subject:"Re\: \[RBW\] Re\: Interesting discussion\: Riv bikes v. BQ bikes"

On Thu, 2013-05-09 at 22:27 -0700, Evan wrote:
 Now that this thread has cooled off -- and also because Grant started
 a new follow-up post -- may I ask you-all some very basic questions
 about trail?

This may help: http://yojimg.net/bike/web_tools/trailcalc.php


 
 
 1. Does fork rake/offset alone determine trail?

No.  See the variables in the above calculator.


 
 
 2. If so, how much rake is low trail? About 45mm?  
 
 
 3. How much rake is mid trail? About 55mm?
 
 
 4. How much rake is high trail? About 65mm?
 
 
 (I'd love to hear, in hard numbers if possible, what constitutes
 low-medium-high trail. Otherwise the distinctions blur too much to be
 useful.)

Varies by wheel size/tire width.  A value that would be low trail for a
bike equipped with 700Cx32mm would be mid trail for one with 42x650B.


 

-- 
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?hl=en-US.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

Re: [RBW] Re: Interesting discussion: Riv bikes v. BQ bikes

2013-05-10 Thread Matthew J

 

 Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe the Soma forks have 1-1/8 
 threadless steerers - too big to fit in Riv frames, which are made for 1 
 steerers. So converting your Riv to low trail isn't quite that easy.

 
I do not know about Soma, but the Rene Herse store currently has 1 
threadless Boulder canti forks on sale.  
http://www.renehersestore.com/servlet/the-1002/Boulder-Bicycle-Fork-700c/Detail
 
These are painted already black.  If you want a low trail fork painted to 
Rivendell standards you would need to have it sand blasted first. 
 
Believe Waterford makes the Boulder forks.

-- 
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?hl=en-US.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

Re: [RBW] Re: Interesting discussion: Riv bikes v. BQ bikes

2013-05-10 Thread Mike Schiller

actually the smaller wheel diameter of the 650B reduces the trail on the 
example provided.  The mechanical trail per Jim's calculator is 43 mm for 
the 700c wheel and 40 mm for the 650B wheel.  Both would be considered low 
trail. 

~mike






-- 
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?hl=en-US.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

Re: [RBW] Re: Interesting discussion: Riv bikes v. BQ bikes

2013-05-10 Thread Steven Frederick

Thanks, Jan-terrific reading, and it informs the discussion to have it
direct from (one of) the horses mouth as it were...

Steve

On Wed, May 8, 2013 at 6:37 PM, Jan Heine hein...@earthlink.net wrote:
 I think there is less difference between Grant's ideas and Bicycle Quarterly
 than many surmise. We both want versatile and durable bikes that are fun to
 ride and look nice. Whether it's a fully integrated 650B randonneur bike or
 a Homer Hilsen, both machines allow you to ride in places where 99% of
 commercially available bikes will be compromised.

 From a technical perspective, I also agree more with Grant than most people
 realize. Grant's vision is a versatile, affordable bike, which can be
 modified to suit. If you want plastic fenders one year, wooden fenders the
 next, a front rack today and a rear rack tomorrow, then Grant's designs
 provide a platform that can handle it all. It's sort of like a
 separate-frame 1950s car, which can be equipped with a sports car body, a
 convertible body, a sedan body or a pickup body, all on the same chassis.
 Grant's bikes can do that. They can be ridden by a variety of riders,
 equipped with a variety of tire sizes. They are a modular platform for
 experimentation. They don't lock you into a single way of riding, like a
 narrow-tire racing bike would.

 Compared to the 1950s car, a modern car's body is load-bearing, so you can't
 change it easily. The suspension is designed for a certain tire size, so you
 shouldn't put on wider tires or bigger wheels without changing the setup.
 Even the seats are specific, and putting in different ones would be
 difficult. The fully integrated constructeur bike is similar. It is
 optimized for a certain rider, a certain tire size, a certain load and even
 a certain fender style.

 The integrated design still can be very versatile – you can take a modern
 BMW M3 on a race track or commute in it to work. Our second tester Mark has
 ridden his 650B randonneur bike in brevets, commuting, in pacelines with
 racers, and on camping tours. The difference is that you achieve that
 versatility within its original design. Mark's bike works well with a
 handlebar bag and front low-riders, but a rear rack would not work well at
 all. His bike handles with precision under a rider who has a light touch on
 the handlebars, but would not work for somebody who grips the bars with more
 force. Its geometry is optimized for 40 mm tires, but with 32s, it wouldn't
 be so much fun. On the plus side, its performance is superior to that of the
 adaptable design, which by definition cannot be optimized for a single
 setup. On the down side, a constructeur bike is much more expensive, because
 everything has to be designed specifically for the bike.

 So it's really about choice: If you want something that is affordable and
 can grow with you as you experiment with new ways of riding and new ways of
 setting up your bike, then a Rivendell is an excellent choice. If you are an
 experienced rider and know what you want, and you ride enough that the high
 cost of a constructeur bike will amortize itself, then the constructeur
 machine offers a performance that is without equal.

 Jan Heine
 Editor
 Bicycle Quarterly
 www.bikequarterly.com

 Follow our blog at www.janheine.com

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

Re: [RBW] Re: Interesting discussion: Riv bikes v. BQ bikes

2013-05-10 Thread Chris Lampe 2

Some of the things that influence trail include:
 
fork rake
head tube angle
tire width
rim diameter
 
I suspect that the following influence the feel of trail:
 
handlebar height
handlebar width
point-of-balance on the bicycle
 
I've used the trail calculator linked in this thread quit a bit and fork 
rake and head tube each have a significant impact for a given rim 
diameter.  Tire width as a small impact.  
On Friday, May 10, 2013 12:27:58 AM UTC-5, Evan wrote:

 Now that this thread has cooled off -- and also because Grant started a 
 new follow-up post -- may I ask you-all some very basic questions about 
 trail?

 1. Does fork rake/offset alone determine trail?

 2. If so, how much rake is low trail? About 45mm?  

 3. How much rake is mid trail? About 55mm?

 4. How much rake is high trail? About 65mm?

 (I'd love to hear, in hard numbers if possible, what constitutes 
 low-medium-high trail. Otherwise the distinctions blur too much to be 
 useful.)

 5. If I had, say, a Hilsen, could I simply buy the Soma forks that Seth 
 mentioned (http://www.somafab.blogspot.com/2013/05/low-trail-forks.html), 
 install them, and have an instant low-trail 
 Hilsen--with no complications?

 Don't get me wrong. I love Riv and Riv bikes and have no desire to mess 
 with their trail. I'm just curious, is all. Thanks!



  

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

Re: [RBW] Re: Interesting discussion: Riv bikes v. BQ bikes

2013-05-10 Thread Steven Frederick

Indeed.  Reminds me of a quote I read in a novel, something like
Academic infighting is so vicious because the stakes are so small.
B-)

Steve

On Wed, May 8, 2013 at 10:26 PM, RonaTD teddur...@gmail.com wrote:
 I am completely baffled by people who seem determined to pick a fight over 
 Jan vs Grant.  I know them both, have been in fun discussions with them about 
 bikes, read a lot of what they have written, and can't for the life of me 
 figure out why people think there is some sort of holy war worth fighting 
 here. My bike selection includes a Riv custom road bike with a (relatively) 
 modern Campy group, a Heron road with plastic fenders and typical end-o-era 
 Suntour parts, a Riv custom ATB with an eclectic mix, a Quickbeam with 
 plastic fenders and front and rear racks and battery lights, a Protovelo 
 Bleriot with SS couplers, plastic fenders, small rear rack, dyno lights, and 
 a handlebar bag, a Terraferma 650B skinny tube brevet bike with aluminum 
 fenders, dyno lights, and a handlebar bag, and a couple of tandems. (And a 
 Moto Guzzi, but we'll stick to bicycle bikes here).

 The two bikes that get the most mileage these days are the Protovelo and the 
 Terraferma. Both 650B with 38-42 mm tires, fenders, and dyno lights. I 
 wouldn't hesitate to take the Protovelo on a brevet. In fact, I did a solo 
 600km ride on it and didn't once think, gee, I wish this thing was lighter 
 and more responsive. But now that I have the Terraferma, it's my first choice 
 for a long ride. Point is, I really like them both, am very happy with them 
 both, and don't understand anyone who says it has to be one or the other. If 
 you can't afford both, pick one and ride the heck out of it.

 --
 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?hl=en-US.
 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?hl=en-US.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

Re: [RBW] Re: Interesting discussion: Riv bikes v. BQ bikes

On Fri, 2013-05-10 at 06:43 -0700, Chris Lampe 2 wrote:
 Some of the things that influence trail include:
  
 fork rake
 head tube angle
 tire width
 rim diameter
  
 I suspect that the following influence the feel of trail:
  
 handlebar height
 handlebar width
 point-of-balance on the bicycle

and amount of load and where carried


  
 I've used the trail calculator linked in this thread quit a bit and
 fork rake and head tube each have a significant impact for a given rim
 diameter.  Tire width as a small impact.  

Tire width has a small inpact on geometric trail.  Tire width has a
large impact on pneumatic trail.  The two combine to produce overall
trail.  When you widen the tires and increase pneumatic trail, you need
to reduce geometric trail, or else you end up with excessive trail and
the bike feel sluggish.  When you narrow the tires you need to increase
the geometric trail, or you may end up with insufficient stability.


-- 
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?hl=en-US.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

Re: [RBW] Re: Interesting discussion: Riv bikes v. BQ bikes

2013-05-10 Thread Evan

Thanks, everyone, for your answers regarding trail. (Pneumatic trail vs. 
geometric trail? Whoa. It's even more complicated than I thought!)




-- 
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?hl=en-US.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

Re: [RBW] Re: Interesting discussion: Riv bikes v. BQ bikes

On Fri, 2013-05-10 at 15:28 -0700, Evan wrote:
 Thanks, everyone, for your answers regarding trail. (Pneumatic trail
 vs. geometric trail? Whoa. It's even more complicated than I thought!)

The end result -- intuitive handling -- is easy.  The variables to get
you there are subtle.  It's only simple if you narrow the range of
possibilities considerably: say, for example, considering only racing
bikes with 23mm tires.  Then things get simpler.  Throw in different
tire sizes, bikes intended to carry heavy loads, etc., things get a lot
more complicated, and not necessarily in an obvious way.

If you're interested, there are several highly interesting articles in
Bicycle Quarterly on this subject.

-- 
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?hl=en-US.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

Re: [RBW] Re: Interesting discussion: Riv bikes v. BQ bikes

2013-05-10 Thread PATRICK MOORE

Dave Moulton's blog (http://davesbikeblog.squarespace.com/) discusses trail
toward the bottom where a link takes you to an earlier entry on trail --
and that in turn to a yet older one. I can't say if he is right, but he has
certainly ridden a lot and built a lot of bikes. At any rate, an
interesting perspective with reference to history (he started racing in the
early 1950s).



On Fri, May 10, 2013 at 4:28 PM, Evan evanellio...@gmail.com wrote:

 Thanks, everyone, for your answers regarding trail. (Pneumatic trail vs.
 geometric trail? Whoa. It's even more complicated than I thought!)


  --
 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?hl=en-US.
 For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.






-- 

http://resumespecialties.com/index.html
patrickmo...@resumespecialties.com

Albuquerque, NM

-- 
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?hl=en-US.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

Re: [RBW] Re: Interesting discussion: Riv bikes v. BQ bikes

2013-05-10 Thread René Sterental

What a great discussion. As someone who has changed two of his four
Rivendell bikes to low trail forks to try to discover what the whole trail
thing was about, I can say the following in a completely subjective manner:

- Had I discovered Jan's low trail randonneurs instead of Grant's versatile
Rivendell mid-trail bikes, I would have completely missed the boat and
would have become convinced that riding any bike pain-free was an utopic
dream (for me).
- Grant's philosophy of bike design, construction and most importantly fit,
allowed me to make that utopic dream a reality with its higher handlebars
and other details. All of the low-trail rando bikes I've seen are set up
with bars lower than the saddle, which triggers a lot of pain for me and
would have made it impossible to enjoy.
- It took me several years of riding Grant's bikes and making adjustments
progressively to get to the point where I could ride pain free for a couple
of hours (the current limit of my fitness/endurance) and enjoy the total
ride. It's one thing to suffer for lack of fitness, which you can improve,
and another to suffer due to incorrect fit/position due to your body
characteristics. I can't explain why I was so slow in adopting the RBW fit
philosophy in its totality, but for some reason something in me kept
resisting the upright swept-back bars until I finally gave in when Grant
launched the Bosco bars. I kept trying to get comfortable on drop bars (and
not finding it) and also didn't like the Moustache and Albatross bars when
I tried them.
- It was only when able to ride pain-free due to Grant's bike philosophy,
that exploring other dimensions like low trail finally made sense for me.
Remember, just low trail on a Rivendell bike, not the rest of the light
tubing rando philosophy. I have the set the goal of trying it out as a
reward when I manage to lose around 70-80 lbs.
- Will I convert the other two Rivendell bikes to low trail? Not likely.
The two issues that triggered this quest for me were shimmy when carrying
any load and the desire to carry loads on the front in addition to the rear
on my Atlantis and my Hunqapillar. As a bonus, I discovered I not only
really like carrying front loads on those bikes, I also enjoy how they ride
unloaded as well.
- The Betty Foy and the Homer ride very well as they are, and I don't
really load them. The Betty is the lowest trail of all the Rivendell bikes
I have, and handles beautifully with rear panniers and a commute load. The
Homer I pretty much ride unloaded. Is it worth getting a low trail fork for
it? I don't think so. I think that when I lose the weight, I'll try to
discover what the whole light-tube-low-trail-rando-bike is all about and
enrich myself in the process. Until then, I have what I need, and plenty of
tweaking and experimenting to do in the meantime!

I am thankful I first discovered Rivendell and Grant. Thanks to him and
what he stands for, a full and rich horizon in my cycling has opened up for
me. One that will always keep the Rivendell philosophy at its core, no
matter where the road takes me. And it includes Jan's philosophy as well.
And much more.

René


On Fri, May 10, 2013 at 3:09 PM, Steve Palincsar palin...@his.com wrote:

 On Fri, 2013-05-10 at 06:43 -0700, Chris Lampe 2 wrote:
  Some of the things that influence trail include:
 
  fork rake
  head tube angle
  tire width
  rim diameter
 
  I suspect that the following influence the feel of trail:
 
  handlebar height
  handlebar width
  point-of-balance on the bicycle

 and amount of load and where carried


 
  I've used the trail calculator linked in this thread quit a bit and
  fork rake and head tube each have a significant impact for a given rim
  diameter.  Tire width as a small impact.

 Tire width has a small inpact on geometric trail.  Tire width has a
 large impact on pneumatic trail.  The two combine to produce overall
 trail.  When you widen the tires and increase pneumatic trail, you need
 to reduce geometric trail, or else you end up with excessive trail and
 the bike feel sluggish.  When you narrow the tires you need to increase
 the geometric trail, or you may end up with insufficient stability.


 --
 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?hl=en-US.
 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

Re: [RBW] Re: Interesting discussion: Riv bikes v. BQ bikes

On Fri, 2013-05-10 at 20:09 -0600, René Sterental wrote:

 
 - Had I discovered Jan's low trail randonneurs instead of Grant's
 versatile Rivendell mid-trail bikes, I would have completely missed
 the boat and would have become convinced that riding any bike
 pain-free was an utopic dream (for me).
 - Grant's philosophy of bike design, construction and most importantly
 fit, allowed me to make that utopic dream a reality with its higher
 handlebars and other details. All of the low-trail rando bikes I've
 seen are set up with bars lower than the saddle, which triggers a lot
 of pain for me and would have made it impossible to enjoy.

Handlebar position has nothing to do with whether a bike has low, medium
or high trail.  It also has nothing to do with whether a bike is
suitable for doing long rides, other than as it affects the comfort of
the rider, which is individual.  

For that matter, how much trail a bike may have has nothing to do with
whether it's suitable for doing long rides, although it may affect where
you would carry the baggage.

 Remember, just low trail on a Rivendell bike, not the rest of the
 light tubing rando philosophy. 

Light tubing has nothing to do with rando philosophy.  Plenty of
racing bikes in the pro peloton back in the day were made with light
tubing.

 I think that when I lose the weight, I'll try to discover what the
 whole light-tube-low-trail-rando-bike is all about and enrich myself
 in the process. 

You might do better experimenting with one variable at a time.

 I am thankful I first discovered Rivendell and Grant. Thanks to him
 and what he stands for, a full and rich horizon in my cycling has
 opened up for me. One that will always keep the Rivendell philosophy
 at its core, no matter where the road takes me. And it includes Jan's
 philosophy as well. And much more.



-- 
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?hl=en-US.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

Re: [RBW] Re: Interesting discussion: Riv bikes v. BQ bikes

2013-05-10 Thread Benz, Sunnyvale, CA

On Friday, May 10, 2013 7:27:02 PM UTC-7, Steve Palincsar wrote:

 Handlebar position has nothing to do with whether a bike has low, medium 
 or high trail.

 
I don't know if that is entirely true. Certainly, lower trail bikes favor 
having a load at the front to feel normal, at least for me. Without a 
load, low trail bikes are squirrely. That means lower trail bikes favor a 
more front-biased weight distribution to feel normal, including perhaps 
by having a lower handlebar. That also means that lower trail bikes will 
probably feel squirrely with Bosco or other upright bars (speculation; 
haven't tested).

Of course, one can get used to either low or high trail bikes and once that 
happens, whichever one that's familiar will feel normal.

-- 
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?hl=en-US.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

Re: [RBW] Re: Interesting discussion: Riv bikes v. BQ bikes

2013-05-09 Thread cyclotourist

The Real Soon Now models are quite popular. :-)

Cheers,
David



On Wed, May 8, 2013 at 5:54 PM, Cecily Walker cecily.wal...@gmail.comwrote:



 On Tuesday, May 7, 2013 8:09:54 PM UTC-7, Jim Thill - Hiawatha Cyclery
 wrote:

  Undersized tubing? Maybe it's not obvious to everybody, but a lot of
 plus-sized people are drawn to Riv by the promise of high-bar comfort and
 sturdiness. Put some chugging 270-pounder on a bike with undersized tubes,
 and it's likely to get a bit too exciting to be enjoyable.


 Hear, hear. One of the reasons I was drawn to my heavy Dutch bike was
 because I'm a heavy rider, and I wanted to ride a bike that felt stable and
 secure under my weight. After my Dutch bike was flattened by an inattentive
 driver (I'm OK, though), I decided I wanted that same strength and
 stability and comfort, but in a much more versatile package that could
 handle Vancouver's hilly terrain.  That's why I'll be putting a deposit on
 a Betty Foy Real Soon Now (tm).

 I will say that though I've a difference of opinion with Velouria in the
 past, I'm glad she's out there, and I'm glad she's contributing to the body
 of knowledge and conversations about bicycling. That she's a woman riding
 about some technical topics while not divorcing them from the sheer
 enjoyment of riding inspired me to do more than just ride to/from work.

 Oh, and hi from a long-time lurker!

  --
 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?hl=en-US.
 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?hl=en-US.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

Re: [RBW] Re: Interesting discussion: Riv bikes v. BQ bikes

2013-05-09 Thread Matt Beebe

What if, as an experienced rider, what you want is something that you can 
easily modify over time, because you've been riding long enough to know 
that your riding changes over the days/years/decades, your body changes, 
and furthermore your bike is just as likely to be ridden on rocky/root 
laden singletrack as on pavement, even on the way to work?

Anyway I agree with what others have pointed out;  most of us agree on far 
more than this thread would indicate (or we wouldn't be reading the RBWOB 
list). Count me among those who are just glad that we have both Jan and 
Grant's contributions to the current world of bicycling.Compared to 
mainstream of the past, they are WAY more similar than is worth arguing 
about.   BQ is an awesome rag.

Now, I'd like to propose a new rule for these kinds of threads, though I 
know it would be ignored anyway:  no more comparisons between flavors of 
automobiles and flavors of bicycles.   At best it's a ruthlessly overworked 
simile, at worst it's just a bummer.


Matt


On Wednesday, May 8, 2013 9:30:34 PM UTC-4, Jan Heine wrote:



 On Wednesday, May 8, 2013 4:15:52 PM UTC-7, Patrick Moore wrote:

 I will also add that Jan is wrong in his general conclusion (at least, 
 this is the sensus verbi) that while other bikes are OK if you don't want 
 to spend a lot of money or don't really know what you like, his preferred 
 types are the only ones chosen by those who have both the knowledge and 
 money to get what they really want. Not proven!

 I am sorry about the misunderstanding. What I was trying to say is this: 
 If you know what you want, then a bike optimized specifically for your 
 preferences will usually be superior to a jack-of-all-trades that is 
 designed to work with many configurations.

 What that configuration is depends on the rider and their preferences. For 
 example, if you ride a lot out of the saddle, a front load usually is 
 superior as it doesn't have the tail wagging the dog feel. If you like to 
 ride no-hands at relatively low speeds, a rear load is better, because a 
 front load needs a certain speed to become stable no-hands. And then there 
 are simply preferences of what you like a bike to feel like.

 Jan Heine
 Editor
 Bicycle Quarterly
 www.bikequarterly.com

 Follow our blog at www.janheine.com 


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

Re: [RBW] Re: Interesting discussion: Riv bikes v. BQ bikes

2013-05-09 Thread bobish

Steve P., what are your riding? Any pics (link). Also, anyone know if there is 
low trail google group or equivalent? (I'm already familiar with BQ and Jan 
but just wondering if there is a general discussion/group going on elsewhere.)

Thanks,
Perry

-- 
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?hl=en-US.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

Re: [RBW] Re: Interesting discussion: Riv bikes v. BQ bikes

2013-05-09 Thread Steve Palincsar

On Thu, 2013-05-09 at 05:50 -0700, bobish wrote:
 Steve P., what are your riding? Any pics (link). 

MAP Randonneur:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/97916047@N00/7252011134/in/set-72157627155309179
seen here on tour in Ohio last year

Kogswell P/R:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/37542512@N04/8652943777/in/pool-2169588@N24
photographed on the Delaware Water Gap tour

Velo Orange Randonneur:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/97916047@N00/sets/72157606169015639/show/

George Longstaff Custom Audax:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/97916047@N00/4018066148/in/set-72157622475590131/

Alex Moulton AM:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/97916047@N00/sets/72157624929495699/show/

and for some reason, I have no photos of my 1991 Spectrum Ti



-- 
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?hl=en-US.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

Re: [RBW] Re: Interesting discussion: Riv bikes v. BQ bikes

2013-05-09 Thread Jim Thill - Hiawatha Cyclery

There really is no one bike to rule them all. That's why I have approximately 
10 bikes.

-- 
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?hl=en-US.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

Re: [RBW] Re: Interesting discussion: Riv bikes v. BQ bikes

2013-05-09 Thread Seth Vidal

There is one bike. It's whichever one I happen to be riding RIGHT NOW. :)

And then I change bikes then it's THAT ONE. :)

-sv



On Thu, May 9, 2013 at 10:10 AM, Jim Thill - Hiawatha Cyclery 
thill@gmail.com wrote:

 There really is no one bike to rule them all. That's why I have
 approximately 10 bikes.

 --
 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?hl=en-US.
 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?hl=en-US.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

Re: [RBW] Re: Interesting discussion: Riv bikes v. BQ bikes

2013-05-09 Thread PATRICK MOORE

I can't argue with that!

I'm glad you meant that; I'd be disappointed if you meant the other. I
sincerely think BQ is one of the best, possibly the best, cycling mag out
today and I'm glad you keep an open mind to your tests.

On Wed, May 8, 2013 at 7:30 PM, Jan Heine hein...@earthlink.net wrote:



 On Wednesday, May 8, 2013 4:15:52 PM UTC-7, Patrick Moore wrote:

 I will also add that Jan is wrong in his general conclusion (at least,
 this is the sensus verbi) that while other bikes are OK if you don't want
 to spend a lot of money or don't really know what you like, his preferred
 types are the only ones chosen by those who have both the knowledge and
 money to get what they really want. Not proven!

 I am sorry about the misunderstanding. What I was trying to say is this:
 If you know what you want, then a bike optimized specifically for your
 preferences will usually be superior to a jack-of-all-trades that is
 designed to work with many configurations.

 What that configuration is depends on the rider and their preferences. For
 example, if you ride a lot out of the saddle, a front load usually is
 superior as it doesn't have the tail wagging the dog feel. If you like to
 ride no-hands at relatively low speeds, a rear load is better, because a
 front load needs a certain speed to become stable no-hands. And then there
 are simply preferences of what you like a bike to feel like.

 Jan Heine
 Editor
 Bicycle Quarterly
 www.bikequarterly.com

 Follow our blog at www.janheine.com

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






-- 

http://resumespecialties.com/index.html
patrickmo...@resumespecialties.com

Albuquerque, NM

-- 
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?hl=en-US.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

Re: [RBW] Re: Interesting discussion: Riv bikes v. BQ bikes

2013-05-09 Thread bobish

Thanks, Steve. Those are some awesome looking bikes (and rides). 

Perry

-- 
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?hl=en-US.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

Re: [RBW] Re: Interesting discussion: Riv bikes v. BQ bikes

2013-05-09 Thread PATRICK MOORE

“He delighted to tread upon the brink of meaning”. (Dr. Johnson of John
Dryden.)

Patrick Moore, saying it affectionately and not at all deprecatingly of
Garth.

On Thu, May 9, 2013 at 6:37 AM, Garth garth...@gmail.com wrote:


 This is apples and oranges ... that's all. There is no one right way for
 all  only the ways it works for each as themselves.  We each have our
 purpose ... our reasons for riding ... for living as we do... and no one
 needs to justify or give reasons as to why they choose what they choose.
 If you want to do that, okay . but no choice is superior or inferior to
 another .


  --
 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?hl=en-US.
 For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.






-- 

http://resumespecialties.com/index.html
patrickmo...@resumespecialties.com

Albuquerque, NM

-- 
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?hl=en-US.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

Re: [RBW] Re: Interesting discussion: Riv bikes v. BQ bikes

2013-05-09 Thread Evan

Now that this thread has cooled off -- and also because Grant started a new 
follow-up post -- may I ask you-all some very basic questions about trail?

1. Does fork rake/offset alone determine trail?

2. If so, how much rake is low trail? About 45mm?  

3. How much rake is mid trail? About 55mm?

4. How much rake is high trail? About 65mm?

(I'd love to hear, in hard numbers if possible, what constitutes 
low-medium-high trail. Otherwise the distinctions blur too much to be 
useful.)

5. If I had, say, a Hilsen, could I simply buy the Soma forks that Seth 
mentioned (http://www.somafab.blogspot.com/2013/05/low-trail-forks.html), 
install them, and have an instant low-trail 
Hilsen--with no complications?

Don't get me wrong. I love Riv and Riv bikes and have no desire to mess 
with their trail. I'm just curious, is all. Thanks!



  

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

Re: [RBW] Re: Interesting discussion: Riv bikes v. BQ bikes

2013-05-08 Thread Brian Hanson

Jan and Grant remind me of old Outdoor Life writers like Jack O'Connor
who brought romance and excitement to their sport (hunting).  They promote
the sport they love through their ideas and designs, but both love
different things about the sport/lifestyle.  I generally love reading
everything they write.  They are both right on for their respective
audiences.  We would be a poorer group if either was gone, and it will be a
sad day when they retire from the bike world.

Brian
Seattle, WA


On Tue, May 7, 2013 at 8:47 PM, samh rbwown...@yahoo.com wrote:

 --She's done a decently balanced review.

 I think the really interesting stuff is in the comments.

 --
 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?hl=en-US.
 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?hl=en-US.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

Re: [RBW] Re: Interesting discussion: Riv bikes v. BQ bikes

On Tue, 2013-05-07 at 20:09 -0700, Jim Thill - Hiawatha Cyclery wrote:
 Undersized tubing? Maybe it's not obvious to everybody, but a lot of
 plus-sized people are drawn to Riv by the promise of high-bar comfort
 and sturdiness. Put some chugging 270-pounder on a bike with
 undersized tubes, and it's likely to get a bit too exciting to be
 enjoyable.

I really don't like your use of the term undersized.  Riv tubes are
OVERsize.  That's what it was called when it was introduced, and that's
still what it's known as.  The stuff that's even larger diameter is
known as over-over-size.   You can have high-bar comfort without
excessive stiffness; the two are not inextricably linked.  

Furthermore, there's a lot of difference between a 190-220 lb plus
size rider and the 270 pounder you write about.  I haven't seen too
many 270 pounders, but plenty of those in the 0.1 ton category
(including myself), and we do not necessarily need the excessive
stiffness Rivs now provide.  In fact, that excessive stiffness takes
away a good deal of enjoyment in my opinion, especially by making the
bikes reluctant climbers.

 I come down on the Riv side. I shy away from the faintest whiff of
 daintiness and anything that seems French. I draw a lot more parallels
 between RBW and Surly than I do between RBW and the integrated rando
 bike concept.
 

And you know what people say about the Surly LHT: rides like a tank, way
overbuilt for unloaded riding.   I've never ridden a Surly LHT, but I
have owned two Rivendells.  While I think they were excessively stiff,
they definitely didn't ride like tanks.

While many randonneurs have turned Rivs into rando bikes, Rivendells are
perhaps the exact opposite of integrated.  Doug Brooks called it
resourceful vs resolved.  



-- 
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?hl=en-US.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

Re: [RBW] Re: Interesting discussion: Riv bikes v. BQ bikes

This is all a matter of taste, I think. I'm 170 - 175, and my custom Rivs
ride just fine -- I've never felt that they are sluggish in any way, and
this compared to other bikes with the old standard sized and all 531
tubing.* My seat-of-the-pants test is how fast I can turn the cranks in a
given gear in given conditions and, #2, how well they do on hills in a 65
to 75 gear.

Of course, there are so many variables that this sort of discussion is
almost like shouting into an abyss, but I do know that, for me, the two
remaining customs have stood out for the *feeling* of speed and efficiency
for 10+ years (one is 10 years old, the other 14 years old). Funny,. the
two customs feel faster than the Ram, even with the Ram shod with
Paris-Roubaix tires. The Sam Hill felt like the Fargo -- not bad, but not
exactly sprightly.

Jim Thill: why the animus against French?

*And yet this particular bike (1973 Motobecane Grand Record, toute 531
racing bike) was one of the best load carriers I've ridden. Go figure.

On Wed, May 8, 2013 at 7:47 AM, Steve Palincsar palin...@his.com wrote:

 On Tue, 2013-05-07 at 20:09 -0700, Jim Thill - Hiawatha Cyclery wrote:
  Undersized tubing? Maybe it's not obvious to everybody, but a lot of
  plus-sized people are drawn to Riv by the promise of high-bar comfort
  and sturdiness. Put some chugging 270-pounder on a bike with
  undersized tubes, and it's likely to get a bit too exciting to be
  enjoyable.

 I really don't like your use of the term undersized.  Riv tubes are
 OVERsize.  That's what it was called when it was introduced, and that's
 still what it's known as.  The stuff that's even larger diameter is
 known as over-over-size.   You can have high-bar comfort without
 excessive stiffness; the two are not inextricably linked.

 Furthermore, there's a lot of difference between a 190-220 lb plus
 size rider and the 270 pounder you write about.  I haven't seen too
 many 270 pounders, but plenty of those in the 0.1 ton category
 (including myself), and we do not necessarily need the excessive
 stiffness Rivs now provide.  In fact, that excessive stiffness takes
 away a good deal of enjoyment in my opinion, especially by making the
 bikes reluctant climbers.

  I come down on the Riv side. I shy away from the faintest whiff of
  daintiness and anything that seems French. I draw a lot more parallels
  between RBW and Surly than I do between RBW and the integrated rando
  bike concept.
 

 And you know what people say about the Surly LHT: rides like a tank, way
 overbuilt for unloaded riding.   I've never ridden a Surly LHT, but I
 have owned two Rivendells.  While I think they were excessively stiff,
 they definitely didn't ride like tanks.

 While many randonneurs have turned Rivs into rando bikes, Rivendells are
 perhaps the exact opposite of integrated.  Doug Brooks called it
 resourceful vs resolved.



 --
 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?hl=en-US.
 For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.





-- 

http://resumespecialties.com/index.html
patrickmo...@resumespecialties.com

Albuquerque, NM

-- 
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?hl=en-US.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

Re: [RBW] Re: Interesting discussion: Riv bikes v. BQ bikes

2013-05-08 Thread Michael

What actually is a Randonneur frame?

Meaning, what is it about its geometry and materials that makes it more suited 
to this activity over other traditionally styled road bikes - fenderability and 
tire width and ad- ons capability excluded?

-- 
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?hl=en-US.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

Re: [RBW] Re: Interesting discussion: Riv bikes v. BQ bikes

On Wed, 2013-05-08 at 07:39 -0700, Michael wrote:
 What actually is a Randonneur frame?

 Meaning, what is it about its geometry and materials that makes it more 
 suited to this activity over other traditionally styled road bikes - 
 fenderability and tire width and ad- ons capability excluded?

Think about the mission.  

You need a bike that's comfortable for long distance riding, that won't
fatigue you because it rides roughly.  You can expect that the rider is
going to be tired and inattentive at some point (inevitable if you're
riding through the night) so you can't tolerate hair-trigger handling
that will get away from you if you're slow and inattentive.

You can expect to start at 7 am and, for the longer rides, ride through
the heat of the day, past sundown, and into the chill of night.  In some
places, that can mean as much as a 25-30 degree temperature range.  You
can't do that with a pair of arm warmers and leg warmers that you can
stick in a jersey pocket, so you're going to have to be able to carry
the clothing you needed when it was cold during the heat of the day.
More than you can stick in a jersey pocket means you're going to have
to carry bags of some kind.  The more accessible those bags are when
you're riding (so you don't have to stop and park the bike to put on a
pair of sun glasses, for example) the better.

On the longer rides you will have to ride at night.  That means you'll
need a lighting system.  The really long rides will outlast the range of
battery-operated systems, so either you'll need to replace batteries or
will have to rely on bicycle-powered systems that don't need batteries.

Randonneuring is a spring-time sport, and in most areas of the country
spring is a rainy season.  You can't skip out on a ride because it
rains, so the bike is going to have to go in bad weather.  The worst
part about riding in the rain is getting chilled because you're wet, and
to deal with that you'll not only need suitable rain clothing, you also
should find a way to keep the worst of it, spray from the road, off you.
That means you'll need to mount fenders, and that in turn means the bike
should have the room to fit them and the attachment points to fit them.

All that said, it's a sport that is run against a time limit.  Time
allowed is based on distance, with no consideration for terrain.  Go too
slow and you won't finish in time.  Also, the rides are typically in
mountainous country, so the bike is going to have to be set up so you
can climb long, steep hills.

Basically, any bike that can meet those functional requirements will do.
Many bikes can't meet them all but can do some, and often compromises
will be made.  In fact, the rules used to mandate fenders but since so
few bicycles made recently can actually fit fenders, they relaxed the
rules to make them optional.  Some people do without them.  



-- 
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?hl=en-US.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

Re: [RBW] Re: Interesting discussion: Riv bikes v. BQ bikes

2013-05-08 Thread James Warren


Very thorough description. Describing the mission is a good way to highlight a 
point that has already been made: Rivendells are designed for riding that 
doesn't resemble that description. So comparing Rivendells to BQ bikes is an 
apples/oranges thing.


-Original Message-
From: Steve Palincsar palin...@his.com
Sent: May 8, 2013 8:03 AM
To: rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: [RBW] Re: Interesting discussion: Riv bikes v. BQ bikes

On Wed, 2013-05-08 at 07:39 -0700, Michael wrote:
 What actually is a Randonneur frame?

 Meaning, what is it about its geometry and materials that makes it more 
 suited to this activity over other traditionally styled road bikes - 
 fenderability and tire width and ad- ons capability excluded?

Think about the mission.  

You need a bike that's comfortable for long distance riding, that won't
fatigue you because it rides roughly.  You can expect that the rider is
going to be tired and inattentive at some point (inevitable if you're
riding through the night) so you can't tolerate hair-trigger handling
that will get away from you if you're slow and inattentive.

You can expect to start at 7 am and, for the longer rides, ride through
the heat of the day, past sundown, and into the chill of night.  In some
places, that can mean as much as a 25-30 degree temperature range.  You
can't do that with a pair of arm warmers and leg warmers that you can
stick in a jersey pocket, so you're going to have to be able to carry
the clothing you needed when it was cold during the heat of the day.
More than you can stick in a jersey pocket means you're going to have
to carry bags of some kind.  The more accessible those bags are when
you're riding (so you don't have to stop and park the bike to put on a
pair of sun glasses, for example) the better.

On the longer rides you will have to ride at night.  That means you'll
need a lighting system.  The really long rides will outlast the range of
battery-operated systems, so either you'll need to replace batteries or
will have to rely on bicycle-powered systems that don't need batteries.

Randonneuring is a spring-time sport, and in most areas of the country
spring is a rainy season.  You can't skip out on a ride because it
rains, so the bike is going to have to go in bad weather.  The worst
part about riding in the rain is getting chilled because you're wet, and
to deal with that you'll not only need suitable rain clothing, you also
should find a way to keep the worst of it, spray from the road, off you.
That means you'll need to mount fenders, and that in turn means the bike
should have the room to fit them and the attachment points to fit them.

All that said, it's a sport that is run against a time limit.  Time
allowed is based on distance, with no consideration for terrain.  Go too
slow and you won't finish in time.  Also, the rides are typically in
mountainous country, so the bike is going to have to be set up so you
can climb long, steep hills.

Basically, any bike that can meet those functional requirements will do.
Many bikes can't meet them all but can do some, and often compromises
will be made.  In fact, the rules used to mandate fenders but since so
few bicycles made recently can actually fit fenders, they relaxed the
rules to make them optional.  Some people do without them.  



-- 
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?hl=en-US.
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?hl=en-US.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

Re: [RBW] Re: Interesting discussion: Riv bikes v. BQ bikes

2013-05-08 Thread Peter Morgano

I have never read BQ, but it is my understanding that they are recommending
a type of bike that isn't off the peg or readily available, the Classic
Randonneur so as pointed out on the Lovely Bicycle blog it might be hard
for a lot of us to make a comparison.  Maybe the VO Polyvalent?


On Wed, May 8, 2013 at 11:41 AM, James Warren jimcwar...@earthlink.netwrote:


 Very thorough description. Describing the mission is a good way to
 highlight a point that has already been made: Rivendells are designed for
 riding that doesn't resemble that description. So comparing Rivendells to
 BQ bikes is an apples/oranges thing.


 -Original Message-
 From: Steve Palincsar palin...@his.com
 Sent: May 8, 2013 8:03 AM
 To: rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com
 Subject: Re: [RBW] Re: Interesting discussion: Riv bikes v. BQ bikes
 
 On Wed, 2013-05-08 at 07:39 -0700, Michael wrote:
  What actually is a Randonneur frame?
 
  Meaning, what is it about its geometry and materials that makes it more
 suited to this activity over other traditionally styled road bikes -
 fenderability and tire width and ad- ons capability excluded?
 
 Think about the mission.
 
 You need a bike that's comfortable for long distance riding, that won't
 fatigue you because it rides roughly.  You can expect that the rider is
 going to be tired and inattentive at some point (inevitable if you're
 riding through the night) so you can't tolerate hair-trigger handling
 that will get away from you if you're slow and inattentive.
 
 You can expect to start at 7 am and, for the longer rides, ride through
 the heat of the day, past sundown, and into the chill of night.  In some
 places, that can mean as much as a 25-30 degree temperature range.  You
 can't do that with a pair of arm warmers and leg warmers that you can
 stick in a jersey pocket, so you're going to have to be able to carry
 the clothing you needed when it was cold during the heat of the day.
 More than you can stick in a jersey pocket means you're going to have
 to carry bags of some kind.  The more accessible those bags are when
 you're riding (so you don't have to stop and park the bike to put on a
 pair of sun glasses, for example) the better.
 
 On the longer rides you will have to ride at night.  That means you'll
 need a lighting system.  The really long rides will outlast the range of
 battery-operated systems, so either you'll need to replace batteries or
 will have to rely on bicycle-powered systems that don't need batteries.
 
 Randonneuring is a spring-time sport, and in most areas of the country
 spring is a rainy season.  You can't skip out on a ride because it
 rains, so the bike is going to have to go in bad weather.  The worst
 part about riding in the rain is getting chilled because you're wet, and
 to deal with that you'll not only need suitable rain clothing, you also
 should find a way to keep the worst of it, spray from the road, off you.
 That means you'll need to mount fenders, and that in turn means the bike
 should have the room to fit them and the attachment points to fit them.
 
 All that said, it's a sport that is run against a time limit.  Time
 allowed is based on distance, with no consideration for terrain.  Go too
 slow and you won't finish in time.  Also, the rides are typically in
 mountainous country, so the bike is going to have to be set up so you
 can climb long, steep hills.
 
 Basically, any bike that can meet those functional requirements will do.
 Many bikes can't meet them all but can do some, and often compromises
 will be made.  In fact, the rules used to mandate fenders but since so
 few bicycles made recently can actually fit fenders, they relaxed the
 rules to make them optional.  Some people do without them.
 
 
 
 --
 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?hl=en-US.
 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?hl=en-US.
 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

Re: [RBW] Re: Interesting discussion: Riv bikes v. BQ bikes

2013-05-08 Thread jpp

Randonneur is the new cyclocross.  Nothing wrong with either, but like 10 
years ago it seemed everyone started making cyclocross bikes and everybody 
started racing, now it has shifted to Rando.  But I agree with Jim Thill, 
get a nice bike you like and JUST RIDE!  



On Wednesday, May 8, 2013 10:39:16 AM UTC-4, Michael wrote:

 What actually is a Randonneur frame?

 Meaning, what is it about its geometry and materials that makes it more 
 suited to this activity over other traditionally styled road bikes - 
 fenderability and tire width and ad- ons capability excluded?


-- 
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?hl=en-US.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

Re: [RBW] Re: Interesting discussion: Riv bikes v. BQ bikes

2013-05-08 Thread Jim Thill - Hiawatha Cyclery

Steve P: I used the term undersized in reference to tubing because the 
smaller tubing diameter has become nonstandard over the last 20 or so years. 
You can switch it around and refer to that which is the current norm as 
oversized if you prefer, but that seems like too much effort swimming 
upstream, not to mention meaningless when the old standards are pretty much 
extinct. I vote that we trash all these judgmental words and just use numbers.

I would add that our physical preferences arise in our heads. If we're 
predisposed to identifying with Jan's personality and attitude, then we'll 
bring that predisposition with us when we ride the bikes Jan likes. If we are 
more in tune with GP's style, then, gosh darn it, that Riv is the best bike one 
could imagine. 

As for the Surly LHT, I ride one almost daily. It suits me. It's tough and as 
fast as I care to be on a bicycle. I can beat the Hell out of it, and if it 
somehow doesn't survive, I can buy a new one this afternoon without losing much 
sleep. But yes, I also sell the LHT, and often I'm asked about its weight. I 
always tell people that if weight is a concern, even an imaginary one, the LHT 
isn't for them. But hey, the Cross-check is kinda the same, but lighter. 

-- 
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?hl=en-US.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

Re: [RBW] Re: Interesting discussion: Riv bikes v. BQ bikes

2013-05-08 Thread Bryan

I've never given this whole debate much thought. I like Rivendell bikes 
because when I manage to squeeze two or three hours out of my busy schedule 
on a weekend for a ride in the local mountains, I want to ride a road 
bike that will take me anywhere, including rocky trails if the notion 
grabs me. I hardly ever ride with other people, so speed is irrelevant. For 
commuting, I've been doing the rear load thing for at least 20 years (I 
still use my early '90s Overland panniers every day!), so the idea of a 
front load bike doesn't do much for me, although it seems that people carry 
front loads on Rivs and they seem to work fine for that, too. 


Bryan

-- 
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?hl=en-US.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

Re: [RBW] Re: Interesting discussion: Riv bikes v. BQ bikes

2013-05-08 Thread Matthew J

I am somewhat contrarian - at least from the Riv / BQ perspective.
 
In the nine years now I've been without a car, I have come to the 
conclusion that I far prefer a a low trail bike with porteur style rack for 
urban commuting and errand running.  For me it is easier popping my things 
and purchases into a front mounted porteur bag.
 
Unless absolutely necessary, I do not drive on vacations either.  For cycle 
vacations I like a bike with lower Mid-trail geometry with luggage in 
panniers weight divided 60 front / 40 back.  I currently have a custom for 
this, but previously toured on a Hilsen  worked great.
 
My third and purely recreational bike has higher trail '80s Italian race 
bike geometry.  I use this mainly for weekend fun rides.  This bike has no 
provisions for fenders or racks.  If the weather is absolutely certain to 
be dry for the weekend, I have loaded a change of clothes in a large 
Carradice saddle bag and ridden up to my Dad's house (about 70 miles a way) 
no problem.  

-- 
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?hl=en-US.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

Re: [RBW] Re: Interesting discussion: Riv bikes v. BQ bikes

On Wed, 2013-05-08 at 09:03 -0700, Jim Thill - Hiawatha Cyclery wrote:

 Steve P: I used the term undersized in reference to tubing because
 the smaller tubing diameter has become nonstandard over the last 20 or
 so years. You can switch it around and refer to that which is the
 current norm as oversized if you prefer, but that seems like too
 much effort swimming upstream, not to mention meaningless when the old
 standards are pretty much extinct. I vote that we trash all these
 judgmental words and just use numbers.
 

Undersized implies too small, insufficient, wrong.  If you object to
calling the smaller diameter tubing standard then the best thing would
be to specify the tubing diameter. That's not value-laden.

 I would add that our physical preferences arise in our heads. If we're
 predisposed to identifying with Jan's personality and attitude, then
 we'll bring that predisposition with us when we ride the bikes Jan
 likes. If we are more in tune with GP's style, then, gosh darn it,
 that Riv is the best bike one could imagine. 
 

Not applicable here.  I was totally on board with GP's choices when I
bought the Rambouillet and the Saluki.  Experience showed me those
frames were too stiff for me.  I had a couple of good comparisons: a
Merlin-built Titanium Spectrum custom, and a George Longstaff that was
very similar in concept to the Rambouillet, only made with a light gauge
standard diameter tubing.  I could see how much better the Spectrum and
the Longstaff did on hills, and when Jan came along and gave what I was
experiencing a name, it all became crystal clear.

So you can forget about predispositions here.  My experience parallels
what Jan wrote in his blog about the journey of discovery.

Yes, I fell in love with the look of a couple of Jack Taylors I saw at
GEAR 1975 with Lefol fenders and TA handlebar bags.  I put a handlebar
bag on my Paramount, rode it that way for a few years, and then when the
bracket broke and I removed the bag, was shocked to see how much that
bag caused the handling to degrade; from that point on and for the next
15 years or so I was totally against handlebar bags.

And then I rode some centuries with a Carradice on days that switched
from sunny to cloudy to rain to overcast to sunny on about a 60 minute
cycle, and found having to stop to park the bike and get my sun glasses
out of the rear bag and then after a half hour stop to put them away was
driving me totally crazy.  Obviously, having the sun glasses up front
was the way to go, you didn't have to dismount, park the bike and
rummage around in a rear bag.  

But what about that awful handling deterioration?  And then I read about
those little racks supporting the handlebar bags.  And the changes in
fork rake that eliminated the feeling of the weight of the bag through
the steering.

So no, I wasn't predisposed to agree with Jan; I was predisposed to
agree with Grant.  Experience taught me that Jan was right.

 As for the Surly LHT, I ride one almost daily. It suits me. It's tough and as 
 fast as I care to be on a bicycle. I can beat the Hell out of it, and if it 
 somehow doesn't survive, I can buy a new one this afternoon without losing 
 much sleep. But yes, I also sell the LHT, and often I'm asked about its 
 weight. I always tell people that if weight is a concern, even an imaginary 
 one, the LHT isn't for them. But hey, the Cross-check is kinda the same, but 
 lighter. 

The comments I've heard about LHT handling had nothing to do with
weight, but rather a feeling of ponderousness.  But, as I say, I've
never ridden one.



-- 
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?hl=en-US.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

Re: [RBW] Re: Interesting discussion: Riv bikes v. BQ bikes

2013-05-08 Thread William

So no, I wasn't predisposed to agree with Jan; I was predisposed to 
agree with Grant.  Experience taught me that Jan was right. 



Of course you don't mean that Jan was objectively right, and by extension 
that Grant was/is objectively wrong.  You mean that subjectively, for you 
and the riding and characteristics you have evolved to prefer, Jan was 
right.  

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?hl=en-US.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

Re: [RBW] Re: Interesting discussion: Riv bikes v. BQ bikes

On Wed, 2013-05-08 at 12:14 -0700, William wrote:
 So no, I wasn't predisposed to agree with Jan; I was predisposed to 
 agree with Grant.  Experience taught me that Jan was right. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Of course you don't mean that Jan was objectively right, and by
 extension that Grant was/is objectively wrong.  You mean that
 subjectively, for you and the riding and characteristics you have
 evolved to prefer, Jan was right.  
 

When on one bike I can easily power up a small grade and on the other I
have to downshift downshift downshift we are beyond the realm of the
subjective, and are firmly in objective territory.

So yes I do mean Jan was objectively 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?hl=en-US.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

RE: [RBW] Re: Interesting discussion: Riv bikes v. BQ bikes

2013-05-08 Thread Allingham II, Thomas J

It seems to me that what you've just said, Steve -- and I think it's all you've 
said -- is that you personally (and subjectively) value the incremental benefit 
in climbing/pedaling efficiency (relative to the efficiency of your Saluki) 
more than you value whatever is given up in other desirable characteristics of 
a bicycle (which in your subjective view may be very little; others might take 
a different view) to achieve that incremental efficiency.   We can objectively 
measure that incremental pedaling efficiency.  It's a lot harder (I think I 
would say impossible) to make an objective judgment of the net value to all 
riders (as opposed to any one individual rider) of the costs and benefits of 
any isolated design decision. 

-Original Message-
From: rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com 
[mailto:rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Steve Palincsar
Sent: Wednesday, May 08, 2013 3:28 PM
To: rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: [RBW] Re: Interesting discussion: Riv bikes v. BQ bikes

On Wed, 2013-05-08 at 12:14 -0700, William wrote:
 So no, I wasn't predisposed to agree with Jan; I was predisposed to 
 agree with Grant.  Experience taught me that Jan was right. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Of course you don't mean that Jan was objectively right, and by 
 extension that Grant was/is objectively wrong.  You mean that 
 subjectively, for you and the riding and characteristics you have 
 evolved to prefer, Jan was right.
 

When on one bike I can easily power up a small grade and on the other I have to 
downshift downshift downshift we are beyond the realm of the subjective, and 
are firmly in objective territory.

So yes I do mean Jan was objectively 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?hl=en-US.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.



--


To ensure compliance with Treasury Department regulations, we advise you that, 
unless otherwise expressly indicated, any federal tax advice contained in this 
message was not intended or written to be used, and cannot be used, for the 
purpose of (i) avoiding tax-related penalties under the Internal Revenue Code 
or applicable state or local tax law provisions or (ii) promoting, marketing or 
recommending to another party any tax-related matters addressed herein.



This email (and any attachments thereto) is intended only for use by the 
addressee(s) named herein and may contain legally privileged and/or 
confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient of this email, 
you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this 
email (and any attachments thereto) is strictly prohibited. If you receive this 
email in error please immediately notify me at (212) 735-3000 and permanently 
delete the original email (and any copy of any email) and any printout thereof.

Further information about the firm, a list of the Partners and their 
professional qualifications will be provided upon request.

==

-- 
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?hl=en-US.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

RE: [RBW] Re: Interesting discussion: Riv bikes v. BQ bikes

On Wed, 2013-05-08 at 19:40 +, Allingham II, Thomas J wrote:
 It seems to me that what you've just said, Steve -- and I think it's
 all you've said -- is that you personally (and subjectively) value the
 incremental benefit in climbing/pedaling efficiency (relative to the
 efficiency of your Saluki) more than you value whatever is given up in
 other desirable characteristics of a bicycle (which in your subjective
 view may be very little; others might take a different view) to
 achieve that incremental efficiency.   We can objectively measure that
 incremental pedaling efficiency.  It's a lot harder (I think I would
 say impossible) to make an objective judgment of the net value to all
 riders (as opposed to any one individual rider) of the costs and
 benefits of any isolated design decision. 
 

I said there's a real, objective difference.  It's not just
subjective.  I'm not imagining it.  It's real.

Now as to trade-offs and costs vs benefits: I'm unaware of having given
up anything as a result of this change.  I won't even call it a
trade-off, because that implies you're giving up something to get
something else.  

I'll come right out with it: the notion that all stiffness is good, and
that infinite stiffness is infinitely good is just plain wrong.  There's
no doubt that for some loadings, some frames will have insufficient
stiffness and that some additional amount will provide just enough; but
going beyond that point into the realm of more does not provide
additional benefit, even though it is measurable.



-- 
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?hl=en-US.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

Re: [RBW] Re: Interesting discussion: Riv bikes v. BQ bikes

2013-05-08 Thread Mike Schiller

...very few people have ridden a bike like Jan suggests so it's hard to 
accept that there is a difference.  A standard dia. 531 tubed bike is built 
stiffer than Jan's performance based Randonneuring bikes.  
While I believe humans  can adapt to most any thing, there are 
subtle advantages to the low trail lightweight bike. If all you ride is an 
Atlantis or LHT you believe that it works well and are probably 
happy. Through my own experimentation I have found that on mostly road and 
smooth dirt the lightweight tubed and low trail  bikes are optimal for me. 
When I get in the rougher dirt or for loaded touring it makes less of a 
difference. 

~mike
Carlsbad Ca.




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

RE: [RBW] Re: Interesting discussion: Riv bikes v. BQ bikes

2013-05-08 Thread Allingham II, Thomas J

I said there's a real, objective difference.  It's not just subjective.  I'm 
not imagining it.  It's real.

Agreed -- the real difference you've identified is an improvement in climbing 
efficiency (or maybe more generally, pedaling efficiency overall).  I wasn't 
suggesting that it was imagined -- in fact I suggested it could probably be 
measured.

Now as to trade-offs and costs vs benefits: I'm unaware of having given up 
anything as a result of this change.  I won't even call it a trade-off, 
because that implies you're giving up something to get something else.

I don't doubt that you're unaware of having given up anything that's of value 
to you as a result of the change from the Saluki to the MAP.  That was my point 
in qualifying my statement about giving up other desirable characteristics of a 
bicycle with the parenthetical which in your subjective view may be very 
little (I should have gone further and acknowledged that in your subjective 
view it could be nil).  But I have to say that I'm skeptical that every rider 
will exactly share your view about the trade-off -- Jim Thill, for example, 
seems to have at least a somewhat different view of the trade-off.

As many people have said on this list in many different contexts, bicycle 
design involves endless compromises, and different riders I think inevitably 
will prefer different sets of compromises for different uses.

Having said all that, I do very much appreciate the detail with which you've 
laid out the reasons for your preferences -- it's very informative, and helps 
me think more clearly about what I like in a bike, and why.

Back to work.


-Original Message-
From: rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com 
[mailto:rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Steve Palincsar
Sent: Wednesday, May 08, 2013 3:47 PM
To: rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com
Subject: RE: [RBW] Re: Interesting discussion: Riv bikes v. BQ bikes

On Wed, 2013-05-08 at 19:40 +, Allingham II, Thomas J wrote:
 It seems to me that what you've just said, Steve -- and I think it's
 all you've said -- is that you personally (and subjectively) value the
 incremental benefit in climbing/pedaling efficiency (relative to the
 efficiency of your Saluki) more than you value whatever is given up in
 other desirable characteristics of a bicycle (which in your subjective
 view may be very little; others might take a different view) to
 achieve that incremental efficiency.   We can objectively measure that
 incremental pedaling efficiency.  It's a lot harder (I think I would
 say impossible) to make an objective judgment of the net value to all
 riders (as opposed to any one individual rider) of the costs and
 benefits of any isolated design decision.


I said there's a real, objective difference.  It's not just subjective.  I'm 
not imagining it.  It's real.

Now as to trade-offs and costs vs benefits: I'm unaware of having given up 
anything as a result of this change.  I won't even call it a trade-off, because 
that implies you're giving up something to get something else.

I'll come right out with it: the notion that all stiffness is good, and that 
infinite stiffness is infinitely good is just plain wrong.  There's no doubt 
that for some loadings, some frames will have insufficient stiffness and that 
some additional amount will provide just enough; but going beyond that point 
into the realm of more does not provide additional benefit, even though it is 
measurable.



--
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.commailto:rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to 
rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.commailto:rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=en-US.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.




--


To ensure compliance with Treasury Department regulations, we advise you that, 
unless otherwise expressly indicated, any federal tax advice contained in this 
message was not intended or written to be used, and cannot be used, for the 
purpose of (i) avoiding tax-related penalties under the Internal Revenue Code 
or applicable state or local tax law provisions or (ii) promoting, marketing or 
recommending to another party any tax-related matters addressed herein.



This email (and any attachments thereto) is intended only for use by the 
addressee(s) named herein and may contain legally privileged and/or 
confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient of this email, 
you are hereby notified that any

Re: [RBW] Re: Interesting discussion: Riv bikes v. BQ bikes

2013-05-08 Thread Philip Williamson

This excellent summation of a randonneur bike's mission also describes a 
commute bike's mission. You need to get yourself and some gear to a 
destination, on time. A commuter (this one, anyway), may get a randonneur's 
five hour feeling at the 40 minute mark. 

In the bigger debate, I don't really see a debate at all. You take what's 
useful, and make it your own. All of my bikes owe a lot to both Grant and 
Jan's ideas. Except the mountain bike - that's more a Keith Bontrager / 
Charlie Cunningham joint. And the Gravel Roadster is sort of a Sheldon 
Brown / Jeff Jones thing... But the way I set up the Quickbeam and the Ross 
low-trail fixed gear bikes surely owes a lot to both Jan and Grant. And 
Sheldon. 

Philip
www.biketinker.com 


On Wednesday, May 8, 2013 8:03:19 AM UTC-7, Steve Palincsar wrote:

 On Wed, 2013-05-08 at 07:39 -0700, Michael wrote: 
  What actually is a Randonneur frame? 

  Meaning, what is it about its geometry and materials that makes it more 
 suited to this activity over other traditionally styled road bikes - 
 fenderability and tire width and ad- ons capability excluded? 

 Think about the mission.   

 You need a bike that's comfortable for long distance riding, that won't 
 fatigue you because it rides roughly.  You can expect that the rider is 
 going to be tired and inattentive at some point (inevitable if you're 
 riding through the night) so you can't tolerate hair-trigger handling 
 that will get away from you if you're slow and inattentive. 

 You can expect to start at 7 am and, for the longer rides, ride through 
 the heat of the day, past sundown, and into the chill of night.  In some 
 places, that can mean as much as a 25-30 degree temperature range.  You 
 can't do that with a pair of arm warmers and leg warmers that you can 
 stick in a jersey pocket, so you're going to have to be able to carry 
 the clothing you needed when it was cold during the heat of the day. 
 More than you can stick in a jersey pocket means you're going to have 
 to carry bags of some kind.  The more accessible those bags are when 
 you're riding (so you don't have to stop and park the bike to put on a 
 pair of sun glasses, for example) the better. 

 On the longer rides you will have to ride at night.  That means you'll 
 need a lighting system.  The really long rides will outlast the range of 
 battery-operated systems, so either you'll need to replace batteries or 
 will have to rely on bicycle-powered systems that don't need batteries. 

 Randonneuring is a spring-time sport, and in most areas of the country 
 spring is a rainy season.  You can't skip out on a ride because it 
 rains, so the bike is going to have to go in bad weather.  The worst 
 part about riding in the rain is getting chilled because you're wet, and 
 to deal with that you'll not only need suitable rain clothing, you also 
 should find a way to keep the worst of it, spray from the road, off you. 
 That means you'll need to mount fenders, and that in turn means the bike 
 should have the room to fit them and the attachment points to fit them. 

 All that said, it's a sport that is run against a time limit.  Time 
 allowed is based on distance, with no consideration for terrain.  Go too 
 slow and you won't finish in time.  Also, the rides are typically in 
 mountainous country, so the bike is going to have to be set up so you 
 can climb long, steep hills. 

 Basically, any bike that can meet those functional requirements will do. 
 Many bikes can't meet them all but can do some, and often compromises 
 will be made.  In fact, the rules used to mandate fenders but since so 
 few bicycles made recently can actually fit fenders, they relaxed the 
 rules to make them optional.  Some people do without them.   





-- 
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?hl=en-US.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

Re: [RBW] Re: Interesting discussion: Riv bikes v. BQ bikes

2013-05-08 Thread Brian Campbell

These types of threads are equivalent to arguing over which is the better 
type of screw dirver, flat head or phillips head? Whichever best suites the 
job you want to accomplish. A true rando bike is a purpose built machine. 
Riv's are not built as rando bikes (integrated lights, front loading 
specific, etc.). You can use most any bike to do whatever ever you want. 
Can you ride a brevet on a Riv. ? Sure. Can you commute on a Rene Herse? 
Sure. It is up to the rider to determine what works works best for them.

 

-- 
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?hl=en-US.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

Re: [RBW] Re: Interesting discussion: Riv bikes v. BQ bikes

2013-05-08 Thread Philip Williamson

Boulder http://renehersebicycles.com/ and Box 
Doghttp://www.boxdogbikes.com/products-the-bdb-pelican/bikes both sell 
off-the-peg randonneuses. Some older bikes are low trail 
(my old Ross), or a used Kogswell, or re-raking a fork on an under-used 
bike are some low-cost ways to try out the idea. 

Philip
www.biketinker.com



On Wednesday, May 8, 2013 8:53:22 AM UTC-7, Peter M wrote:

 I have never read BQ, but it is my understanding that they are 
 recommending a type of bike that isn't off the peg or readily available, 
 the Classic Randonneur so as pointed out on the Lovely Bicycle blog it 
 might be hard for a lot of us to make a comparison.  Maybe the VO 
 Polyvalent?  


 On Wed, May 8, 2013 at 11:41 AM, James Warren 
 jimcw...@earthlink.netjavascript:
  wrote:


 Very thorough description. Describing the mission is a good way to 
 highlight a point that has already been made: Rivendells are designed for 
 riding that doesn't resemble that description. So comparing Rivendells to 
 BQ bikes is an apples/oranges thing.


 -Original Message-
 From: Steve Palincsar pali...@his.com javascript:
 Sent: May 8, 2013 8:03 AM
 To: rbw-owne...@googlegroups.com javascript:
 Subject: Re: [RBW] Re: Interesting discussion: Riv bikes v. BQ bikes
 
 On Wed, 2013-05-08 at 07:39 -0700, Michael wrote:
  What actually is a Randonneur frame?
 
  Meaning, what is it about its geometry and materials that makes it 
 more suited to this activity over other traditionally styled road bikes - 
 fenderability and tire width and ad- ons capability excluded?
 
 Think about the mission.
 
 You need a bike that's comfortable for long distance riding, that won't
 fatigue you because it rides roughly.  You can expect that the rider is
 going to be tired and inattentive at some point (inevitable if you're
 riding through the night) so you can't tolerate hair-trigger handling
 that will get away from you if you're slow and inattentive.
 
 You can expect to start at 7 am and, for the longer rides, ride through
 the heat of the day, past sundown, and into the chill of night.  In some
 places, that can mean as much as a 25-30 degree temperature range.  You
 can't do that with a pair of arm warmers and leg warmers that you can
 stick in a jersey pocket, so you're going to have to be able to carry
 the clothing you needed when it was cold during the heat of the day.
 More than you can stick in a jersey pocket means you're going to have
 to carry bags of some kind.  The more accessible those bags are when
 you're riding (so you don't have to stop and park the bike to put on a
 pair of sun glasses, for example) the better.
 
 On the longer rides you will have to ride at night.  That means you'll
 need a lighting system.  The really long rides will outlast the range of
 battery-operated systems, so either you'll need to replace batteries or
 will have to rely on bicycle-powered systems that don't need batteries.
 
 Randonneuring is a spring-time sport, and in most areas of the country
 spring is a rainy season.  You can't skip out on a ride because it
 rains, so the bike is going to have to go in bad weather.  The worst
 part about riding in the rain is getting chilled because you're wet, and
 to deal with that you'll not only need suitable rain clothing, you also
 should find a way to keep the worst of it, spray from the road, off you.
 That means you'll need to mount fenders, and that in turn means the bike
 should have the room to fit them and the attachment points to fit them.
 
 All that said, it's a sport that is run against a time limit.  Time
 allowed is based on distance, with no consideration for terrain.  Go too
 slow and you won't finish in time.  Also, the rides are typically in
 mountainous country, so the bike is going to have to be set up so you
 can climb long, steep hills.
 
 Basically, any bike that can meet those functional requirements will do.
 Many bikes can't meet them all but can do some, and often compromises
 will be made.  In fact, the rules used to mandate fenders but since so
 few bicycles made recently can actually fit fenders, they relaxed the
 rules to make them optional.  Some people do without them.
 
 
 
 --
 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?hl=en-US.
 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-bun...@googlegroups.com javascript:.
 To post to this group, send email to 
 rbw-owne...@googlegroups.comjavascript:
 .
 Visit

Re: [RBW] Re: Interesting discussion: Riv bikes v. BQ bikes

2013-05-08 Thread Peter Morgano

Damn, forgot about Boulder. Their 650b lugged offering is amazing looking.

On Wed, May 8, 2013 at 4:19 PM, Philip Williamson
philip.william...@gmail.com wrote:

Boulder http://renehersebicycles.com/ and Box
Doghttp://www.boxdogbikes.com/products-the-bdb-pelican/bikes both sell
off-the-peg randonneuses. Some older bikes are low trail
(my old Ross), or a used Kogswell, or re-raking a fork on an under-used
bike are some low-cost ways to try out the idea.

Philip
www.biketinker.com

On Wednesday, May 8, 2013 8:53:22 AM UTC-7, Peter M wrote:

I have never read BQ, but it is my understanding that they are
recommending a type of bike that isn't off the peg or readily available,
the Classic Randonneur so as pointed out on the Lovely Bicycle blog it
might be hard for a lot of us to make a comparison. Maybe the VO
Polyvalent?

On Wed, May 8, 2013 at 11:41 AM, James Warren jimcw...@earthlink.netwrote:

Very thorough description. Describing the mission is a good way to
highlight a point that has already been made: Rivendells are designed for
riding that doesn't resemble that description. So comparing Rivendells to
BQ bikes is an apples/oranges thing.

-Original Message-
From: Steve Palincsar pali...@his.com
Sent: May 8, 2013 8:03 AM
To: rbw-owne...@googlegroups.**com
Subject: Re: [RBW] Re: Interesting discussion: Riv bikes v. BQ bikes

On Wed, 2013-05-08 at 07:39 -0700, Michael wrote:
What actually is a Randonneur frame?

Meaning, what is it about its geometry and materials that makes it
more suited to this activity over other traditionally styled road bikes -
fenderability and tire width and ad- ons capability excluded?

Think about the mission.

You need a bike that's comfortable for long distance riding, that won't
fatigue you because it rides roughly. You can expect that the rider is
going to be tired and inattentive at some point (inevitable if you're
riding through the night) so you can't tolerate hair-trigger handling
that will get away from you if you're slow and inattentive.

You can expect to start at 7 am and, for the longer rides, ride through
the heat of the day, past sundown, and into the chill of night. In some
places, that can mean as much as a 25-30 degree temperature range. You
can't do that with a pair of arm warmers and leg warmers that you can
stick in a jersey pocket, so you're going to have to be able to carry
the clothing you needed when it was cold during the heat of the day.
More than you can stick in a jersey pocket means you're going to have
to carry bags of some kind. The more accessible those bags are when
you're riding (so you don't have to stop and park the bike to put on a
pair of sun glasses, for example) the better.

On the longer rides you will have to ride at night. That means you'll
need a lighting system. The really long rides will outlast the range of
battery-operated systems, so either you'll need to replace batteries or
will have to rely on bicycle-powered systems that don't need batteries.

Randonneuring is a spring-time sport, and in most areas of the country
spring is a rainy season. You can't skip out on a ride because it
rains, so the bike is going to have to go in bad weather. The worst
part about riding in the rain is getting chilled because you're wet, and
to deal with that you'll not only need suitable rain clothing, you also
should find a way to keep the worst of it, spray from the road, off you.
That means you'll need to mount fenders, and that in turn means the bike
should have the room to fit them and the attachment points to fit them.

All that said, it's a sport that is run against a time limit. Time
allowed is based on distance, with no consideration for terrain. Go too
slow and you won't finish in time. Also, the rides are typically in
mountainous country, so the bike is going to have to be set up so you
can climb long, steep hills.

Basically, any bike that can meet those functional requirements will do.
Many bikes can't meet them all but can do some, and often compromises
will be made. In fact, the rules used to mandate fenders but since so
few bicycles made recently can actually fit fenders, they relaxed the
rules to make them optional. Some people do without them.

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

Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/**
group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=en-**UShttp://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=en-US
.
For more options, visit
https://groups.google.com/**groups/opt_outhttps://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

Re: [RBW] Re: Interesting discussion: Riv bikes v. BQ bikes

On Wed, 2013-05-08 at 13:12 -0700, Philip Williamson wrote:
 This excellent summation of a randonneur bike's mission also describes
 a commute bike's mission. You need to get yourself and some gear to a
 destination, on time. A commuter (this one, anyway), may get a
 randonneur's five hour feeling at the 40 minute mark.  

Of course, the load will be different -- at least, mine was: I carried
work clothes, shoes, etc. in two small panniers, around 13 lb weight (my
shoes were heavy!) and lunch in a handle bar bag.  With tools and spare
tubes that brought the load up to almost 20 lb.  That's about twice the
load you'd expect to carry on the randonneur, especially when you figure
in the weight of the panniers and the rack to carry them.

I realize all commutes are not the same.  Many people commute wearing
the clothes they will wear at work.  Also distances vary.  The urban
commuter's route may be much shorter and may have many frequent stops at
traffic lights and stop signs compared to someone riding in to work from
the suburbs.  

The number of stops may influence the choice of drive train.  An IGH
makes a lot of sense for a short distance urban commute with plenty of
stops, some abrupt enough you'll need to shift while stopped; much less
sense for a brevet, where you wouldn't expect to stop more often than at
20-30 mile intervals, if even that often.

It might also influence riding position.  Riding a bicycle with a suit
jacket on works fine with an upright bar like the North Road or the
Albatross, but it doesn't work at all well with drop bars.

If you're trying to optimize the bike for a particular mission, you do
have to pick that mission apart and analyze it in detail, and it will
drive design choices.  If you want maximum versatility, you may have to
choose configurations that will sub-optimal for some missions, maybe
even marginal to poor for others.

-- 
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?hl=en-US.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

Re: [RBW] Re: Interesting discussion: Riv bikes v. BQ bikes

On Wed, 2013-05-08 at 14:29 -0700, Brewster Fong wrote:
 One difference between Riv and BQ that I may have missed is their
 preference in handlebar width. Grant/Riv likes them wide like 46cm or
 even 48cm. In contrast, Jan H appears to like them narrower like
 38-40cm. Could be body difference, but I'm not that clear on why.   

Jan has pointed out that handlebar width has changed over time,
correlated with changes in trail, while body width remained fairly
constant over time.  Higher trail works better with wider bars, lower
trail with narrower bars.

-- 
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?hl=en-US.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

Re: [RBW] Re: Interesting discussion: Riv bikes v. BQ bikes

2013-05-08 Thread VeloZen

I believe everyone is entitled to their opinion, as well as the right to 
express it in a peaceful fashion.  But I can't help asking ... why would 
someone who so blatantly feels all Rivendell frames are designed wrong 
spend so much time hanging out and chatting with the RBW Owner's Bunch?  I 
just can't imagine wanting to involve myself in discussion group where the 
focal point is something I totally disagree with ... unless, of course, I'm 
simply looking for an argument.

-- 
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?hl=en-US.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

Re: [RBW] Re: Interesting discussion: Riv bikes v. BQ bikes

Right for you. Not right for everyone else.

On Wed, May 8, 2013 at 1:28 PM, Steve Palincsar palin...@his.com wrote:

 On Wed, 2013-05-08 at 12:14 -0700, William wrote:
  So no, I wasn't predisposed to agree with Jan; I was predisposed to
  agree with Grant.  Experience taught me that Jan was right. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  Of course you don't mean that Jan was objectively right, and by
  extension that Grant was/is objectively wrong.  You mean that
  subjectively, for you and the riding and characteristics you have
  evolved to prefer, Jan was right.
 

 When on one bike I can easily power up a small grade and on the other I
 have to downshift downshift downshift we are beyond the realm of the
 subjective, and are firmly in objective territory.

 So yes I do mean Jan was objectively 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?hl=en-US.
 For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.





-- 

http://resumespecialties.com/index.html
patrickmo...@resumespecialties.com

Albuquerque, NM

-- 
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?hl=en-US.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

Re: [RBW] Re: Interesting discussion: Riv bikes v. BQ bikes

Another generalization from particular experiences. I like narrow bars on
my Rivendells. To put it in the language of this debate, narrower bars
work better with higher trail.

On Wed, May 8, 2013 at 3:39 PM, Steve Palincsar palin...@his.com wrote:


 Higher trail works better with wider bars, lower
 trail with narrower bars.

 --

http://resumespecialties.com/index.html
patrickmo...@resumespecialties.com

Albuquerque, NM

-- 
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?hl=en-US.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

Re: [RBW] Re: Interesting discussion: Riv bikes v. BQ bikes

On Wed, 2013-05-08 at 16:42 -0600, PATRICK MOORE wrote:
 Right for you. Not right for everyone else.

Nobody ever said everyone else.  I sure didn't.



-- 
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?hl=en-US.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

Re: [RBW] Re: Interesting discussion: Riv bikes v. BQ bikes

Another false generalization from particular experience.

If you are an experienced rider and know what you want, and you ride
enough that the high cost of a constructeur bike will amortize itself, then
the constructeur machine offers a performance that is without equal.


-- 

http://resumespecialties.com/index.html
patrickmo...@resumespecialties.com

Albuquerque, NM

-- 
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?hl=en-US.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

Re: [RBW] Re: Interesting discussion: Riv bikes v. BQ bikes

On Wed, 2013-05-08 at 16:48 -0600, PATRICK MOORE wrote:
 Another false generalization from particular experience. 

Actually I think the problem is simply the omission of the phrase and
what you want is the sort of thing the constructeur bike offers
inserted between want, and and in the first sentence.


 If you are an experienced rider and know what you want, and you ride
 enough that the high cost of a constructeur bike will amortize itself,
 then the constructeur machine offers a performance that is without
 equal.




-- 
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?hl=en-US.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

Re: [RBW] Re: Interesting discussion: Riv bikes v. BQ bikes

2013-05-08 Thread Tim McNamara

Summing up the thread neatly, it was written:

 I tend to waffle between Grant's and Jan's viewpoints on bicycles. 

Jan and Grant have both stated numerous times that the differences between them 
are greatly exaggerated.  When I compare Rivendell to BQ to Trek to Cannondale 
to Blue to Kestrel... Well, then the differences between Jan and Grant shrink 
tremendously.  IMHO anyway.

Says the guy who rides a self-built 3 speed road bike with a Carradice Nelson 
some of the time, and whose Rivendell All-Rounder has fenders, dynamo lighting, 
559 x 32 tires and a Nitto Mini front rack with a Berthoud Mini 86 bag.

Tim

-- 
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?hl=en-US.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

Re: [RBW] Re: Interesting discussion: Riv bikes v. BQ bikes

That is very correct. It may well be that Jan's preferred bikes are best
for randonees -- I don't know that, and it may well be that some educated
randoneurs prefer the qualities of Rivendell style bikes or racing bikes or
whatever else for the same riding. But I do know that Rivendells -- to take
one example -- have very definite positive qualities that derive from their
design and construction (I am being deliberately general) because I have
experienced them. In particular, the elusive (from my experience of
different bikes) combination of stability at speed with -- metaphor --
unerring turn-in quality. Now perhaps this would be a liability at mile
400 of a long ride, but it is most definitely not a liability for the short
distance riding some of us prefer.

Again: a frame that can take 622 wheels with 3 tires. Doubtless there are
compromises, but one on the plus side is the way tall and fat tires ride
over sand. This I've tested with tires of up to 65 mm actual width -- and
am saving pennies for Knards or like.

Again: I've not ridden a porteur -- must ride Ryan's as well as his new
Boulder. But I know that some bikes exhibit a wonderful unladen ride and
yet handle 40 lb on a light rear rack with pleasurable -- pleasurable,
repeated -- aplomb. That is a combination that has its merits for some.

I apologize for being tetchy, and, second admission, I know I have my own
preferences and even biases. But I do know enough to know that what I know
is limited and to draw only reserved conclusions therefrom.

I really must ride Ryan's bikes.

On Wed, May 8, 2013 at 4:58 PM, Steve Palincsar palin...@his.com wrote:

 On Wed, 2013-05-08 at 16:48 -0600, PATRICK MOORE wrote:
  Another false generalization from particular experience.

 Actually I think the problem is simply the omission of the phrase and
 what you want is the sort of thing the constructeur bike offers
 inserted between want, and and in the first sentence.


  If you are an experienced rider and know what you want, and you ride
  enough that the high cost of a constructeur bike will amortize itself,
  then the constructeur machine offers a performance that is without
  equal.




 --
 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?hl=en-US.
 For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.





-- 

http://resumespecialties.com/index.html
patrickmo...@resumespecialties.com

Albuquerque, NM

-- 
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?hl=en-US.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

Re: [RBW] Re: Interesting discussion: Riv bikes v. BQ bikes