Originally Posted by gsa103

Based on some the published destructive comparisons, it seems likely that the generic frames use a less sophisticated lay-up than a top tier bike. Many people report various minor defect/tolerancing issues, drop-out alignment, bottom brackets, etc. The vast majority of these seem to be very minor defects, which can be quickly addressed by a competent home mechanic.

In terms of the lay-up, its quite clear that the generic frames use a more basic layup than a top-tier name brand bike. You're basically getting relatively low tier carbon with a cosmetic wrap of the carbon of your choice. Nothing wrong with that, and I have yet to see a comparison between a generic frame and an entry level carbon frame from a name brand.

The third category is US based companies buying open-mold frames. Again you're getting basic frame, but now you have a US company which sets the basic specifications and can provide warranty support.

Perhaps the biggest drawback to the generic frames is simply that you can't really test them before purchasing. Does it ride better than an entry level Trek, what about a CAAD12? Ultimately, a good bike is much more than simply the raw materials, and that alone makes these very difficult to evaluate. This is fundamentally true of any internet purchase, so is there really much difference between a generic carbon frame and a carbon Motobecane from Bikes Direct.