XM Carbon Speed Race Frame - The wish list

[Dark17]

Looks really interesting! Frame design and geometry ticks most of the boxes I find. Gotta be n+1 again for sure lol.

[jfcb]

That’s some great news from Peter! Besides the fact that the aero bike looks really cool, I’m especially pleased with the geometry. That’s an area where many Chinese vendors tend to drop the ball — often making the stack too low and the reach too long for the intended size, or compromising by squeezing two sizes into one (e.g. L and XL).

If this frame also targets high specs for stiffness and weight, similar to the Gran Turismo frame — using higher-grade materials and more refined manufacturing techniques — I think it will be a real hot seller.

[BikerJens]

I just want it to come in a adult size..

It's happening. It's really happening! 

[benevelo]

Any info regarding the tire clearance?

[Kar25]

Any info regarding the tire clearance?

Both frames take 35c tyres

[Cnasta]

Really like the S5/Foil aero frameset. Any indication on weight? Is sub 950gr for size 54 realistic Peter?

[Takiyaki]

That’s some great news from Peter! Besides the fact that the aero bike looks really cool, I’m especially pleased with the geometry. That’s an area where many Chinese vendors tend to drop the ball — often making the stack too low and the reach too long for the intended size, or compromising by squeezing two sizes into one (e.g. L and XL).

If this frame also targets high specs for stiffness and weight, similar to the Gran Turismo frame — using higher-grade materials and more refined manufacturing techniques — I think it will be a real hot seller.

I find the geometry problem to be the opposite- I am running a 130mm stem and can never find a frame with more TT than stack. I dont see the point of making these endurance bikes. A 1:1 TT:stack ratio is probably the best compromise.

I have been mulling my next build...... the 2nd frame w/some 34-35mm WAM wheels and 32c tires sounds lovely

[jo1673]

The "Foil" looks nice, but come on, steepen those STAs! Similar stack/reach numbers for the "SL8", but easier to achieve the "meme fit" on that one with steeper STA.

Looks like they just copied the geometry from the "inspiration" for those two frames. A bit disappointing I must admit.

[Pistonbroke]

Would like to see steeper sta too :-)
Think PeakTorque said same on Instagram

More reach while I'm wishing too please

Any indication of price yet Peter?

[fhill]

The "Foil" looks nice, but come on, steepen those STAs! Similar stack/reach numbers for the "SL8", but easier to achieve the "meme fit" on that one with steeper STA.

Looks like they just copied the geometry from the "inspiration" for those two frames. A bit disappointing I must admit.

I think the STA is measurred at the Stack height and therefore you should have steeper STA the higher you sit

[jo1673]

I think the STA is measurred at the Stack height and therefore you should have steeper STA the higher you sit

I see what you mean. The axis of the seatpost is eccentric to the BB. I guess this also goes for the original Foil as well as for the S5. Makes it hard to determine whether it will enable positioning the seat as far forward as I would like ... since, as you pointed out, raising the seat effectively steepens the STA.

[toxin]

Meh, looking at the STA, angle of the actual post and its design, doesn't look like it'll be that much steeper in reality. Just disappointingly standard geometry overall.

[Da11as]

Meh, looking at the STA, angle of the actual post and its design, doesn't look like it'll be that much steeper in reality. Just disappointingly standard geometry overall.

Right, I wish we have more progressive design but for XMCS it's a safe bet they get their underground market share. Most people who are less aware of the intricacies of the frame geometry would be scared anyways, heck most fitters can't fit people on the bikes that barely changed in the last 30 years, imagine giving them something completely different.

[patliean1]

I think Peter will be offering both a 0 and 8mm offset seatpost. Problem solved.

Currently a 73.3° seat angle with a 0 offset seatpost puts my saddle rails two-thirds of the way back. All things like effective top tube length, stack, reach etc being equal. A 74° only works for me with an 8mm offset. But as I learned I'm probably the far minority.

[Sakizashi]

Right, I wish we have more progressive design but for XMCS it's a safe bet they get their underground market share. Most people who are less aware of the intricacies of the frame geometry would be scared anyways, heck most fitters can't fit people on the bikes that barely changed in the last 30 years, imagine giving them something completely different.

Couldn't agree more. There is what I wish for, and there is the reality that Peter needs to make money and not take risks beyond what he considers reasonable for his business. I understand why these are the geometries, and while I find it disappointing to see another "me too" bike, it's a very rational choice and almost certainly a better business decision in the near term.

I think Peter will be offering both a 0 and 8mm offset seatpost. Problem solved.

Currently a 73.3° seat angle with a 0 offset seatpost puts my saddle rails two-thirds of the way back. All things like effective top tube length, stack, reach etc being equal. A 74° only works for me with an 8mm offset. But as I learned I'm probably the far minority.

8mm forward offset? It doesn't solve the problem at all, even if that's the case. Yes, it will fit better for people who want to sit further forward, but the handling will be poor because the weight will be too far forward relative to the front wheel.