The_Mickstar

I just can't seem to get it through my thick skull (or maybe it's just that I can't believe it), and now I can't seem to find the thread where this was discussed.

Is it confirmed that the Pedal Force QS2 frame is identical to the Litespeed Pavia? Has someone actually had them side-by-side and compared?

I've been looking over the geometry specs, and, aside from a few minor differences which could just be differences in the way the two companies measure things, they are pretty much dead on. And, from the pics I can find, the frame features sure look the same, too.

Also, has anyone ridden the QS2 in the larger sizes (58 or 61cm)? How's the bottom bracket stiffness on hard climbing/sprinting? How's the frame for absorbing road vibrations (and, since it's directly applicable to this, what fork are you using)?

Thanks.

Steve

linus

There is a possibility that they are made from the same factory, but I doubt that they are exactly the same frames. There is some differences between the two and yes, those minor differences matter. Also even with same geometry, a difference in the grades of CF matters too. For an example, Giant use to make frames for BH cycle, but that doesn't mean BH frames are same as Giant frames.

Do you really care? If a PF frame rides great, that's all you need. PF might be superior to Pavia who knows?

Patriot

QS2's are great frames. And yes, after comparing the two for quite some time with photos, I can say with a high level of certainty that they are the exact same frame (with a twist).

There is one very slight differance, from what I can see. The Litespeed has straight seat stays, and the QS2 is curved. The rest of the frame is exactly the same. From what I understand, they are made at t he same factory in Taiwan, and have the same quality controls, but when the stays are epoxied to the frame, the trademark of Litespeed has the straight stays applied, and the QS2 has the curved. Even the listed weights for the same size frames are within 20g of each other. That's it.

DocRay

QS2, Pavia, Focus are made in the same place.

Wanna start a bike company? Go to Taipei, they will make any frame you want, at any QC and strength standard you want, with a scale of price points. Most part manufacturers will then re-badge for whatever brand you want.

There's a good reason the Taipei bike show is one of the most attended and important for manufacturers.

I have not seen any professional reviews of QS2, but Focus frames have been very well reviewed.

thewalrus

Computex Taipei is the same thing for computer builders and importers:

https://www.computextaipei.com.tw/news20060310.asp

tekhna

Come on guys, you're destroying people's impressions that their brands matter, or are sacred!
Jerks.
We didn't want to know, and for so long you had the courtesy not to tell us.

Vinokurtov

You know, I went to the supermarket and noticed that "Old Dog Urine" came in pretty much the same shaped bottle as "Hand Finished Microbrew".

They even came from the same bottling plant. Old Dog Urine was 30 cents a bottle, vs. $3.95 for the other stuff.

They must think us fools!

It's all marketing!

And I'm sure ODU didn't cause the liver lesions I had the operation for.

So the QS2 and Pavia look kind of the same, other than some differences in geometry and seat stays (I'm going to skip over the blatantly obvious implication of that statement). Do you think there's an ever so small possibility that they might use different carbon/weave/epoxy in the (similar but not identical) mold? Might this not have a tiny implication for how the frame performs or stands up over time?

There are a number of brands that offer what looks to be the same frame in several models, they all ride differently and come in at different price points.

Most of the people who play the "it's all marketing" saw are pretty much riding cheap shiznit. Connection?

fmw

Sounds nice but you're just plain wrong on every count.

steve_wmn

The Litespeed page says they have special Litespeed resin and "3K low density carbon", whatever that means. My guess is that they built the Pavias with resin from Vat A and the QS2s with resin from Vat B just so they can say it's special, while the actually composition of the resins is basically the same. It sounds like plain old mystery ingredient marketing, which is as old as the Bible.

Litespeed would've been better off specifying titanium dropouts and making a big deal out of that. They are probably a bit better than aluminum or carbon dropouts (harder, more durable) and would give the Pavia a bit of the Litespeed heritage.

Vinokurtov

You mean about Specialized, Orbea, and others having three or more frames that look identical but perform and test (yes, using actual quatifiable test jig results (look up fact in the dictionary) here) differently?

Well elucidated response BTW.

Exactly.

Having a half assed guess is as good as facts...

I guess.

BTW, if you state those guesses in clipped British accent people will more readily believe you.

Phantoj

When you cut them open, the Litespeed has the sports section of the local paper as the base layer of the composite; the Pedal Force has the classifieds. Naturally, the sports section is considered more appropriate for a bike, thus it sells for more $$$.

The Motobecane Immortal Force uses the funnies for its base layer...

Vinokurtov

And BMC apparently uses hemp:

https://www.bikeforums.net/road-cycling/195254-custom-painted-bmc-pics.html

fmw

No I didn't say anything about Specialized, Orbea or anybody else. I didn't elucidate the response because your comments responded to posts I have made on the forums. If you want me to nail them down for you.

1. The QS2 and Pavia don't look similar. They look and are exactly alike - geometry, chain stays - the works. I've had the two together in the same room. No difference. None. The frame sizes, however, are different with PF preferring odd sizes and Litespeed even sizes. So there is your difference but I think it's a meaningless difference.

2. Do I think there is a chance they use different materials for the two frames? No, I don't think so. It doesn't make any business or economic sense to do so. I'm not a bike frame manufacturer but I am a businessman and your thesis makes no sense at all to me.

3. I'm one of the people who says "it's all marketing," and I don't ride ****nitz or whatever you said so that's just a personal attack with no foundation in truth and not worthy of posting.

The QS2 is viewed by many in Europe as one of the best CF frames in the business. They could be wrong but, at least, it says positive thing about Litespeed's ability to choose a good CF frame for their line. Or perhaps you're going to suggest that Litespeed with years of success and experience in building titanium frames, suddenly has the urge to develop similar expertise in carbon fiber so they can add a single new product to their line? That makes even less economic and business sense. I say your'e wrong on all counts.

mrt10x

Bottom line on all these threads, and there are dozens of them i.e. motobecane vs fuji, motobecane IF vs ??, etc etc etc. Every one of the proponents of the online frames being the same frame as some other much more expensive frame has to qualify their statements with "I think", "I heard", "someone told me", "they look the same to me." These are not statements of fact and they never can be. Unless you work for Litespeed, PF, MB, whoever and know for a FACT, this is all supposition and speculation. So to the OP, is it "confirmed," no, absolutely not, and it probably never will be. Would I buy a QS2 frame over the Litespeed? In a heartbeat, based upon the personal riding experience of several of the long time posters on this website who generally dont seem to be speaking out of their asses on other topics. Will I tell people that it is the same frame as the Litespeed,, probably, cuz I am a prideful bastard, will I always have the smallest grain of doubt in the back of my mind that my bike was made with inferior resins or carbon fiber, sure, but that tiny doubt is offset by the 2-3k i save on the frame. IMHO.

edit: I hate when people start posts with "bottom line" very pompous.. sorry.

linus

There is some differences in the geometry.
Why not? Your "think" is not important.

You don't have any prove of your assumtion. Unless you get a confirmation from both companies(Litespeed and PF).

They could, but no, they didn't because it's too much for them to invest. So what's that got to do with anything? The current trend is on CF, so they might actually build the frames here later like Cannondale.

fmw, you might be right that they are in fact the same frames that made with different molds, but that's still an assumtion, not a fact. FWIW, I like PF frames and I'm going to get one later this year. I think PF has a class of its own.

Stjtoday

My rolecks watch tells me its time to jump in my hyundai and get the flock out of this thread.

"QS2 is the best carbon fiber in the business"? Lol.. gonna have to save that one for a sig.

Vinokurtov

Actually, you missed the entire point of my post, which is that, unless you have firsthand knowledge of the manufacturing process, or have actually tested the frames, looks are meaningless when trying to decipher if one frame is the same as another. In fact, it's downright silly.

And your assertion that the frames are identical is at odds with what others have posted, so I guess you need to correct their assumptions. It's also at odds with, if I'm reading this correctly, the frame sizing (unless you mean they are identical dimensionally and they choose to CALL them different sizes).

If they are odd/even in actual dimensions, then your comment about manufacturing is blown to hell because if cost effectiveness was the decider, they wouldn't create a whole set of jigs just to make the sizes different. If you're going to do a production run with a different set of jigs, which is where the biggest up front cost is, why not change the grade of carbon or the epoxy?

I've no doubt the QS2 is a great frame. Never said or implied otherwise. And you'll notice the comment was that MOST of the "marketing hype"sters ride cheap shiznit. That would be MOST, not ALL.

I suggested the possibility, not fact, that the two frames could be made from different carbons and resins. You infer it's impossible. Then please spec out the strands per inch, grade of carbon, and epoxy blend, because the Toray T700 HR/HM carbon fiber used in the Pedal Force does not appear have the same specification as the 3k weave claimed for the Litespeed.

I stated "There are a number of brands that offer what looks to be the same frame in several models, they all ride differently and come in at different price points." And as you said I was wrong "on all counts", you are saying this is not correct. I think there are a lot of manufacturers that would take issue with that.

BTW, the oldest marketing ploy in the book is to make something LOOK like something else, and use less expensive ingrediants.

DocRay

A good example of marketing is Stella Azzura carbon products-these cost 50-100% more than Token products, and are just re-badged Token items.

14max

Doc - Where can the Token parts be purchased?

Phantoj

"Yes it is!"

"No it isn't! You can't prove that it is!"

"Yes it is! You can't prove that it isn't!"

etc, etc...


Even if they are different, who is to say that the more expensive Litespeed is not the inferior of the two? "Unless you have FACTS on the weight, stiffness, and durability of each, you're guessing..."

Do they look the same?

Maybe the difference (odd vs. even) in sizing has to do with the method of measuring...

fmw

Personally, I'm just sick of the arguments. The bike community simply doesn't want to believe how things work these days in the industry. I don't want to deal with it any more. If you want to believe the price of or brand name on a frame has anything at all to do with value or performance then you are free to do so. The whole thing has become as ridiculous as high end audio. I realize that challenging peoples' beliefs leads only to frustration and I won't do it any more. That's why I don't post about religion and politics. Take care.

fmw

Or, more likely, the same products bought from the same manufacturer by two different trading companies.

14max

Interesting reading in this thread. I checked out both the Litespeed and Pedal Force websites to compare some of the data for the Pavia and QS2 framesets and confirm the OP's thoughts. The specs for a 58cm Pavia are:

Seat Tube Length- 58
Top Tube Length - 57
Head Tube Angle - 73
Seat Tube Angle - 73
Chainstay Length - 40.6
BB Drop (cm) - 7.1
Wheelbase (cm) - 99.6
Front Center (cm) - 60
Fork Rake (cm) - 4.5
Head Tube Length - 19.5
Frame Weight (lbs) - 2.75

The specs for a 58cm QS2 are:

Seat Tube Length - 58
Top Tube Length - 57.0
Head Tube Angle - 73
Seat Tube Angle - 73
Chainstay Length - 40.6
BB Drop (cm) - 7.0
Wheelbase (cm) - 99.6
Front Center (cm) - 60.0
Fork Rake (cm) - 4.3
Head Tube Length - 19.5
Frame Weight (lbs) - 2.44


The Pavia looks like this:



The QS2 looks like this:



Really too similar for them not to be at least considered identical...

briscoelab

My only complaint with the QS2 in a size 58 was the TT was too short for me. I really like riding a 58.5cm TT with a 120mm stem. The 58 has a 57cm TT and I just didn't like the feel. I even tried a 130mm stem..... still felt a little short, tried a 140 just for kicks. It felt long and looked a little goofy to me. It was a GREAT frame though. If I could have been happy witht he size I would have kept it. I have even though about getting another one and setting it up for longer/century rides... as the 57cm TT and 120mm stem would be nice for a little more upright position. This was going to be my race bike.... so I got one that fit that use a bit better for me.

14max

Steve - What size of frame do you normally ride? I was tossing around the idea of getting a QS2 and, since I ride a 60cm, I wasn't sure which one would work better.