Has anyone tried Ryet's new Aircode 2 yet? The nose is now more rounded, and they've also fixed the side Honeycomb surface that was so hard on bib shorts with the Aircode T40A/B.
The question is what the front section will be like, as it still has the Honeycomb surface — whether it will be like sandpaper on bib shorts or not. In any case, they now also offer a version with conventional foam padding.

Tested it today. I have an alloy ThinkRider crankset with a power meter, measuring approximately 147 mm Q-factor. When I put Shimano R8100 46/36 chainrings on it, the small chainring almost touches the frame. With a +2 mm spacer on the DS, there is a comfortable amount of clearance, but I think +1 mm should also be fine.

These Chinese cranks have splines on the end of the spindle where the NDS crank arm is mounted that are about 5 mm longer than Shimano's, so it should be safe even if the NDS crank arm is not pushed all the way in. They also don't have the safety pin found on Shimano cranks.

The geometry is almost identical to the Spcycle G028, but the details of the shape are slightly different. I think there is no reason to choose the G028 now that the FM376 exists, with much better QC and overall quality. Unfortunately, it's too late for me, as I've already ordered the G028   

It is Winow WR054
https://chinertown.com/index.php/topic,5022.msg103370.html#msg103370

I've been riding it for more than a year. The frame is very well made, but overall setup is simply too heavy. The geometry is similar to the Factor One, with a steep seat tube angle that puts the saddle in a very forward position. I described all of this in the Winow thread.

Quote from: nebula2 on July 11, 2026, 07:24:18 AM
So ive just checked my bibs after a few months of riding the ryet aircode 3d printed saddle, and they have been cheesegrater'd pretty badly which is a shame as i really like the saddles. It is more pronounced on my winter bibs which are a thicker material.

Do people have better results with the t40 version? Otherwise i might just go back to my pro stealth

It's similar on the T40. The photos are a few posts above. The issue is the honeycomb pattern on the sides and in the middle.

Quote from: xcelrec on June 18, 2026, 06:02:10 AM
Apparently this is the new geometry. 

I think the reach in size "L" is still off. It should be something like 398 mm.

Quote from: oker_s on June 12, 2026, 09:17:42 AM
i have problems with the t40. It deforms at the side and is damaging my bibs...

I have the same saddle and checked my bib shorts. The amount of wear depends on the type of fabric. On some bib shorts there is no visible wear at all, while on others—like in the picture—it is more noticeable. This is after about 800 km of riding.

Last year I switched to waxing my chain and used a single Shimano 12‑speed quick link for the entire season. I reconnected/disconnected it around 30 times without any issues—no failures, even under sprint loads.

I think that FM336 hase too roadish geometry and there may be problem with significant toe overlap if you have larger feet, use modern rearward cleat position and run 45-50mm tires.
FM316/326 are much longer.

Quote from: veritasdocet on February 03, 2026, 08:07:08 PM
Are you still positive about this after more riding? Would you say the angle is really that steep?

I had to get used to the modern, more forward riding position, and after about two months it felt fine. I adjusted all my bikes that way. However, this size L frame is simply too short for my height (186cm/90cm), even with a 120 mm stem, and there is also significant toe overlap.
As for the ride behaviour, it is very stiff and responsive, but definitely not a comfortable bike (I ride it with 65 mm high carbon wheels with carbon spokes).
I plan to buy the Mondince aero frame FM126 in size 58 once it becomes available.

Though I deduced the issue with the light front wheel myself, because in show #154 they tested the Factor One with the new lightweight Black Inc carbon-spoke wheelset, and the behavior Jesse described was exactly the same as with my XMCS wheels.

But here's the funny thing: I have a Winow WR054 bike with that crazy 6.5 cm wide fork, very similar to the Factor One. Maybe the wide fork is also a cause of this unstable behavior.

Quote from: Sakizashi on January 04, 2026, 01:01:48 PM
The idea that 100g off a set of wheels is significant enough to affect their handling seems implausible. More likely, the shape of these rims or the geometry of your bike is the reason why riding deep wheels in crosswinds is hard for you.

Crosswind instability arises from a sudden pressure difference between the wheel's two sides as the wheel enters a stall. Once in motion, a heavier wheel would have more torque-induced precision, not less. Looking at the wheel in isolation, a wobble induced by a stall would be worse with a heavier wheel and better with a lighter one. Meanwhile, if the effect is one of system inertia, the mass of the wheel is inconsequential in relation to the mass of the system.

I would love to understand where the Nero guys, Joe, or whoever started talking about light wheels being less crosswind-stable just because they were lighter got the idea from. It doesn't make sense to me that it would be significant.

Quote from: IL_EH_75 on January 02, 2026, 01:05:41 PM
Hi.

I would.like to know if someone feel any speed wooble with Xiamen carbon speed with depth bigger than 50mm when descending straight with crosswind or sidewind and speed more than 50-60kmh. Lets said how they feel with such conditions.

It depends. I can describe my own experience.

I have D65CU-33 T1100 rims, 20/20H, with 5 mm carbon spokes. With no wind, everything is fine and the wheels are super fast, but you still have to be careful when larger cars pass you at high speed.

In windy conditions, you still need to make small corrections. In strong winds, it is not possible to ride with these wheels.

The problem is that the front wheel is simply too light and has too much surface area exposed to the wind. This issue with ultra-light, high-profile wheels has also been discussed on The Nero Show, if you know it.

My solution is to keep enough weight on the front wheel, have strong arms, and stay focused while riding. After a few months, you get used to making constant steering corrections, and eventually you don't even notice it anymore.

My weight is 80 kg.

I think it is because of the Q-factor. Shimano 12-speed chainrings have a different Q-factor (+2 mm) compared to Shimano 11-speed. Because of this, you need to add a washer. Pass Quest makes their chainrings universal for 11/12-speed, but the Q-factor matches the 11-speed Shimano chainrings. I added a 1 mm washer because the FD-8150 front derailleur does not have enough adjustment range.

Thanks for the link. I put the numbers into the calculator and it looks OK. For a 172.5 mm crank and MF326 frame, spindle-to-ground is 95.5 mm with a 32 mm tire and 108.5 mm with a 45 mm tire.
My cyclocross bike has 113 mm (33 mm CX tire) and my road bike has 97 mm (25 mm tire).

Quote from: hunker on December 29, 2025, 10:03:16 AM
Hi! You can check 'Pedal Spindle to Ground Clearance' and 'Bottom Bracket Height' parameters here https://bikeinsights.com/compare?geometries=6903c6ae07e4a3001a6c0175,6903c6ae07e4a3001a6c0175,&builds=,6952a53757482e001a4890bb,

Is the ground clearance really that low? I am using 172,5mm cranks and plan to use this frame not only with gravel tires but also with road tires (32mm nominal, approx. 34mm measured in reality)  Has anyone measured the height from the ground to the center of bottom bracket? And of course, what is tire high that you using.
Thanks Václav