Chinese carbon gravel bike - Tideace

@razorimages how did you have Tideace ship your frame to you?  Are you in Europe by chance?  Did they send it XDB?  I'm curious about how this all works.  They sent mine XDB and the tracking number worked for awhile and now it doesn't.  It seemed to show though that it had been given to UPS at some point.  The people at Tideace aren't very helpful when it comes to communicating info about the shipping and tracking.  Any insight would be appreciated.

ndbike wrote:@razorimages how did you have Tideace ship your frame to you?  Are you in Europe by chance?  Did they send it XDB?  I'm curious about how this all works.  They sent mine XDB and the tracking number worked for awhile and now it doesn't.  It seemed to show though that it had been given to UPS at some point.  The people at Tideace aren't very helpful when it comes to communicating info about the shipping and tracking.  Any insight would be appreciated.

\nI am in France . They ship 2 frames to me actually, both used 2 tracking numbers : one while transiting to France , and one after the custom release. From my understanding, they were shipping to Hong Kong and then France. It took 15 days for each one.... hope it helps !!!!

I'm not sure if you've been able to ride, but I'm curious if you have any more new insights/observations about the frame/ride quality, ... ?

Croz wrote:I'm not sure if you've been able to ride, but I'm curious if you have any more new insights/observations about the frame/ride quality, ... ?

So far, i've only 150 km of mixted terrain rides with it, and i must say, i really love it.

This is my 4th gravelbike (Pinnacle Arkose, Genesis , and cannondale slate), so i can compare... 
It's a great mix between stiffness and comfort. Very responsive, as opposed to the Arkose and Slate : they were all about comfort, rather than transmitting power... indeed, they were made out of aluminium, and the geometries are very different.

The geometry of this frame is the same as the 3T exploro (on paper, got to verify), and it's quite a short bike (toe overlap with mine), but it's fun to ride.
It's not meant to be a grandfondo bike : don't expect to be relaxed on this. It's realy on the roadbike side type of position. But i was looking for that...

Quality : well, it's not really top notch quality. Some flaws here and there, especially on the paint that is thicker at some places (maybe choose the raw carbon matt version ?). But it's alright for this price... it's almost 10 times cheaper than the limited edition Exploro (the black, lighter version).

It's not a bike for long distances, IMO. 
but on 3 hours ride on mixed terrains as i did last week, it's perfect....
hope it helps !!!







 

razorimages wrote:

So far, i've only 150 km of mixted terrain rides with it, and i must say, i really love it.

This is my 4th gravelbike (Pinnacle Arkose, Genesis , and cannondale slate), so i can compare... 
It's a great mix between stiffness and comfort. Very responsive, as opposed to the Arkose and Slate : they were all about comfort, rather than transmitting power... indeed, they were made out of aluminium, and the geometries are very different.

The geometry of this frame is the same as the 3T exploro (on paper, got to verify), and it's quite a short bike (toe overlap with mine), but it's fun to ride.
It's not meant to be a grandfondo bike : don't expect to be relaxed on this. It's realy on the roadbike side type of position. But i was looking for that...

Quality : well, it's not really top notch quality. Some flaws here and there, especially on the paint that is thicker at some places (maybe choose the raw carbon matt version ?). But it's alright for this price... it's almost 10 times cheaper than the limited edition Exploro (the black, lighter version).

It's not a bike for long distances, IMO. 
but on 3 hours ride on mixed terrains as i did last week, it's perfect....
hope it helps !!!

 

Yes! It definitely does help. I'm still deciding between this, the Carbonda 505, and the Workswell R-125 (same geo as the Open - at least printed ;-/). I'm a bit torn as I've currently got an Asylum Meuse with a gravel and road wheelset. It's basically a Chinese carbon frame that started as a crowdfunding project and was sold in the US under the Asylum brand, which has since folded. And it works alright, handling is ok, thought after putting a TRP fork on it, it got noticeably better (more offset/so less trail and a more stable feel especially under braking). I've also got a 2010 Tarmac SL2 which is a joy to ride. I'm toying with the idea of one bike to do duty for both... and I'm reluctant to give up the sharp handling of the Tarmac. That bike is such a pleasure to ride even at almost 8 years old.

I know there will be trade-offs but I'm leaning toward this or the Carbonda as they tend more towards the roadie side of the handling spectrum.  Because this is a newly released frame and I'm not familiar with Tideace, I'm cautious, but since it'll take 650x2.1 tires it is still on my radar. I will be using a 2x so the front derailleur mount screw issue is a bit concerning. I'm going to see how the other builds go for now.

I really appreciate your input.

You know , my first choice was the Carbonda 505 , thanks to this forum 🤗. At the time I ve found that carbonda was slow to reply... I did not know that it would take almost 2 months to have my Tideace because they sent me another frame by mistake...so if i were you i would stick with Carbonda they are more serious I think. \nThat said, I do not regret my choice because so far it’s best Gravel chassis I ve ever had. It’s very fast on the road as well!

Croz wrote:
 And it works alright, handling is ok, thought after putting a TRP fork on it, it got noticeably better (more offset/so less trail and a more stable feel especially under braking). I've also got a 2010 Tarmac SL2 which is a joy to ride. I'm toying with the idea of one bike to do duty for both... and I'm reluctant to give up the sharp handling of the Tarmac. That bike is such a pleasure to ride even at almost 8 years old.

Less trail (greater fork offset) would give less stability, especially while braking, no?

chas wrote:

Less trail (greater fork offset) would give less stability, especially while braking, no?

You are correct.  However I have found most people think more offset means more stable, so many bike/fork reviews on the internet repeat this misinformation.  It also shows how the placebo effect works.  People install a higher offset fork, they think it makes their bike more stable (when its the opposite) and then rave about how stable their bike is thanks to the higher offset fork.

i guess it's all about head angle right ?

razorimages wrote:i guess it's all about head angle right ?

When trying to determine how a given bike will ride, you have to consider the geometry as a whole rather than isolating any one or two particular values.  For instance some things that affect stability are:  wheelbase, head angle, bottom bracket drop, fork offset and even tire/wheelsize (the bigger a wheel is the higher the trail value and the slower the steering).  But at the same time the difference between most frames are very minor and really overemphasized on forums and review sites alike.  For instance I see people make a big deal about a bottom bracket drop of 65mm vs 70mm.  In reality, most people would notice no difference at all going from one to the next.  Of course if I told you ahead of time, the placebo effect takes hold and suddenly you "feel' it.  I would love to see some bike reviews where the reviewers are not told the geometry of a bike prior to riding it, then you would get much more honest reviews.  What happens is reviewers see a number on a geometry chart, and then of course they feel the difference when they ride it.  I suspect if they hadn't seen the geometry before hand they would have no idea from their test ride.  Personally, I went from a 45mm rake fork to a 50mm rake fork and could tell absolutely no difference in the handling.  The one thing I did notice is that it got rid of my toe overlap, so that was a big plus for me.  

ljsmith wrote:

When trying to determine how a given bike will ride, you have to consider the geometry as a whole rather than isolating any one or two particular values.  For instance some things that affect stability are:  wheelbase, head angle, bottom bracket drop, fork offset and even tire/wheelsize (the bigger a wheel is the higher the trail value and the slower the steering).  But at the same time the difference between most frames are very minor and really overemphasized on forums and review sites alike.  For instance I see people make a big deal about a bottom bracket drop of 65mm vs 70mm.  In reality, most people would notice no difference at all going from one to the next.  Of course if I told you ahead of time, the placebo effect takes hold and suddenly you "feel' it.  I would love to see some bike reviews where the reviewers are not told the geometry of a bike prior to riding it, then you would get much more honest reviews.  What happens is reviewers see a number on a geometry chart, and then of course they feel the difference when they ride it.  I suspect if they hadn't seen the geometry before hand they would have no idea from their test ride.  Personally, I went from a 45mm rake fork to a 50mm rake fork and could tell absolutely no difference in the handling.  The one thing I did notice is that it got rid of my toe overlap, so that was a big plus for me.  

This^ absolutely!

I should have been more clear when I said that the handling got noticeably better. It got more responsive and less sluggish. I was actually a bit bummed initially with the handling of the bike when I first got it - coming from racing bikes. As for braking, the fork is much beefier and it felt more solid under heavy braking than the original fork and the same was true on rough terrain/washboards - though it is a thru axle and the other was QR... which could explain some of that.

I actually didn't notice that the TRP fork had greater offset until I was talking with TRP ( I was actually giving them feedback as I'd worked with them before). I mentioned that I took it on a road ride and it seemed to be a bit better in the tight turns with the new fork... The fork's designer asked me if I had the offset on the bike's original fork and when I told him what it was we saw that it shortened up the trail (actually now it has the same trail # as the Open UP which probably doesn't mean much - to ljsmith's points...  ;-)) I am used to a bike riding one way (probably based on decades of riding racing bikes) and I seem to like what some call "less stable" or what I call "more responsive" handling - that's nothing more than my taste. I will likely adapt to whatever bike I have under me, but some clearly feel more fun in certain terrain.

I agree wholeheartedly with the previous comments regarding trail/offset and the importance of looking at the geometry as a whole - or really better yet, just go ride the bike! Looking at one aspect of geometry is pointless. Similar to the example of BB drop, I often hear/read folks say a bike has a "slack" head angle so it must not handle that well... but they never mention the fork offset. The same trail # can be obtained with a fork that has 45mm of offset or 46, or 50 depending on the head angle...(we could look at Gary Fisher's G2 geometry in the MTB 29er world to see how he used increased offset to change the handling of his bikes... which then became the norm for most suspension forks) If you  want to play with more #s you can use this trail calculator (http://www.bikeraceinfo.com/tech/trail.html) and see that a bike with 53mm of offset can have the same trail # as a bike with 43 mm of offset... again, as ljsmith points out, wheel size will change those #s as well. Many bike designers have had some VERY heated discussions about these #'s and there are many paths to a fine handling bike. Frankly, it really comes down to finding a bike that feels good for you.

I think the difficulty that encourages these conversations (and I'm guilty of this as well) is that we can't ride these bikes so we are trying to get SOME idea of the handling based on what information is available - and that is from other riders, who we know little about - and the geometry #s. Unfortunately, we tend to get stuck on one # or another...

I also find that we can adapt to whatever we have to ride... though if you don't like it they are making new ones every day. ;-)

Lastly, razorimages: I really appreciate your feedback about the Carbonda! It is slowly moving to the top of the list... It, incidentally has the shortest trail # of all of them ;-)  Guilty as charged!

Croz

Croz wrote:


Lastly, razorimages: I really appreciate your feedback about the Carbonda! It is slowly moving to the top of the list... It, incidentally has the shortest trail # of all of them ;-)  Guilty as charged!

Croz

you're welcome !  As i said, i was initially up for a (white) Carbonda... more reviews and experiences from other riders. It is defenately worth the money.

I feel like a monkey testing a new frame with this Tideace... hope it won't break   

razorimages wrote:

you're welcome !  As i said, i was initially up for a (white) Carbonda... more reviews and experiences from other riders. It is defenately worth the money.

I feel like a monkey testing a new frame with this Tideace... hope it won't break   

Actually, we are all in the same boat with these frames... I share the same concern with the Carbonda.

While others have been using that frame for a year or so, I don't know how hard it has been pushed in terms of rough roads and at high speeds. I'm not saying it hasn't been pushed hard, I just don't know how others' experience with the bike compares to what I'll be doing with it. I have taken my Asylum down some really rough roads, and after doing that often enough for a couple of years, I feel confident that the frame is up to it. When I look at Carbonda frame, the skinny seatstays and particularly where they join the seat tube - I am hesitant. But I guess that's part of the price we pay for a $600 carbon frameset.

Interestingly, one of the things I like about the Tideace is that it looks to be a stouter frame than the Carbonda... Also, given the weight of most of these frames, I'd bet that they are likely overbuilt. Carbonda does have a 2 year warranty. Did Tideace say anything about a warranty?

Croz

from users experience, the Carbonda seems alright... I can't push my Tideace because of snow right now, but i will ASAP, and i'll let you know...
It looks beefy you're right like the 3T Exploro, since it's very close, i like that... Once again, it's the best feeling gravel i got in hands.

About warranty, Haideli / Tideace claims 2 years (on their page : https://fr.aliexpress.com/store/product/2018-NEW-arrival-Aero-Road-or-MTB-Bike-Frame-S-M-L-size-Cyclocross-Frame-Disc/1944411_32829431129.html?spm=a2g0w.12010108.1000016.1.47bb25c8EEu3fT&isOrigTitle=true ).

I believe if it breaks you'll have to send pictures, and they will or won't replace the frame... 
we'll see !

Little Update after some testing...
No major issues, but 2 little :
-I've swapped the crankset from Shimano 105 to a Sram Force, and the little adapters that they send with the frame (24mm>22mm) are okay, but for those who will mount Sram cranks, i suggest you change the BB for a SRAM (press fit), you will avoid the use of the adapter, it add 2mm of space on the non-driveside crank arm...

-Seatpost tightening tool : first, you have to use carbon paste, to avid slipery, and you have to thighten the bolt to 7Nm. But the bolt they provide is too short, on mine it destoyed the taper, and it was turning loose ! I've used a longer and stronger bolt from a Thonson seatpost, gently drill the taper , and it was okay. I did not over tighten it... 6Nm, and did not had any seatpost issues.

cheers !

   

@razorimages how did you get your frameset shipped to you?  Was it EMS, XDB or some other option.  Mine was shipped XDB and it still hasn't arrived!  If it was XDB, I have a question for you.

Thanks!

ndbike wrote:@razorimages how did you get your frameset shipped to you?  Was it EMS, XDB or some other option.  Mine was shipped XDB and it still hasn't arrived!  If it was XDB, I have a question for you.

Thanks!

It was EMS. I has a shipment number until it reached Singapour, and then a Chronopost one(french post). Both frames from them took 3 weeks to arrive... Can you track your frame thought ?

razorimages wrote:
It was EMS. I has a shipment number until it reached Singapour, and then a Chronopost one(french post). Both frames from them took 3 weeks to arrive... Can you track your frame thought ?

Yes, there´s a tracking number and I´ve seen the frame travel all over Europe and now it is apparently in the Czech Republic waiting to clear customs.  It´s been over 2 months now since it left China.

For anyone else out there reading this, I would NOT recommend shipping by XDB.  

ndbike wrote:

Yes, there´s a tracking number and I´ve seen the frame travel all over Europe and now it is apparently in the Czech Republic waiting to clear customs.  It´s been over 2 months now since it left China.

For anyone else out there reading this, I would NOT recommend shipping by XDB.  

That's really annoying !!!
2 months : it is WAY too long... i hope they did not do the same mistake for you as they did for me (wrong frame !) 

At least , i can assure you that it will be a really great bike to ride. I've changed the wheels for 25mm with 38mm of height, and it's perfect for nearly every terrain... It's worth the wait that's for sure.

ndbike wrote:

Yes, there´s a tracking number and I´ve seen the frame travel all over Europe and now it is apparently in the Czech Republic waiting to clear customs.  It´s been over 2 months now since it left China.

For anyone else out there reading this, I would NOT recommend shipping by XDB.  

I have the exact same problem, frame left from Workswell in november, shipped via XDB, still in Czech republic in customs.