Velduro Rogue 170/165 mullet Enduro with DJI

Rogue and Gen 3 Levo as requested. >

Velduro_vs_Levo_side_by_side.png
 
⚡ EMTB Pro Go Pro — exclusive discounts & ad-free Peaty's 25% off & more · Ad-free browsing · Pro badge See the deals →
Ndanger said:
And Superimposed >

View attachment 175393
Click to expand...
Hate to say it, but the Rogues downtube is nearly the same thickness as the old Levo's in these pics, not taking into account scaling and sizing differences. Of course the same can't be said if the comparison was to the latest gen Levo. Still, the Rogue is a an Avinox steed, so there should have been no comparison and would have been silly if the Levo was compared to, say, an Unno. I'm not trying to harp on the bike's aesthetics (I have a deposit on one), and while I really like the bike's appearance overall, I have a gnawing feeling that the downtube could have been made slimmer, as has been afforded with other bikes that use Avinox's slender battery system. OTOH, this this might be some optical illusion, as I've yet to see any Avinox bike in the flesh.
 
slickrock said:
Hate to say it, but the Rogues downtube is nearly the same thickness as the old Levo's in these pics, not taking into account scaling and sizing differences. Of course the same can't be said if the comparison was to the latest gen Levo. Still, the Rogue is a an Avinox steed, so there should have been no comparison and would have been silly if the Levo was compared to, say, an Unno. I'm not trying to harp on the bike's aesthetics (I have a deposit on one), and while I really like the bike's appearance overall, I have a gnawing feeling that the downtube could have been made slimmer, as has been afforded with other bikes that use Avinox's slender battery system. OTOH, this this might be some optical illusion, as I've yet to see any Avinox bike in the flesh.
Click to expand...
Have you seen it in person? What ebike you ride now?
 
Quite the all round beautiful bike'n nature sunset scape capture slickrock.... Polaroid at its finest 👍 This be now kept in the stable warm dry and clean collectable.....
 
iJak said:
I would for sure go up to 220/223 Front at least. Rear being 200 is fine imo.
Click to expand...
I am not a fan of different size rotors front and back. It's true that a bigger rotor can generate more braking power, and you can use that better on the front while at the back the wheel might already be locked up.
But braking power is usually not an issue, even at the front. Especially not with 200/203 rotors. You will most likely have no trouble locking up your front wheel or go over the bar, depending on grip, any time you want.
What you really want the bigger rotors for is mass and surface area, to absorb and dissipate heat on longer descents and therefor avoid fading and other nastiness that comes with overheated brakes. And I found that I use the front and rear brakes about the same, or the back even a tad more. Thats also visible in brake pad wear. I usually change pads front and back at the same time, but the back is just a little more worn than the front.

So, I would recommend you to go the same size both front and back. What size exactly depends on your use case, weight and also largely on the design of the disc.
Discs with many small holes (BrakeStuff Push, Intend Massive for example) can absorb a lot of heat and dissipate it also very quickly. Here you can size down. The reward is a little less (but still more than you need) initial brake power but great consistency and controlability during all riding conditions.
Discs with large cutouts (Ashima ultralight, as an extreme example) give you lots of initial braking power if you go big diameter, but are not well suited to longer descends. They overheat quickly.
Somewhere in between are discs like Galfer Shark or Trickstuff Dächle.

Overall its not such a good idea to try and save weight on discs if you want to go down for longer periods of time. Cutting many small holes in a disc is expensive (long time in the laser machine), but gives great rewards in terms of heat dissipation on long descends.

That said, I (~75-80 kg with gear) opted for 203 Galfer shark front and back.
 
Last edited:
HiGer said:
I am not a fan of different size rotors front and back. It's true that a bigger rotor can generate more braking power, and you can use that better on the front while at the back the wheel might already be locked up.
But braking power is usually not an issue, even at the front. Especially not with 200/203 rotors. You will most likely have no trouble locking up your front wheel or go over the bar, depending on grip, any time you want.
What you really want the bigger rotors for is mass and surface area, to absorb and dissipate heat on longer descents and therefor avoid fading and other nastiness that comes with overheated brakes. And I found that I use the front and rear brakes about the same, or the back even a tad more. Thats also visible in brake pad wear. I usually change pads front and back at the same time, but the back is just a little more worn than the front.

So, I would recommend you to go the same size both front and back. What size exactly depends on your use case, weight and also largely on the design of the disc.
Discs with many small holes (BrakeStuff Push, Intend Massive for example) can absorb a lot of heat and dissipate it also very quickly. Here you can size down. The reward is a little less (but still more than you need) initial brake power but great consistency and controlability during all riding conditions.
Discs with large cutouts (Ashima ultralight, as an extreme example) give you lots of initial braking power if you go big diameter, but are not well suited to longer descends. They overheat quickly.
Somewhere in between are discs like Galfer Shark or Trickstuff Dächle.

Overall its not such a good idea to try and save weight on discs if you want to go down for longer periods of time. Cutting many small holes in a disc is expensive (long time in the laser machine), but gives great rewards in terms of heat dissipation on long descends.

That said, I (~75-80 kg with gear) opted for 203 Galfer shark front and back.
Click to expand...
answered questions I didn't have ... but good info thanks. If I'm 10-15kg heavier than you so bike and me will be circa 113kg then maybe 223mm is my way.
 
DMR Dave said:
answered questions I didn't have ... but good info thanks. If I'm 10-15kg heavier than you so bike and me will be circa 113kg then maybe 223mm is my way.
Click to expand...
Sounds about right. But don't just look at diameter, look at the design also. That makes a bigger difference imho.
 
The Magura MDR-Ps are the best rotors I've used, and by a long shot.

They are thick, they are 2 piece, they never warp, they are hard to overheat, they have a lot of bite, they are lighter than they look as the center section is Al, heck they even look great imo.

Also, if you see that little hole above the mounting holes, they sell a snap in magnet that on some e-bikes with rotor mount speed pickup can be used in place of your stock magnet pickup. My Fazua 60 is able to utilize this.

Screenshot 2026-02-04 093814.png
 
HiGer said:
I am not a fan of different size rotors front and back. It's true that a bigger rotor can generate more braking power, and you can use that better on the front while at the back the wheel might already be locked up.
But braking power is usually not an issue, even at the front. Especially not with 200/203 rotors. You will most likely have no trouble locking up your front wheel or go over the bar, depending on grip, any time you want.
What you really want the bigger rotors for is mass and surface area, to absorb and dissipate heat on longer descents and therefor avoid fading and other nastiness that comes with overheated brakes. And I found that I use the front and rear brakes about the same, or the back even a tad more. Thats also visible in brake pad wear. I usually change pads front and back at the same time, but the back is just a little more worn than the front.

So, I would recommend you to go the same size both front and back. What size exactly depends on your use case, weight and also largely on the design of the disc.
Discs with many small holes (BrakeStuff Push, Intend Massive for example) can absorb a lot of heat and dissipate it also very quickly. Here you can size down. The reward is a little less (but still more than you need) initial brake power but great consistency and controlability during all riding conditions.
Discs with large cutouts (Ashima ultralight, as an extreme example) give you lots of initial braking power if you go big diameter, but are not well suited to longer descends. They overheat quickly.
Somewhere in between are discs like Galfer Shark or Trickstuff Dächle.

Overall its not such a good idea to try and save weight on discs if you want to go down for longer periods of time. Cutting many small holes in a disc is expensive (long time in the laser machine), but gives great rewards in terms of heat dissipation on long descends.

That said, I (~75-80 kg with gear) opted for 203 Galfer shark front and back.
Click to expand...
Larger rotors on the front are not all about power and heat dissipation. It's also about more breaking control.
I was a 200mm front rotor man for like 20 years. "I can lock the front up, i dont need more breakingpower or bigger rotor" I said. Then I tried a 220 for a while and discovered I had extra control with the bigger rotor.

Also the front has more grip before locking up. It makes sense to put a bigger rotor on the front than the back.
Having same sized rotors means your under gunning the front compared to the back.
 
Literally every single vehicle short of a farm tractor uses larger front brakes than rear, for a reason. Weight transfers, the front end has way more traction and therefore higher braking power needs.

My experience has been those identical sized rotors on a bike, makes the rear feel much more powerful just because it locks up super easy in comparison to the front.

I would not mind experimenting with maybe identical sized rotors but choosing a pad compound that has less grip in the rear. I rarely have the elevation to overheat my current 200/ 180 set up, so the concern would be that a 220mm rotor would never get any heat into it to work fully. Plus... weight weenie...
 
Suns_PSD said:
Literally every single vehicle short of a farm tractor uses larger front brakes than rear, for a reason. Weight transfers, the front end has way more traction and therefore higher braking power needs.

My experience has been those identical sized rotors on a bike, makes the rear feel much more powerful just because it locks up super easy in comparison to the front.

I would not mind experimenting with maybe identical sized rotors but choosing a pad compound that has less grip in the rear. I rarely have the elevation to overheat my current 200/ 180 set up, so the concern would be that a 220mm rotor would never get any heat into it to work fully. Plus... weight weenie...
Click to expand...
Most of my riding is on a 70mtr vert hill. 220 is the ducks nuts and does not need heating up to be powerful

Yeah brakes with the same size rotors are either overgunned at the back or undergunned at the front and are generally miss matched in lever pressure to lock up.
 
intend.jpg

Has no one planned to install the Intend hover monocoque?
I measured my Intend Hover Gamechanger at home and according to my measurements, it should fit. Cornelius from Intend also confirmed to me that the monocoque is very similar in terms of dimensions. Is this shock list from Velduro really correct or did they just write something down?
 
HiGer said:
ah, perfect, no worries for me then. Thanks.

But that was really the last thing I needed to sort out before my frame arrives. All necessary parts for the build are either old ones I have or were bought over the last weeks from various used part sources on the web and are already here. Everything I will buy new is selected and sits in the shopping cart of my favorite shop and will be ordered when the delivery date of the frame is only a couple days out. No need to have stuff laying around here and waste time of the warranty.

But now I have nothing more to do. On top of that I got the info yesterday that the second shipping container going to Germany (I was too late to get a frame out of the first one) is likely going to be delayed by a few weeks until mid of May. That is almost four month from now! What am I going to do? 😧

In my desperation I have started to look for titanium screws to replace steel screws on the parts that I already have. That's not going to make one bit of a difference for the performance of the bike, but, well, it had me occupied for a while. But I found a replacement for every screw where it only remotely makes sense to replace the old one and ordered them. Now what?

You all need to make way more posts. Preferably with pictures. Lots of them. And video. Keep me entertained 😄
Click to expand...
When did you order?
 
I don't know about "again". I did not get any updates at all. Only when I wrote about another question to Velduro and at that time also asked about an ETA did they reply that shipment is delayed and will be mid of may for the second container. That's valid for Germany, no idea if your frame is going to be in the same container.
 
Velduro Germany, aka ZERO-CENTER, the importer in Germany. I ordered the frame from them directly. No idea if there are other dealers in Germany. I did not find any at the time.
 
I ordered mine in October from a dealer in Switzerland and I was given similar timelines. If I ordered then I would have gotten the bike second half of March, otherwise mid May.

Last time I asked them (2 weeks ago) timelines had not changed. I assume these are the same "containers" other countries are procuring from.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Keep reading
    Browse all

    Similar Threads

    Community Stats

    Since 2018
    668K
    Messages
    40,779
    Members
    Join 30,000+ Riders, it's free!
    Back
    Top