Jim, a very thoughtful posting! Thanks for taking the time to write it up. I grew up w/ quill stems, but prefer threadless. I have found installation is incredibly easy. I've never enjoyed tightening threaded headsets, so threadless have been a pleasure to work with. Also I don't really care for the tall backwards "7" look of quill stems at saddle height. They look ungainly to me. It's also a big chunk of angled metal pointing at my crotch which I don't appreciate for unintended dismounts.
Downsides are 1-1/8 threadless not really looking elegant with road tubing, and 1" threadless is next to non-existent. Threadless also looks kinda' silly with 50mm+ of spacers on a poorly designed bike. The strength/lack of flex isn't really a bonus as I've never noticed a quill stem flexing on me. So yeah, long/short: I'd like a Taiwanese built budget Riv country bike (think AHH) w/ threadless and a single top tube for $750 or whatever the San Marcos goes for. I don't know if there are enough people in that niche to build one though, or if GP would even want to go after them. Would be a cool bike though! On Thu, Sep 6, 2012 at 11:39 PM, Jim Thill - Hiawatha Cyclery < thill....@gmail.com> wrote: > I agree that quill stems are a niche that Riv fills, more or less > exclusively, which is no small thing. Obviously, the quill stem has a > modest-sized but loyal following, and Grant would be smart to keep filling > this niche, as long as it exists, all by himself. > > On the other hand, think about demographics. I'm 35 - most cyclists my age > or younger have little or no nostalgia for quill stems and threaded > steerers, and, in fact, may think a quill looks funny or archaic compared > to more familiar threadless systems. If you're over 50, then you probably > came of age as a cyclist in the quill stem era, and are not planning to > change. But if you're over 50, your bike purchases are likely to slow down > in the next 10-20 years, if they haven't already, while people my age and > younger are just ramping up the new bike spending. Obviously, this is loose > speculation, and individual situations vary. But I think it's safe to say > that the number of people who prefer quill stems, and are willing to pay > extra to get a frame that takes a quill stem, is shrinking, not > growing/stabilizing. I have no stats to back this up, just a limited view > from my own knothole. > > Of course, Riv already makes a bunch of frame models that take a quill > stem. If one frame model out of eight stepped outside the lines a bit, in > the interest of cutting costs, making the frame sturdier without a double > top tube, and being more accommodating to a much wider variety of > contemporary stems, bars, and headsets (more versatility!), I imagine that > the result would be broader appeal and new customers. That particular model > with the (for example) disc tabs and 1-1/8" threadless steerer might not be > the "retro-grouch" ideal of many on this discussion board, but there are > lots of other options for the purists. And there's no reason whatsoever > that such a frame couldn't adhere to underlying principles, like good > tire/fender clearance, higher handlebars (it can be done with good design > in a non-ugly way), and, of course, lovely lugged steel with a cool > paintjob. > > I started following Riv when there were basically two models: the heavy > duty Atlantis, and the lightweight Rambouillet/Romulus/Redwood. It seemed > easy to distinguish the two, and I had one of each for awhile. I have > enjoyed seeing the proliferation of new models, but frankly, it starts to > get a little bewildering to me - imagine how the casual observer must feel > when trying to make sense of it! The Hillborne was supposed to be a halfway > compromise of the Atlantis and the Hilsen, I think, but those two models > weren't altogether dissimilar in terms of tire clearance and general > capabilities (the Hilsen moniker replaced the Saluki which was billed as > partway between Atlantis and Rambouillet). The Bombadil is the new > heavy-duty workhorse offroader (which was the Atlantis role, previously), > but the Hunqapillar splits the difference between that and the Atlantis. Do > I have that right? How much difference is there to split? There have been > discussions of what sets the Roadeo apart from the Hilsen, but it seems the > differences are minor. It gets hard to see where one model stops and the > next begins. Now to add yet another heavy-duty touring bike to the mix? Is > there really a hungry market for a slightly less fancy version of the > Hunqapillar that won't cannibalize Hunqapillar sales? Or should this new > "budget" model be a substantially different bike that reaches out to a > whole new crowd without competing with existing models? > > I'm sorry for rambling about all this. Sometimes it rubs people the wrong > way that I say stuff that isn't 100% Riv cheerleading (I've been told by > two other list participants to put a cork in it over the years), but I'm > not trying to damage Riv or criticize anybody for liking what he or she > likes. I enjoy the sharing of different ideas. Amazing that there's so much > to discuss (ad nauseum) about these machines! > > > > On Thursday, September 6, 2012 7:25:54 PM UTC-5, ted wrote: >> >> It may be a cost saver as you suspect, but I hope they never go that >> route. >> I value the easy upping and downing of a quill stem, and not being >> bound to earlier choices by having cut a threadless steerer tube. >> Threaded forks and quill stems are one of the differentiators that >> make RBW a company I am glad is in business. >> Other companies are already making good bikes at lower price points, >> so if you want to choose a bike made with some more economical methods >> (e.g. threadless, tig welded, ...) choose one of them and be happy. >> (naturally we are overlooking the threadless option on the Rodeo, >> which seems to be a rare concession to gram counters, inner racer >> aversion to otherness, and broader selection of available stems) >> >> I don't mean to be scolding. I just like what RBW does, and I would >> rather they stay with it than get more like other companies. >> >> On Sep 6, 4:45 pm, Jim Thill - Hiawatha Cyclery <thill....@gmail.com> >> wrote: >> > I have been scolded for discussing such heresy in the past, but the >> most >> > obvious cost savings I can think of for Riv frames would be to switch >> from >> > threaded to threadless steerers. With threadless, one fork fits all >> frames. >> > With threaded, each frame size takes a different fork. This means extra >> > forks must be stocked in each size for warranty replacements, etc, >> plus, I >> > assume, making 4 or 5 different forks in smaller quantities is more >> > expensive than making one fork in a larger quantity. Obviously, I don't >> > know how the threaded-fork penalty compares to the other costs in frame >> > production, but I wouldn't be surprised if it adds $100+ to each >> frameset >> > at the retail level. I don't have experience with 2TT or diagonal tube >> > frames, but I do have experience to suggest a 1-1/8" threadless system >> > feels MUCH sturdier under load than does a bike with a 1" threaded >> system >> > on otherwise similar frames. >> > >> > As for disc brakes, I prefer the way hydraulics feel and self-adjust, >> but >> > sometimes sacrificing the drop bar is too much, so I go mechanical. The >> > good ones all work, when set up properly. >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > On Thursday, September 6, 2012 6:29:35 PM UTC-5, dougP wrote: >> > >> > > This thread started out talking about a "budget Riv...". I realize >> > > it's hard to see how a few extra tabs, etc., to handle discs could >> > > impact the cost too much, and of course Rivs come with plenty of ways >> > > to hang on racks & fenders. However, I heard Dave Moulton speak >> > > (years ago when he was still building frames) and he made the point >> > > that it was difficult to justify to his customers the additional cost >> > > for adding various eyelets, rack mounts, etc., that tourists demand & >> > > racers don't. More fiddly bits can really up the cost a surprising >> > > amount. >> > >> > > If Grant decided to add disc brake fittings, I would expect it to be >> > > on the $2,000 frames, esp. the Atlantis & Bombadil. I've only ridden >> > > disc braked bikes a couple of times and was impressed. My Atlantis >> > > now has V-brakes (replaced Tektro 720 cantis) which I like a lot but >> > > would go for a disc brake option. Braking changes a lot when you >> load >> > > up the bike with its own weight & go whistling down long hills. >> > >> > > Of course, Riv went thru a big inventory reduction end of last year, >> > > so I wouldn't look for them to embrace stocking yet another kind of >> > > hub, brake, levers, etc., plus the frame redesign work to offer >> > > discs. In any case, it's always fun to speculate The Next Big >> > > Thing. >> > >> > > dougP >> > >> > > On Sep 6, 10:29 am, Jim Thill - Hiawatha Cyclery <thill....@gmail.com> >> >> > > wrote: >> > > > It's certainly true that there's seldom, if ever, a "screaming need >> for >> > > > discs". But we're pretty far down the road past "screaming need" >> for ANY >> > > of >> > > > the gadgetry we chat about in this forum. I personally know a >> number of >> > > > people who do not consider worthwhile any bike innovation that >> isn't >> > > > included on a 1950s English 3sp. I've ridden old 3-speeds plenty, >> and I >> > > see >> > > > the charm, but occasionally I think the technologies developed over >> the >> > > > ensuing half-century have earned a place in my 21st Century >> > > bicycle-centric >> > > > life. >> > >> > > > IMO, a sturdy, fat-tire Riv with capability to handle BOTH >> > > > cantilevers/v-brakes and discs would be a neat thing - sort of a >> > > prettier >> > > > functional-equivalent to the Surly Troll or Ogre. I think it would >> > > broaden >> > > > the appeal to potential customers who appreciate Riv's aesthetic >> > > stylings >> > > > and general approach, but aren't committed to using the same types >> of >> > > parts >> > > > mountain bikers were stuck with 25 years ago. Obviously, the true >> retro >> > > > connoisseurs will scoff at the superfluous disc brake tabs they'd >> never >> > > use >> > > > in a million years, but the scoffers will be offset by those who'll >> > > embrace >> > > > the added versatility. I count myself among the "embracers of >> > > versatility", >> > > > by the way. >> > >> > > > I'm not saying disc brakes are 100% necessary at all, but some >> > > concession >> > > > to modernity and, more importantly, diversity in the product line, >> would >> > > > seem to be a good thing for Riv. Otherwise, it seems like we'll >> have >> > > > another heavy-duty Riv frame that competes for the same seemingly >> > > limited >> > > > pool of customers who are considering the Atlantis, Hunqapillar, >> > > Bombadil, >> > > > Hillborne, etc. Something as simple as disc tabs would be a >> standout >> > > among >> > > > the excellent, but overlapping frames that are already available, >> and >> > > > would, I think, make a splash among a whole new pool of potential >> > > customers. >> > >> > > > On Wednesday, September 5, 2012 4:04:45 PM UTC-5, Matthew J wrote: >> > >> > > > > Seems to me for a budget bike that is almost certainly would be >> > > heavier >> > > > > than the upmarket Rivs, discs will mean extra weight and expense >> with >> > > > > little benefit for most riders. >> > >> > > > > Most people ride on pavement or hard pack trails and then usually >> when >> > > the >> > > > > weather is fine. In those conditions, decent rim brakes provide >> all >> > > the >> > > > > stopping power any rider will ever need. Some ride on pavement in >> > > inclement >> > > > > weather where discs have some advantages over rims. But not so >> much >> > > that >> > > > > there is a screaming need for discs. >> > >> > > > > Discs are markedly better off road and on long distance adventure >> > > > > touring. Neither Riv's niche. >> > >> > > > > On Wednesday, September 5, 2012 12:42:00 PM UTC-5, Jim Thill - >> > > Hiawatha >> > > > > Cyclery wrote: >> > >> > > > >> It seems moderately necessary to point out that there's nothing >> > > specific >> > > > >> to a frame that's made for hydraulic disc brakes that is >> different >> > > than on >> > > > >> a frame made for cable disc brakes. Therefore, IF Riv makes a >> bike >> > > for disc >> > > > >> brakes, which seems only a tiny bit likely IMO, there's no need >> for >> > > any of >> > > > >> us to be forced into one type of brake or another. >> > >> > > > >> I like hydraulic brakes. I've been using several models of Avid >> > > > >> hydraulics for about 3 years now, and I've never had one single >> > > problem >> > > > >> with them. They are, for all practical purposes, self-adjusting >> and >> > > never >> > > > >> seem to make any superfluous noise. It is true, however, that >> using >> > > > >> hydraulic brakes does limit brake lever options. Think of the >> > > hydraulic >> > > > >> brake/lever as a single unit, rather than the mix and match >> > > experience of >> > > > >> cable-actuated systems. This is a mix-and-match-centric group, I >> > > realize. >> > >> > > > >> On Tuesday, September 4, 2012 9:37:17 PM UTC-5, Montclair BobbyB >> > > wrote: >> > >> > > > >>> Or hydraulic brakes... I've been riding both cable and >> hydraulic >> > > disc >> > > > >>> brakes for years, and I'm here to tell you, hydraulic Shimano's >> (the >> > > older >> > > > >>> style) are the bee's knees... I've never had issues with busted >> > > brake lines >> > > > >>> or poor performance... They're easy to maintain and super >> > > dependable, way >> > > > >>> more dependable than rim brakes! And even the best-adjusted >> > > cable-actuated >> > > > >>> disc brakes can't come close to the hydraulics. The price has >> come >> > > way >> > > > >>> down on hydraulic brakes... there are few reasons left to go >> with >> > > cable >> > > > >>> discs... I've been running them on my mountain bikes for years >> in >> > > all kinds >> > > > >>> of rought weather conditions (including ice and snow). THEY >> STOP in >> > > all >> > > > >>> kinds of weather! >> > >> > > > >>> I'd love to see a disc version Rivendell...although I fear it >> would >> > > > >>> require a beefier fork (for the forces applied to the lower >> section >> > > of the >> > > > >>> fork). This might be a challenge to make a beefier fork that >> looks >> > > > >>> elegant. Then again, I'll bet it's possible to preserve the >> beauty >> > > in a >> > > > >>> disc version.. Wes Williams (for example) makes a beautifully >> curved >> > > 29er >> > > > >>> disc fork (the Willits WOW). I love the look of rim brakes, >> but >> > > > >>> performance wise there's simply no contest between rim and disc >> > > brakes. >> > >> > > > >>> Peace, >> > > > >>> BB >> > >> > > > >>> On Monday, September 3, 2012 5:53:11 PM UTC-4, James Warren >> wrote: >> > >> > > > >>>> I would like it if this bike were made ready for disc brakes. >> > > > >>>> Mechanical ones.- Hide quoted text - >> > >> > > > - Show quoted text - >> > -- > 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/-/P8M2bAG0GtwJ. > > 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 ** "The good thing about *science* is that it's *true* whether or not you * believe* in it." -- *Neil deGrasse Tyson*. -- 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.
