Re: [RBW] Re: Lightening up my Joe Appaloosa--a full makeover. AHH--a partial makeover. Thanks to Analog Cycles.

[Mark Roland]

I have heard that the tubeless setup has gotten much less fussy for most 
combinations of tubeless-ready equipment, even for non-bike shop people. 
And agree that it's helpful to have a bicycle that you feel comfortable 
moving around. Enjoy, and maybe we'll be able to pull off another East 
Coast meetup, seeing as how it would be in the Great Outdoors!

On Sunday, June 7, 2020 at 1:38:35 PM UTC-4, Roberta wrote:
>
>
> Mark,  putting on tubeless was easy for me:  I just watched Candice do the 
> work!   They had an IG session on how to do it and it probably comes down 
> to "Candice (Mark and James) do it so much, they are exerts at it)"  I 
> don't plan on changing the tires until they wear out.  That's my MO for 
> tires.
>
> Melanie--I am so glad that you are happy with your changes, too.  Once 
> Covid is over, we should ride our Appaloosas together.
>
> Erik, New 650B dyno wheel, that's exciting!  Since we live near each 
> other, I'm looking forward to seeing it in person.
>
> I hope everyone has a terrific biking day,
> Roberta
>
> On Sunday, June 7, 2020 at 12:11:10 PM UTC-4, Bicycle Belle Ding Ding! 
> wrote:
>>
>> Good to hear from #RivSister Melanie!
>>
>> I am sure none of of us would complain if you chose to indulge us with 
>> photos of your new wheels on your Appaloosa. 朗
>>
>> I agree that the bikes feel very different after getting these new 
>> wheels. I’m not going to “quibble” about tubeless, but what was promised 
>> was a lighter, smoother ride with fun, colorful bits. And that’s exactly 
>> what I got. Therefore, I’m calling Analog tubeless wheels a great choice 
>> for me.
>>
>> I just got back from another 10 miler, fighting winds the whole time and 
>> I didn’t even much mind.
>> Leah
>> Sent from my iPad
>>
>> On Jun 7, 2020, at 7:26 AM, Melanie  wrote:
>>
>> 
>> Hi Roberta and all - I too have been "enlightened." Once Roberta said she 
>> was going to go for it and lighten up her Appaloosa I got the courage to do 
>> the same to mine. Analog built me some new wheels with Pacenti rims, Bitex 
>> hubs, a SRAM 990 cassette and tubeless Gravelkings. Of course, some red 
>> spoke nipples and valve stem as well. I just love it!  It's still not a 
>> light bike because I am keeping my Choco-Moose bars, my triple crank, and 
>> Clem rack. But the feel is very different. That z of the hubs disturbed 
>> me at first. But now I know it is just urging me on, "faster, faster, 
>> faster." Such joy.
>>
>> So Roberta - how does riding with the 1x drivetrain compare with the old 
>> triple???
>>
>>  - Melanie
>>
>> On Saturday, June 6, 2020 at 12:42:36 PM UTC-4, Roberta wrote:
>>>
>>> In April 2017, I rode a 2016 stock-built Rivendell Joe Appaloosa at 
>>> Gravel and Grind and fell in love.  James (formerly of G, now of 
>>> Analog Cycles) recommended a Brooks B-17 saddle, fenders, a rear rack, and 
>>> I happily pedaled away for the next three years.   My only change was 
>>> to a Brooks Flyer saddle.  
>>>
>>>
>>> I love the ride of the Appaloosa and rode it at home on the weekends.  When 
>>> I wanted another bike at my office for after work rides, I bought an A. 
>>> Homer Hilsen from a fellow RBW member.  My only issue with the Joe 
>>> Appaloosa was it was heavy for me to maneuver on mass transportation, 
>>> steps, and general lifting.  Now I had a lighter AHH, and that is the 
>>> bike I chose to travel with.
>>>
>>>
>>> But…I still loved the ride of the Appaloosa…it was just so…heavy.  A 
>>> call to James and Candice one day to talk about tubeless tires options, and 
>>> I was signing up to change nearly everything on it to lighten it and get an 
>>> even better ride.  I changed the saddle back to the B-17, removed the 
>>> heavy and too large for my use Carradice bags. Rack, fenders and kickstand 
>>> are too practical, so I kept them.  
>>>
>>>
>>> On Memorial Day weekend, I drove both bikes to Analog Cycles.  AHH got 
>>> 1.75” Gravel King tubeless tires and a shorter stem.  Instead of 
>>> regular grips, they wrapped the grip area with Fizik tape over gel.  Deity 
>>> valve caps in red for the finishing touch.   I didn’t need to change 
>>> out anything else on the bike—it already had dyno lighting and the correct 
>>> rims.   My new bag is a Sackville Banana Sax, just the perfect size!
>>>
>>>
>>> The Appaloosa got the most work.  They changed the handlebar from steel 
>>> Choco-moose to aluminum Albatross and changed my 3x8 (or 3x9, I forget) 
>>> drive train to a 1x11 with indexed shifting.  However, the biggest 
>>> difference came with the new wheels, tubeless tires and dyno lighting!  
>>> Candice 
>>> recommended purple spoke nipples and they look great with the butterscotch 
>>> frame.  Near the valve stem, she changed the colorway to gold, topped 
>>> off with chartreuse valve caps, and I think it looks smashing!I 
>>> also got nice cork grips that probably a “blend” because they have more 
>>> give than the Rivendell ones.   I also like the ergonomic “bulge” in 

Re: [RBW] Re: Lightening up my Joe Appaloosa--a full makeover. AHH--a partial makeover. Thanks to Analog Cycles.

[ted]

Peace. Nobody should ever try to mess with your tubeless Big Ones. The 
proof is in the pudding, or something.

Schwalbe SV19A tubes for 700C x 40-62mm 140gr.
https://www.renehersecycles.com/shop/components/tires/700c/schwalbe-tubes-for-700c-tires/
doubtless available elsewhere too.


On Sunday, June 7, 2020 at 4:54:02 PM UTC-7, Patrick Moore wrote:
>
> I don't want to hear more evidence. I want my tubeless Big Ones. *Quod 
> erat demonstrandum *(as Euclid would say).
>
> But I'm pleased to hear you can buy 140 gram fat tubes.
>
> Patrick "the evidence is good enough for me, data be damned" Moore
>
> On Sun, Jun 7, 2020 at 5:46 PM ted > 
> wrote:
>
>> I don't doubt she shaved 1.5 lbs in the switch at all, just that it is 
>> all in swapping tubes for sealant.
>>
>> Try your calcs again ignoring the tires.
>> e.g:
>>(250-60)*2/454 -> ~ 0.84 lbs
>>
>> Now the tires alone:
>>(800-450)*2/454 -> ~ 1.54 lbs
>>
>> It's the tires man, the tires. Is all I'm saying.
>>
>> Oh and you could have saved 
>>   (250-140)*2/455 -> ~ .48 lbs
>> just by buying lighter tubes. That's .48/.84 -> ~ 57% of what you save by 
>> only swapping sealant for box stock tubes.
>>
>> On Sunday, June 7, 2020 at 4:21:10 PM UTC-7, Patrick Moore wrote:
>>>
>>> Here is what I can calculate from memory for the switch for my 29er 
>>> wheels; I realize that Leah uses 650B, so adjust accordingly.
>>>
>>> 700C X 60 Big Apple, the "Liteskin" version: 800 grams on my scale.
>>> Box-stock 29er tube: 250 grams.
>>> Total: 1050 grams.
>>>
>>> 700C X 60 Big One: 450 grams on my scale.
>>> 2 fl oz sealant: 60 grams.
>>> Total: 510 grams.
>>>
>>> 1050 - 510 = 540 grams, which is ~1.2 lb, and that's for 1 wheel; 2.4 
>>> for both. So perhaps Leah's calculation is accurate. 
>>>
>>> I also swapped out the very nice 2" wide Snocat (also "Extralights!) at 
>>> 800 grams each even with big holes drilled in them for Velocity Blunt 
>>> SS's at a claimed 435 grams each; let's say 500 grams. That's another 300 
>>> per wheel or 600 total, 1.5 lb, for a grand total of 3.9 lb saved on both 
>>> wheels. Actually, I originally saved  another 0.4 lb -- 4.3 lb total -- 
>>> because I first installed 700C X 50 Furious Freds at 360 grams each.
>>>
>>>
>>> On Sun, Jun 7, 2020 at 4:57 PM ted  wrote:
>>>
 Depending on the size tires you ride, replacing your tubes with sealant 
 can save a few ounces but 1.5 pounds seems implausible.

 1.5 pounds is 24 oz. add 3 for sealant (mind i think that 2-4 oz. is 
 per wheel so I should add 6) and you get 27 so your tubes were over 13oz. 
 each? That's about 370gr per tube.
 A standard Schwalbe tube for 700c 40-62mm tires is only 220gr, the 
 superlight one is 140gr. (ref: 
 https://www.renehersecycles.com/shop/components/tires/700c/schwalbe-tubes-for-700c-tires/
 )
 Coming at it a different way, the 2-4 ounces is per wheel, that's 85 gr 
 plus or minus, a schwalbe tube for a big tire is 140 or 220 gr. So 
 replacing tubes with sealant should save something like 135gr per wheel 
 for 
 regular tubes, 55gr for light ones. That's 0.12 to 0.30 lb per wheel, or 
 .24 to .6 pounds combined.
 Something is not adding up here.
 Also remember in about 6 months you'll add another ~2oz of sealant to 
 each wheel. That's adding about 1/4 pound to your bike.

 I suspect most of your 1.5 pounds is lighter tires. I'd be very 
 surprised if replacing the sealant in your tires with tubes would add 1.5 
 pounds to your new wheels. And in 6 months (if you haven't worn out your 
 tires you'll be adding) 0.25 pounds to refresh the sealant.
 I am all for trimming fat off a bike. I'm also in favor of being 
 accurate about where the fat is coming from.

 Of course it is perfectly reasonable to not care where the lbs come 
 from, hey your bike is now lighter, YAY.

 To try and lighten the mood after raining on the parade I offer:
 Your on the road repair kit for tubeless may well be lighter than what 
 you would carry for tubes. So that makes your bike even lighter.
 Bonus fun, those beautiful colored spoke nipples are Al instead of the 
 typical brass, so not only do they look great they are lighter too.

 On Sunday, June 7, 2020 at 2:05:46 PM UTC-7, Bicycle Belle Ding Ding! 
 wrote:
>
> Well, the other thing the #RivSisters wanted was less weight. Tubes 
> are heavier than sealant - the sealant was only 2-4 ounces. If I remember 
> right, I got rid of 1.5 pounds by shedding tubes. That said, none of us 
> women are weight weenies - we’re choosing stout Rivendell bikes as our 
> daily riders after all, but if we can trim some of the fat to make the 
> bikes more maneuverable, we do. 
>
> Sent from my iPad 
>
> > On Jun 7, 2020, at 1:57 PM, ted  wrote: 
> > 
>
 -- 
 You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google 
 

Re: [RBW] Re: Lightening up my Joe Appaloosa--a full makeover. AHH--a partial makeover. Thanks to Analog Cycles.

[Patrick Moore]

I don't want to hear more evidence. I want my tubeless Big Ones. *Quod erat
demonstrandum *(as Euclid would say).

But I'm pleased to hear you can buy 140 gram fat tubes.

Patrick "the evidence is good enough for me, data be damned" Moore

On Sun, Jun 7, 2020 at 5:46 PM ted  wrote:

> I don't doubt she shaved 1.5 lbs in the switch at all, just that it is all
> in swapping tubes for sealant.
>
> Try your calcs again ignoring the tires.
> e.g:
>(250-60)*2/454 -> ~ 0.84 lbs
>
> Now the tires alone:
>(800-450)*2/454 -> ~ 1.54 lbs
>
> It's the tires man, the tires. Is all I'm saying.
>
> Oh and you could have saved
>   (250-140)*2/455 -> ~ .48 lbs
> just by buying lighter tubes. That's .48/.84 -> ~ 57% of what you save by
> only swapping sealant for box stock tubes.
>
> On Sunday, June 7, 2020 at 4:21:10 PM UTC-7, Patrick Moore wrote:
>>
>> Here is what I can calculate from memory for the switch for my 29er
>> wheels; I realize that Leah uses 650B, so adjust accordingly.
>>
>> 700C X 60 Big Apple, the "Liteskin" version: 800 grams on my scale.
>> Box-stock 29er tube: 250 grams.
>> Total: 1050 grams.
>>
>> 700C X 60 Big One: 450 grams on my scale.
>> 2 fl oz sealant: 60 grams.
>> Total: 510 grams.
>>
>> 1050 - 510 = 540 grams, which is ~1.2 lb, and that's for 1 wheel; 2.4 for
>> both. So perhaps Leah's calculation is accurate.
>>
>> I also swapped out the very nice 2" wide Snocat (also "Extralights!) at
>> 800 grams each even with big holes drilled in them for Velocity Blunt
>> SS's at a claimed 435 grams each; let's say 500 grams. That's another 300
>> per wheel or 600 total, 1.5 lb, for a grand total of 3.9 lb saved on both
>> wheels. Actually, I originally saved  another 0.4 lb -- 4.3 lb total --
>> because I first installed 700C X 50 Furious Freds at 360 grams each.
>>
>>
>> On Sun, Jun 7, 2020 at 4:57 PM ted  wrote:
>>
>>> Depending on the size tires you ride, replacing your tubes with sealant
>>> can save a few ounces but 1.5 pounds seems implausible.
>>>
>>> 1.5 pounds is 24 oz. add 3 for sealant (mind i think that 2-4 oz. is per
>>> wheel so I should add 6) and you get 27 so your tubes were over 13oz. each?
>>> That's about 370gr per tube.
>>> A standard Schwalbe tube for 700c 40-62mm tires is only 220gr, the
>>> superlight one is 140gr. (ref:
>>> https://www.renehersecycles.com/shop/components/tires/700c/schwalbe-tubes-for-700c-tires/
>>> )
>>> Coming at it a different way, the 2-4 ounces is per wheel, that's 85 gr
>>> plus or minus, a schwalbe tube for a big tire is 140 or 220 gr. So
>>> replacing tubes with sealant should save something like 135gr per wheel for
>>> regular tubes, 55gr for light ones. That's 0.12 to 0.30 lb per wheel, or
>>> .24 to .6 pounds combined.
>>> Something is not adding up here.
>>> Also remember in about 6 months you'll add another ~2oz of sealant to
>>> each wheel. That's adding about 1/4 pound to your bike.
>>>
>>> I suspect most of your 1.5 pounds is lighter tires. I'd be very
>>> surprised if replacing the sealant in your tires with tubes would add 1.5
>>> pounds to your new wheels. And in 6 months (if you haven't worn out your
>>> tires you'll be adding) 0.25 pounds to refresh the sealant.
>>> I am all for trimming fat off a bike. I'm also in favor of being
>>> accurate about where the fat is coming from.
>>>
>>> Of course it is perfectly reasonable to not care where the lbs come
>>> from, hey your bike is now lighter, YAY.
>>>
>>> To try and lighten the mood after raining on the parade I offer:
>>> Your on the road repair kit for tubeless may well be lighter than what
>>> you would carry for tubes. So that makes your bike even lighter.
>>> Bonus fun, those beautiful colored spoke nipples are Al instead of the
>>> typical brass, so not only do they look great they are lighter too.
>>>
>>> On Sunday, June 7, 2020 at 2:05:46 PM UTC-7, Bicycle Belle Ding Ding!
>>> wrote:

 Well, the other thing the #RivSisters wanted was less weight. Tubes are
 heavier than sealant - the sealant was only 2-4 ounces. If I remember
 right, I got rid of 1.5 pounds by shedding tubes. That said, none of us
 women are weight weenies - we’re choosing stout Rivendell bikes as our
 daily riders after all, but if we can trim some of the fat to make the
 bikes more maneuverable, we do.

 Sent from my iPad

 > On Jun 7, 2020, at 1:57 PM, ted  wrote:
 >

>>> --
>>> 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-owne...@googlegroups.com.
>>> To view this discussion on the web visit
>>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/rbw-owners-bunch/30821e92-b885-4b2d-aa25-b6c1a2944684o%40googlegroups.com
>>> 
>>> .
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>>
>> 

Re: [RBW] Re: Lightening up my Joe Appaloosa--a full makeover. AHH--a partial makeover. Thanks to Analog Cycles.

[ted]

I don't doubt she shaved 1.5 lbs in the switch at all, just that it is all 
in swapping tubes for sealant.

Try your calcs again ignoring the tires.
e.g:
   (250-60)*2/454 -> ~ 0.84 lbs

Now the tires alone:
   (800-450)*2/454 -> ~ 1.54 lbs

It's the tires man, the tires. Is all I'm saying.

Oh and you could have saved 
  (250-140)*2/455 -> ~ .48 lbs
just by buying lighter tubes. That's .48/.84 -> ~ 57% of what you save by 
only swapping sealant for box stock tubes.

On Sunday, June 7, 2020 at 4:21:10 PM UTC-7, Patrick Moore wrote:
>
> Here is what I can calculate from memory for the switch for my 29er 
> wheels; I realize that Leah uses 650B, so adjust accordingly.
>
> 700C X 60 Big Apple, the "Liteskin" version: 800 grams on my scale.
> Box-stock 29er tube: 250 grams.
> Total: 1050 grams.
>
> 700C X 60 Big One: 450 grams on my scale.
> 2 fl oz sealant: 60 grams.
> Total: 510 grams.
>
> 1050 - 510 = 540 grams, which is ~1.2 lb, and that's for 1 wheel; 2.4 for 
> both. So perhaps Leah's calculation is accurate. 
>
> I also swapped out the very nice 2" wide Snocat (also "Extralights!) at 
> 800 grams each even with big holes drilled in them for Velocity Blunt 
> SS's at a claimed 435 grams each; let's say 500 grams. That's another 300 
> per wheel or 600 total, 1.5 lb, for a grand total of 3.9 lb saved on both 
> wheels. Actually, I originally saved  another 0.4 lb -- 4.3 lb total -- 
> because I first installed 700C X 50 Furious Freds at 360 grams each.
>
>
> On Sun, Jun 7, 2020 at 4:57 PM ted > 
> wrote:
>
>> Depending on the size tires you ride, replacing your tubes with sealant 
>> can save a few ounces but 1.5 pounds seems implausible.
>>
>> 1.5 pounds is 24 oz. add 3 for sealant (mind i think that 2-4 oz. is per 
>> wheel so I should add 6) and you get 27 so your tubes were over 13oz. each? 
>> That's about 370gr per tube.
>> A standard Schwalbe tube for 700c 40-62mm tires is only 220gr, the 
>> superlight one is 140gr. (ref: 
>> https://www.renehersecycles.com/shop/components/tires/700c/schwalbe-tubes-for-700c-tires/
>> )
>> Coming at it a different way, the 2-4 ounces is per wheel, that's 85 gr 
>> plus or minus, a schwalbe tube for a big tire is 140 or 220 gr. So 
>> replacing tubes with sealant should save something like 135gr per wheel for 
>> regular tubes, 55gr for light ones. That's 0.12 to 0.30 lb per wheel, or 
>> .24 to .6 pounds combined.
>> Something is not adding up here.
>> Also remember in about 6 months you'll add another ~2oz of sealant to 
>> each wheel. That's adding about 1/4 pound to your bike.
>>
>> I suspect most of your 1.5 pounds is lighter tires. I'd be very surprised 
>> if replacing the sealant in your tires with tubes would add 1.5 pounds to 
>> your new wheels. And in 6 months (if you haven't worn out your tires you'll 
>> be adding) 0.25 pounds to refresh the sealant.
>> I am all for trimming fat off a bike. I'm also in favor of being accurate 
>> about where the fat is coming from.
>>
>> Of course it is perfectly reasonable to not care where the lbs come from, 
>> hey your bike is now lighter, YAY.
>>
>> To try and lighten the mood after raining on the parade I offer:
>> Your on the road repair kit for tubeless may well be lighter than what 
>> you would carry for tubes. So that makes your bike even lighter.
>> Bonus fun, those beautiful colored spoke nipples are Al instead of the 
>> typical brass, so not only do they look great they are lighter too.
>>
>> On Sunday, June 7, 2020 at 2:05:46 PM UTC-7, Bicycle Belle Ding Ding! 
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Well, the other thing the #RivSisters wanted was less weight. Tubes are 
>>> heavier than sealant - the sealant was only 2-4 ounces. If I remember 
>>> right, I got rid of 1.5 pounds by shedding tubes. That said, none of us 
>>> women are weight weenies - we’re choosing stout Rivendell bikes as our 
>>> daily riders after all, but if we can trim some of the fat to make the 
>>> bikes more maneuverable, we do. 
>>>
>>> Sent from my iPad 
>>>
>>> > On Jun 7, 2020, at 1:57 PM, ted  wrote: 
>>> > 
>>>
>> -- 
>> 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-owne...@googlegroups.com .
>> To view this discussion on the web visit 
>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/rbw-owners-bunch/30821e92-b885-4b2d-aa25-b6c1a2944684o%40googlegroups.com
>>  
>> 
>> .
>>
>
>
> -- 
>
> ---
> 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 

Re: [RBW] Re: Lightening up my Joe Appaloosa--a full makeover. AHH--a partial makeover. Thanks to Analog Cycles.

[Patrick Moore]

Here is what I can calculate from memory for the switch for my 29er wheels;
I realize that Leah uses 650B, so adjust accordingly.

700C X 60 Big Apple, the "Liteskin" version: 800 grams on my scale.
Box-stock 29er tube: 250 grams.
Total: 1050 grams.

700C X 60 Big One: 450 grams on my scale.
2 fl oz sealant: 60 grams.
Total: 510 grams.

1050 - 510 = 540 grams, which is ~1.2 lb, and that's for 1 wheel; 2.4 for
both. So perhaps Leah's calculation is accurate.

I also swapped out the very nice 2" wide Snocat (also "Extralights!) at 800
grams each even with big holes drilled in them for Velocity Blunt SS's at a
claimed 435 grams each; let's say 500 grams. That's another 300 per wheel
or 600 total, 1.5 lb, for a grand total of 3.9 lb saved on both wheels.
Actually, I originally saved  another 0.4 lb -- 4.3 lb total -- because I
first installed 700C X 50 Furious Freds at 360 grams each.


On Sun, Jun 7, 2020 at 4:57 PM ted  wrote:

> Depending on the size tires you ride, replacing your tubes with sealant
> can save a few ounces but 1.5 pounds seems implausible.
>
> 1.5 pounds is 24 oz. add 3 for sealant (mind i think that 2-4 oz. is per
> wheel so I should add 6) and you get 27 so your tubes were over 13oz. each?
> That's about 370gr per tube.
> A standard Schwalbe tube for 700c 40-62mm tires is only 220gr, the
> superlight one is 140gr. (ref:
> https://www.renehersecycles.com/shop/components/tires/700c/schwalbe-tubes-for-700c-tires/
> )
> Coming at it a different way, the 2-4 ounces is per wheel, that's 85 gr
> plus or minus, a schwalbe tube for a big tire is 140 or 220 gr. So
> replacing tubes with sealant should save something like 135gr per wheel for
> regular tubes, 55gr for light ones. That's 0.12 to 0.30 lb per wheel, or
> .24 to .6 pounds combined.
> Something is not adding up here.
> Also remember in about 6 months you'll add another ~2oz of sealant to each
> wheel. That's adding about 1/4 pound to your bike.
>
> I suspect most of your 1.5 pounds is lighter tires. I'd be very surprised
> if replacing the sealant in your tires with tubes would add 1.5 pounds to
> your new wheels. And in 6 months (if you haven't worn out your tires you'll
> be adding) 0.25 pounds to refresh the sealant.
> I am all for trimming fat off a bike. I'm also in favor of being accurate
> about where the fat is coming from.
>
> Of course it is perfectly reasonable to not care where the lbs come from,
> hey your bike is now lighter, YAY.
>
> To try and lighten the mood after raining on the parade I offer:
> Your on the road repair kit for tubeless may well be lighter than what you
> would carry for tubes. So that makes your bike even lighter.
> Bonus fun, those beautiful colored spoke nipples are Al instead of the
> typical brass, so not only do they look great they are lighter too.
>
> On Sunday, June 7, 2020 at 2:05:46 PM UTC-7, Bicycle Belle Ding Ding!
> wrote:
>>
>> Well, the other thing the #RivSisters wanted was less weight. Tubes are
>> heavier than sealant - the sealant was only 2-4 ounces. If I remember
>> right, I got rid of 1.5 pounds by shedding tubes. That said, none of us
>> women are weight weenies - we’re choosing stout Rivendell bikes as our
>> daily riders after all, but if we can trim some of the fat to make the
>> bikes more maneuverable, we do.
>>
>> Sent from my iPad
>>
>> > On Jun 7, 2020, at 1:57 PM, ted  wrote:
>> >
>>
> --
> 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/30821e92-b885-4b2d-aa25-b6c1a2944684o%40googlegroups.com
> 
> .
>


-- 

---
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/CALuTfguMM38hSfd0gG-edX69EB9uaMDy8op%2B7fWOELdogfbS2w%40mail.gmail.com.

Re: [RBW] Re: Lightening up my Joe Appaloosa--a full makeover. AHH--a partial makeover. Thanks to Analog Cycles.

[ted]

Depending on the size tires you ride, replacing your tubes with sealant can 
save a few ounces but 1.5 pounds seems implausible.

1.5 pounds is 24 oz. add 3 for sealant (mind i think that 2-4 oz. is per 
wheel so I should add 6) and you get 27 so your tubes were over 13oz. each? 
That's about 370gr per tube.
A standard Schwalbe tube for 700c 40-62mm tires is only 220gr, the 
superlight one is 140gr. (ref: 
https://www.renehersecycles.com/shop/components/tires/700c/schwalbe-tubes-for-700c-tires/)
Coming at it a different way, the 2-4 ounces is per wheel, that's 85 gr 
plus or minus, a schwalbe tube for a big tire is 140 or 220 gr. So 
replacing tubes with sealant should save something like 135gr per wheel for 
regular tubes, 55gr for light ones. That's 0.12 to 0.30 lb per wheel, or 
.24 to .6 pounds combined.
Something is not adding up here.
Also remember in about 6 months you'll add another ~2oz of sealant to each 
wheel. That's adding about 1/4 pound to your bike.

I suspect most of your 1.5 pounds is lighter tires. I'd be very surprised 
if replacing the sealant in your tires with tubes would add 1.5 pounds to 
your new wheels. And in 6 months (if you haven't worn out your tires you'll 
be adding) 0.25 pounds to refresh the sealant.
I am all for trimming fat off a bike. I'm also in favor of being accurate 
about where the fat is coming from.

Of course it is perfectly reasonable to not care where the lbs come from, 
hey your bike is now lighter, YAY.

To try and lighten the mood after raining on the parade I offer:
Your on the road repair kit for tubeless may well be lighter than what you 
would carry for tubes. So that makes your bike even lighter.
Bonus fun, those beautiful colored spoke nipples are Al instead of the 
typical brass, so not only do they look great they are lighter too.

On Sunday, June 7, 2020 at 2:05:46 PM UTC-7, Bicycle Belle Ding Ding! wrote:
>
> Well, the other thing the #RivSisters wanted was less weight. Tubes are 
> heavier than sealant - the sealant was only 2-4 ounces. If I remember 
> right, I got rid of 1.5 pounds by shedding tubes. That said, none of us 
> women are weight weenies - we’re choosing stout Rivendell bikes as our 
> daily riders after all, but if we can trim some of the fat to make the 
> bikes more maneuverable, we do. 
>
> Sent from my iPad 
>
> > On Jun 7, 2020, at 1:57 PM, ted > 
> wrote: 
> > 
>

-- 
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/30821e92-b885-4b2d-aa25-b6c1a2944684o%40googlegroups.com.

Re: [RBW] Re: Lightening up my Joe Appaloosa--a full makeover. AHH--a partial makeover. Thanks to Analog Cycles.

['Abcyclehank' via RBW Owners Bunch]

I just want to shout out to the Rivsisters how much joy, enthusiasm, and a 
fresh perspective you each are adding to this list.
Welcome Melanie, Roberta and Leah you each already know how much respect I 
maintain for you amazing Riv owners.
The fact that you have found, love, and promote Rivendell and Analog is great 
for each small business and their bicycle goals.
This has to be good for both.  This may sound and be sexist as self examining 
of myself has helped me realize that other Rivendell men may often try to 
manipulate their daughters, girlfriends, wives, and or boyfriends to join them 
in their love of bikes and simply sharing an activity together at a level that 
is not ideal.  In the spirit of everything going on in the world I suggest 
everyone listen to the true voice of those being encouraged.

So much nicer and rewarding to let others find their own level of joy and 
enjoyment in the world of cycling.  Whether that is tubed or tubeless, helmeted 
or helmetless, masked or face free.

Long live the Rivsisters!

Just ride and let ride!

Ryan Hankinson
West Michigan

-- 
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/ba2be6a6-3b88-4764-bd67-65b3a5fc5771o%40googlegroups.com.

Re: [RBW] Re: Lightening up my Joe Appaloosa--a full makeover. AHH--a partial makeover. Thanks to Analog Cycles.

[Leah Peterson]

Well, the other thing the #RivSisters wanted was less weight. Tubes are heavier 
than sealant - the sealant was only 2-4 ounces. If I remember right, I got rid 
of 1.5 pounds by shedding tubes. That said, none of us women are weight weenies 
- we’re choosing stout Rivendell bikes as our daily riders after all, but if we 
can trim some of the fat to make the bikes more maneuverable, we do.

Sent from my iPad

> On Jun 7, 2020, at 1:57 PM, ted  wrote:
> 

-- 
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/9006A0D0-3BCA-4456-B045-412753DD2D27%40gmail.com.

[RBW] Re: Lightening up my Joe Appaloosa--a full makeover. AHH--a partial makeover. Thanks to Analog Cycles.

[ted]

The Riv-sisters are changing three things at once (tires, wheels, tubeless) 
with wondrous results. Which of course is great. 
How much of the wondrousness is directly due to tubeless is, I think, an 
open (though perhaps unimportant) question. As such the clarity of that 
other dividing line might be in doubt. I think James would say: if they 
weren't going tubeless they would get too many flats with those tires and 
wouldn't be happy long term. So in his view the tubeless part of the puzzle 
is necessary to make the better riding tires viable. For anybody that's 
using great riding tires with tubes and not getting flats, that logic 
doesn't quite work.

No matter how you slice it, I think the tubeless v tubes thing comes down 
to what flats would one be getting with tubes that one wouldn't with 
tubeless, and how does the rider feel about those. I suppose there is also 
the matter of whether one finds the repair process for one system more or 
less onerous than the other.

On Sunday, June 7, 2020 at 12:54:39 PM UTC-7, Deacon Patrick wrote:
>
> Precisely my assessment as well, Ted. Goatheads are the dividing line I 
> see. Yet, clearly, there is another dividing line that Roberta and 
> Riv-sisters are pointing out as well, and I'm delighted it is working for 
> them.
>
> With abandon,
> Patrick
>
> On Sunday, June 7, 2020 at 1:30:06 PM UTC-6, ted wrote:
>>
>> Hey Deacon,
>>
>> Though you are certainly big, and you may be an Ogre, I think we both 
>> know you're not dumb.
>> I think sometimes the move to tubeless gets conflated with the move to 
>> big supple low pressure tires, because some people do both at the same 
>> time. As you are already riding big supple low pressure tires, and are not 
>> bothered by flats, I'd argue you're clearly the opposite of a perfect case 
>> study for going tubeless. As you say you have no problem to fix. People who 
>> are familiar with goat heads however, often feel they do have a problem, 
>> and for them (and others bothered by flats resulting from similar 
>> irritants) tubeless may be an answer. Different circumstances / 
>> environments often warrant different equipment choices.
>>
>> regards
>> Ted
>>
>> On Sunday, June 7, 2020 at 11:42:21 AM UTC-7, Deacon Patrick wrote:
>>>
>>> Sweet ride, Roberta! I know how much more my daughters love riding their 
>>> lighter Clementines compared with their previous, much heavier kid's bikes 
>>> or 90s Trek rebuilds. As an ogre who carries my bikepacking rig weighing up 
>>> to 100 pounds as needed, I don't innately appreciate that need and easily 
>>> forget it, until I am helping them get over rocks and roots on steep, 
>>> technical bits I just consider normal. Grin.


>>> Like you, Roberta, I enjoy freely wandering topics, learning much from 
>>> them. My 2.8" beefy tires on my GBW are the perfect case study for going 
>>> tubeless, yet I do not. Why? I've yet to experience the need. Cross 
>>> reference "big, dumb ogre." Grin. For me, the weight isn't a big deal. I 
>>> get plenty of tire suppleness with a tube with the carefully chosen suppler 
>>> tires I ride, and I still don't grasp how a field flat is addressed without 
>>> mess and frustration. Arguably, the one flat I've gotten on "Beorn" was due 
>>> to inner moving rub as it occured on the inside of the tube after months of 
>>> riding. Still, for me, tubeless is a solution looking for a problem. Grin. 
>>> I am delighted it is working for so many!
>>>
>>> With abandon,
>>> Patrick 
>>>
>>

-- 
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/72492e3d-0a2c-4070-b098-656e2b0b4393o%40googlegroups.com.

[RBW] Re: Lightening up my Joe Appaloosa--a full makeover. AHH--a partial makeover. Thanks to Analog Cycles.

[Brian Campbell]

Spoke Nipples! Sorry. hit spost before proofreading.

On Sunday, June 7, 2020 at 4:28:47 PM UTC-4, Brian Campbell wrote:
>
> Congrats Roberta! So glad it all worked out so well for you!  Its always 
> nice to take something you enjoy and find a way to enjoy it even more! Hope 
> to see you on the trail sometime. I won't be able to miss the purple 
> nipples!
>

-- 
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/2d1b6b3b-5a36-4660-aed3-f646cf682cb1o%40googlegroups.com.

[RBW] Re: Lightening up my Joe Appaloosa--a full makeover. AHH--a partial makeover. Thanks to Analog Cycles.

[Brian Campbell]

Congrats Roberta! So glad it all worked out so well for you!  Its always 
nice to take something you enjoy and find a way to enjoy it even more! Hope 
to see you on the trail sometime. I won't be able to miss the purple 
nipples!

-- 
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/a50d1dd4-3df6-4d7a-9179-9680a8ee1b00o%40googlegroups.com.

[RBW] Re: Lightening up my Joe Appaloosa--a full makeover. AHH--a partial makeover. Thanks to Analog Cycles.

['Deacon Patrick' via RBW Owners Bunch]

Precisely my assessment as well, Ted. Goatheads are the dividing line I 
see. Yet, clearly, there is another dividing line that Roberta and 
Riv-sisters are pointing out as well, and I'm delighted it is working for 
them.

With abandon,
Patrick

On Sunday, June 7, 2020 at 1:30:06 PM UTC-6, ted wrote:
>
> Hey Deacon,
>
> Though you are certainly big, and you may be an Ogre, I think we both know 
> you're not dumb.
> I think sometimes the move to tubeless gets conflated with the move to big 
> supple low pressure tires, because some people do both at the same time. As 
> you are already riding big supple low pressure tires, and are not bothered 
> by flats, I'd argue you're clearly the opposite of a perfect case study for 
> going tubeless. As you say you have no problem to fix. People who are 
> familiar with goat heads however, often feel they do have a problem, and 
> for them (and others bothered by flats resulting from similar irritants) 
> tubeless may be an answer. Different circumstances / environments often 
> warrant different equipment choices.
>
> regards
> Ted
>
> On Sunday, June 7, 2020 at 11:42:21 AM UTC-7, Deacon Patrick wrote:
>>
>> Sweet ride, Roberta! I know how much more my daughters love riding their 
>> lighter Clementines compared with their previous, much heavier kid's bikes 
>> or 90s Trek rebuilds. As an ogre who carries my bikepacking rig weighing up 
>> to 100 pounds as needed, I don't innately appreciate that need and easily 
>> forget it, until I am helping them get over rocks and roots on steep, 
>> technical bits I just consider normal. Grin.
>>>
>>>
>> Like you, Roberta, I enjoy freely wandering topics, learning much from 
>> them. My 2.8" beefy tires on my GBW are the perfect case study for going 
>> tubeless, yet I do not. Why? I've yet to experience the need. Cross 
>> reference "big, dumb ogre." Grin. For me, the weight isn't a big deal. I 
>> get plenty of tire suppleness with a tube with the carefully chosen suppler 
>> tires I ride, and I still don't grasp how a field flat is addressed without 
>> mess and frustration. Arguably, the one flat I've gotten on "Beorn" was due 
>> to inner moving rub as it occured on the inside of the tube after months of 
>> riding. Still, for me, tubeless is a solution looking for a problem. Grin. 
>> I am delighted it is working for so many!
>>
>> With abandon,
>> Patrick 
>>
>

-- 
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/0b2ba234-c590-47e8-a0a2-0f175ebc043do%40googlegroups.com.

[RBW] Re: Lightening up my Joe Appaloosa--a full makeover. AHH--a partial makeover. Thanks to Analog Cycles.

[ted]

Hey Deacon,

Though you are certainly big, and you may be an Ogre, I think we both know 
you're not dumb.
I think sometimes the move to tubeless gets conflated with the move to big 
supple low pressure tires, because some people do both at the same time. As 
you are already riding big supple low pressure tires, and are not bothered 
by flats, I'd argue you're clearly the opposite of a perfect case study for 
going tubeless. As you say you have no problem to fix. People who are 
familiar with goat heads however, often feel they do have a problem, and 
for them (and others bothered by flats resulting from similar irritants) 
tubeless may be an answer. Different circumstances / environments often 
warrant different equipment choices.

regards
Ted

On Sunday, June 7, 2020 at 11:42:21 AM UTC-7, Deacon Patrick wrote:
>
> Sweet ride, Roberta! I know how much more my daughters love riding their 
> lighter Clementines compared with their previous, much heavier kid's bikes 
> or 90s Trek rebuilds. As an ogre who carries my bikepacking rig weighing up 
> to 100 pounds as needed, I don't innately appreciate that need and easily 
> forget it, until I am helping them get over rocks and roots on steep, 
> technical bits I just consider normal. Grin.
>>
>>
> Like you, Roberta, I enjoy freely wandering topics, learning much from 
> them. My 2.8" beefy tires on my GBW are the perfect case study for going 
> tubeless, yet I do not. Why? I've yet to experience the need. Cross 
> reference "big, dumb ogre." Grin. For me, the weight isn't a big deal. I 
> get plenty of tire suppleness with a tube with the carefully chosen suppler 
> tires I ride, and I still don't grasp how a field flat is addressed without 
> mess and frustration. Arguably, the one flat I've gotten on "Beorn" was due 
> to inner moving rub as it occured on the inside of the tube after months of 
> riding. Still, for me, tubeless is a solution looking for a problem. Grin. 
> I am delighted it is working for so many!
>
> With abandon,
> Patrick 
>

-- 
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/9d9354c9-a845-4e35-b752-e49bfebb5c8bo%40googlegroups.com.

[RBW] Re: Lightening up my Joe Appaloosa--a full makeover. AHH--a partial makeover. Thanks to Analog Cycles.

['Deacon Patrick' via RBW Owners Bunch]

Sweet ride, Roberta! I know how much more my daughters love riding their 
lighter Clementines compared with their previous, much heavier kid's bikes 
or 90s Trek rebuilds. As an ogre who carries my bikepacking rig weighing up 
to 100 pounds as needed, I don't innately appreciate that need and easily 
forget it, until I am helping them get over rocks and roots on steep, 
technical bits I just consider normal. Grin.
>
>
Like you, Roberta, I enjoy freely wandering topics, learning much from 
them. My 2.8" beefy tires on my GBW are the perfect case study for going 
tubeless, yet I do not. Why? I've yet to experience the need. Cross 
reference "big, dumb ogre." Grin. For me, the weight isn't a big deal. I 
get plenty of tire suppleness with a tube with the carefully chosen suppler 
tires I ride, and I still don't grasp how a field flat is addressed without 
mess and frustration. Arguably, the one flat I've gotten on "Beorn" was due 
to inner moving rub as it occured on the inside of the tube after months of 
riding. Still, for me, tubeless is a solution looking for a problem. Grin. 
I am delighted it is working for so many!

With abandon,
Patrick 

-- 
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/e1fda439-d9de-419f-a86f-8702ba97216co%40googlegroups.com.

[RBW] Re: Lightening up my Joe Appaloosa--a full makeover. AHH--a partial makeover. Thanks to Analog Cycles.

[Jason Fuller]

Dang, that is a beautiful new wheelset and a heck of a pair of bikes. The 
purple nipples with the touch of gold is precisely my plan. This motivates 
me to get my XO-1 sold, since that's what's primarily funding the new 
wheelset. 

-- 
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/39dc1447-840c-43ce-91ff-7c3252d2ce6bo%40googlegroups.com.

Re: [RBW] Re: Lightening up my Joe Appaloosa--a full makeover. AHH--a partial makeover. Thanks to Analog Cycles.

[Roberta]

Hi, Everyone.  I had to borrow a computer today to respond.   I can write 
more when I get home.  Such a lively discussion. I don't mind any civil 
discussions, because it's on this board that I've learned so much!

First, let me say, I don't mind a heavy bike, but for for a female my age 
(or any age, or a child), we need a bike that we can carry, lift, etc., so 
for me, it was a lightening project as well as a ride better project.  Mark 
and others with children, think of how important it is to get your son 
something he can handle, just because of his age/size/strength. I wanted to 
love this bike again as I did the first day I rode it.

Kai--sharing the rack and our conversation on the way to the East Coast Riv 
meetup was MY pleasure!  I was so glad to see your Roscoe Mixte in person.

Leah, Joe, Joyce, CME and Tim.  Thanks for your kind words.  I'm glad so 
many of us are happy with the new rims, dyno, GravelKings and tubeless. 
Perhaps we would have been happy with tubes, but I am happy today with the 
tubeless.   It's the sum of the parts.   Who knows, perhaps when I need new 
tires, I'll do tubes to compare.  Or not, if I stay flat free

Doug, I really like the 1x11.  I did check because (as Leah knows), my cast 
off parts from two weeks ago are still in my trunk--my old rear cogs were 
x9.  It's flat where I live and I'd usually just go up and down the cogs 
anyway, so this isn't much different for me.  If I'd need to shift the 
front, it was always a bit too much of a change.  When Candice handed me 
the new wheel, I thought this is light with the dyno!  Then, I realized 
that was the REAR wheel!  Someone kind here (was it you?  I cannot find the 
original emails) sent me pics of items he put in an XS saddle sack.  Then 
he put those items in the Banana Sax with additional items he could also 
fit,  and sent those pics.  It does hold enough more that it will be right 
right size bag for me.  I am putting together my list with weights and it 
might take a few day, but I can give you the official weight savings.  I'm 
guessing 5-6 pounds.  That along with the better tire is an ooh--lala 
ride!  Least expensive and easiest:  change the saddle and the bag, take 
off the rack and fenders (I didn't do the last two items, as I also need a 
practical bike.)

Patrick and Ted, such a spirited discussion!  No matter the  new tires with 
tubes or new tires with tubeless, the overall effect of the changes are 
suburb for me!  I had been considering selling the Appaloosa, but I loved 
the ride so much.  I'd rather have put the money into this bike than just 
get another.  It is the bike I would have built if I had known anything 
about bikes when I made my first purchase.  Even if James had recommended 
these items to me back then, being an less educated bike person, I probably 
would have declined.

Patrick, I'll get you the info on the kickstand later.  It is detachable 
and very lightweight, folds in half and was about $30.  There is another 
more popular one on Amazon and this isn't that one, as many people said 
that one sagged and suggested this one.  I traveled with the AHH, because I 
can take off the front wheel, turn it on it's side, glide it thru my trunk 
opening to the back seat (and that is over a hybrid battery "shelf"--not 
easy) .  I could never do that physically with my Appaloosa, even if I 
removed the fenders. 

Mark,  putting on tubeless was easy for me:  I just watched Candice do the 
work!   They had an IG session on how to do it and it probably comes down 
to "Candice (Mark and James) do it so much, they are exerts at it)"  I 
don't plan on changing the tires until they wear out.  That's my MO for 
tires.

Melanie--I am so glad that you are happy with your changes, too.  Once 
Covid is over, we should ride our Appaloosas together.

Erik, New 650B dyno wheel, that's exciting!  Since we live near each other, 
I'm looking forward to seeing it in person.

I hope everyone has a terrific biking day,
Roberta

On Sunday, June 7, 2020 at 12:11:10 PM UTC-4, Bicycle Belle Ding Ding! 
wrote:
>
> Good to hear from #RivSister Melanie!
>
> I am sure none of of us would complain if you chose to indulge us with 
> photos of your new wheels on your Appaloosa. 朗
>
> I agree that the bikes feel very different after getting these new wheels. 
> I’m not going to “quibble” about tubeless, but what was promised was a 
> lighter, smoother ride with fun, colorful bits. And that’s exactly what I 
> got. Therefore, I’m calling Analog tubeless wheels a great choice for me.
>
> I just got back from another 10 miler, fighting winds the whole time and I 
> didn’t even much mind.
> Leah
> Sent from my iPad
>
> On Jun 7, 2020, at 7:26 AM, Melanie > 
> wrote:
>
> 
> Hi Roberta and all - I too have been "enlightened." Once Roberta said she 
> was going to go for it and lighten up her Appaloosa I got the courage to do 
> the same to mine. Analog built me some new wheels with Pacenti rims, Bitex 
> hubs, a SRAM 990 

Re: [RBW] Re: Lightening up my Joe Appaloosa--a full makeover. AHH--a partial makeover. Thanks to Analog Cycles.

[Patrick Moore]

By the way, I hope I did not come across as too aggressive; I was simply
being silly.

You obviously have quite a bit of experience with tires, and your opinion
about tubeless, fwiw, corresponds to Jan Heine's, whom I'd consider an
authority of a sort. Of course, I've often found that Jan's opinions don't
match my experience. So I'm still not convinced that taking a tire with
tubes and comparing the same tire without tubes and a fl oz or so of
sealant won't find less RR in the latter setup, but I am quite willing to
be proved wrong -- as a matter of fact, I personally won't, given what I've
heard about the current state of the technology, use tubeless for tires
inflated to anything over 40 psi, nor from experience with sealant failure,
try sealant in tubes at anything less than about 40 psi.

It seems that there is a considerable consensus on the web that tubeless
tires roll easier, all else equal; for example that rolling resistance
website at least implied, if not proved, that Big Ones on a drum (I think
he used a drum) were even better without tubes (they were very good with
tubes).

So, I would be very interested to have others chime in on the subject.

On Sat, Jun 6, 2020 at 10:55 PM ted  wrote:

> Nay, ill not leave it to proxies, though proxies are certainly welcome.
> But rather lets not fight.
>
> Of course an ounce or two of liquid latex inside the tire is nothing like
> a 1/4 inch layer of the solid kind between the tread and the casing. Nor is
> a mr tuffy liner anything like a light tube. Both naught but red herrings.
>
> I think its been fairly well established (i.e. the engineering equivalent
> of settled science) that the vast majority of the energy losses related to
> rolling resistance are due to hysteresis losses in the tread and casing as
> they flex due to the movement of the contact patch around the tire as it
> rolls down the road. That's assuming a hard road surface of course,
> otherwise there are losses in the "road" that could dominate, and please
> lets not start on "suspension losses" occurring in the riders tissues. I
> wouldn't call hysteresis parts of the system rubbing on themselves. There
> are also losses due to bead squirm (reasonable to call that parts of the
> system rubbing against each other) and Jobst famously argued that tubulars
> have worse rolling resistance than clinchers because of losses in the glue.
> But those are small compared to the hysteresis in the tread and casing. I'm
> confident careful testing could measure losses due to the tube but I'm sure
> there would be losses from hysteresis in the tube itself, and I doubt it
> rubs against the casing in a measurable amount. I frequently have to peal
> tubes from tires when I don't talc them well. Don't think I've ever seen
> signs of abrasion. Even with a super thin latex tube and a piece of casing
> glued over a hole in the casing inside the tire.
>
> I've used 80's hand made Clement tubulars, Vitoria CX, CG, and other
> cheeper cotton tubulars, Continental sprinter tubulars, Compass/RH
> extralights, the lighter Jack Browns, Schwalbe G-Ones, Continental BBall
> tires, Marathons, Schwalbe "fatties", Pacenti QuasiMotos, all with tubes
> and WTB Byways set up tubeless. I can certainly tell the difference between
> many of those different tires, and I consistently prefer the lighter
> flimsier ones.
>
> I've also gone from cheep bulky heavy inner tubes to Schwalbe Superlight
> tubes. I can sure tell the difference in how bulky they are (or aren't)
> stuffing them into a patch kit, but I haven't noticed a difference in ride
> feel or effort. I have seen reports of testing with butyl vs latex vs
> sealant for rolling resistance. Can't recall how sealant fit in there but
> my recollection is the whole question was way down in the weeds.
>
> The nearest thing to a direct tubed / tubless comparison I've experienced
> is two bikes I have where one is on WTB byways (47mm) set up tubeless and
> the other is on RH 38mm extralights with light tubes. My experience fits
> well with expectations for the higher volume lower pressure and slightly
> (?) heavier construction of the Byways compared to the RH. The bike with
> byways soaks up bigger bumps and holes better and seems a bit harder to
> push down the road. The only difference I experience that is clearly
> attributable to sealent vs tubes is: I don't give a thought to goat heads
> or road debris when I'm on the tubeless bike.
>
> So I maintain ride, handling, and RR are dominated by tire pressure,
> construction and tread. Type of tube or tubeless has a tertiary effect and
> is lost in the weeds.
> Of course YMMV and I'd not claim you cant have your own opinion.
>
>
> On Saturday, June 6, 2020 at 5:39:31 PM UTC-7, Patrick Moore wrote:
>>
>> Let us agree to fight it out by proxy. Proxies! Let us know your
>> (real-life, personal) experiences relevant to comparing how tubeless setups
>> affect ride quality -- resistance and cushioning. Include the effects, if
>> any, 

Re: [RBW] Re: Lightening up my Joe Appaloosa--a full makeover. AHH--a partial makeover. Thanks to Analog Cycles.

[Leah Peterson]

Good to hear from #RivSister Melanie!

I am sure none of of us would complain if you chose to indulge us with photos 
of your new wheels on your Appaloosa. 朗

I agree that the bikes feel very different after getting these new wheels. I’m 
not going to “quibble” about tubeless, but what was promised was a lighter, 
smoother ride with fun, colorful bits. And that’s exactly what I got. 
Therefore, I’m calling Analog tubeless wheels a great choice for me.

I just got back from another 10 miler, fighting winds the whole time and I 
didn’t even much mind.
Leah
Sent from my iPad

> On Jun 7, 2020, at 7:26 AM, Melanie  wrote:
> 
> 
> Hi Roberta and all - I too have been "enlightened." Once Roberta said she was 
> going to go for it and lighten up her Appaloosa I got the courage to do the 
> same to mine. Analog built me some new wheels with Pacenti rims, Bitex hubs, 
> a SRAM 990 cassette and tubeless Gravelkings. Of course, some red spoke 
> nipples and valve stem as well. I just love it!  It's still not a light bike 
> because I am keeping my Choco-Moose bars, my triple crank, and Clem rack. But 
> the feel is very different. That z of the hubs disturbed me at first. But 
> now I know it is just urging me on, "faster, faster, faster." Such joy.
> 
> So Roberta - how does riding with the 1x drivetrain compare with the old 
> triple???
> 
>  - Melanie
> 
>> On Saturday, June 6, 2020 at 12:42:36 PM UTC-4, Roberta wrote:
>> In April 2017, I rode a 2016 stock-built Rivendell Joe Appaloosa at Gravel 
>> and Grind and fell in love.  James (formerly of G, now of Analog Cycles) 
>> recommended a Brooks B-17 saddle, fenders, a rear rack, and I happily 
>> pedaled away for the next three years.   My only change was to a Brooks 
>> Flyer saddle.  
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> I love the ride of the Appaloosa and rode it at home on the weekends.  When 
>> I wanted another bike at my office for after work rides, I bought an A. 
>> Homer Hilsen from a fellow RBW member.  My only issue with the Joe Appaloosa 
>> was it was heavy for me to maneuver on mass transportation, steps, and 
>> general lifting.  Now I had a lighter AHH, and that is the bike I chose to 
>> travel with.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> But…I still loved the ride of the Appaloosa…it was just so…heavy.  A call to 
>> James and Candice one day to talk about tubeless tires options, and I was 
>> signing up to change nearly everything on it to lighten it and get an even 
>> better ride.  I changed the saddle back to the B-17, removed the heavy and 
>> too large for my use Carradice bags. Rack, fenders and kickstand are too 
>> practical, so I kept them.  
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> On Memorial Day weekend, I drove both bikes to Analog Cycles.  AHH got 1.75” 
>> Gravel King tubeless tires and a shorter stem.  Instead of regular grips, 
>> they wrapped the grip area with Fizik tape over gel.  Deity valve caps in 
>> red for the finishing touch.   I didn’t need to change out anything else on 
>> the bike—it already had dyno lighting and the correct rims.   My new bag is 
>> a Sackville Banana Sax, just the perfect size!
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> The Appaloosa got the most work.  They changed the handlebar from steel 
>> Choco-moose to aluminum Albatross and changed my 3x8 (or 3x9, I forget) 
>> drive train to a 1x11 with indexed shifting.  However, the biggest 
>> difference came with the new wheels, tubeless tires and dyno lighting!  
>> Candice recommended purple spoke nipples and they look great with the 
>> butterscotch frame.  Near the valve stem, she changed the colorway to gold, 
>> topped off with chartreuse valve caps, and I think it looks smashing!I 
>> also got nice cork grips that probably a “blend” because they have more give 
>> than the Rivendell ones.   I also like the ergonomic “bulge” in the middle, 
>> like the older cork grips Riv used to sell.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> The ride with the tubeless tires on both bikes, wheels built by Analog’s 
>> master wheel builder Mark, is sublime.  The more I ride them, the more I 
>> LOVE them.  They soak up the bad city pavement and cracks in the MUP 
>> sidewalks.  Even going over railroad tracks isn’t jarring.  The tires just 
>> “smush” to take up as much road vibrations as it can.  Yet, they are not 
>> slow or plodding.  I explained it to Bicycle Belle Ding Ding, who was 
>> anxiously awaiting delivery of her new wheels, this way:  “By the time I get 
>> home from my rides, I feel so much less beat up and feel like I can keep on 
>> going.The ride was so much more pleasant.”  It took a few days to get to 
>> this state.  Every day I rode them I liked them so much more than the 
>> previous day.  I think part of that is getting the psi down to my optimal 
>> level.  On the day that the pressure felt too low and I just pumped it up to 
>> 35 psi.  Over time, I’ll find my sweet-spot, pressure wise.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> Then, there is Dyno lighting!  I can now just jump on the Appaloosa without 
>> worrying if I charged my lights.  The Edulux light Analog speced is 

[RBW] Re: Lightening up my Joe Appaloosa--a full makeover. AHH--a partial makeover. Thanks to Analog Cycles.

[Tim Bantham]

Hi Roberta, I love my Appaloosa as well. James and Candice have helped me 
lighten it up as well. I had it set up with big Nitto racks front and rear 
but James recommended a better way. He also build a set of wheels for me 
and I too am a tubeless convert. I haven't done the 1 x yet but I am 
considering it. I have that set up on my Clem and I love it! I'm glad you 
are happy with your bikes and the work that Analog has done. I love those 
guys! 

Tim

On Saturday, June 6, 2020 at 12:42:36 PM UTC-4, Roberta wrote:
>
> In April 2017, I rode a 2016 stock-built Rivendell Joe Appaloosa at Gravel 
> and Grind and fell in love.  James (formerly of G, now of Analog 
> Cycles) recommended a Brooks B-17 saddle, fenders, a rear rack, and I 
> happily pedaled away for the next three years.   My only change was to a 
> Brooks Flyer saddle.  
>
>
> I love the ride of the Appaloosa and rode it at home on the weekends.  When 
> I wanted another bike at my office for after work rides, I bought an A. 
> Homer Hilsen from a fellow RBW member.  My only issue with the Joe 
> Appaloosa was it was heavy for me to maneuver on mass transportation, 
> steps, and general lifting.  Now I had a lighter AHH, and that is the 
> bike I chose to travel with.
>
>
> But…I still loved the ride of the Appaloosa…it was just so…heavy.  A call 
> to James and Candice one day to talk about tubeless tires options, and I 
> was signing up to change nearly everything on it to lighten it and get an 
> even better ride.  I changed the saddle back to the B-17, removed the 
> heavy and too large for my use Carradice bags. Rack, fenders and kickstand 
> are too practical, so I kept them.  
>
>
> On Memorial Day weekend, I drove both bikes to Analog Cycles.  AHH got 
> 1.75” Gravel King tubeless tires and a shorter stem.  Instead of regular 
> grips, they wrapped the grip area with Fizik tape over gel.  Deity valve 
> caps in red for the finishing touch.   I didn’t need to change out 
> anything else on the bike—it already had dyno lighting and the correct 
> rims.   My new bag is a Sackville Banana Sax, just the perfect size!
>
>
> The Appaloosa got the most work.  They changed the handlebar from steel 
> Choco-moose to aluminum Albatross and changed my 3x8 (or 3x9, I forget) 
> drive train to a 1x11 with indexed shifting.  However, the biggest 
> difference came with the new wheels, tubeless tires and dyno lighting!  
> Candice 
> recommended purple spoke nipples and they look great with the butterscotch 
> frame.  Near the valve stem, she changed the colorway to gold, topped off 
> with chartreuse valve caps, and I think it looks smashing!I also got 
> nice cork grips that probably a “blend” because they have more give than 
> the Rivendell ones.   I also like the ergonomic “bulge” in the middle, 
> like the older cork grips Riv used to sell.
>
>
> The ride with the tubeless tires on both bikes, wheels built by Analog’s 
> master wheel builder Mark, is sublime.  The more I ride them, the more I 
> LOVE them.  They soak up the bad city pavement and cracks in the MUP 
> sidewalks.  Even going over railroad tracks isn’t jarring.  The tires 
> just “smush” to take up as much road vibrations as it can.  Yet, they are 
> not slow or plodding.  I explained it to Bicycle Belle Ding Ding, who was 
> anxiously awaiting delivery of her new wheels, this way:  “By the time I 
> get home from my rides, I feel so much less beat up and feel like I can 
> keep on going.The ride was so much more pleasant.”  It took a few days to 
> get to this state.  Every day I rode them I liked them so much more than 
> the previous day.  I think part of that is getting the psi down to my 
> optimal level.  On the day that the pressure felt too low and I just 
> pumped it up to 35 psi.  Over time, I’ll find my sweet-spot, pressure 
> wise.
>
>
> Then, there is Dyno lighting!  I can now just jump on the Appaloosa 
> without worrying if I charged my lights.  The Edulux light Analog speced 
> is so bright.  I have Busch + Muller IQ-XS on the AHH.  It’s very nice, 
> but not nearly as bright as the Edulux.
>
>
> Now the Appaloosa is light enough for me to pick up, move it around, even 
> carry it up steps if needed, or onto a train if there is no boarding 
> platform.  I just love it!  Candice, James, and Mark did a fantastic job 
> and I’m SO pleased.  They are easy to work with and are meticulous with 
> their work.  They picked the parts and basically, I said “OK.”
>
> Going tubeless took a lot of consideration.  I heard so much pros and 
> cons, but after speaking with James and Candice, I decided to take the 
> chance.  What would happen if I didn’t like it???—I’d take the goo out of 
> the tires and put in tubes.  And, I’d be out some money.   But, I’m so 
> glad (in the two weeks I’ve had the “new” bikes) I took the chance.  The 
> ride quality is AMAZING.  Beyond anything I could even imagine.
>
>
> Here are my new Appaloosa parts:
>
>
> Shutter Precision PV-8 Hub  
>
> 

[RBW] Re: Lightening up my Joe Appaloosa--a full makeover. AHH--a partial makeover. Thanks to Analog Cycles.

[Erik Wright]

Seems like Analog is getting some good business! I reached out about a month 
ago and have a 650b dyno wheel (not wheelset) in the works for my Crust 
Evasion. My frame is the very bright sunset fade, so I asked them to throw some 
subdued color in there. The loud bike doesn’t need a loud wheelset, but I’m a 
sucker for color. Can’t wait to get it!

Erik, Philly

-- 
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/833903f0-321d-4141-901e-74f7a4fe36c1o%40googlegroups.com.

[RBW] Re: Lightening up my Joe Appaloosa--a full makeover. AHH--a partial makeover. Thanks to Analog Cycles.

[Melanie]

Hi Roberta and all - I too have been "enlightened." Once Roberta said she 
was going to go for it and lighten up her Appaloosa I got the courage to do 
the same to mine. Analog built me some new wheels with Pacenti rims, Bitex 
hubs, a SRAM 990 cassette and tubeless Gravelkings. Of course, some red 
spoke nipples and valve stem as well. I just love it!  It's still not a 
light bike because I am keeping my Choco-Moose bars, my triple crank, and 
Clem rack. But the feel is very different. That z of the hubs disturbed 
me at first. But now I know it is just urging me on, "faster, faster, 
faster." Such joy.

So Roberta - how does riding with the 1x drivetrain compare with the old 
triple???

 - Melanie

On Saturday, June 6, 2020 at 12:42:36 PM UTC-4, Roberta wrote:
>
> In April 2017, I rode a 2016 stock-built Rivendell Joe Appaloosa at Gravel 
> and Grind and fell in love.  James (formerly of G, now of Analog 
> Cycles) recommended a Brooks B-17 saddle, fenders, a rear rack, and I 
> happily pedaled away for the next three years.   My only change was to a 
> Brooks Flyer saddle.  
>
>
> I love the ride of the Appaloosa and rode it at home on the weekends.  When 
> I wanted another bike at my office for after work rides, I bought an A. 
> Homer Hilsen from a fellow RBW member.  My only issue with the Joe 
> Appaloosa was it was heavy for me to maneuver on mass transportation, 
> steps, and general lifting.  Now I had a lighter AHH, and that is the 
> bike I chose to travel with.
>
>
> But…I still loved the ride of the Appaloosa…it was just so…heavy.  A call 
> to James and Candice one day to talk about tubeless tires options, and I 
> was signing up to change nearly everything on it to lighten it and get an 
> even better ride.  I changed the saddle back to the B-17, removed the 
> heavy and too large for my use Carradice bags. Rack, fenders and kickstand 
> are too practical, so I kept them.  
>
>
> On Memorial Day weekend, I drove both bikes to Analog Cycles.  AHH got 
> 1.75” Gravel King tubeless tires and a shorter stem.  Instead of regular 
> grips, they wrapped the grip area with Fizik tape over gel.  Deity valve 
> caps in red for the finishing touch.   I didn’t need to change out 
> anything else on the bike—it already had dyno lighting and the correct 
> rims.   My new bag is a Sackville Banana Sax, just the perfect size!
>
>
> The Appaloosa got the most work.  They changed the handlebar from steel 
> Choco-moose to aluminum Albatross and changed my 3x8 (or 3x9, I forget) 
> drive train to a 1x11 with indexed shifting.  However, the biggest 
> difference came with the new wheels, tubeless tires and dyno lighting!  
> Candice 
> recommended purple spoke nipples and they look great with the butterscotch 
> frame.  Near the valve stem, she changed the colorway to gold, topped off 
> with chartreuse valve caps, and I think it looks smashing!I also got 
> nice cork grips that probably a “blend” because they have more give than 
> the Rivendell ones.   I also like the ergonomic “bulge” in the middle, 
> like the older cork grips Riv used to sell.
>
>
> The ride with the tubeless tires on both bikes, wheels built by Analog’s 
> master wheel builder Mark, is sublime.  The more I ride them, the more I 
> LOVE them.  They soak up the bad city pavement and cracks in the MUP 
> sidewalks.  Even going over railroad tracks isn’t jarring.  The tires 
> just “smush” to take up as much road vibrations as it can.  Yet, they are 
> not slow or plodding.  I explained it to Bicycle Belle Ding Ding, who was 
> anxiously awaiting delivery of her new wheels, this way:  “By the time I 
> get home from my rides, I feel so much less beat up and feel like I can 
> keep on going.The ride was so much more pleasant.”  It took a few days to 
> get to this state.  Every day I rode them I liked them so much more than 
> the previous day.  I think part of that is getting the psi down to my 
> optimal level.  On the day that the pressure felt too low and I just 
> pumped it up to 35 psi.  Over time, I’ll find my sweet-spot, pressure 
> wise.
>
>
> Then, there is Dyno lighting!  I can now just jump on the Appaloosa 
> without worrying if I charged my lights.  The Edulux light Analog speced 
> is so bright.  I have Busch + Muller IQ-XS on the AHH.  It’s very nice, 
> but not nearly as bright as the Edulux.
>
>
> Now the Appaloosa is light enough for me to pick up, move it around, even 
> carry it up steps if needed, or onto a train if there is no boarding 
> platform.  I just love it!  Candice, James, and Mark did a fantastic job 
> and I’m SO pleased.  They are easy to work with and are meticulous with 
> their work.  They picked the parts and basically, I said “OK.”
>
> Going tubeless took a lot of consideration.  I heard so much pros and 
> cons, but after speaking with James and Candice, I decided to take the 
> chance.  What would happen if I didn’t like it???—I’d take the goo out of 
> the tires and put in tubes.  And, I’d 

Re: [RBW] Re: Lightening up my Joe Appaloosa--a full makeover. AHH--a partial makeover. Thanks to Analog Cycles.

[Mark Roland]

While this "quibble" may be considered something of a damp blanket, threads 
go off on much greater tangents than this all the time, (and no tangent is 
"necessary.") When you post you open up to a free range discussion within 
proscribed boundaries, and this is in-bounds.

As Roberta and Leah and the Rivsisters delve further into the science of 
cycling, I think it's fair to give them information, even if it's in the 
form of differing opinions. I've had the pleasure of riding with Roberta, I 
think she'll be okay! (Hi Roberta! Congrats on your bicycle refurbishments, 
awesome!)

My thought is that what Roberta is experiencing may have more to do with 
the new tires and the lighter wheels and experimenting with tire pressure 
rather than the tubes vs. tubeless.(Plus, colored spoke nipples, duh.)  I 
don't have extensive experience on tubeless--Hetres on Pacenti rims back 
when it was a bit more of a chore than apparently it is today--but here is 
a guy who has tried a few things, and his opinions on the matter:


https://www.renehersecycles.com/myth-7-tubeless-tires-roll-faster/

YMMV. 



On Sunday, June 7, 2020 at 4:24:43 AM UTC-4, CMR wrote:
>
> Agreed, super unnecessary tangent from an awesome post.
>
> This bike looks like so much fun!
>

-- 
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/9374fe54-ebd3-49ac-9d68-63b8692fa519o%40googlegroups.com.

Re: [RBW] Re: Lightening up my Joe Appaloosa--a full makeover. AHH--a partial makeover. Thanks to Analog Cycles.

[CMR]

Agreed, super unnecessary tangent from an awesome post.

This bike looks like so much fun!

-- 
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/cdfd1569-344d-4f64-9581-5c9082800f94o%40googlegroups.com.

Re: [RBW] Re: Lightening up my Joe Appaloosa--a full makeover. AHH--a partial makeover. Thanks to Analog Cycles.

[Joe Bernard]

Is there a reason why these long dissertations on tubeless are on this thread? 
I tried the nice version of getting it back on track and it didn't work. I 
don't think it's fair to "can't help quibbling" with Roberta, who just wanted 
to show off her new bike builds. This - whatever this is - isn't necessary. 

-- 
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/b8b3ef9e-8acc-465b-8e33-54fa22b95284o%40googlegroups.com.

Re: [RBW] Re: Lightening up my Joe Appaloosa--a full makeover. AHH--a partial makeover. Thanks to Analog Cycles.

[ted]

Nay, ill not leave it to proxies, though proxies are certainly welcome. But 
rather lets not fight.

Of course an ounce or two of liquid latex inside the tire is nothing like a 
1/4 inch layer of the solid kind between the tread and the casing. Nor is a 
mr tuffy liner anything like a light tube. Both naught but red herrings.

I think its been fairly well established (i.e. the engineering equivalent 
of settled science) that the vast majority of the energy losses related to 
rolling resistance are due to hysteresis losses in the tread and casing as 
they flex due to the movement of the contact patch around the tire as it 
rolls down the road. That's assuming a hard road surface of course, 
otherwise there are losses in the "road" that could dominate, and please 
lets not start on "suspension losses" occurring in the riders tissues. I 
wouldn't call hysteresis parts of the system rubbing on themselves. There 
are also losses due to bead squirm (reasonable to call that parts of the 
system rubbing against each other) and Jobst famously argued that tubulars 
have worse rolling resistance than clinchers because of losses in the glue. 
But those are small compared to the hysteresis in the tread and casing. I'm 
confident careful testing could measure losses due to the tube but I'm sure 
there would be losses from hysteresis in the tube itself, and I doubt it 
rubs against the casing in a measurable amount. I frequently have to peal 
tubes from tires when I don't talc them well. Don't think I've ever seen 
signs of abrasion. Even with a super thin latex tube and a piece of casing 
glued over a hole in the casing inside the tire.

I've used 80's hand made Clement tubulars, Vitoria CX, CG, and other 
cheeper cotton tubulars, Continental sprinter tubulars, Compass/RH 
extralights, the lighter Jack Browns, Schwalbe G-Ones, Continental BBall 
tires, Marathons, Schwalbe "fatties", Pacenti QuasiMotos, all with tubes 
and WTB Byways set up tubeless. I can certainly tell the difference between 
many of those different tires, and I consistently prefer the lighter 
flimsier ones.

I've also gone from cheep bulky heavy inner tubes to Schwalbe Superlight 
tubes. I can sure tell the difference in how bulky they are (or aren't) 
stuffing them into a patch kit, but I haven't noticed a difference in ride 
feel or effort. I have seen reports of testing with butyl vs latex vs 
sealant for rolling resistance. Can't recall how sealant fit in there but 
my recollection is the whole question was way down in the weeds.

The nearest thing to a direct tubed / tubless comparison I've experienced 
is two bikes I have where one is on WTB byways (47mm) set up tubeless and 
the other is on RH 38mm extralights with light tubes. My experience fits 
well with expectations for the higher volume lower pressure and slightly 
(?) heavier construction of the Byways compared to the RH. The bike with 
byways soaks up bigger bumps and holes better and seems a bit harder to 
push down the road. The only difference I experience that is clearly 
attributable to sealent vs tubes is: I don't give a thought to goat heads 
or road debris when I'm on the tubeless bike.

So I maintain ride, handling, and RR are dominated by tire pressure, 
construction and tread. Type of tube or tubeless has a tertiary effect and 
is lost in the weeds.
Of course YMMV and I'd not claim you cant have your own opinion.


On Saturday, June 6, 2020 at 5:39:31 PM UTC-7, Patrick Moore wrote:
>
> Let us agree to fight it out by proxy. Proxies! Let us know your 
> (real-life, personal) experiences relevant to comparing how tubeless setups 
> affect ride quality -- resistance and cushioning. Include the effects, if 
> any, of sealant in tubeless tires.
>
> Also, why is "internal parts of the tire system rubbing against 
> themselves" not a factor? Or even, not reasonably conjectured to be a 
> factor? (Note the difference.) Perhaps it is not -- either; but I don't see 
> why it is not a factor or even a reasonably conjectured factor. Again, I 
> dump responsibility for evidence on proxies.
>
> I do not think, based on a priori and general evidence, that you can 
> reasonably suppose that an fld oz or so of liquid sealant should behave 
> like a layer of puncture belt; after all, one is liquid, one isn't. But I 
> can go beyond thought experiments. I resort to my own experience with the 
> Kojaks: these have a puncture belt (tho' be it said that they roll PDG for 
> commuter tires with such a layer), and were decent, not great, with tubes; 
> without tubes, elevated to Elk Pass (559 X 29, 175 -- !!! -- grams new!) 
> levels of felt speed and smoothness -- with 1 fl oz or so of Orange Seal in 
> them. Thus I refute your imaginings.
>
> On Sat, Jun 6, 2020 at 5:47 PM ted > 
> wrote:
>
>> Well, I've never run the direct experiment so I'll have to deffer to your 
>> greater experience.
>> I will however mumble about confirmation bias, psychological bla bla bla 
>> etc.
>> And I'll reject your 

Re: [RBW] Re: Lightening up my Joe Appaloosa--a full makeover. AHH--a partial makeover. Thanks to Analog Cycles.

[Joe Bernard]

Yeah but Roberta's bikes are sweet. 

-- 
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/6871ae25-3522-4bb1-b35f-97b9a7f7d93fo%40googlegroups.com.

Re: [RBW] Re: Lightening up my Joe Appaloosa--a full makeover. AHH--a partial makeover. Thanks to Analog Cycles.

[Patrick Moore]

Let us agree to fight it out by proxy. Proxies! Let us know your
(real-life, personal) experiences relevant to comparing how tubeless setups
affect ride quality -- resistance and cushioning. Include the effects, if
any, of sealant in tubeless tires.

Also, why is "internal parts of the tire system rubbing against themselves"
not a factor? Or even, not reasonably conjectured to be a factor? (Note the
difference.) Perhaps it is not -- either; but I don't see why it is not a
factor or even a reasonably conjectured factor. Again, I dump
responsibility for evidence on proxies.

I do not think, based on a priori and general evidence, that you can
reasonably suppose that an fld oz or so of liquid sealant should behave
like a layer of puncture belt; after all, one is liquid, one isn't. But I
can go beyond thought experiments. I resort to my own experience with the
Kojaks: these have a puncture belt (tho' be it said that they roll PDG for
commuter tires with such a layer), and were decent, not great, with tubes;
without tubes, elevated to Elk Pass (559 X 29, 175 -- !!! -- grams new!)
levels of felt speed and smoothness -- with 1 fl oz or so of Orange Seal in
them. Thus I refute your imaginings.

On Sat, Jun 6, 2020 at 5:47 PM ted  wrote:

> Well, I've never run the direct experiment so I'll have to deffer to your
> greater experience.
> I will however mumble about confirmation bias, psychological bla bla bla
> etc.
> And I'll reject your "stands to reason" outright.
> I don't think "internal parts of the tire system rubbing against
> themselves" is an apt characterization at all. Also one does not just
> remove the tube and leave it at that, one replaces it with a volume of
> viscous fluid that is sloshing around in there while you ride. I think
> careful measurement would be needed to determine if the rolling resistance
> caused by a tube was greater or smaller than that caused by sealant, and I
> doubt the difference would be one that most cyclists could reliably detect
> in double blind testing.
> On the opposite extreme putting a layer of latex between the tread and the
> casing, as some stout schwalbe tires do, makes for the deadest tires I've
> ever tried. Should I just assume with no careful testing that putting
> ounces of slowly drying laytex inside (and adding more every 6 months or
> so) has no effect at all?
>
> I'm pretty sure I can tell the difference between stout schwalbe tires and
> similar sized RH extralights. The difference between the same tires with
> schwalbe extralight tubes or latex tubes? Not so much. Between extralight
> tubes and sealant? Also, not so much.
>
> On Saturday, June 6, 2020 at 3:45:05 PM UTC-7, Patrick Moore wrote:
>>
>> My experience in comparing the same or similar tires tubeless and with
>> tubes is limited, but from based on that experience, I have to disagree:
>> getting rid of even light tubes (70 gram or even 60 gram lightweights in
>> the 26" X 1" or 650C X 23 mm sizes) certainly seemed to make Schwalbe
>> Kojaks roll faster and smoother, and I've mentioned my experience with
>> tubeless, paper-thin Big Ones.
>>
>> This stands to reason: if a good amount of rolling resistance is caused
>> by the internal parts of the tire system rubbing against themselves, then
>> removing one suchj element would remove one cause of resistance. From the
>> opposite extreme, my experience adding Mr Tuffys or suchlike liners very
>> definitely makes tires feel slower, as in 6" of cold molasses.
>>
>> What do others with experience of both systems say?
>>
>>
>>
>> On Sat, Jun 6, 2020 at 4:32 PM ted  wrote:
>>
>>> Roberta,
>>>
>>> I am so glad you are thrilled with your new stuff. I hope this doesn't
>>> come out too negative/snarky/preachy/ because I can't keep from
>>> quibbling.
>>>
>>> I think tubeless gets a lot of unwarranted or rather I should say
>>> imprecisely stated, jumping over an important logical step, credit for
>>> giving a "better" ride. Your bikes would probably ride just as dreamy if
>>> they had light tubes between the rims and the tires as they do with the
>>> sealant that is in there now. It''s the tires, and pressure, followed
>>> perhaps by the rims and spokes that give you that ride. The tubeless thing
>>> "just" (potentially) changes how you experience flats with those tires.
>>> (Btw I think there is a similar and valid argument regarding weight.) Since
>>> you aren't a 200+ lb guy or riding 23mm tires, I'll wager you'd never have
>>> trouble with pinch flats either way. So what tubeless is really doing for
>>> you is saving you from dealing with road debris (e.g. goat heads,
>>> staples/wires, glass, etc.) induced flats.
>>>
>>> The number of road debris induced flats a person encounters, as well as
>>> how inconvenient those flat are, can be quite dependent the the local and
>>> the person. For example I think there is a list member who can barely go a
>>> mile without hitting a goat head, whereas I can go months at a time on RH
>>> extralight tires 

Re: [RBW] Re: Lightening up my Joe Appaloosa--a full makeover. AHH--a partial makeover. Thanks to Analog Cycles.

[ted]

Well, I've never run the direct experiment so I'll have to deffer to your 
greater experience.
I will however mumble about confirmation bias, psychological bla bla bla 
etc.
And I'll reject your "stands to reason" outright.
I don't think "internal parts of the tire system rubbing against 
themselves" is an apt characterization at all. Also one does not just 
remove the tube and leave it at that, one replaces it with a volume of 
viscous fluid that is sloshing around in there while you ride. I think 
careful measurement would be needed to determine if the rolling resistance 
caused by a tube was greater or smaller than that caused by sealant, and I 
doubt the difference would be one that most cyclists could reliably detect 
in double blind testing.
On the opposite extreme putting a layer of latex between the tread and the 
casing, as some stout schwalbe tires do, makes for the deadest tires I've 
ever tried. Should I just assume with no careful testing that putting 
ounces of slowly drying laytex inside (and adding more every 6 months or 
so) has no effect at all?

I'm pretty sure I can tell the difference between stout schwalbe tires and 
similar sized RH extralights. The difference between the same tires with 
schwalbe extralight tubes or latex tubes? Not so much. Between extralight 
tubes and sealant? Also, not so much.

On Saturday, June 6, 2020 at 3:45:05 PM UTC-7, Patrick Moore wrote:
>
> My experience in comparing the same or similar tires tubeless and with 
> tubes is limited, but from based on that experience, I have to disagree: 
> getting rid of even light tubes (70 gram or even 60 gram lightweights in 
> the 26" X 1" or 650C X 23 mm sizes) certainly seemed to make Schwalbe 
> Kojaks roll faster and smoother, and I've mentioned my experience with 
> tubeless, paper-thin Big Ones. 
>
> This stands to reason: if a good amount of rolling resistance is caused by 
> the internal parts of the tire system rubbing against themselves, then 
> removing one suchj element would remove one cause of resistance. From the 
> opposite extreme, my experience adding Mr Tuffys or suchlike liners very 
> definitely makes tires feel slower, as in 6" of cold molasses.
>
> What do others with experience of both systems say?
>
>
>
> On Sat, Jun 6, 2020 at 4:32 PM ted > 
> wrote:
>
>> Roberta,
>>
>> I am so glad you are thrilled with your new stuff. I hope this doesn't 
>> come out too negative/snarky/preachy/ because I can't keep from 
>> quibbling.
>>
>> I think tubeless gets a lot of unwarranted or rather I should say 
>> imprecisely stated, jumping over an important logical step, credit for 
>> giving a "better" ride. Your bikes would probably ride just as dreamy if 
>> they had light tubes between the rims and the tires as they do with the 
>> sealant that is in there now. It''s the tires, and pressure, followed 
>> perhaps by the rims and spokes that give you that ride. The tubeless thing 
>> "just" (potentially) changes how you experience flats with those tires. 
>> (Btw I think there is a similar and valid argument regarding weight.) Since 
>> you aren't a 200+ lb guy or riding 23mm tires, I'll wager you'd never have 
>> trouble with pinch flats either way. So what tubeless is really doing for 
>> you is saving you from dealing with road debris (e.g. goat heads, 
>> staples/wires, glass, etc.) induced flats. 
>>
>> The number of road debris induced flats a person encounters, as well as 
>> how inconvenient those flat are, can be quite dependent the the local and 
>> the person. For example I think there is a list member who can barely go a 
>> mile without hitting a goat head, whereas I can go months at a time on RH 
>> extralight tires with superlight tubes and never get a flat. I think James 
>> hates fixing flats in the rain and/or mud. Where I live it doesn't rain for 
>> months on end.
>>
>> On the other hand, the difference in ride qualities between uber stout 
>> tires and very light supple tires is the same for everybody everywhere 
>> (though admittedly some folks care more than others). So I think it is 
>> worth while to be clear about exactly what the direct benefits of going 
>> tubeless are.
>>
>> Anyway. Congratulations on your great upgrades. Sounds wonderful.
>>
>> regards
>> Ted
>> p.s. If you want to go crazy on the weight saving, get a Ti frame Brooks, 
>> Rivet, or Berthoud saddle and a 1/3 Ti duraAce cassette.
>>
>> On Saturday, June 6, 2020 at 9:42:36 AM UTC-7, Roberta wrote:
>>>
>>> In April 2017, I rode a 2016 stock-built Rivendell Joe Appaloosa at 
>>> Gravel and Grind and fell in love.  James (formerly of G, now of 
>>> Analog Cycles) recommended a Brooks B-17 saddle, fenders, a rear rack, and 
>>> I happily pedaled away for the next three years.   My only change was 
>>> to a Brooks Flyer saddle.  
>>>
>>>
>>> I love the ride of the Appaloosa and rode it at home on the weekends.  When 
>>> I wanted another bike at my office for after work rides, I bought an A. 
>>> Homer Hilsen 

Re: [RBW] Re: Lightening up my Joe Appaloosa--a full makeover. AHH--a partial makeover. Thanks to Analog Cycles.

[Patrick Moore]

My experience in comparing the same or similar tires tubeless and with
tubes is limited, but from based on that experience, I have to disagree:
getting rid of even light tubes (70 gram or even 60 gram lightweights in
the 26" X 1" or 650C X 23 mm sizes) certainly seemed to make Schwalbe
Kojaks roll faster and smoother, and I've mentioned my experience with
tubeless, paper-thin Big Ones.

This stands to reason: if a good amount of rolling resistance is caused by
the internal parts of the tire system rubbing against themselves, then
removing one suchj element would remove one cause of resistance. From the
opposite extreme, my experience adding Mr Tuffys or suchlike liners very
definitely makes tires feel slower, as in 6" of cold molasses.

What do others with experience of both systems say?



On Sat, Jun 6, 2020 at 4:32 PM ted  wrote:

> Roberta,
>
> I am so glad you are thrilled with your new stuff. I hope this doesn't
> come out too negative/snarky/preachy/ because I can't keep from
> quibbling.
>
> I think tubeless gets a lot of unwarranted or rather I should say
> imprecisely stated, jumping over an important logical step, credit for
> giving a "better" ride. Your bikes would probably ride just as dreamy if
> they had light tubes between the rims and the tires as they do with the
> sealant that is in there now. It''s the tires, and pressure, followed
> perhaps by the rims and spokes that give you that ride. The tubeless thing
> "just" (potentially) changes how you experience flats with those tires.
> (Btw I think there is a similar and valid argument regarding weight.) Since
> you aren't a 200+ lb guy or riding 23mm tires, I'll wager you'd never have
> trouble with pinch flats either way. So what tubeless is really doing for
> you is saving you from dealing with road debris (e.g. goat heads,
> staples/wires, glass, etc.) induced flats.
>
> The number of road debris induced flats a person encounters, as well as
> how inconvenient those flat are, can be quite dependent the the local and
> the person. For example I think there is a list member who can barely go a
> mile without hitting a goat head, whereas I can go months at a time on RH
> extralight tires with superlight tubes and never get a flat. I think James
> hates fixing flats in the rain and/or mud. Where I live it doesn't rain for
> months on end.
>
> On the other hand, the difference in ride qualities between uber stout
> tires and very light supple tires is the same for everybody everywhere
> (though admittedly some folks care more than others). So I think it is
> worth while to be clear about exactly what the direct benefits of going
> tubeless are.
>
> Anyway. Congratulations on your great upgrades. Sounds wonderful.
>
> regards
> Ted
> p.s. If you want to go crazy on the weight saving, get a Ti frame Brooks,
> Rivet, or Berthoud saddle and a 1/3 Ti duraAce cassette.
>
> On Saturday, June 6, 2020 at 9:42:36 AM UTC-7, Roberta wrote:
>>
>> In April 2017, I rode a 2016 stock-built Rivendell Joe Appaloosa at
>> Gravel and Grind and fell in love.  James (formerly of G, now of
>> Analog Cycles) recommended a Brooks B-17 saddle, fenders, a rear rack, and
>> I happily pedaled away for the next three years.   My only change was to
>> a Brooks Flyer saddle.
>>
>>
>> I love the ride of the Appaloosa and rode it at home on the weekends.  When
>> I wanted another bike at my office for after work rides, I bought an A.
>> Homer Hilsen from a fellow RBW member.  My only issue with the Joe
>> Appaloosa was it was heavy for me to maneuver on mass transportation,
>> steps, and general lifting.  Now I had a lighter AHH, and that is the
>> bike I chose to travel with.
>>
>>
>> But…I still loved the ride of the Appaloosa…it was just so…heavy.  A
>> call to James and Candice one day to talk about tubeless tires options, and
>> I was signing up to change nearly everything on it to lighten it and get an
>> even better ride.  I changed the saddle back to the B-17, removed the
>> heavy and too large for my use Carradice bags. Rack, fenders and kickstand
>> are too practical, so I kept them.
>>
>>
>> On Memorial Day weekend, I drove both bikes to Analog Cycles.  AHH got
>> 1.75” Gravel King tubeless tires and a shorter stem.  Instead of regular
>> grips, they wrapped the grip area with Fizik tape over gel.  Deity valve
>> caps in red for the finishing touch.   I didn’t need to change out
>> anything else on the bike—it already had dyno lighting and the correct
>> rims.   My new bag is a Sackville Banana Sax, just the perfect size!
>>
>>
>> The Appaloosa got the most work.  They changed the handlebar from steel
>> Choco-moose to aluminum Albatross and changed my 3x8 (or 3x9, I forget)
>> drive train to a 1x11 with indexed shifting.  However, the biggest
>> difference came with the new wheels, tubeless tires and dyno lighting!  
>> Candice
>> recommended purple spoke nipples and they look great with the butterscotch
>> frame.  Near the valve stem, she changed the 

[RBW] Re: Lightening up my Joe Appaloosa--a full makeover. AHH--a partial makeover. Thanks to Analog Cycles.

[ted]

Roberta,

I am so glad you are thrilled with your new stuff. I hope this doesn't come 
out too negative/snarky/preachy/ because I can't keep from quibbling.

I think tubeless gets a lot of unwarranted or rather I should say 
imprecisely stated, jumping over an important logical step, credit for 
giving a "better" ride. Your bikes would probably ride just as dreamy if 
they had light tubes between the rims and the tires as they do with the 
sealant that is in there now. It''s the tires, and pressure, followed 
perhaps by the rims and spokes that give you that ride. The tubeless thing 
"just" (potentially) changes how you experience flats with those tires. 
(Btw I think there is a similar and valid argument regarding weight.) Since 
you aren't a 200+ lb guy or riding 23mm tires, I'll wager you'd never have 
trouble with pinch flats either way. So what tubeless is really doing for 
you is saving you from dealing with road debris (e.g. goat heads, 
staples/wires, glass, etc.) induced flats. 

The number of road debris induced flats a person encounters, as well as how 
inconvenient those flat are, can be quite dependent the the local and the 
person. For example I think there is a list member who can barely go a mile 
without hitting a goat head, whereas I can go months at a time on RH 
extralight tires with superlight tubes and never get a flat. I think James 
hates fixing flats in the rain and/or mud. Where I live it doesn't rain for 
months on end.

On the other hand, the difference in ride qualities between uber stout 
tires and very light supple tires is the same for everybody everywhere 
(though admittedly some folks care more than others). So I think it is 
worth while to be clear about exactly what the direct benefits of going 
tubeless are.

Anyway. Congratulations on your great upgrades. Sounds wonderful.

regards
Ted
p.s. If you want to go crazy on the weight saving, get a Ti frame Brooks, 
Rivet, or Berthoud saddle and a 1/3 Ti duraAce cassette.

On Saturday, June 6, 2020 at 9:42:36 AM UTC-7, Roberta wrote:
>
> In April 2017, I rode a 2016 stock-built Rivendell Joe Appaloosa at Gravel 
> and Grind and fell in love.  James (formerly of G, now of Analog 
> Cycles) recommended a Brooks B-17 saddle, fenders, a rear rack, and I 
> happily pedaled away for the next three years.   My only change was to a 
> Brooks Flyer saddle.  
>
>
> I love the ride of the Appaloosa and rode it at home on the weekends.  When 
> I wanted another bike at my office for after work rides, I bought an A. 
> Homer Hilsen from a fellow RBW member.  My only issue with the Joe 
> Appaloosa was it was heavy for me to maneuver on mass transportation, 
> steps, and general lifting.  Now I had a lighter AHH, and that is the 
> bike I chose to travel with.
>
>
> But…I still loved the ride of the Appaloosa…it was just so…heavy.  A call 
> to James and Candice one day to talk about tubeless tires options, and I 
> was signing up to change nearly everything on it to lighten it and get an 
> even better ride.  I changed the saddle back to the B-17, removed the 
> heavy and too large for my use Carradice bags. Rack, fenders and kickstand 
> are too practical, so I kept them.  
>
>
> On Memorial Day weekend, I drove both bikes to Analog Cycles.  AHH got 
> 1.75” Gravel King tubeless tires and a shorter stem.  Instead of regular 
> grips, they wrapped the grip area with Fizik tape over gel.  Deity valve 
> caps in red for the finishing touch.   I didn’t need to change out 
> anything else on the bike—it already had dyno lighting and the correct 
> rims.   My new bag is a Sackville Banana Sax, just the perfect size!
>
>
> The Appaloosa got the most work.  They changed the handlebar from steel 
> Choco-moose to aluminum Albatross and changed my 3x8 (or 3x9, I forget) 
> drive train to a 1x11 with indexed shifting.  However, the biggest 
> difference came with the new wheels, tubeless tires and dyno lighting!  
> Candice 
> recommended purple spoke nipples and they look great with the butterscotch 
> frame.  Near the valve stem, she changed the colorway to gold, topped off 
> with chartreuse valve caps, and I think it looks smashing!I also got 
> nice cork grips that probably a “blend” because they have more give than 
> the Rivendell ones.   I also like the ergonomic “bulge” in the middle, 
> like the older cork grips Riv used to sell.
>
>
> The ride with the tubeless tires on both bikes, wheels built by Analog’s 
> master wheel builder Mark, is sublime.  The more I ride them, the more I 
> LOVE them.  They soak up the bad city pavement and cracks in the MUP 
> sidewalks.  Even going over railroad tracks isn’t jarring.  The tires 
> just “smush” to take up as much road vibrations as it can.  Yet, they are 
> not slow or plodding.  I explained it to Bicycle Belle Ding Ding, who was 
> anxiously awaiting delivery of her new wheels, this way:  “By the time I 
> get home from my rides, I feel so much less beat up and feel like I can 
> 

[RBW] Re: Lightening up my Joe Appaloosa--a full makeover. AHH--a partial makeover. Thanks to Analog Cycles.

[Doug Hansford]

Roberta,
Such a nice build and a beautiful bicycle. A use a Riv Banana Sack too and 
it seems to hold so much more than you'd think looking at the outside 
dimensions. Do you like the 1x drivetrain so far? Do you ride many hills?
Doug Hansford

On Saturday, June 6, 2020 at 12:42:36 PM UTC-4, Roberta wrote:
>
> In April 2017, I rode a 2016 stock-built Rivendell Joe Appaloosa at Gravel 
> and Grind and fell in love.  James (formerly of G, now of Analog 
> Cycles) recommended a Brooks B-17 saddle, fenders, a rear rack, and I 
> happily pedaled away for the next three years.   My only change was to a 
> Brooks Flyer saddle.  
>
>
> I love the ride of the Appaloosa and rode it at home on the weekends.  When 
> I wanted another bike at my office for after work rides, I bought an A. 
> Homer Hilsen from a fellow RBW member.  My only issue with the Joe 
> Appaloosa was it was heavy for me to maneuver on mass transportation, 
> steps, and general lifting.  Now I had a lighter AHH, and that is the 
> bike I chose to travel with.
>
>
> But…I still loved the ride of the Appaloosa…it was just so…heavy.  A call 
> to James and Candice one day to talk about tubeless tires options, and I 
> was signing up to change nearly everything on it to lighten it and get an 
> even better ride.  I changed the saddle back to the B-17, removed the 
> heavy and too large for my use Carradice bags. Rack, fenders and kickstand 
> are too practical, so I kept them.  
>
>
> On Memorial Day weekend, I drove both bikes to Analog Cycles.  AHH got 
> 1.75” Gravel King tubeless tires and a shorter stem.  Instead of regular 
> grips, they wrapped the grip area with Fizik tape over gel.  Deity valve 
> caps in red for the finishing touch.   I didn’t need to change out 
> anything else on the bike—it already had dyno lighting and the correct 
> rims.   My new bag is a Sackville Banana Sax, just the perfect size!
>
>
> The Appaloosa got the most work.  They changed the handlebar from steel 
> Choco-moose to aluminum Albatross and changed my 3x8 (or 3x9, I forget) 
> drive train to a 1x11 with indexed shifting.  However, the biggest 
> difference came with the new wheels, tubeless tires and dyno lighting!  
> Candice 
> recommended purple spoke nipples and they look great with the butterscotch 
> frame.  Near the valve stem, she changed the colorway to gold, topped off 
> with chartreuse valve caps, and I think it looks smashing!I also got 
> nice cork grips that probably a “blend” because they have more give than 
> the Rivendell ones.   I also like the ergonomic “bulge” in the middle, 
> like the older cork grips Riv used to sell.
>
>
> The ride with the tubeless tires on both bikes, wheels built by Analog’s 
> master wheel builder Mark, is sublime.  The more I ride them, the more I 
> LOVE them.  They soak up the bad city pavement and cracks in the MUP 
> sidewalks.  Even going over railroad tracks isn’t jarring.  The tires 
> just “smush” to take up as much road vibrations as it can.  Yet, they are 
> not slow or plodding.  I explained it to Bicycle Belle Ding Ding, who was 
> anxiously awaiting delivery of her new wheels, this way:  “By the time I 
> get home from my rides, I feel so much less beat up and feel like I can 
> keep on going.The ride was so much more pleasant.”  It took a few days to 
> get to this state.  Every day I rode them I liked them so much more than 
> the previous day.  I think part of that is getting the psi down to my 
> optimal level.  On the day that the pressure felt too low and I just 
> pumped it up to 35 psi.  Over time, I’ll find my sweet-spot, pressure 
> wise.
>
>
> Then, there is Dyno lighting!  I can now just jump on the Appaloosa 
> without worrying if I charged my lights.  The Edulux light Analog speced 
> is so bright.  I have Busch + Muller IQ-XS on the AHH.  It’s very nice, 
> but not nearly as bright as the Edulux.
>
>
> Now the Appaloosa is light enough for me to pick up, move it around, even 
> carry it up steps if needed, or onto a train if there is no boarding 
> platform.  I just love it!  Candice, James, and Mark did a fantastic job 
> and I’m SO pleased.  They are easy to work with and are meticulous with 
> their work.  They picked the parts and basically, I said “OK.”
>
> Going tubeless took a lot of consideration.  I heard so much pros and 
> cons, but after speaking with James and Candice, I decided to take the 
> chance.  What would happen if I didn’t like it???—I’d take the goo out of 
> the tires and put in tubes.  And, I’d be out some money.   But, I’m so 
> glad (in the two weeks I’ve had the “new” bikes) I took the chance.  The 
> ride quality is AMAZING.  Beyond anything I could even imagine.
>
>
> Here are my new Appaloosa parts:
>
>
> Shutter Precision PV-8 Hub  
>
> Bitex Center lock Disc 145mm Rear Hub
>
> Schmidt Edelux II dynamo light
>
> Busch & Muller Toplight Line Plus rear light
>
> Pancenti Brevet Rims
>
> Sapim Lazer spokes 
>
> Sapim Allow Spoke Nipples in purple
>
> 

Re: [RBW] Re: Lightening up my Joe Appaloosa--a full makeover. AHH--a partial makeover. Thanks to Analog Cycles.

[Joe Bernard]

Another #Rivsister joins the fray! 

-- 
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/2419c4f1-e5ee-45b3-8de0-dff5e74a6e17o%40googlegroups.com.

Re: [RBW] Re: Lightening up my Joe Appaloosa--a full makeover. AHH--a partial makeover. Thanks to Analog Cycles.

[Leah Peterson]

I really want to encourage you to do it, Joyce. If you’ve got the desire and 
the means it’s so worth it. It’s like getting a new bike. 

My sister and I both got 2019 Clems (hers is the bronzy green) and she left it 
stock. I’m hoping she brings hers to the lake when we go to my brother’s for 
the 4th so we can compare. If she jumps on mine and notices the difference 
there can be no argument - she knowS nothing about components so will go on 
feel and ride alone. Maybe I’ll get my sister to be a #RivSister with new 
wheels, too!

But if you don’t outfit your Clem, maybe we get to do this project together on 
our Platypuses. Platypi? 
L

Sent from my iPad

> On Jun 6, 2020, at 10:57 AM, JAS  wrote:
> 
> Wow!  What a fantastic upgrade, Roberta!  Thanks for the detailed write-up 
> and photos.  I’m really happy for you.  Your Appaloosa is stunning and the 
> Homer is too (I love that blue).
> 
> Between you and Leah, I’’m becoming convinced I should make the plunge into a 
> “lightening up” project for my Clem.  I was thinking I’d just wait to invest 
> in a light build on the next mixte (Platapus), but you’ve got me thinking 
> about Clem.  Hmmm
> 
> -- 
> 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/pWpMrkiVUlk/unsubscribe.
> To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, 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/9c375148-9dbb-4af0-806f-95a9859a1e3fo%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/FF473331-C1F5-4C36-8C89-41C3ED054836%40gmail.com.

[RBW] Re: Lightening up my Joe Appaloosa--a full makeover. AHH--a partial makeover. Thanks to Analog Cycles.

[JAS]

Wow!  What a fantastic upgrade, Roberta!  Thanks for the detailed write-up and 
photos.  I’m really happy for you.  Your Appaloosa is stunning and the Homer is 
too (I love that blue).

Between you and Leah, I’’m becoming convinced I should make the plunge into a 
“lightening up” project for my Clem.  I was thinking I’d just wait to invest in 
a light build on the next mixte (Platapus), but you’ve got me thinking about 
Clem.  Hmmm

-- 
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/9c375148-9dbb-4af0-806f-95a9859a1e3fo%40googlegroups.com.