Keith, Thanks for the interesting facts you bring up. They are all true and useful, including that there have been a lot of people who have reported front dérailleur systems as problematic.
However, my own experience is that front dérailleur triple systems have never caused me any problems so I've never passed up on the low gear they offer. 24/36 is still noticeably lower than 34/42. I've been mildly disturbed that multiple regions of the bike world (from mountain racers to Rivendell) have been downplaying the usefulness of the front derailleur. There, I've just jinxed myself right before today's ride with my claim of trouble-free front shifting. (Qualifier: Chainstay gouges due to chain suck have never bothered me.) -Jim W. Sent from my iPhone On Oct 11, 2014, at 11:45 AM, iamkeith <keithhar...@gmail.com> wrote: > Jim, > > I totally hear where you're coming from with the need for lower gears, and I > agree with the comments about fitting the fattest possible tires. Where I > live, in the rural Rocky Mountains, it's a given that I'd want quite a bit > smaller chainring and at least somewhat knobby tread. But I think I disagree > with the idea that this will be mountain-ish. I'm seeing it more as a > "cruiser," which is why I'm so excited about it. > > I don't think it's intended to replace a hunquapillar or bombadil, for > someone who wants a truly capable off-road machine, as much as it is to offer > something completely different. I think this fact, more than the price > point, might be the real genius of this bike. Maybe I'm alone here, but I > often comment about how most or all of the models in Rivendell's current > lineup have too much overlap with the models I already own, and therefore > could never really justify buying one. But a grab-and-go towny, cruiser bike > is something I've really been wanting and actively looking for. I'd > actually been seriously considering this one lately, which I see as more of a > direct comparison to the Clem: > > http://www.konaworld.com/humuhumu.cfm > > It isn't a "bad" choice, but it pales in comparison to the Clem. The disc > brakes, minimal tire clearance, inset headset and, mostly, the lack of at > least a few gears, are total design failures to me. > > Regarding gears: also remember that you can readily find cassettes or add-on > cogs all the way up to 42 teeth these days. That ought to give modifiers > and tinkerers the option to add the range they need before a front derailleur > - with all of it's inherent flaws - even becomes necessary. So I think that > for every person who wanted a front derailleur, there's going to be at least > one who didn't want it. The first group has to resort to clamp-on cable > guides, but the second would have to look at un-used brazeons. Neither > option is perfectly "clean." I am curious to see what they're doing for a > front chainkeeper though. If the goal is to eliminate all superfluous parts > or to use the cheapest possible option, it seems like a cheap front > derailleur might actually be as effective as anything. > > On Saturday, October 11, 2014 11:09:50 AM UTC-6, James Warren wrote: > > There are indications that this bike is going to be mountain-ish. If so, I > really think it needs to have the capability for a true granny gear, 24T, > that you can shift from the handlebar. It doesn't have to COME stock with > these features; it just needs to give the buyer the option of adding them. If > I were to buy the stock model, and it didn't come with front gear-changing, I > wouldn't mind doing the modification myself after I bought the bike. However, > I think it would be a mistake if they offered it as a potential trail bike > whose frame features restricted you from putting on a front derailleur > mechanism. If it is to serve as a trail bike, it should have downtube cable > stops for both front and rear and a cable-runner under the bottom bracket for > both front and rear. > > Since I don't know what the Clem Jr. will be yet, I am not criticizing it. > I'm just speaking hypothetically about any bike: if I'm doing fun dirt-riding > that is likely to have some challenging dirt climbing, my enjoyment will be > hindered if I have to keep dismounting to shift to the small ring. I don't > think I'll ever get to where 40/36 will be low enough for many of the trails > I love climbing in Southern and Northern California. > > -Jim W. > > > > > > > > > > -- > 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. -- 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.
