New Avenger R8-RS

[alfiomotrambo]

Makes sense. I got the 105 Di2 on AliExpress for around €700, if I’m not mistaken. Right now it’s a little bit more expensive https://it.aliexpress.com/item/1005007369349694.html

Of course, during sales you can also find the mechanical one for less, and maybe €100~150 difference for a groupset can matter to some people. I agree with you, I would never go back either, but for some people it can make sense.

[crwlv888]

Love the look of it!

Which groupset did you build it up with? Do you think it is possible to build it with mechanical shifters?

I’m running a 12-speed Ultegra Di2 setup.

The hydraulic hose routing on this bike is pretty straightforward: the hoses exit through small holes on both sides of the stem and enter two small ports on the handlebar.

While routing them is incredibly easy, each port can only fit a single line.
Moreover, there are no routing holes on the frame for mechanical shifting.

Unfortunately, this means the frame is incompatible with mechanical shifting.

[arvh]

I found it on a french webshop as well which would give me free shipping and 2-year warranty according to EU law (I am from EU country). I am very tempted!

I am a bit surprised that only one person has posted a build with this bike. Has anyone else ordered one?

[Serge_K]

I found it on a french webshop as well which would give me free shipping and 2-year warranty according to EU law (I am from EU country). I am very tempted!

I am a bit surprised that only one person has posted a build with this bike. Has anyone else ordered one?

the stack is low AF (the stack they claim is wrong by the height of the bars, which is enormous. You end up with a very very low stack. They dont disclose the tyre clearance which is a huge red flag, apparently it's 34mm? says who, is it true, who knows. Historically these were 500$ frames, until one day they just jacked up the prices. It's like yoeleo. Yoeleo is youtuber catnip. They charge a premium for stuff that should cost 500$.
At the right price, this would have been interesting a year or 2 ago. Now i'm not considering anything that can't clear 35C (not 35mm, mind you).
So, wrong geometry, wrong price, and outdated.

[arvh]

the stack is low AF (the stack they claim is wrong by the height of the bars, which is enormous. You end up with a very very low stack. They dont disclose the tyre clearance which is a huge red flag, apparently it's 34mm? says who, is it true, who knows. Historically these were 500$ frames, until one day they just jacked up the prices. It's like yoeleo. Yoeleo is youtuber catnip. They charge a premium for stuff that should cost 500$.
At the right price, this would have been interesting a year or 2 ago. Now i'm not considering anything that can't clear 35C (not 35mm, mind you).
So, wrong geometry, wrong price, and outdated.

Tire clearance from their website (just search 34 and it will show): https://avengerbikes.com/blogs/news/aero-validation-avenger-r8rs-wind-tunnel-performance-report

So the stack given in their geometry chart is including the handlebar rise?

[crwlv888]

Tire clearance from their website (just search 34 and it will show): https://avengerbikes.com/blogs/news/aero-validation-avenger-r8rs-wind-tunnel-performance-report

So the stack given in their geometry chart is including the handlebar rise?

In geometry charts, stack is measured to the top of the stem.

However, the upper headset cup actually has about a 30mm drop (on a size 56 frame, though I'm not sure about other sizes).

So, the actual stack for a size 56 frame should be: the stack from the geometry chart - 30mm + handlebar rise.

By the way, I noticed the geometry is very similar to the Cervélo S5.（At least on a size 56, the stack from the geometry chart + 40mm handlebar rise）

[arvh]

I think the geometry suits me quite well still. My current road bike, Felt F15 size 58 from 2005, gives me a comfortable position but the frame is too big for me. The reach is slightly shorter (16mm) on the R8RS and the stack is the same as the R8RS (according to geometry chart) but if I include the rise of the bar I will still get a slightly higher position. I think the 120 stem on a size 56 should make for a nice position for me.

I appreciate both of your inputs regarding the geometry.

[Serge_K]

Tire clearance from their website (just search 34 and it will show): https://avengerbikes.com/blogs/news/aero-validation-avenger-r8rs-wind-tunnel-performance-report

So the stack given in their geometry chart is including the handlebar rise?

Ah, thank you, i looked at the product pages, didn't know about this page. It's a major blunder not to spell out tyre clearance on a product page (suspicious too). So that page says 34C (which is actually good) while someone on this thread said 34mm. The fact that it's not on the product page would mean i'd never order that without a formal response from someone working there, by email.

As to stack, +1 on crwlv888's response. The advertised stack, if their diagram is correct, is off by the height of the stem. Whether it's 30mm, idk. Either way, that's another blunder that would need clearing formally by email.

Messy stuff. Frame geometry and tyre clearance might be the 2 most important aspects of a bike if you want it to fit.

[Mariuszuzd]

Honestly I don't understand that conspiracy theories. How you calculated that 30 mm ? They provided rather clear geometry chart, I added it to the post! However, I also pointed them some time ago, that they had some mistake. Previously for the size 58 they provided 410 mm reach while it's 401 mm. I'm using bike geocalc website for all calculations link - https://www.bikegeocalc.com/#12Avenger+R8RSa0b4c738.90475d270e578.68506f794.05501g1049.20277h340.99523i340j340k1341.855l857m1139.5895n708.53751o1184.13038p958.03145q1217.8362r1321.0362s958.03145t31.8u38v-17.2w0x0y250z40A1B102C0D398.31735E45.16906F165G0H0Z15Falath+EVO+2024a0b4c744.1522d271e574.60949f836.11527g1037.72683h379.23734i340j340k1333.35615l841m1132.9522n700.70902o1175.84345p931.29337q1217.88451r1338.75562s933.75643t31.8u35v10w0.00001x0y250z40A4B120C0D391E45.16905F165G0H0Z

Despite that, all measurements are rather solid and valid. I'm lucky and happy owner of Shuttle SL, also size 58. All dimensions are the same as they provided for that frameset. I'm very interested in buying that frame, I have to choose a color only. Come on, 34 mm tire clearance is too small ? Want more, just buy a gravel frameset, not the aero weapon, ready to build a TT bike. Some guy is still fighting with me on my instagram, on the post related to my Elves Falath EXP. He stated that 25 mm is enough and very comfortable    Of course, there are still some maniacs and strange cyclist, that are using 25 mm for bikes, not on a rim brake frame, but 34 mm is quite a lot! I also have some doubts if I calculated that properly, or the data is not correct, but there is no way to check it. Moreover, they provided the calculation for 90 mm steam only. I need 120 mm, so that is also quite different.

[crwlv888]

I assumed the stack would be 565 + 71 = 636mm for a size 56 with a 100 mm stem.

However, once the bike was fully built, I noticed the handlebars felt lower than on my other bikes.
Looking back at the geometry chart, I realized that the stack line actually extends all the way to the top of the stem.
On the other hand, the handlebar rise (Rising height A) is measured from the bottom of the stem.

When I actually measured the height from the bottom to the top of the handlebar, it was about 30mm (or more accurately, somewhere in the 20s, but whatever).
Therefore, the actual stack should be 565 + 71 - 30 = 606mm.
This perfectly explains why the handlebars felt lower than I expected.

The build quality of this bike is excellent, and the design doesn't look like a generic open-mold frame at all.
I really like it and highly recommend it.

That said, they definitely have room for improvement when it comes to the labeling on their geometry charts and the handlebar data.
(They initially told me that the rise was a uniform 71 mm across all handlebars regardless of stem length, but that clearly isn't the case.)

Honestly I don't understand that conspiracy theories. How you calculated that 30 mm ? They provided rather clear geometry chart, I added it to the post! However, I also pointed them some time ago, that they had some mistake. Previously for the size 58 they provided 410 mm reach while it's 401 mm. I'm using bike geocalc website for all calculations link - https://www.bikegeocalc.com/#12Avenger+R8RSa0b4c738.90475d270e578.68506f794.05501g1049.20277h340.99523i340j340k1341.855l857m1139.5895n708.53751o1184.13038p958.03145q1217.8362r1321.0362s958.03145t31.8u38v-17.2w0x0y250z40A1B102C0D398.31735E45.16906F165G0H0Z15Falath+EVO+2024a0b4c744.1522d271e574.60949f836.11527g1037.72683h379.23734i340j340k1333.35615l841m1132.9522n700.70902o1175.84345p931.29337q1217.88451r1338.75562s933.75643t31.8u35v10w0.00001x0y250z40A4B120C0D391E45.16905F165G0H0Z

Despite that, all measurements are rather solid and valid. I'm lucky and happy owner of Shuttle SL, also size 58. All dimensions are the same as they provided for that frameset. I'm very interested in buying that frame, I have to choose a color only. Come on, 34 mm tire clearance is too small ? Want more, just buy a gravel frameset, not the aero weapon, ready to build a TT bike. Some guy is still fighting with me on my instagram, on the post related to my Elves Falath EXP. He stated that 25 mm is enough and very comfortable    Of course, there are still some maniacs and strange cyclist, that are using 25 mm for bikes, not on a rim brake frame, but 34 mm is quite a lot! I also have some doubts if I calculated that properly, or the data is not correct, but there is no way to check it. Moreover, they provided the calculation for 90 mm steam only. I need 120 mm, so that is also quite different.

[Mariuszuzd]

I checked your data, you attached the screenshot. I see 49 mm, above the stack, so why not 565+49=614 mm of total stack on the handlebar? I would suggest to measure your handlebar height from the bottom, from the ground, on both bikes, maybe that will help? I still working on the length, so that also could help me. I have Falath EXP and it's too low for me, I would need some extra 1-2 cm. So I decided to sell it, and go for R8_RS.

[crwlv888]

I checked your data, you attached the screenshot. I see 49 mm, above the stack, so why not 565+49=614 mm of total stack on the handlebar? I would suggest to measure your handlebar height from the bottom, from the ground, on both bikes, maybe that will help? I still working on the length, so that also could help me. I have Falath EXP and it's too low for me, I would need some extra 1-2 cm. So I decided to sell it, and go for R8_RS.

I took some measurements, and the height from the ground to the handlebars is about 885mm, while the ground to the center of the bottom bracket is about 278mm.
That puts the stack at 885 - 278 = 607mm, which is pretty close to what I originally estimated.

Plus, you can add spacers to this bike.
If it feels a bit too low, throwing on a 5 to 10 mm spacer shouldn't ruin the aesthetics at all.

I did notice the '49' in the geometry chart, but the problem is that handlebar rise varies across the board. So, what stem length would actually give you an equivalent reach of 49?

Then again, none of this really matters all that much to me.
I don't race, and I don't need to chase the 'perfect' fit.
Plus, I rotate between nine different bikes, and every single one of them has a slightly different setup.
A higher position feels a bit more comfortable, while a lower one feels more aggressive — to me, that's just part of each bike's unique character.

Since I'm not a bike shop or a manufacturer, having the exact, meticulous data isn't a dealbreaker for my riding.

But I just feel that since they went through the trouble of designing a great bike — and it's not exactly in the budget price range either — the least they could do is get the basic geometry chart and data right.

Consumers shouldn't have to sit around doing the guesswork and math ourselves.

[Mariuszuzd]

That is 100% true! But one question, what is the height to the handlebar for your let say "fitted" and comfortable bike ?

[Bonus79]

I took some measurements, and the height from the ground to the handlebars is about 885mm, while the ground to the center of the bottom bracket is about 278mm.
That puts the stack at 885 - 278 = 607mm, which is pretty close to what I originally estimated.

Plus, you can add spacers to this bike.
If it feels a bit too low, throwing on a 5 to 10 mm spacer shouldn't ruin the aesthetics at all.

I did notice the '49' in the geometry chart, but the problem is that handlebar rise varies across the board. So, what stem length would actually give you an equivalent reach of 49?

Then again, none of this really matters all that much to me.
I don't race, and I don't need to chase the 'perfect' fit.
Plus, I rotate between nine different bikes, and every single one of them has a slightly different setup.
A higher position feels a bit more comfortable, while a lower one feels more aggressive — to me, that's just part of each bike's unique character.

Since I'm not a bike shop or a manufacturer, having the exact, meticulous data isn't a dealbreaker for my riding.

But I just feel that since they went through the trouble of designing a great bike — and it's not exactly in the budget price range either — the least they could do is get the basic geometry chart and data right.

Consumers shouldn't have to sit around doing the guesswork and math ourselves.

Hi there—congratulations on the bike!

Regarding the stack measured at the top of the handlebar, I’d say that figure is also listed in the geometry chart (size 56 > 614mm >> 565mm + 49mm).

Since you’re in the mood for taking measurements, could I ask for a couple of numbers?

1) What is the distance from the underside of the saddle rails to the top of the top tube (see the red arrow in the photo)?
2) The saddle height in the photo you posted is 760mm... could I ask you to measure from the floor to the top of the saddle?

Thanks.

[crwlv888]

I recently bought a Cycplus T7, and it makes adjusting the settings incredibly easy.
I've realized that I have a pretty low tolerance when it comes to reach; even a tiny +-10mm variance makes a noticeable difference to me.
On the other hand, I can comfortably tolerate a stack anywhere between 600〜650mm, with 620〜630mm being my absolute sweet spot.
That said, comfort is highly dependent on body proportions, fitness levels, and riding distance, so these numbers probably don't mean much to anyone else.

Hi there—congratulations on the bike!

Regarding the stack measured at the top of the handlebar, I’d say that figure is also listed in the geometry chart (size 56 > 614mm >> 565mm + 49mm).

Since you’re in the mood for taking measurements, could I ask for a couple of numbers?

1) What is the distance from the underside of the saddle rails to the top of the top tube (see the red arrow in the photo)?
2) The saddle height in the photo you posted is 760mm... could I ask you to measure from the floor to the top of the saddle?

Thanks.

1. The length of the section highlighted by the red line is 190mm.

2. The distance from the center of the BB along the seat tube to the top of the saddle is 760mm. The vertical height from the ground to the top of the saddle is 1050mm.

Also, the saddle-to-handlebar drop looks a bit extreme in the photo, but that's likely just due to camera lens distortion.
It doesn't look nearly that drastic in reality.