I prefer the look of a quill stem for most bikes, but I will admit that a 
threadless stem will never get rusted/corroded into a steerer tube. I've had 
this problem on several bikes in recent years--one is still stuck--despite the 
liberal use of grease to try to keep sweat and water out.

--Eric N
www.campyonly.com


On Sep 9, 2012, at 10:28 PM, cyclotourist <[email protected]> wrote:

> Jim, a very thoughtful posting! Thanks for taking the time to write it up.
> 
> I grew up w/ quill stems, but prefer threadless. I have found installation is 
> incredibly easy. I've never enjoyed tightening threaded headsets, so 
> threadless have been a pleasure to work with. Also I don't really care for 
> the tall backwards "7" look of quill stems at saddle height. They look 
> ungainly to me. It's also a big chunk of angled metal pointing at my crotch 
> which I don't appreciate for unintended dismounts. 
> 
> Downsides are 1-1/8 threadless not really looking elegant with road tubing, 
> and 1" threadless is next to non-existent. Threadless also looks kinda' silly 
> with 50mm+ of spacers on a poorly designed bike. The strength/lack of flex 
> isn't really a bonus as I've never noticed a quill stem flexing on me.
> 
> So yeah, long/short: I'd like a Taiwanese built budget Riv country bike 
> (think AHH) w/ threadless and a single top tube for $750 or whatever the San 
> Marcos goes for. I don't know if there are enough people in that niche to 
> build one though, or if GP would even want to go after them.
> 
> Would be a cool bike though!
> 
> 
> On Thu, Sep 6, 2012 at 11:39 PM, Jim Thill - Hiawatha Cyclery 
> <[email protected]> wrote:
> I agree that quill stems are a niche that Riv fills, more or less 
> exclusively, which is no small thing. Obviously, the quill stem has a 
> modest-sized but loyal following, and Grant would be smart to keep filling 
> this niche, as long as it exists, all by himself.
> 
> On the other hand, think about demographics. I'm 35 - most cyclists my age or 
> younger have little or no nostalgia for quill stems and threaded steerers, 
> and, in fact, may think a quill looks funny or archaic compared to more 
> familiar threadless systems. If you're over 50, then you probably came of age 
> as a cyclist in the quill stem era, and are not planning to change. But if 
> you're over 50, your bike purchases are likely to slow down in the next 10-20 
> years, if they haven't already, while people my age and younger are just 
> ramping up the new bike spending. Obviously, this is loose speculation, and 
> individual situations vary. But I think it's safe to say that the number of 
> people who prefer quill stems, and are willing to pay extra to get a frame 
> that takes a quill stem, is shrinking, not growing/stabilizing. I have no 
> stats to back this up, just a limited view from my own knothole. 
> 
> Of course, Riv already makes a bunch of frame models that take a quill stem. 
> If one frame model out of eight stepped outside the lines a bit, in the 
> interest of cutting costs, making the frame sturdier without a double top 
> tube, and being more accommodating to a much wider variety of contemporary 
> stems, bars, and headsets (more versatility!), I imagine that the result 
> would be broader appeal and new customers. That particular model with the 
> (for example) disc tabs and 1-1/8" threadless steerer might not be the 
> "retro-grouch"  ideal of many on this discussion board, but there are lots of 
> other options for the purists. And there's no reason whatsoever that such a 
> frame couldn't adhere to underlying principles, like good tire/fender 
> clearance, higher handlebars (it can be done with good design in a non-ugly 
> way), and, of course, lovely lugged steel with a cool paintjob.
> 
> I started following Riv when there were basically two models: the heavy duty 
> Atlantis, and the lightweight Rambouillet/Romulus/Redwood. It seemed easy to 
> distinguish the two, and I had one of each for awhile. I have enjoyed seeing 
> the proliferation of new models, but frankly, it starts to get a little 
> bewildering to me - imagine how the casual observer must feel when trying to 
> make sense of it! The Hillborne was supposed to be a halfway compromise of 
> the Atlantis and the Hilsen, I think, but those two models weren't altogether 
> dissimilar in terms of tire clearance and general capabilities (the Hilsen 
> moniker replaced the Saluki which was billed as partway between Atlantis and 
> Rambouillet). The Bombadil is the new heavy-duty workhorse offroader (which 
> was the Atlantis role, previously), but the Hunqapillar splits the difference 
> between that and the Atlantis. Do I have that right? How much difference is 
> there to split? There have been discussions of what sets the Roadeo apart 
> from the Hilsen, but it seems the differences are minor. It gets hard to see 
> where one model stops and the next begins. Now to add yet another heavy-duty 
> touring bike to the mix? Is there really a hungry market for a slightly less 
> fancy version of the Hunqapillar that won't cannibalize Hunqapillar sales? Or 
> should this new "budget" model be a substantially different bike that reaches 
> out to a whole new crowd without competing with existing models?
> 
> I'm sorry for rambling about all this. Sometimes it rubs people the wrong way 
> that I say stuff that isn't 100% Riv cheerleading (I've been told by two 
> other list participants to put a cork in it over the years), but I'm not 
> trying to damage Riv or criticize anybody for liking what he or she likes. I 
> enjoy the sharing of different ideas. Amazing that there's so much to discuss 
> (ad nauseum) about these machines!
> 
> 
> 
> On Thursday, September 6, 2012 7:25:54 PM UTC-5, ted wrote:
> It may be a cost saver as you suspect, but I hope they never go that 
> route. 
> I value the easy upping and downing of a quill stem, and not being 
> bound to earlier choices by having cut a threadless steerer tube. 
> Threaded forks and quill stems are one of the differentiators that 
> make RBW a company I am glad is in business. 
> Other companies are already making good bikes at lower price points, 
> so if you want to choose a bike made with some more economical methods 
> (e.g. threadless, tig welded, ...) choose one of them and be happy. 
> (naturally we are overlooking the threadless option on the Rodeo, 
> which seems to be a rare concession to gram counters, inner racer 
> aversion to otherness, and broader selection of available stems) 
> 
> I don't mean to be scolding. I just like what RBW does, and I would 
> rather they stay with it than get more like other companies. 
> 
> On Sep 6, 4:45 pm, Jim Thill - Hiawatha Cyclery <[email protected]> 
> wrote: 
> > I have been scolded for discussing such heresy in the past, but the most 
> > obvious cost savings I can think of for Riv frames would be to switch from 
> > threaded to threadless steerers. With threadless, one fork fits all frames. 
> > With threaded, each frame size takes a different fork. This means extra 
> > forks must be stocked in each size for warranty replacements, etc, plus, I 
> > assume, making 4 or 5 different forks in smaller quantities is more 
> > expensive than making one fork in a larger quantity. Obviously, I don't 
> > know how the threaded-fork penalty compares to the other costs in frame 
> > production, but I wouldn't be surprised if it adds $100+ to each frameset 
> > at the retail level. I don't have experience with 2TT or diagonal tube 
> > frames, but I do have experience to suggest a 1-1/8" threadless system 
> > feels MUCH sturdier under load than does a bike with a 1" threaded system 
> > on otherwise similar frames. 
> > 
> > As for disc brakes, I prefer the way hydraulics feel and self-adjust, but 
> > sometimes sacrificing the drop bar is too much, so I go mechanical. The 
> > good ones all work, when set up properly. 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > On Thursday, September 6, 2012 6:29:35 PM UTC-5, dougP wrote: 
> > 
> > > This thread started out talking about a "budget Riv...".  I realize 
> > > it's hard to see how a few extra tabs, etc., to handle discs could 
> > > impact the cost too much, and of course Rivs come with plenty of ways 
> > > to hang on racks & fenders.  However, I heard Dave Moulton speak 
> > > (years ago when he was still building frames) and he made the point 
> > > that it was difficult to justify to his customers the additional cost 
> > > for adding various eyelets, rack mounts, etc., that tourists demand & 
> > > racers don't.  More fiddly bits can really up the cost a surprising 
> > > amount. 
> > 
> > > If Grant decided to add disc brake fittings, I would expect it to be 
> > > on the $2,000 frames, esp. the Atlantis & Bombadil.  I've only ridden 
> > > disc braked bikes a couple of times and was impressed.  My Atlantis 
> > > now has V-brakes (replaced Tektro 720 cantis) which I like a lot but 
> > > would go for a disc brake option.  Braking changes a lot when you load 
> > > up the bike with its own weight & go whistling down long hills. 
> > 
> > > Of course, Riv went thru a big inventory reduction end of last year, 
> > > so I wouldn't look for them to embrace stocking yet another kind of 
> > > hub, brake, levers, etc., plus the frame redesign work to offer 
> > > discs.  In any case, it's always fun to speculate The Next Big 
> > > Thing. 
> > 
> > > dougP 
> > 
> > > On Sep 6, 10:29 am, Jim Thill - Hiawatha Cyclery <[email protected]> 
> > > wrote: 
> > > > It's certainly true that there's seldom, if ever, a "screaming need for 
> > > > discs". But we're pretty far down the road past "screaming need" for 
> > > > ANY 
> > > of 
> > > > the gadgetry we chat about in this forum. I personally know a number of 
> > > > people who do not consider worthwhile any bike innovation that isn't 
> > > > included on a 1950s English 3sp. I've ridden old 3-speeds plenty, and I 
> > > see 
> > > > the charm, but occasionally I think the technologies developed over the 
> > > > ensuing half-century have earned a place in my 21st Century 
> > > bicycle-centric 
> > > > life. 
> > 
> > > > IMO, a sturdy, fat-tire Riv with capability to handle BOTH 
> > > > cantilevers/v-brakes and discs would be a neat thing - sort of a 
> > > prettier 
> > > > functional-equivalent to the Surly Troll or Ogre. I think it would 
> > > broaden 
> > > > the appeal to potential customers who appreciate Riv's aesthetic 
> > > stylings 
> > > > and general approach, but aren't committed to using the same types of 
> > > parts 
> > > > mountain bikers were stuck with 25 years ago. Obviously, the true retro 
> > > > connoisseurs will scoff at the superfluous disc brake tabs they'd never 
> > > use 
> > > > in a million years, but the scoffers will be offset by those who'll 
> > > embrace 
> > > > the added versatility. I count myself among the "embracers of 
> > > versatility", 
> > > > by the way. 
> > 
> > > > I'm not saying disc brakes are 100% necessary at all, but some 
> > > concession 
> > > > to modernity and, more importantly, diversity in the product line, 
> > > > would 
> > > > seem to be a good thing for Riv. Otherwise, it seems like we'll have 
> > > > another heavy-duty Riv frame that competes for the same seemingly 
> > > limited 
> > > > pool of customers who are considering the Atlantis, Hunqapillar, 
> > > Bombadil, 
> > > > Hillborne, etc. Something as simple as disc tabs would be a standout 
> > > among 
> > > > the excellent, but overlapping frames that are already available, and 
> > > > would, I think, make a splash among a whole new pool of potential 
> > > customers. 
> > 
> > > > On Wednesday, September 5, 2012 4:04:45 PM UTC-5, Matthew J wrote: 
> > 
> > > > > Seems to me for a budget bike that is almost certainly would be 
> > > heavier 
> > > > > than the upmarket Rivs, discs will mean extra weight and expense with 
> > > > > little benefit for most riders. 
> > 
> > > > > Most people ride on pavement or hard pack trails and then usually 
> > > > > when 
> > > the 
> > > > > weather is fine.  In those conditions, decent rim brakes provide all 
> > > the 
> > > > > stopping power any rider will ever need. Some ride on pavement in 
> > > inclement 
> > > > > weather where discs have some advantages over rims.  But not so much 
> > > that 
> > > > > there is a screaming need for discs. 
> > 
> > > > > Discs are markedly better off road and on long distance adventure 
> > > > > touring.  Neither Riv's niche. 
> > 
> > > > > On Wednesday, September 5, 2012 12:42:00 PM UTC-5, Jim Thill - 
> > > Hiawatha 
> > > > > Cyclery wrote: 
> > 
> > > > >> It seems moderately necessary to point out that there's nothing 
> > > specific 
> > > > >> to a frame that's made for hydraulic disc brakes that is different 
> > > than on 
> > > > >> a frame made for cable disc brakes. Therefore, IF Riv makes a bike 
> > > for disc 
> > > > >> brakes, which seems only a tiny bit likely IMO, there's no need for 
> > > any of 
> > > > >> us to be forced into one type of brake or another. 
> > 
> > > > >> I like hydraulic brakes. I've been using several models of Avid 
> > > > >> hydraulics for about 3 years now, and I've never had one single 
> > > problem 
> > > > >> with them. They are, for all practical purposes, self-adjusting and 
> > > never 
> > > > >> seem to make any superfluous noise. It is true, however, that using 
> > > > >> hydraulic brakes does limit brake lever options. Think of the 
> > > hydraulic 
> > > > >> brake/lever as a single unit, rather than the mix and match 
> > > experience of 
> > > > >> cable-actuated systems. This is a mix-and-match-centric group, I 
> > > realize. 
> > 
> > > > >> On Tuesday, September 4, 2012 9:37:17 PM UTC-5, Montclair BobbyB 
> > > wrote: 
> > 
> > > > >>> Or hydraulic brakes... I've been riding both cable and hydraulic 
> > > disc 
> > > > >>> brakes for years, and I'm here to tell you, hydraulic Shimano's 
> > > > >>> (the 
> > > older 
> > > > >>> style) are the bee's knees... I've never had issues with busted 
> > > brake lines 
> > > > >>> or poor performance... They're easy to maintain and super 
> > > dependable, way 
> > > > >>> more dependable than rim brakes!  And even the best-adjusted 
> > > cable-actuated 
> > > > >>> disc brakes can't come close to the hydraulics.  The price has come 
> > > way 
> > > > >>> down on hydraulic brakes... there are few reasons left to go with 
> > > cable 
> > > > >>> discs... I've been running them on my mountain bikes for years in 
> > > all kinds 
> > > > >>> of rought weather conditions (including ice and snow).  THEY STOP 
> > > > >>> in 
> > > all 
> > > > >>> kinds of weather! 
> > 
> > > > >>> I'd love to see a disc version Rivendell...although I fear it would 
> > > > >>> require a beefier fork (for the forces applied to the lower section 
> > > of the 
> > > > >>> fork).  This might be a challenge to make a beefier fork that looks 
> > > > >>> elegant.  Then again, I'll bet it's possible to preserve the beauty 
> > > in a 
> > > > >>> disc version.. Wes Williams (for example) makes a beautifully 
> > > > >>> curved 
> > > 29er 
> > > > >>> disc fork (the Willits WOW).   I love the look of rim brakes, but 
> > > > >>> performance wise there's simply no contest between rim and disc 
> > > brakes. 
> > 
> > > > >>> Peace, 
> > > > >>> BB 
> > 
> > > > >>> On Monday, September 3, 2012 5:53:11 PM UTC-4, James Warren wrote: 
> > 
> > > > >>>> I would like it if this bike were made ready for disc brakes. 
> > > > >>>> Mechanical ones.- Hide quoted text - 
> > 
> > > > - Show quoted text - 
> 
> -- 
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
> "RBW Owners Bunch" group.
> To view this discussion on the web visit 
> https://groups.google.com/d/msg/rbw-owners-bunch/-/P8M2bAG0GtwJ.
> 
> To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
> [email protected].
> For more options, visit this group at 
> http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=en.
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> Cheers,
> David
> Redlands, CA
> 
> **
> "The good thing about science is that it's true whether or not you believe in 
> it." -- Neil deGrasse Tyson.
> 
> 
> -- 
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
> "RBW Owners Bunch" group.
> To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
> [email protected].
> For more options, visit this group at 
> http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=en.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
[email protected].
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=en.

Reply via email to