Right on!!!
Sent from my iPhone 4
On Aug 3, 2011, at 8:34 PM, Thomas Lynn Skean
thomaslynnsk...@comcast.net wrote:
Well, I decided.
First, I should address the why more clearly. Primarily, sheet redundancy.
Secondarily (a close second), the ability to keep one bike shod with studded
Uh, that's sheer redundancy. Sorry. And there's at least one ad that should
be as.
Yours,
Thomas Lynn Skean
who is wondering if sheet redundancy is technical jargon in some realm
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups RBW
Owners Bunch group.
To view this
Well, I decided.
First, I should address the why more clearly. Primarily, sheet redundancy.
Secondarily (a close second), the ability to keep one bike shod with studded
tires through the winter. Thirdly (distant third), have two different
arrangements available at any one time, for those
Now, *that's* encouraging news! Thanks!
Presuming then that standover might be okay...
If the effective top tube length is only 1.5cm longer than the
Hillborne (the RBW geometry PDF has the Hunqapillar at 62.5cm vs the
Hillborne's 61cm), then I'm confident the Hunqapillar would fit
overall with
jeezus, the agony! tls, you still haven't shared with us how you happen to
be in this fortunate position of requiring a second bike, possibly even if
it duplicates what you already own.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups RBW
Owners Bunch group.
To
i'm 93cm pbh, btw
On Wed, May 25, 2011 at 4:04 PM, William tapebu...@gmail.com wrote:
CUS-TOM!
CUS-TOM!
CUS-TOM!
On May 25, 3:55 pm, Thomas Lynn Skean thomaslynnsk...@comcast.net
wrote:
Well if that's true then I'll probably go for the second Hillborne.
But at least one place on the
Hey so, I have an 89cm pbh. i am six feet tall. i have a 63 cm
homer, a 61 atlantis and a 60 cm bombadil. if i were to choose a
hunquapillar i would get a 58, to account for the larger tires and
such ( the same reason i have a 61 atlantis. I can lift all of my
bikes about 1-1.5 inches off the
On May 24, 2:53 pm, dweendaddy dweenda...@gmail.com wrote:
Just wondering - why are you thinking 62 vs 58? If you want it do be
maximally different than the Sam, you might want to put big tires on
it and then, according to the site:
62cm Hunqa: 91.5-100cm PBH (Saddle hight 82-90cm, standover
Hi!
A reasonable question...
I like my bars really high. Looking at my Hillborne the way I've set
it up, it's easy to think I should be riding the 64 Hillborne. I max
out the Dirt Drop 100 stem on my Moustache and Noodle cockpits. And I
know that, if my eff top tube length is to change at all
Oh, and I forgot to mention... RBW's geometry PDF says the 62cm
Hunqapillar has a standover of 90.6cm.
That's close enough to warrant a real world test before deciding.
Yours,
Thomas Lynn Skean
On May 24, 1:53 pm, dweendaddy dweenda...@gmail.com wrote:
I am around the same size as you and have
Hi!
This may prove to be an important fact. If the eff top tube on the
62cm Hunqapillar is actually 3cm longer than that of my Hillborne,
then I will not get a 62cm Hunqapillar without straddling it first. I
don't think I'd have a problem with the 1.5cm difference listed in the
geometry page. But
You should get a 58 and set it up with a very large tire. It will work well,
and you won't regret the standover when you're riding offroad.
I ride a 66cm atlantis, a 62cm hunqa. I probably would've been equally happy
with a 58. It's all about stem length.
On Wed, May 25, 2011 at 3:32 AM, Thomas
Also, I think that Keven has a 91 cm pbh (lol that I know that) and he
has the 58. Food for thought. It seems like the writeup strongly
suggests that the correct size for you would be 58 cm.
On May 25, 6:15 am, Thomas Lynn Skean thomaslynnsk...@comcast.net
wrote:
Oh, and I forgot to
Well if that's true then I'll probably go for the second Hillborne.
But at least one place on the RBW web-site puts him at a 89 PBH and
says he got the Hunqapillar as a mountain bike. I don't need (or
want) the extra standover that mountain biking would suggest.
But all of the numbers are close
CUS-TOM!
CUS-TOM!
CUS-TOM!
On May 25, 3:55 pm, Thomas Lynn Skean thomaslynnsk...@comcast.net
wrote:
Well if that's true then I'll probably go for the second Hillborne.
But at least one place on the RBW web-site puts him at a 89 PBH and
says he got the Hunqapillar as a mountain bike. I don't
IMHOno one bike doesn't it all as well as something made
specifically for the task at hand. If a guy has a limited budget or
wants a one bike does it all an all rounder that can handle the
rough stuff is the best. Of course this depends on your weight. I
think that since you have a Hillborne I
Another vote for a Bomba.
On May 23, 7:45 pm, newenglandbike matthiasbe...@gmail.com wrote:
How 'bout a 60cm Bombadil? If not, and you can't find a local
Hunqapillar to try, consider that 2cm is not much difference at
all. But, one test would be to straddle your SH, grab the bars in
Oh, you can bet they'll be set up with various arrangements at various
times, probably rarely the same. I've got four ready-to-go cockpits
now (Alba, Moustache, Noodle, tall Bullmoose 150), one not-so-ready-to-
go (normal Bullmoose 150). And I have two more in mind (bar-end
Silvers Alba; current
At this point the Bombadil just feels too pricey.
I can't claim that I'm too fiscally responsible to go with a
Bombadil. But I am that fiscally wimpy. That's $700-$1,100 worth of
bags or racks or dynamo wheels/lights or dreamy tires or bags (I do
love bags) or rugged 40-hole-Phil/Dyad/FW rear
Well... it's not really that simple for me. Either of these bikes will
completely and comfortably cover the functionality I need and want.
Increasing my capabilities is something of an unlikely project, since
they are limited not by the bike but its engine :) I expect to do no
riding that I
thomas, you only need to answer one question: what is it you want your new
bike to do?
if the answer is to duplicate what you already have, then go for it. i
should add that having an identical bike would allow you to go for rides
with your doppelgänger when he visits. or you could set up
I think I have something to offer here.
I measured my own PBH to 91 cm. I went to Riv, used their method, and
got 94 cm (with someone helping, using the paint stick, and really
going for it lol).
I am 6'3 and 240 for reference.
I rode the 62 Hunqapillar and the 64 Hillborne.
I ended up going
Why?
On May 24, 1:25 pm, Zack zack...@gmail.com wrote:
I personally would not get another Sam.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups RBW
Owners Bunch group.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from
Unfortunately, I'm pretty sure that it's not as simple as 62cm - 60cm
= 2cm difference in exactly what's important here, my ability to
comfortably straddle the top tube. There's seat tube angle, there's
rounding of published numbers, there's different effective top tube,
there's inconsistency in
Interesting, indeed.
I have not measured my PBH myself. The nice folks at The Country Bike
Shop in Celina, OH, did. (Can't say enough nice things about the
Dennings and The Country Bike Shop. Nice people and a wonderful
place.) I suspect theirs is comaprable to an RBW measurement. It felt
like it
FWIW, I started with a 61cm Homer and then got a 60cm Bombadil. The
Homer fit perfectly and it's fit has been improved with a 7cm Nitto
stem. It also runs 35 Supreme tires. The Bombadil with 50 Supremes
proved too long and dangerously too high for standover clearance. The
horizontal length was the
It's time for a sweet custom!
On May 24, 3:55 pm, Rene Sterental orthie...@gmail.com wrote:
FWIW, I started with a 61cm Homer and then got a 60cm Bombadil. The
Homer fit perfectly and it's fit has been improved with a 7cm Nitto
stem. It also runs 35 Supreme tires. The Bombadil with 50 Supremes
Tom-
I am 6'3 and would say that I have a relatively short inseam. I have
a very long torso.
I would say that the 62 Hunqa felt significantly smaller than the 64
Sam did. It didn't, however, feel tiny.
Also, your comment about fendering both bikes pushes me even more
firmly in the direction
Hey, that's great. To hear the 62 Hunqapillar described as
significantly smaller than the 64cm Hillborne is encouraging indeed.
Thanks!
Trust me... If there were a 60cm Hunqapillar, it'd be the front
runner. Alas, the 58 is too small.
Yours,
Thomas Lynn Skean
On May 24, 7:30 pm, Zack
I am around the same size as you and have been looking longingly at
Hunqas. According to the Riv site:
5-9 to 5-11: 54cm
Long-legged 5-10 to 6-1: 58cm
Long legged 6ft to 6-4.4: 62cm
Just wondering - why are you thinking 62 vs 58? If you want it do be
maximally different than the Sam, you might
i still contend that the bike you choose needs to have a purpose. perhaps
variety* is* that purpose. the hunq (i would go for the bomba) would give
you a very different ride. i don't quite see the logic in getting a second
hillborne just to have another hillborne. if cockpit swapping is
I just put a 62 Hunqa together after receiving it in Jan-it's been
that kind of spring. I'm amazed at how much I enjoy the upright
position afforded by the Albatross bars!!! I have a color-matched
150mm stem them had laying around and that definitely adds to the
correct fit of the bike.
LOL!!!
Sent from my iPhone 4
On May 24, 2011, at 5:37 PM, William tapebu...@gmail.com wrote:
It's time for a sweet custom!
On May 24, 3:55 pm, Rene Sterental orthie...@gmail.com wrote:
FWIW, I started with a 61cm Homer and then got a 60cm Bombadil. The
Homer fit perfectly and it's fit has
How 'bout a 60cm Bombadil?If not, and you can't find a local
Hunqapillar to try, consider that 2cm is not much difference at
all.But, one test would be to straddle your SH, grab the bars in
one hand and the seat in the other, and lift; then have someone take
a look at how high the wheels
My vote would be two non-identical Hillbornes. It would be interesting
(for me) to (have you) set up the same frame for different purposes.
One smooth road, one roughstuff.
Philip
Philip Williamson
www.biketinker.com
On May 23, 4:28 pm, Thomas Lynn Skean thomaslynnsk...@comcast.net
wrote:
35 matches
Mail list logo
