Lightcarbon: New LCR017-D (or Yishun R1058-D)

[numberzero]

It seems they wanted to keep the same WB for each sizes so they are playing with head angle and reach. Only stack has a normal increase between each size + 20mm.

Yes i think the geometry is really akward and strange, 1,90m people must ride on the same short bike designed for 1,60!
I never understand why road geometry doesn't keep the same HA and just reach and stack increasing.

[BalticSea]

The numbers do seem correct ( I've put the numbers in www.bikegeo.net) . Whether it makes sense to have such a geometry for that bike size I don't know. Maybe compare it with some other brands and make your conclusion?

I see. I compared it against Supersix Evo 4 and Cannondale seems to follow the same logic of playing around with angles to make some measurements like wheelbase roughly similar. However, that bike does have steady increase on stack and reach as opposed to LightCarbon. 520 stack and 390 reach is CRAZY aggressive.

Another thing I wonder about is steerer tube - SSE 4 uses a delta steerer to make room for integrated cables.

[BalticSea]

So I wrote them an email and asked for quote on size 54 frame. Got the following answer:

"Thanks for your inquiry about the LCR017-D size 54cm,
Frame set including frame+ seat post (SP03) + fork + handlebar  (HBR13 supper light handlebar)+ seat clamp+ head set+ front & rear thru-axle, and two hangers for rear derailleur.
Color: UD matt, (painting customized is acceptable with extra cost.)
Supper light version price is USD$805/set including shipping cost and all taxes to Lithuania, loading time is about 70 days,
Normal weight version price is USD$763/set  including shipping cost and all taxes to Lithuania, loading time is about 50 days,
if change the handlebar to normal weight handlebar HBR11, cost can be cheaper about USD$20"

So it seems like the frames are built to order and multiple levels of specs are available. 800 bucks all in for a handlebar, thru axles and a 900g frame isn't so bad

[Timuk]

Hi,

New to forum.  Was looking at the Elves Falath Evo but concerned about the rear wheel clearance (too big a gap for someone used to fag paper clearance on my bikes in 80s).  Looked at various others on here and reached out to Yishun on their R1088-D.

They have agreed btw to supply this in Matt Black, with seatpost, stem (not integrated bar) for 699 Euros from their stock in Germany.  Custom painting would be a different price from China.  My issue that stops me buying is that I run most of my bikes 1 X and I'd want to remove hanger.  They tell me this is difficult (it looks like Allen Key on their web pictures but I'm presuming it's actually riveted). So still thinking about it but thought I'd add the intel as they have suggested it's superior to the R086 which is well reviewed on here.

[neobiker]

They accepted to send you a 1088? Can you forward me the mail? XD I am dying to get the frame.

[joegal]

They accepted to send you a 1088? Can you forward me the mail? XD I am dying to get the frame.

Haha I was thinking the same! I reached out to them regarding the 1088 a few weeks back and they said they would not sell it to individual customers.

[BalticSea]

Haha I was thinking the same! I reached out to them regarding the 1088 a few weeks back and they said they would not sell it to individual customers.

Interesting, when I wrote them last week, the reply I got was "R1088-D size 53, it's only in China stock right now.", which indicates that the frame is available to customers, at least in certain sizes IMO?

[patliean1]

My issue that stops me buying is that I run most of my bikes 1 X and I'd want to remove hanger.  They tell me this is difficult (it looks like Allen Key on their web pictures but I'm presuming it's actually riveted).

The same hanger is on my R086D and I was able to immediately remove it upon delivery. I'm also running a 1x setup.
2mm and 2.5mm bolts don't require much torque so you should be able to remove it.

After a few exchanges with Yishun, it seems the main reason they are reluctant to offer frames to the general public is to avoid overstepping their agreement with 3rd party brands who may have ordered (or in part developed) frames and are charging double the price.

[Timuk]

Thanks.  Good to know.

Looks like they are well made and relatively light.  Will probably go for the black rather than a painted Chinese version.  With duties I think I'll be looking at GBP 750 which seems like a good price. 

My enquiry related to a size 470 btw.

[PLA]

Enquired about this frame and only 54 is currently available- I need a 58. Maybe next year 58 mould will be released.

I'm not a bike designer or bike specific engineer, but I can't but help to think the bottom bracket area looks a shade underbuilt compared to other frames on the market at the moment. Perhaps it'll give more compliance.

[Dark17]

WTF, I just asked if 1058-D Size 54 is available and they said it's not. Maybe I'll ask again and decide now on what to buy

[svanimpe]

So... Has anyone ordered the LCR017-D frame yet? I was taking a second look at their geometry chart and it seems like a mess. I am no bike expert, but size 49 frame should not have longer wheelbase than size 54, right?

Small sizes have a slacker head tube angle, to avoid toe overlap. By lowering the head tube angle, the front wheel moves forward a bit more, which also results in a slightly longer wheel base.

In my opinion, small sizes should be designed around 650B wheels, not 700C. I believe Canyon does this for some of their women's sizes, but I don't know of many others.

[Sakizashi]

While toe overlap is a concern, I doubt its the primary driver behind slack head angles for small riders. Unless your toes are going into the spokes its an annoying but it doesn't really affect most riding situations

The bigger issue is weight balance. A smaller rider often going to be pitched forward relative to the bottom bracket. This is result of 2x groupsets requiring a min chainstay length to function. Combine that with a reluctance to limit crank length / lack of available cranks under 165mm (and in some cases 170mm) and you end up with BB drops maxing out at at 75mm. That min wheelbase for the rear ends up meaning that a typical size 51 frame has weight distribution between 55%-57% rear biased vs. the typical 56mm frame being 61%-62% rear biased. Slacker head angles with higher offset forks like the Cannondale Supersix Evo uses are a way to solve this problem, though that makes those bikes feel kind of slow through, tight, lower speed sections.

650b for road doesn't fix the weight balance issues unless you move to 1x, has a cursedly small selection of tires, and its unworkable for road racing. Not that Canyon is a shining example of good bike design decisions anyway.

[Sakizashi]

I think the geo chart for the LCR017-D is still shaking out. I took the geo chart from this (reseller?) https://jmcarbonframe.nl/frames-race/

And it looks like either the fork rake (unclear if that is what is in the second WB column) or the trail are incorrect.

If they had a 50mm or 55mm fork available for smaller sizes and this bike could take 35mm tires it would be interesting and pushing the envelope a bit, but 32mm is still very much on trend.

[PLA]

And it looks like either the fork rake (unclear if that is what is in the second WB column) or the trail are incorrect.

Hello friend, that is a typo on the reseller's website, along with all of the frame photos. The second WB column should be fork rake/offset. Thankyou.