Considering that the same person designed the RB-T and the Rambouillet within a few years of each other and they were both Japanese production, similarities in some respects are to be expected. Ram has a sloped TT, and uses heat treated material for the downtube and chainstays while the RB-T does not. The Ram feels stiffer but not unpleasantly so. The differences in HT angle are enough to notice in handling characteristics. Ram is a neutral steerer that tracks though turns like it is on rails. Ram has 132.5 OLD to accept either road or mountain hubs. It can be set up with road wheels and 25mm Contis for a fast club ride, or CX wheels with 1 1/2" Paselas for Townie, cruiser, or country road riding. It does both well. I ride mustache bars on mine and like them when canted for comfortable grip although in the past the bike had Nitto Noodles. The RB-T is more roadish, sharper cornering, and at 126 OLD, intended for freewheel equipment. It's easy to spread the stays and pop a 130 road hub in there. I found that I wasn't riding my Bridgestone much compared to the Ram so I sold it some years ago.
On Monday, November 30, 2020 at 10:46:33 AM UTC-6 Nathan Mattia wrote: > > *Has anyone here ridden both the Rambouillet AND an RB-T? *Looking at > it’s geometry, the RB-T is very similar to geometry of a Rivendell > Rambouillet, more than a Hillborne or a Homer. > > My RB-T is 56cm, so that's what I'm comparing and I was struck by the > similarities to the Rambouillet. Note the level top-tube, similar > Standover heights, Seat-tube and Head-tube angles, bottom bracket drop, > and chainstay lengths. Do they ride similarly? I don’t know. But they > look almost the same. > > [image: IMG_5225.jpeg] > > [image: IMG_5226.jpeg] > > In Rivendell Reader 32 from the Spring of 2004, Grant Petersen recalls > his time at Bridgestone and makes these proclamations: > > “Set up a scale from 1 to 100, and let’s agree to call our current > Rivendell customs a 100, and a Magna (department store) mountain bike a 5. > > The high-end Bstones were 45s, and the middle ones were 35s. [Let’s call > an RB-T a “40” then, in Grant’s estimation]. Comparably priced production > bikes in the late ‘80s and ‘90s were in the low 30s. Some of the better > production bikes in the early ‘80s—especially ’81 through ’85 (Specialized > Expedition, Sequoia, Centurion Dave Scott, Miyata 600)—were in the low 50s, > about 55. The Toyo-built bikes are 87s. “ > > Given this scale, I’d actually put the RB-T closer to a 75. It's that > good. > If Grant wanted to place it in the Riv lineup today and move it up to an > 87, he’d just add 2 cm to the stays, put more eyelets on the frame for > racks and give it slightly bigger tire clearances. > > [image: Screen Shot 2020-11-20 at 11.00.47 PM.png] > > Here’s what I know: I like the flexiness of the RB-T frame. I like how > quickly it gets up to speed. I like to push it around downhill curves. It > is NOT the work of art that is my Rivendell Sam Hillborne. I take Samwise > when I want to forget about the effort of the ride and become one with the > beauty all around me. I take the RB-T when I want to go fast and become > one with my bike. > -- 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 view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/rbw-owners-bunch/52ed89c2-8fe7-45f6-b24c-e994851ea266n%40googlegroups.com.
