Advice needed: Which Frame?

[travisandcindy]

Maybe making more of this than I need to, but looking for some collective wisdom.  I have 2 Kona 29ers currently, a 16 inch Satori and an 18 inch Honzo.  I have learned to really love the slacker, short chainstay geometry of these bikes.  As an experiment, I built a set of 27.5+ wheels to try out on those bikes.  The full-sus Satori was fine, but I didn't notice a drastic change.  When I tried the wheels on the hardtail Honzo, man alive it was awesome.  I was as fast on it on rough trails as I was full-sus.  Since it was so fun riding the hardtail, I began looking at these carbon frames.  The 2 that I am considering are the Workswell 29+/27.5+ and the 27.5+ specific one from Peter or Dengfu.  So, I have 27.5+ wheels and I have a set of 35mm width 29 carbon wheels to mess with.  I was just about to pull the trigger on the 27.5+ specific frame when I read what bcxx wrote about the 29+ felling drastically different and 27.5+ not as much.  Now I don't know which one to get.  I am planning to set this up primarily as a trail bike, fork at about 130-140.  Pros and cons list.

27.5+ Specific Pros
Slacker head angle (ie 67 degrees with a 140mm fork)
A little cheaper

27.5+ Specific Cons
No 29+ option

WW 29+/27.5+ Pros
Wheel options

WW 29+/27.5+ Cons
Steeper head angle (ie 68.5 degrees with a 140mm fork)
A little more expensive

Then we need to talk size.  Small or medium in either.  I am about 5'7" and have about a 32" inseam.  At times I feel the small Satori is too small and I feel like the medium Honzo fits better.

Anyway, there you go.  Comment, flame, advise away.

Thanks,
Travis

[bxcc]

Tough call. I wanted something for rough terrain and groomed snow riding so it was an easier decision to go with 29+. For a trail bike, it really is a tough call. Peter replied to one of his posts on FB that his can fit a 29+ wheel. At 430mm, that may be doable. The WW frame as very minimal clearance in 425 mode for the Chup's but it might work with dry terrain or with smaller 3" tires. The Chup's are one of the bigger 29+ tires. You could always run a 29x2.8 in the back too if you were having rubbing issues. Personally I would go with the WW frame again. Slightly shorter stays in 425 mode, more clearance in 440 mode, and I really prefer the looks over the other one. Maybe just run the new 29+ Pike in 140 mode and go with 27.5 plus wheels. That would get you to 67ish.

[SportingGoods]

Never ridden a 29+ but I own a 27.5+, so I'm strongly biased

I'd go again with a 27.5+ hardtail (suspension fork is a must for trail, even with plus tires). My reasons are the following:
- Geometry feels like a 29", I like it and you can convert it back to 29" if you have a need
- Wheel weight is better controlled, and even though I have carbon rims and pretty light tires, this is my limit. I don't want any heavier
- As you described it almost feels like a full sus. I don't need more then that, all the grip and dampening I need.
- 27.5+ standard is taking over 29+. Many e-bikes will be 27.5+. I'd expect more options for fork, tires, wheels

I think either way you can't go wrong. You would enjoy both!

[Carbon_Dude]

Same here.  Trying to decide between 27.5+ and 29+ for my next bike.

The WW frame is very interesting, at first I thought it was the same frame as Peter has available but upon closer inspection I see the TT shape is different and the dropout has two positions for the rear axle.

EDIT:  I contacted Workswell and requested a geometry chart for their frame and now see that all the dimensions match the geometry chart I received from Peter, both gave me the same drawing.  So the frames are basically identical.  The only difference I can see is the Workswell frame has dropouts that allow the rear axle to be installed in two positions, not sure if the frame Peter sells can have the same dropouts.

[jja]

Same here.  Trying to decide between 27.5+ and 29+ for my next bike.

The WW frame is very interesting, at first I thought it was the same frame as Peter has available but upon closer inspection I see the TT shape is different and the dropout has two positions for the rear axle.

EDIT:  I contacted Workswell and requested a geometry chart for their frame and now see that all the dimensions match the geometry chart I received from Peter, both gave me the same drawing.  So the frames are basically identical.  The only difference I can see is the Workswell frame has dropouts that allow the rear axle to be installed in two positions, not sure if the frame Peter sells can have the same dropouts.

Whoa, I just contacted Peter and ICAN and those are the two frames that look identical-- and was about to start a new thread for them. Both chainstays are elevated and the fork is 490mm a-c with a 68.5 deg HA. While the WW (see http://chinertown.com/index.php/topic,832.msg9916.html#msg9916 ) specs a 495 fork at 71.5 HA (for 29+ wheel size).

[Carbon_Dude]

Like many of the Chinese carbon frames being sold direct, this is just another that the main factory is producing.  The Chinese trading companies try to differentiate the product but in the end, they are the same models being manufactured in the same place.

If anyone wants to start a new thread for the -078 High CS frame, be my guest.

[bxcc]

The XMCarbonspeed and Dengfu frames appear to be the same but the Workswell one is different. The ICAN frame might even be a third option as the lines are different then all of them. I prefer the looks of the WW but a little slacker head angle with a rigid 495ish fork would be nice. Peter has mentioned that his will work with a 29+ wheel. I may have went that way if I would have known that 4 months ago. That being said, I have zero complaints with my WW frame. I think I might put the new Yari 29+ in 120 or 140 on my list. I definitely don't need the 140 but slacker HA would be nice. For the riding I have done on it so far, that 71 degree angle hasn't been an issue.

I don't think you could go wrong with either of them. I do like the 425 / 440 options though.

And I did start a 078 thread. It's my Muffin Top build. 

[Carbon_Dude]

bxcc, I know the Workswell WCB-M-078 and CS-527 look slightly different but when requesting information from Peter and from Workswell, I received the exact same spec sheet so I would expect they are both the same.  Either frame works with 27.5+ or 29+ tires.

The DengFu frame looks like the Workswell and Carbonspeed frames but had different specs listed.  However, the pictures on the websites are exactly the same.  Most likely all three of these are the same frame.

The ICAN is different, the chain stays on both sides of the frame are elevated, which looks even more odd to me than just the drive side being elevated.  It only lists the frame as a 27.5+, no mention of 29+ at ICAN.  It's not the same as the other three.

[bxcc]

bxcc, I know the Workswell WCB-M-078 and CS-527 look slightly different but when requesting information from Peter and from Workswell, I received the exact same spec sheet so I would expect they are both the same.  Either frame works with 27.5+ or 29+ tires.

The DengFu frame looks like the Workswell and Carbonspeed frames but had different specs listed.  However, the pictures on the websites are exactly the same.  Most likely all three of these are the same frame.

I am not sure what the spec sheets they sent you contain but I can guarantee that the WW frame and the XMCarbon frame are different. Their forks are the same though. Here are some differences that stand out in the pictures (Peter has posted some nice pictures of his on FB).
-Seat tube - WW is curved back near where the drive side CS connects, XM is straight from BB to top.
-Drive side CS - WW is again curved and the XM one is straight.
-Top tube - WW has a bend just in front of the seat tube and the XM top tube is completely straight.
-Chainstay length - WW is adjustable from 440 to 425 and the XM frame is fixed at 430.
-Seat Post - WW is 27.2 and XM is 31.6.

I haven't seen the spec sheet that Peter is providing but the pictures look identical to the Dengfu frame and they have a spec sheet on their site. From the measurements that I have taken, the WW spec sheet is pretty accurate.

With all of that being said, for me there really isn't one that is "better" than the other. Just slightly different. I guess it probably boils down to price and personal preference on looks.

And for anyone that is interested, here are some links.

Workswell / Sobato
http://www.workswellbikes.com/web/view/161.html

XMCarbon Speed (Peter)
http://www.xmcarbonspeed.com/Productinfo.asp?f=1414

Ican 29+
http://www.icanbikes.com/html/MTB/29ER_frame/317.html#bk_desc_tab

Ican 27.5+
http://www.icanbikes.com/html/MTB/27_5ER_frame/330.html#bk_desc_tab

DengFu
http://www.dengfubikes.com/MTB_FRAME/195.html

[Carbon_Dude]

I agree the frames are different and there appears to be three versions of the elevated CS Chiner frames.  I asked Peter once again for the geometry specs for the CS-527, possibly I mixed up my spec sheets.

1) Workswell - Unique design with Boost drop-outs that have two options for the rear axle, and rear brake caliper mounting, 27.2 seat post, BSA, BB30, BB92, PF30 BB options.
2) ICAN - Unique design, both chain stays are elevated.  Boost spacing, PF30 BB is the only option, 31.6 seat post.
3) DengFu & CS-527 (I think) are the same.  BSA/BB30 73mm BB, Boost spacing, 31.6 seat post.

I'm liking the Workswell frame the most at the moment.  It has the most features out of any Chiner frame I've seen.

[travisandcindy]

That was the other pro/con.  My other bikes have a 31.6 seat post, so going with dengfu keeps up interchangeability.

[Carbon_Dude]

Interchangeability of seat posts sounds good but I've never moved a seat and post from one bike to another so having one bike with a 31.6 and another 27.2 is not an issue for me.  If I want to change seats, I'd just move the seat from one post to the other.

[travisandcindy]

Yeah, not a deal breaker for sure.

[bxcc]

As far as seatposts go, I don't think carbon posts would be a good choice if you were planning on swapping them between frames. Maybe I'm wrong but they tend to get scratched up a lot and that could be bad. I got a Nashbar carbon post for my WW 078 frame for $40. It isn't the lightest at 240 grams but the tube sidewall thickness is at least twice as thick as any other carbon post I have used.

The only issue I can see with the 27.2 size is that you are limited with dropper post selection. And this type of bike would probably see one more so than the standard chinese carbon 29er.

[scottay]

How about this KSM bikes frame?  Almost the same as  Peters frame?  Anybody had dealings with KSM?
.
http://ksm-sports.en.alibaba.com/product/60353836613-800325533/2016_new_carbon_fiber_MTB_27_5er_plus_frame_3_0_tires_carbon_fiber_27_5er_plus_frame_PF30.html