I just checked the bikes in my stable and none of them have the water bottle bosses low enough to interfere with a seat tube mounted bottle. 53 cm frames built over a decade ago. Is it possible that the frames in question have been built more recently and coincide with the advent of 1x drivetrains and the location hasn’t been an issue or is this more pervasive and I’ve just been lucky? Ray
On Saturday, September 21, 2024 at 10:11:38 AM UTC-7 Michael Baquerizo wrote: > Hey Bill - > > If you read my original post I make it clear that despite my understanding > of the situation i concede that am most likely wrong, but my question had > nothing to do with the bottle being more 'easily accessible', just about > its positioning aesthetically and perhaps even functionally, as if it > straddles the FD clamp it requires one more thing to mount (washers to > raise ) So it's kind of an inaccurate recounting to say that 'The OP > believes there is an obvious design flaw' > > Perhaps you're conflating lower on the frame with 'more easily accessible' > and i'm not CERTAIN that's the case. surely too close to the top tube and > the bottle would be impossible to get, but there's a middle ground between > as low as possible and the aforementioned 'too close to the seat tube'. To > ME, that middle ground seems like it'd be easier to access, as it's closer > to ones reach than lower would be. > > A lot of the accounts from bike owners and bike viewers seem to suggest > similar confusion about why sometimes it's above the clamp area, sometimes > it's below. your own account suggests that it might as well be ABOVE the > derailleur clamp area, as it isn't a drinking water position, it's a stored > water position. Therefore, more easily accessible (which i conflate with > being closer to ones reach) > > i prefer the suggestions that weight lower on the frame is ideal (not > actually sure if its true but it seems to make physical sense) and also the > allowance for frame bags (in this day and age especially, less so when the > hillborne that i'm referencing was originally created) AND the idea that > your legs thin out the closer they get to the ankle. > > I hope that helps with some of your confusion. > > > On Saturday, September 21, 2024 at 12:00:38 PM UTC-4 Bill Lindsay wrote: > >> The OP believes there is an obvious design flaw that the seat tube water >> bottle isn't more easily accessible on lots of bikes. >> >> This confuses me. To those who need/want a higher mounted seat tube water >> bottle on their bikes: what exactly is the use case? >> >> a. I run ONLY a seat tube water bottle for some really good reason, and I >> therefor it should be super accessible, because it's my only source of >> ride-hydration >> b. I run two different drinks and have to have easy access at BOTH to >> manage my hydration strategy >> c. I always drink from the seat tube bottle FIRST for some really good >> reason, and use the down tube bottle as the back up, so the seat tube >> bottle needs to be super accessible >> d. some other use case >> >> For me, and I assumed for most other cyclists, the seat tube bottle is >> not for drinking. The down tube bottle is for drinking. When the down >> tube bottle is empty, then I move the seat tube bottle to the down tube, >> and THEN that bottle is for drinking. In other words, it's a STORAGE >> location, not an ACCESSIBILITY location, for my use-case. When I grab for >> a bottle, 19 out of 20 times it's the down tube bottle. I only grab the >> seat tube bottle when it's time to swap. For storage, I prefer efficiency, >> and down the seat tube gets it out of the way and that makes sense to me. >> >> Bill Lindsay >> El Cerrito, CA >> >> >> >> On Friday, September 20, 2024 at 7:00:58 AM UTC-7 Michael Baquerizo wrote: >> >>> i'm ready for the answer to be so obvious that I assume this is a dumb >>> question. >>> >>> So often, on many bike frame, but also on Riv's - the bottle bosses on >>> the seat tube straddle where the derailleur clamp would go. >>> >>> however, almost AS often as I see this, I also see plenty of real estate >>> for them to exist ABOVE said clamp area, where they'd no doubt be more >>> easily accessed by a rider. >>> >>> why? it seems so obviously a design flaw, but surely I'M the one in the >>> wrong. >>> >> -- 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 view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/rbw-owners-bunch/568de7fe-6b34-4cf1-aaff-a48eaa758e3an%40googlegroups.com.
