Hi Patrick, on the rear load thing - that stability is in the main triangle. People sought out old Raleigh Grand Prix to build touring bikes because of the straight-gauge 10-20 tubes and rigid main triangle. In comparison, my International frame has too much flex in the main triangle to carry a rear load, but it's a wonderful ride and climber. Regards
On Thursday, January 11, 2024 at 4:34:47 PM UTC-6 Patrick Moore wrote: > Oh, one more tangentially related remark: The best bikers I've owned for > rear load carrying have had light and flexy frames; most notably the 1973 > Motobecane Grand Record whose frame felt so light compared to that 2003 Riv > Curt custom and was noticeably more flexible. The flexy-flyer early -ed > Raleigh Technium sports tourer also carried rear loads very well, better > than the current 2020 Matthews; and the current .8 .4 .8 normal gauge 531 > 2020 Matthews, if not the best load carrier, does as well as the over-stiff > 2003 Curt and the 2nd gen Rambouillet; Tubus Flys, tho' the 2003 later had > a Matthews custom rack and the 2020's Fly was modified in by Bilenky to, > among other things, to sit lower over the shorter, 26" wheel. > > On Thu, Jan 11, 2024 at 3:29 PM Patrick Moore <bert...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> I'm sure weight makes a difference; I'm not convinced it makes all the >> difference since I've had at least a couple of bikes that consistently felt >> "faster" despite weighing 10 or 12+ lbs more than the 1999. I expect as >> others have said that it is a happy coincidence of weight, flex, tires, >> fit, and position. >> >> The 2 Matthews -- fat tire road bike for dirt, 26" wheel road bike for >> errands -- actually have, I think, thinner tubing and lighter frames, >> proportions preserved, than the 1999. The 2020 Matthews errand bike frame >> was deliberately built with lighter, more flexible tubes than the 2003 Riv >> Goodrich custom which cloned the 1999, and indeed, with Elk Passes, I began >> to think that it might even be faster than the 1999 despite it's 8 or 10 lb >> greater weight. It feels fast with the el NPs but no longer a competitor to >> the 1999. The 622 fat tire Matthews felt almost as fast with the Big Ones >> (and only slightly slower again with the Somas, preferred for their >> pavement handling) and despite a 12 or 13 lb weight difference, but part of >> that may have been the "feel" of longer 175 mm cranks, tho this too had >> thinwall (OS) tubing. >> >> But again: the 1958 Herse felt (consistently over 18 or 24 months) 1 cog >> faster than "usual" despite thick-wall tubes that caused 2 other owners to >> pass it on cheap, heavy weight (forget, but it must have been at least 28 >> lb if not more with racks), and ho-hum 32 mm Paselas. Tho' the thick-wall >> tubing was normal gauge. >> >> Again, all of these and my other bikes have been set up for largely the >> same riding position. >> >> Too look at the question from the reverse -- What made a bike feel so >> slow and awkward? -- the Monocog is a good instance, tho' it's current and >> improved "feel" is merely "nice" and not superlative. When I got it, with >> stiff, heavily knobbed and IIRC wire bead tires, OEM wide (2012) bar, and >> 172 mm Q crank, it just felt penitential to ride, on dirt and certainly on >> pavement. Supple (relatively) WTB Rangers, 156 mm Q crank, close-in 44 cm >> (hoods) drop bar with no ramps, tiny-reach upjutter stem (7 cm along >> extension, 30 or 35* rise), now it's actually fun to ride. What hasn't >> changed is the girder-stiff tubing. >> >> On Tue, Jan 9, 2024 at 1:22 PM 'John Hawrylak, Woodstown NJ' via RBW >> Owners Bunch <rbw-owne...@googlegroups.com> wrote: >> >>> Bill L questioned the 12# weight difference. >>> >>> I sort of missed the 12#, mainly since Bike D was stated to 'feel fast' >>> and I assumed B & C would use heavier tubing due to the 73 to 75# load >>> requirement and A must be thick gauge tubing given the 30# weight (Schwinns >>> in the 1980"s used 1010 18 gauge tubing in lugged frames and quoted 30 to >>> 32# weights). >>> >>> I admit D should be about 1 mph faster than the A, B C due to the 11 to >>> 13# weight difference (basis R Schwinn stated Schwinn tests showed 12# >>> change in frame resulted in a 1 mph change with same effort). I focused >>> on the 'feel fast' vs 'tested and shown faster'. >>> >> > > -- > > Patrick Moore > Alburquerque, Nuevo Mexico, Etats Unis d'Amerique, Orbis Terrarum > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Executive resumes, LinkedIn profiles, bios, letters, and other writing > services > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > *When thou didst not, savage, k**now thine own meaning,* > > *But wouldst gabble like a** thing most brutish,* > > *I endowed thy purposes w**ith words that made them known.* > -- 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 view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/rbw-owners-bunch/718812b3-f6c0-4cb3-aada-7a9beac5fed2n%40googlegroups.com.
