Update.
Listing has been updated, clearance is indeed 32C.
Stated clearance is 32mm tyre + 5.5, so 32+11=43mm.
For comparison, my LT268, at the chainstays, is 32.9+5.3*2= 43-44mm. Aka, the same. I would say that my frame is a truly a 32C frame, in that i have ample space to run a 32C tyre that can balloon bigger, fork too.
My fork measures 30+8.2+8.9=47mm.
My rear rim measures 34mm, which means i can run Peter's 36mm rim w a 30 or 32C tyre w/o a problem. Which means the same should be possible on this frame as well.
So, this 126 frame is compelling, clearance wise. I wish it were 35C, but being able to run a 30C on a 36mm rim, expecting the tyre to measure around 34mm is compelling. And running a 32C measuring 36mm on that 36mm rim should also work, leaving 3.5mm which, assuming the wheels aren't noodly AF (assumes steel or carbon spokes, not the fabric spokes that Peak Torque tested), there shouldn't be any rub.
So, that's a very good thing in my book, makes the bike future proof enough.
I asked what happens if the project doesnt go ahead, and Jack said they will refund all the money. It sounds pretty evident that they mean business, and they're not playing games. If they gather enough traction, it gets made. If not, they refund the money, and voila.
People will have the option to order the regular seat post, or the 0 offset one.
Very compelling. With the clearance question clarified, (700-150=550) for 550$ you get a frameset (no bars), plus DDP shipping, with better specs than everybody else, pretty much. Velobuild is not monocoque and is only T800 / much heavier, tantan is a clown show, Long teng (and related brands) dont have a modern aero frame, Speeder either; Peter has the gran turismo frameset, but it costs a lot more.
Very compelling indeed. I may buy a few.
The x67 is another lightweight aero frame.. geometry and price is quite similar.
Obviously, it's tantan... ;D
Hum quite heavy
this is estimated 760g raw without hardware +100gr ud matt with hardware... the x67 in the specific discussion is given for 758g raw and 920g painted with all the hardware (inc. the metal "spoiler"..)
In size 45 🤣
The x67 is another lightweight aero frame.. geometry and price is quite similar.I don't get why it is so common to call SL8 (and its clones) aero frames. It is an all-rounder, both according to marketing of Specialized and Tour tests. Of course this has to be lighter then a pure aero plank of wood.
Obviously, it's tantan... ;D
I don't get why it is so common to call SL8 (and its clones) aero frames. It is an all-rounder, both according to marketing of Specialized and Tour tests. Of course this has to be lighter then a pure aero plank of wood.
Geometry looks damn close to the Tarmac SL8The claimed weight is also pretty impressive
| Version | S-W SL8 (FACT 12r) | Non-S-W SL8 (FACT 10r) | FACT 10r+ S-W HW | | | Small FM126 (Ti HW) | 56 est. FM126 (Ti HW) |
| Bare frame (unpainted) | 645 [±15g] | 800 [±20g] | 800 [±20g] | | | 760 [±30g] | 860 [±30g] |
| Hardware | 121 (Ti axles + clamp) | 167 (Steel HW) | 121 (Ti HW) | | | 100 (Ti HW) | 100 (Ti HW) |
| Paint (basic) | +65 | +65 | +65 | | | +50 (UD matte) | +60 (UD matte) |
| Complete frame (basic) | 831 | 1,032 | 986 | | | 910 | 1,020 |
This would be a good alternative for those interested in the QUICK PRO ER. Geometry appears similar at least in a size 52.
I would buy it if a version without the Mondice logo was made available. It would be nice if LT were to sell the frame directly just like the 266-D-SL that Mondice/Parleants/Tideace also sell under different model names.
This would be a good alternative for those interested in the QUICK PRO ER. Geometry appears similar at least in a size 52.
I would buy it if a version without the Mondice logo was made available. It would be nice if LT were to sell the frame directly just like the 266-D-SL that Mondice/Parleants/Tideace also sell under different model names.
My saddle height is 81cm and i'm on medium frames. Didn't even cross my mind that it wouldn't work. For good measure, I asked Jack, he wrote the post is 400mm length for 54/56/58/61cm. 300mm for 49/52cm.
I wrote that my saddle height is 81cm and i'm looking at a 54. He confirmed it will work.
The seat tube is 5cm shorter than on my 268, i'm going to get a veeeery comfortable ride.
Beyond the ones i've mentioned, i'm not too sure. There may be Chinese branded options, but usually one of the following applies: the price point is silly; the geometry is silly (low AF / too long); availability is a mystery.
I posted when the new Van Rysel aero came out, and asked about alternatives, and didn't really go anywhere: https://chinertown.com/index.php/topic,5838.0.html
I did consider a cervelo S5 clone, but tyre clearance is too narrow; i think the new mould fixed that somewhat, but it's not available in clone land afaik . And ofc, there's the question around buying a clone.
And ofc, if we talk clone, there's the Ostro clone, but it's such a mine field with so many people paying top dollars to receive dogs, AND the geometry is more aggressive than i'd like. Although to be fair, given that the Mondince is also lower than i'd like the Ostro is "only" an extra 2mm lower than the Mondince.
And because i've mentioned 2 clones, i havent found a clone of the pinarello X. I guess Peter's Gran Turismo is kind of the closest to that one, because the geometry is more relaxed than the Pinarello F.
And this is why this Mondince looks very interesting right now.
Inputs welcome!
And for me that makes winspace an absolute no no: "Support for Up to 32mm Tire Clearance". It doesn't say 32C, but 32mm. The 126 used to say 40mm, which they changed back to 32C. On the 126 you can run a 36 wide rim with a 32C that will measure ~35, no pb. Winspace is explicitly telling you you can't do that. From a future proofing perspective / comfort on an aero bike that is not technically meant to be comfortable like an all rounder or a climber, and because i'm heavy, tyre clearance for me is v important.Here you are insinuating that the 126 has larger tyre clearance then 32mm measured, right?
But here you say the 126 needs even bigger clearance for your perfect bike?
My ideal frame is actually that 126 but w more stack and 35C, but it doesn't exist. Peter's frame is like that, but it costs many hundreds more.
Update.
Listing has been updated, clearance is indeed 32C.
Stated clearance is 32mm tyre + 5.5, so 32+11=43mm.
For comparison, my LT268, at the chainstays, is 32.9+5.3*2= 43-44mm. Aka, the same. I would say that my frame is a truly a 32C frame, in that i have ample space to run a 32C tyre that can balloon bigger, fork too.
My fork measures 30+8.2+8.9=47mm.
My rear rim measures 34mm, which means i can run Peter's 36mm rim w a 30 or 32C tyre w/o a problem. Which means the same should be possible on this frame as well.
So, this 126 frame is compelling, clearance wise. I wish it were 35C, but being able to run a 30C on a 36mm rim, expecting the tyre to measure around 34mm is compelling. And running a 32C measuring 36mm on that 36mm rim should also work, leaving 3.5mm which, assuming the wheels aren't noodly AF (assumes steel or carbon spokes, not the fabric spokes that Peak Torque tested), there shouldn't be any rub.
So, that's a very good thing in my book, makes the bike future proof enough.
I asked what happens if the project doesnt go ahead, and Jack said they will refund all the money. It sounds pretty evident that they mean business, and they're not playing games. If they gather enough traction, it gets made. If not, they refund the money, and voila.
People will have the option to order the regular seat post, or the 0 offset one.
Very compelling. With the clearance question clarified, (700-150=550) for 550$ you get a frameset (no bars), plus DDP shipping, with better specs than everybody else, pretty much. Velobuild is not monocoque and is only T800 / much heavier, tantan is a clown show, Long teng (and related brands) dont have a modern aero frame, Speeder either; Peter has the gran turismo frameset, but it costs a lot more.
Very compelling indeed. I may buy a few.
You wrote that you’re able to get it for 550. When I look up their price on indie it’s 700. Was just wondering how you got the 550 price. Thanks in advance 😊It’s a theoretical calculation excluding the shipping
Just received the info that an update on the frameset will be in about one month.
What is that update? They will start producing the frame in a month? I was about to order the Quick Pro ER but if this one is available soon I will take it instead.
Thanks.
Max
Almost ready to pull the trigger
Isn’t Indiegogo helping you to get a refund if the project isn’t fulfilled ?
Almost ready to pull the trigger
Isn’t Indiegogo helping you to get a refund if the project isn’t fulfilled ?
There’s no way this campaign will reach the number of backers they’re asking for in the remaining time.They stated that the project will go ahead regardless, so even if campaign does go forward in indiegogo, they may honor the pricing for early backers. That’s me assuming based on what I read here…
If you back it, the best-case scenario is getting a refund.
3D printed sample in size 54
Vidéo : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K2C8m_AzaUk (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K2C8m_AzaUk)
Personally not a huge fan of the curvy top tube.
Me neither, it also doesnt seem to appear on any of the renders, I asked him how it will look in the final production
Is it possible to get this in custom paintjob?
The 126 is the exact SL8 geometry. Finding the SL8 too slack makes you an outlier among the outliers, especially now that tour riders are increasingly finding they go faster with spacers under their bars.
Hopefully with the notable exception of brands like Cervelo and what not, that hopefully are more involved in the layup process than random western brands.
Handlebar geometry chart also released on Indiegogo
What it is? Holes for some kind of TT extension as in SPcycle handlebar? Would be perfect.
Presumably for an out-front computer/light/camera mountOn to of the handlebar? No way.
On to of the handlebar? No way.
Official answer: "Yes, for bar extension. But we may cancel that hole."NO. Please do not do it! :) This is great idea to have dedicated tt extension as a option.
NO. Please do not do it! :) This is great idea to have dedicated tt extension as a option.Yeah, there's a huge gap in the market for a solid detachable aero bar. They're brilliant for long solos.
How many backers does it currently have? It shows 2 for me which seems low and it's giving me some hesitation about joining; not sure if it's a bug on my end?
But unfortunately they use no standard for the integration (eg FSA ACR). So I will look for a handlebar somewhere else.Why is this a problem? Sorry for the potentially stupid question, my bikes are externally routed and I'm not too well educated in internal routing.
But unfortunately they use no standard for the integration (eg FSA ACR). So I will look for a handlebar somewhere else.
I think I will get in contact with Peter for the just released XMC handlebar with FSA system
I think I will get in contact with Peter for the just released XMC handlebar with FSA system
Wow that's such good news !
Thank you Serge for convincing them, I am definitely going to pull the trigger in size 61 !
Everything about this frames looks interesting, but the head tube angle of 74 degrees in that size scares me off. I know it's a copy paste of SL8, but that doesn't mean it's good. Do you have any experience with similar frames?
If you are UK based I have the 38x100 from Peter for sale- unfortunately it won’t fit my Vielo.
If you are UK based I have the 38x100 from Peter for sale- unfortunately it won’t fit my Vielo.
So tempting. I absolutely don’t need it though. This girl I’m talking to is nearly my height. If I make her my girlfriend, maybe I can make her a cyclist, gift her my 105 Hygge, and build this up with Ultegra 🤔
Who doesnt like trigonometry on a Friday?
No can do unfortunately :)
I tried :D
And I agree. The somewhat low stack is the one reservation i have about it, but i also know i can work around it.
The 35C though is confirmed, and it's a huge positive.
Edit: bike fit shenanigans, in case it's useful for others.
The one thing i wish were different on this FM126 is the stack: wish it were higher.
Who doesnt like trigonometry on a Friday?
I'm on a LTK268 M, so vs the FM126 in M, the 126 is 2mm longer and 8mm lower, which i dont love. I went from 80 stem to 100 on the 268. From 126 M to L, stack is up 21mm, reach is up 11mm, and seat angle is 0.5 degree slacker, which at my saddle height is 7mm further back, which i dont love either (I ride on the flat mostly so i slam my saddle fwd by default.
So, if i go from 126M to 126 L, you're up 21mm in stack, and 18mm in reach (11 + 7 from the saddle). If i drop back to 80mm stem, then i'm back to square 1, but i gained 21mm in stack. Which then allows me with a full spacer stack to be significantly higher (my saddle to bar drop is pretty epic). 268 M to 126 L is 20mm longer (13+7) and 13mm taller. So i can drop back down to 80mm stem and get an L. Also, they will be making a zero offset seat post, so i'll get one of these on top of the regular one. I'm going to have so much seat post exposed compliance wont be a problem, especially on 32C measuring 34-35mm. If i do that, i will be able to play with the "higher stack is faster when in tuck" vibe.
If you understand anything, bravo, because i dont.
I THINK that M to L in the 126 is basically reach neutral, you gain 21mm stack, and your hip angle should open up. Even more so with a 0 offset seat post. So I guess i'm leaning towards an L. For reference, i'm 184 and my saddle height is 80-81cm. I also plan to switch to 165mm cranks, which should open up my hip angle even more. Might be worse off in the mountains, but so much of my riding is on the flat, i'm solving for that.
Anyone knows the reason for 160/180 rotors instead of the more standard 140/160? Who's using 180, especially on the back? Even 140 on the back seems more than enough for a road bike.
Or a Sunday - I put the dims in bike-insights to play with.
Who doesnt like trigonometry on a Friday?
I think/hope that's a typo from their side. On the Indiegogo page, it's mentioned 140/160mm in the rear. 180mm doesn't make much sense, unless they are going to increase the tire clearance to 55mm and add rear suspension.
(https://c1.iggcdn.com/indiegogo-media-prod-cld/image/upload/c_fit,g_center,q_auto,f_auto,w_695/m0o9xv6eo0ol1ebkjkpa.jpg)
Furthermore, they will make a seatpost adapter for a DI2 battery so installation should be simple
I dont think there will be any need for internal DI2 batteries on newer groupsets anyway - Since shimano have moved away from internal on MTB/Gravel, it will probably be the same for the upcoming road groupsets.
I dont think there will be any need for internal DI2 batteries on newer groupsets anyway - Since shimano have moved away from internal on MTB/Gravel, it will probably be the same for the upcoming road groupsets.
Aero mounts are dropped:'(
This frame looks very tempting. However I read that the hardware will be gold color. Anyone knows if black would also be possible?
Cyclists :)
Speaking as a target audience for this bike, its raison d'être is undoubtedly the deep aero front fork.
When it comes to aerodynamics, the front end of the bike is where about 90% of the drag is created. The air that reaches the rear stays and wheel is already a turbulent mess, so nailing the front-end design is critical. So to satisfy my inner Aero #StanceNash, these forks are money (rest of the bike looks good too).
The other key factor is reducing my frontal profile. Less bike specific and more setup planning, I plan to run this frame with a size down + setback seatpost and Onirii Y1RS-style handlebars to achieve a high stack, pseudo-time trial position. Think along the lines of Arne Peters from Morpheus Bikes on Instagram.
Quite a sad day guys, I think they will not continue the Indiegogo and TBW(which I assume it's China's fundraising site similar to Indiegogo). They said that they will still continue to build the model in the near future. Sad for the backers and future backers which includes me. Well back to the drawing board for me again, so LCR017D or SCR-55D? Or any other suggestions?
Hold on, where did they say that? I wanted to back it at the end of the month :(
Hold on, where did they say that? I wanted to back it at the end of the month :(
I sent them an e-mail asking about warranty and Jack said that "Please wait sometime. We did not get enough order in the TBW. So we may not open the mold. And we will refund all the money to the customers. But we still market this model."
I don't really understand this thing... I mean, if they want to carry on with this model anyway, why refund the customers?
I sent them an e-mail asking about warranty and Jack said that "Please wait sometime. We did not get enough order in the TBW. So we may not open the mold. And we will refund all the money to the customers. But we still market this model."
kinda funny how people are surprised that a campaign that was raising basically nothing got shut down. I'd guess they'll offer the design and exclusive region rights to brands now.
Shame many people wanted to buy, but decided to wait until the last minute. Let that be a lesson to us all for next indiegogo’s…
Personally I’m interested in the frame once it’s available via the normal channels next hear. Still hope they’ll make it.
I've been chatting with Jack and at the moment they expect for it to be ready in June. They are considering making the molds bicoque or not monocoque to decrease the cost.
If they continue with monocoque one piece holding the price might be 500 usd for normal weight and 650 for ultralight and then 150 usd for shipping (roughly)
This is basically the same price as it would be on indiegogo.
The term bicoque was that used by Mondinice? I know things can get lost in translation, but it’s a common error on this forum to think that monocoque means single piece, rather than a structural term on which indicates that the skin is the single structural element vs. unibody where skin and frame are elements are unified but still distinguishable. Its a red flag IMO for someone in the industry, close to the process of molding to make this mistake.
The bike industry has tons of problems—but the most critical one is that there are too many unique SKUs out there and not enough common parts. This just kills economics. Meanwhile, particularly the auto industry gets criticism from the opposite direction. Not enough uniqueness.
Regarding the current environment. I get the sense it’s really bad in China for the bike industry and it seems like its going to get worse before it gets better. That said, some of this is reap what you sow. The western bike companies have been locked into this notion of better design, but thats slowly eroded to the point where it feels like only the very top end frames have something unique going on. On the other side, the chinese brands that used to compete on price are finding that standing up their own brands is expensive.
It’s way too much to expect an Indigogo project to fix the issues with the industry, but this bike was never likely to actually be aero or bend the cost curve in a meaningful way. Unfortunately rather than these bikes “beating” western counterparts, we are more likely to see options like these become rare as brands like Evolve, Pearmeants, and QuickPro become the direct sales outlets for these factories.
Selling bikes at those insane price mostly because they can. They wouldn't show these crazy prices if there was no bike bro buying it to look cool at the Cafe. As we can observe, people buying bikes are ok paying a (huge) premium for the brand.
I can't argue they have costs.
No offense either, but I would love your analysis on why factor sells ostro at 6500$ while you can buy a replica that seems close to the real thing at 750$. We are talking a 1/10th of the price there.
Though we essentially say the same thing, let's celebrate this forum giving us access to bike part priced according to the fundamentals they rely on (quality, materials used, etc...), not some marketing or some HR salary or whatever you feel like
Sakizashi.
When you mention Long Tengs premium products are you referring to LTK 266 SL?
Also it's a lot cheaper to make a replica when all of your design work is a 3d scan and you don't really care if your product puts someone in the hospital
Yeah I think some people in the ostro Vam thread payed around 750$, or a bit more, shipped (not 100% sure). Still expensive but the inside of the frame is probably cleaner than a few OEM. (Cf oralmaster's pics)
Also, to go along with Serge's analogy, I still don't get why a bike would cost the same price as a motorbike. Those companies supports the same costs you mentioned (if not more considering a 200kg+ motorbike require a lot more materials, engineering, safety concerns, even electronics and so on). There is a price gouging, just look at the difference of price from the 105di2 at launch and now, it's drastically lower and they still prolly make margin on it (both Shimano and reseller)
True, the peace of mind is priced, or let's put it the other way around, you get cheaper frame gambling with your life, that's why I'm more inclined buying from a reputable OEM than a company producing fakes. (Even though there are some accidents with big brands too, but that's another topic)
This why it's sad that this project didn't come (yet?) to life. Not having the budget to support the campaign or buy a frame now, but when I do I would have considered this frame
I hope $750 is the shipped cost because that is still more expensive than most open mold frames. As for why it’s less than Factor. They probably only pay $200-$300 to their factory for the knockoff because they are probably made with cheaper materials. The weights of the frame support this. The major associated cost is probably only the physical mold and painting.
Meanwhile Factor is putting like $400 of MATERIALS into the frames. I did a calculation a while back based on numbers from an interview with Factor’s founder and figured that their frames if truely sold D2C like Seka would be closer to $3500-4000 for the bare frameset which is still pretty expensive, but the factory then run really is one of the highest end in China AFAIK.
Yes. I think it qualifies. It’s probably a generation old compared to the latest and greatest like the Scott Addict RC Ultimate or the new Cervelo R5, but it’s a heck of a bike. Build it up with an FSA No 55 headset and Deda Superbox stem in the 140–160mm length paired with a bikedoc bar. Wear a good skinsuit, aero road helmet, etc.; and if you can hold that position, I would bet an average height person on a size 54 could get to sub 0.26 CDA. Compare that against a Fauxtro with a more traditional setup costing you more, being heavier, and leaving you with a 0.32 or smth CDA.
You can’t recalculate ‘actual’ costs like you did.
We’d need to have full visibility on the R&D costs, capital expenses, depreciation, transfer price mark-up etc etc.
And then there is marketing, warehousing, insurance, shipping, warranty etc etc.
It’s impossible to know.
If i remember correctly, the frame was erlier sub-800g weight, and price was around USD750 incl. paint/gold hardware (or around 650 the cheper variant unpainted/black hardware) i think that price was without handlebars though. So around $120 more expensive, and 100g heavier if i remember correctly.Sub 800g was claimed for raw carbon in size 49 without metal parts
They are also going to stick with 32C.
Officially it always said 32c clearance in the campaign. But i think Serge talked with them about this, and they said they would change that to 35c. But i dont think that info ever changed on the indiegogo page.
Anyone received a frame yet?
On some of the photos you can see the bottom bracket pertruding from the frame with a small "lip". Is this normal for most T47I bike frames? It seems weird to me, but what do I know.
They are also on the geometry chart. I ask via WhatsApp.
| Bike Model (Size) | Head Angle | Fork Rake | Trail (Approx) | Handling Character |
| Mondince FM126 (61) | 74.0° | 47mm | ~49mm | Extremely Twitchy / Unstable |
| Specialized Tarmac SL8 (61) | 74.0° | 44mm | ~52mm | Very Agile / Reactive |
| Trek Madone Gen 8 (XL) | 73.9° | 41mm | ~57mm | Neutral Race Stability |
| Factor Ostro VAM (61) | 73.3° | 43mm | ~58mm | Neutral Race Stability |
| Canyon Aeroad CFR (XL) | 73.25° | 38mm | ~64mm | Very Stable / Planted |
I think I already brought it up earlier in this thread that I don't understand why they go that steep in the larger sizes. It's all ok for a flat solo time trial, but in scenarios like cornering, bike handling in groups and descending it would be a no go for me since the bike very likely will feel to twitchy and nervous.The only way to make the 74° HT work is with a different fork but they probably dont want to invest money in a new fork mould.
So yes, I share your thoughts and concerns. Keeping it at 73.3deg for sizes L and XL would make more sense. Geometry is something where those chinese brands lack experience. Compared to western brands, there are not many engineers or designers in those companies who are pasionate cyclists themselves and understand how bike geometry affects bike handling.
GEOMETRY WARNING: Mondince FM126 (Sizes 56+)
While the new Mondince FM126 looks like a standard open-mold aero racer, if you are a taller rider looking at sizes 56, 58, or 61, there is a critical detail in the geometry chart that will drastically affect the ride.
On paper, the geometry looks very similar to the Specialized Tarmac SL8. However, due to a specific choice with the fork offset, the handling on the larger sizes will be significantly different (and likely much twitchier) than you might expect.
The Issue: Fork Rake vs. Head Angle Most manufacturers shorten the fork rake (offset) on large frames to keep the bike stable as the head angle gets steeper.
Specialized: Uses 47mm rake for sizes <54, but switches to 44mm for sizes 54+.
Mondince: Uses a 47mm rake fork across ALL sizes (I suspect saving on mould costs).
When you combine that relatively long 47mm rake with the steep 74° head angle of the Size 61, the "Trail" figure drops to dangerous lows (sub-50mm), essentially giving you track-bike steering on a large road frame.
Bike Model (Size) Head Angle Fork Rake Trail (Approx) Handling Character Mondince FM126 (61) 74.0° 47mm ~49mm Extremely Twitchy / Unstable Specialized Tarmac SL8 (61) 74.0° 44mm ~52mm Very Agile / Reactive Trek Madone Gen 8 (XL) 73.9° 41mm ~57mm Neutral Race Stability Factor Ostro VAM (61) 73.3° 43mm ~58mm Neutral Race Stability Canyon Aeroad CFR (XL) 73.25° 38mm ~64mm Very Stable / Planted
Why Specialized is also an outlier (but Mondince is worse) You'll notice the Tarmac SL8 is also quite low trail (~52mm) compared to the "safe" 57mm+ of Trek or Canyon. I suspect Specialized does this intentionally to make their large bikes feel agile, counteracting the high center of gravity of a tall rider. But even Specialized knows when to stop. They invest in a specific 44mm offset fork to keep the trail above 50mm. Mondince seemingly skipped this step to save on a second fork mold, pushing the handling from "agile" to "unstable."
Can they fix it? Since this frame is reportedly in a "Soft Launch", Mondince actually has a chance to fix this for the larger molds before they are final.
The Fix: They don't even need a new fork. If they simply slackened the Head Tube Angle to ~73° on sizes 56+, the existing 47mm fork would yield a perfect ~56mm of trail.
The Result: This would transform the bike from a nervous outlier into a stable, neutral racer comparable to the Trek Madone or Factor Ostro.
Conclusion So don't think you will get "one bike to do it all" just yet.
-Stack/Reach: Seems good
-Aero: Seems aero enough
-Weight: Seems light enough
-Handling: Major Red Flag for sizes 56+
Hey, I think it's worth taking a step back here and understanding what trail is or isn't.I think you are significantly understating the role of trail here.
Trail is not a primary driver when modeling the handling limits or characteristics of a 2-wheeled system. Trail governs how a bike feels to control, particularly during turn-in when you initiate a countersteer.
There are people like me who prefer the feel of a lower-trail bike geometry, particularly with lower-pressure tires we use on the road now, as those increase what is known as pneumatic trail and have a similar feeling effect to mechanical trail. Another way to balance lower trail in terms of feel is to lower the system's center of mass, which Mondinice is also not doing, likely because they want to preserve crank clearance.Fair points on pneumatic trail; modern tires definitely help add stability back into the system.
HTA, Wheelbase, and F/R weight distribution are primary drivers with regards to the handling limits of a 2-wheeled system, and it's clear to me that for large road bikes, designers consistently balance those three similarly. Those are not being done differently than other designs for this bike. Of course, ideally, you have 2-3 fork rake settings so you can get both the feel and handling you want, but a 52mm or even 49mm trail isn't the end of the world, particularly if you use larger tires at lower pressure. Even better would be to offer multiple chainstay lengths while keeping the HTA relatively consistent, but that isn't common on carbon bikes for cost reasons.
I do not think this bike design is a sign of amateur hour or a half assed job at Mondinice, just a reflection of their budget constraints.There is also a fine line between cost-saving and incompetent engineering. Using a single fork mold to save money is understandable, but they could have simply slackened the Head Tube Angle to ~73° to compensate. That adjustment costs nothing in production. Retaining a steep 74° HTA with that specific fork offset isn't a budget constraint; it’s a failure to check the math.
I think you are significantly understating the role of trail here.
While you are correct that wheelbase and weight distribution define the ultimate grip limits (physics), Trail is the primary driver of directional stability (dynamics).
Have you actually tried to build a model of this? Trail ends up being a secondary variable in your capsize model...Fair points on the physics modeling.
You can't just slacken the HTA without lengthening the chainstay, as you are changing the bike's weight distribution. IMO, this is usually a worse outcome than an HTA that is not the ideal number. Balancing tradeoffs is the challenge here.
| Bike Model (Size 61/XL) | HTA | Fork Offset | Chainstay | Trail (Approx) |
| Factor Ostro VAM | 73.3° | 43 mm | 410 mm | 57 mm |
| Canyon Aeroad CFR | 73.5° | 44 mm | 415 mm | 56 mm |
| Scott Foil RC | 73.3° | 45 mm | 412 mm | 55 mm |
| Pinarello Dogma F | 73.4° | 43 mm | 411 mm | 58 mm |
| Specialized Tarmac SL8 | 74.0° | 44 mm | 410 mm | 52 mm |
| Trek Madone Gen 8 | 73.9° | 40 mm | 412 mm | 57 mm |
| Cervélo S5 | 73.5° | 43.5 mm | 405 mm | 56 mm |
| Cannondale SuperSix | 73.0° | 45 mm | 410 mm | 57 mm |
| Bianchi Oltre RC | 73.0° | 43 mm | 412 mm | 59 mm |
| Colnago V4Rs | 73.1° | 43 mm | 408 mm | 58 mm |
| MARKET AVERAGE | 73.4° | 43.4 mm | 410.5 mm | ~56.5 mm |
| Scenario | HTA | Offset | Trail | Notes |
| Current FM126 (61) | 74° | 47 mm | ~49 mm | Current Setup (Unstable outlier) |
| Ideal FM126 (Change HTA) | 73.3° | 47 mm | ~53 mm | Uses existing fork mold |
| Ideal FM126 (Change Fork) | 74° | 44 mm | ~52 mm | Requires new fork mold |
Here is where I disagree. Your concern that slackening the HTA without lengthening the chainstays leads to a "worse outcome" is theoretically sound, but it is practically disproven by the market.
I compiled the geometry for the Size 61/XL equivalents of current aero-bikes. The industry consensus is actually to do exactly what you described as a negative trade-off: combine a slacker HTA (~73-73.5°) with short chainstays (~410mm).
Videos from Jack of the prototype.
this frame obviously isn't monocoque.
the fork looks fast
i like the BB area, looks stiff
I like that the downtube looks fast.
it looks like my LT268, but meaner, i like it.
The frame literally is monocoque.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monocoque
Stop misusing the term, I am sure there are people very confused about this. Particularly those who actually make stuff.
For bikes, isn't monocoque when the 2 triangles aren't glued together, but the whole frames comes from 1 mold? In the video, isn't it clear that the triangles are glued together?
I'd bet that people on here have on average the same understanding as me on that point, so if that's wrong, please come off your high horse and enlighten us peasants instead of smugly pointing to old ass plane pictures on wikipedia.
Monocoque is a technical term regarding the structure's design, not its construction method. It's not bicycle specific. I've tried explaining this to you over and over, and you have insisted on pushing the wrong definition for a technical design attribute. Manufacturers will call something like what you are suggesting a "single mold design" or "single mold monocoque"
Stop misusing a term that confuses people in an effort to make it look like you know something you don't. It just creates confusion about terminology, where some manufacturers claim a monocoque frame (which I think happens a lot) when it is not made in a single piece and has joints like this one. Besides there is even a bicycle example in that Wikipedia article :)
Edit: for everyone's benefit here is the definition Wikipedia offers for Monocoque: Monocoque (/ˈmɒnəkɒk, -koʊk/ MON-ə-ko(h)k), also called structural skin, is a structural system in which loads are supported by an object's external skin, in a manner similar to an egg shell. The word monocoque is a French term for "single shell".[1]
I must have learning disabilities, because you write more, and it still makes no sense to me.
I expect a binary outcome, for bike stuff: what is, and what isn't, a monocoque bike frame, sire, Holder of Wisdom for us plebs?
I must have learning disabilities, because you write more, and it still makes no sense to me.
I expect a binary outcome, for bike stuff: what is, and what isn't, a monocoque bike frame, sire, Holder of Wisdom for us plebs?
A monocoque bike frame is what pretty much any modern carbon frame is. A non-monocoque frame would typically be the traditional lug and tube construction. Atherton bikes are a good example using carbon tubes and titanium lugs. Gamux are another mtb example but use a solid machined metal frame.
Ah. Is that it? I'm french, so monocoque means 1 piece, pretty literally. One piece monocoque then becomes monocoque moncoque, or one piece one piece, which sounds redundant if not retarded.
mono-coque. one-shell. If you glue 2 pieces together i dont see how it's any more 1 shell than if you weld lugs and tubes together, but i guess here we are.
And from my various discussions with chinese sellers, when the topic of monocoque comes up, it's to say that they use one mould, not 2, that the tooling costs more, that it's more premium, lalala. It is possible that they mean / imply one piece monocoque, because they speak chinese to begin with so idk how they translate the nuance, but saying a carbon frame is monocoque to mean it's made gluing 2 triangles is like saying a carbon frame is made with carbon fiber. Or that walnuts are vegan, the sun is hot, and water wet.
Maybe we could use monocoque monobloc.
https://haidelibikes.com/fr/blog/what-is-a-monocoque-one-piece-bicycle-frame-and-why-are-cyclists-switching-to-it/
PS : I agree with Serge because I am french too 😅.
From Jack:
Check attached pictures for this FM126 with our logo.
And we have ultra light version from 860-960g UD Matt with hardware; And super light version 960-1060g UD Matt with hardware; All screws are Titanium.
IN REGARDS TO GEOMETRY.
They changed the HT angle 73 for size 56, 58 and 61 respectively to increase trail!
IN REGARDS TO GEOMETRY.
They changed the HT angle 73 for size 56, 58 and 61 respectively to increase trail!
From Jack:
Check attached pictures for this FM126 with our logo.
And we have ultra light version from 860-960g UD Matt with hardware; And super light version 960-1060g UD Matt with hardware; All screws are Titanium.
And what about the price, do You already know what to expect?
Has anyone received a frame yet?
I emailed and was told 54cm now available.
Quoted $950 delivered for the super light version.
I want to build up a lightweight aero frameset this year and this looks really good.
I’d just love some real world figures or reviews on it.
Hard to know whether to take a punt on something like this (or Peters upcoming aero frameset) or wait for a Propel frameset on sale.
I have pre-ordered this frame as well now! Got the discount too. 611 EUR, without handlebars, incl shipping.611 eur = 700$, if shipping is 150, that's 550$ w/o bars and i assume w/o paint.
I want to add TT aero clip on bars on this bike and wondering if the 56 would be unsuited for this.
Jack sent me the attached.
M and L molds are ready for production.
I think pricing is ~$750+150 shipping to EU for frameset with bars, with 1 colour. (headline price, no discount)
Not cheap, but looks good!
611 eur = 700$, if shipping is 150, that's 550$ w/o bars and i assume w/o paint.
If TT, you probably want the highest stack possible.
Did you go for it ? Is it really different from your LT268 ?
So they only have white color ?
Do you know the exact size of the headset bearing used ?
Contacted the seller, size 61 not available yet with no expected release-date.Altough its far from the same frame category: the LCR018D is an option looking at stack and reach.
Unfortunately have to keep looking for a similar frame
Came across the FM126 today. Are we able to order one off frames? The Mondice website for this frame says MOQ of 20?
Yes, you can order single frames. There seems like it is no longer MOQ of 20pcs.
I’ve already ordered. I’m planning to use the handlebars included for the indefinite time unless I don’t like them. Was interested in these from lightcarbon before realizing handlebars come with the bike: https://www.lightcarbon.com/ultra-light-and-aero-carbon-road-integrated-handlebar_p257.html
I’ve already ordered. I’m planning to use the handlebars included for the indefinite time unless I don’t like them. Was interested in these from lightcarbon before realizing handlebars come with the bike: https://www.lightcarbon.com/ultra-light-and-aero-carbon-road-integrated-handlebar_p257.html
What do people think in regards to this frame conspred to peters new aerys vrt? Geo is different. How do you guys think they compare in terms aero capabilities?It depends how much of your ride time you spend at speeds 45kmh+? If less than 50% aero gains will be marginal ;)
800 usd difference is pretty huge.
It depends how much of your ride time you spend at speeds 45kmh+? If less than 50% aero gains will be marginal ;)
What do people think in regards to this frame conspred to peters new aerys vrt? Geo is different. How do you guys think they compare in terms aero capabilities?Assuming you end up in the same position, the only difference i see is Peter's head tube is more shaped, presumably narrower (hourglass shape), which should save you a couple of watts at 45kmh. Whether that's worth 800$... :)
800 usd difference is pretty huge.
Let me know if you have any questions.Made of questions! Really keen to see more pictures of tube shapes etc, but also pictures of what they provide in terms of headset parts so I know what im dealing with ahead of receiving the frame. Boroscope images of the inside of the frame would be really cool to see!
Hello everyone. I just received my FM126 frame from LT/Mondince yesterday. This was my first time ordering something like this. I was dealing with Jack over Whatsapp. He was very good at answering questions, always got back to me no later than next day due to time difference.We need:
The pacakge came via UPS to Canada. No damage to the box, all the parts inside was well wrapped styrophome/bubble wrap individually. No concern about shipping damage at all. 10/10 for this.
I have a small mini-cam scope. Purchased it to inspect a clogged pipe few years ago. Might have a peak on the inside with it.
Let me know if you have any questions.
We need:
- Photos
- Component weights
- Measured tire/wheel clearances
I completely forgot about this frame and it's def a main contender. But Im waiting to see how it goes for others.
Hello everyone. I just received my FM126 frame from LT/Mondince yesterday. This was my first time ordering something like this. I was dealing with Jack over Whatsapp. He was very good at answering questions, always got back to me no later than next day due to time difference.
The pacakge came via UPS to Canada. No damage to the box, all the parts inside was well wrapped styrophome/bubble wrap individually. No concern about shipping damage at all. 10/10 for this.
I have a small mini-cam scope. Purchased it to inspect a clogged pipe few years ago. Might have a peak on the inside with it.
Let me know if you have any questions.
Hello everyone. I just received my FM126 frame from LT/Mondince yesterday. This was my first time ordering something like this. I was dealing with Jack over Whatsapp. He was very good at answering questions, always got back to me no later than next day due to time difference.
The pacakge came via UPS to Canada. No damage to the box, all the parts inside was well wrapped styrophome/bubble wrap individually. No concern about shipping damage at all. 10/10 for this.
I have a small mini-cam scope. Purchased it to inspect a clogged pipe few years ago. Might have a peak on the inside with it.
Let me know if you have any questions.
Hi All - Sorry was bit busy last two days. Here is some more info for you.
- Size 56, painted with pearl gloss finish
- Frame weight is 1055 grams w/ both hangers and the cage bolts. This is the 'Superlight' version. I was told the 'Ultralight' version was 100g lighter, but it was going to cost extra $100USD so passed on that option.
- Fork weight is 498g uncut
- Handlebar is 377g
- Seatpost is 227g
- Haven't measured weight of all the bits
Measured tire/wheel clearances... I put in my GP5000 28mm (seem to measure 29mm wide, I dont have a capiler tool), there was a good 10mm on each side, and 16mm to the top. I tried to put in my gravel wheelset which has Hutchison Caracal Rate 40mm (measure more like 45mm wide). They did not fit, but it it was not so much the width, this just didn't fit, it was to the top part of the underside of the fork that didn't have space so I couldn't get the wheel in enough to put the through axel. I think the frame might fit up to 38mm width tires.
Bottom bracket area seems good so far. I was able to put the bottom braket in by hand easily so no threads were all good. Facing seems good all over.
In addition to the Frame, Fork, and Seatpost, the hardware included was headset bearings, race, headset spacers system, UDH rear hanger, standard front hanger, seatpost 45degree angle lock, di2 internal holder thing, seatpost-frame rubber thing, seatpost clamps for round or oval style rails, and through axels. The only had gold colored front hanger and bottle cage bolts when mine shipped.
Haven't had a chance to scope the inside, but from what I can see inside, the carbon is all very smooth
I will get around to posting pictures asap. The headtube front profile is not as 'hourglassy' as XMCS new aero frame AERYS, and seems a bit less sharp in some of the lines and angles, but the AERYS is ~$1900USD according to Patrick Lino's recent review, so the LT/Mondince is 1/3 the price.
Hi All - Sorry was bit busy last two days. Here is some more info for you.
- Size 56, painted with pearl gloss finish
- Frame weight is 1055 grams w/ both hangers and the cage bolts. This is the 'Superlight' version. I was told the 'Ultralight' version was 100g lighter, but it was going to cost extra $100USD so passed on that option.
- Fork weight is 498g uncut
- Handlebar is 377g
- Seatpost is 227g
- Haven't measured weight of all the bits
Measured tire/wheel clearances... I put in my GP5000 28mm (seem to measure 29mm wide, I dont have a capiler tool), there was a good 10mm on each side, and 16mm to the top. I tried to put in my gravel wheelset which has Hutchison Caracal Rate 40mm (measure more like 45mm wide). They did not fit, but it it was not so much the width, this just didn't fit, it was to the top part of the underside of the fork that didn't have space so I couldn't get the wheel in enough to put the through axel. I think the frame might fit up to 38mm width tires.
Bottom bracket area seems good so far. I was able to put the bottom braket in by hand easily so no threads were all good. Facing seems good all over.
In addition to the Frame, Fork, and Seatpost, the hardware included was headset bearings, race, headset spacers system, UDH rear hanger, standard front hanger, seatpost 45degree angle lock, di2 internal holder thing, seatpost-frame rubber thing, seatpost clamps for round or oval style rails, and through axels. The only had gold colored front hanger and bottle cage bolts when mine shipped.
Haven't had a chance to scope the inside, but from what I can see inside, the carbon is all very smooth
I will get around to posting pictures asap. The headtube front profile is not as 'hourglassy' as XMCS new aero frame AERYS, and seems a bit less sharp in some of the lines and angles, but the AERYS is ~$1900USD according to Patrick Lino's recent review, so the LT/Mondince is 1/3 the price.
Thank you ! I'm just waiting for these pictures to maybe purchase one ahah.
Right now I have an order placed for the LCR018-D but I'm thinking about canceling for the FM126
Interesting….i would class them as very different frames.
The LCR018-D is what if class as “endurance aero” but still a very rapid frame (I have one!).
Whereas if class the FM126 as an all out aero frame - especially interested in the ultra light version.
I’m actually considering one to go alongside my LCR018-D, also considering Peters new aero beast and finally waiting to see what LightCarbon come out with this year aero wise - it’ll probably be between those 3.
If you compare mondince 56 to LC 540, geometry are fairly similar, reach on mondince is 12mm more but just get a shorter stem and you get pretty much same riding position as LCR018
Thanks for the insight, that’s really helpful coming from someone who actually rides the LCR018-D!
Here’s my dilemma, this would actually be my very first road bike. Originally I was leaning towards the LCR018-D for the more forgiving endurance geometry, which seems like the safer bet for a beginner.
But the more I read, the more I see people saying that modern aero frames like the FM126 aren’t as harsh as the old-school race bikes used to be, and that you can just set them up a bit more relaxed with spacers and a higher stem and adapt from there.
The idea of going straight to an aero frame and skipping the “buy endurance now, switch to aero later” path is tempting, and it also saves money and I’d only have to adapt once. But I genuinely don’t know if that’s realistic for someone who’s never ridden road before.
What was your experience like on the LCR018-D? And would you say the jump to something like the FM126 is manageable for someone starting out, or would you recommend building up on the endurance frame first? I know this is not necessarily the thread for that, so if needed you can PM me, thank you for the help.
I am comparing both in size 58, I’m 191cmI am sure you can compare the appropriate size on the bike chart website
I have taken a bunch of photos and scoped the inside. Have to run out for the afternoon, but will be posting an update tonight hopefully, and if I can built it up over the weekend.
I am comparing both in size 58, I’m 191cm
Hi All - Sorry was bit busy last two days. Here is some more info for you.
- Size 56, painted with pearl gloss finish
- Frame weight is 1055 grams w/ both hangers and the cage bolts. This is the 'Superlight' version. I was told the 'Ultralight' version was 100g lighter, but it was going to cost extra $100USD so passed on that option.
- Fork weight is 498g uncut
- Handlebar is 377g
- Seatpost is 227g
- Haven't measured weight of all the bits
Measured tire/wheel clearances... I put in my GP5000 28mm (seem to measure 29mm wide, I dont have a capiler tool), there was a good 10mm on each side, and 16mm to the top. I tried to put in my gravel wheelset which has Hutchison Caracal Rate 40mm (measure more like 45mm wide). They did not fit, but it it was not so much the width, this just didn't fit, it was to the top part of the underside of the fork that didn't have space so I couldn't get the wheel in enough to put the through axel. I think the frame might fit up to 38mm width tires.
Bottom bracket area seems good so far. I was able to put the bottom braket in by hand easily so no threads were all good. Facing seems good all over.
In addition to the Frame, Fork, and Seatpost, the hardware included was headset bearings, race, headset spacers system, UDH rear hanger, standard front hanger, seatpost 45degree angle lock, di2 internal holder thing, seatpost-frame rubber thing, seatpost clamps for round or oval style rails, and through axels. The only had gold colored front hanger and bottle cage bolts when mine shipped.
Haven't had a chance to scope the inside, but from what I can see inside, the carbon is all very smooth
I will get around to posting pictures asap. The headtube front profile is not as 'hourglassy' as XMCS new aero frame AERYS, and seems a bit less sharp in some of the lines and angles, but the AERYS is ~$1900USD according to Patrick Lino's recent review, so the LT/Mondince is 1/3 the price.
Here are some pictures of everything that was included in the box, some close up of the facing and some outside shots showing the pearl finish. Weekend had some nice (though windy) weather so was out riding ahead of a spell of raining days now.
Thanks for the insight, that’s really helpful coming from someone who actually rides the LCR018-D!
Here’s my dilemma, this would actually be my very first road bike. Originally I was leaning towards the LCR018-D for the more forgiving endurance geometry, which seems like the safer bet for a beginner.
But the more I read, the more I see people saying that modern aero frames like the FM126 aren’t as harsh as the old-school race bikes used to be, and that you can just set them up a bit more relaxed with spacers and a higher stem and adapt from there.
The idea of going straight to an aero frame and skipping the “buy endurance now, switch to aero later” path is tempting, and it also saves money and I’d only have to adapt once. But I genuinely don’t know if that’s realistic for someone who’s never ridden road before.
What was your experience like on the LCR018-D? And would you say the jump to something like the FM126 is manageable for someone starting out, or would you recommend building up on the endurance frame first? I know this is not necessarily the thread for that, so if needed you can PM me, thank you for the help.
Here are some pictures of everything that was included in the box, some close up of the facing and some outside shots showing the pearl finish. Weekend had some nice (though windy) weather so was out riding ahead of a spell of raining days now.
Did you specifically order the metall hardware in silver and gold or can that be customised (Silver/Gold/Black)?
Those internal photos don't instill alot of confidence.
That was my first thought... I'm hoping the google is correct. Any other threads on here discussing this? Should I ask for a replacement frame?
Here are the scope pics. Everything in the scope was very clean and smooth, except you can see in the seattube and in the downtube, where the rivnuts were installed for bottle cages and FD hanger there is some fraying of the carbon layup (keep in mind this is zoomed in, compare the fray size to the rivnut which is prob 7.5mm) I used the Google and it seems this is normal and a "Sausage" Analogy, "no one likes to see how the sausage is made". Internal imperfections are often cosmetic and do not affect the safety of the ride. Nothing to worry about so long as:
1) Loose Rivnuts: If the threaded insert (rivnut) for the bottle cage spins or feels loose, it can wear through the carbon over time. (they are solid, no spinning etc)
2) Soft Spots: Press on the area around the bolts. If the carbon feels soft or "mushy," it may indicate internal delamination (layers separating). (there are no soft spots)
3) Expanding Cracks: Use a "tap test" with a coin. A sharp "tink" is good; a dull "thud" around the hole suggests deeper internal damage. (it all sounds the same)
Even though the google said it was okay, I was curious and so had a look inside my Factor LS frame. You can see the extra piece of carbon they have which prob prevents the fraying.
I sent the pics to Jack at Mondicne and he said it doesn't affect the frame stiffness/strength. And he said it is okay to share these pics. He said they will add extra 3k on future frames.
Now to build it and see how it rides.
I posted these pictures to Reddit to get some feedback. The most educated responses suggest its fine (See the attached image).
I'll ride it as planned and scope it again after like 1000kms.
I posted these pictures to Reddit to get some feedback. The most educated responses suggest its fine (See the attached image).
I'll ride it as planned and scope it again after like 1000kms.
Hi did you build up the bike yet? Also what size are you as you ordered the 56. I am 186cm with 89,7cm inseam and am debating between a 56 or 58.
Here are the scope pics. Everything in the scope was very clean and smooth, except you can see in the seattube and in the downtube, where the rivnuts were installed for bottle cages and FD hanger there is some fraying of the carbon layup (keep in mind this is zoomed in, compare the fray size to the rivnut which is prob 7.5mm) I used the Google and it seems this is normal and a "Sausage" Analogy, "no one likes to see how the sausage is made". Internal imperfections are often cosmetic and do not affect the safety of the ride. Nothing to worry about so long as:
1) Loose Rivnuts: If the threaded insert (rivnut) for the bottle cage spins or feels loose, it can wear through the carbon over time. (they are solid, no spinning etc)
2) Soft Spots: Press on the area around the bolts. If the carbon feels soft or "mushy," it may indicate internal delamination (layers separating). (there are no soft spots)
3) Expanding Cracks: Use a "tap test" with a coin. A sharp "tink" is good; a dull "thud" around the hole suggests deeper internal damage. (it all sounds the same)
Even though the google said it was okay, I was curious and so had a look inside my Factor LS frame. You can see the extra piece of carbon they have which prob prevents the fraying.
I sent the pics to Jack at Mondicne and he said it doesn't affect the frame stiffness/strength. And he said it is okay to share these pics. He said they will add extra 3k on future frames.
Now to build it and see how it rides.
FYI, I should receive my frame next Tuesday (Size 54, white glossy) and be able to build it on Wednesday. I will make a long review about the quality (inside / outside) then the first ride.
If you want some specific pictures or if you have any questions, let me know.
Sounds great, i think a lot of us are looking forward for someone to share their build experience. It would be great to know some more base stats, for example if you ordered ultralight or superlight (and if you could throw the frame on a scale), if you got the handlebars etc.
My frame arrived yesterday.
I’m going to weigh the parts and maybe take a few pictures. At first glance, there are two drawbacks.
The fork doesn’t have an integrated cone, so you have to use one thats onto the fork crown. This makes the gap between the head tube and the fork crown relatively large, which isn’t very nice.
The biggest problem for me is that the seatpost has a minimum insertion depth of 120mm!
That means the seatpost is too short for me. Normally, a 350mm seatpost with a 100mm insertion depth is spot on for me with the SL8 geometry. So this seatpost is too short. Actually, I should probably sell the frame now. The seat height on the 54cm frame is therefore a maximum of 473mm + 220mm + 40mm = 733mm
My seat height is approx. 750mm
Damn it.
Could you send a picture of the cone and the gap that forms? And regarding the seatpost i was told they could also provide a 400mm seatpost. Maybe that is something you could get from them. Or maybe someone who orders the frame in a similar region to you could get two seatposts so that you dont have the shipping from china. Where are you from? I will probably be ordering one for me in germany.
My frame arrived yesterday.
I’m going to weigh the parts and maybe take a few pictures. At first glance, there are two drawbacks.
The fork doesn’t have an integrated cone, so you have to use one thats onto the fork crown. This makes the gap between the head tube and the fork crown relatively large, which isn’t very nice.
The biggest problem for me is that the seatpost has a minimum insertion depth of 120mm!
That means the seatpost is too short for me. Normally, a 350mm seatpost with a 100mm insertion depth is spot on for me with the SL8 geometry. So this seatpost is too short. Actually, I should probably sell the frame now. The seat height on the 54cm frame is therefore a maximum of 473mm + 220mm + 40mm = 733mm
My seat height is approx. 750mm
Damn it.
Pictures of the crown an the gap
Pictures of the crown an the gapHave you confirmed that this crown is needed? It doesn't look like the attached crown fit the fork.
Crown is mandatory ?100% Sure. Without the crown, so only with the bearings, the headtube touches the fork.
Pictures of the crown an the gap
I am from germany too, close to Frankfurt. Maybe you can ask how much an additional seatpost is. ;)
Pictures of the crown an the gap
More Pictures. The downtube is actually crazy narrow.
100% Sure. Without the crown, so only with the bearings, the headtube touches the fork.
Mine came with the crownrace and when I asked Jack he said it was needed. I used a piece of PVC to try and set the race and I don't think it will go down any farther. Mine has about a 3mm gap, larger than my 'brand name' bikes, I never paid attention to this before. I expect even serious bikers wouldnt notice anything. I think its like AMG Mercedes owners, 99% of population would know difference between C300 and C63s AMG but there is BIG difference.
Re Bearings. Jack said, 8mm is for the upper, and 7mm is for the lower, but if you need you can use the 8mm in the bottom.
My frame arrived yesterday.
I’m going to weigh the parts and maybe take a few pictures. At first glance, there are two drawbacks.
The fork doesn’t have an integrated cone, so you have to use one thats onto the fork crown. This makes the gap between the head tube and the fork crown relatively large, which isn’t very nice.
The biggest problem for me is that the seatpost has a minimum insertion depth of 120mm!
That means the seatpost is too short for me. Normally, a 350mm seatpost with a 100mm insertion depth is spot on for me with the SL8 geometry. So this seatpost is too short. Actually, I should probably sell the frame now. The seat height on the 54cm frame is therefore a maximum of 473mm + 220mm + 40mm = 733mm
My seat height is approx. 750mm
Damn it.
Ok but did you get it seated on the bottom of the fork? In the one close up there was a gap between the fork and the crown which looked quite big.
Hey, so did you ended up building your bike ? :)
Just checked... its not resting on the bottom of the fork, there is prob 1mm between crownrace flange and flat part of fork. Maybe I didn't hit the PVC pipe hard enough, but I thought I was giving it a decent enough wack. I did do some googling, and it said that for the crownrace that has the little opening (can't remember what that type is called atm), that they do not have to 'go all the way down' as thats part of the design feature, whereas, the other style that doesn't have the little opening, they do need to go all the way down.
Ok so I re=googled, I was wrong, it is saying a slotted crownrace should sit flush on the fork crown.Ok so then the gap will become smaller and it will look quite normal just like an integrated crown, that's perfect I would say:)
That's how it should be. It's not possible with the fork that came with the bike and the fork crown or headset. I don't have a solution for that yet.
More pictures and review tomorrow or on Friday.
Are those the bar and spacers from mondice? The lowest spacer looks really tall compared to the others?
The handlebar and the spacers come from SP-cycle.
Is the gap between the fork and the headtube with the crown race sitting directly on the bottom on the fork? That looks quite big.Yes with a 7 mm height bearing.
I measured the bearing seats on the frame, and they match the specifications in the FSA manual for integrated headsets exactly. According to that, the gap between the headset and the frame should be less than 1 mm. I think Mondince completely messed up the fork crown. They should have just chosen a cone integrated into the fork, like every other manufacturer. I’ve now ordered an FSA ACR headset and will see if it improves the situation.
Depends on what mondice messed up. If they only messed up the crown race ring then that could help. If the fork itself is the problem then it wont help the situation if i understand it correctly. Has anyone asked mondice about it?
Try to install a 6,5 mm height bearing instead of 7 mm.
The handlebar and the spacers come from SP-cycle.
What is the weight of your build ? And size ?
Regarding peoples concern with the crown race and fork shape. I don't think that this fork has in integrated crown race but that lip is an error. Those who have frames in hand i think should let Jack know of this error see if there's any recourse for a redesigned fork that either has a proper integrated crown race or has a flat transition. I don't have my frame yet however I think may approach will be to machine a new crown race that adds minimal stack and has a relief in the back to bypass that horrible steerer to crown transition.
Yes they probably have some manufacturing error. That gap does not look proper. I am not sure why they would even choose this route.
How they missed this is bit of mystery to me surely someone tried to dry fit all of this at some point, less than ideal. I just hope that the lip is small enough such that there is enough space to machine in the relief on the back side of the crown race. I cant say im wild about removing material to shape this fork to properly accept a crown race.
My brother works carbon fibre manufacturing ill get his opinion on viable approaches.
Mondince is aware of the issue with the Crown Race and is sending a new version that allows for a smaller gap. They are very responsive. Kudos to them.
Sounds good, so its just a problem with the small metall crown race? Then maybe the fsa headset kit would fix the problem as well.
So I had buddy who runs his own private OEM brand through Mondince put me in contact with them earlier this week. Truthfully I never really heard of Mondince until this forum. And nothing but high remarks from my friend. This was his idea that I connect with them.
Anyway, I'm working on getting a frameset for long term review. My suspicion though is the frame probably won't deliver until mid to late Summer. The overall geometry, pricing, and customer feedback of Mondince takes me back to the peak Chinertown years during the pandemic.
Yes I love the natural progression and increased exposure of Far East brands over the years. Of course that comes with price bumps. But I'll always have a tiny place in my heart for those $700-$1000 prices frames that have a history of being well made.
So I had buddy who runs his own private OEM brand through Mondince put me in contact with them earlier this week. Truthfully I never really heard of Mondince until this forum. And nothing but high remarks from my friend. This was his idea that I connect with them.
Anyway, I'm working on getting a frameset for long term review. My suspicion though is the frame probably won't deliver until mid to late Summer. The overall geometry, pricing, and customer feedback of Mondince takes me back to the peak Chinertown years during the pandemic.
Yes I love the natural progression and increased exposure of Far East brands over the years. Of course that comes with price bumps. But I'll always have a tiny place in my heart for those $700-$1000 prices frames that have a history of being well made.
We know they overlap heavily with Long Teng. We know Long Teng OEMs for the likes of Cube, Argon 18, and more. So your friend's company is probably a mini Cube, aka yet another "brand" / western client that buys frames from OEMs. Afaik, nuance comes in with open / closed moulds, prototyping vs off the shelf layups and so on.I call BS on that Serge! I have never seen you being anything but a mean grinchy French guy lol
Mondince is a marketing / salesforce forward entity, with Long Teng being the factory. Maybe if you're Cube, you deal with Long Teng, and if you're small, you deal with Mondince.
Also, if you ask Alisa nicely, you can get that frame straight from Long Teng, which tells me it's highly likely to be the new open mould aero 2026 iteration, probably the successor to my own 268 that shows its age now.
Bromaxxing over.
Looking fwd to your review.
Guys, I am seriously considering that frame. I do 80% road and 20% compacted gravel road. Do you think that bike on 32C can handle that? Thinking of pairing with 50-55mm wheels with titaniiun spoked to get some compliance?
With FSA Headset:That looks a lot better / actually right. Seems like only the crown race was shit which is good to know😅. Does anyone have something to say regarding ride feel etc.
Guys, I am seriously considering that frame. I do 80% road and 20% compacted gravel road. Do you think that bike on 32C can handle that? Thinking of pairing with 50-55mm wheels with titaniiun spoked to get some compliance?
That’s what I think but I like the go fast look of mondince! The gravel part is really nicely compared, I currently run on 40C on it and maintain an easy 28-30km/h
What torque setting did you use for the seatpost clamp?
How is the ride feel and did anyone order the ultralight instead of the superlight?
Did anyone build up the bike in the carbon black and has some photos?I have a UL variant in raw carbon that should be due soon, will post it as soon as its in my hands
Here we go... 95% ready.Looks really good. Will be interested to heart how it rides. Also.what handlebars are those?
Here we go... 95% ready.Not gonna lie. Looks good
Here we go... 95% ready.
Here we go... 95% ready.
I'm putting mine together still; it's the first time I've done di2/ltwoo battery in a frame. If anyone has done the same, how does the battery attach to the seatpost? I was planning for it to fit inside the seatpost, but it doesn't.On the previous post there is an answer for you ;)
Here we go... 95% ready.
Something I noticed very quickly while assembling the bike is that it has quite a bit of flex around the bottom bracket. I think the horizontal stiffness is limited because of the narrow down tube. I have to admit that I also notice this when sprinting >1000W on the road, and I don’t particularly like it. When riding normally in the saddle or out of the saddle, I can’t really feel it. You can already see it if you tilt the bike slightly to the side and then put some load to the pedal, you can see how the frame flexes. Significantly more flex compared to my other bikes. In the future, I’d probably make sure the tube shapes are designed for high stiffness.
Edit: I have the Superlight… I wouldn't go for the Ultralight, as that would only make the stiffness issue worse.
I don't have this issue. Are you sure that the flex does not come from your wheels ?
FM126
Not yet, but this is not going to change things.
It's simple physics: a narrower down tube can absorb less horizontal force. A larger-diameter tube simply offers better resistance to bending.
Only if the lay-up is the same. Shape angle also has some impact on strength.Could you make a similar video with your frame to see if there is a similar issue?
Hey, do you talk about the LCR018? Between all the frame you’ve cited, could you tell us which one is the most flexible to which one is the less flexible please 🙏 ?If I compare only the carbon frames, the LCR018 is the stiffest, followed by the fake SL8, and the fm126 is the least stiff.
So I might be waiting for LCR020 instead of this frame eh.Same for me propably.
FM126
FM126
i'm curious now, can you please explain how you do that test? i just tried on mine and i'm getting no deflection because i find the position super awkward and can't really apply force: i'm sure you have a technique, and i'd like to try on my own bike. my tube shapes are very aero, so it might be expect to not be laterally very stiff, so curious to try.
Holyshit, that's a lot of flex
I think they designed the frame on paper. The proper process would be to manufacture it, test it, make adjustments, and repeat until the product is fully developed. I think in this case, they designed it on paper, manufactured it, and then sold it straight away to the customer. I’ve learned never to be the first to buy again 😅I am not 100% sure about that, as the frame is produced by long teng which is a reputable manufacturer it would surprise me a bit. Still the flex you are experiencing is weird. Have you send mondice the video regarding clarification? Maybe it is actually an issue with your frame as the other buyers in this forum have yet to report something similar.
Okay, from what I gather, the compression ring here is actually a crown race. Can anyone tell me if I’ve installed it the right way round and whether it’s the new version or the old one?
The test seems to be relevant because you’re definitely applying similar forces when pedaling, is it relevant to safety or performance?!!Where you able to replicate the test with your own bike?
Lean the bike against the wall so that the rear wheel and the handlebars are supported. Then you can apply force to the bottom bracket. In my case, the rear wheel was supported by a doorframe that was close to the wall, and the handlebars were against the wall.
thanks, i tried to do the same, wheel (nor rear triangle) on door frame, bars on another door frame. I get lateral movement, but some of it is the tyres that are half deflated (it seems). What i do not get, is the gap between the seat stays and the rim almost disappearing. Is it a wheel thing, or a frame thing? Would you mind using the same wheels for the test? I feel like most of the play could actually be the wheel rather than the frame.
I guess ideally we'd apply pressure at the rear at the thru axle, not on the wheel. There was no easy way for me to apply pressure on the frame rather than the wheel.
Interesting shenanigans...
Any riding feedback yet?
And what was the frame weight on your builds?
Considering this frame to replace a 2019 SystemSix which - love the SystemSix but would like lower weight, 32 mm clearance and somewhat more compliance, therefore considering the UL version :)
It needs to flush the fork (it will do it when you preload with the top cap stem).
7 mm height bearing for lower.
8 mm height bearing for upper.
I hope that helps. The current gap is still quite large.
Thanks for the info. Jack also wrote to me saying I installed the cone incorrectly. However, the gap is almost just as big the other way around. I hope things improve with the new parts.Then you probably still got the old cone race, the new one from mondice or as someone described an original fsa cone racer will do the trick.
All right, then let’s get back to our highly scientific work. This time, I didn’t lean the rear wheel against the wall or the doorframe, but rather the frame’s axle itself. That means the rear wheel is essentially removed from the equation. Then I asked the Gemini AI how much the bottom bracket deforms relative to the ground. The result is that the bottom bracket of the FM126 shifts about twice as much in the horizontal direction.
Thank you! You've largely isolated the frame, as far as i can tell (to be fair, i still feel the wheels/tyres should be the same because i feel the rubber moving could be contributing maybe?), and so, it doesn't look good that a brand new aero race frame with fancy fibers (that's not even the lightest version) would be significantly softer than the 18D that you'd expect to be not as rigid as an aero race frame.
Do you plan to reach out to Jack?
The fact that you can feel that the frame is soft sprinting isn't great news at all. Trace Velo on his video of the 18D said the 18D doesnt feel like a "legit" road race bike, so I doubt many people will happily buy an aero frame that's noticeably softer.
Thank you! You've largely isolated the frame, as far as i can tell (to be fair, i still feel the wheels/tyres should be the same because i feel the rubber moving could be contributing maybe?), and so, it doesn't look good that a brand new aero race frame with fancy fibers (that's not even the lightest version) would be significantly softer than the 18D that you'd expect to be not as rigid as an aero race frame.
Do you plan to reach out to Jack?
The fact that you can feel that the frame is soft sprinting isn't great news at all. Trace Velo on his video of the 18D said the 18D doesnt feel like a "legit" road race bike, so I doubt many people will happily buy an aero frame that's noticeably softer.
Thank you! You've largely isolated the frame, as far as i can tell (to be fair, i still feel the wheels/tyres should be the same because i feel the rubber moving could be contributing maybe?), and so, it doesn't look good that a brand new aero race frame with fancy fibers (that's not even the lightest version) would be significantly softer than the 18D that you'd expect to be not as rigid as an aero race frame.
Do you plan to reach out to Jack?
The fact that you can feel that the frame is soft sprinting isn't great news at all. Trace Velo on his video of the 18D said the 18D doesnt feel like a "legit" road race bike, so I doubt many people will happily buy an aero frame that's noticeably softer.
Final answer:
It is safe
No worry
We have done the ISO standard test
Everyone can draw their own conclusions.
I'm looking for a new frame that fits my 80 kg. Anyone interested in the FM126? I'll give you a good price 😁
Funny thing is there advertising:
Why Choose the FM126 Premium Aero Carbon Frameset?
[...] high performance aero frame delivers race-winning stiffness. [...]
You could have a look at a thread for a new aero roadbike by yishun. Looks similar to an aeroad and from earlier revies the bikes are very robust. It is not confirmed if they do b2c yet.
They don't. As a consequence, the topic as been closed.
Hi, I could use your help again. The new headset and crown race arrived today. There were also two plastic parts in the package whose purpose I don't understand. Can anyone tell me what they are for and where I should install them?
Ok I haven't ridden it much, but I've finally stopped spilling mineral oil everywhere and have it assembled.
58cm and whatever they call the lighter weight option, which is irrelevant as I painted it.
Good first impressions once the correct pieces have actually been delivered. In hindsight, I can't be upset for the delay, it was my choice to be the trial subject for a new frame. Wrong battery holder, wrong bearings, and wrong crown race made me realize how different of an experience buying a frame direct from a factory is. I'm a little surprised that the person manufacturing the frame didn't want to assemble one and take it for a spin, honestly. I still stand by my decision to buy a frame without reviews, as I bought this knowing that the frame would kind of be a gamble. I didn't go for a expensive or ultralight build as a result. I got everything together for just under $2000, buying parts over time since last November. 8.4kg as pictured (cage and computer mounts, pedals).
I did my own version of the stiffness on the wall test, which seems consistent with what's been described. I'm more of an endurance/long distance rider, so I might not actually be able to hit the watts on the road to notice, but I'll update when I've done a sprint workout. My specialized diverge (fact 9r carbon) flexed quite a bit more using the same test, but that bike is known to be quite soft and since there is so much more clearance, I am more worried about the fm126.
I had my LBS cut the fork before I got the correct crown race and lower bearing, which means the fork is just a bit too long. I'll probably have to find a spacer, but if anyone has a link to a slightly lifted top tap on Aliexpress, I'd appreciate the link! :D
All right, then let’s get back to our highly scientific work. This time, I didn’t lean the rear wheel against the wall or the doorframe, but rather the frame’s axle itself. That means the rear wheel is essentially removed from the equation. Then I asked the Gemini AI how much the bottom bracket deforms relative to the ground. The result is that the bottom bracket of the FM126 shifts about twice as much in the horizontal direction.As I am in the market for a Chiner frame build, I was interested in this frame till this video i shown. It really appears to be a noodle frame. I tried this same test with my old 2013 Giant TCR Advanced SL, and get at most 1mm deflection between wheel and seat stay, and this is using the force of my knees to try to get movement.
Nice Decathlon Van China
You forgot to tell us your riding impressions
Not sure if I should be proud or embarrassed :)
Bike is good, but again, with the asterisk for flex on chainstays. I have ridden it a few times. No surprises on comfort given the SL8 geometry. I rode it 150km yesterday and the positioning and comfort was great. I really like it and am happy. I knew this frame would be a gamble, so I think it is fitting squarely into my expectations. I still want to try some more out of the saddle efforts, but I suspect the real test will be feedback after getting into some quicker group rides (which I haven't been doing lately).
I'm a bit hesitant to my authoritative statements on the frame, as I don't have a lot of experience with carbon road framesets. It feels less stable/premium than a trek madone sl8. Hard efforts feel a little unstable, but it could certainly be me adjusting to a racier road bike. Wish I could provide more, but that's probably all I can say until I get more chances to go fast on it.
If this is real, i am really pissed. But i actually can not imagine they improved the bb stiffness that much.Also, who needs that much BB stiffness?
I was just told by the light cycling contact that they have a new layup with a 130N/mm BB stiffness. Sounds a bit like bullshit to me :D
For comparission this table with different bikes from the nero show (althought the tourmagazine is using a different test as far as i know):
Also, who needs that much BB stiffness?
I'm pretty sure that would be well above the point of diminishing returns.
Who is "the light cycling contact"? Is that someone at Mondince?
No I just wrote to a WhatsApp number that is mentioned on the light-cycling website. I also asked what the difference is between the companies and as suspected Mondice = B2B and Light Cycling = B2C.They also changed the model names on their website in the last few days so they are not the same names as mondice anymore.
Be very careful. Never heard of them. Where did you find them? The website is not serious, and the company (empty shell, really) is 1y old only. Wont call it a scam, but i think i can vibe code the same shit in one afternoon and i m pretty sure registering a HK company costs a few hundred bucks and is dead easy.
https://www.ltddir.com/companies/light-cycling-sports-equipment-co-limited/
They are like velobuild, in that they're clearly a broker. But velobuild has built a reputation after trading for years and years.
If you're going to buy the 126, you're better off buying from the factory (long teng, Alisa will sell it to you if you ask) or Mondince (long teng related party) than from these people. Without hard evidence, i also wouldnt believe they changed the layup, as Mondince brushed off the topic as a non issue. If it's another factory using the moulds, then idk if they share the layup schedule (it is an open mould frame).
Honestly i'd stay away. Unless and until Jack shows that the frame is sprint friendly, i dont think it makes sense to buy that frame. And apparently, he doesnt seem to care.
I also note that some users (like BeR) have reported not noticing anything wrong with the frame flexing at the BB, but why take the risk? My 268 doesnt have nearly the same flex (i repeated the door test) and i can't see any scenario where it would make sense to take such a risk. To be clear, sprinting is one thing, but if you're bombing down a descent at 70+kmh, and you're doing hairpins, the idea of a pool noodle is straight up terrifying (you want something that tracks, not fuzzy lines). If your FTP is low, you dont sprint, you dont race, you ride on the flat, then you're fine, but it's still not a good reason to buy something that's potentially truly impaired.
Excellent description—that really nails it when it comes to the riding feel. I feel exactly the same way about steering precision and bottom bracket stiffness. I think the frame’s head tube stiffness is outstanding, in contrast to the bottom bracket.Agreed I do think the front of the bike feels stiffer than the back for sure, that huge fork and deep head tube help a lot. Really splitting hairs here the section of the fork is wide Id have likes to seen some thinner profiles on those tubes along with the really deep fork, probably.
I am still on the edge about which frame to get. I really prefer the design and look of the mondice over something like the lcr020 or even the new xmcs. Currently I have no real time pressure to decide but I would really like to build up a new bike this year ;D
Be very careful. Never heard of them. Where did you find them? The website is not serious, and the company (empty shell, really) is 1y old only. Wont call it a scam, but i think i can vibe code the same shit in one afternoon and i m pretty sure registering a HK company costs a few hundred bucks and is dead easy.
https://www.ltddir.com/companies/light-cycling-sports-equipment-co-limited/
They are like velobuild, in that they're clearly a broker. But velobuild has built a reputation after trading for years and years.
If you're going to buy the 126, you're better off buying from the factory (long teng, Alisa will sell it to you if you ask) or Mondince (long teng related party) than from these people. Without hard evidence, i also wouldnt believe they changed the layup, as Mondince brushed off the topic as a non issue. If it's another factory using the moulds, then idk if they share the layup schedule (it is an open mould frame).
Honestly i'd stay away. Unless and until Jack shows that the frame is sprint friendly, i dont think it makes sense to buy that frame. And apparently, he doesnt seem to care.
I also note that some users (like BeR) have reported not noticing anything wrong with the frame flexing at the BB, but why take the risk? My 268 doesnt have nearly the same flex (i repeated the door test) and i can't see any scenario where it would make sense to take such a risk. To be clear, sprinting is one thing, but if you're bombing down a descent at 70+kmh, and you're doing hairpins, the idea of a pool noodle is straight up terrifying (you want something that tracks, not fuzzy lines). If your FTP is low, you dont sprint, you dont race, you ride on the flat, then you're fine, but it's still not a good reason to buy something that's potentially truly impaired.
Another shock is on the way. The seat tube of my frame is starting to crack. Let's see what Jack has to say about it. The pattern of the crack and the view of the seat tube from above show that it's not just the paint—it's clearly the carbon structure, unfortunately.
Jack wants to send me a new frame. I'm curious to see if it works out and if anything has changed about the frame compared to the first versions.
Hello guys,
stepping in right in now as I am much much interested in this frame and have some serious thought we can discuss about.
Backstory: Just built a Mondince FM336 Gravelbike a month ago. Loved the process, love the riding. But its a gravel bike and it has its own use case which is not speeding on roads. It performs great on gravel. I initially chose size L and think its a very good match. So far I am very pleased with mondince.
Because I also want to do some races and/or triathlons in the future I am thinking about building up a road bike. I asked Jack if he has a road frame and answered with "yes, the fm126". Then I offered, I could produce a buy and build process video on youtube for this particular frame. His answer was, that he can send me the frame for 450€ only - but I have to mention Mondince as brand (no details yet actually in which way he wants me to place the brand).
Keeping the 450€ in Mind its almost a no-brainer. But there is this flexy BB issue which could be kind of dangerous for me: 185cm tall, 90kg heavy.
Do you think I should still consider this frame? Another way to go would be the LCR018D (but its more of a allroad endurance and not meant for racing), the not yet released LCR020 or the fully built up Seraph TT-X71.
I read so many threads about all those frames and the more you read the more issues you find. Its frustrating diving into a rabbit hole and overthink stuff :-\ :D
Loooking forward to your replies!
I would flag to him your concern. And tell him that if the area isn't stiffened you'll do a ride review and you'll probably find the frame so soft it's unnerving.
If you only make a video about the build and don't say anything about riding quality then we'll all collectively hate you and call you a shill :)
Myself, I wouldn't buy one, I'm 85kg. There are plenty of options that are known not to have that problem. Plenty of scenarios, especially descending, when you want a frame to behave reliably. If you have to slow way down because it feels weird when you're balancing your weight side to side, better buying something else. Safety and enjoyment do matter more than 200 euro.
So, I finally received mine after quite a bit of back and forth with mondince after having a custom paint that went not to plan. After a fair bit of negotiation I paid a bit extra to go for the UL version (basically to make sure i was getting a fresh frame) in raw carbon (the frame weight with hard ware (no headset) and thru axle still in came to 950g for a 54 considering this is a raw carbon gloss finish claimed weights are just not representative but this is still reasonably light all the same) and I did get the mondince branding which honestly looks much better than expected in person.
I received both seat posts and most hard ware in black as well as gold which is great as I have loads of spares. Headset bearings the crown race didn't present an issue on my frame at all (so that appears corrected for me too as well as others). The frame appeared to be well made from what i could see shining a torch in there and construction all round pretty solid. I used the 8mm bearing on the top and the 7mm on the bottom, the fits of the headset bearings in the seats were reasonably tight so not super easy to remove by hand, this is good a sloppy headset bearing fit can lead to issues down the line. I did end up facing both front and rear brake mounts however they really both only needed a touch up and would have been able to get a good brake set up without. Same goes for the t47 threads that I chased but honestly i picked up so little material that a BB would've gone in fine without.
The build itself was really straight forward with the fork routing fully guided chich made life really easy. The di2 mount for the seatpost worked great and wasn't particularly fiddly to install. NB for those this eurostyle brake orientation. The entry hole in the steerer is firmly on the right hand side and depending what kind of set up you have if you have to cross the hoses inside the frame rather than in the bars or stem, like I had to since I was using the PRO headset and stem system youll likely getting biased steering. As a result for this build I went back to a UK orientation (left hand lever rear brake)
Only big comment I have is that currently I have is that on 52t rings im quite close to the top of what the fd allows - I want to move to bigger rings asap but I may need to do a bit of thinking about what will actually work for me considering this limitation.
Like other people have noticed that bottom bracket area does flex, I think theres two problems theres a huge amount of material above the bb this kind of does nothing and i youre looking at the bb it is not encased by that shape (I hope that makes sense) I think as a result the bb area is not as stiff due to this and a really narrow down tube i think if they had effectively moved that large area above the bb down and were willing to widen the down tube as it meets the bb it wouldn't be so bad. The chain stays whilst quite tall are really thin. Head tube is actually quite a bit more hourglass shaped than pictures suggest, I don't think the super narrow down tube is necessarily a bad design choice either. I know a lot of people here want more tyre clearance but I would've like to have seen tyres tun closer to the down tube and the back of the seat tube. There's far too much daylight in those areas for my liking oif were wanting to make a "fast" bike.
Honestly the bike felt fast, on my old 2018 scott foil i had a really fast set up and this will be my reference point. On open flat sections and down hills the bike really did feel like it wanted to pick up speed and hold it nicely. Geo wise just going off the charts i think these should've been fairly similar bikes the mondince is 5mm shorter 3.5mm lower. That being said head and seat angles are quite different. This bike felt short in comparison to the foil and i'll likely bump up to a 130mm stem at some point, I probably should've gone for the 56 (i'm a real 54/56 straddler) on this one. Despite the stiffness concerns people have the bike so far after three rides handles really well i'm super happy to take risks in corners on this thing without second guessing myself. Which I think brings me on to the stiffness thing, I honestly dont think its as bad as people say it is (NB im about 75kg and riding the 54 i suspect it might be worse for taller, heavier riders). It honestly feels fine - buut not excellent whilst it doesn't bother me my foil was really stiff and I loved it, that bike felt alive out the saddle and up hill. By comparison this bike doesn't feel quite as lively, but im not about to condemn it either. People still waiting on one, its likely to not be anywhere near as bad as you might think, people thinking of pulling the trigger honestly so far its a good bike I'm really enjoying it and I dont think id necessarily discourage anyone. Herein lies the issue though, with the Velobuild Aerotrace having just been put on a diet and Light Carbon about to release the LCR 020 D I think this becomes super hard to recommend considering those options exist, and honestly if I wasn't desperate to get my hands on a new frame after selling my foil I may well have waited for either of those. In all I paid i think if i recall £630 for the UL frame and shipping for that kind of money i do think it's worth a shot.
Hey guys, got mine replacement frame today.
I can see they improved things.
E.g. the mounting of the bottle cage screws inside the downtube.
Unfortunately the frame is broken, see the Video.
Transportbox is mit damaged, so i guess it happened before packaging.
Very frustrating.
I suspect that when sanding before painting, too many layers of the carbon layup were sanded away. I think 4 or maybe 5 layers were sanded through, as you can see in the photo. Designs with edges don't seem to be ideal in this regard. I'll test the next frame very carefully.That's a normal carbon fiber layup look.