[RBW] Re: FS: Waterford Rivendell Road Standard/Custom

Hi Ron I was not intending to be rude but I'm sorry if it came across that way. That's a beautiful bike and I was just thinking that you might not get that price...but then again, you might. I paid about the same as your asking price for my 1997 A/R which came with a headset installed and if I

[RBW] Re: FS: Waterford Rivendell Road Standard/Custom

Ron: I think your Road should go for more than a similar condition Rambouillet. The tubeset is silver brazed Reynolds 753 (heat Treated Manganese Moly) with Reynolds 531 (like 753 but not heat treated) fork tubes, all secured with the Richard Sachs designed lugs. The Ram used nice Japanese

Re: [RBW] Re: FS: Waterford Rivendell Road Standard/Custom

I can easily scrape a pedal if I'm cranking while leaned over in a turn. But, it's also quite easy to avoid that by not pedalling when leaned over in a turn. In exchange, the very low BB makes the bike handle great because my weight is so low. It also helps with flat-footing when stopped. In my

Re: [RBW] Re: FS: Waterford Rivendell Road Standard/Custom

Hugh, Thanks. My experiences mirror Tim's. Pedal strike if I lean too far pedaling while turning. I love the 650b wheels/tires and I can fit fenders! A win-win for me. Photos of my build here: https://flickr.com/photos/86975051@N08/sets/72157646658697853 -Erl On Wednesday, November 25, 2015

Re: [RBW] Re: FS: Waterford Rivendell Road Standard/Custom

That's really cool Erl. Did you notice any pedal strike tendencies with the lower BB height? I figure it's a non issue with road riding. Tail Winds, ~Hugh On Wednesday, November 25, 2015 at 7:28:36 AM UTC-8, WETH wrote: > > My frame is similar to Tim's. Attached photo shows clearance under

Re: [RBW] Re: FS: Waterford Rivendell Road Standard/Custom

Hugh I never have pedal strike issues on my 54.5 cm conversion. It's really a good bike to do it on. Sent from my iPhone > On Nov 25, 2015, at 12:13 PM, hsmitham wrote: > > That's really cool Erl. Did you notice any pedal strike tendencies with the > lower BB

Re: [RBW] Re: FS: Waterford Rivendell Road Standard/Custom

https://flickr.com/photos/86975051@N08/sets/72157646658697853 -- 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.

Re: [RBW] Re: FS: Waterford Rivendell Road Standard/Custom

https://flickr.com/photos/86975051@N08/sets/72157646658697853 Oops-a linking fail. Erl -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to

Re: [RBW] Re: FS: Waterford Rivendell Road Standard/Custom

I'm pretty sure the guys at Ibis, talented as they were (the handlebars were fabricated down the street) did not make the front sidepull on my 1993 Scorcher, which came stock with 41mm Specialized Nimbus tires (and actual or not, they were pretty damn fat). I'm not sure the exact model, but if

Re: [RBW] Re: FS: Waterford Rivendell Road Standard/Custom

Just for the heck of it, I dug up the copy of my old mag with the Scorcher on the cover, brake in evidence: > >

Re: [RBW] Re: FS: Waterford Rivendell Road Standard/Custom

Just read the review again after...23 years. I thought it was a bit related to the other thread getting lots of attention, the one having to do with saving ourselves from ourselves. Anyway,

[RBW] Re: FS: Waterford Rivendell Road Standard/Custom

Dear Mark, Those are 32's in the frame (GB Cyprès are actual 32-622 tires whatever they're marked). A 32-622 ends up being about r = 344mm and a 48mm brake reach yields about exactly that, depending on the bridge/fork crown braze on dimensions. The Roads and "road standard" and "long-lows"

[RBW] Re: FS: Waterford Rivendell Road Standard/Custom

Thanks, Will, that's informative. I wonder if Jim has the date of the catalog page referenced in the original post. I suspect a claim of 35mm tire clearance would come after the bike was redesigned around the BR-600, and 32mm before, based on what you outline here. Anyway, if the bike clears

[RBW] Re: FS: Waterford Rivendell Road Standard/Custom

Wow. A lot of unexpected, but lively and good discussion here, but now it's seeming to get a bit off-topic. Back on topic... to address a few points that I have received privately and on the list related to this particular frame, or complete bike if you choose: Model: I'm 99% sure this is a

Re: [RBW] Re: FS: Waterford Rivendell Road Standard/Custom

The earliest ones were not yet called "standard". They are circa 1995. Old decal style, level TT and no HT extension. Shimano dropouts. Later bikes have Technociclo dropouts, sloped TT, extended HT and later decals. Tire size is always a function of available brakes. As reach improved, GP

Re: [RBW] Re: FS: Waterford Rivendell Road Standard/Custom

On 11/25/2015 07:50 AM, 'Mark in Beacon' via RBW Owners Bunch wrote: /Fully lugged wrote: Tire size is always a function of available brakes./ I don't think there were many years in which a sidepull of one brand or another was not produced that could clear a 35mm tire. (Sorry about the

Re: [RBW] Re: FS: Waterford Rivendell Road Standard/Custom

*On Tuesday, November 24, 2015 at 8:52:24 PM UTC-5, Eric Daume wrote:700x35 clearance in 1996 is likely different than 700x35 clearance today. It seems like all tires were overstated for width back then, whereas just some are today.* I suspect the catalog above is slightly newer than the

[RBW] Re: FS: Waterford Rivendell Road Standard/Custom

Well, I don't think it can be a stock Road Standard, at least not from the catalog year posted, because those apparently had clearance for a 700x35, whereas this frame does not go wider than 30. Unless one or the other fact is incorrect. Or it changed year to year and this is a different year

Re: [RBW] Re: FS: Waterford Rivendell Road Standard/Custom

700x35 clearance in 1996 is likely different than 700x35 clearance today. It seems like all tires were overstated for width back then, whereas just some are today. Eric On Tue, Nov 24, 2015 at 8:17 PM, 'Mark in Beacon' via RBW Owners Bunch < rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com> wrote: > Well, I

[RBW] Re: FS: Waterford Rivendell Road Standard/Custom

Forgot to add, if it did actually clear 35mm tires, like the one in the posted catalog, or a current Rodeo, I suspect it would be sold already. 30mm is pretty skinny for most Rivnicks. On Tuesday, November 24, 2015 at 8:17:45 PM UTC-5, Mark in Beacon wrote: > > Well, I don't think it can be a

Re: [RBW] Re: FS: Waterford Rivendell Road Standard/Custom

If you switch it to 650B, you can get 38mm pari motos in there!  Sent from my iPad > On Nov 24, 2015, at 8:52 PM, Eric Daume wrote: > > 700x35 clearance in 1996 is likely different than 700x35 clearance today. It > seems like all tires were overstated for width back

[RBW] Re: FS: Waterford Rivendell Road Standard/Custom

My experience with used Riv prices over the years is that they fluctuate much more than, say, Bridgestones. This is especially true with "Rivendell" branded frames because there's a good bit of confusion between standard Waterfords and the later customs. Plus A/Rs seem to have a particular cult

[RBW] Re: FS: Waterford Rivendell Road Standard/Custom

I think it is a 1996/1997 and the $1350 asking price is about the same as it was then (1.2-1.35K). Nice as the frame is,I don't believe it's a custom and $1350 might be a big ask... On Sunday, November 22, 2015 at 6:56:31 AM UTC-6, Fullylugged wrote: > > Nice looking bike. You can date it by