Lightcarbon LCR72 "aero racing gravel"

[zealot128]

Some of you saw it already in my video of the LightCarbon factory tour/interview, and i got some questions regarding it. So, I just got the recent info on the Gravel Racing Frame as it is finalized and testing now.
I am totally not in the target audience for "Racing Gravel", but for sure there are some of you guys will probably interested in it

Here some photos:





And geometry chart



Not a geometry nerd, but it seems to me a bit upright with S:R ratios of 1:48-1:50 - interested about your opinions.
Clearance should be 50C (Geometry chart also states 50C standover-height). I will update this thread, if I got more info. Frame will be shown at Shanghai Cycle and ofc Eurobike end of june.

From the other thread we already now LC is quite busy at the moment with current production, what I got was, that production will take 4-6 months. My interpretation: some sizes will be earlier, some later, expect later - YMMV

[Rolle2k]

Ok! size M-540 looks perfect for me. This MAY be the frame i have been waiting for! Looks like kind of perfect geometry.. possibly a little more fork rake would suite me better, but otherwise great! Even 420mm chainstays! 
If it made a custom frame for myself i would kinda look like the medium here.... change seat tube angle to 74.5deg, increase the horizontal top tube length by 16mm and change the rake +3mm..
But for a factory frame, this is as close as it gets so far :-)

The only question: Is it possible to get 2.1" Thunder burts in there, with wider rims (~54mm WAM)?

[WhityWhite]

Yeah... From a geotechnical standpoint, that one seems pretty interesting to me too—but you probably won't be able to order it for another year, once the kinks have been worked out, unless you want to be a test driver

[Samuel BMR]

So stoked !! Thanks for sharing

[Rolle2k]

Yeah... From a geotechnical standpoint, that one seems pretty interesting to me too—but you probably won't be able to order it for another year, once the kinks have been worked out, unless you want to be a test driver

I could actually even go for the Large size, and ride with slammed stem, but i guess it would give less comfort, since less seatpost would be exposed - and also gives taller standover height. My bike today does have 480mm seatstay, so 500mm is already taller there.
I would also actually perfer a regular 27.2mm seatpost, because they usually give better comfort - and it's easier to find alternatives if one would like to replace it with damping post like Ergon CF Allroad Pro.
Of course it is a aero frame, but i don't think seatpost would matter that much. its always compromises anyway.
At the same time, really glad that there finally is something on the way that would fit my needs!

[hubba]

I don't really get the steep seat tube angle combined with short reach if it's a aero racing frame. 10mm more reach would seem fitting. But nice that they increased the bb drop.

[jfcb]

I love their concept, but don't understand why they choose for an 'outdated' geometry with such a short reach. All good to have an aero frame, but if you can't position the rider in an optimal aero position, you don't gain much. The short top tube and hence reach combined with the steep headtube angle makes me worried about toe overlap when using bigger tires. Let's hope they (re)do their homework well.

[Rolle2k]

I don't really get the steep seat tube angle and short reach if it's a aero racing frame. 10mm more reach would seem fitting. But nice that they increased the bb drop.

I get that you dont like the short reach, i would also want it a bit longer... buuuut i dont get why you would not like steeper seat tube angle? Usually for racing you ideally sit more forward above the crank for maximum power, and it also open up hips more in aero position. Especially with short chainstay you compensate weight more forward.
An easy fix is also setback seatposts, which probably will also be available.

When i did a bike fit a few weeks ago, i had to slam my saddle all the way forward with zero-setback post, and i still miss about 1cm to have it perfect.
This is with 73.5deg seat tube and 'Comfort position'. Of course saddles have different rail positions so another with rails a bit towards the rear one may be better.

[hubba]

I get that you dont like the short reach, i would also want it a bit longer... buuuut i dont get why you would not like steeper seat tube angle? Usually for racing you ideally sit more forward above the crank for maximum power, and it also open up hips more in aero position. Especially with short chainstay you compensate weight more forward.
An easy fix is also setback seatposts, which probably will also be available.

When i did a bike fit a few weeks ago, i had to slam my saddle all the way forward with zero-setback post, and i still miss about 1cm to have it perfect.
This is with 73.5deg seat tube and 'Comfort position'. Of course saddles have different rail positions so another with rails a bit towards the rear one may be better.

I do like steep seat tube angle. I meant it is usually combined with longer reach, that's why I said it's a weird combination.

I have the same problem. If a seat tube is too slack I have to slam it forward and still might end up having too much setback. On my Yoeleo Altera I run a 5mm setback post flipped around for -5mm setback.

[kubackje]

I get that you dont like the short reach, i would also want it a bit longer... buuuut i dont get why you would not like steeper seat tube angle? Usually for racing you ideally sit more forward above the crank for maximum power, and it also open up hips more in aero position. Especially with short chainstay you compensate weight more forward.
An easy fix is also setback seatposts, which probably will also be available.

When i did a bike fit a few weeks ago, i had to slam my saddle all the way forward with zero-setback post, and i still miss about 1cm to have it perfect.
This is with 73.5deg seat tube and 'Comfort position'. Of course saddles have different rail positions so another with rails a bit towards the rear one may be better.

Because if you have more frame reach you don't have to use a long stem on frame with 71.5 HTA which negatively affects handling making it too slow

[Rolle2k]

Because if you have more frame reach you don't have to use a long stem on frame with 71.5 HTA which negatively affects handling making it too slow

I literally said "I get that you dont like the short reach, i would also want it a bit longer" so, we are on the same page there 😅

I do like steep seat tubes though. 74.5deg ideally for me. And yes, both reach and seat tube angle affects top tube horizontal length... But the reason to have steeper seat tube is rather to get correct placement over pedals then to make top tube shorter. In this case toptube should have been 10mm longer while keeping ST-angle 😊
I also think HT-angle and fork rake is better to change for reactiveness of the bike. As long as stem is not extremely long, its ok.
I would probably be fine with 80-90mm stem, on this frame.

[kubackje]

I literally said "I get that you dont like the short reach, i would also want it a bit longer" so, we are on the same page there 😅

I do like steep seat tubes though. 74.5deg ideally for me. And yes, both reach and seat tube angle affects top tube horizontal length... But the reason to have steeper seat tube is rather to get correct placement over pedals then to make top tube shorter. In this case toptube should have been 10mm longer while keeping ST-angle 😊
I also think HT-angle and fork rake is better to change for reactiveness of the bike. As long as stem is not extremely long, its ok.
I would probably be fine with 80-90mm stem, on this frame.

I'm 187cm but would need to use size 56 due to stack. With such a short reach I would need to pair it with 120 stem

[konass]

I would need a 120 stem on a large. Not what I want on a gravel bike.

[gaisdergerman]

Here also 120mm or 130 stem for a xl frame 

[Zrader]

I would need a 120 stem on a large. Not what I want on a gravel bike.

I’m currently running a 130mm and I can confirm, not the best on gravel but it’s doable.