Mondince new 2026 Aero Gravel

[emilioea]

If the fork is measured axle to crown (which is common), and with a 50 mm offset, then the fork has an effective angle slacker than the head tube angle, which makes the fork's contribution to the stack height smaller than if you calculate it with the head tube angle. Taking that into account I calculate 558 mm for the GV201 (4 mm less than claimed, close enough) and 550 mm for the FM316 (22 mm less than claimed).

PS: when I do the same calculation with the Mondraker Arid (which uses a 420 mm fork) my calculation is within 3 mm of Mondraker's claimed stack.

[lkip]

I guess that solves the mistery.
For the Gv201 I used the measurement as taken in the geometry chart, which isn't clear because it measures fork lenght as projection on the steering axle. If the measurement is axle to crown then the angle varies lowering the front to 558mm indeed.

I guess Mondice used the 400mm measurement as drawn on the geometry chart so the actual axle to crown is slightly longer; I guess this can make sense because of the flip chip that may slightly change axle to crown length.This would make the axle to crown 405mm for 50mm offset that won't be enough to get to that number of stack...

Anyway they changed geometry chart more than once in the last 2 months so errors are a possibility;
my frame is on its way, with quite a bit of delay, I'll take the measurements when it'll be here, also I ordered the frame before the flip chip was a thing so I have no idea what it'll come equipped with  .

[emilioea]

Cool, would be nice if you can report back when you get the frame. I think the claimed stack would fit me well, but if it's 20 mm less in real life, that would make it too aggressive for me. I also like their FM306, but that one may have slightly too much stack at 585 mm for a size M.

[lkip]

I asked Jack the actual length of the equipped fork, we'll see.
I'm not too worried because I'm likely to change the headset with something like DEDA s-dcr to improve cable routing but that'll add 15mm on top of the head tube.

[emilioea]

I just got a reply from Mondince saying that the chart is indeed wrong and that they'll update it next week.

[CJ]

Ordered a S and an XL FM316... the small arrives this Wednesday October 8 (had to pay $81 import fee in the US 🤔)
The XL is due late Oct/early Nov

[CJ]

Updated geometry

[CJ]

The small arrived.  The XL goes into production at the end of October.

[lkip]

The updated geometry is disconcerting.
Now the bike is 24mm longer and 10mm lower.
Seat angle is almost vertical and BB drop is huge at 84.5mm.
I hope they'll fit a 420mm fork on the bike and fix the geometry in the near future.

[kbernstein]

I'm giving it a skip now. That's more reach than some TT bikes. Who is this for? 60mm stems? Aero is one thing but how could anyone be comfortable even for 2 hours on this?

[Asco]

https://mondincecycle.com/product/2026-aero-design-t47-bracket-gravel-bike-frame-fm316

They have already updated and are offering it with a 420 A-C fork as well.

Personally, I love the modern geo resulting from the shorter fork. The only question is whether the fork is too short for a Thunder Burt.

[jo1673]

I actually quite like this geometry ... for a road bike. For a gravel bike I think it is too progressive, but probably designed around short stem lengths. This frame is in line with the Ridley Noah Fast 3.0 when it comes to reach and seat tube angle, albeit with a much taller stack. I personally wish for a chinese road frame with this kind of geometry.

[Asco]

I actually quite like this geometry ... for a road bike. For a gravel bike I think it is too progressive, but probably designed around short stem lengths. This frame is in line with the Ridley Noah Fast 3.0 when it comes to reach and seat tube angle, albeit with a much taller stack. I personally wish for a chinese road frame with this kind of geometry.

Have you seen this one? https://chinertown.com/index.php/topic,6206.0.html

Pretty similar depending on size.

[Pistonbroke]

I actually quite like this geometry ... for a road bike. For a gravel bike I think it is too progressive, but probably designed around short stem lengths. This frame is in line with the Ridley Noah Fast 3.0 when it comes to reach and seat tube angle, albeit with a much taller stack. I personally wish for a chinese road frame with this kind of geometry.

I looked long and hard at this frame or the velobuild aero gravel for the same reason.
I think if you put road forks on the VB it could be a winner.

[jo1673]

I looked long and hard at this frame or the velobuild aero gravel for the same reason.
I think if you put road forks on the VB it could be a winner.

I actually have the VB Aero gravel, but haven't ridden it yet. I probably won't use it as a road bike, though. One major difference from the Noah Fast 3.0 is that the VB has a chainstay length of 425, while the Noah has 407. Also, not quite as steep STA. Will absolutely try mine with large slick tires on the road, but still on the lookout for a new road frame.

Looked at the VB 368, but not a fan of many things about that frame, and also it is not nearly as "progressive" as the Noah.