Jan writes: "It would be easy for Rivendell to sell TIG-welded frames" Not to dispute Jan's assertion that he and riv both sell what they sell because they like it and not the other way around (ie liking what they sell because they sell it), I buy that hook line and sinker for both businesses, but I think Grant has said that Riv would not be successful selling such bikes because other larger well established firms with cost advantages are already covering that.
On Aug 6, 7:03 pm, Jan Heine <hein...@earthlink.net> wrote: > On Aug 6, 12:20 pm, J L <subfas...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > The cranks for example: It seems to me that his decision to > > create a net forged replica of the famous Rene Herse crank in the > > traditional 171mm size is defended by claiming that longer cranks are not > > needed because it is only a 2% difference (or so, don't have the quote in > > front of me but i think we have all read it). > > It would have been very easy to make multiple crank lengths from the > same forging. All small crank makers do this (unless they don't even > forge their cranks at all, and just machine them from billet). We > chose to make a single length, so we can make stronger cranks. > > We don't save any money by doing this, and we get a lot of flak. Why > do we don't we just do it the easy way, like everybody else? Because > we think it is better to have a stronger crank that can pass EN > standards for fatigue resistance. (Ask the other small makers whether > theirs have passed the EN standards.) > > Next thing, people might say that Grant Petersen only likes lugged > frames because all his frames are lugged. Self-serving, isn't it? Of > course, it's utter nonsense: It would be easy for Rivendell to sell > TIG-welded frames - they'd save tens of thousands of dollars they > invest in lug molds along the way. So Grant doesn't like lugged frames > because Rivendell sells them, but Rivendell sells lugged frames > because Grant likes them. The liking came first, the selling second. > > > The happy accident that became the Hetre is another > > example. They are my favorite tires and it all came about in such and > > interesting way. > > The only accident part in the Hetre was that it turned out 2 mm wider > than planned. The fast-rolling, super-comfortable nature of the tire > was no accident, but based on careful research both by Bicycle > Quarterly and Panaracer. I bet that even if the Hetre had been a 38 mm > tire as planned, it still would be your favorite tire. > > If you want to see what we have to say about some products we sell > that didn't meet expectations, you can read that here: > > http://janheine.wordpress.com/2012/05/24/mounting-tires-on-rims-with-... > > I don't think we are prone to making excuses for things that don't > turn out right. > > Jan Heine > Editor > Bicycle Quarterlyhttp://www.bikequarterly.com > > Follow our blog athttp://janheine.wordpress.com/ -- 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.
