Lightcarbon: LCR018-D (endurance all-road)

[NB87]

They already included LCR018-D on their website.
https://www.lightcarbon.com/lightcarbon-aero-endurance-disc-brake-road-carbon-frameset-with-integrated-handlebar_p268.html#parentHorizontalTab022
Rider height, tire compatibility, chainrings references etc included.

Is it just me, or is their height-based sizing reference a bit… interesting? I get that it’s only a guideline and depends on body proportions and personal preference, but looking at the geometry, I’d personally size up one frame. Where they recommend a 54, I’d go 56; where they suggest 56, I’d choose 58, and so on.

[POTOOOOOOOO]

Is it just me, or is their height-based sizing reference a bit… interesting? I get that it’s only a guideline and depends on body proportions and personal preference, but looking at the geometry, I’d personally size up one frame. Where they recommend a 54, I’d go 56; where they suggest 56, I’d choose 58, and so on.

It’s just you.

[hubba]

I'm 186cm but with 94.5cm inseam I would have to choose the largest size on most chinese frames and still the seat tube is too short on most of them.

[POTOOOOOOOO]

I'm 186cm but with 94.5cm inseam I would have to choose the largest size on most chinese frames and still the seat tube is too short on most of them.

You’re at the far end of the bell curve if those are your measurements. The seat tube on the 18-D is pretty low but a frame with a horizontal top tube would be more suitable.

[paul_otta]

Im 193 with a 92cm inseam and the 58 fits like a glove. 110 Stem.
I’d say they are a bit off but not too much. I’d start the recommendation for the 58 at 190 to 197

Of course these numbers can’t take all different bodies into consideration- like potoooooo said

[Bike.Man]

hello, I have a question regarding seatpost. Is it replacable with some seatposts which are available on regular eshops [like for specialized sl8] or it is specific shape which is used only by LC?

There's really no reason not to use the LightCarbon seatpost. The quality and weight are absolutely fine. 👌

[vietmunki]

They already included LCR018-D on their website.
https://www.lightcarbon.com/lightcarbon-aero-endurance-disc-brake-road-carbon-frameset-with-integrated-handlebar_p268.html#parentHorizontalTab022
Rider height, tire compatibility, chainrings references etc included.

Interesting they chose to spam "wind-tunnel optimized" everywhere in the product description.

[NB87]

It’s just you.

Is it?

Maybe.. I do have second thoughts now about the size I ordered. I went with a 56, but I’m 183 cm tall with an 88 cm inseam.

For reference, I've ridden a size 56 Cannondale SuperSix EVO (Gen 4), slammed with 110mm stem, which fitted me perfectly and has a rider height range of 177–185 cm. When I compare that bike to the LightCarbon size 54 (rated for 180–186 cm), the LC is actually about 6 mm lower in stack and 6 mm shorter in reach.

I know the SuperSix isn’t the most aggressive bike out there, but it’s still a proper race bike. The LC, on the other hand, is marketed as an “endurance all-road” bike. Yet these numbers would suggest the LC is actually more aggressive than the SuperSix. That doesn’t quite add up to me.

When I look at the LC size 56 instead (187–193 cm), the endurance label starts to make much more sense: similar reach, but noticeably higher stack. That geometry aligns far better with what I’d expect from an endurance-oriented frame.

The SuperSix rider height range matches my real-world fit perfectly and is also consistent with other manufacturers. So maybe LightCarbon’s height chart is technically correct, and I’m just being thrown off by the “endurance” label. Still, based on the geometry alone, the LC size 56 seems to fit that category much better.

Just sharing my thoughts. Curious how others see it.

[Bike.Man]

Interesting they chose to spam "wind-tunnel optimized" everywhere in the product description.

Probably because Lambda Racing also presents it on their website https://www.lambda-racing.de/lambda-twin-force-road-gravel-rennrad as if the frame is wind tunnel optimized 🤦

[BLachance75]

I think there size recommendations are a little off. I always compare frames based on current bikes that I ride and I know fit me.

Compared to my trusty old Giant Defy in size M the LC frame in a 54 is 2mm more stack and 5mm more reach. Both stack and reach can easily be matched with spacers and stem length
Compared to my gravel bike, Velobuild GF-003 in size medium the LC frame in 54 has 13mm less stack and 1 mm more reach. The LC bars have 8mm of rise so the difference is only 5mm, easy to match with a spacer.

[POTOOOOOOOO]

I think there size recommendations are a little off. I always compare frames based on current bikes that I ride and I know fit me.

Compared to my trusty old Giant Defy in size M the LC frame in a 54 is 2mm more stack and 5mm more reach. Both stack and reach can easily be matched with spacers and stem length
Compared to my gravel bike, Velobuild GF-003 in size medium the LC frame in 54 has 13mm less stack and 1 mm more reach. The LC bars have 8mm of rise so the difference is only 5mm, easy to match with a spacer.

The 18-D.
8mm rise for the bars and another 8 mm for the mandatory headset spacer. That’s +16mm which in turn moves the bar back by 7ish mm.

[jstrawks]

Interesting they chose to spam "wind-tunnel optimized" everywhere in the product description.

Does anyone here think this frame has been in a wind tunnel? I've seen nothing that suggests to me that it has. Also, I don't give a hoot.

[vietmunki]

Does anyone here think this frame has been in a wind tunnel? I've seen nothing that suggests to me that it has. Also, I don't give a hoot.

Yeah, I don't think anyone actually purchasing the frame believes it or cares.

[Pedaldancer]

Is it just me, or is their height-based sizing reference a bit… interesting? I get that it’s only a guideline and depends on body proportions and personal preference, but looking at the geometry, I’d personally size up one frame. Where they recommend a 54, I’d go 56; where they suggest 56, I’d choose 58, and so on.

For me it suits, i would take 50 and regards body size they table recommends 50.. most sizing tables from large brands however would give me one size to large.

[Kwerlo]

I am building the bike up with a Force E1 2by setup. BB is a Rotor T4729 internal. Now I am struggling with the spacers. Sram Website says 3mm on the drivetrain side. Following these sram instructions there is a space so that the crank can move. The BB manual says 3.5mm on the none drivetrain side and 6mm on the drive train side. Following these rotor instructions it doesn’t seem to fit either.

Anyone any ideas? Trial an error? Something like 1.5mm NDS and 4mm DS should work…

Thanks for your help.