Not a 60cm Cheviot, it's a 59cm Clem in my case, but I can attest to its lusciousness, especially off-road. It is very confidence inspiring downhill, and is the best bike I've ever ridden at climbing steep hills.
On Wednesday, March 21, 2018 at 1:18:34 PM UTC-7, Grant @ Rivendell wrote: > > I'm with Ryan. We've ridden a lot of bikes, lots of variations, and we > live surrounded by roads and trails no more than 15 minutes by bike away. > It's not DP-Rocky Mtn style, but as BL and JW and other locals will attest, > it's hard to beat. More important, we ride them. I admittedly don't have > the challenges of fitting bikes into elevators or navigating 3-floor > walkups, and I'm sympathetic to those who do, but that's what Bromptons are > for. > > Bikes tend to grow taller faster than they grow longer, and tall people > end up like circus bears on tiny bikes. That's an exagerration, but the > point is, they sit high on a short bike, with their butt too close to the > rear hub. It's a wacky weight distribution, but it's tolerable and you can > get used to it, but it's-- just not right. Also, shorter bikes tend to be > jumpy, and benefit from longer wheelbases, and the best way to lengthen > them is in back. A longer front-center certainly helps, too, but at some > point it rules out drop bars. > > That's a bad thing if you're locked in to them, but also, the length of > the top tube alone doesn't tell you all you need to know about how much you > have to lean and far you have to reach to grab the bars. It depends so much > on bar height..and seat tube angle affects it, and have you ever thought > about convergence and divergence as it relates to head and seat tube angles > and bar and saddle height? We do that. In some ways it's ridiculous, but > the same ridiculous thinking goes into all of the dimensions, including > chainstay length. > > For a steep hairy descent, the best bike has a monster front-center > dimension--too long for school, for sure---and a longer chainstay, too. You > might think (logically, this is good thinking) that a shorter chainstay > provides more traction up hills and makes it easier to weight the rear > wheel on steep downhills. There are other considerations more important > (imo), though. A shorter bike (chainstay and front-center) wheelies and > endos sooner. Sweepy back'd Boscos make it easy to push the front wheel way > ahead and stop an endo, and a long front center and chainstay fight the > leverage that lead to one wheel or the other lifting off the ground. > > Those are radical circumstance, but on even a flat smooth road, length > adds a quality to the ride that can't be had without it. I'm sure somebody > reading this has a 60cm Cheviot. Tell the group how luscious it feels. If > you haven't ridden a bike like that, it's hard to swallow, and even if you > have, it's hard to explain (so, "luscious" is how I do it). The bike's no > slower for it, but you don't have to be on high alert. > > We're not moving away from anything valuable, and an extra inch or two or > three of chaintay is still a small percentage of the total. It just seems > more when you convert inches to centimeters and focus on the tire-to-seat > tube gap. I seriously, honestly believe that our current bikes ride even > better than the older ones--which have always been and still are > great-riding bikes. Changes are always tough, we will lose people, it's > normal to question why or attribute it to some brain-change or something, > but the changes that you see are evolutionary and in a good direction, I > think. > > On Wed, Mar 21, 2018 at 12:37 PM, Ryan Merrill <crccp...@gmail.com > <javascript:>> wrote: > >> I have a feeling the stability offered by the long chainstays on the >> Appaloosa is going to be pretty nice for the manner in which I'm going to >> ride it. The gravel roads I'm going to take it on could use a little bit >> more stability. I don't know if the bike will fit on my Kuat rack >> though...got to find out about that. I suspect not, so it will be something >> I have to remedy. >> >> I could see how carrying around a rather long bike could get to be a >> burden in an urban setting. Luckily, I don't live in an urban setting and >> instead am in the country. We'll see. >> >> On Wednesday, March 21, 2018 at 2:12:39 PM UTC-5, Eric Karnes wrote: >> >>> I agree. It seems that Riv's bikes are moving in a direction that >>> coincides less and less with my own bike needs and preferences. The >>> significantly longer top tubes make it almost impossible for my t-rex-like >>> arms to utilize multiple positions even on very swept-back bars (drops are >>> impossible at any height). And the super-long chainstays are really hard >>> for city-dwellers who have to cart their bike up and down steep and narrow >>> stairs on a regular basis. >>> >>> Of course, these are simply my own personal needs and preferences. Grant >>> and Co. should absolutely evolve their offerings in directions that they >>> believe in. This may not jive with what I'm looking for and that's totally >>> reasonable. For everyone who isn't thrilled with the new designs, there is >>> likely someone who it. And who am I to tell someone like Grant to how to >>> design a bike? But from a strictly selfish perspective, I do hope that they >>> keep some offerings (such as the Sam and the MUSA frames) in the more >>> 'traditional' riv model. >>> >>> Eric >>> >>> On Tuesday, March 20, 2018 at 11:30:15 PM UTC-4, Stuart Lovinggood wrote: >>>> >>>> As a former Appaloosa owner, I'm a little disappointed to see the >>>> extra-long chainstays and 6° TT come to the Atlantis. Although the Joe is >>>> billed as an "all-arounder," IME that is quite a subjective term. I found >>>> climbing unwieldy without a sizable front load (especially on dirt), and >>>> with the long top tube, drop bars are not as feasible for some riders >>>> using >>>> Riv's suggested sizing (myself included). I would consider the existing >>>> Atlantis geo to be more all-rounder, a balance of traditional stack and >>>> reach numbers with the mid-length chainstays. >>>> >>>> On Tuesday, March 20, 2018 at 4:57:24 PM UTC-7, Eamon Nordquist wrote: >>>>> >>>>> I wonder why they decided to extend the chainstays - that Blug picture >>>>> looks like it has Clem/Appaloosa length stays (maybe it's an illusion >>>>> from >>>>> 26" wheels?). Didn't the Atlantis already have 48cm chainstays? All the >>>>> other changes seem like a good idea to me, but this just seems like >>>>> turning >>>>> the Atlantis into an Appaloosa. >>>>> >>>>> I started a separate thread about super long chainstays and taking >>>>> your bike on buses/trains. >>>>> >>>>> Eamon >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> -- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the >> Google Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group. >> To unsubscribe from this topic, visit >> https://groups.google.com/d/topic/rbw-owners-bunch/ww2KxKe9KPE/unsubscribe >> . >> To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to >> rbw-owners-bun...@googlegroups.com <javascript:>. >> To post to this group, send email to rbw-owne...@googlegroups.com >> <javascript:>. >> Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch. >> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. >> > > -- 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 https://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
