Nailed it. On 4/17/11, William <tapebu...@gmail.com> wrote: > bfd > > I think you are taking your point a little far. Grant/Rivendell is > not marketing the San Marcos at all, much less marketing it towards > the mainstream racing bike customer. Merry Sales and Soma aren't even > 'marketing' the San Marcos, and it's their bike. Grant 'specifically' > said that those folks who did buy a $6000 road bike should have bought > a bike like the San Marcos. Somebody with as much experience reading > Grant's postings as you do know what Grant means by that. He means > that folks who buy plastic 16lb bikes should be buying 20lb steel > bikes. That's a lot different than saying "Hey, you bike shoppers! > After you test ride that Cervelo and that Madone, come check out this > undertube! That would be ridiculous, but that's not what Grant said, > that's what you said. > > Merry Sales paid Grant for a design. Grant supplied one. None of the > prototype photos have the second TT, so I suspect Merry Sales/Soma > made the decision to add it. There's no way Grant called Merry Sales > and said "I've done the calculations and the bigger two sizes MUST > have a 2TT!" I'd bet a dollar that it's a fashion-driven decision, > and the tiny production run makes it sound like a loss-leader, which > bums me out on several levels besides the lousy idea of a 2TT on a > road bike. > > good luck! > > Me, I love the 2TT on my parallel Bombadil, and I'm glad my 56cm > Hillborne doesn't have one. > > On Apr 17, 9:53 am, bfd <bfd...@gmail.com> wrote: >> On Apr 17, 9:09 am, newenglandbike <matthiasbe...@gmail.com> wrote:> I >> guess there is no accounting for taste, because I have always dug >> > the second top-tube (I prefer the name 'innertube' to 'undertube', but >> > i digress) ever since the bombadil came out, although I agree it >> > probably works better on a mountain/all-purpose bike. I was also >> > drawn to the plain-gauge tubing. I still like the bombadil's >> > concept, even though now it is changed, but the original parallel >> > second tube is hard to beat in my book. >> >> I agree in part. There are many, like yourself, who like the double >> top tube look. That's great and with only 15 framesets per size, it >> should easily sell. However, Grant is not marketing to you or those >> who like it. Instead, he specifically said the frame is aimed at "bike >> guys who buy $6,000 carbon frames." That's ridiculous. People in the >> market for $6K carbon bikes are not looking at either 650b or double >> top tubes. The only way either of those things get popular with the >> $6K carbon crowd is if someone in the Tour de Frances wins on one. Now >> THAT will get people's attention and sell these kind of bikes. Of >> course, its not going to happen.... >> >> > FWIW, I was in Harris Cyclery the yesterday, and they have a 58cm >> > Hunqapillar built-up in the show room. It has the gray/red paint >> > job. All I can say is, pictures don't do that bike justice. >> >> I haven't seen one of those yet and I live in San Francisco! I'm sure >> there's a few around as I do see alot of Riv bikes. Good Luck! > > -- > 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-bunch@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. > >
-- Cheers, David Redlands, CA *...in terms of recreational cycling there are many riders who would probably benefit more from improving their taste than from improving their performance.* - RTMS -- 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-bunch@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.
