Chinertown
Chinese Carbon Road Bikes => Road Bike Frames, Wheels & Components => Topic started by: Serge_K on March 28, 2025, 04:10:11 PM
-
The new Van Rysel RCR-F just dropped on youtube. Very exciting. Will be curious to hear how it compares with the Cervelo S5 & the likes in a wind tunnel. Looks super aero, deep tubes everywhere, especially the front end (deep fork, deep & narrow head tube). It makes the canyon aeroad look dated (which it is, as this one doesn't use the updated UCI rules on tube shapes).
What choices do we have in chinese frames, when it comes to aero frames? Anything that looks like the Van Rysel RCR-F?
I love my 268 from Long Teng, which looks a lot like the old ostro.
lots of people riding fake Ostros, and they do look awesome, and the ostro tested fast in the wind tunnel.
What else?
-
Love the RCR F !
I would really like to see that Tantan X67 as a complete bike before ordering one. Still waiting fro photos.
-
Very similar to the speeder SC-R49D in my eyes, apart from the deep head tube. Shame that Decathlon is not selling it in the TDF24 Marble paint scheme.
https://www.speedercycling.com/Carbon-Integrated-Road-Disc-Frameset-SC-R49D-_p399.html
-
I think for now there is quick pro er:one in that category. Big Rock Aero has also deep front end. TanTan x65 has massive tubes shape all around.
-
The design is solid, obviously far better than anything you'll find in china, but the seatpoat angle sucks, way too relaxed and then a setback seatpost on top of that. Archaic. Also, where I'm at it's more expensive than a Foil
-
From what I've seen in the Tour magazine online review (without wind tunnel test) it's really stiff, with a harsh rear end and very little flex on the seatpost.
-
The crazy thing is the price!!
Was a consideration as I am in planning to do a build and there is no frame only option :( :(
-
Yep, they're bo longer in "affordable" territory. It's technically possible for a decathlon store to order all the frameset parts to the store as "spare parts". Question is simply if the particular store would be willing to.
-
Sure, I guess Decathlon are now just harvesting the fruits of their labor. But as far as I'm concerned, there's now nothing distinguishing them anymore from the likes of Specialized and Trek. It's just another 10k bike now. Arguably from a less "desirable" brand. Not that I care. But even with all the pro peloton credibility they got now, I don't think they're quite up there with the big boys from a brand image point of view. What set them apart were interesting and competitive bikes at a good price point. Those are still there. I just don't quite see the point of a Van Rysel at the SWORKS price point. But maybe there are people willing to buy this.
-
I mean this is not a bike for the "budget conscious rider" but for the world tour pros. Can't walk into a Mercedes dealership ask for a Mercedes-AMG GT Coupé and expect an A-Class price tag.
For what it is, it is still priced below what other brands ask. The aforementioned S-Works comes out at 14.500€ whereas this is 9.500€ - that's a whopping 50% added on top. The Trek starts at 13.500€. The only one that is in the same price region is Canyon. And I am not sure you can actually compare the Aeroad to the RCR-F. Even the other two from Trek and Specialized framesets look less "beefy" as in less aero - which is supposed to be the main spiel of this thing.
So, would I buy this? No, most definitely not. But then again I am far from a world tour pro. Do I find this thing interesting and would love to ride it for a test? Well, heck yeah!
But we are digressing: the actual question was, is there anything like it on the Chinese frameset market. I haven't seen anything, and I would be surprised to see something comparable within a year. I like to be surprised though!
-
I mean this is not a bike for the "budget conscious rider" but for the world tour pros. Can't walk into a Mercedes dealership ask for a Mercedes-AMG GT Coupé and expect an A-Class price tag.
For what it is, it is still priced below what other brands ask. The aforementioned S-Works comes out at 14.500€ whereas this is 9.500€ - that's a whopping 50% added on top. The Trek starts at 13.500€. The only one that is in the same price region is Canyon. And I am not sure you can actually compare the Aeroad to the RCR-F. Even the other two from Trek and Specialized framesets look less "beefy" as in less aero - which is supposed to be the main spiel of this thing.
So, would I buy this? No, most definitely not. But then again I am far from a world tour pro. Do I find this thing interesting and would love to ride it for a test? Well, heck yeah!
But we are digressing: the actual question was, is there anything like it on the Chinese frameset market. I haven't seen anything, and I would be surprised to see something comparable within a year. I like to be surprised though!
If the question is in aero only then there are plenty of ridiculously shaped frames from China which are usually stupidly stiff, thus unridable beyond very good roads.
-
If the question is in aero only then there are plenty of ridiculously shaped frames from China which are usually stupidly stiff, thus unridable beyond very good roads.
What would be your prime examples for that?
-
If the question is in aero only then there are plenty of ridiculously shaped frames from China which are usually stupidly stiff, thus unridable beyond very good roads.
You can always get 32c tires and run them low psi...
-
and incur a huge rolling resistance penalty
-
and incur a huge rolling resistance penalty
You're joking right?
-
and incur a huge rolling resistance penalty
I mean he asked for the comfort, frame flex also creates inefficiency no? I don't mind losing 1 or 2 watts per tire. Everyone should check bicycle rolling resistance GP5000s tests before having an opinion. (FYI only penalty comes from low pressures, not 32c!)
Frame stiffness is such a subjective thing, hard to argue for or against imo.
-
Bigger tyres inherently create more rolling resistance. The reason they can perform better in the real world is because they are the only real source of damping on the bike and because they enable safe use of lower pressures. But as long as you can stay in the operaring window of the narrower tyre, it will perform better than a wider tyre for the same percieved comfort/casing tension. And also it'll be aerodynamically faster and less affected by crosswinds.
Frame flex doesn't measurably affect power transfer, only effect it has is mental and on handling. Too much stiffness, does however worsen the damping ability of the system, slowing you down on rough surfaces, and creates more physical and mental fatigue.
-
Bigger tyres inherently create more rolling resistance. The reason they can perform better in the real world is because they are the only real source of damping on the bike and because they enable safe use of lower pressures. But as long as you can stay in the operaring window of the narrower tyre, it will perform better than a wider tyre for the same percieved comfort/casing tension. And also it'll be aerodynamically faster and less affected by crosswinds.
Frame flex doesn't measurably affect power transfer, only effect it has is mental and on handling. Too much stiffness, does however worsen the damping ability of the system, slowing you down on rough surfaces, and creates more physical and mental fatigue.
I had a really long post written about why this isn't quite right but I realized that no one really wants to debate tire pressure on here. The summary is that if you approximate by % drop the RR should be the roughly the same, but there is a point above which increasing tire pressure increases RR. This is because a tire is not an ideal spring but follows an S curve, and you can end up with resonance / "impedance" mismatch. Wider tires have greater volume and are a lower pressure for the same % drop--meaning you can often run less % drop and still avoid the "impedance" mismatch condition. This theoretically means a wider tire can be less RR, depending on the surface.
Skin tension is related but is a red herring because it's a derivative (in the math sense) of the volume equation that governs the spring rate of the tire.
Given we are talking about resonance and energy absorption, speed is a key input too. The faster you ride, the greater the chance that, on a rough road, you will enter the zone where a higher pressure results in increased RR.
The same resonance / "impedance" issues should also apply to frames. Still, I don't think anyone has published data to suggest when / where a frame is so stiff this actually happens vs. tires when assuming the frame is totally rigid, so we have no idea if this frame or any other is too stiff other than how it feels to the riders.
-
I suppose I must've read something that led me down the wrong conclusions about tyres specifically. I still maintain that vertically stiff bikes (the component that matters for comfort) have no objective upsides when the goal is going fast.
-
Nothing special but some pictures of the carbon of the BB shell of the Van Rysel frames (RCR and their triathlon frames) and headset.
-
Thanks for that, I think it's always good to have a proper example of what a western ("premium" now ?) bike looks like on the inside, this will serve as a benchmark to compare Chinese bikes interiors
-
Infortunately, I could not handle the frame and watch the inside.