I'm slight-of-build like Jan Heine, and am sure he knows what he is talking about when that light springy tubing feels great when riding, but I also know I could dent a 7/4/7 tube by looking at it wrong, heat-treated or not. It's a trade-off between the fleeting bliss of floating up hills on your superlight steel bike and the cold reality of racking it among 20 other bicycles or riding it on ice. Any bike of mine gets commuting/grocery duty, even if i have multiple bikes.
Luckily, I'm a bit taller than Mr. Heine, so a bike with heavier OS tubing in my size has some flex and I find them to ride nicely, especially for the long haul. Bikes should be tough and durable. I also think bikes are best when they are as non-integrated as possible, contrary to Jan Heine, but in agreement with Riv's philosophy. To me, having a single custom-made rack for your bike or integrated lighting is not as good as having a wide array of well-made adjustable racks with standard mounting provisions to choose from (tubus, nitto, or custom if you like), or the ability to ride your bike with lights or without, fenders on or off, single-speeded or with a touring triple etc. It's liberating. Bicycle companies such as Surly, Soma, or smaller companies like Rawland and of course Rivendell provide well-made platforms on which to hang whatever parts suit your needs. There is an advantage to that. Jan Heine likes to make comparisons to the integrated design of the modern automobile, and seems to think that the integrated fenders and lights of the modern sedan should be an obvious carry-over to the modern bicycle. However, what that misses is that bicycles are nothing like automobiles. Bicycles are open, while modern automobiles are black, disposable boxes. Anybody with some basic tools and basic experience can setup/tune/adjust a bicycle, and most of these adjustments take only a few minutes. The non-integrated, open, parts-agnostic nature of a well-designed bicycle frame is part of what gives it its agility, versatility and usefulness. On Sunday, August 5, 2012 11:46:12 PM UTC-4, Michael_S wrote: > > As much as I enjoy the technical content of BQ I often struggle with Jan's > "strong negative opinions" with most bikes/parts that are competition for > his products or what he rides. > He also suggests that we all would be happier on thin tubed standard > diameter frames, not offering the ideas that we are all not slight of build > like he is. Any of us who are larger in size but as fit will get the same > effect on larger/thicker tubes that are more proportionate to our size. > > ~mike > Carlsbad Ca > > On Sunday, August 5, 2012 12:29:18 PM UTC-7, Patrick Moore wrote: >> >> http://janheine.wordpress.com/2012/08/02/riding-fast-is-fun/ >> >> I personally -- to quote one commentator -- would rather stab myself >> in the eye than ride 600 km, but this little essay has some good >> points about the joy of riding fast, but on intelligent bikes. Several >> RBW references in the correspondence, too. >> -- >> "When in Rome, do as they done in Milledgeville." >> >> Flannery O'Connor >> >> ------------------------- >> Patrick Moore, Albuquerque, NM, USA >> For professional resumes, contact Patrick Moore, ACRW >> http://resumespecialties.com/index.html >> ------------------------- >> > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msg/rbw-owners-bunch/-/y8FsUHUfXAgJ. 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.
