The picks make me wanna swap out the tires on my Atlantis and mount the rear rack a bit higher.
Anything that brings more Atlantii into the world is a good thing. On Monday, March 26, 2018 at 1:09:21 PM UTC-4, Grant @ Rivendell wrote: > > Just so latecomers know what this is about: > The new Atlantis is everybit as well made as the old one and sells for a > thousand less. The design has evolved, not to sling mud at the old one--a > great bike, yes, I think--but because we've ridden bikes with longer > chainstays and come to prefer them on smooth flat and rough steep, up or > down. It's not a landslide difference, but it is noticeable. It seems > unlikely that a noticeable improvement in the rough would come at the cost > of a good ride in town, but in fact (opinion), they're both improved. A > limo in town, a long surfboard in the oceans.. > Many of the fears or concerns raised are (unavoidably) what I think of as > "intellectual-theoretical" concerns that get magnified and solidified with > repetition: The bike will be sluggish, it will lack zip, something like > that. In my experience (reinforced by others who've ridden it), that's not > the case. When I ride the new 56 (the sample of which has chainstays 1cm > longer than the production will), to me it feels as "quick" as a bike ought > to feel under any circumstances. > The Atlantis in any form is a dear, dear bike to me. I still have the > first prototype. I've ridden every iteration. I'm quite familiar with it. > I'm 63 now--which I don't consider to be old at all, but it's sounding that > way. I think what I want to say is that I don't ride any differently now, I > don't ride different terrain, I am "not going gentle.." or anything. That's > not a matter of pride, just a matter of fact. In other words, I am not > taking the "classic Atla" and turning it into an old man's bike. > I wish everybody here with doubts or who is bummed by the new Atlantis > could actually ride it. Not measure and form conclusions based on the math; > not see the gap and hate it from the get-go. Not let long-held > troublemaking aesthetic-proportional dogma get in the way. > > DOWNHILL, how can a longer rear end not be better? UPHILL, the same--less > wheelie tendency, better weight distribution. Yesterday's ride (shown here) > was up and down steep stuff, had some slop from recent rains, and had tons > of normal riding, too. > > Ultimately change is always met with controversy and criticism, and that's > just life and it's not bad and I LOVE the fact that everybody LOVES the > "old" Atlantis. And the old Atlantis is still available. It costs more, but > it's there. > > Anyway, thanks to all. What a fun thing! Longer's not wronger! Both are > still available! > > B, > > Grant > > > > On Wednesday, March 21, 2018 at 4:50:02 PM UTC-7, dougP wrote: >> >> This extensive discussion of chainstay length got me to thinking: how >> much difference are we really talking? Or is the big gap in the photo just >> freaking people out? So I dug out my old Atlantis flyer from before I >> bought mine in '03. Here's some chainstay length figures from the original >> design (I presume) and from current web posting: >> >> early 2000s: >> >> 56 cm (26" wheels): 44 cm >> 58 cm (700c) : 45.5 cm >> >> current (May 2017 chart) >> >> 56 cm (650B) : 47.5 cm >> 56 cm (26") 46 cm >> 58 cm (700c) 47 cm >> >> Over time, the chainstays have grown somewhat but nothing radical. Of >> course, the large gap and Riv's general evolution to longer chainstays >> suggests something even longer, but until geo charts are published, we can >> only speculate. >> >> To put the extra length into perspective, I measured the wheelbase of my >> 58 cm / 700c bike at +/-107 cm. From original to current, the 58 cm >> chainstays have grown 1.5 cm, extending the wheelbase approx 1.4%. Going >> out on a limb here but I'll guess that's an extremely subtle change, at >> best. >> >> Now of course the next question is how the further extension of >> chainstays on the MIT version will impact ride, handling, etc. The >> announcement says "....made it better here and there...." and Grant's use >> of the term "...penny...." on various measurements suggests pretty subtle >> and incremental changes. Likely they've learned a lot from their trend >> toward longer wheelbases as they've been at it for a few years now. >> Remember the Mystery Bike project? And now the production bikes designed >> as LWB models? The Atlantis is such an icon that my guess is they were >> pretty darn conservative and didn't do anything that have comprised the >> performance. >> >> You gotta trust somebody. I'll bet on Grant & the elves of Walnut Creek. >> >> dougP >> >> On Monday, March 19, 2018 at 3:10:48 PM UTC-7, Bill Lindsay wrote: >>> >>> The BLUG today announced an upcoming pre-sale for a less expensive >>> Atlantis. No doubt they will be made in Taiwan. The pricing hint is "a >>> tad more than an Appaloosa". Is it good that Rivendell is evolving? I say >>> yes. Is it a little sad that the Atlantis is changing? I say sure, a >>> little. I'd bet a dollar that some of their recent cashflow worries came >>> from the financials around this change. Made to order frames are expensive >>> but cost you nothing until somebody wants to buy one. Taiwan builds have >>> to be done in expensive pre-paid runs, which require a bunch of cash on >>> hand. >>> >>> The curved double TT of the biggest size was on instagram I think. >>> >>> Bill Lindsay >>> El Cerrito, CA >>> >> -- 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 https://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
