See likes

See likes given/taken


Posts you liked

Pages: [1]
Post info No. of Likes
VB-177 vs VB-168: My Guide To Choosing A Frame Step One: Frequently Asked Questions
1 - Is the 177 lighter than the 168? YES.
2 - Is the 168 more aero than the 177? YES.
3 - Does the 177 have more flex than the 168? Probably, since it’s lighter…
4 - Is the 168 more stiff than the 177? Probably, since it’s heavier…
5 - Does this mean the 177 is a “flexy” frame overall? NO.
6 - Is the 168 one the stiffest frames you’ve tested? NO.
7 - Are both frames stable at high speeds? Road stability is not exclusive to the frame.

Bottom Line: The differences between the two frame are marginal at best. Especially for a $500 frame. There are more important aspects to your overall bike build to consider. 168 does in fact support 32c tires. The 177 (at least mine) does not. Maybe 30c max. This alone might be a deal breaker for the 177. The 177 uses is a standard seatpost which will be wildly easier to find on the open market for replacements.

Step Two: Geometry
VB 177 Geometry (Size 56/L)
Stack: 556
Reach: 395

VB 168 Geometry (Size 56/L)
Stack: 556
Reach: 398

VB 177 Geometry (Size 54/M)
Stack: 536
Reach: 392

VB 168 Geometry (Size 54/M)
Stack: 535
Reach: 388

Bottom Line: You should probably seek a professional bike fit if you’re uncertain. Geometry is similar for both frames, plus/minus a couple of millimeters in reach. I personally am not a fan of zero-degree setback seatposts. Neither frames are intended to fit all body types. I’m also not a fan of integrated handlebars either, since they limit adjustability later.

Step Three: Aerodynamics
Your wheel choice is one of the most critical areas where aerodynamics can be either saved or loss. The 177 paired with deep sectioned aero wheels will be faster on the flats than the 168 with shallow wheels. And the aerodynamic design of the 168 will inherently trump the lightweight of the 177 on the flats when paired with identical wheels.

Bottom Line: DO NOT SKIMP on your wheelset.

Step Four: Total System Weight
There is not enough emphasis put on total system weight (bike + rider + gear). Nothing wrong with having weight weenie tendencies, but 50-200 gram weight savings isn’t going to make the difference for anything below a World Pro Tour Race. See example below:

Bike:                                     7900g
Rider:                                  74000g
2 Water Bottles:                     1400g
Helmet/Gear/Ect:                   1000g

Total System Weight:           84300 grams (84.3kg)

Bottom Line: Striving to save even 100-200 grams (regardless of cost) is literally only like 0.25 percent of the total weight. 0.25 PERCENT. One-fourth of one percent. Also when it comes to wheels and frames...you WILL eventually be penalized on stiffness once the weight dips to a certain threshold.

Step Five: Road Stability
Your stem length and wheel choice play a pivotal role in stability at higher speeds. These aspects should be considered before asking the question of stability in general. Yes both frames are stable...but I run a 130mm stem paired with aero wheels at a depth (60-65mm) that is suitable for my weight (74kg).


Final thoughts - For the pursuit of speed (and even climbing) your wheel choice, position on the bike, tire/innertube/tubeless choice, and drivetrain efficiency all matter significantly more than simply comparing weight. The 177 is probably the better choice if bike fit is a concern, you absolutely need a climbing bike, and you don’t need clearance for wider tires. Some people may also prefer the "look" of the 177 which is totally understandable. For everyone else…168 is mostly likely the more reasonable choice. And this actually makes sense, since the Tarmac SL7 is supposed to be the one bike to rule them all.

Okay this guide took way longer than I anticipated. Time to suit up my party clothes, get some drinks in me, and hit the clubs. Have a great weekend.
August 26, 2022, 07:43:40 PM 		1
Re: Velobuild VB-R-177 Most budget brands from the Far East should be treated as stepping stones rather than final destinations.

It's a great way to gain valuable bike building experience, before naturally progressing to the bike you actually want...
September 02, 2022, 09:39:59 AM 		1
Re: Tavelo Aero Frame
Quote from: James dean on August 13, 2024, 04:30:39 PM
I have reached out to Tavelo regarding this. Only because I have a arow on order. From what they tell me and yes they can be blowing smoke up my ass. They say that the frames that pt received were first iteration samples and they worked out all the kinks. Regardless I still love riding bikes that I don’t see on the road all the time. I would never buy a tarmac. That being said I will give a real unbiased review once I receive. And to be fair I bought the bike.

I just can't get my head around one simple thing. Why the F those companies keep sending early version of their products to PT without even doing a basic quality check before ?!
August 13, 2024, 05:21:45 PM 		1
Re: Tavelo Aero Frame
Quote from: jonathanf2 on August 14, 2024, 09:33:38 AM
GC Performance posted his review and he likes it. I think I prefer his take. Dude lives in Florida with sunshine and beautiful Latinas, versus the gloomy/grouchy Brit engineers overseas looking to complain about everything. ::)

youtu.be/zdT3G4fJ88M?feature=shared
One is an engineer with a lot of racing experience, the other is a fat guy who rides twice a month, "reviewing it" (reading specs) after EIGHTY miles (with no elevation) and hasn't investigated the BB extensively. It's a close one, I'm not sure who I should trust?
August 14, 2024, 10:06:02 AM 		1
Re: Spcycle 2024 New M868 Downcountry Full Suspension Frame
Quote from: fabus80 on September 16, 2024, 03:07:39 PM
Was there a problem with spcycle previously?
There are several posts of peeps reporting broken suspension arm as well as cracked frames if you google the keywords.
They are claiming to adress those issues with the M868 launch, but since there are also several posts in this forum about other SPcycle frame quality issues, i'm probably going to either skip buying it or wait until others confirming that quality issues have really been solved.
The second problem with them - according to few posts also in this forum, is not honoring their warranty. A couple of buyers left with a broken frame and no replacement in sight.
Either way, SPcycle not doing too good lately with all this bad publishity.
September 19, 2024, 11:16:05 AM 		1
Re: Have Ali vendor asking for more money I don't get why you are even considering paying... It's probably a scam. Report to Ali and block.
November 12, 2024, 01:45:56 AM 		1
Re: Epic Evo Clone
Quote
Which of the Airwolf frames are the Epic Evo replica?

Is it 100mm rear travel or can they be set up as 120mm rear travel?

Airwolf calls it the YFM059

When it comes to travel there is a problem.  This frame and the other open mold frames that use the same design are copies of the older EPIC frame - not the EPIC EVO.  The Epic they copied had 100mm of travel but only when paired with the special brain shock that is 265x52.5mm - thats 52.2mm of stroke.

The aliexpress sellers are recommending a 190x40 shock or 190x45.  This results in a lot less than 100mm of travel.  45 stroke gets you to around 85-90mm of travel NOT the 100mm they advertise

Since the specialized EPIC EVO comes with 110mm and can be upstroked up to 120mm (using 190x40 and 190x45 respectively) with the same front triangle some people have wondered if using the EVO linkages would get to that travel.  Unfortunately the EVO rear triangle mounts to the EVO linkage very differently so you would need an EVO rear triangle as well as the linkage to make that work - or a custom CNC machined linkage that offers the leverage ratio of the EVO but fits the rear triangle of the EPIC.  its not clear how much travel the EPIC rear triangle would allow in that situation.

There is a version of this frame for sale on DIY carbon bikes that advertises 120mm of travel with a 190x40 stroke shock. It however uses the EPIC linkage just like Airwolf, Until someone proves me wrong I can only assume this is wildly false advertising and comes from the chinese suppliers who have confused the EPIC with the EPIC EVO.

I have added some images to show what an EPIC linkage looks like (from specialized website) - and its the same as the open mold copies
and an image to show what an EVO linkage looks like - allowing for much more travel using 40 and 45mm stroke shocks.

I think the Chinese companies simply got confused between the names and specs of the specialized bikes as they look very similar (and indeed the front triangle is the same), so they call it an EVO clone when it is an EPIC clone and then spec EVO shocks and advertise the 100m travel of the EPIC bike.

Hopefully this clears it up.
November 26, 2024, 09:09:09 AM 		1
Re: Epic Evo Clone
Quote from: akuutti247 on December 06, 2024, 08:56:55 AM
Hello

My first front triangle had a loose bottom bracket insert on the drive side. I got a new warranty replacement front triangle on the 15th of October. Today we did a 2-hour zone 2 ride and I noticed odd crank wobble during the ride. The left side BSA bottom bracket insert is loose: it shakes and rattles. The frame lasted less than 300 kilometers this time. Let´s see how Airwolf deals with it.

Aku

Seems I'm not the only one who has had bad luck with Airwolf. I have their Stumpjumper clone frame and the threads in the main pivot were so bad that they stripped out completely after a measly 4nm of torque while performing a basic bolt check. Airwolf was willing to send me new bolts (???) but unwilling to replace the front triangle which is where the problem actually is, and completely ghosted me.

So my AirWolf frame is rocking DIY helicoil inserts secured with loctite red and some Trek branded pivot bolts to make the frame actually ridable. I already had a pretty low opinion of Airwolf after this, given the frame I bought from them was $700 USD after tax and shipping and didn't even last a single ride. But this kind of stuff confirms it for me: stay away from Airwolf.
December 06, 2024, 12:11:17 PM 		1