I am a big fan of the long chainstays, having had them on two Gus Boots-Willsens – a first-generation blue one that was lost to an idiot driver a few months into my time with it, and now a Mermaid one from the newer batch. It sounds like maybe you don't approve of the long-stay design, and I'm not sure whether you've ridden one, but I would recommend finding one to try out if you haven't. Maybe some of your very many question marks will be turned into exclamation points.
My Gus rides more smoothly over bumpy surfaces than any other non-suspension bike I have ridden, and as a tall rider (6'4"), I appreciate the feeling of fore-aft stability that comes from being more in the middle of the bike rather than on top of the rear wheel. It also displays superb handling on snow and ice, which I attribute to the more even weight distribution as well as the overall length. And for more technical trails with steep climbing and descending, the long wheelbase feels like cheating: I can easily spin my way up grades that have my friends on mainstream mountain bikes falling over backwards. The floating sensation that occurs when descending fire roads is indescribable – it reminds me of cruising down the highway in an ancient first-generation New Flyer low floor bus that I had the pleasure of driving for my job for a little while. To answer your question more specifically, I think the problem the long-stay Rivs solve is that there were no bikes that have that distinctive ride quality, and now there are. Maybe you have to have experienced it to appreciate it. I was skeptical before I bought my first Gus, but I trusted Rivendell to build a good bike, and I'm very glad I went for it. I will also hypothesize that the mainstream mountain bike world will "discover" long chainstays in three or four more years after they see a few more people like me easily clean steep climbs where their shred sleds are ineffective wheelie machines. Josiah Anderson Missoula, MT Le dim. 31 mars 2024 à 11:50, 'John Hawrylak, Woodstown NJ' via RBW Owners Bunch <rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com> a écrit : > Enjoyed reading the thread "Anyone else not a fan of long chainstays?", > especially Bill L's explanation of the RBW bike design philosophy. Seems > the prevailing thought is long stays are better for > upright riding > single track type trails (vs a Rails to Trails type trail) > > I'll just note 2 'facts' > 1 The vast majority of RBW models (except the Roadeo type frame) use > slack STA and HTA which may contribute to the ride effect when coupled with > long stays. > 2. In the beginning RBW addressed getting the bars higher and adopting a > non-racer riding style (back at 45° with hands on hoods), which IMHO were > solutions to actual problems. > > *So What problem or current deficiency in bike design is Grant solving by > using long chain stays????* > Just to bring bikes to market that no one else is building?? > Or do they solve a real problem??? > > John Hawrylak > Woodstown NJ > > FWIW 2 of 3 of my frames have 44 to 45cm chain stays, and 1 has a 43cm > chain stay. It's hard to notice a ride difference. > > -- > 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/3eec10de-6019-4ecd-bf6e-b57f0cac78b4n%40googlegroups.com > <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/rbw-owners-bunch/3eec10de-6019-4ecd-bf6e-b57f0cac78b4n%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> > . > -- 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/CADqZWjPVXdDH-eKaQdDwrh4vXuBbgvd_6beD5yexMwNccsVX1Q%40mail.gmail.com.
