Need help deciding a gravel frame: SPcycle G069 vs. Tideace GV201 Noah

[lidation]

I am looking for an all road bike that I can comfortable ride tens of miles, many of which are hilly with big climb and steep descend. Sometimes I will cut through some smooth single tracks/fireroads.  I don't race and don't do large group rides.

These two frames tick all the boxes but I can't decide which one.   SPcycle G069 vs. Tideace GV201 Noah.

I like the look of the Tideace and I like the internal storage space.  However, I don't like the 435mm chainstay (too long).
I like the SPCycle for its 425mm chainstay and its price. Literally half the price of the Tideace.

I made a comparison table below.  Please help chime in.
A few specific questions:
1) overall, how does Tideace compared to SPCycle as a carbon fiber bike frame manufacturer?
2) why the G069 is half the price of the GV201, despite the very similar geometry.

[Lotnik]

You can have Noah frame cheaper.

http://tantancycling.com/index.php?_m=mod_product&_a=view&p_id=1139

End of last year set from TanTan cost 530 USD plus shipping.

[Rolle2k]

The biggest downsides with the Noah/GR201 is as you said, the long chainstays AND the ultra low stack. Also geometry seems alot worse if you go to the bigger sizes.
Of course you could fix the stack with extra spacers - but it cerntainly won't look good.

What i would actually want is a G069 with larger wheel-clearance (2.1"), internal storage - and 0.5 degree higher seat tube angle (74 degree) But that is just me :-)

[s3si1u]

The Noah is available from a handful of manufacturers. Off the top of my head, Tan tan, Longteng, Mondince are all significantly cheaper. I actually like the Mondince FM306...I would have picked it over the GV201 if not for the downtube storage.

[Uberflo]

Yeah but the Tideace paint quality is much better as far as I read and from my own experience with two frames.

[lidation]

The biggest downsides with the Noah/GR201 is as you said, the long chainstays AND the ultra low stack. Also geometry seems alot worse if you go to the bigger sizes.
Of course you could fix the stack with extra spacers - but it cerntainly won't look good.

What i would actually want is a G069 with larger wheel-clearance (2.1"), internal storage - and 0.5 degree higher seat tube angle (74 degree) But that is just me :-)

How does a 435mm chainstay rides? How does it compared to my current Giant Defy (420mm chainstay)? Would it be like riding a bus or is it gonna be not that much difference? I just don't know how 10mm would affect the handling of the bike, especially considering I don't race and don't do large peloton style group rides.

[zett]

Yeah, the ultra low stack of the Tideace frame doesn't make any sense and makes it a no-go IMO. It's like a race road bike! You will probably need a huge spacer tower (which is a bad idea with carbon steerers) and it will still be aggressive.

10 mm more chainstay length on its own are not going to dramatically change handling.

[Requiem84]

I have 1.5cm spacers (small one and big one) on my GV201 - doesn’t feel too aggresive to me, but then again I am used to a Canyon Aeroad.

[Rolle2k]

I would probably want 4-6cm spacers on the GR201. So yes its all what you are fine with.
For a race bike i think the stack is ok. But not for gravel - even though its a gravel race bike.
Geometry-wise the 520 size has the best seat-/headtube-angles also. Then it gets worse for each size larger.

Regarding painting, its usually quite crappy from chinese manufacturers. No personal experience with TanTan, but Spcycle usually does so-so looking paint jobs when i have bought from them - especially around mounting holes of the frame.

[AFE]

I would probably want 4-6cm spacers on the GR201. So yes its all what you are fine with.
For a race bike i think the stack is ok. But not for gravel - even though its a gravel race bike.
Geometry-wise the 520 size has the best seat-/headtube-angles also. Then it gets worse for each size larger.

Regarding painting, its usually quite crappy from chinese manufacturers. No personal experience with TanTan, but Spcycle usually does so-so looking paint jobs when i have bought from them - especially around mounting holes of the frame.

You seem to have a pretty strong opinion on geometry. Knowing it’s a mix of matter of taste, physical preconditions, riding style, etc., what Frame would you recommend/ride yourself?

I just bought the Tideace and I can confirm that it is a sporty/race seating position but I think it’s quite nice to ride (tested it only for 30km so far.)

[Rolle2k]

You seem to have a pretty strong opinion on geometry. Knowing it’s a mix of matter of taste, physical preconditions, riding style, etc., what Frame would you recommend/ride yourself?

I just bought the Tideace and I can confirm that it is a sporty/race seating position but I think it’s quite nice to ride (tested it only for 30km so far.)

Half the point in building a bike (at least for me) is to build one with geometry which suits my liking/riding.
And for a race road bike - it would (in my opinion) be ok with low stack, and a more aggressive positioning. But for anything else - leasure rides, communting, or a bit harsher terrain i think it is always better to have a bit more relaxed position - doesnt give neck problems in the long run, and better control in rowdy terrain. Actually for gravelbike in general i think ultra low stack is never needed.
The same applies to headtube angle - that is also to personal liking... i think 71-72 is great for the type of riding i like and mostly do - if you go harsher terrain i understand you go down to maybe 70. If more than that is needed, we are into MTB territory imo.
This is just my opinion, nothing else. And as said, stack is always fixable with spacers - but i would rather look at another frame with more stack.
Both frames does have it's positives and drawbacks - but for me, GV201 does have the biggest drawbacks of the two.

lidation who started the thread asked for opinions, and the above are my opinions.

[wandulus]

Half the point in building a bike (at least for me) is to build one with geometry which suits my liking/riding.
And for a race road bike - it would (in my opinion) be ok with low stack, and a more aggressive positioning. But for anything else - leasure rides, communting, or a bit harsher terrain i think it is always better to have a bit more relaxed position - doesnt give neck problems in the long run, and better control in rowdy terrain. Actually for gravelbike in general i think ultra low stack is never needed.
The same applies to headtube angle - that is also to personal liking... i think 71-72 is great for the type of riding i like and mostly do - if you go harsher terrain i understand you go down to maybe 70. If more than that is needed, we are into MTB territory imo.
This is just my opinion, nothing else. And as said, stack is always fixable with spacers - but i would rather look at another frame with more stack.
Both frames does have it's positives and drawbacks - but for me, GV201 does have the biggest drawbacks of the two.

lidation who started the thread asked for opinions, and the above are my opinions.

I like that there are low stack frames like Tidace, for 2 main reasons:
I'm 1.70, but but short legs and long torso. So, I need the stack to be as low as possible. Anything above 530 is too much for me.
Also, I race gravel, an some races are most like road races than really rough terrain. Aero is a must.
Currently I race a Van Rysel RCX, but the limitation of 40mm tires and high stack send me to the search for a new frame.

[Rolle2k]

I like that there are low stack frames like Tidace, for 2 main reasons:
I'm 1.70, but but short legs and long torso. So, I need the stack to be as low as possible. Anything above 530 is too much for me.
Also, I race gravel, an some races are most like road races than really rough terrain. Aero is a must.
Currently I race a Van Rysel RCX, but the limitation of 40mm tires and high stack send me to the search for a new frame.

Agreed, if you race than there is a reason to buy low stack frame. And everyone is different built, but age plays a big part also. At the same time - if you race longer races than 30km i think it can introduce neck problems, which higher stack could possibly solve. This frame is actually quite extremely low stack for being a gravel bike. I haven't found any other frame like it!
Also i think many does not buy the bike for real racing, but rather racing for fun, not competition.

On my bike today i have 150mm headtube, about 25mm spacers and 500mm seat tube, kind of same top tube-lenght as G069. When we did a 105km run this summer i felt it would actually be good with even a bit higher stack. I could probably not use longer than 60-70mm stem on any of these two frames in Small/520. I'm 177 with kind of normal leg length.

anyway, my point is : if you don't do competition riding - i think most people would do better with a higher stack frame.

[wandulus]

I race 100-120Km gravel races. Depending on terrain, from 3 to 6hs. And still looking for lower stack at 44 yo. Every case is a single case...
Also, shorter CX races in Winter.

anyway, my point is : if you don't do competition riding - i think most people would do better with a higher stack frame.

100% agree on that.