Quote from: sheff171 on June 22, 2026, 06:59:25 PM
I've mostly finished building my build.  Just figuring out which bar/stem to put on.

-Med frame, raw carbon with clear coat.
-BTLOS 32mm int width wheels
-SRAM Rival/Force drivetrain
- 2.1" Thunder Burts

2 rides on it so far and it's mostly dialed in.  Rides well and the geo fits, so time will tell how it holds up. The only issue I have found with the build quality is the rear brake holes are not really inboard enough to center the brake pads in the calipers.  I'm going to file them out a little and see it can be improved.

This is pretty much exactly the build I'm trying to put together (albeit maybe with 55 G-Ones instead of burts), how is tire clearance?

Quote from: Champirs on June 20, 2026, 03:19:01 AM
Good

Is that a 46 or 48t chainring? How is the chainring clearance and chainline?

Quote from: AngryBear on June 19, 2026, 02:50:32 AM
52T max chainring

Quote from: RiP on June 18, 2026, 08:21:57 AM
This is more like it!

But this begs the question, since the frame already had a mold and there are pictures of a finished one, does this mean that it was just the old geo chart that was wrong and the frame had the geo figures from this new chart, or does that frame feature the strange geo from the 1st chart???

the old geo chart plainly didn't reflect reality, the top tube and seatpost angle numbers just obviously didn't add up to produce the listed reach

just try to get as close to an enve mog geometry as possible while still allowing for 50t chainring clearance with reasonable chainline

Quote from: AngryBear on June 18, 2026, 12:40:19 AM
It seems like they are open to suggestions, what is the perfect geometry?

what plausible measurements they have there are fine (bb drop etc) but the reach numbers are just physically impossible for the bike sizing, the numbers on the the geo chart are simply incorrect

a couple notes:
1. needs updated geo chart lmao
2. needs specs for chainring clearance with 47.5mm chainlines
3. all of the photos look like they have no bottle cage/rack bolts drilled - they absolutely need some top tube bag bolts here

Quote from: drapz77 on June 13, 2026, 09:41:02 PM
Bought it built it. I have purchased both the 135 and the 055 now. Both frames are good. The 055 is slightly stiffer and the headset is cleaner. It comes with a bottom bracket installed. The extra wheel clearance is nice. If I could order again I would ack for no mounting screws on the fork. I did request no BXT logo on the down tube, but I like the look of all the other logos. If you have any questions reply.

how much chainring room is there? Would a 46t fit?

Quote from: Shin56 on June 12, 2026, 01:39:51 PM
Im currently using 45mm pathfinders on 32mm internal rim width, i tried taking some pics for you to the best of my ability but imo the limiting factor is the clearance on down triangle arms not the pivot mechanism. The wheels im using are elitewheels gravel aero+.

The attached pictures are:
-clearance from pivot mechanism arm
- clearance from down tube on rear triangle(non drive side)
- Pic for visual clearance
- total tire width

so based on 8mm clearance for 45.5 as measured, then 53mm as measured should fit with a standard 4mm of clearance?

Quote from: bikepacker_dude on December 27, 2025, 02:23:49 PM
It seems tighter down the tube than on top. Lightcarbon has responded and they are sending me a new seatpost with slightly larger diameter.
I have built the bike now and done two test rides, both with original seatpost and Canyon Ergon seatpost and it doesn't seem to slip.

Here are some photos of the bike

can you post photos of the rear tire fitment? I'm seeing conflicting reports of 50mm width tires clearing the pivot mechanism and I'm wondering if wider internal rims allow the tire profile to be lower and thus improve clearance.