See likes

See likes given/taken


Posts you liked

Pages: [1]
Post info No. of Likes
Re: Velobuild VB-R-168 Frame
Quote from: 1Sigma on June 01, 2022, 08:06:42 AM
Thank you for responding.  I think if you ask people here, QC is probably the most important aspect Vb needs to focus on.

Anecdotally, most of the issues seem to be around:
1) missing or incorrect hardware
2) poor machining of hardware or mounting points on the frame
3) incorrect or sloppy paint job
4) “bait and switch” specifically around handlebars
5) poor after sales service

The frames themselves are fine.

The customer expectation is that they will receive exactly what they have ordered, and not have to contact for after service support.
Because, let’s be honest, after sales support is weak and aside from receiving a broken frame in the mail, the VB warranty is almost useless.

It is also in VBs interest to take the extra time to ensure an order is correct and free of defects.
Consider how much time and money is wasted dealing with after sale complaints, as well as the loss of reputation when these complaints are shared on forums?

Ideally, VB wants to be in a position where you will never hear from a customer again, unless it is to buy another frame.

I am not saying this to complain.  Rather, I say this because I would like to see VB succeed. And these QC issues are seriously harming your business

You sum up the perfect answer, and improvement points to be checked, for sure it will harm the business, why gamble when you can pay a little extra somewhere else and be sure of the quality.

I also hope VB will take all your point in consideration, and hope to see them succeed in the future.
June 02, 2022, 03:45:05 AM 		1
Re: Velobuild VB-R-168 Frame Almost done with a new VB-186, but while working on the rear derailleur, I realized that instead of shifter cable housing I used brake cable housing. Anyone done this before? Is it no big deal or should I redo all my cabling?
June 05, 2022, 06:19:32 PM 		1
Re: Velobuild VB-R-168 Frame
Quote from: kr78 on May 27, 2022, 12:39:11 AM
No response so far  :(

Some final words. After I had opened a case on Paypal and VeloBuild became aware of my postings, they responded. It required some dicussion whereas Chris was quite cooperative. Meanwhile we have sorted things out and came to a solution we both can live with.
June 11, 2022, 02:06:37 PM 		1
Re: Velobuild VB-R-168 Frame
Quote from: kr78 on June 11, 2022, 02:34:00 PM
Handlebar considerations – a hint

Along with the 168 frame I ordered a 100/400mm fully integrated handlebar. I also ordered the VB-HB-021 (2021 New Carbon Handlebar with Separate Stem) with a 110mm stem and a 400mm bar. With the VB-HB-021 option I intended to have a longer cockpit compared to the fully integrated one. However, it turned out that the VB-HB-021 option is shorter than the fully integrated one, although number wise the stem is longer.

Handlebars and stems are always very tricky. What you have seen could have been seen beforehand (if you know what to look for and know about the hurdles there.)

Lets assume the integrated one also has a bar and stem part to explain your problem.

The integrated bar has a given reach of 80mm vs the 75mm of the separated bar. So with identical stems the integrated one would be 5mm longer - this would lessen the difference to 5mm with identical 100mm or 110mm stems.

BUT the stem angles are different - the integrated one levels out, while the separated one still has some upward angle.
This is very hard to decipher from the website - I tried to illustrate this below.

1 is the separated one - see the angle? Also visible in the placement of the measure of 90/100 etc.
2 is the integrated one - no angle at the connection point.

So if you are just looking for the "reach" of the stem the 100mm integrated one is probably more like 95mm and the separate is angled so much upward that 110mm might be less than 100mm - combine this with 5mm less reach in the bar and your observation makes sense.

You can play around with the Stem Comparison tool to figure things like this out in more detail: http://yojimg.net/bike/web_tools/stem.php

BTW: Full disclosure - I would have made the identical mistake and as I went with the integrated bar and had to guess the real reach with no real angle given it came out a bit different than I planned... paired with the long SRAM Hoods my fit is a little off, so more spacers than planned have to stay for the moment.
June 11, 2022, 05:59:22 PM 		1
Re: Velobuild VB-R-168 Frame
Quote from: Kirkspants on June 11, 2022, 03:14:47 PM
Did they do a good job of supplying the little frame bits for entry/exit ports and for different drivetrains like mechanical vs electronic? Has anyone slapped a real FSA ACR headset on one of these? How good are the bearing seats in terms of finish?

Only done mechanical 2x. The derailleur cables have exit ports: cover for front, plug for rear. I've only used the integrated handlebar, no FSA ACR headset.
June 13, 2022, 03:11:23 AM 		1
Re: Velobuild VB-R-168 Frame
Quote from: braincore on June 13, 2022, 03:11:23 AM
Only done mechanical 2x. The derailleur cables have exit ports: cover for front, plug for rear. I've only used the integrated handlebar, no FSA ACR headset.

Stupid question - but where were these covers packed?
I somehow did not get any and cannot find them even with all the packaging still there. (Used some flexible glue mass type of thing to cover them for now)

Short Update from my side:
  • Still rather happy with the frame/ handlebar.
  • I managed to drop my chain after forgetting to double-check the god damn SRAM FD. So some scratches around the BB and since then I got some BB creaking... working on a solution with a bigger spacer and less pre-load etc. just DUB PF BB things I guess.
  • In addition I started using the two water bottle cages I bought with the frame - they are pretty light, but the seat tube one broke on the first speed bump I gently drove over even at lower speed ~20kmh, so this was 20 Bucks out the window and I am back to the trusty nylon ones.

Happy to see that VB is also writing here now.
June 14, 2022, 04:56:14 AM 		1
Re: Velobuild VB-R-177 I think the 177 might be VeloBuild's best frameset offering:

-Sub 1000g painted without derailleur hanger, braze on, or plastic grommets.
-T1000 carbon, lighter yet stiffer than T700/800.
-EPS molding.
-Traditional seatpost.
-(Subjectively) classic frame design.
-Stiff enough for climbing, while the seatpost offers compliancy.

My size Medium frame with Farsports Ventoux C4 wheels comes in at 7.3kg without pedals. And if I were to swap those out for my set of Elite Drive 45D w/ latex tubes I could easily get the bike down to 7.1kg - Crazy to think a $500 frame with a hydraulic disc groupset could be that lightweight.

Few things keeping the 177 from being perfect, that I'd like to see VeloBuild sort out. But for $500 I know they wont:
-Redesigning and/or relocating on the front derailleur opening/cable stop.
-Redesigning the stem and top cap for the separate stem/bar combo option.
-Redesigning the saddle rail clamp. There's no easy or logical method to tightening top bolt for the clamp if your saddle does not have cut away/hole/pressure relief channel.


I suspect that even as new designs get released from major brands, which VeloBuild will inevitably copy, VeloBuild will always have a market for the 177.


November 05, 2022, 09:03:33 PM 		1
Re: Velobuild VB-R-168 Frame Finished build (parts bin / new mix): https://imgur.com/a/DBR12Pr

Size 52 frame matte black
Stock 120mm stem
Stock headset cover
The One handlebar 36cm
Ultegra 8020 shifters
Jagwire cables and housing
105 hydraulic calipers
Dura ace crankset
Ultegra left side crank pm
Look carbon pedals
Token threaded BB
Rotor 53/39 chainrings with Rotor bolt covers
Dura ace fd
Ultegra rd
Pro Stealth saddle
DT Swiss Arc 1100 62mm wheels
GP5000 S TR tires 25mm
MT800 / Ultegra rotors 160/140
Zipp CX bar tape
Generic stem bolt Garmin mount from Amazon

First impressions after 3 rides (155 miles)

It is strange to review a frame like this.  Its a you-get-what-you-get direct-from-an-unknown-manufacturer frameset that costs so little relative to even entry level name brand frames that intuition dictates it should be, in the best case scenario, "acceptable", more likely some degree of "sketchy, problematic and/or vaguely frightening to ride"; unlikely that it would be "good". On the other hand, this is an SL7 in its tube shapes and geometry - the benchmark for a great all-round race bike - with a better bottom bracket (imo), more flexible headset out of the box, and 100-200 grams of extra weight (vs. standard and S-Works, respectively).  How should we assess the things we generally assume occur with name brand frames (like QC and strict conformance to the claimed carbon fiber layup) that might (?) be commercially infeasible at this price point?

I have ridden thousands of miles on a Tarmac SL6 sport frame (which was cannibalized for this build) and a Canyon Aeroad CFR.  Building up and riding this frame leads me to consider what the frame itself really contributes to the entire bicycle.  Geometry and the resulting fit is the most important contribution.  Second is aerodynamics of the frame and tube shapes.  Third is frame material / layup (i.e., desired level of stiffness or compliance in the right areas for the intended uses of the bicycle).  Last is weight. Ride feel, feedback, and comfort are dictated mostly by the contact points, with only a marginal contribution from the frame.  Tire width, pressure, and casing suppleness alone dwarf any differences in "compliance" between any reasonably stiff frames.

In the most important characteristics - geometry and aerodynamics - this bike effectively is an SL7. All the superlatives about handling and speed apply. If you are looking for an all-around race bike, this will fill that need.  The weight difference is quantifiable - materially heavier, though within the margin of difference made by a lighter seatpost, saddle and other finishing kit.  Frame layup and construction is harder to assess without cutting open the frame.  From a visual inspection, it looks clean.  From my initial ride impressions, the bottom bracket is stiffer than my SL6 - power transfer feels immediate, comparable to the Aeroad.  The fork does not flex when climbing or sprinting.  The stock stem combined with The One handlebar feels extremely stiff, but still has the vibration damping I would expect from a carbon bar and stem.  Against my expectations, the bike feels exceptionally good.  Whether that means that my specific frame has a good layup, or the carbon layup for this copy is comparable to the SL7, or it means that the layup, so long as its solidly made and not defective, doesn't have much noticeable impact, I don't know.   Maybe there is some hidden defect that will emerge in the form of a crack or failure after a few thousand miles, but I'm not sure what that would be. And I'm skeptical there is necessarily a higher chance of happening with this frame versus a name brand.  My Aeroad spent three months at a Canyon service center to fix two separate design flaws, one of which (the seatpost) wasn't really corrected.

I love this bike. This experience leaves me conflicted.  Does this mean that an S-Works Tarmac frame would be that much better? What this does leave me wanting is a Velobuild Premier version of this frame: pay double for an 800g version of the frame with an extra QC cert for peace of mind. I would feel better throwing DA di2 on that and doing a sub 7kg build. The benefits of the S-Works without the dentist meme branding or the anxiety of laying down a $5.5k frame in an office park crit.  Maybe I'm just describing winspace, yoeleo, et al.

I will reiterate - maybe I got lucky, and the median frame is missing parts, has holes drilled off center and is full of voids in the carbon.  Maybe carbon frame manufacturing has so matured that the default level of quality is high enough that the differences between frames are almost entirely geometry and branding, with the result that the carbon frame is the new carbon wheel. YMMV.

Build experience

Internal routing: more work with mechanical shifting but doable without any special tools. Just takes time and patience. Routing through The One handlebar was painless, I highly recommend it from that standpoint. I was concerned with the cable angles through the stem, but the shifting is smooth.  The clean look is satisfying and worth the extra effort. It seems popular around here to do mechanical disc brakes, but I wouldn't put brake cables through this stem.

Headset: it works. I read some reviews on this forum that suggested problems with headset play, but I have none at all. Maybe this has since been fixed. I purchased an FSA ACR headset assuming I would use that instead, but it left a large gap with the top of the headtube, and I ended up liking the look of the stock stem and the lower stack of the stock headset cover more anyway. 

Bottom bracket shell: nicely finished, no problems fitting the thread together bb. Stiff and smooth spinning, but will need a few thousand miles to assess for creaking, etc.

Disc brake mounts: did not appear to need facing, no more annoying to align rotors than any other frame (i.e., very annoying but works with some fiddling).
November 06, 2022, 08:50:16 PM 		1