Author Topic: Velobuild VB-R-168 Frame  (Read 269252 times)

Zoc

Re: Velobuild VB-R-168 Frame
« Reply #165 on: June 22, 2021, 08:26:56 AM »
I would go with 54 and the shortest stem available
it has a very race oriented geometry stack to reach 1,34 for 52 cm and 1,37 für the 54 cm frame

with the bigger frame you also won't have such a big difference from the saddle to the handlebar which i would prefer

vasnd

Re: Velobuild VB-R-168 Frame
« Reply #166 on: June 22, 2021, 10:15:36 AM »
I've got almost the same measurements (81 inseam & 169cm) and wouldn't even consider the 54. 52 only because of higher stack compared to 49, but I'd still need spacers and relatively short riser stem. Don't know about your flexibility and reach, but 54 doesn't sound right..

braincore

Re: Velobuild VB-R-168 Frame
« Reply #167 on: June 22, 2021, 12:45:00 PM »
I'm not sure if I should change the size I ordered. I'm 171 cm tall and 80cm inseam.

Velobuild recommend me size 52 and 400/90 handlebar.
Specialized size calculator recommend me 54 size that comes with 420/100 handlebar.

What size would you choose?

I'm 173cm / 81cm. The Specialized bike sizing questionnaire (https://www.specialized.com/us/en/bike-sizing/app#/?mpl=187108) recommended S (52) for me, but it also includes knee to floor height. I'd trust that over their rough sizing table that puts 170 in between a S and M.

I just finished my build yesterday and, while I haven't been on a long ride with it yet, I'm pretty sure I'm going to be happy I went with a small + 420/110.
« Last Edit: June 22, 2021, 05:59:27 PM by braincore »

OlieSimpson

Re: Velobuild VB-R-168 Frame
« Reply #168 on: June 23, 2021, 01:28:26 AM »
    Sounds like there are a few of us in the same boat. I'm 170cm with 80cm inseam and am debating between the 49 and the 52 VB-R-168. Both of which I would get with a 400/90 bar stem combo.

    I prefer the reach of the 49 but the stack is super low and I don't think it would be very comfortable, so will most likely opt for the 52 if I choose the 168 and hope it doesn't feel too stretched out. If only they did an 80mm stem option then the 52 would be perfect!

    I much prefer the look of the 168, but the reach and stack numbers of the VB-R-099 in a 49 size would actually fit me better than either the 49 or 52cm 168. The rational choice would be the VB-R-099 in a 49, just a shame that the 168 is a nicer looking bike in my opinion.

    Is anyone able to confirm the following figures which will help determine overall reach for both the VB-R-099 and VB-R-168.

    • What is the seat-post offset on both frames (from the pics the 099 looks to have more of an offset than the 168)
    • Both bars look to have a forward sweep (similar to the Vision Metron 5D bars), are the sweeps the same for both bars or are they different to each other i.e. is the reach longer on the 099 bars vs the 168?
  • I'm also curious to know if the bar sweep is more of an illusion if that makes sense, in that the reach is the same as a normal 'straight' bar, and that the only thing that is different is the space around where the hoods sit

Zoc

Re: Velobuild VB-R-168 Frame
« Reply #169 on: June 23, 2021, 02:39:46 AM »
the sweep is 2-3 cm vor the VB-R-168

that's the only thing i don't like on the bike
if i grab right next to the stem it fits perfect,
but most of the time i grab the handlebar at the breaks and than it's to long :(

vasnd

Re: Velobuild VB-R-168 Frame
« Reply #170 on: June 23, 2021, 03:38:03 AM »
    Sounds like there are a few of us in the same boat. I'm 170cm with 80cm inseam and am debating between the 49 and the 52 VB-R-168. Both of which I would get with a 400/90 bar stem combo.

    I prefer the reach of the 49 but the stack is super low and I don't think it would be very comfortable, so will most likely opt for the 52 if I choose the 168 and hope it doesn't feel too stretched out. If only they did an 80mm stem option then the 52 would be perfect!

    I much prefer the look of the 168, but the reach and stack numbers of the VB-R-099 in a 49 size would actually fit me better than either the 49 or 52cm 168. The rational choice would be the VB-R-099 in a 49, just a shame that the 168 is a nicer looking bike in my opinion.

    Is anyone able to confirm the following figures which will help determine overall reach for both the VB-R-099 and VB-R-168.

    • What is the seat-post offset on both frames (from the pics the 099 looks to have more of an offset than the 168)
    • Both bars look to have a forward sweep (similar to the Vision Metron 5D bars), are the sweeps the same for both bars or are they different to each other i.e. is the reach longer on the 099 bars vs the 168?
  • I'm also curious to know if the bar sweep is more of an illusion if that makes sense, in that the reach is the same as a normal 'straight' bar, and that the only thing that is different is the space around where the hoods sit
I'm planning to swap the headset for a FSA ACR headset and put a stem and bar of my choice on (probably not an integrated cockpit because I would need 80mm)

Valdes

Re: Velobuild VB-R-168 Frame
« Reply #171 on: June 23, 2021, 08:37:02 AM »
Thanks for the info! I asked in a Tarmac SL7 forum and some owners of the original Tarmac with similar measures said that they are happy with their 52s. So at the moment I think i will keep the size 52 with 400/90 handlebar.

OlieSimpson

Re: Velobuild VB-R-168 Frame
« Reply #172 on: June 23, 2021, 08:37:23 AM »
I'm planning to swap the headset for a FSA ACR headset and put a stem and bar of my choice on (probably not an integrated cockpit because I would need 80mm)

Super interested to hear how you get on with this! Have you already got your frame and are in the process of building or are you waiting for your order?

I've just had a quick look and the official FSA ACR stems come in as short as 70mm so this could be an option (https://shop.fullspeedahead.com/en/type/stems/stems/road-gravel/ns-acr-stem). If you buy the full ACR set-up (headset, stem and bar) it would cost almost as much as the frame  ::)

braincore

Re: Velobuild VB-R-168 Frame
« Reply #173 on: June 23, 2021, 12:19:21 PM »
Here's my build! Just a plain black matte because I was already over budget with the 105 R7020 groupset :) It's my first ever build but because of all the redos from self-inflicted errors it feels like I've built three bikes already. Rides great (especially compared to the commuter bike it replaced) though I think the headset bearings are loose.



Great resources:
- All of you here
- Niels and his blog: https://roadmeister.cc
- Free To Cycle YouTube channel: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCyyUYmKcskySTZh6Cf2blhg
- GCN & Park Tool YouTube videos.

Chris + Velobuild were great at being responsive and answering questions (pre & post sale), but there were a few issues:
- I think we'd all appreciate timeline transparency and realistic estimates. Waiting for months is a part of the process, but they don't have to obscure what's going on.
- My VB wheels ruptured dangerously. I've since purchased ICAN wheels.
- Chris & VB have gone radio silent after my VB wheels ruptured.
- The weight of the frame was incorrect. For a size 52/S, it's actually 1100g for the frame, 473g for the fork, and 244g for the seat post. They had said: "Frame 168 M about 1000g ,fork 400g ,seat post 180g ."

OlieSimpson

Re: Velobuild VB-R-168 Frame
« Reply #174 on: June 23, 2021, 12:44:39 PM »
Here's my build! Just a plain black matte because I was already over budget with the 105 R7020 groupset :) It's my first ever build but because of all the redos from self-inflicted errors it feels like I've built three bikes already. Rides great (especially compared to the commuter bike it replaced) though I think the headset bearings are loose.



Great resources:
- All of you here
- Niels and his blog: https://roadmeister.cc
- Free To Cycle YouTube channel: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCyyUYmKcskySTZh6Cf2blhg
- GCN & Park Tool YouTube videos.

Chris + Velobuild were great at being responsive and answering questions (pre & post sale), but there were a few issues:
- I think we'd all appreciate timeline transparency and realistic estimates. Waiting for months is a part of the process, but they don't have to obscure what's going on.
- My VB wheels ruptured dangerously. I've since purchased ICAN wheels.
- Chris & VB have gone radio silent after my VB wheels ruptured.
- The weight of the frame was incorrect. For a size 52/S, it's actually 1100g for the frame, 473g for the fork, and 244g for the seat post. They had said: "Frame 168 M about 1000g ,fork 400g ,seat post 180g ."

Looks lovely!

Could you elaborate on the issues you faced when building it up?

If you don't mind me asking, how tall are you and what width bar/length of stem did you go for? Does it feel comfortable to ride, not too stretched out?

adriaanm

Re: Velobuild VB-R-168 Frame
« Reply #175 on: June 23, 2021, 01:35:50 PM »
I think the headset bearings are loose
For one potential solution, search the forum for “micro spacers”. They create space for the spacers to compress the bearings before hitting the frame.

1Sigma

Re: Velobuild VB-R-168 Frame
« Reply #176 on: June 23, 2021, 02:39:15 PM »
Order is in for the R-168 in 56.
I am 188cm, 86 inseam

Breakdown
Frame: $479
2 colours:Chameleon Paint + 1 other colour = $80
Decals (top tube, down tube, head tube, seat tube) = $30
Hoping the the weight is under 2kg . We'll see...

Communication with Chris was great. 
Only hiccup was payment.  Their bank is DBS, but they use an HSBC SWIFT, which resulted in an initial rejection.
« Last Edit: June 23, 2021, 02:59:32 PM by MIC2025 »
Better than average - Extra Average

braincore

Re: Velobuild VB-R-168 Frame
« Reply #177 on: June 23, 2021, 02:51:37 PM »
Could you elaborate on the issues you faced when building it up?

If you don't mind me asking, how tall are you and what width bar/length of stem did you go for? Does it feel comfortable to ride, not too stretched out?

I haven't ridden it enough (no 50+ milers yet) to tell you confidently that I did the sizing right. I commented a few posts ago, but I'm 173cm / 81cm. I'm pretty certain that going with a 52 (S) was the right choice. The effective top tube length is more like a 53 anyway. I was previously riding a size 56 (hand-me-down from a friend) 27lbs 3-speed commuter bike so there's a very low bar to feeling happy with the fit of this bike. My concern was mainly that the 56 has never felt too uncomfortable so dropping two sizes might cause more problems than it's worth (don't fix what isn't broken).

I chose 420/110 as the bar/bracket length primarily because that was the measurement of my commuter bike. But, that isn't a very sound way to make the decision when you're dropping two sizes. First, I figured I should keep the bracket long (110mm+) given that the top tube (TT) is shortening. Also, since the TT is shortening, I considered narrower bars to achieve the equivalent shoulder-width position. Unfortunately, since there isn't a 400/110, the 420/110 was still my best bet.

I also got a 165mm crank arm instead of the usual 172.5mm+. I'm more of a runner than a cyclist and after hard runs my knees would be extra sensitive to the lever action of cycling. I'm hoping this works out.

As for my self-inflicted issues:

- I got the wrong size barb for my hydraulic hoses (I asked for barbs and my LBS gave me some without asking about sizing) which made insertion super difficult. Eventually, I had to replace my hoses, barbs (BH90), and olives to do it right.
- I didn't know that shift cables needed special housing even with internal cabling. After my build, I realized the rear shifting wasn't going to work right, and I had to do the cabling over.
- I bled the rear brakes incorrectly. You need to make sure the bike is rotated upwards to compensate for the bottom-bracket being the natural lowest point on the bike. That way, air bubbles can propagate upwards without hindrance.
- I bled the front brakes incorrectly so they're mushy. I need to redo it once I get more fluid. I'm not brave enough to use J&J mineral oil from the supermarket.
- I squeezed the brakes (to test the feel) after bleeding the brakes (but before adding the rotors) which gets the pistons stuck in the closed position. It's a simple fix, but for a while I thought I had made a serious error.
- It took me a while to focus on indexing the rear derailleur rather than the futile process of maxing out the H/L limit screws.
- I didn't realize that the chain will inevitably rub against the 105 front derailleur skid plates. It was clearly impossible to avoid the rubbing, but everything I had read assumed the absence of skid plates and assured me there should be no contact when adjusted correctly.

That's just off the top of my head :)
« Last Edit: June 23, 2021, 02:54:27 PM by braincore »

vasnd

Re: Velobuild VB-R-168 Frame
« Reply #178 on: June 23, 2021, 05:51:07 PM »
Super interested to hear how you get on with this! Have you already got your frame and are in the process of building or are you waiting for your order?

I've just had a quick look and the official FSA ACR stems come in as short as 70mm so this could be an option (https://shop.fullspeedahead.com/en/type/stems/stems/road-gravel/ns-acr-stem). If you buy the full ACR set-up (headset, stem and bar) it would cost almost as much as the frame  ::)
Still waiting for the order to ship.
Sadly there's not an awful lot of choice in regular stem/bars with internal cable management

Nickk2000

Re: Velobuild VB-R-168 Frame
« Reply #179 on: June 23, 2021, 10:02:15 PM »
Here's my build! Just a plain black matte because I was already over budget with the 105 R7020 groupset :) It's my first ever build but because of all the redos from self-inflicted errors it feels like I've built three bikes already. Rides great (especially compared to the commuter bike it replaced) though I think the headset bearings are loose.



Great resources:
- All of you here
- Niels and his blog: https://roadmeister.cc
- Free To Cycle YouTube channel: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCyyUYmKcskySTZh6Cf2blhg
- GCN & Park Tool YouTube videos.

Chris + Velobuild were great at being responsive and answering questions (pre & post sale), but there were a few issues:
- I think we'd all appreciate timeline transparency and realistic estimates. Waiting for months is a part of the process, but they don't have to obscure what's going on.
- My VB wheels ruptured dangerously. I've since purchased ICAN wheels.
- Chris & VB have gone radio silent after my VB wheels ruptured.
- The weight of the frame was incorrect. For a size 52/S, it's actually 1100g for the frame, 473g for the fork, and 244g for the seat post. They had said: "Frame 168 M about 1000g ,fork 400g ,seat post 180g ."


Please please please dont clamp the seat tube! Lol

How much does the bike weigh with pedals? I habe the dengfu r12 with force etap and farsports 50 classics, i think its 19.2 with pedals. Wheels were 1650g so that attributes a bit of extra weight. that and a 61 cm frame
« Last Edit: June 23, 2021, 10:04:43 PM by Nickk2000 »