Debating between some frames, please advise

[RudolfSP]

So want to build my first chiner, i built up my motobecane aluminum frame and now i want a bit more travel. Currently at 140F/100R.

Trail options - worried that 130 rear would not be enough travel.
ICAN P1 - very interesting but seems a bit outdated GEO
LCFS958 - really like this, but concerned about the rear shock options. seems like a rare/odd size.

Enduro - 150 rear travel
P9 - outdated GEO but fairly priced
LCFS947 - by far my favorite thus far, but i will need to get a bigger fork. currently running a Marzocchi bomber Z2 2020, max travel 150
AM831 - looks interesting but not 100% in love with it.

i ride mainly local trails and will start going to a lift access bike park next season doing mainly blues and greens with an occasional black diamond. just got into this sport and driving my wife insane. so my goal is to find the best middle ground for trail & downhill riding.

thank you all!

[casual_build]

Personally, I am waiting on this thirsty monster:
https://www.carbonda.com/news/136.html

[RudolfSP]

Personally, I am waiting on this thirsty monster:
https://www.carbonda.com/news/136.html

that does look interesting, any idea what the travel would be? i dont see anything regarding that, but id imagine 150 rear...

[casual_build]

that does look interesting, any idea what the travel would be? i dont see anything regarding that, but id imagine 150 rear...

180 in both the front and rear!

This semi-recent frame is also worth considering: https://www.carbonda.com/mountain/full-suspension/134.html
I've rode the FM936 for the last year and I am not interested in vertical rear shocks anymore.

[ESC]

I've rode the FM936 for the last year and I am not interested in vertical rear shocks anymore.

Hi Casual,

Would you mind elaborating why? The last bike I owned with a vertical shock was amazing (knolly chilcotin) but that was before 26” wheels died.

[endo.alley]

Pivot has gone to vertical shock similar to the Turner rear end. LCFS947 looks good except that on the medium (my size) you have to run a fairly short dropper post.

[SVChucko]

What is it about the P9 geometry you don't like?

If you're looking for short chainstays, Tideace/Haideli FS830 (a.k.a Top-Fire M930 https://www.top-fire.com/29er-full-suspension-enduro-carbon-mtb-frame_p21.html ) at 431mm is the shortest 29er in that travel class. Next best is the FS831 at 433mm.

I've been eyeing the LCFS947 myself, there's a lot to like about the specs, other than the short seat tube depth. It also has shortish chainstays at 435mm.

[endo.alley]

What is it about the P9 geometry you don't like?

I had a P9 for a while and liked it quite a bit. I wound up selling it to a co worker and buying an IBIS Ripley. Now I am in the market for a slightly longer travel AM bike for gnarlier terrain. I am in no hurry though. The FM1002/1166 seems to be the best of the bunch for what I am looking for. The P9 was really pretty out front for its time when it first came out. But the 73 degree seat tube angle really feels dated after coming off my Ripley. And for an AM bike, 66 degree head angle, which for me seemed like it may have been slightly steeper in reality, seems a little steep for modern standards. If the P9 was upgraded with a slightly steeper seat angle and slightly more relaxed head tube angle (maybe 76 degrees/65 degrees respectively) it would be a back as a big winner. I keep hoping that the guys designing these direct sales frames will come up with a mid travel DW Link in the likes of an IBIS Ripmo or PIVOT Swithchblade style bike.

[StefanB]

I have built or am building three of the bikes on your list. First i built the LCFS958, then the LCFS947 and now I am busy building the AM831.

When I am finished with the AM831 I will sell one of the three, two bikes is enough. But it will be a hard choice to make.

The LCFS958 is quick, a good climber, comfortable on lock rides, works well on descends and it feels very easy to handle in all cases.

The LCFS947 is a monster on descends, everything fells possible and not dangerous. On slow, technical, rocky climbs it conquers everything. Its a bike I prefer when i know its going to be more technical than fast rides.

The AM831 is 3 centimeters longer than the LCFS947 :-o  What that mean when its time to ride it I don't know yet. Maybe its even more of the LCFS947 characteristics?

[endo.alley]

What size frames are these? What is the lenth of your dropper on the LS947?

[SVChucko]

I would be concerned about the rear triangle with the LCFS958. Without a pivot, the chainstay/seatstay assembly has to flex throughout the range of travel. Even if the layup is designed to handle that flex, it will bind a little bit. I think I prefer four links, whether they're short a la VPP and DW-Link, or the old school Horst link geometry.

I'm interested in the LCFS947 because it uses the same size shock as the FS10 I have on order, and the fork I bought for the FS10 can be adjusted to 160mm. It will take up to a 29" x 2.6" tire as well, more than most frames in this class.

[RudolfSP]

I have built or am building three of the bikes on your list. First i built the LCFS958, then the LCFS947 and now I am busy building the AM831.

When I am finished with the AM831 I will sell one of the three, two bikes is enough. But it will be a hard choice to make.

The LCFS958 is quick, a good climber, comfortable on lock rides, works well on descends and it feels very easy to handle in all cases.

The LCFS947 is a monster on descends, everything fells possible and not dangerous. On slow, technical, rocky climbs it conquers everything. Its a bike I prefer when i know its going to be more technical than fast rides.

The AM831 is 3 centimeters longer than the LCFS947 :-o  What that mean when its time to ride it I don't know yet. Maybe its even more of the LCFS947 characteristics?

if you decide to sell the LCFS947, let me know i maybe interested. do you have any complaints or problems you encountered while building or riding the bikes? also, for how long have you had them? how does the LCFS947 climb? Also, if you had to build only one of the of the Light carbon frames, which one would you do?

thanks!

[StefanB]

if you decide to sell the LCFS947, let me know i maybe interested. do you have any complaints or problems you encountered while building or riding the bikes? also, for how long have you had them? how does the LCFS947 climb? Also, if you had to build only one of the of the Light carbon frames, which one would you do?

thanks!

I haven't had any problems with building and riding the bikes. Sometimes I get a squeaking sound from the suspension on the LCFS958 so that I have to tighten the upper bolt holding the shock. They both climb well but I think the LCFS947 with its longer wheelbase and 2.6" tyres is better on really technical, rocky, climbs. But on more normal trail climbs with smaller roots and rocks the LCFS958 is faster.

If i would built one of them again, or recommend to my best friend, it would be the LCFS947.

However I have not ridden the AM831 yet, if its as good as the LCFS947 I could end up with the LCFS958 and AM831, selling the bike that right now is my favorite.

[endo.alley]

What size frame? Nobody will really quantify the dropper post issues this frame has. That is the only thing that would stop me from buying this frame.

[StefanB]

All my bikes is size L and I am 183 cm tall. A 150 mm dropper in the LCFS947 is no problem, maybe even 170 mm could work.