On 09/24/2014 05:01 PM, Jim Thill - Hiawatha Cyclery wrote:
I'm talking about replacing the stock for on a LHT with the same exact
fork with a longer steerer, if aging or injury (or whatever) makes it
desirable to have higher bars. Upgrading to a more magical fork is
another matter. Robert Pirsig had a famous book about a guy who drove
himself insane trying to define "quality", so I won't try to argue
whether or not a Surly fork is of the same quality as a Nitto stem.
But you certainly wouldn't argue that a Surly fork is the same quality
as a Jeff Lyon fork, would you?
Interesting point about disposability. To an extent, you are right.
This doesn't mean you're likely to wear out your LHT anytime soon, but
let's say you wreck it somehow. No problem, for $400ish, you can get
another one just like it tomorrow. For more precious frames, like your
Longstaff or most Rivs, replacement will be more costly in terms of
time and money.
If even possible. In the case of the Longstaff, impossible, since he
passed away in 2003.
On the other hand, there's a lot to be said for using a disposable tool
on a mission that is apt to be potentially hazardous or at a minimum is
likely to lead to rough handling, and touring can certainly be that.
I'd rather use my Kogswell P/R for touring than my MAP Randonneur, even
though Mitch Pryor does make a lovely add-on low-rider rack that mounts
to the front bag support for the current generation of Randonneur
Project bikes.
On Wednesday, September 24, 2014 3:51:33 PM UTC-5, Steve Palincsar wrote:
On 09/24/2014 04:36 PM, Jim Thill - Hiawatha Cyclery wrote:
> For a lot of us, the ideal of a lifetime bike isn't realistic.
Tastes
> often change faster than our bodies do. Anyway, I would point
out that
> a new Surly fork with uncut steerer isn't much more costly than a
> Nitto quill stem. If you don't cut it too short at the beginning,
> which a lot of people do (and regret), then there shouldn't be an
> issue for many years.
>
And a new fork of comparable quality to a Nitto stem will cost
over six
times as much, about as much as a new frame of comparable (or even
superior) quality to the Surly frame, based on what we learned in the
discussion of the Lyon forks. Basically, I interpret all this as
saying
frames made for threadless forks should be considered disposable.
And
I'm sure there are plenty of production frames out there that
legitimately could be considered disposable tools. Certainly the LHT
qualifies. But I don't consider a frame like my Longstaff a
disposable
tool.
--
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
<mailto:rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com>.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com
<mailto:rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com>.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
--
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 post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
