I've got three kids, so have done my part to perpetuate the species... it's all extranious bits now I suppose.
On 4/5/11, rcnute <rcn...@hotmail.com> wrote: > Hmm, "crotchal safety" and "unimportant differentiators" in the same > sentence... > > Ryan > > On Apr 5, 5:39 pm, William <tapebu...@gmail.com> wrote: >> I don't believe anybody is handwringing over whatever their front end >> format is. Both threaded and threadless work and work well. bfd's >> assertion was that more Soma San Marcos framesets would be sold if it >> were spec'd with a 1" threadless fork, because threadless is >> mainstream even though 1" threadless is not mainstream. I don't think >> there are many potential buyers who would tell you that 1" threadless >> is their first choice. The point that bfd didn't make was that from a >> business standpoint, if I was Merry Sales, and if I wanted to keep the >> price as low as possible, I'd seriously consider offering only one >> fork for all sizes and drop the price of the frameset. That, I think, >> would generate more sales, and could only be done with...wait for >> it...threadless. There's already a precedent for one fork rake across >> lots of sizes for the budget Rivendell frames. If Soma wanted to >> offer the San Marcos at a lower price, and wanted to get there with a >> threadless fork, then I could definitely believe that might yield more >> sales. I doubt there are a lot of buyers who say "this frameset right >> here is perfect for me, but I don't like the headset type so I won't >> buy it". They'll disqualify on price, weight, fit, even color, but >> headset? I don't think so. I could be wrong. >> >> FWIW, I've had all the headset formats and all of them worked fine, >> including 1-1/4" threaded and 1" threadless. When it comes down to >> looks and how nervous you are about crotchal safety, I'd say we're >> into the unimportant differentiators. >> >> On Apr 5, 3:34 pm, cyclotourist <cyclotour...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> > I've come to appreciate threadless. The ease of setting them is >> > fantastic. If I were going to get a new bike, I would prefer it. I >> > don't know of any downside to them, other than they don't look good >> > with high bars on a too-small frame. I think they look nicer than the >> > big "7" of a quill stem sticking way up there though. Plus I don't >> > like a big hung of pointy steel aimed at my genitals when I'm trail >> > riding. As bfd mentioned, once you have the position set, presuming >> > you don't cut the steerer you have lots of adjustability. You have to >> > get a new stem to adjust for reach, but you have to do that with a >> > quill stem as well. And the open face plate for bar changes is >> > wonderful, although used rarely. >> >> > My $.02 >> >> > On 4/5/11, bfd <bfd...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> > > On Apr 5, 2:09 pm, William <tapebu...@gmail.com> wrote: >> > >> 1.125" threadless is certainly the MOST mainstream, but I don't think >> > >> I'd advise Riv or even Soma to grow their business by becoming more >> > >> mainstream. >> >> > > Why not? If you offer things familiar to what people want, it will >> > > sell. Further, Riv does offer or once offered a threadless version on >> > > at least a couple of its bikes: >> >> > > Roadeo: >> > >http://assets.rivbike.com/images/products/full/0000/3108/mark_s_roade... >> >> > > Legolas (currently not offered): >> > >http://tandemhearts.com/coppermine/albums/legolas/legolas_03.jpg >> >> > > And I'm sure there are more than one Riv Custom frameset that use >> > > threadless. >> >> > > I'm not the only one who likes threadless. One of the original >> > > "retrogrouches" himself, Jobst Brandt (hope he recovers from his >> > > accident soon!) believes they are an *improvement* over threaded >> > > headsets and quill stems: >> >> > >http://www.sheldonbrown.com/brandt/threadless-headset.html >> >> > >>1" threaded is flat out better for reasons that Riv >> > >> thinks are important. 1.125" threadless is flat out better for >> > >> reasons that Riv thinks are entirely unimportant. >> >> > > I didn't just suggest 1.125" threadless, as I did state that 1" >> > > threadless with a shim could be an option. Further, how many people >> > > really adjust their stems up and down once they've been set? Moreover, >> > > unless you cut the steerer tube too short, spacers can be added or >> > > removed. Finally, there are stems that rise. >> >> > > Again, these are just suggestion to *attract* people to this new >> > > frameset. Good Luck! >> >> > > -- >> > > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >> > > Groups >> > > "RBW Owners Bunch" group. >> > > To post to this group, send email to >> > > rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com. >> > > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to >> > > rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. >> > > For more options, visit this group at >> > >http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=en. >> >> > -- >> > Cheers, >> > David >> > Redlands, CA >> >> > *...in terms of recreational cycling there are many riders who would >> > probably benefit more from >> > improving their taste than from improving their performance.* - RTMS >> >> > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "RBW Owners Bunch" group. > To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=en. > > -- Cheers, David Redlands, CA *...in terms of recreational cycling there are many riders who would probably benefit more from improving their taste than from improving their performance.* - RTMS -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group. To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=en.
