[RBW] Re: Is an Atlantis Worth It?

[Hoch in ut]

Mostly everyone is responding with their  heart, which is expected. 

Atlantis is a touring bike. Heavy duty frame, large tire clearance. 
Exceptional bike. I had two Hunqapillars, which I see as equivalent to the 
Atlantis. For touring and/or slower long distance rides, I’d say go for it. 

For a 4 mile commute? Stick with your bike. I don’t know what the other 
person was talking about. There are plenty of parts to upgrade a vintage 
bike. Or if you really want a Riv, get. Homer, Sam, or another lighter duty 
bike meant for commuting. I think you’d enjoy it more. 

I have a similar 3 mile commute. I rode my Hunq for a few months but 
eventually built up an old Fuji road bike. Then happened upon a Clem for a 
good deal which I rode for a few months. But as much as I wanted to ride it 
for the commutes, it was just too much bike. The old Fuji was better. 

My current commuter is an unknown vintage MTB frame with 26x1.75 slicks. I 
honestly don’t miss my Riv’s on the commutes. Now, if a Homer were to pop 
up for a good deal……..

On Wednesday, May 22, 2024 at 9:44:35 AM UTC-6 max.c@gmail.com wrote:

> First: I realize I am asking this to an entirely biased group of people 
> and I'm okay with that!
>
> For years I have casually dreamed of owning an Atlantis. I commute 4 miles 
> each way by bike, ditched my car a few years ago, and love riding, but I do 
> it pretty casually. I'm not racing or doing endurance rides. I just like 
> riding my bike and I do it whenever I can. 
>
> I don't need the nicest bike in the world and have been fairly satisfied 
> with my 1988 Schwinn Cimarron that I've made a fair approximation of a poor 
> man's rivendell (somewhat out of date pic below!). However, I've always had 
> the itch to upgrade.
>
> Recently, I received an unexpected influx of cash and want to spend it on 
> something fun. I'm wondering: how much will I noticeably appreciate the 
> difference an Atlantis would bring if I were to spend the money? I'm 
> especially interested in the input from those who have gone from the 80s 
> era rigid MTB with swept back bars that approximate a Riv (and Grant's 
> ethos from Bridgestone) to the real deal. Was it worth the money? Do you 
> think you could have gotten by on that 80s frame?
>
>
>
> Thanks in advance!
> 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/32a16d01-15c4-416d-864e-13ad1aebb962n%40googlegroups.com.

Re: ThRe: [RBW] ISO: Toyo Atlantis 56-58cm/26"

[Hoch in ut]

There is a guy on Facebook Riv Marketplace that says he has a Toyo built 
57-58”, 26” Atlantis. Guy named William John Spencer in a WTB: Toyo 
Atlantis thread. 

On Thursday, May 16, 2024 at 6:27:42 PM UTC-6 jerry...@gmail.com wrote:

> Appreciate the insight regarding Toyo Atlantis frame to wheel sizing. At 
> 6'1" a 58 would actually be ideal for me - I was just wanting a 26" wheeled 
> Riv for rides with the wife. Whelp - I'll keep searching for a 56/26" Toyo 
> Atlantis.
> In the mean time  - I do have a custom Ebisu/650B on order that I'm 
> excited over. Just received my hand built Velocity 650B Quill wheelset and 
> White Industries crankset/BB for it. I have other savory bits for it too. 
> Whelp - I do so love building bicycles, I love everything about it - and 
> to a fault.
>
> On Thursday 16 May 2024 at 17:05:36 UTC-7 Ian A wrote:
>
>> There were also a Waterford run of Atlantis. I recall seeing a 56cm MUSA 
>> Atlantis for sale on this list. The MIT (made in Taiwan) models have the 
>> long chainstays and fit differently.
>>
>> The original 56cm 26" Atlantis is very cool, but hard to find. It might 
>> be worth considering newer iterations of the Atlantis too.
>>
>> IanA
>>
>> On Thursday, May 16, 2024 at 5:38:28 PM UTC-6 Frank Brose wrote:
>>
>>> No need for correction. 56 were 26 inch , the 58 were 700c. I've had 
>>> both and preferred the 56 so I bought another one after I sold the 58. Just 
>>> sayin
>>> Frank 
>>>
>>> On Thursday, May 16, 2024 at 5:48:31 PM UTC-5 NYCbikeguy wrote:
>>>
 Hey Jerry,

 Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe the Toyo Atlantis 26inchers were 
 limited to 56cm frames and under. 58 and above were 700c.

 On Thursday, May 16, 2024 at 5:55:32 PM UTC-4 Matthew Williams wrote:

> Atlantis 55 for sale 
> 
> groups.google.com 
> 
> [image: groups_32dp.png] 
> 
>  
> 
>
>
> On May 16, 2024, at 2:54 PM, Jerry Lynn  wrote:
>
> Seeking a Toyo Atlantis 56-58cm/26" frameset please. Looking to hand 
> over my 55cm/93 XO-1 to my wife - it's a bit small for me anyway - so 
> would 
> love to build a 26" Riv for myself (I currently have several 26" 
> wheelsets).
>
> Jerry Lynn
> Imperial Beach 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-bun...@googlegroups.com.
> To view this discussion on the web visit 
> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/rbw-owners-bunch/2d8b3623-8b39-4a35-9227-7951a8224b98n%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/91e445d0-3ed1-4b14-a81f-89233de87e7en%40googlegroups.com.

[RBW] Re: FS: 58 Toyo Atlantis frameset

[Hoch in ut]

With everyone on high alert with fraudulent ads lately, I’d highly suggest 
posting details, location, and pictures. 
On Thursday, May 16, 2024 at 7:50:49 AM UTC-6 gson...@gmail.com wrote:

> Please email me for details
> If interested. Asking $1800.
>
> GMS
>

-- 
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/7a223e11-6271-47d7-bd01-3f1062e2b14an%40googlegroups.com.

[RBW] Re: WTB: Hunqapillar 54 / 56 cm

[Hoch in ut]

Fantastic pictures, John. Makes me miss my old 54 Hunq. 

On Tuesday, May 7, 2024 at 4:32:22 PM UTC-6 John M wrote:

> I'm not Johnny but I used to have a 54 cm Hunqapillar in green and here's 
> an assortment of pictures from tours in New Mexico and Colorado-- mostly 
> the Great Divide Mountain  Bike route.  
> https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1jT4glIHwK2Ox5C8Eigq2Gcxa08MT_ARE?usp=sharing
>
> Its a great bike!
>
> On Tuesday, May 7, 2024 at 2:57:16 PM UTC-6 J J wrote:
>
>> Hey Johnny, do you have any pics of your Hunq to share? Would love to see 
>> some. (I hope this message is on this thread...?)
>>
>> On Tuesday, May 7, 2024 at 12:11:28 PM UTC-4 johnny@gmail.com wrote:
>>
>>> Good luck Max. I was on the same quest when an amazing person from this 
>>> group, Matthew Williams, saw one and let me know about it. I posted here 
>>> every ~6 months letting folks know I was still looking and it took a few 
>>> years to find one in my size, but it did happen eventually. It's a cool 
>>> bike, for sure.
>>>
>>> On Tuesday, May 7, 2024 at 5:44:41 AM UTC-7 Max S wrote:
>>>
 Test-rode one over a decade ago at BBB, shoulda bought it then. Maybe 
 someone's ready to pass theirs on to another good home?.. (Ideally just a 
 frameset)

 - Max "coulda shoulda woulda try againa" in A2

>>>

-- 
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/62af878c-d59c-4694-8a20-636ef665082bn%40googlegroups.com.

[RBW] Re: List Admin Message: Kerfuffle of the week and what to do about scammy folks

[Hoch in ut]

Would it be possible to list the names of the scammers somewhere? Just for 
those initiated contact by a private message prior to the ban. 
On Tuesday, May 7, 2024 at 1:46:25 PM UTC-6 Cyclofiend Jim wrote:

> Hey all - 
>
> I just removed another person who listed an item and appears to have been 
> harvesting internet images and presenting them as their own. That's not OK. 
>
> This has happened pretty infrequently on this group, and it always a minor 
> PITA to deal with. 
>
> All of which has me wanting to tighten down the listing of for sale items 
> for new members. These problems always stem from some "enterprising" 
> individual who joins the group and tries to post a for sale item 
> immediately. I can count on one hand the times that some "known" group 
> member acted inappropriately in a transaction.
>
> The way in which we've avoided this in the past is by asking folks to 
> engage on the list first, and use it as a way to rehome items second. I'm 
> going to be a lot more rigid about that now. 
>
> I'll update the list info to reflect this in stronger language, but if 
> your first post is a For Sale item, I won't be passing it through the 
> queue. If you would like to offer items to other members, please engage 
> with the community for a while (purposefully vague...) and demonstrate that 
> you aren't simply here to cash in. 
>
> So - deep breath everyone. 
>
> Thanks to those who shared more than just conjecture. That clarified the 
> issue in this case. That's important data. 
>
> As for potential or new members who just want to sell gear and not be part 
> of this community - there's ebay or other marketplaces which protect you 
> and the buyer, as well as more transactionally focused groups. Please use 
> those. 
>
> Other than that, we're coming into riding season. Go get some miles in.
>
> Jim / List-admin
>

-- 
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/75a4e20a-290f-4933-8f50-b3076b2e1850n%40googlegroups.com.

[RBW] Re: FS: 56cm (L) Susie/Wolbis Frame, Nitto/Riv lugged stem, Boscomoose bar

[Hoch in ut]

I emailed this seller on May 4th and have not seen a response. If I hear 
back, I’ll post updates. Hoping the person is not a scammer but just 
someone that infrequently checks emails. 

On Tuesday, May 7, 2024 at 8:40:15 AM UTC-6 Jordan R. wrote:

> I took those photos of the handlebar for a sale over a year ago. 
>
> "Cuddle," did I sell the handlebar to you, or are you repurposing my 
> photos? Buyers beware.
>
> Jordan
>
> On Monday, May 6, 2024 at 1:30:16 PM UTC-7 Igor wrote:
>
>> Cuddle Bears,
>> I think folks here would like to know where the frame and parts are 
>> located, and if local pickup is an option.
>>
>> On Saturday, May 4, 2024 at 10:34:55 PM UTC-4 cuddleb...@gmail.com wrote:
>>
>>> Hey Folks,
>>>
>>> Alright unfortunately I’m selling my 56cm (L) Susie/Wolbis Frame-set.  
>>> Looking to upgrade from that Clem? This is the bike for you!
>>>
>>> They discontinued the Susie because it was costing Riv too much to make. 
>>> The newer ones will be lugged apparently and won’t be in for a while! These 
>>> are cooler imo but I had to choose only one bike and this didn’t make the 
>>> cut! Atlantis ftw.  Asking $1150 + shipping.
>>>
>>> Nitto/Riv lugged stem. 95 length.  Great shape. $140 including shipping
>>>
>>> Boscomoose bar for sale. It's the TIG version, 58mm. In excellent 
>>> condition. asking $165 + shipping
>>>
>>> You can send a PM
>>>
>>> Thanks!
>>> Cuddle Bears
>>>
>>

-- 
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/daa7af3b-28f4-4109-88db-69b74239c7d9n%40googlegroups.com.

Re: [RBW] Re: Scam alert? I'm so confused. Blue Homer in LA? ND?

[Hoch in ut]

I’m glad this has been brought up to keep others from getting scammed. 
If there are any others that need to be brought to the group’s attention, 
please speak up. I feel it’s our responsibility and duty to protect the 
group. Don’t be timid. See something, say something. 

On Friday, May 3, 2024 at 6:00:50 AM UTC-6 Doug H. wrote:

> I concur. I sent this scammer Leah's way unknowingly. Stay away from this 
> person. In this case his "cousin" just bought a Homer and so was selling 
> his Roadini. He must troll this group for want to buy posts and pounces.  
> Karma is a concept of action, work, or deed, and its effect or 
> consequences. Here's hoping that a little karma is heading his way.
> Doug
>
> On Friday, May 3, 2024 at 7:55:23 AM UTC-4 Andrew Joseph wrote:
>
>> Bad experience with Jeff and the “seller,” he directed me to with a Homer 
>> as well!
>>
>> I posted that I want to buy a Mustard frameset.  
>> Jeff directed me to his friend, and it went very badly from there. 
>>  Fortunately, I sent no payment.
>>
>> I also reported this to Admin.  
>>
>> Sent from my iPhone
>>
>> On May 3, 2024, at 5:29 AM, Bicycle Belle Ding Ding!  
>> wrote:
>>
>> That Jeff McCathern guy tried to sell me a Roadini. He’s a scammer. I 
>> wasn’t brave enough to say so publicly, but I will now.
>>
>>
>>
>> On Friday, May 3, 2024 at 6:25:52 AM UTC-4 Roberta wrote:
>>
>>> Kim, the link takes us directly to a blue lug page. How did you get 
>>> scammed?  
>>>
>>> BTW, I’ve gotten scammed too — with eBay. I will never not buy directly 
>>> from the seller. 
>>>
>>> On Friday, May 3, 2024 at 12:29:57 AM UTC-4 Kim H. wrote:
>>>
 @Brenton-
 I am sorry to hear and see you go through this ordeal. I wish it was 
 not so.

 The administrator for this RBWOB group is Jim - cyclo...@gmail.com
 Your message may take a day or two for him to respond. I hope he can 
 help you.

 My regards,
 Kim Hetzel.
 I got scammed too last year over these - 
 https://global.bluelug.com/catalog/product/view/id/27109/s/rew10-works-hex-brass-valve-cap/category/1321/
   
 last year.

 On Thursday, May 2, 2024 at 9:17:48 PM UTC-7 brenton...@gmail.com 
 wrote:

> The more I think about this the more fired up I get. I've had so many 
> pleasant exchanges here, both transactional and non-transactional, that I 
> feel protective of this group. If no scam is happening, no one will be 
> bummed on me sharing out a phone number and email. 
>
> I was direct messaged from 'Jeff McCathern' via *jeff00m...@gmail.com* 
> who said they were friends with a seller named "Leonard" and I gave my 
> phone number to that emailer.
>
> The text message correspondence was with phone number *424-269-2563 
> <(424)%20269-2563>* which got super cryptic and scammy. When they 
> told me the bike was in LA, I said I would happily have a friend (I have 
> lots of friends in LA, some are in this group!) meet up to buy the bike, 
> they accused me of being cautious and suggested a deposit.
>
> Not sure who the admins of this group are, but everything about this 
> says *scam*. I would love to be wrong.
>
> On Thursday, May 2, 2024 at 8:48:01 PM UTC-7 Brenton Eastman wrote:
>
>> Hi. I've been searching for a blue homer in 54.5 for my wife and in 
>> my ISO post I was linked to this facebook listing:
>>
>> " @Brenton -
>> If you go FACEBOOK Rivendell Bicycle BUY/SELL/TRADE, there is a blue 
>> Homer under the owner's name of 
>> *Payton Beargrr* 
>> 
>>  
>>
>> Very near mint condition A. Homer Hilsen, 54.5cm with 650b wheels. 
>> Unsure of year but it's likely 4 or less years old. Taiwanese made 
>> frame. I 
>> am not the original owner but this appears to be a Rivendell build. 
>> -Nitto handlebars, stem, and seat post
>> -Brooks saddle
>> -Paul racer brakes, Paul canti levers
>> -Paul thumbie mounts with Microshift shifters
>> -Riv Silver double crankset
>> -IRD front derailleur
>> -Shimano Alivio rear derailleur
>> -MKS Grip Monarch pedals
>> -mismatched Shimano hubs, no name rims
>> -Soma Cazadero 650 x 42b
>> -Sackville bag
>> The only imperfections are the two small paint chips on the top tube, 
>> noted in the pictures. 
>> $2500 + shipping. 
>> Let me know if you have any questions.
>>
>> Kim Hetzel."
>>
>> Other people seem to also be looking at this bike. Robert Carlton 
>> said owner confirmed it's a 58. The facebook post has some comments and 
>> the 
>> owner says the bike is 

Re: [RBW] Homer question

[Hoch in ut]

As Tim said, handlebar choice be a big consideration in recommending 
sizing. Upright/alt bars (ie Albatross, Tosco, etc) would give you the most 
flexibility in sizing. Road bars are more finicky. 

On Wednesday, May 1, 2024 at 4:48:44 AM UTC-6 Tim Bantham wrote:

> To add further confusion I ended up sizing down on my Homer that I ordered 
> this past January.  My PBH is 93.5 making it so that I am squarely in the 
> size 61.5 cm range. My Sam is a 62 and the Platypus is a 60. When I 
> compared the geometry of a 61.5 AHH to my 62 Sam I could see that the AHH 
> would have been too long of a reach. I knew that I wanted the AHH to have 
> drop bars so I would have had to go with a short stem in the 5 cm or less 
> range. My AHH has a normal looking 8 cm stem with Noodle bars. Although I 
> am showing a little more seat post then I would like I am perfectly happy 
> with the 58 Homer based on my use case. 
>
> My general recommendation would be to go with the size based on where you 
> PBH falls but I would also consider your handlebar choice. I would also 
> recommend calling Riv HQ to talk you through the final decision. 
>
> The Homer is a great bike by the way. It truly is a magical ride. I love 
> mine!
>
> Tim
>
> On Wednesday, May 1, 2024 at 2:22:55 AM UTC-4 lindse...@gmail.com wrote:
>
>> Greetings.
>> My PBH is about 87 and I ride a 59 Waterford-built Homer.  I was a little 
>> skeptical when the folks at Rivendell suggested that size, given that my 
>> other bikes are all in the 54-55 cm range, but it worked out very well.  If 
>> memory serves, I had to swap out the stem for something a bit shorter than 
>> usual - I think it has a 70 or 80 mm stem now - but the bike fits me 
>> perfectly.  
>> Kevin Lindsey
>> Alexandria, VA
>> USA
>>
>>
>> On Monday, April 29, 2024 at 7:05:59 AM UTC-4 drew.jo...@gmail.com wrote:
>>
>>> Greetings,
>>>
>>> I settled on a 58 Homer with the same PBH (FWIW) after speaking with 
>>> Grant.  For me, the bike was a perfect fit…
>>>
>>> Best of luck.
>>>
>>> - Drew
>>>
>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>>
>>> On Apr 29, 2024, at 12:29 AM, xerox-dream  wrote:
>>>
>>> Hello all,
>>>
>>>
>>> I had a pretty basic question, but wanted everyone’s opinion and 
>>> expertise. I am thinking of getting a 58CM 2019  a homer Hilson my PBH is 
>>> 86 to 86 1/2. currently I’m riding a 55 CM platypus and that’s been great. 
>>> just reaching out if anyone has a similar set up with a similar PBH?
>>>
>>>
>>> https://bikeinsights.com/bike-geometries/5cedbc58663b2d0017aa071d-2019-rivendell-bicycle-works-a-homer-hilsen-mit-58
>>>
>>> i guess this model was 650b compared to newer 700c model for this frame 
>>> size
>>>
>>> -- 
>>> 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/3a08acac-04cb--9b3a-6a8a0b0fa72bn%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/1add7398-fdcd-46d8-a1f6-6bf71134e80an%40googlegroups.com.

[RBW] Re: 54.5 Homer: 700c or 650b?

[Hoch in ut]

If this is your one bike, I’d say go for the 700c. You’re already used to 
that wheel size from the Vaya. Maybe you have some tubes and 700c parts as 
well. 
Additionally, I am the same height as you with a 83.3cm PBH and much prefer 
700c. I like the handling and rollover when on rough roads. 
I had a Romanceur (650b) and a Hunqapillar (700c). Hunq was my favorite. 

On Tuesday, April 23, 2024 at 8:56:30 AM UTC-6 nca...@gmail.com wrote:

> @aero and @hoch: I am selling my customized Salsa Vaya 55cm (700c) to fund 
> this purchase, and the Homer would be my only bicycle (I say that now). I 
> don't have any specific tires in mind and I wouldn't have any other wheels 
> to swap out. There seems to be several 42-44 tires that would fit my riding 
> needs for 650b, and clearly a *lot* more for 700c. I wouldn't be doing 
> any long touring on this where tire availability is a factor. 
>
> On Tuesday, April 23, 2024 at 10:45:04 AM UTC-4 DavidP wrote:
>
>> Robert - the geometry comparison highlights the point I was going to make 
>> that given your PBH, the 650b will likely have better standover clearance 
>> if you want to run tires at the larger end of the Homer's range.
>>
>> My rough stuff road bike has disc brakes so could take either 650b or 
>> 700c wheels. Since I was wanting to run wider tires I went with 650x48 to 
>> get the extra 16mm standover in a frame size that is near the cusp of what 
>> I can clear.
>>
>> That comparison shows a much larger difference in standover, as well as 
>> other differences that make it look to me like the 650b will be a better 
>> fit for your proportions.
>>
>> -Dave
>>
>> On Tuesday, April 23, 2024 at 10:36:56 AM UTC-4 Robert Calton wrote:
>>
>>> Thanks Bill! That's helpful. The colors are the same on both offerings 
>>> and the 650B's build is essentially what I would do to the 700c (with the 
>>> help of my lovely LBS, of course). I'm not really too concerned with resale 
>>> value, but rather the general riding experience. I suppose I could simply 
>>> research the litany of 650b vs 700c threads out there to learn more about 
>>> this. The geometry between the two are slightly different, however. 
>>>
>>> The BikeInsights chart attached below shows the 700c to be quite a bit 
>>> taller than the 650b, which I wonder if that translates into overall 
>>> comfort with regards to standover and handling.  
>>> On Tuesday, April 23, 2024 at 10:22:15 AM UTC-4 Bill Lindsay wrote:
>>>
 If it were me the decision is close enough that I'd probably leave it 
 to the surrounding details of each transaction.  I'm a particularly snobby 
 and self-absorbed curator of "builds" so that would be a huge vote in 
 favor 
 of the 700 because it's a frame, unless the curator of the 650b build did 
 a 
 lot of the things I would have done.  The effective "labor cost" of doing 
 a 
 build is essentially zero for me.  Is one a shop and the other a person? 
  That would have some weight for me.  If the shop was one that I could 
 frequent, putting money in the register of a shop reaps benefits down the 
 road.  If the person was one that I had particular respect for, that could 
 tilt me a different way.  

 Then there's color!  

 but...if we took it to a purely hypothetical situation, and asserted 
 they were both frames, both in identical condition, at the same price, and 
 from the same seller, so the real and only difference was 650B vs 700, 
 then 
 I'd probably lean 700 because the 700 wheel on the 54.5 is "the latest", 
 and probably has a tiny bit better future proof resale value.  If that 
 wasn't the case and it really was completely wheel size then I'd 
 personally 
 probably lean 650B for a Hilsen, but it would be like a vote of 52 to 48, 
 and my leaning may change on another day.

 Both are great bikes.  

 Bill Lindsay
 El Cerrito, CA



 On Monday, April 22, 2024 at 7:20:48 PM UTC-7 Robert Calton wrote:

> It's looking like I'll have the opportunity to purchase either bicycle 
> within the next week or so, a 54.5 Homer in 700c or 650b. I'm 5'11" with 
> a 
> 83.8PBH, so spot on for both of those sizes. 
>
> I'm curious what the wisdom of the community is in regards to making 
> this decision, which should I consider more strongly? The price 
> difference 
> is negligible. They both have similar components on it (the 650 is a 
> complete bike, the 700c I'd have to build up from a frameset and the cost 
> is about equal for both). 
>
> I mainly ride pavement and rail trails with the occasional wooded 
> paths. 
>
> Thoughts? :) 
>


-- 
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] Re: 54.5 Homer: 700c or 650b?

[Hoch in ut]

I agree with aeroperf. Both will work just fine for your usage. I’d just 
base it on the other bikes in your possession. It’s nice to swap tires and 
dynamo wheels between bikes. 

On Tuesday, April 23, 2024 at 7:58:10 AM UTC-6 aeroperf wrote:

> I would think it would be all about the tires.
>
> If you have more than one bike, what are the wheel sizes of the others? 
>  You might want to standardize so you can swap tires.  Or if you have 
> specific tires in mind, what size do they come in?
> While there are now a lot of options for 650b tires, there are still a lot 
> more for 700c.  If you shred a tire out on a tour, it might be easier to 
> find a 700c to press on with.
>
>

-- 
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/5d6eb419-c7cb-4774-a4bd-d33352c751can%40googlegroups.com.

[RBW] Re: Give this guy a Like and a Subscribe

[Hoch in ut]

Keep up the good work! Really good to see clips from Korea. I lived there 
for a number of years, but haven’t been back in a long time. 

This video is worth a watch as well. I’m glad to see cycling culture 
progress and improve in Korea. 

https://youtu.be/McqPlSJktww?si=KtHwnJrP9IK3cCGp

On Sunday, April 21, 2024 at 11:10:28 AM UTC-6 probablyri...@gmail.com 
wrote:

> Just realised my channel was shared on here. Thank you!
>
> On Tuesday 12 March 2024 at 10:09:34 UTC+9 eric...@gmail.com wrote:
>
>> QUALITY content! 
>>
>> On Monday, March 11, 2024 at 10:58:51 AM UTC-4 tio ryan wrote:
>>
>>> Glad to see he's making longer content for YouTube, as I've also been 
>>> following him on IG for little while now and have been enjoying his bike 
>>> videos. 
>>>
>>> He's got a couple very sweet Rivs and a gift for filming and editing 
>>> bicycle content. 
>>>
>>> On Monday, March 11, 2024 at 8:03:49 AM UTC-4 Tim Bantham wrote:
>>>
>>>> I've been following him on Instagram. He's got a nice collection of 
>>>> Riv's and is constantly posting riding videos. No bike no likes right? I 
>>>> subscribed to the YouTube channel. 
>>>>
>>>> On Sunday, March 10, 2024 at 8:39:37 PM UTC-4 weste...@gmail.com wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Thanks for sharing -- nice understated video that really is worth 
>>>>> watching -- makes me want to go cycle in Korea!  
>>>>>
>>>>> Julian Westerhout
>>>>> Bloomington, Il 
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Saturday, March 9, 2024 at 10:16:40 PM UTC-6 Hoch in ut wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Nice video of his adventures aboard a Clem in Korea. 
>>>>>>
>>>>>> https://youtu.be/IFoDkOQjk08?si=tOa6oP0IbiZmwNRQ
>>>>>>
>>>>>

-- 
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/da442fb4-ad9a-43f1-91b1-14a9f6688710n%40googlegroups.com.

[RBW] Re: Friction 9 V 10 speed

[Hoch in ut]

I’ve tried 8,9,10 speeds with friction shifting. 10 speed, nope. 9 was ok 
But settled on 8-speed for pretty much all friction shift bikes. 

On Monday, April 15, 2024 at 7:27:21 PM UTC-6 ber...@bernardduhon.com wrote:

> I have been friction  shifting my 10 speed campy set up. 11-26 X 44-28 
> Crank is Sugino. 
> Was not happy with performance , ghosts shifts up when spinning & down 
> when stomping the pedals.  
> Switched up to a 34-11 Shimano
> Nothing else changed 
> Seems to be working really well. 
>  
> Previous threads and literature suggests that the closer the cogs in 10 & 
> 11 speeds makes for better friction shifting.
>  
> What has been your experience?  
>  
>

-- 
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/11931080-b81f-408c-b1fc-3cdf839a60ffn%40googlegroups.com.

[RBW] Re: Gravel Tires for Cheviot

[Hoch in ut]

Maybe I’ll be alone in this, but… Just ride it! For the type of riding on a 
Chev, microknobs/file tread doesn’t help much. If you run bigger knobbies, 
it may actually be dangerous with the tire clearance maxed out. Any stone 
picked up by the tread could jam against the fork or chain/seat stays. 
Plus, they’ll fling more rocks and chip paint (or teeth, as I found out 
once!). 
I’d just lower the pressure a bit and see how it goes. 

On Tuesday, April 16, 2024 at 9:57:42 AM UTC-6 R. Scott Lake wrote:

> Wanting to change the shoes on my Cheviot and use as a gravel bike on flat 
> trails in Lowcountry of SC.
> Currently have 38 Schwable LBB.
> I think the Cheviot can handle 45's (without fenders).
> Any suggestions? 
> Panracers, Rene Herse?
> Other?
>
> Thanks!
>

-- 
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/54017a0a-2371-4a95-bda6-0dd625323572n%40googlegroups.com.

[RBW] Looking to buy: V brakes and levers

[Hoch in ut]

I’m building up a vintage MTB frame. Looking for decent v brakes with 
levers. Nothing too expensive as this is a cheap frame. Thanks. 

-- 
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/ee07661f-3b9b-4cd0-a9f8-9eb461a8f395n%40googlegroups.com.

[RBW] Give this guy a Like and a Subscribe

[Hoch in ut]

Nice video of his adventures aboard a Clem in Korea. 

https://youtu.be/IFoDkOQjk08?si=tOa6oP0IbiZmwNRQ

-- 
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/b870f45a-8de6-4db7-8630-94ce16ec8a85n%40googlegroups.com.

Re: [RBW] Re: Thinking of replaceing the clem with the gus. Thoughts?

[Hoch in ut]

One thing I noticed on my Clem was with a heavy load on the rear, the tail 
wagged a little much for me. Due to the low step through design. I’d 
imagine with the Gus’ top tube being higher, the frame most likely wouldn’t 
flex as much. I noticed your rear rack on your Clem and thought I’d point 
that out. 

On Saturday, March 9, 2024 at 2:17:07 PM UTC-7 rmro...@gmail.com wrote:

> I said that wrong. What I meant to say is that Susie & Gus ride the same 
> or at least very similarly. Riv claims they ride the same. I rode a Susie 
> briefly - it felt the same as my Gus.
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On Mar 9, 2024, at 3:09 PM, Richard Rose  wrote:
>
> When I measured mine (a while ago) the bottom bracket on my 57(large) Gus 
> was a full 2”! higher than on my 52 Clem. This single dimension makes these 
> bikes quite different in my opinion. I love both bikes but use Gus for 
> trail/MTB duties almost exclusively. The Clem is my bike for pretty much 
> everything else. Having both I simply could not choose one to keep. 
> Sophie’s Choice. I thought but cannot claim I know that Gus & Susie are 
> more or less the same.
>
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On Mar 9, 2024, at 1:39 PM, Johnny Alien  wrote:
>
> A Susie would be a pretty lateral move from a Clem (by description and 
> such) where as a Gus would be more stout. If the Clem covers the type of 
> riding you like than the main difference would be style/visuals IMO. Which 
> is 100% as good a reason as any other to swap frames. I love my Clem and am 
> often tempted by the beauty of the Susie/Gus.
>
> On Saturday, March 9, 2024 at 12:34:49 PM UTC-5 NYCbikeguy wrote:
>
>> Regardless of the price/value of each frame, what do all of you think are 
>> the pros and cons of either bikes? overlaps vs. differences? Ultimately, 
>> which would you choose to keep?
>>
>> FYI, I tend to over-build my bikes and I enjoy riding them, so any 
>> comments alluding to "that's too much bike" will be disregarded. 
>>
>> Thanks,
>> IY
>> [image: IMG_8169.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-bun...@googlegroups.com.
> To view this discussion on the web visit 
> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/rbw-owners-bunch/4a8e1311-d774-44f2-91c3-f0ba6acfca54n%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/7093f8e4-d984-4e95-800d-8d627debfd3dn%40googlegroups.com.

Re: [RBW] Re: Anyone else not a fan of the very long chainstays?

[Hoch in ut]

Large volume tire is amazing on pavement. Given you’re not racing. 
The larger the tire, the more imperative you get the PSI right. I usually 
use the Silca calculator. 
Generally, if I’m riding pavement (and pavement around here can be pretty 
rough), I’m at 18-20psi on 700x60 tires. 
Get some nice and light fat tires. Set it up with tubeless or latex tubes. 
Like riding on a cloud. 

https://silca.cc/pages/pro-tire-pressure-calculator?PPC_source=1=CjwKCAiAi6uvBhADEiwAWiyRdqe4PHAgPpTdJ2LVbBwxfqt3e8vuukn-sZWWY-bxbG5OL-roKC6f6BoCuPQQAvD_BwE_adid=_campaign=18309541113_source=google
On Friday, March 8, 2024 at 6:50:38 AM UTC-7 Chris Halasz wrote:

> I'll chime in that while the very long (54cm?) chainstays on some of the 
> frames introduce some storage concerns, they (the Platypus, for instance) 
> ride very, very nicely. 
>
> That said, I dislike the common (what, 41cm?) short chainstays far more 
> than I dislike the extended variety. 
>
> My chainstay sweet spot compromise may be more like 46cm, but I find 
> myself drawn to even longer. 
>
> What I haven't yet come to appreciate are large tires for road use, say, 
> anything over 35mm. The longer chainstay bikes, to me, start to look 
> nervous with narrower tires. I really like the looks of the Clem H, though. 
>
> Maybe there's more learning for me to appreciate the wider, heavier, 
> bouncier tread. But that's another topic. 
>
> - Chris 
> On Thursday, March 7, 2024 at 8:30:45 PM UTC-5 Bill Lindsay wrote:
>
>> Ian thinks "there's a heaping good portion of "I got mine" in your 
>> perspective."  
>>
>> You are allowed to think whatever you like about me and my motives.  Are 
>> you in the market for a new (to you) bike now?  What is your build concept?
>>
>> Bill Lindsay
>> El Cerrito, CA
>>  
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Thursday, March 7, 2024 at 4:02:18 PM UTC-8 ian m wrote:
>>
>>> On Thursday, March 7, 2024 at 12:26:11 PM UTC-5 Bill Lindsay wrote:
>>>
>>> All those wanting Rivendell to re-release bikes they made 10 years ago 
>>> do NOT have to turn in their Riv card, but they ARE outing themselves as 
>>> PAWNS of the T IC.  Resist the pressures of the Time and Date Industrial 
>>> Complex!  
>>>
>>>
>>> BL I feel like I understand where you're coming from in this thread and 
>>> largely I don't disagree with much of what you're saying but I think 
>>> there's a heaping good portion of "I got mine" in your perspective. Yes, I 
>>> do have whatever the reverse of FOMO is when it comes to Riv bikes (Sad I 
>>> Missed Out, SIMO?). I learned about Riv circa the late aughts while working 
>>> at Amoeba in Berkeley and riding my POS fixed gear bike (with Wald 808 bars 
>>> and front basket) everywhere. Dreamt of virtually every model at the time, 
>>> all of which were firmly out of reach with a record store employee 
>>> paycheck. Had I been able to afford a couple twos threes of their bikes at 
>>> the time I'd probably be hang up free about their current designs. But I 
>>> think we all want what we can't have, and (for a terrible comparison) I 
>>> lament plenty of other unfortunate changes like the reality of modern 
>>> pickup trucks as opposed to my first two, the Datsun 720 and Toyota 22RE. 
>>> Change may be constant but it's not always beneficial
>>>
>>

-- 
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/db083303-bc86-4235-a4b9-c3e04ec0f930n%40googlegroups.com.

Re: [RBW] Re: Anyone else not a fan of the very long chainstays?

[Hoch in ut]

Certainly. But it wasn’t an option on the Jabberwocky being a singlespeed. 
And the fact my legs have the girth of an Andy Kapp hot fry 
Non-tech steep climbs were nice on the Clem. Spin seated and you could 
climb a wall. 

On Thursday, March 7, 2024 at 5:20:56 PM UTC-7 rmro...@gmail.com wrote:

> If I stay seated & spin (long stays) I do not spin out on steep / slightly 
> rocky climbs. Stand up & you are done. I never stand.:)
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On Mar 7, 2024, at 6:12 PM, Hoch in ut  wrote:
>
> Keith, I’m assuming you’re in the western Wyoming area? 
>
> I actually bought a Jabberwocky back in 2010 or so. To test out the Wet 
> Cat geo. 
> Bike rode nice but it wasn’t for me. Ironically, I thought it excelled on 
> the descents. Climbing, due to the long chainstays, did not fare so well. 
> Note that the Jabberwocky was SS only (unless you got the geared hanger 
> from them). Standing and climbing steep trails meant constant spin out. I 
> think had I built a Bandersbatch, it would’ve performed better. 
>
> I’m trying to remember the chainstay length. Wasn’t it close to 18”? 
> On Thursday, March 7, 2024 at 3:49:11 PM UTC-7 iamkeith wrote:
>
>> I'm beating a dead horse here, drifting off-topic, and not really even 
>> answering questions that anyone has asked - but adding this excerpt for 
>> thread posterity in case I want to find it again.  I referred to Vassago's 
>> ill-fated attempt to popularize long chainstays in my first post, but this 
>> is a better web archive reference and the one I was thinking of.  It would 
>> have had a picture of a hill climb competition motorcycle, and includes 
>> their explanation, at the bottom, of why  THEY chose to do it - which was 
>> prioritizing climbing.  That's why it has always stuck with me.  I'm not 
>> far from Hoch and Utah and that kind of rockier trail riding, but Vassago's 
>> explanation really jives with my own reality.  EVERY SINGLE RIDE here, in 
>> the mountains of wyoming (where we live at the bottom of the valleys and go 
>> UP only to recreate), begins with a long, steep climb in thin mountain air 
>> that accounts for 3/4 or more of the total ride duration.
>>
>>
>> https://web.archive.org/web/20100724060927/http://www.vassagocycles.com/wetcat-geometry/
>>
>>
>> THE ORIGINAL Vassago WetCat Geometry
>>
>> The controversial 29er geometry approach that we were scorned for back in 
>> '05 seams to be more and more common as we enter 2010. We are OK with that 
>> because it means big wheels have come into their own, and the bigger 
>> companies are catching on. We stand by our WetCat design and haven't 
>> changed a thing. Here's the pitch from "back in the day".
>>
>> When refining our exclusive *WetCat Geometry*, We peed in the eye of 
>> tradition and ignored the number-obsessed skeptics.
>>
>> Our long wheelbases, steep seat tubes and slack head tubes made us true 
>> blasphemers in the frame design world. As the critics baulked, we honed our 
>> angles and tube diameters, to fully utilized the big wheels we are so 
>> faithful to.
>>
>> Now, with so many podium finishes under our belt, and a legion of happy 
>> Vassago riders, we confidently say;
>>
>>- 29ers should NOT try to handle like a 26" bike..They're 29ers.
>>- 29 inch wheels are the *Cat's Pajamas*.
>>- Long chainstays are the *Bee's Knees*.
>>- It's all about the rider's *balance* in relation to the wheels, not 
>>just numbers on paper.
>>- Slack doesn't have to mean slow.
>>- 1996 Norba geometry theory dose not apply to 29ers
>>- The Easter Bunny and Santy Claus are the same guy.
>>
>> So what can *WetCat* do for you?
>>
>> *Climbing*
>> Climb the nastiest technical sections like a wet cat climbs the drapes a 
>> grandma's house. (what you never did that?)
>>
>> Traction to spare, and a neutralized rider position will have you 
>> cleaning sections you never expected, and have your buddies buyin' you 
>> rounds when the pedalin's done.
>>
>> *Descending*
>> Stability is your best friend when speed is what you're looking for. The 
>> centrifugal force of fast spinning big hoops and the long, steel frame 
>> offer confidence to rival a full squishy bike at speed.
>>
>> *Comfort*
>> 9 to 5 is just plain wrong. For those of you who's therapy is an nice 
>> epic ride on a Sunday morning, we have your prescription. Between the 
>> balanced geometry and the unrivaled ridability of steel, a vassago will 
>> keep you cumfy in the saddle as long as your legs can keep pushing.

Re: [RBW] Re: Anyone else not a fan of the very long chainstays?

[Hoch in ut]

Keith, I’m assuming you’re in the western Wyoming area? 
I actually bought a Jabberwocky back in 2010 or so. To test out the Wet Cat 
geo. 
Bike rode nice but it wasn’t for me. Ironically, I thought it excelled on 
the descents. Climbing, due to the long chainstays, did not fare so well. 
Note that the Jabberwocky was SS only (unless you got the geared hanger 
from them). Standing and climbing steep trails meant constant spin out. I 
think had I built a Bandersbatch, it would’ve performed better. 

I’m trying to remember the chainstay length. Wasn’t it close to 18”? 
On Thursday, March 7, 2024 at 3:49:11 PM UTC-7 iamkeith wrote:

> I'm beating a dead horse here, drifting off-topic, and not really even 
> answering questions that anyone has asked - but adding this excerpt for 
> thread posterity in case I want to find it again.  I referred to Vassago's 
> ill-fated attempt to popularize long chainstays in my first post, but this 
> is a better web archive reference and the one I was thinking of.  It would 
> have had a picture of a hill climb competition motorcycle, and includes 
> their explanation, at the bottom, of why  THEY chose to do it - which was 
> prioritizing climbing.  That's why it has always stuck with me.  I'm not 
> far from Hoch and Utah and that kind of rockier trail riding, but Vassago's 
> explanation really jives with my own reality.  EVERY SINGLE RIDE here, in 
> the mountains of wyoming (where we live at the bottom of the valleys and go 
> UP only to recreate), begins with a long, steep climb in thin mountain air 
> that accounts for 3/4 or more of the total ride duration.
>
>
> https://web.archive.org/web/20100724060927/http://www.vassagocycles.com/wetcat-geometry/
>
>
> THE ORIGINAL Vassago WetCat Geometry
>
> The controversial 29er geometry approach that we were scorned for back in 
> '05 seams to be more and more common as we enter 2010. We are OK with that 
> because it means big wheels have come into their own, and the bigger 
> companies are catching on. We stand by our WetCat design and haven't 
> changed a thing. Here's the pitch from "back in the day".
>
> When refining our exclusive *WetCat Geometry*, We peed in the eye of 
> tradition and ignored the number-obsessed skeptics.
>
> Our long wheelbases, steep seat tubes and slack head tubes made us true 
> blasphemers in the frame design world. As the critics baulked, we honed our 
> angles and tube diameters, to fully utilized the big wheels we are so 
> faithful to.
>
> Now, with so many podium finishes under our belt, and a legion of happy 
> Vassago riders, we confidently say;
>
>- 29ers should NOT try to handle like a 26" bike..They're 29ers.
>- 29 inch wheels are the *Cat's Pajamas*.
>- Long chainstays are the *Bee's Knees*.
>- It's all about the rider's *balance* in relation to the wheels, not 
>just numbers on paper.
>- Slack doesn't have to mean slow.
>- 1996 Norba geometry theory dose not apply to 29ers
>- The Easter Bunny and Santy Claus are the same guy.
>
> So what can *WetCat* do for you?
>
> *Climbing*
> Climb the nastiest technical sections like a wet cat climbs the drapes a 
> grandma's house. (what you never did that?)
>
> Traction to spare, and a neutralized rider position will have you cleaning 
> sections you never expected, and have your buddies buyin' you rounds when 
> the pedalin's done.
>
> *Descending*
> Stability is your best friend when speed is what you're looking for. The 
> centrifugal force of fast spinning big hoops and the long, steel frame 
> offer confidence to rival a full squishy bike at speed.
>
> *Comfort*
> 9 to 5 is just plain wrong. For those of you who's therapy is an nice epic 
> ride on a Sunday morning, we have your prescription. Between the balanced 
> geometry and the unrivaled ridability of steel, a vassago will keep you 
> cumfy in the saddle as long as your legs can keep pushing.
>
> *Balance*
> Where it all comes together. Our unique frame geometries all work together 
> to provide a perfectly balanced 29er that feels like no other 29er you've 
> ridden.
>
> Forget the many tallish, slow handling 29ers that are becoming all to 
> common. We center the riders weight between the wheel centers for a 
> distinctive feel of riding IN the bike, not ON TOP of big tall wheels.
>
> Test ride a Vassago and then test ride anything else with twice the price 
> tag. You'll see what we mean.
>
>  
>
>
> A word about chainstays.
>
> Generally speaking, we have noticed the media and thus the general opinion 
> is that the shorter the chainstays, the better. Like we have said all 
> along, our dedicated approach to designing 29ers tells us this is bullocks. 
> While short stays are great on a 26" bike and enhance the characteristics 
> of that type of bike, our bikes are built to climb. Since most of your 
> time, blood, sweat and tears involved in a day long epic are spent 
> climbing, we focus on that.
>
> The WetCat geometry further enhance the climbing 

Re: [RBW] Re: Anyone else not a fan of the very long chainstays?

[Hoch in ut]

What I’m reading is that most of you concur that Grant is not right all the 
time (with regards to bike design). Big companies are not right all the 
time. He’s right some of the time, as are the big companies. Answer, as 
always, is somewhere in the middle. 

It’s a good time to be a cyclist right now with so many choices. I can do a 
fast 40 mile loop on my road bike with all modern components. Then go for a 
leisurely ride with my wife on her Betty Foy on the MUP. What great world 
we live in right now. 

On Thursday, March 7, 2024 at 12:32:20 PM UTC-7 rus...@gmail.com wrote:

> I’ve not yet bitten the bullet to buy a Rivendell. I am very much 
> interested in owning one, and I really enjoy this discussion group as I do 
> Classic Rendevous. First, I would like to get a Waterford built Rivendell. 
> I currently own a Waterford 1200 with 753 tubing and I love it. The widest 
> tires that I can fit on it are 700 x 26. I have both clincher and tubular 
> wheel sets for it and the tubulars are more comfortable. I use Grand Bois 
> Cerf Blue label clinchers. They ride well enough but I always return to the 
> tubulars when I ride the Waterford. 
>
> For your information here’s a list of my bicycles with chain stay length 
> measurements (as measured from center of the BB to the center of the rear 
> wheel axle — midway in the dropout if adjustable. The bicycle sizes are 
> measured along the seat tube CtoC
>
> 1964 58 cm Jack Taylor Sports 45.0
>
>
> 1966 56 cm Raleigh Sports 3-speed 45.0
>
> 1973 56 cm Raleigh RRA 42.5
>
> 1978 58 cm Raleigh Pro V 42.0
>
>
> 1972/73 56 cm Schwinn (Panasonic) World Voyageur 44.0
>
> 1973 58 cm Schwinn Paramount P15 45.0
>
>
> 1977 58 cm Trek TX500 44.5
>
>
> 1972 58 cm Masi GC 42.0
>
> 1983 58 cm Masi GC 42.0
>
>
> mid-1990s 58 cm Davidson Discovery 44.0
>
> 1996 58 cm Mercian 44.0
>
> 1996 58 cm Waterford 1200 42.0
>
>
> Russell Duncan
>
> Saratoga, WY
>
> On Thursday, March 7, 2024 at 1:39:45 PM UTC-5 Bill Lindsay wrote:
>
>> "That said, some valid ideas veer into the direction of overdoing a good 
>> thing. Remember double top tubes on 57 cm Sam Hillbornes? Those never 
>> looked right to me, and the whole concept has quietly disappeared except on 
>> the largest frames. And yet, for  a while double tubes were on half the 
>> bikes they sold."
>>
>> LOLOLOL!!  Not only do I remember.  I just answered an off-list email, 
>> describing this thread, and I told them the chain stay complaining 
>> resembles the same level of handwringing that happened when Grant put a 
>> double top tube on ONE medium sized Sam Hillborne (it was the 56cm).  When 
>> he did it, Grant said it was for fun and said it wasn't necessary, but a 
>> fringe of conventionally minded former Riv fans were absolutely FREAKED 
>> about it.  The other "culprit" size was the 52cm Bombadil.  Rivendell 
>> probably made fewer than 10 52cm Bombadil's, but man, were people 
>> hysterical about it.  The TALL (100PBH) Riv users loved their double top 
>> tubes, and the hand wringers declared that was OK, but that 56cm 
>> Hillborne!?! that was TOO FAR!.  And now, in the rear view mirror, it's 
>> half the bikes they sold?  Spoiler alert: it was not half the bikes they 
>> sold.  Spoiler alert #2: two Atlantis sizes and one Hilsen size still have 
>> double top tubes.  The Hillborne doesn't, but it's made with stouter 
>> "Silver" tubing which is stouter.  That's another cause for handwringing 
>> for the hand wringers.  
>>
>> I own a 2009 56cm Hillborne with a single top tube, and I like it very 
>> much.  I did not want to buy one with a double top tube when they were 
>> offered.  To those people reading this thread who own a double top tube 
>> Hillborne: your bike is excellent, despite what somebody else may say about 
>> it.  You get to decide whether or not your bike looks right or wrong.  
>>
>> Bill Lindsay
>> El Cerrito, CA
>>
>> On Thursday, March 7, 2024 at 9:52:22 AM UTC-8 mathiass...@gmail.com 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Bill wrote:
>>> >> Grant's tastes keep evolving.   
>>>
>>> That's one way to put it.
>>>
>>> The thing with Grant is that he HAS ideas, and that he gets excited 
>>> about them, and that he's put himself in a position to do something about 
>>> it. This is all positive and deserving of respect. Anyone who collects a 
>>> monthly paycheck would do well to picture what it would be like to make 
>>> your income by selling things. Whether it's $4k new bicycles or $8 loaves 
>>> of artisan bread, do some math and you'll come away with a lot of respect 
>>> for people who put their liivelihood on the line like that.
>>>
>>> That said, some valid ideas veer into the direction of overdoing a good 
>>> thing. Remember double top tubes on 57 cm Sam Hillbornes? Those never 
>>> looked right to me, and the whole concept has quietly disappeared except on 
>>> the largest frames. And yet, for  a while double tubes were on half the 
>>> bikes they sold. 
>>>
>>> In five years, the dust will have settled on 

Re: [RBW] Re: Anyone else not a fan of the very long chainstays?

[Hoch in ut]

JJ, I don’t think there is a specific definition of long or short chainstay 
bikes. Just relative to what the mainstream bike are at that point in time. 
But generally speaking, I’d consider anything under 17” (~430mm) to be 
short. I had a custom built about 10 years ago and spec’ed it with 16.5” 
chainstays for a 29er with 2.3” clearance. After a while, I felt it was too 
short and settled on 430mm (which is my current bike) for my usage and 
terrain. 
I remember when Gary Fisher introduced the Genesis geo with the 
“revolutionary” short chainstays, long cockpit with short stems back in the 
90’s. Ahead of its time, really. That’s essentially where all the mountain 
bikes are now. 
As I said, long chainstay bikes have their place and if I had unlimited 
garage space, I’d still have the Clem. It rides nice on pavement and smooth 
dirt roads. 
And I definitely say there is a point of diminishing returns on the length. 
I had a Surly Big Dummy for a while when my kids were young. Talk about a 
looong bike. Very useful and rode nice. But it was also cumbersome and if 
the dirt road had any significant climb, forget about getting your weight 
back far enough to bite down on the dirt. 
Riv’s current offering works for a large number of people. Especially ones 
that ride Riv’s. Perhaps Grant is done with short stay trail bikes. But I’d 
say there are still a good number of Riv fans hoping for an alternative. 
Look at Crust bikes. Somewhat Riv-esque and relatively shorter stays than 
Riv’s. Seems to be plenty of demand for them. 

On Thursday, March 7, 2024 at 7:55:01 AM UTC-7 J J wrote:

> A few semantic questions: what defines short chain stay (or wheelbase) vs. 
> long chainstay? Even granting that they are not absolutes, or "you know it 
> when you see it," what are the relative metrics? And why do we rarely hear 
> about "medium chain stay"? We seem to jump from short to long.  
>
> As has been pointed out here, Grant/Rivendell has been touting long chain 
> stays since the very early days, as I discovered when I looked at old 
> Readers. But definitions shift over time. The long chain stays of Riv of 
> the late 1990s and early 2000s are today's "classics" with relatively short 
> chain stays — short in retrospect, and relative to the gargantuan lengths 
> we see in some models today. So the Atlantis (61) here that I outfitted 
> with 55mm tires was yesteryear's "long chain stay". If you think this is 
> outlandish, check out this Atlantis brochure excerpt from when Toyo Japan 
> was still producing them. 
>
> Would you say that the Bombadils and Hunqapillars were "transitional" 
> ("medium?" between the older [long then, short now] ones and the newer ones 
> [super duper long])? 
>  
> FINALLY: how long is long enough for all the beneficial characteristics 
> that long bikes give? Does anyone think Riv will come out with an even 
> longer frame than the longest we see now?
>
> On Thursday, March 7, 2024 at 9:08:44 AM UTC-5 Hoch in ut wrote:
>
>> I should have clarified. I have never ridden a Jone LWB. I owned the 
>> original Jones 29 spaceframe for a number of years. That was a fun bike. 
>>
>> I was referring to the Clem. I understand it’s a “Hillibike,” not a 
>> mountain bike, in the modern world term of that word. Still, Riv markets it 
>> to be used on “trails.” Which is a fairly loose term. The trails in the Bay 
>> Area, which I’ve never ridden, seem to be well-manicured. Mostly smooth 
>> dirt single track, from what I’ve seen. 
>> We have some of that here in Utah but most, if not all trails require 
>> some tight turns, riding through rock gardens, and technical sections. 
>> Whooptie doos are common as well. All of these sections proved to be a 
>> problem for the Clem. Yes, I could take on more of the ATB mentality and 
>> get off and walk those sections. Which I’ve done plenty of times on my 
>> modern mountain bike (which is a Vassago! Single speed, rigid fork). But 
>> why walk when you can ride? I easily ride through those sections on shorter 
>> wheelbase bikes. Not fun. For me. 
>> All this to say, it depends where you live which may dictate what type of 
>> trails you ride. Smooth dirt roads and MUP’s, it’s a nice bike for that. 
>> Not so much for what I’m after. This isn’t a knock against the LWB. I’m 
>> glad some companies are looking at the design from different angles. 
>> Hopefully they’ll continue to innovate. 
>> Having said that, for me, and I’m sure a sizable number of Riv 
>> enthusiasts, I wish they’d give us an option of a SWB hillibike. Clem and 
>> Wolbis are almost identical. And a lot of overlap with the Atlantis, 
>> really. Will said the front ends are pretty much the same. Give us a 

Re: [RBW] Re: Anyone else not a fan of the very long chainstays?

[Hoch in ut]

nals like Radavist seek out and celebrate new ideas.  
>
> I don't know who else dabbles with long chainstays though.  Vassago - also 
> from the early days of 29ers - comes to mind as a company that approached 
> the problem differently than Jones, and were skewered and criticized to no 
> end for having the audacity to lengthen chainstays and wheelbases - to the 
> point that they eventually threw in the towel and sold the company.  They 
> were probably on the right track years early, but closed-minded critics and 
> a sheepish marketplace delayed adoption and progress for a decade and a 
> half or more.  I had to go to the wayback machine to find this, but here 
> they talk about that battle.  It's interesting to read in retrospect.  
> (This was the real point of my now long-winded post.)(The other interesting 
> thing to look at would be the relentless vassago hate threads from 
> contemporary mtbr forums.):
>
>
> https://web.archive.org/web/20090704045348/https://www.vassagocycles.com/wetcat.html
>
> I think it's funny the way Grant is often called a "retrogrouch" when, in 
> reality, he and Rivendell are one of the few companies doing NEW things, 
> opinions of others be damned.  And Jones, on a whole other track.
>
> Last thought:  I have several older more-traditional rivendell models, 
> with short stays and near-level top tubes.  I'm so accustomed to them after 
> years of adjustments that they are good enough and I have no reason to ever 
> upgrade.  But they look dated to my eye - not "classic."  Longer stays, 
> sloped top tubes, more reach - just looks "right" to me.  It's  a bit 
> form-follows-function. Different strokes, I guess.
>
>
> On Wednesday, March 6, 2024 at 9:37:33 PM UTC-7 Hoch in ut wrote:
>
>> Who’s doing long chainstays other than Jones? 
>> For MTB, it doesn’t work for me. I was getting hung up like crazy. 
>> Switchbacks and tight turns were a chore. Up and down techy Boulder 
>> sections, the bash guard was getting a workout. Stopped me dead in my 
>> tracks a few times. 
>>
>> On Wednesday, March 6, 2024 at 7:23:36 PM UTC-7 wboe...@gmail.com wrote:
>>
>>> Do they make you turn in your Riv card for such a question?  Heresy.  
>>>
>>> I haven't ridden a new Riv but I'll confess being put off visually by 
>>> the design.  My 46cm-stay Schwinn passage gets close-ish and I only ride 
>>> that for dirt touring.  It is interesting to see some small mtb makers with 
>>> long-chainstay models; obviously there's something there.  Just not a thing 
>>> I need.  Yet.  :)
>>>
>>> Will
>>>
>>> On Wednesday, March 6, 2024 at 2:45:44 PM UTC-5 pi...@gmail.com wrote:
>>>
>>>> My Roadini has a 45cm chainstay. My custom touring bike has a 43cm 
>>>> chainstay. When riding it doesn't make a big difference --- I'm far more 
>>>> sensitive to the 5mm higher BB on the Roadini. When packing it to tour 2cm 
>>>> is not a huge difference either. The A Homer Hilsen has a whopping 50cm 
>>>> chainstay. At that point it'll be difficult to pack it into a box for 
>>>> flying, which was why I decided against the Hilsen. 
>>>>
>>>> On Wednesday, March 6, 2024 at 10:24:27 AM UTC-8 Bill Lindsay wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Garth got off the point with: "People do lament about modern 
>>>>> frame/parts design Bil"
>>>>>
>>>>> I am aware that there are forums for all kinds of bellyachers.  The 
>>>>> distinction I was making is that I know of no other brand that has a 
>>>>> forum 
>>>>> of users like Rivendell.  In this Riv Group, the participants 
>>>>> self-assemble, and include those who like Rivendell in 2024, those who 
>>>>> have 
>>>>> always liked Rivendell, and those who USED to like Rivendell but now 
>>>>> vigorously disapprove of Rivendell.  There's no other brand that gets 
>>>>> that 
>>>>> kind of devotion.  There's no grumpy cyclist, riding a 1984 Trek 720, 
>>>>> chiming in on a current forum of Trek users, wailing "to hell with your 
>>>>> Emonda!  Trek should re-introduce investment cast lugs!"  
>>>>>
>>>>> That was point #1.  Point #2 is that even if Trek in 2024 is aware of 
>>>>> that pissed-of grouch on a 720, they don't give a crap about that person. 
>>>>>  Rivendell knows that lots of their former fans now hate them.  Rivendell 
>>>>> is flattered that you, Garth, are so devoted to your Bombadil, and so 
&

Re: [RBW] Re: Anyone else not a fan of the very long chainstays?

[Hoch in ut]

Who’s doing long chainstays other than Jones? 
For MTB, it doesn’t work for me. I was getting hung up like crazy. 
Switchbacks and tight turns were a chore. Up and down techy Boulder 
sections, the bash guard was getting a workout. Stopped me dead in my 
tracks a few times. 

On Wednesday, March 6, 2024 at 7:23:36 PM UTC-7 wboe...@gmail.com wrote:

> Do they make you turn in your Riv card for such a question?  Heresy.  
>
> I haven't ridden a new Riv but I'll confess being put off visually by the 
> design.  My 46cm-stay Schwinn passage gets close-ish and I only ride that 
> for dirt touring.  It is interesting to see some small mtb makers with 
> long-chainstay models; obviously there's something there.  Just not a thing 
> I need.  Yet.  :)
>
> Will
>
> On Wednesday, March 6, 2024 at 2:45:44 PM UTC-5 pi...@gmail.com wrote:
>
>> My Roadini has a 45cm chainstay. My custom touring bike has a 43cm 
>> chainstay. When riding it doesn't make a big difference --- I'm far more 
>> sensitive to the 5mm higher BB on the Roadini. When packing it to tour 2cm 
>> is not a huge difference either. The A Homer Hilsen has a whopping 50cm 
>> chainstay. At that point it'll be difficult to pack it into a box for 
>> flying, which was why I decided against the Hilsen. 
>>
>> On Wednesday, March 6, 2024 at 10:24:27 AM UTC-8 Bill Lindsay wrote:
>>
>>> Garth got off the point with: "People do lament about modern frame/parts 
>>> design Bil"
>>>
>>> I am aware that there are forums for all kinds of bellyachers.  The 
>>> distinction I was making is that I know of no other brand that has a forum 
>>> of users like Rivendell.  In this Riv Group, the participants 
>>> self-assemble, and include those who like Rivendell in 2024, those who have 
>>> always liked Rivendell, and those who USED to like Rivendell but now 
>>> vigorously disapprove of Rivendell.  There's no other brand that gets that 
>>> kind of devotion.  There's no grumpy cyclist, riding a 1984 Trek 720, 
>>> chiming in on a current forum of Trek users, wailing "to hell with your 
>>> Emonda!  Trek should re-introduce investment cast lugs!"  
>>>
>>> That was point #1.  Point #2 is that even if Trek in 2024 is aware of 
>>> that pissed-of grouch on a 720, they don't give a crap about that person. 
>>>  Rivendell knows that lots of their former fans now hate them.  Rivendell 
>>> is flattered that you, Garth, are so devoted to your Bombadil, and so 
>>> aggrieved and offended by their evolution that you boycott them -AND- 
>>> continuously participate on the forum to repeat how disapproving you are. 
>>>  That kind of devotion is rare, and Rivendell respects and appreciates the 
>>> energy.  They sometimes get weary of it when the bellyachers want to yell 
>>> at them on the phone, because they've got work to do, but on the forum, 
>>> they love it.  When they built the Bombadil, they HOPED and PRAYED that it 
>>> would be loved and ridden for a century.  You are well on your way to 
>>> making their dream happen.  Keep it up!
>>>
>>> Bill Lindsay
>>> El Cerrito, CA
>>>
>>> On Tuesday, March 5, 2024 at 4:40:42 PM UTC-8 Garth wrote:
>>>

 People do lament about modern frame/parts design Bill, and they do it 
 @Bikeforums.net in mostly the classic & vintage section :) All vintage 
 makes and models are talked about and bought and sold and very much 
 prized/appreciated. It is by far the most active section of BF. There's a 
 couple of members who regularly post .pdf scans of old cycling 
 publications 
 like Bicycling! magazine of most any bike that was reviewed at the time. 
 Not just bikes of course but all the vintage parts too from how they work 
 to how to tear down and repair them. It's a very diverse community that 
 has 
 the same polarizing topics as any other places, but it's broken down into 
 vary sections to make it easier to post and find posts. Lots of riders who 
 love anything "new" and lots that don't. 

 The demand and use for all kinds of bikes and parts Worlwide is far 
 beyond anyone's means or abilities to count. Andel, likely the largest 
 crank manufacturer in the World, has lots of traditional doubles and 
 triples and they manufacture Riv's cranks for them. 

 As for the megastays, it is what it is. There's a whole lotta frames 
 and makers to choose from. Thankfully there are other people/businesses 
 interested in having steel frames(stock and custom), friction shifters and 
 non-disc hubs made so there's very little if anything I shop @Riv for. 
 On Tuesday, March 5, 2024 at 1:13:52 PM UTC-5 Bill Lindsay wrote:

> I promise you that Rivendell is flattered that nice people gather 
> themselves to complain about the former-models that Riv no longer makes. 
>  It shows a love for Rivendell that most other bike brands don't get. 
>  There's no Specialized google group where current Specialized fans are 
> griping about 

[RBW] Re: Anyone else not a fan of the very long chainstays?

[Hoch in ut]

I’m not a fan of long chainstays, either, FOR MY TYPE OF RIDING. 
When I’m cruising around on bike paths and paved roads, long chainstays are 
fine. For everything else, I much prefer the typical 430-440mm chainstays, 
like the older Rivendells. 
I sold my old Hunqapillar and bought a Clem. And very much regret it. 

On Tuesday, March 5, 2024 at 7:27:30 AM UTC-7 jrst...@gmail.com wrote:

> I tried an Atlantis but was not enamored. Sold it and got a Hillborne 
> which I love but still not as much as my finally found Saluki but like it a 
> lot. I am probably in the minority here but I know there must be others who 
> share my sentiments. I have had so many Rivs, 2 roads, one custom when they 
> were custom Roads, Ram, Saluki, Bleriot, Atlantis, AR. I know I am leaving 
> some out but you get the picture. The shorter wheelbase suits me well and 
> is easier to manage bringing it into my sunroom and basement. 
>
> Not meant to offend anyone, just my preference. 
>
> Joel
>

-- 
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/90ef9d3b-2a20-4b79-a82e-4c83ff9c2f6dn%40googlegroups.com.

Re: [RBW] Susie / Appaloosa indecision

[Hoch in ut]

Gus Boots Willsen is probably one of, if not THE coolest bike model ever. 
I wish they would’ve designated the smaller sizes as Susie and the bigger 
as Gus. 

On Wednesday, February 7, 2024 at 7:37:29 PM UTC-7 Joe Bernard wrote:

> I agree about the name, I'm mystified that they dropped Gus Boots-Willsen. 
>
> On Wednesday, February 7, 2024 at 5:48:43 PM UTC-8 Hoch in ut wrote:
>
>> I agree with Richard. Although both would serve your needs, if there is 
>> any chance you’ll ride some singletrack, I’d wholeheartedly get the suze. 
>> 2.6” tires with that long wheelbase is a riot. 
>> Caveat is I only have a 6 mile round trip commute. And grocery is 6 mile 
>> trip. So any bike works. If your commute is much longer, I’d say neither 
>> bike would be great. Just get a cheap Trek 420 for the commutes. 
>> The only thing I don’t like about Susie is the name. 
>>
>> On Wednesday, February 7, 2024 at 3:16:03 PM UTC-7 rmro...@gmail.com 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Others here can no doubt offer more experienced opinions but, I would 
>>> get the Susie and an extra set of wheels. One with 2.5”-2.6” knobbies 
>>> (Honcho, Ehline) for singletrack or other off road stuff (backpacking), and 
>>> the other with 2.0” - 2.25 smoothish tires for more roadish use. Susie is 
>>> such a versatile platform. This of course is my perspective only & reflects 
>>> my preference for off road excursions.
>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>>
>>> On Feb 7, 2024, at 4:23 PM, Brian Thomas  wrote:
>>>
>>> 
>>>
>>> Hey Everyone. I'm seriously torn between a lugged Susie and an Appaloosa 
>>> later this year. Help me commit!
>>>
>>> I commute and run errands (no question that's most of my mileage), but 
>>> fun rides are always in seek of trails with pavement as needed: day rides 
>>> plus occasional camping. I think each bike is overkill in a different way. 
>>> The Appaloosa is capable of longer distances and heavier loads, which would 
>>> be pretty rare for me. The bigger tires on the Susie would open up more 
>>> technical singletrack, which would be similarly rare. 
>>>
>>> What to do? I like the idea of the Appaloosa's more traditional look, 
>>> but I like the Susie's higher handlebars and increased crotch clearance. 
>>> I'm likely to want fenders, so I may end up not using the Susie's tire 
>>> clearance to full advantage (sidebar: what's the biggest tire that will 
>>> really fit under a B65? B69? Anyone know of another decent-looking jumbo 
>>> fender?).
>>>
>>> All opinions welcome, with special thanks to anyone who's ridden or 
>>> owned both.
>>>
>>> -- 
>>> 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/1e47cf36-31e0-4a3c-8e64-39bd3cf86693n%40googlegroups.com
>>>  
>>> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/rbw-owners-bunch/1e47cf36-31e0-4a3c-8e64-39bd3cf86693n%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/19afc0a0-dba9-4f22-ac5f-fea9e2319b93n%40googlegroups.com.

Re: [RBW] Susie / Appaloosa indecision

[Hoch in ut]

I agree with Richard. Although both would serve your needs, if there is any 
chance you’ll ride some singletrack, I’d wholeheartedly get the suze. 2.6” 
tires with that long wheelbase is a riot. 
Caveat is I only have a 6 mile round trip commute. And grocery is 6 mile 
trip. So any bike works. If your commute is much longer, I’d say neither 
bike would be great. Just get a cheap Trek 420 for the commutes. 
The only thing I don’t like about Susie is the name. 

On Wednesday, February 7, 2024 at 3:16:03 PM UTC-7 rmro...@gmail.com wrote:

> Others here can no doubt offer more experienced opinions but, I would get 
> the Susie and an extra set of wheels. One with 2.5”-2.6” knobbies (Honcho, 
> Ehline) for singletrack or other off road stuff (backpacking), and the 
> other with 2.0” - 2.25 smoothish tires for more roadish use. Susie is such 
> a versatile platform. This of course is my perspective only & reflects my 
> preference for off road excursions.
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On Feb 7, 2024, at 4:23 PM, Brian Thomas  wrote:
>
> 
>
> Hey Everyone. I'm seriously torn between a lugged Susie and an Appaloosa 
> later this year. Help me commit!
>
> I commute and run errands (no question that's most of my mileage), but fun 
> rides are always in seek of trails with pavement as needed: day rides plus 
> occasional camping. I think each bike is overkill in a different way. The 
> Appaloosa is capable of longer distances and heavier loads, which would be 
> pretty rare for me. The bigger tires on the Susie would open up more 
> technical singletrack, which would be similarly rare. 
>
> What to do? I like the idea of the Appaloosa's more traditional look, but 
> I like the Susie's higher handlebars and increased crotch clearance. I'm 
> likely to want fenders, so I may end up not using the Susie's tire 
> clearance to full advantage (sidebar: what's the biggest tire that will 
> really fit under a B65? B69? Anyone know of another decent-looking jumbo 
> fender?).
>
> All opinions welcome, with special thanks to anyone who's ridden or owned 
> both.
>
> -- 
> 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/1e47cf36-31e0-4a3c-8e64-39bd3cf86693n%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/390714a0-c05b-4f23-9240-235305cf85ben%40googlegroups.com.

Re: [RBW] WTB: All Rounder

[Hoch in ut]

Yes, that would wor—Toyo or Waterford Atlantis in ~55 or 56 size. 
Preferably 26” or maybe 650b. 

I’ve tried the long chainstays and it does not work for me. 
On Monday, February 5, 2024 at 8:44:18 PM UTC-7 brok...@gmail.com wrote:

> If not an AR, a 54.5cm or 56cm Toyo or Waterford Atlantis 26” will be 
> nearly the same. Probably easier to score, too.
>
> I’m 5’8” with a 83 PBH, and riding a 54.5 Atlantis. Could just as easily 
> ride a 56cm.
>
> - Brian 
>
> On Feb 5, 2024, at 10:26 PM, Hoch in ut  wrote:
>
> Looking for an All Rounder. Not sure what the sizing was, but my PBH is 
> 83.3cm at 5’11”. 
>
>
> I’ll most likely equip it with moustache or similar “sporty” bars. 
>
> Please let me know if you have one available. 
>
> I may be talked into a pre-MIT Atlantis or Hunqapillar. Thanks. 
>
> -- 
> 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/43b41d71-3803-4b1e-9170-52ab280ba139n%40googlegroups.com
>  
> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/rbw-owners-bunch/43b41d71-3803-4b1e-9170-52ab280ba139n%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/177e2c02-5ac1-419e-9c61-2e8347b85698n%40googlegroups.com.

[RBW] WTB: All Rounder

[Hoch in ut]

Looking for an All Rounder. Not sure what the sizing was, but my PBH is 
83.3cm at 5’11”. 

I’ll most likely equip it with moustache or similar “sporty” bars. 

Please let me know if you have one available. 

I may be talked into a pre-MIT Atlantis or Hunqapillar. Thanks. 

-- 
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/43b41d71-3803-4b1e-9170-52ab280ba139n%40googlegroups.com.

[RBW] WTB: Atlantis or Hunqapillar ~54cm 29” wheels

[Hoch in ut]

Searching for an Atlantis (before the long chainstays) or a Hunqapillar for 
29” wheels. In size 54cm or so (could fit 56 or 57 as well). 
I had a 54cm Hunq a few years ago and foolishly sold it. Thanks. 

-- 
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/742c7262-55a8-4959-be88-a433f169aeacn%40googlegroups.com.

[RBW] Re: Selling Betty Foy and Ives Gomez

[Hoch in ut]

I’m interested in the Yves Gonez. My wife has a Betty and I’ve always 
wanted a counterpart. 
Anyone know what the max tire clearance is on the Gomez? Is it 700 or 650b? 

On Thursday, December 14, 2023 at 9:37:16 AM UTC-7 wpes...@gmail.com wrote:

> I am selling both bikes which we purchased in 2013. We hate to sell but in 
> our age biking is no longer possible. The 60 cm Ives Gomez has top of the 
> line components upgrades including White Industries hubs and bottom 
> bracket, Paul center pull brakes, Nitto front and rear racks, Bull Moose 
> handle bar, Shimano Ultegra Derailleurs. The bike is in very good condition 
> with only very minor paint scratches. The 55cm Betty Foy is in superb as 
> new condition with a spare set of fenders. If anyone is interested please 
> let me know. I can send pictures. 

-- 
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/7ad19b7c-c4cd-4377-9e74-9768639c8becn%40googlegroups.com.

[RBW] Re: 1st world commuting dilemma

[Hoch in ut]

How long is your commute? Mine is pretty short. 3 miles. So I’ve used 
various bikes, including an Ogre. Ride quality doesn’t matter so much, as 
I’m on the bike for 10-15 minutes. 

If it’s longer, it depends on your risk appetite. I don’t use any of my 
nice bikes due to reason above but also because I’d be too concerned about 
the bike to focus on work. If I were in your shoes, I’d just keep going 
with the Ogre. 

Or if you have a new bike itch, think about a Brompton. Small wheels are 
pretty fun to ride. And you can take the whole thing inside with you. 

On Thursday, December 7, 2023 at 7:49:30 AM UTC-7 Josh C wrote:

> Hello all. I find myself trying to make a decision regarding which bike to 
> use as my commuter. 
>
> Background: I live in Indianapolis and ride my bike for a good chunk of my 
> daily needs. I have a short commute to work which is done on bike 90% of 
> the time. I usually work from 5:20-ish am to about 6:30 pm 3-4 days a week. 
> The only days I don't ride in are if it's pouring rain when I get up, or 
> the snow is too deep to get through. I could ride in the rain, and don't 
> mind it on the way home, but already get up at 4:30 am and simply don't 
> have time to change or mess with it on work days. I'm commuting on a 
> Rohloff-equipped Surly Ogre currently and have put less than 1K miles on my 
> car this year. We live near downtown and are a short ride to many things 
> that we like to do. We often ride to ball games, art exhibits, concerts, 
> dinners, drinks...you name it.  
>
> Dilemma: Now I warned you that this is a 1st world problem, but here goes. 
> I have several Riv's and they are my favorite bikes to ride but I find 
> myself on the Ogre more often than any other bike. I may accumulate more 
> miles on my Rivs, as I ride a Toyo Atlantis as my all-road bike, but I do 
> way more trips on the Surly. For some reason, I simply feel more 
> comfortable locking up the Surly for 13 hours or outside of a music venue 
> downtown than I do a Rivendell. In my mind, the Riv seems like more of a 
> target for would-be thieves than the Surly and thus it gets most of the 
> day-to-day duty. The thing is that I enjoy riding a Rivendell much more 
> than the Surly and, after giving this some thought, had decided to buy a 
> Clem when this latest batch of completes was released, and start using it 
> for my daily driver. 
>
> However, after doing some math in my head, and realizing that I'd likely 
> change a lot of the Clem complete build, I am thinking that I'd might as 
> well ride one of the Rivs that I currently own. By the time I get the Clem 
> to my door, I've spent $2500 with shipping and tax. I'd change the bars, 
> add a saddle, add fenders, have the front wheel rebuilt with a dyno hub, 
> and so on. I'd easily be into it for $3K or more. My Surly has a $1400 rear 
> hub and is easily over the $3K mark. 
>
> I am lucky enough to have two Rivendell Atlantis and a Hunq. I've owned 
> several others in the past as well. One of the Atlantis bikes that I have 
> would fit the bill. It's the more recent style with the longer wheelbase & 
> double top tube. These are super sturdy bikes that wouldn't mind being 
> loaded up and taken to work. I've already got a wheelset with a dyno hub 
> and a light lying around here somewhere. I purchased this bike for $3K this 
> summer from a local guy. I didn't need the bike but just couldn't pass it 
> up as it was so cool! 
>
> I thought to myself: I've locked up more expensive bikes at work for 13 
> hours or at music venues until the wee hours of the night without issue, so 
> why not just do the bulk of my riding on a bike that I truly enjoy riding? 
> What am I saving it for? 
>
> Questions: Is my logic sound? Do you think that riding a nice Riv to work, 
> to lock it up outside all, day in a city, is a dumb idea? Do you commute on 
> a Riv that is left outside all day? 
>
> *I'd also like to use this as an opportunity to see some of your 
> commuters. Feel free to post a pic of your daily driver and also, let us 
> know if you lock it up outside or not. *
>
> The potential commuter. (I'd change the fenders and bars)
> [image: IMG_0630 Medium.jpeg]
>
> My current all road bike
> [image: IMG_0514 Medium.jpeg]
>
> Not a commuter. I ride this guy around quite a bit though. 
> [image: IMG_0570 Medium.jpeg]
>
> The Surly, although it now has had Jones bars on it for quite some time. 
> [image: IMG_0230 Medium.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/a003fbdd-7509-4b13-8413-3e55821583ean%40googlegroups.com.

[RBW] Re: PSA: Brooks B68

[Hoch in ut]

Hope you guys get yours quick. I put in an order for another item a month 
ago at tradeinn and it still hasn’t shown up. 

On Wednesday, December 6, 2023 at 3:46:44 PM UTC-7 Josh C wrote:

> Thanks, I grabbed one. My wife ordered one with her Platy, that has yet to 
> ship, and it got me wanting to try it out for myself. 
>
> On Wednesday, December 6, 2023 at 4:22:12 PM UTC-5 maxcr wrote:
>
>> PSA: I bought mine here a while back and saw they have some in stock:
>>
>> Brooks england B68 Saddle, Brown | Bikeinn 
>> 
>> tradeinn.com 
>> 
>> [image: icon-180x180.png] 
>> 
>>  
>> 
>>
>>

-- 
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/d80ee0ea-adf9-4318-8f88-934b9e3cd5f9n%40googlegroups.com.

Re: [RBW] Re: Platypus for Clem L?

[Hoch in ut]

What’s your wife wanting out of the bike? If it’s aesthetics, and 
specifically to steel/lugged frames, Riv is great. 

But if it’s ride quality, I’m not so disillusioned with Rivendell (despite 
having owned several and own one now)that I can objectively say, there are 
plenty of other bikes that will serve her equally well, IF NOT BETTER. Even 
ones from the big companies. Light and nimble, or smooth and cushy, upright 
or racy, or really any characteristic you like about any Rivendell can be 
replicated and/or improved on. 
Some won’t like to hear this, but honestly, it’s the truth. 
I’m still a Rivendell fan and still on the lookout for an elusive model 
that I hope to own (again). Just don’t be afraid to try other bikes out. 
There are lots of great ones out there. And in places you may not expect. 

On Saturday, November 11, 2023 at 12:37:48 PM UTC-7 chungeu...@gmail.com 
wrote:

> Thank you so much for all the responses!
>
> Since we are living not too far from the Riv HQ, we may visit and see if 
> how she likes the Platy.
> She rides 45cm Clem, so we may need to check if her PBH fits 50cm Platy. 
> If that goes well, we may stick with Riv. Otherwise, I will take a look 
> outside and check out other brands.
>
> On Friday, November 10, 2023 at 9:38:30 PM UTC+1 rmro...@gmail.com wrote:
>
>> Wheels & tires I suspect.
>> Sent from my iPhone
>>
>> On Nov 10, 2023, at 1:46 PM, Doug H.  wrote:
>>
>> Jake,
>>
>> That is interesting that the bikes are about equal in weight but one 
>> rides "zippier and lighter". I've heard this before in comparing the Clem 
>> to the Platypus but I just don't know what qualities makes a bike feel 
>> zippier if it isn't lighter weight.
>> Thanks,
>> Doug
>>
>> On Friday, November 10, 2023 at 12:25:06 PM UTC-5 jake...@gmail.com 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> I agree with what Garth is saying about weight/size differences. 
>>> Depending on the respective builds and how the sizing falls, it's possible 
>>> that a Platypus could be every bit as long and heavy as a Clem. As people 
>>> in the 81-84cm pbh range, I have a 55cm Platypus and my dad has a 52cm 
>>> Clem, and the Clem is probably lighter in part due to the smaller wheel 
>>> size. Both are great bikes, and I do find the Platypus rides zippier and 
>>> lighter, but in terms of lifting, transport, and storage there is not much 
>>> difference between the two. Hope this helps!
>>>
>>> Jake
>>>
>>> On Thursday, November 9, 2023 at 4:06:09 PM UTC-5 Garth wrote:
>>>
>>>> Chung, If your wife finds the Clem too long and heavy a Platypus is not 
>>>> going to make a effective difference in regards to weight or maneuvering. 
>>>> What would is a frame like a Soma Buena Vista (rim brake or disc) or Velo 
>>>> Orange Polyvalent low kicker. Both have relatively typical chainstays and 
>>>> wheelbases and are going to be easier to pick up and maneuver simply due 
>>>> to 
>>>> the fact that they have "normal" wheelbases and chainstays so are going to 
>>>> be inherently lighter to begin with. There's a notable difference in 
>>>> geometry though, with the VO being more low trail and the Soma mid-high. 
>>>> Plus the Soma has quite steep seat tube angles so if using a Brooks you 
>>>> may 
>>>> not be able to get the seat back where you want. Thankfully they do both 
>>>> use a 27.2 post though. 
>>>>
>>>> Note, the Platy isn't a step through either so all three compared to a 
>>>> Clem are more like step around I suppose ! 
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> https://bikeinsights.com/compare?geometries=5b8578fd48f3a30004789cd9,5ee8f7ce7eaeb8001717ac2f
>>>> ,
>>>>
>>>> On Thursday, November 9, 2023 at 2:53:48 PM UTC-5 Hoch in ut wrote:
>>>>
>>>> I don’t know about the Platypus, but my wife rides a Betty Foy. It 
>>>> rides ligh/zippy  and she loves it. Currently has a Wald 137 front basket 
>>>> and a Riv trunk bag. 
>>>> They’re a bit hard to come by but Cheviot was essentially the same 
>>>> bike. 
>>>>
>>>> Tires are 650b x 38 with fenders. Not sure I’d go larger. 
>>>>
>>>> On Thursday, November 9, 2023 at 9:21:50 AM UTC-7 chungeu...wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>> I bought a complete Clem L for my wife and she enjoyed riding it so far.
>>>> However, she felt that it's a bit too much bike for her since she only 
>>>> rides it on the

[RBW] Re: Platypus for Clem L?

[Hoch in ut]

I don’t know about the Platypus, but my wife rides a Betty Foy. It rides 
ligh/zippy  and she loves it. Currently has a Wald 137 front basket and a 
Riv trunk bag. 
They’re a bit hard to come by but Cheviot was essentially the same bike. 

Tires are 650b x 38 with fenders. Not sure I’d go larger. 

On Thursday, November 9, 2023 at 9:21:50 AM UTC-7 chungeu...@gmail.com 
wrote:

> Hi,
>
> I bought a complete Clem L for my wife and she enjoyed riding it so far.
> However, she felt that it's a bit too much bike for her since she only 
> rides it on the pavement for the commute. She finds it too heavy when 
> storing it in a rack and bring it on the the commuting train.
> Since she still likes the step-through design, I wonder if swapping it 
> with the complete Platypus would solve her problem. Or, can we solve this 
> with lighter components (probably the wheelset and tires?) and some cockpit 
> setup to make it more zippy?
>
> Best,
> Chung
>

-- 
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/8acf9bc4-5de7-40b1-8ff1-7d1365e1d2c5n%40googlegroups.com.

[RBW] Re: 26” MTB Tire Advice

[Hoch in ut]

A good all-around tire is the Maxxis Ikon in 26 x 2.2. Rolls pretty fast 
and has decent grip. I love it for XC rides. I put a pair on a 90’s 
Stumpjumper a couple of years ago. Great tire. Not that expensive, either. 

On Friday, August 25, 2023 at 9:59:55 AM UTC-6 Bones wrote:

> I recently pulled my wife’s old Cannondale F5 hardtail out of hibernation 
> with the intention of moving it along, but she now has a renewed interest 
> in it. It cleaned up nicely, but the tires are falling apart. It looks like 
> it can comfortably fit a 26x2.25, but I haven’t used a 26” tire since the 
> early 90’s so I don’t know where to start. If anyone can point me to to a 
> decent all around trail tire that doesn’t break the bank, I’d greatly 
> appreciate it.
>
> Bones
>

-- 
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/341a6b28-2fa7-4d2a-a5e6-93b02711ed11n%40googlegroups.com.

Re: [RBW] Single Speed (QB/SO/RU..) Questions

[Hoch in ut]

Good advices above. On my SS mountain bike, I run about 51gi. About 5-700’ 
climbing per mile around here. More gravel SS, I ran closer to 60gi. 

I do love fixed offroad. 
If you haven’t visited this site, it’s excellent read. 

http://www.63xc.com

On Thursday, August 24, 2023 at 8:38:07 PM UTC-6 jasonz...@gmail.com wrote:

> Thanks for the excellent information and antidotes Patrick and David... I 
> appreciate the details and after crunching some numbers, it might be a good 
> plan to flip my 48t chainring to a 40 and feel the difference from the 
> current 74" to a more dialed back 61". Then, if I need more or less I can 
> pick up a different cog or play from there.  I was debating back and forth 
> to drop to either my options of 40 or 36 and felt like 36 made more sense 
> but I think I might find a better feel with a 40 and not cut back so far 
> that it takes a lot to bring it closer... smaller tweaks vs giant swings 
> maybe?  a 36t would put me at mid 55" which might be good but I could make 
> more tweaks with the 40t and still have the speed that I do enjoy.
>
> Thanks again, I am fully aware that there is a bunch of value I'd be 
> walking away from, but more importantly I absolutely love this Riv out of 
> the entire lineup and if there were one LOTR races I loved the most it's 
> the Ents (and that matters, to me)
>
> xo
>
> On Thursday, August 24, 2023 at 9:15:54 PM UTC-5 Patrick Moore wrote:
>
>> I have to say that I personally would keep that QB and ride it, at least 
>> until the market improves.
>>
>> The old single speed mtb standard gear was ~50-55". Personally I find 
>> that far too low not to get irritated on the flats. I don't know what your 
>> hills are like, but I preferred 60" to 65" and walking to a lower gear.
>>
>> Long ago I built a fixed gear mountain bike and decided I preferred a 
>> gear no lower than about 60" or 62" (175 mm cranks) because, while I don't 
>> mind getting off and walking, I absolutely hate going downhill or before 
>> headwinds in a tiny gear. My hills were sometimes steep and often sandy but 
>> not that long (half a mile at longest).
>>
>> After a bit I decided I preferred multiple gears for real hills and 
>> turned the mtb (nice top model Diamond Back) into a fixed gear allrounder 
>> with 60 mm Big Apples, a 64" gear and 170 mm cranks.
>>
>> A bit later I set up a 2010 Monocog 29er with a single 63" gear (170 mm 
>> cranks) which was fine for all around sandy road/trail riding and modest 
>> hills as well as flat pavement.
>>
>> My current (2012) Monocog has a single 65" gear and 175 mm cranks for 
>> sometimes deepish sand (but 72 mm tires at 13 psi) but I don't often face 
>> hills on that bike.
>>
>> If I were faced with more hills I'd want at least a second, much lower 
>> climbing gear. I've toyed with the idea of a kickback hub for a ~46" direct 
>> and a 64" overdrive (1.38) but so far I've preferred the simplicity of a 
>> single gear. But if I were faced with more hills I might do this. Or I 
>> might try to find a way to get a 19 t and the current 15 t cog on one side 
>> of the hub that with the 32 t ring (30.5" wheel) would give a 51" low and a 
>> 65" high, and use a QR hub for easy swapping. 
>>
>> OTOH, when I briefly put 42 mm (39 mm actual on the 19 mm OW rims) Naches 
>> Passes on my 1999 Joe Starck road custom, I rode it on some of our firmer 
>> sand with a SA 2 speed fixed hub giving 57" and 76" gears, and it was great 
>> fun but I didn't like getting my "pretty bike" all dirty.
>>
>> On Thu, Aug 24, 2023 at 6:11 PM Jason Zakaras  
>> wrote:
>>
>>> So as its been posted, I'm selling my Quickbeam, but even with "too low" 
>>> prices, its still not moving.  I also have options to figured out how to 
>>> tow my newest addition and I can make space/have the space so who cares.  
>>> The big concern for me is riding it and I don't find myself jumping on it 
>>> as often as I'd like.  Partially due to the epic mtn bike scene immediately 
>>> around me and my newly rebuilt bombora that I absolutely love.  That said, 
>>> It would be fun to hit the trails on a QB and I have a pass rack and 
>>> some bags I'd like to use to do some camping with my twin boys (7) and the 
>>> SS would be a nice way to enjoy the trip out to the woods with them.  
>>>
>>> The question I pose is what gear options do you all enjoy.  I've dug 
>>> into the internets and I'm sure there is a post or 100 on this here already 
>>> but I figured with the upcoming roduno and its many possibilities, this 
>>> might be a fun chat to dig into.
>>>
>>> I'm currently at 48-18 and its great climbing around rural gravel roads 
>>> in the midwest but now I'm in steeper hills its a bear-cat.
>>>
>>> Thanks xo
>>> Jason Cheap QB For Sale.
>>>
>>> -- 
>>>
>> 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 

Re: [RBW] For Sale: Bedrock Cairn sandals, Size 13

[Hoch in ut]

You can actually print out the templates, take pictures of your feet on 
them and send it to Bedrock and they’ll tell you which would be the best 
fit. Sometimes it’s hard to tell how much room you need to get a perfect 
fit. They were very helpful. 
I usually wear a size 10, but had to get size 11 in the Bedrock’s. Fit was 
right on. 


On Thursday, August 3, 2023 at 6:34:05 PM UTC-6 Danny wrote:

> I sized up on my Bedrocks as well. Another vote for printing out their 
> sizing templates. Wish I had known about those templates before I ordered, 
> would have saved the trouble of exchanging my 11s for 12s.
>
> -Danny
>
> On Thu, Aug 3, 2023 at 6:55 PM Jacob Byard  wrote:
>
>> I’m a 10 wide on the brannock device and wear an 11 in Altras. I’ve got 
>> two pair of Bedrocks in size 11. I believe Bedrock has a sizing template 
>> that you can print out. Love the sandals and have ridden lots of miles on 
>> mine. 
>>
>> -Jacob
>>
>> Sent from my iPhone
>>
>> On Aug 3, 2023, at 7:48 PM, Ted W  wrote:
>>
>> 
>> This is quite serendipitous. The strap on my sandals broke today while I 
>> was out on a walk and I was already considering these as a replacement when 
>> they went.
>>
>> How would you consider the sizing compared to what you typically wear? I 
>> tend to be around a 12 in most shoes. I assume they might run big from your 
>> email, though…
>>
>> On Thu, Aug 3, 2023 at 9:18 AM Eric Marth  wrote:
>>
>>> Hello people — I have a pair of Bedrock Cairn sandals 
>>>  for sale. Looking 
>>> for $45 plus shipping to you. They're the regular Cairn model with the flat 
>>> footbed, size men's 13 / women's 14. Black straps. 
>>>
>>> 
>>>
>>>
>>> Purchased new in summer of 2020, have worn them a good bit and enjoyed 
>>> them while riding. I've found one size smaller fits me better so I'm 
>>> putting these up. 
>>>
>>> Some wear to the tread, you can see in the photos where the tread has 
>>> been worn flat. If you're curious about sizing you can check out the 
>>> Bedrock 
>>> sizing page and even print out 
>>> an actual size template. 
>>>
>>> 
>>>
>>>
>>> Thanks! 
>>>
>>> -- 
>>> 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/de78dc55-edb7-4437-a6e3-7a26a6ad681an%40googlegroups.com
>>>  
>>> 
>>> .
>>>
>> -- 
>> Ted Wood < ted.l...@gmail.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-bun...@googlegroups.com.
>> To view this discussion on the web visit 
>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/rbw-owners-bunch/CANCvShrvbVMHT_HaxAF0uE%3DbT87vaP-_tG_3LSCrVSnBXob3Tg%40mail.gmail.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-bun...@googlegroups.com.
>>
> To view this discussion on the web visit 
>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/rbw-owners-bunch/1BE8132A-EE79-4A37-AE6D-BE805933D681%40gmail.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/e7c4aadf-024a-4bdd-b96c-d12336e4d202n%40googlegroups.com.

[RBW] Re: Clem Smith, Jr for sa;e

[Hoch in ut]

I’m assuming this is a 64cm frame. 

Best wishes to the sale and more importantly, your health. 

On Tuesday, August 1, 2023 at 4:44:31 PM UTC-6 eclec...@gmail.com wrote:

> Hi,
> I had a Clem Smith, Jr built at RBW in Walnut Creek about 1 1/2 years ago. 
> Shortly after the purchase I had surgery on my upper left leg that doesn’t 
> allow to sit in the bicycle saddle without pain. So reluctantly I’ve 
> decided to sell it.
>
> Clem Smith, Jr mens 54 cam
> Ergon handlebar grips
> Ergon SL Core Prime Mens
> Lumina Micro 650 front light
> Handlebar mounted clock
> Water holder
> Silver fender 
> Abus folding lock and mounted holder
> Busch and Muller handlebar mounted mirror
> Look trail pedals
> Nitto rear rack
> Rear light
> Mike Lipelt
> eclec...@gmail.com
> Rear light
>

-- 
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/96b163c1-6ca0-41eb-8439-e340045b052an%40googlegroups.com.

[RBW] Re: Cargo/Kid bike recommendations (or bikefriday vs. tern)

[Hoch in ut]

Honestly, cargo bikes are nice but they’re pretty spendy and take up a lot 
of space. 

I sold my cargo/kid specific bikes and got a trailer. Chariot is excellent. 
Kids are safe, surrounded by a cage. Also weatherproof weather rain, sun, 
cold, etc. Best part is you can hook it up to your favorite bike. Very 
versatile and cost-effective solution. 

On Friday, July 21, 2023 at 11:49:29 AM UTC-6 Drw wrote:

> For the last 4 years I've been carrying my kid and all of our family's 
> gear on a rosco bubbe mountain step-thru with crust clydesdale fork. [image: 
> IMG_2875.jpg]
> Overall, it's been great, but as he gets bigger, having that amount of 
> weight, that high up, plus a decent load up front is starting to feel 
> really wiggly. I had early on thought that my son would be riding a bike 
> well enough to transition to one of those tag a long attachments like the 
> burley piccolo, but he has some sensory issues with balance and gross motor 
> that will probably make that not a real possibility before he is big enough 
> to just be riding fully on his own. 
>
> So, I'm looking for a compact cargo bike with the following requirements. 
> -Non electric
> -Footprint no bigger than a standard bike 
> -Platform/bench rear seat for kids
> -Some front cargo capability
> -uses deraillers (though i could be swayed to an IGH)
>
> Right now I am mostly looking at the bike friday haul-a-day elite 
> and 
> the tern short haul D8 
> . Both have pros 
> and cons. I am open to any other cool options. And any thoughts about the 
> above models would be appreciated as well. 
>
> Thanks,
> Drew
>
>

-- 
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/7d7fcee1-54e9-4d40-bb9d-b83a979f691an%40googlegroups.com.

Re: [RBW] Craigslist, etc 2023

[Hoch in ut]

This appears to be an excellent deal. 51cm Appaloosa complete for $1,850

https://classifieds.ksl.com/listing/72490781
On Tuesday, July 18, 2023 at 10:34:54 AM UTC-6 JAS wrote:

>  7 Rivs on Craiglsist in the Northwest:
>
> *Appaloosa,  47cm*
> Prototype, frame built by Mark Nobilette
> $3200
> Silverdale, WA
>
> https://seattle.craigslist.org/kit/bik/d/silverdale-2015-rivendell-joe-appaloosa/7641501704.html
>
> *Appaloosa frame set, 46cm*
> $1200
> blue
> Silverdale, WA
>
> https://seattle.craigslist.org/kit/bik/d/silverdale-rivendell-joe-appaloosa/7642198706.html
>
> *Appaloosa, 54cm*
> $3400
> orange
> Central Point, OR
>
> https://portland.craigslist.org/mlt/bik/d/central-point-rivendell-appaloosa-54cm/7639357342.html
>
> *Ram, 54cm (or 56cm?)*
> $1900
> orange
> Central Point, OR
>
> https://portland.craigslist.org/mlt/bik/d/central-point-rivendell-rambouillet-1st/7639406959.html
>
> *Susie/Wolbis XL frameset*
> $1775
> Eugene, OR
> lime-olive
>
> https://portland.craigslist.org/mlt/bik/d/eugene-new-rivendell-xl-susie-wolbis/7636146396.html
>
> *Hubuhhubuh, small*
> $3700
> Sequim, WA
>
> https://olympic.craigslist.org/bik/d/sequim-rivendell-hubbuhubbuh-tandem/7642793863.html
>
> *Bleriot, 46cm*
> $1000
> Deer Park, WA (near Spokane)
>
> https://spokane.craigslist.org/bik/d/deer-park-rivendell-bleriot/7639080253.html
> On Thursday, July 13, 2023 at 6:51:13 AM UTC-7 maxcr wrote:
>
>> Another All Rounder, beautiful and in my size - so tempting, but the 
>> timing is not right. I was in touch with the owner who also has a Bombadil, 
>> very nice guy.
>>
>> 2004 59cm Rivendell All-Rounder
>> Curt Goodrich built frame USA
>> Joe Bell paint
>> 26” wheels
>> $3K
>> SF, CA
>>
>>
>> https://sfbay.craigslist.org/sfc/bik/d/san-francisco-rivendell-all-rounder/7642699971.html
>>
>> Max
>>
>> On Thursday, July 13, 2023 at 8:39:52 AM UTC-4 eric...@gmail.com wrote:
>>
>>> [image: Screen Shot 2023-07-13 at 8.38.46 AM.png]
>>>
>>> Rivendell All Rounder, 54cm 
>>> Waterford-built
>>> $3,000
>>> Sellwood Cycle. Portland, OR 
>>>
>>> https://sellwoodcycle.com/collections/used-bikes/products/54cm-rivendell-all-arounder
>>>
>>> On Thursday, June 29, 2023 at 2:10:25 AM UTC-4 kw wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> https://newyork.craigslist.org/mnh/bik/d/new-york-rivendell-atlantis-53cm/7635482928.html
>>>>
>>>> On Sunday, June 18, 2023 at 1:38:33 PM UTC-4 jad...@gmail.com wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> https://missoula.craigslist.org/bik/d/missoula-rivendell-sam-hillborne-60cm/7633643955.html
>>>>> On Wednesday, June 14, 2023 at 9:57:41 AM UTC-6 RichS wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Valerie,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The description says it was built in Japan, so Toyo origin. It would 
>>>>>> have come with 26" wheels; must be a conversion.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Best,
>>>>>> Rich in ATL
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Tuesday, June 13, 2023 at 10:44:27 AM UTC-4 Valerie Yates wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Re the Atlantis 53, did Riv sell a 650B version in that size or was 
>>>>>>> it a conversion? I have one and it has 26” wheels.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Tuesday, June 13, 2023 at 7:18:41 AM UTC-6 Hoch in ut wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Toyo Atlantis size 53. 650b with dynamo (F). This looks like a 
>>>>>>>> fantastic deal. I have no relation to the seller. Just happen to see 
>>>>>>>> it. 
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> https://classifieds.ksl.com/listing/72037052
>>>>>>>> On Tuesday, June 6, 2023 at 4:17:54 PM UTC-6 Kainalu V. -Brooklyn 
>>>>>>>> NY wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> 64cm top tube on that Clem, but not a 64cm frame. Biggies in the H 
>>>>>>>>> came in at 65cm. This one above is probably a 59?
>>>>>>>>> -Kai (who saw the most beautiful red Quickbeam this morning on the 
>>>>>>>>> Queensboro bridge, who’s owner said “you haven’t sold that yet?”, 
>>>>>>>>> regarding 
>>>>>>>>> my Rosco, to which I replied “It’s the other Rosco I’ve been thinking 
>>>>>>>>> about 
>>>>>>>>> selling”. But wow, those Roscos are fun fun fun, and measure 64cm and 
>>>>>>>>> are 
>>>>>>>>> considerably zippier feeling that the Clem 65, which I also rode 
>>>>>>>>> today. I 
>>>>>>>>> should send one West to the Wasatch Front for yearly shreds, but I 
>>>>>>>>> shouldn’t….)
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Tuesday, June 6, 2023 at 4:18:44 PM UTC-4 Matthew Williams 
>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Clem Smith Jr. H
>>>>>>>>>> 64cm
>>>>>>>>>> 2200
>>>>>>>>>> Pleasanton, CA
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> https://sfbay.craigslist.org/eby/bik/d/pleasanton-rivendell-clem-smith-jr-64cm/7629580864.html
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>

-- 
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/d9f19d6e-eee8-4eb6-8a02-634ab118fa99n%40googlegroups.com.

[RBW] Re: FS: Nitto Fillet Brazed Bullmoose bars

[Hoch in ut]

SOLD
On Thursday, June 29, 2023 at 8:57:58 AM UTC-6 Hoch in ut wrote:

> [image: IMG_1705.jpeg][image: IMG_1704.jpeg][image: IMG_1703.jpeg][image: 
> IMG_1702.jpeg][image: IMG_1701.jpeg]Nitto Bullmoose bars in great shape. 
> Fillet brazed version. Little bit of bar residue. About 68cm wide (outside, 
> end to end). 
> I ended up going with another set up. 
>
> Asking $160 shipped. I need to find a box for it but should be able to get 
> it shipped by Monday. 
>

-- 
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/cdb3add9-6ae3-44d9-8e11-a75c79fa5c58n%40googlegroups.com.

Re: [RBW] Craigslist, etc 2023

[Hoch in ut]

Toyo Atlantis size 53. 650b with dynamo (F). This looks like a fantastic 
deal. I have no relation to the seller. Just happen to see it. 

https://classifieds.ksl.com/listing/72037052
On Tuesday, June 6, 2023 at 4:17:54 PM UTC-6 Kainalu V. -Brooklyn NY wrote:

> 64cm top tube on that Clem, but not a 64cm frame. Biggies in the H came in 
> at 65cm. This one above is probably a 59?
> -Kai (who saw the most beautiful red Quickbeam this morning on the 
> Queensboro bridge, who’s owner said “you haven’t sold that yet?”, regarding 
> my Rosco, to which I replied “It’s the other Rosco I’ve been thinking about 
> selling”. But wow, those Roscos are fun fun fun, and measure 64cm and are 
> considerably zippier feeling that the Clem 65, which I also rode today. I 
> should send one West to the Wasatch Front for yearly shreds, but I 
> shouldn’t….)
>
>
> On Tuesday, June 6, 2023 at 4:18:44 PM UTC-4 Matthew Williams wrote:
>
>> Clem Smith Jr. H
>> 64cm
>> 2200
>> Pleasanton, CA
>>
>> https://sfbay.craigslist.org/eby/bik/d/pleasanton-rivendell-clem-smith-jr-64cm/7629580864.html
>>
>

-- 
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/a2c3145a-8246-44b9-91cf-230d6eda55d2n%40googlegroups.com.

Re: [RBW] Re: Need help sizing for the upcoming Appaloosa

[Hoch in ut]

You’ve already concluded the 57 was the right size. I think so, too, based 
on the fact you wanted to set this up as an Upright dropbar bike. Higher 
the bars, closer the bars come towards you. 54 would’ve felt too cramped. 
Best wishes on the build!

On Wednesday, June 7, 2023 at 9:05:29 PM UTC-6 ted.l...@gmail.com wrote:

> Thanks to the help from my LBS I was directed to bike insights and pulled 
> up another frame I own and compared it to the Appa. I came to the 
> conclusion that I should go with the 57cm based on the overlaid wire frames 
> of the bikes and purchased one of these in purple.
>
> To Hoch’s question, I want to run drop bars. I’ve tried swept back bars on 
> my Gus and while I like it, this build will serve a different purpose and 
> I’m generally more comfortable with a more upright, drop bar position.
>
> To expand a bit (ok a lot), the 57cm Appa had a difference of about 45mm 
> overall compared to the 54cm Surly Disc Trucker it will be replacing. I 
> naively purchased the trucker thinking I could get away with the smaller 
> frame to maintain 26” wheels by stretching it out with a longer stem and 
> long setback seat post. I was successful, however, in doing so I changed 
> the handling characteristics quite negatively (I believe due to extending 
> the reach so dramatically) and this make it feel like the front wheel 
> wanted to flop over when cornering. When lining up the BB in the wire frame 
> models, the seat tube and head tube angles of the two bikes were nearly 
> identical and the tops of the seat post collar was fairly similar. The 
> primary differences were the extended wheelbase of the Appa due to the 
> extra long chainstays and the head tube being about 45mm further forward, 
> as mentioned previously. So, this made it fairly easy to realize that I 
> could get the 57cm Appa and got quite nicely with a rather “normal” stem 
> length of around 50mm instead of the 120mm I needed on the Surly.
>
> On Wed, Jun 7, 2023 at 10:33 PM DavidP  wrote:
>
>> Hoch's question about intended bars gets to the crux of choosing a frame 
>> size, I think - you want a larger roomier frame for swept back bars and 
>> less reach for drop bars though by changing stem length you can likely get 
>> both bars to work on either.
>>
>> I have the same PBH as you and am comfortable on drop bar bikes with 58cm 
>> ETT. By comparison the ETT on my 60cm Platy seems astronomical, and yet I 
>> run a 120mm stem along with swept back bars and have a fairly upright 
>> position (~75deg back angle) when back on the grips.
>>
>> With regards to your concern about reach - I may be missing something but 
>> the extra 2cm reach also means the BB moves back along with the seat tube 
>> (since reach is measured from BB forward) so the saddle / knee / pedal 
>> alignment isn't impacted? What would impact the saddle to BB alignment is a 
>> difference in seat tube angle.
>>
>> Have you compared the bike geometries on Bike Insights?
>> https://bikeinsights.com/compare?geometries=646ed3ba6c60a90021cb6aa5,,
>>
>> On Wednesday, June 7, 2023 at 9:28:44 PM UTC-4 Hoch in ut wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> Ted, are you setting up the Appaloosa with dropbars or flat bars? 
>>> On Wednesday, June 7, 2023 at 6:09:50 PM UTC-6 ted.l...@gmail.com wrote:
>>>
>>>> Long rambling post ahead, but bear with me...
>>>>
>>>> Folks, I'm stressing about this way more than is probably necessary but 
>>>> I've been pining for an Appaloosa for years and I really want to make sure 
>>>> I won't be bummed out by a poor fit. So, here's the deal. I called Riv and 
>>>> spoke with Roman. After discussing my current bike and my size he 
>>>> suggested 
>>>> the 57cm. Now, I'm not doubting his knowledge on the subject but I can't 
>>>> wrap my head around the difference in measurements between what I'm 
>>>> currently riding and the 57cm Appaloosa and I'm hoping maybe to get some 
>>>> more opinions on the subject to either help me be comfortable with the 
>>>> idea 
>>>> of the 57 or realize that I need the 54...
>>>>
>>>> Current bike has the following measurements:
>>>> 58cm ETT, approx. 39cm reach, 57cm stack and 83cm standover
>>>>
>>>> The 57cm Appa has:
>>>> 62.5cm ETT, 41.3cm reach, 63.5cm stack and 85.2cm standover
>>>>
>>>> The 54cm Appa has:
>>>> 59.8cm ETT, 39.6cm reach, 60.3cm stack and 82.3cm standover
>>>>
>>>> My PBH is around 87cm so I have plenty of room for either size
>>>>
>>>> My curre

[RBW] Re: Need help sizing for the upcoming Appaloosa

[Hoch in ut]

Ted, are you setting up the Appaloosa with dropbars or flat bars? 
On Wednesday, June 7, 2023 at 6:09:50 PM UTC-6 ted.l...@gmail.com wrote:

> Long rambling post ahead, but bear with me...
>
> Folks, I'm stressing about this way more than is probably necessary but 
> I've been pining for an Appaloosa for years and I really want to make sure 
> I won't be bummed out by a poor fit. So, here's the deal. I called Riv and 
> spoke with Roman. After discussing my current bike and my size he suggested 
> the 57cm. Now, I'm not doubting his knowledge on the subject but I can't 
> wrap my head around the difference in measurements between what I'm 
> currently riding and the 57cm Appaloosa and I'm hoping maybe to get some 
> more opinions on the subject to either help me be comfortable with the idea 
> of the 57 or realize that I need the 54...
>
> Current bike has the following measurements:
> 58cm ETT, approx. 39cm reach, 57cm stack and 83cm standover
>
> The 57cm Appa has:
> 62.5cm ETT, 41.3cm reach, 63.5cm stack and 85.2cm standover
>
> The 54cm Appa has:
> 59.8cm ETT, 39.6cm reach, 60.3cm stack and 82.3cm standover
>
> My PBH is around 87cm so I have plenty of room for either size
>
> My current bike has a standard setback seatpost with a B17 saddle. I have 
> a 100mm quill stem and Velo Orange, 50m randonneur bars and 170mm crank 
> arms. In this configuration, the bike is almost perfect. 
>
> Now, I think I'd be quite happy with the additional standover and stack 
> height; my current bike has around 160mm of steerer sticking up out of the 
> head tube, so being able to drop that by 70mm would be aesthetically 
> beneficial. Not to mention the extra top tube length combined with the more 
> slack head tube of the Appa might prevent the toe overlap And since I'm 
> currently running a 100mm stem, I can easily cut that back to accommodate 
> the additional reach.
>
> My main concern with the 57cm Appa is the ETT length as it relates to my 
> knee angle / knee-ankle line. I seem to have a fairly short femur as I'm 
> always having to push my saddles fairly far forward to get my knee in line 
> with, or slightly over my ankle to avoid pain in my knees. Being that my 
> current bike has only about 1-2cm of additional room on the rails to slide 
> the seat forward, and the 57cm Appa effectively places the seat tube 
> another 2cm further back, I'm concerned I'm going to end up unable to 
> achieve the necessary knee/ankle alignment.
>
> So, now that I have probably made myself sound sufficiently insane and 
> obsessive, give me some opinions. Maybe there's a 0 setback 26.8 seatpost 
> that could bail me out if it's a problem? Will the other differences in the 
> frame geometry compensate for the differences in ways I'm not considering? 
> Hit me with anything you think might be relevant :)
>
> -- 
> Ted Wood < ted.l...@gmail.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/fe18dea6-b85e-4061-a9e1-bfdc8f7fdad8n%40googlegroups.com.

[RBW] Re: Homer Hilsen: Braking performance

[Hoch in ut]

Thanks again all. I’ll check out the coated cables/housing. I’ve also used 
Jagwire Pro before with good results. 

If I end up with a Homer, I’ll most likely use it with something like 
Albatross or Bosco’s so it’d be mtb style short pull levers. 

For those that are knowledgeable about these brakes. I have a pair on hand. 
What I’ve noticed is a fairly heavy/stuff return spring. Anyone know if 
lighter springs are available? I’m not sure if I dare try bending the 
spring. I’d think the lighter action would help with better feel. 

On Wednesday, April 26, 2023 at 8:02:06 PM UTC-6 Jeffrey Arita wrote:

> @Jason Fuller:
>
> Good question on which handlebar type are we setting the brake lever with 
> (TRP RRL + Tektro 559).  We've become big fans of Ritchey Logic "Beacon" 
> drop type gravel bars (here 
> <https://ritcheylogic.com/bike/handlebars/wcs-beacon-handlebar?psafe_param=1=CjwKCAjwl6OiBhA2EiwAuUwWZd7tu7JDtrKcpQ4U5-V14tsTXs2SYlcXmQfR1gTBIZbHBBfrve0l4BoCrggQAvD_BwE>).
>   
> They have 36 degrees of flare - some folks might find it severe while 
> others find it ergonomic.  For us, very easy to brake from either the hoods 
> or the drops (the severe flare places the brake levers in a much more ergo 
> position).  Combine the short reach and shallow drop, it makes it comfy (at 
> least for us) in either position (along with the other available positions).
>
> Best regards,
>
> Jeff & Lori
> Claremont, CA
>
> On Wednesday, April 26, 2023 at 4:18:50 PM UTC-7 Jason Fuller wrote:
>
>> What handlebar type are you setting it up with?  If going with a bar that 
>> uses MTB style levers such as Albatross, I would be much less concerned, 
>> because you have much better ergonomic mechanical advantage at the lever 
>> vs. being on the hoods of a drop bar lever.  I don't believe you'll have 
>> any issue, and if you did, you could rectify with either better pads or 
>> going to Paul Racers as mentioned. Then you're certainly well set up for 
>> mountains - after all Jan Heine prefers centerpulls over other types of 
>> brakes for his wet, mountain pass-heavy and mixed surface riding. 
>>
>> On Wednesday, 26 April 2023 at 01:27:52 UTC-7 Hoch in ut wrote:
>>
>>> I’m window shopping for the next project and was interested in the 
>>> Homer. Great looking frame. My only concern is the brakes. I live in a 
>>> pretty mountainous area. Meaning plenty of long, fast descents. 
>>>
>>> Those of you with Homers, how have you liked or disliked the brakes? Do 
>>> the 559’s give you adequate performance to descend with confidence? One 
>>> thing I do like about caliper brakes are how easy they are to set up and 
>>> adjust. 
>>> Thanks for any input. 
>>>
>>

-- 
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/41b04f70-ee8e-4aef-9acb-065c0d6d956bn%40googlegroups.com.

[RBW] Re: Homer Hilsen: Braking performance

[Hoch in ut]

Thanks all. Sounds like the reviews are mixed. I’m also assuming the 
reviews correlate to individual bike set ups and terrain. Some bikes (ie 
Bleriot) probably don’t stretch the pass all the way down the slot to give 
better leverage than another bike with a taller fork necessitating pads to 
be maxed out on the arms, thereby decreasing performance. Maybe brakes like 
Paul’s mitigates that a bit. 

I have caliper brakes on my road race bike and love the simplicity and ease 
of adjustment. Braking is excellent as well. But they’re short reach brakes 
that barely clear 27’s. 

On Wednesday, April 26, 2023 at 8:05:03 AM UTC-6 Ted Durant wrote:

> On Wednesday, April 26, 2023 at 3:27:52 AM UTC-5 Hoch in ut wrote:
>
> Those of you with Homers, how have you liked or disliked the brakes? Do 
> the 559’s give you adequate performance to descend with confidence? One 
> thing I do like about caliper brakes are how easy they are to set up and 
> adjust. 
>
>
> I know lots of people haven't been fully happy with the long reach dual 
> pivots, but I had them on my proto-Bleriot and had no trouble with them at 
> all. I did some pretty steep hills in Washington, California, and Ireland 
> and never felt lacking for braking power. I used Kool Stop dual-compound 
> pads on mine, and AGC (Aero Gran Compe) brake levers. It's worth mentioning 
> that I am super light and never had more than a stuffed handlebar bag on 
> the bike. 
>
> Ted Durant
> Milwaukee, WI USA
>
>
>

-- 
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/059605d0-899d-4c56-ac15-2c76cac3n%40googlegroups.com.

[RBW] Homer Hilsen: Braking performance

[Hoch in ut]

I’m window shopping for the next project and was interested in the Homer. 
Great looking frame. My only concern is the brakes. I live in a pretty 
mountainous area. Meaning plenty of long, fast descents. 

Those of you with Homers, how have you liked or disliked the brakes? Do the 
559’s give you adequate performance to descend with confidence? One thing I 
do like about caliper brakes are how easy they are to set up and adjust. 
Thanks for any input. 

-- 
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/363acf94-a286-4dae-83c1-ae6f941ad18bn%40googlegroups.com.

[RBW] Re: FS: Nitto Mark's M1 Rack

[Hoch in ut]

PMed you  
On Saturday, April 22, 2023 at 8:35:34 AM UTC-6 jeffbog...@hotmail.com 
wrote:

> Great shape, includes double struts for a more rigid mount. $125
> Please send PM for interest, thanks for looking.
>
> Jeff
> (Alabama)
>

-- 
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/2fb985f6-9080-4286-97aa-31e7a59b740fn%40googlegroups.com.

[RBW] Re: Handlebar Recommendations Pls?

[Hoch in ut]

Instead of switching out the bars, I’d experiment on a ride by grabbing the 
more forward part of the handlebars. If that alleviates the issue, then I’d 
even say a longer stem might do the trick. Then I’d go to bars. Just a 
thought. 
On Saturday, April 22, 2023 at 7:12:44 AM UTC-6 philipr...@gmail.com wrote:

> Apologies for the tardy reply, Spectrum decided we didn't want internet 
> last night! But wow, thanks Garth & everyone else for your thoughtful & 
> insightful responses. I do think that stretched out more is going to be the 
> 1 st step here and the bars will be part of that. I also have a collection 
> of saddles including less supportive ones (which sounds counter-intuitive I 
> know) so part 2 will be to try that as well. 
>
> I'll be the only Platypus rider in the drops!
> On Saturday, April 22, 2023 at 8:04:06 AM UTC-5 Garth wrote:
>
>> Having experience with debilitating inner sit bone pain, what worked for 
>> me is going long(stretched) and low and using your quadriceps more, which 
>> may involve moving your saddle forward and even a different saddle that 
>> favors that favors that position. Much more of a road like position, but 
>> with your hands level or even slightly above saddle height. In using your 
>> quads more, pushing hard, that naturally takes pressure off the butt and 
>> the hands at the same time. That's how pro road racers can ride with narrow 
>> saddles and road bars on narrow tires even on cobblestones, they're 
>> exerting so much power with their quads that it rather alleviates butt and 
>> hand pressure. It's just not road riders that do that, it's riders of all 
>> genres that push down on the pedals hard.
>>
>> If your quads aren't particularly strong or more like, unfamiliar with 
>> loading them up, even simply laying on your back and bending your knees 
>> towards you, and raising up your torso, making yourself like a ramp, does 
>> wonders. 
>>
>> The general rule of thumb I grew up with as a subjectively ideal riding 
>> position, when you're in your long and low position, the font hub should 
>> either be hidden or behind the middle of the bar at the stem. This was with 
>> drop bars , but it works too with the Albatross bars I have, the middle of 
>> the bar is a little forward of the hub when I look down. I have a 13cm stem 
>> on the Bombadil, which also has an atypically longer TT and reach than all 
>> other regular chainstay Rivs. 
>>
>> I know all that seems complicated, and it need not be. Just Be Happy 
>> and which Way ;)
>>
>

-- 
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/5366ad57-c317-4d59-9ac7-66dcbc533f53n%40googlegroups.com.

[RBW] Appaloosa’s coming in June

[Hoch in ut]

Anyone have any details on the Appaloosa’s that’s supposed to go on sale in 
June? Geometry or color details? 

-- 
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/34239934-e724-434b-80a2-0d9fb78ef380n%40googlegroups.com.

Re: [RBW] WTB: 54-58cm Joe Appaloosa

[Hoch in ut]

Thank you. That seems like too much for a repaired frame that’s still 
unpainted. 

On Wednesday, April 19, 2023 at 7:32:55 PM UTC-6 Matthew Williams wrote:

> [image: 00c0c_YcPFVUefhs_0CI0pO_600x450.jpg]
>
> Rivendell Joe Appaloosa - bicycles - by owner - bike sale 
> <https://portland.craigslist.org/mlt/bik/d/portland-rivendell-joe-appaloosa/7610380104.html>
> portland.craigslist.org 
> <https://portland.craigslist.org/mlt/bik/d/portland-rivendell-joe-appaloosa/7610380104.html>
>
> <https://portland.craigslist.org/mlt/bik/d/portland-rivendell-joe-appaloosa/7610380104.html>
>
>
> On Apr 19, 2023, at 6:23 PM, Hoch in ut  wrote:
>
> Would prefer a frameset but will consider a complete as well. 
>
> Thanks. 
>
> -- 
> 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/ea280a19-5cd1-4832-a813-b6286ddb13b2n%40googlegroups.com
>  
> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/rbw-owners-bunch/ea280a19-5cd1-4832-a813-b6286ddb13b2n%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/f651226b-6622-4a72-8a10-157d98a28178n%40googlegroups.com.

[RBW] WTB: 54-58cm Joe Appaloosa

[Hoch in ut]

Would prefer a frameset but will consider a complete as well. 

Thanks. 

-- 
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/ea280a19-5cd1-4832-a813-b6286ddb13b2n%40googlegroups.com.

[RBW] Re: Your preferred pressure for 60 mm tires for all-round riding?

[Hoch in ut]

As low as possible without pinch flatting. Usually that means 20-21psi 
(2.2-2.4” tires))  for me at 160lbs. Lots of rocks and sharp edges where I 
ride. 
On Sunday, April 2, 2023 at 1:12:35 PM UTC-6 jwhit...@gmail.com wrote:

> For what it's worth I usually pump my 55mm Fleecer ridges to 18psi front 
> and maybe 22 rear. Probably bump that to 22 and 26 for very loaded touring. 
> On a daily basis I carry more than most, a chess set and several books? 
> Why not. I probably come in around 175-180 with clothes. My bike probably 
> hovers at a minimum 50 lbs. On a Clem btw. 
> Drop as low as 15 front 20 rear on unloaded MTB. Add more or ride smoother 
> if constantly bottoming out rims I suppose. 
>
> On Thursday, March 30, 2023 at 10:18:39 AM UTC-7 Patrick Moore wrote:
>
>> Interesting, so 20 and especially 16 is on the very low side for 60s, and 
>> very supple-wall 60s at that.
>>
>> And my teeth and arms were jarred last night out and back to church on 
>> said horse-hooves-pitted moisture-compacted even with the tires at 16. 
>> There are some days when one wishes to have the sand back. But 16 is 
>> noticeably better than 20 and I'll try it at the lower pressure for a while 
>> more.
>>
>> Really, the only setup I've ridden that smoothed out washboard was an 
>> early CODA suspension seatpost paired with a Softride stem -- BSNYC 
>> recently made fun of these, but I liked mine better than my 1995 top o' 
>> line Manitou elastomer fork. The CODA/Softride combination felt like 
>> floating above the roughness. I'm sure modern suspension does even better.
>>
>> I recall a few years ago riding with my brother on some old steep gravel 
>> logging roads in the Jemez mountains, not in a nature reserve, heavily 
>> washboarded. I was riding my Fargo with 700C x 60 Big Apples at 22 psi or 
>> so. Coming back downhill I'm sure we hit 40 mph despite the washboard, 
>> which was so severe that, very literally, my vision blurred, I had a hard 
>> time drawing breath, and I had a hard time holding on to the hoods.
>>
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Mar 29, 2023 at 10:45 PM Patrick Moore  wrote:
>>
>>> I have been religiously pumping my gossamer 70C X 60 Big Ones to 20 psi 
>>> for combined pavement and dirt, thinking that ~20 was necessary to minimize 
>>> wallow on paved corners, but on an extended dirt ride today on usually 
>>> sandy soil that had been extensively compacted by moisture and then chopped 
>>> up by horses and Conservancy District trucks, 20 felt like wood rims on 
>>> railroad ties, so I dropped both tires to ~16. That did mitigate the chop 
>>> (tho' little really makes horse hoof divots and washboard comfortable 
>>> except suspension) and observing carefully during cornering on pavement at 
>>> speed I didn't notice as much wallow as I had feared. Me 170 clothed and 
>>> shod for cool weather, bike and kit and bags and contents adding another 45 
>>> lb or so.
>>>
>>> So I'm curious: Those of you who use 60 mm tires: what pressure or 
>>> pressures, and on what surfaces? And how much do you and kit weigh?
>>>
>>> Funny: I'd been riding the lightweight fixie gofast with Naches Passes 
>>> at 39 mm (skinny rims) and 30-35 psi on the same roads and found that they 
>>> were at least slightly smoother on the chop than the BOs at 20. The NPs are 
>>> far less gossamer light per unit vol than the Big Ones.
>>>
>>> -- 
>>>
>>> ---
>>> Patrick Moore
>>> Alburquerque, Nuevo Mexico, Etats Unis d'Amerique, Orbis Terrarum
>>>
>>>
>>
>> -- 
>>
>> ---
>> Patrick Moore
>> Alburquerque, Nuevo Mexico, Etats Unis d'Amerique, Orbis Terrarum
>>
>>

-- 
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/634b9d6b-9c7f-475a-adc1-07d28a409336n%40googlegroups.com.

[RBW] Re: Betty Foy for sale

[Hoch in ut]

My wife loves hers as well. Looks like a very nicely kept bike at a superb 
price! This shouldn’t last long. 

On Tuesday, March 28, 2023 at 10:19:02 AM UTC-6 Steve Cole wrote:

> I'm selling my wife's Betty Foy.  She was the second owner.  As you will 
> see from the attached photos, it was very rarely ridden.  It is in near 
> perfect condition; the only blemishes are small scratches on the left-side 
> chain stay (see photo).  There are several upgrades to this bike:  fenders, 
> dynamo and lights, saddle, seat post, stem, handlebars, rack, etc. It's a 
> very wonderful bike.  Photos attached (more upon request).  Here are the 
> specs (more details on request):
>
>- Seat Tube/Frame Size: 55 cm
>- Drive Train:
>   - Rear Derailleur —  Shimano Deore
>   - Front Derailleur — Shimano (I think it’s a 105, but am not sure)
>   - Crankset — Sugino w/ 40 & 26 chainrings.  Pants protector in 3rd 
>   spot.
>   - Shifter — Shimano Deore XT trigger Shifter
>- Brakeset — Tektro R559 long reach, Shimano Levers
>- Cables/Housing — Velo Orange/Velo Orange Metal Braid Housing
>- Handlebars — Velo Orange Curvy; Grips — Miesha's Cork Grips
>- Stem — Nitto Technomic; Seat Post — Nitto S83
>- Saddle — Brooks B67
>- Wheel: Rear Hub — Shimano; Front Hub — Shutter Precision PD-8X Dynamo
>   - Rims — Velocity Synergy 650B; Tires — Rene Herse  Loup Loup Pass 
>- Lights: Front — Busch & Mueller Eyc N Plus; Rear — Topflight Mini 
>Plus
>- Fenders — Velo Orange Snakeskin
>- Rear Rack — Nitto Big Back Rack — Medium 32R
>- Peddles — VP Alloy (excellent bearings)
>- Kickstand
>
> We are asking $2,200 if you want the saddle and the rack.  Otherwise, the 
> we are asking $2,000 without these.  Reasonable offers will be considered.
>

-- 
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/408ee82e-421c-47ec-890e-44689c62c772n%40googlegroups.com.

[RBW] Re: Simworks Ramble Bar experiences

[Hoch in ut]

If you’re referring to my bars, please send me a private message. Thanks. 

On Tuesday, March 28, 2023 at 5:33:23 AM UTC-6 Andrew Huston wrote:

> I’m definitely interested in your bars. 
>
> On Monday, March 27, 2023 at 9:11:21 PM UTC-4 Hoch in ut wrote:
>
>>
>> I have one in silver. Brand new. I purchased it new and was waiting for a 
>> frame to come along. I wouldn’t mind keeping it but I could be talked into 
>> letting it go as I don’t see getting a new frame anytime soon. I’d like to 
>> get what I initially paid ($130) plus shipping. (I paid shipping/taxes on 
>> top of that).  Let me know if anyone is in need of one. 
>> On Monday, March 27, 2023 at 9:54:56 AM UTC-6 Justin Kennedy (Brooklyn, 
>> NY) wrote:
>>
>>> Anyone have a spare set of these bars they're looking to unload? Very 
>>> interested in these for a new cargo bike build. Thanks!
>>>
>>> On Thursday, February 2, 2023 at 2:22:21 PM UTC-5 Damien wrote:
>>>
>>>> Thanks for the replies everyone. As an FYI, I'm a bit of a smaller guy, 
>>>> but bought these because I enjoyed my Albatross bars with the only knock 
>>>> on 
>>>> them being that they were too narrow and I felt cramped with them even 
>>>> with 
>>>> a 120mm stem. My hope was that these bars would give some of the benefits 
>>>> I 
>>>> enjoyed with the Albatrossbut wider.
>>>>
>>>> On Thursday, 2 February 2023 at 11:41:24 UTC-5 mcgr...@gmail.com wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Looks like mounting these with negative rise could be something like a 
>>>>> wider Choco bar, with a little less sweep, which could be good for trail 
>>>>> riding.  (I love the ChocoMoose on my Hunq, but would be nice to be able 
>>>>> to 
>>>>> lean into the bars a bit more off road.)
>>>>>
>>>>> On Thursday, February 2, 2023 at 11:06:38 AM UTC-5 iamkeith wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> If you still have buyer's remorse after receiving them, let me know.  
>>>>>> I wasn't aware of these, but they look to be very much what I wish for 
>>>>>> on a 
>>>>>> daily basis.  (Essentially, a really wide albatross bar.)  Wish they had 
>>>>>> a 
>>>>>> 25.4 or 22.2 clamp area, and the grip area looks too short.  Actually, 
>>>>>> they 
>>>>>> even admit that part.  But you could always use extenders to lengthen 
>>>>>> them 
>>>>>> if you don't want bar end shifters.  
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Funny that they recommend a specific stem length.  That's really 
>>>>>> going to depend on the bike, the desired position, and the particular 
>>>>>> rider's physiology.  I think you'll still have to experiment with stems, 
>>>>>> just like any bar. It's not like we're living in the 90s when every bike 
>>>>>> had the exact same geometry.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The reason those look appealing to me is because I'm a big-ish guy 
>>>>>> with broad shoulders and a proprtionally long torso that puts my ideal 
>>>>>> grip 
>>>>>> posiition further forward than most would want.  The last half-decade or 
>>>>>> so 
>>>>>> has been a godsend for me with bars getting wider, but most (like the 
>>>>>> tosco) sweep back without sweeping forward first, which means I need a 
>>>>>> longer tem - which are hard to find.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Let us know what you think.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Thursday, February 2, 2023 at 7:55:15 AM UTC-7 Damien wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Hi! I'm curious if anyone has experience with these bars? I was able 
>>>>>>> to track down a pair and I pulled the trigger on them without any real 
>>>>>>> thought and had immediate buyers remorse. That said, I'd still love to 
>>>>>>> hear 
>>>>>>> others thoughts on them before I go down the dark path of buying parts 
>>>>>>> to 
>>>>>>> switch out my drop bars. How do they ride? Are they too wide? How did 
>>>>>>> you 
>>>>>>> set them up (i.e., stem length, etc.)? Recommend?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Thanks all!
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Oh, and for reference, here they are: 
>>>>>>> https://sim-works.com/en/news/golden-pliers-x-simworks-ramble-bar
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>

-- 
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/dc340ddb-95bc-4ff1-958e-07877537bf6fn%40googlegroups.com.

[RBW] Re: Simworks Ramble Bar experiences

[Hoch in ut]

I have one in silver. Brand new. I purchased it new and was waiting for a 
frame to come along. I wouldn’t mind keeping it but I could be talked into 
letting it go as I don’t see getting a new frame anytime soon. I’d like to 
get what I initially paid ($130) plus shipping. (I paid shipping/taxes on 
top of that).  Let me know if anyone is in need of one. 
On Monday, March 27, 2023 at 9:54:56 AM UTC-6 Justin Kennedy (Brooklyn, NY) 
wrote:

> Anyone have a spare set of these bars they're looking to unload? Very 
> interested in these for a new cargo bike build. Thanks!
>
> On Thursday, February 2, 2023 at 2:22:21 PM UTC-5 Damien wrote:
>
>> Thanks for the replies everyone. As an FYI, I'm a bit of a smaller guy, 
>> but bought these because I enjoyed my Albatross bars with the only knock on 
>> them being that they were too narrow and I felt cramped with them even with 
>> a 120mm stem. My hope was that these bars would give some of the benefits I 
>> enjoyed with the Albatrossbut wider.
>>
>> On Thursday, 2 February 2023 at 11:41:24 UTC-5 mcgr...@gmail.com wrote:
>>
>>> Looks like mounting these with negative rise could be something like a 
>>> wider Choco bar, with a little less sweep, which could be good for trail 
>>> riding.  (I love the ChocoMoose on my Hunq, but would be nice to be able to 
>>> lean into the bars a bit more off road.)
>>>
>>> On Thursday, February 2, 2023 at 11:06:38 AM UTC-5 iamkeith wrote:
>>>
 If you still have buyer's remorse after receiving them, let me know.  I 
 wasn't aware of these, but they look to be very much what I wish for on a 
 daily basis.  (Essentially, a really wide albatross bar.)  Wish they had a 
 25.4 or 22.2 clamp area, and the grip area looks too short.  Actually, 
 they 
 even admit that part.  But you could always use extenders to lengthen them 
 if you don't want bar end shifters.  

 Funny that they recommend a specific stem length.  That's really going 
 to depend on the bike, the desired position, and the particular rider's 
 physiology.  I think you'll still have to experiment with stems, just like 
 any bar. It's not like we're living in the 90s when every bike had the 
 exact same geometry.

 The reason those look appealing to me is because I'm a big-ish guy with 
 broad shoulders and a proprtionally long torso that puts my ideal grip 
 posiition further forward than most would want.  The last half-decade or 
 so 
 has been a godsend for me with bars getting wider, but most (like the 
 tosco) sweep back without sweeping forward first, which means I need a 
 longer tem - which are hard to find.

 Let us know what you think.



 On Thursday, February 2, 2023 at 7:55:15 AM UTC-7 Damien wrote:

> Hi! I'm curious if anyone has experience with these bars? I was able 
> to track down a pair and I pulled the trigger on them without any real 
> thought and had immediate buyers remorse. That said, I'd still love to 
> hear 
> others thoughts on them before I go down the dark path of buying parts to 
> switch out my drop bars. How do they ride? Are they too wide? How did you 
> set them up (i.e., stem length, etc.)? Recommend?
>
> Thanks all!
>
> Oh, and for reference, here they are: 
> https://sim-works.com/en/news/golden-pliers-x-simworks-ramble-bar
>


-- 
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/28109771-939f-4a04-a48a-99e78151c154n%40googlegroups.com.

[RBW] Re: Hillibikers - do you stand and pedal?

[Hoch in ut]

My main mountain bike is a singlespeed so I know what you mean by standing 
and mashing. For bikes with swept back bars, it just doesn’t work for me to 
do that. 
When I had the Clem on steep dirt roads, I sit and spin. 
First reason, as you stated, bars are too close to your legs. It feels very 
awkward. 

Second, with such long wheelbase, and more importantly, gigantic 
chainstays, it actually helps to sit and keep the weight back to give that 
rear wheel some traction. Especially when it gets loose and rocky. Just 
gear down and the thing tractors up some steep climbs. It doesn’t feel 
natural as a single speeder but you get used to it. 

If you must stand, I put my hands closer to the front of the bars.  There 
not really a great way to grip it, but it’s better than hands by your 
thighs. 

On Wednesday, March 15, 2023 at 5:13:14 PM UTC-6 Mackenzy Albright wrote:

> I've recently been riding my more traditional geometry fixed gear quite a 
> bit for "urban commuting". Out of necessity I've been standing and 
> "mashing" more on inclines. I recall most of my "traditional diamond frame 
> bikes" I would stand and pedal a fair amount. 
>
> Every time I switch back to my Clementine with Boscos I find standing 
> pedaling to be quite un-natural feeling with my hands more or less by my 
> thighs. It works for a short burst to speed up my cadence but doesn't seem 
> like an option for sustainable climbing. 
>
> It's got me thinking with the laid back seat tubes, swept back bars, what 
> is peoples instinctive climbing methods on "hillibikes" (not traditional 
> geo rivs)
>
> Seated spinning? Or have you found a method of standing and pedaling that 
> works well. 
>

-- 
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/792cb92a-b78a-4605-95d1-4438958e6509n%40googlegroups.com.

[RBW] Re: FS: 55 cm Bosco Bar

[Hoch in ut]

“Shipped” price means the seller will pay for shipping. “Net” means the 
buyer pays for fees if applicable (ie PayPal fees). This is an excellent 
price. Last time i shipped bars, i think it was $25 or $30. 

On Sunday, March 12, 2023 at 10:17:03 PM UTC-6 Joe Bernard wrote:

> Am I misunderstanding the post or is the bar $81 plus shipping? That's the 
> new price from Riv. 
>
> On Sunday, March 12, 2023 at 7:56:12 PM UTC-7 captaincon...@gmail.com 
> wrote:
>
>> I have a lightly used 55 cm Bosco Bar I took off my wife's bike and 
>> swapped for my Albatross setup.  $81 net to me shipped in the lower 48.  
>> It's in excellent condition,so my pitch is that you save tax and shipping.
>
>

-- 
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/a20b69a6-2dce-4d6f-b74a-dd822bd2d179n%40googlegroups.com.

[RBW] Re: Fitting the Hunqapillar for touring

[Hoch in ut]

Hi Johnny, yes, I’d like to pick one up. I know they’re pretty rare though! 
On Monday, March 6, 2023 at 7:58:23 AM UTC-7 johnny@gmail.com wrote:

> Hoch you thinking of getting one or did you find a 58 and wondering if 
> it'll fit? It took me a few years to find mine so if you find one in your 
> size, be ready to act :)
>
>

-- 
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/f3c407d2-721c-4032-ac9b-8071f2008ba5n%40googlegroups.com.

[RBW] Re: Fitting the Hunqapillar for touring

[Hoch in ut]

Thank you, Johnny! 

On Saturday, March 4, 2023 at 11:09:16 AM UTC-7 johnny@gmail.com wrote:

> I measure it to be right at 22 1/2". That's center of bb to top of top 
> tube.
>
>

-- 
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/0f1ad607-87a5-4614-8e3a-e78fc7649ad3n%40googlegroups.com.

[RBW] Re: Fitting the Hunqapillar for touring

[Hoch in ut]

Hi, some great looking Hunq’s. Can someone with a 58 please measure the 
seat tube length? Center to Top of the seat tube? Thank you! 

On Wednesday, March 1, 2023 at 4:05:16 PM UTC-7 John Rinker wrote:

>
> Johnny,
>
> No, no real structural reason for the change, just an aesthetic decision. 
> Or, maybe because I moved the light to the dropout. That rack is a Nitto 
> R14 that 
> I bought at BlueLug in Tokyo, and it's very well-built. It's similar to the 
> RBW51 on the Riv site (a little more svelte, I believe). It is entirely 
> adequate for Sackville support plus the sleeping bag, and much lighter than 
> my Big Rack 33R from Riv. 
>
> Jay, 
>
> Yes, I've been fortunate to ride in some pretty special places. Perhaps 
> rather than hijack Johnny's thread here I'll start a new thread "Jay's 
> Goldilocks Packing List" or some such and share a couple of my packing 
> lists. Perhaps there you could also share your 10 Bikepacking Essentials. 
>
> John M,
>
> I agree with Johnny, that dusty Hunq (on the Divide?) photo is sweet!
>
> Cheers, John
>
>
> On Wednesday, March 1, 2023 at 8:18:33 AM UTC-8 johnny@gmail.com 
> wrote:
>
>> I was hoping for some advice, but I got that and a bunch of awesome 
>> photos. Just wow ya'll. And so many hunqapillars crawling around :) I'm 
>> hearing a lighter rear rack and a larger trunk should do me nicely until i 
>> get more serious. I'll see what I can find in terms of a sackville or 
>> similar. John, comparing the two photos of your gorgeous blue hunq, it 
>> looks like you changed the strut position of the rear rack from the lower 
>> mount to a mid-mount. Any reason for that? 
>>
>> John H your dirty bike looks rad. 
>>
>> Edit, sorry for responding with the entire thread. 
>>
>>
>>

-- 
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/39737b2e-cc02-4dd9-b218-28aa09a0cc6dn%40googlegroups.com.

[RBW] Re: FS: Crust Romanceur Canti 58cm (Large)

[Hoch in ut]

Bike has been sold. Thanks. 
On Tuesday, January 17, 2023 at 10:40:31 AM UTC-7 Hoch in ut wrote:

> Almost new Crust Romanceur in 58cm size (large). I bought the frame new 
> over last summer and built it up. But it only has 30 miles on it, as it’s 
> one of (too?) many bikes I have. 
>
> It’s a great riding bike but I will be moving and need to cut down the 
> collection. 
>
> Build specs (some components are from the parts bin. All in great working 
> shape):
> Paul brake levers and Canti brakes(cables left long for different 
> handlebars). 
> Simplex shifters
> Campagnolo Record (front) and Mirage (rear)
> Velo Orange cranks (46/30)
> 11/30 rear cassette
> Velo Orange Grand Cru seat post
> Velocity wheels (Shimano front and Ambrisio rear hubs)
> Currently has Soma 650b x 38 tires. I will also include Rene Herse 650b x 
> 2.2” tires (Untanum Ridge, almost new). 
> Soma front rack. 
> Nitto Bullmoose bar
>
> I am 5’11” with 33.5” PBH. The saddle height is 75cm. 
>
> Note: does not come with pedals, cage, or saddle. 
>
> There is a scratch on the headtube. Before the rack, I had a front bag 
> which scratched up the paint.
>
> Asking $2k plus shipping. 
>
> Venmo, Zelle, or cashiers check only please.
>
> Pictures below. 
> https://ibb.co/album/TY8QDd
>

-- 
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/e6843384-beff-4b20-a3c5-d2b2ef366a3fn%40googlegroups.com.

[RBW] FS: Crust Romanceur Canti 58cm (Large)

[Hoch in ut]

Almost new Crust Romanceur in 58cm size (large). I bought the frame new 
over last summer and built it up. But it only has 30 miles on it, as it’s 
one of (too?) many bikes I have. 

It’s a great riding bike but I will be moving and need to cut down the 
collection. 

Build specs (some components are from the parts bin. All in great working 
shape):
Paul brake levers and Canti brakes(cables left long for different 
handlebars). 
Simplex shifters
Campagnolo Record (front) and Mirage (rear)
Velo Orange cranks (46/30)
11/30 rear cassette
Velo Orange Grand Cru seat post
Velocity wheels (Shimano front and Ambrisio rear hubs)
Currently has Soma 650b x 38 tires. I will also include Rene Herse 650b x 
2.2” tires (Untanum Ridge, almost new). 
Soma front rack. 
Nitto Bullmoose bar

I am 5’11” with 33.5” PBH. The saddle height is 75cm. 

Note: does not come with pedals, cage, or saddle. 

There is a scratch on the headtube. Before the rack, I had a front bag 
which scratched up the paint.

Asking $2k plus shipping. 

Venmo, Zelle, or cashiers check only please.

Pictures below. 
https://ibb.co/album/TY8QDd

-- 
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/65df2a06-52ea-4a23-9253-baa3eb083e89n%40googlegroups.com.

[RBW] Re: SKS fender install on a Clem

[Hoch in ut]

You don’t need a recessed nut. Just go down to your local hardware store 
and get a bolt long enough with a nylock nut. And a couple of washers. 
Should cost you less than $5. I’d get stainless as well. 

On Sunday, January 1, 2023 at 2:48:34 PM UTC-7 Michael Morrissey wrote:

> Hi,
>
> You probably need one bolt there - I think an m6 x 25mm would work. 
> Something like this:
>
> https://www.perennialcycle.com/fork-crown-bolt-kit-fender-light-mounting.html
>
> You can probably find the bolt at any decent hardware store. Good luck.
>
> M
>
> On Sunday, January 1, 2023 at 12:06:02 PM UTC-5 rmro...@gmail.com wrote:
>
>> Or, any bike not currently using the center brake mount hole on the fork. 
>> Here I am with my new SKS fenders and all of the assorted nuts / bolts that 
>> are supplied and I think something is missing. As this bike has v brakes I 
>> am unable to follow the directions on the Riv site as the featured bike 
>> uses center mounted brakes - there is already a nut & bolt used by the 
>> brake.  I think I need recessed nuts (for the front fender at least but 
>> none are supplied by SKS. Am I wrong?
>> I appreciate any insight &, Happy New Year!
>>
>

-- 
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/00d0fceb-1f4e-4b3a-a154-d291c5e7a7ecn%40googlegroups.com.

Re: [RBW] Re: Rivendell-esq fat bike

[Hoch in ut]

For reference, I built a Pugsley years ago with White Industries cranks and 
custom BB. The narrowest I could get the Q factor was 183mm. That is with 
about 2-3mm crank clearance. Much narrower than stock but definitely 
nowhere close to 160. 

On Thursday, December 22, 2022 at 10:48:43 AM UTC-7 Patrick Moore wrote:

> Thanks, Bob. Others: If any of youse have this information, would be very 
> glad to hear it. Thanks.
>
> On Tue, Dec 20, 2022 at 2:33 PM Bob  wrote:
>
>> Patrick,
>>
>> I do not, sorry to say. Would like to have those data myself. Anyone here 
>> have a Prospector, a caliper, and a few minutes to take measurements?
>>
>> --
>> Bob
>>
>> On Tuesday, December 20, 2022 at 1:17:49 PM UTC-7 Patrick Moore wrote:
>>
>>> Bob: Do you know how low a Q you can get on the Prospector, Scapegoat, 
>>> Chimera and Bull Thistle, particularly with a single speed drivetrain (if 
>>> any accept a ss drivetrain)? I've stayed away from Pugsleys etc because of 
>>> the Q but if one can be built as a ss with a Q of no more than 160 I'd be 
>>> very interested for our local sandy trails. As it is, I've been thinking of 
>>> a 29er+ replacement for my Monocog 29er on which the rear 71 mm WTB ranger 
>>> rubs the stays in corners but fat would be even better if the Q could be 
>>> sorted. 
>>>
>>> Thanks.
>>>
>>>

-- 
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/a5b82dc5-edcb-4b57-a3b7-0b62ec3780fdn%40googlegroups.com.

Re: [RBW] Re: Rivendell-esq fat bike

[Hoch in ut]

I’ve owned a number of fat bikes. One I thought was the most Riv-esque was 
the Ritchey Commando. I don’t think they make them anymore. But you may be 
able to find a used one. They rode fantastic. Chainstays were relatively 
long. 
Regarding chainstays, it was just fine in snow. Mike C’s point of short 
stays has some merit, but remember it’s just one guy’s opinion. He’s also 
said in the past that rigid and hard tail bikes were useless and 
full-suspension was the only way to go. I wholeheartedly disagreed with 
that. 
If you ever meet him, ask what he thinks of lugged steel rigid frames with 
rim brakes! 
Don’t put much weight of what he or others say. Go test it out for 
yourself. 
On Tuesday, December 20, 2022 at 3:04:21 PM UTC-7 Joe Bernard wrote:

> For the record I'm not the OP, which is why Keith deleted the post you're 
> replying to. Fortunately his info was helpful anyway, but Joe B. who 
> started a fatbike thread on internet-bob is not Joe D. who started this 
> one! 
>
> On Tuesday, December 20, 2022 at 12:16:48 PM UTC-8 Patrick Moore wrote:
>
>> Not to crowed Joe's questions, but this answers many of my questions 
>> about fatbikes too; and I didn't know that there are 3.25 and 3.5 650B 
>> tires. So thanks Keith for this detail. I've already found that no Riv can 
>> take full 3"/76 mm 700C tires, alas.
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Dec 15, 2022 at 7:06 PM iamkeith  wrote:
>>
>>> Joe,
>>>
>>> before throwing in my 2 cents, I want to acknowledge that this is not 
>>> really answering your questions but, instead, telling you to do something 
>>> different.   I usually get annoyed when people answer a direct question 
>>> with "you don't need that" but, in this case, my friend, I know enough 
>>> about you and your bike-purchase-and-subsequent-regret habits to want to 
>>> save you some hassle.  Others have already mentioned a couple of the ideas 
>>> I was going to offer, but here it is with more explanation:
>>>
>>> I haven't read through  your other ibob thread completely, but do 
>>> understand that much of your interest comes from wanting to relieve wrist 
>>> discomfort - especially on rough trails..  So this response is partly in 
>>> consideration of that question.
>>>
>>>
>>> *"Novelty" concerns:* I was a pretty early adopter of fat bikes. 
>>> They're the only kind of bike I can even ride for fully 6 months of the 
>>> year or more, due to the amount of snow where I live. (Along with northern 
>>> Minnesota and Anchorage, my area - the sister communities of Teton County 
>>> Idaho and Teton County Wyoming - were where much of the early fatbike 
>>> development occurred.) For a number of years around 2010 or so, I rode a 
>>> fat bike almost exclusively, all year. I liked it for it's back-to-basics, 
>>> monster-truck, roll-over-anything simplicity. But, even for an retro-grouch 
>>> like me who lives in a place where they make complete sense, that appeal 
>>> eventually wore off and I now only ride it when no other bike will work. 
>>> Most people who get fat bikes enjoy the novelty for an even shorter period 
>>> of time. They eventually tire of the extra rolling resistance and steering 
>>> compromises and increased q- factor and mechanical complications and 
>>> weight. Then they quit riding them. 
>>>
>>> *Tire Size considerations*: Keep in mind that there have been HUGE 
>>> advances in tire manufacturing and technology since (and because) 26" fat 
>>> bike tires were invented - even though that wasn't all that long ago. 2008, 
>>> maybe? Much of what made 26x4 tires work so well was their diameter, which 
>>> was similar to the not-much-older 29er development. But, unless you really 
>>> plan on riding in loose sand or deep snow most of the time, there is no 
>>> longer any advantage to 4" tires. There are now some 650b semi-fat tires 
>>> that give you almost all of the advantages of 26x4 with none of the 
>>> problems. If you think about it, there's nothing more "rivendell-esqe" than 
>>> 650b, right? They wouldn't even exist if it wasn't for Rivendell! 
>>>
>>> *Regarding suspension and bounciness*: The best thing about fat bikes 
>>> is that they eliminate the need for suspension for most "normal" riding. 
>>> But it takes a lot of effort to tune the tire pressure to really take 
>>> advantage of this. Almost as much hassle as dealing with shock rebound 
>>> rates and pressure settings, etc. on a true full-suspension bike. When you 
>>> get tire pressure >just< right, you don't bounce at all, and you don't have 
>>> funny steering or excessive rolling inefficiency. But the optimum pressure 
>>> requirement changes depending on terrain and load, so you end up fussing 
>>> with it a lot. (or giving up and getting frustrated with the ride qualities 
>>> - a la the "novelty wearing off topic." ) The REALLY important thing to 
>>> keep in mind here is that the bigger the tire volume / cross section, the 
>>> more sensitive it is  to pressure adjustments, and the more you need to 
>>> mess 

[RBW] Re: Bombadil and Hunqapillar origins: The definitive thread

[Hoch in ut]

I had a green one. 700c. Clearance and wheelbase appeared to be essentially 
the same. I couldn’t fit anything bigger than Thunder Burt’s. 

On Wednesday, December 14, 2022 at 5:37:40 PM UTC-7 mcgr...@gmail.com wrote:

> What are the differences between Hunqapillar generations?  I have a July 
> 2010 Waterford 62cm.  Right now it's got 2.1" Schwalbe Thunder Burts.  I 
> think getting 2.2" tires on the back would be dicey.  Did the green 
> generation of the frame have bigger clearance?  Longer wheelbase?
>
> James
>
> On Wednesday, December 14, 2022 at 7:26:45 PM UTC-5 Jason Fuller wrote:
>
>> One more note that I didn't think of until I hit submit - the batch 
>> differences that exist on Bombadils (and maybe Hunqapillars too) are more 
>> significant than the difference between a Bombadil and a Hunq if you remove 
>> the location of manufacture from the equation. 
>>
>> On Wednesday, 14 December 2022 at 16:24:22 UTC-8 Jason Fuller wrote:
>>
>>> Just catching this now, hey thanks for the shoutout Eric! And it means a 
>>> lot that you said that about the forest photo! That was a special day, 
>>> first ride on the rebuild after paint.
>>>
>>> I don't have nearly the historical knowledge that many here do, and a 
>>> lot has already been said. But here are my summarized thoughts between the 
>>> two anyway, beyond the obvious difference of location of manufacture. The 
>>> Hunqapillar seems to me like a "v2" Bombadil - they increased tire 
>>> clearance over the Bombadil from 2.1 to 2.4" on most sizes, they made 
>>> little geometry tweaks but just a smidge here and there, and notably they 
>>> made the frame more cost-effective by not only changing suppliers but by 
>>> simplifying the design a bit. 
>>>
>>> To me they are still both "ATB" Rivendells, made to tackle trails loaded 
>>> or not, and also be comfortable to ride on pavement as long as you're not 
>>> in too much of a rush. When it comes to which is more coveted, it really 
>>> comes down to whether the little superfluous (but beautiful) details on the 
>>> Bombadil are important to you, and/or which paint job and geometry 
>>> specifics suit you better. I think of them like the Appaloosa and Atlantis 
>>> - basically two flavors of the same bike.   
>>>
>>>  
>>>
>>> On Sunday, 11 December 2022 at 07:16:08 UTC-8 eric...@gmail.com wrote:
>>>
 It seems the Bombadil and Hunqapillar frames are beloved. They're 
 stout, beautiful, and sometimes have intricate additional tubes and lugs. 
 While I've done a lot of reading about Rivendell I was a bit unclear on 
 the 
 origins and intended uses of these frames. 

 I wanted to start a thread where we could share and dump info about 
 these bikes along with pictures of builds. 

 Joe and Jim were helpful in laying out a bit of background in another 
 thread 
 ,
  there's 
 some great info there. 

 The original Hunqapillar catalog is up here: 
 http://notfine.com/rivendell/Brochures/Rivendell%20Frames%20Hunqapillar.pdf

 The first mention I can find of the Bombadil is in RR 41, sometime in 
 2009. Excerpted pages attached. As a few members might recall I am very 
 into raw frames with brass spilling out of the lugs! I know that many 
 Bombadil owners have had their frames repainted like Jason Fuller, whose 
 absolute stunner shows up here from time to time. By the way, the picture 
 below is one of my very favorite Rivendell images. 

 [image: Jason Bombadil green.jpg]

 There's also the butter-banana Bombadil that recently sold on eBay. I 
 believe that one was purchased by John Watson of the Radavist (and he's 
 got 
 a Hunq) so we might see some nice pics of that bike sometime soon. 

 [image: s-l1600-2.jpg]

 And speaking of, here's John's Hunqapillar, more images and write-up 
 here .

 [image: Johns-Rivendell-Hunqapillar-29er-Klunker-76.jpg] 

 Are both of these frame names borrowing from Tolkien? I understand RBW 
 had to stop using Tolkien names. 

>>>

-- 
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/a8981d48-ce8d-404f-b901-14c0b4c00b71n%40googlegroups.com.

Re: [RBW] Re: Cliffhanger alternatives?

[Hoch in ut]

I’ve run both Ehline 2.5” and Honcho 2.6” on Cliffhanger rims. Both 
measured just about true to indicated. Zero issues setting up tubeless. I’d 
go with Cliffhangers, personally. 

I actually have an almost brand new set of 29” Cliffhanger wheels, laced to 
SON28 and Bitex rear (100/135). I wish I had a bike to use them on but I 
don’t. I built them for another bike but only used them for 50 miles before 
selling the bike. Never even hooked up lights to the dynamo. Let me know if 
interested. 

On Tuesday, December 13, 2022 at 9:25:41 AM UTC-7 rmro...@gmail.com wrote:

> Good to know!
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On Dec 13, 2022, at 11:09 AM, Ryan Frahm  wrote:
>
> Richard, my 2.5” Ehline measures right at 2.5”. They are huge sitting 
> next to the Fleecer Ridge 55mm. They roll very fast compared to the Maxxis 
> tire as well. 
>
>
>
> On Tuesday, December 13, 2022 at 8:07:31 AM UTC-8 Ryan Frahm wrote:
>
>> Hey Keith, are those rims tubeless compatible? 
>>
>> As for machined sidewall, neither set of my cliffhangers have them and 
>> braking hasn’t been an issue even with the ice and snow. I have seen 
>> plenty of 2.8” tires successfully run on a 25mm ID (like the cliffhanger) 
>> rim so i wouldn’t worry much there. You just can’t go quite as low with the 
>> tire pressure or they get a bit squirmy. Rider weight makes a big 
>> difference on that though at a certain point as well. 
>>
>> On Tuesday, December 13, 2022 at 8:01:29 AM UTC-8 iamkeith wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> I used the Nimbus Dominator Unicycle rims on my Susie.  42mm outside 
>>> /.32 inside.  They don't offer the machined sidewall version anymore, but I 
>>> haven't had braking issues.  I can detect the pinned joint at times, but 
>>> it's not a detractor.  They're stronger than any other rim  (they're meant 
>>> to carry a rider's e tire weight on one unsuspended wheel) but feel MUCH 
>>> lighter in reality than they do on paper.  I wasn't too concerned about 
>>> long-term aesthetics, but the brake surface has held up remarkably well.  
>>>  It's a good anodizing.  I have anodized rims on one of my most used bikes 
>>> from 1997 where the finish has held up well, too.  In both cases, the 
>>> blemishes occur when you use them in wet, muddy conditions and get grit on 
>>> the pads. I have some Kris Holm 29er unicycle rims too, that are even wider 
>>> and DO have a machined braking surface, but they'd be hard to find. 
>>>
>>> Ive posted pics of my susie a few times here over the past couple of 
>>> years, but can try to take some more if you're interested.
>>> On Tuesday, December 13, 2022 at 8:41:01 AM UTC-7 lconley wrote:
>>>
 2mm wider.

 Laing

 On Tuesday, December 13, 2022 at 10:39:16 AM UTC-5 lconley wrote:

> Alex DM-24. When I was deciding what rims to get built for the 
> Hubbuhubbuh, Rich said that the Alex rims were slightly wider - 1mm -> 32 
> mm wide.
>
>
> Laing
> Delray Beach FL
>
> On Tuesday, December 13, 2022 at 10:29:31 AM UTC-5 rmro...@gmail.com 
> wrote:
>
>> 2.5"-2.6" tires seem to be at the very upper limits for the venerable 
>> Cliffhanger. Is anyone aware of a 700c  rim brake rim that is a bit 
>> wider? 
>> I have not found one.
>
> -- 
> 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/kJa7lO5X7sg/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/ce056800-fd3e-49e0-b301-808e1fed0d8en%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/af9ff08f-5e16-4755-9e5c-c7a7ba24fd59n%40googlegroups.com.

[RBW] Re: Clem L vs Rosco Bebe

[Hoch in ut]

Ah, got it. Well, I’m sure you’ll find the Clem rides great. I had one for 
a bit and I liked it. 

That said, I had a bike years ago (Surly). Fit was amazing and I felt like 
I could pedal forever on it. I foolishly decided to sell it for another 
bike. I couldn’t get it to fit right so I bought another. But despite using 
the exact same components, I still couldn’t get it to fit like the 
original. Lesson learned, if you have a bike that rides and fits well, hold 
on to it.  

On Friday, December 2, 2022 at 8:09:03 AM UTC-7 Paul Clifton wrote:

> Hey Hoch,
> The fork is a Clem fork but I'm pretty sure the head tube angle is 
> different, part of the way they made the effective top tube so long and 
> gave it such good balance with a 30 lb load behind the handle bars.
>
> I don't really want to get rid of it or get a new bike, but I do want 
> another parent and kid to have the wonderful experience my daughter and I 
> had for the couple years she fit the Yepp seat, so if there's a 
> more-or-less drop-in replacement out there, I want to know about it.
>
> Paul
>
> On Friday, December 2, 2022 at 8:59:34 AM UTC-6 Hoch in ut wrote:
>
>> I believe the Rosco uses Clem forks, so I’m assuming the front end is 
>> similar, if not the same. Rivendell told me that they also use the same 
>> front end on the Gus, Susie, Atlantis so they should all ride very similar. 
>>
>> Unless you just want a new bike to get a new bike (nothing wrong with 
>> that), I’d just keep the Rosco. It’s a very unique and rare bike. 
>>
>> On Friday, December 2, 2022 at 7:05:27 AM UTC-7 Paul Clifton wrote:
>>
>>> Thanks for the feedback Richard and Laing. I certain I'd enjoy a Clem, 
>>> but I guess I'll never know how unique the Bebe bike is until I can ride 
>>> them both back to back. There's still part of me that wants to get it to 
>>> another new parent.
>>>
>>> Laing, please share you thoughts when you get the Bebe on the road. I 
>>> can tell you it's just as fun without a kid on the front as it is with one. 
>>> The extra load just adds to the stability.
>>>
>>> Paul
>>>
>>> On Wednesday, November 30, 2022 at 6:29:39 PM UTC-6 lconley wrote:
>>>
>>>> I own both, but I have never completed the Bebe build [everything done 
>>>> but the brakes and chain-line (S-A 3 speed)], so not much help yet. I 
>>>> bought the Bebe because of the long effective top tube. I have short legs 
>>>> and a long torso and it seemed like it might be the ideal step through for 
>>>> bars with a lot of backsweep. I also have a Betty Foy, Rosco Bubbe Medium 
>>>> Mountain Mixte and the one and only Keven's Bike true mixte. Some day I 
>>>> may 
>>>> not be able to swing my leg over and I wanted to cover all the options on 
>>>> Rivendell step-thrus. I never intended for the Bebe to be a baby bike, 
>>>> it's 
>>>> my long torso bike.
>>>>
>>>> Laing
>>>>
>>>> On Wednesday, November 30, 2022 at 6:11:23 PM UTC-5 Paul Clifton wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Has anyone ridden both a Clem L and a Rosco Bebe enough to comment on 
>>>>> the differences?
>>>>>
>>>>> My bebe has long since outgrown the Yepp Mini front seat, and I'm now 
>>>>> using the Bebe to drag a copilot.
>>>>>
>>>>> Part of me feels like I should pass the Bebe on to a new parent, but 
>>>>> another part of me wants to just keep it. The ride is phenomenal, and 
>>>>> really unlike anything else I've ever ridden and I doubt I'd ever get it 
>>>>> back if I let it go.
>>>>>
>>>>> The 68 degree seat tube angle is really comfortable, and the really 
>>>>> long effective top tube puts so much bike out in front of the rider that 
>>>>> it 
>>>>> feels like it really takes the lead. It's absurdly stable on fast 
>>>>> descents 
>>>>> and carves corners without any skittishness.
>>>>>
>>>>> If I was going to sell it, I'd probably replace it with a Clem as my 
>>>>> kid hauling townie, since I'd like to keep my Gus set up for rowdy single 
>>>>> track fun.
>>>>>
>>>>> So I'm curious if anyone can actually compare the two.
>>>>>
>>>>> Paul in AR
>>>>>
>>>>

-- 
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/2e41560a-9927-459e-a7bc-d4ec5ec7d128n%40googlegroups.com.

[RBW] Re: Clem L vs Rosco Bebe

[Hoch in ut]

I believe the Rosco uses Clem forks, so I’m assuming the front end is 
similar, if not the same. Rivendell told me that they also use the same 
front end on the Gus, Susie, Atlantis so they should all ride very similar. 

Unless you just want a new bike to get a new bike (nothing wrong with 
that), I’d just keep the Rosco. It’s a very unique and rare bike. 

On Friday, December 2, 2022 at 7:05:27 AM UTC-7 Paul Clifton wrote:

> Thanks for the feedback Richard and Laing. I certain I'd enjoy a Clem, but 
> I guess I'll never know how unique the Bebe bike is until I can ride them 
> both back to back. There's still part of me that wants to get it to another 
> new parent.
>
> Laing, please share you thoughts when you get the Bebe on the road. I can 
> tell you it's just as fun without a kid on the front as it is with one. The 
> extra load just adds to the stability.
>
> Paul
>
> On Wednesday, November 30, 2022 at 6:29:39 PM UTC-6 lconley wrote:
>
>> I own both, but I have never completed the Bebe build [everything done 
>> but the brakes and chain-line (S-A 3 speed)], so not much help yet. I 
>> bought the Bebe because of the long effective top tube. I have short legs 
>> and a long torso and it seemed like it might be the ideal step through for 
>> bars with a lot of backsweep. I also have a Betty Foy, Rosco Bubbe Medium 
>> Mountain Mixte and the one and only Keven's Bike true mixte. Some day I may 
>> not be able to swing my leg over and I wanted to cover all the options on 
>> Rivendell step-thrus. I never intended for the Bebe to be a baby bike, it's 
>> my long torso bike.
>>
>> Laing
>>
>> On Wednesday, November 30, 2022 at 6:11:23 PM UTC-5 Paul Clifton wrote:
>>
>>> Has anyone ridden both a Clem L and a Rosco Bebe enough to comment on 
>>> the differences?
>>>
>>> My bebe has long since outgrown the Yepp Mini front seat, and I'm now 
>>> using the Bebe to drag a copilot.
>>>
>>> Part of me feels like I should pass the Bebe on to a new parent, but 
>>> another part of me wants to just keep it. The ride is phenomenal, and 
>>> really unlike anything else I've ever ridden and I doubt I'd ever get it 
>>> back if I let it go.
>>>
>>> The 68 degree seat tube angle is really comfortable, and the really long 
>>> effective top tube puts so much bike out in front of the rider that it 
>>> feels like it really takes the lead. It's absurdly stable on fast descents 
>>> and carves corners without any skittishness.
>>>
>>> If I was going to sell it, I'd probably replace it with a Clem as my kid 
>>> hauling townie, since I'd like to keep my Gus set up for rowdy single track 
>>> fun.
>>>
>>> So I'm curious if anyone can actually compare the two.
>>>
>>> Paul in AR
>>>
>>

-- 
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/68182890-3bfd-4c1f-8d25-52098d4b0dcbn%40googlegroups.com.

[RBW] Re: WTB: Weathered brass bell

[Hoch in ut]

Looks like you’re all sorted, but if you wanted to use your current bell, 
seems like a fairly easy DIY process. And a chance for another excellent 
video from you 

https://youtu.be/9P6SPTVJwJU

On Wednesday, November 23, 2022 at 6:19:26 AM UTC-7 eric...@gmail.com wrote:

> Thanks to all who have reached out, I have a bell deal in the works! 
>
> On Wednesday, November 23, 2022 at 3:25:00 AM UTC-5 Nick Payne wrote:
>
>> I think the Viva brass hammer bells are uncoated and weather quite nicely.
>> [image: image-85-600x600[1].jpeg]
>>
>> Nick
>>
>

-- 
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/09502396-29ec-4fef-a530-15780b7c5286n%40googlegroups.com.

[RBW] Re: The do-it-all Rivendell of choice

[Hoch in ut]

Ah, one bike topic—winter time must be upon us.  
I’m also fortunate to have a bike for almost every purpose. But if I had to 
choose one, it wouldn’t be a Rivendell. Unfortunately, there is no lighter 
tubed, traditional Diamond frame bike with ~2.2” clearance available. 

I currently ride a Romanceur. 2.2” for off road and (currently) 38’s for 
commuting and road riding. Diamond frame for a frame pack for bikepacking. 
 I’d happily ride this bike year round. 

On Wednesday, November 16, 2022 at 2:35:25 PM UTC-7 Patrick Moore wrote:

> The threads on Platypus versus [name] and using versus "saving" your 
> Rivendell raises an interesting if (fortunately!) academic question: if you 
> could have only 1 Rivendell as your only bicycle, and that Rivendell had to 
> serve all purposes -- fast pavement, commuting, errand loads, at least 
> light dirt and gravel: what model would you choose and how would you build 
> and equip it?
>
> I'm fortunate to have a bike for each of my purposes, except a 
> theft-be-damned but fun to ride grocery beater, which I hope to add to the 
> collection*, but if I had to choose just 1 and that a Riv, it would be my 
> gofast with a second set of wheels shod with 42 mm Naches Passes (which fit 
> with room to spare under the front normal reach single pivot) but not bolt 
> anything else to the Riv. Lights: I have an excellent B Ixon IQ Premium 
> which puts out at least as much brightness and has a nicer beam pattern 
> than my Edeluxe I, and Cateye clamps are cheap and easy to find. There are 
> all sorts of bright, strap-on blinkies for the rear. I'd rig up a QR for my 
> Saddlesack Medium and attach it with the Nitto standoff only as needed, and 
> augment it with a courier bag in 1 of 3 sizes. I'd get some clip-on, easy 
> on/off fenders, shorties if need be -- hell, this is New Mexico. 
>
> Wheels: Actually, I might do as I did decades ago when I tried to make a 
> mountain bike do triple duty with 3 wheelsets: gofast with 23 mm tires and 
> 12-19 (7-sp) cassette, commuting with 35 mm tires with 13-21, and off road 
> with knobbies and 14-28. The Phil fixed/fixed with Elk Pass would keep the 
> 17/19 Dingle and the 28 mm Elk Passes, but I'd have another Elk Pass rear 
> for the TC fixed hub with 17 t cog for 76" direct and 66" underdrive; and 
> then I'd have a third wheeset for Naches Passes with the fixed TF hub with 
> a 19 t cog and the Naches Passes for 70" and 52"; good pavement-to-moderate 
> dirt ratios.
>
> Of course, I'd have to overcome the scruple of keeping this bike pristine 
>  Funny, I usually take a brief detour for a mile or  mile-and-a-half 
> along a very busy 6-lane when I ride North from my house because the direct 
> route is dusty, sandy crusher fine. Would have to strenuously overcome that 
> vice.
>
> * Actually, one reason for this 5th beater bike would be just the fun of 
> building up a bike that rides nice and meets my gearing and handling 
> preferences at the lowest possible price.
>
> -- 
>
> ---
> Patrick Moore
> Alburquerque, Nuevo Mexico, Etats Unis d'Amerique, Orbis Terrarum
>
>

-- 
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/6c40deed-910d-43a7-abf8-94df9781bf46n%40googlegroups.com.

Re: [RBW] Re: Is a Gus the right choice for me? Would a Platypus be better?

[Hoch in ut]

Apparently, this is all subjective, because I felt just the opposite!  
The Clem was so long, much longer than what I’d been used to mountain 
biking for 30+ years. The trails here are fairly chunky, and maneuvering 
around rocks and/or high-centering became issues. I thought I’d adapt, but 
never could. 
The Romeo (with flat bars) handled razor sharp and I could weave around and 
over all obstacles without the fear of pedal strikes or getting hung up. 
We’ve got some steep climbs here and I never had a problem with the front 
end wandering. I just felt “at home” with it in just about every aspect. 

One thing the Clem absolutely destroys the Romeo and other bikes is 
straight line descents. I could bomb steep gravel roads like Bode Miller 
soaring down a run. 

Both good bikes. Just depends on what you prefer and are used to. I 
personally gave the long wheelbase a couple of tries but couldn’t ever come 
to grips with it. You might. 

On Tuesday, November 15, 2022 at 5:16:39 PM UTC-7 Mackenzy Albright wrote:

> RE those comparing Romanceurs and Rivs 
>
> I loved my (XL disc) Romanceur - but have a bad shoulder / neck. I 
> couldn't run drops. It didn't handle that well with upright bars IMO. The 
> short wheelbase makes it hop  and wheelie a lot climbing. I love climbing. 
> It rode amazing with a shortish stem and towel racks, but was a real neck 
> destroyer. Looked great though. Hauled front basket cargo like nobody's 
> business. I loved it - but not for me. 
>
> I traded it for a Clementine 59 and (also bought a) Clem Smith JR 64. OG 
> clementine feels a tad like the Romanceur a bit with a bit more room in the 
> front for swept backs and appropriate chain stays to keep it on the ground. 
> Climbs wonderfully. Clem JR just cruises like nobody's business. One of the 
> most fun and cruisey bikes ive ever ridden. The more slack head tube makes 
> it a bit floppier than the Clementine with a high front load (ie basket or 
> porteur bag) Im likely going to keep the Clementine and part with the JR 
> only because of slight overlap and lack of space. 
>
> Now that I took the RIV plunge, having a high maintenance body that gets 
> pissed off easily, I can't imagine not owning a rivendell for my main ride 
> anymore. I dont think you can make a wrong decision. I think it comes down 
> to more or less tire size, aesthetics, and availability. Each has their 
> slight niche variations, but overall no matter what be amazing. 
>
> On Tuesday, November 15, 2022 at 3:47:06 PM UTC-8 Luke Hendrickson wrote:
>
>> Triples are my fave. 
>>
>> On Tuesday, November 15, 2022 at 3:14:06 PM UTC-8 jacob...@gmail.com 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> It’s the Mermaid color. They only had one in stock so the decision was 
>>> pretty easy. 
>>>
>>> Right now I’ll be going 3x9. I bought a NOS Ritchey triple recently to 
>>> put on my Long Haul Trucker but it’ll be going on the Gus. I could see 
>>> going 2x9 or 2x10 at some point. White Industries makes some really nice 
>>> stuff. 
>>>
>>> It’s funny because I just bought some Paul Motolite brakes for the 
>>> Trucker and now they’ll be pulled for the Gus. Back to the mismatched 
>>> v-brakes. 
>>>
>>> I still need wheels but I found a cheap set on eBay. They’ll do for now. 
>>>
>>> The shipping notification just came through. Hopefully I’ll have it 
>>> early next week. 
>>>
>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>>
>>> On Nov 15, 2022, at 5:45 PM, Luke Hendrickson  
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Awesome!!! Which color is your Gus, Jacob? Very much looking forward to 
>>> seeing it built up. What sorta gearing you have in mind?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Tuesday, November 15, 2022 at 2:41:13 PM UTC-8 jacob...@gmail.com 
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Thanks for all the replies. I ended up going with a Gus. C Cycles out 
>>>> of Montreal had a frame in stock. I've been eyeing parts for the build all 
>>>> day. My parts stash is pretty full so hopefully things will come together 
>>>> quickly on the build. Thanks again for the help! 
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Monday, November 14, 2022 at 11:30:00 AM UTC-5 Mark Schneider wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Country roads, sounds like the Platypus would be perfect. The 
>>>>> Gus/Susie really is nice for washboard, and rough off-road rides, but 
>>>>> rides 
>>>>> great on the roads too. I have a large Susie, and I'm running Rene Herse 
>>>>> tires, and I'm impressed with the responsiveness. It's very plush! Kind 
>>>>> of 
>>>>> wi

[RBW] WTB: Nitto Marks Rack M18

[Hoch in ut]

Looking for a Marks Rack. Please reply off list if you have one. Thank you. 

-- 
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/30e62be0-2ee8-41a7-8989-6e398985ce72n%40googlegroups.com.

[RBW] Re: Is a Gus the right choice for me? Would a Platypus be better?

[Hoch in ut]

I’m running Albatross currently  it works well but I am looking for 
something with a little less rise and sweep. I may have to just bend my 
Albatross out a little and call it good. 

The bike itself is awesome. Coming from a Clem, which was too heavy duty 
for me, this bike feels more springy and lively. Rides fast on the road and 
tackles dirt roads and singletrack with ease. 

One knock I have is the fork feels a little stiff. I guess for heavier 
front loads. But I wish it were a little more compliant. Other than that, 
it’s a great bike. 

On Sunday, November 13, 2022 at 3:19:22 PM UTC-7 saxt...@gmail.com wrote:

>
> What bars are you running on the Romanceur?  I was about to start a 
> similar thread looking for advice and one of my shortlist choices was the 
> Romanceur..so curious about your set up. 
> On Saturday, November 12, 2022 at 8:32:37 PM UTC-5 Hoch in ut wrote:
>
>> I’d agree Gus is not the right bike. Neither is a Clem. Riv rates them 
>> the same, as far as durability. 
>>
>> There’s been some good suggestions already. 
>>
>> I’d offer a non-Riv option: Crust Romanceur. Light, lugged frame. 853 
>> steel. 650b x 2.4” clearance. In my opinion, perfect for the ride that you 
>> describe. Mine rides light and springy (mine is the canti version). 
>>
>> On Saturday, November 12, 2022 at 6:55:02 AM UTC-7 jacob...@gmail.com 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> I've got the new bike itch and have shortlisted a Gus or possibly a 
>>> Platypus. The Gus has called to me for a couple of years but something or 
>>> other always came up. 
>>>
>>> The purpose of the new bike would be mostly to ride 25-35 miles on paved 
>>> country roads. I live in central Pennsylvania and most of the unpaved stuff 
>>> is rougher than I care to ride. There's trails that I do ride but any bike 
>>> with 45mm tires can handle that. Once a month I'll do a 50-60 mile ride. 
>>>
>>> I do C level group rides but nothing over 12-13 mph. Frequent in town 
>>> rides to get food/ coffee. Maybe some overnight camping. My solo riding 
>>> usually sits around 11 mph unless I'm in a hurry. 
>>>
>>> My torso and arms are long so reach has always been an issue. I know the 
>>> Gus has a long toptube and I think the fit would be a bit better. I'm not a 
>>> fan of super upright positioning. My hand/ wrist got broke in a fall last 
>>> year so I like bars with lots of sweep (Jones Loop is wonderful). 
>>>
>>> Gearing and tires being equal would the Gus perform as well on the road 
>>> as the Platypus?  
>>>
>>> Thanks for the help! 
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>>
>>> Jacob
>>>
>>

-- 
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/223e303b-f677-42f4-aa43-b5140d2d99c0n%40googlegroups.com.

[RBW] Re: Is a Gus the right choice for me? Would a Platypus be better?

[Hoch in ut]

I’d agree Gus is not the right bike. Neither is a Clem. Riv rates them the 
same, as far as durability. 

There’s been some good suggestions already. 

I’d offer a non-Riv option: Crust Romanceur. Light, lugged frame. 853 
steel. 650b x 2.4” clearance. In my opinion, perfect for the ride that you 
describe. Mine rides light and springy (mine is the canti version). 

On Saturday, November 12, 2022 at 6:55:02 AM UTC-7 jacob...@gmail.com wrote:

> I've got the new bike itch and have shortlisted a Gus or possibly a 
> Platypus. The Gus has called to me for a couple of years but something or 
> other always came up. 
>
> The purpose of the new bike would be mostly to ride 25-35 miles on paved 
> country roads. I live in central Pennsylvania and most of the unpaved stuff 
> is rougher than I care to ride. There's trails that I do ride but any bike 
> with 45mm tires can handle that. Once a month I'll do a 50-60 mile ride. 
>
> I do C level group rides but nothing over 12-13 mph. Frequent in town 
> rides to get food/ coffee. Maybe some overnight camping. My solo riding 
> usually sits around 11 mph unless I'm in a hurry. 
>
> My torso and arms are long so reach has always been an issue. I know the 
> Gus has a long toptube and I think the fit would be a bit better. I'm not a 
> fan of super upright positioning. My hand/ wrist got broke in a fall last 
> year so I like bars with lots of sweep (Jones Loop is wonderful). 
>
> Gearing and tires being equal would the Gus perform as well on the road as 
> the Platypus?  
>
> Thanks for the help! 
>
> Cheers,
>
> Jacob
>

-- 
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/60250432-decb-4771-98ab-343b52526429n%40googlegroups.com.

Re: [RBW] Re: Perfect tires for Clem?

[Hoch in ut]

I’ve been running RH Untanum on my Romanceur. I’m not sure how aggressive 
of a tire you’re looking for,  But it had plenty of side knob traction on 
some single track I rode. Lots of loose over hard. I’m not sure how rowdy 
you get on the Clem, but these tires have been enough, or possibly too 
aggressive of a tire for me. I may go with GK SS next time around. 

Another tire that worked well for me was Teravail Ehline. I had the 29” 
version but they come in 27.5 as well. 
On Wednesday, November 2, 2022 at 6:32:17 AM UTC-6 rmro...@gmail.com wrote:

> The Herse tires have become ubiquitous. I suppose with good reason.
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On Nov 2, 2022, at 1:30 AM, Danny Noonan  wrote:
>
> Not quite the same tire sizes, but as far as tread goes, I really wasn't 
> impressed by the Ultradynamico Mars when I ran the 26 x 2.3 (JFF) version 
> on my Velo Orange Polyvalent two summers ago. They were very loud and slow 
> on pavement, and only marginally more capable on light trail than the RH 
> Rat Trap Passes I was previously running (and switched back to). I'm sure 
> more gnarly trails like what Ron rides up in New England these days are a 
> different story altogether, and probably where the Mars shines. But not 
> really an all-road tire.
>
>
> For what it's worth I do really like the RH knobbies on my Homer, but 
> they're 700c x 42.
>
>
>
> Le mardi 1 novembre 2022 à 17:51:00 UTC-7, rmro...@gmail.com a écrit :
>
>> I forgot about another interesting(?) option - 650b x 55 Simworks Homage. 
>> Anyone tried them?
>>
>> Sent from my iPhone
>>
>> On Nov 1, 2022, at 7:38 PM, Doug H.  wrote:
>>
>> This doesn't answer your question or help really but I thought I'd share 
>> that I run Grand Bois Hetre 42 mm tires on my Clem L. I do road riding 
>> almost exclusively nowadays and they roll well. They even work on the wide 
>> Cliffhanger rims. It seems a Clem can be set up for many different tasks.
>>
>> Doug
>>
>> On Tuesday, November 1, 2022 at 4:39:38 PM UTC-4 J Imler wrote:
>>
>>> I'm fond of Schwalbe Smart Sams in 55 sizing for all-purpose riding.
>>>
>>> [image: IMG-6906.jpg]
>>>
>>> On Tuesday, November 1, 2022 at 7:33:36 AM UTC-7 rmro...@gmail.com 
>>> wrote:
>>>
 The impossible question, right? And when I read Riv's intro to their 
 website tire offerings "we are not tire snobs" I almost feel guilty 
 obsessing over such things. "Just ride", right? I want the "do it all" set 
 of tires (aren't we all?). I have been quite happy with the Gravelking SS 
 650 x 48 tires for all road / gravel and mild trail conditions. On a 
 single 
 foray onto a truer singletrack they fell short in loose conditions and 
 sandy corners. So after exhaustive research I am considering a 
 Ultradynamica combo, Mars front / Rose' rear. Other contender  is Soma 
 Cazadero. Naturally RH Untanum are a consideration but lack of side knobs 
 are a concern. I had Fleecer Ridge tires on my Jones 29 and did not think 
 the noise cancellation thing lived up to the hype - they were rather noisy 
 on pavement especially compared to the Gravelkings. Speaking of the 
 Gravelking, check out these pics. I was on a ride recently and felt a 
 "lump" in the rear tire on pavement. It disappeared when the ride turned 
 to 
 dirt but was there again when I returned to pavement. when I got home all 
 I 
 could discern was a slightly raised football shaped bulge and it was worn 
 smooth. Upon removal I was stunned by the amount of structural damage and 
 the fact that I did not flat. I wonder if something like this qualifies as 
 a defect? I will add the pics in a comment momentarily...
>>>
>>> -- 
>>
>> 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/369a986a-7023-48f4-b193-33a4a7cb0a1en%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-bun...@googlegroups.com.
>
> To view this discussion on the web visit 
> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/rbw-owners-bunch/d6e684e7-8bdf-4d19-a00d-6916cc8f37f4n%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 

Re: [RBW] Re: Susie / Gus questions

[Hoch in ut]

Thanks for the photo and details. 

I don’t think stack will be an issue. It’s obvious made for swept back 
riser bars (ie Ortho, Bosco, Albatross, etc). Handlebars look about level 
with the saddle in the picture. I personally have my Romanceur set up with 
about 1” drop (with Albatross). . 
I’m looking forward to its release. I don’t do well with super upright 
riding position( Gus, Suz, Clem). I like the slightly sporty riding 
position with riser bars. 

On Monday, October 31, 2022 at 2:52:54 PM UTC-6 fra...@gmail.com wrote:

> [image: 10502AD6-F020-4485-8CA5-11800239A776.jpeg]
>
> This is what my rear clearance looks like 29x2.5 Ehline. I know I know, 
> take the boot off. Haha. 
>
> On Monday, October 31, 2022 at 12:51:04 PM UTC-7 iamkeith wrote:
>
>> Actually, it looks to me like steel blades in an aluminum crown - not 
>> unlike the bontrager composite forks that were popular upgrades in the 
>> early 90s.  I kind of dig it.  To each his own  but I also really like the 
>> dropouts.  Reminds me of sturdy bmx forks - as well as early klunker 
>> upgrade forks - not wallmart.  Clearly I'm swooned by historical references 
>> though.
>>
>> On Monday, October 31, 2022 at 1:03:39 PM UTC-6 lconley wrote:
>>
>>> Looks like a torture device. The only thing that rides worse than 
>>> straight aluminum forks, would be straight aluminum disc forks. I know:
>>> [image: IMG_0387 (2)s.JPG]
>>>
>>> Laing
>>>
>>> On Monday, October 31, 2022 at 2:37:11 PM UTC-4 DavidP wrote:
>>>
>>>> Here's a recent teaser photo of the Crust AL bike:
>>>>
>>>> [image: crustbikes-al.jpg]
>>>>
>>>> -Dave (looking at too many bikes while finalizing parts for a Platy 
>>>> build)
>>>>
>>>> On Monday, October 31, 2022 at 11:34:04 AM UTC-4 fra...@gmail.com 
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Unfortunately there are no details yet, just teasers. Supposed to be 
>>>>> something like the purple M2 specialized he’s been riding but with 27.5 
>>>>> up 
>>>>> to 2.6” tire and some tweaks he thinks will make it better. My favorite 
>>>>> rides are mountain goating around and having to carry through sections. 
>>>>> Exploration rides. So the light bike seems like it would be fun for that. 
>>>>> But there are only 50 frames made for the first run. Made by a guy in 
>>>>> Vermont I think. They will likely sell in seconds. No idea on a price for 
>>>>> the frame/fork yet so who knows. Similar ugly as sin front dropouts as 
>>>>> the 
>>>>> Wombat is the only downside I could see from the teaser. Looks like 
>>>>> something on a bike from Walmart. There is a picture on the ronsbikes 
>>>>> instagram. 
>>>>>
>>>>> I looked but couldn’t find the full picture I had seen somewhere, 
>>>>> sorry!
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Monday, October 31, 2022 at 8:04:21 AM UTC-7 Hoch in ut wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> I haven’t heard of the Ronnie aluminum ATB. Any details you can post? 
>>>>>> A link? 
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Sunday, October 30, 2022 at 6:26:46 PM UTC-6 fra...@gmail.com 
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The only conclusion I can come up with is N+1. I thought, maybe I’ll 
>>>>>>> just sell my Susie, I absolutely love my Clem H. Had to take the Clem 
>>>>>>> apart 
>>>>>>> for service, it’s getting a new fork and a full powder coat job. Tried 
>>>>>>> to 
>>>>>>> throw the 2.5 Ehline from my Susie in just to see. Honestly a bit tight 
>>>>>>> for 
>>>>>>> my comfort. The Susie has tons of tire clearance for mud side to side, 
>>>>>>> I 
>>>>>>> couldn’t get much more height because I’m within 3mm of the brake 
>>>>>>> (rubber 
>>>>>>> boot, without I guess a 2.8 would fit with similar room) in the rear. 
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> My Susie rides more lively and (likely the tire size) smooth. Unless 
>>>>>>> I decide to have a custom frame made or go with something from 
>>>>>>> Tanglefoot 
>>>>>>> (71 degree seat tube angle!), I can’t see selling the Susie. I just 
>>>>>>> kinda 
>>>>>>> wish it was 27.5” in my size.  I like the smaller whee

Re: [RBW] Re: Susie / Gus questions

[Hoch in ut]

I haven’t heard of the Ronnie aluminum ATB. Any details you can post? A 
link? 

On Sunday, October 30, 2022 at 6:26:46 PM UTC-6 fra...@gmail.com wrote:

> The only conclusion I can come up with is N+1. I thought, maybe I’ll just 
> sell my Susie, I absolutely love my Clem H. Had to take the Clem apart for 
> service, it’s getting a new fork and a full powder coat job. Tried to throw 
> the 2.5 Ehline from my Susie in just to see. Honestly a bit tight for my 
> comfort. The Susie has tons of tire clearance for mud side to side, I 
> couldn’t get much more height because I’m within 3mm of the brake (rubber 
> boot, without I guess a 2.8 would fit with similar room) in the rear. 
>
> My Susie rides more lively and (likely the tire size) smooth. Unless I 
> decide to have a custom frame made or go with something from Tanglefoot (71 
> degree seat tube angle!), I can’t see selling the Susie. I just kinda wish 
> it was 27.5” in my size.  I like the smaller wheel for the exploration 
> riding I do. The Susie has more clearance and the tubes flex a lot to give 
> a nice ride. The Clem is stout and ready for anything. They are both such 
> great bikes, if they fit your bike needs. But, catch me on the right day 
> and a large gold Susie might be for sale!
>
> Anybody else excited to see the new Ronnie Romance aluminum (gasp!) ATB 
> bike? 27.5x2.6 capable rim brake adventure bike. Nice. 
> On Sunday, October 30, 2022 at 4:33:36 PM UTC-7 rmro...@gmail.com wrote:
>
>> The only conclusion (?) I can get from this tire discussion on Susie / 
>> Gus & possibly Clems is - get a duplicate set of wheels. One for pavement / 
>> gravel, and a dedicated set for MTB with proper knobbies. Anything less 
>> seems a compromise?
>>
>> Sent from my iPhone
>>
>> On Oct 30, 2022, at 12:14 PM, Brian Turner  wrote:
>>
>> 
>>
>> I’m running the Ehline 27.5 x 2.5 on my Gus currently. I had them on a 
>> previous bike that was a dedicated trail bike, and I liked them for that 
>> purpose a lot, so I knew what to expect. So far, I’m riding my Gus 50/50 
>> dirt/pavement and I’ve actually been pleasantly surprised at how well they 
>> roll on paved surfaces. Pretty quiet, too. I doubt I’m going to be doing 
>> any long paved rides, but for knocking around town and shorter paved trips 
>> 30 mi or less, they are quite enjoyable. 
>>
>> All this said, if Jan H. decided to make a tire slightly bigger than the 
>> Umtanum or Fleecer Ridge in the 2.5” / 2.6” range, I would buy them in an 
>> instant. Those RH knobbies perform equally well and roll fast and quiet on 
>> all surfaces in my opinion and experience.
>>
>> On Oct 30, 2022, at 10:56 AM, Ryan Frahm  wrote:
>>
>> I’ll chime in on the Teravail Ehline vs the Ranger. Granted, I ran a 3” 
>> Ranger tough vs the Light 2.5 Ehline, but the Ranger was extremely slow in 
>> comparison. I haven’t tried the Vittoria, but I’ve heard they are great 
>> tires. That being said, when I need new tires they will likely be Rene 
>> Herse Fleecer Ridge endurance casing. They are fantastic all around tires, 
>> worth the extra $ in my experience. 
>>
>> On Saturday, October 29, 2022 at 9:26:16 PM UTC-7 mkernan...@gmail.com 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> If we’re talking tires,  take a look at the Kenda Booster Pro.   It 
>>> comes in 29x 2.6 and 27.5x2.8 and both in 120 TPI with standard casing and 
>>> a more puncture resistant casing,  both tubeless ready.I have the 
>>> 29x2.2 version and they are a surprisingly fast and not buzzy on pavement 
>>> and very very grippy tire on gravel and single track.  I have them in the 
>>> standard casing and they feel really solid and don’t squirm with running 
>>> lower pressure.   
>>>
>>> A quick look at the tech specs and the claimed weights are very light 
>>> for a 29x2.6 tire( 681 +/-34 g for the standard casing and 763 +/- 38g for 
>>> the more puncture resistant casing.   Again,  I only have the 29x2.2 tires 
>>> so can’t speak of real world experience of the 29x 2.6 or 27.5x2.8 but if 
>>> the characteristics carry over,  it is a wonderfully fast and grippy tire
>>>
>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>>
>>> On Oct 29, 2022, at 7:50 PM, Luke Hendrickson  
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> I appreciate it. ❤️
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Saturday, October 29, 2022 at 7:45:47 PM UTC-7 jmlmu...@gmail.com 
>>> wrote:
>>>
 Luke,

 I'm so sorry for your loss. What a nice story behind your Atlantis. The 
 build is great but the story behind it makes it extra special. Thanks for 
 sharing it with us!

 On Sat, Oct 29, 2022 at 7:16 PM Luke Hendrickson <
 phendr...@paulpath.net> wrote:

> I appreciate the input on the sorta terrain you’re on with them. Since my 
> Riv  is my 
> do-it-all, I spend time on fire roads, single track, paved, and 
> everything 
> in between. The Maxxis tires currently on the bike are tough wearing and 
> durable. Supple is sorta down the list in desired qualities 

[RBW] Re: Betty Foy Sizing & Search

[Hoch in ut]

My wife is 5’6” with a 79cm PBH and rides a 52. 
Size is perfect with 110mm stem and Albatross bars. I’d say your wife would 
fit on it just fine. Especially with a shorter stem and if needed, bars 
that swept back more (ie Bosco). 

Best of luck. 

On Monday, October 24, 2022 at 1:00:06 PM UTC-6 mmille...@gmail.com wrote:

> Hello all,
>
> I've been looking for a step-through for my wife. She specifically likes a 
> Betty Foy, but really anything "pretty" would work. She's not really in to 
> changing gears a lot, and this would also be for commuting and trail rides 
> <10 miles. Does this crew have any ideas/bikes?
>
> Also, it's tough to find sizing on the Betty Foy bikes. Does anyone have 
> old material or could chime in with their size? I've searched and searched, 
> but been coming up empty.
>
> She's 5'4" with a 77 PBH.
>
> Thanks,
> Matt in STL
>

-- 
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/026f7f80-c859-4e8e-a039-6c5c0aa85bdcn%40googlegroups.com.

Re: [RBW] Re: FS: Clem Smith L 59cm (Utah)

[Hoch in ut]

I’ve received emails from a couple of people but it is still available. 
I’ve replied to all inquiries so if you’ve emailed, please email again. 
I’ve checked my inbox and the spam box and no unresponded emails remain. 
Thanks 

On Wednesday, August 10, 2022 at 10:07:10 AM UTC-6 River Bailey wrote:

> Anyone hear back about this post?
>
> On Tuesday, August 9, 2022 at 2:17:56 PM UTC-4 rmro...@gmail.com wrote:
>
>> I sent a PM also about 30 minutes ago. No response yet.
>>
>> Sent from my iPhone
>>
>> On Aug 9, 2022, at 2:16 PM, Jan O.  wrote:
>>
>> PM sent. Thanks.
>>
>>
>> Jan
>> San Francisco
>>
>>
>> On Tuesday, August 9, 2022 at 10:17:48 AM UTC-7 Hoch in ut wrote:
>>
>>> Clem Smith Jr. in 59cm size. Rides great. 
>>> No crashes, dings, dents, or scratches. Almost new condition. I 
>>> purchased it earlier this year and it has 105 miles on it.  Bought from a 
>>> guy who bought it new from Riv a month prior but never rode it. 
>>> It’s a great bike but I have another upcoming project that I need the 
>>> garage space for. 
>>>
>>> It is a stock build except:
>>> Nitto Bosco Bullmoose bars
>>> Paul Love levers
>>> Paul Canti brakes (Neo retro and touring) 
>>> Microshift shifter
>>> Ergon cork grips 
>>> Schwalbe 29x2.2 tires
>>>
>>> Note, no saddle, bag, pedals or cages included.
>>>
>>> I have over $2,600 into the bike. Asking $2,000 (net) plus shipping. 
>>>
>>>
>>> -- 
>> 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/9e33b6a1-b6bd-4148-ae71-4e399f1012d5n%40googlegroups.com
>>  
>> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/rbw-owners-bunch/9e33b6a1-b6bd-4148-ae71-4e399f1012d5n%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/aa63304f-4a05-4b20-a7bd-99c11e7320a3n%40googlegroups.com.

[RBW] Re: wheels (135mm spaced rear with freehub) for a Sam Hillborne

[Hoch in ut]

Wilbur knowing your budget or intended usage, I’d say for a bike like a 
Sam, I’d get a local wheel builder to build up:
- Velocity Quill rims
- Bitex hubs, front and rear

This should cost around $600 usd. Great set up for pavement and gravel 
riding. 

I recently built up a heavier duty set up with Velocity Cliffhangers and. 
Bitex hubs for my Clem. I did go with a SON dynamo so added about $250 to 
the build. 

On Sunday, June 19, 2022 at 2:38:59 AM UTC-6 Garth wrote:

>
> Peter, If you can be more specific of what exactly you're looking for 
> that'd help me to give you some direction. 
> The given is the 135mm 700c wheelset. 
> Do you care if all the parts are silver , if not, which parts are 
> acceptable otherwise ?
> Do you care if the spokes are double butted or straight gauge ? 
> What tire widths are you riding and @ what pressures ? 
> Do you have specific price range ? 
>
> Basically there are ready-to-buy prebuilt machine or machine + hand 
> finished wheels whose quality can vary a whole lot. Then there are many 
> custom options whose quality is usually excellent, meaning the wheel will 
> remain round and true without the rider ever needing to touch them. 
>
> Shipping with anyone varies wildly, regardless of the location, it's 
> always been that way ! 
>
>

-- 
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/2e090644-c220-4ec1-92d0-8c0a4f2f84e6n%40googlegroups.com.

[RBW] Re: Clem Smith Jr. L 59 cm Wheel Sizes

[Hoch in ut]

I have a Clem L 59 and have fitted some 29x2.5” tires. (700x63mm). Coming 
from the stock 45mm slicks, these fat tires have been amazing and made the 
bike super fun. Even on pavement. 
On Wednesday, June 8, 2022 at 4:44:11 PM UTC-6 Mackenzy Albright wrote:

> My understanding is it's a colloquially 29er was referring to a 2"+ tire 
> that makes the diameter approximately 29" vs a 700c with a 23mm is 
> approximately 27". 
>
> On Wednesday, June 8, 2022 at 4:29:32 PM UTC-6 Jacob Lopez wrote:
>
>> Well, I feel silly.  A little more research could have answered that!  
>> Thanks, folks!  I appreciate that.  Makes sense now, the part where it says 
>> 29er *tires*...
>>
>> ~Jacob
>>
>> On Wednesday, June 8, 2022 at 3:20:16 PM UTC-7 Garth wrote:
>>
>>> Jacob, 700c and 29er, 29in all refer to the same rim diameter of 622mm. 
>>> The term "29er" came about because the mtb crowd wouldn't dare be 
>>> associated with them thar road biker crowd so they had to call it 
>>> *something*. A fatter tire would only induce toe overlap if the frame 
>>> didn't have sufficient clearance to begin with and/or you pedal midfoot 
>>> with big feet and long cranks. The latest Clems though have so much 
>>> front-center(measured from the center BB to center front axle), none of the 
>>> above applies. 
>>> On Wednesday, June 8, 2022 at 6:01:54 PM UTC-4 Jacob Lopez wrote:
>>>
 Hi, All.

 I did a quick search but didn't find a thread, so let me know if you 
 know of one re this topic and I can remove this re Clem L's 59cm with 
 29ers:

 I noticed on the Riv site that 59cm Clem's can take 700c rims and "29er 
 Tires".  Does that mean that it can take 29in rims, or...?   I may be 
 looking to size up on my 52cm Clem L to a 59cm and I'm super curious to 
 how 
 29's perform on this size.  Any experience with that (if, of course I'm 
 reading the specs right and the bike can take 29in wheels)?  Does this 
 introduce toe-overlap?

 Jacob
 San Diego, 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/39f26310--49fb-9f5b-e75a893e2fe4n%40googlegroups.com.

Re: [RBW] Re: Erik's new Gus. Questions.

[Hoch in ut]

Make sure a 3” tire will be enough for you. I’ve ridden deep sand in 
southern Utah. 3” tires (Chupacabra and XR4) were ok. You’re still putting 
out a ton of wattage to keep going, especially on climbs. 
Nothing beats fat tires. 4” or bigger. Get yourself a fat bike with light 
carbon rims and fast rolling tires. 

On Wednesday, May 25, 2022 at 7:00:20 PM UTC-6 Patrick Moore wrote:

> Thanks again, Keith. I want to hold out for true 3"/76 mm tires and 5 mm 
> clearance at all 4 stays, and from such research as I've done, the Krampus 
> and one other off-shelf bike which I forget -- in my archive -- should 
> allow this with a =/< 160 mm Q, which is the goal (again, single speed), as 
> also of course would a custom.
>
> On Wed, May 25, 2022 at 3:17 PM iamkeith  wrote:
>
>> I think I responded to the question last time, but just in case:
>>
>> I have my 1st run, size L Susie set up with 29x2.8 tires, measuring at 
>> least 74mm  on 42mm rims, with a 3x9 drivetrain.   My tires don't have huge 
>> knobs, but there are no absolutely no clearance or interference issues 
>> anywhere, in any gear.   By far the biggest constraint is the height of the 
>> fork crown.   If it was higher, I could and would put fenders on the bike, 
>> too.   
>>
>> If I can find a 2.6 tire that I like, I will eventually switch to those.  
>> I want fenders,.  And the 2.8 tires are fine on dirt but have a little too 
>> much self-steer on hard surfaces.
>>
>> On Wednesday, May 25, 2022 at 2:55:14 PM UTC-6 Patrick Moore wrote:
>>
>>> Thanks, Erik and others. Garth, come to think of it, I think that I did 
>>> ask this before -- more Ralph Wiggumry. Oh well.
>>>
>>> And I would prefer disc brakes, tho' that's not a deal breaker.
>>>
>>> Also, any Monocog replacement would be a single speed, or perhaps use a 
>>> hub gear -- typical wide range 3 speed or perhaps a 2 speed kickback; but 
>>> probably just a simple single speed.
>>>
>>> The dealbreaker tho' is 76 mm tires with 5 mm clearance on each side, so 
>>> 86 mm between stays at tire level.
>>>
>>> Garth, I find that an extra cm of width and corresponding 5 psi or so 
>>> drop in pressure makes a huge difference when negotiating sand. 60 mm at 19 
>>> psi is much better than 50 mm at 23 psi, but 71-2 mm at 13-15 psi is even 
>>> better, and 76mm+ I daresay would improve things further. 
>>>
>>> On Tue, May 24, 2022 at 11:28 PM Erik  wrote:
>>>
 Well, that sand looks brutal!  As you noted, the max listed tire size 
 on the Gus or Susie is 2.8, but I feel like that would be pushing it for a 
 couple of reasons.  I'm running 29" x 2.5 Terravail Ehlines. They measure 
 about 62mm without any weight on them on Cliffhanger rims, tubeless.  They 
 have plenty of clearance on the sides (about 12mm on the front, a little 
 less in the rear). I measured the distance between the inside of the 
 chainstays and it looks like it's right about 80mm (I wasn't measuring 
 with 
 calipers!), so I don't think you could fit 3" tires (about 76mm) with any 
 meaningful room to spare.  The forks have a little more clearance so maybe 
 a slightly larger front tire would be possible.

 The bigger issue that I would see with trying to get even larger tires 
 on the back is the bottom bracket width necessary to keep the chain off of 
 the tire.  It would push the chainline out pretty far.  It's a 73mm shell 
 and I'm running a 122 IRD bottom bracket with spacers.  Even with that and 
 a chainline that is wy outboard, the chain runs pretty close to the 
 tire in the 50t gear in the back.  I think that if I sized up even to the 
 2.8 I might have to switch up to a 127 BB, pushing the chainline out even 
 further.  You almost need Boost spacing at that point to push the cassette 
 further out in line with the front chainring.  Otherwise the front 
 chainring is starting to line up with the smallest cog which makes for a 
 terrible chainline.  That's my amateur opinion at any rate!  I'm sure 
 someone on here has tried it or knows this better than I do. 

 Otherwise, even with "just" 2.5 inch tires it's handled the terrain 
 just fine and was easy to keep on track on multiple surfaces, including 
 rocky sections and sections with lots of roots and loose gravel.  It was 
 equally fine with all of it.  Sand, however, is another matter.  We don't 
 have much of that on the trails in my area so I can't really speak to it.

 I may try out a larger front tire soon and will happily report back.  I 
 don't think I'm going to try a larger rear tire for the reasons above re: 
 chainline.  

 And thanks for the nod on the build!  Happy with all the shiny bits.  

 Erik  

>
>
> -- 
 You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google 
 Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group.
 To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving