# Custom ti frame (Waltly, China) - my experience



## gregorywells (26 Feb 2021)

After reading varying reviews of Walty frames and the order process, I thought I'd share my own personal experience now my bike build is complete.

I decided I wanted to build a gravel titanium bike and having looked around a fair bit and checked out all the more well-known brands, I kept stumbling upon Waltly. I was nervous to order something of such value from a fairly unknown company from China but the savings compared to stock frames was just too much for me to ignore. The other key things for me is I have fairly short legs but longer upper body so most stock frames leave me needing me to adjust various stock parts just to make each bike fit.

Having originally thought I could order everything myself I soon realised I was really out of my depth when it came to frame geometry. I knew I wanted a endurance style frame with more relaxed geometry then a racing frame with clearance for 40mm tyres but I had no idea how to reflect that in the frame measurements/specs. This is when I decided to consult Wei, a guy who did a bike fit for me a few years back. For £80 he created a cad drawing based on my original measurements reflecting all my requirements and helped me through the order form.

With a final CAD drawing and complete order form, I contacted Waltly who swiftly replied with a few questions (what chain ring, axle etc) and following that quoted me £810 for the frame + delivery (no forks). I nervously paid the deposit via AliBaba (1/2 the total) and that was it for a while. Around a month later a few more questions come in re which forks intend to use. Following that I finally got an email saying my frame was ready (took around 2 in total) along with some photos. Frame looked amazing, welding was neat and everything looked perfect as far as I could see.

The frame arrived around 10 days later well-packaged and in perfect condition. The frame included a seat post clamp + rear thru axle (142).

Overall the process was very positive. Waltly were efficient, stuck to their proposed deadline and the quality of their work is very high. Having read a few other peoples experience of ordering from Waltly, I feel a lot of the problems arise from sizing/questions about geometry and answers being lost in translation. By having CAD drawing from day one, I was able to bypass a lot of these issues and skip straight to the final order stages.

I've attached a photo of my build, super happy with how its turned out. It really is my dream bike and I can't stop smirking when I ride it.

Hope this is helpful, more than happy to answer any questions for those considering ordering from a custom ti frame or using Waltly.


----------



## matticus (26 Feb 2021)

Any warranty?


----------



## gregorywells (26 Feb 2021)

matticus said:


> Any warranty?


Yep, lifetime warranty.


----------



## Eziemnaik (26 Feb 2021)

Great bike!
If I needed another bike I would be tempted to order one of those with SS couplers or breakaway system
Did they charge you more for through axle?
Straight gauge or butted?
Internal cabling?


----------



## Once a Wheeler (26 Feb 2021)

Even cooler than the water cooler.


----------



## Dan77 (26 Feb 2021)

Beautiful bike. When I am able to get another bike, it will be a titanium gravel bike with endurance geometry. I'm unlikely to be brave enough to order from China and self build but applaud you for doing so. Outstanding result.


----------



## gregorywells (26 Feb 2021)

Eziemnaik said:


> Great bike!
> If I needed another bike I would be tempted to order one of those with SS couplers or breakaway system
> Did they charge you more for through axle?
> Straight gauge or butted?
> Internal cabling?


Thank you.
They didn’t display prices for each spec so not sure how much it would of been without through axle. 

Tubes are butted and yep, cables are internally routed.


----------



## midlife (26 Feb 2021)

Nice  

Titanium ...... Always wanted a Speedwell titanium bike like the one in the link. I worked in a bike shop in the 70's and it was my job to polish the frames in the shop, including the speedwell  one day lol. 

https://www.speedbicycles.ch/velo/278/speedwell_extralight_1974.html


----------



## ianrauk (27 Feb 2021)

Iirc @jowwy also had a Walty build.


----------



## jowwy (27 Feb 2021)

ianrauk said:


> Iirc @jowwy also had a Walty build.


Yes i did although i went through a middle man for mine and paid circe £650 - it was cello rosso cycles

again, did all the design based on questions asked of me and then 2 mths later it arrived. Was a superb frame and is now being ridden around ireland with sram etap 1x11 and hydrualic breaks.........i sold it for £2400


----------



## Eziemnaik (1 Mar 2021)

Hi @gregorywells, did you get charged for more than 25% on duties and VAT?


----------



## gregorywells (1 Mar 2021)

Eziemnaik said:


> Hi @gregorywells, did you get charged for more than 25% on duties and VAT?


Just checked back and it was as follows (slightly cheaper than I original thought)-
$800 for frame
$250 for shipping/taxes


----------



## T4tomo (1 Mar 2021)

looks smart. I keep getting tempted by Planet X. would deffo go amber wall tyres though


----------



## Soltydog (3 Mar 2021)

I was lucky enough to pick a used Waltly bike up at the end of summer last year for a very reasonable price. I was looking at a new Van Nic Yukon, but as a commuter/winter bike it was going to be quite expensive, even using C2W scheme. I've only done a few hundred miles on it so far, but it's a nice ride 👍


----------



## SkipdiverJohn (6 Mar 2021)

Interesting thread, but why do titanium frames always seem to be cursed with those damn ugly carbon forks? I understand why titanium isn't an ideal material for forks, but why not specify cro-moly steel ones?


----------



## jowwy (7 Mar 2021)

SkipdiverJohn said:


> Interesting thread, but why do titanium frames always seem to be cursed with those damn ugly carbon forks? I understand why titanium isn't an ideal material for forks, but why not specify cro-moly steel ones?


Because not everyone is adverse to carbon like you......


----------



## gregorywells (8 Mar 2021)

SkipdiverJohn said:


> Interesting thread, but why do titanium frames always seem to be cursed with those damn ugly carbon forks? I understand why titanium isn't an ideal material for forks, but why not specify cro-moly steel ones?


Being honest, I kinda like (certain) carbon forks on titanium frames. I also think the ride feel is nicer vs steel. I would agree if you were going for more a retro build but then I guess you might as well go all steel. That aside, I'd assume getting steel forks with thru axle and integrated isn't as simple since there is less of a market for it.


----------



## matticus (8 Mar 2021)

gregorywells said:


> Being honest, I kinda like (certain) carbon forks on titanium frames. I also think the ride feel is nicer vs steel. I would agree if you were going for more a retro build but then I guess you might as well go all steel. That aside, I'd assume getting steel forks with thru axle and integrated isn't as simple since there is less of a market for it.


Many plain carbon forks are quite unobtrusive, so wouldn't jar against most frames visually.
For me, the typical Ti frame doesn't look like a classic steel one, with fancy lugwork or any of that jazz - so putting a more modern component on the front end doesn't look as odd as it would on an old steel frame. Personal views!

(regarding the modern curse of thru axles: i think steel f&f are now fashionable enough that someone is making them in every permutation going, and discs are the current predominant trend!)


----------



## Eziemnaik (8 Mar 2021)

@SkipdiverJohn for me it would be puerly visual aspect. With most of Ti bikes using larger diameter tubes than steel ones, a svelte 753 form would not look attractive on a overbuilt in comparison bike


----------



## Chris S (8 Mar 2021)

I wonder if they meant to call the company 'Watery'?


----------



## matticus (8 Mar 2021)

Eziemnaik said:


> @SkipdiverJohn for me it would be puerly visual aspect. With most of Ti bikes using larger diameter tubes than steel ones, a svelte 753 form would not look attractive on a overbuilt in comparison bike


But why _would _you use larger diameter tubes? I don't think Ti is weaker/floppier than good steels, is it?

(My Raleigh Dynatech Ti looked exactly like an average steel frame from a distance - it was painted to help the deception!)


----------



## Eziemnaik (8 Mar 2021)

If I was smarter than I am I would probably had a great reply
I have no doubt there are beautiful Ti bikes with 28mm tubing, but with the current market pushing for tapered fugly headtubes and thicker downtubes a straight steel fork might look out of a place, at least to my admittedly limited sense of aesthethics.






As far as I am concerned it will never approach the beauty of this:




But then again, tastes are tastes


----------



## matticus (8 Mar 2021)

Eziemnaik said:


> If I was smarter than I am I would probably had a great reply
> I have no doubt there are beautiful Ti bikes with 28mm tubing, but with the current market pushing for tapered fugly headtubes and thicker downtubes a straight steel fork might look out of a place, at least to my admittedly limited sense of aesthethics.



Because the topic is "CUSTOM ti frame" I reckon we don't need to worry about market fashions, and can just spec our lovely frames according to taste and engineering :P


----------



## jowwy (8 Mar 2021)

Eziemnaik said:


> If I was smarter than I am I would probably had a great reply
> I have no doubt there are beautiful Ti bikes with 28mm tubing, but with the current market pushing for tapered fugly headtubes and thicker downtubes a straight steel fork might look out of a place, at least to my admittedly limited sense of aesthethics.
> View attachment 577624
> 
> ...


That green thing is fugly


----------



## SkipdiverJohn (9 Mar 2021)

jowwy said:


> That green thing is fugly



No, that's real engineering, designed and built by humans not robots.


----------



## si_c (9 Mar 2021)

SkipdiverJohn said:


> No, that's real engineering, designed and built by humans not robots.


You do realise that Carbon parts are entirely made by hand. No robots.


----------



## jowwy (9 Mar 2021)

SkipdiverJohn said:


> No, that's real engineering, designed and built by humans not robots.


still fugly......


----------



## Dan77 (9 Mar 2021)

SkipdiverJohn said:


> No, that's real engineering, designed and built by humans not robots.



What? Carbon fibre is a triumph of engineering progress.

All bikes are designed by humans. Steel parts are more likely to be made by robots, although admittedly not on that fugly green thing.


----------



## SkipdiverJohn (9 Mar 2021)

jowwy said:


> Because not everyone is adverse to carbon like you......



I'm not adverse to all carbon fibre. Just the ugly stuff with all the visual aopeal of a kitchen table leg or cats scratching post. Some very early CF bikes were actually quite nice to look at when they were built using an aluminium lugged method. They only became ugly when they started moulding the whole frame in one piece.



Dan77 said:


> What? Carbon fibre is a triumph of engineering progress.



Carbon fibre is nothing new. It has been used in aerospace for several decades. However there is a big difference between planes and bikes. The operators of the former go to great lengths to avoid them impacting into other solid objects. Bikes get bashed into hard things all the time and there's the problem. Carbon fibre is fine so long as it can avoid damaging impacts, but in bicycle applications it often can't avoid such impacts. Therefore it is not the ideal choice of material to make bike frames & components from.


----------



## Milkfloat (9 Mar 2021)

SkipdiverJohn said:


> I'm not adverse to all carbon fibre. Just the ugly stuff with all the visual aopeal of a kitchen table leg or cats scratching post. Some very early CF bikes were actually quite nice to look at when they were built using an aluminium lugged method. They only became ugly when they started moulding the whole frame in one piece.
> 
> 
> 
> Carbon fibre is nothing new. It has been used in aerospace for several decades. However there is a big difference between planes and bikes. The operators of the former go to great lengths to avoid them impacting into other solid objects. Bikes get bashed into hard things all the time and there's the problem. Carbon fibre is fine so long as it can avoid damaging impacts, but in bicycle applications it often can't avoid such impacts. Therefore it is not the ideal choice of material to make bike frames & components from.



1. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder, everything else you wrote is just pure bollocks.


----------



## matticus (9 Mar 2021)

SkipdiverJohn said:


> Carbon fibre is nothing new. It has been used in aerospace for several decades. However there is a big difference between planes and bikes. The operators of the former go to great lengths to avoid them impacting into other solid objects. Bikes get bashed into hard things all the time and there's the problem


You guys have to admit, he's not wrong there!

(although CF is _fairly_ new - the Wright Brothers certainly didn't have access to it, nor Eddy Merckx.)


----------



## Milkfloat (9 Mar 2021)

matticus said:


> You guys have to admit, he's not wrong there!
> 
> (although CF is _fairly_ new - the Wright Brothers certainly didn't have access to it, nor Eddy Merckx.)


Carbon fibre planes are designed to withstand massive impacts, from simple heavy landings to wheels up landings, plus the small matter of hitting a large bird at over 300 mph.


----------



## T4tomo (9 Mar 2021)

Milkfloat said:


> Carbon fibre planes are designed to withstand massive impacts, from simple heavy landings to wheels up landings, plus the small matter of hitting a large bird at over 300 mph.


You say that, but those planes would be safer if they use marathon plus tyres and nothing more complicated than square taper bottom brackets.


----------



## matticus (9 Mar 2021)

M+ tyres are far more puncture-proof than most lightweight tyres, and CF is far more prone to sudden brittle failure than a decent steel.
Each has cons/pros in other areas over alternative products. (I happen to be broadly anti-CF due to being a silly tree-hugger, but I don't take it to religious lengths).

Now can we move on??


----------



## ColinJ (9 Mar 2021)

jowwy said:


> That green thing is fugly


And cantilever brakes are fugly _AND _poor in comparison to alternative types!


----------



## rogerzilla (9 Mar 2021)

matticus said:


> Any warranty?


That would be my main concern: cheap Ti (and much expensive Ti) has a woeful record for breakage. The fatigue limit is irrelevant if it's underspecified or overheated when welded, as there are local weak bits. For some reason, most of them go at the seat tube.

Steel breaks too, but Ti seems especially vulnerable.


----------



## FishFright (9 Mar 2021)

SkipdiverJohn said:


> No, that's real engineering, designed and built by humans not robots.



but a nasty colour with naff lugs, otherwise its ok


----------



## matticus (9 Mar 2021)

rogerzilla said:


> That would be my main concern: cheap Ti (and much expensive Ti) has a woeful record for breakage. The fatigue limit is irrelevant if it's underspecified or overheated when welded, as there are local weak bits. For some reason, most of them go at the seat tube.
> 
> Steel breaks too, but Ti seems especially vulnerable.


Yup. But what I've seen and/or heard about they have failed very early in life. Any Ti frame I buy will get a lot of usage quite quickly! (like the other two I've had!)

p.s. they can be bonded instead, which presumably gets round this issue? No idea if anyone still does this though!


----------

