Re: [RBW] Tics in the bars at the stem clamp - help
Leah You may want to slightly loosen the stem clamp bolt and drip in the T9 or Loctitie. The loosen bolt may increase the distance between the bar and the sleeve allowing the fluid to penetrate further. Alternatively, you could remove the bar, turn on it's side and drip the fluid in. As for the headset, It is a brand new headset, so wear should not be an issue. You may want to them to verify it is installed correctly, the fixed cups are square in the headtube & the headset is assembled and tightened correctly. It is brand new headset, so wear should not be an issue. I believe they come installed from Taiwan, but yours may be different. John Hawrylak Woodstown NJ On Wednesday, October 2, 2024 at 2:51:19 PM UTC-4 Bicycle Belle Ding Ding! wrote: > It’s pretty tight. I don’t know that the Loctite would really make it in > there. It’s been pointed out to me in DMs that this could be a number of > things, including a worn headset. I don’t know. There is one man at the > shop who can fix anything. The trick is handing HIM the bike when I get > there. I am never sure when he works and I’m too Midwest nice to pull away > from the outstretched hand of whatever mechanic that isn’t him… > > On Oct 2, 2024, at 2:40 PM, 'John Hawrylak, Woodstown NJ' via RBW Owners > Bunch wrote: > > Leah > > > Have you considered dripping some Loctite into the sleeve and letting it > dry, as one of the posters suggested. I would think Blue Loctite but you > might reach out to him to verify the color. > > John Hawrylak > Woodstown NJ > > On Wednesday, October 2, 2024 at 2:28:03 PM UTC-4 Bicycle Belle Ding Ding! > wrote: > >> Oh, no way was I that thorough. I had no idea I should do all those >> things. I wiped all the old goop off so the stem was shiny and smeared >> around fresh lube and then pumped the stem up and down. I need a mentor! >> Leah >> >> On Oct 2, 2024, at 1:44 PM, Ted Durant wrote: >> >> When you say you "attacked that stem with a towel and fresh lube", does >> that mean you cleaned the stem, wedge, and expander bolt fully and then >> greased it all, reassembled, and put back in the bike? Did you also put >> some grease under the expander bolt at the top of the stem? Did you wipe >> out the inside of the steerer tube (the fork, where the stem inserts), as >> well? >> >> >> Ted "I hate clicks and creaks" Durant >> Milwaukee WI USA >> >> -- >> >> 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/uU_ZxeE0Pag/unsubscribe >> . >> To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, 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/1278721d-9f2a-4ca5-bc59-aa2b645a4992n%40googlegroups.com >> >> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/rbw-owners-bunch/1278721d-9f2a-4ca5-bc59-aa2b645a4992n%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> >> . >> >> -- > 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/uU_ZxeE0Pag/unsubscribe > . > To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, 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/ab428f72-daf6-4bd7-b6b1-304205af088bn%40googlegroups.com > > <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/rbw-owners-bunch/ab428f72-daf6-4bd7-b6b1-304205af088bn%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> > . > > -- 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/a279b5d8-0d0b-41db-ab8c-ed00f6635e61n%40googlegroups.com.
Re: [RBW] Tics in the bars at the stem clamp - help
Leah Have you considered dripping some Loctite into the sleeve and letting it dry, as one of the posters suggested. I would think Blue Loctite but you might reach out to him to verify the color. John Hawrylak Woodstown NJ On Wednesday, October 2, 2024 at 2:28:03 PM UTC-4 Bicycle Belle Ding Ding! wrote: > Oh, no way was I that thorough. I had no idea I should do all those > things. I wiped all the old goop off so the stem was shiny and smeared > around fresh lube and then pumped the stem up and down. I need a mentor! > Leah > > On Oct 2, 2024, at 1:44 PM, Ted Durant wrote: > > When you say you "attacked that stem with a towel and fresh lube", does > that mean you cleaned the stem, wedge, and expander bolt fully and then > greased it all, reassembled, and put back in the bike? Did you also put > some grease under the expander bolt at the top of the stem? Did you wipe > out the inside of the steerer tube (the fork, where the stem inserts), as > well? > > > Ted "I hate clicks and creaks" Durant > Milwaukee WI USA > > -- > > 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/uU_ZxeE0Pag/unsubscribe > . > To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, 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/1278721d-9f2a-4ca5-bc59-aa2b645a4992n%40googlegroups.com > > <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/rbw-owners-bunch/1278721d-9f2a-4ca5-bc59-aa2b645a4992n%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> > . > > -- 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/ab428f72-daf6-4bd7-b6b1-304205af088bn%40googlegroups.com.
[RBW] Re: Tics in the bars at the stem clamp - help
Leah Suggest verifying the stem quill bolt is tight by tightening it. I believe Franc's 'jazzing' means to remove the stem from the headtube, clean it, grease it very well. and insert back into the head/steerer tube, and tighten it very well. Also is the Technomic stem clamp diameter (25.4 or 26mm) match the Billie bar clamp diameter??? RBW site does not state the Billie bar clamp diameter. John Hawrylak Woodstown NJ On Monday, September 30, 2024 at 4:40:46 PM UTC-4 Bicycle Belle Ding Ding! wrote: > On my raspberry Platypus I have aluminum Billie bars and a Nitto Technomic > 12 cm stem from Riv. Maybe once a year in any of my bikes, I’ll get this > irritating ticking in the bars. Years ago after trial and error, I found it > was coming from where the stem clamps the bars. Put a little T9 on there > and you’ll ride in blissful silence for another year or so. But this time, > it is HORRID. A constant cacophony of ticking that nearly drove me wild > during our 34 mile club ride today. If I grab the bar ends, I can make the > sound happen. I have applied T9 twice, greased the bolt, unscrewed it and > screwed it back in again…it’s still making the noise. If I go howling to > the bike shop they will have mercy and help but before I do that, I’m > coming to you all because you’ll know more about our type of bars. > > 1. Do these bars wear out? I can’t imagine that would be the case. The > stem is maybe a year old and the bars maybe 3 years. > > 2. Has this ever happened to you? How did you fix it? > > 3. Would a faceplater stem fix this issue? If I thought it would, I’d get > one and learn how to properly torque that sucker. > > 4. I can’t get the bars to move on me, if that’s what you’re wondering. I > can stand and put weight on them and they don’t obviously slip. > > Thanks for your help! > Leah > -- 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/03a9e120-6415-474e-b45d-ab6badddf369n%40googlegroups.com.
[RBW] Re: Triple cranks for 9-speed build: advise me
+1 on Nick Payne said about the crank arms from Spa Cycles in the UK. The have the XD-2 and the TD-2 crank arms for L30, which comes to about $40 after currency conversion, minus VAT and + shipping. The TD-2 crank is a normal 5 arm without a hidden chainring bolt. I bought the TD-2 arms =with the Spa 7075 rings in 2022 and have had no problems. Currently using a Sugino AT triple for a low Q (152mm). The TD-2 has a Q of 159mm with a SKF symmetric 113mm BB with a 2.5mm drive side spacer & 2mm clearance to the chain stay. John Hawrylak Woodstown NJ On Sunday, August 18, 2024 at 1:07:46 PM UTC-4 smer...@gmail.com wrote: > I am putting together an Atlantis for touring/long rides/light trail use. > > I am thinking of using a new Velo Orange fluted triple or perhaps picking > up a used Shimano XTR M900. > > Silver is a little too spendy for me, and I given that am built like a > tank and ride accordingly, think the Clipper/New Albion triples might not > be hardy enough. > > I figured if anyone would have an informed opinion on this crucial matter, > it would be this bunch. What would you do? > > smm > -- 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/f51c4700-031f-4081-9475-c02cc37060abn%40googlegroups.com.
Re: [RBW] Re: New Bike Day: My Little Platy
Leah you stated " I’m conflicted about the Silver shifters; they ghost shift and I don’t always hit the gears perfectly. I have Microshift on the red Platy and honestly, they do a better job. I know I should paint some Loctite on the wingnut.". 1 question, 1 suggestion Was the Microshift barcons set up in friction or index? John Thurston on the iBob list has a 3D printed part for the SunTour barcons which replaces (with a nylock nut) the hex nut/screw plate arrangement SunTour used to tighten the shifter. His design holds the tightness and only requires a screwdriver to adjust the tightness. You may want to ask him if the Silver has a similar design. John Hawrylak Woodstown NJ On Thursday, July 18, 2024 at 7:57:51 AM UTC-4 Bicycle Belle Ding Ding! wrote: > I feel I’ve finally gotten enough miles on the My Little Platy to trust > it. It feels really good and sporty and solid. I haven’t loaded it down as > I haven’t had cause, but I’m sure it would do fine. I’ve added a cerakoted > pink Racer basket from Analog, secured with aqua zip ties and then even got > a pink Voile strap (also Analog) I’ve employed as a safety strap for the > front rack. I think pink is outstanding on Ana Purple. I have lots of it > sprinkled on the bike and it really sets off the paint color. It is so > nice to have a more compact Riv to take if need be; I’m really lucky to be > able to fit 2 sizes. I still love the big 700c wheels on my other bikes, > but this more compact frame is fantastic - I can lift and turn it easily > without feeling like I’m wielding something ungainly. > > I’m conflicted about the Silver shifters; they ghost shift and I don’t > always hit the gears perfectly. I have Microshift on the red Platy and > honestly, they do a better job. I know I should paint some Loctite on the > wingnut but I’m reluctant because I don’t know how tight I want the nut to > be - too tight and it makes the lever really hard to push. Too loose and it > slips gears. Frustrating, considering the high praise these shifters have > received. > > I’ll send photos in a separate post. > Leah > > On Tuesday, May 28, 2024 at 11:17:09 PM UTC-4 John Hawrylak, Woodstown NJ > wrote: > >> Leah >> >> You stated wrt tires " Both bikes have Velocity Quills, set up tubeless, >> but the Racing Platy has 42mm Ultradynamicos and the My Little Platy has 48 >> mm Gravel Kings." >> If both bikes are 650B, then the Angular Moment of Inertia is slightly >> higher for the 48's (larger radius, tires weigh more), so the 48s >> accelerate a little slower vs the 42's >> If the 42's are 700C, the Moment of Inertia for the 42s is higher than a >> 650B (larger radius) and the difference in acceleration would be less. >> >> You stated wrt to front end shaking "The front end feels a bit shaky >> when I stand and pedal, another thing I don’t understand. These are >> Albatross bars and I have Billies on the others. Also, this bike has a >> front rack. Maybe that’s why." >> Both bikes have almost identical trail and wheel flop (assuming fork rake >> is the same since they are both stock Platy's) and the high flop causes >> side to side motion which is amplified by front weight. So if the other >> bike has NO front rack, then the "shakiness" may be the 'amplified" side to >> side motion. Not sure if you notice this only at low speed when climbing >> or when riding around the neighborhood at low speed (generally < 6 to 8 >> mph).High wheel flop is the downside of high trail. >> If the new bike bars have a shorter lever arm to the stem, then you may >> be overcompensating the side to side motion compared to the other bike >> >> Hope this helps. I think you did a superlative job on this new bike, >> figuring out everything in advance. >> >> John Hawrylak >> Woodstown NJ >> On Sunday, May 26, 2024 at 8:55:44 AM UTC-4 Bicycle Belle Ding Ding! >> wrote: >> >>> I’ve had so much fun putting the first 50 miles on my new bike. I love >>> looking at it and wish I could see it when I’m riding it. The spokes do >>> gleam in the sun as the wheels rotate, which thrills me. I don’t know >>> anything, but it feels to me like my 700c wheels are faster than these >>> 650b. I am not slow on them, but also I would never use this bike for a >>> club ride if my other Platy was in the shop. Both bikes have Velocity >>> Quills, set up tubeless, but the Racing Platy has 42mm Ultradynamicos and >>> the My Little Platy has 48 mm Gravel Kings. Maybe these things are the real >>> differences, I don’t know. &
[RBW] Re: Going from 2x9 to 3x9 - FD Selection
I use a Sora FD-R3030b to shift a Sugino AT triple and it works fine. The
Sora is designed for a 45mm front chain line so it should work you Silver
crank. I paid $27.99 for the Sora, so it's not much to pay for trying it.
RBW states the Microshift FDs they sell ("skeleton key'??) works with Siver
triples. You can find it at Universal Cycles cheaper than the $34 RBW
wants.
John Hawrylak
Woodstown NJ
On Monday, July 8, 2024 at 9:06:56 PM UTC-4 wong.d...@gmail.com wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I currently have a 2x9 with a 26/38 crank (Silver brand) and a 11/34
> cassette on my Rivendell Clem Smith Jr - H.
>
> I want to add a third/outer chainring (maybe a 44 or 46), which can be
> done by replacing the Silver bashguard with an outer chainring.
>
> I am shopping for a replacement front derailleur (either a Shimano XT M771
> or XTR M971) because I don’t think my Claris FD is capable of a 3x.
>
> I am looking at the specs of both FDs.
>
> The “Front Chainwheel Tooth Difference” is 20T/22T for the XTR and 18T for
> the XT
>
> The “Min. difference between top and intermediate” is 12T for the XTR and
> 10T for the XT
>
> How closely do I need to meet these two requirements? If I get a 46T, I
> don’t meet the Shimano specs. The Front Chainwheel Difference is 20T and
> the Min Difference between the top and intermediate is 8T. Will either FD
> work? I wanted to save money by leaving the 26/28 alone.
>
> On a side note, I don’t plan to use the smallest chaining (26T) very often
> (if ever) as I basically spinout for most of the 9 cogs.
>
> Thank you.
>
--
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/6d978d3c-a438-449b-91ee-7ae44cda67b6n%40googlegroups.com.
[RBW] Re: A PSA From Gordon Ramsay
George Schick wrote: " Grant posted a lengthy article in his December, '23 Blahg issue. His points revolved more around the way modern helmets are constructed, using styrofoam-like material that won't compress during an impact,...it's a worthwhile read. He covers various tests used to measure the integrity of each helmet..:" George, with all due respect, this thread contains 2 to 3 instances of folks reporting the helmet *did it's jo*b, not including Gordo's crash.. And there are no instances where folks complained the helmet did *not* do it's job, despite what Paterson claims is incorrectly testing. I read his Blahg when it came out & I was disturbed about his POV. I think it shows his false logic about wearing a helmet, It is worthwhile only because it is a POV of an influential person. Grant could be wrong, John Hawrylak Woodstown, NJ On Tuesday, June 18, 2024 at 12:56:53 PM UTC-4 George Schick wrote: > FWIW concerning this discussion, Grant posted a lengthy article in his > December, '23 Blahg issue. His points revolved more around the way modern > helmets are constructed, using styrofoam-like material that won't compress > during an impact, than it did wearing vs. not wearing one. At one time or > another I've owned each of the helmets from the past that he highlights - > Skid Lid, Kucharik "hair net," etc. Whether you are pro or con helmet > wearing while cycling, it's a worthwhile read. He covers various tests > used to measure the integrity of each helmet, how it does or doesn't do > what it is supposed to do (or at least "hyped" to do), modifications made > to existing models, and other things. > > On Saturday, June 15, 2024 at 4:27:36 PM UTC-5 Matthew Williams wrote: > >> [image: >> oMe3QaPR4E9b7DDpDnQFwbXwIfYum0EBKDB8bA~tplv-photomode-video-share-card:1200:630:20.jpeg] >> >> 1.1M likes, 21.3K comments. “Sound ON for this one…with #FathersDay >> tomorrow I have very important message for all the dads out there…WEAR A >> HELMET ! This week I had a really bad accident while riding my bike in >> Connecticut. I'm doing ok and did not break any bones or suffer any major >> injuries but I am a bit bruised up looking like a purple potato. I’m >> thankful for all the doctors, nurses and staff at Lawerence + Memorial >> Hospital in New London who looked after me and checked me out, but most >> thankful for my helmet that saved my life. Have a great Father’s Day and be >> safe Gx” >> <https://www.tiktok.com/@gordonramsayofficial/video/7380749671632882977> >> TikTok · Gordon Ramsay >> <https://www.tiktok.com/@gordonramsayofficial/video/7380749671632882977> >> tiktok.com >> <https://www.tiktok.com/@gordonramsayofficial/video/7380749671632882977> >> <https://www.tiktok.com/@gordonramsayofficial/video/7380749671632882977> >> >> Also: “I Love Helmets!” >> >> [image: maxresdefault.jpg] >> >> Prescott Highside (I Love Helmets) >> <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qus2wiRUVBw> >> youtube.com <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qus2wiRUVBw> >> <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qus2wiRUVBw> >> > -- 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/e8d3b17d-bf6b-4d28-8273-01e2153c5770n%40googlegroups.com.
[RBW] Re: A PSA From Gordon Ramsay
Thanks for posting this. Gordo is dead right on helmets. He spoke from the heart. John Hawrylak Woodstown NJ On Saturday, June 15, 2024 at 5:27:36 PM UTC-4 Matthew Williams wrote: > [image: > oMe3QaPR4E9b7DDpDnQFwbXwIfYum0EBKDB8bA~tplv-photomode-video-share-card:1200:630:20.jpeg] > > 1.1M likes, 21.3K comments. “Sound ON for this one…with #FathersDay > tomorrow I have very important message for all the dads out there…WEAR A > HELMET ! This week I had a really bad accident while riding my bike in > Connecticut. I'm doing ok and did not break any bones or suffer any major > injuries but I am a bit bruised up looking like a purple potato. I’m > thankful for all the doctors, nurses and staff at Lawerence + Memorial > Hospital in New London who looked after me and checked me out, but most > thankful for my helmet that saved my life. Have a great Father’s Day and be > safe Gx” > <https://www.tiktok.com/@gordonramsayofficial/video/7380749671632882977> > TikTok · Gordon Ramsay > <https://www.tiktok.com/@gordonramsayofficial/video/7380749671632882977> > tiktok.com > <https://www.tiktok.com/@gordonramsayofficial/video/7380749671632882977> > <https://www.tiktok.com/@gordonramsayofficial/video/7380749671632882977> > > Also: “I Love Helmets!” > > [image: maxresdefault.jpg] > > Prescott Highside (I Love Helmets) > <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qus2wiRUVBw> > youtube.com <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qus2wiRUVBw> > <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qus2wiRUVBw> > -- 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/859af540-cfa4-4827-8d22-11246244c046n%40googlegroups.com.
Re: [RBW] Touch-up paint
Bill Would the Rambouillets being built in Japan have anything to do with the shade of orange??? The Waterford colors seem to be the colors they used for the Rivendell models they made. John Hawrylak Woodstown NJ On Friday, May 31, 2024 at 4:54:44 PM UTC-4 Bill Lindsay wrote: > Orange Sam Hillbornes and Orange Rambouillets are both "sparkly metallic > Orange" in color FAMILY. They are not identical. The multi-coated > treatment of the Orange Rambouillets have been described as a "thousand > dollar paint job". Whether a scratch on an Orange Rambouillet could be > made slightly less ugly with the $50 Hilborne Orange touchup from > Waterford, that's up to the beholder. > > Bill Lindsay > El Cerrito, CA > > On Friday, May 31, 2024 at 1:35:04 PM UTC-7 maxcr wrote: > >> Does anyone know if the Sam Hilborne Orange is the same as Rambouillet >> orange? >> Max >> >> On Friday, May 10, 2024 at 10:21:02 PM UTC-4 Roy Summer wrote: >> >>> Sometimes you can find nail polish that will match or come very close. >>> Clear polish will help prevent rust if you can’t find a color match. >>> >>> On Friday, May 10, 2024 at 9:31:18 PM UTC-4 gds...@gmail.com wrote: >>> >>>> I need Pea Sage Green. Got a "beusage" spot on my Romulus. >>>> >>>> On Fri, May 10, 2024, 4:49 PM Zac wrote: >>>> >>>>> FWIW, I was checking the Gunnar/Waterford site to see if they had my >>>>> paint color (I ordered a bottle when I first heard they were shutting >>>>> down, >>>>> but it broke during a move) and noticed they added some Riv colors: >>>>> >>>>> Rivendell Atlantis Green >>>>> Rivendell Cream >>>>> Rivendell Head Tube Ivory >>>>> Rivendell Homer Hilsen Blue >>>>> Rivendell Jay's Green >>>>> Rivendell Light Blue Met >>>>> Rivendell Light Green >>>>> Rivendell Pearly Arctic Blue >>>>> Rivendell Roadeo R >>>>> Rivendell Roadeo White >>>>> Rivendell Sage >>>>> Rivendell Sam Hilborne Orange >>>>> >>>>> I think the touch-up paint is now shipped in plastic bottles instead >>>>> of glass like I received. >>>>> https://waterfordbikes.com/fv/store/Touch-up-one-step-p579850196 >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> 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/c4e0d5ad-42b1-4ec8-81a2-123aee64d8a8n%40googlegroups.com >>>>> >>>>> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/rbw-owners-bunch/c4e0d5ad-42b1-4ec8-81a2-123aee64d8a8n%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> >>>>> . >>>>> >>>> -- 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/e072f0fd-5cdb-498a-97a2-84d931622e76n%40googlegroups.com.
Re: [RBW] Re: New Bike Day: My Little Platy
Leah You stated wrt tires " Both bikes have Velocity Quills, set up tubeless, but the Racing Platy has 42mm Ultradynamicos and the My Little Platy has 48 mm Gravel Kings." If both bikes are 650B, then the Angular Moment of Inertia is slightly higher for the 48's (larger radius, tires weigh more), so the 48s accelerate a little slower vs the 42's If the 42's are 700C, the Moment of Inertia for the 42s is higher than a 650B (larger radius) and the difference in acceleration would be less. You stated wrt to front end shaking "The front end feels a bit shaky when I stand and pedal, another thing I don’t understand. These are Albatross bars and I have Billies on the others. Also, this bike has a front rack. Maybe that’s why." Both bikes have almost identical trail and wheel flop (assuming fork rake is the same since they are both stock Platy's) and the high flop causes side to side motion which is amplified by front weight. So if the other bike has NO front rack, then the "shakiness" may be the 'amplified" side to side motion. Not sure if you notice this only at low speed when climbing or when riding around the neighborhood at low speed (generally < 6 to 8 mph).High wheel flop is the downside of high trail. If the new bike bars have a shorter lever arm to the stem, then you may be overcompensating the side to side motion compared to the other bike Hope this helps. I think you did a superlative job on this new bike, figuring out everything in advance. John Hawrylak Woodstown NJ On Sunday, May 26, 2024 at 8:55:44 AM UTC-4 Bicycle Belle Ding Ding! wrote: > I’ve had so much fun putting the first 50 miles on my new bike. I love > looking at it and wish I could see it when I’m riding it. The spokes do > gleam in the sun as the wheels rotate, which thrills me. I don’t know > anything, but it feels to me like my 700c wheels are faster than these > 650b. I am not slow on them, but also I would never use this bike for a > club ride if my other Platy was in the shop. Both bikes have Velocity > Quills, set up tubeless, but the Racing Platy has 42mm Ultradynamicos and > the My Little Platy has 48 mm Gravel Kings. Maybe these things are the real > differences, I don’t know. > > The bike is more compact and manageable but does not feel too small. I’m > so grateful for my 81 cm PBH, which allows me the flexibility to ride both > frame sizes. I have pretty heavy racks on the My Little Platy and yet the > bike doesn’t feel THAT heavy. I bet it would feel light as a feather if I > didn’t have fenders, racks, dyno and bags all over it. > > The Silver shifters are taking some getting used to. One wingnut handle > flops and the other stays in place. The shifting was like butter, but when > I tightened the nut (hoping to stop the handle flapping) it made the lever > difficult to move. So, I loosened it again and I’m having some ghost > shifting. On my red bike, I have Microshift and I never miss a gear. I can > hit it perfectly, every darn time. Hoping I get the hang of these shifters, > because they come highly lauded. > > The front end feels a bit shaky when I stand and pedal, another thing I > don’t understand. These are Albatross bars and I have Billies on the > others. Also, this bike has a front rack. Maybe that’s why. > > At any rate, I have a lot to think about, fine tune and to learn. And I’m > having such fun in the process. > Leah > > > On May 24, 2024, at 7:44 PM, Leah Peterson wrote: > > So deep. I couldn’t stand putting a solid color on the spacer when I saw > so many oil slick option in 1 1/4 inch. Sure enough, the BMXers came > through with the 1 in for me. > > > Sent from my iPhone > > On May 24, 2024, at 11:27 AM, Wesley wrote: > > You know you're in deep when you're sourcing BMX parts to get the look > right. It's funny how the bike world is almost completely separated between > BMX and all other bikes - the brands, the language, and the parts standards > apparently have almost no contact across the divide. > -Wes > On Thursday, May 23, 2024 at 3:51:53 PM UTC-7 Patrick Moore wrote: > >> IMO this ties with the other customized Platypus featured here recently >> for "nicest-looking Platypus in list history," and it probably wins the >> award for "most attention paid to aesthetics" in list history. Note: I >> think very many of the Rivs posted are lovely to look at. >> >> Me, as with Mitch, "I am a guy." I am fully OC about my bikes for parts >> and builds and design (I remember most of the parts from my first 1970 full >> build), but not aesthetics, and it's interesting to see how others' >> passions turn out. >> >>
Re: [RBW] Track Supermarket
Garth Thanks for directions to the 2024 Nitto catalogue John Hawrylak Woodstown NJ On Friday, May 24, 2024 at 5:15:56 PM UTC-4 Garth wrote: > The catalog is on their home page, upper right in big letters :* PDF > Catalog * :) > https://nitto-tokyo.sakura.ne.jp/index-E.html > > > On Friday, May 24, 2024 at 4:27:02 PM UTC-4 ian m wrote: > >> On Friday, May 24, 2024 at 11:49:33 AM UTC-4 Keith P. wrote: >> >> Where does one get a Nitto catalog?! >> k. >> >> >> Inquiring minds must know! >> > -- 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/d6f943a5-a5d3-4448-b6f4-b32af37e5d12n%40googlegroups.com.
[RBW] Re: 007 Rescued!
very nice, especially the headtube. The paint at the lugs looks great and not heavy. John Hawrylak Woodstown NJ On Wednesday, May 8, 2024 at 6:52:36 PM UTC-4 mhec...@gmail.com wrote: > I bought this Saluki, serial #007, used in 03 or 4. It soon became my go > to ride, but after another twenty years on dirt roads the frame showed a > lot of wear and tear. I hated sacrificing the beautiful yellow decals but > am thrilled by what a good color match and quality job RaceMetalSmith of > White River Jct. VT did. Next up, rebuild and a sweet ride. > [image: IMG_2615.jpeg] > -- 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/9b09ae85-06ee-45dc-91f5-cafde622a9e6n%40googlegroups.com.
[RBW] Re: FS: parts clear out (wheel sets, bags, stems, brakes...)
What are you asking for the D/A 9 speed bar ends?? Not on the list but in the pics John Hawrylak Woodstown NJ On Saturday, April 27, 2024 at 11:44:45 PM UTC-4 eil...@umich.edu wrote: > Hi all. To make an upcoming move easier, I'm hoping to clear out all parts > and accessories not currently in use. Open to offers especially if bundling > multiple items. Prices do not include shipping from zip code 48103. > > Link to photos > <https://www.flickr.com/photos/199878034@N06/albums/72177720316534472/> > >1. 700c Velocity A23 singlespeed wheelset, White Industries 18t >freewheel, & Ultradynamico 700x42 Cava tires. Bought all this new. Wheels, >freewheel, and tires ridden under 1 mile. $450. >2. 650b Velocity Dyad wheelset, Deore hubs, Col de la Vie tires. In >great shape. Ridden fewer than 5 miles. $275. >3. Set of Velo Orange wing nuts. $35. >4. Velo Orange 1x crankset, 40t chainring, 165mm crank arm length. $90. >5. Rivendell Baggins handlebar bag. $35. >6. One pair of blue Swift Industries panniers. Never used. Small >grease marks on the front of one bag. No stains or signs of use on the >inside. $120. >7. Acorn rando bag. $80. >8. Brooks saddle with brass rivets and silver rails. $75. >9. Gilles Berthoud Aspin saddle. $165. >10. Black Sim Works bar end plugs. $15. >11. MKS Sylvan Gordito pedals. $35. >12. Bruce Gordon stem. $65. >13. Ritchey Force stem. $30. >14. Nitto faceplater stem. $65. >15. Shimano SL-BS77 bar end shifters. Never used, still in the box. >$90. >16. Busch-muller IQ-XS front dynamo light. $80. >17. Nitto NR21 rear rack. $90. >18. Salsa Casseroll canti mount front rack. $65. >19. Ocean Air Cycles x Nitto Erlen rear rack. $80. >20. Dia Compe long reach center pull brakes. Unused. $80. >21. Gran Compe center pull brakes. Unused. $110. >22. Shimano Deore 9s rear derailleur. $25. >23. Dia Compe BRS 100 short reach brakes. $30. >24. Shimano V-brakes. bolts missing. free with purchase of anything >else. >25. TRP CX 8.4 V-brakes. $55. >26. S-Ride 11s rear derailleur. $10. >27. Hsin Lung stem and mustache bar (from 1993 Bridgestone XO-3). $40. >28. Velo Orange Randonneur handlebar. $15. > > > -- 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/fd33b416-fe5f-4baa-a11a-29ba7898c54en%40googlegroups.com.
[RBW] Re: FS: Sackville Happisack w/ Kangaroo Pocket - $180 Shipped
I sent you a PM. Is bag still available? Do you have additional photos. The photo in the post does not enlarge. John Hawrylak Woodstown NJ On Sunday, April 21, 2024 at 7:34:59 PM UTC-4 jde...@gmail.com wrote: > Has some patina but in perfect functional condition. [image: > IMG_3344.jpeg]\ > > > -- 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/aaff964a-4a40-4bd5-b3e4-0e8efd2eb9d9n%40googlegroups.com.
[RBW] Re: Long Chainstays - What Problem/Deficiency Do They Solve?
Andy Thanks for posting the U Factor article. It was good to read it and understand the thinking. John Hawrylak Woodstown NJ On Thursday, April 4, 2024 at 8:49:10 AM UTC-4 ascpgh wrote: > The U Factor > <https://www.rivbike.com/pages/rivendell-archives-rivendell-reader-5-the-u-factor> > > Andy Cheatham > Pittsburgh > > On Sunday, March 31, 2024 at 1:50:18 PM UTC-4 John Hawrylak, Woodstown NJ > wrote: > >> Enjoyed reading the thread "Anyone else not a fan of long chainstays?", >> especially Bill L's explanation of the RBW bike design philosophy. Seems >> the prevailing thought is long stays are better for >> upright riding >> single track type trails (vs a Rails to Trails type trail) >> >> I'll just note 2 'facts' >> 1 The vast majority of RBW models (except the Roadeo type frame) use >> slack STA and HTA which may contribute to the ride effect when coupled with >> long stays. >> 2. In the beginning RBW addressed getting the bars higher and adopting a >> non-racer riding style (back at 45° with hands on hoods), which IMHO were >> solutions to actual problems. >> >> *So What problem or current deficiency in bike design is Grant solving by >> using long chain stays* >> Just to bring bikes to market that no one else is building?? >> Or do they solve a real problem??? >> >> John Hawrylak >> Woodstown NJ >> >> FWIW 2 of 3 of my frames have 44 to 45cm chain stays, and 1 has a 43cm >> chain stay.It's hard to notice a ride difference. >> > -- 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/cf6cc101-4bf9-49a8-a028-fec378ff6e8fn%40googlegroups.com.
RE: [RBW] Re: Long Chainstays - What Problem/Deficiency Do They Solve?
Eric Thanks for the RBW explanation. I vaguely remember it, but didn’t think he would increase then C/S so much I see Grant’s point: it’s more an improvement vs a problem solver. I see the ‘tall rider’ issue, longer seat tubes increase the saddle setback. However, I’m 5’6” and my frames are all 21”, so I couldn’t even ride a 25”, let along know how the increased 3cm setback effects the rider I see the weight distribution/stability effects. John Hawrylak Woodstown NJ From: rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com On Behalf Of Eric Daume Sent: Sunday, March 31, 2024 8:15 PM To: rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com Subject: Re: [RBW] Re: Long Chainstays - What Problem/Deficiency Do They Solve? If you want Riv's explanation, it's here: https://www.rivbike.com/pages/why-the-long-stays-chainstay-length Eric On Sun, Mar 31, 2024 at 8:02 PM 'John Hawrylak' via RBW Owners Bunch mailto:rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com> > wrote: Bill I would say “solve some objective problem not addressed by all other bikes or be an improvement by all other bikes” regardless of the logical/philosophical issue of Rivendells existing or nor. Also, I think most of us would agree “all other bikes” would the bikes you see in Trek store, a Fuji store, a Specialized store, a Crust website, a Walmart sporting goods section, etc. I am not thinking about designs which may exist in the world where bikes are used in lieu of motorized vehicles and not just as a recreational diversion. John Hawrylak Woodstown NJ From: rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com <mailto:rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com> mailto:rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com> > On Behalf Of William Lindsay Sent: Sunday, March 31, 2024 6:57 PM To: rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com <mailto:rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com> Subject: Re: [RBW] Re: Long Chainstays - What Problem/Deficiency Do They Solve? John OK so you are saying that every bike on earth that is currently available are all in one group and Rivendells are not in that group. In order to be allowed to exist a Rivendell must either conform with the first group’s designs or solve some objective problem not addressed by all other bikes. Is that it? BL in EC On Sun, Mar 31, 2024 at 3:43 PM 'John Hawrylak' via RBW Owners Bunch mailto:rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com> > wrote: Bill Good challenge, what I was thinking is what problem with bikes is the long C/S solving? I thought it was a straight forward question. I suggest eliminate “in bike design” and problems or current deficiencies refer to the current bikes available.Another way of saying it is what “improvements” in bicycles result from the Long C/S. So far the responses indicate Long C/S improve Overall handling, seems to apply to all surfaces. Comfort, especially from bumps in the surface. Climbing and Descending single track type trails (like the ones in the RBW pictures on Mt Diablo). The climbing improvement appears to due to improved weight distribution vs improved bio-mechanical items. John Hawrylak Woodstown NJ From: rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com <mailto:rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com> mailto:rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com> > On Behalf Of Bill Lindsay Sent: Sunday, March 31, 2024 5:19 PM To: RBW Owners Bunch mailto:rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com> > Subject: [RBW] Re: Long Chainstays - What Problem/Deficiency Do They Solve? The OP asked: "What problem or current deficiency in bike design is Grant solving by using long chain stays" What exactly is this entity you call "bike design"? If you can define that, perhaps I can respond to your question (emphatically stated with FOUR question marks) Bill Lindsay El Cerrito, CA On Sunday, March 31, 2024 at 10:50:18 AM UTC-7 John Hawrylak, Woodstown NJ wrote: Enjoyed reading the thread "Anyone else not a fan of long chainstays?", especially Bill L's explanation of the RBW bike design philosophy. Seems the prevailing thought is long stays are better for upright riding single track type trails (vs a Rails to Trails type trail) I'll just note 2 'facts' 1 The vast majority of RBW models (except the Roadeo type frame) use slack STA and HTA which may contribute to the ride effect when coupled with long stays. 2. In the beginning RBW addressed getting the bars higher and adopting a non-racer riding style (back at 45° with hands on hoods), which IMHO were solutions to actual problems. So What problem or current deficiency in bike design is Grant solving by using long chain stays Just to bring bikes to market that no one else is building?? Or do they solve a real problem??? John Hawrylak Woodstown NJ FWIW 2 of 3 of my frames have 44 to 45cm chain stays, and 1 has a 43cm chain stay.It
RE: [RBW] Re: Long Chainstays - What Problem/Deficiency Do They Solve?
Bill I would say “solve some objective problem not addressed by all other bikes or be an improvement by all other bikes” regardless of the logical/philosophical issue of Rivendells existing or nor. Also, I think most of us would agree “all other bikes” would the bikes you see in Trek store, a Fuji store, a Specialized store, a Crust website, a Walmart sporting goods section, etc. I am not thinking about designs which may exist in the world where bikes are used in lieu of motorized vehicles and not just as a recreational diversion. John Hawrylak Woodstown NJ From: rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com On Behalf Of William Lindsay Sent: Sunday, March 31, 2024 6:57 PM To: rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com Subject: Re: [RBW] Re: Long Chainstays - What Problem/Deficiency Do They Solve? John OK so you are saying that every bike on earth that is currently available are all in one group and Rivendells are not in that group. In order to be allowed to exist a Rivendell must either conform with the first group’s designs or solve some objective problem not addressed by all other bikes. Is that it? BL in EC On Sun, Mar 31, 2024 at 3:43 PM 'John Hawrylak' via RBW Owners Bunch mailto:rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com> > wrote: Bill Good challenge, what I was thinking is what problem with bikes is the long C/S solving? I thought it was a straight forward question. I suggest eliminate “in bike design” and problems or current deficiencies refer to the current bikes available.Another way of saying it is what “improvements” in bicycles result from the Long C/S. So far the responses indicate Long C/S improve Overall handling, seems to apply to all surfaces. Comfort, especially from bumps in the surface. Climbing and Descending single track type trails (like the ones in the RBW pictures on Mt Diablo). The climbing improvement appears to due to improved weight distribution vs improved bio-mechanical items. John Hawrylak Woodstown NJ From: rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com <mailto:rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com> mailto:rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com> > On Behalf Of Bill Lindsay Sent: Sunday, March 31, 2024 5:19 PM To: RBW Owners Bunch mailto:rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com> > Subject: [RBW] Re: Long Chainstays - What Problem/Deficiency Do They Solve? The OP asked: "What problem or current deficiency in bike design is Grant solving by using long chain stays" What exactly is this entity you call "bike design"? If you can define that, perhaps I can respond to your question (emphatically stated with FOUR question marks) Bill Lindsay El Cerrito, CA On Sunday, March 31, 2024 at 10:50:18 AM UTC-7 John Hawrylak, Woodstown NJ wrote: Enjoyed reading the thread "Anyone else not a fan of long chainstays?", especially Bill L's explanation of the RBW bike design philosophy. Seems the prevailing thought is long stays are better for upright riding single track type trails (vs a Rails to Trails type trail) I'll just note 2 'facts' 1 The vast majority of RBW models (except the Roadeo type frame) use slack STA and HTA which may contribute to the ride effect when coupled with long stays. 2. In the beginning RBW addressed getting the bars higher and adopting a non-racer riding style (back at 45° with hands on hoods), which IMHO were solutions to actual problems. So What problem or current deficiency in bike design is Grant solving by using long chain stays Just to bring bikes to market that no one else is building?? Or do they solve a real problem??? John Hawrylak Woodstown NJ FWIW 2 of 3 of my frames have 44 to 45cm chain stays, and 1 has a 43cm chain stay.It's hard to notice a ride difference. -- 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/CvtnXgIblG8/unsubscribe. To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com <mailto:rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com> . To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/rbw-owners-bunch/0415e7b9-d462-402e-961f-0fe4ba41a5b3n%40googlegroups.com <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/rbw-owners-bunch/0415e7b9-d462-402e-961f-0fe4ba41a5b3n%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> . -- 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/CvtnXgIblG8/unsubscribe. To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com <mailto:rbw-owners-bu
RE: [RBW] Re: Long Chainstays - What Problem/Deficiency Do They Solve?
Bill Good challenge, what I was thinking is what problem with bikes is the long C/S solving? I thought it was a straight forward question. I suggest eliminate “in bike design” and problems or current deficiencies refer to the current bikes available.Another way of saying it is what “improvements” in bicycles result from the Long C/S. So far the responses indicate Long C/S improve Overall handling, seems to apply to all surfaces. Comfort, especially from bumps in the surface. Climbing and Descending single track type trails (like the ones in the RBW pictures on Mt Diablo). The climbing improvement appears to due to improved weight distribution vs improved bio-mechanical items. John Hawrylak Woodstown NJ From: rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com On Behalf Of Bill Lindsay Sent: Sunday, March 31, 2024 5:19 PM To: RBW Owners Bunch Subject: [RBW] Re: Long Chainstays - What Problem/Deficiency Do They Solve? The OP asked: "What problem or current deficiency in bike design is Grant solving by using long chain stays" What exactly is this entity you call "bike design"? If you can define that, perhaps I can respond to your question (emphatically stated with FOUR question marks) Bill Lindsay El Cerrito, CA On Sunday, March 31, 2024 at 10:50:18 AM UTC-7 John Hawrylak, Woodstown NJ wrote: Enjoyed reading the thread "Anyone else not a fan of long chainstays?", especially Bill L's explanation of the RBW bike design philosophy. Seems the prevailing thought is long stays are better for upright riding single track type trails (vs a Rails to Trails type trail) I'll just note 2 'facts' 1 The vast majority of RBW models (except the Roadeo type frame) use slack STA and HTA which may contribute to the ride effect when coupled with long stays. 2. In the beginning RBW addressed getting the bars higher and adopting a non-racer riding style (back at 45° with hands on hoods), which IMHO were solutions to actual problems. So What problem or current deficiency in bike design is Grant solving by using long chain stays Just to bring bikes to market that no one else is building?? Or do they solve a real problem??? John Hawrylak Woodstown NJ FWIW 2 of 3 of my frames have 44 to 45cm chain stays, and 1 has a 43cm chain stay.It's hard to notice a ride difference. -- 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/CvtnXgIblG8/unsubscribe. To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com <mailto:rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com> . To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/rbw-owners-bunch/0415e7b9-d462-402e-961f-0fe4ba41a5b3n%40googlegroups.com <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/rbw-owners-bunch/0415e7b9-d462-402e-961f-0fe4ba41a5b3n%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> . -- 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/01c901da83bc%24d0e96d20%2472bc4760%24%40verizon.net.
[RBW] Long Chainstays - What Problem/Deficiency Do They Solve?
Enjoyed reading the thread "Anyone else not a fan of long chainstays?", especially Bill L's explanation of the RBW bike design philosophy. Seems the prevailing thought is long stays are better for upright riding single track type trails (vs a Rails to Trails type trail) I'll just note 2 'facts' 1 The vast majority of RBW models (except the Roadeo type frame) use slack STA and HTA which may contribute to the ride effect when coupled with long stays. 2. In the beginning RBW addressed getting the bars higher and adopting a non-racer riding style (back at 45° with hands on hoods), which IMHO were solutions to actual problems. *So What problem or current deficiency in bike design is Grant solving by using long chain stays* Just to bring bikes to market that no one else is building?? Or do they solve a real problem??? John Hawrylak Woodstown NJ FWIW 2 of 3 of my frames have 44 to 45cm chain stays, and 1 has a 43cm chain stay.It's hard to notice a ride difference. -- 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/3eec10de-6019-4ecd-bf6e-b57f0cac78b4n%40googlegroups.com.
[RBW] Re: Revisiting the Nitto 52f Basket Rack
Leah You asked: " Maybe the 650b wheels will be less floppy with this rack? Maybe the smaller, lighter bike won’t seem as penalized by the heft of this rack?" The 650B wheel have a minimal effect on Wheel Flop, since the wider tire results in a tire radius close to a 700C x 32 tire (650x48 radius = 344mm vs a 700C x 32 radius = 347mm). Using Jim Youngs on line trial/flop calculator Bicycle Trail Calculator | yojimg.net <http://yojimg.net/bike/web_tools/trailcalc.php> with the following frame geometries from RBW for a 50cm Platy with 650B wheels: HTA, 69.5°, from RBW geo charts Fork Rake, assumed to be 55mm. RBW does NOT publish fork rake and the 55mm is from a 50 Cheviot with 650B wheels. Wheel/Tire, assumed to be 650B x 48, RBW states 50mm as the largest tire. Trial and Flop are solely determined by Wheel Radius, HTA, and fork rake: Flop = Trail x sin(HTA) x cos (HTA), and Trial = (Wheel Radius x cos(HTA) - Fork Rake) / sin (HTA) Here are the results for a 650x48 and a 700x32 tire for the 69.5° HTA and 55mm Rake 650x48 700x32 Trail 70mm 71mm No surprise, RBW models are known to have high trail, due to slack HTA and a nominal 2" fork rake Flop 23mm 23mm High Flop is direct result of the high trial So the Trail and Flop are essentially the same for a 650x48 and a 700x32. If you use 650x42, Trial and Flop are slightly reduced Trail = 68mm &Flop = 22mm Frame weight or bike weight does not affect trail or flop per the above equations. Your lighter custom will handle the same with the basket as your other Platy.IF you reduce the weight carried in the basket, you will notice less side to side motion at low speeds, due to the downward force produced by the lower weight (mass). I hope this helps John Hawrylak Woodstown NJ On Sunday, March 10, 2024 at 12:34:26 PM UTC-4 Bicycle Belle Ding Ding! wrote: > [image: IMG_5598.jpeg][image: IMG_5582.jpeg]Hi Friends, > > I’ve had a Nitto Basket Rack from Rivendell for a few years. I think it > looks awesome, it’s dead useful, but it annoyed me that it was heavy and > made my bars swing around on my mermaid Platy. But as I plan the build for > my 50 cm purple Platy (which is taking a million years) I am considering > putting the basket rack back into service. It pains me to see it sitting, > and it’s so pretty and unique that I just want to give it another try. > Maybe the 650b wheels will be less floppy with this rack? Maybe the > smaller, lighter bike won’t seem as penalized by the heft of this rack? It > would be such an easy experiment if it wasn’t for the dyno light/wiring > that is affected by the decision. It’s not a matter of simply pulling the > rack, because wire length, light mount, etc are affected and will not be an > easy switch. My shop hates soldering and I certainly can’t do it. > > I had started a thread long ago about this and a lot of people reported > similar experiences. Now that some more years have gone by, I’m curious if > opinions have changed, or if more people have these racks and would offer > their opinions. There isn’t much in the way of reviews to read online. > Maybe some here would offer theirs. If more folks are trying and loving > their Nitto Basket Racks, I’ll be likely to install mine. > > Meanwhile, this beautiful Platypus sits in my living room on the shelf, > waiting for its parts to return from the anodizer. And, there’s fresh snow > on the ground. But talking bikes will get me through! > Leah > -- 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/8c0667a7-63a0-478f-a5ae-a8d75c06099bn%40googlegroups.com.
Re: [RBW] Re: Cantilevers or Direct Mount-Centerpulls
Kyle said " I was looking at the Rene Herse cps." I have the RH CP's and I don't think they are all they are advertised and are not worth their high price. The pads are extremely difficult to adjust and RH does not provide a tool to hold them in place during adjustment The brakes don't seem much better than the Dia Comp 610/750s I used on another bike. The 'quick release' design, squeeze the return spring arm and move it off the caliper, is an invitation to prick your fingers and hand. RH does not sell the small washer for the straddle cable movement, unless you pay $115 for a complete hardware set. IMHO, I would use a pair of Dia Compes, just buy new springs. Other posters have used the their existing bolt on ones and removed the arms from the yoke. RBW could probably tell you which model, 610 or 750, fits the Beloit. If you are using 42/44 mm tires, you will need a 62mm wide fender to obtain the 1.4 ratio of fender width/tire width Jan Heine recommends. A 62mm fender requires indenting at the fork crown and possible seatstays. A 38mm tire and a 52mm fender gives an adequate 1.37 ratio and should clear the fork crown. Just my 2c John Hawrylak Woodstown NJ On Monday, February 26, 2024 at 4:06:12 PM UTC-5 kyleco...@gmail.com wrote: > Hey Christian thanks for all your thoughts! To answer a couple of your > questions: > > *Which CPs are you considering and what is your max tire size? * > I was looking at the Rene Herse cps. I'd be looking to run 44's, but 42's > seem to be more intended for the Bleriot > <http://www.cyclofiend.com/Images/rbw/rr37_pg15.jpg>. The Rene Herse are > for sure pricey, and I will be spending a bit as it is with the frame > builder mods. However, they state they have the clearance for 42s and > fenders. I have a pair of dia-compe canti's > <https://analogcycles.com/products/blue-lug-diacompe-dc980-cantilever-brakes> > I love on another bicycle, so much so I put a pair on my girlfriend's > bicycle. On that note: @Patrick - I've gotten pretty comfy now at setting > up canti's with drop bars. Specifically the dia-comps. It's all about > getting that straddle wire set up in the right position. I have done it > poorly on other pairs of cantis and been called out by real mechanics haha. > > *Will you be using fenders? * > Potentially. I see most of these tours happening in summer and hopefully > some that require a flight in the nearish future. I'd probably snag a pair > of SKS for easy mounting and peace of mind when flying. not so much of a > big deal if my plastic fenders get damaged instead of banging up a nice > pair of honjos! > > *Are you planning on mounting anything to the brake studs (racks, lights > etc)?* > If I did canti's I would likely get a Nitto M12 and attach it to the > brakes. I do plan on having low rider pannier attachments put on for a > nitto s rack > <https://global.bluelug.com/catalog/product/view/id/31396/s/nitto-s-rack/category/1460/> > . > > > Kyle > > > > On Mon, Feb 26, 2024 at 12:17 PM christian poppell > wrote: > >> Hey Kyle! >> >> I have used cantilevers and direct mounted centerpulls (MAFAC RAID with >> new Rene Herse hardware). If I could do it over I would have installed >> cantilevers. The downsides for centerpulls for me are modulation, fender >> fitting, and braze on locations on the fork. >> >> Modulation - The MAFAC RAID brakes feel more squishy to me, even after >> adding a brake booster to the rear. Also, despite my best efforts, I have >> not been able to eliminate the howling from the rear brake. I threw >> everything at them, new bushings, toe in washers, salmon pads, black >> compound pads, sanded and filed the pads, sanded the rims, rode and braked >> in the rain and in the dirt. Nothing has stopped the howl. >> >> Fender fitting - There would be a lot more room to mount fenders and >> large tires with cantilevers. Honjo h80s rub on the inside of the >> centerpull arms. If you want to go above 42mm tire with fenders I would go >> cantilever. >> >> Post location on the fork - Not a deal breaker but the posts are mounted >> really close to the fork crown. Its more of an aesthetic thing for me. In >> fact, its probably better as it moves the posts into the HAZ of the fork >> crown/blade joint >> >> Brian Chapman has some of the best reference images for how large tires, >> large fenders, and direct mount centerpulls should look. >> https://www.flickr.com/photos/chapmancycles/35900124245/in/photostream/ >> >> Which CPs are you considering and what is your max tire size? Will you be &g
[RBW] Re: The Official Introduction of RoadeoRosa
Bill What width RH fenders are you using??? They look to be the Smooth style. The front and rear fender lines are excellent John Hawrylak Woodstown NJ On Monday, February 19, 2024 at 11:27:37 PM UTC-5 Bill Lindsay wrote: > Here she is. RoadeoRosa is complete > > > https://www.flickr.com/photos/45758191@N04/53540567348/in/album-72177720313109003/ > > Frame set: Nobilette built Rivendell Roadeo. Cantilever posts. Legolas > fork crown. Cane Creek 40 headset > > Wheelset: HED Ardennes RA Black. Stampede Pass Extralight tires. TPU > tubes. 12-27 Dura Ace 10sp cassette. Tune skewers > > Drivetrain: Rene Herse Crankset 46/30. White Industries Ti 108mm bottom > bracket. Look Keo Carbon Ceramic Pedals. Dura Ace 7900 F Der, R Der, Down > tube shifters. KMC chain > > Components: Rene Herse cantilevers. Jagwire Elite cables and housing. > Soba Noodle bars. Nobilette stem. Campagnolo Athena EPS brake levers > (electronics removed). Dura Ace 7900 seat post. Fizik Arione 00 saddle > > Accessories: Rene Herse Fenders. Arundel carbon H2O cages. Rene Herse > pump. Spurcycle Bell. Rene Herse UD-2 front rack > > total weight 20.2lbs. 9.16kg > > Bill Lindsay > El Cerrito, CA > -- 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/e9aa94e7-8f6d-4dad-a07f-e5604c23def0n%40googlegroups.com.
[RBW] Re: The Official Introduction of RoadeoRosa
Bill Stunning color, the pink fenders really look overpowering. The white on the bottom of the front fender really stands out. John Hawrylak Woodstown NJ On Monday, February 19, 2024 at 11:27:37 PM UTC-5 Bill Lindsay wrote: > Here she is. RoadeoRosa is complete > > > https://www.flickr.com/photos/45758191@N04/53540567348/in/album-72177720313109003/ > > Frame set: Nobilette built Rivendell Roadeo. Cantilever posts. Legolas > fork crown. Cane Creek 40 headset > > Wheelset: HED Ardennes RA Black. Stampede Pass Extralight tires. TPU > tubes. 12-27 Dura Ace 10sp cassette. Tune skewers > > Drivetrain: Rene Herse Crankset 46/30. White Industries Ti 108mm bottom > bracket. Look Keo Carbon Ceramic Pedals. Dura Ace 7900 F Der, R Der, Down > tube shifters. KMC chain > > Components: Rene Herse cantilevers. Jagwire Elite cables and housing. > Soba Noodle bars. Nobilette stem. Campagnolo Athena EPS brake levers > (electronics removed). Dura Ace 7900 seat post. Fizik Arione 00 saddle > > Accessories: Rene Herse Fenders. Arundel carbon H2O cages. Rene Herse > pump. Spurcycle Bell. Rene Herse UD-2 front rack > > total weight 20.2lbs. 9.16kg > > Bill Lindsay > El Cerrito, CA > -- 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/778b763b-9113-466d-9b87-38f817f6ef1fn%40googlegroups.com.
[RBW] Re: Intro post, pics of my RIvs, and a Homer fit question
Chris stated, " not sure I'd call the Noodles short reach with a 92mm (per Riv site) reach.. maybe shorter than some older school bars, but current bar design has much shorter reaches." 2019 Nitto catalog page 9 shows the Mod 177 (noodles) having a 95mm Reach, BUT the ends come back towards the rider by 7mm so the 'Reach at the curve forward' is 88mm. The Noodles also have a SHALLOW (less steep) Ramp as can be seen in the bar profiles in the Nitto catalog. In the past, Grant stated the shallow ramp was a main factor in the comfort of the bar, your hands have less tendency to slide down the ramp. You only need to rotate them around 15 degrees to have a flat ramp section. Yes you can get shorter reach bars, BUT they may have steep ramps and may not be as comfortable as the 177. My point is the 177 is already short reach, so think about shorter stems before possibly compromising on bar comfort. WRT to the 140mm Drop, RBW designed the bar to be at or above saddle height, so the effective drop is much shorter. I have my bars at 10mm above SH and when using the Noddle I was comfortable in the drops for extended periods of time. True, if your bars are below SH, Drop will have more significance. John Hawrylak comfortable on 44cm RH Radonnuer bar at or +10mm of SH and rotated about 25deg down for the small bump, but thinks a 42 or 40 may be better Woodstown NJ On Saturday, February 10, 2024 at 12:56:34 AM UTC-5 four...@gmail.com wrote: > not sure I'd call the Noodles short reach with a 92mm (per Riv site) > reach.. maybe shorter than some older school bars, but current bar design > has much shorter reaches.. the Salsa Cowbells I use on my Homer have a > reach of 68mm and drops of 115mm.. the Noodles have a much deeper drop at > 140mm that, for me, is far to deep to really be useful.. but everyone has > their own preferences.. the other bars I like are the Ritchey Butano bars > that have a 73mm reach and 115mm drops.. > > Chris in Sonoma County > > On Friday, February 9, 2024 at 5:48:02 PM UTC-8 John Hawrylak, Woodstown > NJ wrote: > >> Ethan >> >> I suggest you measure your AHH and Breezer as I suggested. This will >> give you a good idea of how much each change on the AHH goes to meeting the >> distance you have on the Breezer. Your Noddle bars are already short >> reach, 96mm comes to mind changing bars may not give you much. >> >> John Hawrylak >> Woodstown NJ >> >> On Thursday, February 8, 2024 at 8:14:49 PM UTC-5 Ethan K wrote: >> >>> Hi all, thank you so much for the replies. To answer some questions and >>> provide additional info: >>> Joe you are correct: 55 Cheviot, 54.5 Homer. I had thought about getting >>> a purple Apaloosa when they went on sale last year, but after talking to >>> Rivendell, realized that the Homer was a better fit for my use case. Once I >>> saw they were offering the butternut/mustard/classic Datsun color, I was >>> in. >>> >>> It's tough picking a size without getting a chance to try the bikes >>> first, so I utilized the PBH sizing Riv recommends--but I do think the >>> frame is a bit large, all things considered. Standover does work for me, so >>> I'm hopeful I can get it to work. I already have the seat forward on the >>> rails, btw. I will swap the stem this weekend and see how that goes. Next >>> would be handlebars, going shorter reach and also narrower. (sounds like >>> I shouldn't be afraid of going even shorter.) I'm currently running a 46cm >>> Noodle, which feels wide in addition to long. When I swapped bars on the >>> Breezer, I went with shorter AND narrower, going from 44-42, and both of >>> those changes helped a lot. . Oh, and Chris, thanks for reminding me about >>> handlebar diameter. I forgot about the different standards. I think between >>> bar and stem, I can make it work for me. This bike is beautiful (way more >>> than my pic), and I put a lot of thought into the build. In retrospect, I >>> would have gotten the bike fit first, with the Breezer, to get all the #s I >>> need. >>> >>> Also, thank you Liz for the detailed fit info and the suggestion >>> regarding quill/threadless adapters for the bike fit. I was wondering how >>> that would work. >>> >>> --Eitan >>> >>> >>> >>> On Thursday, February 8, 2024 at 9:21:47 AM UTC-8 maxcr wrote: >>> >>>> Agreed, I used to run a 30mm extension (w)right stem from Analog Cycles >>>> paired with a short reach SimWorks Co-Misirlou Bar on my 61 Toyo AHH. I
[RBW] Re: Intro post, pics of my RIvs, and a Homer fit question
Ethan I suggest you measure your AHH and Breezer as I suggested. This will give you a good idea of how much each change on the AHH goes to meeting the distance you have on the Breezer. Your Noddle bars are already short reach, 96mm comes to mind changing bars may not give you much. John Hawrylak Woodstown NJ On Thursday, February 8, 2024 at 8:14:49 PM UTC-5 Ethan K wrote: > Hi all, thank you so much for the replies. To answer some questions and > provide additional info: > Joe you are correct: 55 Cheviot, 54.5 Homer. I had thought about getting a > purple Apaloosa when they went on sale last year, but after talking to > Rivendell, realized that the Homer was a better fit for my use case. Once I > saw they were offering the butternut/mustard/classic Datsun color, I was > in. > > It's tough picking a size without getting a chance to try the bikes > first, so I utilized the PBH sizing Riv recommends--but I do think the > frame is a bit large, all things considered. Standover does work for me, so > I'm hopeful I can get it to work. I already have the seat forward on the > rails, btw. I will swap the stem this weekend and see how that goes. Next > would be handlebars, going shorter reach and also narrower. (sounds like > I shouldn't be afraid of going even shorter.) I'm currently running a 46cm > Noodle, which feels wide in addition to long. When I swapped bars on the > Breezer, I went with shorter AND narrower, going from 44-42, and both of > those changes helped a lot. . Oh, and Chris, thanks for reminding me about > handlebar diameter. I forgot about the different standards. I think between > bar and stem, I can make it work for me. This bike is beautiful (way more > than my pic), and I put a lot of thought into the build. In retrospect, I > would have gotten the bike fit first, with the Breezer, to get all the #s I > need. > > Also, thank you Liz for the detailed fit info and the suggestion regarding > quill/threadless adapters for the bike fit. I was wondering how that would > work. > > --Eitan > > > > On Thursday, February 8, 2024 at 9:21:47 AM UTC-8 maxcr wrote: > >> Agreed, I used to run a 30mm extension (w)right stem from Analog Cycles >> paired with a short reach SimWorks Co-Misirlou Bar on my 61 Toyo AHH. I >> think a shorter 5cm or even 30mm extension stem will do the trick if you're >> set on dropbars >> Max >> >> On Thursday, February 8, 2024 at 11:18:41 AM UTC-5 four...@gmail.com >> wrote: >> >>> so I have a first gen Homer with drop bars and I totally get your point >>> on reach, they do seem to be long bikes.. at least with drop bars fitted. >>> Plus, I firmly believe the Riv folks tend to skew to putting folks a bike >>> one size too large for them (at least in my experience).. >>> >>> What I did was get the Velo Orange quill stem with removable faceplate. >>> This stem allows you to use 31.8 bars (or smaller with shims) and opens up >>> a TON more bar options than a traditional quill stem with the smaller >>> diameters. I'm currently using Salsa Cowbell bars as they have a shorter >>> reach and shorter drop that I MUCH prefer over something like a Noodle.. >>> another point is the wider the bars, the longer the reach will feel.. >>> >>> Chris in Sonoma County >>> >>> On Thursday, February 8, 2024 at 7:31:28 AM UTC-8 ian m wrote: >>> >>>> If the standover height is acceptable, then I would argue the larger >>>> frame is going to lead to a better fit. I have a hard time with just the >>>> raw data which is why I like using bike insights. Comparing the 54.5 and >>>> 51 >>>> Homers, we can see a few important points: the stack is much higher >>>> meaning >>>> the bars are already starting higher. Even with an effective top tube >>>> increase of 15mm, the reach is only 1mm more on the 54.5. Easily mitigated >>>> with a stem. Seat is going to land on the same axis with either size, so >>>> fit should be very similar with less seatpost and stem showing. >>>> >>>> On Thursday, February 8, 2024 at 9:20:54 AM UTC-5 Joe Bernard wrote: >>>> >>>>> I don't know your frame sizes so I'll do some wild guessing based on >>>>> photos: I believe you have a 55cm Cheviot and a 54.5 Homer. If this is >>>>> accurate the effective toptube numbers should be about the same and >>>>> you're >>>>> happy with the pullback bars on the Chev. Conclusion: the Homer may be a >>>>
[RBW] Re: Intro post, pics of my RIvs, and a Homer fit question
I suggest measuring the distance form the tip of the saddle to the line between the brake levers on the Breezer if this bike fits you. Measure the same on the AHH. I think you will find the Breezer has a shorter distance. You can then see how much length reduction each change will make. The seat tube setback for the 2 bikes is calculated using SH * cos STA. SH = Saddle Height, STA =seat tube angle Calc for each and take the difference. See if you can move the AHH saddle forward (per Bill L's suggestion) to cancel the difference. All AHH have a 71.5° STA. If your SH = 83cm (just a guess) and the Breezer STA is 73°, the AHH is setback by 21mm vs the Breezer. You probably can move the AHH full forward to make up the seat tube setback John Hawrylak Woodstown NJ On Wednesday, February 7, 2024 at 7:06:31 PM UTC-5 Ethan K wrote: > Thanks Bill, I don't have my bike fit completey figure out yet. I used to > bike a lot more 20 years ago (mountain biking) and have recently gotten > back into riding. To your point, I am hoping to get a professional bike fit > sometime in the near future. (Nate Loyal seems well-recommended and > reviewed.) Not cheap but likely one of the best bang for the buck bike > "upgrades." When I mention "endurance," I am referring more to "road bike > with more relaxed geometry than a race bike," than endurance athletics per > se. I am in decent shape but would like to be able to work up to day-long > rides, which will require some work on aerobic endurance as well as > adjustments to bike and rider. Currently I am significantly less > comfortable on the Homer than on the drop-bar Breezer Doppler Pro I have. I > was too stretched on that one until I switched out the bars. The bars I am > thinking of for the Homer are the Velo Orange Rando bars, which have about > a 10mm shorter reach than the Noodle, and will accomodate bar ends. > > On Wednesday, February 7, 2024 at 2:42:05 PM UTC-8 Bill Lindsay wrote: > >> Here are a few thoughts: >> >> People who know exactly what works for them figure it out over a long >> time with lots of bikes, and have a set of numbers in their pocket so they >> can know before buying whether a particular will set up correctly for them. >> It sounds like you don't have that all figured out for yourself. Is that >> a reasonable assumption? >> >> People who don't have their fit completely figured out for themselves are >> usually well advised to get a fitting from an experienced fitter who >> understands the target use-case. Can you find such a person? Have you had >> anybody who knows about such things look at you while you are riding? >> >> This is intended for an endurance/all-road use case. Are you currently >> an endurance athlete? Or do you aspire to be an endurance athlete? Do you >> want the bike to fit the body you have, or the body you intend to have? >> >> Those are my thoughts. Best of luck >> >> Bill Lindsay >> El Cerrito, CA >> >> On Wednesday, February 7, 2024 at 1:20:53 PM UTC-8 eitanz...@gmail.com >> wrote: >> >>> Hi all, wanted to introduce myself and my bikes. Over the last six >>> months I went from zero to two Rivendells, and joined this group--though >>> this is my first post: First up, a Cheviot, picked up secondhand, as my >>> city bike. Previous owner built this up swanky: Son, XTR,, Pacenti, Paul, >>> XT, etc. . added the front and rear racks. I also picked up a Riv >>> Happisack, which alternates with the YEPP mount. Apologies for the >>> distinctly un-glamorous garage pic: >>> >>> >>> [image: IMG_2009.jpeg] >>> >>> I love this bike. It is exceedingly comfortable and beautiful. >>> >>> Last month I took delivery of a Homer, which I had built up to be a >>> zippy road bike with a classic look: 9 speed friction shifting using the >>> Dia Compe shifters to XT derailleur, Rene Herse crankset, Paul brakes, the >>> TRP drilled brake levers, with Velocity Quill rims on Deore hubs. >>> >>> [image: IMG_2739.jpeg] >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> That said, as beautiful as this bike is, I haven't been able to get >>> comfortable on it. I am too stretched out. I have tried raising the bars a >>> bit from these pics, but fundamentally I think the reach is too long. I >>> gave my height/PBH to Antonio at Rivendell, and they set the bike up with >>> an 80mm stem. I have ordered a 70mm version of the stem, though I'm >>> concerned that's getting pretty sh
Re: [RBW] Re: Silver crank surprise and the weight of things
Chris made some good points. I am not justifying a heavy bike, merely
pointing out what you can expect if you take that trip & 'go down the rabbit
hole' wrt to reducing frame weight and overall weight including the rims/tires.
You may not get your kicks on Rt 66 ('when you take that CA trip...")
Good point on wheels. If you maintain a constant speed, you minimize the
acceleration and reduce the effect wheels have. But real world riding has a
lot of acceleration , so lighter wheels help. The biggest effect was probably
the change from STEEL RIMS to AL RIMS in rotational inertial.
John HawrylakWoodstown NJ
On Sunday, January 14, 2024 at 08:05:11 PM EST, Chris Fly
wrote:
if you just look at the numbers, you can go down a long rabbit hole and
certainly justify a heavy bike.. I agree 1mph isn't anything.. what you can't
justify with numbers is what a heavy bike feels like when riding.. some heavier
bikes certainly can "ride light", but many don't in my experience.. same with
heavier wheels or tires, my 650b Hilsen with Rich-built wheels and 42mm Compass
tires do NOT feel like they spin up as well as my Serotta with HED Belgium
tires with 28mm Vittoria Corsas on it..
I would never begrudge someone riding what they want to ride, but often, heavy
is just that.. heavy..
On Sunday, January 14, 2024 at 4:49:18 PM UTC-8 John Hawrylak, Woodstown NJ
wrote:
During a appearance on The Opiniated Cyclist, Richard Schwinn stated the
following: Reducing the bike weight by 12 lbm, increases your speed by 1 mph,
given the same power input from testing Schwinn did.
John HawrylakWoodstown NJ
On Sunday, January 14, 2024 at 12:11:36 PM UTC-5 Bicycle Belle Ding Ding! wrote:
It will always have a dyno hub. I just can’t give up that kind of
practicality. I didn’t know Paul components would save me any weight but I’m
glad if they do. My Velo Orange levers were pretty feather-light already
though.
I probably do have the Platy set up as light as I dare, save the drivetrain
stuff from White Industries. And Richard has a good point that all that money
would only save me a third of a pound.
On Jan 14, 2024, at 8:40 AM, Johnny Alien wrote:
Does the raspberry Platy still have a dyno hub? If so that would be a big gain
as far as weight loss and lessening drag. Otherwise you have it set up fairly
light from what I remember about your posts. Paul components will sure help
shave some grams.
When weight is brought up the first thing Grant would say is take weight off
the engine. Well I just took a massive amount of weight off the engine so I
feel that I am now free and clear to be a weight weenie about the bike. :)
--
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/eReNb9qsX94/unsubscribe.
To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, 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/fd92245f-6eec-4430-b9c2-c4f2996b8b8bn%40googlegroups.com.
--
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/eReNb9qsX94/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/84184ce2-e6a8-4df1-8f50-375ce2d12e7cn%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/962680152.1600989.1705281943215%40mail.yahoo.com.
Re: [RBW] Re: Silver crank surprise and the weight of things
Yes, that is what I remember. I dont know if the lady still has the podcast. She had a shop in Cleveland, so if someone is from the area, maybe they can chime in. She also said if you feel like you want to push yourself back on the saddle, your distance to the bars is too great. Counterintuitive, but I found it to be true, at least for drop bars. John HawrylakWoodstown NJ On Sunday, January 14, 2024 at 08:02:48 PM EST, Richard Rose wrote: 12 pounds? Sent from my iPhone On Jan 14, 2024, at 7:49 PM, 'John Hawrylak, Woodstown NJ' via RBW Owners Bunch wrote: During a appearance on The Opiniated Cyclist, Richard Schwinn stated the following: Reducing the bike weight by 12 lbm, increases your speed by 1 mph, given the same power input from testing Schwinn did. John HawrylakWoodstown NJ On Sunday, January 14, 2024 at 12:11:36 PM UTC-5 Bicycle Belle Ding Ding! wrote: It will always have a dyno hub. I just can’t give up that kind of practicality. I didn’t know Paul components would save me any weight but I’m glad if they do. My Velo Orange levers were pretty feather-light already though. I probably do have the Platy set up as light as I dare, save the drivetrain stuff from White Industries. And Richard has a good point that all that money would only save me a third of a pound. On Jan 14, 2024, at 8:40 AM, Johnny Alien wrote: Does the raspberry Platy still have a dyno hub? If so that would be a big gain as far as weight loss and lessening drag. Otherwise you have it set up fairly light from what I remember about your posts. Paul components will sure help shave some grams. When weight is brought up the first thing Grant would say is take weight off the engine. Well I just took a massive amount of weight off the engine so I feel that I am now free and clear to be a weight weenie about the bike. :) -- 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/eReNb9qsX94/unsubscribe. To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, 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/fd92245f-6eec-4430-b9c2-c4f2996b8b8bn%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/aab1c280-b31d-4a10-94c2-d1d2c2f3cdeen%40googlegroups.com. -- 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/eReNb9qsX94/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/3FA91767-82F1-4E81-99D1-A66F975291B8%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/1526049167.1605951.1705281151688%40mail.yahoo.com.
Re: [RBW] Re: Silver crank surprise and the weight of things
During a appearance on The Opiniated Cyclist, Richard Schwinn stated the following: Reducing the bike weight by 12 lbm, increases your speed by 1 mph, given the same power input from testing Schwinn did. John Hawrylak Woodstown NJ On Sunday, January 14, 2024 at 12:11:36 PM UTC-5 Bicycle Belle Ding Ding! wrote: > > It will always have a dyno hub. I just can’t give up that kind of > practicality. I didn’t know Paul components would save me any weight but > I’m glad if they do. My Velo Orange levers were pretty feather-light > already though. > > I probably do have the Platy set up as light as I dare, save the > drivetrain stuff from White Industries. And Richard has a good point that > all that money would only save me a third of a pound. > > On Jan 14, 2024, at 8:40 AM, Johnny Alien wrote: > > Does the raspberry Platy still have a dyno hub? If so that would be a big > gain as far as weight loss and lessening drag. Otherwise you have it set up > fairly light from what I remember about your posts. Paul components will > sure help shave some grams. > > > When weight is brought up the first thing Grant would say is take weight > off the engine. Well I just took a massive amount of weight off the engine > so I feel that I am now free and clear to be a weight weenie about the > bike. :) > > -- > 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/eReNb9qsX94/unsubscribe > . > To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, 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/fd92245f-6eec-4430-b9c2-c4f2996b8b8bn%40googlegroups.com > > <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/rbw-owners-bunch/fd92245f-6eec-4430-b9c2-c4f2996b8b8bn%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> > . > > -- 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/aab1c280-b31d-4a10-94c2-d1d2c2f3cdeen%40googlegroups.com.
Re: [RBW] Re: Why do some bikes just feel consistently faster?
The discussion made me think about the various factors., especially Bill L's undergearing comments In my case, I went from a touring style frame with 7 speeds wide range gearing (13-34) to a thin wall frame with 9 speeds wide range gearing (12-36). While the 2 extra gears dont seem like much, they do you give you a gear where you did not have one, and if the new gear is just a little bit higher and you can use it, the 9 speed bike might 'seem' faster. Maybe I was undergeared on the 7 speed, because the next gear up was too high, while the 9 speed had a gear just a little bit higher than the 7 speed and I was comfortable in that gear. So I seem faster. Here is the gearing (gear inches) for the top 4 cogs in each. Both used a 46T chainring 7sp 13T 15T 17T 20T 24T 97 84 74 63 52 9sp 12T 14T 16T 18T 21T 101 86 76 68 58 My cruising range is 55 to 77, and the riding was predominately flat with small hills. The 9 speed does have slightly higher gears in the cruising range and since the rides were predominately cruising, then being able to use the slightly higher gears could feel like the 9 speed 'seemed' faster.. Did do one (1) 10M time trail in the 9 speed thin wall and was not faster than in the 7 speed. Fitness could be a big variable, but I was a little disappointed the thin wall did not go much faster. It sure seems like it wants 'to go" much better than the tourer. So maybe Bill has something with 'undergearing' as a cause. I think I'll say that, and just enjoy riding the thin wall 9 speed John HawrylakWoodstown NJ On Sunday, January 14, 2024 at 05:13:15 PM EST, Patrick Moore wrote: Actually, "not really" is not true. Others have raised old issues in new ways that clarified them to some extent; for example, enumerating all the factors that might play a part in such a feeling, and the elaborations on the phenomenon rightly or wrongly called "planing" On Sat, Jan 13, 2024 at 10:14 PM Patrick Moore wrote: Not really, but it's fun rehashing old stories. On Sat, Jan 13, 2024 at 8:07 AM Bill Lindsay wrote: In this year's revisiting of this topic, have you picked up anything new? Bill LindsayEl Cerrito, CA -- Patrick MooreAlburquerque, Nuevo Mexico, Etats Unis d'Amerique, Orbis Terrarum --- Executive resumes, LinkedIn profiles, bios, letters, and other writing services --- When thou didst not, savage, know thine own meaning, But wouldst gabble like a thing most brutish, I endowed thy purposes with words that made them known. -- 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/e1zJO1Hhl-U/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/CALuTfgtKy%3DTnCR8Hr8hm_i2%2BAf2ZKCVFXPugq%3DMnNZ5_6%2BbzFg%40mail.gmail.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/1754641144.1573183.1705274462582%40mail.yahoo.com.
Re: [RBW] Re: Low q, low range 2x cranks
Adam You might want to verify with VO about the actual Q of their 50.4 crank. They list a 144mm Q with a 118mm BB. I exchanged emails with one member on the iBob list using the VO 50.4 crank and measured a 141.5mm Q with a 110mm BB. This would indicated the Q stated by VO for their 50.4mm crank is lower than actual 5mm 141.5 + (118-110) = 149.5 vs a VO claim of 144. A 149.5mm Double is not quite low Q. John HawrylakWoodstown NJ On Sunday, January 14, 2024 at 03:15:52 PM EST, Adam wrote: Thanks for all the help everyone! I definitely appreciate the V.O. cranks more now that I've seen the alternatives. I am still mulling it all over, but it seems like buying those and swapping the rings may be the thing for me. FWIW, I've come to prefer more compact cassettes for the FLAT riding around Chicago. I replaced a 11-32 with a 12-27 and much prefer the new setup, mostly because wind is so constant. Realistically, I'll never use the smaller chainring here, but want it for potential travel. Thanks! Adam On Sunday, January 14, 2024 at 11:58:45 AM UTC-6 John Hawrylak, Woodstown NJ wrote: On 10 Jan Adam asked: " I'm thinking about moving away from a triple to a double in order to get a lower Q." One option is a 1980's Sugino AT (110/74mm BCD) set for a double, say 46-33, sicne 33T is the smallest 110mm BCD ring out there, e.g. TA Zephyr on Peter White's site. The AT was designed as a low Q triple.* I have achieved 152mm Q with a Tange 127 cartridge BB and 2mm drive side spacer for a total asymmetry of 6mm, very close to the D-3U Sugino recommended. The Outer ring FCL is 45mm and the Inner ring FCL is 37mm with a 43.5mm RCL.* Others on the I-Bob list have stated 147mm Q. The AT Inner 74mm BCD ring uses very very low posts cast in the spider & 5mm spacers instead of higher cast posts using no spacer. The Middle 110mm DCB ring protrudes further inward than the 74mm holes. Therefore, removing the 74mm Inner ring and spacers creates a double with the Inner ring chainbolt head being the limiting clearance to the chainstay. The double has a Q of about 145mm with a 46-36. The only problem with a 110mm double is the smallest 110BCD ring in 33T. However, with a 12-36 9 speed cassette, a 46-33 is 1 gear higher than a 46-30 for a No Load low gear (24.1gi vs 20.4gi with 584x38). EBay seems to have a decent supply of AT's, I bought 2 a year ago, a 1980 and 1984 one. So unless you need the very lowest No Load low, a Sugino AT as a double may work. John HawrylakWoodstown NJ On Wednesday, January 10, 2024 at 11:15:06 AM UTC-5 Adam wrote: Hi all, Adjacent to the triples thread, I'm thinking about moving away from a triple to a double in order to get a lower Q. What are options for double cranksets that are around 40/26 or so? I think that would be doable with the Rene Herse cranks, but too much $$$ for me. Are there any cheaper options that will do that and give me a q in the 140s? Second, drivetrain stuff is a little new to me. What determines how small a q factor a specific bike can have? I'm assuming chainstays play a role here? This hypothetical project is for a Hillborne, so I'd be curious what folks have used to get low q on their Hillbornes. I'm assuming I may have to change the BB as well. Thanks! Adam -- 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/wS0-NPvWx9U/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/50a96ccc-ca44-4918-8293-ef41abe01fecn%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/1466570941.1545448.1705267387051%40mail.yahoo.com.
[RBW] Re: Low q, low range 2x cranks
On 10 Jan Adam asked: " I'm thinking about moving away from a triple to a double in order to get a lower Q." One option is a 1980's Sugino AT (110/74mm BCD) set for a double, say 46-33, sicne 33T is the smallest 110mm BCD ring out there, e.g. TA Zephyr on Peter White's site. The AT was designed as a low Q triple. * I have achieved 152mm Q with a Tange 127 cartridge BB and 2mm drive side spacer for a total asymmetry of 6mm, very close to the D-3U Sugino recommended. The Outer ring FCL is 45mm and the Inner ring FCL is 37mm with a 43.5mm RCL. * Others on the I-Bob list have stated 147mm Q. The AT Inner 74mm BCD ring uses very very low posts cast in the spider & 5mm spacers instead of higher cast posts using no spacer. The Middle 110mm DCB ring protrudes further inward than the 74mm holes. Therefore, removing the 74mm Inner ring and spacers creates a double with the Inner ring chainbolt head being the limiting clearance to the chainstay. The double has a Q of about 145mm with a 46-36.The only problem with a 110mm double is the smallest 110BCD ring in 33T. However, with a 12-36 9 speed cassette, a 46-33 is 1 gear higher than a 46-30 for a No Load low gear (24.1gi vs 20.4gi with 584x38). EBay seems to have a decent supply of AT's, I bought 2 a year ago, a 1980 and 1984 one. So unless you need the very lowest No Load low, a Sugino AT as a double may work. John Hawrylak Woodstown NJ On Wednesday, January 10, 2024 at 11:15:06 AM UTC-5 Adam wrote: > Hi all, > > Adjacent to the triples thread, I'm thinking about moving away from a > triple to a double in order to get a lower Q. > > What are options for double cranksets that are around 40/26 or so? I think > that would be doable with the Rene Herse cranks, but too much $$$ for me. > Are there any cheaper options that will do that and give me a q in the 140s? > > Second, drivetrain stuff is a little new to me. What determines how small > a q factor a specific bike can have? I'm assuming chainstays play a role > here? This hypothetical project is for a Hillborne, so I'd be curious what > folks have used to get low q on their Hillbornes. I'm assuming I may have > to change the BB as well. > > Thanks! > > Adam > -- 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/74f36654-c145-4f29-bc31-e92e64241ffbn%40googlegroups.com.
Re: [RBW] Re: Why do some bikes just feel consistently faster?
Responding to Bill L's 2nd thought experiment, here's my quick $0.02 (can't find the cent key) Is Cyclist A's bike fast? It's as fast they like it to be. They report 'happy' not necessarily fast Is the magical encouragement claimed by Cyclist B all in their head?No, with the initial gearing, they felt a higher gear would be ok and it worked out to be so. Good for them Is "a slightly under geared bike" and "encourages me to ride one cog smaller" the exact same thing? Good point, in this case it seems to be. Assumptions1 both bikes have same tubing since weight is given as 17# for both with no qualifications for other components2 A and B weigh about the same, within 20# ObservationThe gearing change was about 6% higher in both cases or about 4.4gi if using 700x32 tires (74.4gi to 78.8gi). This is pretty much my upper cruising range, so we are not talking hills. John HawrylakWoodstown NJ On Friday, January 12, 2024 at 02:03:29 PM EST, Bill Lindsay wrote: I only got one taker on my last thought experiment. Here's another one: Cyclist A has a 17-pound fixie. They take a guess at a gear for the fixie, install a 49x18 and ride it around. They decide "This seems a little under geared." and they switch the 18 tooth cog for a 17. They ride that and decide "this is just right" and ride the bike happily Cyclist B has a 17-pound fixie. They take a guess at a gear for the fixie, install a 49x18 and declare this is "usual". They ride it around and find the bicycle encourages them to ride one tooth smaller. They obey the bicycle's encouragement and switch the 18 tooth cog for a 17. They ride that happily, and ask everyone around them "What makes this bike encourage me to ride one tooth smaller than usual, consistently?" Is Cyclist A's bike fast? Is the magical encouragement claimed by Cyclist B all in their head? Is "a slightly under geared bike" and "encourages me to ride one cog smaller" the exact same thing? Bill LindsayEl Cerrito, CA On Tuesday, January 9, 2024 at 9:42:00 AM UTC-8 Bill Lindsay wrote: OK, thought experiment time! You have to build four bikes. All four bikes must fit you identically. All the contact points of all four bikes will be identical. All four bikes will have geometry/handling that are similar enough to each other that you'll concede they ride/handle the same. Bike A is for sand and has 3.0" wide tires and weighs 30 poundsBike B is for grocery runs, pavement and firm dirt. It's got front and rear derailleurs and weighs 30 pounds unloaded and 75 pounds with groceriesBike C has an IGH and is used for pavement and grocery runs. It weighs 28 pounds unloaded and 73 pounds with groceriesBike D is a stripped down fixie for unloaded pavement rides only. It weighs 17 pounds You mostly ride bikes A, B and C. Every once in a while you ride bike D and every time you do, it feels amazingly fast and easy to pedal. Question: Why does Bike D feel fast and easy to pedal? Bill LindsayEl Cerrito, CA On Monday, January 8, 2024 at 10:12:25 AM UTC-8 Patrick Moore wrote: All bikes have the same effective sta: the 1999 and the Matthews #2 clone both have 73* stas, and the Matthews #1 has the saddle forward on the rails to compensate for the 72* sta. I start setup with saddle height and setback wrt the bb centerline -- pretty close to identical for all my bikes -- and use the saddle to gauge bar and brake lever position. On Sun, Jan 7, 2024 at 2:49 PM 'John Hawrylak, Woodstown NJ' via RBW Owners Bunch wrote: Patrick Maybe this was asked/answered, but is the STA or saddle setback the same on Ford Blue as the others?? Are you in a different position?? John Hawrylak Woodstown NJ On Thursday, December 28, 2023 at 5:35:08 PM UTC-5 Patrick Moore wrote: This is hardly a new question for me or for others, but it is a question that strikes me anew when I ride the 1999 Joe Starck and find, once again as always in getting on for 25 years of ownership that it's just easier to maintain speed and cadence in given conditions in given gears, this both on the flats and on hills. I remember being struck by this, again at the start of each ride on it, in the first years of ownership. Tires make a difference, tho' it felt this way with 571 X 23 mm Conti Grands Prix and Michelin Pro Races and with 559 X 23 mm Specialized Turbos; with the slightly wider (27.19 mm rear at 60 psi and 27.49 mm front at 55 psi on my 19 mm OW rims) and even lighter and more supple Elk Passes it feels even faster and smoother. BTW, I wholly discountenance the opinion that harshness or vibration makes riders think they're going fast. At least, perhaps some people do that, but I've always associated harshness with slowness and smoothness with speed. But again, the '99 has always felt sm
Re: [RBW] Re: Why do some bikes just feel consistently faster?
A 1010 steel frame would typically be a thicker tube gauge than a 531 frame, since it has a lower tensile strength. Since the majority of frames of this period used 1" diameter TT and 1-1/8" diameter DT, the thicker tube gauge results in a stiffer frame of the same frame size. It would be interesting to see the 73 Moto frame weights. John Hawrylak Woodstown NJ On Friday, January 12, 2024 at 12:30:31 PM EST, Ron Mc wrote: '73 catalog, Grand Touring was straight-gauge 1020 On Friday, January 12, 2024 at 11:13:15 AM UTC-6 John Hawrylak, Woodstown NJ wrote: P Moore asked: "what besides tubing stiffness might make a main triangle stiff or stable?" Frame size: small frames are stiffer than large frames. John HawrylakWoodstown NJ On Friday, January 12, 2024 at 10:48:14 AM EST, Patrick Moore wrote: And yet that very light 531 normal gauge 1973 Motobecane frame handled heavy rear loads (all comparisons on Tubus Fly racks) better than much stouter frames. Why should that have been? To turn that into another question: what besides tubing stiffness might make a main triangle stiff or stable? It was rather remarkable: That presumably thinnish-wall, and certainly lighter, normal gauge 531 Motobecane handled rear loads better (for me -- this is all judged by seat-of-pants feel -- than that (for me) overbuilt 2003 Curt frameset, and better than with the Ram. Fond memory: grunting 45 lb on the rear Fly in a 67" fixed gear on that Motobecane up an uber-steep 4/10 mile hill at 4 mph by the bike computer -- yep, 20 rpm. On Fri, Jan 12, 2024 at 6:13 AM Ron Mc wrote: Hi Patrick, on the rear load thing - that stability is in the main triangle. -- 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/e1zJO1Hhl-U/unsubscribe. To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, 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/CALuTfgsJVMMdPHP-CiqvJBhbEQzTE0DOUpsAUOuv4oEa9RhTOQ%40mail.gmail.com. -- 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/e1zJO1Hhl-U/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/f074a7a6-6f64-4652-a9de-3018a9d294dcn%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/1205016933.855960.1705081211620%40mail.yahoo.com.
Re: [RBW] Re: Why do some bikes just feel consistently faster?
P Moore asked: "what besides tubing stiffness might make a main triangle stiff or stable?" Frame size: small frames are stiffer than large frames. John HawrylakWoodstown NJ On Friday, January 12, 2024 at 10:48:14 AM EST, Patrick Moore wrote: And yet that very light 531 normal gauge 1973 Motobecane frame handled heavy rear loads (all comparisons on Tubus Fly racks) better than much stouter frames. Why should that have been? To turn that into another question: what besides tubing stiffness might make a main triangle stiff or stable? It was rather remarkable: That presumably thinnish-wall, and certainly lighter, normal gauge 531 Motobecane handled rear loads better (for me -- this is all judged by seat-of-pants feel -- than that (for me) overbuilt 2003 Curt frameset, and better than with the Ram. Fond memory: grunting 45 lb on the rear Fly in a 67" fixed gear on that Motobecane up an uber-steep 4/10 mile hill at 4 mph by the bike computer -- yep, 20 rpm. On Fri, Jan 12, 2024 at 6:13 AM Ron Mc wrote: Hi Patrick, on the rear load thing - that stability is in the main triangle. -- 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/e1zJO1Hhl-U/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/CALuTfgsJVMMdPHP-CiqvJBhbEQzTE0DOUpsAUOuv4oEa9RhTOQ%40mail.gmail.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/108183738.853616.1705079585910%40mail.yahoo.com.
[RBW] Re: Low q, low range 2x cranks
VO has a 50.4mm BCD crank in 46-30, but you can use TA rings to get what you want. Their spec is a 144mm Q on a 116mm symmetric BB with a 43.5 FCL (per email from VO). However, John Thruston in AK told me he achieved a 141.5mm Q with a 110mm BB, indicating the VO spec is 3.5mm optimistic (the crank should have a 138mm Q with a 110mm BB). The VO is $200, but they have 20% sales so you can get it at $160. Sun XCD is 50.4 with a Q spec of 145mm with a 113mm BB & 43.5mm FCL and can be had with TA rings from Jitensha Studios for about $290. This is about the same $ as the VO sale after buying TA rings in other than 46-30. I thought the SunXCD was the better deal and the optimum cost/benefit for a low Q double with low gearing. The SunXCD specs are from a SunXCD drawing shown on Santucci Cycles site after selecting the crank in their Shop. As Bill L stated, your Sam is a 135mm OLD, so a 43.5mm FCL puts the Outer ring closer to the middle cog, so the Inner ring should not use the smallest cogs. This should not be a problem if you watch your shifting. John Hawrylak Woodstown NJ On Wednesday, January 10, 2024 at 11:15:06 AM UTC-5 Adam wrote: > Hi all, > > Adjacent to the triples thread, I'm thinking about moving away from a > triple to a double in order to get a lower Q. > > What are options for double cranksets that are around 40/26 or so? I think > that would be doable with the Rene Herse cranks, but too much $$$ for me. > Are there any cheaper options that will do that and give me a q in the 140s? > > Second, drivetrain stuff is a little new to me. What determines how small > a q factor a specific bike can have? I'm assuming chainstays play a role > here? This hypothetical project is for a Hillborne, so I'd be curious what > folks have used to get low q on their Hillbornes. I'm assuming I may have > to change the BB as well. > > Thanks! > > Adam > -- 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/ef7d9ba4-4714-4614-b2f9-75789c103fc5n%40googlegroups.com.
[RBW] Re: Advantages of triple drivetrains (VO post)
I find a 46-36-26 triple with a 9 speed 12-36 cassette on 650Bx38 wheels gives me a 100 to 19 gi range and nice steps in my cruising range (50 to 75 gi) with a relatively straight chain line. The middle and inner ring chain lines are relatively straight if shifting to the middle after cog 5 and the inner after cog 7. *I think, the main drawback to triple is the inherently higher Q.* I have a Sugino AT (46-36-26) with a 150-152mm Q, but also a 1975 Shimano Dura Ace 52-39 (1st generation) with a 138mm Q. I wish the triple could have the lower Q. John Hawrylak Woodstown NJ On Tuesday, January 9, 2024 at 11:47:31 AM UTC-5 Patrick Moore wrote: > VO makes a good case for triples: > > https://mailchi.mp/velo-orange.com/triplesaregreatchangemymind?e=9c5efe5ba1 > > *Simplicity and Effectiveness* While 1x systems boast simplicity, the > emphasis on constant shifting may be overstated. Many riders find > themselves primarily using the middle ring, operating as a 1x system with > added flexibility to adapt to different terrain. > > The point that triples are usually used as 1Xs with low and high ranges > available is the key, I think. I know that, even with 10 or 11 in back, I'd > not want a 1X, and even a 1X + granny (ie, very wide range subcompact 2X) > would leave me wanting easy-shifting gears for steep rolling offroad > terrain (which I don't ride anymore), as I found when I swapped out a 3X7 > for a 2X9 on my erstwhile Fargo. For road use including heavy loads and > steep hills the 2X9 was easier to use and provided sufficient range with > close cruising steps, but I did miss the middle-ring range between about > 65" and 35" which comes with the middle ring on a 46/36/24 triple. > > -- > > Patrick Moore > Alburquerque, Nuevo Mexico, Etats Unis d'Amerique, Orbis Terrarum > > --- > > Executive resumes, LinkedIn profiles, bios, letters, and other writing > services > > > --- > > *When thou didst not, savage, k**now thine own meaning,* > > *But wouldst gabble like a** thing most brutish,* > > *I endowed thy purposes w**ith words that made them known.* > -- 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/b5f153ef-ba27-402d-8dfd-539bb5b46567n%40googlegroups.com.
Re: [RBW] Advantages of triple drivetrains (VO post)
Bill L stated: " If it were me, I'd experiment with a 42-tooth big ring before going to a triple" Question to Bill: Will a 42T large ring result in the FD hitting the chain stay in the inner ring of a triple (say 24T or 26T) ??? PS I agree with your comment on the 46-11 being a very high gear. John Hawrylak Woodstown NJ On Tuesday, January 9, 2024 at 3:21:33 PM UTC-5 Bill Lindsay wrote: > Ben > > You run a 46/30 with an 11-34 11sp cassette. If it were me, I'd > experiment with a 42-tooth big ring before going to a triple. 46x11 is > pretty darn high for a commuter/city bike. Anything higher than a 4:1 in > my book is for the sole purpose of pedaling at >>40mph. That is a real > use-case in hilly areas, but not for me, and especially not for a > commuter/city bike. That's just a suggestion. The jump from 42 to 30 is > much less dramatic. > > BL in EC > > On Tuesday, January 9, 2024 at 11:25:39 AM UTC-8 bunny...@gmail.com wrote: > >> I've been kind of triple-curious again. I live in a hilly part of L.A. My >> commuter/city bike has an 11-34 11s with a 46/30 front. I've been finding >> the 46 to 30 jump to feel pretty large. It feels much more dramatic than >> 50-34. For instance, if I switch big to small in the from, I'll sift down >> at least 3 cogs on the back to totally avoid spinning out immediately. I >> sometimes find myself mildly cross chaining in either direction to find the >> right gear. >> >> So I've been thinking of either going 1x, or 3x. My other bike is 1x, and >> it's a carbon all-road/gravel thing. I like the setup for rougher terrain. >> Also, I just don't like the idea of having duplicate bikes. I also >> romanticize the bike I had about 20 years go, which had an 11-27 9 speed >> with 24/36/46. At the time, it felt luxurious, natural, and easy. But I >> didn't know then what I know now, and many times when I've set up a modern >> bike like this one from my past, I get quickly disillusioned and undo that >> change. >> >> I kinda feel like the headline should be "triples: still fun and useful >> for hands on bike nerds who like to tinker." >> >> Ben >> >> On Tuesday, January 9, 2024 at 10:44:06 AM UTC-8 captaincon...@gmail.com >> wrote: >> >>> I dissent. Front derailers are unnecessarily complicated to setup, and >>> so are triple chainrings, especially on XD2s. I have 1X 10 one two bikes, >>> and love it, and I just specced a 1X 11 with a Deore 5100 derailer and >>> 11-51 cassette for my BMC Monstercross. The whole drivetrain cost less >>> than a nice triple crankset, it's all lighter too. Check out Analog Cycles >>> for inspiration. >>> On Tuesday, January 9, 2024 at 11:45:17 AM UTC-6 Johnny Alien wrote: >>> >>>> For years Grant/Rivendell argued against lots of gears in the rear >>>> because people didn't need to shift that much. The message was to push >>>> through if its too hard or even get off and push the bike up the hill. Now >>>> its shifting to a new argument...why not have those extra gears available. >>>> Honestly its all marketing to me. I like the simplicity of a 1x because I >>>> get the bulk of the gears I need with less maintenance. For me (personally >>>> mind you) the front derailer has always been the sketchiest part of the >>>> setup. Dropping chains, chain rubits all a balancing act. I am happy >>>> to >>>> have that all go away with a sacrifice of the granny gear. I see what VO >>>> is >>>> saying and I think its probably a practical opinion but for me?? 1x just >>>> works. >>>> >>>> On Tuesday, January 9, 2024 at 12:33:52 PM UTC-5 campyo...@me.com >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> I have a triple on just one bike (Soma Saga). My main problem is that >>>>> when I’m in the smallest chainring I am moving so slowly that it’s hard >>>>> to >>>>> stay upright. On the very steep inclines that necessitate the small cog, >>>>> I >>>>> find it easier to just get off and walk the bike up the hill (something >>>>> we >>>>> used to call a “24-inch gear”). >>>>> >>>>> --Eric Norris >>>>> campyo...@me.com >>>>> Insta: @CampyOnlyGuy >>>>> YouTube: YouTube.com/CampyOnlyGuy >>>>> >>>>> On Jan 9, 2024, at 9:20 AM, Ron Mc wrote: >>>&g
Re: [RBW] Re: Why do some bikes just feel consistently faster?
Bill L questioned the 12# weight difference. I sort of missed the 12#, mainly since Bike D was stated to 'feel fast' and I assumed B & C would use heavier tubing due to the 73 to 75# load requirement and A must be thick gauge tubing given the 30# weight (Schwinns in the 1980"s used 1010 18 gauge tubing in lugged frames and quoted 30 to 32# weights). I admit D should be about 1 mph faster than the A, B C due to the 11 to 13# weight difference (basis R Schwinn stated Schwinn tests showed 12# change in frame resulted in a 1 mph change with same effort). I focused on the 'feel fast' vs 'tested and shown faster'. I did ride a Trek 5500 (Rolf paired spoke wheels) for 5 years between riding a 1975 Schwinn Approved Voyaguer II and a 1988 Schwinn Voyaguer (touring) and both with 36 spoke wheels. I did not find it to 'feel a significant degree faster' than the Voyageur II even though it weighed less. I may have been faster, but did not feel it. However, my Norther-Lyon (36 spoke Velocity Atlas wheels) *does 'feel faster"* than either of the 2 Schwinns and is definitely easier to pedal than the other 3. So my answer is probably biased to my experiences & assumptions discussed above. Note: The 4 frames are all essentially the same sizes: 21" )C-T), 54cm and 52cm, both C-C. So tube rigidity may be more important in the smaller frame since a small frame is more rigid than a large one. This was enjoyable and thought provoking. Thanks Bill John Hawrylak Woodstown NJ On Tuesday, January 9, 2024 at 2:24:49 PM UTC-5 Bill Lindsay wrote: > John played along and gave an interesting answer. Interesting for two > reasons: > > 1. Patrick Moore's Bike C is objectively more flexible than Bike D. > 2. John H doesn't think a 12 pound lighter bike will feel faster or easier > to pedal > > BL in EC > -- 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/7b7c309e-4fb7-4b5b-b35c-f5cbe2f9e3e2n%40googlegroups.com.
Re: [RBW] Re: Why do some bikes just feel consistently faster?
Because the other 3 are stiffer and harder to pedal, unless operated at their design conditions, e.g B & C need a 73 to 75 lbm additional load. John HawrylakWoodstown NJ On Tuesday, January 9, 2024 at 12:42:09 PM EST, Bill Lindsay wrote: OK, thought experiment time! You have to build four bikes. All four bikes must fit you identically. All the contact points of all four bikes will be identical. All four bikes will have geometry/handling that are similar enough to each other that you'll concede they ride/handle the same. Bike A is for sand and has 3.0" wide tires and weighs 30 poundsBike B is for grocery runs, pavement and firm dirt. It's got front and rear derailleurs and weighs 30 pounds unloaded and 75 pounds with groceriesBike C has an IGH and is used for pavement and grocery runs. It weighs 28 pounds unloaded and 73 pounds with groceriesBike D is a stripped down fixie for unloaded pavement rides only. It weighs 17 pounds You mostly ride bikes A, B and C. Every once in a while you ride bike D and every time you do, it feels amazingly fast and easy to pedal. Question: Why does Bike D feel fast and easy to pedal? Bill LindsayEl Cerrito, CA On Monday, January 8, 2024 at 10:12:25 AM UTC-8 Patrick Moore wrote: All bikes have the same effective sta: the 1999 and the Matthews #2 clone both have 73* stas, and the Matthews #1 has the saddle forward on the rails to compensate for the 72* sta. I start setup with saddle height and setback wrt the bb centerline -- pretty close to identical for all my bikes -- and use the saddle to gauge bar and brake lever position. On Sun, Jan 7, 2024 at 2:49 PM 'John Hawrylak, Woodstown NJ' via RBW Owners Bunch wrote: Patrick Maybe this was asked/answered, but is the STA or saddle setback the same on Ford Blue as the others?? Are you in a different position?? John Hawrylak Woodstown NJ On Thursday, December 28, 2023 at 5:35:08 PM UTC-5 Patrick Moore wrote: This is hardly a new question for me or for others, but it is a question that strikes me anew when I ride the 1999 Joe Starck and find, once again as always in getting on for 25 years of ownership that it's just easier to maintain speed and cadence in given conditions in given gears, this both on the flats and on hills. I remember being struck by this, again at the start of each ride on it, in the first years of ownership. Tires make a difference, tho' it felt this way with 571 X 23 mm Conti Grands Prix and Michelin Pro Races and with 559 X 23 mm Specialized Turbos; with the slightly wider (27.19 mm rear at 60 psi and 27.49 mm front at 55 psi on my 19 mm OW rims) and even lighter and more supple Elk Passes it feels even faster and smoother. BTW, I wholly discountenance the opinion that harshness or vibration makes riders think they're going fast. At least, perhaps some people do that, but I've always associated harshness with slowness and smoothness with speed. But again, the '99 has always felt smooth and fast. What provoked this perennial question was my very pleasant mid-afternoon ride today. My route included about 1 mile of steep hill starting at Broadway and, feeling tired and sluggish and being old I considered swapping the Phil 17/19Dingle wheel (76" and 68") with the SA TF wheel (76" and 57" underdrive), but didn't want the bother and decided I'd just walk if necessary. I did plan to move the chain to the 19 t/68" gear once I got downtown, but didn't do this, either. Winds variable up to about 7-8 mph. I took it easy but found myself following some youngster on a thin-tire 700C derailleur hybrid for about 8 miles; I finally caught up to him at the first light on Coal and followed him up the climb. I think he was a UNM student and at least 45 years younger than I, and he put a few yards on me up the hill spinning in a low gear but I was surprised once again (this is the point, don't mind my meandering) at how well and easily the bike climbs. ??? Planing? The frame is not as over-beefy as the 2003 Goodrich custom but it's not as light and certainly has fatter tubes than the wonderful thinwall 531 normal gauge 2020 Matthews replacement of the 2003. Weight? With the Phil it's right at 18 lb without bottle or bag versus ~28 for the Matthews road with F+R racks, fenders, lights, and SA 3 speed hub, and versus the 30-31 lb of the Matthews road-bike-for-dirt with 2X10 derailleur drivetrain, 50 mm tires, 2X gauge fenders, dynamo lighting, and rear rack. But it feels fast on the flats at steady-state cruising. I daresay that the weight makes a difference on hills, but I don't think that weight is the only reason. I know that some bikes just fit and feel "perfect," and this is one of them (tho' the 2 Matthewses fit just about the same since I built them up to do so). That old Herse was a tank that 2 earlier owners sold
[RBW] Re: Why do some bikes just feel consistently faster?
Patrick Maybe this was asked/answered, but is the STA or saddle setback the same on Ford Blue as the others?? Are you in a different position?? John Hawrylak Woodstown NJ On Thursday, December 28, 2023 at 5:35:08 PM UTC-5 Patrick Moore wrote: > This is hardly a new question for me or for others, but it is a question > that strikes me anew when I ride the 1999 Joe Starck and find, once again > as always in getting on for 25 years of ownership that *it's just easier > to maintain speed and cadence in given conditions in given gears,* this > both on the flats and on hills. I remember being struck by this, again at > the start of each ride on it, in the first years of ownership. > > Tires make a difference, tho' it felt this way with 571 X 23 mm Conti > Grands Prix and Michelin Pro Races and with 559 X 23 mm Specialized Turbos; > with the slightly wider (27.19 mm rear at 60 psi and 27.49 mm front at 55 > psi on my 19 mm OW rims) and even lighter and more supple Elk Passes it > feels even faster and *smoother.* > > BTW, I wholly discountenance the opinion that harshness or vibration makes > riders think they're going fast. At least, perhaps some people do that, but > I've always associated harshness with slowness and smoothness with speed. > But again, the '99 has always felt *smooth* and *fast.* > > What provoked this perennial question was my very pleasant mid-afternoon > ride today. My route included about 1 mile of steep hill starting at > Broadway and, feeling tired and sluggish and being old I considered > swapping the Phil 17/19Dingle wheel (76" and 68") with the SA TF wheel (76" > and 57" underdrive), but didn't want the bother and decided I'd just walk > if necessary. > > I did plan to move the chain to the 19 t/68" gear once I got downtown, but > didn't do this, either. Winds variable up to about 7-8 mph. > > I took it easy but found myself following some youngster on a thin-tire > 700C derailleur hybrid for about 8 miles; I finally caught up to him at the > first light on Coal and followed him up the climb. I think he was a UNM > student and at least 45 years younger than I, and he put a few yards on me > up the hill spinning in a low gear but I was surprised once again (this is > the point, don't mind my meandering) at *how well and easily* the bike > climbs. > > ??? > > Planing? The frame is not as over-beefy as the 2003 Goodrich custom but > it's not as light and certainly has fatter tubes than the wonderful > thinwall 531 normal gauge 2020 Matthews replacement of the 2003. > > Weight? With the Phil it's right at 18 lb without bottle or bag versus ~28 > for the Matthews road with F+R racks, fenders, lights, and SA 3 speed hub, > and versus the 30-31 lb of the Matthews road-bike-for-dirt with 2X10 > derailleur drivetrain, 50 mm tires, 2X gauge fenders, dynamo lighting, and > rear rack. But it feels fast on the flats at steady-state cruising. I > daresay that the weight makes a difference on hills, but I *don't* think > that weight is the only reason. > > I know that some bikes just fit and feel "perfect," and this is one of > them (tho' the 2 Matthewses fit just about the same since I built them up > to do so). That old Herse was a tank that 2 earlier owners sold for cheap > but for me it rode "fast" if not as fast as the 1999 Joe Starck. > > To end this meandering: since so much of my riding is either errands > requiring bags or dirt requiring fat tires the 1999 gets ridden less than > it otherwise would, but if I had to get ride of all bikes but one, I'd > happily keep this and build 1 or 2 alternative wheelsets (geared/skinny, > geared/fattish) and buy a bit selection of strap-on saddlebags from repair > kit only to Sackville Medium. > > I've owned 5 Rivendells including 3 customs and this one is the last (tho' > the 2020 Matthews is a copy of the 2003). > > Sorry, can't resist posting again: > > [image: image.png] > -- > > Patrick Moore > Alburquerque, Nuevo Mexico, Etats Unis d'Amerique, Orbis Terrarum > > --- > > Executive resumes, LinkedIn profiles, bios, letters, and other writing > services > > > --- > > *When thou didst not, savage, k**now thine own meaning,* > > *But wouldst gabble like a** thing most brutish,* > > *I endowed thy purposes w**ith words that made them known.* > -- 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/1d8e24a9-0448-4830-8a0e-806fbfc45371n%40googlegroups.com.
[RBW] Re: Why do some bikes just feel consistently faster?
+1 on Bill L's thoughts on Ford Blue. I would suggest planning as the frame is large (25"??) and if a normal wall tubing was used, the large frame might plane without being too flexible. Do you know what wall thickness was used??? Maybe it's better not to know, following Bill's line of thought. PS, the darker blue bars contrast nicely. Would Ford use a white?? John Hawrylak Woodstown NJ On Thursday, December 28, 2023 at 5:35:08 PM UTC-5 Patrick Moore wrote: > This is hardly a new question for me or for others, but it is a question > that strikes me anew when I ride the 1999 Joe Starck and find, once again > as always in getting on for 25 years of ownership that *it's just easier > to maintain speed and cadence in given conditions in given gears,* this > both on the flats and on hills. I remember being struck by this, again at > the start of each ride on it, in the first years of ownership. > > Tires make a difference, tho' it felt this way with 571 X 23 mm Conti > Grands Prix and Michelin Pro Races and with 559 X 23 mm Specialized Turbos; > with the slightly wider (27.19 mm rear at 60 psi and 27.49 mm front at 55 > psi on my 19 mm OW rims) and even lighter and more supple Elk Passes it > feels even faster and *smoother.* > > BTW, I wholly discountenance the opinion that harshness or vibration makes > riders think they're going fast. At least, perhaps some people do that, but > I've always associated harshness with slowness and smoothness with speed. > But again, the '99 has always felt *smooth* and *fast.* > > What provoked this perennial question was my very pleasant mid-afternoon > ride today. My route included about 1 mile of steep hill starting at > Broadway and, feeling tired and sluggish and being old I considered > swapping the Phil 17/19Dingle wheel (76" and 68") with the SA TF wheel (76" > and 57" underdrive), but didn't want the bother and decided I'd just walk > if necessary. > > I did plan to move the chain to the 19 t/68" gear once I got downtown, but > didn't do this, either. Winds variable up to about 7-8 mph. > > I took it easy but found myself following some youngster on a thin-tire > 700C derailleur hybrid for about 8 miles; I finally caught up to him at the > first light on Coal and followed him up the climb. I think he was a UNM > student and at least 45 years younger than I, and he put a few yards on me > up the hill spinning in a low gear but I was surprised once again (this is > the point, don't mind my meandering) at *how well and easily* the bike > climbs. > > ??? > > Planing? The frame is not as over-beefy as the 2003 Goodrich custom but > it's not as light and certainly has fatter tubes than the wonderful > thinwall 531 normal gauge 2020 Matthews replacement of the 2003. > > Weight? With the Phil it's right at 18 lb without bottle or bag versus ~28 > for the Matthews road with F+R racks, fenders, lights, and SA 3 speed hub, > and versus the 30-31 lb of the Matthews road-bike-for-dirt with 2X10 > derailleur drivetrain, 50 mm tires, 2X gauge fenders, dynamo lighting, and > rear rack. But it feels fast on the flats at steady-state cruising. I > daresay that the weight makes a difference on hills, but I *don't* think > that weight is the only reason. > > I know that some bikes just fit and feel "perfect," and this is one of > them (tho' the 2 Matthewses fit just about the same since I built them up > to do so). That old Herse was a tank that 2 earlier owners sold for cheap > but for me it rode "fast" if not as fast as the 1999 Joe Starck. > > To end this meandering: since so much of my riding is either errands > requiring bags or dirt requiring fat tires the 1999 gets ridden less than > it otherwise would, but if I had to get ride of all bikes but one, I'd > happily keep this and build 1 or 2 alternative wheelsets (geared/skinny, > geared/fattish) and buy a bit selection of strap-on saddlebags from repair > kit only to Sackville Medium. > > I've owned 5 Rivendells including 3 customs and this one is the last (tho' > the 2020 Matthews is a copy of the 2003). > > Sorry, can't resist posting again: > > [image: image.png] > -- > > Patrick Moore > Alburquerque, Nuevo Mexico, Etats Unis d'Amerique, Orbis Terrarum > > --- > > Executive resumes, LinkedIn profiles, bios, letters, and other writing > services > > > --- > > *When thou didst not
[RBW] Re: 26.8 seatposts with generous setback
+1 on Eric's comments. I have a 27.2mm LTE-100 I bought from a list member. I measured the setback on the work bench and the '0' mark on the LTE-100 scale is apporx 20mm of setback. So the '50' mark is 70mm of setback. Quite a bit of setback. If pushed back to the 50mm mark, the setback corresponds to a 69° STA from a 73°STA with a Saddle Height of 71cm and a 20mm setback seatpost. The list member used the adjustable design to get an initial setting. Then used a conventional nut/bolt for riding. John Hawrylak Woodstown NJ On Thursday, April 13, 2023 at 1:28:18 PM UTC-4 Eric Marth wrote: > Leah, I'm happy to be helpful! I'm also sorry to hear you tried and had a > bad experience with the IRD seatpost. I was excited when it was released > because it seemed like it would solve the 26.8 lots of setback problem. But > that seatpost is just a problem and a setback in and of itself. > > Just as a note on the Kalloy post: it lists 24mm of offset. Compared to a > Nitto S83 at 23mm that's hardly a noticeable difference. I can get that > extra millimeter if I forego underwear. > > I will again endorse the SR MTE-100. They're hard to find, they're pretty > ugly but they're stout and have *tons* of setback. I did have trouble > getting that quick release to stay put so I replaced mine with a long 8mm > bolt and a nylock nut. > > [image: Screenshot 2023-04-13 at 1.25.06 PM.png] > > On Thursday, April 13, 2023 at 12:07:01 PM UTC-4 Bicycle Belle Ding Ding! > wrote: > >> Eric, I’m so glad you started this thread. I went through the same >> odyssey a few years ago and tried the IRD seatpost and it slipped like >> crazy. Riv took it back and stopped selling it because it was a widespread >> problem. I want a bit more setback on my Platy so I’m going to take Liz’s >> recommendation. >> >> Liz - thank you SO much! I was led to believe during my search that I was >> out of luck because most seatposts come in the-27-whatever size and not our >> uncommon 26.8. Can this seat post really work well at only $15?!? >> >> Much thanks, >> Leah >> >> On Wednesday, April 12, 2023 at 10:42:42 PM UTC-4 eric...@gmail.com >> wrote: >> >>> [image: Screenshot 2023-04-12 at 10.40.34 PM.png] >>> >>> Hi all — I'm comparing 26.8 seatposts and their varying setback. I'd >>> like the saddle on my MB-2 to be further back. >>> >>> Does anyone have any firsthand experience with how a Thompson and Nitto >>> S83 compare in terms of setback? I've been searching around and can't find >>> any definitive measurements. >>> >>> I'm currently running a Suntour XC Pro seatpost and it looks like either >>> of the above will give me more setback than I currently have. >>> >>> I've tried and very much did *not* like the IRD wayback seatpost, it >>> slips. Others have reported the same. Don't buy this seatpost! >>> >>> The vintage SR MTE-100 is good, solid, I run one on my Appaloosa. Would >>> rather try something different. Plus, they're hard to find! >>> >>> >>> -- 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/f82a3620-8b1a-477e-a44d-a0a26ec2c1b1n%40googlegroups.com.
Re: [RBW] Re: New Bike Day—Retirement Bike
Roberta Beautiful Betty and great report. One suggestion, check the distance from the ground to the front mudflap is 4 cm or greater. 4cm is generally considered to the minimum distance. Any lower increases air resistance and tends to pick up much more debris from the road. The SKS safety tabs will protect you if the flap picks up a tree branch. John Hawrylak Woodstown NJ On Tuesday, December 26, 2023 at 8:40:27 PM UTC-5 Roberta wrote: > Well, I certainly am in good company with similar tastes and components. > Thank you for all your well wishing. And, good wishes to you, too! > > This group has always been so helpful, so supportive. It also got me into > colors (Leah, especially, dragged me into the brightness.)! My first Riv, > which I loved riding wasn't too much to look at. Butterscotch Appaloosa > with a black saddle, cork grips, black luggage. Rode wonderfully, but I > think it would look more "fun" if I owned it today. > > Now, all I have to do is actually retire... I think that will be in > 2024. Where shall I go? Not sure yet, but I have family in NC, so I might > go on another Pam Likes to Bike Ride. Or, perhaps I'll end up in MI on a > Bicycle Belle Ding Ding Riv ride! In the meantime, Betty is my daily > commuter bike and my main weekend ride. > > Roberta > Philadelphia, PA > > On Tuesday, December 26, 2023 at 7:01:33 PM UTC-5 aelga...@castilleja.org > wrote: > >> Congrats Roberta! I bought my first riv for my 40th birthday and then I >> bought a Jitensha Studio Ebisu for my 50th birthday. But I’ve had my eyes >> open for a Betty Foy for my oldest daughter. She’s not old/tall enough yet, >> but I’m jealous of the gem you found! I’m also jealous of your retirement. >> 😊 Happy riding! >> >> Best >> Ahmed in Redwood Shores >> >> *Ahmed Elgasseir* >> >> Department Chair, Visual and Performing Arts >> >> >> *Castilleja School* >> >> 1310 Bryant Street >> <https://maps.google.com/?q=1310+Bryant+Street+Palo+Alto,+CA.+94301&entry=gmail&source=g> >> >> Palo Alto, CA 94301 >> <https://maps.google.com/?q=1310+Bryant+Street+Palo+Alto,+CA+94301&entry=gmail&source=g> >> >> >> P (415) 654-7977 >> >> E aelga...@castilleja.org >> >> www.castilleja.org >> >> >> Follow us on Instagram <https://www.instagram.com/castilleja_school/> | >> Facebook <https://www.facebook.com/CastillejaSchool/> | Twitter >> <https://twitter.com/CastillejaNews> | LinkedIn >> <https://www.linkedin.com/school/castilleja-school/> >> >> >> *Women Learning. Women Leading. * >> >> >> On Tue, Dec 26, 2023 at 3:07 PM Bicycle Belle Ding Ding! < >> jonasa...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> It just turned out so well! Where will you go? What will you see? Maybe >>> you will keep a ride journal with places and miles you go on your Betty in >>> retirement. All the happy miles to you, and I hope to look upon this little >>> blue-green wonder in March at the Philly Bike Expo! >>> Leah >>> >>> On Tuesday, December 26, 2023 at 4:28:00 PM UTC-6 aeroperf wrote: >>> >>>> Excellent, excellent choice. >>>> When I retired I also bought a Rivendell. I’ve never regretted it. >>>> Neither will you. >>>> Love the mud flaps! Great choice! Enjoy! >>>> >>>> -- >>> 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/a3721c52-39c3-4d1c-8ee0-96352dd7af02n%40googlegroups.com >>> >>> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/rbw-owners-bunch/a3721c52-39c3-4d1c-8ee0-96352dd7af02n%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> >>> . >>> >> -- 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/46425e2d-8bbe-4f5f-b44b-6da6cc917f7en%40googlegroups.com.
[RBW] Re: FS: Acorn, Nigel Smythe Bags-Obsolete Tan, Tweed
The $2 bills with Tom are a nice touch, rare as hen's teeth. Much better than a $1 bill John Hawrylak Woodstown NJ On Sunday, December 10, 2023 at 8:10:31 AM UTC-5 mike goldman wrote: > All bags are in excellent condition. The 2 smaller rear Acorns on the > right side of the main photo were on my personal bikes and show some easily > removable dirt and minor strap wear > > Prices: From the main picture left to right top to bottom > > -Med/Large Acorn: main compartment w/ tube size smaller pockets..$75 > shipped > -Nigel Smythe rear banana bags: 1 main compartment..$70 each shipped > -Acorn front bag: main compartment w. inner map type compartment..$60 > shipped > -Acorn front bag: main compartment...$55 shipped > -Acorn front bag: main compartment, narrowest of frt. Acorn.$50 shipped > -Nigel Smythe front H bags: side D rings, 1 compartment.$75 shipped each > -Acorn bags: see description above, no rips, very solid.$45 shipped each > -Nigel Smythe: small front/rear bag, room for tubes,tools.$50 shipped > > mike goldman > rhode island > -- 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/99c2dd85-7cac-415f-b3dc-b6fd8ef3d0a7n%40googlegroups.com.
Re: [RBW] Re: NBOD: New Bike Ordered Day! The mythical canti-Roa!
Bill Nice photos of the frame. The fork rake looks very nice. A few questions after reading all the posts: How much fork rake do you have?? How much BBD do you have?? Earlier you mentioned Grant used some extra BBD, based on his Roadeo?I thought 80mm was RBW standard BBD for 700C wheels. Did you get extra BBD to compensate for larger tires than say 700x32, e.g., increase the BBD so tires wider than 700x28/32 gives the same BBH as narrower tires?? What was the main consideration for the canti's?? Obtain unrestricted tire clearance or something else?? The fork crown looks very wide. You mentioned it was not the standard RBW crown. Do you know the inside width??? John Hawrylak Woodstown NJ On Sunday, December 3, 2023 at 11:06:19 AM UTC-5 Bill Lindsay wrote: > Here is the Flickr album where I will post my photos. > https://www.flickr.com/photos/45758191@N04/albums/72177720313109003/ > > There are several shots of the raw frame set in there now. > > BL in EC > > On Sunday, December 3, 2023 at 7:13:08 AM UTC-8 Bill Lindsay wrote: > >> I absolutely will be hoping for RivSister approval of my color way. In >> my convo with Grant, he asked to photograph a number of the projects I've >> been working on or recently completed, like he may Blagh about it, and >> since this Canti-Roa is a relatively unique thing, I was going to give them >> first shot at the actual reveal. >> >> Bill Lindsay >> El Cerrito, Ca >> >> On Sunday, December 3, 2023 at 5:17:12 AM UTC-8 sarahlik...@gmail.com >> wrote: >> >>> I love seeing someone else's bike dream fulfilled! Congratulations on >>> your new bike day and what color did you paint your bike??! (I >>> promise you all your RivSisters want to know...) >>> >>> On Saturday, December 2, 2023 at 8:19:18 PM UTC-8 Bill Lindsay wrote: >>> >>>> Since starting this thread, I did spring for a fancy new wheel set that >>>> I'm pretty excited about. I like the people and products at HED, and I >>>> appreciate their vestigial commitment to rim brakes. They offer a premier >>>> rim treatment called RA black. The rim is machined rough, and then hard >>>> anodized to give a super high friction braking surface. It's supposed to >>>> be premier braking, and I'm excited to try it out. >>>> >>>> Mocking up the weights of things, I may be able to pull in a full build >>>> at 18.5 pounds without rack and fenders, and maybe (just maybe) at >>>> 19.99lbs >>>> with rack and fenders. We'll see how it turns out... it will not be red. >>>> >>>> BL in EC >>>> >>>> On Saturday, December 2, 2023 at 9:23:07 AM UTC-8 Ryan wrote: >>>> >>>>> Can hardly wait to see it built up! Long wait but worth it I'm sure >>>>> >>>>> On Saturday, December 2, 2023 at 9:57:15 AM UTC-6 George Schick wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> You gonna stick with the default red/white Roadeo color scheme or >>>>>> choose something else? >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> On Saturday, December 2, 2023 at 8:45:33 AM UTC-6 Bill Lindsay wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> ...and 20 months later, it has arrived! Rivendell received my >>>>>>> Cantilever Roadeo from Nobilette this week, and it's off to paint. I >>>>>>> paid >>>>>>> them a visit and gave it a look over. It looks very nice and I'm eager >>>>>>> to >>>>>>> see it painted, and built up. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On my visit I had a very nice chat with Grant about various things, >>>>>>> and a few of the familiar old faces were there, so it was a pleasant >>>>>>> visit >>>>>>> all around. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Bill Lindsay >>>>>>> El Cerrito, CA >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Wednesday, April 6, 2022 at 11:15:17 AM UTC-7 Bill Lindsay wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> John >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I will definitely run my current Roadeo wheelsets. 27mm tubulars. >>>>>>>> Rene Herse Stampede Pass (622-32) and Bon Jon Pass (622-35). For >>>>>>>> kicks >>>>>>>> I'll probably check how Barlow Passes look on the bike (622-38). >>
Re: [RBW] Re: Bike Makeover Thread
Leah, perhaps the Brooks on the Mermaid is setback 10mm more than the Rivet on the Raspberry. However, the Raspberry seatpost SB is 42mm with 0 on the IRD scale corresponding to an actual 20mm. The Mermaid has a 'standard' looking seatpost, most likely with 20mm SB. The 10mm in saddle position is only 25% of the 42mm in seatpost seatback.So you are still much further back on the Rapsberry than on the Mermaid. A simple measurement could help determine if the setbacks are the same or different. If the 2 bikes have the SAME stem length and bars and the bars are set to the same height, then measuring the distance from the center of the stem quill bolt to the back of the saddle (or to where your sit bones indention is) should reveal if both are setback the same or if there is a difference, it would quantify it. John Hawrylak Woodstown NJ On Sunday, October 15, 2023 at 7:06:51 PM UTC-4 Bicycle Belle Ding Ding! wrote: > I’m nearly sure Rivet Sonora is 10mm shorter rails than Brooks. I think > that could account for the difference. > Sent from my iPhone > > On Oct 15, 2023, at 7:03 PM, 'John Hawrylak, Woodstown NJ' via RBW Owners > Bunch wrote: > > Leah stated concerning her Mermaid Platy: " This one has a Brooks. I > know it sounds crazy but this bike feels perfect to me and I believe it to > be because the Brooks rails are a little longer and allow for just enough > setback. " > > > My Comment: Brooks B17s are notorious for their rails having a short > adjustment length. I measured 2.1 to 3.0 cm depending on how much you > force the saddle fore and aft in the clamp. > > The Mermaid looks like a 'normal' setup form that type of frame. There > seems to be more seatpost showing the=an on the Raspberry Platy. > > The Raspberry Platy seems more stretched out, which George has diagnosed > in his replies > > Leah, if you think the Billie bars on the Mermaid are different than the > Billie bars on the Raspberry., just place the 2 side by side, line up the > bars and visually compare the 2. Any differences should be apparent. If > NO differences are observed they are probably the same. > > John Hawrylak > Woodstown NJ > > On Sunday, October 15, 2023 at 6:40:42 PM UTC-4 Bicycle Belle Ding Ding! > wrote: > >> I have the mermaid Platy: >> [image: image0.jpeg] >> >> This one has a Brooks. I know it sounds crazy but this bike feels perfect >> to me and I believe it to be because the Brooks rails are a little longer >> and allow for just enough setback. Either that or the Billie Bars are >> somehow not made to spec and don’t come back as far. That’s my layperson >> crumby understanding. But that bike fits great. >> >> The Clem: >> [image: image1.jpeg] >> >> I rode it last night and decided I hate how it feels. Bars too close, too >> bolt upright. This is the fault of club riding where I now like leaning >> forward more. But I rarely ride this bike so it won’t get any new parts. >> Poor thing. >> >> On Oct 15, 2023, at 6:36 PM, 'John Hawrylak, Woodstown NJ' via RBW Owners >> Bunch wrote: >> >> >> >> Curious if Leah has her other Rivendells set up the same way. >> >> John Hawrylak >> Woodstown NJ >> >> On Sunday, October 15, 2023 at 5:03:31 PM UTC-4 George Schick wrote: >> >>> I'll probably get clobbered for my reply to this discussion - I'm used >>> to it - but from viewing the pics of Leah's bikes in this thread plus >>> others in previous threads, her bike always seems to be either in the >>> highest gear or at least the next to highest. And she has admitted to as >>> much in previous discussions that's how she likes it. And since she likes >>> the saddle moved as far as possible to the rear this means that she's using >>> the leverage of that angle while pulling back on the bar grips in order to >>> "stomp" as hard as possible on the pedals. Since she has the leg >>> development and strength to get away with that kind of riding due to her >>> weight training and other off-bike workouts, that's just how she's using to >>> riding. >>> >>> Many of the rest of us old farts who learned road riding on a >>> diamond-framed bike with drop bars, having the saddle positioned more >>> closely to the center of the BB so we could "spin" the pedals at as high a >>> cadence (RPM) as possible, shifting gears when necessary in order to >>> maintain that cadence (which is how I assume the pro racers still learn to >>> ride). Which is
Re: [RBW] Re: Bike Makeover Thread
Leah stated concerning her Mermaid Platy: " This one has a Brooks. I know it sounds crazy but this bike feels perfect to me and I believe it to be because the Brooks rails are a little longer and allow for just enough setback. " My Comment: Brooks B17s are notorious for their rails having a short adjustment length. I measured 2.1 to 3.0 cm depending on how much you force the saddle fore and aft in the clamp. The Mermaid looks like a 'normal' setup form that type of frame. There seems to be more seatpost showing the=an on the Raspberry Platy. The Raspberry Platy seems more stretched out, which George has diagnosed in his replies Leah, if you think the Billie bars on the Mermaid are different than the Billie bars on the Raspberry., just place the 2 side by side, line up the bars and visually compare the 2. Any differences should be apparent. If NO differences are observed they are probably the same. John Hawrylak Woodstown NJ On Sunday, October 15, 2023 at 6:40:42 PM UTC-4 Bicycle Belle Ding Ding! wrote: > I have the mermaid Platy: > [image: image0.jpeg] > > This one has a Brooks. I know it sounds crazy but this bike feels perfect > to me and I believe it to be because the Brooks rails are a little longer > and allow for just enough setback. Either that or the Billie Bars are > somehow not made to spec and don’t come back as far. That’s my layperson > crumby understanding. But that bike fits great. > > The Clem: > [image: image1.jpeg] > > I rode it last night and decided I hate how it feels. Bars too close, too > bolt upright. This is the fault of club riding where I now like leaning > forward more. But I rarely ride this bike so it won’t get any new parts. > Poor thing. > > On Oct 15, 2023, at 6:36 PM, 'John Hawrylak, Woodstown NJ' via RBW Owners > Bunch wrote: > > > > Curious if Leah has her other Rivendells set up the same way. > > John Hawrylak > Woodstown NJ > > On Sunday, October 15, 2023 at 5:03:31 PM UTC-4 George Schick wrote: > >> I'll probably get clobbered for my reply to this discussion - I'm used to >> it - but from viewing the pics of Leah's bikes in this thread plus others >> in previous threads, her bike always seems to be either in the highest gear >> or at least the next to highest. And she has admitted to as much in >> previous discussions that's how she likes it. And since she likes the >> saddle moved as far as possible to the rear this means that she's using the >> leverage of that angle while pulling back on the bar grips in order to >> "stomp" as hard as possible on the pedals. Since she has the leg >> development and strength to get away with that kind of riding due to her >> weight training and other off-bike workouts, that's just how she's using to >> riding. >> >> Many of the rest of us old farts who learned road riding on a >> diamond-framed bike with drop bars, having the saddle positioned more >> closely to the center of the BB so we could "spin" the pedals at as high a >> cadence (RPM) as possible, shifting gears when necessary in order to >> maintain that cadence (which is how I assume the pro racers still learn to >> ride). Which is probably why she gets some sideways looks by others in the >> pace lines of her bike club. That's not how she's learned to ride for >> whatever reason, so fiddling around with saddle position is likely to be a >> problem, or as least a considerable adjustment for her. Anyway, that's my >> 2¢. >> >> On Sunday, October 15, 2023 at 3:27:57 PM UTC-5 John Hawrylak, Woodstown >> NJ wrote: >> >>> Ok, I understand >>> >>> Moving the saddle back increases the saddle to bar distance by about >>> 2.5cm. This indicates the frame/stem/bar combination was too SHORT. >>> >>> Then, You cut 1 cm from the bars. This increased the saddle to bar >>> distance, indicating the frame/stem/bar combination was too SHORT, but >>> is OK now. >>> >>> So you ended up increasing the saddle to bar distance 3.5 cm to get to >>> an Acceptable position.. >>> >>> I think the Alba bar would be better based on this from the RBW write up >>> on the Billie: >>> 'The Billie straight grip section is 2" (5 cm) longer than an Alba." >>> >>> So an Alba with a 10cm stem would have a saddle to bar distance 1.5cm >>> longer (5 - 3.5) than what you ended up. >>> Replace the 10 cm stem with a 9cm and you are within 0.5cm (5mm) of >>> where you are at. A 8cm stem would also work, just 5mm on the oth
Re: [RBW] Re: Bike Makeover Thread
Curious if Leah has her other Rivendells set up the same way. John Hawrylak Woodstown NJ On Sunday, October 15, 2023 at 5:03:31 PM UTC-4 George Schick wrote: > I'll probably get clobbered for my reply to this discussion - I'm used to > it - but from viewing the pics of Leah's bikes in this thread plus others > in previous threads, her bike always seems to be either in the highest gear > or at least the next to highest. And she has admitted to as much in > previous discussions that's how she likes it. And since she likes the > saddle moved as far as possible to the rear this means that she's using the > leverage of that angle while pulling back on the bar grips in order to > "stomp" as hard as possible on the pedals. Since she has the leg > development and strength to get away with that kind of riding due to her > weight training and other off-bike workouts, that's just how she's using to > riding. > > Many of the rest of us old farts who learned road riding on a > diamond-framed bike with drop bars, having the saddle positioned more > closely to the center of the BB so we could "spin" the pedals at as high a > cadence (RPM) as possible, shifting gears when necessary in order to > maintain that cadence (which is how I assume the pro racers still learn to > ride). Which is probably why she gets some sideways looks by others in the > pace lines of her bike club. That's not how she's learned to ride for > whatever reason, so fiddling around with saddle position is likely to be a > problem, or as least a considerable adjustment for her. Anyway, that's my > 2¢. > > On Sunday, October 15, 2023 at 3:27:57 PM UTC-5 John Hawrylak, Woodstown > NJ wrote: > >> Ok, I understand >> >> Moving the saddle back increases the saddle to bar distance by about >> 2.5cm. This indicates the frame/stem/bar combination was too SHORT. >> >> Then, You cut 1 cm from the bars. This increased the saddle to bar >> distance, indicating the frame/stem/bar combination was too SHORT, but >> is OK now. >> >> So you ended up increasing the saddle to bar distance 3.5 cm to get to an >> Acceptable position.. >> >> I think the Alba bar would be better based on this from the RBW write up >> on the Billie: >> 'The Billie straight grip section is 2" (5 cm) longer than an Alba." >> >> So an Alba with a 10cm stem would have a saddle to bar distance 1.5cm >> longer (5 - 3.5) than what you ended up. >> Replace the 10 cm stem with a 9cm and you are within 0.5cm (5mm) of where >> you are at. A 8cm stem would also work, just 5mm on the other side. A >> 8.5cm would be mathematically correct, but the 5mm either way probably cant >> be felt.. >> >> Leah is also in a too short condition, excess seatpost SB and max length >> stem.. The extra 5cm of straight grip length of the Billie contributes to >> the 'shortness' by having the LONG straight grip section. The fact that >> other Riv sisters had the same problem and they used Billie bars, indicate >> the Billie bar is the common problem. >> >> >> RBW supplies the Platy built up in Taiwan with a Tosco bar which has a >> sweep back about the same a s a Billie. So they seem to supply Platy's as >> too short due t9 the bar sweep back. >> >> John Hawrylak >> Woodstown NJ >> >> >> >> On Sunday, October 15, 2023 at 02:45:29 PM EDT, Roberta < >> rcha...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> >> Thanks, John. >> >> I must have said it wrong. I moved my saddle AWAY from the bars, towards >> the rear end of my bike. I think that's called aft (I had to look it up). >> the bars were still too close, so I cut off 1cm (after a year of trying to >> feel OK). If the stem had come in an 11cm, I would have just done that. >> >> I ended in a good position, so like you said " then all is good in life." >> >> Roberta >> >> On Sunday, October 15, 2023 at 2:08:31 PM UTC-4 John Hawrylak, Woodstown >> NJ wrote: >> >> Roberta >> >> Pushing the saddle BACK to the back of the clamp, moves the saddle >> FORWARD the maximum amount. This indicates the saddle to bar distance is >> too long and your needed to reduce the reach. Maybe you pushed it too far >> forward, most Brooks have only 20 to 30mm of total fore/aft motion.. >> >> Did you cut 1cm off the bars after pushing forward the max amount??. >> Cutting the bars indicate the saddle to bar distance is too short, the >> opposite of your
Re: [RBW] Re: Bike Makeover Thread
Ok, I understand
Moving the saddle back increases the saddle to bar distance by about 2.5cm.
This indicates the frame/stem/bar combination was too SHORT.
Then, You cut 1 cm from the bars. This increased the saddle to bar distance,
indicating the frame/stem/bar combination was too SHORT, but is OK now.
So you ended up increasing the saddle to bar distance 3.5 cm to get to an
Acceptable position..
I think the Alba bar would be better based on this from the RBW write up on the
Billie:'The Billie straight grip section is 2" (5 cm) longer than an Alba."
So an Alba with a 10cm stem would have a saddle to bar distance 1.5cm longer
(5 - 3.5) than what you ended up.Replace the 10 cm stem with a 9cm and you are
within 0.5cm (5mm) of where you are at. A 8cm stem would also work, just 5mm
on the other side. A 8.5cm would be mathematically correct, but the 5mm either
way probably cant be felt..
Leah is also in a too short condition, excess seatpost SB and max length stem..
The extra 5cm of straight grip length of the Billie contributes to the
'shortness' by having the LONG straight grip section. The fact that other Riv
sisters had the same problem and they used Billie bars, indicate the Billie bar
is the common problem.
RBW supplies the Platy built up in Taiwan with a Tosco bar which has a sweep
back about the same a s a Billie. So they seem to supply Platy's as too short
due t9 the bar sweep back.
John HawrylakWoodstown NJ
On Sunday, October 15, 2023 at 02:45:29 PM EDT, Roberta
wrote:
Thanks, John.
I must have said it wrong. I moved my saddle AWAY from the bars, towards the
rear end of my bike. I think that's called aft (I had to look it up). the
bars were still too close, so I cut off 1cm (after a year of trying to feel
OK). If the stem had come in an 11cm, I would have just done that.
I ended in a good position, so like you said "then all is good in life."
Roberta
On Sunday, October 15, 2023 at 2:08:31 PM UTC-4 John Hawrylak, Woodstown NJ
wrote:
Roberta
Pushing the saddle BACK to the back of the clamp, moves the saddle FORWARD the
maximum amount. This indicates the saddle to bar distance is too long and your
needed to reduce the reach. Maybe you pushed it too far forward, most Brooks
have only 20 to 30mm of total fore/aft motion..
Did you cut 1cm off the bars after pushing forward the max amount??. Cutting
the bars indicate the saddle to bar distance is too short, the opposite of your
original action (push saddle forward). The 1 cm cut is within the range of
Brooks adjustability.
But if you ended in a good position, then all is good in life.
John HawrylakWoodstown NJOn Sunday, October 15, 2023 at 1:26:10 PM UTC-4
Roberta wrote:
I've had a few emails with other RivSisters who own Platys and there are quite
a few of us who've commented on having to push one's saddle back as far as the
rails could take it.
I'm on a 55 Platy with 83cm pbh--one or two more than Leah AND I like my saddle
high-- and would probably like mine back a touch more, but I'm unwilling to buy
a new seat post. My stem is one of the Nitto extra tall ones with 10 cm, the
longest they make for the extra high model. I ended up cutting ("the horror")
1 cm off my Billie Bars. Her saddle/seatpost would be shorter than mine,
closer to the handlebars, right?, so she might feel it more.
On Sunday, October 15, 2023 at 1:02:30 PM UTC-4 Bicycle Belle Ding Ding! wrote:
What’s weird is that I sized up! My PBH would technically fit the 50!
Sent from my iPhone
On Oct 15, 2023, at 12:55 PM, Joe Bernard wrote:
Reflecting on all the setback talk, I do think the reach may be inherently a
tad short for the rider in question. I'm the same height as Leah - possibly
even shorter, I'm aging and shrinking! - and Grant designed my Rivendell with a
54.2 ST, 63 ETT to work with Boscos up way high. It's perfect.
On Friday, October 13, 2023 at 10:33:09 AM UTC-7 Joe Bernard wrote:
I love the new look. I also love the old look! Basically I just love that
Raspberry Racing Platy ❤️❤️❤️
On Wednesday, October 11, 2023 at 6:52:55 PM UTC-7 Bicycle Belle Ding Ding!
wrote:
In the same vein as my Bike Style thread, I’m starting a Bike Makeover thread.
Every now and then, I get the urge to change up the look of my favorite
Platypus. I have it perfect mechanically, but bags and grips and occasionally,
saddles, beg to be changed up. It’s fully autumn here in the Great Lakes State,
and my ivory Rivet was looking a little out of season. I was gifted a chestnut
Rivet from a dear RivSister, so I decided to pull it out and put it on the
bike. I took the brown Ergons from my other Platypus, slapped them on and sent
her a photo.
“That bike deserves prettier grips. Those are ugly,” she said, giving me the
unvarnished truth.
I looked again. She was right. Back to the drawing board. I finally found
Re: [RBW] Re: Bike Makeover Thread
Roberta Pushing the saddle BACK to the back of the clamp, moves the saddle FORWARD the maximum amount. This indicates the saddle to bar distance is too long and your needed to reduce the reach. Maybe you pushed it too far forward, most Brooks have only 20 to 30mm of total fore/aft motion.. Did you cut 1cm off the bars after pushing forward the max amount??. Cutting the bars indicate the saddle to bar distance is too short, the opposite of your original action (push saddle forward). The 1 cm cut is within the range of Brooks adjustability. But if you ended in a good position, then all is good in life. John Hawrylak Woodstown NJ On Sunday, October 15, 2023 at 1:26:10 PM UTC-4 Roberta wrote: > I've had a few emails with other RivSisters who own Platys and there are > quite a few of us who've commented on having to push one's saddle back as > far as the rails could take it. > > I'm on a 55 Platy with 83cm pbh--one or two more than Leah AND I like my > saddle high-- and would probably like mine back a touch more, but I'm > unwilling to buy a new seat post. My stem is one of the Nitto extra tall > ones with 10 cm, the longest they make for the extra high model. I ended > up cutting (*"the horror"*) 1 cm off my Billie Bars. Her saddle/seatpost > would be shorter than mine, closer to the handlebars, right?, so she might > feel it more. > > > > On Sunday, October 15, 2023 at 1:02:30 PM UTC-4 Bicycle Belle Ding Ding! > wrote: > >> What’s weird is that I sized up! My PBH would technically fit the 50! >> Sent from my iPhone >> >> On Oct 15, 2023, at 12:55 PM, Joe Bernard wrote: >> >> Reflecting on all the setback talk, I *do *think the reach may be >> inherently a tad short for the rider in question. I'm the same height as >> Leah - possibly even shorter, I'm aging and shrinking! - and Grant designed >> my Rivendell with a 54.2 ST, 63 ETT to work with Boscos up way high. It's >> perfect. >> >> >> >> On Friday, October 13, 2023 at 10:33:09 AM UTC-7 Joe Bernard wrote: >> >>> I love the new look. I also love the old look! Basically I just love >>> that Raspberry Racing Platy ❤️❤️❤️ >>> >>> On Wednesday, October 11, 2023 at 6:52:55 PM UTC-7 Bicycle Belle Ding >>> Ding! wrote: >>> >>>> In the same vein as my Bike Style thread, I’m starting a Bike Makeover >>>> thread. >>>> >>>> Every now and then, I get the urge to change up the look of my favorite >>>> Platypus. I have it perfect mechanically, but bags and grips and >>>> occasionally, saddles, beg to be changed up. It’s fully autumn here in the >>>> Great Lakes State, and my ivory Rivet was looking a little out of season. >>>> I >>>> was gifted a chestnut Rivet from a dear RivSister, so I decided to pull it >>>> out and put it on the bike. I took the brown Ergons from my other >>>> Platypus, >>>> slapped them on and sent her a photo. >>>> >>>> “That bike deserves prettier grips. Those are ugly,” she said, giving >>>> me the unvarnished truth. >>>> >>>> I looked again. She was right. Back to the drawing board. I finally >>>> found these grips from Rivet Cycle Works - Deb told me she had these but >>>> didn’t have them up on the website yet. She had the exact match to my >>>> chestnut saddle and days later, I had these gorgeous stamped leather grips >>>> in hand. The bike looks positively *tonal.* The colors of the paint >>>> throw out so many different shades of pinks and reds, thanks to the >>>> abundant glitter in the metallic; adding rich leather accessories only >>>> elevates the look. The stamped designs on the leather give the bike some >>>> texture and add visual interest at the handlebar area. >>>> >>>> This Platypus is like a little autumn posey. Perfect and pretty, and >>>> wholly appointed to its duty. >>>> >>>> Now if I can just convince Deb to make these in ivory, so I have a pair >>>> to match my ivory Rivet saddle when spring comes… >>>> >>>> Attached in the next post are the before and afters. >>>> Leah >>>> >>> -- >> >> 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/u_2mo2hU3Xo/unsubscribe >> . >> To unsubscribe fr
Re: [RBW] Re: Bike Makeover Thread
Leah you stated " What’s weird is that I sized up! My PBH would technically fit the 50!" >From the pictures you posted, your seatpost is almost fully inserted in the seat tube. This indicates the frame is the LARGEST frame for your PBH. However, your need for a LONG reach indicates you need a frame larger than your PBH allows. The RBW geo tables show the Following Effective top tube lengths for the Platy (all in cm) Frame Effective TTL 50 59 55 61.5 60 66.5 So even a 55cm frame only gives you 2.5cm more reach ( Eff TTL (55) - Eff TTL (50) ), which is not enough get you to a normal seat post SB of 2 to 3 cm. A 60cm frame gives toy 7.5cm more reach, allowing a 2/3cm SB seat post and also recuing the stem to 7 to 8cm. If you are using 175mm cranks, you could buy 5mm by using 170mm cranks, allowing you to raise the saddle 5mm and lower the bars 5mm. But that seems like a drop in the bucket. Like I said, the Wayback seat post is nice since it shows "Form is following Function" An alternative is bar which does not come back as far as the Billie bar (8.25" per RBW & a key point, 2" (5cm) longer than an Alba)). This allows the saddle to move forward on the seatpost. Alternately, cut the Billie bar 2cm to shorten it and see if it improves. You could also push the saddle as far forward in the seatpost clamp to move the saddle forward (you probably did this already) John Hawrylak Woodstown NJ On Sunday, October 15, 2023 at 1:02:30 PM UTC-4 Bicycle Belle Ding Ding! wrote: > What’s weird is that I sized up! My PBH would technically fit the 50! > Sent from my iPhone > > On Oct 15, 2023, at 12:55 PM, Joe Bernard wrote: > > Reflecting on all the setback talk, I *do *think the reach may be > inherently a tad short for the rider in question. I'm the same height as > Leah - possibly even shorter, I'm aging and shrinking! - and Grant designed > my Rivendell with a 54.2 ST, 63 ETT to work with Boscos up way high. It's > perfect. > > > > On Friday, October 13, 2023 at 10:33:09 AM UTC-7 Joe Bernard wrote: > >> I love the new look. I also love the old look! Basically I just love that >> Raspberry Racing Platy ❤️❤️❤️ >> >> On Wednesday, October 11, 2023 at 6:52:55 PM UTC-7 Bicycle Belle Ding >> Ding! wrote: >> >>> In the same vein as my Bike Style thread, I’m starting a Bike Makeover >>> thread. >>> >>> Every now and then, I get the urge to change up the look of my favorite >>> Platypus. I have it perfect mechanically, but bags and grips and >>> occasionally, saddles, beg to be changed up. It’s fully autumn here in the >>> Great Lakes State, and my ivory Rivet was looking a little out of season. I >>> was gifted a chestnut Rivet from a dear RivSister, so I decided to pull it >>> out and put it on the bike. I took the brown Ergons from my other Platypus, >>> slapped them on and sent her a photo. >>> >>> “That bike deserves prettier grips. Those are ugly,” she said, giving me >>> the unvarnished truth. >>> >>> I looked again. She was right. Back to the drawing board. I finally >>> found these grips from Rivet Cycle Works - Deb told me she had these but >>> didn’t have them up on the website yet. She had the exact match to my >>> chestnut saddle and days later, I had these gorgeous stamped leather grips >>> in hand. The bike looks positively *tonal.* The colors of the paint >>> throw out so many different shades of pinks and reds, thanks to the >>> abundant glitter in the metallic; adding rich leather accessories only >>> elevates the look. The stamped designs on the leather give the bike some >>> texture and add visual interest at the handlebar area. >>> >>> This Platypus is like a little autumn posey. Perfect and pretty, and >>> wholly appointed to its duty. >>> >>> Now if I can just convince Deb to make these in ivory, so I have a pair >>> to match my ivory Rivet saddle when spring comes… >>> >>> Attached in the next post are the before and afters. >>> Leah >>> >> -- > > 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/u_2mo2hU3Xo/unsubscribe > . > To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, 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/f856ed0e-45fe-49ea-98
Re: [RBW] Bike Makeover Thread
Leah I believe the ACTUAL Set Back (SB) of the IRD Wayback is 2cm MORE Than the Indication. This is based on measurements I made using a Sakae MTE-100 adjustable setback seat post on a workbench with the seatpost at a 73° to the horizontal, which mimics the actual angel it is on a 'nominal' frame, and results in the seatpost clamp being horizontal. The IRD is based on the Sakae MTE-100 design You stated you are currently at 42 to 43 SB (the units are mm), which would be an Actual SB of 6.2 to 6.3 cm. This increased SB is like a seat tube angel which 3.5° less than what you have. As Garth pointed out, the Platy STA is 71.5°, so your effective STA with your current SB is 68°. Most seatposts have setbacks of 2.0 to 3.0cm, so you are about 3.0 to 4.0 cm further setback. Your new grips would have to be 3 to 4 cm further up the bars than the old, in order to have a seat post SB of 2 to 3 cm, the range of a normal seat post. Alternately, cutting the bars by 2cm may be enough, with the new grips, to reduce your SB to 2 to 3 cm for a normal seatpost and also move you to a more 'normal' position. A 2cm shorter bar may not decrease your real estate in the areas that matter. Otherwise, The IRD Wayback looks good on your Platy and looks even better when you consider "Form is following Function' Also, as you pointed out earlier, your Platy frame seems to be 'short'. The SB you are using indicates the frame needs a 3 to 4cm longer effective top tube length, to reduce the SB to a 'normal' range. Do you have similar SBs on your other RBW frames??? John Hawrylak Woodstown NJ On Sunday, October 15, 2023 at 8:02:54 AM UTC-4 Bicycle Belle Ding Ding! wrote: > John, > My seatpost actually has setback to 50. I have my saddle at 42 or 43. Now > that I have these new grips, I could try the old seat post. The new grips > sit further up the bars and I have more reach now. The feeling of being > cramped was fairly slight, and I could often ignore it, but it was one of > those little niggling details I wanted improved. Some people would have > chopped their Billie Bars - not me! I need all that real estate so keep > 1000 things on my bars! > > Eric, I know. I have had this exact thought. Bill Lindsay - I would trust > you to do it! And I would drive to your part of Michigan if you had the > tool to make it happen! No pressure or anything. 😬 > > Joseph! Oh why bother getting it in silver? Such a magnificent seat post > deserves to be a focal point: I should just go with the black. 🙃 > > Joyce, there’s a woman in product design over at 1 Up, I see! I love my > RivSisters; they don’t want me to miss out on any of the best stuff. > > Leah > > On Oct 14, 2023, at 4:48 PM, 'John Hawrylak, Woodstown NJ' via RBW Owners > Bunch wrote: > > A Nitto S84 has at least 10mm LESS setback than the IRD Wayback (approx > 40mm (S84) vs 50mm (IRD) per RBW site). Leah pics shows the IRD to be > full back. So even if she could use a 27.2 post, the S84 does not have > the setback she needs. > > > The real question is why didn't RBW design the frame for a 27.2mm seat > postAre they using a straight gauge seat tube vs a butted seat tube > to save cost??? Or do they need a thicker wall for the lug in the middle > of the seat tube?? > > John Hawrylak > Woodstown NJ > > > On Saturday, October 14, 2023 at 7:28:07 AM UTC-4 ascpgh wrote: > >> The difficulty of less than common seat tube diameters was the indirect >> subject of another lister's, touched upon a bit ago from a different >> perspective: >> https://groups.google.com/g/rbw-owners-bunch/c/ooTGF-OdSws/m/9T6WazuQAAAJ >> >> Every bike is different but if feasible on your Platy, it can be done to >> permit something as nice as the Nitto S84 >> <https://www.rivbike.com/products/nitto-lugged-seat-post-27-2-x-250-11048> >> . >> >> Love Deb's "pre stock" grips for your Ergons. She's the best. >> >> Andy Cheatham >> Pittsburgh >> >> >> >> >> On Thursday, October 12, 2023 at 7:36:47 PM UTC-4 Bicycle Belle Ding >> Ding! wrote: >> >>> I’ve had enough experiences with bike shops to be very hesitant to hand >>> them my bike for a task that could ruin the frame. What happens if the hole >>> is reamed too large? I can’t see that the frame would be salvageable. >>> >>> On Oct 12, 2023, at 9:10 AM, Johnny Alien wrote: >>> >>> Many here have said that its not a big deal to get a bike shop to ream >>> it to 27.2 to allow for more seatpost options. I find it frustrating as >>> well but slightly less so because I
Re: [RBW] Bike Makeover Thread
A Nitto S84 has at least 10mm LESS setback than the IRD Wayback (approx 40mm (S84) vs 50mm (IRD) per RBW site). Leah pics shows the IRD to be full back. So even if she could use a 27.2 post, the S84 does not have the setback she needs. The real question is why didn't RBW design the frame for a 27.2mm seat postAre they using a straight gauge seat tube vs a butted seat tube to save cost??? Or do they need a thicker wall for the lug in the middle of the seat tube?? John Hawrylak Woodstown NJ On Saturday, October 14, 2023 at 7:28:07 AM UTC-4 ascpgh wrote: > The difficulty of less than common seat tube diameters was the indirect > subject of another lister's, touched upon a bit ago from a different > perspective: > https://groups.google.com/g/rbw-owners-bunch/c/ooTGF-OdSws/m/9T6WazuQAAAJ > > Every bike is different but if feasible on your Platy, it can be done to > permit something as nice as the Nitto S84 > <https://www.rivbike.com/products/nitto-lugged-seat-post-27-2-x-250-11048> > . > > Love Deb's "pre stock" grips for your Ergons. She's the best. > > Andy Cheatham > Pittsburgh > > > > > On Thursday, October 12, 2023 at 7:36:47 PM UTC-4 Bicycle Belle Ding Ding! > wrote: > >> I’ve had enough experiences with bike shops to be very hesitant to hand >> them my bike for a task that could ruin the frame. What happens if the hole >> is reamed too large? I can’t see that the frame would be salvageable. >> >> On Oct 12, 2023, at 9:10 AM, Johnny Alien wrote: >> >> Many here have said that its not a big deal to get a bike shop to ream >> it to 27.2 to allow for more seatpost options. I find it frustrating as >> well but slightly less so because I don't need the extra setback. >> >> >> >> On Thursday, October 12, 2023 at 7:39:10 AM UTC-4 brok...@gmail.com >> wrote: >> >>> Yeah, the whole 26.8 seat tube limitation has got to be one of the most >>> frustrating things about this era of Rivendell. >>> >>> On Oct 12, 2023, at 6:43 AM, Leah Peterson wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>> Ryan, >>> That seat post is butt ugly. The only ugly thing on the bike. I like the >>> setback it offers, and there are zero other options for that. Zero. This >>> bike is unimprovable, save this one thing: the seat tube should have been >>> 27.2 so I would have some OPTIONS. It’s my one sorrow. >>> Leah >>> >>> On Oct 11, 2023, at 10:54 PM, Ryan wrote: >>> >>> the grips are smashing.but nitto needs to make a 26.8 lugged seatpost >>> for that lovely bike.just saying >>> >>> On Wednesday, October 11, 2023 at 8:57:32 PM UTC-5 Bicycle Belle Ding >>> Ding! wrote: >>> >>>> Raspberry Platypus BEFORE: >>>> [image: image0.jpeg] >>>> >>>> [image: image6.jpeg] >>>> >>>> >>>> AND After… >>>> [image: image1.jpeg] >>>> >>>> [image: image2.jpeg][image: image3.jpeg][image: image4.jpeg][image: >>>> image5.jpeg] >>>> >>>> >>>> On Oct 11, 2023, at 9:53 PM, Bicycle Belle Ding Ding! < >>>> jonasa...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> >>>> In the same vein as my Bike Style thread, I’m starting a Bike Makeover >>>> thread. >>>> >>>> >>>> Every now and then, I get the urge to change up the look of my favorite >>>> Platypus. I have it perfect mechanically, but bags and grips and >>>> occasionally, saddles, beg to be changed up. It’s fully autumn here in the >>>> Great Lakes State, and my ivory Rivet was looking a little out of season. >>>> I >>>> was gifted a chestnut Rivet from a dear RivSister, so I decided to pull it >>>> out and put it on the bike. I took the brown Ergons from my other >>>> Platypus, >>>> slapped them on and sent her a photo. >>>> >>>> “That bike deserves prettier grips. Those are ugly,” she said, giving >>>> me the unvarnished truth. >>>> >>>> I looked again. She was right. Back to the drawing board. I finally >>>> found these grips from Rivet Cycle Works - Deb told me she had these but >>>> didn’t have them up on the website yet. She had the exact match to my >>>> chestnut saddle and days later, I had these gorgeous stamped leather grips >>>> in hand. The bike looks positively *tonal.* The colors of the paint >>>> throw out so many different shades of
Re: [RBW] Bike Makeover Thread
Leah I thought the seatpost looked like a Sakae LTE-100 type.Not sure what problems you have making you consider reaming the seat tube, but that post has the most setback you can get. If you need additional distance to the bars, you could try a 10mm longer stem. John Hawrylak Woodstown NJ On Thursday, October 12, 2023 at 9:05:12 PM UTC-4 Bicycle Belle Ding Ding! wrote: > Thanks, the seat post is the IRD Wayback post and the bag is Riv’s > Saddlesack, the BagBoy. > > On Oct 12, 2023, at 9:01 PM, 'John Hawrylak, Woodstown NJ' via RBW Owners > Bunch wrote: > > Leah > > > Your changes look good. What is the seatpost and the saddlebag you have?? > > John Hawrylak > Woodstown NJ > > On Wednesday, October 11, 2023 at 9:57:32 PM UTC-4 Bicycle Belle Ding > Ding! wrote: > >> Raspberry Platypus BEFORE: >> [image: image0.jpeg] >> >> [image: image6.jpeg] >> >> >> AND After… >> [image: image1.jpeg] >> >> [image: image2.jpeg][image: image3.jpeg][image: image4.jpeg][image: >> image5.jpeg] >> >> >> On Oct 11, 2023, at 9:53 PM, Bicycle Belle Ding Ding! < >> jonasa...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> In the same vein as my Bike Style thread, I’m starting a Bike Makeover >> thread. >> >> >> Every now and then, I get the urge to change up the look of my favorite >> Platypus. I have it perfect mechanically, but bags and grips and >> occasionally, saddles, beg to be changed up. It’s fully autumn here in the >> Great Lakes State, and my ivory Rivet was looking a little out of season. I >> was gifted a chestnut Rivet from a dear RivSister, so I decided to pull it >> out and put it on the bike. I took the brown Ergons from my other Platypus, >> slapped them on and sent her a photo. >> >> “That bike deserves prettier grips. Those are ugly,” she said, giving me >> the unvarnished truth. >> >> I looked again. She was right. Back to the drawing board. I finally found >> these grips from Rivet Cycle Works - Deb told me she had these but didn’t >> have them up on the website yet. She had the exact match to my chestnut >> saddle and days later, I had these gorgeous stamped leather grips in hand. >> The bike looks positively *tonal.* The colors of the paint throw out so >> many different shades of pinks and reds, thanks to the abundant glitter in >> the metallic; adding rich leather accessories only elevates the look. The >> stamped designs on the leather give the bike some texture and add visual >> interest at the handlebar area. >> >> This Platypus is like a little autumn posey. Perfect and pretty, and >> wholly appointed to its duty. >> >> Now if I can just convince Deb to make these in ivory, so I have a pair >> to match my ivory Rivet saddle when spring comes… >> >> Attached in the next post are the before and afters. >> Leah >> >> -- >> 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/u_2mo2hU3Xo/unsubscribe >> . >> To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, 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/53c9c0cc-59ef-460c-930e-e0c5301545cbn%40googlegroups.com >> >> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/rbw-owners-bunch/53c9c0cc-59ef-460c-930e-e0c5301545cbn%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> >> . >> >> -- > 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/u_2mo2hU3Xo/unsubscribe > . > To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, 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/2f13feeb-79d9-431c-be98-742724456e3cn%40googlegroups.com > > <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/rbw-owners-bunch/2f13feeb-79d9-431c-be98-742724456e3cn%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> > . > > -- 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/46558ed1-ded0-400d-93cb-599d7c5a8d8en%40googlegroups.com.
Re: [RBW] Bike Makeover Thread
Leah Your changes look good. What is the seatpost and the saddlebag you have?? John Hawrylak Woodstown NJ On Wednesday, October 11, 2023 at 9:57:32 PM UTC-4 Bicycle Belle Ding Ding! wrote: > Raspberry Platypus BEFORE: > [image: image0.jpeg] > > [image: image6.jpeg] > > > AND After… > [image: image1.jpeg] > > [image: image2.jpeg][image: image3.jpeg][image: image4.jpeg][image: > image5.jpeg] > > > On Oct 11, 2023, at 9:53 PM, Bicycle Belle Ding Ding! > wrote: > > In the same vein as my Bike Style thread, I’m starting a Bike Makeover > thread. > > > Every now and then, I get the urge to change up the look of my favorite > Platypus. I have it perfect mechanically, but bags and grips and > occasionally, saddles, beg to be changed up. It’s fully autumn here in the > Great Lakes State, and my ivory Rivet was looking a little out of season. I > was gifted a chestnut Rivet from a dear RivSister, so I decided to pull it > out and put it on the bike. I took the brown Ergons from my other Platypus, > slapped them on and sent her a photo. > > “That bike deserves prettier grips. Those are ugly,” she said, giving me > the unvarnished truth. > > I looked again. She was right. Back to the drawing board. I finally found > these grips from Rivet Cycle Works - Deb told me she had these but didn’t > have them up on the website yet. She had the exact match to my chestnut > saddle and days later, I had these gorgeous stamped leather grips in hand. > The bike looks positively *tonal.* The colors of the paint throw out so > many different shades of pinks and reds, thanks to the abundant glitter in > the metallic; adding rich leather accessories only elevates the look. The > stamped designs on the leather give the bike some texture and add visual > interest at the handlebar area. > > This Platypus is like a little autumn posey. Perfect and pretty, and > wholly appointed to its duty. > > Now if I can just convince Deb to make these in ivory, so I have a pair to > match my ivory Rivet saddle when spring comes… > > Attached in the next post are the before and afters. > Leah > > -- > 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/u_2mo2hU3Xo/unsubscribe > . > To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, 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/53c9c0cc-59ef-460c-930e-e0c5301545cbn%40googlegroups.com > > <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/rbw-owners-bunch/53c9c0cc-59ef-460c-930e-e0c5301545cbn%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> > . > > -- 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/2f13feeb-79d9-431c-be98-742724456e3cn%40googlegroups.com.
[RBW] Re: FS Frost River bags, Nitto lugged seat post, Bananna bags
Are you selling the cranks in the picture??? John Hawrylak Woodstown NJ On Sunday, August 20, 2023 at 5:41:04 PM UTC-4 Frank Brose wrote: > I have the following for sale. > Frost River Taconite Trail trunk bag and Sawbill trail handle bar bag I'd > like to sell together$165 net to me includes shipping. Like new condition. > read about them here: https://frostriver.com/collections/cycling-bike-bags > Three Banana bags 2 Rivendell, 1 Duluth Trading > $55 net to me for the Riv bags > $40 net to me for the Duluth trading. It's in the roughest shape. The Riv > bags are in good shape. > Nitto Lugged seatpost 27.2 x 300 Light insertion marks not even visible > when on the bike. They would easily be buffed out with aluminum polish. > $125 net to me. Includes shipping. CONUS shipping only. > [image: P1020495.JPG] > [image: P1020496.JPG] > [image: P1020500.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/441c06ef-89d3-45df-a447-94182ef70322n%40googlegroups.com.
[RBW] Re: Question; Frame Geometry for 54.5cm AHH-MIT, 650B Wheels
Drew Thanks for the link. This is what I was looking for. I got the values I needed. John Hawrylak Woodstown NJ On Friday, September 15, 2023 at 4:20:30 PM UTC-4 Drew Henson wrote: > this might help, i use it sometimes to compare bike frames: > https://bikeinsights.com/compare?geometries=5cedbc58663b2d0017aa071c,, > > On Friday, September 15, 2023 at 12:07:03 PM UTC-7 John Hawrylak, > Woodstown NJ wrote: > >> Does anyone have the frame geometry info (Effective TTL, STA, HTA, Rake, >> BBD) for the 1st generation of the AHH-MIT, specifically the 54 or 54.5cm >> frame size which used 650B wheels??? >> >> I have tables for the later AHH-MIT but not the first ones. The current >> 54.5cm frame uses 700C wheels >> >> Not sure how to use the Way Back Machine or even if the info exists. I >> remeber RBW stopped updating their geo tables about the time of the MIT >> AHHs and Atlantis. >> >> John Hawrylak >> Woodstown NJ >> > -- 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/cbcc2f8e-9955-49c9-831d-d81c017c11f9n%40googlegroups.com.
[RBW] Question; Frame Geometry for 54.5cm AHH-MIT, 650B Wheels
Does anyone have the frame geometry info (Effective TTL, STA, HTA, Rake, BBD) for the 1st generation of the AHH-MIT, specifically the 54 or 54.5cm frame size which used 650B wheels??? I have tables for the later AHH-MIT but not the first ones. The current 54.5cm frame uses 700C wheels Not sure how to use the Way Back Machine or even if the info exists. I remeber RBW stopped updating their geo tables about the time of the MIT AHHs and Atlantis. John Hawrylak Woodstown NJ -- 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/a95b56d5-bdde-43cd-8bca-6daa4e8cd6a7n%40googlegroups.com.
Re: [RBW] A College Clem
Leah I might I missed it, but does your son want a bike at college John Hawrylak Woodstown NJ On Sunday, August 13, 2023 at 11:09:58 PM UTC-4 Bicycle Belle Ding Ding! wrote: > > > Wow, since the boys were in elementary school, Ryan, that’s a long time! > But yes, I started out in late 2012 with a Betty and was pulling the > younger one on his “one-wheeler.” > -- 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/c6498812-487c-469f-b8c1-51af6783f724n%40googlegroups.com.
[RBW] Re: Triple to double conversion
Nick You are correct. My explanation is reversed. Thnaks John Hawrylak Woodstown NJ On Sunday, July 16, 2023 at 3:04:21 AM UTC-4 Nick Payne wrote: > On Sunday, 16 July 2023 at 10:02:54 am UTC+10 John Hawrylak, Woodstown NJ > wrote: > > To address the Chain Line Question. Assuming if you have a PERFECT Front > Chain Line (FCL) with the triple (middle ring lines up with middle cog), > then If you with: > > Option 1, remove Outer ring, the FCL needs to shift INWARDS, 1/2 of > the spacing between the middle and inner ring. This is typically 6mm, so > you need to shift the crank INWARDS by 3mm. You need a BB with a drive > side distance 3mm *less than* you have currently. This will also give > you a lower Q. > > Option 2, remove Inner ring, the FCL needs to shift OUTWARDS, 1/2 of > the spacing between the middle and outer ring. This is typically 6mm, so > you need to shift the crank OUTWARDS by 3mm. You need a BB with a drive > side distance 3mm *greater than* you have currently. This will also > give you a higher Q. > > > You've got this the wrong way around. If you remove the outer ring, then > the crank needs to be moved outwards, because the chainline is now between > the two remaining chainrings rather than being on what was the middle ring > when there were three. And vice versa if you get rid of the granny. > > Nick Payne > -- 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/f3e44465-5c75-4aba-9e69-68feb42b43c7n%40googlegroups.com.
[RBW] Re: Triple to double conversion
To address the Chain Line Question. Assuming if you have a PERFECT Front Chain Line (FCL) with the triple (middle ring lines up with middle cog), then If you with: Option 1, remove Outer ring, the FCL needs to shift INWARDS, 1/2 of the spacing between the middle and inner ring. This is typically 6mm, so you need to shift the crank INWARDS by 3mm. You need a BB with a drive side distance 3mm *less than* you have currently. This will also give you a lower Q. Option 2, remove Inner ring, the FCL needs to shift OUTWARDS, 1/2 of the spacing between the middle and outer ring. This is typically 6mm, so you need to shift the crank OUTWARDS by 3mm. You need a BB with a drive side distance 3mm *greater than* you have currently. This will also give you a higher Q. Hopes this helps. Suggest sighting down the chain to determine if the CURRENT FCL and RCL match or if the FCL is outwards or inwards of the RCL. If CURRENT is NOT perfect, then Option1 or 2 may result in a better FCL WITHOUT changing the BB John Hawrylak Woodstown NJ On Friday, July 14, 2023 at 5:01:22 PM UTC-4 maxcr wrote: > I have a couple of fun cranksets and I'm contemplating a few ideas for > which I'd love your input. > > Crankset 1. Ritchey Logic Compact crankset with 42/32/22 chainrings 94/58 > bcd. > Crankset 2. Suntour XC Pro crankset with 46/36/24 chainrings power > ring 110/74 bcd (I actually bought a few things with this, mtn thumb > shifters (7 spd), rear derailleur, rear hub, freewheel - all XC Pro) > > I'm perfectly content with the Sugino triple 46/36/24 on my Bombadil and I > actually have nothing against triples, but I'm contemplating converting one > of the cranksets above to a double just because who doesn't need a project > to tinker with your Riv? > > The bike is a do-it-all All Rounder, so I want to have wide gearing range, > something like a 42/32 double with a 12-36 cassette would accomplish that > for me. A 46/36 might not quite cut it, but I could go low low 36-24 too. > > Anyway back to converting a triple into a double. As I understand it, > there are a few ways to do that: > 1) Remove the big chainring (potentially swap it for a chainguard) and > call it a day (or change some chainrings) > > 2) Remove the little chainring and call it a day (or change some > chainrings after) > > But... not so fast. If I go with option 1 without the chain guard do I > need new / shorter chainring bolts? If so, which ones do I get? Are these > universal? > > Are the pros/cons of either option? Will I run into Q-factor issues, > chainline and chainstay / derailer problems? I had read this on an old > post: "my Bomba and I suppose a Hunqa frame you are limited to a 36t middle > unless you get a wider BB." > > So, what about the bottom bracket? Do I need to go narrower to get the > right chainline? Or wider to fit the 32? > > I tracked down a few conversations from way back, here and in other > forums. It seems like the original suggested bottom bracket for these > cranks are: > 1) Ritchey Logic Double - 110-113mm (this is probably close to what's in > there now) > 2) Suntour XC Pro - Suntour Greaseguard 122.5mm (I managed to get my hands > on one of these) > > For the Ritchey as a double (when removing the inner ring) I heard people > suggesting a Phil 98mm BB which I cannot find. Another alternative is using > a 103mm with some hacks <http://alexwetmore.org/archives/423.html> > > For the Suntour, I have no idea what is required in terms of BB. Maybe you > just have to try a few. > > What does the collective knowledge here recommend? Ritchey or Suntour? > Remove the outer or the inner? > > Thanks > Max > > -- 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/c264758b-3cd4-44a5-9da6-0a769b7fb550n%40googlegroups.com.
Re: [RBW] Front Derailleur Suggestions
*Matt with the 44-34-24 & in need of a new FD* I suggest a Shimano Sora FD-R3030b, a 9speed triple designed for a 45mm front chainline. You can still buy these at Universal Cycles for about $30 Universal Cycles -- Shimano FD-R3030 Sora Triple Front Derailleur - 9 Speed [EFDR3030X, EFDR3030F] <https://www.universalcycles.com/shopping/product_details.php?id=85016&category=71> . Amazon has them for $28. I use it with a Sugino TD-2 46-36-26 triple with 130mm OLD rear hub, Shimano HG-400 12-36T- 9 cassette and a Shimano Deore RD-M591. My front chain line is 44.1mm and rear is 43.6mm (middle cog). Shifts great. It has a nice, standard bottom pull mechanism, no lever arm bending the cable to the stop as used on the dual pull designs. A 1980's Shimano Deore MT-60 (a triple) also shifts great. Your Altus should work. The only problem is IF it was designed for a 50mm front chainline, there may not be enough LOW stop adjustment to shift to the Inner ring. Found this out with a Shimano FD-M781 with setup described above. The Sora cleared this up. John Hawrylak Woodstown NJ On Sunday, March 26, 2023 at 6:50:48 PM UTC-4 Matthew Williams wrote: > Crankset and chainrings: > > SIlver 173 > 44 x 34 x 24 > > > [image: 665_1857.JPG] > > Crank - Silver - Triple 44x34x24 > <https://www.rivbike.com/products/silver-crank-triple-44x34x24?variant=34285679245> > rivbike.com > <https://www.rivbike.com/products/silver-crank-triple-44x34x24?variant=34285679245> > > <https://www.rivbike.com/products/silver-crank-triple-44x34x24?variant=34285679245> > > > > On Mar 26, 2023, at 3:05 PM, Peter White wrote: > > Modern triple FDs are designed for a specific combination of chainrings. > For example, the IRD FD in the photo is an exact copy of the Shimano 9 > speed Ultegra Triple and 105 Triple FDs. Probably made by the same company > that made it for Shimano. The bottom edges of the derailleur plates are > properly spaced for the 10 tooth difference between the outer and middle > chainrings of the Ultegra and 105 9 speed triple cranksets; 52 and 42 teeth > respectively. When properly installed, the bottom edges of the derailleur > will be about 1mm to 2mm above the tips of the chainring teeth when > shifting between the outer and middle rings. So this FD only shifts well if > the middle and outer rings have a 10 tooth difference. If, for example, > they have a 12 tooth difference, and you have the FD high enough for the > outer plate to clear the outer chainring, the inner plate will have a > larger gap to the middle ring and the shift from the inner ring will not be > good. With a 14 tooth difference, it's hopeless. You'll have to over-shift > to get the chain cleanly onto the middle chainring. > > So, to answer the original question, we need to know what chainring sizes > are on the crankset in question. > > On Sun, Mar 26, 2023 at 1:04 PM Matthew Williams > wrote: > >> Hi everyone, >> >> I need to replace my stock Rivendell front derailleur. Can someone please >> recommend a good front derailleur? >> >> Here’s my existing setup: >> >> Appaloosa >> Rivendell Silver crankset and 3 rings >> Rear cassette: Shimano XTR 11-34T >> Rear derailleur: Shimano Deore long cage >> >> With the exception of the rear cassette, all of the components came stock >> with the bike. >> >> I picked up a Shimano Altus FD-M311 at the swap meet. Will this work for >> my setup? Does a better option exist? Please let me know your >> recommendations, advice, opinions, and experience! >> >> Thanks, everyone. >> On Thursday, February 23, 2023 at 9:45:08 AM UTC-8 mmille...@gmail.com >> wrote: >> >>> I've been having a heckuva time getting my front derailleur to go from >>> little to big without hopping over. Eventually, if I talked sweetly to it >>> and said Hail Mary three times, it would usually settle. Even took it to an >>> experience mechanic. He also lowered it, then slowly kept raising it up, >>> and also kept working the limit screw. A fraction of a turn was difference >>> between not reaching the big ring, or going over! >>> >>> It's a White Industries VBC with 46-28. FD is IRD compact triple Aplina. >>> Friction Microshift thumbie. I think it's bottom pull. >>> >>> [image: IMG_2391 Medium.jpeg] >>> >>> Any suggestions for different FD? May need different chain rings because >>> of that big jump, but if I do that, I may be best off buying something else >>> and selling these. >>> >>> Thanks, >>> Matt >>> &g
[RBW] Re: ISO Better Bar-End Friction Shifting!
Caroline
You could quickly check if your chain length (# of links) is correct by
using this formula:
# links = 2 * {(2*ChainStay Length (inches)) + 1/4*(# ChainRing Teeth + #
Largest Cog) + 1}
You can measure the chainstay length or if your frame is a RBW, look it up
in the geo charts. Older RBW's tend to have 44 to 45 cm stays (17.3 to
17.7 inches). Since you have a 1 x drive train, you dont have to worry
about which ring to use.
If your actual # links is much greater than this value, your chain may have
too much slack.
John Hawrylak
Woodstown NJ
On Thursday, June 8, 2023 at 1:32:44 PM UTC-4 Caroline Golum wrote:
> Currently running 1x10 and friction bar-end shifting. The chain keeps
> coming off my crank, not hitting the right gear in the rear, etc. I've had
> the derailleur serviced, it's fine, etc.
>
> Time to get a new shifter? Switch to indexed shifting? Switch to an 8/9spd
> in the rear? The bar-end shifter is RBW's Shifter - Silver2
> <https://www.rivbike.com/products/kjalgjoihjga44451>.
--
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/5c38d747-e669-4b94-8133-360f4a12b676n%40googlegroups.com.
[RBW] Re: ISO Better Bar-End Friction Shifting!
Caroline Might want to consider installing a N-Gear Jump Stop or similar chain stop device on the seat tube to prevent the chain from coming off. Sounds like when you shift, you develop a wave in the chain which takes it off the ring John Hawrylak Woodstown NJ On Thursday, June 8, 2023 at 1:32:44 PM UTC-4 Caroline Golum wrote: > Currently running 1x10 and friction bar-end shifting. The chain keeps > coming off my crank, not hitting the right gear in the rear, etc. I've had > the derailleur serviced, it's fine, etc. > > Time to get a new shifter? Switch to indexed shifting? Switch to an 8/9spd > in the rear? The bar-end shifter is RBW's Shifter - Silver2 > <https://www.rivbike.com/products/kjalgjoihjga44451>. -- 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/fbe1e433-21e2-46e4-b87c-c18935117a06n%40googlegroups.com.
[RBW] Re: ESI Chunky Grips with bar end shifter wire question
Roberta You said " putting wire through the grips?" Are you saying the mechanic will push the shifter wire through the length of the silicone or put the shifter wire between the bar and the grip??? If the former, it should work since the wire should be able to move fore and aft in the silicone. If the latter, I would be worried the shifter wire will not move fore and aft easily. On drop bars with bar end shifters, the normal practice is to place the shifter wire inside the plastic tunnel supplied with the shifter and the tape the plastic tunnel to the bar. So the shifter wire is totally free to move fore/aft, but held securely to the bar. It would be nice if the mfg molded a small diameter (say 3 mm) tunnel on the inside of the grip for shifter wire (shifter wire is < 2mm in diameter). Maybe using a small diameter plastic straw between the bar and grip with the wire inside the straw would allow the wire to move fore/aft freely. The straw need to be 13cm (5-1/8" long), since the grip is 13cm long John Hawrylak Woodstown NJ On Sunday, May 28, 2023 at 6:14:12 PM UTC-4 Roberta wrote: > Currently I have an albatross handlebar on my A. Homer Hilsen with bar end > shifters and a leather-like handlebar wrap over a gel pad for my handlebar > grip. I need to change my stem so I’m considering the ESI Chunky grips > instead. I like the feel and sophisticated look of the current wrap but > wouldn’t mind more cushioning. > > The bike mechanic tells me he can put the bar end shifter wires through > the ESI grips. *Is this OK/safe/good idea?* > > Another option would be to put the wire underneath the ESI grip and wrap > the grips with Newbaum’s tape to hold the wire in place. > > A third option would be to put back what I have now with the wrap going > over the wire. > > I have honey colored Brooks B68 and would get the blue or tan ESI grips, > or honey for leather like wrap. Opinions, especially about putting wire > through the grips? > > Thanks, > Roberta > -- 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/2e09cc3a-8a4e-4515-aa82-28ce0916258an%40googlegroups.com.
[RBW] Re: Platy Geometry Chart
Just bumping to see if anyone knows John Hawrylak Woodstown NJ On Friday, May 26, 2023 at 10:06:02 AM UTC-4 John Hawrylak, Woodstown NJ wrote: > Does anyone have the Platypus geometry chart or a link to it???. The RBW > site does not show it, although they showed it in the past. > > Interested in STA, chainstay length and BBD for the 55cm frame. TIA > > John Hawrylak > Woodstown NJ > -- 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/fbdb24fc-b44b-479c-80f8-6e46c6ffef9bn%40googlegroups.com.
[RBW] Platy Geometry Chart
Does anyone have the Platypus geometry chart or a link to it???. The RBW site does not show it, although they showed it in the past. Interested in STA, chainstay length and BBD for the 55cm frame. TIA John Hawrylak Woodstown NJ -- 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/a6ba63e2-4b1b-4448-8fd2-a74ee8c1be99n%40googlegroups.com.
[RBW] Re: Gearing (was Getting Over My Head)
I agree with Ted on the problem of getting Ideal Cog Teeth & first cogs being too small (11T & less) , but I believe a 46-36-26 triple with a wide range Shimano HG-400 12-36 9 speed cassette (Deore RD-M591-SGS), 130mm OLD Tiagra 4000 rear hub, and 650Bx38's gives me: good gearing in my cruising range (75 to 55gi) with 3 cogs to use in the Outer and Middle rings an even 16% to 12% gearing change between all the cogs. good chain line (<= 0.040% chain stretch) over a 6 cog range on each chain ring (front CL's of 52, 44, 38mm & rear CL of 44mm) good high/low range (101 to 19 gi) good FD performance with old school style FDs (using a 9 speed Sora FD-R3000, but also used a 1980's Shimano FD-MT60) The learning for me was to be willing to shift between the Outer and Middle rings *much more often *than I thought before, e.g. shift to Middle 3 cog when using the Outer 4 cog and the terrain indicates a need for lower gearing. Before I tended to stay on the Outer ring too long. Now, the outer and middle rings are used much more evenly. The 10T ring difference makes shifting the rings easy. The 26T Inner is still for big hills, but I feel I get to it more efficiently than before. The triple limits you to a 44T Outer (FD cage hitting the C/S with a 42T). but the 46T/12T combo gives me the 100 gi high I want with 650Bx38, so I see the chain ring size limit as theoretical limit I don't encounter as long I have a large stock of HG400-9 12-36 cassettes. *As for Leah's problem *with shifting to lower gears, I think Sheldon said it best (paraphasing), "when you come to hills, shift to your lower gears before you need too". Easier said than done. John Hawrylak Woodstown NJ On Saturday, May 20, 2023 at 1:55:27 PM UTC-4 Ted Durant wrote: > Hi All - > > Leah's "Getting Over My Head" thread seems to have evolved into a gearing > thread. I retired from a career in data mining and statistical modeling, so > you can just imagine how much time I've wasted on "optimizing" bicycle > gearing. > > Here's the TL;DR version: it's impossible to optimize gearing, so stop > sweating it. > > The slightly longer version is that we are locked into integer tooth > counts; when the optimal cog is 14.5 teeth, that ain't an option! So, we > are forced into compromising or, better yet, satisficing. > > There are essentially three key points we are trying to fix with gears: > the lowest low, the highest high, and the steps in between. Given those, we > then try create a system that reliably and easily shifts among the gears. > For me, a 2x system using components available today provides the best > combination of low-low, high-high, steps in between, simplicity, > consistency, and reliability. But that depends highly on the chain, the > chainrings, and the front derailer playing nicely together. It also works > for me because I use it as 2 gearing ranges, one for flats and downhills, > the other for long, steeper uphills. > > The lowest low and the highest high are pretty straightforward, and plenty > of ink has been spilled on how to choose those, so there's no point in > elaborating on that. It's the "steps in between" part that drives us wild. > In theory, we think, we'd like to have perfectly even steps between the > high and low. In practice, though, 1) that's simply not possible with a > cog-and-chain drivetrain, and 2) it might not even be that desirable. A lot > of riders, myself included, find that we prefer smaller steps between gears > in the range in which we normally ride, and larger steps out in the > extremes. > > What I definitely don't like is having a big difference between 3 adjacent > cogs in the middle of my cruising range. For example, a 1-tooth difference > one way and a 2-tooth difference the other. Unfortunately, this is a common > occurrence in large cog count cassettes with tiny small cogs - they go from > a 1-tooth difference to a 2-tooth difference near the middle of the > cluster. That's twice the amount of reduction/increase in effort. So, when > I'm looking at cassettes, I'm looking for ones where that 1-to-2 transition > occurs as close to the small cog as I can get it. A major factor here is > the movement to smaller smallest cogs, which has gone from 14 to 10 in my > time. Starting from 11 (or, God forbid, 10!) you use a lot of cogs to get > to the point where 2-tooth steps start to make sense. > > On the other hand, those small smallest cogs mean we can use small outer > chainrings, and that's something of a boon if your front derailer can > handle it, because it means we can also use smaller inner rings on a 2x to > get sufficiently low gearing.
[RBW] Re: spacing between chainrings
*Suggest calling/writing RBW.* I recall a Grant write up a few years ago comparing the Silver to the XD2 2 and I remember something about spacers on the 74mm BCD posts. If the crank is on the bike, you can measure the distance form the end of the seat tube to the teeth of the Middle and Inner rings using paper cut to size, and then the difference is the middle to Inner ring spacing and verify if > 5mm. For reference, my XD-2 with Sugino Rings have ring spacing > thr 5mm Shimano standard: Outer to Middle, 7mm Middle to Inner, 8mm John Hawrylak Woodstown NJ On Saturday, May 13, 2023 at 8:50:06 AM UTC-4 J Schwartz wrote: > weird question...but here goes > I disassembled a Silver triple and had it apart for awhile and recently > put it back together as a double with a bashguard. > So, it's Guard>40t>30t. > I think I may have used the incorrect spacers between the 74bcd 30t and > the 110bcd 40t...they were in my box of parts. I'm not sure. I think > there is too much space between those two chainrings ...a few times riding > recently, the chain wants to go down between them > Can someone tell me what size this spacers should be and how much space, > in general should be between two chainrings on a triple, 9 speed? > thanks > [image: IMG_0574.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/e63bae23-8719-4c6d-b121-a0ff87dc91e7n%40googlegroups.com.
[RBW] Re: Help me "Riv" my bike fit, Please!
Dave I sent you PM with an Excel file to help you select the correct stem length John Hawrylak Woodstown NJ On Monday, January 9, 2023 at 9:42:15 AM UTC-5 Davey Two Shoes wrote: > Hi Everyone, > I'm building up a Sam Hillborne and this is my first Riv build. I'm not > sure where to start with stack and reach. Coming from your typical roadie > fit I'm not sure how much shorter to make my reach and taller to make my > stack in order to get that coveted Rivendell riding position. I'm trying to > get this right with as few stem purchases and bar wrap jobs as possible! > Are there any general rules of thumb here? This build will be a drop bar > build. > > My handlebar (not frame) XY position is as follows: > Stack 626mm > Reach 498mm > Appreciate any help you can give me! > > For reference, my Fred Sled: (excuse the flat tires)[image: > purple.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/35173edf-393c-4a90-90f6-c3d3a7555a86n%40googlegroups.com.
[RBW] Re: Help me "Riv" my bike fit, Please!
No offense, but your current bike could be a Riv poster child for the 'racer look' vs the 'Riv look', bars much lower than saddle vs bars at or above saddle height (<= 2" above). The Sam uses a quill stem, so you can adjust the quill height. To replicate the fit on your existing bike, get a quill stem of approximately 150mm quill length and a stem length of the your current threadless stem adjusted for the increased seat tube setback of the Sam vs current frame Saddle Height * (cos(STA current) - cos(STA sam)), Probaly 3cm based on a 71cm SH and a 74° STAcurrent (Sam STA is 71.5°). For a higher bar height, you'll need a quill length of 180mm or 225mm. Moving the bars up also brings them back by a few mm, use the above equation and substitute 'difference in quill length' for 'saddle height' Your frame seems to be small or medium, so a 180 or 225mm quill may NOT be able to be inserted into the head tube/steerer tube far enough to get a 'low' bar height. This has happened to people before, since Riv recommends longer quills, assuming you'll use the longer quill to extend the bar height and stuff it into a short head tube. Dont wrap the bars until you are done getting the bars where you want. John Hawrylak Woodstown NJ PS the Seat Tube Setback is greater with the Sam vs current bike, since the Sam STA is smaller (71.5° vs probably 74° on current bike). This affects the distance from the saddle to bars using Stack and Reach by themselves On Monday, January 9, 2023 at 9:42:15 AM UTC-5 Davey Two Shoes wrote: > Hi Everyone, > I'm building up a Sam Hillborne and this is my first Riv build. I'm not > sure where to start with stack and reach. Coming from your typical roadie > fit I'm not sure how much shorter to make my reach and taller to make my > stack in order to get that coveted Rivendell riding position. I'm trying to > get this right with as few stem purchases and bar wrap jobs as possible! > Are there any general rules of thumb here? This build will be a drop bar > build. > > My handlebar (not frame) XY position is as follows: > Stack 626mm > Reach 498mm > Appreciate any help you can give me! > > For reference, my Fred Sled: (excuse the flat tires)[image: > purple.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/7206ff84-0dd1-48cc-8527-10c966139556n%40googlegroups.com.
[RBW] Re: Very short reach drop bar, not too wide, gives a relatively normal hood position, and has anormal (not anatomic) bend?
Nitto M186 STI, 80mm reach & 122mm drop Nitto M151AAF, 78mm reach & 128mm drop Nitto Neat MOD 104, 65mm reach & 140mm drop Raech/Drop are C-C dimensions John Hawrylak Woodstown NJ On Wednesday, January 11, 2023 at 5:06:34 PM UTC-5 Patrick Moore wrote: > Is there any bar that is not more than about 44 cm at hoods, has a regular > hook, gives more or less a regular hoods position, and that has a very > short reach? And a very shallow drop? I think of replacing the cut-down > Aherne MAP bar with something that gives me the ever comfortable hood > position but doesn't stretch me out much more than the Aherne bar. I > realize that I can buy a shorter stem too, but I want to know what the > shortest reach, etc., option/s is/are. > > Thanks. > > -- > > --- > Patrick Moore > Alburquerque, Nuevo Mexico, Etats Unis d'Amerique, Orbis Terrarum > > -- 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/0a02ffca-e86e-471c-9569-39df8fbc3669n%40googlegroups.com.
[RBW] Re: Saddle height and BPH
Jay The most accurate SH would be using a gonimeter to measure your leg angle and adjust SH to get the optimum leg angle (I forgot the value). The bike is bike is on a trainer and the front wheel is leveled. The gonimeter measures the leg angle at the bottom of the pedal stroke. Typically this is a bike shop and costs about $50 to $75. I had it done and the result was within 2mm of both the LeMond 88.3% of PBH (BB center to saddle) and the 109% of PBH when adding your crank length. Heres a link to 1 of the many websites How to Determine the Correct Saddle Height - Mantel <https://www.mantel.com/blog/en/how-to-determine-the-correct-saddle-height> He discusses the leg angle method. John Hawrylak Woodstown NJ 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/271296fb-f8e9-4dcc-b7ab-2fd6169582f7n%40googlegroups.com.
[RBW] Re: Front Derailer Adjustment
Doug It sounds like the FD does not move far enough to the inside to shift to the granny of a triple with the low adjustment screw all the way out. A possibility is your FD is designed for a front chain line greater than you actual front chain line. FD have about 20mm of sideway motion and if the front chain lines are mismatched AND the crank ring spacing is > 5mm, the FD can move to the granny. Suggestion: Measure the front chain line to the middle chain ring and compare it to the design value for the FD Measure the front chain line of the granny ring. If the middle - granny is > 5mm (like 7 to 8 mm on a Sugino XD/TD crank you may have a problem. Possible solution: Get an old triple FD designed for a 45 mm front chain line, like a FD-MT-60 form the 80's. I bought a Sora FD-3030b (9spd) with a FCL of 45m and it shifts a Sugino TD-2 46-36-26 with problem. The XT-FD-M781-AX6S had a FCL of about 50mm and could not shift to the 28T granny. TD-2 ring spacing is 8mm Outer to Middle and 5mm Inner to Small. I bought the Sora from Universal Cycles for $34.88. My FD-MT60 also shifted it fine, part of a Biopace crank on a 88 Schwinn Voyaguer. John Hawrylak Woodstown NJ On Saturday, December 3, 2022 at 2:41:41 PM UTC-5 Doug H. wrote: > I want to tap into the collective knowledge here. I need to adjust my > Shimano Deore front derailer on my Clem. It looks to be aligned properly. > Is it proper to tighten the cable when the chain is on the small ring and > largest rear cog? Should the H and L screws be all the way screwed in when > I start the adjustment? I was able to get it to shift but the low screw is > pretty much all the way out so it just seems to be off in some way. And, > after a couple of rides it seems to come back out of adjustment. Any advice > would be most appreciated. > Doug > -- 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/800d23d1-4981-41bc-ab4c-e42140c9d3f2n%40googlegroups.com.
[RBW] Re: First Ride of the Platypus
David P Excellent description of your different hand positions & back angles on the Rosco bar. By far, the best write-up, I have ever saw. John Hawrylak Woodstown NJ On Wednesday, November 30, 2022 at 1:27:05 PM UTC-5 DavidP wrote: > This morning I squeezed a quick ride in before work - a dangerous thing > with most any bike but, as I learned, especially so with the Platypus. A > short ride can feel like an appetizer and there is always the temptation to > eke out a few more miles. > > I covered 12 miles of roads, bike paths, and multi-use trails that I've > been riding regularly in various loops for the past several years. I have > several bikes that are well suited to these types of mixed surface rides > and they all bring something different to the table. My Platypus is built > with these types of rides in mind with Cliffhanger rims, Gravel King 50mm > (rear) and Fleecer Ridge endurance 55mm (front) tires, and 650mm wide Tosco > bars. > > The Platypus is my first Rivendell and the first one I've ever ridden. > I've gotten a few short rides in before this one but those were mostly > about setup rather than riding. My goodness, what a bike it is. I guess the > best way to describe the ride could be "cruisy zoomy", it's a very easy > going yet zippy ride. > > It is supremely comfortable and can be a very upright cruiser, though even > when ridden this way feels responsive. My setup with a 120mm stem puts me > at a ~75 degree back angle with my hands fully rearward on the grips of the > Tosco bar, perfect for taking in the scenery and appearing approachable > when encountering dog walkers on multi-use trails. > > I spend most of my time with the heels of my palms on the front of the > grips, palms over the brake lever clamps, fingers either loosely draped > over or wrapped around the taped bends of the Tosco bar, giving about a 60 > degree back angle. This is a good home base position for forward progress, > still balanced enough to not put noticeable pressure on the hands. > > Moving my hands a bit forward, resting the heels of my palms on the brake > lever clamps, and bending the elbows more gets me to a ~45 degree back > angle to stretch out a bit or get lower in the face of wind. The forward > flats of the bar are also usable when wanting to get to the same angle with > less elbow bend and is nice option on open road sections, though I doubt > I'll bother taping there. > > During standing efforts I can hold the bars back at the grips or up at the > bends - both positions work fine and I found myself doing both in different > places. > > In all positions the fit is roomy and the handling is responsive but not > twitchy. > > I still haven't installed a front derailleur but a 46x34 low gear is > enough to grunt up most of the short climbs on this route. I did opt to > walk one short and steep pitch on a trail rather than manually changing to > the 30t ring. > > I also haven't settled the front carrying method yet but am leaning > towards a 137 basket and bag. For this ride temps were in the upper 30Fs > and wanting a place for a layer and extra pair of gloves, I borrowed the > Swift Catalyst from my wife's bike to hold those things and my pump. I do > plan on putting a bottle cage on the bike but the stem bag is a really > convenient spot for the primary water bottle. > > A fantastic first ride (including a deer sighting!) for a fantastic bike. > > I took a few photos to commemorate the occasion: > > [image: Bog-tree.jpg] > (Our local open space stewards decorate trees throughout town lands this > time of year; it's kind of a scavenger hunt.) > > [image: otter-slide.jpg] > > [image: Bog-deer.png] > (Excuse the poor photo - this guy was a ways off after he and two does > dashed across the path in front of me.) > > [image: pine-point.jpg] > > -Dave (5'11"' on a 60cm Platy in Massachusetts) > > -- 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/2690a80a-4c5f-44aa-8eed-cd62270c6f06n%40googlegroups.com.
[RBW] Re: New Sam Hillbornes
2 stand outs on this batch of Sam H's from the geo chart: The seatpost is a 26.8mm, NOT a more standard 27.2mm. This indicates the 28.6mm seattube wall thickness is 0.8mm vs a more standard 0.7. The Butted section wall is probably 1.1mm or thicker. Seems like Grant likes thicker walls at the BB, as has been mentioned in a previous post. I do not recall a 26.8mm seatpost in the past for the Sam H. The Chain Stay LENGTH varies from 45.5cm (near standard) for a 48/51cm frame to 48.5cm for a 60cm frame. Seems RBW is trying to locate everyone at the same spot along the chain stay. This was mentioned in a previous post, but in a funny way. Seems like they decided to go with it. Tall riders may feel a change. Short riders less so. John Hawrylak Woodstown NJ On Thursday, December 1, 2022 at 10:04:00 AM UTC-5 jak...@me.com wrote: > Anxiously awaiting the new Sams to land on our shores and am obsessing > over the potential build. Perusing these pages with all of your > experiences have really helped. I thought the lime olive was for me until > I saw the early photos of the HiHo Silver. Smitten. > > Anyone going in on these? I feel like I am on baby watch! > -- 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/8884de2e-3c1a-4ed0-8939-cde84834ff5fn%40googlegroups.com.
Re: [RBW] SunTour Rachet Bar Ends shifting a Modern RD - Need to Trim??
Ted thanks for the confirmation on the barcons with Shimano 9 speed. Looks like the Shimano 9sp Rd's have a ratio of about 1.72. I got the 4.34mm cog spacing from the Shimano exploded view drawing of a 2.56mm spacer and 1.78mm cog for a 9 speed cassette. John Hawrylak Woodstown NJ On Tuesday, November 29, 2022 at 4:00:33 PM UTC-5 Ted Durant wrote: > On Tuesday, November 29, 2022 at 2:36:34 PM UTC-6 John Hawrylak wrote: > >> Did you measure the RD ratio's or are they a published value somewhere?? >> > I have seen some published, but my memory is that I measured them from the > total distance between cogs and the total amount of cable pulled. > > >> Do you happen to know the ratio for a Shimano Deore M-591-SGS?? I have >> this with a Shimano 9sp road cassette (4.34mm cog spacing). >> > Classic Shimano 6-7-8-9 (and 10 Road) derailers are 1.72. > > >> The RD ratio would have to greater than 1.39 for the SunTour barcon 25mm >> travel to shift the 8 cog spacings on the 9 speed cassette (8 * 4.34)/25 >> = 1.39 >> > Well, I have Shimano 9 at 4.35, not 4.34, but otherwise I concur :-) My > spreadsheet says you need 20.2mm of cable pull to shift a Shimano 9-sp > derailer across a Shimano 9-sp cog set, so BarCons should have plenty of > capacity. Just don't try to put a SRAM road derailer on that setup - you'll > be a couple mm short. > > Newer derailers are using lower actuation ratios so that more cable pull > is required for each shift, so that there is more room for error. So, any > derailer that pre-dates the 11-speed era, other than SRAM "Exact Actuation" > will probably be a good match with BarCons. > > Ted Durant > Milwaukee, WI USA > -- 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/d56f3a0d-2250-41cf-98e1-f5349e754a38n%40googlegroups.com.
Re: [RBW] SunTour Rachet Bar Ends shifting a Modern RD - Need to Trim??
Scott Thanks for the suggestion. Others have stated the barcons have enough pull for Shimano 9 speed and the M591 is definitely 9 speed. Also, I am quite happy with my drivetrain choices for the 650B-38's I'm using 12-36 Shimano CS-HG-400, 12-14-16-18-21-24-28-32-36 46-36-26 triple gives me a gear range of 101 to 19 and more importantly I try to shift the rings to maintain the sideways chain stretch to <= 0.020% except for the Small-Large 28-36 combo at 0.040%. I use cogs 1 thru 5 on the Large ring, shift to Middle using cogs 3 thru 6, shift to Inner ring using cogs using cogs 5 thru 9. The ring/cog setup puts my cruising range (5 to 78 gi) on the Large & Middle ring, but I have not noticed any problems with the ring/cog shift to do it. So overall, very happy with the drivetrain selection and 8 speed maynot work as well. I looked at 10 spee, but did not see an improvement over 9. John Hawrylak Woodstown NJ On Tuesday, November 29, 2022 at 4:13:24 PM UTC-5 Scott wrote: > John: > > How about using your 9 speed cassette as an 8 speed by adjusting out > lowest or highest gear with a limit screw, assuming you can so without one > of those gears? > > Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android > <https://go.onelink.me/107872968?pid=InProduct&c=Global_Internal_YGrowth_AndroidEmailSig__AndroidUsers&af_wl=ym&af_sub1=Internal&af_sub2=Global_YGrowth&af_sub3=EmailSignature> > > On Tue, Nov 29, 2022 at 2:00 PM, Ted Durant > wrote: > > On Tuesday, November 29, 2022 at 2:36:34 PM UTC-6 John Hawrylak wrote: > > Did you measure the RD ratio's or are they a published value somewhere?? > > I have seen some published, but my memory is that I measured them from the > total distance between cogs and the total amount of cable pulled. > > > Do you happen to know the ratio for a Shimano Deore M-591-SGS?? I have > this with a Shimano 9sp road cassette (4.34mm cog spacing). > > Classic Shimano 6-7-8-9 (and 10 Road) derailers are 1.72. > > > The RD ratio would have to greater than 1.39 for the SunTour barcon 25mm > travel to shift the 8 cog spacings on the 9 speed cassette (8 * 4.34)/25 > = 1.39 > > Well, I have Shimano 9 at 4.35, not 4.34, but otherwise I concur :-) My > spreadsheet says you need 20.2mm of cable pull to shift a Shimano 9-sp > derailer across a Shimano 9-sp cog set, so BarCons should have plenty of > capacity. Just don't try to put a SRAM road derailer on that setup - you'll > be a couple mm short. > > Newer derailers are using lower actuation ratios so that more cable pull > is required for each shift, so that there is more room for error. So, any > derailer that pre-dates the 11-speed era, other than SRAM "Exact Actuation" > will probably be a good match with BarCons. > > Ted Durant > Milwaukee, WI USA > > -- > > 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/9a74b190-2375-434f-8fb6-cc30c9b27cb8n%40googlegroups.com > > <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/rbw-owners-bunch/9a74b190-2375-434f-8fb6-cc30c9b27cb8n%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> > . > > -- 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/d6cb2e9f-7b04-436e-8cf7-027de78b0f7bn%40googlegroups.com.
Re: [RBW] SunTour Rachet Bar Ends shifting a Modern RD - Need to Trim??
Ted Thanks very much for the detailed explanation and 25mm of cable pull for the SunTour barcons Did you measure the RD ratio's or are they a published value somewhere?? Do you happen to know the ratio for a Shimano Deore M-591-SGS?? I have this with a Shimano 9sp road cassette (4.34mm cog spacing). The RD ratio would have to greater than 1.39 for the SunTour barcon 25mm travel to shift the 8 cog spacings on the 9 speed cassette (8 * 4.34)/25 = 1.39 John Hawrylak Woodstown NJ On Tuesday, November 29, 2022 at 9:04:58 AM UTC-5 Ted Durant wrote: > On Sunday, November 27, 2022 at 8:43:17 PM UTC-6 Scott wrote: > >> Your research task: find out how much RD moves with each ratchet of your >> 1975s. Then you'll be able to better assess compatibility with different >> cassettes of any maker/speed, as long as you get the respective cog >> spacing. >> > > I spent an inordinate amount of time on this topic and put together a > spreadsheet (naturally). I found 25 clicks on my SunTour BarCons, and 25mm > of total cable pull, so each click is 1.0mm. > > Rear derailer ratio, the amount of horizontal movement per mm of cable > movement, varies pretty widely, from 1.1 (Shimano 11 mtn, SRAM 7-9 Mtn) (I > did this before 12 and 13 speed...) to 1.90 (SunTour). > > The SunTour BarCon has a pretty small barrel, and 25mm isn't enough cable > pull for a low-ratio derailer across a large number of cogs. For example, a > Shimano 11-speed MTB derailer needs 36mm of cable pull. > > If you want to dial it in, a Campy newer 9-speed derailer with a matching > cassette needs 3.03mm of cable pull (3 BarCon clicks) for each cog. Or, > combine a Shimano 10 or 11 speed derailer with a SunTour freewheel and > you'll use right around 2mm (2 clicks) per cog. > > There aren't many combo's that line up with even 1 mm clicks. > > Ted Durant > Milwaukee, WI USA > -- 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/f6b894e5-b845-4c37-9477-e716f5bf9832n%40googlegroups.com.
[RBW] SunTour Rachet Bar Ends shifting a Modern RD - Need to Trim??
IF I use my 1975 Suntour Bar End Ratcheted shifters with a modern Shimano RD (Deroe M531) and a Shimano 7 speed HG cassette, and modern Shimano shifter cables/housings, WILL the RD shift each gear going from the smallest cog to the largest cog, WITHOUT the need to ‘trim’ the RD after each shift, especially when moving up in the large cogs Secondary question: If the SunTours would work without trimming, do they enough pull for a 7 speed cassette??? I have been using 8 speed Shimano Ultegra bar ends (BS-64) with a HG-50 7 speed cassette and like it, 1 click, 1 shift, no need to trim. Been curious about going back to using the SunTours rachets if the modern RD eliminates the need to “trim”. Would like to know if others have tried it and what the results are with respect to trimming. Note, NOT looking for a debate on Index vs Friction. I think index is better, but I have trouble burying those nice SunTour bar ends & maybe I can use them if the RD eliminates trimming. YMMV and that’s great, diversity is good. John Hawrylak Woodstown NJ -- 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/54804a74-49b4-458d-87f5-359194462c8fn%40googlegroups.com.
Re: [RBW] Haul'in the Goods with MouseTraps and Trailers
Patrick Good point on rigidity. I don't think the modern Pletscher is much more rigid, but the mounting is more rigid. The folks up there typically mount the older style rack's front to the rack mounts on the stays using a U shaped piece of steel strip going from the rack mounts and the rack being attached to the bottom of the U. This makes the front mounting much more rigid than the steel plate sandwiched between the stays method Pletscher used before. The rack's flat mounting piece in the front bolts directly to the U shaped piece oif steel strip I'll try to get a picture of the U shaped mounting the next time we get up there. Also, I think the new Pletscher racks mount directly to the rack mounts, increasing rigidity of the front mounting. . These folks use recent frames, vs older frames, and they come with rack mounts on the stays. The new frames fit the needs of these folks better than the older frames, which typically don't have rack mounts. Also, new Fuji's, Jamis's, etc come with new components which work good vs 'legacy' equipment which can be hard to find when replacement is needed. They want utility, not really 'memories'. John Hawrylak Woodstown NJ On Friday, November 25, 2022 at 8:42:16 PM UTC-5 Patrick Moore wrote: > Is the modern Pletscher better than the original model from the 1970s and > '80s? I ask because the Pletscher I installed circa 1985 on a beater city > Sprite to carry 2 Wald basket panniers was the most flexible rack I've ever > used; I recall literally being unable to ride a straight line with heavily > loaded rear baskets. Fortunately my return trip from the grocery store was > only about 1/2 mile. > > On Sat, Nov 19, 2022 at 5:05 PM 'John Hawrylak' via RBW Owners Bunch < > rbw-owne...@googlegroups.com> wrote: > >> Here is a picture of 3 bikes haul'in the goods in the PA Dutch country on >> Sat 11/19/22. This is the back of the Goods store in East Earl PA on Rt 23 >> near Rt 322. People were out doing the Thanksgiving shopping and some >> Balck Friday shopping. >> >> The bikes are used for more utilitarian tasks up there with young, middle >> and older age riders using them for day to day tasks. >> >> The near one has a trailer with items from the Shady Maple supermarket >> (blue bag) and the gentleman riding it is just about to add a bag of items >> from Goods. >> >> The second has a Pletchser with a working Mousetrap holding a wooden >> cargo box. Note hoe the box has a nice cut out accommodating both the >> Mousetrap bend and his/her hand. >> >> The far on has a Pletchser Mousetrap holding the standard cardboard box >> with the trap deforming the box top. >> >> All 3 use kickstands. The near one is a Fuji and the other 2 are >> Jamis. Those folks must be in great shape! Great to see a Pletchser >> MouseTrap being used for what they designed it for and doing a good job. >> >> >> John Hawrylak >> Woodstown NJ >> >> -- >> 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/7e206e56-121e-4c62-87f1-a6e7e9917b71n%40googlegroups.com >> >> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/rbw-owners-bunch/7e206e56-121e-4c62-87f1-a6e7e9917b71n%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> >> . >> > > > -- > > --- > Patrick Moore > Alburquerque, Nuevo Mexico, Etats Unis d'Amerique, Orbis Terrarum > > -- 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/63a8fea7-f5fb-4a9d-865f-b2f332359d2dn%40googlegroups.com.
[RBW] Re: The Rivendell Ride
Nick Interesting comparison between the Open and the Rivendell. Are you using seatposts with the same amount of seatpost setback on the Romulus and the Open???The STA for a 61cm/Large frame are very close Romulus 72° - Open 71.5° Also, do you notice any difference in handling/riding due to the slightly larger BBD on the Romulus? Romulus 77mmOpen 70mm John Hawrylak Woodstown NJ On Wednesday, November 23, 2022 at 1:53:42 AM UTC-5 Nick Payne wrote: > On Friday, 18 November 2022 at 2:18:11 pm UTC+11 pi...@gmail.com wrote: > >> Look at a modern gravel bike like the Open UPPER (which Jan Heine >> praises as the ideal "all road" bike --- to the point where they're going >> to sell a special Rene Herse edition of it on their website) and the >> differences are even more stark. With 700c wheels and a 40mm tire, you're >> looking at a trail of 69mm, which is going to give a slowish handling >> that's worlds away from what a Rivendell has. Couple that with a steep seat >> tube and high BB there's no way it will ride like a Rivendell. Even with >> 650B wheels that bike still has a trail of 63mm, which is great for high >> speed fire road descents but isn't going to ride on pavement with the >> agility that you'll find in any of the Rivs. >> > > As someone who actually owns an Open UPPER, in addition to four Rivendells > (one custom and three off-the-shelf), plus a few other bikes, I have to say > this is nonsense. I normally ride the Open as a road bike with Bon Jon Pass > 700x35 tyres, and I've had both it and the Rivendells up and down winding > mountain passes without feeling any shortcoming in the handling of any of > them. When I plug HTA and fork rake into the trail calculator at > http://yojimg.net/bike/web_tools/trailcalc.php, there's little difference: > > Rivendell Romulus geometry: > http://cyclofiend.com/rbw/romulus/romflyer/04.html. For the 61cm frame I > have, with 35mm tyres the 73° HTA and 42.5mm rake gives 63mm of trail. > > Open geometry: https://opencycle.com/updates/more-u-p--info---geometry. > For the L size I have, 35mm tyres with 72.5°HTA and 50mm rake gives 58mm > trail. > > Nick > -- 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/5ec12809-47e0-4b44-ae10-714aeaf97da1n%40googlegroups.com.
[RBW] Re: FS: "Estate Sale" of components and gear, part deux
PM sent for the D/A hubs John Hawrylak Woodstown NJ On Sunday, November 20, 2022 at 11:40:58 AM UTC-5 esoter...@gmail.com wrote: > Howdy again, > > > Here’s part two of my massive “estate sale”, in order to clear everything > out for my family’s upcoming cross-Pacific move in the spring. Big thanks > to those who’ve already bought stuff; you’re making my life easier one > shipped box at a time. > > > The prices listed do not include shipping, but I’ll be using > Pirateship.com <http://pirateship.com/> and Bikeflights to ship, and I’ve > got boxes of all shapes and sizes and a postage scale, so I can find you > the best rates to ship your stuff. *PayPal, money order, or cash accepted > for payment*. If you’d like more pics or info about any of the items, > please reach out; I’m usually pretty quick about getting back to you. To > make it easier and quicker for me to get you an accurate shipping quote, > please include your address (or zip code at the very least) with your > inquiries. Local pickup in Raleigh, NC for those of you nearby. The more > things you buy, the more we can wheel and deal! Thanks for looking and have > a great week! > > > ~Mark Higa > > Raleigh, NC > > > link to the pics are here: > > > https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1ghcJHfjpTpNnOnzh0-gMGhRjlJR6ge5V?usp=sharing > > > *Tires* > >1. Rene Herse Oracle Ridge 700c x 48mm. Extralight casing, tan >sidewall, <150 miles (They’re amazing, but I couldn’t fit them under the >fenders I installed on my Monstercross, so I had to go with narrower > tires) >- $135/pair >2. Compass Steilacoom 700c x 38mm knobbies. Standard casing, tan >sidewall, heavy use - $45/pair >3. Schwalbe G-One All-Round 650b x 40mm, black sidewalls, extended use >- $40/pair >4. Panaracer Gravelking Slick 650b x 48mm, black sidewalls, moderate >use - $50/pair > > > >1. Single Panaracer Pacenti Pari-Moto 650b x 38mm, black sidewall, >brand new in package - $25 >2. Single Panaracer Gravelking Slick 700c x 28mm, black sidewall. Less >than 50 miles - $15 >3. Single Panaracer Pacenti Pari-Moto 650b x 42mm, black sidewall, >extended use - $10 > > > > *Handlebars, Grips and Tape* > >1. Soma Portola 56cm wide, 26.0 clamp - $25 >2. Soma Portola 53cm wide, 26.0 clamp - $25 >3. Velo Orange Milan, 25.4 clamp - $20 >4. Origin8 Off Road Space Bar - $15 >5. Bar-end grips (measure 3” from center of clamp to tip) - $5 > > >1. Extra Chunky ESI grips, pink - $10 >2. Khaki cushioned bar tape (Riv used to sell this), brand new - $15 >3. Random grips - $5/pair >4. Big bag o’ used bar tapes and such - $10 > > > > > *Hubs* > > > >1. Shimano 105 HB/FH5500 32-hole hubset, 130mm OLD rear (front hub is >brand new) - $6 >2. Shimano Dura Ace FH-7400/HB-7100 36-hole hubset, 126mm OLD rear - >$50 >3. Shimano XTR HB-M900 front hub, 32-hole - $30 >4. Shimano XTR front skewer - $15 > > > *Pedals* > >1. Suntour XC Bear Trap (recently regreased bearings, but no dust >caps) - $50 >2. Shimano XT PD-M730 Bear Trap - $30 >3. Specialized Touring with Christophe toe clips and original >Specialized leather straps - $65 >4. CrankBrothers Stamp 1 special edition white w/ gold pins (near new) >- $40 >5. All City anodized red cages with Sakae leather straps and toe clips >- $30 > > > *Stems* > > (All stems measured center of bolt to center of clamp) > >1. Nitto Technomic Deluxe, 11cm reach, 25.4 clamp - $30 >2. Nitto Dynamic II, 7cm reach, 25.4 clamp - $20 >3. SR Custom, 10.5cm, 25.4 clamp - $15 >4. SR Custom, 10.5cm, 25.4 clamp - $15 >5. Kusuki, 10.5cm, 26.0 clamp - $15 > > > Seatposts > > (All seat posts $10 each) > >1. Unbranded 26.8, 350mm length >2. Kalloy 26.8, 300mm length >3. Unbranded 26.0, 300mm length > > > *Clothing* > >1. Randi Jo waxed canvas cycling cap with “Rivelo ’04” on side, dark >grey - $15 >2. Icebreaker Bodyfitzone seamless merino wool underwear, brand new in >box - $30 >3. Icebreaker 100% wool beanie, size M, light heather loden - $15 >4. Mountain Hardwear technical short sleeve polo w/ quarter zip, size >S, black & light olive - $10 >5. Sidi leather w/ nylon cycling shoes, size 42 (9 US) - $35 >6. Canari convertible jacket w/ removable sleeves, men’s Medium - $25 >7. Sugoi Resistor Aero shoe covers, Large - $15 >8. Pearl Izumi leg warmers, Small - $10 >9. Nathan arm warmers w/ reflective band, Small/Med
Re: [RBW] The Rivendell Ride
Rich Can you share the STA, OD and wall thickness of the main tubes and the trail for the Mercian?? Curious as to how they compare to your Rivendells. I looked at the Mercian 15 years ago and they are very nice frames/forks. The price was good even at the exchange rate then. Might be better with the better exchange rate now John Hawrylak Woodstown NJ On Friday, November 18, 2022 at 9:32:54 AM UTC-5 RichS wrote: > Paul asked about another bike that rides like a Rivendell. I have a > Mercian Audax that was built to my specs with 725 tubing and 650b wheels. > The bike rides and handles as well as any Rivendell I've owned. This is > completely subjective of course and YMMV. > > Best, > Rich in ATL > > On Thursday, November 17, 2022 at 7:45:42 PM UTC-5 Paul Clifton wrote: > >> Chris, >> I've heard this too, about the trade secret numbers. >> >> It made me wonder, has anyone ridden another bike that rides like a >> Rivendell? >> >> To me, more-or-less like Joe said, it's nimble handling that also feels >> extremely stable. It's easy to change lines around a curve, but it's also >> easy to just let the bike hold it's line (straight or in corners). >> >> I've ridden plenty of miles on two Rosco Bubbes (MTBubbe and Rosco Bebe), >> a Gus, and a tandem. I've ridden a few miles on a too small Clem L and a >> Sam. They all handle similarly. The thing that changes is position and how >> much bike is out front and how much bike is out back. The Bebe bike, with a >> lot of length out front really leads itself through the curves. The Gus >> kind of trails behind. But both are absurdly stable. I'd put the MTBubbe >> and the Sam as kind of neutral in that respect. I can choose to place the >> front or back wheel as a way to pick my line. >> >> The only other bike I've ridden that comes close was my Surly Long Haul >> Trucker. It was not the same as a Riv, but it was stable, but not nimble >> (which may or may not have made me like it more or less). I finally >> realized that it was also a size too big, which I suspect has a tendency to >> make a bike less nimble - think about how nimble a BMX bike is for a full >> grown person ... I traded it for a 1984 Trek 720, which I don't consider >> either stable or nimble compared to the LHT or my Rivs. But it's still an >> alright bike. >> >> But it's gotta be something about the trail and the ratio of rider weight >> over the front and back ends. So as rake increases, the rear end might also >> increase. I dunno, I'd love to make an spreadsheet. >> >> Paul in AR >> >> On Thursday, November 17, 2022 at 6:32:53 AM UTC-6 Chris L wrote: >> >>> I remember reading where Grant, or one of his long-term employees but I >>> think Grant, said on front end geometry handling there are a few numbers >>> they hold to but they don't discuss them outside the shop. Trail would be >>> an obvious one, but I've always thought it would be interesting to hear the >>> rest. Jan Heine gets into what might be some of RBW's other unspoken >>> factors in his book on performance bicycles. >>> >>> On Wednesday, November 16, 2022 at 10:38:08 PM UTC-6 pi...@gmail.com >>> wrote: >>> >>>> Grant's 1993 Bridgestone RB-1 had a 54mm trail with 25mm tires. The >>>> 2022 Roadini had a trail of around 58mm but with a 5mm lower BB. The >>>> Cheviot (I can't find numbers for the Platypus) had a trail of 58mm with a >>>> 25mm tire (but obviously few people would run 25mm tires on that bike), >>>> but >>>> even with a 33mm tire it'll still be a 61mm trail, making the bike steer a >>>> little slower but still agile. I had a custom bike built around the 1993 >>>> RB-1 geometry with a lower BB, and it rides similarly great. Now when it >>>> comes to compliance, stiffness, etc., the tubing thickness etc matters >>>> more, but in terms of handling I think Grant has it dialed down and you >>>> can >>>> see that he pretty much keeps all his bikes in the same zone when it comes >>>> to trail. The longer wheel base that he's been going for recently adds >>>> alot >>>> to stability and high speed handling at the expense of packability into >>>> bike boxes, which few care about. If you were to buy say, a Craig Calfee >>>> carbon framed bike, it actually has a very similar geometry too the RB-1, >>>> and rides similarly, but of co
[RBW] Re: The Rivendell Ride
Joe What is the Seat Tube Angle of your custom?? John Hawrylak Woodstown NJ On Wednesday, November 16, 2022 at 5:41:41 PM UTC-5 Joe Bernard wrote: > This is an edited version of an email I recently sent Grant, I wanted to > post here cuz I think the magical Riv ride he designs into these frames is > slightly under discussed..like we all know it and love it, then talk about > other stuff like paint and parts. My comments are specifically about my > custom but I've owned a bunch of Rivs and they all ride like this (Clem > maybe not so light-feeling, but still zippy). Add your thoughts about your > bikes! : > > The handling is amazing. It feels light and zippy, yet absorbs shock > (there's a lot of shock on these roads) and is very stable. When you put it > in a turn it goes where you point it and holds the line until you change > it. It does this when getting bumped offline, too..the darn thing pops > right back to where it was going! I've ridden a bazillion bikes and nothing > rides like a Rivendell 🙌 > > Joe Bernard > -- 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/3d2c39b6-7c3a-4faa-81b0-d36588deeba9n%40googlegroups.com.
Re: [RBW] Betty Foy Sizing & Search
The price looks very good if the 2 racks are included. A 55 may be too big for Matt's wife John Hawrylak Woodstown NJ On Friday, October 28, 2022 at 8:20:51 PM UTC-4 Matthew Williams wrote: > Here’s a 55cm Betty Foy in Santa Barbara... > > > [image: 00N0N_24mfIhCIO8Bz_0pO0jm_600x450.jpg] > > Rivendell Betty Foy mixte - bicycles - by owner - bike sale > <https://santabarbara.craigslist.org/bik/d/fillmore-rivendell-betty-foy-mixte/7548933443.html> > santabarbara.craigslist.org > <https://santabarbara.craigslist.org/bik/d/fillmore-rivendell-betty-foy-mixte/7548933443.html> > > <https://santabarbara.craigslist.org/bik/d/fillmore-rivendell-betty-foy-mixte/7548933443.html> > -- 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/94102a18-21d8-4f0e-b033-0e541b82015en%40googlegroups.com.
Re: [RBW] Who is getting a Platypus?
Scott AFAIK RBW had stated in the newsletter that they do not want to open the box just to check it sicne they need to ship it in another box. One can see their logic, especially since they are handling many more frames than 5 years ago, and can't/don't have the time to check them or feel the level of service they provided in the past is just unattainable now, John Hawrylak Woodstown NJ On Friday, October 28, 2022 at 11:14:06 AM UTC-4 Scott wrote: > Joe: > > I talked to Riv earlier this week about purchasing an Atlantis and posed a > few questions about F/F prep. I'm not here to make a blanket statement > about how all F/F are handled before they depart Riv, but I was told they > receive the Atlantis F/F with headset already installed and that a F/F I > purchase would not have the hanger checked/aligned before sent to me. My > "guess" is they may not even unpack the F/F when they receive it. There > wouldn't be any reason for them to open it up, if nothing is to be done on > F/F. Maybe they are so busy it's easier to just place a new shipping label > on the box and out it goes. I live in rural Montana and am a little bummed > I have to travel a good distance just to ensure hanger is properly aligned > after spending $1750 on a new baby. And I would doubt the threads are > chased. > > Nothing whatsoever against Riv, just an observation. Seems it should be > part of the frame making process to quickly verify proper hanger position > somewhere between frame build completion and paint. I'm going to travel and > pay to have it done, anyways. > > On Thursday, October 20, 2022 at 08:21:39 PM MDT, Joe Bernard < > joer...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > Are these frames being sold as unprepped? I'm not clear on where they are > with that now but it would certainly slow down my "buy" finger if I knew I > still had to install the fork, adjust the headset, chase the threads and > check the derailer hanger adjustment. > > Joe "I don't know how to do the last two parts" Bernard > > On Thursday, October 20, 2022 at 6:52:23 PM UTC-7 Doug H. wrote: > > I imagine quite a few have sold but Riv not being able to offer many > complete builds may be reducing sales. Hopefully they can get caught up on > the backlog of builds in the queue. And, the Rosco version of the Platypus > was just released recently so that fulfilled some people's wish for a mixte > type road bike. > Doug > > On Thursday, October 20, 2022 at 7:13:17 PM UTC-4 cycli...@gmail.com > wrote: > > It would seem that demand is mirroring that of the housing market. > Decidedly cooler than 12 months ago when Platys and house listing were sold > out in mere hours. > > On Monday, October 10, 2022 at 2:34:14 PM UTC-7 Johnny Alien wrote: > > I think they will sell pretty quick but not as lightning fast as they did > during the pandemic. > On Monday, October 10, 2022 at 4:13:58 PM UTC-4 Eric Daume wrote: > > There is still one Rosco Plat in 60cm of each color available, so maybe > supply and demand are balancing out. At least for the taller folks. > > Eric > > On Monday, October 10, 2022, Bicycle Belle Ding Ding! > wrote: > > I can never tamp down my excitement over the Riv mixtes and have given up > trying. I’m SO excited that there is a paddle of Platypuses on the water, > heading to Rivendell as I type this. I remember the excitement of the 2020 > Platypuses (which were delivered in 2021); they were gone in minutes. > Heartbreak and jubilee ensued and then came the waiting. > > But the wait is nearly over because the presale is the 19th. I’m keen to > know if these will sell out as quickly or if demand and availability will > have evened out by now. > > Who is purchasing a Platypus? > > Leah > > -- > 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/ee67c1d2-7f06-4fa2-a126-6565386ac35dn%40googlegroups.com > > <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/rbw-owners-bunch/ee67c1d2-7f06-4fa2-a126-6565386ac35dn%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> > . > > -- > 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.goo
[RBW] Re: Betty Foy Sizing & Search
Matt Soma has a 20% sale until 10/30/22 if you are considering their Buena Vista mixte F/F. The coupon code is "fall20" John Hawrylak Woodstown NJ On Monday, October 24, 2022 at 3:00:06 PM UTC-4 mmille...@gmail.com wrote: > Hello all, > > I've been looking for a step-through for my wife. She specifically likes a > Betty Foy, but really anything "pretty" would work. She's not really in to > changing gears a lot, and this would also be for commuting and trail rides > <10 miles. Does this crew have any ideas/bikes? > > Also, it's tough to find sizing on the Betty Foy bikes. Does anyone have > old material or could chime in with their size? I've searched and searched, > but been coming up empty. > > She's 5'4" with a 77 PBH. > > Thanks, > Matt in STL > -- 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/0b46247b-685f-4caf-a20a-cbb8b58f6aabn%40googlegroups.com.
[RBW] Re: Betty Foy Sizing & Search
Matt Looks of good choices were mentioned. All were long trail frames and the Rivendells were the only frames with 'relaxed' frame angles, placing you further back. Here is an estimate of the costs for each: Frame/ForkReady to Ride Schwinn World Sport or Traveler via Craiglist/yard sales/Goodwill $150 to $300 complete, may need new cables, grease (84-86 Traveler, 86-91 World Sport - Traveler & 86 WS are Panasonic, 87-91 WS are Taiwan (Giant??)) She Devil Frame/fork and complete bike by Mfg) $460 frame/fork$1,000-$1,200 complete from Mfg Soma Buena Vista (F/F by Soma, you build it up) $900 frame, $2,000-$2,500 to Ride Away Betty Foy (B Lindsay quoted $1,000 for F/F recently)$1,000 frame $2,500 to $4,000 for complete Bike Platypus (F/F by RBW, you build it up) $1,800 frame $3,000-$3,500 to Ride Away Toe Clip Overlap is likely on SMALL frames with 27" or 700C wheels. 650B or 26" should greatly minimize TCO concerns . The Schwinn's use drop bars (and in small frames they tend to be narrow (38 or 39cm wide) with short stems), the others use more upright bars or accommodate both. The Schwiins are Step Thrus while the others are Mixtes. The Schwiinns are Standard diameter main tubes, while the others are or look to be OS main tubes. The She Devil is an interesting item form a cost/value/ready availability standpoint John Hawrylak Woodstown NJ On Tuesday, October 25, 2022 at 10:23:44 PM UTC-4 mmille...@gmail.com wrote: > Wow. You all are amazing. I've got sizing info, plenty of other models to > check out, and many ideas for builds. Those Soma are kind of cool. The > Schwinn are available. Never heard of SR. I don't have Eric's skill, and > I'm 100% she doesn't want me to commit the time to get there. (Although I > some non-parenting quiet time in the basement over the winter sounds > awesome!) I'll see what she thinks. She definitely wants a step-through. > (I'm sure I'll be there myself in 5-10 years.) > > On Tuesday, October 25, 2022 at 2:27:47 PM UTC-5 Tom Wyland wrote: > >> I would recommend a Handsome Devil step-through aka She Devil. It's >> going to have a little more lively steering than a Riv due to lower trail. >> The frame itself is also not as nice and a little heavier than a Riv >> Platy/Betty, but it still has very clean welds. No lugs. You could also >> build it with a IGH rear hub because it has semi-horizontal rear dropouts >> to tension the chain. The folks at Handsome are good people to work with. >> The Devil was originally a nod to Bridgestone bikes. >> >> I had a Handsome Devil for years all decked out in Riv Style before I got >> my Platy. >> >> Tom >> >> >> -- 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/605049a7-7724-410f-a151-253372277e54n%40googlegroups.com.
[RBW] Re: Betty Foy Sizing & Search
Matt The World Sport used 1020 stays. John Hawrylak Woodstown NJ On Monday, October 24, 2022 at 10:27:06 PM UTC-4 John Hawrylak wrote: > Matt > > Have you considered a 1986 to 1990 Schwinn World Sport or 1986/87 Traveler > Step Thrus or a 1984 to 1987 Schwinn LeTour Step Thru?? The Step thru > looks like a Betty but without the extra set of stays behind the TT/ST lug, > scan of 1985 Schwinn catalog of a World Sport step thru > > Schwinn catalogs, 1981 - 1990 (266 of 456) (waterfordbikes.com) > <https://waterfordbikes.com/SchwinnCat/flschwinn_1981_1990/1985Ltwt21.html> > > Both use 4130 double Butted TT/DT (lugged) and a 1020 tubular fork & have > 27" alloy rims. The LeTours used 4130 stays. Craiglist is a good source > with prices in the $125 to $250 range. Common size frame size is 19" C-T > (48cm) with some 21" frames. A 19" should fit her 5'4". Schwinn gave > 26# for the LeTour and 27# for the World Sport. Panaracer still has the > Pasela in a 27" tire. > > She may appreciate the lower cost. > > The World model is a 1020 LUGGED frame and weighs about 28# which is not > bad and have 27" alloy rims in 1985 and after. There tend to be more > World's vs World Sport/Traveler simply because they cost less > > John Hawrylak > Woodstown NJ > > On Monday, October 24, 2022 at 3:00:06 PM UTC-4 mmille...@gmail.com wrote: > >> Hello all, >> >> I've been looking for a step-through for my wife. She specifically likes >> a Betty Foy, but really anything "pretty" would work. She's not really in >> to changing gears a lot, and this would also be for commuting and trail >> rides <10 miles. Does this crew have any ideas/bikes? >> >> Also, it's tough to find sizing on the Betty Foy bikes. Does anyone have >> old material or could chime in with their size? I've searched and searched, >> but been coming up empty. >> >> She's 5'4" with a 77 PBH. >> >> Thanks, >> Matt in STL >> > -- 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/49f99b6f-3c87-4d25-ac10-e02912710a7bn%40googlegroups.com.
[RBW] Re: Betty Foy Sizing & Search
Matt Have you considered a 1986 to 1990 Schwinn World Sport or 1986/87 Traveler Step Thrus or a 1984 to 1987 Schwinn LeTour Step Thru?? The Step thru looks like a Betty but without the extra set of stays behind the TT/ST lug, scan of 1985 Schwinn catalog of a World Sport step thru Schwinn catalogs, 1981 - 1990 (266 of 456) (waterfordbikes.com) <https://waterfordbikes.com/SchwinnCat/flschwinn_1981_1990/1985Ltwt21.html> Both use 4130 double Butted TT/DT (lugged) and a 1020 tubular fork & have 27" alloy rims. The LeTours used 4130 stays. Craiglist is a good source with prices in the $125 to $250 range. Common size frame size is 19" C-T (48cm) with some 21" frames. A 19" should fit her 5'4". Schwinn gave 26# for the LeTour and 27# for the World Sport. Panaracer still has the Pasela in a 27" tire. She may appreciate the lower cost. The World model is a 1020 LUGGED frame and weighs about 28# which is not bad and have 27" alloy rims in 1985 and after. There tend to be more World's vs World Sport/Traveler simply because they cost less John Hawrylak Woodstown NJ On Monday, October 24, 2022 at 3:00:06 PM UTC-4 mmille...@gmail.com wrote: > Hello all, > > I've been looking for a step-through for my wife. She specifically likes a > Betty Foy, but really anything "pretty" would work. She's not really in to > changing gears a lot, and this would also be for commuting and trail rides > <10 miles. Does this crew have any ideas/bikes? > > Also, it's tough to find sizing on the Betty Foy bikes. Does anyone have > old material or could chime in with their size? I've searched and searched, > but been coming up empty. > > She's 5'4" with a 77 PBH. > > Thanks, > Matt in STL > -- 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/62be620c-262a-494c-ad73-c0c0fd7e2138n%40googlegroups.com.
[RBW] Re: Which is the best frame size for me? Pictures
I would say which ever one fits you better wrt saddle to bar distance. I would think the AHH has a slightly longer TT than the Romulus since it is a larger frame. The picture shows the Romulus have a shorter saddle to bar distance and a shorter TTL (from the frame pumps). Is the stem length and bar reach the same on each??? Which one is more comfortable wrt to the saddle to bar distance?? Which one feels most lively on the road?? John Hawrylak Woodstown NJ On Saturday, October 22, 2022 at 6:24:53 PM UTC-4 Dave C wrote: > I have a 59 cm Romulus and a 61 cm Toyo Hilsen. The bar height on the > Hilsen is temporarily limited by the cable length to the brake levers, so I > can raise it once I have taken care of that. I plan on usually running > 35-38 mm tires. Currently, the Romulus has 30 mm Gravelking tires and the > Hilsen has 33.3 Jack Browns. I can raise the saddle height on both and ride > them, I wouldn’t lower it. Which is the better frame size in your opinion? > > I appreciate any feedback. I may keep both - I don’t know. Thanks, Dave in > Carlsbad > > [image: 4B71C8FC-1748-4E42-BE11-BC0C4D7C7EB6.jpeg] > -- 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/7f92fa7c-2bab-44e7-ba42-1c84edc0ea8cn%40googlegroups.com.
[RBW] Re: WTB: randoneur style bag for front rack
Jon I suggest you look at the Roadrunner bag VO sells. It was made with grommeted holes in the back which match the holes in the VO decailluer. Randonneur Handlebar Bag - Velo Orange (velo-orange.com) <https://velo-orange.com/collections/bags/products/randonneur-handlebar-bag?variant=728543526919> I see they are sold out, but give them a call and see when they will be in. I believe they are MUSA, so the wait should be short. The VO decailluer is too short for standard Berthoud type bag ad does not reach the leather strip typically on the back of the bag.. John Hawrylak Woodstown NJ On Wednesday, October 12, 2022 at 8:43:36 PM UTC-4 freem...@gmail.com wrote: > Hello! > > I just bought an early 2000's Quickbeam which I've added VO's Randonneur > Front Rack with Integrated Decaleur. Does anyone have a bag for sale that > would work with this rack? I'm also open to recommendations and opinions on > what bag i should be looking at. I'm lusting over Fabio's Chest (lol) > -small size- to give you an idea of what I'm imagining would work for me. > > I want a bag that can carry some essentials for city commuting and could > also handle the extra item here or there in addition. > > Thanks everyone, > > -Jon in San Francisco > -- 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/a49e6b1c-92dc-4309-97ec-f35d9b4389cfn%40googlegroups.com.
[RBW] Re: Homers and road touring
The AHH uses Oversized (OS) tubing (1-1/8" TT & 1-1/4" DT), which is more rigid than Standard (Std) tubing (1" TT & 1-1/8" DT) which most of the frames discussed are. The extra 1/8" increased diameter results in a OS tube having about the same rigidity as a Std tube which is thicker by 0.2mm. It seems the AHH uses OS tubes with butting of 0.8mm x 0.5mm x 0.8mm, which is fairly thin tubing. Grant never stated what tubing thickness he uses. This would be have the same rigidity as s Std tube of 1.0mm x 0.7mm x 1.0mm.IF the AHH tubing is thicker than what I stated, THEN it the equivalent rigid Std tube would be thicker My 1988 Schwinn Voyaguer (a full touring frame) uses Std Columbus Tenax tubing which by everything I can find has a 1" TT of 0.9mm x 0.7mm x 0.9mm and a 1-1/8" DT of 1.0mm x 0.7mm x 1.0mm. So a AHH has tubing which is as rigid as the 88 Voyageur which was sold as full touring bike. If the AHH tube is thicker than 8-5-8, then it is even more rigid than the 88 Voyaguer. John Hawrylak Woodstown NJ On Monday, October 10, 2022 at 12:12:05 PM UTC-4 Tirebiter ATX wrote: > I have a question or the group. I ride a Homer and considering using it > for road touring. Since its not by definition a touring Rivendell, is > loaded touring pushing the envelope for this bike? > > thanks, > Lyman ATX > -- 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/6869b8d4-5dc1-4a18-ab7c-64a0895006d3n%40googlegroups.com.
[RBW] Re: Philly Bike Expo
Andy Nice pic of the fountain at the Point. The fountain spray makes a gloomy day glommier John Hawrylak Woodstown NJ On Wednesday, October 5, 2022 at 11:33:37 AM UTC-4 ascpgh wrote: > Can’t plug VAR without Mel Pinto Imports, carried on by Wayne Bingham > since Mel’s retirement (and passing last year). Wayne is a real keeper of > the flame for cycling, “when craftsmanship and individualism was the > hallmark of the "good stuff.”” > > Haven’t seen the map yet but Brian Chapman usually shares a booth with > Johnny Coast who I will plug. I rode the bike he made me for 14 hours in > the drizzle Sunday guiding some first timers down the GAP to Dawson, PA > where they wed 31 years ago then getting home at 10pm. > > > Paul Price of Paul Component Engineering will be there. White Industry, > Velocity, Rivet Cycleworks, Paragon, Sinewave… > > Come meet your maker! > > Andy Cheatham > Pittsburgh > -- 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/624f7233-92d8-411f-8f39-772c6b418787n%40googlegroups.com.
[RBW] Re: FS: Riv Sackville Medium Grid Gray
Mike Is this sold??? John Hawrylak Woodstown NJ On Monday, September 26, 2022 at 9:39:31 AM UTC-4 Michael Ullmer wrote: > Catch and release for this one. I bought it from a list memeber a few > weeks back hoping to fit it on my new (to me) Trek 520 SS. I mistakenly > didn't measure the distance between my saddle rack, and unfortunately this > one is too short. > > I bought for $155 shipped, offering it here for the same price. > > In great shape, lovely Grid Gray colorway. > > Pics here: https://photos.app.goo.gl/AysCiVTKb3Myh7vT7 > > PM off-list > -- 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/5f7376bd-c3b3-4965-bd28-24aebd34d574n%40googlegroups.com.
[RBW] Re: WTB 47-49cm Saluki or Bleriot
Brian Just remember a Waterford AHH in 650B is essentially the same as a Saluki (per the RBW literature/statements) and maybe more available since they were around longer. The 650B AHH-MUSA were in 47cm and 50cm frames and the 50 has 1cm shorter effective TTL than a 47 (per the 2017 RBW geo charts, 53cm on the 50 and 54cm on the 47, due to 1° slacker STA on the 47 & both have the same HTA), so if Reach is your concern, a 50 would be better. There maybe more 50s AHH-MUSA out there than 47's. You may want to compare the geometries of the Saluki and 650B AHH-MUSA to confirm. John Hawrylak Woodstown NJ On Saturday, September 3, 2022 at 9:16:23 PM UTC-4 bridav...@gmail.com wrote: > Hi- I'm on a quest to find 47cm Saluki or 49cm Bleriot frame set out > there...My PBH is 75cm. preferably old geometry & 650B set up. I know it > is fat chance to find one out there, especially small sizes. Hit me up if > you know anyone who may have one for sale. > > Thanks, > Brian M > Wilmington NC > -- 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/756e017e-ecea-457a-ad4e-70a898199ce6n%40googlegroups.com.
[RBW] Re: Advantages of front loading
Patrick Have you tried any loads *split* between the front and the rear??? Say 15# in front and 30# in rear?? John Hawrylak Woodstown NJ On Saturday, September 3, 2022 at 9:14:37 PM UTC-4 Patrick Moore wrote: > Just curious, after adjusting my Ortlieb Sports Packers to the front > lowriders and carrying home about 12 bulky lbs on the front of the 2020 > Matthews which is a geometrical clone of a 2003 Riv Road custom -- Riv lost > the geometry chart but I think it's med trail. > > 10 or 12 lb makes almost no difference in handling, but it does make > wheeling the bike one-handed (gripping stem and adjacent bar) through the > aisles less easy; 20 lb does slow the handling noticeably though not > impossibly. ~15 evenly divided is about the max for happiness. > > Rear loads are more stable. 20 lb in the rear is not noticeable, 30 lb in > the rear affects handling less than 20 (evenly distributed) does in front, > and I've carried 45 with the bike still rideable. (For comparo, my best > rear loader was an early 1970s thinnish wall and normal gauge 531 framed > racing bike with long stays and shortish front-center: Motobecane Grand > Record. Though light and flexy, with a *very* stiff 400 gram Tubus Fly > this carried 45 better than any stouter-tubed road bike I've owned, > including any of 4 Riv road models (well, if a first-gen Sam Hill is > "road). Another nice rear grocery load carrier was an '80s Fuji Royale "12 > speed" that actually handled better with 20 lb in back than it did unladen; > that one hated front loads. > > So, after that long windup, what is the benefit of front loading *on > Rivendell models*. Is it purely convenience? > > And, different question: what is the benefit of front loading on > *non-Rivendell > low-trail bikes*: convenience? > > Just curious and describing my own experience. > > -- > > --- > Patrick Moore > Alburquerque, Nuevo Mexico, Etats Unis d'Amerique, Orbis Terrarum > > -- 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/71f8081d-1b81-4629-b121-374866e6e25cn%40googlegroups.com.
[RBW] Re: WTB 47-49cm Saluki or Bleriot
Brian Have you considered an early AHH in 650B. The 650B AHH's were the Saluki, according to all the RBW literature. The Waterford AHH frames were in 2cm increments, so they may fit you better, if you can find them. Can not remember when RBW changed the name from Saluki to AHH for the 650B's, 2006-2007???? John Hawrylak Woodstown NJ On Saturday, September 3, 2022 at 9:16:23 PM UTC-4 bridav...@gmail.com wrote: > Hi- I'm on a quest to find 47cm Saluki or 49cm Bleriot frame set out > there...My PBH is 75cm. preferably old geometry & 650B set up. I know it > is fat chance to find one out there, especially small sizes. Hit me up if > you know anyone who may have one for sale. > > Thanks, > Brian M > Wilmington NC > -- 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/c7ae0ec5-bf19-4796-8491-de168877118bn%40googlegroups.com.
