Author Topic: Lightcarbon LCG071-D Build  (Read 17612 times)

ehvoo

Re: Lightcarbon LCG071-D Build
« Reply #30 on: September 30, 2023, 07:38:46 PM »
Oh and for the record, the mallet was not used on my bearings, I just desperately need to clean up in my workshop  ;D

You and me both!

svanimpe

Re: Lightcarbon LCG071-D Build
« Reply #31 on: October 01, 2023, 04:19:50 PM »
Regarding the press-fit BB: Park Tool makes a really expensive and hard-to-get reaming tool for BB86. It's one of the few tools I can't justify buying myself, but if I ever buy a frame with BB86 (which unfortunately is most Light Bicycle and Yishun frames), I'd definitely take it to a bike shop that has that tool. Same goes for facing the disc brake mounts.

Noladutch

Re: Lightcarbon LCG071-D Build
« Reply #32 on: October 01, 2023, 08:42:29 PM »
Regarding the press-fit BB: Park Tool makes a really expensive and hard-to-get reaming tool for BB86. It's one of the few tools I can't justify buying myself, but if I ever buy a frame with BB86 (which unfortunately is most Light Bicycle and Yishun frames), I'd definitely take it to a bike shop that has that tool. Same goes for facing the disc brake mounts.

I hear you on owning real shop tools. Too expensive for one use.

The amazing thing is way back in the day when I worked at a shop every build got faced and chased and I don't understand when that went away. Every seat tube got reamed along with headset before cups got pressed in. I don't understand why it is expected really it is part of build prep.

Even stupid expensive frames needed it and  aluminum alway needed it to just get round again. Then again this was threaded days before the stupid bb explosion.

Yeah if I was worried about the bb I would certainly be bringing it to a shop.

On the plus side looks like t47 is gonna take over hopefully

ehvoo

Re: Lightcarbon LCG071-D Build
« Reply #33 on: October 08, 2023, 12:01:40 AM »
Yeah I agree for $660 it’s quite good. All the complaints I have, have solutions. I really just present my review of the build to provide some contrast to the overly-rosy reviews from the YouTubers. I chose this frame because I was led to believe this frame was exceptionally high quality despite the price. And while it’s not bad, (especially compared to some of the competition) it has significant flaws I hadn’t expected that need attention in the workshop.

I’ve taken the bike out for its first ride, it’s a fine bike! Crank is no longer binding so much, hopefully I start feeling better about it as a whole.

Oh and for the record, the mallet was not used on my bearings, I just desperately need to clean up in my workshop  ;D

Have you had more time to ride the bike?  Curious how it worked for cyclocross since I was thinking the same thing.

dsveddy

Re: Lightcarbon LCG071-D Build
« Reply #34 on: October 10, 2023, 07:46:10 AM »
I’ve been riding it, mostly on singletrack, but I’ve also gotten a bit of grass in there. Haven’t raced it yet, that’s coming this weekend.

For the most part, I have a hard time distinguishing it from my 2016 Crux—the geometry is really close to that bike, bar the longer chainstays. On paper the stack is quite different, but if you overlay the models, the front end is actually very similar. So take anything I say with a grain of salt, it probably mostly in my head/confirmation bias of what I’m expecting it to feel.

I think the handling feels like my Crux, but with a little “edge” taken off the handling characteristic—at times it feels more stable in corners. The handling also just feels stiffer and more predictable, maybe because of the thru-axles/142 rear spacing. I think mainly the effect of the long chainstays is it makes this bike feel less prone to snap-oversteer/has a slightly more progressive feel to the rear end grip, but also a bit less peak grip at the rear. I do feel i can push this bike harder/closer to the grip limit through corners on flat ground. Does this bike feel less nimble/agile? Sure, slightly. But I also think there’s a worthwhile tradeoff—this bike holds its line better and more confidently than a similar bike with shorter chainstays. I also feel like this bike corners better under trail-braking, where dabbing a bit more rear brake will help you swing the front-end into corners.

I do feel the front-center isn’t as long as I want. The steering starts to feel a little vague/susceptible to redirection, and requires a lot of commitment when going downhill. In understeer-heavy situations, like when turning-in at high speed, on the brakes, into a downhill, tight corner, it feels hard to predict if the front will bite. Once you’re bitten-in the front end traction feels good, it just feels a little hard to predict the edge of traction on turn-in. My old crux also had a bit of this, which makes sense—both bikes’ horizontal F-C is within 2mm of each other. 

I don’t really get the sense that it is slower, more sluggish, or less stiff than my old crux, like some others have commented. Interestingly, it also doesn’t feel particularly more plush to me. But that’s comparing to an older Crux with QRs. Again, I acknowledge subjectivity here, I think I was expecting noodle-y and plush, and what I felt didn’t line up with that expectation.

So—does this make a serviceable amateur cross bike? Absolutely! It does not feel like a yacht, or anything radically different than a typical cross bike. Maybe if you’re a super-enthusiast/semi-pro or have very traditional (or ultra-progressive) values about CX geometry, this bike will bother you—but you’d know if you fall into those categories just by looking at the geo chart.

How about the gestalt? How does this bike perform according to its goals of being not just a cross bike? I think if you want to have one all-road machine—a bike that can do gravel, CX, bike packing, and even road riding, this is a solid pick. It’s light, has nods to aero, can do 1x or 2x, has a wide range of tire clearances, and the geometry is well-suited to a broad range of tire sizes. Albeit, the geometry is quite behind the times compared to most modern gravel race bikes.

How do I feel about my choice? Something I also regret not considering when ordering this bike is that it’s pretty standard these days to ride 38mm tires if you’re not complying with UCI rules. With that in mind, I probably would have gone for the airwolf YFR68—my only hang up with that bike was the BB height, but it wouldn’t be a concern with larger tires. Thankfully, I have the rest of my life to buy more bikes.

kubackje

Re: Lightcarbon LCG071-D Build
« Reply #35 on: October 10, 2023, 11:13:23 AM »
@dsveddy can we get some pictures lf the bike? Curious how it looks in your size and configuration

ehvoo

Re: Lightcarbon LCG071-D Build
« Reply #36 on: October 10, 2023, 02:40:56 PM »
I’ve been riding it, mostly on singletrack, but I’ve also gotten a bit of grass in there. Haven’t raced it yet, that’s coming this weekend.

For the most part, I have a hard time distinguishing it from my 2016 Crux—the geometry is really close to that bike, bar the longer chainstays. On paper the stack is quite different, but if you overlay the models, the front end is actually very similar. So take anything I say with a grain of salt, it probably mostly in my head/confirmation bias of what I’m expecting it to feel.

I think the handling feels like my Crux, but with a little “edge” taken off the handling characteristic—at times it feels more stable in corners. The handling also just feels stiffer and more predictable, maybe because of the thru-axles/142 rear spacing. I think mainly the effect of the long chainstays is it makes this bike feel less prone to snap-oversteer/has a slightly more progressive feel to the rear end grip, but also a bit less peak grip at the rear. I do feel i can push this bike harder/closer to the grip limit through corners on flat ground. Does this bike feel less nimble/agile? Sure, slightly. But I also think there’s a worthwhile tradeoff—this bike holds its line better and more confidently than a similar bike with shorter chainstays. I also feel like this bike corners better under trail-braking, where dabbing a bit more rear brake will help you swing the front-end into corners.

I do feel the front-center isn’t as long as I want. The steering starts to feel a little vague/susceptible to redirection, and requires a lot of commitment when going downhill. In understeer-heavy situations, like when turning-in at high speed, on the brakes, into a downhill, tight corner, it feels hard to predict if the front will bite. Once you’re bitten-in the front end traction feels good, it just feels a little hard to predict the edge of traction on turn-in. My old crux also had a bit of this, which makes sense—both bikes’ horizontal F-C is within 2mm of each other. 

I don’t really get the sense that it is slower, more sluggish, or less stiff than my old crux, like some others have commented. Interestingly, it also doesn’t feel particularly more plush to me. But that’s comparing to an older Crux with QRs. Again, I acknowledge subjectivity here, I think I was expecting noodle-y and plush, and what I felt didn’t line up with that expectation.

So—does this make a serviceable amateur cross bike? Absolutely! It does not feel like a yacht, or anything radically different than a typical cross bike. Maybe if you’re a super-enthusiast/semi-pro or have very traditional (or ultra-progressive) values about CX geometry, this bike will bother you—but you’d know if you fall into those categories just by looking at the geo chart.

How about the gestalt? How does this bike perform according to its goals of being not just a cross bike? I think if you want to have one all-road machine—a bike that can do gravel, CX, bike packing, and even road riding, this is a solid pick. It’s light, has nods to aero, can do 1x or 2x, has a wide range of tire clearances, and the geometry is well-suited to a broad range of tire sizes. Albeit, the geometry is quite behind the times compared to most modern gravel race bikes.

How do I feel about my choice? Something I also regret not considering when ordering this bike is that it’s pretty standard these days to ride 38mm tires if you’re not complying with UCI rules. With that in mind, I probably would have gone for the airwolf YFR68—my only hang up with that bike was the BB height, but it wouldn’t be a concern with larger tires. Thankfully, I have the rest of my life to buy more bikes.

Thanks very much for the insight!  Much appreciated.

dsveddy

Re: Lightcarbon LCG071-D Build
« Reply #37 on: October 18, 2023, 09:10:31 PM »
Here's a photos of my build + an action shot!

I'm currently running Pararacer EXT 38mm on the rear and Donnelly PDX 33mm (effectively 35) on the front. I've got another Panaracer ext tire coming in the mail for the front ;D

What can I say? This bike has been a fast cross bike. This bike hasn't stopped me from setting some new Strava PRs up the doubletrack climb and the toughest switchback descent at my local stomping grounds. It also hasn't stopped me from modestly outperforming my most recent crossresults-predicted race result this weekend, despite being way-down on fitness according to Garmin. I'm guessing the move to sightly wider rubber has helped, but honestly I'm riding this thing faster at my local mountain bike track than I am riding my new Cannondale Scalpel. So much to say--It's not a completely new or mind-blowing experience, but I feel very confident on this bike, it's very light, and it effectively lets me put down power. Despite my initial misgivings, I have to say I am very happy about the bike so far!
« Last Edit: October 18, 2023, 09:42:38 PM by dsveddy »

JimLee

Re: Lightcarbon LCG071-D Build
« Reply #38 on: October 18, 2023, 09:44:15 PM »
Here's a photos of my build + an action shot!

I'm currently running Pararacer EXT 38mm on the rear and Donnelly PDX 33mm (effectively 35) on the front. I've got another Panaracer ext tire coming in the mail for the front ;D

What can I say? This bike has been a fast cross bike. This bike hasn't stopped me from setting some new Strava PRs up the doubletrack climb and the toughest switchback descent at my local stomping grounds. It also hasn't stopped me from modestly outperforming my most recent crossresults-predicted race result this weekend, despite being way-down on fitness according to Garmin. I'm guessing the move to sightly wider rubber has helped, but honestly I'm riding this thing faster at my local mountain bike track than I am riding my new Cannondale Scalpel. So much to say--It's not a completely new or mind-blowing experience, but I feel very confident on this bike, it's very light, and it effectively lets me put down power. Despite my initial misgivings, I have to say I am very happy about the bike so far!
Well done!
Looking forward to more photos and ride sharing from you!

PLA

Re: Lightcarbon LCG071-D Build
« Reply #39 on: October 24, 2023, 08:29:10 PM »
Alright so I'm going to update everyone on my build so far:

As I noted in my last comment, shipping was not quick. Initially I had been quoted 15 days to shipping. The next 2 times I had asked for updates, Wendy said the frame would ship "by the end of next week", which was a lie on both occasions. Lesson learned, if you care about the lead time, ask for a quoted lead time BEFORE you pay. I had also ordered the frame with no rivets, but was told I would have to wait ANOTHER week for that one, but I could choose to take the riveted frame immediately, so I went for that. Not ideal but I'll live

Options chosen: 55cm frame, 100mm integrated stem, SP03 seatpost, black paint/no custom paint

Weights:
- frame: 1063g
- fork: 499g
- seatpost: 192g
- stem: 153g

Notes:

Frame: tubes look nice, feels very light, but the quality of the bottom bracket is dogshit. I don't know how this frame passed Hambini's BB-weenie test, because my frame's BB is terrible. HUGE deposit of resin on one of the cups that I had to file down. There's a big gouge/void in the other cup. Internal diameter was something like 40.3-40.8mm in diameter, when it should be a bit closer to 41. I've had to file down the void, and hit the cups with some sandpaper to clean up the surface. I'm using a token ninja thread-together BB, evidently the cups are not aligned because the crank has been binding like crazy to install, and does not spin freely. I'm hoping that most of it is just binding between the bottom bracket bearings and the crank spindle, but I might have to resort to a BBinfinite if the situation does not improve with some use. 

Fork: Chunky and solid. I mean, it weighs half as much as the frame. Thru-axle threads were crusty and bind-ey. As on many budget forks, inside of the steerer is fiberglass.

Seatpost: The tube is very thick and chunky. Easily could be 50g lighter. Painted with opaque gloss black paint. Internal profile is slightly oval. I like the seat binding clamps. This post definitely won't fail on you! Definitely a part I look to upgrade soon.

Stem: Awful awful awful. Stem face bolts and threads are not aligned well so it binds when screwing. Internal diameter of handlebar clamp is slightly smaller than spec so it slightly crushes the handlebar (I may have damaged my handlebar, oh well). Heavy. Why did this need to be carbon?

Hardware & assembly: Stem spacers are split, good. Seatpost clamp face is machined to literally appear like a device for filing/grinding things. Pretty okay for post-security, but this will LITERALLY shred the paint/material off of your seatpost where/near you clamp it. Headset bearings are okay, fitment is spot-on, no notes there, good-job lightcarbon. Everything else is bog-standard solid & cheap parts. Steerer tube compression bung and topcap compressor are heavy steel parts. For assembly, I built up with SRAM Force AXS etap, so very easy to just route the brake hoses, especially since I didn't have an integrated bar. No surprises there, I used a magnetic routing toolkit to help me out.

So, overall verdict? I guess for $660, it's fine. I kind of have regrets about getting this bike instead of a used bike, but that's on me. I've spent so much on this bike it's not really competitive with used bike prices anymore, which is really what motivated my road bike build in the first place. As for the quality--I have questions. This frame has ended up in the workshops of several youtubers lately, who have sung its praises--and my experience definitely does not line up. Is this "Wendy's revenge" for me insistently bugging them about getting my frame shipped? Or is some funny business afoot--did lightcarbon decide to let QC slip with the new popularity of this frame? Who knows.

Anways, wish me luck as I finish this build out and attempt a season of cyclocross on it.

Damn that sounds like dogshit. Sorry to hear. I just ordered a Yishun frame and hoping it doesn't turn out crap like this.
LET'S MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN!

TRUMP FOR PRESIDENT 2024!

MAGA!

Chamomile

Re: Lightcarbon LCG071-D Build
« Reply #40 on: November 05, 2023, 03:54:58 AM »
Gentlemen, could anyone measure the front/rear clearance with your tyres, please? I wonder how thick I can go. And if there is a room for fenders.

repoman

Re: Lightcarbon LCG071-D Build
« Reply #41 on: November 12, 2023, 11:26:48 AM »
Gentlemen, could anyone measure the front/rear clearance with your tyres, please? I wonder how thick I can go. And if there is a room for fenders.

I measure about 65mm between fork and 64mm between stays, so 50mm-ish is probably max (IE 47mm).

GratiotGravel

Re: Lightcarbon LCG071-D Build
« Reply #42 on: December 20, 2023, 09:07:01 AM »
Gentlemen, could anyone measure the front/rear clearance with your tyres, please? I wonder how thick I can go. And if there is a room for fenders.

I run 700X50C WTB Tires on 25mm internal width wheels. The tires measure 52.3mm when mounted. I have roughly 2.5mm of clearance on each side. I would not want to go any wider at all.

Recently installed a new bottom bracket and switched out to a praxis works crankset. Also switched the cassette out to an 11-46 as the bike will be spending the next 3 months in Brevard, NC on some gnarly pisgah forest gravel. All of the info for this frame says you need a hangar extender to run a cassette larger than 42, however, mine shifts flawlessly with this 11-46 cassette coupled with a 40T absolute black oval chainring. The derailleur seems to end up in a very odd position when on the 46, but it functions perfectly. Wil have better feedback after riding some 20% grades in NC soon.

I now have around 3000 miles of gravel riding on the bike and have very few complaints. My main complaint is ive had a tough time keeping the headset adjusted properly. It seems to always be either a touch loose or a touch too tight. Much more difficult than any other bike ive ever had to get it just right. Seems to be very little leeway. I also ended up having to put silicone in all of the mounting points on the frame that i do not use (Fender mounts) in order to keep gravel and debris from getting inside the frame while riding. One last thing is that it took a LOT of carbon paste and a slightly higher torque setting to get the seat post to hold when riding rough gravel.

Attached is a photo of the bike as it sits today.

dsveddy

Re: Lightcarbon LCG071-D Build
« Reply #43 on: February 26, 2024, 09:56:24 PM »
Thought you all would appreciate my new decal job  ;D

I've put 35 mm gravelking slicks + a FD and double chainrings on and have been riding it as an all-road bike for spring season while my race bike is on the trainer. This thing is truly comfortable, silent, and serene to ride around on.

I have also really been enjoying using this bike as an all-road bike in the suburbs of Boston. I didn't realize "all road" was not just a gimmick.
I can ride out to areas with trails and pop in and out of the trail systems as I please. My routes can get so much more interesting and varied than they used to be. I can cut through areas, avoid busy roads much more easily than with a road bike. Super fun.

I'll agree with previous posters' points about this bike riding slow. It feels solid when I stand up and sprint but something grinding out at tempo on this bike doesn't feel particularly efficient. I can't tell if it's my tires, breaking in a new chain, if it's that I'm just super out of shape this spring, or if it's all in my head. It's weird because I never felt this way last fall, I even rode it 30 miles across the city on the road in CX guise, and it felt like a rocket. 

But for me that doesn't matter right now. I'm just trying to ride spring base miles and enjoy. Maybe as I get stronger I'll change my mind and find that it actually rides faster that I thought.

repoman

Re: Lightcarbon LCG071-D Build
« Reply #44 on: July 24, 2024, 03:09:21 PM »
 

Here's mine I built up about a year ago.
Overall it's been a pretty good frame. Pretty light, comfortable. For 700 bucks I paid it's pretty good, although it's not a frame I'd consider impressive or excellent in how it rides. Overall fit and finish/build quality was very good.

Couple complaints: 
This thing is an absolute brick aerodynamically. I have no idea why, but the thing really struggles to get up over 42mph on steep descents. The previous generic carbon frame I had (can't remember the brand) would easily blow through 45mph on 27mm deep rims and me not in any sort of aero kit. I have this bike on 45mm 9Velo wheels, I now have an aerohelmet, my kit is full aero/race fit and I weigh about 3kg heavier than when I was using the other bike and it's rare I get up over 42mph.  Very strange. I suspect the rear stays might be negatively effecting as they have a very flat face, the fork legs are also pretty chunky and not aero looking at all, very blunt looking. The tires I have on it are a little bit wider than what I had on the other bike, but these tires (40mm Challenge Getaway Pro HTLR) have about the lowest rolling resistance possible for a tire with any sort of tread, the other tires were slower rolling Gravel Kings at 38mm.

At that high speed the handling is pretty squirrelly, it is not confidence inspiring at all up there. Only carbon bike I've ever had that made me a bit nervous above 40mph.

Horrendous toe overlap. Constantly rubbing my toes on the front wheel if I have to make any sort of tight turns on the bike.

Overall a decent frame for the money, but certainly not impressive for the money. I've been searching for a replacement for some time, trying to figure out where to go with that. 


« Last Edit: July 24, 2024, 03:14:02 PM by repoman »