That makes sense, thanks Bill. On Mon, Oct 13, 2025 at 10:53 AM Bill Lindsay <[email protected]> wrote:
> "I'm not actually sure why Charlie would have a lower weight limit" > > The caution probably centers on where the dropped top tube of the Gallop > wants to bend the seat tube in the middle. In your imagination, stack 100 > pound bags of concrete on the saddle. When something gives at some truly > massive weight, it'll be the seat tube that bends in half at that > intersection. The more triangulated diamond of the Roadini would fail at a > higher weight and would probably be the fork or the head tube joints > failing. > > Bill Lindsay > El Cerrito, CA > On Monday, October 13, 2025 at 7:44:32 AM UTC-7 Joseph Kolker wrote: > >> I got a Roadini with Albatross bars (in a standard Riv build package, >> with a long stem) rather than a Charlie both for aesthetics but also after >> reading this language on Riv's website: >> >> "If you weigh over 207 pounds, get a Roadini, Sam, or Homer. They’re >> plenty zippy, too. It’s doubtful that a 240 pounder would break the >> Charlie, but it’s just not the right bike." >> >> I don't weigh over 200 pounds, but was close enough that this made me >> wary, especially since this was a bike I hope to have a long time. That >> said I'm not actually sure why Charlie would have a lower weight limit >> since as I understand it the tubing is pretty similar to Roadini and Homer. >> >> I keep thinking about switching the Roadini to drop bars on the theory >> that it's maybe better suited to that, but it feels so good as it is >> currently set up that I'm hesitant to mess with it. >> >> On Sunday, October 12, 2025 at 8:32:55 PM UTC-4 Jason Fuller wrote: >> >> I agree - to me, they are flat bar and drop bar versions of otherwise the >> same bike. While you could run drops on a Charlie and you could run swept >> bars on a Roadini, it doesn't make a lot of sense to me - better to get the >> frame that's optimized for the setup you want to run. >> >> And it would be easy to think 'well, the Roadini has a much shorter rear >> end than the Charlie so they're not really the same bike', but I would >> challenge this by saying that the longer rear end of the Charlie is simply >> maintaining the correct weight distribution between wheels when going from >> drops to upright bars. We're conditioned to think the longer chainstays are >> not sporty, but having ridden the Charlie vs. "sporty" bikes set up with >> upright bars, the long chainstays just make this rider position work better >> all around. Climbing is noticeably better - each pedal stroke feels like >> its going towards forward momentum more than with the shorter wheelbase >> bike. More control in low-traction situations thanks to more weight on the >> front wheel. And yes, also more comfort too (ie you're in the middle of the >> bus vs the back of the bus!) >> >> -- > 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/O4ga65KM9ww/unsubscribe > . > To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to > [email protected]. > To view this discussion visit > https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/rbw-owners-bunch/2e19f3a5-c2b1-4b1c-9558-fa40daaada57n%40googlegroups.com > <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/rbw-owners-bunch/2e19f3a5-c2b1-4b1c-9558-fa40daaada57n%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> > . > -- 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 visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/rbw-owners-bunch/CAE61DeW_qLqNQ0iMHhvHwPQLAv1M%3DFG-J_uXcODSTXXKDZ353g%40mail.gmail.com.
