[RBW] Re: 007 Rescued!

['John Hawrylak, Woodstown NJ' via RBW Owners Bunch]

very nice, especially the headtube.  The paint at the lugs looks great and 
not heavy. 

John Hawrylak
Woodstown NJ

On Wednesday, May 8, 2024 at 6:52:36 PM UTC-4 mhec...@gmail.com wrote:

> I bought this Saluki, serial #007, used in 03 or 4.  It soon became my go 
> to ride, but after another twenty years on dirt roads the frame showed a 
> lot of wear and tear.  I hated sacrificing the beautiful yellow decals but 
> am thrilled by what a good color match and quality job RaceMetalSmith of 
> White River Jct. VT did.  Next up, rebuild and a sweet ride.
> [image: IMG_2615.jpeg]
>

-- 
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 view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/rbw-owners-bunch/9b09ae85-06ee-45dc-91f5-cafde622a9e6n%40googlegroups.com.

[RBW] Re: FS: parts clear out (wheel sets, bags, stems, brakes...)

['John Hawrylak, Woodstown NJ' via RBW Owners Bunch]

What are you asking for the D/A 9 speed bar ends??  Not on the list but in 
the pics

John Hawrylak
Woodstown NJ

On Saturday, April 27, 2024 at 11:44:45 PM UTC-4 eil...@umich.edu wrote:

> Hi all. To make an upcoming move easier, I'm hoping to clear out all parts 
> and accessories not currently in use. Open to offers especially if bundling 
> multiple items. Prices do not include shipping from zip code 48103.
>
> Link to photos 
> 
>
>1. 700c Velocity A23 singlespeed wheelset, White Industries 18t 
>freewheel, & Ultradynamico 700x42 Cava tires. Bought all this new. Wheels, 
>freewheel, and tires ridden under 1 mile. $450.
>2. 650b Velocity Dyad wheelset, Deore hubs, Col de la Vie tires. In 
>great shape. Ridden fewer than 5 miles. $275.
>3. Set of Velo Orange wing nuts. $35.
>4. Velo Orange 1x crankset, 40t chainring, 165mm crank arm length. $90.
>5. Rivendell Baggins handlebar bag. $35.
>6. One pair of blue Swift Industries panniers. Never used. Small 
>grease marks on the front of one bag. No stains or signs of use on the 
>inside. $120.
>7. Acorn rando bag. $80.
>8. Brooks saddle with brass rivets and silver rails. $75.
>9. Gilles Berthoud Aspin saddle. $165.
>10. Black Sim Works bar end plugs. $15.
>11. MKS Sylvan Gordito pedals. $35.
>12. Bruce Gordon stem. $65.
>13. Ritchey Force stem. $30.
>14. Nitto faceplater stem. $65.
>15. Shimano SL-BS77 bar end shifters. Never used, still in the box. 
>$90.
>16. Busch-muller IQ-XS front dynamo light. $80.
>17. Nitto NR21 rear rack. $90.
>18. Salsa Casseroll canti mount front rack. $65.
>19. Ocean Air Cycles x Nitto Erlen rear rack. $80.
>20. Dia Compe long reach center pull brakes. Unused. $80.
>21. Gran Compe center pull brakes. Unused. $110.
>22. Shimano Deore 9s rear derailleur. $25.
>23. Dia Compe BRS 100 short reach brakes. $30.
>24. Shimano V-brakes. bolts missing. free with purchase of anything 
>else.
>25. TRP CX 8.4 V-brakes. $55.
>26. S-Ride 11s rear derailleur. $10.
>27. Hsin Lung stem and mustache bar (from 1993 Bridgestone XO-3). $40.
>28. Velo Orange Randonneur handlebar. $15.
>
>
>

-- 
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 view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/rbw-owners-bunch/fd33b416-fe5f-4baa-a11a-29ba7898c54en%40googlegroups.com.

[RBW] Re: FS: Sackville Happisack w/ Kangaroo Pocket - $180 Shipped

['John Hawrylak, Woodstown NJ' via RBW Owners Bunch]

I sent you a PM.  Is bag still available?  Do you have additional photos.  
The photo in the post does not enlarge.

John Hawrylak
Woodstown NJ

On Sunday, April 21, 2024 at 7:34:59 PM UTC-4 jde...@gmail.com wrote:

> Has some patina but in perfect functional condition. [image: 
> IMG_3344.jpeg]\
>
>
>

-- 
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 view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/rbw-owners-bunch/aaff964a-4a40-4bd5-b3e4-0e8efd2eb9d9n%40googlegroups.com.

[RBW] Re: Long Chainstays - What Problem/Deficiency Do They Solve?

['John Hawrylak, Woodstown NJ' via RBW Owners Bunch]

Andy

Thanks for posting the U Factor article.  It was good to read it and 
understand the thinking.

John Hawrylak
Woodstown NJ

On Thursday, April 4, 2024 at 8:49:10 AM UTC-4 ascpgh wrote:

> The U Factor 
> 
>
> Andy Cheatham
> Pittsburgh
>
> On Sunday, March 31, 2024 at 1:50:18 PM UTC-4 John Hawrylak, Woodstown NJ 
> wrote:
>
>> Enjoyed reading the thread "Anyone else not a fan of long chainstays?", 
>> especially Bill L's explanation of the RBW bike design philosophy.   Seems 
>> the prevailing thought is long stays are better for
>> upright riding
>> single track type trails (vs a Rails to Trails type trail)
>>
>> I'll just note 2 'facts'
>> 1  The vast majority of RBW models (except the Roadeo type frame) use 
>> slack STA and HTA which may contribute to the ride effect when coupled with 
>> long stays.
>> 2.  In the beginning RBW addressed getting the bars higher and adopting a 
>> non-racer riding style (back at 45° with hands on hoods), which IMHO were 
>> solutions to actual problems.
>>
>> *So What problem or current deficiency in bike design is Grant solving by 
>> using long chain stays*
>> Just to bring bikes to market that no one else is building??
>> Or do they solve a real problem???
>>
>> John Hawrylak
>> Woodstown NJ
>>
>> FWIW 2 of 3 of my frames have 44 to 45cm chain stays, and 1 has a 43cm 
>> chain stay.It's hard to notice a ride difference.
>>
>

-- 
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 view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/rbw-owners-bunch/cf6cc101-4bf9-49a8-a028-fec378ff6e8fn%40googlegroups.com.

[RBW] Long Chainstays - What Problem/Deficiency Do They Solve?

['John Hawrylak, Woodstown NJ' via RBW Owners Bunch]

Enjoyed reading the thread "Anyone else not a fan of long chainstays?", 
especially Bill L's explanation of the RBW bike design philosophy.   Seems 
the prevailing thought is long stays are better for
upright riding
single track type trails (vs a Rails to Trails type trail)

I'll just note 2 'facts'
1  The vast majority of RBW models (except the Roadeo type frame) use slack 
STA and HTA which may contribute to the ride effect when coupled with long 
stays.
2.  In the beginning RBW addressed getting the bars higher and adopting a 
non-racer riding style (back at 45° with hands on hoods), which IMHO were 
solutions to actual problems.

*So What problem or current deficiency in bike design is Grant solving by 
using long chain stays*
Just to bring bikes to market that no one else is building??
Or do they solve a real problem???

John Hawrylak
Woodstown NJ

FWIW 2 of 3 of my frames have 44 to 45cm chain stays, and 1 has a 43cm 
chain stay.It's hard to notice a ride difference.

-- 
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 view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/rbw-owners-bunch/3eec10de-6019-4ecd-bf6e-b57f0cac78b4n%40googlegroups.com.

[RBW] Re: Revisiting the Nitto 52f Basket Rack

['John Hawrylak, Woodstown NJ' via RBW Owners Bunch]

Leah

You asked:  " Maybe the 650b wheels will be less floppy with this rack? 
Maybe the smaller, lighter bike won’t seem as penalized by the heft of this 
rack?"

The 650B wheel have a minimal effect on Wheel Flop, since the wider tire 
results in a tire radius close to a 700C x 32 tire (650x48 radius = 344mm 
vs a 700C x 32 radius = 347mm).   Using Jim Youngs on line trial/flop 
calculator Bicycle Trail Calculator | yojimg.net 
 with the following frame 
geometries from RBW for a 50cm Platy with 650B wheels:
HTA,  69.5°, from RBW geo charts
Fork Rake,   assumed to be 55mm.   RBW does NOT publish fork rake and the 
55mm is from a 50 Cheviot with 650B wheels.
Wheel/Tire,   assumed to be 650B x 48,  RBW states 50mm as the largest tire.

Trial and Flop are solely determined by Wheel Radius, HTA, and fork rake:

Flop = Trail x sin(HTA) x cos (HTA), and Trial = (Wheel Radius x 
cos(HTA) - Fork Rake) / sin (HTA)

Here are the results for a 650x48 and a 700x32 tire for the 69.5° HTA and 
55mm Rake
   650x48   700x32
Trail 70mm  71mm   No surprise, RBW models are 
known to have high trail, due to slack HTA and a nominal 2" fork rake
Flop 23mm  23mm   High Flop is direct result of the 
high trial

So the Trail and Flop are essentially the same for a 650x48 and a 700x32. 

If you use 650x42, Trial and Flop are slightly reduced
Trail = 68mm   &Flop = 22mm

Frame weight or bike weight does not affect trail or flop per the above 
equations.  Your lighter custom will handle the same with the basket as 
your other Platy.IF you reduce the weight carried in the basket, you 
will notice less side to side motion at low speeds, due to the downward 
force produced by the lower weight (mass). 

I hope this helps

John Hawrylak
Woodstown NJ


On Sunday, March 10, 2024 at 12:34:26 PM UTC-4 Bicycle Belle Ding Ding! 
wrote:

> [image: IMG_5598.jpeg][image: IMG_5582.jpeg]Hi Friends,
>
> I’ve had a Nitto Basket Rack from Rivendell for a few years. I think it 
> looks awesome, it’s dead useful, but it annoyed me that it was heavy and 
> made my bars swing around on my mermaid Platy. But as I plan the build for 
> my 50 cm purple Platy (which is taking a million years) I am considering 
> putting the basket rack back into service. It pains me to see it sitting, 
> and it’s so pretty and unique that I just want to give it another try. 
> Maybe the 650b wheels will be less floppy with this rack? Maybe the 
> smaller, lighter bike won’t seem as penalized by the heft of this rack? It 
> would be such an easy experiment if it wasn’t for the dyno light/wiring 
> that is affected by the decision. It’s not a matter of simply pulling the 
> rack, because wire length, light mount, etc are affected and will not be an 
> easy switch. My shop hates soldering and I certainly can’t do it. 
>
> I had started a thread long ago about this and a lot of people reported 
> similar experiences. Now that some more years have gone by, I’m curious if 
> opinions have changed, or if more people have these racks and would offer 
> their opinions. There isn’t much in the way of reviews to read online. 
> Maybe some here would offer theirs. If more folks are trying and loving 
> their Nitto Basket Racks, I’ll be likely to install mine. 
>
> Meanwhile, this beautiful Platypus sits in my living room on the shelf, 
> waiting for its parts to return from the anodizer. And, there’s fresh snow 
> on the ground. But talking bikes will get me through!
> Leah
>

-- 
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 view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/rbw-owners-bunch/8c0667a7-63a0-478f-a5ae-a8d75c06099bn%40googlegroups.com.

Re: [RBW] Re: Cantilevers or Direct Mount-Centerpulls

['John Hawrylak, Woodstown NJ' via RBW Owners Bunch]

Kyle said  " I was looking at the Rene Herse cps."  

I have the RH CP's and I don't think they are all they are advertised and 
are not worth their high price.
The pads are extremely difficult to adjust and RH does not provide a tool 
to hold them in place during adjustment
The brakes don't seem much better than the Dia Comp 610/750s I used on 
another bike.
The 'quick release' design, squeeze the return spring arm and move it off 
the caliper, is an invitation to prick your fingers and hand.  
RH does not sell the small washer for the straddle cable movement, unless 
you pay $115 for a complete hardware set.

IMHO, I would use a pair of Dia Compes, just buy new springs.  Other 
posters have used the their existing bolt on ones and removed the arms from 
the yoke.  RBW could probably tell you which model, 610 or 750, fits the 
Beloit.

If you are using 42/44 mm tires, you will need a 62mm wide fender to obtain 
the 1.4 ratio of fender width/tire width Jan Heine recommends.  A 62mm 
fender requires indenting at the fork crown and possible seatstays.   A 
38mm tire and a 52mm fender gives an adequate 1.37 ratio and should clear 
the fork crown.

Just my 2c

John Hawrylak
Woodstown NJ
On Monday, February 26, 2024 at 4:06:12 PM UTC-5 kyleco...@gmail.com wrote:

> Hey Christian thanks for all your thoughts! To answer a couple of your 
> questions:
>
> *Which CPs are you considering and what is your max tire size? *
> I was looking at the Rene Herse cps. I'd be looking to run 44's, but 42's 
> seem to be more intended for the Bleriot 
> . The Rene Herse are 
> for sure pricey, and I will be spending a bit as it is with the frame 
> builder mods. However, they state they have the clearance for 42s and 
> fenders. I have a pair of dia-compe canti's 
>  
> I love on another bicycle, so much so I put a pair on my girlfriend's 
> bicycle. On that note: @Patrick - I've gotten pretty comfy now at setting 
> up canti's with drop bars. Specifically the dia-comps. It's all about 
> getting that straddle wire set up in the right position. I have done it 
> poorly on other pairs of cantis and been called out by real mechanics haha.
>
> *Will you be using fenders? *
> Potentially. I see most of these tours happening in summer and hopefully 
> some that require a flight in the nearish future. I'd probably snag a pair 
> of SKS for easy mounting and peace of mind when flying. not so much of a 
> big deal if my plastic fenders get damaged instead of banging up a nice 
> pair of honjos!
>
> *Are you planning on mounting anything to the brake studs (racks, lights 
> etc)?*
> If I did canti's I would likely get a Nitto M12 and attach it to the 
> brakes. I do plan on having low rider pannier attachments put on for a 
> nitto s rack 
> 
> .
>
>
> Kyle
>
>
>
> On Mon, Feb 26, 2024 at 12:17 PM christian poppell  
> wrote:
>
>> Hey Kyle! 
>>
>> I have used cantilevers and direct mounted centerpulls (MAFAC RAID with 
>> new Rene Herse hardware). If I could do it over I would have installed 
>> cantilevers. The downsides for centerpulls for me are modulation, fender 
>> fitting, and braze on locations on the fork. 
>>
>> Modulation - The MAFAC RAID brakes feel more squishy to me, even after 
>> adding a brake booster to the rear. Also, despite my best efforts, I have 
>> not been able to eliminate the howling from the rear brake. I threw 
>> everything at them, new bushings, toe in washers, salmon pads, black 
>> compound pads, sanded and filed the pads, sanded the rims, rode and braked 
>> in the rain and in the dirt. Nothing has stopped the howl. 
>>
>> Fender fitting - There would be a lot more room to mount fenders and 
>> large tires with cantilevers. Honjo h80s rub on the inside of the 
>> centerpull arms. If you want to go above 42mm tire with fenders I would go 
>> cantilever.
>>
>> Post location on the fork - Not a deal breaker but the posts are mounted 
>> really close to the fork crown. Its more of an aesthetic thing for me. In 
>> fact, its probably better as it moves the posts into the HAZ of the fork 
>> crown/blade joint
>>
>> Brian Chapman has some of the best reference images for how large tires, 
>> large fenders, and direct mount centerpulls should look. 
>> https://www.flickr.com/photos/chapmancycles/35900124245/in/photostream/
>>
>> Which CPs are you considering and what is your max tire size? Will you be 
>> using fenders? are you planning on mounting anything to the brake studs 
>> (racks, lights etc) ?
>>
>> Good Luck! 
>> Christian
>> Phoenix, AZ
>> On Monday, February 26, 2024 at 10:07:56 AM UTC-7 kyleco...@gmail.com 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> good question. I would think the brakes would play a part, but the 
>>> previous owner was running paul center pulls and 48s - I don't think the 
>>> frame could 

[RBW] Re: The Official Introduction of RoadeoRosa

['John Hawrylak, Woodstown NJ' via RBW Owners Bunch]

Bill

What width RH fenders are you using???  They look to be the Smooth style.

The front and rear fender lines are excellent

John Hawrylak
Woodstown NJ

On Monday, February 19, 2024 at 11:27:37 PM UTC-5 Bill Lindsay wrote:

> Here she is.  RoadeoRosa is complete
>
>
> https://www.flickr.com/photos/45758191@N04/53540567348/in/album-72177720313109003/
>
> Frame set: Nobilette built Rivendell Roadeo.  Cantilever posts.  Legolas 
> fork crown.  Cane Creek 40 headset
>
> Wheelset:  HED Ardennes RA Black.  Stampede Pass Extralight tires.  TPU 
> tubes.  12-27 Dura Ace 10sp cassette.  Tune skewers
>
> Drivetrain:  Rene Herse Crankset 46/30.  White Industries Ti 108mm bottom 
> bracket.  Look Keo Carbon Ceramic Pedals.  Dura Ace 7900 F Der, R Der, Down 
> tube shifters.  KMC chain
>
> Components:  Rene Herse cantilevers. Jagwire Elite cables and housing. 
>  Soba Noodle bars.  Nobilette stem.  Campagnolo Athena EPS brake levers 
> (electronics removed).  Dura Ace 7900 seat post.  Fizik Arione 00 saddle
>
> Accessories:  Rene Herse Fenders.  Arundel carbon H2O cages.  Rene Herse 
> pump.  Spurcycle Bell.  Rene Herse UD-2 front rack
>
> total weight 20.2lbs.  9.16kg
>
> Bill Lindsay
> El Cerrito, CA
>

-- 
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 view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/rbw-owners-bunch/e9aa94e7-8f6d-4dad-a07f-e5604c23def0n%40googlegroups.com.

[RBW] Re: The Official Introduction of RoadeoRosa

['John Hawrylak, Woodstown NJ' via RBW Owners Bunch]

Bill

Stunning color, the pink fenders really look overpowering.  The white on 
the bottom of the front fender really stands out.

John Hawrylak
Woodstown NJ 

On Monday, February 19, 2024 at 11:27:37 PM UTC-5 Bill Lindsay wrote:

> Here she is.  RoadeoRosa is complete
>
>
> https://www.flickr.com/photos/45758191@N04/53540567348/in/album-72177720313109003/
>
> Frame set: Nobilette built Rivendell Roadeo.  Cantilever posts.  Legolas 
> fork crown.  Cane Creek 40 headset
>
> Wheelset:  HED Ardennes RA Black.  Stampede Pass Extralight tires.  TPU 
> tubes.  12-27 Dura Ace 10sp cassette.  Tune skewers
>
> Drivetrain:  Rene Herse Crankset 46/30.  White Industries Ti 108mm bottom 
> bracket.  Look Keo Carbon Ceramic Pedals.  Dura Ace 7900 F Der, R Der, Down 
> tube shifters.  KMC chain
>
> Components:  Rene Herse cantilevers. Jagwire Elite cables and housing. 
>  Soba Noodle bars.  Nobilette stem.  Campagnolo Athena EPS brake levers 
> (electronics removed).  Dura Ace 7900 seat post.  Fizik Arione 00 saddle
>
> Accessories:  Rene Herse Fenders.  Arundel carbon H2O cages.  Rene Herse 
> pump.  Spurcycle Bell.  Rene Herse UD-2 front rack
>
> total weight 20.2lbs.  9.16kg
>
> Bill Lindsay
> El Cerrito, CA
>

-- 
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 view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/rbw-owners-bunch/778b763b-9113-466d-9b87-38f817f6ef1fn%40googlegroups.com.

[RBW] Re: Intro post, pics of my RIvs, and a Homer fit question

['John Hawrylak, Woodstown NJ' via RBW Owners Bunch]

Chris stated,  " not sure I'd call the Noodles short reach with a 92mm (per 
Riv site) reach.. maybe shorter than some older school bars, but current 
bar design has much shorter reaches."

2019 Nitto catalog page 9 shows the Mod 177 (noodles) having a 95mm Reach, 
BUT the ends come back towards the rider by 7mm so the 'Reach at the curve 
forward' is 88mm.  The Noodles also have a SHALLOW (less steep) Ramp as can 
be seen in the bar profiles in the Nitto catalog.  In the past, Grant 
stated the shallow ramp was a main factor in the comfort of the bar, your 
hands have less tendency to slide down the ramp.  You only need to rotate 
them around 15 degrees to have a flat ramp section.

Yes you can get shorter reach bars, BUT they may have steep ramps and may 
not be as comfortable as the 177.   My point is the 177 is already short 
reach, so think about shorter stems before possibly compromising on bar 
comfort.

WRT to the 140mm Drop, RBW designed the bar to be at or above saddle 
height, so the effective drop is much shorter.   I have my bars at 10mm 
above SH and when using the Noddle I was comfortable in the drops for 
extended periods of time.   True, if your bars are below SH, Drop will have 
more significance.

John Hawrylak  comfortable on 44cm RH Radonnuer bar at or +10mm of SH 
and rotated about 25deg down for the small bump, but thinks a 42 or 40 may 
be better
Woodstown NJ

On Saturday, February 10, 2024 at 12:56:34 AM UTC-5 four...@gmail.com wrote:

> not sure I'd call the Noodles short reach with a 92mm (per Riv site) 
> reach.. maybe shorter than some older school bars, but current bar design 
> has much shorter reaches.. the Salsa Cowbells I use on my Homer have a 
> reach of 68mm and drops of 115mm.. the Noodles have a much deeper drop at 
> 140mm that, for me, is far to deep to really be useful.. but everyone has 
> their own preferences.. the other bars I like are the Ritchey Butano bars 
> that have a 73mm reach and 115mm drops.. 
>
> Chris in Sonoma County 
>
> On Friday, February 9, 2024 at 5:48:02 PM UTC-8 John Hawrylak, Woodstown 
> NJ wrote:
>
>> Ethan
>>
>> I suggest you measure your AHH and Breezer as I suggested.  This will 
>> give you a good idea of how much each change on the AHH goes to meeting the 
>> distance you have on the Breezer.  Your Noddle bars are already short 
>> reach, 96mm comes to mind changing bars may not give you much.   
>>
>> John Hawrylak
>> Woodstown NJ
>>
>> On Thursday, February 8, 2024 at 8:14:49 PM UTC-5 Ethan K wrote:
>>
>>> Hi all, thank you so much for the replies. To answer some questions and 
>>> provide additional info: 
>>> Joe you are correct: 55 Cheviot, 54.5 Homer. I had thought about getting 
>>> a purple Apaloosa when they went on sale last year, but after talking to 
>>> Rivendell, realized that the Homer was a better fit for my use case. Once I 
>>> saw they were offering the butternut/mustard/classic Datsun color, I was 
>>> in. 
>>>
>>>  It's tough picking a size without getting a chance to try the bikes 
>>> first, so I utilized the PBH sizing Riv recommends--but I do think the 
>>> frame is a bit large, all things considered. Standover does work for me, so 
>>> I'm hopeful I can get it to work.  I already have the seat forward on the 
>>> rails, btw. I will swap the stem this weekend and see how that goes. Next 
>>>  would be  handlebars, going shorter reach and also narrower. (sounds like 
>>> I shouldn't be afraid of going even shorter.) I'm currently running a 46cm 
>>> Noodle, which feels wide in addition to long. When I swapped bars on the 
>>> Breezer, I went with shorter AND narrower, going from 44-42, and both of 
>>> those changes helped a lot. . Oh, and Chris, thanks for reminding me about 
>>> handlebar diameter. I forgot about the different standards. I think between 
>>> bar and stem, I can make it work for me. This bike is beautiful (way more 
>>> than my pic), and I put a lot of thought into the build. In retrospect, I 
>>> would have gotten the bike fit first, with the Breezer, to get all the #s I 
>>> need. 
>>>
>>> Also, thank you Liz for the detailed fit info and the suggestion 
>>> regarding quill/threadless adapters for the bike fit. I was wondering how 
>>> that would work.
>>>
>>> --Eitan
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Thursday, February 8, 2024 at 9:21:47 AM UTC-8 maxcr wrote:
>>>
 Agreed, I used to run a 30mm extension (w)right stem from Analog Cycles 
 paired with a short reach SimWorks Co-Misirlou Bar on my 61 Toyo AHH. I 
 think a shorter 5cm or even 30mm extension stem will do the trick if 
 you're 
 set on dropbars 
 Max 

 On Thursday, February 8, 2024 at 11:18:41 AM UTC-5 four...@gmail.com 
 wrote:

> so I have a first gen Homer with drop bars and I totally get your 
> point on reach, they do seem to be long bikes.. at least with drop bars 
> fitted. Plus, I firmly believe the Riv folks tend to skew to putting 
> folks 
> a bike one size too large 

[RBW] Re: Intro post, pics of my RIvs, and a Homer fit question

['John Hawrylak, Woodstown NJ' via RBW Owners Bunch]

Ethan

I suggest you measure your AHH and Breezer as I suggested.  This will give 
you a good idea of how much each change on the AHH goes to meeting the 
distance you have on the Breezer.  Your Noddle bars are already short 
reach, 96mm comes to mind changing bars may not give you much.   

John Hawrylak
Woodstown NJ

On Thursday, February 8, 2024 at 8:14:49 PM UTC-5 Ethan K wrote:

> Hi all, thank you so much for the replies. To answer some questions and 
> provide additional info: 
> Joe you are correct: 55 Cheviot, 54.5 Homer. I had thought about getting a 
> purple Apaloosa when they went on sale last year, but after talking to 
> Rivendell, realized that the Homer was a better fit for my use case. Once I 
> saw they were offering the butternut/mustard/classic Datsun color, I was 
> in. 
>
>  It's tough picking a size without getting a chance to try the bikes 
> first, so I utilized the PBH sizing Riv recommends--but I do think the 
> frame is a bit large, all things considered. Standover does work for me, so 
> I'm hopeful I can get it to work.  I already have the seat forward on the 
> rails, btw. I will swap the stem this weekend and see how that goes. Next 
>  would be  handlebars, going shorter reach and also narrower. (sounds like 
> I shouldn't be afraid of going even shorter.) I'm currently running a 46cm 
> Noodle, which feels wide in addition to long. When I swapped bars on the 
> Breezer, I went with shorter AND narrower, going from 44-42, and both of 
> those changes helped a lot. . Oh, and Chris, thanks for reminding me about 
> handlebar diameter. I forgot about the different standards. I think between 
> bar and stem, I can make it work for me. This bike is beautiful (way more 
> than my pic), and I put a lot of thought into the build. In retrospect, I 
> would have gotten the bike fit first, with the Breezer, to get all the #s I 
> need. 
>
> Also, thank you Liz for the detailed fit info and the suggestion regarding 
> quill/threadless adapters for the bike fit. I was wondering how that would 
> work.
>
> --Eitan
>
>
>
> On Thursday, February 8, 2024 at 9:21:47 AM UTC-8 maxcr wrote:
>
>> Agreed, I used to run a 30mm extension (w)right stem from Analog Cycles 
>> paired with a short reach SimWorks Co-Misirlou Bar on my 61 Toyo AHH. I 
>> think a shorter 5cm or even 30mm extension stem will do the trick if you're 
>> set on dropbars 
>> Max 
>>
>> On Thursday, February 8, 2024 at 11:18:41 AM UTC-5 four...@gmail.com 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> so I have a first gen Homer with drop bars and I totally get your point 
>>> on reach, they do seem to be long bikes.. at least with drop bars fitted. 
>>> Plus, I firmly believe the Riv folks tend to skew to putting folks a bike 
>>> one size too large for them (at least in my experience).. 
>>>
>>> What I did was get the Velo Orange quill stem with removable faceplate. 
>>> This stem allows you to use 31.8 bars (or smaller with shims) and opens up 
>>> a TON more bar options than a traditional quill stem with the smaller 
>>> diameters. I'm currently using Salsa Cowbell bars as they have a shorter 
>>> reach and shorter drop that I MUCH prefer over something like a Noodle.. 
>>> another point is the wider the bars, the longer the reach will feel.. 
>>>
>>> Chris in Sonoma County
>>>
>>> On Thursday, February 8, 2024 at 7:31:28 AM UTC-8 ian m wrote:
>>>
 If the standover height is acceptable, then I would argue the larger 
 frame is going to lead to a better fit. I have a hard time with just the 
 raw data which is why I like using bike insights. Comparing the 54.5 and 
 51 
 Homers, we can see a few important points: the stack is much higher 
 meaning 
 the bars are already starting higher. Even with an effective top tube 
 increase of 15mm, the reach is only 1mm more on the 54.5. Easily mitigated 
 with a stem. Seat is going to land on the same axis with either size, so 
 fit should be very similar with less seatpost and stem showing. 

 On Thursday, February 8, 2024 at 9:20:54 AM UTC-5 Joe Bernard wrote:

> I don't know your frame sizes so I'll do some wild guessing based on 
> photos: I believe you have a 55cm Cheviot and a 54.5 Homer. If this is 
> accurate the effective toptube numbers should be about the same and 
> you're 
> happy with the pullback bars on the Chev. Conclusion: the Homer may be a 
> bit big for you, which is why the reach to drops is too long. I agree 
> with 
> Riv that a 7cm stem should help but I'm concerned that you'll still find 
> the Homer kinda big-ish. 
>
> Joe Bernard, who fits a 55 Chev with pullbacks and would need a 51 
> Homer for drops 
>
> On Wednesday, February 7, 2024 at 7:34:08 PM UTC-8 Joe Bernard wrote:
>
>> What are the sizes of your Riv frames? 
>>
>> On Wednesday, February 7, 2024 at 4:06:31 PM UTC-8 
>> eitanz...@gmail.com wrote:
>>
>>> Thanks Bill,  I don't have my bike fit 

[RBW] Re: Intro post, pics of my RIvs, and a Homer fit question

['John Hawrylak, Woodstown NJ' via RBW Owners Bunch]

I suggest measuring the distance form the tip of the saddle to the line 
between the brake levers on the Breezer if this bike fits you.  Measure the 
same on the AHH.   I think you will find the Breezer has a shorter 
distance.  You can then see how much length reduction each change will  
make.

The seat tube setback for the 2 bikes is calculated using  SH * cos 
STA.   SH = Saddle Height,  STA =seat tube angle
Calc for each and take the difference.  See if you can move the AHH saddle 
forward (per Bill L's suggestion) to cancel the difference.

All AHH have a 71.5° STA.  If your SH = 83cm (just a guess) and the Breezer 
STA is 73°, the AHH is setback by 21mm vs the Breezer.   You probably can 
move the AHH full forward to make up the seat tube setback

John Hawrylak
Woodstown NJ


On Wednesday, February 7, 2024 at 7:06:31 PM UTC-5 Ethan K wrote:

> Thanks Bill,  I don't have my bike fit completey figure out yet. I used to 
> bike a lot more 20 years ago (mountain biking) and have recently gotten 
> back into riding. To your point, I am hoping to get a professional bike fit 
> sometime in the near future. (Nate Loyal seems well-recommended and 
> reviewed.)  Not cheap but likely one of the best bang for the buck bike 
> "upgrades." When I mention "endurance," I am referring more to "road bike 
> with more relaxed geometry than a race bike," than endurance athletics per 
> se. I am in decent shape but would like to be able to work up to  day-long 
> rides, which will require some work on aerobic endurance as well as 
> adjustments to bike and rider.  Currently I am significantly less 
> comfortable on the Homer than on the drop-bar Breezer Doppler Pro I have. I 
> was too stretched on that one until I switched out the bars. The bars I am 
> thinking of for the Homer are the Velo Orange Rando bars, which have about 
> a 10mm shorter reach than the Noodle, and will accomodate bar ends. 
>
> On Wednesday, February 7, 2024 at 2:42:05 PM UTC-8 Bill Lindsay wrote:
>
>> Here are a few thoughts:
>>
>> People who know exactly what works for them figure it out over a long 
>> time with lots of bikes, and have a set of numbers in their pocket so they 
>> can know before buying whether a particular will set up correctly for them. 
>>  It sounds like you don't have that all figured out for yourself.  Is that 
>> a reasonable assumption?
>>
>> People who don't have their fit completely figured out for themselves are 
>> usually well advised to get a fitting from an experienced fitter who 
>> understands the target use-case.  Can you find such a person?  Have you had 
>> anybody who knows about such things look at you while you are riding?  
>>
>> This is intended for an endurance/all-road use case.  Are you currently 
>> an endurance athlete?  Or do you aspire to be an endurance athlete?  Do you 
>> want the bike to fit the body you have, or the body you intend to have?  
>>
>> Those are my thoughts.  Best of luck
>>
>> Bill Lindsay
>> El Cerrito, CA
>>
>> On Wednesday, February 7, 2024 at 1:20:53 PM UTC-8 eitanz...@gmail.com 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi all, wanted to introduce myself and my bikes. Over the last six 
>>> months I went from zero to two Rivendells, and joined this group--though 
>>> this is my first post: First up, a Cheviot, picked up secondhand, as my 
>>> city bike.  Previous owner built this up swanky: Son, XTR,, Pacenti, Paul, 
>>> XT, etc. . added the front and rear racks. I also picked up a Riv 
>>> Happisack, which alternates with the YEPP mount. Apologies for the 
>>> distinctly un-glamorous garage pic:
>>>
>>>
>>> [image: IMG_2009.jpeg]
>>>
>>> I love this bike. It is exceedingly comfortable and beautiful. 
>>>
>>> Last month I took delivery of a Homer,  which I had built up to be a 
>>> zippy road bike with a classic look: 9 speed friction shifting using the 
>>> Dia Compe shifters to XT derailleur, Rene Herse crankset, Paul brakes, the 
>>> TRP drilled brake levers, with Velocity Quill rims on Deore hubs. 
>>>
>>> [image: IMG_2739.jpeg]
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> That said, as beautiful as this bike is, I haven't been able to get 
>>> comfortable on it. I am too stretched out. I have tried raising the bars a 
>>> bit from these pics, but fundamentally I think the reach is too long. I 
>>> gave my height/PBH to Antonio at Rivendell, and they set the bike up with 
>>> an 80mm stem. I have ordered a 70mm version of the stem, though I'm 
>>> concerned that's getting pretty short. Next step if that's not enough is 
>>> try a shorter-reach handlebar, in a narrower size.  If that doesn't work I 
>>> fear I will need to sell the bike. I could replace the drops with upright 
>>> bars, but I already have the Cheviot and specifically wanted a drop-bar 
>>> endurance/all-roadish bike. 
>>>
>>> I get the need to raise the bars, but I don't want a situation where the 
>>> bars are 5" above the saddle. 
>>>
>>> Any thoughts on other ways to get this bike to fit better?
>>>
>>> Thanks!
>>> --Eitan (in Los Angeles)

Re: [RBW] Re: Silver crank surprise and the weight of things

['John Hawrylak, Woodstown NJ' via RBW Owners Bunch]

During a appearance on The Opiniated Cyclist, Richard Schwinn stated the 
following:  Reducing the bike weight by 12 lbm, increases your speed by 1 
mph, given the same power input from testing Schwinn did.

John Hawrylak
Woodstown NJ

On Sunday, January 14, 2024 at 12:11:36 PM UTC-5 Bicycle Belle Ding Ding! 
wrote:

> 
> It will always have a dyno hub. I just can’t give up that kind of 
> practicality. I didn’t know Paul components would save me any weight but 
> I’m glad if they do. My Velo Orange levers were pretty feather-light 
> already though. 
>
> I probably do have the Platy set up as light as I dare, save the 
> drivetrain stuff from White Industries. And Richard has a good point that 
> all that money would only save me a third of a pound.
>
> On Jan 14, 2024, at 8:40 AM, Johnny Alien  wrote:
>
> Does the raspberry Platy still have a dyno hub? If so that would be a big 
> gain as far as weight loss and lessening drag. Otherwise you have it set up 
> fairly light from what I remember about your posts. Paul components will 
> sure help shave some grams.
>
>
> When weight is brought up the first thing Grant would say is take weight 
> off the engine. Well I just took a massive amount of weight off the engine 
> so I feel that I am now free and clear to be a weight weenie about the 
> bike. :)
>
> -- 
> 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/eReNb9qsX94/unsubscribe
> .
> To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to 
> rbw-owners-bun...@googlegroups.com.
> To view this discussion on the web visit 
> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/rbw-owners-bunch/fd92245f-6eec-4430-b9c2-c4f2996b8b8bn%40googlegroups.com
>  
> 
> .
>
>

-- 
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 view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/rbw-owners-bunch/aab1c280-b31d-4a10-94c2-d1d2c2f3cdeen%40googlegroups.com.

[RBW] Re: Low q, low range 2x cranks

['John Hawrylak, Woodstown NJ' via RBW Owners Bunch]

On 10 Jan Adam asked:   "  I'm thinking about moving away from a triple to 
a double in order to get a lower Q." 

One option is a 1980's Sugino AT (110/74mm BCD) set for a double, say 
46-33, sicne 33T is the smallest 110mm BCD ring out there,  e.g. TA Zephyr 
on Peter White's site.  The AT was designed as a low Q triple.
*  I have achieved 152mm Q with a Tange 127 cartridge BB and 2mm drive side 
spacer for a total asymmetry of 6mm, very close to the D-3U Sugino 
recommended.  The Outer ring FCL is 45mm and the Inner ring FCL is 37mm 
with a 43.5mm RCL.
*  Others on the I-Bob list have stated 147mm Q. 

The AT Inner 74mm BCD ring uses very very low posts cast in the spider & 
5mm spacers instead of higher cast posts using no spacer.  The Middle 110mm 
DCB ring protrudes further inward than the 74mm holes.  Therefore, removing 
the 74mm Inner ring and spacers creates a double with the Inner ring 
chainbolt head being the limiting clearance to the chainstay.

The double has a Q of about 145mm with a 46-36.The only problem with a 
110mm double is the smallest 110BCD ring in 33T.   However, with a 12-36 9 
speed cassette, a 46-33 is 1 gear higher than a 46-30 for a No Load low 
gear (24.1gi vs 20.4gi with 584x38).  

EBay seems to have a decent supply of AT's, I bought 2 a year ago, a 1980 
and 1984 one.

So unless you need the very lowest No Load low, a Sugino AT as a double may 
work. 

John Hawrylak
Woodstown NJ

On Wednesday, January 10, 2024 at 11:15:06 AM UTC-5 Adam wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> Adjacent to the triples thread, I'm thinking about moving away from a 
> triple to a double in order to get a lower Q.
>
> What are options for double cranksets that are around 40/26 or so? I think 
> that would be doable with the Rene Herse cranks, but too much $$$ for me. 
> Are there any cheaper options that will do that and give me a q in the 140s?
>
> Second, drivetrain stuff is a little new to me. What determines how small 
> a q factor a specific bike can have? I'm assuming chainstays play a role 
> here? This hypothetical project is for a Hillborne, so I'd be curious what 
> folks have used to get low q on their Hillbornes. I'm assuming I may have 
> to change the BB as well.
>
> Thanks!
>
> Adam
>

-- 
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 view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/rbw-owners-bunch/74f36654-c145-4f29-bc31-e92e64241ffbn%40googlegroups.com.

[RBW] Re: Low q, low range 2x cranks

['John Hawrylak, Woodstown NJ' via RBW Owners Bunch]

VO has a 50.4mm BCD crank in 46-30, but you can use TA rings to get what 
you want.   Their spec is a 144mm Q on a 116mm symmetric BB with a 43.5 FCL 
(per email from VO).   However, John Thruston in AK told me he achieved a 
141.5mm Q with a 110mm BB, indicating the VO spec is 3.5mm optimistic (the 
crank should have a 138mm Q with a 110mm BB).  The VO is $200, but they 
have 20% sales so you can get it at $160. 

Sun XCD is 50.4 with a Q spec of 145mm with a 113mm BB & 43.5mm FCL and can 
be had with TA rings from Jitensha Studios for about $290.   This is about 
the same $ as the VO sale after buying TA rings in other than 46-30.   I 
thought the SunXCD was the better deal and the optimum cost/benefit for a 
low Q double with low gearing.  The SunXCD specs are from a SunXCD drawing 
shown on Santucci Cycles site after selecting the crank in their Shop.

As Bill L stated, your Sam is a 135mm OLD, so a 43.5mm FCL puts the Outer 
ring closer to the middle cog, so the Inner ring should not use the 
smallest cogs.  This should not be a problem if you watch your shifting.

John Hawrylak
Woodstown NJ

On Wednesday, January 10, 2024 at 11:15:06 AM UTC-5 Adam wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> Adjacent to the triples thread, I'm thinking about moving away from a 
> triple to a double in order to get a lower Q.
>
> What are options for double cranksets that are around 40/26 or so? I think 
> that would be doable with the Rene Herse cranks, but too much $$$ for me. 
> Are there any cheaper options that will do that and give me a q in the 140s?
>
> Second, drivetrain stuff is a little new to me. What determines how small 
> a q factor a specific bike can have? I'm assuming chainstays play a role 
> here? This hypothetical project is for a Hillborne, so I'd be curious what 
> folks have used to get low q on their Hillbornes. I'm assuming I may have 
> to change the BB as well.
>
> Thanks!
>
> Adam
>

-- 
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 view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/rbw-owners-bunch/ef7d9ba4-4714-4614-b2f9-75789c103fc5n%40googlegroups.com.

[RBW] Re: Advantages of triple drivetrains (VO post)

['John Hawrylak, Woodstown NJ' via RBW Owners Bunch]

I find a 46-36-26 triple with a 9 speed 12-36 cassette on 650Bx38 wheels 
gives me a 100 to 19 gi range and nice steps in my cruising range (50 to 75 
gi) with a relatively straight chain line.   The middle and inner ring 
chain lines are relatively straight if shifting to the middle after cog 5 
and the inner after cog 7.  

*I think, the main drawback to triple is the inherently higher Q.*   I have 
a Sugino AT (46-36-26) with a 150-152mm Q, but also a 1975 Shimano Dura Ace 
52-39 (1st generation) with a 138mm Q.   I wish the triple could have the 
lower Q.

John Hawrylak
Woodstown NJ
On Tuesday, January 9, 2024 at 11:47:31 AM UTC-5 Patrick Moore wrote:

> VO makes a good case for triples:
>
> https://mailchi.mp/velo-orange.com/triplesaregreatchangemymind?e=9c5efe5ba1
>
> *Simplicity and Effectiveness* While 1x systems boast simplicity, the 
> emphasis on constant shifting may be overstated. Many riders find 
> themselves primarily using the middle ring, operating as a 1x system with 
> added flexibility to adapt to different terrain.
>
> The point that triples are usually used as 1Xs with low and high ranges 
> available is the key, I think. I know that, even with 10 or 11 in back, I'd 
> not want a 1X, and even a 1X + granny (ie, very wide range subcompact 2X) 
> would leave me wanting easy-shifting gears for steep rolling offroad 
> terrain (which I don't ride anymore), as I found when I swapped out a 3X7 
> for a 2X9 on my erstwhile Fargo. For road use including heavy loads and 
> steep hills the 2X9 was easier to use and provided sufficient range with 
> close cruising steps, but I did miss the middle-ring range between about 
> 65" and 35" which comes with the middle ring on a 46/36/24 triple.
>
> -- 
>
> Patrick Moore
> Alburquerque, Nuevo Mexico, Etats Unis d'Amerique, Orbis Terrarum
>
> ---
>
> Executive resumes, LinkedIn profiles, bios, letters, and other writing 
> services
>
>
> ---
>
> *When thou didst not, savage, k**now thine own meaning,*
>
> *But wouldst gabble like a** thing most brutish,*
>
> *I endowed thy purposes w**ith words that made them known.*
>

-- 
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 view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/rbw-owners-bunch/b5f153ef-ba27-402d-8dfd-539bb5b46567n%40googlegroups.com.

Re: [RBW] Advantages of triple drivetrains (VO post)

['John Hawrylak, Woodstown NJ' via RBW Owners Bunch]

Bill L stated:   " If it were me, I'd experiment with a 42-tooth big ring 
before going to a triple"

Question to Bill:   Will a 42T large ring result in the FD hitting the 
chain stay in the inner ring of a triple (say 24T or 26T) ???

PS  I agree with your comment on the 46-11 being a very high gear.

John Hawrylak
Woodstown NJ

On Tuesday, January 9, 2024 at 3:21:33 PM UTC-5 Bill Lindsay wrote:

> Ben
>
> You run a 46/30 with an 11-34 11sp cassette.  If it were me, I'd 
> experiment with a 42-tooth big ring before going to a triple.  46x11 is 
> pretty darn high for a commuter/city bike.  Anything higher than a 4:1 in 
> my book is for the sole purpose of pedaling at >>40mph.  That is a real 
> use-case in hilly areas, but not for me, and especially not for a 
> commuter/city bike.  That's just a suggestion.  The jump from 42 to 30 is 
> much less dramatic.  
>
> BL in EC
>
> On Tuesday, January 9, 2024 at 11:25:39 AM UTC-8 bunny...@gmail.com wrote:
>
>> I've been kind of triple-curious again. I live in a hilly part of L.A. My 
>> commuter/city bike has an 11-34 11s with a 46/30 front. I've been finding 
>> the 46 to 30 jump to feel pretty large. It feels much more dramatic than 
>> 50-34. For instance, if I switch big to small in the from, I'll sift down 
>> at least 3 cogs on the back to totally avoid spinning out immediately. I 
>> sometimes find myself mildly cross chaining in either direction to find the 
>> right gear.
>>
>> So I've been thinking of either going 1x, or 3x. My other bike is 1x, and 
>> it's a carbon all-road/gravel thing. I like the setup for rougher terrain. 
>> Also, I just don't like the idea of having duplicate bikes. I also 
>> romanticize the bike I had about 20 years go, which had an 11-27 9 speed 
>> with 24/36/46. At the time, it felt luxurious, natural, and easy. But I 
>> didn't know then what I know now, and many times when I've set up a modern 
>> bike like this one from my past, I get quickly disillusioned and undo that 
>> change.
>>
>> I kinda feel like the headline should be "triples: still fun and useful 
>> for hands on bike nerds who like to tinker."
>>
>> Ben
>>
>> On Tuesday, January 9, 2024 at 10:44:06 AM UTC-8 captaincon...@gmail.com 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> I dissent.  Front derailers are unnecessarily complicated to setup, and 
>>> so are triple chainrings, especially on XD2s.  I have 1X 10 one two bikes, 
>>> and love it, and I just specced a 1X 11 with a Deore 5100 derailer and 
>>> 11-51 cassette for my BMC Monstercross.  The whole drivetrain cost less 
>>> than a nice triple crankset, it's all lighter too.  Check out Analog Cycles 
>>> for inspiration.
>>> On Tuesday, January 9, 2024 at 11:45:17 AM UTC-6 Johnny Alien wrote:
>>>
 For years Grant/Rivendell argued against lots of gears in the rear 
 because people didn't need to shift that much. The message was to push 
 through if its too hard or even get off and push the bike up the hill. Now 
 its shifting to a new argument...why not have those extra gears available. 
 Honestly its all marketing to me. I like the simplicity of a 1x because I 
 get the bulk of the gears I need with less maintenance. For me (personally 
 mind you) the front derailer has always been the sketchiest part of the 
 setup. Dropping chains, chain rubits all a balancing act. I am happy 
 to 
 have that all go away with a sacrifice of the granny gear. I see what VO 
 is 
 saying and I think its probably a practical opinion but for me?? 1x just 
 works.

 On Tuesday, January 9, 2024 at 12:33:52 PM UTC-5 campyo...@me.com 
 wrote:

> I have a triple on just one bike (Soma Saga). My main problem is that 
> when I’m in the smallest chainring I am moving so slowly that it’s hard 
> to 
> stay upright. On the very steep inclines that necessitate the small cog, 
> I 
> find it easier to just get off and walk the bike up the hill (something 
> we 
> used to call a “24-inch gear”).
>
> --Eric Norris
> campyo...@me.com
> Insta: @CampyOnlyGuy
> YouTube: YouTube.com/CampyOnlyGuy 
>
> On Jan 9, 2024, at 9:20 AM, Ron Mc  wrote:
>
> I've been on half-step triples for over a decade, and never looked 
> back.  
> Many 30-mi rides never see a rear shift.  
>
> 
>
> On Tuesday, January 9, 2024 at 11:00:57 AM UTC-6 Steven Sweedler wrote:
>
>> For several years all my bikes have had triples, usually 46-32-20 on 
>> XT 737 cranks. For this current trip I took off the big ring because I 
>> rarely use it when touring with Cindy, or any of my solo riding, just 
>> when 
>> riding with the guys chasing them down hills. It does look a little 
>> ridiculous, with the front der way up in the air but so far its working 
>> out 
>> just fine.
>>
>>
>> Steven Sweedler
>> Plymouth, New Hampshire
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Jan 9, 2024 at 4:47 PM 

Re: [RBW] Re: Why do some bikes just feel consistently faster?

['John Hawrylak, Woodstown NJ' via RBW Owners Bunch]

Bill L questioned the 12# weight difference.

I sort of missed the 12#, mainly since Bike D was stated to 'feel fast' and 
I assumed B & C would use heavier tubing due to the 73 to 75# load 
requirement and A must be thick gauge tubing given the 30# weight (Schwinns 
in the 1980"s used 1010 18 gauge tubing in lugged frames and quoted 30 to 
32# weights).

I admit D should be about 1 mph faster than the A, B C due to the 11 to 13# 
weight difference (basis R Schwinn stated Schwinn tests showed 12# change 
in frame resulted in a 1 mph change with same effort).   I focused on the 
'feel fast' vs 'tested and shown faster'.

I did ride a Trek 5500 (Rolf paired spoke wheels) for 5 years between 
riding a 1975 Schwinn Approved Voyaguer II and a 1988 Schwinn Voyaguer 
(touring) and both with 36 spoke wheels.  I did not find it to 'feel a 
significant degree faster' than the Voyageur II even though it weighed 
less.  I may have been faster, but did not feel it.

However, my Norther-Lyon (36 spoke Velocity Atlas wheels) *does 'feel 
faster"* than either of the 2 Schwinns and is definitely easier to pedal 
than the other 3.   So my answer is probably biased to my experiences & 
assumptions discussed above.

Note:  The 4 frames are all essentially the same sizes: 21" )C-T), 54cm and 
52cm, both C-C.  So tube rigidity may be more important in the smaller 
frame since a small frame is more rigid than a large one.

This was enjoyable and thought provoking.  Thanks Bill   

John Hawrylak
Woodstown NJ

On Tuesday, January 9, 2024 at 2:24:49 PM UTC-5 Bill Lindsay wrote:

> John played along and gave an interesting answer.  Interesting for two 
> reasons:
>
> 1. Patrick Moore's Bike C is objectively more flexible than Bike D.  
> 2. John H doesn't think a 12 pound lighter bike will feel faster or easier 
> to pedal
>
> BL in EC
>

-- 
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 view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/rbw-owners-bunch/7b7c309e-4fb7-4b5b-b35c-f5cbe2f9e3e2n%40googlegroups.com.

[RBW] Re: Why do some bikes just feel consistently faster?

['John Hawrylak, Woodstown NJ' via RBW Owners Bunch]

Patrick

Maybe this was asked/answered, but is the STA or saddle setback the same on 
Ford Blue as the others??   Are you in a different position??

John Hawrylak
Woodstown NJ

On Thursday, December 28, 2023 at 5:35:08 PM UTC-5 Patrick Moore wrote:

> This is hardly a new question for me or for others, but it is a question 
> that strikes me anew when I ride the 1999 Joe Starck and find, once again 
> as always in getting on for 25 years of ownership that *it's just easier 
> to maintain speed and cadence in given conditions in given gears,* this 
> both on the flats and on hills. I remember being struck by this, again at 
> the start of each ride on it, in the first years of ownership.
>
> Tires make a difference, tho' it felt this way with 571 X 23 mm Conti 
> Grands Prix and Michelin Pro Races and with 559 X 23 mm Specialized Turbos; 
> with the slightly wider (27.19 mm rear at 60 psi and 27.49 mm front at 55 
> psi on my 19 mm OW rims) and even lighter and more supple Elk Passes it 
> feels even faster and *smoother.* 
>
> BTW, I wholly discountenance the opinion that harshness or vibration makes 
> riders think they're going fast. At least, perhaps some people do that, but 
> I've always associated harshness with slowness and smoothness with speed. 
> But again, the '99 has always felt *smooth* and *fast.*
>
> What provoked this perennial question was my very pleasant mid-afternoon 
> ride today. My route included about 1 mile of steep hill starting at 
> Broadway and, feeling tired and sluggish and being old I considered 
> swapping the Phil 17/19Dingle wheel (76" and 68") with the SA TF wheel (76" 
> and 57" underdrive), but didn't want the bother and decided I'd just walk 
> if necessary.
>
> I did plan to move the chain to the 19 t/68" gear once I got downtown, but 
> didn't do this, either. Winds variable up to about 7-8 mph.
>
> I took it easy but found myself following some youngster on a thin-tire 
> 700C derailleur hybrid for about 8 miles; I finally caught up to him at the 
> first light on Coal and followed him up the climb. I think he was a UNM 
> student and at least 45 years younger than I, and he put a few yards on me 
> up the hill spinning in a low gear but I was surprised once again (this is 
> the point, don't mind my meandering) at *how well and easily* the bike 
> climbs.
>
> ???
>
> Planing? The frame is not as over-beefy as the 2003 Goodrich custom but 
> it's not as light and certainly has fatter tubes than the wonderful 
> thinwall 531 normal gauge 2020 Matthews replacement of the 2003.
>
> Weight? With the Phil it's right at 18 lb without bottle or bag versus ~28 
> for the Matthews road with F+R racks, fenders, lights, and SA 3 speed hub, 
> and versus the 30-31 lb of the Matthews road-bike-for-dirt with 2X10 
> derailleur drivetrain, 50 mm tires, 2X gauge fenders, dynamo lighting, and 
> rear rack. But it feels fast on the flats at steady-state cruising. I 
> daresay that the weight makes a difference on hills, but I *don't* think 
> that weight is the only reason.
>
> I know that some bikes just fit and feel "perfect," and this is one of 
> them (tho' the 2 Matthewses fit just about the same since I built them up 
> to do so). That old Herse was a tank that 2 earlier owners sold for cheap 
> but for me it rode "fast" if not as fast as the 1999 Joe Starck.
>
> To end this meandering: since so much of my riding is either errands 
> requiring bags or dirt requiring fat tires the 1999 gets ridden less than 
> it otherwise would, but if I had to get ride of all bikes but one, I'd 
> happily keep this and build 1 or 2 alternative wheelsets (geared/skinny, 
> geared/fattish) and buy a bit selection of strap-on saddlebags from repair 
> kit only to Sackville Medium.
>
> I've owned 5 Rivendells including 3 customs and this one is the last (tho' 
> the 2020 Matthews is a copy of the 2003).
>
> Sorry, can't resist posting again:
>
> [image: image.png]
> -- 
>
> Patrick Moore
> Alburquerque, Nuevo Mexico, Etats Unis d'Amerique, Orbis Terrarum
>
> ---
>
> Executive resumes, LinkedIn profiles, bios, letters, and other writing 
> services
>
>
> ---
>
> *When thou didst not, savage, k**now thine own meaning,*
>
> *But wouldst gabble like a** thing most brutish,*
>
> *I endowed thy purposes w**ith words that made them known.*
>

-- 
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 view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/rbw-owners-bunch/1d8e24a9-0448-4830-8a0e-806fbfc45371n%40googlegroups.com.

[RBW] Re: Why do some bikes just feel consistently faster?

['John Hawrylak, Woodstown NJ' via RBW Owners Bunch]

+1 on Bill L's thoughts on Ford Blue.   I would suggest planning as the 
frame is large (25"??) and if a normal wall tubing was used, the large 
frame might plane without being too flexible.   Do you know what wall 
thickness was used???   Maybe it's better not to know, following Bill's 
line of thought.

PS, the darker blue bars contrast nicely.   Would Ford use a white??

John Hawrylak
Woodstown NJ

On Thursday, December 28, 2023 at 5:35:08 PM UTC-5 Patrick Moore wrote:

> This is hardly a new question for me or for others, but it is a question 
> that strikes me anew when I ride the 1999 Joe Starck and find, once again 
> as always in getting on for 25 years of ownership that *it's just easier 
> to maintain speed and cadence in given conditions in given gears,* this 
> both on the flats and on hills. I remember being struck by this, again at 
> the start of each ride on it, in the first years of ownership.
>
> Tires make a difference, tho' it felt this way with 571 X 23 mm Conti 
> Grands Prix and Michelin Pro Races and with 559 X 23 mm Specialized Turbos; 
> with the slightly wider (27.19 mm rear at 60 psi and 27.49 mm front at 55 
> psi on my 19 mm OW rims) and even lighter and more supple Elk Passes it 
> feels even faster and *smoother.* 
>
> BTW, I wholly discountenance the opinion that harshness or vibration makes 
> riders think they're going fast. At least, perhaps some people do that, but 
> I've always associated harshness with slowness and smoothness with speed. 
> But again, the '99 has always felt *smooth* and *fast.*
>
> What provoked this perennial question was my very pleasant mid-afternoon 
> ride today. My route included about 1 mile of steep hill starting at 
> Broadway and, feeling tired and sluggish and being old I considered 
> swapping the Phil 17/19Dingle wheel (76" and 68") with the SA TF wheel (76" 
> and 57" underdrive), but didn't want the bother and decided I'd just walk 
> if necessary.
>
> I did plan to move the chain to the 19 t/68" gear once I got downtown, but 
> didn't do this, either. Winds variable up to about 7-8 mph.
>
> I took it easy but found myself following some youngster on a thin-tire 
> 700C derailleur hybrid for about 8 miles; I finally caught up to him at the 
> first light on Coal and followed him up the climb. I think he was a UNM 
> student and at least 45 years younger than I, and he put a few yards on me 
> up the hill spinning in a low gear but I was surprised once again (this is 
> the point, don't mind my meandering) at *how well and easily* the bike 
> climbs.
>
> ???
>
> Planing? The frame is not as over-beefy as the 2003 Goodrich custom but 
> it's not as light and certainly has fatter tubes than the wonderful 
> thinwall 531 normal gauge 2020 Matthews replacement of the 2003.
>
> Weight? With the Phil it's right at 18 lb without bottle or bag versus ~28 
> for the Matthews road with F+R racks, fenders, lights, and SA 3 speed hub, 
> and versus the 30-31 lb of the Matthews road-bike-for-dirt with 2X10 
> derailleur drivetrain, 50 mm tires, 2X gauge fenders, dynamo lighting, and 
> rear rack. But it feels fast on the flats at steady-state cruising. I 
> daresay that the weight makes a difference on hills, but I *don't* think 
> that weight is the only reason.
>
> I know that some bikes just fit and feel "perfect," and this is one of 
> them (tho' the 2 Matthewses fit just about the same since I built them up 
> to do so). That old Herse was a tank that 2 earlier owners sold for cheap 
> but for me it rode "fast" if not as fast as the 1999 Joe Starck.
>
> To end this meandering: since so much of my riding is either errands 
> requiring bags or dirt requiring fat tires the 1999 gets ridden less than 
> it otherwise would, but if I had to get ride of all bikes but one, I'd 
> happily keep this and build 1 or 2 alternative wheelsets (geared/skinny, 
> geared/fattish) and buy a bit selection of strap-on saddlebags from repair 
> kit only to Sackville Medium.
>
> I've owned 5 Rivendells including 3 customs and this one is the last (tho' 
> the 2020 Matthews is a copy of the 2003).
>
> Sorry, can't resist posting again:
>
> [image: image.png]
> -- 
>
> Patrick Moore
> Alburquerque, Nuevo Mexico, Etats Unis d'Amerique, Orbis Terrarum
>
> ---
>
> Executive resumes, LinkedIn profiles, bios, letters, and other writing 
> services
>
>
> ---
>
> *When thou didst not, savage, k**now thine own meaning,*
>
> *But wouldst gabble like a** thing most brutish,*
>
> *I endowed thy purposes w**ith words that made them known.*
>

-- 
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 view 

[RBW] Re: 26.8 seatposts with generous setback

['John Hawrylak, Woodstown NJ' via RBW Owners Bunch]

+1 on Eric's comments.

I have a 27.2mm LTE-100 I bought from a list member.   I measured the 
setback on the work bench and the '0' mark on the LTE-100 scale is apporx 
20mm of setback.  So the '50' mark is 70mm of setback.  Quite a bit of 
setback.  If pushed back to the 50mm mark, the setback corresponds to a 69° 
STA from a 73°STA with a Saddle Height of 71cm and a 20mm setback seatpost.

The list member used the adjustable design to get an initial setting. Then 
used a conventional nut/bolt for riding.

John Hawrylak
Woodstown NJ
On Thursday, April 13, 2023 at 1:28:18 PM UTC-4 Eric Marth wrote:

> Leah, I'm happy to be helpful! I'm also sorry to hear you tried and had a 
> bad experience with the IRD seatpost. I was excited when it was released 
> because it seemed like it would solve the 26.8 lots of setback problem. But 
> that seatpost is just a problem and a setback in and of itself. 
>
> Just as a note on the Kalloy post: it lists 24mm of offset. Compared to a 
> Nitto S83 at 23mm that's hardly a noticeable difference. I can get that 
> extra millimeter if I forego underwear. 
>
> I will again endorse the SR MTE-100. They're hard to find, they're pretty 
> ugly but they're stout and have *tons* of setback. I did have trouble 
> getting that quick release to stay put so I replaced mine with a long 8mm 
> bolt and a nylock nut. 
>
> [image: Screenshot 2023-04-13 at 1.25.06 PM.png]
>
> On Thursday, April 13, 2023 at 12:07:01 PM UTC-4 Bicycle Belle Ding Ding! 
> wrote:
>
>> Eric, I’m so glad you started this thread. I went through the same 
>> odyssey a few years ago and tried the IRD seatpost and it slipped like 
>> crazy. Riv took it back and stopped selling it because it was a widespread 
>> problem. I want a bit more setback on my Platy so I’m going to take Liz’s 
>> recommendation.
>>
>> Liz - thank you SO much! I was led to believe during my search that I was 
>> out of luck because most seatposts come in the-27-whatever size and not our 
>> uncommon 26.8. Can this seat post really work well at only $15?!? 
>>
>> Much thanks,
>> Leah
>>
>> On Wednesday, April 12, 2023 at 10:42:42 PM UTC-4 eric...@gmail.com 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> [image: Screenshot 2023-04-12 at 10.40.34 PM.png]
>>>
>>> Hi all — I'm comparing 26.8 seatposts and their varying setback. I'd 
>>> like the saddle on my MB-2 to be further back. 
>>>
>>> Does anyone have any firsthand experience with how a Thompson and Nitto 
>>> S83 compare in terms of setback? I've been searching around and can't find 
>>> any definitive measurements. 
>>>
>>> I'm currently running a Suntour XC Pro seatpost and it looks like either 
>>> of the above will give me more setback than I currently have.  
>>>
>>> I've tried and very much did *not* like the IRD wayback seatpost, it 
>>> slips. Others have reported the same. Don't buy this seatpost! 
>>>
>>> The vintage SR MTE-100 is good, solid, I run one on my Appaloosa. Would 
>>> rather try something different. Plus, they're hard to find! 
>>>
>>>
>>>

-- 
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 view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/rbw-owners-bunch/f82a3620-8b1a-477e-a44d-a0a26ec2c1b1n%40googlegroups.com.

Re: [RBW] Re: New Bike Day—Retirement Bike

['John Hawrylak, Woodstown NJ' via RBW Owners Bunch]

Roberta

Beautiful Betty and great report.  One suggestion, check the distance from 
the ground to the front mudflap is 4 cm or greater.   4cm is generally 
considered to the minimum distance.  Any lower increases air resistance and 
tends to pick up much more debris from the road.  The SKS safety tabs will 
protect you if the flap picks up a tree branch.

John Hawrylak
Woodstown NJ 

On Tuesday, December 26, 2023 at 8:40:27 PM UTC-5 Roberta wrote:

> Well, I certainly am in good company with similar tastes and components.  
> Thank you for all your well wishing.  And, good wishes to you, too!
>
> This group has always been so helpful, so supportive.  It also got me into 
> colors (Leah, especially, dragged me into the brightness.)!  My first Riv, 
> which I loved riding wasn't too much to look at.  Butterscotch Appaloosa 
> with a black saddle, cork grips, black luggage.  Rode wonderfully, but I 
> think it would look more "fun" if I owned it today.
>
> Now, all I have to do is actually retire...  I think that will be in 
> 2024.  Where shall I go?  Not sure yet, but I have family in NC, so I might 
> go on another Pam Likes to Bike Ride.  Or, perhaps I'll end up in MI on a 
> Bicycle Belle Ding Ding Riv ride!  In the meantime, Betty is my daily 
> commuter bike and my main weekend ride.  
>
> Roberta 
> Philadelphia, PA
>
> On Tuesday, December 26, 2023 at 7:01:33 PM UTC-5 aelga...@castilleja.org 
> wrote:
>
>> Congrats Roberta! I bought my first riv for my 40th birthday and then I 
>> bought a Jitensha Studio Ebisu for my 50th birthday. But I’ve had my eyes 
>> open for a Betty Foy for my oldest daughter. She’s not old/tall enough yet, 
>> but I’m jealous of the gem you found! I’m also jealous of your retirement. 
>>  Happy riding! 
>>
>> Best
>> Ahmed in Redwood Shores
>>
>> *Ahmed Elgasseir*
>>
>> Department Chair, Visual and Performing Arts
>>
>>
>> *Castilleja School* 
>>
>> 1310 Bryant Street 
>> 
>>
>> Palo Alto, CA 94301 
>> 
>>
>>
>> P (415) 654-7977
>>
>> E aelga...@castilleja.org
>>
>> www.castilleja.org   
>>
>>
>> Follow us on Instagram  | 
>> Facebook  | Twitter 
>>  | LinkedIn 
>> 
>>
>>
>> *Women Learning. Women Leading. *
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Dec 26, 2023 at 3:07 PM Bicycle Belle Ding Ding! <
>> jonasa...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> It just turned out so well! Where will you go? What will you see? Maybe 
>>> you will keep a ride journal with places and miles you go on your Betty in 
>>> retirement. All the happy miles to you, and I hope to look upon this little 
>>> blue-green wonder in March at the Philly Bike Expo!
>>> Leah
>>>
>>> On Tuesday, December 26, 2023 at 4:28:00 PM UTC-6 aeroperf wrote:
>>>
 Excellent, excellent choice.
 When I retired I also bought a Rivendell.  I’ve never regretted it.  
 Neither will you.
 Love the mud flaps! Great choice! Enjoy! 

 -- 
>>> 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-bun...@googlegroups.com.
>>>
>> To view this discussion on the web visit 
>>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/rbw-owners-bunch/a3721c52-39c3-4d1c-8ee0-96352dd7af02n%40googlegroups.com
>>>  
>>> 
>>> .
>>>
>>

-- 
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 view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/rbw-owners-bunch/46425e2d-8bbe-4f5f-b44b-6da6cc917f7en%40googlegroups.com.

[RBW] Re: FS: Acorn, Nigel Smythe Bags-Obsolete Tan, Tweed

['John Hawrylak, Woodstown NJ' via RBW Owners Bunch]

The $2 bills with Tom are a nice touch, rare as hen's teeth.  Much better 
than a $1 bill

John Hawrylak
Woodstown NJ

On Sunday, December 10, 2023 at 8:10:31 AM UTC-5 mike goldman wrote:

> All bags are in excellent condition. The 2 smaller rear Acorns on the 
> right side of the main photo were on my personal bikes and show some easily 
> removable dirt and minor strap wear
>
> Prices: From the main picture left to right top to bottom
>
> -Med/Large Acorn: main compartment w/ tube size smaller pockets..$75 
> shipped
> -Nigel Smythe rear banana bags: 1 main compartment..$70 each shipped
> -Acorn front bag: main compartment w. inner map type compartment..$60 
> shipped
> -Acorn front bag: main compartment...$55 shipped
> -Acorn front bag: main compartment, narrowest of frt. Acorn.$50 shipped
> -Nigel Smythe front H bags: side D rings, 1 compartment.$75 shipped each
> -Acorn bags: see description above, no rips, very solid.$45 shipped each
> -Nigel Smythe: small front/rear bag, room for tubes,tools.$50 shipped
>
> mike goldman
> rhode island
>

-- 
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 view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/rbw-owners-bunch/99c2dd85-7cac-415f-b3dc-b6fd8ef3d0a7n%40googlegroups.com.

Re: [RBW] Re: NBOD: New Bike Ordered Day! The mythical canti-Roa!

['John Hawrylak, Woodstown NJ' via RBW Owners Bunch]

Bill

Nice photos of the frame.  The fork rake looks very nice.  A few questions 
after reading all the posts:

How much fork rake do you have??

How much BBD do you have??  Earlier you mentioned Grant used some extra 
BBD, based on his Roadeo?I thought 80mm was RBW standard BBD for 700C 
wheels.

Did you get extra BBD to compensate for larger tires than say 700x32, e.g., 
increase the BBD so tires wider than 700x28/32 gives the same BBH as 
narrower tires??   

What was the main consideration for the canti's??   Obtain unrestricted 
tire clearance or something else??   

The fork crown looks very wide.  You mentioned it was not the standard RBW 
crown.   Do you know the inside width???

John Hawrylak
Woodstown NJ

On Sunday, December 3, 2023 at 11:06:19 AM UTC-5 Bill Lindsay wrote:

> Here is the Flickr album where I will post my photos.  
> https://www.flickr.com/photos/45758191@N04/albums/72177720313109003/
>
> There are several shots of the raw frame set in there now.  
>
> BL in EC
>
> On Sunday, December 3, 2023 at 7:13:08 AM UTC-8 Bill Lindsay wrote:
>
>> I absolutely will be hoping for RivSister approval of my color way.  In 
>> my convo with Grant, he asked to photograph a number of the projects I've 
>> been working on or recently completed, like he may Blagh about it, and 
>> since this Canti-Roa is a relatively unique thing, I was going to give them 
>> first shot at the actual reveal.  
>>
>> Bill Lindsay
>> El Cerrito, Ca
>>
>> On Sunday, December 3, 2023 at 5:17:12 AM UTC-8 sarahlik...@gmail.com 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> I love seeing someone else's bike dream fulfilled! Congratulations on 
>>> your new bike day and what color did you paint your bike??! (I 
>>> promise you all your RivSisters want to know...) 
>>>
>>> On Saturday, December 2, 2023 at 8:19:18 PM UTC-8 Bill Lindsay wrote:
>>>
 Since starting this thread, I did spring for a fancy new wheel set that 
 I'm pretty excited about.  I like the people and products at HED, and I 
 appreciate their vestigial commitment to rim brakes.  They offer a premier 
 rim treatment called RA black.  The rim is machined rough, and then hard 
 anodized to give a super high friction braking surface.  It's supposed to 
 be premier braking, and I'm excited to try it out.  

 Mocking up the weights of things, I may be able to pull in a full build 
 at 18.5 pounds without rack and fenders, and maybe (just maybe) at 
 19.99lbs 
 with rack and fenders.  We'll see how it turns out...  it will not be red. 

 BL in EC

 On Saturday, December 2, 2023 at 9:23:07 AM UTC-8 Ryan wrote:

> Can hardly wait to see it built up! Long wait but worth it I'm sure 
>
> On Saturday, December 2, 2023 at 9:57:15 AM UTC-6 George Schick wrote:
>
>> You gonna stick with the default red/white Roadeo color scheme or 
>> choose something else?
>>
>>
>> On Saturday, December 2, 2023 at 8:45:33 AM UTC-6 Bill Lindsay wrote:
>>
>>> ...and 20 months later, it has arrived!  Rivendell received my 
>>> Cantilever Roadeo from Nobilette this week, and it's off to paint.  I 
>>> paid 
>>> them a visit and gave it a look over.  It looks very nice and I'm eager 
>>> to 
>>> see it painted, and built up.  
>>>
>>> On my visit I had a very nice chat with Grant about various things, 
>>> and a few of the familiar old faces were there, so it was a pleasant 
>>> visit 
>>> all around.  
>>>
>>> Bill Lindsay
>>> El Cerrito, CA
>>>
>>> On Wednesday, April 6, 2022 at 11:15:17 AM UTC-7 Bill Lindsay wrote:
>>>
 John

 I will definitely run my current Roadeo wheelsets.  27mm tubulars.  
 Rene Herse Stampede Pass (622-32) and Bon Jon Pass (622-35).  For 
 kicks 
 I'll probably check how Barlow Passes look on the bike (622-38).  

 I don't plan on using fenders.  I plan on being able to use 
 fenders.  I don't have a width or model in mind at the moment.  

 I am considering using Rene Herse Cantilevers.  Those brakes are 
 super light, super minimalist, and very not-adjustable.  My opinion is 
 that 
 they can only work great when a master builder builds the frame and 
 fork 
 with those brakes in mind.  Weigle and Nobilette are the two who I'd 
 trust 
 to execute that, because both have done it dozens of times.  

 I expect to take delivery about a year from now.  Nobilette's queue 
 is indeed deep, and it contains other Roadeos, Riv customs, and 
 Nobilettes.  I'm happy that Nobilette has the steady work, and hope he 
 is 
 charging what he needs to keep the lights on.  I was happy to pay the 
 price 
 I've paid.  

 Bill Lindsay
 El Cerrito, CA

 On Wednesday, April 6, 2022 at 9:41:52 

Re: [RBW] Re: Bike Makeover Thread

['John Hawrylak, Woodstown NJ' via RBW Owners Bunch]

Leah, perhaps the Brooks on the Mermaid is setback 10mm more than the Rivet 
on the Raspberry.   However, the Raspberry seatpost SB is 42mm with 0 on 
the IRD scale corresponding to an actual 20mm.  The Mermaid has a 
'standard' looking seatpost, most likely with 20mm SB.  The 10mm in saddle 
position is only 25% of the 42mm in seatpost seatback.So you are still 
much further back on the Rapsberry than on the Mermaid.

A simple measurement could help determine if the setbacks are the same or 
different.   If the 2 bikes have the SAME stem length and bars and the bars 
are set to the same height, then measuring the distance from the center of 
the stem quill bolt to the back of the saddle (or to where your sit bones 
indention is) should reveal if both are setback the same or if there is a 
difference, it would quantify it.

John Hawrylak
Woodstown NJ

On Sunday, October 15, 2023 at 7:06:51 PM UTC-4 Bicycle Belle Ding Ding! 
wrote:

> I’m nearly sure Rivet Sonora is 10mm shorter rails than Brooks. I think 
> that could account for the difference.
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On Oct 15, 2023, at 7:03 PM, 'John Hawrylak, Woodstown NJ' via RBW Owners 
> Bunch  wrote:
>
> Leah stated concerning her Mermaid Platy:  " This one has a Brooks. I 
> know it sounds crazy but this bike feels perfect to me and I believe it to 
> be because the Brooks rails are a little longer and allow for just enough 
> setback. "
>
>
> My Comment: Brooks B17s are notorious for their rails having a short 
> adjustment length.  I measured 2.1 to 3.0 cm depending on how much you 
> force the saddle fore and aft in the clamp.
>
> The Mermaid looks like a 'normal' setup form that type of frame.   There 
> seems to be more seatpost showing the=an on the Raspberry Platy.
>
> The Raspberry Platy seems more stretched out, which George has diagnosed 
> in his replies
>
> Leah, if you think the Billie bars on the Mermaid are different than the 
> Billie bars on the Raspberry., just place the 2 side by side, line up the 
> bars and visually compare the 2.  Any differences should be apparent.  If 
> NO differences are observed they are probably the same.
>
> John Hawrylak
> Woodstown NJ
>
> On Sunday, October 15, 2023 at 6:40:42 PM UTC-4 Bicycle Belle Ding Ding! 
> wrote:
>
>> I have the mermaid Platy:
>> [image: image0.jpeg]
>>
>> This one has a Brooks. I know it sounds crazy but this bike feels perfect 
>> to me and I believe it to be because the Brooks rails are a little longer 
>> and allow for just enough setback. Either that or the Billie Bars are 
>> somehow not made to spec and don’t come back as far. That’s my layperson 
>> crumby understanding. But that bike fits great.
>>
>> The Clem:
>> [image: image1.jpeg]
>>
>> I rode it last night and decided I hate how it feels. Bars too close, too 
>> bolt upright. This is the fault of club riding where I now like leaning 
>> forward more. But I rarely ride this bike so it won’t get any new parts. 
>> Poor thing.
>>
>> On Oct 15, 2023, at 6:36 PM, 'John Hawrylak, Woodstown NJ' via RBW Owners 
>> Bunch  wrote:
>>
>> 
>>
>> Curious if Leah has her other Rivendells set up the same way.
>>
>> John Hawrylak
>> Woodstown NJ
>>
>> On Sunday, October 15, 2023 at 5:03:31 PM UTC-4 George Schick wrote:
>>
>>> I'll probably get clobbered for my reply to this discussion - I'm used 
>>> to it - but from viewing the pics of Leah's bikes in this thread plus 
>>> others in previous threads, her bike always seems to be either in the 
>>> highest gear or at least the next to highest. And she has admitted to as 
>>> much in previous discussions that's how she likes it. And since she likes 
>>> the saddle moved as far as possible to the rear this means that she's using 
>>> the leverage of that angle while pulling back on the bar grips in order to 
>>> "stomp" as hard as possible on the pedals.  Since she has the leg 
>>> development and strength to get away with that kind of riding due to her 
>>> weight training and other off-bike workouts, that's just how she's using to 
>>> riding.
>>>
>>> Many of the rest of us old farts who learned road riding on a 
>>> diamond-framed bike with drop bars, having the saddle positioned more 
>>> closely to the center of the BB so we could "spin" the pedals at as high a 
>>> cadence (RPM) as possible, shifting gears when necessary in order to 
>>> maintain that cadence (which is how I assume the pro racers still learn to 
>>> ride).  Which is probably why she gets some sideways looks by others in the 
>>> pa

Re: [RBW] Re: Bike Makeover Thread

['John Hawrylak, Woodstown NJ' via RBW Owners Bunch]

Leah stated concerning her Mermaid Platy:  " This one has a Brooks. I know 
it sounds crazy but this bike feels perfect to me and I believe it to be 
because the Brooks rails are a little longer and allow for just enough 
setback. "

My Comment: Brooks B17s are notorious for their rails having a short 
adjustment length.  I measured 2.1 to 3.0 cm depending on how much you 
force the saddle fore and aft in the clamp.

The Mermaid looks like a 'normal' setup form that type of frame.   There 
seems to be more seatpost showing the=an on the Raspberry Platy.

The Raspberry Platy seems more stretched out, which George has diagnosed in 
his replies

Leah, if you think the Billie bars on the Mermaid are different than the 
Billie bars on the Raspberry., just place the 2 side by side, line up the 
bars and visually compare the 2.  Any differences should be apparent.  If 
NO differences are observed they are probably the same.

John Hawrylak
Woodstown NJ

On Sunday, October 15, 2023 at 6:40:42 PM UTC-4 Bicycle Belle Ding Ding! 
wrote:

> I have the mermaid Platy:
> [image: image0.jpeg]
>
> This one has a Brooks. I know it sounds crazy but this bike feels perfect 
> to me and I believe it to be because the Brooks rails are a little longer 
> and allow for just enough setback. Either that or the Billie Bars are 
> somehow not made to spec and don’t come back as far. That’s my layperson 
> crumby understanding. But that bike fits great.
>
> The Clem:
> [image: image1.jpeg]
>
> I rode it last night and decided I hate how it feels. Bars too close, too 
> bolt upright. This is the fault of club riding where I now like leaning 
> forward more. But I rarely ride this bike so it won’t get any new parts. 
> Poor thing.
>
> On Oct 15, 2023, at 6:36 PM, 'John Hawrylak, Woodstown NJ' via RBW Owners 
> Bunch  wrote:
>
> 
>
> Curious if Leah has her other Rivendells set up the same way.
>
> John Hawrylak
> Woodstown NJ
>
> On Sunday, October 15, 2023 at 5:03:31 PM UTC-4 George Schick wrote:
>
>> I'll probably get clobbered for my reply to this discussion - I'm used to 
>> it - but from viewing the pics of Leah's bikes in this thread plus others 
>> in previous threads, her bike always seems to be either in the highest gear 
>> or at least the next to highest. And she has admitted to as much in 
>> previous discussions that's how she likes it. And since she likes the 
>> saddle moved as far as possible to the rear this means that she's using the 
>> leverage of that angle while pulling back on the bar grips in order to 
>> "stomp" as hard as possible on the pedals.  Since she has the leg 
>> development and strength to get away with that kind of riding due to her 
>> weight training and other off-bike workouts, that's just how she's using to 
>> riding.
>>
>> Many of the rest of us old farts who learned road riding on a 
>> diamond-framed bike with drop bars, having the saddle positioned more 
>> closely to the center of the BB so we could "spin" the pedals at as high a 
>> cadence (RPM) as possible, shifting gears when necessary in order to 
>> maintain that cadence (which is how I assume the pro racers still learn to 
>> ride).  Which is probably why she gets some sideways looks by others in the 
>> pace lines of her bike club.  That's not how she's learned to ride for 
>> whatever reason, so fiddling around with saddle position is likely to be a 
>> problem, or as least a considerable adjustment for her.  Anyway, that's my 
>> 2¢.
>>
>> On Sunday, October 15, 2023 at 3:27:57 PM UTC-5 John Hawrylak, Woodstown 
>> NJ wrote:
>>
>>> Ok, I understand
>>>
>>> Moving the saddle back increases the saddle to bar distance by about 
>>> 2.5cm.  This indicates the frame/stem/bar combination was too SHORT.
>>>
>>> Then, You cut 1 cm from the bars.  This increased the saddle to bar 
>>> distance, indicating the frame/stem/bar combination was too SHORT, but 
>>> is OK now.
>>>
>>> So you ended up increasing the saddle to bar distance 3.5 cm to get to 
>>> an Acceptable position..
>>>
>>> I think the Alba bar would be better based on this from the RBW write up 
>>> on the Billie:
>>> 'The Billie straight grip section is 2" (5 cm) longer than an Alba."
>>>
>>>  So an Alba with a 10cm stem would have a saddle to bar distance 1.5cm 
>>> longer (5 - 3.5) than what you ended up.
>>> Replace the 10 cm stem with a 9cm and you are within 0.5cm (5mm) of 
>>> where you are at.  A 8cm stem would also work, just 5mm on the other side.  
>>> A 8.5cm would be mathematically correct, but the 5m

Re: [RBW] Re: Bike Makeover Thread

['John Hawrylak, Woodstown NJ' via RBW Owners Bunch]

Curious if Leah has her other Rivendells set up the same way.

John Hawrylak
Woodstown NJ

On Sunday, October 15, 2023 at 5:03:31 PM UTC-4 George Schick wrote:

> I'll probably get clobbered for my reply to this discussion - I'm used to 
> it - but from viewing the pics of Leah's bikes in this thread plus others 
> in previous threads, her bike always seems to be either in the highest gear 
> or at least the next to highest. And she has admitted to as much in 
> previous discussions that's how she likes it. And since she likes the 
> saddle moved as far as possible to the rear this means that she's using the 
> leverage of that angle while pulling back on the bar grips in order to 
> "stomp" as hard as possible on the pedals.  Since she has the leg 
> development and strength to get away with that kind of riding due to her 
> weight training and other off-bike workouts, that's just how she's using to 
> riding.
>
> Many of the rest of us old farts who learned road riding on a 
> diamond-framed bike with drop bars, having the saddle positioned more 
> closely to the center of the BB so we could "spin" the pedals at as high a 
> cadence (RPM) as possible, shifting gears when necessary in order to 
> maintain that cadence (which is how I assume the pro racers still learn to 
> ride).  Which is probably why she gets some sideways looks by others in the 
> pace lines of her bike club.  That's not how she's learned to ride for 
> whatever reason, so fiddling around with saddle position is likely to be a 
> problem, or as least a considerable adjustment for her.  Anyway, that's my 
> 2¢.
>
> On Sunday, October 15, 2023 at 3:27:57 PM UTC-5 John Hawrylak, Woodstown 
> NJ wrote:
>
>> Ok, I understand
>>
>> Moving the saddle back increases the saddle to bar distance by about 
>> 2.5cm.  This indicates the frame/stem/bar combination was too SHORT.
>>
>> Then, You cut 1 cm from the bars.  This increased the saddle to bar 
>> distance, indicating the frame/stem/bar combination was too SHORT, but 
>> is OK now.
>>
>> So you ended up increasing the saddle to bar distance 3.5 cm to get to an 
>> Acceptable position..
>>
>> I think the Alba bar would be better based on this from the RBW write up 
>> on the Billie:
>> 'The Billie straight grip section is 2" (5 cm) longer than an Alba."
>>
>>  So an Alba with a 10cm stem would have a saddle to bar distance 1.5cm 
>> longer (5 - 3.5) than what you ended up.
>> Replace the 10 cm stem with a 9cm and you are within 0.5cm (5mm) of where 
>> you are at.  A 8cm stem would also work, just 5mm on the other side.  A 
>> 8.5cm would be mathematically correct, but the 5mm either way probably cant 
>> be felt..
>>
>> Leah is also in a too short condition, excess seatpost SB and max length 
>> stem..   The extra 5cm of straight grip length of the Billie contributes to 
>> the 'shortness' by having the LONG straight grip section.   The fact that 
>> other Riv sisters had the same problem and they used Billie bars, indicate 
>> the Billie bar is the common problem.
>>
>>
>> RBW supplies the Platy built up in Taiwan with a Tosco bar which has a 
>> sweep back about the same a s a Billie.  So they seem to supply Platy's as 
>> too short due t9 the bar sweep back.
>>
>> John Hawrylak
>> Woodstown NJ
>>
>>  
>>
>> On Sunday, October 15, 2023 at 02:45:29 PM EDT, Roberta <
>> rcha...@gmail.com> wrote: 
>>
>>
>> Thanks, John.
>>
>> I must have said it wrong.  I moved my saddle AWAY from the bars, towards 
>> the rear end of my bike.  I think that's called aft (I had to look it up).  
>> the bars were still too close, so I cut off 1cm (after a year of trying to 
>> feel OK).  If the stem had come in an 11cm, I would have just done that.  
>>
>> I ended in a good position, so like you said " then all is good in life."
>>
>> Roberta
>>
>> On Sunday, October 15, 2023 at 2:08:31 PM UTC-4 John Hawrylak, Woodstown 
>> NJ wrote:
>>
>> Roberta
>>
>> Pushing the saddle BACK to the back of the clamp, moves the saddle 
>> FORWARD the maximum amount.  This indicates the saddle to bar distance is 
>> too long and your needed to reduce the reach.   Maybe you pushed it too far 
>> forward, most Brooks have only 20 to 30mm of total fore/aft motion..  
>>
>> Did you cut 1cm off the bars after pushing forward the max amount??.  
>>  Cutting the bars indicate the saddle to bar distance is too short, the 
>> opposite of your original action (push saddle forward).   The 1 cm cut is 
>> within the range of Brooks adjustability.
>>
>> But if you ended in a good position, then all is good in life.
>>
>> John Hawrylak
>> Woodstown NJ
>> On Sunday, October 15, 2023 at 1:26:10 PM UTC-4 Roberta wrote:
>>
>> I've had a few emails with other RivSisters who own Platys and there are 
>> quite a few of us who've commented on having to push one's saddle back as 
>> far as the rails could take it.  
>>
>> I'm on a 55 Platy with 83cm pbh--one or two more than Leah AND I like my 
>> saddle high-- and would probably like mine back a 

Re: [RBW] Re: Bike Makeover Thread

['John Hawrylak, Woodstown NJ' via RBW Owners Bunch]

Roberta

Pushing the saddle BACK to the back of the clamp, moves the saddle FORWARD 
the maximum amount.  This indicates the saddle to bar distance is too long 
and your needed to reduce the reach.   Maybe you pushed it too far forward, 
most Brooks have only 20 to 30mm of total fore/aft motion..  

Did you cut 1cm off the bars after pushing forward the max amount??.  
 Cutting the bars indicate the saddle to bar distance is too short, the 
opposite of your original action (push saddle forward).   The 1 cm cut is 
within the range of Brooks adjustability.

But if you ended in a good position, then all is good in life.

John Hawrylak
Woodstown NJ
On Sunday, October 15, 2023 at 1:26:10 PM UTC-4 Roberta wrote:

> I've had a few emails with other RivSisters who own Platys and there are 
> quite a few of us who've commented on having to push one's saddle back as 
> far as the rails could take it.  
>
> I'm on a 55 Platy with 83cm pbh--one or two more than Leah AND I like my 
> saddle high-- and would probably like mine back a touch more, but I'm 
> unwilling to buy a new seat post.  My stem is one of the Nitto extra tall 
> ones with 10 cm, the longest they make for the extra high model.  I ended 
> up cutting (*"the horror"*) 1 cm off my Billie Bars.  Her saddle/seatpost 
> would be shorter than mine, closer to the handlebars, right?, so she might 
> feel it more.
>
>
>
> On Sunday, October 15, 2023 at 1:02:30 PM UTC-4 Bicycle Belle Ding Ding! 
> wrote:
>
>> What’s weird is that I sized up! My PBH would technically fit the 50!
>> Sent from my iPhone
>>
>> On Oct 15, 2023, at 12:55 PM, Joe Bernard  wrote:
>>
>> Reflecting on all the setback talk, I *do *think the reach may be 
>> inherently a tad short for the rider in question. I'm the same height as 
>> Leah - possibly even shorter, I'm aging and shrinking! - and Grant designed 
>> my Rivendell with a 54.2 ST, 63 ETT to work with Boscos up way high. It's 
>> perfect. 
>>
>>
>>
>> On Friday, October 13, 2023 at 10:33:09 AM UTC-7 Joe Bernard wrote:
>>
>>> I love the new look. I also love the old look! Basically I just love 
>>> that Raspberry Racing Platy ❤️❤️❤️
>>>
>>> On Wednesday, October 11, 2023 at 6:52:55 PM UTC-7 Bicycle Belle Ding 
>>> Ding! wrote:
>>>
 In the same vein as my Bike Style thread, I’m starting a Bike Makeover 
 thread.

 Every now and then, I get the urge to change up the look of my favorite 
 Platypus. I have it perfect mechanically, but bags and grips and 
 occasionally, saddles, beg to be changed up. It’s fully autumn here in the 
 Great Lakes State, and my ivory Rivet was looking a little out of season. 
 I 
 was gifted a chestnut Rivet from a dear RivSister, so I decided to pull it 
 out and put it on the bike. I took the brown Ergons from my other 
 Platypus, 
 slapped them on and sent her a photo. 

 “That bike deserves prettier grips. Those are ugly,” she said, giving 
 me the unvarnished truth. 

 I looked again. She was right. Back to the drawing board. I finally 
 found these grips from Rivet Cycle Works - Deb told me she had these but 
 didn’t have them up on the website yet. She had the exact match to my 
 chestnut saddle and days later, I had these gorgeous stamped leather grips 
 in hand. The bike looks positively *tonal.* The colors of the paint 
 throw out so many different shades of pinks and reds, thanks to the 
 abundant glitter in the metallic; adding rich leather accessories only 
 elevates the look. The stamped designs on the leather give the bike some 
 texture and add visual interest at the handlebar area. 

 This Platypus is like a little autumn posey. Perfect and pretty, and 
 wholly appointed to its duty.

 Now if I can just convince Deb to make these in ivory, so I have a pair 
 to match my ivory Rivet saddle when spring comes…

 Attached in the next post are the before and afters.
 Leah

>>> -- 
>>
>> 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/u_2mo2hU3Xo/unsubscribe
>> .
>> To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to 
>> rbw-owners-bun...@googlegroups.com.
>>
>> To view this discussion on the web visit 
>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/rbw-owners-bunch/f856ed0e-45fe-49ea-9831-aaacaa76a6b6n%40googlegroups.com
>>  
>> 
>> .
>>
>>

-- 
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 view this discussion on the web visit 

Re: [RBW] Re: Bike Makeover Thread

['John Hawrylak, Woodstown NJ' via RBW Owners Bunch]

Leah you stated " What’s weird is that I sized up! My PBH would technically 
fit the 50!"

>From the pictures you posted, your seatpost is almost fully inserted in the 
seat tube.  This indicates the frame is the LARGEST frame for your PBH.

However, your need for a LONG reach indicates you need a frame larger than 
your PBH allows.

The RBW geo tables show the Following Effective top tube lengths for the 
Platy (all in cm)

Frame   Effective TTL
50  59
55  61.5
60  66.5

So even a 55cm frame only gives you 2.5cm more reach ( Eff TTL (55)  -  Eff 
TTL (50) ), which is not enough get you to a normal seat post SB of 2 to 3 
cm.   A 60cm frame gives toy 7.5cm more reach, allowing a 2/3cm SB seat 
post and also recuing the stem to 7 to 8cm.

If you are using 175mm cranks, you could buy 5mm by using 170mm cranks, 
allowing you to raise the saddle 5mm and lower the bars 5mm.  But that 
seems like a drop in the bucket.

Like I said, the Wayback seat post is nice since it shows "Form is 
following Function"

An alternative is bar which does not come back as far as the Billie bar 
(8.25" per RBW & a key point, 2" (5cm) longer than an Alba)).  This allows 
the saddle to move forward on the seatpost.   Alternately, cut the Billie 
bar 2cm to shorten it and see if it improves.

You could also push the saddle as far forward in the seatpost clamp to move 
the saddle forward (you probably did this already)

John Hawrylak
Woodstown NJ

On Sunday, October 15, 2023 at 1:02:30 PM UTC-4 Bicycle Belle Ding Ding! 
wrote:

> What’s weird is that I sized up! My PBH would technically fit the 50!
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On Oct 15, 2023, at 12:55 PM, Joe Bernard  wrote:
>
> Reflecting on all the setback talk, I *do *think the reach may be 
> inherently a tad short for the rider in question. I'm the same height as 
> Leah - possibly even shorter, I'm aging and shrinking! - and Grant designed 
> my Rivendell with a 54.2 ST, 63 ETT to work with Boscos up way high. It's 
> perfect. 
>
>
>
> On Friday, October 13, 2023 at 10:33:09 AM UTC-7 Joe Bernard wrote:
>
>> I love the new look. I also love the old look! Basically I just love that 
>> Raspberry Racing Platy ❤️❤️❤️
>>
>> On Wednesday, October 11, 2023 at 6:52:55 PM UTC-7 Bicycle Belle Ding 
>> Ding! wrote:
>>
>>> In the same vein as my Bike Style thread, I’m starting a Bike Makeover 
>>> thread.
>>>
>>> Every now and then, I get the urge to change up the look of my favorite 
>>> Platypus. I have it perfect mechanically, but bags and grips and 
>>> occasionally, saddles, beg to be changed up. It’s fully autumn here in the 
>>> Great Lakes State, and my ivory Rivet was looking a little out of season. I 
>>> was gifted a chestnut Rivet from a dear RivSister, so I decided to pull it 
>>> out and put it on the bike. I took the brown Ergons from my other Platypus, 
>>> slapped them on and sent her a photo. 
>>>
>>> “That bike deserves prettier grips. Those are ugly,” she said, giving me 
>>> the unvarnished truth. 
>>>
>>> I looked again. She was right. Back to the drawing board. I finally 
>>> found these grips from Rivet Cycle Works - Deb told me she had these but 
>>> didn’t have them up on the website yet. She had the exact match to my 
>>> chestnut saddle and days later, I had these gorgeous stamped leather grips 
>>> in hand. The bike looks positively *tonal.* The colors of the paint 
>>> throw out so many different shades of pinks and reds, thanks to the 
>>> abundant glitter in the metallic; adding rich leather accessories only 
>>> elevates the look. The stamped designs on the leather give the bike some 
>>> texture and add visual interest at the handlebar area. 
>>>
>>> This Platypus is like a little autumn posey. Perfect and pretty, and 
>>> wholly appointed to its duty.
>>>
>>> Now if I can just convince Deb to make these in ivory, so I have a pair 
>>> to match my ivory Rivet saddle when spring comes…
>>>
>>> Attached in the next post are the before and afters.
>>> Leah
>>>
>> -- 
>
> 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/u_2mo2hU3Xo/unsubscribe
> .
> To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to 
> rbw-owners-bun...@googlegroups.com.
>
> To view this discussion on the web visit 
> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/rbw-owners-bunch/f856ed0e-45fe-49ea-9831-aaacaa76a6b6n%40googlegroups.com
>  
> 
> .
>
>

-- 
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 view this discussion on the web visit 

Re: [RBW] Bike Makeover Thread

['John Hawrylak, Woodstown NJ' via RBW Owners Bunch]

Leah

I believe the ACTUAL Set Back (SB) of the IRD Wayback is 2cm MORE Than the 
Indication.   This is based on measurements I made using a Sakae MTE-100 
adjustable setback seat post on a workbench with the seatpost at a 73° to 
the horizontal, which mimics the actual angel it is on a 'nominal' frame, 
and results in the seatpost clamp being horizontal.  The IRD is based on 
the Sakae MTE-100 design 

You stated you are currently at 42 to 43 SB (the units are mm), which would 
be an Actual SB of 6.2 to 6.3 cm.   This increased SB  is like a seat tube 
angel which 3.5° less than what you have.  As Garth pointed out, the Platy 
STA is 71.5°, so your effective STA with your current SB is 68°.

Most seatposts have setbacks of 2.0 to 3.0cm, so you are about 3.0 to 4.0 
cm further setback.   Your new grips would have to be 3 to 4 cm further up 
the bars than the old, in order to have a seat post SB of 2 to 3 cm, the 
range of a normal seat post.

Alternately, cutting the bars by 2cm may be enough, with the new grips, to 
reduce your SB to 2 to 3 cm for a normal seatpost and also move you to a 
more 'normal' position.   A 2cm shorter bar may not decrease your real 
estate in the areas that matter.

Otherwise, The IRD Wayback looks good on your Platy and looks even better 
when you consider "Form is following Function'

Also, as you pointed out earlier, your Platy frame seems to be 'short'.  
The SB you are using indicates the frame needs a 3 to 4cm longer effective 
top tube length, to reduce the SB to a 'normal' range.   Do you have 
similar SBs on your other RBW frames???

John Hawrylak
Woodstown NJ
On Sunday, October 15, 2023 at 8:02:54 AM UTC-4 Bicycle Belle Ding Ding! 
wrote:

> John, 
> My seatpost actually has setback to 50. I have my saddle at 42 or 43. Now 
> that I have these new grips, I could try the old seat post. The new grips 
> sit further up the bars and I have more reach now. The feeling of being 
> cramped was fairly slight, and I could often ignore it, but it was one of 
> those little niggling details I wanted improved. Some people would have 
> chopped their Billie Bars - not me! I need all that real estate so keep 
> 1000 things on my bars!
>
> Eric, I know. I have had this exact thought. Bill Lindsay - I would trust 
> you to do it! And I would drive to your part of Michigan if you had the 
> tool to make it happen! No pressure or anything. 
>
> Joseph! Oh why bother getting it in silver? Such a magnificent seat post 
> deserves to be a focal point: I should just go with the black. 
>
> Joyce, there’s a woman in product design over at 1 Up, I see! I love my 
> RivSisters; they don’t want me to miss out on any of the best stuff.
>
> Leah
>
> On Oct 14, 2023, at 4:48 PM, 'John Hawrylak, Woodstown NJ' via RBW Owners 
> Bunch  wrote:
>
> A Nitto S84 has at least 10mm LESS setback than the IRD Wayback (approx 
> 40mm (S84) vs 50mm (IRD) per RBW site).   Leah pics shows the IRD to be 
> full back.   So even if she could use a 27.2 post, the S84 does not have 
> the setback she needs.
>
>
> The real question is why didn't  RBW design the frame for a 27.2mm seat 
> postAre they using a straight gauge seat tube vs a butted seat tube 
> to save cost???  Or do they need a thicker wall for the lug in the middle 
> of the seat tube??
>
> John Hawrylak
> Woodstown NJ
>
>
> On Saturday, October 14, 2023 at 7:28:07 AM UTC-4 ascpgh wrote:
>
>> The difficulty of less than common seat tube diameters was the indirect 
>> subject of another lister's, touched upon a bit ago from a different 
>> perspective: 
>> https://groups.google.com/g/rbw-owners-bunch/c/ooTGF-OdSws/m/9T6WazuQAAAJ
>>
>> Every bike is different but if feasible on your Platy, it can be done to 
>> permit something as nice as the Nitto S84 
>> <https://www.rivbike.com/products/nitto-lugged-seat-post-27-2-x-250-11048>
>> .
>>
>> Love Deb's "pre stock" grips for your Ergons. She's the best. 
>>
>> Andy Cheatham
>> Pittsburgh
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Thursday, October 12, 2023 at 7:36:47 PM UTC-4 Bicycle Belle Ding 
>> Ding! wrote:
>>
>>> I’ve had enough experiences with bike shops to be very hesitant to hand 
>>> them my bike for a task that could ruin the frame. What happens if the hole 
>>> is reamed too large? I can’t see that the frame would be salvageable. 
>>>
>>> On Oct 12, 2023, at 9:10 AM, Johnny Alien  wrote:
>>>
>>> Many here have said that its not a big deal to get a bike shop to ream 
>>> it to 27.2 to allow for more seatpost options. I find it frustrating as 
>>> well but slightly less so because I don't need the extra setback. 
>>>
>>>
>>>
>

Re: [RBW] Bike Makeover Thread

['John Hawrylak, Woodstown NJ' via RBW Owners Bunch]

A Nitto S84 has at least 10mm LESS setback than the IRD Wayback (approx 
40mm (S84) vs 50mm (IRD) per RBW site).   Leah pics shows the IRD to be 
full back.   So even if she could use a 27.2 post, the S84 does not have 
the setback she needs.

The real question is why didn't  RBW design the frame for a 27.2mm seat 
postAre they using a straight gauge seat tube vs a butted seat tube 
to save cost???  Or do they need a thicker wall for the lug in the middle 
of the seat tube??

John Hawrylak
Woodstown NJ


On Saturday, October 14, 2023 at 7:28:07 AM UTC-4 ascpgh wrote:

> The difficulty of less than common seat tube diameters was the indirect 
> subject of another lister's, touched upon a bit ago from a different 
> perspective: 
> https://groups.google.com/g/rbw-owners-bunch/c/ooTGF-OdSws/m/9T6WazuQAAAJ
>
> Every bike is different but if feasible on your Platy, it can be done to 
> permit something as nice as the Nitto S84 
> 
> .
>
> Love Deb's "pre stock" grips for your Ergons. She's the best. 
>
> Andy Cheatham
> Pittsburgh
>
>
>
>
> On Thursday, October 12, 2023 at 7:36:47 PM UTC-4 Bicycle Belle Ding Ding! 
> wrote:
>
>> I’ve had enough experiences with bike shops to be very hesitant to hand 
>> them my bike for a task that could ruin the frame. What happens if the hole 
>> is reamed too large? I can’t see that the frame would be salvageable. 
>>
>> On Oct 12, 2023, at 9:10 AM, Johnny Alien  wrote:
>>
>> Many here have said that its not a big deal to get a bike shop to ream 
>> it to 27.2 to allow for more seatpost options. I find it frustrating as 
>> well but slightly less so because I don't need the extra setback. 
>>
>>
>>
>> On Thursday, October 12, 2023 at 7:39:10 AM UTC-4 brok...@gmail.com 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Yeah, the whole 26.8 seat tube limitation has got to be one of the most 
>>> frustrating things about this era of Rivendell. 
>>>
>>> On Oct 12, 2023, at 6:43 AM, Leah Peterson  wrote:
>>>
>>> 
>>>
>>> Ryan,
>>> That seat post is butt ugly. The only ugly thing on the bike. I like the 
>>> setback it offers, and there are zero other options for that. Zero. This 
>>> bike is unimprovable, save this one thing: the seat tube should have been 
>>> 27.2 so I would have some OPTIONS. It’s my one sorrow.
>>> Leah
>>>
>>> On Oct 11, 2023, at 10:54 PM, Ryan  wrote:
>>>
>>> the grips are smashing.but nitto needs to make a 26.8 lugged seatpost
>>> for that lovely bike.just saying
>>>
>>> On Wednesday, October 11, 2023 at 8:57:32 PM UTC-5 Bicycle Belle Ding 
>>> Ding! wrote:
>>>
 Raspberry Platypus BEFORE:
 [image: image0.jpeg]

 [image: image6.jpeg]


 AND After…
 [image: image1.jpeg]

 [image: image2.jpeg][image: image3.jpeg][image: image4.jpeg][image: 
 image5.jpeg]


 On Oct 11, 2023, at 9:53 PM, Bicycle Belle Ding Ding! <
 jonasa...@gmail.com> wrote:

 In the same vein as my Bike Style thread, I’m starting a Bike Makeover 
 thread.


 Every now and then, I get the urge to change up the look of my favorite 
 Platypus. I have it perfect mechanically, but bags and grips and 
 occasionally, saddles, beg to be changed up. It’s fully autumn here in the 
 Great Lakes State, and my ivory Rivet was looking a little out of season. 
 I 
 was gifted a chestnut Rivet from a dear RivSister, so I decided to pull it 
 out and put it on the bike. I took the brown Ergons from my other 
 Platypus, 
 slapped them on and sent her a photo. 

 “That bike deserves prettier grips. Those are ugly,” she said, giving 
 me the unvarnished truth. 

 I looked again. She was right. Back to the drawing board. I finally 
 found these grips from Rivet Cycle Works - Deb told me she had these but 
 didn’t have them up on the website yet. She had the exact match to my 
 chestnut saddle and days later, I had these gorgeous stamped leather grips 
 in hand. The bike looks positively *tonal.* The colors of the paint 
 throw out so many different shades of pinks and reds, thanks to the 
 abundant glitter in the metallic; adding rich leather accessories only 
 elevates the look. The stamped designs on the leather give the bike some 
 texture and add visual interest at the handlebar area. 

 This Platypus is like a little autumn posey. Perfect and pretty, and 
 wholly appointed to its duty.

 Now if I can just convince Deb to make these in ivory, so I have a pair 
 to match my ivory Rivet saddle when spring comes…

 Attached in the next post are the before and afters.
 Leah

 -- 
 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/u_2mo2hU3Xo/unsubscribe
 .
 To unsubscribe from 

Re: [RBW] Bike Makeover Thread

['John Hawrylak, Woodstown NJ' via RBW Owners Bunch]

Leah

I thought the seatpost looked like a Sakae LTE-100 type.Not sure what 
problems you have making you consider reaming the seat tube, but that post 
has the most setback you can get.   If you need additional distance to the 
bars, you could try a 10mm longer stem.

John Hawrylak
Woodstown NJ

On Thursday, October 12, 2023 at 9:05:12 PM UTC-4 Bicycle Belle Ding Ding! 
wrote:

> Thanks, the seat post is the IRD Wayback post and the bag is Riv’s 
> Saddlesack, the BagBoy.
>
> On Oct 12, 2023, at 9:01 PM, 'John Hawrylak, Woodstown NJ' via RBW Owners 
> Bunch  wrote:
>
> Leah
>
>
> Your changes look good.   What is the seatpost and the saddlebag you have??
>
> John Hawrylak
> Woodstown NJ
>
> On Wednesday, October 11, 2023 at 9:57:32 PM UTC-4 Bicycle Belle Ding 
> Ding! wrote:
>
>> Raspberry Platypus BEFORE:
>> [image: image0.jpeg]
>>
>> [image: image6.jpeg]
>>
>>
>> AND After…
>> [image: image1.jpeg]
>>
>> [image: image2.jpeg][image: image3.jpeg][image: image4.jpeg][image: 
>> image5.jpeg]
>>
>>
>> On Oct 11, 2023, at 9:53 PM, Bicycle Belle Ding Ding! <
>> jonasa...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> In the same vein as my Bike Style thread, I’m starting a Bike Makeover 
>> thread.
>>
>>
>> Every now and then, I get the urge to change up the look of my favorite 
>> Platypus. I have it perfect mechanically, but bags and grips and 
>> occasionally, saddles, beg to be changed up. It’s fully autumn here in the 
>> Great Lakes State, and my ivory Rivet was looking a little out of season. I 
>> was gifted a chestnut Rivet from a dear RivSister, so I decided to pull it 
>> out and put it on the bike. I took the brown Ergons from my other Platypus, 
>> slapped them on and sent her a photo. 
>>
>> “That bike deserves prettier grips. Those are ugly,” she said, giving me 
>> the unvarnished truth. 
>>
>> I looked again. She was right. Back to the drawing board. I finally found 
>> these grips from Rivet Cycle Works - Deb told me she had these but didn’t 
>> have them up on the website yet. She had the exact match to my chestnut 
>> saddle and days later, I had these gorgeous stamped leather grips in hand. 
>> The bike looks positively *tonal.* The colors of the paint throw out so 
>> many different shades of pinks and reds, thanks to the abundant glitter in 
>> the metallic; adding rich leather accessories only elevates the look. The 
>> stamped designs on the leather give the bike some texture and add visual 
>> interest at the handlebar area. 
>>
>> This Platypus is like a little autumn posey. Perfect and pretty, and 
>> wholly appointed to its duty.
>>
>> Now if I can just convince Deb to make these in ivory, so I have a pair 
>> to match my ivory Rivet saddle when spring comes…
>>
>> Attached in the next post are the before and afters.
>> Leah
>>
>> -- 
>> 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/u_2mo2hU3Xo/unsubscribe
>> .
>> To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to 
>> rbw-owners-bun...@googlegroups.com.
>> To view this discussion on the web visit 
>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/rbw-owners-bunch/53c9c0cc-59ef-460c-930e-e0c5301545cbn%40googlegroups.com
>>  
>> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/rbw-owners-bunch/53c9c0cc-59ef-460c-930e-e0c5301545cbn%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email_source=footer>
>> .
>>
>> -- 
> 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/u_2mo2hU3Xo/unsubscribe
> .
> To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to 
> rbw-owners-bun...@googlegroups.com.
>
> To view this discussion on the web visit 
> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/rbw-owners-bunch/2f13feeb-79d9-431c-be98-742724456e3cn%40googlegroups.com
>  
> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/rbw-owners-bunch/2f13feeb-79d9-431c-be98-742724456e3cn%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email_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 rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/rbw-owners-bunch/46558ed1-ded0-400d-93cb-599d7c5a8d8en%40googlegroups.com.

Re: [RBW] Bike Makeover Thread

['John Hawrylak, Woodstown NJ' via RBW Owners Bunch]

Leah

Your changes look good.   What is the seatpost and the saddlebag you have??

John Hawrylak
Woodstown NJ

On Wednesday, October 11, 2023 at 9:57:32 PM UTC-4 Bicycle Belle Ding Ding! 
wrote:

> Raspberry Platypus BEFORE:
> [image: image0.jpeg]
>
> [image: image6.jpeg]
>
>
> AND After…
> [image: image1.jpeg]
>
> [image: image2.jpeg][image: image3.jpeg][image: image4.jpeg][image: 
> image5.jpeg]
>
>
> On Oct 11, 2023, at 9:53 PM, Bicycle Belle Ding Ding!  
> wrote:
>
> In the same vein as my Bike Style thread, I’m starting a Bike Makeover 
> thread.
>
>
> Every now and then, I get the urge to change up the look of my favorite 
> Platypus. I have it perfect mechanically, but bags and grips and 
> occasionally, saddles, beg to be changed up. It’s fully autumn here in the 
> Great Lakes State, and my ivory Rivet was looking a little out of season. I 
> was gifted a chestnut Rivet from a dear RivSister, so I decided to pull it 
> out and put it on the bike. I took the brown Ergons from my other Platypus, 
> slapped them on and sent her a photo. 
>
> “That bike deserves prettier grips. Those are ugly,” she said, giving me 
> the unvarnished truth. 
>
> I looked again. She was right. Back to the drawing board. I finally found 
> these grips from Rivet Cycle Works - Deb told me she had these but didn’t 
> have them up on the website yet. She had the exact match to my chestnut 
> saddle and days later, I had these gorgeous stamped leather grips in hand. 
> The bike looks positively *tonal.* The colors of the paint throw out so 
> many different shades of pinks and reds, thanks to the abundant glitter in 
> the metallic; adding rich leather accessories only elevates the look. The 
> stamped designs on the leather give the bike some texture and add visual 
> interest at the handlebar area. 
>
> This Platypus is like a little autumn posey. Perfect and pretty, and 
> wholly appointed to its duty.
>
> Now if I can just convince Deb to make these in ivory, so I have a pair to 
> match my ivory Rivet saddle when spring comes…
>
> Attached in the next post are the before and afters.
> Leah
>
> -- 
> 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/u_2mo2hU3Xo/unsubscribe
> .
> To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to 
> rbw-owners-bun...@googlegroups.com.
> To view this discussion on the web visit 
> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/rbw-owners-bunch/53c9c0cc-59ef-460c-930e-e0c5301545cbn%40googlegroups.com
>  
> 
> .
>
>

-- 
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 view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/rbw-owners-bunch/2f13feeb-79d9-431c-be98-742724456e3cn%40googlegroups.com.

[RBW] Re: FS Frost River bags, Nitto lugged seat post, Bananna bags

['John Hawrylak, Woodstown NJ' via RBW Owners Bunch]

Are you selling the cranks in the picture???

John Hawrylak
Woodstown NJ

On Sunday, August 20, 2023 at 5:41:04 PM UTC-4 Frank Brose wrote:

> I have the following for sale.
> Frost River Taconite Trail trunk bag and Sawbill trail handle bar bag I'd 
> like to sell together$165 net to me includes shipping. Like new condition. 
> read about them here: https://frostriver.com/collections/cycling-bike-bags
> Three Banana bags 2 Rivendell, 1 Duluth Trading 
> $55 net to me for the Riv bags
> $40 net to me for the Duluth trading. It's in the roughest shape. The Riv 
> bags are in good shape.
> Nitto Lugged seatpost 27.2 x 300 Light insertion marks not even visible 
> when on the bike. They would easily be buffed out with aluminum polish. 
> $125 net to me. Includes shipping. CONUS shipping only.
> [image: P1020495.JPG]
> [image: P1020496.JPG]
> [image: P1020500.JPG]
>
>

-- 
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 view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/rbw-owners-bunch/441c06ef-89d3-45df-a447-94182ef70322n%40googlegroups.com.

[RBW] Re: Question; Frame Geometry for 54.5cm AHH-MIT, 650B Wheels

['John Hawrylak, Woodstown NJ' via RBW Owners Bunch]

Drew

Thanks for the link.  This is what I was looking for.  I got the values I 
needed.

John Hawrylak
Woodstown NJ

On Friday, September 15, 2023 at 4:20:30 PM UTC-4 Drew Henson wrote:

> this might help, i use it sometimes to compare bike frames: 
> https://bikeinsights.com/compare?geometries=5cedbc58663b2d0017aa071c,,
>
> On Friday, September 15, 2023 at 12:07:03 PM UTC-7 John Hawrylak, 
> Woodstown NJ wrote:
>
>> Does anyone have the frame geometry info (Effective TTL, STA, HTA, Rake, 
>> BBD) for the 1st generation of the AHH-MIT, specifically the 54 or 54.5cm 
>> frame size which used 650B wheels???
>>
>> I have tables for the later AHH-MIT but not the first ones.   The current 
>> 54.5cm frame uses 700C wheels
>>
>> Not sure how to use the Way Back Machine or even if the info exists.  I 
>> remeber RBW stopped updating their geo tables about the time of the MIT 
>> AHHs and Atlantis.
>>
>> John Hawrylak
>> Woodstown NJ
>>
>

-- 
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 view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/rbw-owners-bunch/cbcc2f8e-9955-49c9-831d-d81c017c11f9n%40googlegroups.com.

[RBW] Question; Frame Geometry for 54.5cm AHH-MIT, 650B Wheels

['John Hawrylak, Woodstown NJ' via RBW Owners Bunch]

Does anyone have the frame geometry info (Effective TTL, STA, HTA, Rake, 
BBD) for the 1st generation of the AHH-MIT, specifically the 54 or 54.5cm 
frame size which used 650B wheels???

I have tables for the later AHH-MIT but not the first ones.   The current 
54.5cm frame uses 700C wheels

Not sure how to use the Way Back Machine or even if the info exists.  I 
remeber RBW stopped updating their geo tables about the time of the MIT 
AHHs and Atlantis.

John Hawrylak
Woodstown NJ

-- 
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 view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/rbw-owners-bunch/a95b56d5-bdde-43cd-8bca-6daa4e8cd6a7n%40googlegroups.com.

Re: [RBW] A College Clem

['John Hawrylak, Woodstown NJ' via RBW Owners Bunch]

Leah

I might I missed it, but does your son want a bike at college

John Hawrylak
Woodstown NJ

On Sunday, August 13, 2023 at 11:09:58 PM UTC-4 Bicycle Belle Ding Ding! 
wrote:

> 
> 
> Wow, since the boys were in elementary school, Ryan, that’s a long time! 
> But yes, I started out in late 2012 with a Betty and was pulling the 
> younger one on his “one-wheeler.” 
>

-- 
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 view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/rbw-owners-bunch/c6498812-487c-469f-b8c1-51af6783f724n%40googlegroups.com.

[RBW] Re: Triple to double conversion

['John Hawrylak, Woodstown NJ' via RBW Owners Bunch]

Nick

You are correct.  My explanation is reversed.   Thnaks

John Hawrylak
Woodstown NJ 

On Sunday, July 16, 2023 at 3:04:21 AM UTC-4 Nick Payne wrote:

> On Sunday, 16 July 2023 at 10:02:54 am UTC+10 John Hawrylak, Woodstown NJ 
> wrote:
>
> To address the Chain Line Question.  Assuming if you have a PERFECT Front 
> Chain Line (FCL) with the triple (middle ring lines up with middle cog), 
> then If you with:
>
> Option 1, remove Outer ring, the  FCL needs to shift INWARDS, 1/2 of 
> the spacing between the middle and inner ring.  This is typically 6mm, so 
> you need to shift the crank INWARDS by 3mm.  You need a BB with a drive 
> side distance 3mm *less than* you have currently.   This will also give 
> you a lower Q.
>
> Option 2, remove Inner ring, the  FCL needs to shift OUTWARDS, 1/2 of 
> the spacing between the middle and outer ring.  This is typically 6mm, so 
> you need to shift the crank OUTWARDS by 3mm.  You need a BB with a drive 
> side distance 3mm *greater than* you have currently.   This will also 
> give you a higher Q.
>
>
> You've got this the wrong way around. If you remove the outer ring, then 
> the crank needs to be moved outwards, because the chainline is now between 
> the two remaining chainrings rather than being on what was the middle ring 
> when there were three. And vice versa if you get rid of the granny. 
>
> Nick Payne
>

-- 
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 view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/rbw-owners-bunch/f3e44465-5c75-4aba-9e69-68feb42b43c7n%40googlegroups.com.

[RBW] Re: Triple to double conversion

['John Hawrylak, Woodstown NJ' via RBW Owners Bunch]

To address the Chain Line Question.  Assuming if you have a PERFECT Front 
Chain Line (FCL) with the triple (middle ring lines up with middle cog), 
then If you with:

Option 1, remove Outer ring, the  FCL needs to shift INWARDS, 1/2 of 
the spacing between the middle and inner ring.  This is typically 6mm, so 
you need to shift the crank INWARDS by 3mm.  You need a BB with a drive 
side distance 3mm *less than* you have currently.   This will also give you 
a lower Q.

Option 2, remove Inner ring, the  FCL needs to shift OUTWARDS, 1/2 of 
the spacing between the middle and outer ring.  This is typically 6mm, so 
you need to shift the crank OUTWARDS by 3mm.  You need a BB with a drive 
side distance 3mm *greater than* you have currently.   This will also give 
you a higher Q.

Hopes this helps.  Suggest sighting down the chain to determine if the 
CURRENT FCL and RCL match or if the FCL is outwards or inwards of the RCL.  
If CURRENT is NOT perfect, then Option1 or 2 may result in a better FCL 
WITHOUT changing the BB

John Hawrylak
Woodstown NJ
On Friday, July 14, 2023 at 5:01:22 PM UTC-4 maxcr wrote:

> I have a couple of fun cranksets and I'm contemplating a few ideas for 
> which I'd love your input.
>
> Crankset 1. Ritchey Logic Compact crankset with 42/32/22 chainrings 94/58 
> bcd.
> Crankset 2. Suntour XC Pro crankset with 46/36/24 chainrings power 
> ring 110/74 bcd (I actually bought a few things with this, mtn thumb 
> shifters (7 spd), rear derailleur, rear hub, freewheel - all XC Pro)
>
> I'm perfectly content with the Sugino triple 46/36/24 on my Bombadil and I 
> actually have nothing against triples, but I'm contemplating converting one 
> of the cranksets above to a double just because who doesn't need a project 
> to tinker with your Riv?
>
> The bike is a do-it-all All Rounder, so I want to have wide gearing range, 
> something like a 42/32 double with a 12-36 cassette would accomplish that 
> for me. A 46/36 might not quite cut it, but I could go low low 36-24 too.
>
> Anyway back to converting a triple into a double. As I understand it, 
> there are a few ways to do that:
> 1) Remove the big chainring (potentially swap it for a chainguard) and 
> call it a day (or change some chainrings)
>
> 2) Remove the little chainring and call it a day (or change some 
> chainrings after)
>
> But... not so fast. If I go with option 1 without the chain guard do I 
> need new / shorter chainring bolts? If so, which ones do I get? Are these 
> universal?
>
> Are the pros/cons of either option? Will I run into Q-factor issues, 
> chainline and chainstay / derailer problems? I had read this on an old 
> post: "my Bomba and I suppose a Hunqa frame you are limited to a 36t middle 
> unless you get a wider BB."
>
> So, what about the bottom bracket? Do I need to go narrower to get the 
> right chainline? Or wider to fit the 32?
>
> I tracked down a few conversations from way back, here and in other 
> forums. It seems like the original suggested bottom bracket for these 
> cranks are:
> 1) Ritchey Logic Double - 110-113mm (this is probably close to what's in 
> there now)
> 2) Suntour XC Pro - Suntour Greaseguard 122.5mm (I managed to get my hands 
> on one of these)
>
> For the Ritchey as a double (when removing the inner ring) I heard people 
> suggesting a Phil 98mm BB which I cannot find. Another alternative is using 
> a 103mm with some hacks 
>
> For the Suntour, I have no idea what is required in terms of BB. Maybe you 
> just have to try a few.
>
> What does the collective knowledge here recommend? Ritchey or Suntour? 
> Remove the outer or the inner?
>
> Thanks
> Max
>  
>

-- 
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 view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/rbw-owners-bunch/c264758b-3cd4-44a5-9da6-0a769b7fb550n%40googlegroups.com.

Re: [RBW] Front Derailleur Suggestions

['John Hawrylak, Woodstown NJ' via RBW Owners Bunch]

*Matt with the 44-34-24 & in need of a new FD*

I suggest a Shimano Sora FD-R3030b, a 9speed triple designed for a 45mm 
front chainline.  You can still buy these at Universal Cycles for about $30

Universal Cycles -- Shimano FD-R3030 Sora Triple Front Derailleur - 9 Speed 
[EFDR3030X, EFDR3030F] 

.

Amazon has them for $28.

I use it with a Sugino TD-2 46-36-26 triple with 130mm OLD rear hub, 
Shimano HG-400 12-36T- 9 cassette and a Shimano Deore RD-M591.  My front 
chain line is 44.1mm and rear is 43.6mm (middle cog).  Shifts great.   It 
has a nice, standard bottom pull mechanism, no lever arm bending the cable 
to the stop as used on the dual pull designs.

A 1980's Shimano Deore MT-60 (a triple) also shifts great.  

Your Altus should work.  The only problem is IF it was designed for a 50mm 
front chainline, there may not be enough LOW stop adjustment to shift to 
the Inner ring.  Found this out with a Shimano FD-M781 with setup described 
above.  The Sora cleared this up.

John Hawrylak
Woodstown NJ

On Sunday, March 26, 2023 at 6:50:48 PM UTC-4 Matthew Williams wrote:

> Crankset and chainrings:
>
> SIlver 173
> 44 x 34 x 24
>
>
> [image: 665_1857.JPG]
>
> Crank - Silver - Triple 44x34x24 
> 
> rivbike.com 
> 
>
> 
>
>
>
> On Mar 26, 2023, at 3:05 PM, Peter White  wrote:
>
> Modern triple FDs are designed for a specific combination of chainrings. 
> For example, the IRD FD in the photo is an exact copy of the Shimano 9 
> speed Ultegra Triple and 105 Triple FDs. Probably made by the same company 
> that made it for Shimano. The bottom edges of the derailleur plates are 
> properly spaced for the 10 tooth difference between the outer and middle 
> chainrings of the Ultegra and 105 9 speed triple cranksets; 52 and 42 teeth 
> respectively. When properly installed, the bottom edges of the derailleur 
> will be about 1mm to 2mm above the tips of the chainring teeth when 
> shifting between the outer and middle rings. So this FD only shifts well if 
> the middle and outer rings have a 10 tooth difference. If, for example, 
> they have a 12 tooth difference, and you have the FD high enough for the 
> outer plate to clear the outer chainring, the inner plate will have a 
> larger gap to the middle ring and the shift from the inner ring will not be 
> good. With a 14 tooth difference, it's hopeless. You'll have to over-shift 
> to get the chain cleanly onto the middle chainring.
>
> So, to answer the original question, we need to know what chainring sizes 
> are on the crankset in question.
>
> On Sun, Mar 26, 2023 at 1:04 PM Matthew Williams  
> wrote:
>
>> Hi everyone,
>>
>> I need to replace my stock Rivendell front derailleur. Can someone please 
>> recommend a good front derailleur?
>>
>> Here’s my existing setup:
>>
>> Appaloosa
>> Rivendell Silver crankset and 3 rings
>> Rear cassette: Shimano XTR 11-34T 
>> Rear derailleur: Shimano Deore long cage
>>
>> With the exception of the rear cassette, all of the components came stock 
>> with the bike.
>>
>> I picked up a Shimano Altus FD-M311 at the swap meet. Will this work for 
>> my setup? Does a better option exist? Please let me know your 
>> recommendations, advice, opinions, and experience!
>>
>> Thanks, everyone.
>> On Thursday, February 23, 2023 at 9:45:08 AM UTC-8 mmille...@gmail.com 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> I've been having a heckuva time getting my front derailleur to go from 
>>> little to big without hopping over. Eventually, if I talked sweetly to it 
>>> and said Hail Mary three times, it would usually settle. Even took it to an 
>>> experience mechanic. He also lowered it, then slowly kept raising it up, 
>>> and also kept working the limit screw. A fraction of a turn was difference 
>>> between not reaching the big ring, or going over!
>>>
>>> It's a White Industries VBC with 46-28. FD is IRD compact triple Aplina. 
>>> Friction Microshift thumbie. I think it's bottom pull. 
>>>
>>> [image: IMG_2391 Medium.jpeg]
>>>
>>> Any suggestions for different FD? May need different chain rings because 
>>> of that big jump, but if I do that, I may be best off buying something else 
>>> and selling these.
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Matt
>>>
>>
>> -- 
>> 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-bun...@googlegroups.com.
>> To view this discussion on the web visit 
>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/rbw-owners-bunch/68001ed0-b4c8-4dee-b847-7eea267cf44fn%40googlegroups.com
>>  
>> 

[RBW] Re: ISO Better Bar-End Friction Shifting!

['John Hawrylak, Woodstown NJ' via RBW Owners Bunch]

Caroline

You could quickly check if your chain length (# of links) is correct by 
using this formula:

# links = 2 * {(2*ChainStay Length (inches)) + 1/4*(# ChainRing Teeth + # 
Largest Cog) + 1}

You can measure the chainstay length or if your frame is a RBW, look it up 
in the geo charts.   Older RBW's tend to have 44 to 45 cm stays (17.3 to 
17.7 inches).  Since you have a 1 x drive train, you dont have to worry 
about which ring to use.

If your actual # links is much greater than this value, your chain may have 
too much slack.

John Hawrylak
Woodstown NJ

On Thursday, June 8, 2023 at 1:32:44 PM UTC-4 Caroline Golum wrote:

> Currently running 1x10 and friction bar-end shifting. The chain keeps 
> coming off my crank, not hitting the right gear in the rear, etc. I've had 
> the derailleur serviced, it's fine, etc. 
>
> Time to get a new shifter? Switch to indexed shifting? Switch to an 8/9spd 
> in the rear? The bar-end shifter is RBW's Shifter - Silver2 
> . 

-- 
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 view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/rbw-owners-bunch/5c38d747-e669-4b94-8133-360f4a12b676n%40googlegroups.com.

[RBW] Re: ISO Better Bar-End Friction Shifting!

['John Hawrylak, Woodstown NJ' via RBW Owners Bunch]

Caroline

Might want to consider installing a N-Gear Jump Stop or similar chain stop 
device on the seat tube to prevent the chain from coming off.  Sounds like 
when you shift, you develop a wave in the chain which takes it off the ring

John Hawrylak
Woodstown NJ

On Thursday, June 8, 2023 at 1:32:44 PM UTC-4 Caroline Golum wrote:

> Currently running 1x10 and friction bar-end shifting. The chain keeps 
> coming off my crank, not hitting the right gear in the rear, etc. I've had 
> the derailleur serviced, it's fine, etc. 
>
> Time to get a new shifter? Switch to indexed shifting? Switch to an 8/9spd 
> in the rear? The bar-end shifter is RBW's Shifter - Silver2 
> . 

-- 
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 view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/rbw-owners-bunch/fbe1e433-21e2-46e4-b87c-c18935117a06n%40googlegroups.com.

[RBW] Re: ESI Chunky Grips with bar end shifter wire question

['John Hawrylak, Woodstown NJ' via RBW Owners Bunch]

Roberta

You said " putting wire through the grips?"   Are you saying the mechanic 
will push the shifter wire through the length of the silicone or put the 
shifter wire between the bar and the grip???

If the former, it should work since the wire should be able to move fore 
and aft in the silicone.
If the latter, I would be worried the shifter wire will not move fore and 
aft easily.

On drop bars with bar end shifters, the normal practice is to place the 
shifter wire inside the plastic tunnel supplied with the shifter and the 
tape the plastic tunnel to the bar.  So the shifter wire is totally free to 
move fore/aft, but held securely to the bar.

It would be nice if the mfg molded a small diameter (say 3 mm) tunnel on 
the inside of the grip for shifter wire (shifter wire is < 2mm in 
diameter).   Maybe using a small diameter plastic straw between the bar and 
grip with the wire inside the straw would allow the wire to move fore/aft 
freely.  The straw need to be 13cm (5-1/8" long), since the grip is 13cm 
long

John Hawrylak
Woodstown NJ



On Sunday, May 28, 2023 at 6:14:12 PM UTC-4 Roberta wrote:

> Currently I have an albatross handlebar on my A. Homer Hilsen with bar end 
> shifters and a leather-like handlebar wrap over a gel pad for my handlebar 
> grip. I need to change my stem so I’m considering the ESI Chunky grips 
> instead. I like the feel and sophisticated look of the current wrap but 
> wouldn’t mind more cushioning. 
>
> The bike mechanic tells me he can put the bar end shifter wires through 
> the ESI grips. *Is this OK/safe/good idea?*
>
> Another option would be to put the wire underneath the ESI grip and wrap 
> the grips with Newbaum’s tape to hold the wire in place. 
>
> A third option would be to put back what I have now with the wrap going 
> over the wire. 
>
> I have honey colored Brooks B68 and would get the blue or tan ESI grips, 
> or honey for leather like wrap.  Opinions, especially about putting wire 
> through the grips?  
>
> Thanks,
> Roberta 
>

-- 
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 view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/rbw-owners-bunch/2e09cc3a-8a4e-4515-aa82-28ce0916258an%40googlegroups.com.

[RBW] Re: Platy Geometry Chart

['John Hawrylak, Woodstown NJ' via RBW Owners Bunch]

Just bumping to see if anyone knows

John Hawrylak
Woodstown NJ

On Friday, May 26, 2023 at 10:06:02 AM UTC-4 John Hawrylak, Woodstown NJ 
wrote:

> Does anyone have the Platypus geometry chart or a link to it???.  The RBW 
> site does not show it, although they showed it in the past.
>
> Interested in STA, chainstay length and BBD for the 55cm frame.  TIA
>
> John Hawrylak
> Woodstown NJ 
>

-- 
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 view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/rbw-owners-bunch/fbdb24fc-b44b-479c-80f8-6e46c6ffef9bn%40googlegroups.com.

[RBW] Platy Geometry Chart

['John Hawrylak, Woodstown NJ' via RBW Owners Bunch]

Does anyone have the Platypus geometry chart or a link to it???.  The RBW 
site does not show it, although they showed it in the past.

Interested in STA, chainstay length and BBD for the 55cm frame.  TIA

John Hawrylak
Woodstown NJ 

-- 
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 view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/rbw-owners-bunch/a6ba63e2-4b1b-4448-8fd2-a74ee8c1be99n%40googlegroups.com.

[RBW] Re: Gearing (was Getting Over My Head)

['John Hawrylak, Woodstown NJ' via RBW Owners Bunch]

I agree with Ted on the problem of getting Ideal Cog Teeth & first cogs 
being too small (11T & less) , but I believe a 46-36-26 triple with a wide 
range Shimano HG-400 12-36 9 speed cassette (Deore RD-M591-SGS), 130mm OLD 
Tiagra 4000 rear hub, and 650Bx38's gives me:
good gearing in my cruising range (75 to 55gi) with 3 cogs to use in the 
Outer and Middle rings
an even 16% to 12% gearing change between all the cogs.  
good chain line (<= 0.040% chain stretch) over a 6 cog range on each chain 
ring (front CL's of 52, 44, 38mm & rear CL of 44mm)
good high/low range (101 to 19 gi)
good FD performance with old school style FDs (using a 9 speed Sora  
FD-R3000, but also used a 1980's Shimano FD-MT60) 

The learning for me was to be willing to shift between the Outer and Middle 
rings *much more often *than I thought before, e.g. shift to Middle 3 cog 
when using the Outer 4 cog and the terrain indicates a need for lower 
gearing.   Before I tended to stay on the Outer ring too long.  Now, the 
outer and middle rings are used much more evenly.  The 10T ring difference 
makes shifting the rings easy.  The 26T Inner is still for big hills, but I 
feel I get to it more efficiently than before.

The triple limits you to a 44T Outer (FD cage hitting the C/S with a 42T). 
but the 46T/12T combo gives me the 100 gi high I want with 650Bx38, so I 
see the chain ring size limit as theoretical limit I don't encounter as 
long I have a large stock of HG400-9 12-36 cassettes.

*As for Leah's problem *with shifting to lower gears, I think Sheldon said 
it best (paraphasing),  "when you come to hills, shift to your lower gears 
before you need too".  Easier said than done.

John Hawrylak
Woodstown NJ

 

On Saturday, May 20, 2023 at 1:55:27 PM UTC-4 Ted Durant wrote:

> Hi All -
>
> Leah's "Getting Over My Head" thread seems to have evolved into a gearing 
> thread. I retired from a career in data mining and statistical modeling, so 
> you can just imagine how much time I've wasted on "optimizing" bicycle 
> gearing. 
>
> Here's the TL;DR version: it's impossible to optimize gearing, so stop 
> sweating it.
>
> The slightly longer version is that we are locked into integer tooth 
> counts; when the optimal cog is 14.5 teeth, that ain't an option! So, we 
> are forced into compromising or, better yet, satisficing. 
>
> There are essentially three key points we are trying to fix with gears: 
> the lowest low, the highest high, and the steps in between. Given those, we 
> then try create a system that reliably and easily shifts among the gears. 
> For me, a 2x system using components available today provides the best 
> combination of low-low, high-high, steps in between, simplicity, 
> consistency, and reliability. But that depends highly on the chain, the 
> chainrings, and the front derailer playing nicely together. It also works 
> for me because I use it as 2 gearing ranges, one for flats and downhills, 
> the other for long, steeper uphills.
>
> The lowest low and the highest high are pretty straightforward, and plenty 
> of ink has been spilled on how to choose those, so there's no point in 
> elaborating on that. It's the "steps in between" part that drives us wild. 
> In theory, we think, we'd like to have perfectly even steps between the 
> high and low. In practice, though, 1) that's simply not possible with a 
> cog-and-chain drivetrain, and 2) it might not even be that desirable. A lot 
> of riders, myself included, find that we prefer smaller steps between gears 
> in the range in which we normally ride, and larger steps out in the 
> extremes. 
>
> What I definitely don't like is having a big difference between 3 adjacent 
> cogs in the middle of my cruising range. For example, a 1-tooth difference 
> one way and a 2-tooth difference the other. Unfortunately, this is a common 
> occurrence in large cog count cassettes with tiny small cogs - they go from 
> a 1-tooth difference to a 2-tooth difference near the middle of the 
> cluster. That's twice the amount of reduction/increase in effort. So, when 
> I'm looking at cassettes, I'm looking for ones where that 1-to-2 transition 
> occurs as close to the small cog as I can get it. A major factor here is 
> the movement to smaller smallest cogs, which has gone from 14 to 10 in my 
> time. Starting from 11 (or, God forbid, 10!) you use a lot of cogs to get 
> to the point where 2-tooth steps start to make sense.
>
> On the other hand, those small smallest cogs mean we can use small outer 
> chainrings, and that's something of a boon if your front derailer can 
> handle it, because it means we can also use smaller inner rings on a 2x to 
> get sufficiently low gearing. The difference between chainrings is worth 
> examining a bit. Typical road double front derailers have a 16-tooth max 
> difference specification, which derives from the standard "compact double" 
> 50-34. That's a 39% difference, which is a pretty big jump, roughly 3.3x 
> the average jump on the 

[RBW] Re: spacing between chainrings

['John Hawrylak, Woodstown NJ' via RBW Owners Bunch]

*Suggest calling/writing RBW.*
I recall a Grant write up a few years ago comparing the Silver to the XD2 2 
and I remember something about spacers on the 74mm BCD posts.

 If the crank is on the bike, you can measure the distance form the end of 
the seat tube to the teeth of the Middle and Inner rings using paper cut to 
size, and then the difference is the middle to Inner ring spacing and 
verify if > 5mm.

For reference, my XD-2 with Sugino Rings have ring spacing > thr 5mm 
Shimano standard:
Outer to Middle,   7mm
Middle to Inner,  8mm

John Hawrylak
Woodstown NJ

On Saturday, May 13, 2023 at 8:50:06 AM UTC-4 J Schwartz wrote:

> weird question...but here goes
> I disassembled a Silver triple and had it apart for awhile and recently 
> put it back together as a double with a bashguard.
> So, it's Guard>40t>30t.
> I think I may have used the incorrect spacers between the 74bcd 30t and 
> the 110bcd 40t...they were in my box of parts.  I'm not sure.  I think 
> there is too much space between those two chainrings ...a few times riding 
> recently, the chain wants to go down between them
> Can someone tell me what size this spacers should be and how much space, 
> in general should be between two chainrings on a triple, 9 speed?
> thanks
> [image: IMG_0574.jpg]
>

-- 
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 view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/rbw-owners-bunch/e63bae23-8719-4c6d-b121-a0ff87dc91e7n%40googlegroups.com.