Lightcarbon: LCR018-D (endurance all-road)

[cycloholic]

I would like to ask about using insulation around the brake hose inside the frame (eg Jagwire type). I guess it imposes on the space available inside the storage area in the frame? I am thinking of leaving it out in this area because the storage bag will stop the hose from moving anyway. What have others done?

[Picograms]

I would like to ask about using insulation around the brake hose inside the frame (eg Jagwire type). I guess it imposes on the space available inside the storage area in the frame? I am thinking of leaving it out in this area because the storage bag will stop the hose from moving anyway. What have others done?

I put foam in the whole downtube, but I will probably leave the insulation only in the upper part. The gained space will be minimal though.

[bsharp77]

Hello, is this frame good to use as aero road bike? I’m now riding a 2022 factor ostro vam in 56. I i compare the frames on bikeinsight,  i could have the same geometry in this frame with a 54 and stem 110. I don’t get why everyone is calling this an full endurence bike, it looks pretty aero and fast to me? Or am i missing something?

So like for like, the LCR018-D is not the same.
Put your Ostro against a 56cm LCR018-D and it'll be taller and more endurance based - exactly as designed.
You can get away with going to a 54 with it, exactly because of the more relaxed geometry.

The bike is fun to ride and quite fast, but any comparisons to an Aeroad are crazy in my humble opinion.
I have had 2 Aeroads in the past, and still have an old rim brake Aeroad copy from way back in 2017, and it is simply a faster bike than the LCR018-D.
But then if I put the bikes side by side, the Aeroad bars are at least 4cm lower than the LCR018-D.....as they should be for an endurance geometry.
I have another fork on the way which I will install with minimal spacers which will bring it down 2cm or so, and no doubt will make it more racy for the summer months, but its still an endurance bike.

This is not to bash the LCR018-D - I absolutely love it, have over 1200km ridden on it so far and think its a superb bike, but to compare it to an out and out aero race bike is misleading.

I would be very interested in a proper aero race bike if Light Carbon bring one out this year.

[KRoser]

bsharp77: Yeah, Iam not saying that LightCarbon is quicker than aeroad, aeroad is objectively one of the fastest bike out there, but what Iam trying to say is that you are not loosing to much.

Also maybe my height and weight is to blame here (196cm and 83kg), because even if I objectively compare my average speeds with a same power between aeroad and my previous bike witch was alu cyclocros bike with road wheels, that genuinely looked like a brick, I do not see much diference, yes aeroad is quicker but not that much as you would think maybe like 0.5km/h on 35km/h average 100km loop.

I genuinely see much bigger diference just when I take a different jersey or helmet than with different bikes, but maybe with someone smaller bike itself makes a much bigger difference.

[bsharp77]

bsharp77: Yeah, Iam not saying that LightCarbon is quicker than aeroad, aeroad is objectively one of the fastest bike out there, but what Iam trying to say is that you are not loosing to much.

Also maybe my height and weight is to blame here (196cm and 83kg), because even if I objectively compare my average speeds with a same power between aeroad and my previous bike witch was alu cyclocros bike with road wheels, that genuinely looked like a brick, I do not see much diference, yes aeroad is quicker but not that much as you would think maybe like 0.5km/h on 35km/h average 100km loop.

I genuinely see much bigger diference just when I take a different jersey or helmet than with different bikes, but maybe with someone smaller bike itself makes a much bigger difference.

I totally agree that we're not talking massive differences in figures here - especially at non-pro speeds, but a difference is there nonetheless.

[paul_otta]

Something to consider for longer distances: the comfort.
The bike is maybe slower at the same power output but maybe a non professional rider can sustain a certain power output for longer time/distance on the LCR-018 because of its higher comfort (tire size, geo etc.) the question is: where is this super individual point 🤣

In the end, it doesn’t matter as long you are not racing the bike

[CryogenieX]

Hello everyone, finally finished my build and the total weight came up to 7.5kgs! Quite impressed with the paint job and the glossy finish is a treat to the eyes! If I had to nitpick, the paint around the bottom tube storage door wasn't consistent and there was some paint on the rear brake mount.
The build was pretty smooth too for my first build! The only thing I struggled with in the build was some disc rub (VXM rotors) with Zrace XG4 calipers on the rear wheel. Did anyone else face disc rubs in their build?
I haven't had a chance to ride it properly yet due to the weather, but hopefully soon!

[Hoogie]

My Build: Velar RF2.18
Frame: LCR018-D (Size 56)
Groupset: SRAM Force E1 2x12 (Integrated Spider PM)
Wheelset: Elitewheels Aero+ (42mm Front / 53mm Rear) with ceramic bearings
Weight: 7.75kg (dry)

Coming from an old aluminium 2013 Cube Peloton Pro, the jump to this build has been a total shock to me, I could not believe the feeling when I first left home. I spent years on that aluminum frame with its external cables and rim brakes, and while it served me well, the "Velar" feels like it’s from a different planet. It’s essentially a rocket ship compared to the old bike, I should have upgraded much sooner.

On my first 50k ride last weekend, the biggest thing I noticed was how every pedal stroke feels "live"—where the Cube felt a bit sluggish or flexy when I put the power down, this LCR018 frame just snaps forward. Leaving home the first time on this, I’ve truly felt the "free speed" compared to the old frame, the difference really is night and day.

My color choice was bold (and I have to admit, nerve wrecking), but I'm absolutely loving it now I've got it here, can't help but smile everytime I walk past it in the garage. The Yellow/Black is a very strong combo in my opinion.

[Ludo]

I love it, great and black should be left for cars, on road bike I want the 60s, full on colors!

[K-Ninja]

Hello everyone. Any thoughts about the LightCarbon 3D printed saddle (SD02) and bottle cages (BC11).

Thanks

[cycloholic]

Hello everyone. Any thoughts about the LightCarbon 3D printed saddle (SD02) and bottle cages (BC11).

Thanks

I have the SD01 which is the slightly more 'cushioned' version of the SD02 saddle. I am currently using it on my indoor trainer. Its very light and made very well. I can't complain about the quality. The 3D printing is softer in some areas than others (how it's supposed to be - I believe). However I don't think it's as comfortible as my Salle Italia Boost SLR. I think this is because the nose on the SD01 is slightly wider than the nose on the SLR and it rubs my thighs. But, that's just me - I probably have fat thighs  Otherwise its a good saddle and great for the price.

[casper.f]

Hello, is this frame good to use as aero road bike? I’m now riding a 2022 factor ostro vam in 56. I i compare the frames on bikeinsight,  i could have the same geometry in this frame with a 54 and stem 110. I don’t get why everyone is calling this an full endurence bike, it looks pretty aero and fast to me? Or am i missing something?

To be fair: Your Ostro VAM is likely faster in a pure drag race. It has narrower tubing and a slimmer fork profile designed purely for speed, whereas this frame carries more bulk to accommodate 38mm tires.

However, calling it a "full endurance" bike is misleading. It’s better to think of it as an Aero-Allroad bike. A much better comparison than the Ostro would be a Cervélo Soloist with ~20mm of spacers (which is how most mortals ride it).

I ran some comparative numbers to see how this frame (slammed) stacks up against a Soloist (with spacers to match the stack). The consensus is that the aerodynamic difference is negligible because the "Endurance" features actually solve aerodynamic problems:

• Headtube Efficiency: The LCR wins here. Running zero spacers vs. a round spacer stack on the Soloist saves ~1.5W in turbulence.
• System Integration: The LCR's mono-cockpit vs. a standard clamped stem on the Soloist saves another ~2.0W.
• Seat Tube Cutout: The LCR has a rear wheel cutout which the Soloist lacks, saving ~3.0W by shielding the tire.
• Frontal Area (Fork): The Soloist wins here. Its narrow stance is theoretically ~3.5W faster than the wide LCR fork due to pure frontal area.

The Verdict: We are splitting hairs. Sometimes the model showed the Cervélo 0.5W ahead, sometimes the LCR came out on top due to the clean cockpit. If you can fit a 54 with a 110mm stem, you are getting a geometry that matches your Ostro VAM's reach, just with a slightly higher "virtual" stack that saves you from running spacers. It might lag slightly behind a slammed Ostro, but it will be significantly faster than a traditional endurance frame.

[NB87]

To be fair: Your Ostro VAM is likely faster in a pure drag race. It has narrower tubing and a slimmer fork profile designed purely for speed, whereas this frame carries more bulk to accommodate 38mm tires.

However, calling it a "full endurance" bike is misleading. It’s better to think of it as an Aero-Allroad bike. A much better comparison than the Ostro would be a Cervélo Soloist with ~20mm of spacers (which is how most mortals ride it).

I ran some comparative numbers to see how this frame (slammed) stacks up against a Soloist (with spacers to match the stack). The consensus is that the aerodynamic difference is negligible because the "Endurance" features actually solve aerodynamic problems:

• Headtube Efficiency: The LCR wins here. Running zero spacers vs. a round spacer stack on the Soloist saves ~1.5W in turbulence.
• System Integration: The LCR's mono-cockpit vs. a standard clamped stem on the Soloist saves another ~2.0W.
• Seat Tube Cutout: The LCR has a rear wheel cutout which the Soloist lacks, saving ~3.0W by shielding the tire.
• Frontal Area (Fork): The Soloist wins here. Its narrow stance is theoretically ~3.5W faster than the wide LCR fork due to pure frontal area.

The Verdict: We are splitting hairs. Sometimes the model showed the Cervélo 0.5W ahead, sometimes the LCR came out on top due to the clean cockpit. If you can fit a 54 with a 110mm stem, you are getting a geometry that matches your Ostro VAM's reach, just with a slightly higher "virtual" stack that saves you from running spacers. It might lag slightly behind a slammed Ostro, but it will be significantly faster than a traditional endurance frame.

Interesting comment! I guess you're using some kind of simulator to get to these numbers? Which model are you referring to? 

[POTOOOOOOOO]

Just remember that the big lump of meat on top of the bike makes the biggest difference.
I’d rather have an “endurance” bike set up for aero hoods, than a slammed S5 that quickly fatigues.

[vietmunki]

Came across Light Carbon's factory walk through video. Gives us another sneak peak of their upcoming Aero Gravel Race Bike and some custom painted LCR018-Ds.

https://youtu.be/pg80CGPZw0c?si=u0d_HLSag68jSA58