Chinese Carbon fatty - Page 5- Mtbr.com
Page 5 of 21 FirstFirst 12345678915 ... LastLast
Results 801 to 1,000 of 4184
  1. #801
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    519
    how much are these for frame and fork?

  2. #802
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    246
    Quote Originally Posted by joeduda View Post
    how much are these for frame and fork?
    529$ for the fb02 frame and fork

  3. #803
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    519
    Wow, that's a deal, I'm assuming another 4 hundred or so for the right hubs and axles? thanks for the quick response, I got my eye on the borealis deal that was posted and weighing my options.

  4. #804
    mtbr member
    Reputation: brankulo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    1,647
    joe, $529 is what i payed too. there is also shipping charge from china and paypall fee, so total i payed $649 i believe. axles are included as i was told. fatsno hubs can be had for $300 if you get a deal. otherwise $400 seems about right.

  5. #805
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    246
    I was told no axl,was shipped last night.Just have to wait and see

  6. #806
    mtbr member
    Reputation: brankulo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    1,647
    mortenste, i would not bet my arm on the axle, if it doesnt come no big deal. hopefully next frame is mine

  7. #807
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    741
    It will be interesting to see if the ebay axles work on all these frames. Axles are different lengths depending on dropout thickness. As long as an alxe is sufficiently long and is threaded far enough down the axle, it would work with most frames.

    However a frame with unusually thin or dropouts might not work with an axle that has a short threaded area. Similarly, a frame with exceptionally thick dropouts might not work with a short axle. Note, this is referring to the thickness of the frame dropout, not the spacing between the dropouts.

  8. #808
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    519
    Here is the response I got from Justin on the axles

    "Yes we offer the thru axles to match the carbon fat bike frames."

    Has anybody ordered the carbon rims with the frame or has everybody gone the light bicycle route for the rims? I would order the FB01 to get the larger 20" frame but i wish they had a 21". I'm 6-2 and am afraid the 20 may be a bit small.

    The frame, fork and set of rims is 1309 shipped. its a deal for sure, its like getting a free set of carbon rims vs the Borealis deal. That is as long as the quality is there.

  9. #809
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    246
    joeduda hope you have right,because 4 days ago justin told me they don't follow the frame.

  10. #810
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    519
    I saw that, and if you look at his answer it is not a direct answer, he says they "offer" them and then quoted me the total price. I sent another email. thanks.

  11. #811
    mtbr member
    Reputation: davedivided's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    119
    I ordered a headset with my frame. Any tapered headset (For Carbon frame) should work.

  12. #812
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    162
    The FB02 frame shipped came to $650. I ordered a 12x170 and corresponding front axle from ebay seller (another $44) and Sarma Hubs--12x170, 15x135--$300.

    I will likely go with Nextie rims ($650), but I have also thought about marge light rims ($320)--plus all the other stuff.

    The Marge lights weigh about the same as the Nextie--of course 65mm vs 90 mm, but my wife rides groomed trails only with 4" Dillingers (streets get a bit icy).
    I have not decided how much I will pilfer from my wife's pugsley to move over to her new build vs. selling the puglsey and using the funds to offset the build.

  13. #813
    Rider
    Reputation: JonL's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    52
    Quote Originally Posted by dfiler View Post
    Mean ass mother effin stealth monster fighter truck

    Tomorrow is the inaugural ride. Damn I can't wait to ride it.

    Attachment 906989
    dfiler, I might have missed it, but how does it ride? I bought my motobecane after chatting with you and seems I am following you once again. Have a ltk008 frame coming in 2 weeks.

  14. #814
    Oslo, Norway
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    801
    Have you guys measured the rear spacing on the various frames? 190mm or 197mm on these?

    Most running Novatec rear hubs?

  15. #815
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    519
    Asked Justin about the axles again

    "Yes we offer the thru axles to match the carbon fat bike frames."

    Still not a direct answer, it may be a language thing, I don't know.

    I just bit the bullet on the Borealis Yampa Frame, Fork, and Hubs. I figure it is at a $300 premium to go that route over the FB01. But I liked the fact that it has the right hubs and axles with it plus it uses the 100mm bottom bracket so I can use the Race Face crank I already have. Now I have to decide which carbon rims to buy? Last things I need are cassette, rear derailleur, chain, and shifters. Any advice would be appreciated.
    Thanks.

  16. #816
    mtbr member
    Reputation: brankulo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    1,647
    i think the email i got from Justin today confirms they can supply axles. Based on email from Sarah from couple days ago, stating that my frame is coming with axles, i am assuming that the frames from now on come with axles. i dont think the axles and hubs are problem anymore, but it is coming from somebody who has not received the frame yet. waiting on report from Dave and others who have the frame already .

  17. #817
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    246
    Brankulo, did you order the 170 frame or 190 mm?

  18. #818
    mtbr member
    Reputation: brankulo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    1,647
    190mm, now thinking i will go with sarma hubs instead of fatsnos, as they come in 12x190 option. 120 POA sounds good too.

  19. #819
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Posts
    345
    Quote Originally Posted by joeduda View Post
    Asked Justin about the axles again

    "Yes we offer the thru axles to match the carbon fat bike frames."

    Still not a direct answer, it may be a language thing, I don't know.

    I just bit the bullet on the Borealis Yampa Frame, Fork, and Hubs. I figure it is at a $300 premium to go that route over the FB01. But I liked the fact that it has the right hubs and axles with it plus it uses the 100mm bottom bracket so I can use the Race Face crank I already have. Now I have to decide which carbon rims to buy? Last things I need are cassette, rear derailleur, chain, and shifters. Any advice would be appreciated.
    Thanks.

    How do you figure only a $300 premium? $545 for frame/fork/axles. (Fb02 quote I got from speedercycling). And $370 for borealis fh1 hubset. That's $915. I thought the yampa deal was $1499. That's $584 or 64% premium over the open mould frame.

  20. #820
    mtbr member
    Reputation: brankulo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    1,647
    what was delivery charge on yampa deal?

  21. #821
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    519
    I didn't break out the calculator but lets see. My total with the for the FB01 frame, fork, and two carbon rims was $1362. this is without hubs and maybe with axles. My total for the Borealis with hubs and axles but no carbon rims was $ 1549. The FB01 would need hubs at around $400 so that would be $ 1762. The Borealis will need rims so say $600 so that would be $ 2149. So I guess its closer to 400 than 300.

    The real decision maker was the size of the frame, I was afraid that the 20" FB01 would be too small. And I wanted the 100mm bottom bracket. The xl borealis should be perfect. I hope at least.

  22. #822
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    519
    Delivery was $50

  23. #823
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Posts
    345
    Quote Originally Posted by joeduda View Post
    I didn't break out the calculator but lets see. My total with the for the FB01 frame, fork, and two carbon rims was $1362. this is without hubs and maybe with axles. My total for the Borealis with hubs and axles but no carbon rims was $ 1549. The FB01 would need hubs at around $400 so that would be $ 1762. The Borealis will need rims so say $600 so that would be $ 2149. So I guess its closer to 400 than 300.

    The real decision maker was the size of the frame, I was afraid that the 20" FB01 would be too small. And I wanted the 100mm bottom bracket. The xl borealis should be perfect. I hope at least.
    Interesting. The quote I got for fb02/fork/axles/2 carbon nextie style rims from speeder before shipping was $1135. That's $230 less than what you were quoted.

  24. #824
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    519
    Yes but was that with the shipping and paypal fees?

    Edit, I just saw that was without the shipping. Plus they add paypal fee.

  25. #825
    mtbr member
    Reputation: brankulo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    1,647
    my overall for f-fb02+fork+axles (assuming)+shipping+paypal, nexite rims+ shipping+paypal: $1,294, with sarma hubs $349, or fatsnos $306, so total of $1,600 (with fatsnos)
    vs
    yampa deal $1,549+nextie rims $645 for total of $2,149.
    still think that yampa is very decent deal.

  26. #826
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Posts
    345
    Quote Originally Posted by joeduda View Post
    Yes but was that with the shipping and paypal fees?

    Edit, I just saw that was without the shipping. Plus they add paypal fee.

    I was able to negotiate only $50 for shipping to Canada. But they never mentioned anything about Paypal fees. In any case, I decided to get the Motobecane Night Train. Spec-for-spec, it is about $700-$800 less than building up an FB02. The Carbon frame/fork wasn't worth that premium to me vs. the Fatboy frame/fork copy.

  27. #827
    mtbr member
    Reputation: PeterQ520's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Posts
    82
    Now we have IP-018 in 18'' with BSA in UD matt, IP-010 in 17'' with BSA in UD matt in stock, and fitting axles are available as well.

    Same price as Speedercycling's offer

    Carbon fat bike frameset,Xiamen Iplay Sporting Goods Co.,Ltd.

    IP-018 in 16'' with BSA in UD matt will be available in 10 days, and IP-010 in 19'' will be available in 20 days.

    Please feel free to contact me

    Email: [email protected]
    Skype: peterque520
    Chinese Carbon fatty-img_1969.jpg

  28. #828
    Oslo, Norway
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    801
    Peter: are the frames that you guys sell (with TA rear) 190mm or 197mm?

    Seems to be a lot of confusion in the bike biz regarding that right now, and it will be a mess with both 190mm and 197mm TA12 hubs and frames on the market, with mass producers like Novatec making 190mm TA hubs and smaller makers like Hope selling 197mm TA12.

    197mm is the logical O.L.D. for TA, as it follows up on 142mm TA vs 135 QR and 177mm TA vs. 170mm QR, so the 190mm TA is the result of someone making a mistake due to the 190mm width on 190mm QR.

  29. #829
    mtbr member
    Reputation: brankulo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    1,647
    espen, the frames he sells are the same as ones speedercycling sells. one is 177and 197, other one is 170 and 190 spaced. there are hub options available for both, so not a big deal.

  30. #830
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Posts
    345
    Quote Originally Posted by Espen W View Post
    Peter: are the frames that you guys sell (with TA rear) 190mm or 197mm?

    Seems to be a lot of confusion in the bike biz regarding that right now, and it will be a mess with both 190mm and 197mm TA12 hubs and frames on the market, with mass producers like Novatec making 190mm TA hubs and smaller makers like Hope selling 197mm TA12.

    197mm is the logical O.L.D. for TA, as it follows up on 142mm TA vs 135 QR and 177mm TA vs. 170mm QR, so the 190mm TA is the result of someone making a mistake due to the 190mm width on 190mm QR.
    There certainly is confusion. What is interesting to confirm is if the 197mm rear frames are actually 197mm spacing or 190mm spacing with end caps recessed into the frame to make 197mm (i.e. 142 / 177 standards). Based on the picture of the axles that Peter posted, it appears 197mm rear frames are actually 197mm spacing. Not 190mm spacing +7mm hub/frame interface. Making a frame actually 197mm spacing would be the mistake as the 197mm hubs would still free-float between the dropouts and not index like the 142/177 standards. But it may give significantly more clearance for 11sp cassettes.

    Don't forget that before 135QR/142TA were widely adopted, there was actually a 135TA used by DH guys. Similar to the 190TA on these frames. It was just a bit of a PITA to install the wheel as the hub free-floated between the dropouts and you had to have it aligned, then put the axle through. 142 solved that by indexing the hub end caps to a 3.5mm cut-out on each side of the drop-outs. So the frame spacing of 135mm never changed on 142mm frames. Only the "chips" that manufacturers started using to make the drop-outs interchangeable with the different axle standards. Any given frame with these chips in theory could use 135QR, 135TA and 142TA with the right dropout chips if the manufacturer made them available. And the exact same hub could be used in all three scenarios if the hub manufacturer made replaceable end caps with the right length/diameter.

  31. #831
    Oslo, Norway
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    801
    I actually have a few sample frames from various suppliers here, and they are approx 187mm spacing, with approx. 1.5mm index for the axle on each side, so 190mm total.

    Having both 190mm TA12 and 197mm TA12 is just an invitation to a lot of frustration. Stuff will get mixed up, people will damage frames, either from forcing a 197 into a 190 frame, or compressing the stays of a 197 frame in order to clamp a 190 hub.

    I'm riding a 190 TA12 frame right now, and it works fine, but there is chain rub on the droputs when in the 10t cog (as others have observed too). This would not have been the case with a 197 spacing.

    Pretty amazing that companies that only make hubs manage to screw up things like this, but I'm not surprised at all, unfortunately. Not the first time that those of us in the biz who have to know a decent amount about every single component on the bike (and that means the range of components used on $30 to $10.0000 bikes need to assist those who should be specialized in their narrow field (like makers of hubs, rims, forks, etc.)
    Last edited by Espen W; 07-18-2014 at 02:39 PM.

  32. #832
    Loser
    Reputation: Jisch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    5,535
    I agree with you Espen, there should not be 190 and 197. I suppose it can be dealt with, but with a little forethought it wouldn't be an issue at all.

  33. #833
    mtbr member
    Reputation: brankulo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    1,647
    if you look on detail images of dropouts nether 197 spaced nor 190 spaced frame seem to have replaceable chips, just replaceable hanger on drive side. both of them however have slits so the wheel can sit in them while installing axle.

  34. #834
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Posts
    345
    Quote Originally Posted by Espen W View Post
    I actually have a few sample frames from various suppliers here, and they are approx 187mm spacing, with approx. 1.5mm index for the axle on each side, so 190mm total.

    Having both 190mm TA12 and 197mm TA12 is just an invitation to a lot of frustration. Stuff will get mixed up, people will damage frames, either from forcing a 197 into a 190 frame, or compressing the stays of a 197 frame in order to clamp a 190 hub.

    I'm riding a 190 TA12 frame right now, and it works fine, but there is chain rub on the droputs when in the 10t cog (as others have observed too). This would not have been the case with a 197 spacing.

    Pretty amazing that companies that only make hubs manage to screw up things like this, but I'm not surprised at all, unfortunately. Not the first time that those of us in the biz who have to know a something about every component on the bike (and that means the range of components used on $30 to $10.0000 bikes need to assist those who should be specialized in their narrow field (like makers of hubs, rims, forks, etc.)

    I'm guessing the problem is actually the frame manufacturers, not the hub guys. They just make what the frame guys ask. And its just end caps for them to produce.

    To make a 190mm frame with actual 187mm spacing and 1.5mm index is so far from the established 135QR/142TA standard. That's like making a 135mm TA frame as a 132mm frame with 1.5mm index. There is no wonder that 11sp cassettes rub on the dropout. 197hub with 190mm frame spacing and 3.5mm index on each dropout SHOULD be the TA standard...to align with 135/142 and 170/177.

    If 190mm TA was actually 190mm spacing, but hub free-floated between drop-outs, that would be OKAY (not ideal) as you wouldn't get cassete clearance issues. It would at least align with 135TA (but mostly phased out long ago).

    These conversations are enough for me to hold off buying one of these Chinese Carbon Frames for at least another year until the manufacturers get these minor (but significant) issues ironed out.

  35. #835
    Oslo, Norway
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    801
    Yes, both the 190TA ones that we have here have slits, only approx 1.5mm on each side, though.
    Fact remains that they offer less clearance than our own aluminium 190QR frame that I rode all winter.
    I think 190 TA12 will be rather short lived, but the (pretty much) biggest hub manufacturer in the world, went 190TA, so who knows.

  36. #836
    mtbr member
    Reputation: brankulo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    1,647
    the slits are actually 3.5mm if you look on the drawing. but yeah, who knows whats next, as there are quite a few of bikes out or soon to be out with this weird 190 spacing. i guess with these first generation fat chiners you have to accept the fact that you are their free tester

  37. #837
    Oslo, Norway
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    801
    I just remesured the slits on the latest version of the frame, and they are 1mm wide.
    Spacing from machined surface to machined surface is 190mm, while distance from inside dropout to inside dropout is 188mm, so a very narrow slit.
    Makes inserting the axle a little tricky.
    This frame is from a very reputable manufacturer (they make the 907 frame, etc), so them messing up 190 vs 197 seems odd.
    Makes me wonder if anyone has actually measured a ''197'' to actually be 197, or if they just expect it to be 197/call it a 197 out of through axle habit.

    I suggest that those who have received their frames make the same measurements.

  38. #838
    mtbr member
    Reputation: brankulo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    1,647
    well if slits are shallower than what attached drawing suggests, it helps a bit with the clearances i assume.


    free upload image

  39. #839
    Oslo, Norway
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    801
    Yes, more clearance, but makes the wheel wobble more when inserting the TA.

    On the first sample that we got, the cassette would not spin and the rear caliper would hit the rotor due to frame interference on both sides.
    Pretty strange when all one does is to make frames, and this is not just a random Chinese workshop, it is one of the major carbon frame manufacturers, making OE frames for plenty of major brands within MTB and road (and fat, of course).

  40. #840
    mtbr member
    Reputation: brankulo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    1,647
    espen, what frame are you measuring, if its not a secret?

  41. #841
    Oslo, Norway
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    801
    Quote Originally Posted by brankulo View Post
    espen, what frame are you measuring, if its not a secret?
    The name of the factory is secret, but the frame itself should be very similar to the one depicted a few pages ago, so would be interesting to know the true, measured rear spacing of that one.

  42. #842
    mtbr member
    Reputation: brankulo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    1,647
    the one dfiler has?

  43. #843
    Oslo, Norway
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    801
    Quote Originally Posted by brankulo View Post
    the one dfiler has?
    Yep

  44. #844
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    3,458
    Quote Originally Posted by Espen W View Post
    Yes, more clearance, but makes the wheel wobble more when inserting the TA.

    On the first sample that we got, the cassette would not spin and the rear caliper would hit the rotor due to frame interference on both sides.
    Pretty strange when all one does is to make frames, and this is not just a random Chinese workshop, it is one of the major carbon frame manufacturers, making OE frames for plenty of major brands within MTB and road (and fat, of course).
    I'm glad I'm not the only one scratching my head on these 190/197 sizes.
    I have money down on 2 yet to be releases fatties....one claims 197 and one 190.
    Who knows what they will actually be.
    Was going to build an extra set of wheels with some Nextie rims. I was going to go with Borealis hubs because of the different end caps.( I wanted Hope...but I don't see the availability of different end caps....or am I missing that?)
    But I might just wait to see what the frames actually turn out to be.

  45. #845
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    477
    Quote Originally Posted by the mayor View Post
    Was going to build an extra set of wheels with some Nextie rims. I was going to go with Borealis hubs because of the different end caps.( I wanted Hope...but I don't see the availability of different end caps....or am I missing that?)
    I think the end caps from Hopes "standard" hubs are what folks are using to convert the Fatsno as a workaround .
    It's not official (but seems to work for some) AFAIK so this maybe why you can't find any info .


    Fat Biker

  46. #846
    mtbr member
    Reputation: davedivided's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    119
    My FB02 came with confirmed(By me) 190mm spacing.

  47. #847
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    246
    Quote Originally Posted by davedivided View Post
    My FB02 came with confirmed(By me) 190mm spacing.
    did the thru axles Come with the frame?

  48. #848
    mtbr member
    Reputation: davedivided's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    119
    Quote Originally Posted by dfiler View Post
    Mean ass mother effin stealth monster fighter truck

    Tomorrow is the inaugural ride. Damn I can't wait to ride it.

    Attachment 906989
    What size frame is this? I want to use the same seat post if the geo works out for my FB02
    Last edited by davedivided; 07-19-2014 at 04:02 PM. Reason: Spelling

  49. #849
    mtbr member
    Reputation: davedivided's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    119
    Quote Originally Posted by mortenste View Post
    did the thru axles Come with the frame?
    I did not get through axles with mine. I was pre-thru axle support. I bought mine from Xmiplay.

  50. #850
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    741
    Quote Originally Posted by Fat Biker View Post
    I think the end caps from Hopes "standard" hubs are what folks are using to convert the Fatsno as a workaround .
    It's not official (but seems to work for some) AFAIK so this maybe why you can't find any info .
    That's what I did. Detail and photos are posted earlier in this thread. The end caps are identical across hope's entire line of hubs so a 150x12 or 135x12 pair of caps makes a 190 hub body into 190x12.

    But if I had to do it over again, I'd get a hub with more engagement points. 48poe is not enough for my tastes.
    Last edited by dfiler; 07-20-2014 at 06:25 AM.

  51. #851
    mtbr member
    Reputation: brankulo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    1,647
    fatsno is 40poe. my old hope hubs are only 20 something, i dont complain, of course i dont know how higher poe ones ride. for this fat build i am thinking sarma 120poe

  52. #852
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    3,458
    Quote Originally Posted by dfiler View Post
    That's what I did. Detail and photos are posted earlier in this thread. The end caps are identical across hope's entire line of hubs so a 150x12 or 135x12 pair of caps makes a 190 hub body into 190x12.

    But if I had to do it over again, I'd get a hub with more engagement points. 48poe is not enough for my tastes.
    Thanks for the info on the 190 conversion.
    But that leaves nothing for 197.....or am I missing that too?

  53. #853
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    741
    Quote Originally Posted by the mayor View Post
    Thanks for the info on the 190 conversion.
    But that leaves nothing for 197.....or am I missing that too?
    You can just buy the hope 197x12mm fatsno hub.

  54. #854
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    246
    my frame arrived today Chinese Carbon fatty-mms_img-465555350.jpg then i can start building,but haven't decided what wheels to buy yet.

  55. #855
    mtbr member
    Reputation: brankulo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    1,647
    Quote Originally Posted by mortenste View Post
    my frame arrived today Click image for larger version. 

Name:	mms_img-465555350.jpg 
Views:	745 
Size:	225.0 KB 
ID:	909622 then i can start building,but haven't decided what wheels to buy yet.
    impressions?

  56. #856
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    246
    it seems to be good quality,think its better to tell when i get the first ride .

  57. #857
    Oslo, Norway
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    801
    Looks good!
    Corvus style.

    Can you measure the rear spacing?

  58. #858
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    246
    takk thanks,this is the 170mm rear frame and measured to 170mm

  59. #859
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Posts
    345
    Quote Originally Posted by mortenste View Post
    takk thanks,this is the 170mm rear frame and measured to 170mm
    So that's 170mm inside dropout-to-dropout. So there are no "slots" in the drop-outs to index/locate the rear hub? Exactly like a 135x12 or 150x12 frame would be (i.e. rear hub floats completely within the dropout).

    What seller is this frame from?

  60. #860
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    246
    there are slots,and is 170 mm between inside slots.the frame is from speeder cycling.

  61. #861
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    113
    Quote Originally Posted by mortenste View Post
    there are slots,and is 170 mm between inside slots.the frame is from speeder cycling.
    So the hubs would need to be exactly 170mm , is that right?
    Hope so as that's what I'm after

    Also what is the front fork spacing measurement
    Cheers
    Ip

  62. #862
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    246
    Front is 135 mm.

  63. #863
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    113
    Thanks
    Cheers
    Ip

  64. #864
    Oslo, Norway
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    801
    Alrighty, that means that we have yet another fatbike rear spacing standard on our hands:

    135mm QR (offset frames)
    170mm QR
    190mm QR
    170mm TA12
    177mm TA12
    190mm TA12
    197mm TA 12

    What a mess.

  65. #865
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    741
    I actually like that "mess". It seems like a nice set of options.

    There are 3 hub body widths; 135, 170 and 190. Cheap, interchangeable end caps provide all the options. This allows people or companies to build exactly the bike they want. I hope all three sizes remain in production.

  66. #866
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Posts
    345
    Quote Originally Posted by dfiler View Post
    I actually like that "mess". It seems like a nice set of options.

    There are 3 hub body widths; 135, 170 and 190. Cheap, interchangeable end caps provide all the options. This allows people or companies to build exactly the bike they want. I hope all three sizes remain in production.
    While there may be three hubshell standards emerging, there appears to be 167, 170, 177, 187, 190 and 197 rear frame spacing.

    The fact that some of these Chinese carbon frames are notching out the 170/190 frames with 1.5mm notches on each dropout means that they are actually 3mm narrower than one would expect, which is what is causing some to have cassette clearance issues.

    170 and 190 should not have any notches in the dropouts. These hubs should float between dropouts. If notching them out, the frame spacing should still be 190, but with 3.5mm notches on each dropout for total of 197.

    What seems to be happening is these chinese frame makers are getting it wrong by making their 190 frames actually 187 spacing + two 1.5mm notches. These should be marketed as 187 spacing and not 190. They are confusing axle length with frame spacing.

  67. #867
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    477
    Quote Originally Posted by neons97 View Post
    While there may be three hubshell standards emerging, there appears to be 167, 170, 177, 187, 190 and 197 rear frame spacing.

    The fact that some of these Chinese carbon frames are notching out the 170/190 frames with 1.5mm notches on each dropout means that they are actually 3mm narrower than one would expect, which is what is causing some to have cassette clearance issues.

    170 and 190 should not have any notches in the dropouts. These hubs should float between dropouts. If notching them out, the frame spacing should still be 190, but with 3.5mm notches on each dropout for total of 197.

    What seems to be happening is these chinese frame makers are getting it wrong by making their 190 frames actually 187 spacing + two 1.5mm notches. These should be marketed as 187 spacing and not 190. They are confusing axle length with frame spacing.
    This is exactly what I feared would happen and seems to be coming about . Also the convertible hubs needed to accommodate these "new standards" seem to be at the upper end of the price spectrum (I'm thinking Hope Fatsno) compared to the fixed spacing unknown brand hubs that have recently become available .

    I was hoping to get sorted out with a carbon fat bike ready for this coming winter . But I think I'll sit back a season till something emerges as a more dominant standard at least .

    This is turning out to be a most confusing sh*tstorm


    Fat Biker

  68. #868
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    741
    Quote Originally Posted by neons97 View Post
    While there may be three hubshell standards emerging, there appears to be 167, 170, 177, 187, 190 and 197 rear frame spacing.

    The fact that some of these Chinese carbon frames are notching out the 170/190 frames with 1.5mm notches on each dropout means that they are actually 3mm narrower than one would expect, which is what is causing some to have cassette clearance issues.

    170 and 190 should not have any notches in the dropouts. These hubs should float between dropouts. If notching them out, the frame spacing should still be 190, but with 3.5mm notches on each dropout for total of 197.

    What seems to be happening is these chinese frame makers are getting it wrong by making their 190 frames actually 187 spacing + two 1.5mm notches. These should be marketed as 187 spacing and not 190. They are confusing axle length with frame spacing.
    No need to explain. I'm the guy who brought the issue to light and explained it repeatedly on this thread as well as to the first manufacurer to announce such a frame. I am even riding a 190x12 frame.

    My take is that it wasn't by accident and that the frames will work just fine after a couple issues are worked out. More established companies handle that process internally but the factory direct offerings are relying on early adopter customers who are willing to be guinea pigs. Some customers like that development model while others won't touch it.

    Because the end caps are so cheap and easy, if the design works, increasing heel clearance by 7mm seems like a great thing. Note that I say if. The 1.5mm insets on my dropouts aren't sufficient to actually align the hub because the spacing is a hair more than 190mm. If that was spot on the design would be fine. That and the derailer hanger was a bit wide. 2 minutes of dremeling fixed that and there are now no clearance issues. This is a normal part of the design process, albeit one that is normally hidden from customers.

    If 190x12 and 170x12 end up being bad, my take is that it will be because it doesn't work, not because there are too many designs for manufacturers and customers to handle. Early on it seemed like sourcing a compatible hub would be difficult, but a couple months later, it turns out that some UD matte carbon head tube spacers were more expensive and more difficult to find than those end caps.

  69. #869
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    741
    Quote Originally Posted by Fat Biker View Post
    This is exactly what I feared would happen and seems to be coming about . Also the convertible hubs needed to accommodate these "new standards" seem to be at the upper end of the price spectrum (I'm thinking Hope Fatsno) compared to the fixed spacing unknown brand hubs that have recently become available .

    I was hoping to get sorted out with a carbon fat bike ready for this coming winter . But I think I'll sit back a season till something emerges as a more dominant standard at least .

    This is turning out to be a most confusing sh*tstorm
    I can see the verdict eventually being that the design provides too little clearance to avoid issues in some riding scenarios.

    But is it really that confusing? Either a frame needs a 170x12, 177x12, 190x12 or 197x12 hub. Buying a seatpost and clamp is exactly that confusing as well. Same with headsets. I had a harder time confirming headset specs than hub specs. And bottom brackets and crank sets as too...

  70. #870
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    477
    Quote Originally Posted by dfiler View Post
    I can see the verdict eventually being that the design provides too little clearance to avoid issues in some riding scenarios.

    But is it really that confusing? Either a frame needs a 170x12, 177x12, 190x12 or 197x12 hub. Buying a seatpost and clamp is exactly that confusing as well. Same with headsets. I had a harder time confirming headset specs than hub specs. And bottom brackets and crank sets as too...
    Yeah I see what you're saying.
    Guess I'm just p*ssed that you can't just say "yeah I'd like a fat bike rear hub please" and the reply being "ok what colour, what company or price point"
    But then when has the cycling industry ever been like that ?

    All I can say is I'm glad and grateful to the early adopters such as your self for ironing out the kinks.

    P.S. Great looking bike you've got BTW



    Fat Biker

  71. #871
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    3,458
    Quote Originally Posted by dfiler View Post
    I can see the verdict eventually being that the design provides too little clearance to avoid issues in some riding scenarios.

    But is it really that confusing? Either a frame needs a 170x12, 177x12, 190x12 or 197x12 hub. Buying a seatpost and clamp is exactly that confusing as well. Same with headsets. I had a harder time confirming headset specs than hub specs. And bottom brackets and crank sets as too...
    Yes...headsets are confusing....but a headset will stay with the bike.
    Wheelsets on the other hand....if you have 2 different bikes....or you buy a new bike that may have different spacing....is where the problem may be.
    I think I'm going to go with a Borealis rear hub because they seem to have the different end caps ( unless I'm missing some other manufacturers)

  72. #872
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    741
    Sarma is another option with all the possible interchangeable caps. If I were doing it over again, I'd get Sarma instead of Hope because 120 points of engagement is preferable to 40. I've been riding a True Precision Stealth (instant engagement roller bearing clutch) hub for so long that I forgot what a low engagement count feels like.

    I suspect that most manufacturers will offer all the different caps soon.

  73. #873
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    162
    I just received my 170 rear, 135 Sarma hubs this week--just need to decide on some rims now to build up wheels.

  74. #874
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    6
    fyi that wasnt walmart selling them might want to read your own links...

  75. #875
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    195
    Quote Originally Posted by davedivided View Post
    My FB02 arrived today, looks very nice.
    do ya have some pics? How does it ride? Craftsmanship? I've been reading the thread and the more opinions, the better. I'm debating hard if I should pull the trigger...

    thanks!

  76. #876
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    6
    Quote Originally Posted by Logantri View Post
    You're saying everything I wanted to say. Nice job.

    My other somewhat similar pet peeve is the "need" of riders to do there shopping online, but are then quickly head into the LBS when it is time to ask for schwag for a race, sponsorship, race support, etc (or see the product up close so they know what to order). Seen it first hand many times.

    It is amazing how many people will justify compromising their principles to save some money.
    easton havox stem 40 on amazon or 100 at the lbs... HMMM btw im starting to remember why i stopped coming to these forums.

  77. #877
    mtbr member
    Reputation: OFFcourse's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    919
    Who's doing a 170mm rear without the Corvus curve top tube?

  78. #878
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Posts
    345
    Anyone know where I can get a 150x15 carbon front fork?

    My plan: Purchase a Motobecane Lurch, strip it down to frame/fork/post (and sell those parts), then use all the parts to put onto a Chinese Carbon frame. That will provide me with a decently spec'd ready-to-ride carbon fatty for about $1500 after selling off the Lurch frame/fork. But the Lurch comes with a 150mm front hub, so that won't work on the current 135mm forks coming with these frames.

  79. #879
    mtbr member
    Reputation: brankulo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    1,647
    is getting bluto an option?

  80. #880
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Posts
    345
    Quote Originally Posted by brankulo View Post
    is getting bluto an option?
    Not my ideal plan as it would take my overall cost to about $2k vs. $1,500. I plan to do at least 50% of the mileage on this bike in the snow, so not sure I need/want a Bluto. If I go bluto route, I would just get the Motobecane Night Train Bullet for $1,500 with a bluto and forego carbon frame for the extra $500. However, I would rather trade off the bluto for carbon for the same price. I know I'm over-complicating things...just wanted to know if anyone knows of a 150x15 carbon fork available yet (I know there was a prototype in thread earlier, but none I have actually seen available for sale).

  81. #881
    mtbr member
    Reputation: brankulo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    1,647
    i think dfilers fork is 150mm spaced. you might want to contact q2 cycling if they will be willing to sell you fork. i know they will not sell you frame if you are in us, but you might be able to talk them into selling fork only. if you are outside of usa, should not be a problem.

  82. #882
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Posts
    345
    Quote Originally Posted by brankulo View Post
    i think dfilers fork is 150mm spaced. you might want to contact q2 cycling if they will be willing to sell you fork. i know they will not sell you frame if you are in us, but you might be able to talk them into selling fork only. if you are outside of usa, should not be a problem.
    I'm in Canada. I saw the 150x15 fork in their "news" section, but not anywhere available for sale. I'll try contacting them.

  83. #883
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Welnic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Posts
    883
    Salsa's new Blackborow has an alloy 150mm front fork. It seems like they sell all of their forks separately. You say that you want carbon, but it is still a good sign that 150mm forks are going to be available.

  84. #884
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    878

    Chinese Carbon fatty

    Lurch is not a thru axle rear , if that is what you are looking for. The Stugis does, and appears to have an aluminum fork, which is probably light . I'm speculating on the alum fork.
    Motobecane frames bring in very little resale. Ride as is until what you are looking for becomes available


    Pedaling

  85. #885
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Posts
    345
    Quote Originally Posted by rjedoaks View Post
    Lurch is not a thru axle rear , if that is what you are looking for. The Stugis does, and appears to have an aluminum fork, which is probably light . I'm speculating on the alum fork.
    Motobecane frames bring in very little resale. Ride as is until what you are looking for becomes available


    Pedaling

    The lurch isn't a thru axle rear, but both hubs are thru-axle ready by removing the QR endcaps.

    Hoping the MB fat bike frames will bring a little more than the generic 26/29/700C frames (i.e. hoping to get $250-$350 for the frame/fork) as there is very little competition in market, especially at that end of the spectrum. also, Sturgis/NightTrain aren't available till late Oct. Lurch is available late August. But we're getting off topic in this thread.

    Really, question is whether or not a carbon 150x15 fork is available anywhere. I've contacted Q2.

  86. #886
    mtbr member
    Reputation: davedivided's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    119

    Ebay NoName Hubs Play Nicely with FB02 Frame and Xmiplay Axles

    Chinese Carbon fatty-front-nut.jpgChinese Carbon fatty-rear.jpg
    This is Speeder Cycling 190mm rear with Peter's Axles. Fit and finish on all parts is beautiful.

  87. #887
    squish, squish in da fish
    Reputation: fishwrinkle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Posts
    1,686
    what is that shaving of, carbon or metal?

  88. #888
    mtbr member
    Reputation: trevorrr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    91
    Does anybody have a 17" IP-010 / FB02 with a Bluto fork yet? Does the fork clear the down tube?

  89. #889
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    195
    Quote Originally Posted by trevorrr View Post
    Does anybody have a 17" IP-010 / FB02 with a Bluto fork yet? Does the fork clear the down tube?
    Second this question. Also looking at doing this setup.

  90. #890
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Posts
    345
    Quote Originally Posted by neons97 View Post
    The lurch isn't a thru axle rear, but both hubs are thru-axle ready by removing the QR endcaps.

    Hoping the MB fat bike frames will bring a little more than the generic 26/29/700C frames (i.e. hoping to get $250-$350 for the frame/fork) as there is very little competition in market, especially at that end of the spectrum. also, Sturgis/NightTrain aren't available till late Oct. Lurch is available late August. But we're getting off topic in this thread.

    Really, question is whether or not a carbon 150x15 fork is available anywhere. I've contacted Q2.

    Got a reply from Q2...no shipping of their frame and fork to any North American address. Presumably due to exclusive rights. Really highlights the gouging in the industry. Their posted price is $615 usd for frame/fork/headset without volume discounts. Whichever brand reselling this in N.A. is taking it in as I haven't seems frame fork combo retail for less than about $2500 (other than the yampa deal going around)

  91. #891
    Rocking on a Rocky
    Reputation: RockyJo1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Posts
    1,574
    Quote Originally Posted by mortenste View Post
    my frame arrived today Click image for larger version. 

Name:	mms_img-465555350.jpg 
Views:	745 
Size:	225.0 KB 
ID:	909622 then i can start building,but haven't decided what wheels to buy yet.
    Nice.
    :thumbsup:It doesn't matter what I ride as long as I ride it Rubber Side Down●~●.

  92. #892
    mtbr member
    Reputation: brankulo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    1,647
    Quote Originally Posted by davedivided View Post
    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	front nut.jpg 
Views:	285 
Size:	91.0 KB 
ID:	910740Click image for larger version. 

Name:	rear.jpg 
Views:	347 
Size:	91.0 KB 
ID:	910741
    This is Speeder Cycling 190mm rear with Peter's Axles. Fit and finish on all parts is beautiful.
    how many points of engagement?

  93. #893
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Posts
    23
    Quote Originally Posted by davedivided View Post
    This is Speeder Cycling 190mm rear with Peter's Axles. Fit and finish on all parts is beautiful.
    Where did you get this hubs? Unable to find them on Ebay.
    Thanks!

  94. #894
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    1,918
    Quote Originally Posted by neons97 View Post
    Got a reply from Q2...no shipping of their frame and fork to any North American address. Presumably due to exclusive rights. Really highlights the gouging in the industry. Their posted price is $615 usd for frame/fork/headset without volume discounts. Whichever brand reselling this in N.A. is taking it in as I haven't seems frame fork combo retail for less than about $2500 (other than the yampa deal going around)
    Mail & Package Forwarding from Germany, Europe | Mailboxde.com

    Downside is that you'll have to pay VAT

  95. #895
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    592
    Quote Originally Posted by neons97 View Post
    Got a reply from Q2...no shipping of their frame and fork to any North American address. Presumably due to exclusive rights. Really highlights the gouging in the industry. Their posted price is $615 usd for frame/fork/headset without volume discounts. Whichever brand reselling this in N.A. is taking it in as I haven't seems frame fork combo retail for less than about $2500 (other than the yampa deal going around)
    interesting, they just told me $899 frame+fork.

  96. #896
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    592
    Quote Originally Posted by davedivided View Post
    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	front nut.jpg 
Views:	285 
Size:	91.0 KB 
ID:	910740Click image for larger version. 

Name:	rear.jpg 
Views:	347 
Size:	91.0 KB 
ID:	910741
    This is Speeder Cycling 190mm rear with Peter's Axles. Fit and finish on all parts is beautiful.
    dave, whats the quality of these hubs? do they look pretty decent. how many poe? i am on budget and these would fit the bill, just dont want to be re-lacing wheels after couple rides. is there any info on hub sizes so i can plug it in spoke calc.

  97. #897
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    246
    Think i need some red hubs too Chinese Carbon fatty-img_20140731_110142.jpg

  98. #898
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Posts
    23
    Quote Originally Posted by cavo View Post
    interesting, they just told me $899 frame+fork.
    Me too...sounds strange 615$...

  99. #899
    Rocking on a Rocky
    Reputation: RockyJo1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Posts
    1,574
    Quote Originally Posted by mortenste View Post
    Think i need some red hubs too Click image for larger version. 

Name:	IMG_20140731_110142.jpg 
Views:	362 
Size:	135.8 KB 
ID:	911375
    No get red rims.
    :thumbsup:It doesn't matter what I ride as long as I ride it Rubber Side Down●~●.

  100. #900
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    246
    That to

  101. #901
    mtbr member
    Reputation: davedivided's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    119
    Quote Originally Posted by cavo View Post
    dave, whats the quality of these hubs? do they look pretty decent. how many poe? i am on budget and these would fit the bill, just dont want to be re-lacing wheels after couple rides. is there any info on hub sizes so i can plug it in spoke calc.
    These were listed on Ebay. I do not know the POE. They look and feel very good. I suspect that the manufacturer is the machine shop for an OEM or two? I would like to compare them next to the Fatsno's.

  102. #902
    mtbr member
    Reputation: davedivided's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    119
    What brakes are you installing? I am trying to figure out how to run my Magura tubes on mine.

  103. #903
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    246
    Magura mt8,but changing the hose to red

  104. #904
    mtbr member
    Reputation: davedivided's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    119
    Quote Originally Posted by mortenste View Post
    Magura mt8,but changing the hose to red
    I have Marta SL's but am puzzling over the routing. How are you accomplishing this??

  105. #905
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    246
    Screw off the routing cap in one end,and then take the hose true the hole.

  106. #906
    mtbr member
    Reputation: campykid's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    286
    I'm thinking of pulling the trigger on the Xmiplay IP-010 frame with 170 thru axle. I"m riding an aluminum Fatback with Hed Big Deal rims laced to Paul front hub and Hope EvoII rear hub (170mm). I can't convert my Paul whub to 15qr so I'd use my O'beast carbon fork (straight 1 1/8"). I believe I can convert my rear hub to 170 x 12 using the Hope HUB241 conversion caps. I would need a headset that adapts my straight steerer to tapered steerer. So my questions are:
    1. Is this a sound plan, everything would be compatible as outlined?
    2. How good is this frame? I realize all carbon is not created equal depending on fibers and layup. How would this frame compare to a Lamere/Whiteout/Borealis (at a fraction of the price)? Any real world experience with this yet?

    Thanks.

  107. #907
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    469

    Chinese Carbon fatty

    Quote Originally Posted by campykid View Post
    2. How good is this frame? I realize all carbon is not created equal depending on fibers and layup. How would this frame compare to a Lamere/Whiteout/Borealis (at a fraction of the price)? Any real world experience with this yet?

    Thanks.
    I don't believe any of the frames mentioned are high modulus carbon, likely t700. The product is new and all one can hope for is similar results as the Chinese 29er and road product.

  108. #908
    mtbr member
    Reputation: trevorrr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    91
    Quote Originally Posted by campykid View Post
    I'm thinking of pulling the trigger on the Xmiplay IP-010 frame with 170 thru axle. I"m riding an aluminum Fatback with Hed Big Deal rims laced to Paul front hub and Hope EvoII rear hub (170mm). I can't convert my Paul whub to 15qr so I'd use my O'beast carbon fork (straight 1 1/8"). I believe I can convert my rear hub to 170 x 12 using the Hope HUB241 conversion caps. I would need a headset that adapts my straight steerer to tapered steerer. So my questions are:
    1. Is this a sound plan, everything would be compatible as outlined?
    2. How good is this frame? I realize all carbon is not created equal depending on fibers and layup. How would this frame compare to a Lamere/Whiteout/Borealis (at a fraction of the price)? Any real world experience with this yet?

    Thanks.
    I am also likely to get this frame (IP-010 170mm TA, 17") and would like to hear feedback, although I suspect there is none to be had at this point.

    I can't say for sure, but I suspect that the HUB241 kit will convert your 170mmQR hub to 177x12TA since their normal function is to convert a 135QR to 142x12TA. Anybody else know for sure? I'd love to get the hope fatsnow hubs for this build, but I don't think there is an off the shelf endcap option for 170x12TA. I think the options at this point are Sarma (which I don't want because they seem to sell the hubs as a set, and I want a 150mm front for the Bluto), or various China direct / eBay China options.

  109. #909
    mtbr member
    Reputation: brankulo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    1,647
    Quote Originally Posted by trevorrr View Post
    I am also likely to get this frame (IP-010 170mm TA, 17") and would like to hear feedback, although I suspect there is none to be had at this point.

    I can't say for sure, but I suspect that the HUB241 kit will convert your 170mmQR hub to 177x12TA since their normal function is to convert a 135QR to 142x12TA. Anybody else know for sure? I'd love to get the hope fatsnow hubs for this build, but I don't think there is an off the shelf endcap option for 170x12TA. I think the options at this point are Sarma (which I don't want because they seem to sell the hubs as a set, and I want a 150mm front for the Bluto), or various China direct / eBay China options.
    have not seen complete build for that frame yet, still waiting for mine to arrive.
    that fatsno kit will work for conversion of rear hub as you plan. sarma sells their hubs individually too, its just you get better price for set.

  110. #910
    mtbr member
    Reputation: davedivided's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    119
    Quote Originally Posted by mortenste View Post
    Screw off the routing cap in one end,and then take the hose true the hole.
    Cool! Thanks, I did not have that tiny allen wrench required for the job. I am working out rim solutions now. Going toward Nextie. $$ pretty much the same as no name carbon from anywhere else online.

  111. #911
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    246
    I am waiting for the 65 mm nextie rim,Its coming for sale soon.

  112. #912
    mtbr member
    Reputation: davedivided's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    119
    Quote Originally Posted by mortenste View Post
    I am waiting for the 65 mm nextie rim,Its coming for sale soon.
    Whoa! Did you say sale soon?? Details man!

  113. #913
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    246
    Same design as 90 mm,520 gram pr rim :-)

  114. #914
    mtbr member
    Reputation: trevorrr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    91
    Quote Originally Posted by brankulo View Post
    have not seen complete build for that frame yet, still waiting for mine to arrive.
    that fatsno kit will work for conversion of rear hub as you plan. sarma sells their hubs individually too, its just you get better price for set.
    Brankulo,
    After looking at the hub conversion options shown on the Universal website (which include the hope part numbers), I agree with you that HUB241 kit should work to fit a 170x12mm axle. I think this will be my plan too. Thanks for the reply.

  115. #915
    mtbr member
    Reputation: campykid's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    286
    I'm seeing that among the many standards, there is currently a 170x12 TA AND a 177x12 TA. I think the Chinese carbon fatty is 170x12 and the Fatsno with endcaps will be 177, thus NOT compatible. Can someone explain this to me? Thanks.

  116. #916
    mtbr member
    Reputation: trevorrr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    91
    Quote Originally Posted by campykid View Post
    I'm seeing that among the many standards, there is currently a 170x12 TA AND a 177x12 TA. I think the Chinese carbon fatty is 170x12 and the Fatsno with endcaps will be 177, thus NOT compatible. Can someone explain this to me? Thanks.
    I assumed this too, but as was pointed out, there are different end cap kits from hope. Take a look here:
    Universal Cycles -- Hope Hub Conversion Kits
    There is HUB242 which is for 142x12, and HUB241 which is for 135x12. So if you need to change in the future, it's just $25-27 for new end caps. That's my interpretation at least...

  117. #917
    Classic weekend warrior
    Reputation: sk1er18's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    222
    Quote Originally Posted by mortenste View Post
    Think i need some red hubs too Click image for larger version. 

Name:	IMG_20140731_110142.jpg 
Views:	362 
Size:	135.8 KB 
ID:	911375
    Would love to see that with the wheels I just built!!



    Now you have me second guessing my black frame; i was debating going with white..
    -Carver Ti O'Beast
    -Niner RLT 9
    -'16 Trek Farley 7 (hers)

  118. #918
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    246
    Would be perfect :-)
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails Chinese Carbon fatty-dsc_0068.jpg  


  119. #919
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    741
    Quote Originally Posted by trevorrr View Post
    I assumed this too, but as was pointed out, there are different end cap kits from hope. Take a look here:
    Universal Cycles -- Hope Hub Conversion Kits
    There is HUB242 which is for 142x12, and HUB241 which is for 135x12. So if you need to change in the future, it's just $25-27 for new end caps. That's my interpretation at least...
    Yep. That worked for me.

    More detail can be found in a couple previous posts:
    Chinese Carbon fatty - post11230772
    Chinese Carbon fatty - post11232315

  120. #920
    Rocking on a Rocky
    Reputation: RockyJo1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Posts
    1,574
    Just pulled the pin on a Carbon frame. Ordered the 170 rear 30 to 45 days before shipping. Going to be asking a lot of questions soon.
    :thumbsup:It doesn't matter what I ride as long as I ride it Rubber Side Down●~●.

  121. #921
    Rocking on a Rocky
    Reputation: RockyJo1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Posts
    1,574
    Quote Originally Posted by trevorrr View Post
    I am also likely to get this frame (IP-010 170mm TA, 17") and would like to hear feedback, although I suspect there is none to be had at this point.

    I can't say for sure, but I suspect that the HUB241 kit will convert your 170mmQR hub to 177x12TA since their normal function is to convert a 135QR to 142x12TA. Anybody else know for sure? I'd love to get the hope fatsnow hubs for this build, but I don't think there is an off the shelf endcap option for 170x12TA. I think the options at this point are Sarma (which I don't want because they seem to sell the hubs as a set, and I want a 150mm front for the Bluto), or various China direct / eBay China options.
    What about these hubs? Bikeman Salsa Fat Conversion Hubset 2 Red
    :thumbsup:It doesn't matter what I ride as long as I ride it Rubber Side Down●~●.

  122. #922
    mtbr member
    Reputation: trevorrr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    91

    Chinese Carbon fatty

    Quote Originally Posted by RockyJo1 View Post
    Those look like 177mm end caps not 170mm. It's only 170mm if it's quick release.

  123. #923
    Rocking on a Rocky
    Reputation: RockyJo1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Posts
    1,574
    Quote Originally Posted by trevorrr View Post
    Those look like 177mm end caps not 170mm. It's only 170mm if it's quick release.
    Front convertible 9x135mm QR/15x142 Thru axle spacing
    Rear convertible 10x170mm QR/12x177 Thru axle spacing
    Front Hub Spacing: 135,142mm
    Front Axle Type: 9x1,15mm Thru
    Rear Hub Spacing: 170mm
    The 142 and the 177 are the length of the thru axles?
    :thumbsup:It doesn't matter what I ride as long as I ride it Rubber Side Down●~●.

  124. #924
    mtbr member
    Reputation: brankulo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    1,647
    Quote Originally Posted by RockyJo1 View Post
    The 142 and the 177 are the length of the thru axles?
    no, these are hub spacing dimensions as stated in your post.

  125. #925
    mtbr member
    Reputation: PeterQ520's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Posts
    82
    Custom paint IP-010 frameset and IP-FR80C 80mm width rims were shipped out today

    Some pictures for reference

    Email: [email protected]
    Skype: peterque520

    Chinese Carbon fatty-img_2039.jpgChinese Carbon fatty-img_2035.jpgChinese Carbon fatty-img_2036.jpgChinese Carbon fatty-img_2037.jpgChinese Carbon fatty-img_2038.jpg

  126. #926
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    627

    Re: Chinese Carbon fatty

    Quote Originally Posted by dfiler View Post
    Mean ass mother effin stealth monster fighter truck

    Tomorrow is the inaugural ride. Damn I can't wait to ride it.

    Attachment 906989
    Dfiler, don't think you ever got around to it or I missed it, but can you give us some info on the ride on that bad boy?

    Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk

  127. #927
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    741
    Quote Originally Posted by Negotiator50 View Post
    Dfiler, don't think you ever got around to it or I missed it, but can you give us some info on the ride on that bad boy?
    It rides great but I'd make a few changes. The chainstays should be much shorter if it is to be used as a trail bike. It is hard to get the front end up with such long chainstays.

    Here's a video of me riding it in my local park:
    http://forums.mtbr.com/fat-bikes/ful...eo-924282.html

  128. #928
    mtbr member
    Reputation: brankulo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    1,647
    Quote Originally Posted by dfiler View Post
    It rides great but I'd make a few changes. The chainstays should be much shorter if it is to be used as a trail bike. It is hard to get the front end up with such long chainstays.
    this is what i am worried about a bit with speedercycling frame. if you look at original corvus frame, it has curved seat tube to help to bring rear wheel closer underneath your butt. chinese one has straight seat tube, so assuming stays will be longer.

  129. #929
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    741
    With metal frames, it is easiest to have the down tube, chain stays and seat tube come together at the bottom bracket. Thus, to move shorten the chain stays, it is necessary to bend the seat post.

    However with carbon there are plenty of design options. The juncture of those tubes is huge on my bike and the same thing could be accomplished without bending any tubes. The bottom bracket could be placed anywhere, not needing the seat tube to terminate at the same spot.

    But as you've noted, that wasn't done and the seat stays are long.

    Manuals are hard and I don't trust wheely drops like I do on my other bikes. People attempt to lift the front end when trying out the bike and comment on how it is heavy. Really what they're noticing are the long chainstays moving the rear axle backward, not the weight.

    It's still crazy fun to ride. But just like when 29ers were new and geometries not perfectly refined, there is room for fat bike improvement. Up until recently they were more like touring rigs designed for adverse conditions. Now we're trying to use them as everyday trail bikes, ripping our usual singletrack and wanting them to perform best in that scenario.

    Some companies are catching on but it's obvious that many others will take a year or two or three to make the shift. Just like there are various types of road/cx/touring frames, there will be various types of fat bike frames.
    Last edited by dfiler; 08-07-2014 at 06:46 AM.

  130. #930
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    627

    Re: Chinese Carbon fatty

    Quote Originally Posted by dfiler View Post
    With metal frames, it is easiest to have the down tube, chain stays and seat tube come together at the bottom bracket. Thus, to move shorten the chain stays, it is necessary to bend the seat post.

    However with carbon there are plenty of design options. The juncture of those tubes is huge on my bike and the same thing could be accomplished without bending any tubes. The bottom bracket could be placed anywhere, not needing the seat tube to terminate at the same spot.

    But as you've noted, that wasn't done and the seat stays are long.

    Manuals are hard and I don't trust wheely drops like I do on my other bikes. People attempt to lift the front end when trying out the bike and comment on how it is heavy. Really what they're noticing are the long seat stays moving the rear axle backward, not the weight.

    It's still crazy fun to ride. But just like when 29ers were new and geometries not perfectly refined, there is room for fat bike improvement. Up until recently they were more like touring rigs designed for adverse conditions. Now we're trying to use them as everyday trail bikes, ripping our usual singletrack and wanting them to perform best in that scenario.

    Some companies are catching on but it's obvious that many others will take a year or two or three to make the shift. Just like there are various types of road/cx/touring frames, there will be various types of fat bike frames.
    So what length chain stay are you looking for? Your frame looks to have a 445 mm chain stay. My Kona Honzo I believe has some of the shortest chain stays on a 29er at about 415 mm. You think they can put a fat bike frame together with that short of a chain stay and still keep it rideable?

    Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk

  131. #931
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    741
    Quote Originally Posted by Negotiator50 View Post
    So what length chain stay are you looking for? Your frame looks to have a 445 mm chain stay. My Kona Honzo I believe has some of the shortest chain stays on a 29er at about 415 mm. You think they can put a fat bike frame together with that short of a chain stay and still keep it rideable?

    Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk
    The chainstays on my fatty are 468mm, not 445mm. That's pretty similar to the 907 whiteout which is 467mm.

    I run my 29er canfield nimble 9 at around 420mm in the sliding dropouts. The 48mm difference is massive. On that bike, sneezing is enough to lift the front end. My fat bike requires throwing my entire weight backward as violently as possible. I can get the front end up some but not up to the balance point. That is, it's hard to do an instant unless there is time to prepare. This rules out manualling over a lot of the stuff that comes up quickly or around blind turns. I'll certainly get better at it. But requiring that kind of exaggerated weight shift makes it an unusable maneuver on a milisecond notice.

  132. #932
    mtbr member
    Reputation: brankulo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    1,647
    445mm he is referring to, is stays length on chinese corvus.

  133. #933
    mtbr member
    Reputation: trevorrr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    91
    I just sent payment for an IP-010 - 17" UD Matte 170mm/12mm spacing. No fork - I'm going to do a Bluto. Sounds like the axle is not being included with the frame.

    Winter comes early in Alberta - lets hope it doesn't take too long for delivery...

  134. #934
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    741
    Looks like that mysterious frame could be available via KHS soon!

    Enrico Lodi just posted the following to facebook.

    Chinese Carbon fatty-10390928_731773616887584_8722559689709826274_n.jpg

    Chinese Carbon fatty-10524725_731773643554248_3056083988067684444_n.jpg

    Chinese Carbon fatty-10303442_731790296885916_8441633849060251529_n.jpg

    KHS 4SEASON 5000, FIBRA DI CARBONIO E MOLTO ALTRO ANCORA

    Quasi un mese fa avevamo anticipato le nuove proposte di KHS nel segmento fat bike e ora siamo finalmente in
    grado di mostrare le prime immagini e presentare l'allestimento della 4Season 5000, modello top di gamma con
    telaio e forcella in fibra di carbonio destinato a raccogliere l'eredità di un modello di grande successo qual è stata
    KHS 4season 3000.
    Basta dare un'occhiata alle foto per ricevere una sensazione di robustezza e potenza perchè KHS 4 Season 5000
    è stata pensata per non fermarsi davanti a nulla, che sia sabbia, pietre, fango o neve oppure discese tecniche.
    Telaio e forcella sono in fibra di carbonio, monterà ruote da 26" con cerchioni Weinmann forati di 100mm di larghezza
    per ospitare coperture sino a 4.8" di dimensione.
    I tecnici KHS in fase di progettazione sono ripartiti da zero per permettere alla 4Season 5000 di ospitare ruote con
    coperture maggiorate ancorate a telaio e forcella da perni passanti; infatti i forcellini posteriori ospiteranno un mozzo
    da 190mm con perno passante da 12mm, mentre la forcella sarà vincolata alla ruota anteriore grazie a un perno da 15mm,
    al fine di garantire maggior rigidità struttura e migliore precisione di guida.
    Novità importanti rispetto ai modelli 2014 anche nella zona dello sterzo dove l'adozione di un cannotto conico
    permetterà l'eventuale upgrade passando a una forcella ammortizzata come la RockShox Bluto, mentre la modifica
    dell'angolo di sterzo che passa da 70° a 68.5° permetterà a KHS 4Season 5000 di affrontare con maggiore baldanza
    le discese più tecniche.
    Infine l'ammiraglia fat di KHS sarà equipaggiata con una trasmissione SRAM 2x10 velocità e freni a disco idraulici Hayes
    Prime Sport con rotori da 180mm all'anteriore e da 160mm al posteriore. Disponibile in tre misure, S/15", M/17"e L/19",
    avrà un prezzo consigliato al pubblico di 2.699 euro assemblata oppure di 1.399 euro in kit telaio e forcella e sarà disponibile
    a partire dal primo autunno.

    Per ulteriori informazioni: Irontrust sas - Carpi
    Translation:
    KHS 4SEASON 5000, carbon fiber and more nearly a month ago we anticipated the new proposals of KHS in fat bike segment and now we are finally able to show the first images and present the 4Season 5000, top model with frame and carbon fork intended to collect the inheritance of a highly successful model what was KHS 4season 3000.
    Just take a look at the picture to get a feeling of strength and power because KHS 4 Season 5000 has been designed to not stop at nothing, it is sand, stones, mud or snow or technical descents.
    Frame and fork are made of carbon fiber, is now 26 wheels with rims Weinmann width 100 mm perforated to accommodate up to 4.8 cover "in size.
    KHS engineers at design time are allocated from the ground up to enable the 4Season 5000 to accommodate oversized tyres wheels secured to frame and fork with passers pins; in fact the rear dropouts will host a hub by 190 mm with 12 mm thru-axle, while the fork is placed to the front wheel with a 15 mm axle, in order to ensure greater rigidity structure and better precision.
    Important news than 2014 in the Steering area where the adoption of a tapered steerer tube will allow the eventual upgrade to a suspension fork RockShox like Bluto, while changing the steering angle which goes from 70° to 68.5° will allow KHS 4Season 5000 to address with greater boldness more technical descents.
    Finally the flagship fat of KHS will be equipped with SRAM'S 2 x 10 speed transmission and hydraulic disc brakes Hayes First Sport with 180 mm rotors front and 160 mm at the rear. Available in three sizes, S/M/15 ", 17" and 19 "w, will have a retail price of € 2,699 assembled or EUR 1,399 frame and fork kit and will be available starting in early autumn.

    For more information: http://www.irontrust.net/KHS 4SEASON 5000, Staging: full carbon frame, 12X190mm, tapered steerer 1.5 ";
    Fork: full carbon, pp15mm;
    Headset: FSA Orbit CF40, no. 42/ACB, integrated;
    Rims: Weinmann HL100, drilled, 26X32h;
    Covers: Vee Rubber Snow Shoe XL 26 x 4.7 ", 120TPI;
    Transmission: 20 speed;
    Front derailleur: Sram X 7;
    Deragliatoe post: Sram X 9 type2;
    Shifters: Sram X 7 Trigger;
    Chain: KMC X 10 with missing Link;
    Crankset: FSA, double Crown 36X22 CK7156;
    Bottom bracket: 100 mm;
    Cassette: Sram PG-.11 .10 teeth -36 1030 speed;
    Pedals: not foreseen;
    Seatpost: aluminium, 31.6 x 350;
    Saddle: WTB Volt Comp handlebar: Kore XCD Super Flat Alloy Riser, stem 31.8 mm diameter, width 700 mm;
    Stem: Kore XCD Alloy, 31.8 mm 3D;
    Knobs: Q2 lock-on;
    Brakes: Hayes Prime hydraulic rotors Sport 180/160 mm;
    Color: carbon gray matt. (Translated by Bing)

  135. #935
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    741
    A friend pointed out it is also a match for the Framed Alaskan Carbon which should be available in November.

    Alaskan Carbon | Framed Bikes

    Do people agree that these are the same frames?

  136. #936
    mtbr member
    Reputation: brankulo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    1,647
    i knew about Framed, KHS is something new. they do look like the frame you have for sure.

  137. #937
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    627

    Re: Chinese Carbon fatty

    Quote Originally Posted by dfiler View Post
    A friend pointed out it is also a match for the Framed Alaskan Carbon which should be available in November.

    Alaskan Carbon | Framed Bikes

    Do people agree that these are the same frames?
    Any idea which frame this is and whether it can be purchased from an over seas distributor to the US in its generic form?

    Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk

  138. #938
    mtbr member
    Reputation: brankulo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    1,647
    you can get it from q2 cycling. they will not ship to any north american address. there are ways to get around this however. last time i inquired about the frame, 2 or 3 months ago, the price was just tad over $1000, including shipping.

  139. #939
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    4,211
    Quote Originally Posted by brankulo View Post
    i knew about Framed, KHS is something new. they do look like the frame you have for sure.
    Interesting. When KHS came out with their original fat bike, Bikes Direct had an exact copy pretty quickly after.

  140. #940
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    741
    That is pretty common in the bike industry. A lot of smaller brands will simply buy a design and slap their logo on it. Sometimes they buy exclusive distribution rights for a region or the entire world. Other times they only buy the right to put their logo on it, with full knowledge that other companies will be doing the same thing with that exact frame.

    In this situation, it looks like we're dealing with what is sometimes called an "open mold", meaning the factory owns it and sells distribution rights to more than one company.

    Upon closer examination, it appears as if the KHS version doesn't have water cage mounts on the seat tube while the Framed version does. But maybe it's just the photo that makes it look that way.

  141. #941
    frl
    frl is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Posts
    76
    Have to be the same frame. Or a cloned one. I think that is the nicest carbon fat bike frame, ever.

  142. #942
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    156
    I tried searching this monster thread but couldn't find it. Does anyone know if the IP-018 will fit a 29+?

    Besides the 120mm vs 100mm BB and a higher standover, is there any disadvantage of the IP-018 vs the IP-010? It seems like having 197mm rear would be a big advantage if you are swapping wheels, using existing mainstream hubs, etc.

  143. #943
    mtbr member
    Reputation: trevorrr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    91

    Chinese Carbon fatty

    I know this has been asked and sort-of answered before, but I've been burned on headset compatibility before. For IP-010, what headset should I be buying for a tapered fork? I am used to frame mfgs specifying "EC34 upper, ECxxx lower" etc, not just a generic 1 1/8" - 1 1/2" tapered.

    Second question - seatpost clamp included on these frames?

  144. #944
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    246
    anybody mounted wheels and tires in there fb-02 frame,thinking about 170 mm rear frame ?wonder if i can use the snowshoe xl,with 1*10 gearing.

  145. #945
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    358
    Anyone got their frames assembled? Time for some pictures and specs. What tires fit etc. so the rest of us can follow

    I am looking at getting one painted green/black with wheels to match.

    Chris.

  146. #946
    dvn
    dvn is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation: dvn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    711
    Quote Originally Posted by trevorrr View Post
    I know this has been asked and sort-of answered before, but I've been burned on headset compatibility before. For IP-010, what headset should I be buying for a tapered fork? I am used to frame mfgs specifying "EC34 upper, ECxxx lower" etc, not just a generic 1 1/8" - 1 1/2" tapered.

    Second question - seatpost clamp included on these frames?
    I just ordered a headset with the frame from Peter. Seatpost clamp not incuded. It takes a 34.9
    "Either way it doesn't really matter, I just got back from a bike ride."
    > dbhammercycle

  147. #947
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    175
    a bottom bracket related question;
    has anybody found a 120mm BSA crank/spindle/ bottom bracket ?

    It seems to me this is a mistake.
    the 100mm BSA is the standard fat bike norm.
    surly has done the 120 mm Press Fit bottom bracket on their ICT. The 120mm PF uses the same cranks and spindle as the 100mm BSA, only instead of threading the bearing on the outside, the bearings are pressed into the frame, resulting in the same Q

    it looks to me that some manufacturars have been to quick in their cut and paste and have created a new (un-wanted) standard.
    I am interested in one of these frames, but not with a silly bottom bracket/ shell

  148. #948
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    741
    100mm works for 170mm frames. 190 or 197 spaced frames require a 20mm longer spindle. With 100mm BB that means adding a 10mm spacer on each side between the bearing and crank. A 120mm BB frame eliminates the need for those spacers.

    I wish my frame had a 120mm BB because without those spacers the bearings would be next to the cranks. The BB on my frame creeks already and I think it could be partially because he cranks are cantilevered out from the bearings causing the spindle to twist when seriously mashing on the pedals.

  149. #949
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    741
    Quote Originally Posted by constantijn13 View Post
    @dfiler; can you point me in the direction for the suppliers/ brands of those spindles ?
    Race face next sl or turbine 190mm with press fit bearings. I'm not sure about the internal spacing sleeve between the bearings though. But otherwise, the spindle is the correct length.

    Other brands might work but I have race face so that's all I've paid attention to.

    (Edit: weird, this post appeared before the one it is replying to)

  150. #950
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    175
    @dfiler; can you point me in the direction for the suppliers/ brands of those spindles ?

  151. #951
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    52
    Quote Originally Posted by trevorrr View Post
    I know this has been asked and sort-of answered before, but I've been burned on headset compatibility before. For IP-010, what headset should I be buying for a tapered fork? I am used to frame mfgs specifying "EC34 upper, ECxxx lower" etc, not just a generic 1 1/8" - 1 1/2" tapered.
    I ordered my headset with the frame (Xiamen). I have ordered two carbon frames from China before, and both of these where IS42/28.6 | IS52/40. I expect the IP10 frame to use the same headset. In fact I think all 1 1/8" to 1.5" china frames use the same headset...

  152. #952
    mtbr member
    Reputation: brankulo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    1,647
    can external bearings be used of some sort to keep em close to cranks?

  153. #953
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    741
    Raceface threaded bottom brackets already use external bearings due to the larger spindle diameter.

  154. #954
    mtbr member
    Reputation: campykid's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    286
    Just received confirmation from Hope: HUB241 converts the Fatsno rear hub to 170x12, NOT 177x12. So sounds like it will work with this frame. Now, where does one find a 170x12 thru-axle compatible with this frame? Peter at xmiplay says the thru axle does not come with the frame, and they don't sell them. Also, what specific model headset I would need to use with a 1 1/8" straight steerer fork?

  155. #955
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    741
    Ebay: Thru AXLE12MM x 170mm Rear Quick Release Frame thru Axle Skewer | eBay

    The same seller offers various other fat through axles.

  156. #956
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    246
    i am wondering about making my own thru axles with carbon tubes.wonder if it would be strong enough with reinforcement in the ends.will not be quick release,but with bolts in the end.

  157. #957
    mtbr member
    Reputation: SundayRiverRider's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    153
    Do you guys know of any Chinese manufacturers making aluminum framed fat bikes for sale? I have a friend with a beat up Pugs and was thinking of picking up a new frame that was lighter and not steel, and hopefully cheaper than the $500 price tag for a carbon frame. Sorry to hijack the thread, I just figured someone with some info may read this.
    Thanks for any links and/or info.

  158. #958
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    60

  159. #959
    mtbr member
    Reputation: PeterQ520's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Posts
    82
    Quote Originally Posted by campykid View Post
    Just received confirmation from Hope: HUB241 converts the Fatsno rear hub to 170x12, NOT 177x12. So sounds like it will work with this frame. Now, where does one find a 170x12 thru-axle compatible with this frame? Peter at xmiplay says the thru axle does not come with the frame, and they don't sell them. Also, what specific model headset I would need to use with a 1 1/8" straight steerer fork?
    Actually we have the fitting 170x12 rear thru axle available now.

    So we have below axles available:
    135x15
    170x12
    190x12
    197x12

  160. #960
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    175
    can anyone post any pictures of what crank they have been able to fit to 120mm BSA bottom bracket ?

  161. #961
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Posts
    345
    All cranks designed around the 190mm rear spacing standard should fit without a problem in a 120mm BB. (i.e. Race Face Turbine, Race Face Next, Race Face Cinch systems, Sram XX1 with RF spindle, etc.)

    While they are all designed around the 100mm BB shell width, they use extra 10mm spacers on each end of the axle to make it equivalent to a 120mm wide bb shell. The challenge you will find with 120mm BB, using currently available cranks is that you will not have a wide-enough plastic sleeve inside the BB, between the bearing cups. This can lead to premature bearing failure if you ride in wet conditions with water ingress from the inside-out.

  162. #962
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    741
    The raceface 190mm systems allegedly come with a sleeve that will work for 120mm setups.

    My RF Next SL cranks creak like mad so I need to take them apart and investigate. I can check on the sleeve at that point, probably sometime next week. It is currently installed on a 100mm BB frame. The provided sleeve did seem to insert quite far into the BB cups so perhaps it was indeed 20mm longer than needed and might also work for 120mm BBs.

    Or... you know, like just buy a crankset that is advertised as working with 120mm frames. Here is one example:
    Universal Cycles -- Race Face Turbine Fat Bike Crank Arms - Includes Bottom Bracket

  163. #963
    dvn
    dvn is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation: dvn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    711
    Can anyone confirm the seatpost clamp size for the FB02 or IP-010? Peter says 34.9 but that seems very small for a 31.6 post.
    "Either way it doesn't really matter, I just got back from a bike ride."
    > dbhammercycle

  164. #964
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    175
    thanks for clearing the bb issue!

  165. #965
    Formerly PaintPeelinPbody
    Reputation: PHeller's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Posts
    2,597
    Has anyone tried fitting 29+ to a chinese carbon fattie? I thought I had looked before and the clearance didn't look like they would work, and searching for "29x3.0" and "Knards" didn't yield any results in this thread.
    Work - Utility GIS Analyst
    Party - 2019 Guerrilla Gravity Revved Trail Pistol Sz 3

  166. #966
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    741
    The 190 or 197mm spaced frames should fit without a problem. They're designed to fit 26x4.8 tires on a 100mm rim. The diameter of that setup is within a few millimeters of a 29x3 tire on a 50mm rim.

  167. #967
    Formerly PaintPeelinPbody
    Reputation: PHeller's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Posts
    2,597
    What's the difference between IP010 and the IP018?
    Work - Utility GIS Analyst
    Party - 2019 Guerrilla Gravity Revved Trail Pistol Sz 3

  168. #968
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    8
    I have been sitting on the sidelines reading this massive thread, and last night, I pulled the trigger on a chinese carbon fat bike & some 65mm rims from icanbikes.com - i ended up getting the SN-01 frame with no fork - since I am going to get a Bluto instead.

    My question for dfiler is: which travel bluto did you get? has anyone checked out the axle to crown measurement on the stock carbon fork and compared it to the bluto?

    I am trying to decide if I should get the 100mm bluto, or the 120mm? I don't want to throw the bike out of whack too much, but I seem to remember dfiler saying that with the longer chainstays, it's tough to manual and get the front end up quickly and effortlessly... Wondering if raising up the front end with a 120mm bluto would help that???

    Thanks in advance - all ideas & thoughts are greatly appreciated...

    Quote Originally Posted by dfiler View Post
    You need fatties in the flesh?

    Enjoy.

    Attachment 899253

    Attachment 899254

  169. #969
    Anchorage, AK
    Reputation: Lars_D's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    1,346
    Cool lots of options. What is out there with 170 spacing, quick releases, a head angle of 69.5 or less with a 468mm fork, and a threaded bottom bracket?

    --Peace

  170. #970
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    741
    I got the 100 bluto because that is what was available. A 120 would have been preferable for how and where I ride. A 100 could just as easily be better for other people or other places. Sorry, there's really no correct answer as to what the best fork length is.

    Fork length won't make a difference in how easy it is to manual.

  171. #971
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    18
    Just a very quick question. It appears all of the frames are made for thru-axles of varying widths, has anyone used these frames with standard 170mm, 9mm quick release wheels? If so what has to be done?

  172. #972
    dvn
    dvn is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation: dvn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    711
    Received my IP-010 today just 6 business days after placing my order with Peter. Amazing! Frame looks great and through axles fit nice. Can't wait for the rest of my parts to arrive.
    Chinese Carbon fatty-0819142033_resized.jpg
    Last edited by dvn; 08-20-2014 at 04:08 AM.
    "Either way it doesn't really matter, I just got back from a bike ride."
    > dbhammercycle

  173. #973
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    8
    DVN, What cranks and BB you gonna put on that bad boy?

    Quote Originally Posted by dvn View Post
    Received my IP-010 today just 6 business days after placing my order. Amazing! Frame looks great and through axles fit nice. Can't wait for the rest of my parts to arrive.
    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	0819142033_resized.jpg 
Views:	667 
Size:	115.3 KB 
ID:	916930

  174. #974
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Posts
    4

    IP010 and 018 geometry differences

    Quote Originally Posted by PHeller View Post
    What's the difference between IP010 and the IP018?
    There are significant differences in the geometry of the 010 and 018. All measurements are functionally different except chain stay length.

    We have chosen and bought 2 of the 010 last week based on Bottom Bracket 100mm vs 120mm, 190mm rear spacing vs 197 and looks.

    I'm keen to hear how things go just on these two basic configs alone.
    At the end of our decision making timeline a new frame came on the market but we just didn't like the look of it.

    Thanks to all the contributors to this forum thread.
    We'll keep posting as the build/use cycle progresses.

    Cheers from Margaret River, West Australia.

  175. #975
    dvn
    dvn is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation: dvn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    711
    Quote Originally Posted by mtakahashi View Post
    DVN, What cranks and BB you gonna put on that bad boy?
    SRAM X9 with spiderless chainring. 1x10 setup.
    "Either way it doesn't really matter, I just got back from a bike ride."
    > dbhammercycle

  176. #976
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Posts
    4
    Can any one recommend a disk brake adapter model number for an IP-010 for 180mm disk brakes?

  177. #977
    GoCyco
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    354
    Quote Originally Posted by Lars_D View Post
    Cool lots of options. What is out there with 170 spacing, quick releases, a head angle of 69.5 or less with a 468mm fork, and a threaded bottom bracket?

    I've been looking at LT Bike's LTK010. It's 170mm with a 69 HT angle and 470 fork. Close to what you are after. Getting close to pulling the trigger. They also offer a fat suspension fork.

  178. #978
    dvn
    dvn is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation: dvn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    711
    Quote Originally Posted by Milo-Bar View Post
    Can any one recommend a disk brake adapter model number for an IP-010 for 180mm disk brakes?
    Not sure a 180 will fit the rear but you would need a standard +20mm post mount adapter either way.
    Chinese Carbon fatty-20mm-post.jpg
    "Either way it doesn't really matter, I just got back from a bike ride."
    > dbhammercycle

  179. #979
    Anchorage, AK
    Reputation: Lars_D's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    1,346
    Quote Originally Posted by aizu1 View Post
    I've been looking at LT Bike's LTK010. It's 170mm with a 69 HT angle and 470 fork. Close to what you are after. Getting close to pulling the trigger. They also offer a fat suspension fork.
    Wow, that is pretty close. Do you have a link to a description of the frame?
    --Peace

  180. #980
    GoCyco
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    354
    Quote Originally Posted by Lars_D View Post
    Wow, that is pretty close. Do you have a link to a description of the frame?
    I am having trouble uploading the file. Sorry. Just go to their website and ask for the details.

  181. #981
    dvn
    dvn is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation: dvn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    711
    IP-010 coming along. I think she's gonna come in under 25 lbs.

    Chinese Carbon fatty-0823141414a_resized_1.jpg
    "Either way it doesn't really matter, I just got back from a bike ride."
    > dbhammercycle

  182. #982
    mtbr member
    Reputation: brankulo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    1,647
    man, plain ud matte is the best looking finish

  183. #983
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    592
    anyone having issues with 190mm spaced frame? here is what i received today from speedercycling.
    "Originally we planned arrange shipment this week, but we received our customer feedback from USA. they said the frame 190mm spacing design is a little difference for the hub in USA market, in order to you can build the fat bike easy, so, we advise factory adjust the design. the delivery time within September 10"

  184. #984
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Greg_o's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    566
    As a 'curious but not overly adept at building' observer, I gotta ask - Why do they not sell complete bikes, but rather just the frame and fork?

    (sorry if it's already been covered here)

  185. #985
    bigger than you.
    Reputation: Gigantic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    3,068
    Quote Originally Posted by Greg_o View Post
    As a 'curious but not overly adept at building' observer, I gotta ask - Why do they not sell complete bikes, but rather just the frame and fork?

    (sorry if it's already been covered here)
    They're manufacturing subcontractors who build bikes for other companies. They've discovered that they can add to their income stream by selling unbranded product to individuals. Some of the individuals that companies like this sell to, actually start their own brands; Lamere springs to mind as an example. Mostly though, these websites aren't there for us, the end user, they're B2B sites to market their wares to small brands worldwide in quantities of 100pc or more.

  186. #986
    dvn
    dvn is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation: dvn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    711
    Quote Originally Posted by cavo View Post
    anyone having issues with 190mm spaced frame? here is what i received today from speedercycling.
    "Originally we planned arrange shipment this week, but we received our customer feedback from USA. they said the frame 190mm spacing design is a little difference for the hub in USA market, in order to you can build the fat bike easy, so, we advise factory adjust the design. the delivery time within September 10"
    Yes. I have the 190 spaced IP-010 and with a 190 spaced hub in place, the rotor is too far outward as is the cassette lockring. Both rub bad. If I install the hub with the supplied 197 spacers everything lines up much better but this requires a slight spreading of the dropouts. I'm not going to sweat it but there does seem to be some confusion on the spacing.
    "Either way it doesn't really matter, I just got back from a bike ride."
    > dbhammercycle

  187. #987
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    592
    ok, thanks

  188. #988
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Posts
    4
    Quote Originally Posted by dvn View Post
    Yes. I have the 190 spaced IP-010 and with a 190 spaced hub in place, the rotor is too far outward as is the cassette lockring. Both rub bad. If I install the hub with the supplied 197 spacers everything lines up much better but this requires a slight spreading of the dropouts. I'm not going to sweat it but there does seem to be some confusion on the spacing.
    Hi DVN
    I concur with you regards rear spacing, brake rub, cassette rub and the fact that the rear will only fit a 160mm rotor.

    Today a carbon wheelset from a different supplier with chosen hubs arrived these hubs seem to be about 188mm wide. (I only have 160mm calipers)

    There were 4 equal width spacers totaling 14mm supplied with the wheel, each spacer's width takes the full depth of the rebate, leaving no rebate for the wheel to drop into.

    Spreading the rear from 190 to 197 does not appear to be an optimum solution but something is going to have to give.

    Jamming it all in there is a solution.
    I'll remove the derailleur hanger and consider modifying the spacers, hanger or the frame or see if a packer fits into the hub somewhere on the drive side....

    Not sure I'll get any love from the frame or wheel supplier, at least folks who have not received their frame have a chance for the manufacturer to get it right...

  189. #989
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    52
    I revived my 190mm Xiamen(Speedercycling) IP10 last week. The machined recess is 2.5mm on each side. This is "stealing" from the width of the hub. This should be 190mm flat-face or 197 with 3.5mm recess on each side as discussed earlier in this thread.

    OK, so I have to force a 197mm hub in my frame to make things line up! I have some Sarma hubs in the mail, which is convertible...but now my axle is to short. Arghhh!

    This is the price to pay for being Chinese beta testers...

  190. #990
    dvn
    dvn is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation: dvn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    711
    It seems like the manufacturer got their 190 and 197 spacing mixed up. Even with the 197 spacers in there, I had to dremel the mounting slots in my calipers to get them out far enough the be centered on the rotor. My Xmiplay axle is a bit short as well. I was supposed to receive axles with my Chinese wheelset (Chosen hubs) but did not. They are on the way so I'll see if that one is any longer. I'm not too concerned about having to spread the dropouts a bit. What I am concerned about is dropping one of those axle spacers during a flat change on the trail and losing it. Then I'm done! I think I need to find a way to bond the spacer to the dropout so that can't happen. +1 on being the beta testers!
    "Either way it doesn't really matter, I just got back from a bike ride."
    > dbhammercycle

  191. #991
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    52
    Quote Originally Posted by dvn View Post
    It seems like the manufacturer got their 190 and 197 spacing mixed up.
    I have an idea of what happened. Look at this detail of the IP10 frame drawing posted by [email protected]:
    Name:  Fatbike_FB02_190mm_detail.png
Views: 2277
Size:  70.3 KB

    The dimension for the position of the 160mm brake rotor (13.5mm) is referencing the inside of the frame instead of the hub face which would have been the logical choice. If this is true, this is simply a CAD error that got into production.

  192. #992
    dvn
    dvn is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation: dvn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    711
    Quote Originally Posted by Geir68 View Post
    I have an idea of what happened. Look at this detail of the IP10 frame drawing posted by [email protected]:
    Name:  Fatbike_FB02_190mm_detail.png
Views: 2277
Size:  70.3 KB

    The dimension for the position of the 160mm brake rotor (13.5mm) is referencing the inside of the frame instead of the hub face which would have been the logical choice. If this is true, this is simply a CAD error that got into production.
    Looks like you've got it there. I'm sure Peter will see this. I'm interested to hear his response.
    "Either way it doesn't really matter, I just got back from a bike ride."
    > dbhammercycle

  193. #993
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    469

    Chinese Carbon fatty

    Quote Originally Posted by Geir68 View Post
    I have an idea of what happened. Look at this detail of the IP10 frame drawing posted by [email protected]:
    Name:  Fatbike_FB02_190mm_detail.png
Views: 2277
Size:  70.3 KB

    The dimension for the position of the 160mm brake rotor (13.5mm) is referencing the inside of the frame instead of the hub face which would have been the logical choice. If this is true, this is simply a CAD error that got into production.
    The drawing is missing the assumed hub face distance from the frame. The 13.5mm measurement may be the necessary clearance so the rotor doesn't hit the caliper or stays.

  194. #994
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    592
    Quote Originally Posted by Geir68 View Post
    I revived my 190mm Xiamen(Speedercycling) IP10 last week. The machined recess is 2.5mm on each side. This is "stealing" from the width of the hub. This should be 190mm flat-face or 197 with 3.5mm recess on each side as discussed earlier in this thread.
    so would, lets say JB welding 2.5mm spacer in each slot and using 190mm spaced hub be a solution?

  195. #995
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Posts
    23
    Hi All, just joined the forum although I've lurked here for sometime and previously in the Chinese carbon 29er one. Been reading everything with interest. I have a Dengfu FM190 frame and fork arriving this week and carbon wheelset with chosen hubs are en route. Some concerns about the hub to drop out interface as I have been informed that it's a 190mm hub requiring spacers to make up to 197mm for the thru axle. Fingers crossed it will fit ok and I'll be getting my first fat bike experience in the near future.

  196. #996
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    592
    Jay, fm190 is not the frame discussed in last couple of posts. you never know, they might have gotten this one right

  197. #997
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    52
    Quote Originally Posted by cavo View Post
    so would, lets say JB welding 2.5mm spacer in each slot and using 190mm spaced hub be a solution?
    No, the frame is already 190mm inside the slots. Thats the problem. It should have been 197.
    I see I made a typing error about this. The slots are 3.5mm, like they should be according to the drawing.
    ----------
    There must exist a standardized distance from hub face to brake rotor. This could be a function of hub width, but I think it is the same across all hub widths.
    This is a picture of one of my 135mm rear hubs:
    Chinese Carbon fatty-brake-position.jpg

    It measures aprox. 15.5mm from hub to inside brake rotor. Subtract 2mm from the rotor width and we are down to 13.5mm.

    Our frames have the brake mount 3.5mm to far towards the center of the wheel.

  198. #998
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    592
    ok, so i n that case, could dropouts be drilled additional 3.5 mm with sanding drill bit or something similar? or is there going to be not enough dropout material left?

  199. #999
    Loser
    Reputation: Jisch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    5,535
    That stinks! that's the frame I would have bought too.

  200. #1000
    mtbr member
    Reputation: brankulo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    1,647
    i think you need to add 3.5mm on non drive side, rather than subtract. seems like spreading the dropouts is the only way.

Page 5 of 21 FirstFirst 12345678915 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Sette Razzo Carbon vs Chinese Direct Carbon
    By bank5 in forum 29er Bikes
    Replies: 21
    Last Post: 05-28-2015, 12:07 PM
  2. Replies: 11
    Last Post: 01-31-2013, 05:17 PM
  3. Replies: 2
    Last Post: 12-11-2012, 10:10 PM
  4. Chinese Carbon FS vs GT Zaskar 100 9er Carbon
    By Perfect Gentleman in forum 29er Bikes
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 03-08-2012, 06:45 AM
  5. not just a chinese carbon frame, but 90% chinese!
    By menusk in forum Bike and Frame discussion
    Replies: 22
    Last Post: 06-22-2011, 01:53 PM

Members who have read this thread: 123

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

THE SITE

ABOUT MTBR

VISIT US AT

© Copyright 2020 VerticalScope Inc. All rights reserved.