Quote from: BigMold on October 05, 2025, 01:18:32 PM
Hello
since some of you guys will be receiving their frames in the near future I would appreciate it if you could post pictures specifically of the frame's front end, the headset cover and stem situation and how it looks when you slam the stem as much as possible with either of the covers they send with the frame.
I'm interested in the frame because I'm looking for a long reach frame but as it stands I would need size 58 in reach and size 55 in stack. The 58 with a stack of 591 is at least 20 mm too tall but maybe I can make it work with a -17° stem, from looking at the pictures I'm just not sure how many spacers you need to add between headset cover and stem because you surely can't slam the stem on there.

i´m in the same place as you. I would need 20 mm less stack than the XL size so i am still thinking what would be the smallest spacer needed and if something like the ridley noah spacer or even thinner would be possible to make 3d printed so that we have the minimum stack possible

Cost-Reach-Stack
Pick two

Quote from: Pistonbroke on October 05, 2025, 03:02:10 PM
Cost-Reach-Stack
Pick two

I think i could have all of them running a -17 stem and the thinnest headset cover possible 

Quote from: Finiesta on October 05, 2025, 03:05:35 PM
I think i could have all of them running a -17 stem and the thinnest headset cover possible 

Happy days!
I guess we will find out soon....

Quote from: Finiesta on October 05, 2025, 03:05:35 PM
I think i could have all of them running a -17 stem and the thinnest headset cover possible 

Why not just throw on a longer stem on the smaller size? It'll be a bit extra weight, but that's more or less it. A lot of racers do that here in flat Denmark where aero is king and weight is next to meaningless. Stems of 170-190mm are not uncommon. Personally running a 170mm and no issues with handling. The bigger problem is usually getting your saddle forward enough on most bikes for a proper aggressive position.

Quote from: mtm on October 05, 2025, 03:15:21 PM
Why not just throw on a longer stem on the smaller size? It'll be a bit extra weight, but that's more or less it. A lot of racers do that here in flat Denmark where aero is king and weight is next to meaningless. Stems of 170-190mm are not uncommon. Personally running a 170mm and no issues with handling. The bigger problem is usually getting your saddle forward enough on most bikes for a proper aggressive position.

I have also tried longer stems on my current bike but i want to try how it feels longer reach bike and the bigger BB drop that this frame has and maybe i will try to go even longer for a tt style position. I will go with the saddle forward within the 5 cm rule, 165 mm cranks  and i am also searching for a 110 to 120 mm reach handlebar to have stability and comfort when going aero.

Quote from: mtm on October 05, 2025, 03:15:21 PM
Why not just throw on a longer stem on the smaller size? It'll be a bit extra weight, but that's more or less it. A lot of racers do that here in flat Denmark where aero is king and weight is next to meaningless. Stems of 170-190mm are not uncommon. Personally running a 170mm and no issues with handling. The bigger problem is usually getting your saddle forward enough on most bikes for a proper aggressive position.

As you say you live in flatland. A setup like you suggest would absolutely destroy your centre of mass on steep descents, which are common enough for me that it has to be considered.

Hadn't seen this one before... Although it's probably in this thread

Quote from: Pistonbroke on October 08, 2025, 11:29:43 AM


Hadn't seen this one before... Although it's probably in this thread

It needs a deeper fork

You may be right, but these guys forks aren't crazy deep...

Quote from: Pistonbroke on October 08, 2025, 11:29:43 AM


Hadn't seen this one before... Although it's probably in this thread

Wait why this one has different seatpost?? Is the seatpost shipping with the frame this one or the TT style one?
Also in my view it looks amazing but i agree it would be even better with deeper fork.

Quote from: Pistonbroke on October 08, 2025, 11:38:16 AM
You may be right, but these guys forks aren't crazy deep...

That's true. But I mean purely for the looks. When your seatpost is twice as deep as your fork it just looks weird in my opinion

Now that I see it built up in a full bike, yeah it really should have a deeper fork, aesthetically. Though I don't like that seatpost. If that's the new standard, I'm no longer interested

Aerodynamically, a deeper fork isn't an automatic win. Being deeper means more surface friction drag and there is a point of diminishing returns in regards to performance at yaw. Obviously, that's not what VB were looking at when designing this, but I feel like it could use another cm of depth, for looks

Where did you source the photo of the velobuild?
When I first saw the picture it said it was ChatGPT generated (ie. wheels and groupset). Not sure if that is true or not.