On Wed, 2010-05-05 at 14:22 -0700, William wrote: > The 2TT has almost nothing to do with strength and almost everything > to do with stiffness under cargo load. > > A campeur didn't get extra tubes because Randonneurs were breaking > their frames: > > http://www.flickr.com/photos/bicigirl/4037516334/
Yes, but the bike shown in that photo does not have two top tubes. It has diagonal stays. I'm not sure I've ever seen a photo of a campeur with two top tubes. > A stiffer frame just responds to load better. If a double top tube was needed to make a heavy duty camping bike, I'm pretty sure Bruce Gordon and Bilenky would be using them on their camping (i.e., loaded touring) bikes. The only double top tubes I can recall (other than these new Rivendells) are roadsters and newsboy bikes, and in the case of the newsboy bikes I think the double top tube existed chiefly to provide something to attach the "tanks" to. > My 56 Hillborne is > really floppy when my saddlesack Large is stuffed and I'm out of the > saddle. The whole frame twists from that rocking load. Maybe you ought to get some kind of saddle bag support or rack to attach that flopping bag to. > If you never > load the Sam with cargo, you'll likely never notice and never need > it. A flopping saddle bag isn't at all the same thing as well secured panniers attached to a sturdy rear rack. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group. To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bu...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=en.
