date:20221212

I've only owned/ridden a Susie so my only input is I'm fairly certain it 
has a shallower headtube angle than Platypus, this might account for a 
front load causing more floppiness on the Susie. 

On Monday, December 12, 2022 at 7:57:20 PM UTC-8 bei...@gmail.com wrote:

> Wow, Jared! What a great way to get us started off. Thanks for sharing! 
> Interesting that moving "up" to the Susie which can handle bigger tires, 
> you're itching to move back "down" to the max tire size for the Platy!
> Also, I love that this world exists where one can write "Leah's dual 
> Platypus situation" and everyone knows who you're referencing. A huge 
> driver in my decision to buy a Platypus, that's for sure! 
> Thanks again for lending your thoughts. Looking forward to other folks 
> takes too!
>
> Best, Christian
>
> On Monday, December 12, 2022 at 7:14:02 PM UTC-7 Jared Wilson wrote:
>
>> I'll give it a go...
>>
>> Prerequisites: 56cm Susie, 59cm Susie, 60cm Cheviot and 60cm Platypus
>>
>> I think you're on the right track with the similarities between these two 
>> models, they ride much the same with, IMO, the main difference being the 
>> max tire size and front load-abliity.
>>
>> The Platypus lends itself to what the copy states, zooming around town 
>> and in my experience the Platy handles a front (racked) load better than 
>> the Susie. This isn't to say that's all the Platypus is good for, as you 
>> have experienced first hand the Plat is very capable off road as well. Set 
>> up with Snoqualmie Pass tires for country or town cruising and 2.1 Thunder 
>> Burts for all terrain riding and you have a bike that's hard to beat. The 
>> bottom bracket does feel lower on the Platypus (I'm certain it is) and that 
>> does factor into some of the difference in feel between the two, but it's 
>> certainly not all that dramatic. I wouldn't worry about stated load 
>> capacity variances between the two, they're both stout bikes that can 
>> handle most anything the average person can throw at them. Weight wise I'd 
>> say they're also comparable, just depends on the racks, tires, etc.
>>
>> My old 60cm Platypus is now in the hands of my wife (86pbh) who loads it 
>> down with a small Fabios chest up front and Swift panniers on a shiny rack 
>> out back. Even when she doesn't need all that capacity she'll leave the 
>> bags on because they leave the ability to find treasure out on the road 
>> (alley fruit, garage sale finds, etc). You'd think she's going on tour with 
>> her daily kit, but the Platypus takes it well and keeps on ticking. She 
>> claims it to be her forever bike and the only addition to the stable she 
>> cares to make will be a Heron touring whenever it may present itself.
>>
>> My (89pbh) current bike is the 59cm Susie, with the 56cm being my first 
>> venture into Rivendells. I love the Susie, and the 56cm was just a little 
>> too small for my taste, with more stem and seatpost showing than I cared 
>> for. The 59cm feels a bit less crowded than the 60cm Platypus which I 
>> appreciate, and the additional tire clearance is welcome, but I feel that 
>> bike encourages a bit more tire than I actually need. The bulk of our 
>> riding is on country roads and occasional dirt, and the 2.5" Ehlines are a 
>> little overkill, but they sure look right at home. I'm keeping my eyes 
>> peeled for a pair of Fleecer Ridge or Super Yummy tires (both 29x2.2) to 
>> see how the bike responds to a little less meat. Like I stated above, I 
>> don't care for a front racked load on the Susie, and this is after trying a 
>> few different set ups (Pass and Stow 5 rail, Marks Rack, RBW51) and I'm not 
>> quite sure how so many other people are content with front racks on theirs. 
>> I do toggle between an XS Sackville saddlebag on the bars and a small 
>> Fabios Chest, which doesn't give nearly the ill effects that a rack and 
>> basket does, YMMV. In the rear I use a shiny rear rack with Sackville 
>> Happisack and love the combo, I can't tell the difference with or without a 
>> bag in the rear.
>>
>> I think it's a bit of the Leah's dual Platypus situation, they're similar 
>> bikes and can be set up to do much of the same things, but why not have 
>> both to shine in their respective areas. When customs come back online I'll 
>> be thinking long and hard about a Platypus-esque mixte with a few tweaks to 
>> make it a better fit for me, but for now I'm content with my Susie for what 
>> it is.
>>
>> Apologies if my long winded response didn't make anything more clear, I 
>> guess the short of it is that they have a lot of overlap and can do much of 
>> the same stuff, just depends on how you set them up.
>>
>> -Jared in SLO, CA
>> On Monday, December 12, 2022 at 5:20:55 PM UTC-8 bei...@gmail.com wrote:
>>
>>> How similar or different are the Platypus and the Wolbis Slugstone aka 
>>> Susie W. Longbolts?
>>>
>>> Some of the discussion around Jacob’s Gus v Platy decision 
>>>

[RBW] Re: San Francisco/Bay Area Riv Riders

2022-12-12 Thread Jay P

I'd also appreciate the invitation for Bay Area rides and to meet some of 
yous

Jay P

Marin

On Sunday, December 11, 2022 at 9:16:48 PM UTC-8 Luke Hendrickson wrote:

> Hey all! I know that it’s been a bit wet & cold, but I’d love to see if 
> anyone would want to have a little ride in the coming week(s). Perhaps even 
> a New Year’s day ride to celebrate in the new year in style?
>
> I’m in the City proper and was thinking about some mixed terrain around 
> town while keeping it mostly road-ish so that no one’s limited by the ride 
> route. Pastries + hot drinks + more snacks?
>
> I’d love to hear from anyone interested or even connect with other 
> like-minded people for more than just a one-off ride. 
>

-- 
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/78bad565-822a-4cc5-bfd4-5c79de3f7933n%40googlegroups.com.

[RBW] Re: Platypus v Susie Longbolts Comparison

2022-12-12 Thread Christian B-H

Wow, Jared! What a great way to get us started off. Thanks for sharing! 
Interesting that moving "up" to the Susie which can handle bigger tires, 
you're itching to move back "down" to the max tire size for the Platy!
Also, I love that this world exists where one can write "Leah's dual 
Platypus situation" and everyone knows who you're referencing. A huge 
driver in my decision to buy a Platypus, that's for sure! 
Thanks again for lending your thoughts. Looking forward to other folks 
takes too!

Best, Christian

On Monday, December 12, 2022 at 7:14:02 PM UTC-7 Jared Wilson wrote:

> I'll give it a go...
>
> Prerequisites: 56cm Susie, 59cm Susie, 60cm Cheviot and 60cm Platypus
>
> I think you're on the right track with the similarities between these two 
> models, they ride much the same with, IMO, the main difference being the 
> max tire size and front load-abliity.
>
> The Platypus lends itself to what the copy states, zooming around town and 
> in my experience the Platy handles a front (racked) load better than the 
> Susie. This isn't to say that's all the Platypus is good for, as you have 
> experienced first hand the Plat is very capable off road as well. Set up 
> with Snoqualmie Pass tires for country or town cruising and 2.1 Thunder 
> Burts for all terrain riding and you have a bike that's hard to beat. The 
> bottom bracket does feel lower on the Platypus (I'm certain it is) and that 
> does factor into some of the difference in feel between the two, but it's 
> certainly not all that dramatic. I wouldn't worry about stated load 
> capacity variances between the two, they're both stout bikes that can 
> handle most anything the average person can throw at them. Weight wise I'd 
> say they're also comparable, just depends on the racks, tires, etc.
>
> My old 60cm Platypus is now in the hands of my wife (86pbh) who loads it 
> down with a small Fabios chest up front and Swift panniers on a shiny rack 
> out back. Even when she doesn't need all that capacity she'll leave the 
> bags on because they leave the ability to find treasure out on the road 
> (alley fruit, garage sale finds, etc). You'd think she's going on tour with 
> her daily kit, but the Platypus takes it well and keeps on ticking. She 
> claims it to be her forever bike and the only addition to the stable she 
> cares to make will be a Heron touring whenever it may present itself.
>
> My (89pbh) current bike is the 59cm Susie, with the 56cm being my first 
> venture into Rivendells. I love the Susie, and the 56cm was just a little 
> too small for my taste, with more stem and seatpost showing than I cared 
> for. The 59cm feels a bit less crowded than the 60cm Platypus which I 
> appreciate, and the additional tire clearance is welcome, but I feel that 
> bike encourages a bit more tire than I actually need. The bulk of our 
> riding is on country roads and occasional dirt, and the 2.5" Ehlines are a 
> little overkill, but they sure look right at home. I'm keeping my eyes 
> peeled for a pair of Fleecer Ridge or Super Yummy tires (both 29x2.2) to 
> see how the bike responds to a little less meat. Like I stated above, I 
> don't care for a front racked load on the Susie, and this is after trying a 
> few different set ups (Pass and Stow 5 rail, Marks Rack, RBW51) and I'm not 
> quite sure how so many other people are content with front racks on theirs. 
> I do toggle between an XS Sackville saddlebag on the bars and a small 
> Fabios Chest, which doesn't give nearly the ill effects that a rack and 
> basket does, YMMV. In the rear I use a shiny rear rack with Sackville 
> Happisack and love the combo, I can't tell the difference with or without a 
> bag in the rear.
>
> I think it's a bit of the Leah's dual Platypus situation, they're similar 
> bikes and can be set up to do much of the same things, but why not have 
> both to shine in their respective areas. When customs come back online I'll 
> be thinking long and hard about a Platypus-esque mixte with a few tweaks to 
> make it a better fit for me, but for now I'm content with my Susie for what 
> it is.
>
> Apologies if my long winded response didn't make anything more clear, I 
> guess the short of it is that they have a lot of overlap and can do much of 
> the same stuff, just depends on how you set them up.
>
> -Jared in SLO, CA
> On Monday, December 12, 2022 at 5:20:55 PM UTC-8 bei...@gmail.com wrote:
>
>> How similar or different are the Platypus and the Wolbis Slugstone aka 
>> Susie W. Longbolts?
>>
>> Some of the discussion around Jacob’s Gus v Platy decision 
>> , 
>> and Masa’s "How you choose 2 Rivendells?" thread 
>>  
>> have me thinking about the similarities and differences between the Susie 
>> Longbolts and the Platypus.  I think I’ve heard about Susies carrying 
>> weight better or worse in the front or in the

[RBW] Re: FS: White T11/DT R460 wheels, gamma pedals, So bars, Paul Canti brakes, etc.

2022-12-12 Thread Trevor Oleniuk

Canti brakes, VO mount, and Paul rack mounts are sold.

On Friday, December 9, 2022 at 8:02:40 PM UTC-6 Trevor Oleniuk wrote:

> I am looking to clear out some bike parts, which won't work on my current 
> lot of bikes. All prices in *Canadian dollars*, do not include shipping 
> or paypal fees. 
>
>
>- White Industries T11 hubs, laced to DT Swiss R460 rims (rim brake, 
>100/130 spacing); front wheel is BRAND NEW, rear hub is in excellent 
>condition and rim is in good condition with one minor dent - $600
>- Pair of Paul Canti brakes, blue (comes with cross over cables, 1 
>hunter nug, good condition) - $200
>- Paul rack mounts (work with the brakes), brand new - $50
>- Paul Funky Monkey, silver - $60
>- MKS Gamma pedals, black - $80
>- Velo Orange Randonneur rack, canti mount version, excellent 
>condition - $100
>- Simworks SO bars, with 80mm 26.0 stem - $100
>- Supernova E3 Pro HBM light - $150
>
> I am happy to look up shipping quotes from Saskatchewan, Canada. Please 
> message me for photos or more information. Will consider offers, especially 
> if you're buying multiple items. 
>

-- 
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/6aade013-6e87-430d-a29b-21148b469510n%40googlegroups.com.

Re: [RBW] Craigslist Alert ! - 2022 Rivendell Gus Boots Wilson - $2,000

Well damn.:)Sent from my iPhoneOn Dec 12, 2022, at 9:49 PM, Kim Hetzel  wrote:This was posted 29 days. 

https://knoxville.craigslist.org/bik/d/greenville-2022-rivendell-gus-boots/7557073606.html
It might be worth a call before you do a happy dance. Contact phone: (864) 884-4957Kim HetzelYelm, WA. 





-- 
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/53f9cc77-2a9d-4db1-b68d-5c25b43a0fc2n%40googlegroups.com.




-- 
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/C3ED90FA-5E21-48B2-94C3-E49A5509A2F3%40gmail.com.

[RBW] Craigslist Alert ! - 2022 Rivendell Gus Boots Wilson - $2,000

2022-12-12 Thread Kim Hetzel

This was posted 29 days. 

https://knoxville.craigslist.org/bik/d/greenville-2022-rivendell-gus-boots/7557073606.html
It might be worth a call before you do a happy dance. Contact phone: (864) 
884-4957

Kim Hetzel
Yelm, WA. 

-- 
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/53f9cc77-2a9d-4db1-b68d-5c25b43a0fc2n%40googlegroups.com.

[RBW] Re: Platypus v Susie Longbolts Comparison

2022-12-12 Thread Jared Wilson

I'll give it a go...

Prerequisites: 56cm Susie, 59cm Susie, 60cm Cheviot and 60cm Platypus

I think you're on the right track with the similarities between these two 
models, they ride much the same with, IMO, the main difference being the 
max tire size and front load-abliity.

The Platypus lends itself to what the copy states, zooming around town and 
in my experience the Platy handles a front (racked) load better than the 
Susie. This isn't to say that's all the Platypus is good for, as you have 
experienced first hand the Plat is very capable off road as well. Set up 
with Snoqualmie Pass tires for country or town cruising and 2.1 Thunder 
Burts for all terrain riding and you have a bike that's hard to beat. The 
bottom bracket does feel lower on the Platypus (I'm certain it is) and that 
does factor into some of the difference in feel between the two, but it's 
certainly not all that dramatic. I wouldn't worry about stated load 
capacity variances between the two, they're both stout bikes that can 
handle most anything the average person can throw at them. Weight wise I'd 
say they're also comparable, just depends on the racks, tires, etc.

My old 60cm Platypus is now in the hands of my wife (86pbh) who loads it 
down with a small Fabios chest up front and Swift panniers on a shiny rack 
out back. Even when she doesn't need all that capacity she'll leave the 
bags on because they leave the ability to find treasure out on the road 
(alley fruit, garage sale finds, etc). You'd think she's going on tour with 
her daily kit, but the Platypus takes it well and keeps on ticking. She 
claims it to be her forever bike and the only addition to the stable she 
cares to make will be a Heron touring whenever it may present itself.

My (89pbh) current bike is the 59cm Susie, with the 56cm being my first 
venture into Rivendells. I love the Susie, and the 56cm was just a little 
too small for my taste, with more stem and seatpost showing than I cared 
for. The 59cm feels a bit less crowded than the 60cm Platypus which I 
appreciate, and the additional tire clearance is welcome, but I feel that 
bike encourages a bit more tire than I actually need. The bulk of our 
riding is on country roads and occasional dirt, and the 2.5" Ehlines are a 
little overkill, but they sure look right at home. I'm keeping my eyes 
peeled for a pair of Fleecer Ridge or Super Yummy tires (both 29x2.2) to 
see how the bike responds to a little less meat. Like I stated above, I 
don't care for a front racked load on the Susie, and this is after trying a 
few different set ups (Pass and Stow 5 rail, Marks Rack, RBW51) and I'm not 
quite sure how so many other people are content with front racks on theirs. 
I do toggle between an XS Sackville saddlebag on the bars and a small 
Fabios Chest, which doesn't give nearly the ill effects that a rack and 
basket does, YMMV. In the rear I use a shiny rear rack with Sackville 
Happisack and love the combo, I can't tell the difference with or without a 
bag in the rear.

I think it's a bit of the Leah's dual Platypus situation, they're similar 
bikes and can be set up to do much of the same things, but why not have 
both to shine in their respective areas. When customs come back online I'll 
be thinking long and hard about a Platypus-esque mixte with a few tweaks to 
make it a better fit for me, but for now I'm content with my Susie for what 
it is.

Apologies if my long winded response didn't make anything more clear, I 
guess the short of it is that they have a lot of overlap and can do much of 
the same stuff, just depends on how you set them up.

-Jared in SLO, CA
On Monday, December 12, 2022 at 5:20:55 PM UTC-8 bei...@gmail.com wrote:

> How similar or different are the Platypus and the Wolbis Slugstone aka 
> Susie W. Longbolts?
>
> Some of the discussion around Jacob’s Gus v Platy decision 
> , 
> and Masa’s "How you choose 2 Rivendells?" thread 
>  
> have me thinking about the similarities and differences between the Susie 
> Longbolts and the Platypus.  I think I’ve heard about Susies carrying 
> weight better or worse in the front or in the back compared to the 
> Platypus, but would love to hear from especially anyone who owns BOTH a 
> PLATY and a SUSIE or who has owned or ridden both close together in time.
>
> Are the Platypus and the Susie VERY similar? If the Susie is a “hillibike” 
> only qualified up to 205 + 25lbs, and the platypus is a country bike 
> ostensibly designed for less jarring impact and bumps but without a 
> mentioned weight limit and carrying up to 30lbs…if the Platy could take 
> 2.4”s would we have an Atlantis vs Appaloosa situation almost?
>
> From what I can tell, the Major differences Platy to Susie (sure, 7 plus 
> differences are certainly enough to make two bikes VERY different, but *How 
> do they ride

Re: [RBW] Re: Rivendell Timeline - it's happening!

With an electric motor! 藍

On Monday, December 12, 2022 at 5:38:27 PM UTC-8 Doug H. wrote:

> Joe, we now all know you can only ride singletrack on a full suspension 
> bike with a dropper post nowadays...everything else is underbiking. Ha, I 
> write in jest. The Rivendell timeline is neat to see. Most of the names on 
> the list are fantastic names for bikes!
>
> On Monday, December 12, 2022 at 6:24:05 PM UTC-5 Joe Bernard wrote:
>
>> Then there's the pre-Rivendell timeline which has an article in a 
>> Bridgestone catalogue by Chris Kostman about "underbiking"..he was riding 
>> an RB-1 with skinny slicks on singletrack. Which Grant design is a 
>> Hillibike? All of them! 
>>
>> On Monday, December 12, 2022 at 2:44:53 PM UTC-8 Slin wrote:
>>
>>> Yeah, I totally agree that the bikes have been categorized different 
>>> ways over the years. I quickly threw the spreadsheet together and thought I 
>>> was using the categories on the current rivbike.com - 'Roadish' , 
>>> 'Touring & Trailish', and 'Comboish - Country Bikes'.  The names are 
>>> different, but that's what I was thinking. Clicking through there, the 
>>> Atlantis and Appaloosa are in the 'Touring/Trailish' category.
>>>
>>> On Monday, December 12, 2022 at 3:02:04 AM UTC-8 brendonoid wrote:
>>>
 Oh, this is exciting!
 I think Grant has/had the all-rounder category between the hillibikes 
 and the country bikes. So the Atlantis/Appaloosa was an all-rounder whilst 
 the Sam/Homer was a country bike.
 Unfortunately the nomenclature has been somewhat fluid along with the 
 concepts of what certain models can and should do. Overlap all over the 
 place, makes categorizing super hard.



-- 
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/f2146cd7-cbea-493e-a376-3ea81ded49c9n%40googlegroups.com.

Re: [RBW] Re: Rivendell Timeline - it's happening!

2022-12-12 Thread Doug H.

Joe, we now all know you can only ride singletrack on a full suspension 
bike with a dropper post nowadays...everything else is underbiking. Ha, I 
write in jest. The Rivendell timeline is neat to see. Most of the names on 
the list are fantastic names for bikes!

On Monday, December 12, 2022 at 6:24:05 PM UTC-5 Joe Bernard wrote:

> Then there's the pre-Rivendell timeline which has an article in a 
> Bridgestone catalogue by Chris Kostman about "underbiking"..he was riding 
> an RB-1 with skinny slicks on singletrack. Which Grant design is a 
> Hillibike? All of them! 
>
> On Monday, December 12, 2022 at 2:44:53 PM UTC-8 Slin wrote:
>
>> Yeah, I totally agree that the bikes have been categorized different ways 
>> over the years. I quickly threw the spreadsheet together and thought I was 
>> using the categories on the current rivbike.com - 'Roadish' , 'Touring & 
>> Trailish', and 'Comboish - Country Bikes'.  The names are different, but 
>> that's what I was thinking. Clicking through there, the Atlantis and 
>> Appaloosa are in the 'Touring/Trailish' category.
>>
>> On Monday, December 12, 2022 at 3:02:04 AM UTC-8 brendonoid wrote:
>>
>>> Oh, this is exciting!
>>> I think Grant has/had the all-rounder category between the hillibikes 
>>> and the country bikes. So the Atlantis/Appaloosa was an all-rounder whilst 
>>> the Sam/Homer was a country bike.
>>> Unfortunately the nomenclature has been somewhat fluid along with the 
>>> concepts of what certain models can and should do. Overlap all over the 
>>> place, makes categorizing super hard.
>>>
>>>

-- 
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/0406c66c-97df-476b-9291-bf4fe73dbbd5n%40googlegroups.com.

[RBW] Re: Saddle height and BPH

2022-12-12 Thread Paul Clifton

Laing, I've puzzled about how to take crank length into account and this 
seems like a great idea. I'll give it a try. But at the end of the day, 
anything that is a fairly reproducible number for an individual gets the 
job done. I have a seamstress tape with a little rivet on the end that 
grabs the top of the hole where the crank bolt goes and it gets the zero 
point of the tape close enough to the center of the crank that it's never 
been a problem, or at least it keeps my measurements fairly consistent.

Paul in AR

On Monday, December 12, 2022 at 2:41:33 PM UTC-6 lconley wrote:

> I have never understood why any body is concerned "saddle height" which as 
> I understand it is the distance from the CL of the crank to the top of the 
> saddle, inline with the seat tube. It is very hard to measure from the 
> center of the crank and what if you have bikes with different crank 
> lengths?. I put the crank low and in-line with the seat tube and measure 
> from the top of the pedal axle to the top of the saddle,  inline with the 
> seat tube - takes the crank length out of the equation. I used 35" when I 
> was younger, but now use 34". It is constant from bike to bike, no worrying 
> about crank length, nor trying to line up the end of the tape with the 
> centerline of the crank at the same time as trying read the tape at the 
> saddle.
>
> Laing
> Delray Beach FL
>
> On Monday, December 12, 2022 at 12:49:07 PM UTC-5 Jay Lonner wrote:
>
>> I just took delivery of a new (non-Riv) bike and am dialing in the fit. 
>> I’m a little worried that the frame is too big for me, since I only have 
>> maybe 2” standover, which seems tight for a gravel bike.
>>
>> So I went out and measured the saddle height on my Hunq (which is a size 
>> 62). It came in at about 75cm. This gives me a solid fistful of seatpost. 
>> Then I remeasured my PBH, which is 93-94 cm depending on hard I pull. For 
>> reference, here’s the relevant page from HQ:
>>
>> https://www.rivbike.com/pages/pubic-bone-height-how-to-measure-your-pbh
>>
>> This suggests that based on my  PBH my saddle height should be closer to 
>> 83 cm – an 8cm discrepancy. Before riding in this morning I raised my 
>> saddle height to 79 cm, basically splitting the difference. It felt weird, 
>> which of course it would after so many years at 75cm. But I made it in and 
>> my feet were in full contact with the pedals without any tippytoe 
>> maneuvers. So I guess I’ve been doing it wrong this whole time? Kind of 
>> embarrassing. Even so, according to the Riv method my saddle height is 
>> still ~4cm lower than my PBH would suggest. 
>>
>> So I guess I’m wondering about alternative ways of determining saddle 
>> height somewhat objectively, and/or whether I should now be looking at 
>> other variables such as a fore-aft saddle positioning, saddle angle, and 
>> even saddle type (currently a B68, slammed back as far as it can go on a 
>> S83, with the nose pitched up ~10 degrees or so). Other relevant factors 
>> might be crank arm length (175mm), pedal height (Pedaling Innovations 
>> platform pedals), and shoes (Chuck Taylors, typically). Looking for the 
>> optimum balance of comfort, efficiency, and protecting my perineum.
>>
>> Jay Lonner
>> Bellingham, WA
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>

-- 
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/1abf947f-8db1-4d10-bd38-1c3d59677ee0n%40googlegroups.com.

[RBW] Re: Nivex on a Rivendell?

2022-12-12 Thread Garth

I'm all peanut gallery on this one. I'm reminded of a Canadian rock band I 
listened to as a teen named Max Webster. They had an album called "High 
Class in Borrowed Shoes". I never really related much to that title until 
right now.. and how underneath the inflated image of "high class" 
resides the person, place or thing as it truly is. In this case, it's 
"just" a derailleur regardless of the sales pitch and inflated sense of 
worthiness. Not to diminish the "just", I mean that as the authenticity of 
Existence. A derailleur is a marvelous and ingenious thing and no amount of 
over or under inflating can change that. 



-- 
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/1896231e-e024-4cf3-b639-cf0fd644abc1n%40googlegroups.com.

Re: [RBW] Bombadil and Hunqapillar origins: The definitive thread

2022-12-12 Thread Garth

The Bombadil(60 cm w/700c wheels, parallel TT) is the only frame I really 
much paid attention to and bought, albeit from a list member in 2011. I'm 
pretty sure they were all customer choice paint jobs, save and specials, 
returns, cancels and such.

I recall also that the Bomba tubes were heat treated, not sure about the 
Hunq but I'd be surprised if they were. Only GP knows what tubes cost what. 
Plus the fancy lugs. I have no idea about the Hunqa frames lugs but the 
Bombas sure are fancy, if that's you're thing. I don't ride a Riv for the 
rep/status or the paint jobs or even the looks, I have two because they fit 
me well and they're steel. I'm outside the bounds of most every stock Riv 
bike and yet those two worked(Susie is the other). That's about it. I'm all 
for Practicability. 

While the Hunqapillar was touted as a Bomba replacement, it was only that 
in category as the frame itself was totally different in dimensions and 
sizes, not to mention the diagonal tube which still looks odd to me. 

-- 
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/78ecb541-0793-4ecb-9e37-ebfc7f8605b8n%40googlegroups.com.

Re: [RBW] Re: Rivendell Timeline - it's happening!

Then there's the pre-Rivendell timeline which has an article in a 
Bridgestone catalogue by Chris Kostman about "underbiking"..he was riding 
an RB-1 with skinny slicks on singletrack. Which Grant design is a 
Hillibike? All of them! 

On Monday, December 12, 2022 at 2:44:53 PM UTC-8 Slin wrote:

> Yeah, I totally agree that the bikes have been categorized different ways 
> over the years. I quickly threw the spreadsheet together and thought I was 
> using the categories on the current rivbike.com - 'Roadish' , 'Touring & 
> Trailish', and 'Comboish - Country Bikes'.  The names are different, but 
> that's what I was thinking. Clicking through there, the Atlantis and 
> Appaloosa are in the 'Touring/Trailish' category.
>
> On Monday, December 12, 2022 at 3:02:04 AM UTC-8 brendonoid wrote:
>
>> Oh, this is exciting!
>> I think Grant has/had the all-rounder category between the hillibikes and 
>> the country bikes. So the Atlantis/Appaloosa was an all-rounder whilst the 
>> Sam/Homer was a country bike.
>> Unfortunately the nomenclature has been somewhat fluid along with the 
>> concepts of what certain models can and should do. Overlap all over the 
>> place, makes categorizing super hard.
>>
>>

-- 
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/f0c46b74-6aee-4a47-936a-e3c97e13741dn%40googlegroups.com.

Re: [RBW] Re: Rivendell Timeline - it's happening!

2022-12-12 Thread Slin

Yeah, I totally agree that the bikes have been categorized different ways 
over the years. I quickly threw the spreadsheet together and thought I was 
using the categories on the current rivbike.com - 'Roadish' , 'Touring & 
Trailish', and 'Comboish - Country Bikes'.  The names are different, but 
that's what I was thinking. Clicking through there, the Atlantis and 
Appaloosa are in the 'Touring/Trailish' category.

On Monday, December 12, 2022 at 3:02:04 AM UTC-8 brendonoid wrote:

> Oh, this is exciting!
> I think Grant has/had the all-rounder category between the hillibikes and 
> the country bikes. So the Atlantis/Appaloosa was an all-rounder whilst the 
> Sam/Homer was a country bike.
> Unfortunately the nomenclature has been somewhat fluid along with the 
> concepts of what certain models can and should do. Overlap all over the 
> place, makes categorizing super hard.
>
>

-- 
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/7d5a4a92-f1ae-40e0-ad5d-dbd13013875cn%40googlegroups.com.

Re: [RBW] Bombadil and Hunqapillar origins: The definitive thread

2022-12-12 Thread Jim M.

Our peerless site admin has a whole Bombadil page 
here: http://cyclofiend.com/rbw/bombadil/index.html, which goes back to RR 
39 and the prot-velo Bombas.

jim m
walnut creek, ca

On Monday, December 12, 2022 at 1:06:23 PM UTC-8 Marty Gierke, Stewartstown 
PA wrote:

> I may have shared this years ago, but when the idea of a diagatube Hunq 
> was floated out there, I took the liberty of photoshopping the concept 
> based on the double top tube model. That led to a conversation with Grant 
> and a whole bunch of quick iterations for different paint and graphic 
> details. Here is the complete series. You may notice I eventually used the 
> tire graphics to keep track of which was which - I think it ended at #22. I 
> am a rank amateur when it comes to photoshop, but it was close enough at 
> the time. Crazy to look back now and imagine how different it could have 
> been. Have fun browsing the pics! See if you can spot the nifty details 
> like an extra seat tube badge on a couple of them. (I still like that 
> idea.) 
>
> Hunqapillar Concepts 
> 
>
> Marty
>
> On Monday, December 12, 2022 at 3:50:17 PM UTC-5 captaincon...@gmail.com 
> wrote:
>
>> I have that poster signed by Grant and framed.
>>
>>
>> Fair winds,
>>
>> Captain Conway Bennett
>> 239.877.4119 <(239)%20877-4119>
>>
>> On Mon, Dec 12, 2022, 2:23 PM Eric Marth  wrote:
>>
>>> I'm enjoying the discussion, pics and details! 
>>>
>>> Does anyone have a higher-res version of this absurd Hunq poster? 
>>>
>>> [image: 440ebc01ea30bd8ba7f7e5328708bea2--urban-life-bicycle-art.jpg]
>>>
>>> On Monday, December 12, 2022 at 3:11:30 PM UTC-5 Coal Bee Rye Anne wrote:
>>>
 This is certainly an interesting and complex question and I am in no 
 position to provide any answers or guidance but think it's further 
 complicated by overall cost changes over time and how it's been mentioned 
 before how some of the Tolkien models like Bombadil & Legolas essentially 
 became off menu, non-custom customs - wasn't it something like a stock geo 
 Nobilette built but non-Joe Bell paint frame so significantly less than a 
 full custom and more of a made-to-order with the custom builder... in 
 other 
 words, were they ever actually being made in the same exact place, even 
 when both were MUSA?  

 Years ago before acquiring my 65cm Clem H I actually posed a similar 
 question to Will regarding the Waterford made A.Homer Hilsen vs. Waterford 
 made 64cm Sam Hillborne, which was the only MUSA made Hillborne size at 
 the 
 time, and had me wondering what, if anything, would ultimately make the 
 two 
 differ in overall cost/value/performance when considering a made to order 
 canti-equipped countrybike with both options going through Waterford.  I 
 was just over the recommended pbh range for the production 62cm Hillborne 
 and understood going to Waterford for a 64cm Sam would essentially 
 eliminate the value gained from the Taiwan production Sam's so I really 
 was 
 just looking to verify whether the ultimate difference may more or less 
 boil down to a visual one with the sloping Hillborne vs. the more 
 horizontal Homer, if overall costs and tubing at that size would 
 effectively balance out.  The whole discussion ended up being moot since 
 this was in fact right at the time the 64cm Sam was already pulled and 
 they 
 just hadn't gotten around the updating the site yet to reflect the changes 
 and Riv's recommendation became a 67cm AHH by default.  Of course, the 
 65cm 
 Clem H was also about to be released and ultimately meet my value based 
 mega size Rivendell biking needs.

 Brian Cole
 Lawrence NJ

 On Monday, December 12, 2022 at 2:29:05 PM UTC-5 jasonz...@gmail.com 
 wrote:

> I've often wondered what made the Hunq the "less expensive Bombadil" 
> given the tubing being as Grant calls "the most expensive tubes around".  
> I'm assuming it was based on it being MIT and the Bomba being a MUSA 
> frame?  IF so, were they equally priced once the Hunq moved to MUSA 
> Waterford, why/why not?  I figured it was something similar to the 
> manufacturing locations of the Quickbeam/SimpleOne with the exception 
> that 
> those two have identical geometry and the Hunq/Bomba are different.  I'm 
> only asking because its often referred here as the cheaper bomba, but I 
> was 
> of the understanding it was more like the 700c bike (hunq) and the bomba 
> was the 650b earlier option.  
>
> Probably a messy way to ask but to clean it up, can anyone tell me if 
> the Hunq was actually that much cheaper once it was moved to Wisconsin 
> and 
> also if the tubing stayed the same once it was manufactured in the US?
>
> thanks! Love these two bikes and this thread!
>

[RBW] Re: Platypus ride report

2022-12-12 Thread Tom Palmer

Hi Dave,
I was quite surprised at the handling difference as well. I went from a 
heavy canvas military surplus bag attached to the handlebars to a light 
mini rack that attaches to the brake posts and a very light low basket from 
a 1950's office paper in box, or was it an out box? 
The weight is very similar so the slower handling  was unexpected. The mass 
with the rack is probably 6" farther forward, and I thought lower, but the 
bag actually is pretty long and would hit the rack top, now that I think of 
it. Maybe just the  weight being farther from the steering axis is all I am 
experiencing. For bars, the options are VO Granola and Soma Port Mann and 
both are 31.8 so a new stem may be an issue.
Tom



On Monday, December 12, 2022 at 12:21:06 PM UTC-5 DavidP wrote:

> Thanks for sharing, Tom. I'm glad to hear you've gotten some nice miles on 
> the new Platypus. It really is "a big floaty couch" with a cruisy zoomy 
> feel.
>
> I was interested to read your impressions on the handling change going 
> from a bar bag to a rack bag, even with what sounds like a light load. I'm 
> planning on using a front basket/bag on my Platypus and wonder how 
> noticeable I'll find the change from the small and light bar bag I'm 
> currently using.
>
> Will also be interested to see where you land on bars. I've been very 
> happy with the width and riding positions of the 65cm Toscos on my Platy 
> but they do require a 31.8 stem.
>
> We got a coating of snow last night here in MA but the forecast looks warm 
> enough that "real winter" is still a bit off and I will be trying to get 
> more miles on the Platy before the end of the year.
>
> -Dave
>
> On Monday, December 12, 2022 at 9:10:21 AM UTC-5 Tom Palmer wrote:
>
>> Hi all,
>> After many shortish 8-10mile rides, I finally did a real ride on the 
>> Platypus. over 20 miles, 37 degrees and rain for about half of it. It was 
>> actually a pleasant ride because almost no wind. If it was 5 degrees cooler 
>> or blowing, it would have been miserable and I would have cut it short.  
>> The bike is brilliant. Did some decent hills (for west Michigan) that 
>> included nice flowy descents. I put a small front rack and basket and moved 
>> tool/tube and neck warmer/hat to the rack. Handling not quite as quick as 
>> with the handlebar bag with same contents. I think the handling was 
>> affected by the weight being out front more, even though it was lower. Will 
>> be going to wider bars soon as the Albas just a tiny bit narrow for my 
>> standing  and rocking the bars climbing technique.
>> Back to the brilliance of this Platypus. The bike is a big floaty couch 
>> that is still quick to accelerate and climb. It handles amazingly well. It 
>> is my most enigmatic bike by a long way.
>>
>> Tom (riding as much as possible before real winter strikes) Palmer
>> Twin Lake, MI
>>
>

-- 
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/55d4e130-1d9d-4062-a603-9b78a648db11n%40googlegroups.com.

Re: [RBW] Saddle height and BPH

2022-12-12 Thread Eric Daume

I'm about your same size (36"/91cm PBH), but I run a 32"/81cm saddle height
(bottom bracket center to top of my (of course) level saddle). I couldn't
imagine pedaling with my saddle 6cm lower.

When I played around with mid foot pedaling, I found I had to drop my
saddle, but less than an inch.

Eric


On Mon, Dec 12, 2022 at 12:49 PM Jay Lonner  wrote:

> I just took delivery of a new (non-Riv) bike and am dialing in the fit.
> I’m a little worried that the frame is too big for me, since I only have
> maybe 2” standover, which seems tight for a gravel bike.
>
> So I went out and measured the saddle height on my Hunq (which is a size
> 62). It came in at about 75cm. This gives me a solid fistful of seatpost.
> Then I remeasured my PBH, which is 93-94 cm depending on hard I pull. For
> reference, here’s the relevant page from HQ:
>
> https://www.rivbike.com/pages/pubic-bone-height-how-to-measure-your-pbh
>
> This suggests that based on my  PBH my saddle height should be closer to
> 83 cm – an 8cm discrepancy. Before riding in this morning I raised my
> saddle height to 79 cm, basically splitting the difference. It felt weird,
> which of course it would after so many years at 75cm. But I made it in and
> my feet were in full contact with the pedals without any tippytoe
> maneuvers. So I guess I’ve been doing it wrong this whole time? Kind of
> embarrassing. Even so, according to the Riv method my saddle height is
> still ~4cm lower than my PBH would suggest.
>
> So I guess I’m wondering about alternative ways of determining saddle
> height somewhat objectively, and/or whether I should now be looking at
> other variables such as a fore-aft saddle positioning, saddle angle, and
> even saddle type (currently a B68, slammed back as far as it can go on a
> S83, with the nose pitched up ~10 degrees or so). Other relevant factors
> might be crank arm length (175mm), pedal height (Pedaling Innovations
> platform pedals), and shoes (Chuck Taylors, typically). Looking for the
> optimum balance of comfort, efficiency, and protecting my perineum.
>
> Jay Lonner
> Bellingham, WA
>
>
>
>
> --
> 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/cf9d0b0a-c497-4181-9c30-afdac0d6f54bn%40googlegroups.com
> 
> .
>

-- 
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/CAHFNW5COw_KuVysmyGJsDKfiROoeRKryvgwX%2BE0Jev36fRi8bg%40mail.gmail.com.

[RBW] Re: Saddle height and BPH

2022-12-12 Thread George Schick

Laing - I agree with you about the crank length.  But then, I'm old and 
have dealt with the issues of frame size v. saddle height v. crank length 
so many times over the years that I can't recall them all.  Nevertheless, I 
seem to have dialed into some kind of combination of these that I have 
managed to accommodate the differences well enough to "just ride."  Enough 
is enough.



On Monday, December 12, 2022 at 2:41:33 PM UTC-6 lconley wrote:

> I have never understood why any body is concerned "saddle height" which as 
> I understand it is the distance from the CL of the crank to the top of the 
> saddle, inline with the seat tube. It is very hard to measure from the 
> center of the crank and what if you have bikes with different crank 
> lengths?. I put the crank low and in-line with the seat tube and measure 
> from the top of the pedal axle to the top of the saddle,  inline with the 
> seat tube - takes the crank length out of the equation. I used 35" when I 
> was younger, but now use 34". It is constant from bike to bike, no worrying 
> about crank length, nor trying to line up the end of the tape with the 
> centerline of the crank at the same time as trying read the tape at the 
> saddle.
>
> Laing
> Delray Beach FL
>
> On Monday, December 12, 2022 at 12:49:07 PM UTC-5 Jay Lonner wrote:
>
>> I just took delivery of a new (non-Riv) bike and am dialing in the fit. 
>> I’m a little worried that the frame is too big for me, since I only have 
>> maybe 2” standover, which seems tight for a gravel bike.
>>
>> So I went out and measured the saddle height on my Hunq (which is a size 
>> 62). It came in at about 75cm. This gives me a solid fistful of seatpost. 
>> Then I remeasured my PBH, which is 93-94 cm depending on hard I pull. For 
>> reference, here’s the relevant page from HQ:
>>
>> https://www.rivbike.com/pages/pubic-bone-height-how-to-measure-your-pbh
>>
>> This suggests that based on my  PBH my saddle height should be closer to 
>> 83 cm – an 8cm discrepancy. Before riding in this morning I raised my 
>> saddle height to 79 cm, basically splitting the difference. It felt weird, 
>> which of course it would after so many years at 75cm. But I made it in and 
>> my feet were in full contact with the pedals without any tippytoe 
>> maneuvers. So I guess I’ve been doing it wrong this whole time? Kind of 
>> embarrassing. Even so, according to the Riv method my saddle height is 
>> still ~4cm lower than my PBH would suggest. 
>>
>> So I guess I’m wondering about alternative ways of determining saddle 
>> height somewhat objectively, and/or whether I should now be looking at 
>> other variables such as a fore-aft saddle positioning, saddle angle, and 
>> even saddle type (currently a B68, slammed back as far as it can go on a 
>> S83, with the nose pitched up ~10 degrees or so). Other relevant factors 
>> might be crank arm length (175mm), pedal height (Pedaling Innovations 
>> platform pedals), and shoes (Chuck Taylors, typically). Looking for the 
>> optimum balance of comfort, efficiency, and protecting my perineum.
>>
>> Jay Lonner
>> Bellingham, WA
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>

-- 
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/9ac4f770-560b-4f6e-a538-6a16eccf9b5an%40googlegroups.com.

Re: [RBW] Bombadil and Hunqapillar origins: The definitive thread

2022-12-12 Thread Marty Gierke, Stewartstown PA

I may have shared this years ago, but when the idea of a diagatube Hunq was 
floated out there, I took the liberty of photoshopping the concept based on 
the double top tube model. That led to a conversation with Grant and a 
whole bunch of quick iterations for different paint and graphic details. 
Here is the complete series. You may notice I eventually used the tire 
graphics to keep track of which was which - I think it ended at #22. I am a 
rank amateur when it comes to photoshop, but it was close enough at the 
time. Crazy to look back now and imagine how different it could have been. 
Have fun browsing the pics! See if you can spot the nifty details like an 
extra seat tube badge on a couple of them. (I still like that idea.) 

Hunqapillar Concepts 


Marty

On Monday, December 12, 2022 at 3:50:17 PM UTC-5 captaincon...@gmail.com 
wrote:

> I have that poster signed by Grant and framed.
>
>
> Fair winds,
>
> Captain Conway Bennett
> 239.877.4119 <(239)%20877-4119>
>
> On Mon, Dec 12, 2022, 2:23 PM Eric Marth  wrote:
>
>> I'm enjoying the discussion, pics and details! 
>>
>> Does anyone have a higher-res version of this absurd Hunq poster? 
>>
>> [image: 440ebc01ea30bd8ba7f7e5328708bea2--urban-life-bicycle-art.jpg]
>>
>> On Monday, December 12, 2022 at 3:11:30 PM UTC-5 Coal Bee Rye Anne wrote:
>>
>>> This is certainly an interesting and complex question and I am in no 
>>> position to provide any answers or guidance but think it's further 
>>> complicated by overall cost changes over time and how it's been mentioned 
>>> before how some of the Tolkien models like Bombadil & Legolas essentially 
>>> became off menu, non-custom customs - wasn't it something like a stock geo 
>>> Nobilette built but non-Joe Bell paint frame so significantly less than a 
>>> full custom and more of a made-to-order with the custom builder... in other 
>>> words, were they ever actually being made in the same exact place, even 
>>> when both were MUSA?  
>>>
>>> Years ago before acquiring my 65cm Clem H I actually posed a similar 
>>> question to Will regarding the Waterford made A.Homer Hilsen vs. Waterford 
>>> made 64cm Sam Hillborne, which was the only MUSA made Hillborne size at the 
>>> time, and had me wondering what, if anything, would ultimately make the two 
>>> differ in overall cost/value/performance when considering a made to order 
>>> canti-equipped countrybike with both options going through Waterford.  I 
>>> was just over the recommended pbh range for the production 62cm Hillborne 
>>> and understood going to Waterford for a 64cm Sam would essentially 
>>> eliminate the value gained from the Taiwan production Sam's so I really was 
>>> just looking to verify whether the ultimate difference may more or less 
>>> boil down to a visual one with the sloping Hillborne vs. the more 
>>> horizontal Homer, if overall costs and tubing at that size would 
>>> effectively balance out.  The whole discussion ended up being moot since 
>>> this was in fact right at the time the 64cm Sam was already pulled and they 
>>> just hadn't gotten around the updating the site yet to reflect the changes 
>>> and Riv's recommendation became a 67cm AHH by default.  Of course, the 65cm 
>>> Clem H was also about to be released and ultimately meet my value based 
>>> mega size Rivendell biking needs.
>>>
>>> Brian Cole
>>> Lawrence NJ
>>>
>>> On Monday, December 12, 2022 at 2:29:05 PM UTC-5 jasonz...@gmail.com 
>>> wrote:
>>>
 I've often wondered what made the Hunq the "less expensive Bombadil" 
 given the tubing being as Grant calls "the most expensive tubes around".  
 I'm assuming it was based on it being MIT and the Bomba being a MUSA 
 frame?  IF so, were they equally priced once the Hunq moved to MUSA 
 Waterford, why/why not?  I figured it was something similar to the 
 manufacturing locations of the Quickbeam/SimpleOne with the exception that 
 those two have identical geometry and the Hunq/Bomba are different.  I'm 
 only asking because its often referred here as the cheaper bomba, but I 
 was 
 of the understanding it was more like the 700c bike (hunq) and the bomba 
 was the 650b earlier option.  

 Probably a messy way to ask but to clean it up, can anyone tell me if 
 the Hunq was actually that much cheaper once it was moved to Wisconsin and 
 also if the tubing stayed the same once it was manufactured in the US?

 thanks! Love these two bikes and this thread!
 Jason

 On Monday, December 12, 2022 at 11:44:50 AM UTC-6 Dick Combs wrote:

> They are the same, both the originals that came with the frame
>
> On Monday, December 12, 2022 at 11:24:59 AM UTC-5 J J wrote:
>
>> Cool pair of Hunqs! are the forks different? Or is it just the photo 
>> angle that makes the curve on the fork on the one with the black saddle 
>> look different?
>>

Re: [RBW] Bombadil and Hunqapillar origins: The definitive thread

2022-12-12 Thread Conway Bennett

I have that poster signed by Grant and framed.


Fair winds,

Captain Conway Bennett
239.877.4119

On Mon, Dec 12, 2022, 2:23 PM Eric Marth  wrote:

> I'm enjoying the discussion, pics and details!
>
> Does anyone have a higher-res version of this absurd Hunq poster?
>
> [image: 440ebc01ea30bd8ba7f7e5328708bea2--urban-life-bicycle-art.jpg]
>
> On Monday, December 12, 2022 at 3:11:30 PM UTC-5 Coal Bee Rye Anne wrote:
>
>> This is certainly an interesting and complex question and I am in no
>> position to provide any answers or guidance but think it's further
>> complicated by overall cost changes over time and how it's been mentioned
>> before how some of the Tolkien models like Bombadil & Legolas essentially
>> became off menu, non-custom customs - wasn't it something like a stock geo
>> Nobilette built but non-Joe Bell paint frame so significantly less than a
>> full custom and more of a made-to-order with the custom builder... in other
>> words, were they ever actually being made in the same exact place, even
>> when both were MUSA?
>>
>> Years ago before acquiring my 65cm Clem H I actually posed a similar
>> question to Will regarding the Waterford made A.Homer Hilsen vs. Waterford
>> made 64cm Sam Hillborne, which was the only MUSA made Hillborne size at the
>> time, and had me wondering what, if anything, would ultimately make the two
>> differ in overall cost/value/performance when considering a made to order
>> canti-equipped countrybike with both options going through Waterford.  I
>> was just over the recommended pbh range for the production 62cm Hillborne
>> and understood going to Waterford for a 64cm Sam would essentially
>> eliminate the value gained from the Taiwan production Sam's so I really was
>> just looking to verify whether the ultimate difference may more or less
>> boil down to a visual one with the sloping Hillborne vs. the more
>> horizontal Homer, if overall costs and tubing at that size would
>> effectively balance out.  The whole discussion ended up being moot since
>> this was in fact right at the time the 64cm Sam was already pulled and they
>> just hadn't gotten around the updating the site yet to reflect the changes
>> and Riv's recommendation became a 67cm AHH by default.  Of course, the 65cm
>> Clem H was also about to be released and ultimately meet my value based
>> mega size Rivendell biking needs.
>>
>> Brian Cole
>> Lawrence NJ
>>
>> On Monday, December 12, 2022 at 2:29:05 PM UTC-5 jasonz...@gmail.com
>> wrote:
>>
>>> I've often wondered what made the Hunq the "less expensive Bombadil"
>>> given the tubing being as Grant calls "the most expensive tubes around".
>>> I'm assuming it was based on it being MIT and the Bomba being a MUSA
>>> frame?  IF so, were they equally priced once the Hunq moved to MUSA
>>> Waterford, why/why not?  I figured it was something similar to the
>>> manufacturing locations of the Quickbeam/SimpleOne with the exception that
>>> those two have identical geometry and the Hunq/Bomba are different.  I'm
>>> only asking because its often referred here as the cheaper bomba, but I was
>>> of the understanding it was more like the 700c bike (hunq) and the bomba
>>> was the 650b earlier option.
>>>
>>> Probably a messy way to ask but to clean it up, can anyone tell me if
>>> the Hunq was actually that much cheaper once it was moved to Wisconsin and
>>> also if the tubing stayed the same once it was manufactured in the US?
>>>
>>> thanks! Love these two bikes and this thread!
>>> Jason
>>>
>>> On Monday, December 12, 2022 at 11:44:50 AM UTC-6 Dick Combs wrote:
>>>
 They are the same, both the originals that came with the frame

 On Monday, December 12, 2022 at 11:24:59 AM UTC-5 J J wrote:

> Cool pair of Hunqs! are the forks different? Or is it just the photo
> angle that makes the curve on the fork on the one with the black saddle
> look different?
>
> On Monday, December 12, 2022 at 6:56:43 AM UTC-5 Dick Combs wrote:
>
>> [image: 61977D70-55E2-4782-A93A-A8333171AFD6.jpeg][image:
>> 7A5D4923-2037-4ACB-81D6-3091B473A0FB.jpeg]My two Hunqs
>>
>> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the
> Google Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group.
> To unsubscribe from this topic, visit
> https://groups.google.com/d/topic/rbw-owners-bunch/8k2ulNQVpUk/unsubscribe
> .
> To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, 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/a75a2668-bb74-4cd9-8feb-b09c3fa7f02en%40googlegroups.com
> 
> .
>

-- 
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

Re: [RBW] Re: New Gus & bottom bracket confusion

It's certainly a valid Riv Bunch topic and one I expected to see shortly 
after Crust sold their new batch of frames. The knowledge bank on what 
works in the 73mm BB shells of these two Riv models is not deep. 

On Monday, December 12, 2022 at 10:24:59 AM UTC-8 Scott wrote:

> The forum, in part, is a good starting point for trivial questions like 
> yours, Richard. If you aren't satisfied with answers, or lack there of, 
> here then, of course, Riv is another option to seek an answer. You haven't 
> committed a party foul, IMHO...
>
> I'm faced with same issue, since I have a Gus on the way, too. I plan on 
> trying a 107 and then a 113. I plan on using an XTR M900 set of triple 
> cranks and using the middle ring only, as a 1x. You seek increased chain 
> line by way of longer spindle. I am getting increased chain line out of 
> using middle ring on my triple.
>
> PM me if you wanna drill down on it. I need to sort it out, too.
>
> Scott
>
> Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android 
> 
>
> On Mon, Dec 12, 2022 at 10:06 AM, Richard Rose
>  wrote:
>
> Oh I agree & believe me I call them a lot! I just thought the collective 
> brain power of this group might give me an answer before they wake up in 
> California.
>
> On Monday, December 12, 2022 at 10:41:25 AM UTC-5 Garth wrote:
>
> No offense, but you're asking RBW business questions that would be 
> addressed by them. Call them ! They don't bite. 
> On Monday, December 12, 2022 at 10:11:44 AM UTC-5 rmro...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> I have decided to stick with a square taper crank, either White Eno or Riv 
> Silver, and I have bottom bracket questions.
> Gus BB shell is 73 BSA. The bottom brackets they sell (Shimano & IRD) are 
> 68. Riv says "use the 113 (spindle) if you have a mountain bike front 
> derailleur." But, they also say r.e. the IRD BB, "If you have a Gus or 
> Susie with a tire up to 2.5", you'll need a 123 with the right cup spacer." 
> But, they do not even show the 123 as being available?
> Alternatively, White Industries offers both 68 & 73 widths but the widest 
> spindle offering is 121.
> So I guess my question is 1. If I go with a Silver double, which bottom 
> bracket to buy? 2. If I go with a White Ind. Eno single, which bottom 
> bracket? I plan to run 2.5"-2.6" tires.
> Thanks in advance for our help.
>
> -- 
> 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-bun...@googlegroups.com.
> To view this discussion on the web visit 
>
> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/rbw-owners-bunch/2329218b-4fe8-493d-8f82-b806025073b5n%40googlegroups.com
>  
> 
> .
>
>

-- 
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/d10c2557-4a0b-4641-87c9-28ab8ca70478n%40googlegroups.com.

[RBW] Re: Saddle height and BPH

I have never understood why any body is concerned "saddle height" which as 
I understand it is the distance from the CL of the crank to the top of the 
saddle, inline with the seat tube. It is very hard to measure from the 
center of the crank and what if you have bikes with different crank 
lengths?. I put the crank low and in-line with the seat tube and measure 
from the top of the pedal axle to the top of the saddle,  inline with the 
seat tube - takes the crank length out of the equation. I used 35" when I 
was younger, but now use 34". It is constant from bike to bike, no worrying 
about crank length, nor trying to line up the end of the tape with the 
centerline of the crank at the same time as trying read the tape at the 
saddle.

Laing
Delray Beach FL

On Monday, December 12, 2022 at 12:49:07 PM UTC-5 Jay Lonner wrote:

> I just took delivery of a new (non-Riv) bike and am dialing in the fit. 
> I’m a little worried that the frame is too big for me, since I only have 
> maybe 2” standover, which seems tight for a gravel bike.
>
> So I went out and measured the saddle height on my Hunq (which is a size 
> 62). It came in at about 75cm. This gives me a solid fistful of seatpost. 
> Then I remeasured my PBH, which is 93-94 cm depending on hard I pull. For 
> reference, here’s the relevant page from HQ:
>
> https://www.rivbike.com/pages/pubic-bone-height-how-to-measure-your-pbh
>
> This suggests that based on my  PBH my saddle height should be closer to 
> 83 cm – an 8cm discrepancy. Before riding in this morning I raised my 
> saddle height to 79 cm, basically splitting the difference. It felt weird, 
> which of course it would after so many years at 75cm. But I made it in and 
> my feet were in full contact with the pedals without any tippytoe 
> maneuvers. So I guess I’ve been doing it wrong this whole time? Kind of 
> embarrassing. Even so, according to the Riv method my saddle height is 
> still ~4cm lower than my PBH would suggest. 
>
> So I guess I’m wondering about alternative ways of determining saddle 
> height somewhat objectively, and/or whether I should now be looking at 
> other variables such as a fore-aft saddle positioning, saddle angle, and 
> even saddle type (currently a B68, slammed back as far as it can go on a 
> S83, with the nose pitched up ~10 degrees or so). Other relevant factors 
> might be crank arm length (175mm), pedal height (Pedaling Innovations 
> platform pedals), and shoes (Chuck Taylors, typically). Looking for the 
> optimum balance of comfort, efficiency, and protecting my perineum.
>
> Jay Lonner
> Bellingham, WA
>
>
>
>
>

-- 
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/0ac089e3-1d3e-4e8b-bc6d-5bcd99a5c3b7n%40googlegroups.com.

Re: [RBW] Bombadil and Hunqapillar origins: The definitive thread

2022-12-12 Thread Chris L

I had it on the wall in my office for years.  

I've never heard it mentioned, but one of the early Hunqapillar brochures 
showed three colors they had planned for the heat tube and decals, 
red/maroon, orange and blue, which apparently didn't make the cut.  The 
three Mammoths on the poster seem to reflect those three colors. 

On Monday, December 12, 2022 at 2:23:17 PM UTC-6 eric...@gmail.com wrote:

> I'm enjoying the discussion, pics and details! 
>
> Does anyone have a higher-res version of this absurd Hunq poster? 
>
> [image: 440ebc01ea30bd8ba7f7e5328708bea2--urban-life-bicycle-art.jpg]
>
> On Monday, December 12, 2022 at 3:11:30 PM UTC-5 Coal Bee Rye Anne wrote:
>
>> This is certainly an interesting and complex question and I am in no 
>> position to provide any answers or guidance but think it's further 
>> complicated by overall cost changes over time and how it's been mentioned 
>> before how some of the Tolkien models like Bombadil & Legolas essentially 
>> became off menu, non-custom customs - wasn't it something like a stock geo 
>> Nobilette built but non-Joe Bell paint frame so significantly less than a 
>> full custom and more of a made-to-order with the custom builder... in other 
>> words, were they ever actually being made in the same exact place, even 
>> when both were MUSA?  
>>
>> Years ago before acquiring my 65cm Clem H I actually posed a similar 
>> question to Will regarding the Waterford made A.Homer Hilsen vs. Waterford 
>> made 64cm Sam Hillborne, which was the only MUSA made Hillborne size at the 
>> time, and had me wondering what, if anything, would ultimately make the two 
>> differ in overall cost/value/performance when considering a made to order 
>> canti-equipped countrybike with both options going through Waterford.  I 
>> was just over the recommended pbh range for the production 62cm Hillborne 
>> and understood going to Waterford for a 64cm Sam would essentially 
>> eliminate the value gained from the Taiwan production Sam's so I really was 
>> just looking to verify whether the ultimate difference may more or less 
>> boil down to a visual one with the sloping Hillborne vs. the more 
>> horizontal Homer, if overall costs and tubing at that size would 
>> effectively balance out.  The whole discussion ended up being moot since 
>> this was in fact right at the time the 64cm Sam was already pulled and they 
>> just hadn't gotten around the updating the site yet to reflect the changes 
>> and Riv's recommendation became a 67cm AHH by default.  Of course, the 65cm 
>> Clem H was also about to be released and ultimately meet my value based 
>> mega size Rivendell biking needs.
>>
>> Brian Cole
>> Lawrence NJ
>>
>> On Monday, December 12, 2022 at 2:29:05 PM UTC-5 jasonz...@gmail.com 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> I've often wondered what made the Hunq the "less expensive Bombadil" 
>>> given the tubing being as Grant calls "the most expensive tubes around". 
>>>  I'm assuming it was based on it being MIT and the Bomba being a MUSA 
>>> frame?  IF so, were they equally priced once the Hunq moved to MUSA 
>>> Waterford, why/why not?  I figured it was something similar to the 
>>> manufacturing locations of the Quickbeam/SimpleOne with the exception that 
>>> those two have identical geometry and the Hunq/Bomba are different.  I'm 
>>> only asking because its often referred here as the cheaper bomba, but I was 
>>> of the understanding it was more like the 700c bike (hunq) and the bomba 
>>> was the 650b earlier option.  
>>>
>>> Probably a messy way to ask but to clean it up, can anyone tell me if 
>>> the Hunq was actually that much cheaper once it was moved to Wisconsin and 
>>> also if the tubing stayed the same once it was manufactured in the US?
>>>
>>> thanks! Love these two bikes and this thread!
>>> Jason
>>>
>>> On Monday, December 12, 2022 at 11:44:50 AM UTC-6 Dick Combs wrote:
>>>
 They are the same, both the originals that came with the frame

 On Monday, December 12, 2022 at 11:24:59 AM UTC-5 J J wrote:

> Cool pair of Hunqs! are the forks different? Or is it just the photo 
> angle that makes the curve on the fork on the one with the black saddle 
> look different?
>
> On Monday, December 12, 2022 at 6:56:43 AM UTC-5 Dick Combs wrote:
>
>> [image: 61977D70-55E2-4782-A93A-A8333171AFD6.jpeg][image: 
>> 7A5D4923-2037-4ACB-81D6-3091B473A0FB.jpeg]My two Hunqs
>>
>>

-- 
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/856d2a48-5757-404b-acb7-2745a1a749a0n%40googlegroups.com.

[RBW] Re: Saddle height and BPH

2022-12-12 Thread Alan Barnard

Like others have intimated, it sounds as if you’ve been running your saddle 
much lower than recommended. I would suggest measuring your PBH one more 
time with an assistant to be absolutely sure it’s correct, then adjust your 
saddle to PBH minus 10-10.5 cm.

Alternatively, you could use the LeMond method which is essentially the 
same using different math. His formula is PBH x .883. 

On Monday, December 12, 2022 at 10:46:57 AM UTC-8 Paul Clifton wrote:

> IME, there's no objective way to get the "right" saddle height, but the 
> Riv method gets me in the ballpark. I do change my saddle height +/- a cm 
> or so, even on the same bike, depending on the kind of riding I'm doing 
> (single track vs path/road/gravel) and how flexible I'm feeling at any 
> given time. I'm not searching for the most efficient position in terms of 
> power transfer, but the most comfortable in terms of my muscles, joints, 
> and movements on the bike.
>
> What the others have said (heel on pedal to almost lock out, and adjusting 
> the fore/aft/tilt) is good advice, but how straight to get your knee at the 
> bottom of the pedal stroke is subjective in my opinion. I'd say jack the 
> seat up another 4cm and see how it feels, but don't be shy about lowering 
> it back down either. I think some of the individual differences have to do 
> with femur-to-fibula ratios, hip flexibility, quad-to-calf strength ratios, 
> and butt size, not to mention upright vs leaned forward riding position.
>
> Another Riv method that I like is 
> 1. Move the seat way up. Get it high enough that when you ride, you notice 
> your hips moving from side to side, like you're trying to get a little more 
> extension to reach the bottom of the pedal stroke.
> 2. Move the saddle down 1/2 to 1 cm at a time until you feel that hip 
> rocking stop.
>
> That's gonna get you your maximum acceptable saddle height, which I would 
> consider "leaned-forward, go fast, roadie saddle height". Go down from 
> there based on what feels comfortable to your knees and hips on the type of 
> riding you're doing.
>
> These are just my thoughts as I've searched for saddle height nirvana and 
> found that it only really exists in the moment.
>
> Paul in AR
>
> On Monday, December 12, 2022 at 11:49:07 AM UTC-6 Jay Lonner wrote:
>
>> I just took delivery of a new (non-Riv) bike and am dialing in the fit. 
>> I’m a little worried that the frame is too big for me, since I only have 
>> maybe 2” standover, which seems tight for a gravel bike.
>>
>> So I went out and measured the saddle height on my Hunq (which is a size 
>> 62). It came in at about 75cm. This gives me a solid fistful of seatpost. 
>> Then I remeasured my PBH, which is 93-94 cm depending on hard I pull. For 
>> reference, here’s the relevant page from HQ:
>>
>> https://www.rivbike.com/pages/pubic-bone-height-how-to-measure-your-pbh
>>
>> This suggests that based on my  PBH my saddle height should be closer to 
>> 83 cm – an 8cm discrepancy. Before riding in this morning I raised my 
>> saddle height to 79 cm, basically splitting the difference. It felt weird, 
>> which of course it would after so many years at 75cm. But I made it in and 
>> my feet were in full contact with the pedals without any tippytoe 
>> maneuvers. So I guess I’ve been doing it wrong this whole time? Kind of 
>> embarrassing. Even so, according to the Riv method my saddle height is 
>> still ~4cm lower than my PBH would suggest. 
>>
>> So I guess I’m wondering about alternative ways of determining saddle 
>> height somewhat objectively, and/or whether I should now be looking at 
>> other variables such as a fore-aft saddle positioning, saddle angle, and 
>> even saddle type (currently a B68, slammed back as far as it can go on a 
>> S83, with the nose pitched up ~10 degrees or so). Other relevant factors 
>> might be crank arm length (175mm), pedal height (Pedaling Innovations 
>> platform pedals), and shoes (Chuck Taylors, typically). Looking for the 
>> optimum balance of comfort, efficiency, and protecting my perineum.
>>
>> Jay Lonner
>> Bellingham, WA
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>

-- 
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/36e4403e-d7a9-4c64-bcf6-5e1af112c241n%40googlegroups.com.

Re: [RBW] Bombadil and Hunqapillar origins: The definitive thread

2022-12-12 Thread Eric Marth

I'm enjoying the discussion, pics and details! 

Does anyone have a higher-res version of this absurd Hunq poster? 

[image: 440ebc01ea30bd8ba7f7e5328708bea2--urban-life-bicycle-art.jpg]

On Monday, December 12, 2022 at 3:11:30 PM UTC-5 Coal Bee Rye Anne wrote:

> This is certainly an interesting and complex question and I am in no 
> position to provide any answers or guidance but think it's further 
> complicated by overall cost changes over time and how it's been mentioned 
> before how some of the Tolkien models like Bombadil & Legolas essentially 
> became off menu, non-custom customs - wasn't it something like a stock geo 
> Nobilette built but non-Joe Bell paint frame so significantly less than a 
> full custom and more of a made-to-order with the custom builder... in other 
> words, were they ever actually being made in the same exact place, even 
> when both were MUSA?  
>
> Years ago before acquiring my 65cm Clem H I actually posed a similar 
> question to Will regarding the Waterford made A.Homer Hilsen vs. Waterford 
> made 64cm Sam Hillborne, which was the only MUSA made Hillborne size at the 
> time, and had me wondering what, if anything, would ultimately make the two 
> differ in overall cost/value/performance when considering a made to order 
> canti-equipped countrybike with both options going through Waterford.  I 
> was just over the recommended pbh range for the production 62cm Hillborne 
> and understood going to Waterford for a 64cm Sam would essentially 
> eliminate the value gained from the Taiwan production Sam's so I really was 
> just looking to verify whether the ultimate difference may more or less 
> boil down to a visual one with the sloping Hillborne vs. the more 
> horizontal Homer, if overall costs and tubing at that size would 
> effectively balance out.  The whole discussion ended up being moot since 
> this was in fact right at the time the 64cm Sam was already pulled and they 
> just hadn't gotten around the updating the site yet to reflect the changes 
> and Riv's recommendation became a 67cm AHH by default.  Of course, the 65cm 
> Clem H was also about to be released and ultimately meet my value based 
> mega size Rivendell biking needs.
>
> Brian Cole
> Lawrence NJ
>
> On Monday, December 12, 2022 at 2:29:05 PM UTC-5 jasonz...@gmail.com 
> wrote:
>
>> I've often wondered what made the Hunq the "less expensive Bombadil" 
>> given the tubing being as Grant calls "the most expensive tubes around". 
>>  I'm assuming it was based on it being MIT and the Bomba being a MUSA 
>> frame?  IF so, were they equally priced once the Hunq moved to MUSA 
>> Waterford, why/why not?  I figured it was something similar to the 
>> manufacturing locations of the Quickbeam/SimpleOne with the exception that 
>> those two have identical geometry and the Hunq/Bomba are different.  I'm 
>> only asking because its often referred here as the cheaper bomba, but I was 
>> of the understanding it was more like the 700c bike (hunq) and the bomba 
>> was the 650b earlier option.  
>>
>> Probably a messy way to ask but to clean it up, can anyone tell me if the 
>> Hunq was actually that much cheaper once it was moved to Wisconsin and also 
>> if the tubing stayed the same once it was manufactured in the US?
>>
>> thanks! Love these two bikes and this thread!
>> Jason
>>
>> On Monday, December 12, 2022 at 11:44:50 AM UTC-6 Dick Combs wrote:
>>
>>> They are the same, both the originals that came with the frame
>>>
>>> On Monday, December 12, 2022 at 11:24:59 AM UTC-5 J J wrote:
>>>
 Cool pair of Hunqs! are the forks different? Or is it just the photo 
 angle that makes the curve on the fork on the one with the black saddle 
 look different?

 On Monday, December 12, 2022 at 6:56:43 AM UTC-5 Dick Combs wrote:

> [image: 61977D70-55E2-4782-A93A-A8333171AFD6.jpeg][image: 
> 7A5D4923-2037-4ACB-81D6-3091B473A0FB.jpeg]My two Hunqs
>
>

-- 
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/a75a2668-bb74-4cd9-8feb-b09c3fa7f02en%40googlegroups.com.

Re: [RBW] Bombadil and Hunqapillar origins: The definitive thread

2022-12-12 Thread Coal Bee Rye Anne

This is certainly an interesting and complex question and I am in no 
position to provide any answers or guidance but think it's further 
complicated by overall cost changes over time and how it's been mentioned 
before how some of the Tolkien models like Bombadil & Legolas essentially 
became off menu, non-custom customs - wasn't it something like a stock geo 
Nobilette built but non-Joe Bell paint frame so significantly less than a 
full custom and more of a made-to-order with the custom builder... in other 
words, were they ever actually being made in the same exact place, even 
when both were MUSA?  

Years ago before acquiring my 65cm Clem H I actually posed a similar 
question to Will regarding the Waterford made A.Homer Hilsen vs. Waterford 
made 64cm Sam Hillborne, which was the only MUSA made Hillborne size at the 
time, and had me wondering what, if anything, would ultimately make the two 
differ in overall cost/value/performance when considering a made to order 
canti-equipped countrybike with both options going through Waterford.  I 
was just over the recommended pbh range for the production 62cm Hillborne 
and understood going to Waterford for a 64cm Sam would essentially 
eliminate the value gained from the Taiwan production Sam's so I really was 
just looking to verify whether the ultimate difference may more or less 
boil down to a visual one with the sloping Hillborne vs. the more 
horizontal Homer, if overall costs and tubing at that size would 
effectively balance out.  The whole discussion ended up being moot since 
this was in fact right at the time the 64cm Sam was already pulled and they 
just hadn't gotten around the updating the site yet to reflect the changes 
and Riv's recommendation became a 67cm AHH by default.  Of course, the 65cm 
Clem H was also about to be released and ultimately meet my value based 
mega size Rivendell biking needs.

Brian Cole
Lawrence NJ

On Monday, December 12, 2022 at 2:29:05 PM UTC-5 jasonz...@gmail.com wrote:

> I've often wondered what made the Hunq the "less expensive Bombadil" given 
> the tubing being as Grant calls "the most expensive tubes around".  I'm 
> assuming it was based on it being MIT and the Bomba being a MUSA frame?  IF 
> so, were they equally priced once the Hunq moved to MUSA Waterford, why/why 
> not?  I figured it was something similar to the manufacturing locations of 
> the Quickbeam/SimpleOne with the exception that those two have identical 
> geometry and the Hunq/Bomba are different.  I'm only asking because its 
> often referred here as the cheaper bomba, but I was of the understanding it 
> was more like the 700c bike (hunq) and the bomba was the 650b earlier 
> option.  
>
> Probably a messy way to ask but to clean it up, can anyone tell me if the 
> Hunq was actually that much cheaper once it was moved to Wisconsin and also 
> if the tubing stayed the same once it was manufactured in the US?
>
> thanks! Love these two bikes and this thread!
> Jason
>
> On Monday, December 12, 2022 at 11:44:50 AM UTC-6 Dick Combs wrote:
>
>> They are the same, both the originals that came with the frame
>>
>> On Monday, December 12, 2022 at 11:24:59 AM UTC-5 J J wrote:
>>
>>> Cool pair of Hunqs! are the forks different? Or is it just the photo 
>>> angle that makes the curve on the fork on the one with the black saddle 
>>> look different?
>>>
>>> On Monday, December 12, 2022 at 6:56:43 AM UTC-5 Dick Combs wrote:
>>>
 [image: 61977D70-55E2-4782-A93A-A8333171AFD6.jpeg][image: 
 7A5D4923-2037-4ACB-81D6-3091B473A0FB.jpeg]My two Hunqs

-- 
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/54eb8a0a-03bf-43b6-b239-b5b5cf1f3a22n%40googlegroups.com.

Re: [RBW] Bombadil and Hunqapillar origins: The definitive thread

2022-12-12 Thread J J

I discussed the history of Hunqapillar pricing in another recent thread 
. 
It started out at $1,500 and incrementally rose to $2,350.

As far as I can ascertain from the Wayback archive, the most the Bombadil 
went for was $3,000. It started out at $2,000.

On Monday, December 12, 2022 at 2:47:21 PM UTC-5 lconley wrote:

> There was an actual additional piece of steel. It looks like a longer lug 
> in paint, but if one of raw, clear coated frames, you can see that is an 
> addition piece of metal.
> [image: bomb2 (2).jpg]
>
> Laing
>
> On Monday, December 12, 2022 at 2:38:07 PM UTC-5 jasonz...@gmail.com 
> wrote:
>
>> Sure thing Laing, so the Bombadil was more ornate with the lug profile? 
>>
>> On Monday, December 12, 2022 at 1:32:41 PM UTC-6 lconley wrote:
>>
>>> For one thing, the Hunqapillar did not have the lower head tube - down 
>>> tube lug extension like the Bombadil.
>>>
>>> Laing
>>>
>>> On Monday, December 12, 2022 at 2:29:05 PM UTC-5 jasonz...@gmail.com 
>>> wrote:
>>>
 I've often wondered what made the Hunq the "less expensive Bombadil" 
 given the tubing being as Grant calls "the most expensive tubes around". 
  I'm assuming it was based on it being MIT and the Bomba being a MUSA 
 frame?  IF so, were they equally priced once the Hunq moved to MUSA 
 Waterford, why/why not?  I figured it was something similar to the 
 manufacturing locations of the Quickbeam/SimpleOne with the exception that 
 those two have identical geometry and the Hunq/Bomba are different.  I'm 
 only asking because its often referred here as the cheaper bomba, but I 
 was 
 of the understanding it was more like the 700c bike (hunq) and the bomba 
 was the 650b earlier option.  

 Probably a messy way to ask but to clean it up, can anyone tell me if 
 the Hunq was actually that much cheaper once it was moved to Wisconsin and 
 also if the tubing stayed the same once it was manufactured in the US?

 thanks! Love these two bikes and this thread!
 Jason

 On Monday, December 12, 2022 at 11:44:50 AM UTC-6 Dick Combs wrote:

> They are the same, both the originals that came with the frame
>
> On Monday, December 12, 2022 at 11:24:59 AM UTC-5 J J wrote:
>
>> Cool pair of Hunqs! are the forks different? Or is it just the photo 
>> angle that makes the curve on the fork on the one with the black saddle 
>> look different?
>>
>> On Monday, December 12, 2022 at 6:56:43 AM UTC-5 Dick Combs wrote:
>>
>>> [image: 61977D70-55E2-4782-A93A-A8333171AFD6.jpeg][image: 
>>> 7A5D4923-2037-4ACB-81D6-3091B473A0FB.jpeg]My two Hunqs
>>>
>>>

-- 
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/9ee596d0-1d4e-445f-8133-a8196e6fa53en%40googlegroups.com.

Re: [RBW] Bombadil and Hunqapillar origins: The definitive thread

There was an actual additional piece of steel. It looks like a longer lug 
in paint, but if one of raw, clear coated frames, you can see that is an 
addition piece of metal.
[image: bomb2 (2).jpg]

Laing

On Monday, December 12, 2022 at 2:38:07 PM UTC-5 jasonz...@gmail.com wrote:

> Sure thing Laing, so the Bombadil was more ornate with the lug profile? 
>
> On Monday, December 12, 2022 at 1:32:41 PM UTC-6 lconley wrote:
>
>> For one thing, the Hunqapillar did not have the lower head tube - down 
>> tube lug extension like the Bombadil.
>>
>> Laing
>>
>> On Monday, December 12, 2022 at 2:29:05 PM UTC-5 jasonz...@gmail.com 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> I've often wondered what made the Hunq the "less expensive Bombadil" 
>>> given the tubing being as Grant calls "the most expensive tubes around". 
>>>  I'm assuming it was based on it being MIT and the Bomba being a MUSA 
>>> frame?  IF so, were they equally priced once the Hunq moved to MUSA 
>>> Waterford, why/why not?  I figured it was something similar to the 
>>> manufacturing locations of the Quickbeam/SimpleOne with the exception that 
>>> those two have identical geometry and the Hunq/Bomba are different.  I'm 
>>> only asking because its often referred here as the cheaper bomba, but I was 
>>> of the understanding it was more like the 700c bike (hunq) and the bomba 
>>> was the 650b earlier option.  
>>>
>>> Probably a messy way to ask but to clean it up, can anyone tell me if 
>>> the Hunq was actually that much cheaper once it was moved to Wisconsin and 
>>> also if the tubing stayed the same once it was manufactured in the US?
>>>
>>> thanks! Love these two bikes and this thread!
>>> Jason
>>>
>>> On Monday, December 12, 2022 at 11:44:50 AM UTC-6 Dick Combs wrote:
>>>
 They are the same, both the originals that came with the frame

 On Monday, December 12, 2022 at 11:24:59 AM UTC-5 J J wrote:

> Cool pair of Hunqs! are the forks different? Or is it just the photo 
> angle that makes the curve on the fork on the one with the black saddle 
> look different?
>
> On Monday, December 12, 2022 at 6:56:43 AM UTC-5 Dick Combs wrote:
>
>> [image: 61977D70-55E2-4782-A93A-A8333171AFD6.jpeg][image: 
>> 7A5D4923-2037-4ACB-81D6-3091B473A0FB.jpeg]My two Hunqs
>>
>>

-- 
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/f9b03274-9b37-4f42-9c66-7114f9aa8447n%40googlegroups.com.

Re: [RBW] Bombadil and Hunqapillar origins: The definitive thread

2022-12-12 Thread Conway Bennett

Hunqapillars we're $1850 in 2011 when I became aware of them.  I paid $2000 
for a used 650b which was the final iteration.  I feel like it cost $2500 
new.

On Monday, December 12, 2022 at 1:32:41 PM UTC-6 lconley wrote:

> For one thing, the Hunqapillar did not have the lower head tube - down 
> tube lug extension like the Bombadil.
>
> Laing
>
> On Monday, December 12, 2022 at 2:29:05 PM UTC-5 jasonz...@gmail.com 
> wrote:
>
>> I've often wondered what made the Hunq the "less expensive Bombadil" 
>> given the tubing being as Grant calls "the most expensive tubes around". 
>>  I'm assuming it was based on it being MIT and the Bomba being a MUSA 
>> frame?  IF so, were they equally priced once the Hunq moved to MUSA 
>> Waterford, why/why not?  I figured it was something similar to the 
>> manufacturing locations of the Quickbeam/SimpleOne with the exception that 
>> those two have identical geometry and the Hunq/Bomba are different.  I'm 
>> only asking because its often referred here as the cheaper bomba, but I was 
>> of the understanding it was more like the 700c bike (hunq) and the bomba 
>> was the 650b earlier option.  
>>
>> Probably a messy way to ask but to clean it up, can anyone tell me if the 
>> Hunq was actually that much cheaper once it was moved to Wisconsin and also 
>> if the tubing stayed the same once it was manufactured in the US?
>>
>> thanks! Love these two bikes and this thread!
>> Jason
>>
>> On Monday, December 12, 2022 at 11:44:50 AM UTC-6 Dick Combs wrote:
>>
>>> They are the same, both the originals that came with the frame
>>>
>>> On Monday, December 12, 2022 at 11:24:59 AM UTC-5 J J wrote:
>>>
 Cool pair of Hunqs! are the forks different? Or is it just the photo 
 angle that makes the curve on the fork on the one with the black saddle 
 look different?

 On Monday, December 12, 2022 at 6:56:43 AM UTC-5 Dick Combs wrote:

> [image: 61977D70-55E2-4782-A93A-A8333171AFD6.jpeg][image: 
> 7A5D4923-2037-4ACB-81D6-3091B473A0FB.jpeg]My two Hunqs
>
>

-- 
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/8afcf388-7d02-4b67-861a-a528e8fcace6n%40googlegroups.com.

Re: [RBW] Bombadil and Hunqapillar origins: The definitive thread

2022-12-12 Thread Jason Zakaras

Sure thing Laing, so the Bombadil was more ornate with the lug profile? 

On Monday, December 12, 2022 at 1:32:41 PM UTC-6 lconley wrote:

> For one thing, the Hunqapillar did not have the lower head tube - down 
> tube lug extension like the Bombadil.
>
> Laing
>
> On Monday, December 12, 2022 at 2:29:05 PM UTC-5 jasonz...@gmail.com 
> wrote:
>
>> I've often wondered what made the Hunq the "less expensive Bombadil" 
>> given the tubing being as Grant calls "the most expensive tubes around". 
>>  I'm assuming it was based on it being MIT and the Bomba being a MUSA 
>> frame?  IF so, were they equally priced once the Hunq moved to MUSA 
>> Waterford, why/why not?  I figured it was something similar to the 
>> manufacturing locations of the Quickbeam/SimpleOne with the exception that 
>> those two have identical geometry and the Hunq/Bomba are different.  I'm 
>> only asking because its often referred here as the cheaper bomba, but I was 
>> of the understanding it was more like the 700c bike (hunq) and the bomba 
>> was the 650b earlier option.  
>>
>> Probably a messy way to ask but to clean it up, can anyone tell me if the 
>> Hunq was actually that much cheaper once it was moved to Wisconsin and also 
>> if the tubing stayed the same once it was manufactured in the US?
>>
>> thanks! Love these two bikes and this thread!
>> Jason
>>
>> On Monday, December 12, 2022 at 11:44:50 AM UTC-6 Dick Combs wrote:
>>
>>> They are the same, both the originals that came with the frame
>>>
>>> On Monday, December 12, 2022 at 11:24:59 AM UTC-5 J J wrote:
>>>
 Cool pair of Hunqs! are the forks different? Or is it just the photo 
 angle that makes the curve on the fork on the one with the black saddle 
 look different?

 On Monday, December 12, 2022 at 6:56:43 AM UTC-5 Dick Combs wrote:

> [image: 61977D70-55E2-4782-A93A-A8333171AFD6.jpeg][image: 
> 7A5D4923-2037-4ACB-81D6-3091B473A0FB.jpeg]My two Hunqs
>
>

-- 
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/5a1dde1a-67fd-4b5f-bb5c-f238163f31ebn%40googlegroups.com.

[RBW] Swift Jr. Rangers coyote & Dyad SS "DOS" wheelset

2022-12-12 Thread Jason Zakaras

I have these two listed at crust but discounted pricing here as I have yet
to add any real value to this community and feel shameful for constantly
plugging my overstock gear. Please DM me with questions or comments.

FS: Hands on Wheels (Rich @ Rivendell) built wheelset: $775.00

https://crustbikes.com/a/shopicial/topics/148822

700c Velocity Dyad rims

120 rear Phil (polished) free/fixed hub w/ White industry DOS 16/19t free
wheel PLUS non installed never used NOS white industries 20/22t DOS free
wheel

100 front Phil hub (polished)

gravel king rubber in grey/blue color

wheelset was installed on my QuickBeam for ~ 30 miles but replaced when I
sold my Simple One frame and kept the old wheelset.

FS: new never used Jr. Ranger Pannier Set - coyote -

https://crustbikes.com/a/shopicial/topics/148819

I have too many bags so I’m going to just use my beat up old otlieb
panniers and let these go... My loss your gain.

300.00

The Jr. Ranger Pannier Set is a duo of lightweight, low profile bicycle
panniers that were designed with gravel riding and remote bicycle touring
in mind. With the Jr. Ranger Pannier Set, it’s more simple than ever to
cover more territory and soak in the goodness of long days on the bicycle.

The Jr. Ranger Pannier Set is made out of recycled polyester and contains
roughly 28 plastic bottles rescued from polluted rivers.

Thanks for looking feel free to send offers.

Jason

--
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/aea4f2c9-c43d-4bfa-bed5-638185df1f6cn%40googlegroups.com.

Re: [RBW] Bombadil and Hunqapillar origins: The definitive thread

For one thing, the Hunqapillar did not have the lower head tube - down tube 
lug extension like the Bombadil.

Laing

On Monday, December 12, 2022 at 2:29:05 PM UTC-5 jasonz...@gmail.com wrote:

> I've often wondered what made the Hunq the "less expensive Bombadil" given 
> the tubing being as Grant calls "the most expensive tubes around".  I'm 
> assuming it was based on it being MIT and the Bomba being a MUSA frame?  IF 
> so, were they equally priced once the Hunq moved to MUSA Waterford, why/why 
> not?  I figured it was something similar to the manufacturing locations of 
> the Quickbeam/SimpleOne with the exception that those two have identical 
> geometry and the Hunq/Bomba are different.  I'm only asking because its 
> often referred here as the cheaper bomba, but I was of the understanding it 
> was more like the 700c bike (hunq) and the bomba was the 650b earlier 
> option.  
>
> Probably a messy way to ask but to clean it up, can anyone tell me if the 
> Hunq was actually that much cheaper once it was moved to Wisconsin and also 
> if the tubing stayed the same once it was manufactured in the US?
>
> thanks! Love these two bikes and this thread!
> Jason
>
> On Monday, December 12, 2022 at 11:44:50 AM UTC-6 Dick Combs wrote:
>
>> They are the same, both the originals that came with the frame
>>
>> On Monday, December 12, 2022 at 11:24:59 AM UTC-5 J J wrote:
>>
>>> Cool pair of Hunqs! are the forks different? Or is it just the photo 
>>> angle that makes the curve on the fork on the one with the black saddle 
>>> look different?
>>>
>>> On Monday, December 12, 2022 at 6:56:43 AM UTC-5 Dick Combs wrote:
>>>
 [image: 61977D70-55E2-4782-A93A-A8333171AFD6.jpeg][image: 
 7A5D4923-2037-4ACB-81D6-3091B473A0FB.jpeg]My two Hunqs



-- 
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/1a6f82d6-e5fb-49d4-a579-6582f6ad1f44n%40googlegroups.com.

Re: [RBW] Bombadil and Hunqapillar origins: The definitive thread

2022-12-12 Thread Jason Zakaras

I've often wondered what made the Hunq the "less expensive Bombadil" given 
the tubing being as Grant calls "the most expensive tubes around".  I'm 
assuming it was based on it being MIT and the Bomba being a MUSA frame?  IF 
so, were they equally priced once the Hunq moved to MUSA Waterford, why/why 
not?  I figured it was something similar to the manufacturing locations of 
the Quickbeam/SimpleOne with the exception that those two have identical 
geometry and the Hunq/Bomba are different.  I'm only asking because its 
often referred here as the cheaper bomba, but I was of the understanding it 
was more like the 700c bike (hunq) and the bomba was the 650b earlier 
option.  

Probably a messy way to ask but to clean it up, can anyone tell me if the 
Hunq was actually that much cheaper once it was moved to Wisconsin and also 
if the tubing stayed the same once it was manufactured in the US?

thanks! Love these two bikes and this thread!
Jason

On Monday, December 12, 2022 at 11:44:50 AM UTC-6 Dick Combs wrote:

> They are the same, both the originals that came with the frame
>
> On Monday, December 12, 2022 at 11:24:59 AM UTC-5 J J wrote:
>
>> Cool pair of Hunqs! are the forks different? Or is it just the photo 
>> angle that makes the curve on the fork on the one with the black saddle 
>> look different?
>>
>> On Monday, December 12, 2022 at 6:56:43 AM UTC-5 Dick Combs wrote:
>>
>>> [image: 61977D70-55E2-4782-A93A-A8333171AFD6.jpeg][image: 
>>> 7A5D4923-2037-4ACB-81D6-3091B473A0FB.jpeg]My two Hunqs
>>>
>>>

-- 
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/4e7cade5-70c2-4662-b080-c3bcd18c60f8n%40googlegroups.com.

[RBW] Re: New Gus shipping from Canada

2022-12-12 Thread Mr. Ray

Last time I checked (2019), US has an $800 tax and duty exempt limit for 
purchases made outside the country (i.e. mail order)..  Anything above is 
liable for State taxes however in reality this is rarely enforced.

On Monday, December 12, 2022 at 12:01:23 PM UTC-5 rmro...@gmail.com wrote:

> Yes, the Gus I found is at a Riv dealer in Canada. Having googled until I 
> cannot stand it anymore I ask; anyone have experience with "clearance" fees 
> associated with importing a bicycle frame from Canada? The closest I have 
> come to uncovering the cost is that items valued under $2,500.00 US are 
> less expensive and easier to do than items over $2,500.00. I started a 
> Bikeflights estimate and I get the shipping cost and a message that 
> clearance fees will be calculated and added to order.

-- 
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/6c8fd013-ce55-4bab-9fed-114be928440en%40googlegroups.com.

Re: [RBW] Re: San Francisco/Bay Area Riv Riders

2022-12-12 Thread ericyue...@gmail.com

I'd be into this, but probably couldn't make the first one due to some 
other commitments.  I weirdly split my time between SF and RWC, but 
primarily ride my Sam on the Peninsula.  

On Monday, December 12, 2022 at 10:51:50 AM UTC-8 Luke Hendrickson wrote:

> It’d be a lot of fun to ride with members of this forum in each respective 
> area of the Bay (Oakland, Peninsula, etc.).
>
> Perhaps a tentative end of the year/beginning of the year ride for 
> starters? I say this selfishly because I’ll be out of the City until later 
> this month! As such, I propose a ride on either the 31st of December or the 
> 1st of January that’s to take place in San Francisco and is a couple/few 
> hours of sightseeing, snacks, & occasional bike ogling. I’m thinking a meet 
> up time of 10:30 to allow ample time for those crossing the Bay or coming 
> from the Peninsula (should y’all want to join) or just enough time to enjoy 
> either your Sunday off (the 31st) or to recover from the 31st (if the 1st 
> is when we ride).
>
> I’ll think on it some more and invite suggestions, etc. I look forward to 
> talking more about it here. ❤️
>
> On Monday, December 12, 2022 at 10:12:46 AM UTC-8 edwardb...@gmail.com 
> wrote:
>
>> In Oakland but I’m in, also wondering if anyone would be interested in a 
>> Lake Chabot ride sometime.
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Dec 12, 2022 at 8:05 AM Piaw Na  wrote:
>>
>>> I'm down in the Peninsula. Traditionally the club ride is to climb Mt. 
>>> Hamilton on New Year's Day, but with 2 kids I'm unlikely to make it. If you 
>>> do come down to the Peninsula we can try to do something.
>>> On Monday, December 12, 2022 at 7:47:49 AM UTC-8 Slin wrote:
>>>
 Hi Luke!

 I'm also in the city and would love to meet up with folks for a chill 
 ride.

 S

 On Sunday, December 11, 2022 at 9:16:48 PM UTC-8 Luke Hendrickson wrote:

> Hey all! I know that it’s been a bit wet & cold, but I’d love to see 
> if anyone would want to have a little ride in the coming week(s). Perhaps 
> even a New Year’s day ride to celebrate in the new year in style?
>
> I’m in the City proper and was thinking about some mixed terrain 
> around town while keeping it mostly road-ish so that no one’s limited by 
> the ride route. Pastries + hot drinks + more snacks?
>
> I’d love to hear from anyone interested or even connect with other 
> like-minded people for more than just a one-off ride. 
>
 -- 
>>> 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-bun...@googlegroups.com.
>>> To view this discussion on the web visit 
>>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/rbw-owners-bunch/4808001d-f699-4610-bb6a-671de000d709n%40googlegroups.com
>>>  
>>> 
>>> .
>>>
>>

-- 
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/5ac6d335-2d20-4efe-81ce-3f1fe5dc5e86n%40googlegroups.com.

Re: [RBW] Re: San Francisco/Bay Area Riv Riders

2022-12-12 Thread Luke Hendrickson

It’d be a lot of fun to ride with members of this forum in each respective 
area of the Bay (Oakland, Peninsula, etc.).

Perhaps a tentative end of the year/beginning of the year ride for 
starters? I say this selfishly because I’ll be out of the City until later 
this month! As such, I propose a ride on either the 31st of December or the 
1st of January that’s to take place in San Francisco and is a couple/few 
hours of sightseeing, snacks, & occasional bike ogling. I’m thinking a meet 
up time of 10:30 to allow ample time for those crossing the Bay or coming 
from the Peninsula (should y’all want to join) or just enough time to enjoy 
either your Sunday off (the 31st) or to recover from the 31st (if the 1st 
is when we ride).

I’ll think on it some more and invite suggestions, etc. I look forward to 
talking more about it here. ❤️

On Monday, December 12, 2022 at 10:12:46 AM UTC-8 edwardb...@gmail.com 
wrote:

> In Oakland but I’m in, also wondering if anyone would be interested in a 
> Lake Chabot ride sometime.
>
>
> On Mon, Dec 12, 2022 at 8:05 AM Piaw Na  wrote:
>
>> I'm down in the Peninsula. Traditionally the club ride is to climb Mt. 
>> Hamilton on New Year's Day, but with 2 kids I'm unlikely to make it. If you 
>> do come down to the Peninsula we can try to do something.
>> On Monday, December 12, 2022 at 7:47:49 AM UTC-8 Slin wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Luke!
>>>
>>> I'm also in the city and would love to meet up with folks for a chill 
>>> ride.
>>>
>>> S
>>>
>>> On Sunday, December 11, 2022 at 9:16:48 PM UTC-8 Luke Hendrickson wrote:
>>>
 Hey all! I know that it’s been a bit wet & cold, but I’d love to see if 
 anyone would want to have a little ride in the coming week(s). Perhaps 
 even 
 a New Year’s day ride to celebrate in the new year in style?

 I’m in the City proper and was thinking about some mixed terrain around 
 town while keeping it mostly road-ish so that no one’s limited by the ride 
 route. Pastries + hot drinks + more snacks?

 I’d love to hear from anyone interested or even connect with other 
 like-minded people for more than just a one-off ride. 

>>> -- 
>> 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-bun...@googlegroups.com.
>> To view this discussion on the web visit 
>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/rbw-owners-bunch/4808001d-f699-4610-bb6a-671de000d709n%40googlegroups.com
>>  
>> 
>> .
>>
>

-- 
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/d3ba4c18-ad86-4e19-a6bb-316fef85e112n%40googlegroups.com.

[RBW] Re: Nivex on a Rivendell?

Except that the shift levers are sold out!

Laing

On Monday, December 12, 2022 at 12:25:16 PM UTC-5 mcgr...@gmail.com wrote:

> Pretty cool - but another $250 for the shift lever.  Still great to see 
> components like this being made!
>
> On Monday, December 12, 2022 at 10:57:26 AM UTC-5 Marty Gierke, 
> Stewartstown PA wrote:
>
>> The Nivex is on the market now, and I really like the look of it. Even at 
>> $729.00 it feels like money well spent if you want something a little 
>> different and appreciate all that goes into making something like this. 
>> KUDOs to Jan for sticking with it. 
>> Nivex Rear 
>> 
>> [image: Oregon-Outback-RH_Nivex-600x387.jpeg]
>>
>> For a custom Rivendell, it might make for a very sweet build. If my ship 
>> comes in I'd be tempted to spring for one, but I'll hold out until I see 
>> the new Riv rear derailer. 
>>
>> Marty
>>
>

-- 
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/eb148797-c23a-4e19-b6e9-b3262cc6c0dan%40googlegroups.com.

[RBW] Re: FOR SALE: 110 BCB CHAIN RINGS

2022-12-12 Thread 'Charlie' via RBW Owners Bunch

STILL FOR SALE

On Tuesday, November 1, 2022 at 4:45:00 PM UTC-4 Charlie wrote:

> he last item as NOT 30 it is 34 teeth
> So sorry for mistake 
> Charlie 
>
>
> On Monday, October 31, 2022 at 4:15:50 PM UTC-4 Charlie wrote:
>
>> $15 EACH + SHIPPING $16 ALL OR 1 CASH OR USPS MONEY ORDER (POST OFFICE)
>>   NO OTHER MONEY ORDER
>> NO STEEL   
>> 53 TEETH - SUGINO
>> 52 T -SR
>> 48T NO NAME
>> 42T - SUGINO
>> 42T  SUGINO
>> 42T- SPEALIZED
>> 38T - VELUTA
>> 36T - VULATA
>> 34T  -SPEATES   MADE IN FRANCE
>> 30T SHIMANO-NEW
>> CONTACT OFF LIST 
>> Charlie Petry  
>>
>> [image: CIMG6600.JPG]
>>
>

-- 
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/90e2d2c9-5d24-40f8-8675-2928ba034adbn%40googlegroups.com.

[RBW] Re: Saddle height and BPH

2022-12-12 Thread Paul Clifton

IME, there's no objective way to get the "right" saddle height, but the Riv 
method gets me in the ballpark. I do change my saddle height +/- a cm or 
so, even on the same bike, depending on the kind of riding I'm doing 
(single track vs path/road/gravel) and how flexible I'm feeling at any 
given time. I'm not searching for the most efficient position in terms of 
power transfer, but the most comfortable in terms of my muscles, joints, 
and movements on the bike.

What the others have said (heel on pedal to almost lock out, and adjusting 
the fore/aft/tilt) is good advice, but how straight to get your knee at the 
bottom of the pedal stroke is subjective in my opinion. I'd say jack the 
seat up another 4cm and see how it feels, but don't be shy about lowering 
it back down either. I think some of the individual differences have to do 
with femur-to-fibula ratios, hip flexibility, quad-to-calf strength ratios, 
and butt size, not to mention upright vs leaned forward riding position.

Another Riv method that I like is 
1. Move the seat way up. Get it high enough that when you ride, you notice 
your hips moving from side to side, like you're trying to get a little more 
extension to reach the bottom of the pedal stroke.
2. Move the saddle down 1/2 to 1 cm at a time until you feel that hip 
rocking stop.

That's gonna get you your maximum acceptable saddle height, which I would 
consider "leaned-forward, go fast, roadie saddle height". Go down from 
there based on what feels comfortable to your knees and hips on the type of 
riding you're doing.

These are just my thoughts as I've searched for saddle height nirvana and 
found that it only really exists in the moment.

Paul in AR

On Monday, December 12, 2022 at 11:49:07 AM UTC-6 Jay Lonner wrote:

> I just took delivery of a new (non-Riv) bike and am dialing in the fit. 
> I’m a little worried that the frame is too big for me, since I only have 
> maybe 2” standover, which seems tight for a gravel bike.
>
> So I went out and measured the saddle height on my Hunq (which is a size 
> 62). It came in at about 75cm. This gives me a solid fistful of seatpost. 
> Then I remeasured my PBH, which is 93-94 cm depending on hard I pull. For 
> reference, here’s the relevant page from HQ:
>
> https://www.rivbike.com/pages/pubic-bone-height-how-to-measure-your-pbh
>
> This suggests that based on my  PBH my saddle height should be closer to 
> 83 cm – an 8cm discrepancy. Before riding in this morning I raised my 
> saddle height to 79 cm, basically splitting the difference. It felt weird, 
> which of course it would after so many years at 75cm. But I made it in and 
> my feet were in full contact with the pedals without any tippytoe 
> maneuvers. So I guess I’ve been doing it wrong this whole time? Kind of 
> embarrassing. Even so, according to the Riv method my saddle height is 
> still ~4cm lower than my PBH would suggest. 
>
> So I guess I’m wondering about alternative ways of determining saddle 
> height somewhat objectively, and/or whether I should now be looking at 
> other variables such as a fore-aft saddle positioning, saddle angle, and 
> even saddle type (currently a B68, slammed back as far as it can go on a 
> S83, with the nose pitched up ~10 degrees or so). Other relevant factors 
> might be crank arm length (175mm), pedal height (Pedaling Innovations 
> platform pedals), and shoes (Chuck Taylors, typically). Looking for the 
> optimum balance of comfort, efficiency, and protecting my perineum.
>
> Jay Lonner
> Bellingham, WA
>
>
>
>
>

-- 
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/13b8103f-805e-43c1-a7d8-b726b2e34892n%40googlegroups.com.

[RBW] Re: Nivex on a Rivendell?

2022-12-12 Thread DavidP

The "custom Rivendell" part is key as it requires the chainstay braze-on 
for the RD mount rather than the standard dropout hanger mount.

-Dave

On Monday, December 12, 2022 at 10:57:26 AM UTC-5 Marty Gierke, 
Stewartstown PA wrote:

> The Nivex is on the market now, and I really like the look of it. Even at 
> $729.00 it feels like money well spent if you want something a little 
> different and appreciate all that goes into making something like this. 
> KUDOs to Jan for sticking with it. 
> Nivex Rear 
> 
> [image: Oregon-Outback-RH_Nivex-600x387.jpeg]
>
> For a custom Rivendell, it might make for a very sweet build. If my ship 
> comes in I'd be tempted to spring for one, but I'll hold out until I see 
> the new Riv rear derailer. 
>
> Marty
>

-- 
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/1f14e296-fd42-4055-960e-3752669bd023n%40googlegroups.com.

Re: [RBW] Re: New Gus & bottom bracket confusion

2022-12-12 Thread 'Scott Luly' via RBW Owners Bunch

The forum, in part, is a good starting point for trivial questions like yours,
Richard. If you aren't satisfied with answers, or lack there of, here then, of
course, Riv is another option to seek an answer. You haven't committed a party
foul, IMHO...
I'm faced with same issue, since I have a Gus on the way, too. I plan on trying
a 107 and then a 113. I plan on using an XTR M900 set of triple cranks and
using the middle ring only, as a 1x. You seek increased chain line by way of
longer spindle. I am getting increased chain line out of using middle ring on
my triple.
PM me if you wanna drill down on it. I need to sort it out, too.
Scott

Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android

On Mon, Dec 12, 2022 at 10:06 AM, Richard Rose wrote:
Oh I agree & believe me I call them a lot! I just thought the collective brain
power of this group might give me an answer before they wake up in California.

On Monday, December 12, 2022 at 10:41:25 AM UTC-5 Garth wrote:

No offense, but you're asking RBW business questions that would be addressed by
them. Call them ! They don't bite.
On Monday, December 12, 2022 at 10:11:44 AM UTC-5 rmro...@gmail.com wrote:

I have decided to stick with a square taper crank, either White Eno or Riv
Silver, and I have bottom bracket questions.Gus BB shell is 73 BSA. The bottom
brackets they sell (Shimano & IRD) are 68. Riv says "use the 113 (spindle) if
you have a mountain bike front derailleur." But, they also say r.e. the IRD BB,
"If you have a Gus or Susie with a tire up to 2.5", you'll need a 123 with the
right cup spacer." But, they do not even show the 123 as being
available?Alternatively, White Industries offers both 68 & 73 widths but the
widest spindle offering is 121.So I guess my question is 1. If I go with a
Silver double, which bottom bracket to buy? 2. If I go with a White Ind. Eno
single, which bottom bracket? I plan to run 2.5"-2.6" tires.Thanks in advance
for our help.

--
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/2329218b-4fe8-493d-8f82-b806025073b5n%40googlegroups.com.

Re: [RBW] Saddle height and BPH

2022-12-12 Thread Eliot B


If you put the heel of your foot on the pedal and rotate it to the furthest 
point away from you, you should be just about locked out. When you then put 
the ball of your foot on the pedal like you normally ride, you will be just 
shy of full extension which should be a good ball park. You want the saddle 
as high as it will go without causing rocking in your hips or over 
extension in your legs. 
On Monday, December 12, 2022 at 10:06:58 AM UTC-8 cjus...@gmail.com wrote:

> Standover is generally a non-issue and should be of limited consideration 
> for fit purposes, all things being equal.
>
> I do believe your saddle height has been very low based on the fact that I 
> have an 83cm PBH and run a height of 72cm.  The Riv guidance looks to be 
> within expected range.
>
> Generally recommend dialing in saddle setback first and since yours is 
> slammed back, I would recommend centering it on the rails and raising it a 
> little further.  If you can sit  on the bike (with someone holding it 
> upright for you) and hover your hands over the bars without engaging too 
> much core strength, you are probably in a good spot with respect to saddle 
> setback (and its relation to bar height).  If your weight distribution with 
> the new setback leans you into the bars and puts weight on your wrists, 
> then still work to do (fore, aft, tilt, relationship to bars etc.)  
>
> Saddle height should be such that your legs come close to full extension 
> on downstroke but do not lock out and does not create side to side hip 
> movement (reaching for the pedals).
>
> On Monday, December 12, 2022 at 11:55:35 AM UTC-6 Jay Lonner wrote:
>
>> Please note the typo in the subject heading - I am referring to PBH 
>> (pubic bone height) and not BPH (benign prostatic hypertrophy) which is 
>> another, separate factor of potential interest to bike riding men of a 
>> certain age…
>>
>> Sent from my Atari 400
>>
>> On Dec 12, 2022, at 9:49 AM, Jay Lonner  wrote:
>>
>> I just took delivery of a new (non-Riv) bike and am dialing in the fit. 
>> I’m a little worried that the frame is too big for me, since I only have 
>> maybe 2” standover, which seems tight for a gravel bike.
>>
>>
>> So I went out and measured the saddle height on my Hunq (which is a size 
>> 62). It came in at about 75cm. This gives me a solid fistful of seatpost. 
>> Then I remeasured my PBH, which is 93-94 cm depending on hard I pull. For 
>> reference, here’s the relevant page from HQ:
>>
>> https://www.rivbike.com/pages/pubic-bone-height-how-to-measure-your-pbh
>>
>> This suggests that based on my  PBH my saddle height should be closer to 
>> 83 cm – an 8cm discrepancy. Before riding in this morning I raised my 
>> saddle height to 79 cm, basically splitting the difference. It felt weird, 
>> which of course it would after so many years at 75cm. But I made it in and 
>> my feet were in full contact with the pedals without any tippytoe 
>> maneuvers. So I guess I’ve been doing it wrong this whole time? Kind of 
>> embarrassing. Even so, according to the Riv method my saddle height is 
>> still ~4cm lower than my PBH would suggest. 
>>
>> So I guess I’m wondering about alternative ways of determining saddle 
>> height somewhat objectively, and/or whether I should now be looking at 
>> other variables such as a fore-aft saddle positioning, saddle angle, and 
>> even saddle type (currently a B68, slammed back as far as it can go on a 
>> S83, with the nose pitched up ~10 degrees or so). Other relevant factors 
>> might be crank arm length (175mm), pedal height (Pedaling Innovations 
>> platform pedals), and shoes (Chuck Taylors, typically). Looking for the 
>> optimum balance of comfort, efficiency, and protecting my perineum.
>>
>> Jay Lonner
>> Bellingham, WA
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> -- 
>> 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-bun...@googlegroups.com.
>> To view this discussion on the web visit 
>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/rbw-owners-bunch/cf9d0b0a-c497-4181-9c30-afdac0d6f54bn%40googlegroups.com
>>  
>> 
>> .
>>
>>

-- 
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/0f048656-735d-4ef1-a03f-6cdca79f0190n%40googlegroups.com.

Re: [RBW] Re: San Francisco/Bay Area Riv Riders

2022-12-12 Thread Edward Garnica

In Oakland but I’m in, also wondering if anyone would be interested in a
Lake Chabot ride sometime.


On Mon, Dec 12, 2022 at 8:05 AM Piaw Na  wrote:

> I'm down in the Peninsula. Traditionally the club ride is to climb Mt.
> Hamilton on New Year's Day, but with 2 kids I'm unlikely to make it. If you
> do come down to the Peninsula we can try to do something.
> On Monday, December 12, 2022 at 7:47:49 AM UTC-8 Slin wrote:
>
>> Hi Luke!
>>
>> I'm also in the city and would love to meet up with folks for a chill
>> ride.
>>
>> S
>>
>> On Sunday, December 11, 2022 at 9:16:48 PM UTC-8 Luke Hendrickson wrote:
>>
>>> Hey all! I know that it’s been a bit wet & cold, but I’d love to see if
>>> anyone would want to have a little ride in the coming week(s). Perhaps even
>>> a New Year’s day ride to celebrate in the new year in style?
>>>
>>> I’m in the City proper and was thinking about some mixed terrain around
>>> town while keeping it mostly road-ish so that no one’s limited by the ride
>>> route. Pastries + hot drinks + more snacks?
>>>
>>> I’d love to hear from anyone interested or even connect with other
>>> like-minded people for more than just a one-off ride. 
>>>
>> --
> 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/4808001d-f699-4610-bb6a-671de000d709n%40googlegroups.com
> 
> .
>

-- 
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/CAMqQswTq9ufTufa1SMueB3H7CCfEaaWiXDtbN51n5NT37Ha%2BJA%40mail.gmail.com.

Re: [RBW] Saddle height and BPH

2022-12-12 Thread Justus G

Standover is generally a non-issue and should be of limited consideration 
for fit purposes, all things being equal.

I do believe your saddle height has been very low based on the fact that I 
have an 83cm PBH and run a height of 72cm.  The Riv guidance looks to be 
within expected range.

Generally recommend dialing in saddle setback first and since yours is 
slammed back, I would recommend centering it on the rails and raising it a 
little further.  If you can sit  on the bike (with someone holding it 
upright for you) and hover your hands over the bars without engaging too 
much core strength, you are probably in a good spot with respect to saddle 
setback (and its relation to bar height).  If your weight distribution with 
the new setback leans you into the bars and puts weight on your wrists, 
then still work to do (fore, aft, tilt, relationship to bars etc.)  

Saddle height should be such that your legs come close to full extension on 
downstroke but do not lock out and does not create side to side hip 
movement (reaching for the pedals).

On Monday, December 12, 2022 at 11:55:35 AM UTC-6 Jay Lonner wrote:

> Please note the typo in the subject heading - I am referring to PBH (pubic 
> bone height) and not BPH (benign prostatic hypertrophy) which is another, 
> separate factor of potential interest to bike riding men of a certain age…
>
> Sent from my Atari 400
>
> On Dec 12, 2022, at 9:49 AM, Jay Lonner  wrote:
>
> I just took delivery of a new (non-Riv) bike and am dialing in the fit. 
> I’m a little worried that the frame is too big for me, since I only have 
> maybe 2” standover, which seems tight for a gravel bike.
>
>
> So I went out and measured the saddle height on my Hunq (which is a size 
> 62). It came in at about 75cm. This gives me a solid fistful of seatpost. 
> Then I remeasured my PBH, which is 93-94 cm depending on hard I pull. For 
> reference, here’s the relevant page from HQ:
>
> https://www.rivbike.com/pages/pubic-bone-height-how-to-measure-your-pbh
>
> This suggests that based on my  PBH my saddle height should be closer to 
> 83 cm – an 8cm discrepancy. Before riding in this morning I raised my 
> saddle height to 79 cm, basically splitting the difference. It felt weird, 
> which of course it would after so many years at 75cm. But I made it in and 
> my feet were in full contact with the pedals without any tippytoe 
> maneuvers. So I guess I’ve been doing it wrong this whole time? Kind of 
> embarrassing. Even so, according to the Riv method my saddle height is 
> still ~4cm lower than my PBH would suggest. 
>
> So I guess I’m wondering about alternative ways of determining saddle 
> height somewhat objectively, and/or whether I should now be looking at 
> other variables such as a fore-aft saddle positioning, saddle angle, and 
> even saddle type (currently a B68, slammed back as far as it can go on a 
> S83, with the nose pitched up ~10 degrees or so). Other relevant factors 
> might be crank arm length (175mm), pedal height (Pedaling Innovations 
> platform pedals), and shoes (Chuck Taylors, typically). Looking for the 
> optimum balance of comfort, efficiency, and protecting my perineum.
>
> Jay Lonner
> Bellingham, WA
>
>
>
>
> -- 
> 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-bun...@googlegroups.com.
> To view this discussion on the web visit 
> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/rbw-owners-bunch/cf9d0b0a-c497-4181-9c30-afdac0d6f54bn%40googlegroups.com
>  
> 
> .
>
>

-- 
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/5daad538-1161-4803-a311-21171aec438dn%40googlegroups.com.

Re: [RBW] Re: Nivex on a Rivendell?

2022-12-12 Thread 'Scott Luly' via RBW Owners Bunch

That's a really cool bit, yet it's a lot to spend just to be different and
stylish.
What's the functional benefit to investing in one?

Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android

On Mon, Dec 12, 2022 at 10:25 AM, James M wrote:
Pretty cool - but another $250 for the shift lever. Still great to see
components like this being made!

On Monday, December 12, 2022 at 10:57:26 AM UTC-5 Marty Gierke, Stewartstown PA
wrote:

The Nivex is on the market now, and I really like the look of it. Even at
$729.00 it feels like money well spent if you want something a little different
and appreciate all that goes into making something like this. KUDOs to Jan for
sticking with it. Nivex Rear

For a custom Rivendell, it might make for a very sweet build. If my ship comes
in I'd be tempted to spring for one, but I'll hold out until I see the new Riv
rear derailer.
Marty

--
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/73f788c8-b307-4fdf-aa11-3b75d0053eben%40googlegroups.com.

Re: [RBW] Saddle height and BPH

2022-12-12 Thread Jay Lonner

Please note the typo in the subject heading - I am referring to PBH (pubic bone height) and not BPH (benign prostatic hypertrophy) which is another, separate factor of potential interest to bike riding men of a certain age…Sent from my Atari 400On Dec 12, 2022, at 9:49 AM, Jay Lonner wrote:I just took delivery of a new (non-Riv) bike and am dialing in the fit. I’m a little worried that the frame is too big for me, since I only have maybe 2” standover, which seems tight for a gravel bike.So I went out and measured the saddle height on my Hunq (which is a size 62). It came in at about 75cm. This gives me a solid fistful of seatpost. Then I remeasured my PBH, which is 93-94 cm depending on hard I pull. For reference, here’s the relevant page from HQ:https://www.rivbike.com/pages/pubic-bone-height-how-to-measure-your-pbhThis suggests that based on my PBH my saddle height should be closer to 83 cm – an 8cm discrepancy. Before riding in this morning I raised my saddle height to 79 cm, basically splitting the difference. It felt weird, which of course it would after so many years at 75cm. But I made it in and my feet were in full contact with the pedals without any tippytoe maneuvers. So I guess I’ve been doing it wrong this whole time? Kind of embarrassing. Even so, according to the Riv method my saddle height is still ~4cm lower than my PBH would suggest. So I guess I’m wondering about alternative ways of determining saddle height somewhat objectively, and/or whether I should now be looking at other variables such as a fore-aft saddle positioning, saddle angle, and even saddle type (currently a B68, slammed back as far as it can go on a S83, with the nose pitched up ~10 degrees or so). Other relevant factors might be crank arm length (175mm), pedal height (Pedaling Innovations platform pedals), and shoes (Chuck Taylors, typically). Looking for the optimum balance of comfort, efficiency, and protecting my perineum.Jay LonnerBellingham, WA

--
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/cf9d0b0a-c497-4181-9c30-afdac0d6f54bn%40googlegroups.com.

--
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/0A2E0445-C858-49EA-B365-574DAB8BA901%40gmail.com.

Re: [RBW] Heron Poster

2022-12-12 Thread 'Eric Norris' via RBW Owners Bunch

Heron poster SOLD and on its way to a new home!

--Eric Norris
campyonly...@me.com
Insta: @CampyOnlyGuy
YouTube: YouTube.com/CampyOnlyGuy 

> On Dec 12, 2022, at 9:39 AM, Eliot B  wrote:
> 
> I’ll take it.
> 
> On Monday, December 12, 2022 at 8:27:37 AM UTC-8 campyo...@me.com wrote:
>> How about $30 shipped in the USA? Nice condition—a few tiny holes where it 
>> was pinned to a wall. I have neither a Heron nor the wall space for this, so 
>> I’m looking to get it to someone who will display and appreciate it. 22x28 
>> inches.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> --Eric Norris
>> campyo...@me.com <>
>> Insta: @CampyOnlyGuy
>> YouTube: YouTube.com/CampyOnlyGuy 
>> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> 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/bb4e4fee-f754-420e-b1f9-2f8f764e547bn%40googlegroups.com
>  
> .

-- 
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/DA5550A2-7584-4991-B2C2-A6309679EF4A%40me.com.

[RBW] Saddle height and BPH

2022-12-12 Thread Jay Lonner

I just took delivery of a new (non-Riv) bike and am dialing in the fit. I’m
a little worried that the frame is too big for me, since I only have maybe
2” standover, which seems tight for a gravel bike.

So I went out and measured the saddle height on my Hunq (which is a size
62). It came in at about 75cm. This gives me a solid fistful of seatpost.
Then I remeasured my PBH, which is 93-94 cm depending on hard I pull. For
reference, here’s the relevant page from HQ:

https://www.rivbike.com/pages/pubic-bone-height-how-to-measure-your-pbh

This suggests that based on my PBH my saddle height should be closer to 83
cm – an 8cm discrepancy. Before riding in this morning I raised my saddle
height to 79 cm, basically splitting the difference. It felt weird, which
of course it would after so many years at 75cm. But I made it in and my
feet were in full contact with the pedals without any tippytoe maneuvers.
So I guess I’ve been doing it wrong this whole time? Kind of embarrassing.
Even so, according to the Riv method my saddle height is still ~4cm lower
than my PBH would suggest.

So I guess I’m wondering about alternative ways of determining saddle
height somewhat objectively, and/or whether I should now be looking at
other variables such as a fore-aft saddle positioning, saddle angle, and
even saddle type (currently a B68, slammed back as far as it can go on a
S83, with the nose pitched up ~10 degrees or so). Other relevant factors
might be crank arm length (175mm), pedal height (Pedaling Innovations
platform pedals), and shoes (Chuck Taylors, typically). Looking for the
optimum balance of comfort, efficiency, and protecting my perineum.

Jay Lonner
Bellingham, WA

--
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/cf9d0b0a-c497-4181-9c30-afdac0d6f54bn%40googlegroups.com.

Re: [RBW] New Gus shipping from Canada

2022-12-12 Thread 'Scott Luly' via RBW Owners Bunch

Shouldn't the dealer be able to answer that for you?

Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android

On Mon, Dec 12, 2022 at 10:34 AM, Jacob Byard wrote:
I bought my Gus from C Cycles out of Montreal. They shipped it to me
(Pennsylvania) via UPS. I think it took 3 days? UPS sent me the bill for import
fees and I think it was around $50. Dead simple process.
Cheers,
Jacob

Sent from my iPhone

On Dec 12, 2022, at 12:01 PM, Richard Rose wrote:

Yes, the Gus I found is at a Riv dealer in Canada. Having googled until I
cannot stand it anymore I ask; anyone have experience with "clearance" fees
associated with importing a bicycle frame from Canada? The closest I have come
to uncovering the cost is that items valued under $2,500.00 US are less
expensive and easier to do than items over $2,500.00. I started a Bikeflights
estimate and I get the shipping cost and a message that clearance fees will be
calculated and added to order.

--
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/f3ee3bbd-71f6-460e-b130-90edfa93a11en%40googlegroups.com.

Re: [RBW] New Gus shipping from Canada

Pm’ed you Jacob.Sent from my iPhoneOn Dec 12, 2022, at 12:34 PM, Jacob Byard wrote:I bought my Gus from C Cycles out of Montreal. They shipped it to me (Pennsylvania) via UPS. I think it took 3 days? UPS sent me the bill for import fees and I think it was around $50. Dead simple process. Cheers,JacobSent from my iPhoneOn Dec 12, 2022, at 12:01 PM, Richard Rose wrote:Yes, the Gus I found is at a Riv dealer in Canada. Having googled until I cannot stand it anymore I ask; anyone have experience with "clearance" fees associated with importing a bicycle frame from Canada? The closest I have come to uncovering the cost is that items valued under $2,500.00 US are less expensive and easier to do than items over $2,500.00. I started a Bikeflights estimate and I get the shipping cost and a message that clearance fees will be calculated and added to order.

--
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/f3ee3bbd-71f6-460e-b130-90edfa93a11en%40googlegroups.com.

--
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/EEED7CCA-AE53-4BEF-B2B4-6DEAB88B9910%40gmail.com.

--
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/2257EEAF-B9F8-4346-8D3A-C9DFD53430EC%40gmail.com.

Re: [RBW] Bombadil and Hunqapillar origins: The definitive thread

2022-12-12 Thread Dick Combs

They are the same, both the originals that came with the frame

On Monday, December 12, 2022 at 11:24:59 AM UTC-5 J J wrote:

> Cool pair of Hunqs! are the forks different? Or is it just the photo angle 
> that makes the curve on the fork on the one with the black saddle look 
> different?
>
> On Monday, December 12, 2022 at 6:56:43 AM UTC-5 Dick Combs wrote:
>
>> [image: 61977D70-55E2-4782-A93A-A8333171AFD6.jpeg][image: 
>> 7A5D4923-2037-4ACB-81D6-3091B473A0FB.jpeg]My two Hunqs
>>
>>

-- 
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/c6c572ae-e12b-4078-9cb6-83dea4cef86dn%40googlegroups.com.

[RBW] Re: FS: Heron Poster

2022-12-12 Thread Eliot B

I’ll take it.

On Monday, December 12, 2022 at 8:27:37 AM UTC-8 campyo...@me.com wrote:

> How about $30 shipped in the USA? Nice condition—a few tiny holes where it 
> was pinned to a wall. I have neither a Heron nor the wall space for this, 
> so I’m looking to get it to someone who will display and appreciate it. 
> 22x28 inches.
>
> [image: IMG_2194.jpeg]
>
> --Eric Norris
> campyo...@me.com
> Insta: @CampyOnlyGuy
> YouTube: YouTube.com/CampyOnlyGuy 
>
>

-- 
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/bb4e4fee-f754-420e-b1f9-2f8f764e547bn%40googlegroups.com.

[RBW] Re: FS: 58 cm Green Quickbeam

2022-12-12 Thread Conway Bennett

Crickets on this, and it just relisted on eBay.  I can sell just the 
frameset and rear wheel independent of each other.

On Monday, December 5, 2022 at 7:11:54 AM UTC-6 Conway Bennett wrote:

> I have an embarrassment of riches, and I don't have time or desire to make 
> granular decisions about which bike to ride.  I have been riding with both 
> of my kids lashed to my Hunqapillar, so this bike has been ridden in over a 
> year, so I think it's time to move it along.  This is a riders bike, and it 
> has plenty of beausage.  I am at least the second owner, and it has been 
> well.  It is currently located in Chicagoland, and I have a box ready to 
> pack and ship it.  The price for the bike as listed below is $1000 net to 
> me via Chase QuickPay.  Buyer pays for shipping and provides prepaid 
> shipping label.
>
> So, for your consideration is a:
>
>- 58 cm Green Quickbeam frameset with surly chain tensioner, 
>
>
>- original but serviced headset, 
>
>
>- 103 velo orange bottom bracket installed by me, 
>
>
>- and an all silver fixed/free velocity built 36h Atlas 120 mm spaced 
>REAR wheel (I NEED THE FRONT WHEEL) with a new surly fixed cog and white 
>industries dos eno freewheel.  I also have a velocity single speed rebuild 
>kit, but this wheel has relatively light use.
>
>
>- Pictures: https://photos.app.goo.gl/w7P8uR296sQuUUs78
>
> - Captain Conway 
>

-- 
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/ffbb94e0-1161-4539-902e-e159d6838fe8n%40googlegroups.com.

Re: [RBW] New Gus shipping from Canada

2022-12-12 Thread Jacob Byard

I bought my Gus from C Cycles out of Montreal. They shipped it to me (Pennsylvania) via UPS. I think it took 3 days? UPS sent me the bill for import fees and I think it was around $50. Dead simple process. Cheers,JacobSent from my iPhoneOn Dec 12, 2022, at 12:01 PM, Richard Rose wrote:Yes, the Gus I found is at a Riv dealer in Canada. Having googled until I cannot stand it anymore I ask; anyone have experience with "clearance" fees associated with importing a bicycle frame from Canada? The closest I have come to uncovering the cost is that items valued under $2,500.00 US are less expensive and easier to do than items over $2,500.00. I started a Bikeflights estimate and I get the shipping cost and a message that clearance fees will be calculated and added to order.

--
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/f3ee3bbd-71f6-460e-b130-90edfa93a11en%40googlegroups.com.

--
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/EEED7CCA-AE53-4BEF-B2B4-6DEAB88B9910%40gmail.com.

[RBW] Re: Nivex on a Rivendell?

2022-12-12 Thread James M

Pretty cool - but another $250 for the shift lever.  Still great to see 
components like this being made!

On Monday, December 12, 2022 at 10:57:26 AM UTC-5 Marty Gierke, 
Stewartstown PA wrote:

> The Nivex is on the market now, and I really like the look of it. Even at 
> $729.00 it feels like money well spent if you want something a little 
> different and appreciate all that goes into making something like this. 
> KUDOs to Jan for sticking with it. 
> Nivex Rear 
> 
> [image: Oregon-Outback-RH_Nivex-600x387.jpeg]
>
> For a custom Rivendell, it might make for a very sweet build. If my ship 
> comes in I'd be tempted to spring for one, but I'll hold out until I see 
> the new Riv rear derailer. 
>
> Marty
>

-- 
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/73f788c8-b307-4fdf-aa11-3b75d0053eben%40googlegroups.com.

[RBW] Re: Platypus ride report

2022-12-12 Thread DavidP

Thanks for sharing, Tom. I'm glad to hear you've gotten some nice miles on 
the new Platypus. It really is "a big floaty couch" with a cruisy zoomy 
feel.

I was interested to read your impressions on the handling change going from 
a bar bag to a rack bag, even with what sounds like a light load. I'm 
planning on using a front basket/bag on my Platypus and wonder how 
noticeable I'll find the change from the small and light bar bag I'm 
currently using.

Will also be interested to see where you land on bars. I've been very happy 
with the width and riding positions of the 65cm Toscos on my Platy but they 
do require a 31.8 stem.

We got a coating of snow last night here in MA but the forecast looks warm 
enough that "real winter" is still a bit off and I will be trying to get 
more miles on the Platy before the end of the year.

-Dave

On Monday, December 12, 2022 at 9:10:21 AM UTC-5 Tom Palmer wrote:

> Hi all,
> After many shortish 8-10mile rides, I finally did a real ride on the 
> Platypus. over 20 miles, 37 degrees and rain for about half of it. It was 
> actually a pleasant ride because almost no wind. If it was 5 degrees cooler 
> or blowing, it would have been miserable and I would have cut it short.  
> The bike is brilliant. Did some decent hills (for west Michigan) that 
> included nice flowy descents. I put a small front rack and basket and moved 
> tool/tube and neck warmer/hat to the rack. Handling not quite as quick as 
> with the handlebar bag with same contents. I think the handling was 
> affected by the weight being out front more, even though it was lower. Will 
> be going to wider bars soon as the Albas just a tiny bit narrow for my 
> standing  and rocking the bars climbing technique.
> Back to the brilliance of this Platypus. The bike is a big floaty couch 
> that is still quick to accelerate and climb. It handles amazingly well. It 
> is my most enigmatic bike by a long way.
>
> Tom (riding as much as possible before real winter strikes) Palmer
> Twin Lake, MI
>

-- 
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/2d1926da-a4c4-4c5b-a478-5c6623c42aa6n%40googlegroups.com.

[RBW] Re: Nivex on a Rivendell?

2022-12-12 Thread Luke Hendrickson

Marty!

Thank you for sharing this here. I’ve often admired Jan’s rig with the 
Nivex and wanted a production version for myself. It’s beautiful and to the 
point and what’s more – I want one! Should I tire of my three pulley 
Suntour (and want to pony up for a frame modification + repaint), I’d take 
this in a heartbeat. I hope that someone here gets one. 

On Monday, December 12, 2022 at 8:49:40 AM UTC-8 Bill Lindsay wrote:

> I hereby submit a pre-emptive APPROVE to the first person to run a Nivex 
> RD on a Rivendell.  
>
> Bill Lindsay
> El Cerrito, CA
>
> On Monday, December 12, 2022 at 7:57:26 AM UTC-8 Marty Gierke, 
> Stewartstown PA wrote:
>
>> The Nivex is on the market now, and I really like the look of it. Even at 
>> $729.00 it feels like money well spent if you want something a little 
>> different and appreciate all that goes into making something like this. 
>> KUDOs to Jan for sticking with it. 
>> Nivex Rear 
>> 
>> [image: Oregon-Outback-RH_Nivex-600x387.jpeg]
>>
>> For a custom Rivendell, it might make for a very sweet build. If my ship 
>> comes in I'd be tempted to spring for one, but I'll hold out until I see 
>> the new Riv rear derailer. 
>>
>> Marty
>>
>

-- 
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/3cffe03d-9ef7-4562-810e-46cfb8b18474n%40googlegroups.com.

[RBW] Re: New Gus & bottom bracket confusion

Oh I agree & believe me I call them a lot! I just thought the collective 
brain power of this group might give me an answer before they wake up in 
California.

On Monday, December 12, 2022 at 10:41:25 AM UTC-5 Garth wrote:

> No offense, but you're asking RBW business questions that would be 
> addressed by them. Call them ! They don't bite. 
> On Monday, December 12, 2022 at 10:11:44 AM UTC-5 rmro...@gmail.com wrote:
>
>> I have decided to stick with a square taper crank, either White Eno or 
>> Riv Silver, and I have bottom bracket questions.
>> Gus BB shell is 73 BSA. The bottom brackets they sell (Shimano & IRD) are 
>> 68. Riv says "use the 113 (spindle) if you have a mountain bike front 
>> derailleur." But, they also say r.e. the IRD BB, "If you have a Gus or 
>> Susie with a tire up to 2.5", you'll need a 123 with the right cup spacer." 
>> But, they do not even show the 123 as being available?
>> Alternatively, White Industries offers both 68 & 73 widths but the widest 
>> spindle offering is 121.
>> So I guess my question is 1. If I go with a Silver double, which bottom 
>> bracket to buy? 2. If I go with a White Ind. Eno single, which bottom 
>> bracket? I plan to run 2.5"-2.6" tires.
>> Thanks in advance for our help.
>>
>

-- 
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/2329218b-4fe8-493d-8f82-b806025073b5n%40googlegroups.com.

[RBW] New Gus shipping from Canada

Yes, the Gus I found is at a Riv dealer in Canada. Having googled until I 
cannot stand it anymore I ask; anyone have experience with "clearance" fees 
associated with importing a bicycle frame from Canada? The closest I have 
come to uncovering the cost is that items valued under $2,500.00 US are 
less expensive and easier to do than items over $2,500.00. I started a 
Bikeflights estimate and I get the shipping cost and a message that 
clearance fees will be calculated and added to order.

-- 
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/f3ee3bbd-71f6-460e-b130-90edfa93a11en%40googlegroups.com.

[RBW] Re: Nivex on a Rivendell?

2022-12-12 Thread Bill Lindsay

I hereby submit a pre-emptive APPROVE to the first person to run a Nivex RD 
on a Rivendell.  

Bill Lindsay
El Cerrito, CA

On Monday, December 12, 2022 at 7:57:26 AM UTC-8 Marty Gierke, Stewartstown 
PA wrote:

> The Nivex is on the market now, and I really like the look of it. Even at 
> $729.00 it feels like money well spent if you want something a little 
> different and appreciate all that goes into making something like this. 
> KUDOs to Jan for sticking with it. 
> Nivex Rear 
> 
> [image: Oregon-Outback-RH_Nivex-600x387.jpeg]
>
> For a custom Rivendell, it might make for a very sweet build. If my ship 
> comes in I'd be tempted to spring for one, but I'll hold out until I see 
> the new Riv rear derailer. 
>
> Marty
>

-- 
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/56c9fcc3-275b-4610-a930-1944055265fan%40googlegroups.com.

[RBW] Re: Bombadil and Hunqapillar origins: The definitive thread

2022-12-12 Thread RichS

Bombadil and Hunqapillar—two of the best names (among some really good 
ones) in the Rivendell lineup. When I was contemplating my first Rivendell 
(it was an Atlantis) they were selling an unpainted 48cm Bomba frame for a 
good price. So tempting. One of the details that got to me was the lug 
joining the headtube/downtube. Didn't buy it but if I had it would have 
been for that lug!

Best,
Rich in ATL

On Sunday, December 11, 2022 at 10:16:08 AM UTC-5 eric...@gmail.com wrote:

> It seems the Bombadil and Hunqapillar frames are beloved. They're stout, 
> beautiful, and sometimes have intricate additional tubes and lugs. While 
> I've done a lot of reading about Rivendell I was a bit unclear on the 
> origins and intended uses of these frames. 
>
> I wanted to start a thread where we could share and dump info about these 
> bikes along with pictures of builds. 
>
> Joe and Jim were helpful in laying out a bit of background in another 
> thread 
> , 
> there's 
> some great info there. 
>
> The original Hunqapillar catalog is up here: 
> http://notfine.com/rivendell/Brochures/Rivendell%20Frames%20Hunqapillar.pdf
>
> The first mention I can find of the Bombadil is in RR 41, sometime in 
> 2009. Excerpted pages attached. As a few members might recall I am very 
> into raw frames with brass spilling out of the lugs! I know that many 
> Bombadil owners have had their frames repainted like Jason Fuller, whose 
> absolute stunner shows up here from time to time. By the way, the picture 
> below is one of my very favorite Rivendell images. 
>
> [image: Jason Bombadil green.jpg]
>
> There's also the butter-banana Bombadil that recently sold on eBay. I 
> believe that one was purchased by John Watson of the Radavist (and he's got 
> a Hunq) so we might see some nice pics of that bike sometime soon. 
>
> [image: s-l1600-2.jpg]
>
> And speaking of, here's John's Hunqapillar, more images and write-up here 
> .
>
> [image: Johns-Rivendell-Hunqapillar-29er-Klunker-76.jpg] 
>
> Are both of these frame names borrowing from Tolkien? I understand RBW had 
> to stop using Tolkien names. 
>

-- 
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/f9633949-3d84-4fa2-8005-12fe5039bb89n%40googlegroups.com.

Re: [RBW] Bombadil and Hunqapillar origins: The definitive thread

2022-12-12 Thread J J

Cool pair of Hunqs! are the forks different? Or is it just the photo angle 
that makes the curve on the fork on the one with the black saddle look 
different?

On Monday, December 12, 2022 at 6:56:43 AM UTC-5 Dick Combs wrote:

> [image: 61977D70-55E2-4782-A93A-A8333171AFD6.jpeg][image: 
> 7A5D4923-2037-4ACB-81D6-3091B473A0FB.jpeg]My two Hunqs
>
>

-- 
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/7ceba5ab-8985-4c0b-be14-e11de68a0220n%40googlegroups.com.

[RBW] Re: San Francisco/Bay Area Riv Riders

2022-12-12 Thread Piaw Na

I'm down in the Peninsula. Traditionally the club ride is to climb Mt. 
Hamilton on New Year's Day, but with 2 kids I'm unlikely to make it. If you 
do come down to the Peninsula we can try to do something.
On Monday, December 12, 2022 at 7:47:49 AM UTC-8 Slin wrote:

> Hi Luke!
>
> I'm also in the city and would love to meet up with folks for a chill ride.
>
> S
>
> On Sunday, December 11, 2022 at 9:16:48 PM UTC-8 Luke Hendrickson wrote:
>
>> Hey all! I know that it’s been a bit wet & cold, but I’d love to see if 
>> anyone would want to have a little ride in the coming week(s). Perhaps even 
>> a New Year’s day ride to celebrate in the new year in style?
>>
>> I’m in the City proper and was thinking about some mixed terrain around 
>> town while keeping it mostly road-ish so that no one’s limited by the ride 
>> route. Pastries + hot drinks + more snacks?
>>
>> I’d love to hear from anyone interested or even connect with other 
>> like-minded people for more than just a one-off ride. 
>>
>

-- 
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/4808001d-f699-4610-bb6a-671de000d709n%40googlegroups.com.

[RBW] Nivex on a Rivendell?

2022-12-12 Thread Marty Gierke, Stewartstown PA

The Nivex is on the market now, and I really like the look of it. Even at 
$729.00 it feels like money well spent if you want something a little 
different and appreciate all that goes into making something like this. 
KUDOs to Jan for sticking with it. 
Nivex Rear 

[image: Oregon-Outback-RH_Nivex-600x387.jpeg]

For a custom Rivendell, it might make for a very sweet build. If my ship 
comes in I'd be tempted to spring for one, but I'll hold out until I see 
the new Riv rear derailer. 

Marty

-- 
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/5b64aa46-985f-4cc6-b39e-2417bbff47c1n%40googlegroups.com.

[RBW] Re: Rivendell Timeline - it's happening!

2022-12-12 Thread Alan Barnard

Olivier Chetelat’s photos of the proto-Appaloosa are located here:

https://www.flickr.com/photos/olipop/8418423327/in/photostream/

On Tuesday, November 30, 2021 at 2:47:21 PM UTC-8 Chris L wrote:

> The Mystery Bike/Appaloosa happened shortly after I discovered RBW, so 
> 2012'ish sounds about right.  
>
> My memory is that Grant put out feelers for 10 people to buy a new bike, 
> completely sight unseen with no input (I don't remember if they were 
> allowed to choose color) into the bike.  I don't recall if they were 
> completes or F/F/H, but $4000 sticks in my mind as being the cost.  
>
> I have several really good photos that were posted of those bikes.  
>
> [image: Joe Appaloosa (5).jpg]
>
> On Saturday, November 27, 2021 at 1:14:05 PM UTC-6 Jason Fuller wrote:
>
>> Cheers for the feedback! Yeah, it was pretty wild to go from about a 3/10 
>> to a 6/10 overnight on my Rivendell knowledge (still a good ways to go 
>> before I'm any sort of expert).  Of course, my "knowledge" is limited to 
>> what I've found either in the reader or on the website for the most part, 
>> and there's a lot that's not really covered in those spots.  
>>
>> I wasn't sure whether to consider the Road and Road Standard as different 
>> bikes, but I'll separate them out yeah.  So then on the '95 lineup, was the 
>> Road a semi-custom while the AR and Mountain (Expedition? Should I include 
>> this alt name?) were set geometry?  From memory the Road was the cheapest 
>> of the three so I was a bit confused by that all. 
>>
>> I'll research more on the Gen 1 Appaloosa and Mystery Bike because I 
>> omitted them out of unawareness rather than conscious decision. I welcome 
>> (heck, I beg for) any insight or leads you may have in this regard.  I 
>> think I'd also like to highlight in this timeline when models either 
>> underwent significant geometry changes or changed builders (AHH and 
>> Atlantis being obvious ones).  This might turn into a full wiki, not sure 
>> yet, depends how bored I get this winter I guess!  I have webhosting 
>> available, just need to sort some stuff out on that end. 
>>
>>
>>  
>>
>> On Saturday, 27 November 2021 at 10:58:35 UTC-8 iamkeith wrote:
>>
>>> Good effort.  I bet that was fun, digesting so much at once.  My comment 
>>> is that I don't think I'd discount the original Appaloosa or "mystery 
>>> bike," which is different from the current Appaloosa.  I know it was 'sort 
>>> of' a prototype, but they were produced for specific, paying customers - 
>>> exactly the way early Roads, All Rounders and Mountains were - with no 
>>> design input from the buyers and - unlike those others - they DID have an 
>>> actual model name and head badge.  I don't think I'd consider them 
>>> insignificant either, as they were the experience that led to the current 
>>> long chainstay, longer top tube models and the big swept-back bars like the 
>>> bosco.  Kind of key to understanding the whole evolution.
>>>
>>>
>>> On Saturday, November 27, 2021 at 3:29:08 AM UTC-8 Fullylugged wrote:
>>>
 Nice Jason, and needed.  The Road was followed quickly by the Road 
 Standard, I think by '96.

 On Saturday, November 27, 2021 at 1:45:44 AM UTC-6 Jason Fuller wrote:

> I spent the afternoon and evening trawling the full set of Riv 
> Readers, as well as old copies of the Rivendell website via 
> archive.org (it was veloworks.com/rivendell first, then it was 
> rivendellbicycles.com, then moved to the current home of rivbike.com 
> - I've perused probably upwards of 100's of snapshots of these sites 
> today).  
>
> I don't have nearly as deep of experience with Rivendell as some of 
> you so I wanted to run this timeline by y'all and see if you can point 
> out 
> omissions or errors in my timeline. There are a lot of permutations of 
> some 
> of these models of course - I have pretty detailed notes about where each 
> model was made (including many which went through a few shops) in 
> addition 
> to the timeline, which I plan to include in whatever final form this 
> takes.  
>
> Please let me know if you see something missing or incorrect!  Note: I 
> left Protovelo's out because I'm not considering prototypes to be 
> relevant; 
> I might be missing some Rosco's but only the Bubbe 51 and Road 55.5 are 
> ones I have any info on. The step-thru version seems to have snuck past 
> my 
> research so far. 
>
>  [image: PXL_20211127_062150509.jpg]
>
>
>

-- 
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/fe7fc550-5696-431a-afc7-bf87b7e5efb5n%40googlegroups.com.

[RBW] Re: San Francisco/Bay Area Riv Riders

2022-12-12 Thread Slin

Hi Luke!

I'm also in the city and would love to meet up with folks for a chill ride.

S

On Sunday, December 11, 2022 at 9:16:48 PM UTC-8 Luke Hendrickson wrote:

> Hey all! I know that it’s been a bit wet & cold, but I’d love to see if 
> anyone would want to have a little ride in the coming week(s). Perhaps even 
> a New Year’s day ride to celebrate in the new year in style?
>
> I’m in the City proper and was thinking about some mixed terrain around 
> town while keeping it mostly road-ish so that no one’s limited by the ride 
> route. Pastries + hot drinks + more snacks?
>
> I’d love to hear from anyone interested or even connect with other 
> like-minded people for more than just a one-off ride. 
>

-- 
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/5cf8c70e-22fc-41e2-871f-3b9f5684a580n%40googlegroups.com.

[RBW] Re: New Gus & bottom bracket confusion

2022-12-12 Thread Garth

No offense, but you're asking RBW business questions that would be 
addressed by them. Call them ! They don't bite. 
On Monday, December 12, 2022 at 10:11:44 AM UTC-5 rmro...@gmail.com wrote:

> I have decided to stick with a square taper crank, either White Eno or Riv 
> Silver, and I have bottom bracket questions.
> Gus BB shell is 73 BSA. The bottom brackets they sell (Shimano & IRD) are 
> 68. Riv says "use the 113 (spindle) if you have a mountain bike front 
> derailleur." But, they also say r.e. the IRD BB, "If you have a Gus or 
> Susie with a tire up to 2.5", you'll need a 123 with the right cup spacer." 
> But, they do not even show the 123 as being available?
> Alternatively, White Industries offers both 68 & 73 widths but the widest 
> spindle offering is 121.
> So I guess my question is 1. If I go with a Silver double, which bottom 
> bracket to buy? 2. If I go with a White Ind. Eno single, which bottom 
> bracket? I plan to run 2.5"-2.6" tires.
> Thanks in advance for our help.
>

-- 
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/e89a9d1d-9c58-4768-8fba-ca117728e852n%40googlegroups.com.

[RBW] New Gus & bottom bracket confusion