assisting force af03. the actual tire clearence of af03 under iso+6mm standard is front53 rear48

it's a bit funny you get stack/reach from size to size more like a traditional mtb than a proper dropbar gravel.
你弯把瓜搞一个和山地xc一样的沿着尺码光动前伸不动堆高是何意味呢？弯把车尺码是这样设计的吗？

Quote from: frewster on August 26, 2026, 09:17:03 AM
I tried looking up pricing on NOSIG the last time you mentioned it but cannot find anywhere selling the wheels. The NOSIG website lists an absurd price of $9999. They're interesting, but they seem impossible to buy.

Maybe try straight contacting them on ig(name nosig_official )? the website is still under development afaik, sorry for that......

Quote from: BadIdeasMakeGoodStories on April 11, 2026, 06:25:08 AM
A flyxii FE-02 will fit 53 WAM tires with 2x SRAM and even more clearance on GRX, where chainstays become the issue. Wicked cheap, too.

flyxii fe-02(which is just flybike fm616 which is even older than cfr696 which is flybike fm696, all of which including af01 came from the same flybike factory from different eras and with different performances) comes with a 435mm CS, AF01 comes with a 425mm CS. 2x front derailleur issue & chainring size issue only occur when CS is short enough which old long & dumber framesets didn't have to care about.

Quote from: Hazardman_69 on August 21, 2026, 05:41:36 PM
Personally I wish manufacturers would focus less on massive internals and more on increasing the external width and the thickness of the rim lip. Something like the new newmen streem g.62 or duke sierra aera w48 that have thick lips which would surely handle rim impacts better. I'm not sure on the impact of wider lips on pinch flats but maybe it will also help there? Just my 2 cents.

Wider lips do help on preventing pinch flats, more or less confirmed during development of rim profiles I designed. The main conflict is, thick side lips result in heavier rims which is okay for full wheelset products from bespoke brands but do affect figures of the rims when being sold alone, and not every supplier in xiamen provide the capability of manufacturing rims with lightweight fillings in sidewall.

I know this might sound like self‑promotion, but feel free to check out the NOSIG gravel wheelsets I designed if you're interested. ps thick side lips helps a lot on aerodynamics also, at least in cfd i ran

I designed the rim profile of NOSIG HW-X gravel wheels and Voicevelo GA5450(They share the same profile but uses different carbon layups to accommodate different spokes system). the front profile is 30mm iw hookless & 44mm ow (with a 43mm ow at the hooks) 54mm deep. We use special layups to get a 6.5mm platform on either side of the hook to maximize aero performance & reduce tire crackings. You may choose same profile for front&rear or a 38mm ow 50mm deep lighter rim on the rear(just like standard voicevelo ones)

So far I think the profile is still one of the best on market. On NOSIG wheelsets Daan Soete just won the BK gravel 2026 in front of WVA last week and got 7th on Unbound 200 earlier this year.

build finished , size XL full weight with pedals & mounts & some bolts 7.64kg
red xplr with force cassette
35c michelin pro5
Quite happy with the ride

Received my size XL frameset at last, would finish build this weekend.
Frame only 1037g without hanger/seatpost clamp, fork 444g.
Carbonda team have done all they can on the livery so a big thankyou to them.

Quote from: acwj8rwh on December 08, 2025, 03:34:55 PM
Did my first ride today (~72km) and I'm really happy with the result. It's comfortable, has lots of grip and is feels quick.
But I don't have any data to back that up. I simply believe the latest research which shows that...

• wider tires reduce rolling resistance
• increasing comfort through greater air volume as suspension minimizes rider fatigue

And all of that without compromising performance.

The widths match quite nice according the 105%-rule (42mm outer rim width; 39.5mm tire width).

The Michelin Pro 5 tires have an unmounted tread width of 45mm, which is even more than the Pirelli P Zero 40-622 at 42mm. This means that even when stretched, the risk of running off the tread is reduced.

---

Regarding ETRTO compliance: I don't really like the concept of regulatory documents being behind a paywall. Additionally, it seems that bicycle tire standards are outdated and not up to current requirements. The complexity also exceeds that of car/motorcycle tire standards. While ETRTO is indeed a technical institution with regulatory purposes and its importance is highly regarded in various forums, threads, and Reddit discussions, this apparently doesn't tell the whole story.

This article provides valuable insights: https://www.cyclingweekly.com/products/will-the-adoption-of-tubeless-technology-finally-force-wheel-and-tyre-brands-to-get-friendly

The most prominent example of deviating from ETRTO standards is SRAM/Zipp. They allow a 40mm tire on their 303 XPLR wheels  (32mm inner width rim) through their 'dual testing' approach, far from ETRTO standards.

zipp gravel tires are vastly different from normal standard tires on thread width, puncture belt and full bead width. They don't allow just any 40mm tire on their xplr wheels but only their dedicated tires. Using normal 40mm tires on 32mm+ iw wheels is mostly okay in tests (yeah they won't get rip off anyway) but they balloon up too much (meaning the badged spec useless and aero penalties) and the cross section layout would be sub-optimal from the tires' original design which results in RR penalties.

Quote from: pinkyyto on December 10, 2025, 04:59:31 AM
Thanks for the clarification! This and the lightcarbon is on my shortlist. If you have completed the build please share the feedback about ride quality. Also, how easy was the build? The original spec sheet said that it only supported a one-by groupset. This one shows a FD mount? So can we install a FD on there?

FD mount have been added back on production versions. sram wide FD/shimano grx FD only though, you may have test if a normal road Cl FD would work(esp. check if the road chainring fits in without interference against chainstay)

Quote from: motaro1989 on December 07, 2025, 05:32:31 PM
My frame has arrived and so far I'm really happy with it. Both the frame and fork look premium in person.
The packaging was basic, but that's not a big deal.

The frame has internal cable guides near the frame-storage area. Entry and exit points of those guides aren't accessible so I'm not sure how to route the cables through them when i won't have the guide tubes.

The bolts aren't attracted by a magnet, so they're probably aluminum or titanium. I'm not sure how to tell.

For some reason the photos don't show the UD carbon finish properly - it definitely isn't just plain black gloss like it appears. On the website they managed to capture it better. Through the clear coat you can see the carbon joins, and in my opinion it looks cool. I'm sure it will look even better outdoors.

A much brighter light source directly to the surface would show the ud finish more clearly, you need a lot of light to let the carbon fibers reflect themselves.

Quote from: maettu99 on December 05, 2025, 05:52:30 AM
Do you know why they changed the seat tube lenght later? In the first geometry charts the seat tube was already short but now it's even shorter which makes no sense because it limits the space in the frame triangle which is not ideal for bikepacking. Ultra short seat tubes are more a thing if using long travel dropper posts. But on a gravel bike? Do I miss somerhing?
Hope you will get your frame soon!

the actual seattube length has never changed during the entire design phase. For some reason they mistaked few of the geo data with those of other things when releasing the geo publicly for the first time.
the main target is to get maximized comfort and full compatibility with drop posts through all size range. yes in some way you are right. it does have affects on frame bags though, i'm working on a full customized fidlock frame bag on that.

Quote from: Motosato on December 03, 2025, 02:45:31 PM
I ordered a XL frame in July also, but did not yet got picture of a finished frame yet. Unfortunately, two weeks ago, they mentioned a paint issue and needed to rebuild the complete frame because of sand particles on the surface. Despite of this issue and because of the fact that they are in the series production ramp-up phase (issues like that are daily business in the composite production environment - until a certain series prod quality is reached), I still think they do a great job and look foreward to get the new frame.

I designed a custom livery for my xl and one very special color in it(actually a high-vis reflecting layer like the ones on traffic signs for some small areas of the frame) became a super big issue so the proccess has been stuck on getting a right paint for that part for a very long time. I've seen the other colors ready on the frame without trouble already and the livery comes in a good shape mostly.If it goes well the frame would be ready about next week,but still donno.
I was alongside in the developement of this frame and contribute a little to the whole project so actually my frame went into order pretty earlier than most, but it's just that paint i choosed hampered it.

Quote from: motaro1989 on November 13, 2025, 08:53:37 AM
Mine is finished. I love the UD carbon paint, but on some images it looks like plain gloss black paint. I guess it depends on the lighting.

Anyone knows what exactly is this seatstay brace for? I'm hoping it's not structural and it can be removed?

it's just a removeable universal bolt mount(for fenders/racks), same design just as on cfr707 and some other framesets so no worry. With this you can have the original mounts on the upper seatstay facing downward and invisible when not in use.

mine delayed to about mid-November, waiting for the livery to be done. Should be the first size xl i guess...