Re: [RBW] Re: Mixed bag results: Fenders on my Leo

[Steve Palincsar]

Re: "Rinko Joining Tabs" -- Peter Weigle has posted some detailed photos 
- with comments - of how he does it on Flickr.


 * https://www.flickr.com/photos/49353569@N00/46221753611/in/photostream/
   and
 * https://www.flickr.com/photos/49353569@N00/45525398034/in/photostream/

As is so often the case, the discussion is well worth the read. It's 
hard to tell where the joining tabs come from, he's clearly doing 
several at a time and as many as he does, it might make sense for him to 
cut one fender up to make tabs for a bunch of fenders.  His tabs do look 
a bit longer than 2 inches to me - perhaps as much as twice that length 
- but it's hard to tell for sure.


On 12/20/18 6:51 PM, Bill Lindsay wrote:
It is my opinion that "everybody" who is doing a Rinko fender agrees 
that all Honjo fenders can afford to sacrifice 2-inches of their own 
length to provide the Rinko-Bridge-piece, without rendering that 
fender useless or ineffective.  In the one Rinko job I did, the bridge 
came from the fender itself, and 2" was/is plenty.  I am not aware of 
anybody who has ever purchased a second set of fenders to make one 
Rinko bridge.  If anyone ever did that, I would agree that's an 
expensive little stub.




--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [RBW] Re: Mixed bag results: Fenders on my Leo

[Bill Lindsay]

It is my opinion that "everybody" who is doing a Rinko fender agrees that 
all Honjo fenders can afford to sacrifice 2-inches of their own length to 
provide the Rinko-Bridge-piece, without rendering that fender useless or 
ineffective.  In the one Rinko job I did, the bridge came from the fender 
itself, and 2" was/is plenty.  I am not aware of anybody who has ever 
purchased a second set of fenders to make one Rinko bridge.  If anyone ever 
did that, I would agree that's an expensive little stub.  

BL

On Thursday, December 20, 2018 at 9:50:13 AM UTC-8, Steve Palincsar wrote:
>
>
> On 12/20/18 12:46 PM, Bill Lindsay wrote:
>
> "A case could be made for a Rinko-style separable fender for that 
> situation" 
>
> I've retained the cut-section for exactly that reason.  That material 
> makes the ideal Rinko-bridge piece.  I even have an extra Compass 
> Rinko-nut.  All it would take is one more cut, if the situation demands 
> it.  
>
>
> It's a pity Honjo doesn't make "bridge" sections available for that 
> purpose.  It makes sense for a builder to cut up fenders to create bridges 
> for many bikes but for an individual user, it sure does make that little 
> stub very expensive!
>
> Steve Palincsar
> Alexandria, Virginia 
> USA
>
>
>
>
> On Thursday, December 20, 2018 at 9:33:38 AM UTC-8, Steve Palincsar wrote: 
>>
>>
>> On 12/20/18 12:17 PM, Bill Lindsay wrote:
>>
>> Steve asked for my reasoning. 
>>
>> 1. The front extension length was too long because the UNSUPPORTED front 
>> extension vibrated and flexed enough to make objectionable noises. That's 
>> an objective fact that we both agree on 
>> 2. The front extension length was longer than necessary because it is not 
>> and never will be required to protect the underside of a traditional 
>> handlebar bag or basket.  That is a judgement call by me that I think you 
>> can provisionally support
>> 3. The front extension length was longer than necessary because it was 
>> much longer than SKS P45s, which I have used for thousands of miles and 
>> have never felt my body was insufficiently protected from spray off the 
>> tops of my tires.  That is a judgement call by me that you've shared you 
>> are pretty sure you disagree with.  Fair enough
>> 4. The lower SPAN between the fork crown and the stay was too long 
>> because my physical sideways manipulation of the fender at the midpoint of 
>> that span showed me the fender was objectionably flexy.  This model of 
>> fender is also too skinny in cross section. A wider fender cross section 
>> would be stiffer laterally and could handle that span-length better.  This 
>> is a judgement call by me.
>> 5. The lower extension was both too short and too long,  because it 
>> wasn't long enough to protect my feet optimally, and wasn't short enough to 
>> add a flap to protect my feet.  This is a judgement call by me.
>>
>> Given those judgments, I needed to do one of three things
>>
>> A. Add a stay to the front to address 1.  Reposition the existing stay to 
>> address 4.  Cut the trailing edge to address 5. Leave the front longer than 
>> necessary (2,3) because it looks cool
>> B. Rotate the whole fender backwards to address 1, 2, 3 and 5. Redrill 
>> everything to reposition everything, addressing 4. 
>> C. Cut the trailing edge and add a flap, and rotate the remaining fender 
>> back. Reposition the existing stay, addressing 1-5. 
>>
>> I went with C because it maintains my ability to put the bike on my 
>> Yakima fork mount roof rack.  A full-length front fender makes that 
>> impractical, as you know.  
>>
>>
>> Thanks for the clear explanation of your thinking.  Precisely what I was 
>> hoping for!  I always enjoy seeing the way you work out these solutions.
>>
>> As for those Yakima mounts, I do indeed know, although shoulder injuries 
>> have made my use of any roof rack entirely out of the question.  A case 
>> could be made for a Rinko-style separable fender for that situation, in 
>> that even a shortened fender with flap doesn't work all that well - at 
>> least, it didn't for me, with SKS fenders on my Rambouillet.
>>
>>
>> Bill
>>
>> On Thursday, December 20, 2018 at 8:43:50 AM UTC-8, Steve Palincsar 
>> wrote: 
>>>
>>>
>>> On 12/19/18 10:45 PM, Bill Lindsay wrote: 
>>> > Steve P asked why I did things my way instead of his way. 
>>> > 
>>> > I decided to cut the fender off because I decided the front fender was 
>>> too long for my use on this bike. If I decided to leave the fender too long 
>>> for my liking on this bike, I would have run another stay. 
>>>
>>>
>>> Fair enough, but how did you determine that its length was too long?  
>>> Curious to understand your reasoning. 
>>>
>>>
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.

Re: [RBW] Re: Mixed bag results: Fenders on my Leo

[Bill Lindsay]

"A case could be made for a Rinko-style separable fender for that situation"

I've retained the cut-section for exactly that reason.  That material makes 
the ideal Rinko-bridge piece.  I even have an extra Compass Rinko-nut.  All 
it would take is one more cut, if the situation demands it.  

Bill

On Thursday, December 20, 2018 at 9:33:38 AM UTC-8, Steve Palincsar wrote:
>
>
> On 12/20/18 12:17 PM, Bill Lindsay wrote:
>
> Steve asked for my reasoning. 
>
> 1. The front extension length was too long because the UNSUPPORTED front 
> extension vibrated and flexed enough to make objectionable noises. That's 
> an objective fact that we both agree on 
> 2. The front extension length was longer than necessary because it is not 
> and never will be required to protect the underside of a traditional 
> handlebar bag or basket.  That is a judgement call by me that I think you 
> can provisionally support
> 3. The front extension length was longer than necessary because it was 
> much longer than SKS P45s, which I have used for thousands of miles and 
> have never felt my body was insufficiently protected from spray off the 
> tops of my tires.  That is a judgement call by me that you've shared you 
> are pretty sure you disagree with.  Fair enough
> 4. The lower SPAN between the fork crown and the stay was too long because 
> my physical sideways manipulation of the fender at the midpoint of that 
> span showed me the fender was objectionably flexy.  This model of fender is 
> also too skinny in cross section. A wider fender cross section would be 
> stiffer laterally and could handle that span-length better.  This is a 
> judgement call by me.
> 5. The lower extension was both too short and too long,  because it wasn't 
> long enough to protect my feet optimally, and wasn't short enough to add a 
> flap to protect my feet.  This is a judgement call by me.
>
> Given those judgments, I needed to do one of three things
>
> A. Add a stay to the front to address 1.  Reposition the existing stay to 
> address 4.  Cut the trailing edge to address 5. Leave the front longer than 
> necessary (2,3) because it looks cool
> B. Rotate the whole fender backwards to address 1, 2, 3 and 5. Redrill 
> everything to reposition everything, addressing 4. 
> C. Cut the trailing edge and add a flap, and rotate the remaining fender 
> back. Reposition the existing stay, addressing 1-5. 
>
> I went with C because it maintains my ability to put the bike on my Yakima 
> fork mount roof rack.  A full-length front fender makes that impractical, 
> as you know.  
>
>
> Thanks for the clear explanation of your thinking.  Precisely what I was 
> hoping for!  I always enjoy seeing the way you work out these solutions.
>
> As for those Yakima mounts, I do indeed know, although shoulder injuries 
> have made my use of any roof rack entirely out of the question.  A case 
> could be made for a Rinko-style separable fender for that situation, in 
> that even a shortened fender with flap doesn't work all that well - at 
> least, it didn't for me, with SKS fenders on my Rambouillet.
>
>
> Bill
>
> On Thursday, December 20, 2018 at 8:43:50 AM UTC-8, Steve Palincsar wrote: 
>>
>>
>> On 12/19/18 10:45 PM, Bill Lindsay wrote: 
>> > Steve P asked why I did things my way instead of his way. 
>> > 
>> > I decided to cut the fender off because I decided the front fender was 
>> too long for my use on this bike. If I decided to leave the fender too long 
>> for my liking on this bike, I would have run another stay. 
>>
>>
>> Fair enough, but how did you determine that its length was too long?  
>> Curious to understand your reasoning. 
>>
>>
>> Steve Palincsar
> Alexandria, Virginia 
> USA
>
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [RBW] Re: Mixed bag results: Fenders on my Leo

[Steve Palincsar]

On 12/20/18 12:46 PM, Bill Lindsay wrote:
"A case could be made for a Rinko-style separable fender for that 
situation"


I've retained the cut-section for exactly that reason. That material 
makes the ideal Rinko-bridge piece.  I even have an extra Compass 
Rinko-nut.  All it would take is one more cut, if the situation 
demands it.



It's a pity Honjo doesn't make "bridge" sections available for that 
purpose.  It makes sense for a builder to cut up fenders to create 
bridges for many bikes but for an individual user, it sure does make 
that little stub very expensive!


Steve Palincsar
Alexandria, Virginia
USA




On Thursday, December 20, 2018 at 9:33:38 AM UTC-8, Steve Palincsar 
wrote:



On 12/20/18 12:17 PM, Bill Lindsay wrote:

Steve asked for my reasoning.

1. The front extension length was too long because the
UNSUPPORTED front extension vibrated and flexed enough to make
objectionable noises. That's an objective fact that we both agree on
2. The front extension length was longer than necessary because
it is not and never will be required to protect the underside of
a traditional handlebar bag or basket.  That is a judgement call
by me that I think you can provisionally support
3. The front extension length was longer than necessary because
it was much longer than SKS P45s, which I have used for thousands
of miles and have never felt my body was insufficiently protected
from spray off the tops of my tires.  That is a judgement call by
me that you've shared you are pretty sure you disagree with. 
Fair enough
4. The lower SPAN between the fork crown and the stay was too
long because my physical sideways manipulation of the fender at
the midpoint of that span showed me the fender was objectionably
flexy. This model of fender is also too skinny in cross section.
A wider fender cross section would be stiffer laterally and could
handle that span-length better.  This is a judgement call by me.
5. The lower extension was both too short and too long,  because
it wasn't long enough to protect my feet optimally, and wasn't
short enough to add a flap to protect my feet.  This is a
judgement call by me.

Given those judgments, I needed to do one of three things

A. Add a stay to the front to address 1. Reposition the existing
stay to address 4.  Cut the trailing edge to address 5. Leave the
front longer than necessary (2,3) because it looks cool
B. Rotate the whole fender backwards to address 1, 2, 3 and 5.
Redrill everything to reposition everything, addressing 4.
C. Cut the trailing edge and add a flap, and rotate the remaining
fender back. Reposition the existing stay, addressing 1-5.

I went with C because it maintains my ability to put the bike on
my Yakima fork mount roof rack.  A full-length front fender makes
that impractical, as you know.



Thanks for the clear explanation of your thinking. Precisely what
I was hoping for!  I always enjoy seeing the way you work out
these solutions.

As for those Yakima mounts, I do indeed know, although shoulder
injuries have made my use of any roof rack entirely out of the
question.  A case could be made for a Rinko-style separable fender
for that situation, in that even a shortened fender with flap
doesn't work all that well - at least, it didn't for me, with SKS
fenders on my Rambouillet.



Bill

On Thursday, December 20, 2018 at 8:43:50 AM UTC-8, Steve
Palincsar wrote:


On 12/19/18 10:45 PM, Bill Lindsay wrote:
> Steve P asked why I did things my way instead of his way.
>
> I decided to cut the fender off because I decided the front
fender was too long for my use on this bike. If I decided to
leave the fender too long for my liking on this bike, I would
have run another stay.


Fair enough, but how did you determine that its length was
too long?
Curious to understand your reasoning.





--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [RBW] Re: Mixed bag results: Fenders on my Leo

[Bill Lindsay]

Steve asked for my reasoning. 

1. The front extension length was too long because the UNSUPPORTED front 
extension vibrated and flexed enough to make objectionable noises. That's 
an objective fact that we both agree on
2. The front extension length was longer than necessary because it is not 
and never will be required to protect the underside of a traditional 
handlebar bag or basket.  That is a judgement call by me that I think you 
can provisionally support
3. The front extension length was longer than necessary because it was much 
longer than SKS P45s, which I have used for thousands of miles and have 
never felt my body was insufficiently protected from spray off the tops of 
my tires.  That is a judgement call by me that you've shared you are pretty 
sure you disagree with.  Fair enough
4. The lower SPAN between the fork crown and the stay was too long because 
my physical sideways manipulation of the fender at the midpoint of that 
span showed me the fender was objectionably flexy.  This model of fender is 
also too skinny in cross section. A wider fender cross section would be 
stiffer laterally and could handle that span-length better.  This is a 
judgement call by me.
5. The lower extension was both too short and too long,  because it wasn't 
long enough to protect my feet optimally, and wasn't short enough to add a 
flap to protect my feet.  This is a judgement call by me.

Given those judgments, I needed to do one of three things

A. Add a stay to the front to address 1.  Reposition the existing stay to 
address 4.  Cut the trailing edge to address 5. Leave the front longer than 
necessary (2,3) because it looks cool
B. Rotate the whole fender backwards to address 1, 2, 3 and 5. Redrill 
everything to reposition everything, addressing 4. 
C. Cut the trailing edge and add a flap, and rotate the remaining fender 
back. Reposition the existing stay, addressing 1-5. 

I went with C because it maintains my ability to put the bike on my Yakima 
fork mount roof rack.  A full-length front fender makes that impractical, 
as you know.  

Bill

On Thursday, December 20, 2018 at 8:43:50 AM UTC-8, Steve Palincsar wrote:
>
>
> On 12/19/18 10:45 PM, Bill Lindsay wrote: 
> > Steve P asked why I did things my way instead of his way. 
> > 
> > I decided to cut the fender off because I decided the front fender was 
> too long for my use on this bike. If I decided to leave the fender too long 
> for my liking on this bike, I would have run another stay. 
>
>
> Fair enough, but how did you determine that its length was too long?  
> Curious to understand your reasoning. 
>
>
> -- 
> Steve Palincsar 
> Alexandria, Virginia 
> USA 
>
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [RBW] Re: Mixed bag results: Fenders on my Leo

[Steve Palincsar]

On 12/20/18 12:17 PM, Bill Lindsay wrote:

Steve asked for my reasoning.

1. The front extension length was too long because the UNSUPPORTED 
front extension vibrated and flexed enough to make objectionable 
noises. That's an objective fact that we both agree on
2. The front extension length was longer than necessary because it is 
not and never will be required to protect the underside of a 
traditional handlebar bag or basket.  That is a judgement call by me 
that I think you can provisionally support
3. The front extension length was longer than necessary because it was 
much longer than SKS P45s, which I have used for thousands of miles 
and have never felt my body was insufficiently protected from spray 
off the tops of my tires. That is a judgement call by me that you've 
shared you are pretty sure you disagree with.  Fair enough
4. The lower SPAN between the fork crown and the stay was too long 
because my physical sideways manipulation of the fender at the 
midpoint of that span showed me the fender was objectionably flexy.  
This model of fender is also too skinny in cross section. A wider 
fender cross section would be stiffer laterally and could handle that 
span-length better. This is a judgement call by me.
5. The lower extension was both too short and too long, because it 
wasn't long enough to protect my feet optimally, and wasn't short 
enough to add a flap to protect my feet. This is a judgement call by me.


Given those judgments, I needed to do one of three things

A. Add a stay to the front to address 1.  Reposition the existing stay 
to address 4.  Cut the trailing edge to address 5. Leave the front 
longer than necessary (2,3) because it looks cool
B. Rotate the whole fender backwards to address 1, 2, 3 and 5. Redrill 
everything to reposition everything, addressing 4.
C. Cut the trailing edge and add a flap, and rotate the remaining 
fender back. Reposition the existing stay, addressing 1-5.


I went with C because it maintains my ability to put the bike on my 
Yakima fork mount roof rack.  A full-length front fender makes that 
impractical, as you know.




Thanks for the clear explanation of your thinking.  Precisely what I was 
hoping for!  I always enjoy seeing the way you work out these solutions.


As for those Yakima mounts, I do indeed know, although shoulder injuries 
have made my use of any roof rack entirely out of the question.  A case 
could be made for a Rinko-style separable fender for that situation, in 
that even a shortened fender with flap doesn't work all that well - at 
least, it didn't for me, with SKS fenders on my Rambouillet.




Bill

On Thursday, December 20, 2018 at 8:43:50 AM UTC-8, Steve Palincsar 
wrote:



On 12/19/18 10:45 PM, Bill Lindsay wrote:
> Steve P asked why I did things my way instead of his way.
>
> I decided to cut the fender off because I decided the front
fender was too long for my use on this bike. If I decided to leave
the fender too long for my liking on this bike, I would have run
another stay.


Fair enough, but how did you determine that its length was too long?
Curious to understand your reasoning.



Steve Palincsar
Alexandria, Virginia
USA

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [RBW] Re: Mixed bag results: Fenders on my Leo

[Steve Palincsar]

On 12/19/18 10:45 PM, Bill Lindsay wrote:

Steve P asked why I did things my way instead of his way.

I decided to cut the fender off because I decided the front fender was too long 
for my use on this bike. If I decided to leave the fender too long for my 
liking on this bike, I would have run another stay.



Fair enough, but how did you determine that its length was too long?  
Curious to understand your reasoning.



--
Steve Palincsar
Alexandria, Virginia
USA

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [RBW] Re: Mixed bag results: Fenders on my Leo

[Bill Lindsay]

Steve P asked why I did things my way instead of his way. 

I decided to cut the fender off because I decided the front fender was too long 
for my use on this bike. If I decided to leave the fender too long for my 
liking on this bike, I would have run another stay. 

Bill Lindsay 
El Cerrito Ca

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[RBW] Re: Mixed bag results: Fenders on my Leo

[Evan E.]

I've found, on my commuter bike, that the front fender (SKS Commuter) is 
too short because it doesn't reach forward quite far enough to cover the 
top, or apex, of the tire. Because of this shortfall, I can coast down a 
hill on wet pavement and watch a stream of water leap off the front tire 
and blow back toward my bike's frame, and toward my feet. Is this a 
tragedy? Not at all. And I'm not suggesting that a shorter fender is a Bad 
Thing. But I do see the value of a front fender (such as Honjo and many VO 
fenders) that reaches just beyond the highest point of the tire. 

Evan Elliot
San Francisco, CA

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [RBW] Re: Mixed bag results: Fenders on my Leo

[Steve Palincsar]

On 12/19/18 6:27 PM, Evan E. wrote:
I've found, on my commuter bike, that the front fender (SKS Commuter) 
is too short because it doesn't reach forward quite far enough to 
cover the top, or apex, of the tire. Because of this shortfall, I can 
coast down a hill on wet pavement and watch a stream of water leap off 
the front tire and blow back toward my bike's frame, and toward my 
feet. Is this a tragedy? Not at all. And I'm not suggesting that a 
shorter fender is a Bad Thing. But I do see the value of a front 
fender (such as Honjo and many VO fenders) that reaches just beyond 
the highest point of the tire.




IIRC that's where the main aerodynamic benefit of fenders comes from, 
too.  I can see the value in having the front part.  I understand -- up 
close and personal -- the effort that's involved in adding an extra 
stay.  I'm not well equipped with tools for cutting off fender tips, so 
to me that seems much more difficult than simply adding the extra 
stay.   Perhaps with the skills and the tools it might seem the easier 
of the two options, I can't say.


If it was presented earlier on, I must have missed it or forgotten: why 
would you want to cut them rather than add the 3rd stay?



Steve Palincsar
Alexandria, Virginia
USA

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[RBW] Re: Mixed bag results: Fenders on my Leo

[scott minor]

I’ve used a small strip of thick moleskin on the fender to take up a tiny gap 
and it has worked surprisingly well, has lasted 3 years so far and no rattle or 
unsightly issues.  

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[RBW] Re: Mixed bag results: Fenders on my Leo

[LBleriot]

I use the fuzzy side of a stick on Velcro strip.  The sticky part keeps it in 
place and quiets the vibration from the fender.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[RBW] Re: Mixed bag results: Fenders on my Leo

[Bill Lindsay]

Yes, Jeremy, the tiny gap between the fender material and the underside of 
the brake caliper either demands a bigger gap with a dimple, or needs to be 
taken to zero with a squishy shim material that will quiet things.  Those 
two options will be in the suggestion box.  

BL in EC

On Friday, December 14, 2018 at 1:05:17 PM UTC-8, Jeremy Till wrote:
>
> I ran into a similar issue with the super skinny Honjos over Ruffy Tuffies 
> that came on the used Rambouillet I bought over the summer: 
>
> 
>
> When first had the bike, the front fender would rattle over everything. I 
> spent some time in the garage in September and now it doesn't, although I 
> can't say exactly why. I changed two things: 
>
> 1. I tweaked the fender line and alignment so that it followed the wheel 
> better and was straight over the tire (when I first got it, the front part 
> of the fender curved off to one side).
> 2. I put a couple of layers of electrical tape over the fender right where 
> it passed under the brake, figuring it might help to dampen vibrations if 
> there was contact there.  
>
> The fender is quiet now. I can't say if 1 or 2 made the difference. 
> Knowing Bill, he's probably already done #1 as much as possible.  Maybe #2 
> might help?
>
> The only thing that still rattles on the Rambouillet are my preferred 
> Klean Kanteens in the beautiful but flimsy Nitto bottle cage. It may get 
> swapped for a King Iris at some point but it's a shame not to use such a 
> nice looking cage on a nice looking bike.  
>
> I might still try a second set of stays for the fender forward of the 
> fork, as there's a lot of overhang there and the fender still vibrates a 
> lot over bumps even if it's quiet.  The fender already has a hole up there 
> suggesting somebody did so, or attached it to a front rack, before.  
>
> On Friday, December 14, 2018 at 11:02:58 AM UTC-8, Bill Lindsay wrote:
>>
>> [image: IMG_1240.jpg]
>>
>>
>> The rain has finally come to California, which triggered a couple new 
>> aluminum fender installations in my stable.  My 57cm Leo Roadini was one of 
>> the bikes to get new aluminum fenders.  Velo Orange has their really skinny 
>> ones on clearance, so I gave it a shot.  In order to maximize tire 
>> clearance I also switched to skinny Soma New Express tires, which measure a 
>> true 27mm on really narrow rims.  The tires are labelled 700x28.  The 
>> fender lines turned out well, and they were silent in the stand.  I'm 
>> really happy with how the bike looks with black aluminum fenders.  
>>
>> But...The front fender is super noisy.  In order to get good tire 
>> clearance, I needed to run it way up close to the brake caliper, and every 
>> little vibration caused that tiny gap from fender to brake caliper to 
>> rattle.  It was pretty annoying.  It had me thinking that since my stable 
>> of bikes is pretty huge, not every bike has to have fenders.  I could 
>> afford to have a stripped down road bike without fenders and use it only on 
>> dry days.  It also had me thinking that skinny fenders are just not very 
>> good.  I've also got a couple modification ideas.  That front extension of 
>> the front fender doesn't really get me anything, and it really is kind of a 
>> floppy diving board in this flimsy narrow width.  I could modify the 
>> fenders to make that extension a lot shorter.  I think I could shorten it a 
>> fair bit in back as well and elevate where the stay mounts to stiffen up 
>> that section a little bit more.  
>>
>> The good news from this 40 mile commute this morning is that the skinny 
>> 700x28 New Express tires rode just fine for me.  I was worried that my fat 
>> Compass Tire leanings were going to make me hate skinny tires.  They seemed 
>> fine.  
>>
>> Bill Lindsay
>> El Cerrito, CA
>>
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[RBW] Re: Mixed bag results: Fenders on my Leo

[Jeremy Till]

I ran into a similar issue with the super skinny Honjos over Ruffy Tuffies 
that came on the used Rambouillet I bought over the summer: 



When first had the bike, the front fender would rattle over everything. I 
spent some time in the garage in September and now it doesn't, although I 
can't say exactly why. I changed two things: 

1. I tweaked the fender line and alignment so that it followed the wheel 
better and was straight over the tire (when I first got it, the front part 
of the fender curved off to one side).
2. I put a couple of layers of electrical tape over the fender right where 
it passed under the brake, figuring it might help to dampen vibrations if 
there was contact there.  

The fender is quiet now. I can't say if 1 or 2 made the difference. Knowing 
Bill, he's probably already done #1 as much as possible.  Maybe #2 might 
help?

The only thing that still rattles on the Rambouillet are my preferred Klean 
Kanteens in the beautiful but flimsy Nitto bottle cage. It may get swapped 
for a King Iris at some point but it's a shame not to use such a nice 
looking cage on a nice looking bike.  

I might still try a second set of stays for the fender forward of the fork, 
as there's a lot of overhang there and the fender still vibrates a lot over 
bumps even if it's quiet.  The fender already has a hole up there 
suggesting somebody did so, or attached it to a front rack, before.  

On Friday, December 14, 2018 at 11:02:58 AM UTC-8, Bill Lindsay wrote:
>
> [image: IMG_1240.jpg]
>
>
> The rain has finally come to California, which triggered a couple new 
> aluminum fender installations in my stable.  My 57cm Leo Roadini was one of 
> the bikes to get new aluminum fenders.  Velo Orange has their really skinny 
> ones on clearance, so I gave it a shot.  In order to maximize tire 
> clearance I also switched to skinny Soma New Express tires, which measure a 
> true 27mm on really narrow rims.  The tires are labelled 700x28.  The 
> fender lines turned out well, and they were silent in the stand.  I'm 
> really happy with how the bike looks with black aluminum fenders.  
>
> But...The front fender is super noisy.  In order to get good tire 
> clearance, I needed to run it way up close to the brake caliper, and every 
> little vibration caused that tiny gap from fender to brake caliper to 
> rattle.  It was pretty annoying.  It had me thinking that since my stable 
> of bikes is pretty huge, not every bike has to have fenders.  I could 
> afford to have a stripped down road bike without fenders and use it only on 
> dry days.  It also had me thinking that skinny fenders are just not very 
> good.  I've also got a couple modification ideas.  That front extension of 
> the front fender doesn't really get me anything, and it really is kind of a 
> floppy diving board in this flimsy narrow width.  I could modify the 
> fenders to make that extension a lot shorter.  I think I could shorten it a 
> fair bit in back as well and elevate where the stay mounts to stiffen up 
> that section a little bit more.  
>
> The good news from this 40 mile commute this morning is that the skinny 
> 700x28 New Express tires rode just fine for me.  I was worried that my fat 
> Compass Tire leanings were going to make me hate skinny tires.  They seemed 
> fine.  
>
> Bill Lindsay
> El Cerrito, CA
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [RBW] Re: Mixed bag results: Fenders on my Leo

[Bill Lindsay]

Your refusal to test it means we can both be right, in our own minds.  
Often times, that is sufficient  ;-)

BL in EC

On Friday, December 14, 2018 at 12:14:02 PM UTC-8, Steve Palincsar wrote:
>
>
> On 12/14/18 2:51 PM, Bill Lindsay wrote:
>
>
>
> On Friday, December 14, 2018 at 11:17:51 AM UTC-8, Justin, Oakland wrote: 
>>
>> Question: have you considered an extra stay to the front extension?
>>
>
> Yes, I have.  In fact, I've considered two extra stays.  One for the front 
> floppy diving board, and one to split the difference between the current 
> stay and the crown, which is also quite floppy.  
>  
>
>> Question: Why does the fender extend to the front?
>
>
> In my experience, short extensions can fail to protect the underside of 
> the stuff that is in your basket or the underside of your handlebar bag.  
> In my opinion, long extensions in front look nicer.  I think Steve 
> Palincsar's two bikes both look lovely with the long front extension.  In 
> my opinion, if Steve Palincsar chose to cut 3-4" off that front extension, 
> his bikes would be less pretty, but I don't think he would suffer any 
> additional spray to his person.  
>
>
>
> You may be right, although I suspect not - I've seen a lot of spray coming 
> up off the front of shorter SKS plastic fencers on the Longstaff - but I'm 
> certainly not willing to make the effort to find out!  
>
> -- 
> Steve Palincsar
> Alexandria, Virginia 
> USA
>
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [RBW] Re: Mixed bag results: Fenders on my Leo

[Steve Palincsar]

On 12/14/18 2:51 PM, Bill Lindsay wrote:



On Friday, December 14, 2018 at 11:17:51 AM UTC-8, Justin, Oakland wrote:

Question: have you considered an extra stay to the front extension?


Yes, I have.  In fact, I've considered two extra stays. One for the 
front floppy diving board, and one to split the difference between the 
current stay and the crown, which is also quite floppy.


Question: Why does the fender extend to the front?


In my experience, short extensions can fail to protect the underside 
of the stuff that is in your basket or the underside of your handlebar 
bag.  In my opinion, long extensions in front look nicer.  I think 
Steve Palincsar's two bikes both look lovely with the long front 
extension.  In my opinion, if Steve Palincsar chose to cut 3-4" off 
that front extension, his bikes would be less pretty, but I don't 
think he would suffer any additional spray to his person.





You may be right, although I suspect not - I've seen a lot of spray 
coming up off the front of shorter SKS plastic fencers on the Longstaff 
- but I'm certainly not willing to make the effort to find out!


--
Steve Palincsar
Alexandria, Virginia
USA

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[RBW] Re: Mixed bag results: Fenders on my Leo

[Bill Lindsay]

On Friday, December 14, 2018 at 11:17:51 AM UTC-8, Justin, Oakland wrote:
>
> Question: have you considered an extra stay to the front extension?
>

Yes, I have.  In fact, I've considered two extra stays.  One for the front 
floppy diving board, and one to split the difference between the current 
stay and the crown, which is also quite floppy.  
 

> Question: Why does the fender extend to the front?


In my experience, short extensions can fail to protect the underside of the 
stuff that is in your basket or the underside of your handlebar bag.  In my 
opinion, long extensions in front look nicer.  I think Steve Palincsar's 
two bikes both look lovely with the long front extension.  In my opinion, 
if Steve Palincsar chose to cut 3-4" off that front extension, his bikes 
would be less pretty, but I don't think he would suffer any additional 
spray to his person.  

-B

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.