+1. To which I add:
Riding seasons vary. In WI, for example, unless you wish to install studded tires, the season ends in early December, returns late March. Your body looses elasticity during the off-season. So the first 2-3 weeks in March you need to raise the bars and lower the seat. Not much, but a little. Then as your riding fitness returns, the seat returns to last year's level, and the bars drop, just a bit. This fine tuning matches your body's increasing limberness. I also notice that I change my cockpit slightly depending on the temperature. In summer, shorts and sandals (and lots of mileage) make it easy and desireable to stretch out. In late fall when it's cold, wearing bulky clothes and winter shoes, reduce mobility, and a somewhat shorter, more upright, cockpit is fits better. For me, these are always modest adjustments: ~1 cm here or there. But feeling dialed in is nice, particularly when you can do it in less than a minute. Quills make this possible. On Wednesday, September 24, 2014 1:22:03 PM UTC-5, Steve Palincsar wrote: > > On 09/24/2014 01:10 PM, Jim Thill - Hiawatha Cyclery wrote: > > I always thought the Cross-check was probably more comparable to the Sam, > but the LHT isn't far off. All three are smartly designed and versatile. > All three can be "lifetime bikes", if you want them to be. I've extensively > ridden a Disc Trucker, Cross-check, Atlantis, Romulus, and a few test miles > on a Sam. There isn't anything magical about the intrinsic ride quality of > the Sam compared to the two Surly models I mentioned, but it does have an > extra measure of cosmetic flair, which may or may not be worth the extra > cost and wait, depending on your point of view. Despite the lower price of > the Surly, I don't believe there's any sacrifice of "quality", which is > sometimes implied in any Surly vs Riv discussion. Surly's quality control > is the best of any company I've dealt with - they almost never make > mistakes. > > Here are a few technical details to consider. The Riv uses a 1" quill > stem, which has some advantage for quickly raising and lowering the bar, > but the quill stems currently available don't have a 31.8 clamp option. > Since 25.4/26.0 handlebars are getting fewer everyday, and 31.8 is > effectively "standard" now, you'll be opting out of some great handlebar > options with a standard quill stem (there are workarounds to solve this > problem, but it's better to not have the problem in the first place, IMO). > The Surly frames come with a threadless steerer, which makes switching to > different bars much easier/cheaper. In general, threaded steerers and quill > stems are regarded as outdated in the bicycle industry, and few > manufacturers are supporting that design anymore. That makes the Surly > somewhat more "future-proof" in regard to headsets, stems, and handlebars. > I see the quill stems as a fairly major inconvenience, but, of course, the > quill stems have an aesthetic effect that some people prefer, and I can't > argue that. A second consideration is how you plan to accessorize the bike. > Rivs tend to have rack braze-ons designed around the Nitto racks that they > sell, while Surly frames have braze-ons designed around more universal rack > designs. The rack thing shouldn't be a deal-breaker, because many racks > will fit on the back of a Riv, but it does get difficult if you want, say, > a Tubus low-rider rack on the fork of a Riv. > > > In my personal experience, the biggest issue regarding a "lifetime" > bicycle is the ability to adjust your position to physiological changes > that occur with time. Most significant of these, certainly for me and > probably for most, has been the need to raise the handlebar position. In > my 30s, I had a 5" drop. In my 50s, 5cm below the saddle was fine. By the > time I turned 60, as mile 80 rolled around I'd feel as though a railroad > spike had been hammered down into the back of my neck, a problem that was > solved by raising the bars to seat height. > > Step 1 with threadless is to cut the steerer. And once you have done > that, there is no way to make it longer again. Yes, you could go for more > of an up-angle, but unless you started out with a -17 (and odds are you > actually started out with an up-angled stem already) you're very limited in > how much higher you can go. > > With a quill stem you can not only raise the bars, if necessary you can > substitute a stem with a longer quill. > > Let's take this bike as a case in point. > > > > It was originally built for a well known New England randonneur in 1991, > for the 100th anniversary PBP. Here's how he had it set up when I bought > it in 2002: > > > > Not quite "slammed," but the stem is easily several inches lower than I > could use. Switching from a "standard" quill length to a Technomic made > this frame usable for me. If it had been threadless, there would have been > no way on earth I could have ridden this bike. Which would have been a > terrible shame, because I love this bike. > > I think worrying about the future availability of 25.4 or 26.0 handlebars, > quill stems and threaded headsets is worrying about the wrong thing. There > are plenty of bars, stems and headsets and I'm confident there will > continue to be. What you need to worry about is future-proofing your > ability to fit on the bike long term. And there, threadless falls on its > face. > > > > > > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
