On Wed, 2010-05-05 at 22:46 -0700, happyriding wrote:
On May 5, 9:42 pm, PATRICK MOORE bertin...@gmail.com wrote:
I'm glad I got a 56 with the single tt. I can see any reason for two,
neither looks nor durability. Odd.
Maybe not on the 56, but as frames get larger they become more
On Thu, May 6, 2010 at 1:46 AM, happyriding happyrid...@yahoo.com wrote:
On May 5, 9:42 pm, PATRICK MOORE bertin...@gmail.com wrote:
I'm glad I got a 56 with the single tt. I can see any reason for two,
neither looks nor durability. Odd.
Maybe not on the 56, but as frames get larger they
Are you contending that the double (or god forbid, triple)
Why God forbid?
I like traditional diamond frames, but triple frames done right look
swell.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/retrotec-inglis-cycles/4561446951/
On May 6, 6:11 am, Steve Palincsar palin...@his.com wrote:
On Wed, 2010-05-05
I love my double-TT Bombadil, and I love that twin top-tubes pisses
everybody off. Moustache bars, lugs, technomic stems, 650b
wheels. Same thing.It's why I like Rivendell.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups RBW
Owners Bunch group.
To post to
I would say that the double top tube is not completely necessary for
structural integrity. I would just say it looks awesome! Very unique
design, but I agree with newenglandbike that it is like lugs, 650b or
moustache bars, Riv always pushes the boundaries of the normal
definition of what a bike
I think you've hit the nail on the head...
A double top tube is an opportunity for:
More lugs!
On 5/6/2010 8:17 AM, jpp wrote:
I would say that the double top tube is not completely necessary for
structural integrity. I would just say it looks awesome! Very unique
design, but I agree with
This seems like a great deal. Waterford frame (double top tube no
less), Taiwan fork for $1250! They must have a really good
relationship with waterford. I am surprised the price is so low, does
the fork require that much work?? I am sure the double top tuber will
look great.
On May 3, 9:01
Me too. I can't think of any reason to put a double top tube on a
road bike, and even on a mt. bike it is overkill for all but the most
extreme users. I wouldn't consider buying a bike with a double top
tube. How many failures has Grant experienced with the top tubes on
the Atlantis -
Me too. I can't think of any reason to put a double top tube on a
road bike,
How about they look so darn cool?
http://www.flickr.com/photos/retrotec-inglis-cycles/4561446951/
(for the record, while I really like curved double top tubes, I am not
sold on the straight).
On May 5, 1:29 pm,
a Gunnar with custom curved blade Waterford fork is $1150.
Interesting price points both companies are juggling here. It all
sounds good to me.
delete the extra top tube and lower the price $100. Then you got the
lovely lugged, sloping top tube, steel forked, American made (mostly)
$1000 beaut.
Does it really matter? outside of the fact that one is MUSA and the
other is not, is there any real tangible difference? Is the Waterford
one better? better quality? better construction? better riding? longer
lasting? better... something? or are we just talking about ideas and
ideals? Would you
The 2TT has almost nothing to do with strength and almost everything
to do with stiffness under cargo load.
A campeur didn't get extra tubes because Randonneurs were breaking
their frames:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/bicigirl/4037516334/
A stiffer frame just responds to load better. My 56
other is not, is there any real tangible difference? Is the Waterford
one better? better quality? better construction? better riding? longer
lasting? better... something? or are we just talking about ideas and
ideals?
Waterford has been making highly regarded bikes for quite some time
now.
On Wed, 2010-05-05 at 14:23 -0700, JoelMatthews wrote:
other is not, is there any real tangible difference? Is the Waterford
one better? better quality? better construction? better riding? longer
lasting? better... something? or are we just talking about ideas and
ideals?
Waterford has
On Wed, 2010-05-05 at 14:22 -0700, William wrote:
The 2TT has almost nothing to do with strength and almost everything
to do with stiffness under cargo load.
A campeur didn't get extra tubes because Randonneurs were breaking
their frames:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/bicigirl/4037516334/
Will agree with Steve here. Have had my 56cm Sam Hillborne loaded up
with 25 plus pounds of gear in panniers and rear rack and have had no
noticable issues with frame flexiness. Even a loaded Carradice Nelson
Longflap doesn't seem to change the handling. Other than weight shift
of where the
Most likely, highly regarded bikes you never heard of, or might have
heard of under another name.
Could well be. But if it's my money, I am going with what I know and
trust. I know and trust Waterford. If I never heard of something, no
matter how good it might be, it is hard for me to trust
That being said, I personally like the look of double top tubes on the
larger Bombadil.
Yes.
Big bikes without the double tube probably ride alright but look,
well, odd:
http://oswaldcycleworks.com/mcoswhole.jpg
On May 5, 4:56 pm, EricP ericpl...@aol.com wrote:
Will agree with Steve here.
On Wed, 2010-05-05 at 15:04 -0700, JoelMatthews wrote:
Most likely, highly regarded bikes you never heard of, or might have
heard of under another name.
Could well be. But if it's my money, I am going with what I know and
trust. I know and trust Waterford. If I never heard of something,
Eric,Steve
I clumsily overstated the front triangle flex of my Sam. It's not a
problem. It's also not a swinging unsupported saddlebag, but that
doesn't particularly matter.
I should have simply posted that I think Grant designed in the 2TT
option to stiffen the front triangle of the larger
i am not a loaded tourer. Aesthetically, given a choice, I'd choose
that mixte approach to stiffening way before the current Riv
approach to double top tubes.
On May 5, 2:22 pm, William tapebu...@gmail.com wrote:
The 2TT has almost nothing to do with strength and almost everything
to do with
There are definitely several ways to design a bike that is 'stiff
enough' for the application. I'm a fan of that long mixte look also,
but I like the 2TT look, too. For whatever reason, the one that I
visually don't like at all is the curvy tube beach-cruiser look.
On May 5, 4:58 pm, eflayer
I was under the impression that the heavy duty camper in the line-up
was the Atlantis, and the Hillbourne / AHH were all purpose country
bikes. The Atlantis, the Surly LHT, and the Co-motion Americano all
have pretty good reputation as heavy duty campers, and all with a
single top tube.
Michael
I just took possession of a Waterford Sam last Thursday. It is a 56cm
and it has only a single top tube. I wasn't expecting to go the
Waterford route but when I finally decided to pull the trigger I went
to RBWWHQ with debit card in hand and was told that the incoming batch
would only accept
my only comment to this discussion is the location of the reinforcing
2nd tube. The Retrotec's and the Singers both look aesthetically
correct. The Bomba does not work for me visually. I cast my lowly
Rivendell newbie vote for the diagonal design on any new Sam or
Hunqua.
~Mike~
On May 5, 2:22
I'm glad I got a 56 with the single tt. I can see any reason for two,
neither looks nor durability. Odd.
On Wed, May 5, 2010 at 12:46 PM, JoelMatthews joelmatth...@mac.com wrote:
Me too. I can't think of any reason to put a double top tube on a
road bike,
How about they look so darn cool?
I've carried close to 40 lb in back on my 56 single tuber with no problems;
and this in Dutch style panniers that aren't nearly as securely fastened as,
say, Ortliebs. I still don't see the need, and I'm glad I got a Waterford
with cantis and one tt.
On Wed, May 5, 2010 at 3:22 PM, William
On May 5, 9:42 pm, PATRICK MOORE bertin...@gmail.com wrote:
I'm glad I got a 56 with the single tt. I can see any reason for two,
neither looks nor durability. Odd.
Maybe not on the 56, but as frames get larger they become more
susceptible to shimmy. The 60 and above could be shimmy machines
Saw that post also and was initially confused but I was reading it at
work where things were kinda hectic. I looked it over again and I
guess it makes sense. I like that some Hillbornes will be designed
around sidepulls, makes sense if you're only going to be light
touring, and keeping it on the
Seems like Richard Schwinn and Grant really put their heads together
on this. Price wise and features wise right there in between off the
rack Gunnars and custom Waterfords. I just took delivery of a Gunnar
Sport with custom Waterford threaded fork. Kinda like a Hillborne but
no lugs, lighter
When will we start to see double seat tubes?
On May 4, 8:01 am, Dustin Sharp paleo.v...@gmail.com wrote:
There will be a double top tube on the Roadeo before Grant is finished.
You heard it here first.
On 5/4/10 7:47 AM, eflayer eddie.fla...@att.net wrote:
Seems like Richard Schwinn
how about the SimpleOne?
would it then need to be renamed the SimpleTwo? :)
best,
andrew
On May 4, 2010, at 8:01 AM, Dustin Sharp wrote:
There will be a double top tube on the Roadeo before Grant is finished.
You heard it here first.
--
You received this message because you are
I don't get the two top tube thing. I ride the 56 Sam and putting two
top tubes on it seems like it would take an elegant design and turn it
into a five-legged chair. I understand the strength argument, just
can't see why it would be necessary. This bike's already pretty
stout. I also wonder
i dunno.. i bought an orange cantisam recently.. if i'd had the option of
another top tube for $250 more i'd have taken it.. of course, i probably
wouldn't have subsequently picked up a used Bombadil frame.. seems to me that
there is a risk of blurring the lines between a Sam and a Bomba, but
For real bomber-strength frames, what we need is double head tubes.
And maybe 4-legged forks.
On Tue, May 4, 2010 at 10:13 AM, Mike mjawn...@gmail.com wrote:
When will we start to see double seat tubes?
On May 4, 8:01 am, Dustin Sharp paleo.v...@gmail.com wrote:
There will be a double top
I'm considering either a Gunnar Sport or a Waterford sport tourer.
Interested in your build and getting a look at it once you get your
build completed.
D.G.
On May 4, 8:47 am, eflayer eddie.fla...@att.net wrote:
Seems like Richard Schwinn and Grant really put their heads together
on this.
Grant's been talking about the double top tube Sam for a while. I
don't think you'll have a problem of it blurring the lines with a
bombadil--it'll still be made out of lighter tubing, and still have
country bike clearances and geometry. They might look similar, but
in the grand scheme of
I took delivery of an orange Sam (60) in early April - had a few
questions after I got it assembled so I contacted Riv. Found out it
was a Waterford build...that was a nice surprise! So - Waterford
builds are out there.
Joel
On May 3, 7:25 pm, eflayer eddie.fla...@att.net wrote:
i am a bit more
I wonder if the Hillborne will have the diagonal or parallel top
tube. My guess is parallel, as that style will be lost with the
Hunqa, and my guess is that the Bombadil will go to diagonal with a
third set of stays, a la mixte.
If there were double tt, seat tube, and head tube... maybe you
This is a test to see if I could show my new Gunnar Sport in the
spirit of Waterford and Hillborne:
http://picasaweb.google.com/107231724174916923201/Gunnar#5467470333073420066
On May 4, 9:49 am, Esteban proto...@gmail.com wrote:
I wonder if the Hillborne will have the diagonal or parallel top
How do you tell if your Sam is Waterford built? is there some s/n
decoder ring?
I got my 56 Sam in late Dec 2009.
Not that it would change anything, just nice to know.
~Mike~
On May 3, 8:46 pm, SFF jgre...@earthlink.net wrote:
I took delivery of an orange Sam (60) in early April - had a few
Waterford bikes generally have Waterford stamped into the rear
dropouts. There might be other simple identifiers. My Bombadil is
stamped on the rear dropout, and my Sam (purchased in Dec '09) is
not.
On May 4, 11:07 am, Michael_S mikeybi...@rocketmail.com wrote:
How do you tell if your Sam is
Re: double seat tubes:
People have been asking for a Riv tandem for years. Think how many
top tubes you could put on a tandem!
Bill
On May 4, 8:13 am, Mike mjawn...@gmail.com wrote:
When will we start to see double seat tubes?
On May 4, 8:01 am, Dustin Sharp paleo.v...@gmail.com wrote:
It sounds like there are some 56 and 60's coming in now from Taiwan.
They sell for $1000 and come with BB and seatpost and use sidepulls.
Then after that the SH frame will be made by Waterford and come with a
Taiwan fork. No BB or seatpost and made for canti brakespriced at
$1250.
I am not
i am a bit more perplexed by the mention of two top tubes? a new
viral advertising campaign for new stuff from Riv. I can be with
that. Grant is the master.
On May 3, 6:07 pm, Johnny Alien johnnyal...@verizon.net wrote:
It sounds like there are some 56 and 60's coming in now from Taiwan.
45 matches
Mail list logo
