2024, 05:13:13 AM »
- For owners, do you think size m is ok for 170 cm tall and 80 cm insteam?
thanks
I'd say no. Unless you want a very relaxed position with short stem, M will be be way too big, especially tall headtube.
You will surely be better on S size.

gf

Re: Carbonda Gravel Carbon frame CFR707
« Reply #235 on: March 07, 2024, 05:44:10 AM »
I'd say no. Unless you want a very relaxed position with short stem, M will be be way too big, especially tall headtube.
You will surely be better on S size.
Thanks for your advice.
Bigger headtube (or bigger stack) wouldn't mean more relaed and comfortable position?
If I compare cfr707 to other frames I am considering (such as Spcycle g056 or g058) the main difference in size m is the longer top tube on crf707; should this model be too long? In size s I think the stack is too much low and less comfortable than other frames.
Is it right? I always ride mtb and never teste road/gravel bike, so is quite difficult to understand geometry table 

numberzero

Re: Carbonda Gravel Carbon frame CFR707
« Reply #236 on: March 07, 2024, 06:55:19 AM »
Is it right? I always ride mtb and never teste road/gravel bike, so is quite difficult to understand geometry table
Don't worry 8 to 10 cm saddle to bar drop is pretty common for a dropbar bike.
You can always add spacer if you're not supple enough to handle a road position but you can't cut a headtube^^

To me, in the case of the 707, for 170cm tall, M size is too long and too high front end.
S is the better option, XS can do the job too but at the price of an agressive position which i won't recommend to a newbie.
And it's be better not to get a combo handlebar as it's your first experience in dropbar bikes.



gf

Re: Carbonda Gravel Carbon frame CFR707
« Reply #237 on: March 07, 2024, 07:12:19 AM »
Don't worry 8 to 10 cm saddle to bar drop is pretty common for a dropbar bike.
You can always add spacer if you're not supple enough to handle a road position but you can't cut a headtube^^

To me, in the case of the 707, for 170cm tall, M size is too long and too high front end.
S is the better option, XS can do the job too but at the price of an agressive position which i won't recommend to a newbie.
And it's be better not to get a combo handlebar as it's your first experience in dropbar bikes.
Thanks again.
Just to have an idea and compare different frames, around which value of reach/top tube I should stay in order to obtain neutral/comfortable position (not race or aggressive)?

2old2mould

Re: Carbonda Gravel Carbon frame CFR707
« Reply #238 on: March 07, 2024, 10:11:50 AM »
I'm 175cm with 82cm inseam. Saddle height is usually 74.5cm. I run a M with a 90 stem and 10mm spacer which rides like an endurance bike. For gravel I'd swap to an 80mm  stem. This seems fine for 3-4hr rides. For reference my road bike is a TCR with same saddle height, 100mm stem and 90mm drop to bars. A small 707 would have been fine for more speed and aggressive handling but I'm OK with a M.
« Last Edit: March 07, 2024, 10:13:43 AM by 2old2mould »

gf

Re: Carbonda Gravel Carbon frame CFR707
« Reply #239 on: March 07, 2024, 04:52:37 PM »
I'm 175cm with 82cm inseam. Saddle height is usually 74.5cm. I run a M with a 90 stem and 10mm spacer which rides like an endurance bike. For gravel I'd swap to an 80mm  stem. This seems fine for 3-4hr rides. For reference my road bike is a TCR with same saddle height, 100mm stem and 90mm drop to bars. A small 707 would have been fine for more speed and aggressive handling but I'm OK with a M.
Thanks.
So, from your experience and data, quite simular to me, size Ma should be ok. Probabily also si, but more nervous and unstable?