Re: [RBW] Re: Low trail schmo trail......
Joe you are correct about the light tubing and shimmy, that, combined with low trail seems to cause it. Precisely why I didn't order a Boulder frame at my weight I'd have to pay extra for heavier tubing. These frames seem to be built more for a specific purpose and rider weight than for general riding. At least that was my perception. I wouldn't mind trying a low trail frame/fork combo to see if it makes much difference. I do know my latest 'Sam' rides pleasantly and I'm not sure it could be improved upon much overall. On Monday, December 10, 2012 9:52:46 PM UTC-8, joe b. wrote: > > On Mon, Dec 10, 2012 at 9:28 PM, charlie > > wrote: > >> The helmet story was mentioned to make a point about keeping ones hands >> on the bars. *I thought it humorous* that the other rider mentioned my >> lack of helmet all the while riding *no handed* but.. actually I was >> responding to Williams comment about his Hilsen."my* Rawland does >> shimmy* coasting no handed at above 16mph or so and *the Hilsen does noti >> *. Maybe I'll get a needle bearing headset to try and get after that a >> little. * My Hilsen is totally shimmy-free*". >> The fact that his Hilsen does't shimmy doesn't surprise me since it has >> enough trail. Shimmy at any speed could be terrifying if you are not >> expecting it which is the main point I wanted to make in that Grant designs >> that out of his frames by adding enough trail. It may compromise straight >> line handling or the ability to hold a line better up a slow grinder but >> overall it results in a safer ride IMO. >> > > Charlie, I'm not convinced that trail has much to do with shimmy. It so > happens that a lot of modern low trail bikes also have light tubing, and I > would guess that has more to do with it. My 63cm Romulus has a nasty shimmy > with any load on a rear rack. It's a great no hands bike with light front > load and/or saddlebag, though. No hands riding is one of cycling's great > joys. To each his own, but don't not try it out of safety concerns. I'm > actually typing this on my phone while descending no hands at speed. Just > kidding. I'll just say that my bikes that can be ridden sans hands get more > miles than the other ones! > > Best, > joe "still can't trackstand, though, dangit" broach > portland, or > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msg/rbw-owners-bunch/-/21TrAdkzv-MJ. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=en.
Re: [RBW] Re: Low trail schmo trail......
To perfect your analogy, I think you meant Fender vs. Gibson. :) Ryan On Monday, December 10, 2012 5:42:23 PM UTC-8, William wrote: > > Toshi > > I'm like you, I think. As I think you know, I've got a Hilsen and a > Rawland. Unlike people who say the difference between high trail and low > trail is night and day, my experience has been a bit more nuanced. In > summary, I'm like Esteban, in that for me "they both work". > > The low-speed stability trick that I can do on my Rawland that no other > bike I've owned can do: I can ride up a >10% grade no-handed. I'm not > saying that's a critical enhancement, but it is for me an objective > empricism that tells me there is a difference in ultra low speed stability. > Take that for what you want. What I've noticed as well is that now that > the seed was planted in my mind that riding in a straight line up a hill is > possible, I find myself wanting to ride my Hilsen in a straight line up > hills as well. It forces me to keep my upper body very quiet with a very > light touch on the bars. I get leverage on the pedals with my lean, not > with a death grip on the bars. I think it's made me a better climber, and > it's helped me work on my flexibility. > > The other difference is that my Rawland does shimmy coasting no handed at > above 16mph or so and the Hilsen does not. Maybe I'll get a needle bearing > headset to try and get after that a little. My Hilsen is totally > shimmy-free. For long brevets if my neck and shoulders are getting tired, > being able to sit up on the Hilsen is really nice. Neither the Hilsen nor > the Rawland has ever had a rear rack on it, so whether there's a shimmy > difference with a rear load, I wouldn't know. > > They are both splendid bikes, and choosing one for a ride is like choosing > between a Les Paul and a Gibson (and no, I don't know how to play guitar). > > Bill > > > On Monday, December 10, 2012 5:18:20 PM UTC-8, ttoshi wrote: >> >> I dunno what this wandering is either. Is it like when you are >> stopping at a stop light and you are going nearly 0 miles an hour and >> you have to turn your wheel from side to side to keep your balance? >> Maybe the hill is so steep that your bike wants you to ride sideways >> to cut the gradient (Is that the bike or driver)? >> >> Sure, I always ride with a ~8 lb (klickfix) handlebar bag on my tandem >> and I've ridden up steep hills with my son and a little one in a >> trailer. Yeah, I've gone slower than the bike computer would recognize >> (maybe 2-2.5 mph) and yes, my front tire would wobble a bit, but it >> was like when I am trying to balance at a stop light, and I was never >> in any danger of falling. Would the rake of the fork potentially solve >> that wobbling? (I try to keep an open mind) >> >> Toshi in Oakland, CA, whose squirming children cause many more >> handling difficulties than the bicycle thusfar. >> >> On Mon, Dec 10, 2012 at 3:18 PM, soapscum wrote: >> > I've never been on a bike that didn't wander a bit on climbs, and I've >> > always just internalized that as "I always wander a bit when riding up >> > hills". I guess once I get my technique dialed-in (I mean, I've only >> been >> > riding for 40 years or so), I'll start working on the bike... >> > >> > Shawn >> > >> > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msg/rbw-owners-bunch/-/LcekEdJQByMJ. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=en.
Re: [RBW] Re: Low trail schmo trail......
In reading all this trail business, of which I am very uninformed, could I assume that a low trail bike would make a less desirable "trail" bike, i.e. off road bike? Or low or medium or high trail doesnt really make a difference. thanks -Mike On Mon, Dec 10, 2012 at 10:16 PM, Philip Williamson < [email protected]> wrote: > I have two bikes (really I have 4 bikes), a low trail touring bike, and a > medium-high trail Quickbeam. They're both fixed, and usually run a 72" > gear. They're both great bikes. The main difference seems to be that I can > point my hips on the Quickbeam to turn the bike, and the Ross ignores input > from behind the bars. Back to back (jump off the Quickbeam, leap onto the > Ross), I've actually turned the bars the wrong direction to straighten the > bike, leaving the driveway. I don't know what that was about, but after a > "that was weird" moment, I just rode away happily. I wouldn't mind > replacing the Ross with a Boulder, in order together a longer top tube (and > a little more respect), but it isn't pressing. > The Ross actually handles rough undulating gravel surprisingly well, but I > don't take it into the woods like I do the Quickbeam. > > Philip > www.biketinker.com > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "RBW Owners Bunch" group. > To view this discussion on the web visit > https://groups.google.com/d/msg/rbw-owners-bunch/-/MyGvkpMkwFgJ. > To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > [email protected]. > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=en. > > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=en.
Re: [RBW] Re: Low trail schmo trail......
I have two bikes (really I have 4 bikes), a low trail touring bike, and a medium-high trail Quickbeam. They're both fixed, and usually run a 72" gear. They're both great bikes. The main difference seems to be that I can point my hips on the Quickbeam to turn the bike, and the Ross ignores input from behind the bars. Back to back (jump off the Quickbeam, leap onto the Ross), I've actually turned the bars the wrong direction to straighten the bike, leaving the driveway. I don't know what that was about, but after a "that was weird" moment, I just rode away happily. I wouldn't mind replacing the Ross with a Boulder, in order together a longer top tube (and a little more respect), but it isn't pressing. The Ross actually handles rough undulating gravel surprisingly well, but I don't take it into the woods like I do the Quickbeam. Philip www.biketinker.com -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msg/rbw-owners-bunch/-/MyGvkpMkwFgJ. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=en.
Re: [RBW] Re: Low trail schmo trail......
"This post was written by my good friend Steve Goodman, who said he thought he'd written the perfect Rivendell Owners Bunch forum post. "I told him, no, he hadn't written the perfect Rivendell Owners Bunch post, because he didn't mention Lance..., planing..., carbon..., or paleo." Philip www.biketinker.com -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msg/rbw-owners-bunch/-/ovc4-8-lVwwJ. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=en.
Re: [RBW] Re: Low trail schmo trail......
On Mon, Dec 10, 2012 at 9:28 PM, charlie wrote: > The helmet story was mentioned to make a point about keeping ones hands > on the bars. *I thought it humorous* that the other rider mentioned my > lack of helmet all the while riding *no handed* but.. actually I was > responding to Williams comment about his Hilsen."my* Rawland does > shimmy* coasting no handed at above 16mph or so and *the Hilsen does noti*. > Maybe I'll get a needle bearing headset to try and get after that a > little. * My Hilsen is totally shimmy-free*". > The fact that his Hilsen does't shimmy doesn't surprise me since it has > enough trail. Shimmy at any speed could be terrifying if you are not > expecting it which is the main point I wanted to make in that Grant designs > that out of his frames by adding enough trail. It may compromise straight > line handling or the ability to hold a line better up a slow grinder but > overall it results in a safer ride IMO. > Charlie, I'm not convinced that trail has much to do with shimmy. It so happens that a lot of modern low trail bikes also have light tubing, and I would guess that has more to do with it. My 63cm Romulus has a nasty shimmy with any load on a rear rack. It's a great no hands bike with light front load and/or saddlebag, though. No hands riding is one of cycling's great joys. To each his own, but don't not try it out of safety concerns. I'm actually typing this on my phone while descending no hands at speed. Just kidding. I'll just say that my bikes that can be ridden sans hands get more miles than the other ones! Best, joe "still can't trackstand, though, dangit" broach portland, or -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=en.
Re: [RBW] Re: Low trail schmo trail......
The helmet story was mentioned to make a point about keeping ones hands on the bars. *I thought it humorous* that the other rider mentioned my lack of helmet all the while riding *no handed* but.. actually I was responding to Williams comment about his Hilsen."my* Rawland does shimmy* coasting no handed at above 16mph or so and *the Hilsen does noti*. Maybe I'll get a needle bearing headset to try and get after that a little. * My Hilsen is totally shimmy-free*". The fact that his Hilsen does't shimmy doesn't surprise me since it has enough trail. Shimmy at any speed could be terrifying if you are not expecting it which is the main point I wanted to make in that Grant designs that out of his frames by adding enough trail. It may compromise straight line handling or the ability to hold a line better up a slow grinder but overall it results in a safer ride IMO. On Monday, December 10, 2012 8:54:26 PM UTC-8, Kelly wrote: > > This thread is now complete.. We had trail and now helmets... :) > > Wait wait.. I can make it complete without anyone's mother getting run > over by a freight train.. > > Politics... > > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msg/rbw-owners-bunch/-/OoeWyTEfeswJ. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=en.
Re: [RBW] Re: Low trail schmo trail......
Cycle-chic: Empowering or repressing? Please discuss. On Mon, Dec 10, 2012 at 8:54 PM, Kelly wrote: > This thread is now complete.. We had trail and now helmets... :) > > Wait wait.. I can make it complete without anyone's mother getting run > over by a freight train.. > > Politics... > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "RBW Owners Bunch" group. > To view this discussion on the web visit > https://groups.google.com/d/msg/rbw-owners-bunch/-/zuwzDa9s0WAJ. > To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > [email protected]. > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=en. > > -- Cheers, David Redlands, CA ** "Censorship is telling a man he can't have a steak just because a baby can't chew it." -*Mark Twain* -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=en.
Re: [RBW] Re: Low trail schmo trail......
This thread is now complete.. We had trail and now helmets... :) Wait wait.. I can make it complete without anyone's mother getting run over by a freight train.. Politics... -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msg/rbw-owners-bunch/-/zuwzDa9s0WAJ. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=en.
Re: [RBW] Re: Low trail schmo trail......
The idea of a bike that shimmies would not give me confidence..but then I never ride without at least one hand on the bar. I remember getting the stink eye from a fellow rider on the local bike path because I rode without a helmet ( he mentioned I should have one on too) but he was riding with no hands on the bars.less safe than riding sans helmet IMO. On Monday, December 10, 2012 5:42:23 PM UTC-8, William wrote: > > Toshi > > I'm like you, I think. As I think you know, I've got a Hilsen and a > Rawland. Unlike people who say te he difference between high trail and low > trail is night and day, my experience has been a bit more nuanced. In > summary, I'm like Esteban, in that for me "they both work". > > The low-speed stability trick that I can do on my Rawland that no other > bike I've owned can do: I can ride up a >10% grade no-handed. I'm not > saying that's a critical enhancement, but it is for me an objective > empricism that tells me there is a difference in ultra low speed stability. > Take that for what you want. What I've noticed as well is that now that > the seed was planted in my mind that riding in a straight line up a hill is > possible, I find myself wanting to ride my Hilsen in a straight line up > hills as well. It forces me to keep my upper body very quiet with a very > light touch on the bars. I get leverage on the pedals with my lean, not > with a death grip on the bars. I think it's made me a better climber, and > it's helped me work on my flexibility. > > The other difference is that my Rawland does shimmy coasting no handed at > above 16mph or so and the Hilsen does not. Maybe I'll get a needle bearing > headset to try and get after that a little. My Hilsen is totally > shimmy-free. For long brevets if my neck and shoulders are getting tired, > being able to sit up on the Hilsen is really nice. Neither the Hilsen nor > the Rawland has ever had a rear rack on it, so whether there's a shimmy > difference with a rear load, I wouldn't know. > > They are both splendid bikes, and choosing one for a ride is like choosing > between a Les Paul and a Gibson (and no, I don't know how to play guitar). > > Bill > > > On Monday, December 10, 2012 5:18:20 PM UTC-8, ttoshi wrote: >> >> I dunno what this wandering is either. Is it like when you are >> stopping at a stop light and you are going nearly 0 miles an hour and >> you have to turn your wheel from side to side to keep your balance? >> Maybe the hill is so steep that your bike wants you to ride sideways >> to cut the gradient (Is that the bike or driver)? >> >> Sure, I always ride with a ~8 lb (klickfix) handlebar bag on my tandem >> and I've ridden up steep hills with my son and a little one in a >> trailer. Yeah, I've gone slower than the bike computer would recognize >> (maybe 2-2.5 mph) and yes, my front tire would wobble a bit, but it >> was like when I am trying to balance at a stop light, and I was never >> in any danger of falling. Would the rake of the fork potentially solve >> that wobbling? (I try to keep an open mind) >> >> Toshi in Oakland, CA, whose squirming children cause many more >> handling difficulties than the bicycle thusfar. >> >> On Mon, Dec 10, 2012 at 3:18 PM, soapscum wrote: >> > I've never been on a bike that didn't wander a bit on climbs, and I've >> > always just internalized that as "I always wander a bit when riding up >> > hills". I guess once I get my technique dialed-in (I mean, I've only >> been >> > riding for 40 years or so), I'll start working on the bike... >> > >> > Shawn >> > >> > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msg/rbw-owners-bunch/-/X8oisEd2FLkJ. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=en.
Re: [RBW] Re: Low trail schmo trail......
Toshi I'm like you, I think. As I think you know, I've got a Hilsen and a Rawland. Unlike people who say the difference between high trail and low trail is night and day, my experience has been a bit more nuanced. In summary, I'm like Esteban, in that for me "they both work". The low-speed stability trick that I can do on my Rawland that no other bike I've owned can do: I can ride up a >10% grade no-handed. I'm not saying that's a critical enhancement, but it is for me an objective empricism that tells me there is a difference in ultra low speed stability. Take that for what you want. What I've noticed as well is that now that the seed was planted in my mind that riding in a straight line up a hill is possible, I find myself wanting to ride my Hilsen in a straight line up hills as well. It forces me to keep my upper body very quiet with a very light touch on the bars. I get leverage on the pedals with my lean, not with a death grip on the bars. I think it's made me a better climber, and it's helped me work on my flexibility. The other difference is that my Rawland does shimmy coasting no handed at above 16mph or so and the Hilsen does not. Maybe I'll get a needle bearing headset to try and get after that a little. My Hilsen is totally shimmy-free. For long brevets if my neck and shoulders are getting tired, being able to sit up on the Hilsen is really nice. Neither the Hilsen nor the Rawland has ever had a rear rack on it, so whether there's a shimmy difference with a rear load, I wouldn't know. They are both splendid bikes, and choosing one for a ride is like choosing between a Les Paul and a Gibson (and no, I don't know how to play guitar). Bill On Monday, December 10, 2012 5:18:20 PM UTC-8, ttoshi wrote: > > I dunno what this wandering is either. Is it like when you are > stopping at a stop light and you are going nearly 0 miles an hour and > you have to turn your wheel from side to side to keep your balance? > Maybe the hill is so steep that your bike wants you to ride sideways > to cut the gradient (Is that the bike or driver)? > > Sure, I always ride with a ~8 lb (klickfix) handlebar bag on my tandem > and I've ridden up steep hills with my son and a little one in a > trailer. Yeah, I've gone slower than the bike computer would recognize > (maybe 2-2.5 mph) and yes, my front tire would wobble a bit, but it > was like when I am trying to balance at a stop light, and I was never > in any danger of falling. Would the rake of the fork potentially solve > that wobbling? (I try to keep an open mind) > > Toshi in Oakland, CA, whose squirming children cause many more > handling difficulties than the bicycle thusfar. > > On Mon, Dec 10, 2012 at 3:18 PM, soapscum > > wrote: > > I've never been on a bike that didn't wander a bit on climbs, and I've > > always just internalized that as "I always wander a bit when riding up > > hills". I guess once I get my technique dialed-in (I mean, I've only > been > > riding for 40 years or so), I'll start working on the bike... > > > > Shawn > > > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msg/rbw-owners-bunch/-/5ZOrsylVFtYJ. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=en.
Re: [RBW] Re: Low trail schmo trail......
I dunno what this wandering is either. Is it like when you are stopping at a stop light and you are going nearly 0 miles an hour and you have to turn your wheel from side to side to keep your balance? Maybe the hill is so steep that your bike wants you to ride sideways to cut the gradient (Is that the bike or driver)? Sure, I always ride with a ~8 lb (klickfix) handlebar bag on my tandem and I've ridden up steep hills with my son and a little one in a trailer. Yeah, I've gone slower than the bike computer would recognize (maybe 2-2.5 mph) and yes, my front tire would wobble a bit, but it was like when I am trying to balance at a stop light, and I was never in any danger of falling. Would the rake of the fork potentially solve that wobbling? (I try to keep an open mind) Toshi in Oakland, CA, whose squirming children cause many more handling difficulties than the bicycle thusfar. On Mon, Dec 10, 2012 at 3:18 PM, soapscum wrote: > I've never been on a bike that didn't wander a bit on climbs, and I've > always just internalized that as "I always wander a bit when riding up > hills". I guess once I get my technique dialed-in (I mean, I've only been > riding for 40 years or so), I'll start working on the bike... > > Shawn > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=en.
Re: [RBW] Re: Low trail schmo trail......
I love my Pelican, Ebisu, and Nobilette low-trail bikes. It works. I love my Rivs - mid-trail. Totally works, too! http://www.flickr.com/photos/25671211@N02/8258743340/ Frame design is more than trail. Grant's is a complete package - and has always, in my experience, held the qualities of stability, predictability, solidity, and high-class. On Sunday, December 9, 2012 12:23:47 PM UTC-8, Patrick Moore wrote: > > I would be very interested in learning more about how position, rider > size and weight, tire width and pressure, and for that matter pedaling > style affect handling for a given geometry. My wandering problem on > the Sam was with heavy rear load and nothing in front; and my favored > position is rearward biased. > > Interesting ... > > One of the best rear load bikes I had was that Motobecane with very > light 531 tubing and long stays -- better than other bikes with > equally long stays and stouter tubing. It's all very odd. This even > pushing the limit for the Tubus Fly rack. > > On Sun, Dec 9, 2012 at 12:21 PM, dougP > > wrote:IMHO, > discussions regarding trail, shimmy, loading, handling, etc., often > ignore the rider input factor. Our position on the bike, pedaling > style, tires & pressure, etc., must have a significant influence. > Generally even a lightweight rider outweighs the bike, even loaded for > a camping tour. > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msg/rbw-owners-bunch/-/qPLunaZwJhAJ. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=en.
Re: [RBW] Re: Low trail schmo trail......
I would be very interested in learning more about how position, rider size and weight, tire width and pressure, and for that matter pedaling style affect handling for a given geometry. My wandering problem on the Sam was with heavy rear load and nothing in front; and my favored position is rearward biased. Interesting ... One of the best rear load bikes I had was that Motobecane with very light 531 tubing and long stays -- better than other bikes with equally long stays and stouter tubing. It's all very odd. This even pushing the limit for the Tubus Fly rack. On Sun, Dec 9, 2012 at 12:21 PM, dougP wrote:IMHO, discussions regarding trail, shimmy, loading, handling, etc., often ignore the rider input factor. Our position on the bike, pedaling style, tires & pressure, etc., must have a significant influence. Generally even a lightweight rider outweighs the bike, even loaded for a camping tour. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=en.
