On Thursday, October 26, 2017 at 4:21:24 PM UTC-7, Bill Lindsay wrote: > > I can't tell if this question is honest curiosity or the beginning of a > semantic debate. I hope it's the former, because semantic debates are > super boring. >
Honest curiosity. There has been a LOT of bicycle design in the last 160 years, and it's a pretty bold claim to state that every design that Grant has made is something bold and unique. I see Riv pushing at the edges (tire gigantism, long chainstays & an almost religious faith in the benefits of upright seating) but even models that I thought were pretty unique (the Rosco Bubbe) have predecessors (in the case of the mtb RB, my first half frame was based off a Trek 820 from '91(ish) that has almost exactly -- the HT is much shorter on the 820, and the rear triangle is a cm or so shorter -- the same geometry as the RB that was briefly in my hands) in the field. The lugs are really distinctive (I wish that I'd stocked up on them when Riv was still selling grabbag lugs from discontinued models!) and Grant has an eye for matching lugs to frames to paint that I've not seen elsewhere (and this is nothing to complain about. If I were buying expensive frames -- and if Riv didn't have their religious faith in upright seating -- I'd rather buy a pretty and marginally heavier Riv instead of a carbon fiber frame.) -- 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 [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
