I would assume that it's because of the fillet-brazed 2nd top tube. Same with
the MIT Atlantis. That probably adds more than $100 actual cost but, since
it's only on the larger frames, it is ammortized over the full range of sizes
so that there isn't a "penalty" for taller riders.
(But
Not only cost of materials but cost of time may be associated. The Hilsen
are relatively the same frame as it was a few years ago, just canti
provisions. However, the MIT Homer's have not been around. So there must've
been a lot of time associated with Riv designing in the new geometry, then
I imagine it has a lot to do with future proofing their prices. Every time they
raise prices people grumble and Grant apologizes. If you start pricing things a
little higher from the get go you can wait a bit longer to raise prices, maybe
even get some more cash flow and be able to float a
It could be paint if they're duplicating the color Waterford used. In
researching touch-up for my Hunqapillar with them this week, I discovered the
Hilsen color is a pretty fancy mix.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW
Owners Bunch" group.
To
I wasn't unclear on your curiosity. I was unclear on precisely which
question you were asking. Now I think I understand that your two questions:
"anyone know why new MIT Homer frames cost $100 more than new MIT Sam
frames? Tubing?"
Could be rewritten to read:
"I assume that the Hilsen
I'll add that time and an associated increased cost could be major factors.
From the perspective of "older" to "newer", there is the Appaloosa ($1300)
to the Hillborne ($1400) to the latest Hilsen ($1500). I know the Cheviot
could be considered an outlier in that logic, and in several ways,
