Re: [RBW] Re: New Riv cantilever brakes

[S]

No worries. My point is that, although the SH most closely matches the kind 
of frame I want, I am considering other Riv models as well, and frame geo 
is one of the factors I am weighing. I wouldn't rule out any frame for not 
exactly matching my ideal. In fact, most of my bikes are less than perfect 
in this way-- in particular, I am in between sizes on older Treks. 

On Tuesday, September 15, 2020 at 4:31:52 AM UTC-7 Mark Roland wrote:

> My post wasn't meant to single you out, other than as random example of a 
> trend we are mostly all caught up in some way or another. I'm not so 
> precious about frame size as long as it's within range, but I have become a 
> tire snob. Way too many dang tire choices out there right now. Though that 
> could change in the years ahead...
>
>
> On Monday, September 14, 2020 at 8:00:53 PM UTC-4, S wrote:
>>
>> I admit to being picky, but then, I would guess this is true of most 
>> posters in the group. The shorter stays and trad end caps were part of why 
>> I was interested in the SH to begin with, so if my ideal geo happens to 
>> fall between sizes, that's just one more check on the "con" side. Again, 
>> yes, I am being picky, but these frames are $1500-1800. As I said, maybe 
>> the photos of the actual frames change my mind. That would be great. 
>>
>> On Monday, September 14, 2020 at 5:13:11 AM UTC-7 Mark Roland wrote:
>>
>>> The SH comes in five sizes, increments of 3cm from 48 to 60cm, so unless 
>>> a person is unusually tall or short, or has proportions that generally 
>>> "require" a custom geometry, I would think there is a sweet spot in there 
>>> for the 99 percent. I realize there are other parameters than just seat 
>>> tube length, but one would think the designer keeps that in mind. And of 
>>> course you have stem lengths, handlebar reach, seat post setback, saddle 
>>> rail length, all to fine tune a fit. I am thankful my sweet spot is fairly 
>>> big. We certainly live in a time of consumer "choice". The more "choices" 
>>> we have access to, the pickier we get! Human nature I suppose. (I put 
>>> "choice" in quotes because the choices we often have are not much of a 
>>> choice, in my opinion. For example, you can choose a blue car or a red one, 
>>> but for the vast majority, you must have a car to get along.)
>>>
>>>
>>> On Sunday, September 13, 2020 at 6:12:16 PM UTC-4, S wrote:

 Maybe the "slightly longer" stays are truly that. And maybe I could get 
 over the ball and socket ends. I hope photos of the actual frame change my 
 mind. In any case, more depends on whether or not one of the frame sizes 
 happens to fit the sweet spot for me. 

 On Sunday, September 13, 2020 at 12:37:24 PM UTC-7 Joel wrote:

>
> Thanks, I just pulled up the latest email, it got by me.  
>
> “ The seattube sizes are slightly different this time. Here's the PBH 
> range:
>
> 48cm 650b = 77-80cm
> 51cm 650b = 80-83cm 
> 54cm 700c = 84-86cm 
> 57cm 700c = 86-90cm 
> 60cm  700c = 89-94cm
>
> The changes from the last batch are minimal:
>
>- Ball n socket seatlugs
>- Slightly longer chainstays. The 60cm has the longest at 48.5cm. 
>They were too short before.
>
> It's compatible with all of our bars from Bosco to Noodles and is good 
> for just about all reasonable riding.
>
> It's not a full blown trail bike like the Gus/Susie but it'll do just 
> fine on most trails and isn't inappropriate on a road ride either if 
> you're 
> with like-minded people. You can stretch it into almost all types of 
> riding 
> outside of downhill, BMX and road racing.
>
> I used mine for Mt Diablo lunch rides with speedy Mark, one night 
> camping trips on fairly mellow trails, and even unloaded, careful 
> singletrack riding. Most of the time it was a fantastic commuter though.” 
> On Sun, Sep 13, 2020 at 2:34 PM S  wrote:
>
>> Yes, quite a few group members have called the SH the "perfect Riv," 
>> or words to that effect, and I was set to buy one when they became 
>> available. No longer. I wish they had left well enough, or maybe even 
>> "perfect," alone. I agree variety would be nice -- I don't think 
>> chainstay 
>> length is as cut-and-dried a design decision as the latest email made it 
>> sound, "the chainstays were too short." There are always trade offs in 
>> bike 
>> design and although I agree that *longish* stays are good, I think Riv 
>> has 
>> taken that idea a bit too far or, at least, applied it too widely. Of 
>> course, up to them. They dig it, I don't, no big deal, I will buy the 
>> parts 
>> and tools instead. 
>> On Sunday, September 13, 2020 at 10:52:22 AM UTC-7 Joel wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> S, this is the second time I have heard this in 2 days, here and on 
>>> the FB RBW site.  I would hope the chainstays in the 

Re: [RBW] Re: New Riv cantilever brakes

[Mark Roland]

My post wasn't meant to single you out, other than as random example of a 
trend we are mostly all caught up in some way or another. I'm not so 
precious about frame size as long as it's within range, but I have become a 
tire snob. Way too many dang tire choices out there right now. Though that 
could change in the years ahead...

On Monday, September 14, 2020 at 8:00:53 PM UTC-4, S wrote:
>
> I admit to being picky, but then, I would guess this is true of most 
> posters in the group. The shorter stays and trad end caps were part of why 
> I was interested in the SH to begin with, so if my ideal geo happens to 
> fall between sizes, that's just one more check on the "con" side. Again, 
> yes, I am being picky, but these frames are $1500-1800. As I said, maybe 
> the photos of the actual frames change my mind. That would be great. 
>
> On Monday, September 14, 2020 at 5:13:11 AM UTC-7 Mark Roland wrote:
>
>> The SH comes in five sizes, increments of 3cm from 48 to 60cm, so unless 
>> a person is unusually tall or short, or has proportions that generally 
>> "require" a custom geometry, I would think there is a sweet spot in there 
>> for the 99 percent. I realize there are other parameters than just seat 
>> tube length, but one would think the designer keeps that in mind. And of 
>> course you have stem lengths, handlebar reach, seat post setback, saddle 
>> rail length, all to fine tune a fit. I am thankful my sweet spot is fairly 
>> big. We certainly live in a time of consumer "choice". The more "choices" 
>> we have access to, the pickier we get! Human nature I suppose. (I put 
>> "choice" in quotes because the choices we often have are not much of a 
>> choice, in my opinion. For example, you can choose a blue car or a red one, 
>> but for the vast majority, you must have a car to get along.)
>>
>>
>> On Sunday, September 13, 2020 at 6:12:16 PM UTC-4, S wrote:
>>>
>>> Maybe the "slightly longer" stays are truly that. And maybe I could get 
>>> over the ball and socket ends. I hope photos of the actual frame change my 
>>> mind. In any case, more depends on whether or not one of the frame sizes 
>>> happens to fit the sweet spot for me. 
>>>
>>> On Sunday, September 13, 2020 at 12:37:24 PM UTC-7 Joel wrote:
>>>

 Thanks, I just pulled up the latest email, it got by me.  

 “ The seattube sizes are slightly different this time. Here's the PBH 
 range:

 48cm 650b = 77-80cm
 51cm 650b = 80-83cm 
 54cm 700c = 84-86cm 
 57cm 700c = 86-90cm 
 60cm  700c = 89-94cm

 The changes from the last batch are minimal:

- Ball n socket seatlugs
- Slightly longer chainstays. The 60cm has the longest at 48.5cm. 
They were too short before.

 It's compatible with all of our bars from Bosco to Noodles and is good 
 for just about all reasonable riding.

 It's not a full blown trail bike like the Gus/Susie but it'll do just 
 fine on most trails and isn't inappropriate on a road ride either if 
 you're 
 with like-minded people. You can stretch it into almost all types of 
 riding 
 outside of downhill, BMX and road racing.

 I used mine for Mt Diablo lunch rides with speedy Mark, one night 
 camping trips on fairly mellow trails, and even unloaded, careful 
 singletrack riding. Most of the time it was a fantastic commuter though.” 
 On Sun, Sep 13, 2020 at 2:34 PM S  wrote:

> Yes, quite a few group members have called the SH the "perfect Riv," 
> or words to that effect, and I was set to buy one when they became 
> available. No longer. I wish they had left well enough, or maybe even 
> "perfect," alone. I agree variety would be nice -- I don't think 
> chainstay 
> length is as cut-and-dried a design decision as the latest email made it 
> sound, "the chainstays were too short." There are always trade offs in 
> bike 
> design and although I agree that *longish* stays are good, I think Riv 
> has 
> taken that idea a bit too far or, at least, applied it too widely. Of 
> course, up to them. They dig it, I don't, no big deal, I will buy the 
> parts 
> and tools instead. 
> On Sunday, September 13, 2020 at 10:52:22 AM UTC-7 Joel wrote:
>
>>
>> S, this is the second time I have heard this in 2 days, here and on 
>> the FB RBW site.  I would hope the chainstays in the Sam would remain 
>> the 
>> same so we would have some variety.  I found an Orange Sam, new at a 
>> decent 
>> price but I am not sure on the orange, but now it is a big maybe.  
>>
>> On Sun, Sep 13, 2020 at 1:40 PM S  wrote:
>>
>>> I agree that the design looks very close to the Avid Shorty. I still 
>>> plan to buy a pair, if they aren't too expensive.
>>>
>>> I like that Riv is offering more original parts and tools. I think 
>>> this could be a growth area for them, especially the 

Re: [RBW] Re: New Riv cantilever brakes

[Joel Stern]

On the previous numbers I was in the middle for a 51cm.  I didn’t think the
51 has changed in any way but now I am no longer in the middle with an 80.6
PBH.


On Mon, Sep 14, 2020 at 8:01 PM S  wrote:

> I admit to being picky, but then, I would guess this is true of most
> posters in the group. The shorter stays and trad end caps were part of why
> I was interested in the SH to begin with, so if my ideal geo happens to
> fall between sizes, that's just one more check on the "con" side. Again,
> yes, I am being picky, but these frames are $1500-1800. As I said, maybe
> the photos of the actual frames change my mind. That would be great.
>
> On Monday, September 14, 2020 at 5:13:11 AM UTC-7 Mark Roland wrote:
>
>> The SH comes in five sizes, increments of 3cm from 48 to 60cm, so unless
>> a person is unusually tall or short, or has proportions that generally
>> "require" a custom geometry, I would think there is a sweet spot in there
>> for the 99 percent. I realize there are other parameters than just seat
>> tube length, but one would think the designer keeps that in mind. And of
>> course you have stem lengths, handlebar reach, seat post setback, saddle
>> rail length, all to fine tune a fit. I am thankful my sweet spot is fairly
>> big. We certainly live in a time of consumer "choice". The more "choices"
>> we have access to, the pickier we get! Human nature I suppose. (I put
>> "choice" in quotes because the choices we often have are not much of a
>> choice, in my opinion. For example, you can choose a blue car or a red one,
>> but for the vast majority, you must have a car to get along.)
>>
>>
>> On Sunday, September 13, 2020 at 6:12:16 PM UTC-4, S wrote:
>>>
>>> Maybe the "slightly longer" stays are truly that. And maybe I could get
>>> over the ball and socket ends. I hope photos of the actual frame change my
>>> mind. In any case, more depends on whether or not one of the frame sizes
>>> happens to fit the sweet spot for me.
>>>
>>> On Sunday, September 13, 2020 at 12:37:24 PM UTC-7 Joel wrote:
>>>

 Thanks, I just pulled up the latest email, it got by me.

 “ The seattube sizes are slightly different this time. Here's the PBH
 range:

 48cm 650b = 77-80cm
 51cm 650b = 80-83cm
 54cm 700c = 84-86cm
 57cm 700c = 86-90cm
 60cm  700c = 89-94cm

 The changes from the last batch are minimal:

- Ball n socket seatlugs
- Slightly longer chainstays. The 60cm has the longest at 48.5cm.
They were too short before.

 It's compatible with all of our bars from Bosco to Noodles and is good
 for just about all reasonable riding.

 It's not a full blown trail bike like the Gus/Susie but it'll do just
 fine on most trails and isn't inappropriate on a road ride either if you're
 with like-minded people. You can stretch it into almost all types of riding
 outside of downhill, BMX and road racing.

 I used mine for Mt Diablo lunch rides with speedy Mark, one night
 camping trips on fairly mellow trails, and even unloaded, careful
 singletrack riding. Most of the time it was a fantastic commuter though.”
 On Sun, Sep 13, 2020 at 2:34 PM S  wrote:

> Yes, quite a few group members have called the SH the "perfect Riv,"
> or words to that effect, and I was set to buy one when they became
> available. No longer. I wish they had left well enough, or maybe even
> "perfect," alone. I agree variety would be nice -- I don't think chainstay
> length is as cut-and-dried a design decision as the latest email made it
> sound, "the chainstays were too short." There are always trade offs in 
> bike
> design and although I agree that *longish* stays are good, I think Riv has
> taken that idea a bit too far or, at least, applied it too widely. Of
> course, up to them. They dig it, I don't, no big deal, I will buy the 
> parts
> and tools instead.
> On Sunday, September 13, 2020 at 10:52:22 AM UTC-7 Joel wrote:
>
>>
>> S, this is the second time I have heard this in 2 days, here and on
>> the FB RBW site.  I would hope the chainstays in the Sam would remain the
>> same so we would have some variety.  I found an Orange Sam, new at a 
>> decent
>> price but I am not sure on the orange, but now it is a big maybe.
>>
>> On Sun, Sep 13, 2020 at 1:40 PM S  wrote:
>>
>>> I agree that the design looks very close to the Avid Shorty. I still
>>> plan to buy a pair, if they aren't too expensive.
>>>
>>> I like that Riv is offering more original parts and tools. I think
>>> this could be a growth area for them, especially the tools, which 
>>> usually
>>> sell out instantly. And since their frame designs have begun to diverge
>>> from my tastes -- eg, I am disappointed the new Hillborne will have ball
>>> and socket seat stay ends and longer chainstays -- the parts and tools 
>>> give

Re: [RBW] Re: New Riv cantilever brakes

[S]

I admit to being picky, but then, I would guess this is true of most 
posters in the group. The shorter stays and trad end caps were part of why 
I was interested in the SH to begin with, so if my ideal geo happens to 
fall between sizes, that's just one more check on the "con" side. Again, 
yes, I am being picky, but these frames are $1500-1800. As I said, maybe 
the photos of the actual frames change my mind. That would be great. 

On Monday, September 14, 2020 at 5:13:11 AM UTC-7 Mark Roland wrote:

> The SH comes in five sizes, increments of 3cm from 48 to 60cm, so unless a 
> person is unusually tall or short, or has proportions that generally 
> "require" a custom geometry, I would think there is a sweet spot in there 
> for the 99 percent. I realize there are other parameters than just seat 
> tube length, but one would think the designer keeps that in mind. And of 
> course you have stem lengths, handlebar reach, seat post setback, saddle 
> rail length, all to fine tune a fit. I am thankful my sweet spot is fairly 
> big. We certainly live in a time of consumer "choice". The more "choices" 
> we have access to, the pickier we get! Human nature I suppose. (I put 
> "choice" in quotes because the choices we often have are not much of a 
> choice, in my opinion. For example, you can choose a blue car or a red one, 
> but for the vast majority, you must have a car to get along.)
>
>
> On Sunday, September 13, 2020 at 6:12:16 PM UTC-4, S wrote:
>>
>> Maybe the "slightly longer" stays are truly that. And maybe I could get 
>> over the ball and socket ends. I hope photos of the actual frame change my 
>> mind. In any case, more depends on whether or not one of the frame sizes 
>> happens to fit the sweet spot for me. 
>>
>> On Sunday, September 13, 2020 at 12:37:24 PM UTC-7 Joel wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> Thanks, I just pulled up the latest email, it got by me.  
>>>
>>> “ The seattube sizes are slightly different this time. Here's the PBH 
>>> range:
>>>
>>> 48cm 650b = 77-80cm
>>> 51cm 650b = 80-83cm 
>>> 54cm 700c = 84-86cm 
>>> 57cm 700c = 86-90cm 
>>> 60cm  700c = 89-94cm
>>>
>>> The changes from the last batch are minimal:
>>>
>>>- Ball n socket seatlugs
>>>- Slightly longer chainstays. The 60cm has the longest at 48.5cm. 
>>>They were too short before.
>>>
>>> It's compatible with all of our bars from Bosco to Noodles and is good 
>>> for just about all reasonable riding.
>>>
>>> It's not a full blown trail bike like the Gus/Susie but it'll do just 
>>> fine on most trails and isn't inappropriate on a road ride either if you're 
>>> with like-minded people. You can stretch it into almost all types of riding 
>>> outside of downhill, BMX and road racing.
>>>
>>> I used mine for Mt Diablo lunch rides with speedy Mark, one night 
>>> camping trips on fairly mellow trails, and even unloaded, careful 
>>> singletrack riding. Most of the time it was a fantastic commuter though.” 
>>> On Sun, Sep 13, 2020 at 2:34 PM S  wrote:
>>>
 Yes, quite a few group members have called the SH the "perfect Riv," or 
 words to that effect, and I was set to buy one when they became available. 
 No longer. I wish they had left well enough, or maybe even "perfect," 
 alone. I agree variety would be nice -- I don't think chainstay length is 
 as cut-and-dried a design decision as the latest email made it sound, "the 
 chainstays were too short." There are always trade offs in bike design and 
 although I agree that *longish* stays are good, I think Riv has taken that 
 idea a bit too far or, at least, applied it too widely. Of course, up to 
 them. They dig it, I don't, no big deal, I will buy the parts and tools 
 instead. 
 On Sunday, September 13, 2020 at 10:52:22 AM UTC-7 Joel wrote:

>
> S, this is the second time I have heard this in 2 days, here and on 
> the FB RBW site.  I would hope the chainstays in the Sam would remain the 
> same so we would have some variety.  I found an Orange Sam, new at a 
> decent 
> price but I am not sure on the orange, but now it is a big maybe.  
>
> On Sun, Sep 13, 2020 at 1:40 PM S  wrote:
>
>> I agree that the design looks very close to the Avid Shorty. I still 
>> plan to buy a pair, if they aren't too expensive.
>>
>> I like that Riv is offering more original parts and tools. I think 
>> this could be a growth area for them, especially the tools, which 
>> usually 
>> sell out instantly. And since their frame designs have begun to diverge 
>> from my tastes -- eg, I am disappointed the new Hillborne will have ball 
>> and socket seat stay ends and longer chainstays -- the parts and tools 
>> give 
>> me a way to keep supporting them.
>>
>> On Sunday, September 13, 2020 at 2:29:59 AM UTC-7 Garth wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> I was hoping for a simpler, old-school sort of cantilever, more like 
>>> the Rene Herse version which while 

Re: [RBW] Re: New Riv cantilever brakes

[Mark Roland]

The SH comes in five sizes, increments of 3cm from 48 to 60cm, so unless a 
person is unusually tall or short, or has proportions that generally 
"require" a custom geometry, I would think there is a sweet spot in there 
for the 99 percent. I realize there are other parameters than just seat 
tube length, but one would think the designer keeps that in mind. And of 
course you have stem lengths, handlebar reach, seat post setback, saddle 
rail length, all to fine tune a fit. I am thankful my sweet spot is fairly 
big. We certainly live in a time of consumer "choice". The more "choices" 
we have access to, the pickier we get! Human nature I suppose. (I put 
"choice" in quotes because the choices we often have are not much of a 
choice, in my opinion. For example, you can choose a blue car or a red one, 
but for the vast majority, you must have a car to get along.)

On Sunday, September 13, 2020 at 6:12:16 PM UTC-4, S wrote:
>
> Maybe the "slightly longer" stays are truly that. And maybe I could get 
> over the ball and socket ends. I hope photos of the actual frame change my 
> mind. In any case, more depends on whether or not one of the frame sizes 
> happens to fit the sweet spot for me. 
>
> On Sunday, September 13, 2020 at 12:37:24 PM UTC-7 Joel wrote:
>
>>
>> Thanks, I just pulled up the latest email, it got by me.  
>>
>> “ The seattube sizes are slightly different this time. Here's the PBH 
>> range:
>>
>> 48cm 650b = 77-80cm
>> 51cm 650b = 80-83cm 
>> 54cm 700c = 84-86cm 
>> 57cm 700c = 86-90cm 
>> 60cm  700c = 89-94cm
>>
>> The changes from the last batch are minimal:
>>
>>- Ball n socket seatlugs
>>- Slightly longer chainstays. The 60cm has the longest at 48.5cm. 
>>They were too short before.
>>
>> It's compatible with all of our bars from Bosco to Noodles and is good 
>> for just about all reasonable riding.
>>
>> It's not a full blown trail bike like the Gus/Susie but it'll do just 
>> fine on most trails and isn't inappropriate on a road ride either if you're 
>> with like-minded people. You can stretch it into almost all types of riding 
>> outside of downhill, BMX and road racing.
>>
>> I used mine for Mt Diablo lunch rides with speedy Mark, one night camping 
>> trips on fairly mellow trails, and even unloaded, careful singletrack 
>> riding. Most of the time it was a fantastic commuter though.” 
>> On Sun, Sep 13, 2020 at 2:34 PM S  wrote:
>>
>>> Yes, quite a few group members have called the SH the "perfect Riv," or 
>>> words to that effect, and I was set to buy one when they became available. 
>>> No longer. I wish they had left well enough, or maybe even "perfect," 
>>> alone. I agree variety would be nice -- I don't think chainstay length is 
>>> as cut-and-dried a design decision as the latest email made it sound, "the 
>>> chainstays were too short." There are always trade offs in bike design and 
>>> although I agree that *longish* stays are good, I think Riv has taken that 
>>> idea a bit too far or, at least, applied it too widely. Of course, up to 
>>> them. They dig it, I don't, no big deal, I will buy the parts and tools 
>>> instead. 
>>> On Sunday, September 13, 2020 at 10:52:22 AM UTC-7 Joel wrote:
>>>

 S, this is the second time I have heard this in 2 days, here and on the 
 FB RBW site.  I would hope the chainstays in the Sam would remain the same 
 so we would have some variety.  I found an Orange Sam, new at a decent 
 price but I am not sure on the orange, but now it is a big maybe.  

 On Sun, Sep 13, 2020 at 1:40 PM S  wrote:

> I agree that the design looks very close to the Avid Shorty. I still 
> plan to buy a pair, if they aren't too expensive.
>
> I like that Riv is offering more original parts and tools. I think 
> this could be a growth area for them, especially the tools, which usually 
> sell out instantly. And since their frame designs have begun to diverge 
> from my tastes -- eg, I am disappointed the new Hillborne will have ball 
> and socket seat stay ends and longer chainstays -- the parts and tools 
> give 
> me a way to keep supporting them.
>
> On Sunday, September 13, 2020 at 2:29:59 AM UTC-7 Garth wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> I was hoping for a simpler, old-school sort of cantilever, more like 
>> the Rene Herse version which while wildly priced, ticks all the boxes of 
>> what I'd like in a cantilever brake (Post style pads with toe-in 
>> washers, 
>> pads open up wide past the frame). 
>>
>> I can't say much about the Riv design though as I've not seem them in 
>> person as to how they work, or tire/frame clearance and all. The 
>> blueprint 
>> appears complicated though. 
>>
>> Cantilevers matter to me, I prefer what the bike industry must 
>> consider "not very user friendly" as I find that comical as they ARE 
>> friendly ! The kind with post style pads and washers for toe in. 
>> Infinite 

Re: [RBW] Re: New Riv cantilever brakes

[S]

Maybe the "slightly longer" stays are truly that. And maybe I could get 
over the ball and socket ends. I hope photos of the actual frame change my 
mind. In any case, more depends on whether or not one of the frame sizes 
happens to fit the sweet spot for me. 

On Sunday, September 13, 2020 at 12:37:24 PM UTC-7 Joel wrote:

>
> Thanks, I just pulled up the latest email, it got by me.  
>
> “ The seattube sizes are slightly different this time. Here's the PBH 
> range:
>
> 48cm 650b = 77-80cm
> 51cm 650b = 80-83cm 
> 54cm 700c = 84-86cm 
> 57cm 700c = 86-90cm 
> 60cm  700c = 89-94cm
>
> The changes from the last batch are minimal:
>
>- Ball n socket seatlugs
>- Slightly longer chainstays. The 60cm has the longest at 48.5cm. They 
>were too short before.
>
> It's compatible with all of our bars from Bosco to Noodles and is good for 
> just about all reasonable riding.
>
> It's not a full blown trail bike like the Gus/Susie but it'll do just fine 
> on most trails and isn't inappropriate on a road ride either if you're with 
> like-minded people. You can stretch it into almost all types of riding 
> outside of downhill, BMX and road racing.
>
> I used mine for Mt Diablo lunch rides with speedy Mark, one night camping 
> trips on fairly mellow trails, and even unloaded, careful singletrack 
> riding. Most of the time it was a fantastic commuter though.” 
> On Sun, Sep 13, 2020 at 2:34 PM S  wrote:
>
>> Yes, quite a few group members have called the SH the "perfect Riv," or 
>> words to that effect, and I was set to buy one when they became available. 
>> No longer. I wish they had left well enough, or maybe even "perfect," 
>> alone. I agree variety would be nice -- I don't think chainstay length is 
>> as cut-and-dried a design decision as the latest email made it sound, "the 
>> chainstays were too short." There are always trade offs in bike design and 
>> although I agree that *longish* stays are good, I think Riv has taken that 
>> idea a bit too far or, at least, applied it too widely. Of course, up to 
>> them. They dig it, I don't, no big deal, I will buy the parts and tools 
>> instead. 
>> On Sunday, September 13, 2020 at 10:52:22 AM UTC-7 Joel wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> S, this is the second time I have heard this in 2 days, here and on the 
>>> FB RBW site.  I would hope the chainstays in the Sam would remain the same 
>>> so we would have some variety.  I found an Orange Sam, new at a decent 
>>> price but I am not sure on the orange, but now it is a big maybe.  
>>>
>>> On Sun, Sep 13, 2020 at 1:40 PM S  wrote:
>>>
 I agree that the design looks very close to the Avid Shorty. I still 
 plan to buy a pair, if they aren't too expensive.

 I like that Riv is offering more original parts and tools. I think this 
 could be a growth area for them, especially the tools, which usually sell 
 out instantly. And since their frame designs have begun to diverge from my 
 tastes -- eg, I am disappointed the new Hillborne will have ball and 
 socket 
 seat stay ends and longer chainstays -- the parts and tools give me a way 
 to keep supporting them.

 On Sunday, September 13, 2020 at 2:29:59 AM UTC-7 Garth wrote:

>
>
> I was hoping for a simpler, old-school sort of cantilever, more like 
> the Rene Herse version which while wildly priced, ticks all the boxes of 
> what I'd like in a cantilever brake (Post style pads with toe-in washers, 
> pads open up wide past the frame). 
>
> I can't say much about the Riv design though as I've not seem them in 
> person as to how they work, or tire/frame clearance and all. The 
> blueprint 
> appears complicated though. 
>
> Cantilevers matter to me, I prefer what the bike industry must 
> consider "not very user friendly" as I find that comical as they ARE 
> friendly ! The kind with post style pads and washers for toe in. Infinite 
> adjustabilty. 
>
> V-brakes and "user friendly" ?  Nah ... what fun is that ? !!!  
>
>  
>








 -- 


 You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the 
 Google Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group.


 To unsubscribe from this topic, visit 
 https://groups.google.com/d/topic/rbw-owners-bunch/DNFWIlqEKk4/unsubscribe
 .


 To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to 
 rbw-owners-bun...@googlegroups.com.


 To view this discussion on the web visit 
 https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/rbw-owners-bunch/a19867c6-e7d8-42ab-8216-e9217dcbd59an%40googlegroups.com
  
 
 .


 -- 
>>> ~IMPORTANT~ Note to all~~ EMAIL ETIQUETTE
>>> If you forward this email, please highlight and delete the forwarding 
>>> 

Re: [RBW] Re: New Riv cantilever brakes

[Joel Stern]

Thanks, I just pulled up the latest email, it got by me.

“ The seattube sizes are slightly different this time. Here's the PBH range:

48cm 650b = 77-80cm
51cm 650b = 80-83cm
54cm 700c = 84-86cm
57cm 700c = 86-90cm
60cm  700c = 89-94cm

The changes from the last batch are minimal:

   - Ball n socket seatlugs
   - Slightly longer chainstays. The 60cm has the longest at 48.5cm. They
   were too short before.

It's compatible with all of our bars from Bosco to Noodles and is good for
just about all reasonable riding.

It's not a full blown trail bike like the Gus/Susie but it'll do just fine
on most trails and isn't inappropriate on a road ride either if you're with
like-minded people. You can stretch it into almost all types of riding
outside of downhill, BMX and road racing.

I used mine for Mt Diablo lunch rides with speedy Mark, one night camping
trips on fairly mellow trails, and even unloaded, careful singletrack
riding. Most of the time it was a fantastic commuter though.”
On Sun, Sep 13, 2020 at 2:34 PM S  wrote:

> Yes, quite a few group members have called the SH the "perfect Riv," or
> words to that effect, and I was set to buy one when they became available.
> No longer. I wish they had left well enough, or maybe even "perfect,"
> alone. I agree variety would be nice -- I don't think chainstay length is
> as cut-and-dried a design decision as the latest email made it sound, "the
> chainstays were too short." There are always trade offs in bike design and
> although I agree that *longish* stays are good, I think Riv has taken that
> idea a bit too far or, at least, applied it too widely. Of course, up to
> them. They dig it, I don't, no big deal, I will buy the parts and tools
> instead.
> On Sunday, September 13, 2020 at 10:52:22 AM UTC-7 Joel wrote:
>
>>
>> S, this is the second time I have heard this in 2 days, here and on the
>> FB RBW site.  I would hope the chainstays in the Sam would remain the same
>> so we would have some variety.  I found an Orange Sam, new at a decent
>> price but I am not sure on the orange, but now it is a big maybe.
>>
>> On Sun, Sep 13, 2020 at 1:40 PM S  wrote:
>>
>>> I agree that the design looks very close to the Avid Shorty. I still
>>> plan to buy a pair, if they aren't too expensive.
>>>
>>> I like that Riv is offering more original parts and tools. I think this
>>> could be a growth area for them, especially the tools, which usually sell
>>> out instantly. And since their frame designs have begun to diverge from my
>>> tastes -- eg, I am disappointed the new Hillborne will have ball and socket
>>> seat stay ends and longer chainstays -- the parts and tools give me a way
>>> to keep supporting them.
>>>
>>> On Sunday, September 13, 2020 at 2:29:59 AM UTC-7 Garth wrote:
>>>


 I was hoping for a simpler, old-school sort of cantilever, more like
 the Rene Herse version which while wildly priced, ticks all the boxes of
 what I'd like in a cantilever brake (Post style pads with toe-in washers,
 pads open up wide past the frame).

 I can't say much about the Riv design though as I've not seem them in
 person as to how they work, or tire/frame clearance and all. The blueprint
 appears complicated though.

 Cantilevers matter to me, I prefer what the bike industry must consider
 "not very user friendly" as I find that comical as they ARE friendly ! The
 kind with post style pads and washers for toe in. Infinite adjustabilty.

 V-brakes and "user friendly" ?  Nah ... what fun is that ? !!!



>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>>
>>>
>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the
>>> Google Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group.
>>>
>>>
>>> To unsubscribe from this topic, visit
>>> https://groups.google.com/d/topic/rbw-owners-bunch/DNFWIlqEKk4/unsubscribe
>>> .
>>>
>>>
>>> To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to
>>> rbw-owners-bun...@googlegroups.com.
>>>
>>>
>>> To view this discussion on the web visit
>>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/rbw-owners-bunch/a19867c6-e7d8-42ab-8216-e9217dcbd59an%40googlegroups.com
>>> 
>>> .
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>> ~IMPORTANT~ Note to all~~ EMAIL ETIQUETTE
>> If you forward this email, please highlight and delete the forwarding
>> history, which includes my email address and maybe others. It is a courtesy
>> to me and others who may not wish to have their email addresses sent all
>> over the world. Erasing the history helps prevent Spammers from obtaining
>> addresses, prevents viruses from being propagated, and limits the
>> proliferation of spam. Also, please use the “BCC” area instead of “TO” and
>> “CC” when forwarding to several people at once.
>> ~~Thank you~~
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> --
>
>
> You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the
> 

Re: [RBW] Re: New Riv cantilever brakes

[S]

Yes, quite a few group members have called the SH the "perfect Riv," or 
words to that effect, and I was set to buy one when they became available. 
No longer. I wish they had left well enough, or maybe even "perfect," 
alone. I agree variety would be nice -- I don't think chainstay length is 
as cut-and-dried a design decision as the latest email made it sound, "the 
chainstays were too short." There are always trade offs in bike design and 
although I agree that *longish* stays are good, I think Riv has taken that 
idea a bit too far or, at least, applied it too widely. Of course, up to 
them. They dig it, I don't, no big deal, I will buy the parts and tools 
instead. 
On Sunday, September 13, 2020 at 10:52:22 AM UTC-7 Joel wrote:

>
> S, this is the second time I have heard this in 2 days, here and on the FB 
> RBW site.  I would hope the chainstays in the Sam would remain the same so 
> we would have some variety.  I found an Orange Sam, new at a decent price 
> but I am not sure on the orange, but now it is a big maybe.  
>
> On Sun, Sep 13, 2020 at 1:40 PM S  wrote:
>
>> I agree that the design looks very close to the Avid Shorty. I still plan 
>> to buy a pair, if they aren't too expensive.
>>
>> I like that Riv is offering more original parts and tools. I think this 
>> could be a growth area for them, especially the tools, which usually sell 
>> out instantly. And since their frame designs have begun to diverge from my 
>> tastes -- eg, I am disappointed the new Hillborne will have ball and socket 
>> seat stay ends and longer chainstays -- the parts and tools give me a way 
>> to keep supporting them.
>>
>> On Sunday, September 13, 2020 at 2:29:59 AM UTC-7 Garth wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> I was hoping for a simpler, old-school sort of cantilever, more like the 
>>> Rene Herse version which while wildly priced, ticks all the boxes of what 
>>> I'd like in a cantilever brake (Post style pads with toe-in washers, pads 
>>> open up wide past the frame). 
>>>
>>> I can't say much about the Riv design though as I've not seem them in 
>>> person as to how they work, or tire/frame clearance and all. The blueprint 
>>> appears complicated though. 
>>>
>>> Cantilevers matter to me, I prefer what the bike industry must consider 
>>> "not very user friendly" as I find that comical as they ARE friendly ! The 
>>> kind with post style pads and washers for toe in. Infinite adjustabilty. 
>>>
>>> V-brakes and "user friendly" ?  Nah ... what fun is that ? !!!  
>>>
>>>  
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> -- 
>>
>>
>> You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the 
>> Google Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group.
>>
>>
>> To unsubscribe from this topic, visit 
>> https://groups.google.com/d/topic/rbw-owners-bunch/DNFWIlqEKk4/unsubscribe
>> .
>>
>>
>> To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to 
>> rbw-owners-bun...@googlegroups.com.
>>
>>
>> To view this discussion on the web visit 
>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/rbw-owners-bunch/a19867c6-e7d8-42ab-8216-e9217dcbd59an%40googlegroups.com
>>  
>> 
>> .
>>
>>
>> -- 
> ~IMPORTANT~ Note to all~~ EMAIL ETIQUETTE
> If you forward this email, please highlight and delete the forwarding 
> history, which includes my email address and maybe others. It is a courtesy 
> to me and others who may not wish to have their email addresses sent all 
> over the world. Erasing the history helps prevent Spammers from obtaining 
> addresses, prevents viruses from being propagated, and limits the 
> proliferation of spam. Also, please use the “BCC” area instead of “TO” and 
> “CC” when forwarding to several people at once.
> ~~Thank you~~
>

-- 
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 view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/rbw-owners-bunch/60026004-b610-4022-93bb-d1863820b1f1n%40googlegroups.com.

Re: [RBW] Re: New Riv cantilever brakes

[Joel Stern]

S, this is the second time I have heard this in 2 days, here and on the FB
RBW site.  I would hope the chainstays in the Sam would remain the same so
we would have some variety.  I found an Orange Sam, new at a decent price
but I am not sure on the orange, but now it is a big maybe.

On Sun, Sep 13, 2020 at 1:40 PM S  wrote:

> I agree that the design looks very close to the Avid Shorty. I still plan
> to buy a pair, if they aren't too expensive.
>
> I like that Riv is offering more original parts and tools. I think this
> could be a growth area for them, especially the tools, which usually sell
> out instantly. And since their frame designs have begun to diverge from my
> tastes -- eg, I am disappointed the new Hillborne will have ball and socket
> seat stay ends and longer chainstays -- the parts and tools give me a way
> to keep supporting them.
>
> On Sunday, September 13, 2020 at 2:29:59 AM UTC-7 Garth wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> I was hoping for a simpler, old-school sort of cantilever, more like the
>> Rene Herse version which while wildly priced, ticks all the boxes of what
>> I'd like in a cantilever brake (Post style pads with toe-in washers, pads
>> open up wide past the frame).
>>
>> I can't say much about the Riv design though as I've not seem them in
>> person as to how they work, or tire/frame clearance and all. The blueprint
>> appears complicated though.
>>
>> Cantilevers matter to me, I prefer what the bike industry must consider
>> "not very user friendly" as I find that comical as they ARE friendly ! The
>> kind with post style pads and washers for toe in. Infinite adjustabilty.
>>
>> V-brakes and "user friendly" ?  Nah ... what fun is that ? !!!
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> --
>
>
> You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the
> Google Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group.
>
>
> To unsubscribe from this topic, visit
> https://groups.google.com/d/topic/rbw-owners-bunch/DNFWIlqEKk4/unsubscribe
> .
>
>
> To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to
> rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
>
>
> To view this discussion on the web visit
> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/rbw-owners-bunch/a19867c6-e7d8-42ab-8216-e9217dcbd59an%40googlegroups.com
> 
> .
>
>
> --
~IMPORTANT~ Note to all~~ EMAIL ETIQUETTE
If you forward this email, please highlight and delete the forwarding
history, which includes my email address and maybe others. It is a courtesy
to me and others who may not wish to have their email addresses sent all
over the world. Erasing the history helps prevent Spammers from obtaining
addresses, prevents viruses from being propagated, and limits the
proliferation of spam. Also, please use the “BCC” area instead of “TO” and
“CC” when forwarding to several people at once.
~~Thank you~~

-- 
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 view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/rbw-owners-bunch/CAPjfky_iPC_LN5wvmJsAR40BTqeHs5X6-ykeO2JxJekU6PAZ-w%40mail.gmail.com.

[RBW] Re: New Riv cantilever brakes

[S]

I agree that the design looks very close to the Avid Shorty. I still plan 
to buy a pair, if they aren't too expensive.

I like that Riv is offering more original parts and tools. I think this 
could be a growth area for them, especially the tools, which usually sell 
out instantly. And since their frame designs have begun to diverge from my 
tastes -- eg, I am disappointed the new Hillborne will have ball and socket 
seat stay ends and longer chainstays -- the parts and tools give me a way 
to keep supporting them.

On Sunday, September 13, 2020 at 2:29:59 AM UTC-7 Garth wrote:

>
>
> I was hoping for a simpler, old-school sort of cantilever, more like the 
> Rene Herse version which while wildly priced, ticks all the boxes of what 
> I'd like in a cantilever brake (Post style pads with toe-in washers, pads 
> open up wide past the frame). 
>
> I can't say much about the Riv design though as I've not seem them in 
> person as to how they work, or tire/frame clearance and all. The blueprint 
> appears complicated though. 
>
> Cantilevers matter to me, I prefer what the bike industry must consider 
> "not very user friendly" as I find that comical as they ARE friendly ! The 
> kind with post style pads and washers for toe in. Infinite adjustabilty. 
>
> V-brakes and "user friendly" ?  Nah ... what fun is that ? !!!  
>
>  
>

-- 
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 view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/rbw-owners-bunch/a19867c6-e7d8-42ab-8216-e9217dcbd59an%40googlegroups.com.

[RBW] Re: New Riv cantilever brakes

[Garth]

I was hoping for a simpler, old-school sort of cantilever, more like the 
Rene Herse version which while wildly priced, ticks all the boxes of what 
I'd like in a cantilever brake (Post style pads with toe-in washers, pads 
open up wide past the frame). 

I can't say much about the Riv design though as I've not seem them in 
person as to how they work, or tire/frame clearance and all. The blueprint 
appears complicated though. 

Cantilevers matter to me, I prefer what the bike industry must consider 
"not very user friendly" as I find that comical as they ARE friendly ! The 
kind with post style pads and washers for toe in. Infinite adjustabilty. 

V-brakes and "user friendly" ?  Nah ... what fun is that ? !!!  

 

-- 
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 view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/rbw-owners-bunch/022f2082-f49b-458a-9e51-4c5e1cb5f8a5o%40googlegroups.com.

[RBW] Re: New Riv cantilever brakes

[Daniel M]

I believe Grant is also working on a V-brake and I will certainly buy a set the 
moment they become available. 

Daniel M
Berkeley, 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 view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/rbw-owners-bunch/e7f5f6e5-c579-487e-a899-60da2e9d4bcfo%40googlegroups.com.

[RBW] Re: New Riv cantilever brakes

[Jason Fuller]

>From an engineering perspective, I was meh on the new canti brake design, 
to be honest.  The arms are hollowed in the direction that reduces 
stiffness during braking forces, and the fact the allen end is blocked by 
the canti arm would probably annoy me in use. Not that it's a bad looking 
brake but there's plenty of great canti brakes out there already at the 
full range of price points! 

Seems way more useful to put energy into a nice, classy but unique v-brake 
IMO!  But Grant's gonna be Grant and I love that about him. 

-- 
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 view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/rbw-owners-bunch/cec1b307-5bf7-4f54-919c-72542910a28en%40googlegroups.com.