I am reminded of a story about Richard Sachs. Early in his career, he made a frame for a pro rider. The pro rider had very specific design requests that Sachs strongly disagreed with, but he made the frame anyway, because he thought that was the job. Of course, the bike rode badly and the rider was unhappy. Sachs decided from that point on that he would no longer make custom frames, he would make *bespoke* frames -- tailored to the rider's anatomy, but with a design he could stand behind.
Maybe the no level top tube is a similar issue and Grant has a strong belief in sloped TT's. Maybe a level TT should be no big deal -- I like them -- but if you find yourself disagreeing with a frame designer on geometry, maybe he's just not the frame designer for you. At the end of the day, it's Grant's company's name on the bike and I assume he wants to feel 100% good about everything that goes out the door. On Sunday, January 26, 2020 at 7:59:22 PM UTC-8, Joe Bernard wrote: > > "Odd: Didn't Grant way back in the day vocally hold out for level-top > tube, fistful of seapost design? I think I do recall that. Not that I care; > my 2 remaining rivs have a 3* or so slope." > > Yes on a fistful of post so you could ride a level-ish toptube frame big > enough to get the bars up, no on dead flat. Every Riv ever produced has at > least a modicum of rise from seattube to headtube and I'm not surprised > Grant wasn't going to be talked out of it. But I also doubt the story was > as simple as that request... > -- 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 view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/rbw-owners-bunch/08c16656-2c57-4368-a13c-a9e86b3c279c%40googlegroups.com.
