Who on BR has bought a 'cheap' Chinese carbon frame?

yaya

NapoleonD wrote:

Carbon fibre is an incredibly cheap raw material. It's the moulding and laying up that costs a lot...

In previous life I owned a small workshop for modelling and prototyping in composite materials...mostly hi-tech and medical/ military equipment but also fairings for motorbikes, buses bumpers etc.

Carbon on average is 5-10 times more expensive than fibreglass and epoxy is 2-3 times more expensive than polyester...

It's all relative...you can make an expensive CNC'ed mould or you can make a cheap fibreglass one. You can lay up manually or use pre-preg sheets, you can use a balloon or a solid insert etc. pros and cons to each method of course...

geebee2

Look these frames are the real deal. I don't see how you could make a reliable ~1kg frame that wasn't made from proper material as advertised.

I have been riding my FM015 for a few months on UK roads, have hit a few potholes, and have never been in doubt that the frame is sturdy, well designed and well built.

It might now be quite as light or aero as some real fancy frames costing £2,000+, but it's pretty damn good for the money, and probably sturdier than the super light frames.

EKIMIKE

Daddylonglegs wrote:

That said, we are, I noticed, talking exclusively about monocoque carbon-fibre frames. These are frames made in one piece in a mould and lend themselves fairly easily to cheap mass-production. The down-side is they tend to be relatively heavy. Top of the range, hand-made carbon fibre frames on the other hand such as those produced by Look and others are a very different matter, with weights, comfort and stiffness that really do justice to the material as well as the huge price tags.

I think you'll find monocoque production is producing the lightest and stiffest frames around. You lugged Colnago's, Look and Time's are a few hundred grams heavier and not quite as stiff (although you'd need a laboratory of machines to know).

It's interesting you mention Look as they've now gone monocoque on the high end models, even the 695. Of course there is a place for beautiful lugged carbon frames. Monocoque production has clearly moved on and developed fast.

These Chinese frames aren't ever going to be at the pinnacle of production methods but they'll do fine/suffice for almost all of us out there riding our bikes. The true innovations will still come from the big name brands, but you can bet they will be copied eventually. This is what we're witnessing here. We've out sourced production to the Chinese for years and now they are simply putting into practice what they've learned over the years.

They're not some sort of inferior underclass wanting to sell us un-safe crap just to turn a profit at all costs. In fact pop over to weightweenies and look at the thread where the guy strips the paint and lacquer off his Scott Addict frame to reveal a whole load of handy-work with filler in various places around the frame. If anything it will be the big brands wanting to turn a profit at all costs.

Anonymous

^^
Wot he said.

mrbrightside

I pop in and out of these threads and a couple of things spring to mind;

Would a manufacturing plant really go to the expense of knocking up extra moulds to the ones with Pina/Wilier/Ribble written on them to pump frames out of the back door, in addition ordering in sub-standard materials to the ones they are currently getting through tons of onsite

Would a chief ex of *insert leading brand name here* continue building / buying frames in the current market downturn ignoring the fact that he could go buy similar frames to these increasing profit margins...

stephenswindley

Hi all,

I have been pouring over many threads about these carbon frames and have decided I want to give them a shot. I'm thinkng of getting the FM015 in 58cm and also getting a pair of 20mm carbon tubs and the carbon integrated handlebars and stem from carbonzone on ebay to build up my first 'proper' racing machine . I emailed carbonzone and they said the total cost for that lot would be approx £700, all being well I should have enough money to order in about a weeks time, can't wait!!

appletrees

After all the positive comments about Carbonzone, I've just pulled the trigger on some 20mm carbon tubs - £235 plus post of about 30 for a set of 1200 gm wheels?! Can't possibly go wrong at that price surely? Now how to explain to my wife... :?

rolf_f

EKIMIKE wrote:

I think you'll find monocoque production is producing the lightest and stiffest frames around. You lugged Colnago's, Look and Time's are a few hundred grams heavier and not quite as stiff (although you'd need a laboratory of machines to know).

It's interesting you mention Look as they've now gone monocoque on the high end models, even the 695. Of course there is a place for beautiful lugged carbon frames. Monocoque production has clearly moved on and developed fast.

Disappointed with Look for abandoning lugs - and a geometry that fits me........

Maybe not as much as a few 100 grams. Last years lugged Look 585 had a quoted weight of frame and forks of 1315 grams. The monocoque equivalent 586 was 1290 grams. So, only 25 grams difference. The monocoque 595s were actually heavier than the lugged 585. A Pinarello Dogma frame weighs 40 grams less than a 585 but you do pay £1500 more for it.

Mind you, I don't know how stiff the 585 is meant to be by modern standards - but it isn't that relevant to me as I don't weigh enough to flex bikes anyway!

Monty Dog

I guess someone had better call up Colnago, Time, Parlee, Crumpton and the like to tell them that their lugged frame designs are no good and that they better pack up and go home! :roll:

cal_stewart

why would a factory who makes the same frame for a large name charge the grade of carbon and lay up and drop standards to a dangerous level when making its own frame to sell on.

I'd like to make a bike up of only parts from china and sram force bet it wouldn't blow up and kill me. would think it would be cheap and light.

ga02clr

Has anybody used www.farsports.cn ?? Thinking of getting some wheels.

EKIMIKE

Monty Dog wrote:

I guess someone had better call up Colnago, Time, Parlee, Crumpton and the like to tell them that their lugged frame designs are no good and that they better pack up and go home! :roll:

No-one has said or insinuated that. On the other hand someone did insinuate that monocoque construction produces heavier and less stiff frames, which on the facts available, is a patent lie.

Obviously making generalisations are dangerous as there are so many different manufacturers out there, some who are specialist producers so there are exceptions on either side - heavy monocoque's, light lugged frames, light monocoque's, heavy lugged frames. Same for stiffness. But on measure there are more monocoque's with better stats.

But what do stats mean to us the average rider? Maybe we want a bike that handles excellently and ride's smoothly and that might indeed be a lugged Colnago, Parlee, Look, Time e.t.c.

One thing is for sure you'll pay through the nose for one of those frames. You may or may not find similar characteristics in a Chinese eBay special - therein lies the reason for this thread/trend.

It's not about what is better or worse in an absolute sense - just what one person is prepared to invest their money in. I don't get the perpetual 'one is better than the other' arguments. :roll:

Monty Dog

Ekimike quote: I think you'll find monocoque production is producing the lightest and stiffest frames around.

C'mon - make your mind up

FWIW One of the German bike mags did a test of frames for stiffness - top of the heap was a Pegoretti made from aluminium alloy.

Back to the debate, there's nothing to suggest these unbranded Chinese products are inferior to their 'branded' equivalents - the only record of any failure I've seen was due to a numbtie over-exuberatly sanding a fork steerer in order to get a crown race to fit which soon resulted in a broken fork!

agent_buchwald

All I can categorically say if searching for a chinese frame is make sure your anti-virus software is working - I've had 5 trouble free years and have just spent £49 of my frame fund getting the laptop sorted.
The chinarello is getting closer though.

ct4oc

these do look like a tempting proposition,

Just a quick question, what is the meaning of the "3K" or "12K" when you're talking about frames?

UnworthyPapaLazaru

NapoleonD wrote:

DesWeller wrote:

NapoleonD wrote:

Well, the wheels seem TOP

Weight is only 200g heavier than Zipp 808s, front 70g heavier and rear 130g heavier...

Build quality seems spot on, spokes are good, wheels true, rims look smart and the red nips and hubs look pimp.

No customs charge.

Looking forward to avvin a go!

I take it you went for the 80mm deep rims then? Have you had a chance to give them a spin yet?

Thinking of getting a pair of 60mm or 50mm rims and building them up!

88mm.

Not tried it yet, need to get a valve extender...

Im interested in these wheels, have you been able to put any decent milage in them yet? Are they quick?

mcrdave

3k and 12k refers to the top layer of carbon weave before the frame is clear coated. 12k is the narrower weave, 3k is wider (as per recent scott frames). I think that's the right way round

stephenswindley

[/quote]
No 3k is the narrower and 12k is the chunkier looking

Monty Dog

The weave pattern is purely cosmetic - the frame tubes themselves are usually uni-directional and have a fairly plain / marbled finish - paint is cheap and can hide all sorts of cosmetic imperfections.
To re-inforce the comments regarding the cost of a frame, a £999 bike probably leaves the factory gate at a cost of about $500, with the frame accounting for about a third of that cost. Don't kid yourself that 'branded' frames from the same factory cost a significant multiple more - anyone who has worked in marketing knows that price has no direct relation to cost.

UnworthyPapaLazaru

Yeah, but how do the wheels ride!!??

pickled

Do any of these companies do carbon clinchers?
I couldn't find any with carbonzone, and I'm not ready to go with tubs yet.

pickled

Forget it. I'm useless. :oops:
Found some with Yishun.

Anonymous

UnworthyPapaLazaru wrote:

NapoleonD wrote:

DesWeller wrote:

NapoleonD wrote:

Well, the wheels seem TOP

Weight is only 200g heavier than Zipp 808s, front 70g heavier and rear 130g heavier...

Build quality seems spot on, spokes are good, wheels true, rims look smart and the red nips and hubs look pimp.

No customs charge.

Looking forward to avvin a go!

I take it you went for the 80mm deep rims then? Have you had a chance to give them a spin yet?

Thinking of getting a pair of 60mm or 50mm rims and building them up!

88mm.

Not tried it yet, need to get a valve extender...

Im interested in these wheels, have you been able to put any decent milage in them yet? Are they quick?

Zero miles.

However, if I'm riding the bike of course they'll be freaking quick because my QuadPowertm is AWESOME!

ct4oc

ok, that makes sense, so if i wanted a frame the same as an R838 with a custom paint job who should i go through and how much should i expect to pay?

mroli

Carbonzone do 60m clinchers. Email for a price.

Zachariah

QUAD DAMAGE!

petemadoc

Zachariah wrote:

QUAD DAMAGE!

ay?

Zachariah

NapD's comment made me nostalgic for true quad power.

slunker

Anyone know what carbonzones equivelant frame is to the FM015??

they just have so many frames.....

UnworthyPapaLazaru

Awesome quad power? Watch you dont melt those bad boys when you head out...