Re: [RBW] Re: The way I design a build, and the first chapter

[brendonoid]

*Jason Fuller:*
*Crust makes some really light-for-their-width options but I've seen too
many crack at the eyelets for me to buy them.*

Ah, you just saved me a lot of money. Thanks.
Well not really because Quills cost a lot more but you know what I mean...

-- 
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 visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/rbw-owners-bunch/CAJ5Lu1sSEaJjwsk8xbGE31yE%2BkvYRaasMaiSy_bAgARhrxGZwA%40mail.gmail.com.

Re: [RBW] Re: The way I design a build, and the first chapter

[Richard Rose]

Interesting. I did not think the quill could take a 55. But even that is a far cry from my 2.6” tires.Regarding the dynamo - I got a nice deal on the wheels & envisioned some possible nighttime adventures in addition to standard MTB duties. So far it’s been exclusively MTB - nothing at night.Sent from my iPhoneOn Dec 3, 2024, at 9:40 PM, Jason Fuller  wrote:Richard - regarding the weight of dynamo, a friend did a pretty comprehensive gram-counting exercise on dynamo vs. battery lights and found that dynamo is about 170g heavier on average, if I'm remembering correctly.  It assumes though that you're carrying battery lights if you don't have dynamo, which is obviously not always the case unless you're a pack-rat like I am.  Battery lights themselves are heavier than dynamo lights, so that partially offsets the mass of the hub.  I love the Blue Lug Koma lights; minimal and not bright enough to light the way at night but super light (and can be unscrewed leaving only the ~2g base in place). This is what I'd do on a gram-counting build to maintain practicality. Cliffhangers are beautiful rims that build up so wonderfully but good gosh, they are heavy. Quill are significantly lighter while maintaining some extra width (not as much).  Crust makes some really light-for-their-width options but I've seen too many crack at the eyelets for me to buy them, honestly. A weight-sensitive fatter tire build for me would be Quill rims and RH 55mm knobby tires in Extralight casing, both 650B and 700c options available. 



-- 
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 visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/rbw-owners-bunch/025e0f7a-c57c-48bc-b216-cdbb68f0211dn%40googlegroups.com.




-- 
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 visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/rbw-owners-bunch/45472643-E542-4C9F-9017-C8340CDF1053%40gmail.com.

Re: [RBW] Re: The way I design a build, and the first chapter

[Richard Rose]

I almost forgot. The wheelset I kind of fell into (Cliffhanger’s) came with a Son dynamo hub. I still do not own a dynamo powered light two years on. I think it’s a relative boat anchor? So yeah, an alternate wheelset might make a difference I would notice. Lastly there is the Silver double crank vs. a lightweight single not to mention the rather lovely Nexave rapid rise.., the list goes on.Sent from my iPhoneOn Dec 3, 2024, at 2:15 PM, Bill Lindsay  wrote:It sounds to me like you have a good handle on the trade-offs.  Good luck if you decide to do somethingBL in ECOn Tuesday, December 3, 2024 at 10:53:08 AM UTC-8 Richard Rose wrote:Fair points. FYI, the Susie is (I think?) 8 ounces lighter. If I was truly concerned I could shed the B17 & steel Albacore handlebar for instant weight loss, but I love both.Sent from my iPhoneOn Dec 3, 2024, at 12:29 PM, Bill Lindsay  wrote:A gram-shaving Gus build sounds to me like a Susie build ;-). Rim-brake rim options for wide tires are indeed slim.  I've heard of an Alex DX-32 which may be ~75g lighter than a Cliffhanger.  In my stable, when the tires get that wide, that's where we switch over to disc brakes, which opens up a lot more light options, like the excellent Velocity Blunt SS.  If I had a Gus and wanted to make it easier to pedal up steep single track, I'd do it mostly with cargo reduction, lower gearing, and try to manage my own bodyweight.  Gram shaving a Gus is going to get lost in the noise, in my humble opinion.  Unless you can do something like Armand above and move your entire build over to another bike and earn yourself a do-over on your Gus buildBL in ECOn Tuesday, December 3, 2024 at 7:01:56 AM UTC-8 Richard Rose wrote:Thanks for that. I love every single thing about my Gus & it’s build - except its weight. It’s a heavy beast & it only bothers me going uphill on singletrack. When I built it up from bare frame I paid no attention to weight. I even (foolishly?) sold a Cane Creek ee wings Ti crankset to fund the frame purchase. I’d kinda like to do it over & take this shaving every gram approach. But, it would have to start with wheels. I just do not know of a better/lighter rim to use than the Cliffhanger? Is there another MTB worthy rim that will support a 2.6” tire? Sent from my iPhoneOn Dec 2, 2024, at 10:43 PM, Armand Kizirian  wrote:Sure, feels a bit snappier off the line and surprisingly fast for an upright bike (nice tires with light wheels mostly help here). If you get really active with the bike, go for a spirited sprint, or chuck it in some turns at an aggressive speed, the weight shift does feel more noticeable. It's more for the feel, not concerned with actual speed. All-in-all not a big deal though for a bike that is meant for pleasure and commuting. The weight is easily replaced by what I usually carry for a strict pleasure ride, which really is the main intention, to offset that weight. 70% of the time I have 20-30lb's of cargo for my commutes, as I pack a mobile office, food for the day, and usually a change of clothes as well. The main motivation for me to do this work is that I was building from the frame up, which is the time to do it. Doing this work down the line requires changing nearly everything, which is not time or cost-effective, like Bill pointed out. If I had kept the stock complete built, the only thing I would bother with is the wheelset, which really is the only thing you'll actually feel a difference on. On Monday, December 2, 2024 at 5:51:23 PM UTC-8 Richard Rose wrote:Very fascinating stuff. Two questions; how much did the 4+ pound weight loss cost & how does it feel? Sent from my iPhoneOn Dec 2, 2024, at 7:06 PM, Armand Kizirian  wrote:Whoops! Good catch. From what's identified on that list, the correct total is 1938g / 4.27lbs. I feel silly after all that weighing and I didn't weigh the complete bike stock. Oh well! The 2.5lb+ drop in wheel weight also includes the exceptionally light, extralight rene herse casing, and lightweight Schwalbe butyl tubes. Though I have foregone both to run the endurance casing tubeless. On Monday, December 2, 2024 at 2:46:46 PM UTC-8 Bill Lindsay wrote:Looks like 1188g of savings is the SUM of both wheels reduction.  670g + 518g = 1,188g Now it makes sense.  Did you double-count the front wheel savings in your total though?  Maybe it doesn't matter anymore.  :)BL in ECOn Monday, December 2, 2024 at 2:44:17 PM UTC-8 Bill Lindsay wrote:I don't follow the math.  The rear wheel math makes sense to me:Heavy old rear wheel weight - Lighter new rear wheel weight = rear wheel weight savings2252g - 1582g =670g = 23.634 oz (checks out)Heavy old front wheel weight - Lighter new front wheel weight = front wheel weight savings1942g - 1424g = 518g =18.272 oz (Impressive, but you claim 1188g of savings on the front wheel)Bill LindsayEl Cerrito, CAOn Monday, December 2, 2024 at 12:10:31 PM UTC-8 Armand Kizirian wrote:For reference, 

Re: [RBW] Re: The way I design a build, and the first chapter

[Bill Lindsay]

It sounds to me like you have a good handle on the trade-offs.  Good luck 
if you decide to do something

BL in EC

On Tuesday, December 3, 2024 at 10:53:08 AM UTC-8 Richard Rose wrote:

> Fair points. FYI, the Susie is (I think?) 8 ounces lighter. If I was truly 
> concerned I could shed the B17 & steel Albacore handlebar for instant 
> weight loss, but I love both.
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On Dec 3, 2024, at 12:29 PM, Bill Lindsay  wrote:
>
> A gram-shaving Gus build sounds to me like a Susie build ;-). 
>
>
> Rim-brake rim options for wide tires are indeed slim.  I've heard of an 
> Alex DX-32 which may be ~75g lighter than a Cliffhanger.  In my stable, 
> when the tires get that wide, that's where we switch over to disc brakes, 
> which opens up a lot more light options, like the excellent Velocity Blunt 
> SS.  
>
> If I had a Gus and wanted to make it easier to pedal up steep single 
> track, I'd do it mostly with cargo reduction, lower gearing, and try to 
> manage my own bodyweight.  Gram shaving a Gus is going to get lost in the 
> noise, in my humble opinion.  Unless you can do something like Armand above 
> and move your entire build over to another bike and earn yourself a do-over 
> on your Gus build
>
> BL in EC
>
> On Tuesday, December 3, 2024 at 7:01:56 AM UTC-8 Richard Rose wrote:
>
>> Thanks for that. I love every single thing about my Gus & it’s build - 
>> except its weight. It’s a heavy beast & it only bothers me going uphill on 
>> singletrack. When I built it up from bare frame I paid no attention to 
>> weight. I even (foolishly?) sold a Cane Creek ee wings Ti crankset to fund 
>> the frame purchase. I’d kinda like to do it over & take this shaving every 
>> gram approach. But, it would have to start with wheels. I just do not know 
>> of a better/lighter rim to use than the Cliffhanger? Is there another MTB 
>> worthy rim that will support a 2.6” tire? 
>> Sent from my iPhone
>>
>> On Dec 2, 2024, at 10:43 PM, Armand Kizirian  
>> wrote:
>>
>> Sure, feels a bit snappier off the line and surprisingly fast for an 
>> upright bike (nice tires with light wheels mostly help here). If you get 
>> really active with the bike, go for a spirited sprint, or chuck it in some 
>> turns at an aggressive speed, the weight shift does feel more noticeable. 
>> It's more for the feel, not concerned with actual speed. All-in-all not a 
>> big deal though for a bike that is meant for pleasure and commuting. The 
>> weight is easily replaced by what I usually carry for a strict pleasure 
>> ride, which really is the main intention, to offset that weight. 70% of the 
>> time I have 20-30lb's of cargo for my commutes, as I pack a mobile office, 
>> food for the day, and usually a change of clothes as well. 
>>
>>
>> The main motivation for me to do this work is that I was building from 
>> the frame up, which is the time to do it. Doing this work down the line 
>> requires changing nearly everything, which is not time or cost-effective, 
>> like Bill pointed out. If I had kept the stock complete built, the only 
>> thing I would bother with is the wheelset, which really is the only thing 
>> you'll actually feel a difference on. 
>>
>> On Monday, December 2, 2024 at 5:51:23 PM UTC-8 Richard Rose wrote:
>>
>>> Very fascinating stuff. Two questions; how much did the 4+ pound weight 
>>> loss cost & how does it feel? 
>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>>
>>> On Dec 2, 2024, at 7:06 PM, Armand Kizirian  
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Whoops! Good catch. From what's identified on that list, the correct 
>>> total is 1938g / 4.27lbs. I feel silly after all that weighing and I didn't 
>>> weigh the complete bike stock. Oh well! 
>>>
>>>
>>> The 2.5lb+ drop in wheel weight also includes the exceptionally light, 
>>> extralight rene herse casing, and lightweight Schwalbe butyl tubes. Though 
>>> I have foregone both to run the endurance casing tubeless. 
>>>
>>> On Monday, December 2, 2024 at 2:46:46 PM UTC-8 Bill Lindsay wrote:
>>>
 Looks like 1188g of savings is the SUM of both wheels reduction.  670g 
 + 518g = 1,188g Now it makes sense.  Did you double-count the front wheel 
 savings in your total though?  Maybe it doesn't matter anymore.  :)

 BL in EC

 On Monday, December 2, 2024 at 2:44:17 PM UTC-8 Bill Lindsay wrote:

> I don't follow the math.  The rear wheel math makes sense to me:
>
> Heavy old rear wheel weight - Lighter new rear wheel weight = rear 
> wheel weight savings
> 2252g - 1582g =670g = 23.634 oz (checks out)
>
> Heavy old front wheel weight - Lighter new front wheel weight = front 
> wheel weight savings
> 1942g - 1424g = 518g =18.272 oz (Impressive, but you claim 1188g of 
> savings on the front wheel)
>
> Bill Lindsay
> El Cerrito, CA
> On Monday, December 2, 2024 at 12:10:31 PM UTC-8 Armand Kizirian wrote:
>
>> For reference, I reduced the weight of my Platypus Complete by 
>> 5.75lbs. I stripped th

Re: [RBW] Re: The way I design a build, and the first chapter

[Richard Rose]

Fair points. FYI, the Susie is (I think?) 8 ounces lighter. If I was truly concerned I could shed the B17 & steel Albacore handlebar for instant weight loss, but I love both.Sent from my iPhoneOn Dec 3, 2024, at 12:29 PM, Bill Lindsay  wrote:A gram-shaving Gus build sounds to me like a Susie build ;-). Rim-brake rim options for wide tires are indeed slim.  I've heard of an Alex DX-32 which may be ~75g lighter than a Cliffhanger.  In my stable, when the tires get that wide, that's where we switch over to disc brakes, which opens up a lot more light options, like the excellent Velocity Blunt SS.  If I had a Gus and wanted to make it easier to pedal up steep single track, I'd do it mostly with cargo reduction, lower gearing, and try to manage my own bodyweight.  Gram shaving a Gus is going to get lost in the noise, in my humble opinion.  Unless you can do something like Armand above and move your entire build over to another bike and earn yourself a do-over on your Gus buildBL in ECOn Tuesday, December 3, 2024 at 7:01:56 AM UTC-8 Richard Rose wrote:Thanks for that. I love every single thing about my Gus & it’s build - except its weight. It’s a heavy beast & it only bothers me going uphill on singletrack. When I built it up from bare frame I paid no attention to weight. I even (foolishly?) sold a Cane Creek ee wings Ti crankset to fund the frame purchase. I’d kinda like to do it over & take this shaving every gram approach. But, it would have to start with wheels. I just do not know of a better/lighter rim to use than the Cliffhanger? Is there another MTB worthy rim that will support a 2.6” tire? Sent from my iPhoneOn Dec 2, 2024, at 10:43 PM, Armand Kizirian  wrote:Sure, feels a bit snappier off the line and surprisingly fast for an upright bike (nice tires with light wheels mostly help here). If you get really active with the bike, go for a spirited sprint, or chuck it in some turns at an aggressive speed, the weight shift does feel more noticeable. It's more for the feel, not concerned with actual speed. All-in-all not a big deal though for a bike that is meant for pleasure and commuting. The weight is easily replaced by what I usually carry for a strict pleasure ride, which really is the main intention, to offset that weight. 70% of the time I have 20-30lb's of cargo for my commutes, as I pack a mobile office, food for the day, and usually a change of clothes as well. The main motivation for me to do this work is that I was building from the frame up, which is the time to do it. Doing this work down the line requires changing nearly everything, which is not time or cost-effective, like Bill pointed out. If I had kept the stock complete built, the only thing I would bother with is the wheelset, which really is the only thing you'll actually feel a difference on. On Monday, December 2, 2024 at 5:51:23 PM UTC-8 Richard Rose wrote:Very fascinating stuff. Two questions; how much did the 4+ pound weight loss cost & how does it feel? Sent from my iPhoneOn Dec 2, 2024, at 7:06 PM, Armand Kizirian  wrote:Whoops! Good catch. From what's identified on that list, the correct total is 1938g / 4.27lbs. I feel silly after all that weighing and I didn't weigh the complete bike stock. Oh well! The 2.5lb+ drop in wheel weight also includes the exceptionally light, extralight rene herse casing, and lightweight Schwalbe butyl tubes. Though I have foregone both to run the endurance casing tubeless. On Monday, December 2, 2024 at 2:46:46 PM UTC-8 Bill Lindsay wrote:Looks like 1188g of savings is the SUM of both wheels reduction.  670g + 518g = 1,188g Now it makes sense.  Did you double-count the front wheel savings in your total though?  Maybe it doesn't matter anymore.  :)BL in ECOn Monday, December 2, 2024 at 2:44:17 PM UTC-8 Bill Lindsay wrote:I don't follow the math.  The rear wheel math makes sense to me:Heavy old rear wheel weight - Lighter new rear wheel weight = rear wheel weight savings2252g - 1582g =670g = 23.634 oz (checks out)Heavy old front wheel weight - Lighter new front wheel weight = front wheel weight savings1942g - 1424g = 518g =18.272 oz (Impressive, but you claim 1188g of savings on the front wheel)Bill LindsayEl Cerrito, CAOn Monday, December 2, 2024 at 12:10:31 PM UTC-8 Armand Kizirian wrote:For reference, I reduced the weight of my Platypus Complete by 5.75lbs. I stripped the parts entirely for another frame, which was the plan from the get go. The list below shows the weight difference of parts. It is mostly complete, but missing brakes and some other accessories, because I ultimately lost interest and just wanted to finish the bike and ride it. :) On Monday, December 2, 2024 at 8:16:37 AM UTC-8 Bill Lindsay wrote:CONFIRMED!  All of you who bought a CLEM complete from Rivendell are now confirmed as Weight Weenies!!  Pop those reflectors off to save a gram or two!BL in ECOn Monday, December 2, 2024 at 7:51:04 AM UTC-8 Ted Durant wrote:On Monday, December

Re: [RBW] Re: The way I design a build, and the first chapter

[Bill Lindsay]

A gram-shaving Gus build sounds to me like a Susie build ;-). 

Rim-brake rim options for wide tires are indeed slim.  I've heard of an 
Alex DX-32 which may be ~75g lighter than a Cliffhanger.  In my stable, 
when the tires get that wide, that's where we switch over to disc brakes, 
which opens up a lot more light options, like the excellent Velocity Blunt 
SS.  

If I had a Gus and wanted to make it easier to pedal up steep single track, 
I'd do it mostly with cargo reduction, lower gearing, and try to manage my 
own bodyweight.  Gram shaving a Gus is going to get lost in the noise, in 
my humble opinion.  Unless you can do something like Armand above and move 
your entire build over to another bike and earn yourself a do-over on your 
Gus build

BL in EC

On Tuesday, December 3, 2024 at 7:01:56 AM UTC-8 Richard Rose wrote:

> Thanks for that. I love every single thing about my Gus & it’s build - 
> except its weight. It’s a heavy beast & it only bothers me going uphill on 
> singletrack. When I built it up from bare frame I paid no attention to 
> weight. I even (foolishly?) sold a Cane Creek ee wings Ti crankset to fund 
> the frame purchase. I’d kinda like to do it over & take this shaving every 
> gram approach. But, it would have to start with wheels. I just do not know 
> of a better/lighter rim to use than the Cliffhanger? Is there another MTB 
> worthy rim that will support a 2.6” tire? 
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On Dec 2, 2024, at 10:43 PM, Armand Kizirian  wrote:
>
> Sure, feels a bit snappier off the line and surprisingly fast for an 
> upright bike (nice tires with light wheels mostly help here). If you get 
> really active with the bike, go for a spirited sprint, or chuck it in some 
> turns at an aggressive speed, the weight shift does feel more noticeable. 
> It's more for the feel, not concerned with actual speed. All-in-all not a 
> big deal though for a bike that is meant for pleasure and commuting. The 
> weight is easily replaced by what I usually carry for a strict pleasure 
> ride, which really is the main intention, to offset that weight. 70% of the 
> time I have 20-30lb's of cargo for my commutes, as I pack a mobile office, 
> food for the day, and usually a change of clothes as well. 
>
>
> The main motivation for me to do this work is that I was building from the 
> frame up, which is the time to do it. Doing this work down the line 
> requires changing nearly everything, which is not time or cost-effective, 
> like Bill pointed out. If I had kept the stock complete built, the only 
> thing I would bother with is the wheelset, which really is the only thing 
> you'll actually feel a difference on. 
>
> On Monday, December 2, 2024 at 5:51:23 PM UTC-8 Richard Rose wrote:
>
>> Very fascinating stuff. Two questions; how much did the 4+ pound weight 
>> loss cost & how does it feel? 
>> Sent from my iPhone
>>
>> On Dec 2, 2024, at 7:06 PM, Armand Kizirian  wrote:
>>
>> Whoops! Good catch. From what's identified on that list, the correct 
>> total is 1938g / 4.27lbs. I feel silly after all that weighing and I didn't 
>> weigh the complete bike stock. Oh well! 
>>
>>
>> The 2.5lb+ drop in wheel weight also includes the exceptionally light, 
>> extralight rene herse casing, and lightweight Schwalbe butyl tubes. Though 
>> I have foregone both to run the endurance casing tubeless. 
>>
>> On Monday, December 2, 2024 at 2:46:46 PM UTC-8 Bill Lindsay wrote:
>>
>>> Looks like 1188g of savings is the SUM of both wheels reduction.  670g + 
>>> 518g = 1,188g Now it makes sense.  Did you double-count the front wheel 
>>> savings in your total though?  Maybe it doesn't matter anymore.  :)
>>>
>>> BL in EC
>>>
>>> On Monday, December 2, 2024 at 2:44:17 PM UTC-8 Bill Lindsay wrote:
>>>
 I don't follow the math.  The rear wheel math makes sense to me:

 Heavy old rear wheel weight - Lighter new rear wheel weight = rear 
 wheel weight savings
 2252g - 1582g =670g = 23.634 oz (checks out)

 Heavy old front wheel weight - Lighter new front wheel weight = front 
 wheel weight savings
 1942g - 1424g = 518g =18.272 oz (Impressive, but you claim 1188g of 
 savings on the front wheel)

 Bill Lindsay
 El Cerrito, CA
 On Monday, December 2, 2024 at 12:10:31 PM UTC-8 Armand Kizirian wrote:

> For reference, I reduced the weight of my Platypus Complete by 
> 5.75lbs. I stripped the parts entirely for another frame, which was the 
> plan from the get go. The list below shows the weight difference of 
> parts. 
> It is mostly complete, but missing brakes and some other accessories, 
> because I ultimately lost interest and just wanted to finish the bike and 
> ride it. :) 
>
> [image: platypus weight savings.png]
>
> On Monday, December 2, 2024 at 8:16:37 AM UTC-8 Bill Lindsay wrote:
>
>> CONFIRMED!  All of you who bought a CLEM complete from Rivendell are 
>> now confirmed as Weight Weenies!

Re: [RBW] Re: The way I design a build, and the first chapter

[Richard Rose]

Thanks for that. I love every single thing about my Gus & it’s build - except its weight. It’s a heavy beast & it only bothers me going uphill on singletrack. When I built it up from bare frame I paid no attention to weight. I even (foolishly?) sold a Cane Creek ee wings Ti crankset to fund the frame purchase. I’d kinda like to do it over & take this shaving every gram approach. But, it would have to start with wheels. I just do not know of a better/lighter rim to use than the Cliffhanger? Is there another MTB worthy rim that will support a 2.6” tire? Sent from my iPhoneOn Dec 2, 2024, at 10:43 PM, Armand Kizirian  wrote:Sure, feels a bit snappier off the line and surprisingly fast for an upright bike (nice tires with light wheels mostly help here). If you get really active with the bike, go for a spirited sprint, or chuck it in some turns at an aggressive speed, the weight shift does feel more noticeable. It's more for the feel, not concerned with actual speed. All-in-all not a big deal though for a bike that is meant for pleasure and commuting. The weight is easily replaced by what I usually carry for a strict pleasure ride, which really is the main intention, to offset that weight. 70% of the time I have 20-30lb's of cargo for my commutes, as I pack a mobile office, food for the day, and usually a change of clothes as well. The main motivation for me to do this work is that I was building from the frame up, which is the time to do it. Doing this work down the line requires changing nearly everything, which is not time or cost-effective, like Bill pointed out. If I had kept the stock complete built, the only thing I would bother with is the wheelset, which really is the only thing you'll actually feel a difference on. On Monday, December 2, 2024 at 5:51:23 PM UTC-8 Richard Rose wrote:Very fascinating stuff. Two questions; how much did the 4+ pound weight loss cost & how does it feel? Sent from my iPhoneOn Dec 2, 2024, at 7:06 PM, Armand Kizirian  wrote:Whoops! Good catch. From what's identified on that list, the correct total is 1938g / 4.27lbs. I feel silly after all that weighing and I didn't weigh the complete bike stock. Oh well! The 2.5lb+ drop in wheel weight also includes the exceptionally light, extralight rene herse casing, and lightweight Schwalbe butyl tubes. Though I have foregone both to run the endurance casing tubeless. On Monday, December 2, 2024 at 2:46:46 PM UTC-8 Bill Lindsay wrote:Looks like 1188g of savings is the SUM of both wheels reduction.  670g + 518g = 1,188g Now it makes sense.  Did you double-count the front wheel savings in your total though?  Maybe it doesn't matter anymore.  :)BL in ECOn Monday, December 2, 2024 at 2:44:17 PM UTC-8 Bill Lindsay wrote:I don't follow the math.  The rear wheel math makes sense to me:Heavy old rear wheel weight - Lighter new rear wheel weight = rear wheel weight savings2252g - 1582g =670g = 23.634 oz (checks out)Heavy old front wheel weight - Lighter new front wheel weight = front wheel weight savings1942g - 1424g = 518g =18.272 oz (Impressive, but you claim 1188g of savings on the front wheel)Bill LindsayEl Cerrito, CAOn Monday, December 2, 2024 at 12:10:31 PM UTC-8 Armand Kizirian wrote:For reference, I reduced the weight of my Platypus Complete by 5.75lbs. I stripped the parts entirely for another frame, which was the plan from the get go. The list below shows the weight difference of parts. It is mostly complete, but missing brakes and some other accessories, because I ultimately lost interest and just wanted to finish the bike and ride it. :) On Monday, December 2, 2024 at 8:16:37 AM UTC-8 Bill Lindsay wrote:CONFIRMED!  All of you who bought a CLEM complete from Rivendell are now confirmed as Weight Weenies!!  Pop those reflectors off to save a gram or two!BL in ECOn Monday, December 2, 2024 at 7:51:04 AM UTC-8 Ted Durant wrote:On Monday, December 2, 2024 at 9:33:16 AM UTC-6 Bill Lindsay wrote:Somebody off-list told me that plastic sealed bearing Clem pedals are impressively light.  As I posted earlier in this thread, I weighed a pair of them at 272g, including the plastic shrink-wrap holding them together :-)  The only pedals I have that are lighter are Eggbeater 11 (titanium axles).Ted DurantMilwaukee WI USA



-- 
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-bun...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/rbw-owners-bunch/a87ebec6-1fd3-46ce-8d65-9cdcf0a30faan%40googlegroups.com.




-- 
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 visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/rbw-owners-bunch/f470ffbd-ba53-4798-a71c-3bcb12630c

Re: [RBW] Re: The way I design a build, and the first chapter

[Armand Kizirian]

Sure, feels a bit snappier off the line and surprisingly fast for an 
upright bike (nice tires with light wheels mostly help here). If you get 
really active with the bike, go for a spirited sprint, or chuck it in some 
turns at an aggressive speed, the weight shift does feel more noticeable. 
It's more for the feel, not concerned with actual speed. All-in-all not a 
big deal though for a bike that is meant for pleasure and commuting. The 
weight is easily replaced by what I usually carry for a strict pleasure 
ride, which really is the main intention, to offset that weight. 70% of the 
time I have 20-30lb's of cargo for my commutes, as I pack a mobile office, 
food for the day, and usually a change of clothes as well. 

The main motivation for me to do this work is that I was building from the 
frame up, which is the time to do it. Doing this work down the line 
requires changing nearly everything, which is not time or cost-effective, 
like Bill pointed out. If I had kept the stock complete built, the only 
thing I would bother with is the wheelset, which really is the only thing 
you'll actually feel a difference on. 

On Monday, December 2, 2024 at 5:51:23 PM UTC-8 Richard Rose wrote:

> Very fascinating stuff. Two questions; how much did the 4+ pound weight 
> loss cost & how does it feel? 
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On Dec 2, 2024, at 7:06 PM, Armand Kizirian  wrote:
>
> Whoops! Good catch. From what's identified on that list, the correct 
> total is 1938g / 4.27lbs. I feel silly after all that weighing and I didn't 
> weigh the complete bike stock. Oh well! 
>
>
> The 2.5lb+ drop in wheel weight also includes the exceptionally light, 
> extralight rene herse casing, and lightweight Schwalbe butyl tubes. Though 
> I have foregone both to run the endurance casing tubeless. 
>
> On Monday, December 2, 2024 at 2:46:46 PM UTC-8 Bill Lindsay wrote:
>
>> Looks like 1188g of savings is the SUM of both wheels reduction.  670g + 
>> 518g = 1,188g Now it makes sense.  Did you double-count the front wheel 
>> savings in your total though?  Maybe it doesn't matter anymore.  :)
>>
>> BL in EC
>>
>> On Monday, December 2, 2024 at 2:44:17 PM UTC-8 Bill Lindsay wrote:
>>
>>> I don't follow the math.  The rear wheel math makes sense to me:
>>>
>>> Heavy old rear wheel weight - Lighter new rear wheel weight = rear wheel 
>>> weight savings
>>> 2252g - 1582g =670g = 23.634 oz (checks out)
>>>
>>> Heavy old front wheel weight - Lighter new front wheel weight = front 
>>> wheel weight savings
>>> 1942g - 1424g = 518g =18.272 oz (Impressive, but you claim 1188g of 
>>> savings on the front wheel)
>>>
>>> Bill Lindsay
>>> El Cerrito, CA
>>> On Monday, December 2, 2024 at 12:10:31 PM UTC-8 Armand Kizirian wrote:
>>>
 For reference, I reduced the weight of my Platypus Complete by 5.75lbs. 
 I stripped the parts entirely for another frame, which was the plan from 
 the get go. The list below shows the weight difference of parts. It is 
 mostly complete, but missing brakes and some other accessories, because I 
 ultimately lost interest and just wanted to finish the bike and ride it. 
 :) 

 [image: platypus weight savings.png]

 On Monday, December 2, 2024 at 8:16:37 AM UTC-8 Bill Lindsay wrote:

> CONFIRMED!  All of you who bought a CLEM complete from Rivendell are 
> now confirmed as Weight Weenies!!  Pop those reflectors off to save a 
> gram 
> or two!
>
> BL in EC
>
> On Monday, December 2, 2024 at 7:51:04 AM UTC-8 Ted Durant wrote:
>
>> On Monday, December 2, 2024 at 9:33:16 AM UTC-6 Bill Lindsay wrote:
>>
>> Somebody off-list told me that plastic sealed bearing Clem pedals are 
>> impressively light.  
>>
>>
>> As I posted earlier in this thread, I weighed a pair of them at 272g, 
>> including the plastic shrink-wrap holding them together :-)  The only 
>> pedals I have that are lighter are Eggbeater 11 (titanium axles).
>>
>> Ted Durant
>> Milwaukee WI USA
>>
> -- 
>
> 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-bun...@googlegroups.com.
>
> To view this discussion visit 
> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/rbw-owners-bunch/a87ebec6-1fd3-46ce-8d65-9cdcf0a30faan%40googlegroups.com
>  
> 
> .
>
>

-- 
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 visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/rbw-owners-bunch/f470ffbd-ba53-4798-a71c-3bcb12630c29n%40googlegroups.com.

Re: [RBW] Re: The way I design a build, and the first chapter

[Richard Rose]

Very fascinating stuff. Two questions; how much did the 4+ pound weight loss cost & how does it feel? Sent from my iPhoneOn Dec 2, 2024, at 7:06 PM, Armand Kizirian  wrote:Whoops! Good catch. From what's identified on that list, the correct total is 1938g / 4.27lbs. I feel silly after all that weighing and I didn't weigh the complete bike stock. Oh well! The 2.5lb+ drop in wheel weight also includes the exceptionally light, extralight rene herse casing, and lightweight Schwalbe butyl tubes. Though I have foregone both to run the endurance casing tubeless. On Monday, December 2, 2024 at 2:46:46 PM UTC-8 Bill Lindsay wrote:Looks like 1188g of savings is the SUM of both wheels reduction.  670g + 518g = 1,188g Now it makes sense.  Did you double-count the front wheel savings in your total though?  Maybe it doesn't matter anymore.  :)BL in ECOn Monday, December 2, 2024 at 2:44:17 PM UTC-8 Bill Lindsay wrote:I don't follow the math.  The rear wheel math makes sense to me:Heavy old rear wheel weight - Lighter new rear wheel weight = rear wheel weight savings2252g - 1582g =670g = 23.634 oz (checks out)Heavy old front wheel weight - Lighter new front wheel weight = front wheel weight savings1942g - 1424g = 518g =18.272 oz (Impressive, but you claim 1188g of savings on the front wheel)Bill LindsayEl Cerrito, CAOn Monday, December 2, 2024 at 12:10:31 PM UTC-8 Armand Kizirian wrote:For reference, I reduced the weight of my Platypus Complete by 5.75lbs. I stripped the parts entirely for another frame, which was the plan from the get go. The list below shows the weight difference of parts. It is mostly complete, but missing brakes and some other accessories, because I ultimately lost interest and just wanted to finish the bike and ride it. :) On Monday, December 2, 2024 at 8:16:37 AM UTC-8 Bill Lindsay wrote:CONFIRMED!  All of you who bought a CLEM complete from Rivendell are now confirmed as Weight Weenies!!  Pop those reflectors off to save a gram or two!BL in ECOn Monday, December 2, 2024 at 7:51:04 AM UTC-8 Ted Durant wrote:On Monday, December 2, 2024 at 9:33:16 AM UTC-6 Bill Lindsay wrote:Somebody off-list told me that plastic sealed bearing Clem pedals are impressively light.  As I posted earlier in this thread, I weighed a pair of them at 272g, including the plastic shrink-wrap holding them together :-)  The only pedals I have that are lighter are Eggbeater 11 (titanium axles).Ted DurantMilwaukee WI USA



-- 
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 visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/rbw-owners-bunch/a87ebec6-1fd3-46ce-8d65-9cdcf0a30faan%40googlegroups.com.




-- 
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 visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/rbw-owners-bunch/0B70306E-6B11-425D-8087-F1139AB7F7C9%40gmail.com.

Re: [RBW] Re: The way I design a build, and the first chapter

[Ted Durant]

On Saturday, November 30, 2024 at 10:34:03 AM UTC-6 John Dewey wrote:

Gram counting is primarily an intellectual exercise is it not?


I don't think so. In some sense it's purely a physical exercise, removing 
mass from the bike. Or, as Bill has noted, it can be a financial exercise, 
calculating the cost:benefit ratio.

>From a practical perspective, however, an argument can (and has been) made 
that marginal grams in the relevant range do not impact performance. I 
enjoyed this paper a great deal. As a data scientist, however, I would note 
that removal of an outlier event would alter his results.

https://www.bmj.com/content/341/bmj.c6801

Ted Durant
Milwaukee WI USA 

-- 
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 visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/rbw-owners-bunch/91d9ba1e-0ad5-4b2a-a909-8ac8f69f8f13n%40googlegroups.com.

Re: [RBW] Re: The way I design a build, and the first chapter

[John Dewey]

Gram counting is primarily an intellectual exercise is it not? For sure,
light wheels are sublime if you can get away with it. I gave up on sew-ups
long ago but I’ll never forget my first ride on those I built for a Torpado
race bike I owned while living on Nantucket. Transformative, oh my! I’m not
so good with thread & needles, however, and not so patient either.

So…who among us still rides sew-ups, and who among us in that subset
patches tubes and stitches ‘em back up? Got to be at least one BOB out
there with patience of a saint and lots of free time.

Jock

On Sat, Nov 30, 2024 at 8:07 AM Ted Durant  wrote:

> Fun thread. Reminds me of "It's All About The Bike" by Robert Penn.
>
> I'm also a spreadsheet jockey (I recently said to a retired-actuary-biking
> friend, "If it can't be done in a spreadsheet, it's not worth doing."), and
> I have a column for component weights, but I haven't used that column in a
> long time. My process these days starts with the question, "What does this
> bike want to be?" From there it's a process of refining form, function, and
> parts availability, either from my inventory, new, or sourcing used stuff.
> A few of my spreadsheet columns are dedicated to identifying where the part
> will come from and how much it will cost.
>
> Almost all of my thinking begins with tire size. I'm surprised, Bill, that
> hasn't shown up in your chapters so far, other than a mention of RH Barlow
> Pass (622-38) , which appears to be what you've chosen for the build. I
> think 38 is an excellent choice for this sort of bike, a great balance of
> weight/comfort/speed. It happens to be the root of my next bike, though it
> will be 584-38.
>
> It's fun to pursue lightness, and I'll be doing that on my next bike.
> However, I went with higher-zoot-lower-weight on West Coast Sam, and
> lower-zoot-less-money-higher-weight on East Coast Sam, and I'm certain that
> if I put the same tires on each bike I wouldn't be able to tell the
> difference between them.
>
> If you want light pedals, RBW Clem Smith / VP 538 pedals are 272g a pair,
> and the Lems sneakers I wear are around 500g for the pair. It's tough to
> beat that with any SPD system.
>
> Ted Durant
> Milwaukee WI USA
>
> --
> 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 visit
> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/rbw-owners-bunch/9d834b0b-3a9d-41c2-9e1c-b9da4a2d55bcn%40googlegroups.com
> 
> .
>

-- 
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 visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/rbw-owners-bunch/CA%2BkTrE5P7YGjFn5tiZgQOfC5zONzf%3DZhLEqx%3DTAQZUYpY4u2ig%40mail.gmail.com.

Re: [RBW] Re: The way I design a build, and the first chapter

[Ted Durant]

Fun thread. Reminds me of "It's All About The Bike" by Robert Penn.

I'm also a spreadsheet jockey (I recently said to a retired-actuary-biking 
friend, "If it can't be done in a spreadsheet, it's not worth doing."), and 
I have a column for component weights, but I haven't used that column in a 
long time. My process these days starts with the question, "What does this 
bike want to be?" From there it's a process of refining form, function, and 
parts availability, either from my inventory, new, or sourcing used stuff. 
A few of my spreadsheet columns are dedicated to identifying where the part 
will come from and how much it will cost. 

Almost all of my thinking begins with tire size. I'm surprised, Bill, that 
hasn't shown up in your chapters so far, other than a mention of RH Barlow 
Pass (622-38) , which appears to be what you've chosen for the build. I 
think 38 is an excellent choice for this sort of bike, a great balance of 
weight/comfort/speed. It happens to be the root of my next bike, though it 
will be 584-38. 

It's fun to pursue lightness, and I'll be doing that on my next bike. 
However, I went with higher-zoot-lower-weight on West Coast Sam, and 
lower-zoot-less-money-higher-weight on East Coast Sam, and I'm certain that 
if I put the same tires on each bike I wouldn't be able to tell the 
difference between them.

If you want light pedals, RBW Clem Smith / VP 538 pedals are 272g a pair, 
and the Lems sneakers I wear are around 500g for the pair. It's tough to 
beat that with any SPD system. 

Ted Durant
Milwaukee WI USA

-- 
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 visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/rbw-owners-bunch/9d834b0b-3a9d-41c2-9e1c-b9da4a2d55bcn%40googlegroups.com.

Re: [RBW] Re: The way I design a build, and the first chapter

[brendonoid]

I look forward to the next part Bill, Thanks.

My usual method is throw my parts bin at a frame and see what sticks then 
open 50+tabs in my browser and see what arrives in the mail a month later.

This method seems more organised.

-- 
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 visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/rbw-owners-bunch/342ad302-3716-4ef3-9cef-9bbdf9d8fdffn%40googlegroups.com.

Re: [RBW] Re: The way I design a build, and the first chapter

[Patrick Moore]

Sheesh: 12-21. I sometimes swapped in a 13-23.

On Fri, Nov 29, 2024 at 4:23 PM Patrick Moore  wrote:

> … 12-19 Am Classic 10 spee
>

-- 
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 visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/rbw-owners-bunch/CALuTfgsyqYMsBwPap_1hOY4SvnNqqQbTf6UQFw3SVVNnzh5k6Q%40mail.gmail.com.

Re: [RBW] Re: The way I design a build, and the first chapter

[Patrick Moore]

Xpedo.

On Fri, Nov 29, 2024 at 4:23 PM Patrick Moore  wrote:

> … Xpedia ti-spindle 2-sided SPD-type pedals
>

-- 
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 visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/rbw-owners-bunch/CALuTfgvEX_JwFp4S-pfzQUz%2BVrBG85%3Dvr9OSDTDUovWuYbSrGw%40mail.gmail.com.

Re: [RBW] Re: The way I design a build, and the first chapter

[Patrick Moore]

Forgot to add that the Curt frameset, 58 c-c with fork with long steerer
and 2003 Ultegra headset weighed a surprisingly heavy 7 lb.

On Fri, Nov 29, 2024 at 4:23 PM Patrick Moore  wrote:

> … the Curt came in at 19 lb even with 1X10 (TA Pro 5 Vis 48 pulling 12-19
> Am Classic 10 speed with retrofriction dt shifter and with removable
> leftside shifter boss removed) exactly 1 lb heavier than its parent and
> model the 1999 Joe Starck fixed gear.
>

-- 
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 visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/rbw-owners-bunch/CALuTfgtuDHjRb9B_Xm1O6V-fDVHOtRuCi%3D9n5xUQTP%3DBRrYvtQ%40mail.gmail.com.

Re: [RBW] Re: The way I design a build, and the first chapter

[Patrick Moore]

Bill: pedals: if you wan them,  I’ll send you (no cost except patience) my
hitherto hoarded Xpedia ti-spindle 2-sided SPD-type pedals at IIRC 260
grams, 180 lb weight limit. I’m well under but still have qualms about
torquing a 76” gear uphill with them. (My lovely DA SPDs weigh 100 grams
more.) Note: I got these second hand, used them briefly, they worked fine
and I had no problems, but no guarantees.

1500 grams wheelsets: my 559 bsd Sun M14A + 8-speed Ultegra wheelset with
15/17 and alloy nipples back when I had it built for the then-new 2003 Curt
Riv Road custom weighed IIRC 1565 grams with Velox on both rims. The Curt
came in at 19 lb even with 1X10 (TA Pro 5 Vis 48 pulling 12-19 Am Classic
10 speed with retrofriction dt shifter and with removable leftside shifter
boss removed) exactly 1 lb heavier than its parent and model the 1999 Joe
Starck fixed gear.

I enjoy your meticulous descriptions of meticulous builds, the diametrical
opposite of my own careless “bright idea, let’s see if this works, no it
doesn’t, find a way to make it work” method, eventually paying a lot of
money to get someone else to get things to work.

On Fri, Nov 29, 2024 at 11:28 AM Bill Lindsay  wrote:

> I'll throw a couple more numbers around about wheels.  Back in the 1980s
> when roadies had clinchers for "training wheels" and tubulars for "racing
> wheels, we picked up the number 1500g as the number for "light" wheels,
> without a freewheel/cassette.  Without tires.  Without skewers.  Turns out
> that number is pretty applicable today as well.  Carbon disc wheels aren't
> much lighter, but their rims are considered a LOT stronger than
> featherweight aluminum rims.  My top-shelf HED all-metal wheelset weighed
> in at 1532g, so it's right there in the neighborhood of light wheels.  It's
> all-black and has low spoke count, so it will be the most eye-catching
> non-Rivendell look on the build.  That was the ironic vibe I was shooting
> for based on my DT240 conversation with Will.  The Riv employees will look
> at it and say "Ha! that's awesome".
>
> In my stable, I have another wheelset with the same HED Belgium+ rims,
> built on Dura Ace hubs and 32 silver spokes.  That wheel set can swap right
> in and will have a lot more typical Rivendell look.
>
> OK, moving on to Section 3, the drivetrain.  My drivetrain section is
> comprised of:
>
> 3. Drivetrain
> A. Crankset
> i. Crank Arms
> ii. Chainring(s)
> iii. Bolts (crank and chainring)
> B. Pedals
> C. Chain
> D. Bottom Bracket
> E. Rear Derailer
> F. Front Derailer
> G. Shifters
> H. Cables and housing
>
> Whether to include the cassette in the drivetrain or in the wheelset is a
> clerical consideration.  There can also be blurring of the categories if
> you insist on using integrated brake levers / shifters.  I "never" do that,
> so it's not a problem.
>
> Architecturally, the first lever I pull for a light weight build was/is
> the first trick I listed up in the frame set section: "Air is weightless".
> So I decided to do a 1x 8 drivetrain featuring a crankset that can be set
> up as a multi-chainring build later.  The lightest front detailer is no
> front detailer.  The lightest left shifter is no left shifter.  The
> lightest small chainring is no small chainring.  Cassettes with fewer cogs
> tend to be lighter, etc.
>
> I had planned on running what is, in my opinion, the nicest crankset out
> there: Rene Herse.  It's great, it is reliable, simple, minimalist.  It can
> be set up as a single/double/triple and it is gorgeous and very light.  It
> is also $450.  I had it in there as a place holder, but later decided to do
> some swapping in the stable.  My RoadUno build is not light with front and
> rear racks, a basket and three bags always attached.  Who cares about
> another 150g?  I swapped IN a Silver1 Crankset to my RoadUno and freed up a
> Silver3.  The bare Rene Herse arms have a claimed weight of 418g.  My
> Silver3 bare arms came in at 460g.  The universe paid me $450 to accept 42g
> of extra weight, and it will be cool to have a <9kg Rivendell CHG featuring
> Silver3 cranks.  The single ring will be a 38T Wolf Tooth 110mm BCD ring
> that I used my REI discount and rewards to pay for.  My kids like getting
> me bike bling for Christmas so I gave my son the URL for some nice Wolf
> Tooth aluminum chainring bolts and RAZR grips.
>
> For the Bottom Bracket, I picked up a titanium White Industries unit,
> used, on the list for a good price, from a local, bundled with a Choco
> handlebar, which is a great bar to have on-hand.  We'll see if the Choco
> bar gets used when we get to section 4 of the build.  The Ti BB (140g) uses
> the same bearings and cups as the Steel unit that Riv sells.  For Pedals I
> just grabbed the lightest pedals I already have in my stable: Ultegra-level
> Road SPDs (290g)
>
> The rear derailleur is a short cage (GS) Rapid-Rise XTR M950 (210g) that I
> removed from my Black Mountain Mons