That's the earliest catalog I have. Does anyone have some scans of catalogs or
frame brochures earlier than #5 (1999)? I think Keith is right.
-Norm
From: iamkeith <[email protected]>
To: RBW Owners Bunch <[email protected]>
Cc: [email protected]
Sent: Wednesday, February 17, 2016 6:43 PM
Subject: Re: [RBW] 26" vs. 700c for touring/load hauling
On Wednesday, February 17, 2016 at 4:49:17 PM UTC-7, Norman Bone wrote:
Thanks Hugh!
It looks like 59 was a large as you could go with 26. Catalog says 61, 63 and
65 went to 700c
I'm guessing that this particular catalog excerpt was from later in the period
of model availability, and reflected a change that occurred at some point. As
noted, mine is 60cm and has 26" wheels. And I know of at least one larger
than mine (assuming 61cm, picture attached below) that also has 26" wheels.
Prior to 1999, it may be that this size still fell below the "cutoff" between
26 and 700c, or it may just be the case that nothing larger was ever
ordered/built.
I still kind of think that, at first, they were ALL 26" though. Remember
that the original reason for using 26" tires was that there were no 700c tires
that had enough volume. (Or at least very few.) At some point, that obviously
changed.
If I'm correct, it looks like the change might have actually happened mid 1999,
comparing with Norman's info, and corresponded to a change in builders (Joe
Starck, earlier in the year, used 26", and Match, later in the year, used
700c?) Or who knows... maybe there was an option to choose for a short period
during the overlap.
--
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 [email protected].
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
