That being said, I do agree that the Hunqapillar is a killer bike which offers all of the awesomeness of the Bombadil, so the lineup still has the O.G. mountain bike category covered even without the B.
On Thursday, February 7, 2013 5:56:34 PM UTC-5, Matt Beebe wrote: > > *"And yeah, as I said, the sizing stuff is somewhat subjective. The > Hunqapillar works better for me than the Bombadil, especially for > running drop bars. But that's just me."* > > The Bombadil has a slightly shorter TT relative to ST than the > Hunqapillar, so I'd prefer it for running drop bars. That's what I have > on mine (Nitto Noodles). I also have 2.3 Pacenti Neo-Motos on it, and > while the chainstay clearance is a little close, they work great. > > > > On Thursday, February 7, 2013 3:37:20 PM UTC-5, Mike wrote: >> >> The Bridgestone MBs weren't designed around suspension forks. I had an >> MB2 for years with a Softride suspension stem which was great. I never >> expected the Bombadil to be a bike for a suspension fork, just >> expected it to be different than what was released. I liked the >> original prototype that was posted in one of the RRs. >> >> As for clearance, I seem to remember that it couldn't handle a 2.25 >> tire. Perhaps I'm wrong. It just seems if you were gonna make a >> "mountain bike" you'd want it to be able to handle a tire that size >> with clearance for mud. >> >> And yeah, as I said, the sizing stuff is somewhat subjective. The >> Hunqapillar works better for me than the Bombadil, especially for >> running drop bars. But that's just me. >> >> --mike >> > -- 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 post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=en. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
