Yea the aesthetics are the sticking point for me here.  I'm looking for something that will give easy access to the couplers, but still look good and be relatively inexpensive.

I am curious about those Zeno couplers.  Is that a particular reason you're going with those instead of the Formulas?  Are they small and/or shorter?

Pros of the Zeno System vs. Formula:
- Assembled they are nearly 10mm shorter 2mm smaller in diameter.
- They can be placed anywhere on the line.
- They do not require special cables.
- You can reinstall them a couple of times in the case you kink a hose or something goes wrong with the install.

Cons:
- The downside is that the male end of the hose is larger and requires a 10mm hole to pass them through.

That "con" is not an issue with the FSA SMR stem and I designed my own headset top caps so I could pull them through to drop the fork.

These are Zeno couplers. Unlike the Formula couplers you can put them anywhere along the lines.

I prefer them, but DM me if you want a set of the Formula ones, I have a set I have been meaning to to stick on ebay for a while.

If all you are looking for is a stem that has a routing hole at the bottom, the Pro Superlight might be another option, but I feel like the couplers under that stem wouldnt be very good looking.

My take is that some of the criticism of Lwoo is unfair. Luke (trace Vello) admits that there was an issue with the trifox frame  where the FD hangar was moving. How sure is he that the FD did not sustain damage due to this? The other issue  is some persons are clearly purchasing  a beta version. At the time of their  purchase Ltwoo had not released hence it was not sold on their official page . Can  Ltwoo be blamed for persons who were part of its beta testing, turning around and selling the product they were to test?  There are simply too many variables, not being properly considered. I have 11 speed DI2 and I know there is an issue sometimes when you use the app, even after properly disconnecting, the gears won't shift. You cannot re-enter the app, because its now unable to see the device.. Took me awhile to figure out it still thinks its connected and I need to disconnect Bluetooth (Even Shimano released product has bugs)

I am pretty sure in terms of timeline GC performance bought his after Ltwoo had announced but before they started selling from their official store. There should be a reasonable expectation that the product would be up to snuff at that point and that Ltwoo would try and control the sale of test units. I know Sram and Shimano have also had test units resold; but the communication that those were test units and asking for them back are the difference between how the different companies handle the situation.

Sram and Shimano also get criticized when their groups are used with non official components or are attached to frames that violate their published frame fit specs, which is why documentation is really important. Shimano does a meh job of this, but Ltwoo's is nonexistent. Those things should also include install documentation on how to prevent / minimize damage from moving or adjusting the front mech.

Additionally, I do think there is something to the somewhat charged language and frustration around customers being used as beta testers by these Chinese brands. They absolutely need a culture shift around their engineering to better test and validate their products. Ltwoo is just the latest in a long line of these kinds of issues. Other recent examples include Craft Racing and Elite's Drive wheels. I think this is problem with how their engineers are trained, but it needs to change if you want to build something as complex as an electronic groupset and win in the market.

There is so much potential here to build groupsets that can have profiles to run nearly any modern cassette offering up an expanded choice of drivetrain components, particularly for the 1x ERG where you have simplified the problem down to rear shifting. I only wish that group had a battery that was easier to access as well as a kit to allow for the compatibility with the accessory powerline from an e-bike battery.

I will soon be doing 90% of my miles on 2 custom Ti bikes. Not because I love Ti but because the geometries I wanted were not available at the time either designed or commissioned them and custom carbon seemed prohibitively expensive at the time.

The big western brands like Specialized and Trek are a step ahead in terms of the combination of high end construction methods and open molds dont seem to do any aero development. However a geometry that helps me get into the position I want is going to be more important than the aero gains from the frame assuming reasonable good construction. Therefore I am willing to cast a wide net.

Right now, the Trek Domane RSL is the off the shelf bike that is closest to the geometry I would want. A bike that had that kind of lower trail geometry with a long and low position + clearance for a 34mm-35mm tires would instantly be on my shopping list regardless of the name on the side (or not) if it was of reasonable quality. UCI approved would be nice too.

I should add that since the Domane RSL in my size (52) is sold out if my Ti Road bike disappeared today, the Elilee Blize with a -20 deg drop stem and some 3d printing magic would most likely be tbe bike i would build. Though an SL8 with their -12, 110mm stem would get me close, the look of that bike with the tarmac stem and the "speedsniffer" is horrendous.

Matte black paints are usually a finish over a primer, not just a primer itself, the reason being that RTP or primers perform poorly as an outer layer over time and tend to be hard to clean.

I would specifically ask them for primer only as you want to finish painting yourself, or a “ready to paint” (RTP) finish.

I think the geo chart for the LCR017-D is still shaking out. I took the geo chart from this (reseller?) https://jmcarbonframe.nl/frames-race/

And it looks like either the fork rake (unclear if that is what is in the second WB column) or the trail are incorrect.

If they had a 50mm or 55mm fork available for smaller sizes and this bike could take 35mm tires it would be interesting and pushing the envelope a bit, but 32mm is still very much on trend.

And the R086-D ist this modell:
https://prorace.be/bikes/aero/randa/


What are the other ones from prorace.be?
https://prorace.be/bikes/aero/fusion-x/ ?
https://prorace.be/bikes/lightweight/cura/ ?

https://prorace.be/bikes/tofla/ ? ( this one looks very good and sporty vor an endurance...?)

The Cura also has a different geometry than Yishun has on their own website. Curious to see if that also gets updated over time. For a long time I thought that the Flybike Carbonda stuff was a cut above the other available open molds, but the recent stuff on here from Yishun is really impressive and I am certainly following the 1058-d to see where it goes.

A couple of thoughts.

This paper is comparing short fiber reinforced polymers, not the materials you have proposed using, there is some discussion in other papers about whether or not 3d printing can actually help you gain directional strength because of the ability to control fiber orientation.

The caution i am expressing regarding FDM vs. production quality injection molded parts is also what you will hear if you contact production experts at places like Xometry that work on rapid prototyping with all of these technologies and is what most engineers who work with these technologies will tell you. For example, when HP says "MJF produces a part with anisotropic differences that vary between 95% and 90% of an injection molded part" they are, like these papers, assuming the same formulation of material. Unfortunately even for something like "standard" PA12 there are fairly significant differences between the materials themselves that would be used for different production processes including FDM, SLS, MFJ and injection molding. You can pull the data sheets from Stratasys, HP, etc and see for yourself.

Of course this stuff continues to change and today we see 3d printed parts being used for small production parts and on race bikes at highest levels. That would have not been the case only a few years ago.

Obviously the risk is yours to take and it very well may work fine, but this project is pushing the limits of both the materials and the design envelope for most carbon bikes in multiple ways. Good luck!