Re: [RBW] Re: Soma Grand Randonnee, from a Rivendell perspective
I have to agree--the extended seat tube looks (to put it kindly) odd, and limits ones ability to raise the bars. I recently bought a Rawland Stag and find it a more agreeable design. (though not without a few issues of it's own--hey, it's a budget frame) Steve On Tue, Nov 12, 2013 at 2:08 PM, Garth garth...@gmail.com wrote: They've simply made the seat tube overly long, but the top of the head tube itself is well lower than the top of the ST. If you like lower bars, that'll be great. If you want higher bars without lots of spacers or extenders , not so great. Back to using a long quill adapter on a brand new frame? You really should not have to do that with a new frame if it is made to fit you. If the steering tube is long enough before cut you can add some spacers, but only so many. It's rather the opposite of a Riv type frame where the top of the HT is well above the top of the ST. It's more like a track bike proportion. On Tuesday, November 12, 2013 1:17:08 PM UTC-5, Jim Bronson wrote: Why do you say it's more like a 60 or 61? Don't really care about standover to tell you the truth, just want a comfortable, well balanced ride. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups RBW Owners Bunch group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups RBW Owners Bunch group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: [RBW] Re: Soma Grand Randonnee, from a Rivendell perspective
On 11/15/2013 09:10 AM, Steven Frederick wrote: I have to agree--the extended seat tube looks (to put it kindly) odd, and limits ones ability to raise the bars. How can an extended seat tube limit one's ability to raise the handlebars? Let's suppose you don't like the extended seat tube and saw it off. Does this now let you raise the handlebars higher? Did you mean to say extended head tube limits one's ability to lower the bars? You can saw those off, too. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups RBW Owners Bunch group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: [RBW] Re: Soma Grand Randonnee, from a Rivendell perspective
I think he meant that the seat tube extension might limit the size frame one can fit, and without the extension one might otherwise order the next size up, getting a higher head tube. Anton On Friday, November 15, 2013 9:15:25 AM UTC-5, Steve Palincsar wrote: How can an extended seat tube limit one's ability to raise the handlebars? Let's suppose you don't like the extended seat tube and saw it off. Does this now let you raise the handlebars higher? -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups RBW Owners Bunch group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: [RBW] Re: Soma Grand Randonnee, from a Rivendell perspective
On 11/15/2013 10:49 AM, Anton Tutter wrote: I think he meant that the seat tube extension might limit the size frame one can fit, In other words, can't the saddle low enough? and without the extension one might otherwise order the next size up, getting a higher head tube. I think this entire discussion is based on a misunderstanding. Looking at the geometry chart http://www.somafab.com/archives/product/grand-randonneur-frame-set the illustration makes it clear this is a sloper, and not just a wee little one, like the Rambouillet/Atlantis, either. Even with the seat tube extension, the head tube itself, never mind the headset stack, etc., is significantly higher than the end of the seat tube. It looks like with both stem and seat post slammed the bars are going to be significantly higher than the saddle. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups RBW Owners Bunch group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: [RBW] Re: Soma Grand Randonnee, from a Rivendell perspective
Bill pointed out that it's only 17mm higher Steve in the 65cm. size. That's not a whole lot more than a classic steel road frame with it's naturally higher head tube than seat tube. On Friday, November 15, 2013 2:09:14 PM UTC-5, Steve Palincsar wrote: On 11/15/2013 10:49 AM, Anton Tutter wrote: I think he meant that the seat tube extension might limit the size frame one can fit, In other words, can't the saddle low enough? and without the extension one might otherwise order the next size up, getting a higher head tube. I think this entire discussion is based on a misunderstanding. Looking at the geometry chart http://www.somafab.com/archives/product/grand-randonneur-frame-set the illustration makes it clear this is a sloper, and not just a wee little one, like the Rambouillet/Atlantis, either. Even with the seat tube extension, the head tube itself, never mind the headset stack, etc., is significantly higher than the end of the seat tube. It looks like with both stem and seat post slammed the bars are going to be significantly higher than the saddle. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups RBW Owners Bunch group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
[RBW] Re: Soma Grand Randonnee, from a Rivendell perspective
I thought the Rivendell perspective was that wheel diameter should be a direct function of frame size and that a 65 cm frame would have a wheel diameter somewhat greater than 622 mm if such a thing was (readily) available. I'm just recalling something I think I once read, perhaps in an old Bridgestone catalog or Reader. On Monday, November 11, 2013 10:15:31 PM UTC-8, Jim Bronson wrote: Why, as a discerning Rivendell owner, should I not like this bike? It comes in a 65cm and it costs $489 for a frame and fork. Obviously, it's not lugged, but I have other bikes that aren't lugged. The chain stays are non-ideal at 42cm. (my Riv has 46cm chainstays!) The bend on the front fork is not so pretty like on a Riv. I'm a bit concerned about the top tube being only 61cm in the 65cm size. But could probably be compensated for partially with a stem that has more horizontal run to it, or an offset seatpost, or both. Other than that, I'm finding it hard not to want to get this frame. I'm thinking of culling the herd and buying one. I have a few bikes that I don't really use enough to keep that could probably add up to $489 or more. I have a lot - a lot! of parts on hand in various areas of a bicycle so wouldnt need to acquire much. The plan has been to convert my Riv to 650b but I could just leave it alone at 700c and buy the Soma to put the 650b stuff on to. Hmm. -- Keep the metal side up and the rubber side down! -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups RBW Owners Bunch group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: [RBW] Re: Soma Grand Randonnee, from a Rivendell perspective
I'm abandoning this Soma idea, for me anyway. I still think this is a nice frame at an outstanding price for those it will fit well. I am curious to see how Nick likes it. I called Boulder Bicycle and they really seemed hesitant to say it would fit. They wanted me to take a bunch of measurements of my existing bike(s) before they would make a recommendation. I decided ultimately that I still have over 21 months to sort out what was going to be my PBP bike and there's no rush to go out and buy yet another frame. I think I can make the 650b work on my Riv custom. I can restore pretty much the same ride height with shorter cranks and taller tires. It was already low to the ground anyway with the lower BB and the 180 cranks. Would have liked to had a purpose built 650b with low trail so I could roll with a bag in the front. But it's really not worth guessing on the fit and plus spending more money will not endear me to my significant other at home. I also have a 1975 Eisentraut touring A frameset hanging on my garage wall. It's got a 69mm ST with a 62MM TT. I think I am going to turn my curiosity towards that. I can put the 700c wheels I took of my Riv on that bike, and maybe I have enough spare parts kicking around to Frankenstein it together without spending much. I was thinking before that I would sell it and put the money towards the Soma but I think the old Eisentraut at least deserves a chance. Just got called about an impromptu 101K populaire tonight just north of Austin so I gotta go get ready for that. I am picking up another Rivendell owner on the way there so it will be a 2/3rds Riv Ride!! Happy cycling! On Fri, Nov 15, 2013 at 2:15 PM, Garth garth...@gmail.com wrote: Bill pointed out that it's only 17mm higher Steve in the 65cm. size. That's not a whole lot more than a classic steel road frame with it's naturally higher head tube than seat tube. On Friday, November 15, 2013 2:09:14 PM UTC-5, Steve Palincsar wrote: On 11/15/2013 10:49 AM, Anton Tutter wrote: I think he meant that the seat tube extension might limit the size frame one can fit, In other words, can't the saddle low enough? and without the extension one might otherwise order the next size up, getting a higher head tube. I think this entire discussion is based on a misunderstanding. Looking at the geometry chart http://www.somafab.com/archives/product/grand-randonneur-frame-set the illustration makes it clear this is a sloper, and not just a wee little one, like the Rambouillet/Atlantis, either. Even with the seat tube extension, the head tube itself, never mind the headset stack, etc., is significantly higher than the end of the seat tube. It looks like with both stem and seat post slammed the bars are going to be significantly higher than the saddle. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups RBW Owners Bunch group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. -- Keep the metal side up and the rubber side down! -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups RBW Owners Bunch group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: [RBW] Re: Soma Grand Randonnee, from a Rivendell perspective
A shorter (than 180) crank is probably a good call. I 650'd my Riv Road Standard and its 175 cranks are pretty low now. I've grazed the pavement once or twice. I put light loads in a Wald basket on the Mark's rack on front, and I can load it up to about 10lbs before it starts affecting the handling. Try 650b on your Riv custom with a small front load; it may handle just great. I bet that Eisentraut handles nice too. Have you considered going 650b on that bike? On Fri, Nov 15, 2013 at 2:54 PM, Jim Bronson jim.bron...@gmail.com wrote: I'm abandoning this Soma idea, for me anyway. I still think this is a nice frame at an outstanding price for those it will fit well. I am curious to see how Nick likes it. I called Boulder Bicycle and they really seemed hesitant to say it would fit. They wanted me to take a bunch of measurements of my existing bike(s) before they would make a recommendation. I decided ultimately that I still have over 21 months to sort out what was going to be my PBP bike and there's no rush to go out and buy yet another frame. I think I can make the 650b work on my Riv custom. I can restore pretty much the same ride height with shorter cranks and taller tires. It was already low to the ground anyway with the lower BB and the 180 cranks. Would have liked to had a purpose built 650b with low trail so I could roll with a bag in the front. But it's really not worth guessing on the fit and plus spending more money will not endear me to my significant other at home. I also have a 1975 Eisentraut touring A frameset hanging on my garage wall. It's got a 69mm ST with a 62MM TT. I think I am going to turn my curiosity towards that. I can put the 700c wheels I took of my Riv on that bike, and maybe I have enough spare parts kicking around to Frankenstein it together without spending much. I was thinking before that I would sell it and put the money towards the Soma but I think the old Eisentraut at least deserves a chance. Just got called about an impromptu 101K populaire tonight just north of Austin so I gotta go get ready for that. I am picking up another Rivendell owner on the way there so it will be a 2/3rds Riv Ride!! Happy cycling! On Fri, Nov 15, 2013 at 2:15 PM, Garth garth...@gmail.com wrote: Bill pointed out that it's only 17mm higher Steve in the 65cm. size. That's not a whole lot more than a classic steel road frame with it's naturally higher head tube than seat tube. On Friday, November 15, 2013 2:09:14 PM UTC-5, Steve Palincsar wrote: On 11/15/2013 10:49 AM, Anton Tutter wrote: I think he meant that the seat tube extension might limit the size frame one can fit, In other words, can't the saddle low enough? and without the extension one might otherwise order the next size up, getting a higher head tube. I think this entire discussion is based on a misunderstanding. Looking at the geometry chart http://www.somafab.com/archives/product/grand-randonneur-frame-set the illustration makes it clear this is a sloper, and not just a wee little one, like the Rambouillet/Atlantis, either. Even with the seat tube extension, the head tube itself, never mind the headset stack, etc., is significantly higher than the end of the seat tube. It looks like with both stem and seat post slammed the bars are going to be significantly higher than the saddle. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups RBW Owners Bunch group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. -- Keep the metal side up and the rubber side down! -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups RBW Owners Bunch group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups RBW Owners Bunch group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: [RBW] Re: Soma Grand Randonnee, from a Rivendell perspective
And this conversation is why I enjoy the Riv List in the Winter months. Lots of talk. Lots of opinions. Here's mine : We talk and talk and talk about fit and sizing. When it comes down to it, if you aren't 100% sure on the fit, don't buy it online. I make many purchases online, but almost never shoes or pants. Those are things where fit matters to me. Someday Soma might either build more or distribute them better and there might be one at a shop near you. Sit on it and see. Realistically though, expecting a small company to make a stock frame to fit short or tall people at the two extremes really isn't going to happen. Like it or not, the world is built around the 5' 9 unisex humanoid. At 6foot and 210# I can shop for clothing at WalMart and bikes from just about anyone. If I was 6' 9 and 350#, I'd be heading to the big and tall shop and riding a custom or tall specific frame from a company like Rivendell. Seriously, how many companies stop at a 60-63cm frame. Be happy with a 65. Cheers, Scott Henry Dayton, OH FTM-PTB On Tue, Nov 12, 2013 at 8:06 PM, Bill Lindsay tapebu...@gmail.com wrote: There are names for both of these measurements and their position in space is not ambiguous. You don't need to rotate photographs or draw lines on anything. You do need to look at the numbers and trust that Boulder is publishing accurate numbers. I do trust them, but it never hurts to doublecheck with them. Referenced from the center of the BB, the tippy top of the seat tube extension on a 65cm Soma Grand Randonneur is simply 650mm x sin(72.5 degrees) = 620mm vertically higher than the BB. The tippy top of the headtube of a 65cm Soma Grand Randonneur is defined as the Frame Stack, and is published as 637mm. So the top of the head tube is 17mm higher than the top of the seat tube extension. It's not level, and it's not lower in front like a track bike, it's a little bit higher in front. 17mm. But nobody really cares where the frame ends. Jim wants to know if he can get the bars level. For a rider like Jim with a PBH of 99 who maybe has a SH of 89, that would mean the saddle top will be hovering nearly 850mm vertically above the BB plane. That's no problem with a longish seatpost. In order to get the tops of Jim's handlebars equally high, his handlebar stack would need to be ~213mm higher than the frame stack. Estimate that you get about 30mm from the headset and steertube stack, meaning Jim would need a stem that gets him about 180mm of vertical above the min insertion line. I don't know where the min insertion line is on a 225mm Nitto, but I doubt that will get your bars to level. A dirt drop would almost certainly get you there, it has like 200mm of vertical above the min insertion line, but not much reach. The thing to ask Boulder is how much extra steertube there is on the fork. If there's a lot of extra steertube, allowing you to run a big old stack of spacers, then maybe your 225mm Nitto at max height might get you up there. For comparison, that 64cm Hillborne would have substantially more frame stack. By my calculation, the top of the headtube on a 64cm Hillborne will be (ballpark) 50mm higher than it is on the 65cm Soma. That's 50mm of elevation you don't need to get from your stem. On Tuesday, November 12, 2013 4:09:20 PM UTC-8, Tom Harrop wrote: Guys, Sorry to stick my oar in but it seems to me that the question is how the seat tube (frame size) is measured. If it's measured all the way to the top of the seat tube where the seatpost clamp is, then the HT extension will be (roughly!!!) cancelled out by the seat tube extension, and the bike will fit (roughly) like it's got a level top tube. On the other hand if it's measured only to where the top tube joins the seat tube, then the head tube extension will add some handlebar height with respect to the stated frame size (i.e. it will fit like it had a slightly up-sloping top tube). Right? -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups RBW Owners Bunch group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups RBW Owners Bunch group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: [RBW] Re: Soma Grand Randonnee, from a Rivendell perspective
Intention is that this will be my primary randonneuring bike. On the plus side, my Velo Orange fenders moved right over with no problem from their current location on an '84 Trek 610. On the minus side, the Velo Orange Pass Hunter front rack apparently will not fit on this frame so I guess I will be getting a Nitto. Nick On Tuesday, November 12, 2013 12:55:41 PM UTC-5, Jim Bronson wrote: That is great, Nick! What are you planning on using it for? Send some pics when you're done! On Tue, Nov 12, 2013 at 11:07 AM, NickBull nick.bi...@gmail.comjavascript: wrote: I am in the process of building one up. Shorter chainstays should make the frame more responsive, which is a plus for randonneuring. And since this frame is designed for front-loading, there's no reason to have long chainstays for pannier clearance. There is certainly plenty of room in the rear triangle for fenders and 650Bx42 Hetre's. Don't know about your top tube issue, mine is a 58cm. Agree that the fork isn't as pretty as on a Riv, but it isn't a truly-ugly dogleg bend, or even worse one of these new-fangled forks that has no bend at all. Like you, I'm culling another bike and moving the parts over -- the two things I've had to buy new for this bike are cantilever brakes and a cantilever-based front rack. As to the comment about the crown race having been milled to the wrong standard, if you buy your frame and fork from Mike Kone, he is milling the crown race to the correct setting before he ships the frame. I had a 26.4, 1 threaded Ritchey headset sitting around that I had bought but never used, and it installed with no problem. I just need to put the front brakes on and connect up the cables and I should be able to go on a short test ride, probably tonight. Nick On Tuesday, November 12, 2013 1:15:31 AM UTC-5, Jim Bronson wrote: Why, as a discerning Rivendell owner, should I not like this bike? It comes in a 65cm and it costs $489 for a frame and fork. Obviously, it's not lugged, but I have other bikes that aren't lugged. The chain stays are non-ideal at 42cm. (my Riv has 46cm chainstays!) The bend on the front fork is not so pretty like on a Riv. I'm a bit concerned about the top tube being only 61cm in the 65cm size. But could probably be compensated for partially with a stem that has more horizontal run to it, or an offset seatpost, or both. Other than that, I'm finding it hard not to want to get this frame. I'm thinking of culling the herd and buying one. I have a few bikes that I don't really use enough to keep that could probably add up to $489 or more. I have a lot - a lot! of parts on hand in various areas of a bicycle so wouldnt need to acquire much. The plan has been to convert my Riv to 650b but I could just leave it alone at 700c and buy the Soma to put the 650b stuff on to. Hmm. -- Keep the metal side up and the rubber side down! -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups RBW Owners Bunch group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to rbw-owners-bun...@googlegroups.com javascript:. To post to this group, send email to rbw-owne...@googlegroups.comjavascript: . Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. -- Keep the metal side up and the rubber side down! -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups RBW Owners Bunch group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: [RBW] Re: Soma Grand Randonnee, from a Rivendell perspective
If anybody cares Nitto has a 280mm version of the Technomics quill available now. That should be more than enough rise for just about any build. https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/internet-bob/qXP5MLcLIFs On Wednesday, November 13, 2013 11:49:43 AM UTC-8, NickBull wrote: Garth, You are hypothesizing and coming to incorrect conclusions. On my built-up GR, the top of the seat tube is 3/4 lower than the top of the head tube. Plus the steerer is cut pretty long so you need a 3/4 stack of spacers between the top of the headset bearing race and the top nut. It's a threaded steerer, so there's no uncut steerer involved. I put this in front of a door in my basement that conveniently has a horizontal molding that provides a level that's approximately at the top of the head tube. I'm slightly embarassed to say that I just moved all the parts directly over from my current primary randonneuring bike without even cleaning them up. Partly that's just because I wanted to get this built up faster so I can start riding it, but I also consider the slight amount of dirt that doesn't affect function to be a form of beausage--it's a reflection of the thousands of miles that my '84 Trek 610 was ridden. Maybe I'll give all the parts a good wash some time and take snazzier photos. I went on a ride on the GR last night and it felt great. The frame disappeared under me and the miles melted away. Well, to be more precise, I rode down the block and back, it was freezing cold out and I didn't bother to put on gloves, jacket, or even socks. But the frame did feel nice :-) To add a bit of Riv content to this message: the GR is parked next to my orange Ram. Nick On Tuesday, November 12, 2013 5:13:58 PM UTC-5, Garth wrote: Steve I say this with light heart You're missing the point I made. It's not that it does not have a liberal HT extension. The point I made was that relative to the ST top , the frame appears to have *less *ST-HT differential height , making it's no better, if not worse than a classic level TT frame with no HT extension. Most bike are a plus in this differential , meaning the top of the HT is higher than the top of the ST. Even a classic road frame has some plus. This appears to have minus, and that I do find strikingly odd. Hence, the track bike reference, where this may be a good quality. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups RBW Owners Bunch group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: [RBW] Re: Soma Grand Randonnee, from a Rivendell perspective
I have to say that is a tempting choice for a 650b round town bike. I love my bombadil but with a stumpjumper and a MB2 I feel I have a lot of overlap in my stable right now. Would this be considered livelier than a Sam H? On Wed, Nov 13, 2013 at 2:49 PM, NickBull nick.bike.b...@gmail.com wrote: Garth, You are hypothesizing and coming to incorrect conclusions. On my built-up GR, the top of the seat tube is 3/4 lower than the top of the head tube. Plus the steerer is cut pretty long so you need a 3/4 stack of spacers between the top of the headset bearing race and the top nut. It's a threaded steerer, so there's no uncut steerer involved. I put this in front of a door in my basement that conveniently has a horizontal molding that provides a level that's approximately at the top of the head tube. I'm slightly embarassed to say that I just moved all the parts directly over from my current primary randonneuring bike without even cleaning them up. Partly that's just because I wanted to get this built up faster so I can start riding it, but I also consider the slight amount of dirt that doesn't affect function to be a form of beausage--it's a reflection of the thousands of miles that my '84 Trek 610 was ridden. Maybe I'll give all the parts a good wash some time and take snazzier photos. I went on a ride on the GR last night and it felt great. The frame disappeared under me and the miles melted away. Well, to be more precise, I rode down the block and back, it was freezing cold out and I didn't bother to put on gloves, jacket, or even socks. But the frame did feel nice :-) To add a bit of Riv content to this message: the GR is parked next to my orange Ram. Nick On Tuesday, November 12, 2013 5:13:58 PM UTC-5, Garth wrote: Steve I say this with light heart You're missing the point I made. It's not that it does not have a liberal HT extension. The point I made was that relative to the ST top , the frame appears to have *less *ST-HT differential height , making it's no better, if not worse than a classic level TT frame with no HT extension. Most bike are a plus in this differential , meaning the top of the HT is higher than the top of the ST. Even a classic road frame has some plus. This appears to have minus, and that I do find strikingly odd. Hence, the track bike reference, where this may be a good quality. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups RBW Owners Bunch group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups RBW Owners Bunch group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: [RBW] Re: Soma Grand Randonnee, from a Rivendell perspective
Also, can anyone compare this to the Velo Orange Polyvalent MKII? On Wed, Nov 13, 2013 at 4:14 PM, Peter Morgano uscpeter11...@gmail.comwrote: I have to say that is a tempting choice for a 650b round town bike. I love my bombadil but with a stumpjumper and a MB2 I feel I have a lot of overlap in my stable right now. Would this be considered livelier than a Sam H? On Wed, Nov 13, 2013 at 2:49 PM, NickBull nick.bike.b...@gmail.comwrote: Garth, You are hypothesizing and coming to incorrect conclusions. On my built-up GR, the top of the seat tube is 3/4 lower than the top of the head tube. Plus the steerer is cut pretty long so you need a 3/4 stack of spacers between the top of the headset bearing race and the top nut. It's a threaded steerer, so there's no uncut steerer involved. I put this in front of a door in my basement that conveniently has a horizontal molding that provides a level that's approximately at the top of the head tube. I'm slightly embarassed to say that I just moved all the parts directly over from my current primary randonneuring bike without even cleaning them up. Partly that's just because I wanted to get this built up faster so I can start riding it, but I also consider the slight amount of dirt that doesn't affect function to be a form of beausage--it's a reflection of the thousands of miles that my '84 Trek 610 was ridden. Maybe I'll give all the parts a good wash some time and take snazzier photos. I went on a ride on the GR last night and it felt great. The frame disappeared under me and the miles melted away. Well, to be more precise, I rode down the block and back, it was freezing cold out and I didn't bother to put on gloves, jacket, or even socks. But the frame did feel nice :-) To add a bit of Riv content to this message: the GR is parked next to my orange Ram. Nick On Tuesday, November 12, 2013 5:13:58 PM UTC-5, Garth wrote: Steve I say this with light heart You're missing the point I made. It's not that it does not have a liberal HT extension. The point I made was that relative to the ST top , the frame appears to have *less *ST-HT differential height , making it's no better, if not worse than a classic level TT frame with no HT extension. Most bike are a plus in this differential , meaning the top of the HT is higher than the top of the ST. Even a classic road frame has some plus. This appears to have minus, and that I do find strikingly odd. Hence, the track bike reference, where this may be a good quality. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups RBW Owners Bunch group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups RBW Owners Bunch group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
[RBW] Re: Soma Grand Randonnee, from a Rivendell perspective
I just looked at the Soma fabrications website and the frame section. The fact that Mike Kone of Rene Herse/Boulder BIkes is a co-designer for this frame is definitely a good indication. Mike has been around the randonneur scene for years, and his own developments at Boulder Bicycle have included a long gestation with appropriate prototypes. I would imagine that his contribution to the Soma Grand Randonneur frame set would be very positive, and the price is quite attractive. Jim On Monday, November 11, 2013 11:15:31 PM UTC-7, Jim Bronson wrote: Why, as a discerning Rivendell owner, should I not like this bike? It comes in a 65cm and it costs $489 for a frame and fork. Obviously, it's not lugged, but I have other bikes that aren't lugged. The chain stays are non-ideal at 42cm. (my Riv has 46cm chainstays!) The bend on the front fork is not so pretty like on a Riv. I'm a bit concerned about the top tube being only 61cm in the 65cm size. But could probably be compensated for partially with a stem that has more horizontal run to it, or an offset seatpost, or both. Other than that, I'm finding it hard not to want to get this frame. I'm thinking of culling the herd and buying one. I have a few bikes that I don't really use enough to keep that could probably add up to $489 or more. I have a lot - a lot! of parts on hand in various areas of a bicycle so wouldnt need to acquire much. The plan has been to convert my Riv to 650b but I could just leave it alone at 700c and buy the Soma to put the 650b stuff on to. Hmm. -- Keep the metal side up and the rubber side down! -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups RBW Owners Bunch group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
[RBW] Re: Soma Grand Randonnee, from a Rivendell perspective
Something else to consider for the current production run of the Soma Randonneur frame set is this caveat from their website: *NOTE: First production has a error with the fork's crown race interface. It fits JIS(27.0) 1 threaded headsets, not the more popular ISO (26.4mm). If you think you are OK with a JIS headset (http://sheldonbrown.com/harris/headsets/headsets-1-inch-threaded-jis.html) go ahead and purchase, but if not please wait for the next batch. Thanks.* If this is a problem for you, it might be best to wait for the next batch as the statement indicates. Jim On Monday, November 11, 2013 11:15:31 PM UTC-7, Jim Bronson wrote: Why, as a discerning Rivendell owner, should I not like this bike? It comes in a 65cm and it costs $489 for a frame and fork. Obviously, it's not lugged, but I have other bikes that aren't lugged. The chain stays are non-ideal at 42cm. (my Riv has 46cm chainstays!) The bend on the front fork is not so pretty like on a Riv. I'm a bit concerned about the top tube being only 61cm in the 65cm size. But could probably be compensated for partially with a stem that has more horizontal run to it, or an offset seatpost, or both. Other than that, I'm finding it hard not to want to get this frame. I'm thinking of culling the herd and buying one. I have a few bikes that I don't really use enough to keep that could probably add up to $489 or more. I have a lot - a lot! of parts on hand in various areas of a bicycle so wouldnt need to acquire much. The plan has been to convert my Riv to 650b but I could just leave it alone at 700c and buy the Soma to put the 650b stuff on to. Hmm. -- Keep the metal side up and the rubber side down! -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups RBW Owners Bunch group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
[RBW] Re: Soma Grand Randonnee, from a Rivendell perspective
From the ReneHersestore: *Please allow about 10 days for your frame to ship - we are just catching up on prepping them.* Also - there is discussion about the fork's crown race diameter. When you purchase the frame from us we machine down the crown race so it is the typical 26.4 seat diameter. On Tuesday, November 12, 2013 10:54:51 AM UTC-6, Jim Cloud wrote: Something else to consider for the current production run of the Soma Randonneur frame set is this caveat from their website: *NOTE: First production has a error with the fork's crown race interface. It fits JIS(27.0) 1 threaded headsets, not the more popular ISO (26.4mm). If you think you are OK with a JIS headset (http://sheldonbrown.com/harris/headsets/headsets-1-inch-threaded-jis.html http://sheldonbrown.com/harris/headsets/headsets-1-inch-threaded-jis.html) go ahead and purchase, but if not please wait for the next batch. Thanks.* If this is a problem for you, it might be best to wait for the next batch as the statement indicates. Jim On Monday, November 11, 2013 11:15:31 PM UTC-7, Jim Bronson wrote: Why, as a discerning Rivendell owner, should I not like this bike? It comes in a 65cm and it costs $489 for a frame and fork. Obviously, it's not lugged, but I have other bikes that aren't lugged. The chain stays are non-ideal at 42cm. (my Riv has 46cm chainstays!) The bend on the front fork is not so pretty like on a Riv. I'm a bit concerned about the top tube being only 61cm in the 65cm size. But could probably be compensated for partially with a stem that has more horizontal run to it, or an offset seatpost, or both. Other than that, I'm finding it hard not to want to get this frame. I'm thinking of culling the herd and buying one. I have a few bikes that I don't really use enough to keep that could probably add up to $489 or more. I have a lot - a lot! of parts on hand in various areas of a bicycle so wouldnt need to acquire much. The plan has been to convert my Riv to 650b but I could just leave it alone at 700c and buy the Soma to put the 650b stuff on to. Hmm. -- Keep the metal side up and the rubber side down! -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups RBW Owners Bunch group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: [RBW] Re: Soma Grand Randonnee, from a Rivendell perspective
On 11/12/2013 12:04 PM, Tony McG wrote: From the ReneHersestore: *Please allow about 10 days for your frame to ship - we are just catching up on prepping them. * Also - there is discussion about the fork's crown race diameter. When you purchase the frame from us we machine down the crown race so it is the typical 26.4 seat diameter. Who is us in this context, Tony? -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups RBW Owners Bunch group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
[RBW] Re: Soma Grand Randonnee, from a Rivendell perspective
I am in the process of building one up. Shorter chainstays should make the frame more responsive, which is a plus for randonneuring. And since this frame is designed for front-loading, there's no reason to have long chainstays for pannier clearance. There is certainly plenty of room in the rear triangle for fenders and 650Bx42 Hetre's. Don't know about your top tube issue, mine is a 58cm. Agree that the fork isn't as pretty as on a Riv, but it isn't a truly-ugly dogleg bend, or even worse one of these new-fangled forks that has no bend at all. Like you, I'm culling another bike and moving the parts over -- the two things I've had to buy new for this bike are cantilever brakes and a cantilever-based front rack. As to the comment about the crown race having been milled to the wrong standard, if you buy your frame and fork from Mike Kone, he is milling the crown race to the correct setting before he ships the frame. I had a 26.4, 1 threaded Ritchey headset sitting around that I had bought but never used, and it installed with no problem. I just need to put the front brakes on and connect up the cables and I should be able to go on a short test ride, probably tonight. Nick On Tuesday, November 12, 2013 1:15:31 AM UTC-5, Jim Bronson wrote: Why, as a discerning Rivendell owner, should I not like this bike? It comes in a 65cm and it costs $489 for a frame and fork. Obviously, it's not lugged, but I have other bikes that aren't lugged. The chain stays are non-ideal at 42cm. (my Riv has 46cm chainstays!) The bend on the front fork is not so pretty like on a Riv. I'm a bit concerned about the top tube being only 61cm in the 65cm size. But could probably be compensated for partially with a stem that has more horizontal run to it, or an offset seatpost, or both. Other than that, I'm finding it hard not to want to get this frame. I'm thinking of culling the herd and buying one. I have a few bikes that I don't really use enough to keep that could probably add up to $489 or more. I have a lot - a lot! of parts on hand in various areas of a bicycle so wouldnt need to acquire much. The plan has been to convert my Riv to 650b but I could just leave it alone at 700c and buy the Soma to put the 650b stuff on to. Hmm. -- Keep the metal side up and the rubber side down! -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups RBW Owners Bunch group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: [RBW] Re: Soma Grand Randonnee, from a Rivendell perspective
I think it looks like a great bike. Wouldn't mind setting one up as a townie/porteur. Plus it would keep me in the bike a month club! Cheers, David it isn't a contest. Just enjoy the ride. - Seth Vidal On Tue, Nov 12, 2013 at 9:07 AM, NickBull nick.bike.b...@gmail.com wrote: I am in the process of building one up. Shorter chainstays should make the frame more responsive, which is a plus for randonneuring. And since this frame is designed for front-loading, there's no reason to have long chainstays for pannier clearance. There is certainly plenty of room in the rear triangle for fenders and 650Bx42 Hetre's. Don't know about your top tube issue, mine is a 58cm. Agree that the fork isn't as pretty as on a Riv, but it isn't a truly-ugly dogleg bend, or even worse one of these new-fangled forks that has no bend at all. Like you, I'm culling another bike and moving the parts over -- the two things I've had to buy new for this bike are cantilever brakes and a cantilever-based front rack. As to the comment about the crown race having been milled to the wrong standard, if you buy your frame and fork from Mike Kone, he is milling the crown race to the correct setting before he ships the frame. I had a 26.4, 1 threaded Ritchey headset sitting around that I had bought but never used, and it installed with no problem. I just need to put the front brakes on and connect up the cables and I should be able to go on a short test ride, probably tonight. Nick On Tuesday, November 12, 2013 1:15:31 AM UTC-5, Jim Bronson wrote: Why, as a discerning Rivendell owner, should I not like this bike? It comes in a 65cm and it costs $489 for a frame and fork. Obviously, it's not lugged, but I have other bikes that aren't lugged. The chain stays are non-ideal at 42cm. (my Riv has 46cm chainstays!) The bend on the front fork is not so pretty like on a Riv. I'm a bit concerned about the top tube being only 61cm in the 65cm size. But could probably be compensated for partially with a stem that has more horizontal run to it, or an offset seatpost, or both. Other than that, I'm finding it hard not to want to get this frame. I'm thinking of culling the herd and buying one. I have a few bikes that I don't really use enough to keep that could probably add up to $489 or more. I have a lot - a lot! of parts on hand in various areas of a bicycle so wouldnt need to acquire much. The plan has been to convert my Riv to 650b but I could just leave it alone at 700c and buy the Soma to put the 650b stuff on to. Hmm. -- Keep the metal side up and the rubber side down! -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups RBW Owners Bunch group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups RBW Owners Bunch group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
[RBW] Re: Soma Grand Randonnee, from a Rivendell perspective
If it's what you* really want*, great ... if not ... let it pass. I'd gladly pay whatever extra to get what I really want, then nickel and dime myself with what I do not . The 65 is more like a 60 or 61 ...lol with a 33.5 standover. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups RBW Owners Bunch group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: [RBW] Re: Soma Grand Randonnee, from a Rivendell perspective
On 11/12/2013 12:07 PM, NickBull wrote: I am in the process of building one up. Shorter chainstays should make the frame more responsive, which is a plus for randonneuring. And since this frame is designed for front-loading, there's no reason to have long chainstays for pannier clearance. There is certainly plenty of room in the rear triangle for fenders and 650Bx42 Hetre's. Don't know about your top tube issue, mine is a 58cm. Shorter top tube than seat tube, often by as much as 2-3cm on level top tube designs is not at all uncommon for randonneur bikes, and that's true for the largest two sizes. The 58 cm is square, and for the three smallest size frames the top tube is longer than the seat tube. -- http://somafab.blogspot.com/2013/06/soma-grand-randonneur-official-geometry.html Agree that the fork isn't as pretty as on a Riv, but it isn't a truly-ugly dogleg bend, or even worse one of these new-fangled forks that has no bend at all. Like you, I'm culling another bike and moving the parts over -- the two things I've had to buy new for this bike are cantilever brakes and a cantilever-based front rack. As to the comment about the crown race having been milled to the wrong standard, if you buy your frame and fork from Mike Kone, he is milling the crown race to the correct setting before he ships the frame. I had a 26.4, 1 threaded Ritchey headset sitting around that I had bought but never used, and it installed with no problem. I just need to put the front brakes on and connect up the cables and I should be able to go on a short test ride, probably tonight. Looking forward to hearing how that goes. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups RBW Owners Bunch group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: [RBW] Re: Soma Grand Randonnee, from a Rivendell perspective
That is great, Nick! What are you planning on using it for? Send some pics when you're done! On Tue, Nov 12, 2013 at 11:07 AM, NickBull nick.bike.b...@gmail.com wrote: I am in the process of building one up. Shorter chainstays should make the frame more responsive, which is a plus for randonneuring. And since this frame is designed for front-loading, there's no reason to have long chainstays for pannier clearance. There is certainly plenty of room in the rear triangle for fenders and 650Bx42 Hetre's. Don't know about your top tube issue, mine is a 58cm. Agree that the fork isn't as pretty as on a Riv, but it isn't a truly-ugly dogleg bend, or even worse one of these new-fangled forks that has no bend at all. Like you, I'm culling another bike and moving the parts over -- the two things I've had to buy new for this bike are cantilever brakes and a cantilever-based front rack. As to the comment about the crown race having been milled to the wrong standard, if you buy your frame and fork from Mike Kone, he is milling the crown race to the correct setting before he ships the frame. I had a 26.4, 1 threaded Ritchey headset sitting around that I had bought but never used, and it installed with no problem. I just need to put the front brakes on and connect up the cables and I should be able to go on a short test ride, probably tonight. Nick On Tuesday, November 12, 2013 1:15:31 AM UTC-5, Jim Bronson wrote: Why, as a discerning Rivendell owner, should I not like this bike? It comes in a 65cm and it costs $489 for a frame and fork. Obviously, it's not lugged, but I have other bikes that aren't lugged. The chain stays are non-ideal at 42cm. (my Riv has 46cm chainstays!) The bend on the front fork is not so pretty like on a Riv. I'm a bit concerned about the top tube being only 61cm in the 65cm size. But could probably be compensated for partially with a stem that has more horizontal run to it, or an offset seatpost, or both. Other than that, I'm finding it hard not to want to get this frame. I'm thinking of culling the herd and buying one. I have a few bikes that I don't really use enough to keep that could probably add up to $489 or more. I have a lot - a lot! of parts on hand in various areas of a bicycle so wouldnt need to acquire much. The plan has been to convert my Riv to 650b but I could just leave it alone at 700c and buy the Soma to put the 650b stuff on to. Hmm. -- Keep the metal side up and the rubber side down! -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups RBW Owners Bunch group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. -- Keep the metal side up and the rubber side down! -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups RBW Owners Bunch group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: [RBW] Re: Soma Grand Randonnee, from a Rivendell perspective
Why do you say it's more like a 60 or 61? Don't really care about standover to tell you the truth, just want a comfortable, well balanced ride. To give some idea of where I am with another bike, I am 6'7 and my Burley tandem is a 23/21. Not exactly ideal, but it works out pretty good in practice. I have a 350mm seatpost and a 140mm stem extender installed. The seating position is VERY upright. So much so that pedestrians comment on it. I have 48cm Noodles on it that I ordered from Riv, pretty happy with them. Definitely make the steering much better. It still feels a bit ponderous but then everyone says their Burley handles like a truck, so, it may be just inherent to the bike. The frame is flexy with 450 lbs of riders on it but what can you do? I still enjoy riding it with my bride. Probably never do a century on it but it's fine for 20 mile rides. Granted, I don't think I'd rather replicate this setup on a single bike. And the sizing of the Soma bike is one of my hesitations. But I don't think it would be nearly as bad as the tandem. And I'm making that work. But I don't want to make the Soma work if I get it. That's what I am trying to sort out now. I guess I would define making something work as in doing modifications that change the basic handling characteristics of the bike. Anyway, I put in a call to Boulder Bicycle since they helped co-design the frame. I figure they would have a pretty good handle on the fit situation. They are not open on Tuesdays, so I guess I will patiently wait. -Jim On Tue, Nov 12, 2013 at 11:22 AM, Garth garth...@gmail.com wrote: If it's what you* really want*, great ... if not ... let it pass. I'd gladly pay whatever extra to get what I really want, then nickel and dime myself with what I do not . The 65 is more like a 60 or 61 ...lol with a 33.5 standover. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups RBW Owners Bunch group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. -- Keep the metal side up and the rubber side down! -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups RBW Owners Bunch group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: [RBW] Re: Soma Grand Randonnee, from a Rivendell perspective
us would be the Rene Herse Store On Tuesday, November 12, 2013 11:06:49 AM UTC-6, Steve Palincsar wrote: On 11/12/2013 12:04 PM, Tony McG wrote: From the ReneHersestore: *Please allow about 10 days for your frame to ship - we are just catching up on prepping them. * Also - there is discussion about the fork's crown race diameter. When you purchase the frame from us we machine down the crown race so it is the typical 26.4 seat diameter. Who is us in this context, Tony? -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups RBW Owners Bunch group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: [RBW] Re: Soma Grand Randonnee, from a Rivendell perspective
They've simply made the seat tube overly long, but the top of the head tube itself is well lower than the top of the ST. If you like lower bars, that'll be great. If you want higher bars without lots of spacers or extenders , not so great. Back to using a long quill adapter on a brand new frame? You really should not have to do that with a new frame if it is made to fit you. If the steering tube is long enough before cut you can add some spacers, but only so many. It's rather the opposite of a Riv type frame where the top of the HT is well above the top of the ST. It's more like a track bike proportion. On Tuesday, November 12, 2013 1:17:08 PM UTC-5, Jim Bronson wrote: Why do you say it's more like a 60 or 61? Don't really care about standover to tell you the truth, just want a comfortable, well balanced ride. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups RBW Owners Bunch group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
[RBW] Re: Soma Grand Randonnee, from a Rivendell perspective
If you don't mind the loss associated with reselling it if it doesn't work out, then go for it! Like you, I have a complete 650B build kit laying around, so I could set one up for myself for under $600 total, and I love doing builds, so for me the risk would be tiny. It sounds like you are the same way. Try it and sell it if you don't like it. The only other reasons not to like it would be if you are certain you can't make it fit, or you hate how it looks. On Monday, November 11, 2013 10:15:31 PM UTC-8, Jim Bronson wrote: Why, as a discerning Rivendell owner, should I not like this bike? It comes in a 65cm and it costs $489 for a frame and fork. Obviously, it's not lugged, but I have other bikes that aren't lugged. The chain stays are non-ideal at 42cm. (my Riv has 46cm chainstays!) The bend on the front fork is not so pretty like on a Riv. I'm a bit concerned about the top tube being only 61cm in the 65cm size. But could probably be compensated for partially with a stem that has more horizontal run to it, or an offset seatpost, or both. Other than that, I'm finding it hard not to want to get this frame. I'm thinking of culling the herd and buying one. I have a few bikes that I don't really use enough to keep that could probably add up to $489 or more. I have a lot - a lot! of parts on hand in various areas of a bicycle so wouldnt need to acquire much. The plan has been to convert my Riv to 650b but I could just leave it alone at 700c and buy the Soma to put the 650b stuff on to. Hmm. -- Keep the metal side up and the rubber side down! -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups RBW Owners Bunch group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: [RBW] Re: Soma Grand Randonnee, from a Rivendell perspective
On 11/12/2013 02:08 PM, Garth wrote: They've simply made the seat tube overly long, but the top of the head tube itself is well lower than the top of the ST. If you like lower bars, that'll be great. If you want higher bars without lots of spacers or extenders , not so great. That does not look like what you are describing. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups RBW Owners Bunch group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. inline: soma_grandrando_framefork_ivory2014_1_1000-370x300.jpg
Re: [RBW] Re: Soma Grand Randonnee, from a Rivendell perspective
Pretty clear by any stretch of the imagination ...lol. . Much taller than average ST height and* taller than the top of the Head Tube*. (I'm not referring to the top of the uncut steering tube) On Tuesday, November 12, 2013 2:26:00 PM UTC-5, Steve Palincsar wrote: On 11/12/2013 02:08 PM, Garth wrote: They've simply made the seat tube overly long, but the *top of the head tube* itself is well* lower than the top of the ST*. If you like lower bars, that'll be great. If you want higher bars without lots of spacers or extenders , not so great. That does not look like what you are describing. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups RBW Owners Bunch group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: [RBW] Re: Soma Grand Randonnee, from a Rivendell perspective
On 11/12/2013 02:34 PM, Garth wrote: Pretty clear by any stretch of the imagination ...lol. . Much taller than average ST height and_taller than the top of the Head Tube_. (I'm not referring to the top of the uncut steering tube) That is hardly a cut-down head tube. In fact, it's a rather large head tube extension. And after all, this is a sloper, not a level top tube bike, right? Hold that frame at even a slight angle and it looks as though the top of the seat tube comes right to where the top of the head tube sits. Not exactly what I'd call *well lower*. Here's that same image rotated 3 degrees, so that the top tube slopes upwards: with a horizontal line connecting the top of the seat tube with the top of the head tube extension. Now where's that huge disparity? On Tuesday, November 12, 2013 2:26:00 PM UTC-5, Steve Palincsar wrote: On 11/12/2013 02:08 PM, Garth wrote: They've simply made the seat tube overly long, but the *_top of the head tube_* itself is well*_lower than the top of the ST_*. If you like lower bars, that'll be great. If you want higher bars without lots of spacers or extenders , not so great. That does not look like what you are describing. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups RBW Owners Bunch group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups RBW Owners Bunch group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. inline: soma_grandrando_framefork_ivory2014_1_1000-370x300.jpg
Re: [RBW] Re: Soma Grand Randonnee, from a Rivendell perspective
Steve ...I'm not going to continue because this could go on endlessly point-counter point-etc-etc.. This is matter of *perspective*, and I have mine, you yours, and we simply cannot see the same thing the same way no matter how many words or drawings. The orignal question was what's not to like from a Riv perspective , I answered . If it's what One really wants ... get it. If it's not ... don't. Or buy it anyways ... lol. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups RBW Owners Bunch group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: [RBW] Re: Soma Grand Randonnee, from a Rivendell perspective
It's a threaded quill on the Soma, so no spacers. I have one of those 225mm Nittos sitting around. If that's not long enough to make the handlebars level with the seat, then the bike is not acceptable. That's what I'm trying to work out in my mind. I will wait to talk to Boulder Cycles before going any farther. I can make adjustments to fit, but only within reasonable parameters. I did talk to Rivendell this morning. They think a 64 Sam would probably fit, ostensibly because the TT upslopes 6 degrees. My PBH is 99 The 64 is more than the other sizes though because they have to order it as a one-off from Waterford and thusly it's $300 more and the lead time is longer. So rather than being $700 more, it's $1000 more, basically three times the price. Of course, I have no doubt in my mind that I would like it if Rivendell says I would like it, so there's that. It's just that, getting a Sam would involve me offloading my existing Rivendell most likely and that's an emotional thing. On Tue, Nov 12, 2013 at 1:08 PM, Garth garth...@gmail.com wrote: They've simply made the seat tube overly long, but the top of the head tube itself is well lower than the top of the ST. If you like lower bars, that'll be great. If you want higher bars without lots of spacers or extenders , not so great. Back to using a long quill adapter on a brand new frame? You really should not have to do that with a new frame if it is made to fit you. If the steering tube is long enough before cut you can add some spacers, but only so many. It's rather the opposite of a Riv type frame where the top of the HT is well above the top of the ST. It's more like a track bike proportion. On Tuesday, November 12, 2013 1:17:08 PM UTC-5, Jim Bronson wrote: Why do you say it's more like a 60 or 61? Don't really care about standover to tell you the truth, just want a comfortable, well balanced ride. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups RBW Owners Bunch group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. -- Keep the metal side up and the rubber side down! -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups RBW Owners Bunch group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: [RBW] Re: Soma Grand Randonnee, from a Rivendell perspective
Jim, I'm 5 inches shorter than you and have a 61cm GR, which I choose over the 63cm trying to avoid a too-long reach. In hindsight, a 63cm would've been a better fit for me. I have more seatpost and stem showing than I think the style police would allow and I think I still want my saddle higher. Here's a link to a profile shot: http://www.flickr.com/photos/dvadna/10618563224/in/set-72157637283707385 Daniel Yorba Linda, CA On Tue, Nov 12, 2013 at 12:44 PM, Jim Bronson jim.bron...@gmail.com wrote: It's a threaded quill on the Soma, so no spacers. I have one of those 225mm Nittos sitting around. If that's not long enough to make the handlebars level with the seat, then the bike is not acceptable. That's what I'm trying to work out in my mind. I will wait to talk to Boulder Cycles before going any farther. I can make adjustments to fit, but only within reasonable parameters. I did talk to Rivendell this morning. They think a 64 Sam would probably fit, ostensibly because the TT upslopes 6 degrees. My PBH is 99 The 64 is more than the other sizes though because they have to order it as a one-off from Waterford and thusly it's $300 more and the lead time is longer. So rather than being $700 more, it's $1000 more, basically three times the price. Of course, I have no doubt in my mind that I would like it if Rivendell says I would like it, so there's that. It's just that, getting a Sam would involve me offloading my existing Rivendell most likely and that's an emotional thing. On Tue, Nov 12, 2013 at 1:08 PM, Garth garth...@gmail.com wrote: They've simply made the seat tube overly long, but the top of the head tube itself is well lower than the top of the ST. If you like lower bars, that'll be great. If you want higher bars without lots of spacers or extenders , not so great. Back to using a long quill adapter on a brand new frame? You really should not have to do that with a new frame if it is made to fit you. If the steering tube is long enough before cut you can add some spacers, but only so many. It's rather the opposite of a Riv type frame where the top of the HT is well above the top of the ST. It's more like a track bike proportion. On Tuesday, November 12, 2013 1:17:08 PM UTC-5, Jim Bronson wrote: Why do you say it's more like a 60 or 61? Don't really care about standover to tell you the truth, just want a comfortable, well balanced ride. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups RBW Owners Bunch group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. -- Keep the metal side up and the rubber side down! -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups RBW Owners Bunch group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups RBW Owners Bunch group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: [RBW] Re: Soma Grand Randonnee, from a Rivendell perspective
Jim some Riv frames are assembled with spacers in a threaded headset stack to get some extra bar height with a traditional -17 degree stem. They've done this a long time, especially with the frames prior to the 6 degree sloping TT. The 64 Sam would suit you great. Also being tall, I've never encountered a top of HT relative to ST that was Too Tall ! Having extra HT height is a good thing, especially if one day in the future you choose a bar like the Albatross or something. See the frame as in investment . What seems like a big difference today, in 10,20 years you will not remember at all. Look at broader perspective of owning it :) -- On Tuesday, November 12, 2013 3:44:58 PM UTC-5, Jim Bronson wrote: It's a threaded quill on the Soma, so no spacers. I have one of those 225mm Nittos sitting around. If that's not long enough to make the handlebars level with the seat, then the bike is not acceptable. That's what I'm trying to work out in my mind. I will wait to talk to Boulder Cycles before going any farther. I can make adjustments to fit, but only within reasonable parameters. I did talk to Rivendell this morning. They think a 64 Sam would probably fit, ostensibly because the TT upslopes 6 degrees. My PBH is 99 The 64 is more than the other sizes though because they have to order it as a one-off from Waterford and thusly it's $300 more and the lead time is longer. So rather than being $700 more, it's $1000 more, basically three times the price. Of course, I have no doubt in my mind that I would like it if Rivendell says I would like it, so there's that. It's just that, getting a Sam would involve me offloading my existing Rivendell most likely and that's an emotional thing. On Tue, Nov 12, 2013 at 1:08 PM, Garth gart...@gmail.com javascript:wrote: They've simply made the seat tube overly long, but the top of the head tube itself is well lower than the top of the ST. If you like lower bars, that'll be great. If you want higher bars without lots of spacers or extenders , not so great. Back to using a long quill adapter on a brand new frame? You really should not have to do that with a new frame if it is made to fit you. If the steering tube is long enough before cut you can add some spacers, but only so many. It's rather the opposite of a Riv type frame where the top of the HT is well above the top of the ST. It's more like a track bike proportion. On Tuesday, November 12, 2013 1:17:08 PM UTC-5, Jim Bronson wrote: Why do you say it's more like a 60 or 61? Don't really care about standover to tell you the truth, just want a comfortable, well balanced ride. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups RBW Owners Bunch group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to rbw-owners-bun...@googlegroups.com javascript:. To post to this group, send email to rbw-owne...@googlegroups.comjavascript: . Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. -- Keep the metal side up and the rubber side down! -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups RBW Owners Bunch group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
[RBW] Re: Soma Grand Randonnee, from a Rivendell perspective
I was looking forward to the Soma as well but decided to go with a Rawland Stag because of the lighter tubing spec and a much nicer bend in the fork. The Soma Grand Randonneur is stouter in it's build which is fine as Soma wanted that feature but I am on the light side and wanted something with a bit more lively. The down side is the availability is limited. On Monday, 11 November 2013 22:15:31 UTC-8, Jim Bronson wrote: Why, as a discerning Rivendell owner, should I not like this bike? It comes in a 65cm and it costs $489 for a frame and fork. Obviously, it's not lugged, but I have other bikes that aren't lugged. The chain stays are non-ideal at 42cm. (my Riv has 46cm chainstays!) The bend on the front fork is not so pretty like on a Riv. I'm a bit concerned about the top tube being only 61cm in the 65cm size. But could probably be compensated for partially with a stem that has more horizontal run to it, or an offset seatpost, or both. Other than that, I'm finding it hard not to want to get this frame. I'm thinking of culling the herd and buying one. I have a few bikes that I don't really use enough to keep that could probably add up to $489 or more. I have a lot - a lot! of parts on hand in various areas of a bicycle so wouldnt need to acquire much. The plan has been to convert my Riv to 650b but I could just leave it alone at 700c and buy the Soma to put the 650b stuff on to. Hmm. -- Keep the metal side up and the rubber side down! -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups RBW Owners Bunch group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: [RBW] Re: Soma Grand Randonnee, from a Rivendell perspective
Jim, I'm late to this, but as a data point: I have a PBH of 100 cm I would not expect to get the bars anywhere near high enough with that Soma frame and a Tallux stem. High enough for me means at least saddle height or higher. To illustrate: I have a 66 cm Peugeot frame with a level top tube. On that bike I have a 100 mm Dirt Drop stem (which is taller than the Tallux with 225 mm of quill) and bars with ~40 mm of rise (i.e. not drops) and the grips are only a little above saddle height. I'd want them even higher if they were drop bars. I know ST angle and HT extension could make things different but hopefully it gives you an idea, at least. Tom -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups RBW Owners Bunch group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: [RBW] Re: Soma Grand Randonnee, from a Rivendell perspective
On 11/12/2013 03:08 PM, Garth wrote: Steve ...I'm not going to continue because this could go on endlessly point-counter point-etc-etc.. This is matter of *perspective*, and I have mine, you yours, and we simply cannot see the same thing the same way no matter how many words or drawings. No, this is a matter of fact. You said: They've simply made the seat tube overly long, but the top of the head tube itself is well lower than the top of the ST. If you like lower bars, that'll be great. If you want higher bars without lots of spacers or extenders , not so great. Back to using a long quill adapter on a brand new frame? You really should not have to do that with a new frame if it is made to fit you. Here http://www.flickr.com/photos/dvadna/1040374/in/set-72157637283707385/lightbox/ is a photo of a built-up Grand Randonneur. As you can see, even if the quill stem were slammed all the way down the bars would be pretty high compared with frames of the past that might be considered 650B conversion candidates. In case you've forgotten what a bike built without head tube extension but with a threaded steerer looks like, compare my George Longstaff http://www.flickr.com/photos/97916047@N00/4018066148/in/set-72157622475590131 with the Grand Randonneur linked to in this paragraph. Rather a dramatic difference, I'd say. Contrary to what you've suggested, it certainly appears to be possible to get the bars up at least to seat height without bizarre adapters or extenders. You also said: It's rather the opposite of a Riv type frame where the top of the HT is well above the top of the ST. It's more like a track bike proportion. I submit, this is nothing at all like a track bike, and clearly shows all kinds of Riv influence. Quill stem? Very Riv-ish. Wide tires? Definitely. To be sure, in some highly significant areas it departs from Riv orthodoxy, notably in its low trail geometry and in the use of 650B tires on the medium and large size frames, as well as its welded construction. But the head tube extension is easily as tall as a Rambouillet http://www.flickr.com/photos/97916047@N00/1526014599/in/set-72157602336534002 although that bike lacked Kogswell P/R-like seat tube extension. The orignal question was what's not to like from a Riv perspective , I answered . If it's what One really wants ... get it. If it's not ... don't. Or buy it anyways ... lol. From a Riv perspective, what's not to like are low trail geometry and no lugs. The lugs are cosmetic, of course, but the differences in geometry and in the way the bike is meant to be loaded are huge. With the best will in the world, there is simply no way you could load this bike up the way the attendees at this year's Delaware Water Gap ride loaded their Rivendells http://www.flickr.com/groups/2169588@N24/ Buy, don't buy, up to you. There's a lot to be said for both approaches. But let's not misrepresent what this bike is. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups RBW Owners Bunch group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: [RBW] Re: Soma Grand Randonnee, from a Rivendell perspective
Steve I say this with light heart You're missing the point I made. It's not that it does not have a liberal HT extension. The point I made was that relative to the ST top , the frame appears to have *less *ST-HT differential height , making it's no better, if not worse than a classic level TT frame with no HT extension. Most bike are a plus in this differential , meaning the top of the HT is higher than the top of the ST. Even a classic road frame has some plus. This appears to have minus, and that I do find strikingly odd. Hence, the track bike reference, where this may be a good quality. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups RBW Owners Bunch group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: [RBW] Re: Soma Grand Randonnee, from a Rivendell perspective
On 11/12/2013 05:13 PM, Garth wrote: Steve I say this with light heart You're missing the point I made. It's not that it does not have a liberal HT extension. The point I made was that relative to the ST top , the frame appears to have *less *ST-HT differential height , making it's no better, if not worse than a classic level TT frame with no HT extension. Most bike are a plus in this differential , meaning the top of the HT is higher than the top of the ST. Even a classic road frame has some plus. This appears to have minus, and that I do find strikingly odd. Hence, the track bike reference, where this may be a good quality. I suspect, based on these comments, that you have never tried to raise the handlebars on a traditional level top tube frame. It is not the difference, if any, in height between the seat tube and the head tube that is relevant, it is the difference between the top of the head tube and the top tube that matters. There is no shortage of long seat posts. You can always put a super long seat post into a frame without a seat tube extension, but the height of the bars is limited by the length of the quill and the height of the head tube, and even with stems like the Nitto Technomic quills only come so long -- much, much less than long seat posts. Your belief that a head tube extension of at least 3 cm, judging from the photos, is no better than a classic frame is wrong, by at least 3 cm. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups RBW Owners Bunch group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: [RBW] Re: Soma Grand Randonnee, from a Rivendell perspective
The seat post clamp is further from the cluster because there's less chance of heat distortion at the clamping point. We've seen issues in the past with integrated binders that didn't clamp down properly as a result of this. If you have adequate standover it shouldn't have an affect your saddle position. If you're running a handlebar bag on the bars you'll probably want a longer TT with a shorter stem to get everything lined up right. If you use an adjustable decaleur like the Berthoud then it doesn't really matter. It seems that most of the builds I've seen so far have been on the smaller, lower hood position end of the spectrum. A Rivvier rider would probably use a larger frame with less ST showing and the bars closer to the saddle height. To accommodate a wider range of riders a sloping top tube makes a big difference. Since this is undeniably a niche within a niche it makes sense to build the bike so that it works for a greater range of riders. If horizontal TT and minimal seat post are deal breakers for you then you might want to look at a more custom option. Just sayin. I'm sure Mike can accommodate. On Tuesday, November 12, 2013 2:13:58 PM UTC-8, Garth wrote: Steve I say this with light heart You're missing the point I made. It's not that it does not have a liberal HT extension. The point I made was that relative to the ST top , the frame appears to have *less *ST-HT differential height , making it's no better, if not worse than a classic level TT frame with no HT extension. Most bike are a plus in this differential , meaning the top of the HT is higher than the top of the ST. Even a classic road frame has some plus. This appears to have minus, and that I do find strikingly odd. Hence, the track bike reference, where this may be a good quality. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups RBW Owners Bunch group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: [RBW] Re: Soma Grand Randonnee, from a Rivendell perspective
Guys, Sorry to stick my oar in but it seems to me that the question is how the seat tube (frame size) is measured. If it's measured all the way to the top of the seat tube where the seatpost clamp is, then the HT extension will be (roughly!!!) cancelled out by the seat tube extension, and the bike will fit (roughly) like it's got a level top tube. On the other hand if it's measured only to where the top tube joins the seat tube, then the head tube extension will add some handlebar height with respect to the stated frame size (i.e. it will fit like it had a slightly up-sloping top tube). Right? -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups RBW Owners Bunch group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: [RBW] Re: Soma Grand Randonnee, from a Rivendell perspective
There are names for both of these measurements and their position in space is not ambiguous. You don't need to rotate photographs or draw lines on anything. You do need to look at the numbers and trust that Boulder is publishing accurate numbers. I do trust them, but it never hurts to doublecheck with them. Referenced from the center of the BB, the tippy top of the seat tube extension on a 65cm Soma Grand Randonneur is simply 650mm x sin(72.5 degrees) = 620mm vertically higher than the BB. The tippy top of the headtube of a 65cm Soma Grand Randonneur is defined as the Frame Stack, and is published as 637mm. So the top of the head tube is 17mm higher than the top of the seat tube extension. It's not level, and it's not lower in front like a track bike, it's a little bit higher in front. 17mm. But nobody really cares where the frame ends. Jim wants to know if he can get the bars level. For a rider like Jim with a PBH of 99 who maybe has a SH of 89, that would mean the saddle top will be hovering nearly 850mm vertically above the BB plane. That's no problem with a longish seatpost. In order to get the tops of Jim's handlebars equally high, his handlebar stack would need to be ~213mm higher than the frame stack. Estimate that you get about 30mm from the headset and steertube stack, meaning Jim would need a stem that gets him about 180mm of vertical above the min insertion line. I don't know where the min insertion line is on a 225mm Nitto, but I doubt that will get your bars to level. A dirt drop would almost certainly get you there, it has like 200mm of vertical above the min insertion line, but not much reach. The thing to ask Boulder is how much extra steertube there is on the fork. If there's a lot of extra steertube, allowing you to run a big old stack of spacers, then maybe your 225mm Nitto at max height might get you up there. For comparison, that 64cm Hillborne would have substantially more frame stack. By my calculation, the top of the headtube on a 64cm Hillborne will be (ballpark) 50mm higher than it is on the 65cm Soma. That's 50mm of elevation you don't need to get from your stem. On Tuesday, November 12, 2013 4:09:20 PM UTC-8, Tom Harrop wrote: Guys, Sorry to stick my oar in but it seems to me that the question is how the seat tube (frame size) is measured. If it's measured all the way to the top of the seat tube where the seatpost clamp is, then the HT extension will be (roughly!!!) cancelled out by the seat tube extension, and the bike will fit (roughly) like it's got a level top tube. On the other hand if it's measured only to where the top tube joins the seat tube, then the head tube extension will add some handlebar height with respect to the stated frame size (i.e. it will fit like it had a slightly up-sloping top tube). Right? -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups RBW Owners Bunch group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
