subject:"Re\: \[RBW\] Rear fender mounting. Was\: Christmas Clementine"



On 12/30/2015 11:18 AM, ted wrote:
Actually, though it can be a bit tedious, it is not difficult to be 
very precise with spacers/shims.
Therefore I believe your presumption that they can not be used 
successfully with metal fenders is wrong.


If "tedious" bothers anyone, they should avoid metal fenders as they 
would the plague, because no matter what their installation is going to 
be tedious.  If you can make things fit with spacers and not have to 
adjust the curve of the fender by hand, then great -- because that's not 
only time consuming, it can be downright difficult and painful, and 
that's with soft, easily manipulated aluminum.  I'd hate to think about 
doing it with stainless.


--
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 post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [RBW] Rear fender mounting. Was: Christmas Clementine




On 12/30/2015 12:10 PM, ted wrote:
I have alway thought the reason for adjusting the fenders curve was to 
match the tire and get the fender line one wants.
If your fender doesn't match your tire radius they way you want it to, 
you have to adjust the fender or live with the miss-match.
For me that is a separate issue from bridge placement and spacers 
(unless of course the bridge blocks where the fender needs to go to 
get the line I want).


...or if you try to adjust the curve at the front part of the fender so 
you can reach a chain stay bridge that's too far away without spacers, 
or to reduce the size of the gap you need to bridge.


--
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 post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [RBW] Rear fender mounting. Was: Christmas Clementine

So. as long as this particular discussion is active, I'm hoping I can 
get a bit of related advice/suggestions.  I just yesterday got some SKS 
plastic fenders from Tim, to install on my 59 Clem, and am running into 
something I haven't seen before.

First of all though,  I can confirm that the kickstand plate is indeed 
further from the center of the wheel than the seatstay brace.  However BOTH 
mounting points are far enough away that they will need form of spacer - 
even with the enormous 2.4" tires I plan to use.My go-to solution is to 
stack aluminum inner chainring spacers as needed, and I will do that again. 
 They look nice.   Since the hole diameter is larger than the screw, a 
piece of rubber hose inside the stack keeps them snug and nicely aligned.   
I mention this just as an idea for the OP though.  My actual question is 
this:

The holes on the seatstay brace are oriented radially rather than 
tangentially, relative to the wheel axle, which I've never seen before. 
 [Picture below.]   What's the normal way to attach the fender in this 
configuration?  I'm sure I can hack something together, but thought I'd see 
if anybody has already figured out some elegant solution.   On "normal" 
bikes, it would probably work to simply drill through the  fender and bolt 
directly to the stay.  Especially where there's this much clearance.   But 
on the Clem, the unique curve of the stays means that the  hole is not 
actually pointing at the center of the axle, so it  looks like it would 
either require a wedge shaped spacer,  would end  up putting stress on the 
fender or bolt or both.  Thanks for any ideas.


 

-- 
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 post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [RBW] Rear fender mounting. Was: Christmas Clementine



On Wednesday, December 30, 2015 at 4:48:31 PM UTC-7, Steve Palincsar wrote:
>
>
> ???
>
>
The "napkin rings" were the cast reinforcements at the top and bottom of 
the headtubes, which have recessed lettering.   Together, they were 
supposed to say "RBW - EST 1994"  but the production versions ended up 
saying "RBW - RBW"   I'm quite sure they are already aware of this botch, 
though.

-- 
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 post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [RBW] Rear fender mounting. Was: Christmas Clementine




On 12/30/2015 07:09 PM, iamkeith wrote:



On Wednesday, December 30, 2015 at 4:48:31 PM UTC-7, Steve Palincsar 
wrote:



???


The "napkin rings" were the cast reinforcements at the top and bottom 
of the headtubes, which have recessed lettering. Together, they were 
supposed to say "RBW - EST 1994"  but the production versions ended up 
saying "RBW - RBW"   I'm quite sure they are already aware of this 
botch, though.




Ah.

--
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 post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [RBW] Rear fender mounting. Was: Christmas Clementine

2015-12-30 Thread William deRosset

Dear Keith,

A set of four (two pair) of the concave/convex washers sold with v-brake pads 
would sort that issue, one on either side of the fender. The best solution 
would have been for that threaded boss to have been oriented to the axis of the 
hub, I.e. rotating the boss  fifteen degrees or so. Complain, and they'll fix 
it on the next batch. Or not.

Best, 

Will
William M deRosset
Fort Collins

-- 
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 post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [RBW] Rear fender mounting. Was: Christmas Clementine

The boss on the underside of the brace is threaded.  But it is NOT at a 
right angle to the face of the fender, where it wants to be.Hard to 
show in a picture, so I'm slightly exaggerating in the photo below, just 
for illustration's sake.   Just slightly.  On your bike, the stays point 
directly at the dropout/axle, so everything is "in line" as you say, and 
aimed more-or-less directly at what would be the center of the arc of the 
fender.   On the clem, the hole is parallel to the stays where the brace 
happens to be attached, but the stays at that point are not pointed 
anywhere near the axle/dropout.  So there ends up being a wedge-shaped gap 
between the top of the fender and the bottom of the boss.   If I tried to 
firmly clamp the fender at that point, it would significantly deform and/or 
pull the fender out of alignment and/or stress the fender & bolt.  




I think the idea of sandwiching the fender between flexible rubber donuts 
will work.   Sort of like the way stud-mounted shock absorbers attache on 
some vehicles, to allow a variable angle.  I'll need to use a pair of nuts 
to lock against each other at the top, since it will not be possible to 
snug the bolt against anything.  






Only problem with this approach is that it will increase the length of the 
protrusion at the underside of the fender.   So I'm still open to other 
ideas, like the ones Ted suggests.  I'll look at bending the stock mounting 
tab, but it doesn't seem like it will quite work.  Am hoping someone has 
already dealt with this



Not sure I understand.  Does the seatstay brace have a threaded boss or 
> not?  This sure looks to me as though it's already drilled and tapped.
>
>
>
> If it its, you drill up through the fender directly under the threaded 
> hole.  As far as the fender surface and the seat stay are concerned, it's 
> all in line.  Where it is with respect to the hub (i.e., curvature of the 
> stays) shouldn't matter at all, and wouldn't put any stress on the fender.  
>
> Or is the issue that the hole is drilled at a slant, and won't be at right 
> angles to the fender surface?  Looking at what looks like a bolt head in 
> your photo, it looks as though it's straight through.  (I just don't know 
> what that little "nub" under the stay in this photo is.)
>

-- 
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 post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [RBW] Rear fender mounting. Was: Christmas Clementine

I think that's a good idea too!.  I'll try it. You are definitely 
visualizing the problem anyway.   Meanwhile, you bring up a question I've 
had:

I don't want to "complain" at all.  I'm not unhappy.   But, being a distant 
mail-order-only customer, I have no personal relationship with Rivendell. 
 What do Grant and the crew think about getting unsolicited "feedback?"  I 
have this image in my mind that they get random complaints and 
"suggestions" all the time from armchair bike designers, and I don't want 
to be one of 'those guys.'  It does seem like something that should be 
addressed on future batches or future bikes though.  (Along with reversing 
the bottom napkin ring and whatever other little glitches are discovered.) 
 On the other hand, I always got the feeling that this particular bike was 
intended, as much as anything,  as a way to use up some lugs and parts that 
didn't get used elsewhere, and as an experiment with maxing-out the  new 
chainstays - but that it wasn't going to be around indefinitely.  If that's 
the case, its hardly worth sweating such minor details.

On Wednesday, December 30, 2015 at 4:18:23 PM UTC-7, William deRosset wrote:
>
> Dear Keith,
>
> A set of four (two pair) of the concave/convex washers sold with v-brake 
> pads would sort that issue, one on either side of the fender. The best 
> solution would have been for that threaded boss to have been oriented to 
> the axis of the hub, I.e. rotating the boss  fifteen degrees or so. 
> Complain, and they'll fix it on the next batch. Or not.
>
> Best, 
>
> Will
> William M deRosset
> Fort Collins
>
>

-- 
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 post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [RBW] Rear fender mounting. Was: Christmas Clementine


I see.  That wasn't at all clear in the other photos, but it is here.

On 12/30/2015 06:23 PM, iamkeith wrote:
The boss on the underside of the brace is threaded.  But it is NOT at 
a right angle to the face of the fender, where it wants to be.Hard 
to show in a picture, so I'm slightly exaggerating in the photo below, 
just for illustration's sake. Just slightly.  On your bike, the stays 
point directly at the dropout/axle, so everything is "in line" as you 
say, and aimed more-or-less directly at what would be the center of 
the arc of the fender.   On the clem, the hole is parallel to the 
stays where the brace happens to be attached, but the stays at that 
point are not pointed anywhere near the axle/dropout.  So there ends 
up being a wedge-shaped gap between the top of the fender and the 
bottom of the boss.   If I tried to firmly clamp the fender at that 
point, it would significantly deform and/or pull the fender out of 
alignment and/or stress the fender & bolt.






I think the idea of sandwiching the fender between flexible rubber 
donuts will work.   Sort of like the way stud-mounted shock absorbers 
attache on some vehicles, to allow a variable angle.  I'll need to use 
a pair of nuts to lock against each other at the top, since it will 
not be possible to snug the bolt against anything.







Only problem with this approach is that it will increase the length of 
the protrusion at the underside of the fender.   So I'm still open to 
other ideas, like the ones Ted suggests.  I'll look at bending the 
stock mounting tab, but it doesn't seem like it will quite work.  Am 
hoping someone has already dealt with this




That rubber shim "underneath" could be a tapered washer, it doesn't have 
to be rubber.



--
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 post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [RBW] Rear fender mounting. Was: Christmas Clementine




On 12/30/2015 06:32 PM, iamkeith wrote:
I think that's a good idea too!.  I'll try it. You are definitely 
visualizing the problem anyway.   Meanwhile, you bring up a question 
I've had:


I don't want to "complain" at all.  I'm not unhappy.   But, being a 
distant mail-order-only customer, I have no personal relationship with 
Rivendell.  What do Grant and the crew think about getting unsolicited 
"feedback?"


I think they'd better like it, because they're getting plenty of it here 
and if they didn't I think we'd have heard about it by now.



I have this image in my mind that they get random complaints and 
"suggestions" all the time from armchair bike designers, and I don't 
want to be one of 'those guys.'


This doesn't fall into that class at all.  This is a case of "Hey, the 
way you made that thing makes it damned hard for me to put fenders on 
the bike. Hard to believe that was intentional, was there a screw-up 
somewhere?"  That's not a "random suggestion from an armchair designer."



It does seem like something that should be addressed on future batches 
or future bikes though.  (Along with reversing the bottom napkin ring


???

and whatever other little glitches are discovered.)  On the other 
hand, I always got the feeling that this particular bike was intended, 
as much as anything,  as a way to use up some lugs and parts that 
didn't get used elsewhere, and as an experiment with maxing-out the 
 new chainstays - but that it wasn't going to be around indefinitely. 
 If that's the case, its hardly worth sweating such minor details.


It's always worth sweating the details.



On Wednesday, December 30, 2015 at 4:18:23 PM UTC-7, William deRosset 
wrote:


Dear Keith,

A set of four (two pair) of the concave/convex washers sold with
v-brake pads would sort that issue, one on either side of the
fender. The best solution would have been for that threaded boss
to have been oriented to the axis of the hub, I.e. rotating the
boss  fifteen degrees or so. Complain, and they'll fix it on the
next batch. Or not.




I think we already did that for him... :-)
(complain, I mean)


--
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 post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [RBW] Rear fender mounting. Was: Christmas Clementine

2015-12-30 Thread ted

I have alway thought the reason for adjusting the fenders curve was to 
match the tire and get the fender line one wants.
If your fender doesn't match your tire radius they way you want it to, you 
have to adjust the fender or live with the miss-match.
For me that is a separate issue from bridge placement and spacers (unless 
of course the bridge blocks where the fender needs to go to get the line I 
want).

On Wednesday, December 30, 2015 at 8:32:58 AM UTC-8, Steve Palincsar wrote:
>
>
> On 12/30/2015 11:18 AM, ted wrote: 
> > Actually, though it can be a bit tedious, it is not difficult to be 
> > very precise with spacers/shims. 
> > Therefore I believe your presumption that they can not be used 
> > successfully with metal fenders is wrong. 
>
> If "tedious" bothers anyone, they should avoid metal fenders as they 
> would the plague, because no matter what their installation is going to 
> be tedious.  If you can make things fit with spacers and not have to 
> adjust the curve of the fender by hand, then great -- because that's not 
> only time consuming, it can be downright difficult and painful, and 
> that's with soft, easily manipulated aluminum.  I'd hate to think about 
> doing it with stainless. 
>

-- 
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 post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [RBW] Rear fender mounting. Was: Christmas Clementine

2015-12-30 Thread 'Mark in Beacon' via RBW Owners Bunch



As the original poster, I'd like to just say that I was only asking for 
some guidance on an attachment point I had not previously dealt with, not 
whining! I would not say I have an abhorrence of spacers; I've set up a few 
custom spring things at the chainstay points on bikes with horizontal 
dropouts. Though I would say fender fussing is not on my top ten fun things 
to do with a bicycle! In any case, thanks everyone for toning it down and 
making it useful--after all, who wants a fender bender to start the new 
year?!  I think I can work it out from here. Thanks to all, and to all a 
happy new year!










On Tuesday, December 29, 2015 at 8:18:33 PM UTC-5, ted wrote:
>
> Easy and hard are subjective assessments made by the person doing the 
> work, but ...
> I don't think it is accurate to say that "Rivendells are typically not 
> really very well set up for fendering." They take fenders just fine. They 
> all have room for fenders, they all have fender eyelets so you don't have 
> to use p clamps, they all have chainstay bridges or kickstand plates that 
> accommodate bolting a fender there.
> Apparently some folks find using spacers hard. I don't, and I doubt I am 
> alone in that view. The only thing I have ever encountered that really made 
> putting fenders on a bike hard was there not being room for them. 
> I am a bit mystified by the fixation on equidistant bridges (or kickstand 
> plates), and abhorrence of spacers some folks seem to have.
> If one orders a custom built bike and feels strongly about such details 
> then by all means make your preferences known and the builder should honor 
> them. Otherwise, if the fenders fit stop whining.
>
> On Tuesday, December 29, 2015 at 4:06:07 PM UTC-8, Bill Lindsay wrote:
>>
>> "Maybe I expected too much."
>>
>> I think your definition of "perfect fenders" is identical to mine.  If I 
>> specified a custom, I would specify "perfect fenders" and I would specify 
>> what I mean by perfect fenders in the minute detail and I would expect to 
>> get them.  I don't know if you have actually ever specified a custom 
>> frame.  I know you purchased at least one bike that was originally built 
>> custom for somebody else, your Longstaff, but I don't think you had 
>> anything to do with the original spec.  I also know that you bought a 
>> M.A.P. Randonneur Project, which has some custom aspects.  Mitch builds 
>> perfect fenderability whether you specify that or not, as I understand it.  
>>
>> My Atlantis has perfectly equidistant bridges in the back.  Since I'm 
>> using tires that are far skinnier than the max, I've chosen to use a 5mm 
>> spacer at both bridges, but it's the identical 5mm spacer at both spots, as 
>> it should be.  If I needed no spacer at the seatstay bridge and needed a 
>> >1.5" spacer at the chainstay bridge, I would be disappointed, just like 
>> you.  I might even ask for a new frame.  I would probably not use that 
>> situation to conclude that the bicycle company responsible for it was 
>> consistently or "typically" sloppy or careless.  
>>
>> Specifically, I bought one of those factory refurbished "Renovelo" frames 
>> from Rivendell.  It was badly out of alignment, but it passed the string 
>> test.  Riv had checked it with the string test and didn't check it on a 
>> frame table or by putting a wheel in it.  I returned it and Rivendell more 
>> than made it right.  If I wanted to, I could have made a big deal about it, 
>> claiming Rivendell was sloppy or didn't care about quality.  I could have 
>> told that story as often as you have talked about that small Atlantis.  Or, 
>> I could let them take care of it to my satisfaction and be done with it.  
>>
>> Bill Lindsay
>> El Cerrito, CA
>>
>> On Tuesday, December 29, 2015 at 3:09:15 PM UTC-8, Steve Palincsar wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 12/29/2015 05:39 PM, Bill Lindsay wrote: 
>>> > Steve 
>>> > 
>>> > You will be pleased to know my Hillborne has a threaded boss on the 
>>> > underside of the seatstay bridge, perfectly placed for easy fender 
>>> > installation.  My Hillborne has a threaded boss on the trailing edge 
>>> > of its kickstand plate, perfectly placed for easy perfect fender 
>>> > line.  All my Rivendells have vertical dropouts, which allow me to 
>>> > achieve good fenderlines.  I've owned several Rivendells and none of 
>>> > them required a wine cork. 
>>>
>>> I am indeed pleased to hear that.   It's what we should expect on a 
>>> quality frame, and other than issues with misplaced bridges Rivendells 
>>> certainly are quality frames. 
>>>
>>>
>>> > So from my perspective "typical" is very good fenderability.  Not 
>>> > perfect, but very good.  I was pleased to inspect the Appaloosa 
>>> > frameset and find an inward facing threaded boss on the seatstay 
>>> > bridge.  I hope they are equidistant, as you would hope.  So, not

Re: [RBW] Rear fender mounting. Was: Christmas Clementine

Oops.  Deleted my previous post becasue I just realized I was asking the 
exact same question that Mark was asking in the other thread, which was 
what initiated this thread in the first place.  Didn't really see an answer 
yet though, so let me simplify my question:

I don't worry, in theory, about drilling up through the rear fender, for 
attachment directly to the seatstay brace.   What I worry about is the fact 
that, because of the curvature of the seatstays on the clem,  the hole on 
the brace is not oriented axially toward the center of the wheel (or 
fender).  It aims several inches forward of the axle.   So bolting tightly 
to it would put a lot of stress on the fender, and deform it or pull 
through after some use.   Or would bend the bolt if I used a spacer.  It's 
a pretty significant angle discrepancy when you see it in person - at least 
on the 59 clem.  

Does anybody know of another elegant way to do this?  Perhaps by adding a 
second bracket between the factory clip and the mounting hole?  Or using 
spherical disc brake hardware, or something of the sort, to compensate for 
the difference in angle?



-- 
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 post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [RBW] Rear fender mounting. Was: Christmas Clementine

Thanks, Steve.  I guess I was clarifying/correcting my question as you were 
responding.  You may have inadvertently answered it though:  If I use some 
sort of thick rubber that can deform, on both sides of the fender, that may 
solve the problem just fine.

-- 
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 post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [RBW] Rear fender mounting. Was: Christmas Clementine



On 12/30/2015 04:45 PM, iamkeith wrote:
I don't worry, in theory, about drilling up through the rear fender, 
for attachment directly to the seatstay brace. What I worry about is 
the fact that, because of the curvature of the seatstays on the clem, 
 the hole on the brace is not oriented axially toward the center of 
the wheel (or fender).  It aims several inches forward of the axle.   
So bolting tightly to it would put a lot of stress on the fender, and 
deform it or pull through after some use.   Or would bend the bolt if 
I used a spacer.  It's a pretty significant angle discrepancy when you 
see it in person - at least on the 59 clem. 


Not sure I understand.  Does the seatstay brace have a threaded boss or 
not?  This sure looks to me as though it's already drilled and tapped.




If it its, you drill up through the fender directly under the threaded 
hole.  As far as the fender surface and the seat stay are concerned, 
it's all in line.  Where it is with respect to the hub (i.e., curvature 
of the stays) shouldn't matter at all, and wouldn't put any stress on 
the fender.


Or is the issue that the hole is drilled at a slant, and won't be at 
right angles to the fender surface?  Looking at what looks like a bolt 
head in your photo, it looks as though it's straight through. (I just 
don't know what that little "nub" under the stay in this photo is.)


--
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 post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [RBW] Rear fender mounting. Was: Christmas Clementine

2015-12-30 Thread ted

iamkieth,

It looks like you might have room to bend the tang of your sliding bridge 
over into the tangent orientation and then use a hex head bolt to attach it 
to the bottom side of the bridge. I think I would try something along those 
lines before messing with cutting/filing wedge shaped spacers to account 
for the angle miss match. If the sliding bridge won't work the way Im 
suggesting, perhaps bolt a piece of flat stock to the bridge extending aft 
and then bolt to the fender to that behind the bridge?

Did you really mean disk brake hardware in your last sentence, or were you 
thinking of the spherical washers on regular brake pad holders that are 
used to adjust toe in? In any case those might bear looking into too.


On Wednesday, December 30, 2015 at 1:45:49 PM UTC-8, iamkeith wrote:
>
> Oops.  Deleted my previous post becasue I just realized I was asking the 
> exact same question that Mark was asking in the other thread, which was 
> what initiated this thread in the first place.  Didn't really see an answer 
> yet though, so let me simplify my question:
>
> I don't worry, in theory, about drilling up through the rear fender, for 
> attachment directly to the seatstay brace.   What I worry about is the fact 
> that, because of the curvature of the seatstays on the clem,  the hole on 
> the brace is not oriented axially toward the center of the wheel (or 
> fender).  It aims several inches forward of the axle.   So bolting tightly 
> to it would put a lot of stress on the fender, and deform it or pull 
> through after some use.   Or would bend the bolt if I used a spacer.  It's 
> a pretty significant angle discrepancy when you see it in person - at least 
> on the 59 clem.  
>
> Does anybody know of another elegant way to do this?  Perhaps by adding a 
> second bracket between the factory clip and the mounting hole?  Or using 
> spherical disc brake hardware, or something of the sort, to compensate for 
> the difference in angle?
>
>
> 
>
>

-- 
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 post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [RBW] Rear fender mounting. Was: Christmas Clementine

Awesome.  That is a true "hack."Does that mean that you've actually 
been getting rain and snow in the desert this winter?  I've been meaning to 
tell you how impressed I am with the way you've figured out and dialed-in 
that bike already.  I've been riding one or more bontragers continuously 
since 1994.  For 8 years, my Race was my only functioning bike.  Then it 
had a baby seat mounted to it.   Had a Race Lite briefly, but decided I'm 
too heavy.  Now on a Ti lite, but working on a non-suspension-corrected OR 
at the moment.   Thing is, it took me decades to figure out some of the 
things you already did  - like  how much better it rides with a shorter 
stem, more seat setback and higher bars. 

On Wednesday, December 30, 2015 at 5:38:07 PM UTC-7, Patrick Moore wrote:
>
> That looks like a design or a production flaw, to me. If I were you, I'd 
> hack a wedge-shaped spacer, and then complain to Rivendell.
>
> I've had my own, self-imposed fender hassles, but nothing like this!
>
> I append for comic relief the fender arrangement (I am going to market 
> this system under the trade name, HalfAssed Fenders) I hacked today for my 
> Race Lite, which has no fender bosses, no hole in the fork crown, and brake 
> boosters that clear the new, larger tires by about 1/4".
>
>
>

-- 
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 post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [RBW] Rear fender mounting. Was: Christmas Clementine



On 12/30/2015 12:34 AM, ted wrote:
I wonder what the fender material has to do with it since I never 
"just grab hold of it, yank in the direction you want and clamp it down".
I use a spacer to support the fender where I want it to get the fender 
line I want (as long as the frame is not in the way).
Is the use of spacers to adjust fit really beyond your comprehension, 
or are you being willfully obtuse?


You cannot use spacers to adjust the line of the curve of the fender.  
With plastic fenders you just pull the fender where you want it to be, 
with metal ones you have to adjust the curve by opening or closing the 
fender opening a bit.  Yes, you can use spacers to fill a gross gap 
between the forward edge of the rear fender and the chain stay bridge 
but you don't have to be very accurate, you can pull the fender to where 
you want it and hold it in place with tension without doing any harm to 
the fender.   Do that with aluminum fenders and they will crack.


As you say, is that "beyond your comprehension, or are you being 
willfully obtuse?"



--
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 post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [RBW] Rear fender mounting. Was: Christmas Clementine



On 12/29/2015 10:36 PM, William deRosset wrote:

Dear Steve,

Sure. The Longstaff was built to carry fenders full-time. The basic Rivendell 
design templates were adapted/lifted from Bridgestone and Schwinn Paramount 
production concepts and standard American build practice. These are not bad 
roots, but they are grounded in a less-specified build concept, that of 
frame+wheels+parts+accessories vs. integrated design.

The Rivendells products I have used were built with horizontal dropouts, and 
used a forward-biased fitting for the chainstay bridge as a result. They were 
built to clear a design tire when inflated, and fender line was apparently not 
a significant priority. Having room for them was an avowed concern.

Besides, the Rivendell sales literature ppked a bit of fun at the Honjo fenders 
in favor of Esges, and made specific reference to the difficulties of Honjo 
setup.



As usual, I think you have got it 100% correct.




--
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 post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [RBW] Rear fender mounting. Was: Christmas Clementine




On 12/29/2015 11:52 PM, William deRosset wrote:

Dear Will,

Expanding on my own post--is this a sign of senility?


No more so than a composer taking a delightful short melody and 
expanding it into a full-fledged symphony.   This is a wonderful 
exposition, and I am sure you are 100% correct.  It explains everything.




I did want to point out that  the rear fender lines of early Rivendell 
designs aren't accidental. They are consistent with most 
non-constructeur builds of any era. There were a few Japanese bikes, a 
few now very influential French bikes, and a few British bikes that 
bucked this trend, but they were the exception, not ordinarily widely 
produced, and, significantly, ordinarily featured vertical dropouts.


If you design around maximum "versatility", you build around 
horizontal dropouts (fixed wheel/singlespeed/internal hub 
gear/derailleur gears all work fine), and, if you maximize the tire 
clearance for a given bridge-mounted brake, then you end up with an 
offset chainstay bridge given the dropout configuration--bad fender 
line, but big tire clearance without deflating the rear tire. This is 
the bargain the early Rivendell designs made. You can do anything with 
them, they're lovingly built of the best materials, fantastically 
finished, and they maximized the stock technology of the mid-1990's.


Digression: I bet there is a lag from the widespread switch to 
vertical dropouts and capitializing on the improvement to fender 
alignment made possible by vertical dropouts. It sounds like Grant's 
designs caught up sometime after the early bikes (including my own 
Heron) and the early Atlantis were designed.


This switch to vertical dropouts resulted from a push from the MTB 
world to shorten chainstays, one initiated byGrant Petersen's MB 
designs. It was enthusiastically picked up by the 
22mm-max-tire-crit-racing bike designers that finally drove "road 
bikes" into a ditch that Grant worked hard to avoid with his 
road-going designs, before leading/following his demographic into 
lovely cruisers and non-suspension light mountain bikes. "Gravel 
bikes" and most cyclocross bikes, honestly, are probably the 
non-racer's commercially-available road-bike answer to the mass-market 
road-racing bike, which started to fall into the specialization trap 
starting sometime before I rode road bikes thirty-five years ago, and 
has stayed there, immobilized by strictures of "lighter, stiffer, and 
more aero", and the "purposeful" racing aesthetic of really tight tire 
clearances. Modern racing bikes are a ball to drive, but they're not 
practical machines for most of us. Moving on


In fact, many builders though the mid 2000's, including Waterford, 
just specified a standard cast bit for the chainstay bridge, which, 
depending on the chainstay length and the chainstay configuration, 
would be located in different places relative to the rear axle, but 
well away from the arc of an inflated tire as it was removed from a 
(hypothetical) horizontal dropout. Basically, that one, even if a 
threaded boss was added for a fender, had a go/no go spec, and users 
of fenders could work out how to make up the difference on their own 
time, and if the buyer isn't insisting on more closely-specified 
design, or didn't know to ask, then why torture your builder to locate 
that bridge in a given spot--about an "unimportant" detail?  "It has 
clearance, clarence"


With vertical dropouts and braze-on brakes, there really isn't any 
good functional reason (there are production reasons, but they're 
minor if you care) not to place the bridges equidistant from the wheel 
axis, and there really isn't any good reason not to include a threaded 
boss perpendicular to the fender--unless it isn't a design 
consideration or unless you specifically don't want fenders on the 
bike. Even so, basic good design puts the support structure in the 
right places.  For example, my own Road Sport, built by Waterford 
under contract to Boulder Bicycles, includes equidistant bridges and 
would fit fenders and its design tire fine, even though the bike was 
intended /not/ to accept fenders by its maker (no eyelets, no bridge 
bosses. Mine ended up with one bridge boss, due to a prototyping 
error...) due to the potential horror of toe clip overlap potential on 
racing bikes.





--
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 post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [RBW] Rear fender mounting. Was: Christmas Clementine

2015-12-30 Thread Shoji Takahashi

Hi Will,
Thanks for the history! I love these stories.

Happy New Year to all,
Shoji



On Wednesday, December 30, 2015 at 9:47:06 AM UTC-5, Steve Palincsar wrote:
>
>
>
> On 12/29/2015 11:52 PM, William deRosset wrote:
>
> Dear Will,
>
> Expanding on my own post--is this a sign of senility? 
>
>
> No more so than a composer taking a delightful short melody and expanding 
> it into a full-fledged symphony.   This is a wonderful exposition, and I am 
> sure you are 100% correct.  It explains everything.
>
>
> I did want to point out that  the rear fender lines of early Rivendell 
> designs aren't accidental. They are consistent with most non-constructeur 
> builds of any era. There were a few Japanese bikes, a few now very 
> influential French bikes, and a few British bikes that bucked this trend, 
> but they were the exception, not ordinarily widely produced, and, 
> significantly, ordinarily featured vertical dropouts. 
>
> If you design around maximum "versatility", you build around horizontal 
> dropouts (fixed wheel/singlespeed/internal hub gear/derailleur gears all 
> work fine), and, if you maximize the tire clearance for a given 
> bridge-mounted brake, then you end up with an offset chainstay bridge given 
> the dropout configuration--bad fender line, but big tire clearance without 
> deflating the rear tire. This is the bargain the early Rivendell designs 
> made. You can do anything with them, they're lovingly built of the best 
> materials, fantastically finished, and they maximized the stock technology 
> of the mid-1990's.
>
> Digression: I bet there is a lag from the widespread switch to vertical 
> dropouts and capitializing on the improvement to fender alignment made 
> possible by vertical dropouts. It sounds like Grant's designs caught up 
> sometime after the early bikes (including my own Heron) and the early 
> Atlantis were designed.
>
> This switch to vertical dropouts resulted from a push from the MTB world 
> to shorten chainstays, one initiated byGrant Petersen's MB designs. It 
> was enthusiastically picked up by the 22mm-max-tire-crit-racing bike 
> designers that finally drove "road bikes" into a ditch that Grant worked 
> hard to avoid with his road-going designs, before leading/following his 
> demographic into lovely cruisers and non-suspension light mountain bikes. 
> "Gravel bikes" and most cyclocross bikes, honestly, are probably the 
> non-racer's commercially-available road-bike answer to the mass-market 
> road-racing bike, which started to fall into the specialization trap 
> starting sometime before I rode road bikes thirty-five years ago, and has 
> stayed there, immobilized by strictures of "lighter, stiffer, and more 
> aero", and the "purposeful" racing aesthetic of really tight tire 
> clearances. Modern racing bikes are a ball to drive, but they're not 
> practical machines for most of us. Moving on
>
> In fact, many builders though the mid 2000's, including Waterford, just 
> specified a standard cast bit for the chainstay bridge, which, depending on 
> the chainstay length and the chainstay configuration, would be located in 
> different places relative to the rear axle, but well away from the arc of 
> an inflated tire as it was removed from a (hypothetical) horizontal 
> dropout. Basically, that one, even if a threaded boss was added for a 
> fender, had a go/no go spec, and users of fenders could work out how to 
> make up the difference on their own time, and if the buyer isn't insisting 
> on more closely-specified design, or didn't know to ask, then why torture 
> your builder to locate that bridge in a given spot--about an "unimportant" 
> detail?  "It has clearance, clarence"
>
> With vertical dropouts and braze-on brakes, there really isn't any good 
> functional reason (there are production reasons, but they're minor if you 
> care) not to place the bridges equidistant from the wheel axis, and there 
> really isn't any good reason not to include a threaded boss perpendicular 
> to the fender--unless it isn't a design consideration or unless you 
> specifically don't want fenders on the bike. Even so, basic good design 
> puts the support structure in the right places.  For example, my own Road 
> Sport, built by Waterford under contract to Boulder Bicycles, includes 
> equidistant bridges and would fit fenders and its design tire fine, even 
> though the bike was intended *not* to accept fenders by its maker (no 
> eyelets, no bridge bosses. Mine ended up with one bridge boss, due to a 
> prototyping error...) due to the potential horror of toe clip overlap 
> potential on racing bikes.
>
>
>
>

-- 
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 post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at

Re: [RBW] Rear fender mounting. Was: Christmas Clementine

2015-12-30 Thread Patrick Moore

+1; Will's posts are among my favorites. Don't get senile *too *quickly,
please.

On Wed, Dec 30, 2015 at 8:23 AM, Shoji Takahashi 
wrote:

> Hi Will,
> Thanks for the history! I love these stories.
>
> Happy New Year to all,
> Shoji
>
>
>
> On Wednesday, December 30, 2015 at 9:47:06 AM UTC-5, Steve Palincsar wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> On 12/29/2015 11:52 PM, William deRosset wrote:
>>
>> Dear Will,
>>
>> Expanding on my own post--is this a sign of senility?
>>
>>
>> No more so than a composer taking a delightful short melody and expanding
>> it into a full-fledged symphony.   This is a wonderful exposition, and I am
>> sure you are 100% correct.  It explains everything.
>>
>>
>> I did want to point out that  the rear fender lines of early Rivendell
>> designs aren't accidental. They are consistent with most non-constructeur
>> builds of any era. There were a few Japanese bikes, a few now very
>> influential French bikes, and a few British bikes that bucked this trend,
>> but they were the exception, not ordinarily widely produced, and,
>> significantly, ordinarily featured vertical dropouts.
>>
>> If you design around maximum "versatility", you build around horizontal
>> dropouts (fixed wheel/singlespeed/internal hub gear/derailleur gears all
>> work fine), and, if you maximize the tire clearance for a given
>> bridge-mounted brake, then you end up with an offset chainstay bridge given
>> the dropout configuration--bad fender line, but big tire clearance without
>> deflating the rear tire. This is the bargain the early Rivendell designs
>> made. You can do anything with them, they're lovingly built of the best
>> materials, fantastically finished, and they maximized the stock technology
>> of the mid-1990's.
>>
>> Digression: I bet there is a lag from the widespread switch to vertical
>> dropouts and capitializing on the improvement to fender alignment made
>> possible by vertical dropouts. It sounds like Grant's designs caught up
>> sometime after the early bikes (including my own Heron) and the early
>> Atlantis were designed.
>>
>> This switch to vertical dropouts resulted from a push from the MTB world
>> to shorten chainstays, one initiated byGrant Petersen's MB designs. It
>> was enthusiastically picked up by the 22mm-max-tire-crit-racing bike
>> designers that finally drove "road bikes" into a ditch that Grant worked
>> hard to avoid with his road-going designs, before leading/following his
>> demographic into lovely cruisers and non-suspension light mountain bikes.
>> "Gravel bikes" and most cyclocross bikes, honestly, are probably the
>> non-racer's commercially-available road-bike answer to the mass-market
>> road-racing bike, which started to fall into the specialization trap
>> starting sometime before I rode road bikes thirty-five years ago, and has
>> stayed there, immobilized by strictures of "lighter, stiffer, and more
>> aero", and the "purposeful" racing aesthetic of really tight tire
>> clearances. Modern racing bikes are a ball to drive, but they're not
>> practical machines for most of us. Moving on
>>
>> In fact, many builders though the mid 2000's, including Waterford, just
>> specified a standard cast bit for the chainstay bridge, which, depending on
>> the chainstay length and the chainstay configuration, would be located in
>> different places relative to the rear axle, but well away from the arc of
>> an inflated tire as it was removed from a (hypothetical) horizontal
>> dropout. Basically, that one, even if a threaded boss was added for a
>> fender, had a go/no go spec, and users of fenders could work out how to
>> make up the difference on their own time, and if the buyer isn't insisting
>> on more closely-specified design, or didn't know to ask, then why torture
>> your builder to locate that bridge in a given spot--about an "unimportant"
>> detail?  "It has clearance, clarence"
>>
>> With vertical dropouts and braze-on brakes, there really isn't any good
>> functional reason (there are production reasons, but they're minor if you
>> care) not to place the bridges equidistant from the wheel axis, and there
>> really isn't any good reason not to include a threaded boss perpendicular
>> to the fender--unless it isn't a design consideration or unless you
>> specifically don't want fenders on the bike. Even so, basic good design
>> puts the support structure in the right places.  For example, my own Road
>> Sport, built by Waterford under contract to Boulder Bicycles, includes
>> equidistant bridges and would fit fenders and its design tire fine, even
>> though the bike was intended *not* to accept fenders by its maker (no
>> eyelets, no bridge bosses. Mine ended up with one bridge boss, due to a
>> prototyping error...) due to the potential horror of toe clip overlap
>> potential on racing bikes.
>>
>>
>>
>> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "RBW Owners Bunch" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group

Re: [RBW] Rear fender mounting. Was: Christmas Clementine

2015-12-29 Thread Jim Bronson

Generally true, although my buddy's Riv custom sets up really well for
fenders, probably because he specified it needed to be built that way.
I am jealous of his custom, the fenders look so clean compared to
mine.

On Tue, Dec 29, 2015 at 2:47 PM, Steve Palincsar  wrote:
>
>
> On 12/29/2015 12:03 PM, 'Mark in Beacon' via RBW Owners Bunch wrote:
>>
>>
>> Thanks, Steve. I get the theory behind the better, but as I said, I've
>> never experienced shifting or rattling caused by the seat stay attachment.
>> This includes plastic SKS, old Bluemels, and newer VO metal fenders. Maybe
>> I've been lucky, but I'm also not sure how much play can develop at the mid
>> point if both the fore (chainstay) and aft (drop-out braze-on) attachment
>> points are secure, and the bracket is pinched well. I do understand that the
>> other way may offer a cleaner, more integrated look for high end machines,
>> and I know what you mean that the situation has improved--my newer model VO
>> fenders are easier to set up than the first iterations. (In fact I did find
>> one of my bicycles with a similar attachment, though these fenders were OEM.
>> My not terribly high end Raleigh Twenty.) And finally, if you are going to
>> design a "fancy" constructeur-style attachment for the rear, why not include
>> the fork crown eye bolt, which is not to be found on the Clem (which has
>> plenty of other braze-ons, so I doubt it is a matter of cutting corners)?
>>
>
> Rivendells are typically not really very well set up for fendering. Not only
> is there not a fork crown eye bolt, but all too often the bridges are not
> placed equidistant from the wheel centers, making it difficult if not
> impossible to achieve a good fender line.  I recall as a case in point one
> small Atlantis that needed the full length of a wine cork as a spacer
> between the edge of the fender and the chainstay bridge.  It doesn't cost
> any more to put the bridges in the right place than to put them 2-3cm too
> far away, so it's clearly not a cost issue, but rather one of not caring.
> And after all, no one who cared would even dream of suggesting using zip
> ties to mount fenders on a bike costing several thousand dollars.
>
> But then, think about the climate out where those bikes are designed.  I've
> never been there, but I've heard many times Walnut Creek is a place where it
> rains for a couple of months, and then nary a drop for the rest of the year,
> so full-time fenders don't make a compelling case.
>
>
>
> --
> 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 post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
> Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.



-- 
--
signature goes here

-- 
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 post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [RBW] Rear fender mounting. Was: Christmas Clementine

2015-12-29 Thread sameness

What is the sound of one hand wringing?

Jeff Hagedorn
Los Angeles, CA 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 post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [RBW] Rear fender mounting. Was: Christmas Clementine




On 12/29/2015 05:39 PM, Bill Lindsay wrote:

Steve

You will be pleased to know my Hillborne has a threaded boss on the 
underside of the seatstay bridge, perfectly placed for easy fender 
installation.  My Hillborne has a threaded boss on the trailing edge 
of its kickstand plate, perfectly placed for easy perfect fender 
line.  All my Rivendells have vertical dropouts, which allow me to 
achieve good fenderlines.  I've owned several Rivendells and none of 
them required a wine cork.


I am indeed pleased to hear that.   It's what we should expect on a 
quality frame, and other than issues with misplaced bridges Rivendells 
certainly are quality frames.



So from my perspective "typical" is very good fenderability.  Not 
perfect, but very good.  I was pleased to inspect the Appaloosa 
frameset and find an inward facing threaded boss on the seatstay 
bridge.  I hope they are equidistant, as you would hope.  So, not all 
Rivendells will infuriate you the way that one small Atlantis did and 
continues to do.  I can't think of anybody on this group that has 
gotten as much mileage out of badmouthing somebody else's bike than 
you have out of that one small Atlantis.  Maybe all my recent good 
luck with fenders on Rivendells has been the result of your frequent 
"constructive criticism" of that one small Atlantis? If that's the 
case, thanks!


What can I say?  "Infuriating" is wrong: I found it shocking. 
Dismaying.  Deeply disappointing.  Maybe I expected too much.  If things 
have changed for the better, then I am delighted.




--
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 post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [RBW] Rear fender mounting. Was: Christmas Clementine

2015-12-29 Thread ted

Easy and hard are subjective assessments made by the person doing the work, 
but ...
I don't think it is accurate to say that "Rivendells are typically not 
really very well set up for fendering." They take fenders just fine. They 
all have room for fenders, they all have fender eyelets so you don't have 
to use p clamps, they all have chainstay bridges or kickstand plates that 
accommodate bolting a fender there.
Apparently some folks find using spacers hard. I don't, and I doubt I am 
alone in that view. The only thing I have ever encountered that really made 
putting fenders on a bike hard was there not being room for them. 
I am a bit mystified by the fixation on equidistant bridges (or kickstand 
plates), and abhorrence of spacers some folks seem to have.
If one orders a custom built bike and feels strongly about such details 
then by all means make your preferences known and the builder should honor 
them. Otherwise, if the fenders fit stop whining.

On Tuesday, December 29, 2015 at 4:06:07 PM UTC-8, Bill Lindsay wrote:
>
> "Maybe I expected too much."
>
> I think your definition of "perfect fenders" is identical to mine.  If I 
> specified a custom, I would specify "perfect fenders" and I would specify 
> what I mean by perfect fenders in the minute detail and I would expect to 
> get them.  I don't know if you have actually ever specified a custom 
> frame.  I know you purchased at least one bike that was originally built 
> custom for somebody else, your Longstaff, but I don't think you had 
> anything to do with the original spec.  I also know that you bought a 
> M.A.P. Randonneur Project, which has some custom aspects.  Mitch builds 
> perfect fenderability whether you specify that or not, as I understand it.  
>
> My Atlantis has perfectly equidistant bridges in the back.  Since I'm 
> using tires that are far skinnier than the max, I've chosen to use a 5mm 
> spacer at both bridges, but it's the identical 5mm spacer at both spots, as 
> it should be.  If I needed no spacer at the seatstay bridge and needed a 
> >1.5" spacer at the chainstay bridge, I would be disappointed, just like 
> you.  I might even ask for a new frame.  I would probably not use that 
> situation to conclude that the bicycle company responsible for it was 
> consistently or "typically" sloppy or careless.  
>
> Specifically, I bought one of those factory refurbished "Renovelo" frames 
> from Rivendell.  It was badly out of alignment, but it passed the string 
> test.  Riv had checked it with the string test and didn't check it on a 
> frame table or by putting a wheel in it.  I returned it and Rivendell more 
> than made it right.  If I wanted to, I could have made a big deal about it, 
> claiming Rivendell was sloppy or didn't care about quality.  I could have 
> told that story as often as you have talked about that small Atlantis.  Or, 
> I could let them take care of it to my satisfaction and be done with it.  
>
> Bill Lindsay
> El Cerrito, CA
>
> On Tuesday, December 29, 2015 at 3:09:15 PM UTC-8, Steve Palincsar wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> On 12/29/2015 05:39 PM, Bill Lindsay wrote: 
>> > Steve 
>> > 
>> > You will be pleased to know my Hillborne has a threaded boss on the 
>> > underside of the seatstay bridge, perfectly placed for easy fender 
>> > installation.  My Hillborne has a threaded boss on the trailing edge 
>> > of its kickstand plate, perfectly placed for easy perfect fender 
>> > line.  All my Rivendells have vertical dropouts, which allow me to 
>> > achieve good fenderlines.  I've owned several Rivendells and none of 
>> > them required a wine cork. 
>>
>> I am indeed pleased to hear that.   It's what we should expect on a 
>> quality frame, and other than issues with misplaced bridges Rivendells 
>> certainly are quality frames. 
>>
>>
>> > So from my perspective "typical" is very good fenderability.  Not 
>> > perfect, but very good.  I was pleased to inspect the Appaloosa 
>> > frameset and find an inward facing threaded boss on the seatstay 
>> > bridge.  I hope they are equidistant, as you would hope.  So, not all 
>> > Rivendells will infuriate you the way that one small Atlantis did and 
>> > continues to do.  I can't think of anybody on this group that has 
>> > gotten as much mileage out of badmouthing somebody else's bike than 
>> > you have out of that one small Atlantis.  Maybe all my recent good 
>> > luck with fenders on Rivendells has been the result of your frequent 
>> > "constructive criticism" of that one small Atlantis? If that's the 
>> > case, thanks! 
>>
>> What can I say?  "Infuriating" is wrong: I found it shocking. 
>> Dismaying.  Deeply disappointing.  Maybe I expected too much.  If things 
>> have changed for the better, then I am delighted. 
>>
>>
>>
>>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to

Re: [RBW] Rear fender mounting. Was: Christmas Clementine

2015-12-29 Thread Bill Lindsay

"Maybe I expected too much."

I think your definition of "perfect fenders" is identical to mine.  If I 
specified a custom, I would specify "perfect fenders" and I would specify 
what I mean by perfect fenders in the minute detail and I would expect to 
get them.  I don't know if you have actually ever specified a custom 
frame.  I know you purchased at least one bike that was originally built 
custom for somebody else, your Longstaff, but I don't think you had 
anything to do with the original spec.  I also know that you bought a 
M.A.P. Randonneur Project, which has some custom aspects.  Mitch builds 
perfect fenderability whether you specify that or not, as I understand it.  

My Atlantis has perfectly equidistant bridges in the back.  Since I'm using 
tires that are far skinnier than the max, I've chosen to use a 5mm spacer 
at both bridges, but it's the identical 5mm spacer at both spots, as it 
should be.  If I needed no spacer at the seatstay bridge and needed a >1.5" 
spacer at the chainstay bridge, I would be disappointed, just like you.  I 
might even ask for a new frame.  I would probably not use that situation to 
conclude that the bicycle company responsible for it was consistently or 
"typically" sloppy or careless.  

Specifically, I bought one of those factory refurbished "Renovelo" frames 
from Rivendell.  It was badly out of alignment, but it passed the string 
test.  Riv had checked it with the string test and didn't check it on a 
frame table or by putting a wheel in it.  I returned it and Rivendell more 
than made it right.  If I wanted to, I could have made a big deal about it, 
claiming Rivendell was sloppy or didn't care about quality.  I could have 
told that story as often as you have talked about that small Atlantis.  Or, 
I could let them take care of it to my satisfaction and be done with it.  

Bill Lindsay
El Cerrito, CA

On Tuesday, December 29, 2015 at 3:09:15 PM UTC-8, Steve Palincsar wrote:
>
>
>
> On 12/29/2015 05:39 PM, Bill Lindsay wrote: 
> > Steve 
> > 
> > You will be pleased to know my Hillborne has a threaded boss on the 
> > underside of the seatstay bridge, perfectly placed for easy fender 
> > installation.  My Hillborne has a threaded boss on the trailing edge 
> > of its kickstand plate, perfectly placed for easy perfect fender 
> > line.  All my Rivendells have vertical dropouts, which allow me to 
> > achieve good fenderlines.  I've owned several Rivendells and none of 
> > them required a wine cork. 
>
> I am indeed pleased to hear that.   It's what we should expect on a 
> quality frame, and other than issues with misplaced bridges Rivendells 
> certainly are quality frames. 
>
>
> > So from my perspective "typical" is very good fenderability.  Not 
> > perfect, but very good.  I was pleased to inspect the Appaloosa 
> > frameset and find an inward facing threaded boss on the seatstay 
> > bridge.  I hope they are equidistant, as you would hope.  So, not all 
> > Rivendells will infuriate you the way that one small Atlantis did and 
> > continues to do.  I can't think of anybody on this group that has 
> > gotten as much mileage out of badmouthing somebody else's bike than 
> > you have out of that one small Atlantis.  Maybe all my recent good 
> > luck with fenders on Rivendells has been the result of your frequent 
> > "constructive criticism" of that one small Atlantis? If that's the 
> > case, thanks! 
>
> What can I say?  "Infuriating" is wrong: I found it shocking. 
> Dismaying.  Deeply disappointing.  Maybe I expected too much.  If things 
> have changed for the better, then I am delighted. 
>
>
>
>

-- 
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 post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [RBW] Rear fender mounting. Was: Christmas Clementine




On 12/29/2015 12:03 PM, 'Mark in Beacon' via RBW Owners Bunch wrote:


Thanks, Steve. I get the theory behind the better, but as I said, I've 
never experienced shifting or rattling caused by the seat stay 
attachment. This includes plastic SKS, old Bluemels, and newer VO 
metal fenders. Maybe I've been lucky, but I'm also not sure how much 
play can develop at the mid point if both the fore (chainstay) and aft 
(drop-out braze-on) attachment points are secure, and the bracket is 
pinched well. I do understand that the other way may offer a cleaner, 
more integrated look for high end machines, and I know what you mean 
that the situation has improved--my newer model VO fenders are easier 
to set up than the first iterations. (In fact I did find one of my 
bicycles with a similar attachment, though these fenders were OEM. My 
not terribly high end Raleigh Twenty.) And finally, if you are going 
to design a "fancy" constructeur-style attachment for the rear, why 
not include the fork crown eye bolt, which is not to be found on the 
Clem (which has plenty of other braze-ons, so I doubt it is a matter 
of cutting corners)?




Rivendells are typically not really very well set up for fendering. Not 
only is there not a fork crown eye bolt, but all too often the bridges 
are not placed equidistant from the wheel centers, making it difficult 
if not impossible to achieve a good fender line.  I recall as a case in 
point one small Atlantis that needed the full length of a wine cork as a 
spacer between the edge of the fender and the chainstay bridge.  It 
doesn't cost any more to put the bridges in the right place than to put 
them 2-3cm too far away, so it's clearly not a cost issue, but rather 
one of not caring.  And after all, no one who cared would even dream of 
suggesting using zip ties to mount fenders on a bike costing several 
thousand dollars.


But then, think about the climate out where those bikes are designed.  
I've never been there, but I've heard many times Walnut Creek is a place 
where it rains for a couple of months, and then nary a drop for the rest 
of the year, so full-time fenders don't make a compelling case.



--
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 post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [RBW] Rear fender mounting. Was: Christmas Clementine

2015-12-29 Thread Bill Lindsay

Steve

You will be pleased to know my Hillborne has a threaded boss on the 
underside of the seatstay bridge, perfectly placed for easy fender 
installation.  My Hillborne has a threaded boss on the trailing edge of its 
kickstand plate, perfectly placed for easy perfect fender line.  All my 
Rivendells have vertical dropouts, which allow me to achieve good 
fenderlines.  I've owned several Rivendells and none of them required a 
wine cork.  So from my perspective "typical" is very good fenderability.  
Not perfect, but very good.  I was pleased to inspect the Appaloosa 
frameset and find an inward facing threaded boss on the seatstay bridge.  I 
hope they are equidistant, as you would hope.  So, not all Rivendells will 
infuriate you the way that one small Atlantis did and continues to do.  I 
can't think of anybody on this group that has gotten as much mileage out of 
badmouthing somebody else's bike than you have out of that one small 
Atlantis.  Maybe all my recent good luck with fenders on Rivendells has 
been the result of your frequent "constructive criticism" of that one small 
Atlantis?  If that's the case, thanks!  

Happy New Year
Bill Lindsay
El Cerrito, CA

On Tuesday, December 29, 2015 at 2:05:41 PM UTC-8, Steve Palincsar wrote:
>
> Significantly more difficult to fender than my George Longstaff Audax 
> Custom.  Of course, that's a custom (made for John Bayley 25 years ago) 
> rather than an off-the-shelf bike, but still.   Both bridges in back are 
> in exactly the correct locations, and the seatstay bridge has a fender 
> mount boss underneath, and the chainstay bridge has one as well.   
> Clearance and versatility are fine things, but honestly, for the 
> chainstay bridge to be over an inch too far forward?  Today?  If Grant 
> says "it isn't hard, you just have to pay attention," should we take 
> that as evidence that he is not paying attention? 
>
> On 12/29/2015 04:47 PM, William deRosset wrote: 
> > Dear Steve, 
> > 
> > Rivendells are as easy to fender as the typical British club bikes, or 
> the Japanese sport-touring machines. It is only in the last fifteen years 
> of the integrated-bike renaissance that designing for more than "clearance" 
> and "versatility" has been even recognized as desirable in the USA. Grant 
> himself stated that it isn't hard. You just have to pay attention. 
> > 
> > Best, 
> > 
> > Will 
> > William M deRosset 
> > Fort Collins 
> > 
>
>

-- 
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 post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [RBW] Rear fender mounting. Was: Christmas Clementine

2015-12-29 Thread William deRosset

Dear Steve,

Rivendells are as easy to fender as the typical British club bikes, or the 
Japanese sport-touring machines. It is only in the last fifteen years of the 
integrated-bike renaissance that designing for more than "clearance" and 
"versatility" has been even recognized as desirable in the USA. Grant himself 
stated that it isn't hard. You just have to pay attention.

Best,

Will
William M deRosset
Fort Collins

-- 
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 post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [RBW] Rear fender mounting. Was: Christmas Clementine

Significantly more difficult to fender than my George Longstaff Audax
Custom. Of course, that's a custom (made for John Bayley 25 years ago)
rather than an off-the-shelf bike, but still. Both bridges in back are
in exactly the correct locations, and the seatstay bridge has a fender
mount boss underneath, and the chainstay bridge has one as well.
Clearance and versatility are fine things, but honestly, for the
chainstay bridge to be over an inch too far forward? Today? If Grant
says "it isn't hard, you just have to pay attention," should we take
that as evidence that he is not paying attention?

On 12/29/2015 04:47 PM, William deRosset wrote:

Dear Steve,

Rivendells are as easy to fender as the typical British club bikes, or the Japanese sport-touring
machines. It is only in the last fifteen years of the integrated-bike renaissance that designing
for more than "clearance" and "versatility" has been even recognized as
desirable in the USA. Grant himself stated that it isn't hard. You just have to pay attention.

Best,

Will
William M deRosset
Fort Collins

--
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 post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [RBW] Rear fender mounting. Was: Christmas Clementine