Australian Cycling Forums - Bicycles Network Australia

masa wrote:Hi, I thought of building a bike too but not in a rush. Is there any price cycle for Chinese carbon frame and wheelset? For example price drop after Easter? ( may not be an good example). I like to order when that time comes.

Nope, only get a discount if you start buying larger qty's.

masa wrote:Hi, I thought of building a bike too but not in a rush. Is there any price cycle for Chinese carbon frame and wheelset? For example price drop after Easter? ( may not be an good example). I like to order when that time comes.

Not that I am an expert by any means, but frames tend to drop once they have been available for 6mths to a year and the initial crush of orders is over. Prices are also lower for group orders - check velobuild.com. Availability is a bit hit and miss. Mine was a stock size and finish, so I received it within a week.

YouAgainstMe wrote:I am trying to decide between FSC38-CA-DT with the DT swiss 240 hubs vs DA c24's. They are both around the same price and either will be lighter than mavic aksiums I currently have.
I don't ride big climbs often but do enjoy it and was leaning towards the c24's for the lightweight factor. However I do most of my riding on flat to small hills around Melbourne and after hearing good reviews on the chinese carbons got a price of $790 delivered. Can anyone care to share any advice?

Cheers,

It's pretty simple, you don't do climbs so aero will be more important, go the deeper rims.

I'm pretty sure that anyone you talk to will say aero > weight except for climbing.

I have DA c24's, I love them. I do heaps of climbing though - aiming for 175000m this year

I am thinking to get a frame either in 3k matte or UD matte finish. I prefer the UD but the patches of carbon, see the fork and top tube below, have made me hard to pull the trigger. Any past experience that can be shared ?

Looks crap finish.

wurtulla wabbit wrote:Looks crap finish.

That's what UD can look like. Some like it, some don't. Meh

MichaelB wrote:

wurtulla wabbit wrote:Looks crap finish.

That's what UD can look like. Some like it, some don't. Meh

It looks allot better in person, quite cool up close actually.

My bianchi has a kind of marble finish at the headstock, looks awesome under clearcoat, not so sure it would look good raw !

It's not raw, it has a matte finish.
One is shiny one is not, they both a have a 'finish'.

After 4500km's the front hub bearings on my Farsports FSC50CM 50mm clinchers have packed it in.
Standard Edhubs / Bitex hubs.
Started to make a bit of a metallic pinging noise. thought it was spokes, but isolated it to the hub.
Pulled the bearings out today & 3 of them were completely shagged.

Off to hoopers bearings & 4 new 688llb bearings.

Overall I'm fairly happy with this wheelset after 5 months / 4500km's
If i had my time again i would go with a aluminum braking surface.
Have tried Reynolds blue cryo brake pads & the ones they throw in with the wheels
& neither imo are confidence inspiring in the wet.

This week while i had the front wheel off i have been riding with a mavic aksium on the front.
Much much heavier, but in this weeks wet weather, I was happy to trade weight with superior braking performance.

mike95 wrote:After 4500km's the front hub bearings on my Farsports FSC50CM 50mm clinchers have packed it in.
Standard Edhubs / Bitex hubs.
Started to make a bit of a metallic pinging noise. thought it was spokes, but isolated it to the hub.
Pulled the bearings out today & 3 of them were completely shagged.

Off to hoopers bearings & 4 new 688llb bearings.

Overall I'm fairly happy with this wheelset after 5 months / 4500km's
If i had my time again i would go with a aluminum braking surface.
Have tried Reynolds blue cryo brake pads & the ones they throw in with the wheels
& neither imo are confidence inspiring in the wet.

This week while i had the front wheel off i have been riding with a mavic aksium on the front.
Much much heavier, but in this weeks wet weather, I was happy to trade weight with superior braking performance.

The 688 bearings are pretty small which is why four are used in the front hub to improve the static load capacity. Out of interest how much do you weigh?

yeah the 688 bearings are quite small. i was a bit surprised.
I weigh approx 78kg.
A lot of my riding is commuting combined with training, with a backpack that would weigh a few extra kg's.

Marty Moose wrote:Where do you buy these wheels from ?? The sites I've seen they are over $600 plus shipping not really that cheap.

MM

Cheers people been doing the interweb rounds about these pretty interested in the U shaped rims or the 23-24mm farsports. Still not decided will send Paw Paw a pm see how his are going.

MM

mike95 wrote:yeah the 688 bearings are quite small. i was a bit surprised.
I weigh approx 78kg.
A lot of my riding is commuting combined with training, with a backpack that would weigh a few extra kg's.

I was going to look at my bearings but was not sure how to get to them. Can you please give a brief description of how to access them?

Ta

Pretty generic http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=udFqrm5pUe0" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Howdy. Thought I'd post some feedback on my 5Omm carbon clinchers from Farsports. (For pic, specs & initial feedback - original post is a few pages back at Aug 31, 2012).

I've now I've got 6 months and about 6000ks into these wheels. All good, no issues at all, looking and riding as good as new. Just back from the LBS - thought it was time to get the wheels checked over for trueness, spoke tension, hubs etc (didn't bother getting them looked at out of the box, just plonked them on), and all good, nothing to be done except for a very slight tweak of one spoke on the rear wheel. So, couldn't be happier and will have confidence in ordering more gear from Farsports and the couple of other well-known Chinese outlets in the future.

Cheers, Ross

has anyone bought Farsports' 50mm alloy brake surface carbon clinchers yet?

Regarding RoadBikeReview, nice to hear you've had a troublefree run RossB. How many hills have you taken them on?

WinstonW - gday. Done some riding through Perth hills on them, no worries at all. However, when I know I've got plenty of hills riding coming up, I do swap back to the original wheels - RS80s. Reasons being:
- the RS80s have a 12-25 cassette, versus the Farsports on which I've got 11-23 (specifically set up for the majority of my riding which is on the flats)
- on the RS80s I know I can break as hard and for as long as I like, rather than feeling the need to be gentler on the Farsports out of concern for overheating/rim distortion
- no major issues otherwise. The carbon rims I find a slightly harsher ride on the rougher hills roads, but like them better for climbing as they are a good bit lighter & more responsive

End of the day, I like both of these wheelsets, horses for courses... And after all, only takes a few minutes to swap wheels & break pads as need be.

Cheers

...BTW, among the guys I ride with are some who have got plenty of ks into their BladeX wheels and swear by them (quality and price), I'll be considering their stuff along with Farsports when next the need arises...

Anyone tried these?

warthog1 wrote:Anyone tried these?

Shame they are only 20.5 wide, from personal experience I find a 23mm wide rim (carbon or alloy) is noticeably more comfortable and corners waaaay better due to tyre shape.
Not sure why they went aero with a 20.5 rim rather than 23, as far as I can tell they only make aero rims in 20.5 and 25mm width?

I have just made an interesting (& disappointing) observation between some 20.5 & 23mm wide carbon clinchers.
They have an almost identical internal width, the so called 23mm wide is not going to give me any benefits such as rounder tyre profile or more volume.

Y0ele0 '23mm' rim - Internal width: 14.6-14.7mm
FarSports '23mm' rim - Internal width: 14.1mm
FarSports '20.5mm' rim - Internal width: 13.3-13.5mm

In summary the only difference is that the 23mm rim walls are twice as thick and weight more
Better off going the 20.5 or 25mm.

Crawf wrote:I have just made an interesting (& disappointing) observation between some 20.5 & 23mm wide carbon clinchers.
They have an almost identical internal width, the so called 23mm wide is not going to give me any benefits such as rounder tyre profile or more volume.

Y0ele0 '23mm' rim - Internal width: 14.6-14.7mm
FarSports '23mm' rim - Internal width: 14.1mm
FarSports '20.5mm' rim - Internal width: 13.3-13.5mm

In summary the only difference is that the 23mm rim walls are twice as thick and weight more
Better off going the 20.5 or 25mm.

Interesting. My Kinlin 23mm wide rims have an internal width of 17mm. So a 23mm Vittoria Rubino Pro 3 measures 25mm across on these rims.

That's what I was assuming these would have, like my a23's and archetypes - something around 17mm internal.

Crawf wrote:That's what I was assuming these would have, like my a23's and archetypes - something around 17mm internal.

PFBB.

One quick way of keeping up with the trend and minimising costs. Make something that looks like it is, but it isn't.

Whilst I haven't measured the internal width of my Far Sports 29er CC rims (23mm deep x 24mm wide), I had to quickly check the drawings that were supplied. It shows an internal width of 18.4mm from Bead to Bead. I used 19mm width rim tape (i.l.o. the normal 17mm) and it fitted fine, so I think the internal with was pretty right).

Phew (sort of).

That sucks Crawf. And you've built these up already ? Otherwise, send them back.

Other than that, thanks for letting us know another thing to double check before ordering ....