Re: [RBW] Re: what would make the best..
On Jun 21, 1:02 am, andrew hill wrote: > Lighter rubber and/or lighter wheels on the Sam are an excellent place to > start. > And I appreciate the suggestion to enjoy the slowness. :) > > But it's not really an illusion - on a different bike (29er mtn bike with > 2.2" knobbys) i can do my 6 mile morning commute (in) in about 20 minutes if > I hit most of the lights. on the Sam, it's more like 30. for commuting I > could care less about the speed, but it's definitely different on the two > bikes, and not in the direction I'd expect. Y'know, I sat down and worked the math on that one, and I gotta say, that's a pretty huge difference for 6 miles. Maybe the MOE brings it closer together, but 10 minutes difference for that distance is a head-scratcher - especially since one of the bikes shouldn't really be all that fast on pavement (the 29er w/ knobbies). Maybe if you had a whole bunch of short blocks with stop signs/stop lights at each intersection... Or a bunch of short, sharp risers to climb. If you are _that_ much faster on the mtb, and you want to sharpen up the performance of the Sam, you might take a look at the position of your saddle relative to the bb, the relative height of the bars, and see if some concessions are to be made. Sometimes it takes a little more riding to be efficient - I know the first day when I switch over from Quickbeam to Hilsen, things feel a bit pokey. Honestly, I'd also take a good stem-to-stern look at things that move - the wheels, making sure they roll smoothly and aren't rubbing brake pads, make sure they aren't somehow binding when in the dropouts. Also, are you using a different computer on each bike? Or, are you timing via watch? Ok. 'nuff pondering. - J -- Jim Edgar [email protected] Cyclofiend Bicycle Photo Galleries - http://www.cyclofiend.com Current Classics - Cross Bikes Singlespeed - Working Bikes Gallery updates now appear here - http://cyclofiend.blogspot.com "'You both ride your bike?' He held his hands out and grabbed imaginary handlebars, grinning indulgently, eyeing Tom's helmet. Double disbeleif: not one, but two grown Americans riding bicycles." -- Neal Stephenson, "Zodiac" -- 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: what would make the best..
I ought also to add that I am repeatedly surprised (after riding, say, Jack Browns and even the Liteskin version of the Big Apples) how shock absorbing 23 mm Conti Grands Prix and 22 mm Speclialized Turbos are (the 190 gram one, very light and supple), and, note, these on small 26" wheels which are inherently rougher. Sure, 6" expansion gaps jar one, but rough pavement? Smooth! As good, I swear, as 559X32 Paselas. Perhaps I underinflate (90/100, I'm 170) or overinflate the others ...? On Mon, Jun 21, 2010 at 8:02 AM, PATRICK MOORE wrote: > >> On Sun, Jun 20, 2010 at 5:54 PM, Bill Gibson wrote: >> >>> >>> >>> the song of tubulars and high pressure skinny tires is a siren song. >>> >>> > From Dave Moulton. Emphasis added. Discuss. > > "If pros and top amateurs still race on tubulars it is because the *ride > quality and the more important, the performance is superior*. That is the > way I see it, because pro riders will normally ride whatever they are paid > to ride; all other things being equal. " > > And: > > "They are lightweight, some can be inflated up to 130 psi so there is very > little rolling resistance. At the same time b*ecause they are a complete > tube, they absorb the shocks of riding over very rough road surfaces*. > They are extremely responsive and this is why they are preferred for racing, > you make a sudden effort and the wheels and tires respond immediately." > > -- > Patrick Moore > Albuquerque, NM > For professional resumes, contact > Patrick Moore, ACRW at [email protected] > > > > > -- Patrick Moore Albuquerque, NM For professional resumes, contact Patrick Moore, ACRW at [email protected] -- 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: what would make the best..
> > > On Sun, Jun 20, 2010 at 5:54 PM, Bill Gibson wrote: > >> >> >> the song of tubulars and high pressure skinny tires is a siren song. >> >> >From Dave Moulton. Emphasis added. Discuss. "If pros and top amateurs still race on tubulars it is because the *ride quality and the more important, the performance is superior*. That is the way I see it, because pro riders will normally ride whatever they are paid to ride; all other things being equal. " And: "They are lightweight, some can be inflated up to 130 psi so there is very little rolling resistance. At the same time b*ecause they are a complete tube, they absorb the shocks of riding over very rough road surfaces*. They are extremely responsive and this is why they are preferred for racing, you make a sudden effort and the wheels and tires respond immediately." -- Patrick Moore Albuquerque, NM For professional resumes, contact Patrick Moore, ACRW at [email protected] -- 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: what would make the best..
My similar data-point: http://cyclotourist.blogspot.com/2010/05/bike-servations.html That was on a flat route though. On Sun, Jun 20, 2010 at 5:54 PM, Bill Gibson wrote: > Perception of speed is just that: subjective. Enjoy your ride! To go > fast, get a good night's sleep, eat & drink well, be well, don't wear > flappy clothes, find your fast tires (which may or may not the most > durable). In that order. > > The engine, the air, then tires. If it's hilly, OK, lose weight, but > on the open plain, don't worry. On rolling hills extra momentum might > even help. > > On rough roads, my ancient prejudice has recently been scientifically > confirmed: fatter, lower pressure tires may seem slower, but aren't; > the song of tubulars and high pressure skinny tires is a siren song. > > On Sun, Jun 20, 2010 at 3:02 PM, Angus wrote: > > Andrew, > > > > If it were me, changing the tires to a good quality lighter weight > > tire would be the first thing I would do. Panaracer Paselas (non- > > tourguard) roll reasonably well and relatively inexpensive. I've got > > 32s (measure 28-29) on the Rambouillet and 35s (measure 35) on the > > Quickbeam. Heavier/more durable tires on the Rambouillet were > > noticeably/measurably slower. > > > > Angus > > > > On Jun 13, 9:17 pm, andrew hill wrote: > >> hi folks, > >> > >> i loved riding my first century recently, on a Sam Hillborne, but it was > a pretty slow (though mostly comfortable) push. so the way i have it set up > it's excellent for city commuting and loaded touring / randonneuring, but > still think i want a gofast for club/training rides, built up with lighter > wheels/rubber, etc. > >> > >> the thing is - the expanded geometry of the Sam fits my build (and that > of a few other odd ducks who have recently posted) at 5'11 with an 84.5 pbh, > rounding up. > >> > >> so - of the current frames new or in circulation, what lightish, > expandedish frame should i be looking for for? should i simply try another > Sam? maybe a size down with a longer stem? :) > >> > >> just musing - but i figured y'all would have some opinions. > >> > >> thanks, > >> andrew > > > > -- > > 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. > > > > > > > > -- > Bill Gibson > Tempe, Arizona, USA > > -- > 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. > > -- Cheers, David Redlands, CA "Bicycling is a big part of the future. It has to be. There is something wrong with a society that drives a car to workout in a gym." ~Bill Nye, scientist guy -- 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: what would make the best..
Thanks for all the suggestions folks. Lighter rubber and/or lighter wheels on the Sam are an excellent place to start. And I appreciate the suggestion to enjoy the slowness. :) But it's not really an illusion - on a different bike (29er mtn bike with 2.2" knobbys) i can do my 6 mile morning commute (in) in about 20 minutes if I hit most of the lights. on the Sam, it's more like 30. for commuting I could care less about the speed, but it's definitely different on the two bikes, and not in the direction I'd expect. For a 100 mile push though.. I do care if it's 6 hours or 8, on the bike. I'll try lighter rubber and figure out a 30 mile training course or something and see how it feels. But I do think an expanded geo SimpleOne, ur-Amos, etc., is in my future. Best, Andrew On Jun 20, 2010, at 5:54 PM, Bill Gibson wrote: > Perception of speed is just that: subjective. Enjoy your ride! To go > fast, get a good night's sleep, eat & drink well, be well, don't wear > flappy clothes, find your fast tires (which may or may not the most > durable). In that order. > > The engine, the air, then tires. If it's hilly, OK, lose weight, but > on the open plain, don't worry. On rolling hills extra momentum might > even help. > > On rough roads, my ancient prejudice has recently been scientifically > confirmed: fatter, lower pressure tires may seem slower, but aren't; > the song of tubulars and high pressure skinny tires is a siren song. > > On Sun, Jun 20, 2010 at 3:02 PM, Angus wrote: >> Andrew, >> >> If it were me, changing the tires to a good quality lighter weight >> tire would be the first thing I would do. Panaracer Paselas (non- >> tourguard) roll reasonably well and relatively inexpensive. I've got >> 32s (measure 28-29) on the Rambouillet and 35s (measure 35) on the >> Quickbeam. Heavier/more durable tires on the Rambouillet were >> noticeably/measurably slower. >> >> Angus >> >> On Jun 13, 9:17 pm, andrew hill wrote: >>> hi folks, >>> >>> i loved riding my first century recently, on a Sam Hillborne, but it was a >>> pretty slow (though mostly comfortable) push. so the way i have it set up >>> it's excellent for city commuting and loaded touring / randonneuring, but >>> still think i want a gofast for club/training rides, built up with lighter >>> wheels/rubber, etc. >>> >>> the thing is - the expanded geometry of the Sam fits my build (and that of >>> a few other odd ducks who have recently posted) at 5'11 with an 84.5 pbh, >>> rounding up. >>> >>> so - of the current frames new or in circulation, what lightish, >>> expandedish frame should i be looking for for? should i simply try another >>> Sam? maybe a size down with a longer stem? :) >>> >>> just musing - but i figured y'all would have some opinions. >>> >>> thanks, >>> andrew >> >> -- >> 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. >> >> > > > > -- > Bill Gibson > Tempe, Arizona, USA > > -- > 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. > -- 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: what would make the best..
Perception of speed is just that: subjective. Enjoy your ride! To go fast, get a good night's sleep, eat & drink well, be well, don't wear flappy clothes, find your fast tires (which may or may not the most durable). In that order. The engine, the air, then tires. If it's hilly, OK, lose weight, but on the open plain, don't worry. On rolling hills extra momentum might even help. On rough roads, my ancient prejudice has recently been scientifically confirmed: fatter, lower pressure tires may seem slower, but aren't; the song of tubulars and high pressure skinny tires is a siren song. On Sun, Jun 20, 2010 at 3:02 PM, Angus wrote: > Andrew, > > If it were me, changing the tires to a good quality lighter weight > tire would be the first thing I would do. Panaracer Paselas (non- > tourguard) roll reasonably well and relatively inexpensive. I've got > 32s (measure 28-29) on the Rambouillet and 35s (measure 35) on the > Quickbeam. Heavier/more durable tires on the Rambouillet were > noticeably/measurably slower. > > Angus > > On Jun 13, 9:17 pm, andrew hill wrote: >> hi folks, >> >> i loved riding my first century recently, on a Sam Hillborne, but it was a >> pretty slow (though mostly comfortable) push. so the way i have it set up >> it's excellent for city commuting and loaded touring / randonneuring, but >> still think i want a gofast for club/training rides, built up with lighter >> wheels/rubber, etc. >> >> the thing is - the expanded geometry of the Sam fits my build (and that of a >> few other odd ducks who have recently posted) at 5'11 with an 84.5 pbh, >> rounding up. >> >> so - of the current frames new or in circulation, what lightish, expandedish >> frame should i be looking for for? should i simply try another Sam? maybe >> a size down with a longer stem? :) >> >> just musing - but i figured y'all would have some opinions. >> >> thanks, >> andrew > > -- > 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. > > -- Bill Gibson Tempe, Arizona, USA -- 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: what would make the best..
On Mon, 2010-06-14 at 20:30 -0700, Jim Thill - Hiawatha Cyclery wrote: > But now that you mentioned > it, maybe Jan Heine can repeat his tire rolling resistance tests, > except to test the effect of different numbers and lacing patterns of > spokes. Wouldn't a drum test work even better? -- 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: what would make the best..
A pound per wheel... wow! On Mon, Jun 14, 2010 at 9:17 PM, Jim Thill - Hiawatha Cyclery < [email protected]> wrote: > We use UL 26x2.4-2.7 tubes in Surly Endomorph/Larry 26x3.7 tires. > Saves about a pound per wheel over the standard tube. Haven't had one > of these flat yet. > > On Jun 14, 11:01 pm, cyclotourist wrote: > > FWIW, my buddy uses 26" tubes in his 29er wheels. They're lighter than > 29er > > UL tubes (and half the cost) as well as the tubeless fluids/strips. He's > > pretty happy with his set up, and doesn't puncture very often. He says > it's > > not a hassle to mount them, but YMMV. > > > > On Mon, Jun 14, 2010 at 8:30 PM, Jim Thill - Hiawatha Cyclery < > > > > > > > > [email protected]> wrote: > > > I don't want to get into a 2nd hand argument with Eric Hjertberg about > > > aerodynamics of spokes, but I would suggest that the OP is riding a > > > Hillborne (not the usual choice for the TT crowd) and that he just did > > > his first century with relatively large, heavy touring tires. I'm sure > > > there are at least a dozen things he could do to refine his technique > > > or free/cheap ways to make his bike faster that would have more effect > > > than cutting the aero drag of a few spokes. But now that you mentioned > > > it, maybe Jan Heine can repeat his tire rolling resistance tests, > > > except to test the effect of different numbers and lacing patterns of > > > spokes. I have an academic background in fluid mechanics for whatever > > > that's worth (not much), and based on no data, I believe the > > > aerodynamic effect of a few spokes is negligible. But I've been wrong > > > before. > > > > > I don't believe ultralight tubes get punctured more often. If > > > something sharp goes through the tire, it'll most likely poke a hole > > > in any tube, regardless of whether that tube is ultralight or normal > > > thickness. I've been using UL tubes for a couple years, with no > > > noticeable increase in my flat-rate. Nothing fancy, just Kenda or QBP- > > > brand lightweight tubes. Curiously, probably because a lot of people > > > are leery of lightweight tubes, I often find them cheaper than regular > > > tubes. > > > > > On Jun 14, 9:05 pm, "XO-1.org Rough Riders" > > > wrote: > > > > Eric Hjertberg, who knows more about wheels than the rest of the > > > > planet combined, told me that the combined frontal area of 36 spokes > > > > is more than the bicycle frame itself, plus the spokes are spinning > > > > through the air as the bike moves forward, further adding drag to our > > > > forward movement. Thus, "the point" of having less spokes is about > > > > aerodynamics, NOT weight. > > > > > > As for ultralight tubes, any time saved because they are lighter and > > > > offer less rolling resistance is probably negligible, especially when > > > > compared to the time lost to the higher frequency of punctures they > > > > will provide. > > > > > > - Chris Kostman > > > > La Jolla, CAhttp://www.XO-1.orghttp://www.adventurecorps.com > > > > > > On Jun 14, 6:39 pm, Jim Thill - Hiawatha Cyclery < > [email protected]> > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > The spoke count matters very little compared to the weight of the > tire/ > > > > > tube/rim combination. You can save a bunch of rolling weight and > > > > > probably improve rolling resistance, for example, simply by > switching > > > > > to an ultralight tube (I almost always use ultralight tubes). You > save > > > > > even more rolling weight by switching to any of the 200-250-ish > gram > > > > > 25-28 mm tires on the market. If you go with new wheels, I second > an > > > > > earlier recommendation of the Velocity Aerohead. Lacing radial in > the > > > > > front and half-radial in the back probably saves as much spoke > weight > > > > > as going to an exotically low number of spokes (exotic in the sense > > > > > that there aren't many economical 24h hubs). You could even splurge > on > > > > > DT Revolution butted spokes if you wanna go crazy. Buying expensive > > > > > lightweight hubs and cassettes will give you considerably less bang > > > > > for your buck. > > > > > > > Also: Consider ways to improve aerodynamics, reduce the number and > > > > > duration of stops, work on eating/drinking on the bike without > > > > > stopping, etc. > > > > > > > Or, my favorite solution: reject the dominant racing paradigm and > > > > > embrace your slowness! > > > > > > > On Jun 14, 12:39 am, andrew hill wrote: > > > > > > > > thanks guys - good suggestion. > > > > > > > > i'm using Mavic rims with 36h XT hubs front and rear, with 40mm > > > Schwalbe Mara Supremems. > > > > > > a lighter 32h wheelest/tires for event rides is an extremely good > > > idea. and then i'd have one for a road-ey bike if i wanted to go more > > > dedicated :) > > > > > > > > best, > > > > > > andrew > > > > > -- > > > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google > Groups > > > "RBW Owners Bunch" group. > > > To post to this group, send email t
Re: [RBW] Re: what would make the best..
Now that you mention Jan Heine, today I received my BQ for the summer of 2010 and in it, there is a very interesting article and discussion regarding whether modern bicycles are actually faster than older ones based on an analysis of Tour de France speed. I haven't read it yet, just finished browsing the magazine, but so far it seems to be one of those pieces that will give some people a lot of debate hours... :-) I won't spoil the article for those who will want to read it, but as always, it makes for a very interesting read and analysis. Now that I can no longer relate to the commercial magazines like Bicycling, RBA, etc., getting BQ and/or a Riv Reader are festive occasions. René -- 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: what would make the best..
FWIW, my buddy uses 26" tubes in his 29er wheels. They're lighter than 29er UL tubes (and half the cost) as well as the tubeless fluids/strips. He's pretty happy with his set up, and doesn't puncture very often. He says it's not a hassle to mount them, but YMMV. On Mon, Jun 14, 2010 at 8:30 PM, Jim Thill - Hiawatha Cyclery < [email protected]> wrote: > I don't want to get into a 2nd hand argument with Eric Hjertberg about > aerodynamics of spokes, but I would suggest that the OP is riding a > Hillborne (not the usual choice for the TT crowd) and that he just did > his first century with relatively large, heavy touring tires. I'm sure > there are at least a dozen things he could do to refine his technique > or free/cheap ways to make his bike faster that would have more effect > than cutting the aero drag of a few spokes. But now that you mentioned > it, maybe Jan Heine can repeat his tire rolling resistance tests, > except to test the effect of different numbers and lacing patterns of > spokes. I have an academic background in fluid mechanics for whatever > that's worth (not much), and based on no data, I believe the > aerodynamic effect of a few spokes is negligible. But I've been wrong > before. > > I don't believe ultralight tubes get punctured more often. If > something sharp goes through the tire, it'll most likely poke a hole > in any tube, regardless of whether that tube is ultralight or normal > thickness. I've been using UL tubes for a couple years, with no > noticeable increase in my flat-rate. Nothing fancy, just Kenda or QBP- > brand lightweight tubes. Curiously, probably because a lot of people > are leery of lightweight tubes, I often find them cheaper than regular > tubes. > > On Jun 14, 9:05 pm, "XO-1.org Rough Riders" > wrote: > > Eric Hjertberg, who knows more about wheels than the rest of the > > planet combined, told me that the combined frontal area of 36 spokes > > is more than the bicycle frame itself, plus the spokes are spinning > > through the air as the bike moves forward, further adding drag to our > > forward movement. Thus, "the point" of having less spokes is about > > aerodynamics, NOT weight. > > > > As for ultralight tubes, any time saved because they are lighter and > > offer less rolling resistance is probably negligible, especially when > > compared to the time lost to the higher frequency of punctures they > > will provide. > > > > - Chris Kostman > > La Jolla, CAhttp://www.XO-1.orghttp://www.adventurecorps.com > > > > On Jun 14, 6:39 pm, Jim Thill - Hiawatha Cyclery > > wrote: > > > > > The spoke count matters very little compared to the weight of the tire/ > > > tube/rim combination. You can save a bunch of rolling weight and > > > probably improve rolling resistance, for example, simply by switching > > > to an ultralight tube (I almost always use ultralight tubes). You save > > > even more rolling weight by switching to any of the 200-250-ish gram > > > 25-28 mm tires on the market. If you go with new wheels, I second an > > > earlier recommendation of the Velocity Aerohead. Lacing radial in the > > > front and half-radial in the back probably saves as much spoke weight > > > as going to an exotically low number of spokes (exotic in the sense > > > that there aren't many economical 24h hubs). You could even splurge on > > > DT Revolution butted spokes if you wanna go crazy. Buying expensive > > > lightweight hubs and cassettes will give you considerably less bang > > > for your buck. > > > > > Also: Consider ways to improve aerodynamics, reduce the number and > > > duration of stops, work on eating/drinking on the bike without > > > stopping, etc. > > > > > Or, my favorite solution: reject the dominant racing paradigm and > > > embrace your slowness! > > > > > On Jun 14, 12:39 am, andrew hill wrote: > > > > > > thanks guys - good suggestion. > > > > > > i'm using Mavic rims with 36h XT hubs front and rear, with 40mm > Schwalbe Mara Supremems. > > > > a lighter 32h wheelest/tires for event rides is an extremely good > idea. and then i'd have one for a road-ey bike if i wanted to go more > dedicated :) > > > > > > best, > > > > andrew > > -- > 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. > > -- Cheers, David Redlands, CA "Bicycling is a big part of the future. It has to be. There is something wrong with a society that drives a car to workout in a gym." ~Bill Nye, scientist guy -- 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 rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@g
Re: [RBW] Re: what would make the best..
ah.. i had forgotten the not-Amos. that or a SimpleOne will prob be my next, then.. thanks! andrew On Jun 14, 2010, at 11:37 AM, Jeremy Till wrote: > Don't forget the upcoming Rivendell/Soma collaboration (Amos?)- > basically a road bike for 57mm calipers (like Ram, Rom, and Roadeo) > with the expanded geos. Sounds like exactly what you're looking for. > -- 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: what would make the best..
thanks guys - good suggestion. i'm using Mavic rims with 36h XT hubs front and rear, with 40mm Schwalbe Mara Supremems. a lighter 32h wheelest/tires for event rides is an extremely good idea. and then i'd have one for a road-ey bike if i wanted to go more dedicated :) best, andrew -- 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.
