fenders and short reach brakes

[J L]

Hey all,

Im sure there are multiple factors here but what is the biggest tire that will work with fenders and short reach (at 49mm) brakes?  I would love to get some 28's underneath fenders on my road standard but it looks like it is only possible with the front.  I don't want to "make" the fenders work with alternative placement, so my next option is to use smaller tires.  Anyone have success with fenders and this little brake reach? 

Jason

[Bill M.]

I have had Roly Polys under Esge fenders on my Road Standard, with Dia
Compe BRS200 calipers. Close fit, but it worked fine for me. I'm
currently running 32 mm Paselas on that bike, no room for fenders with
those.

Bill

[Jim Cloud]

I have a Rivendell Road Standard, purchased in 1996, equipped with
Suntour Superbe Pro sidepull brakes (reach: 49 MAX, 39 MIN). The
bicycle is presently fitted with Honjo hammered fenders (45mm width)
and tires marked 700Cx28 (Panaracer Category Pro). I've actually
measured the tires and they are 25mm in width and height. I believe,
just eyeballing the present configuration, that I'd be able to fit a
set of 28mm tires (Grand Bois Cerf, for example), while keeping the
fenders mounted. Certainly, there wouldn't be sufficient room to fit
32mm tires with fenders mounted. Here's a link to a photo on flickr
that shows the bike with fenders mounted:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/37964304@N05/3633237391/in/set-72157619758078965/

Jim Cloud
Tucson, AZ

[JL]

Thanks everyone

I can't seem to figure it out. I have a 1996 road standard as well.
I am currently running Grand Bois 700x28c and had run Panaracer
Pasalea TG 700x28c tires and I can't see how there is enough room for
a fender to fit underneath the brake bridge. I think I am going to
buy a set of fenders and just try it out. There might be room in the
front but the rear is a def no go. I should grab some pics and show
what I mean. I think another issue I might have is with the brakes.
I have some ultegra/600 brakes on the bike right now and would really
rather not go back to single pivot side pulls.

Do the tires I use run "actual" size as opposed to undersized? Is
there a fender trick that I am not thinking of? Two responses with
two separate kinds of fenders gives me hope. Not that the bike isn't
great without fenders.

Jason

On Nov 19, 5:44 pm, Jim Cloud <Cloud...@aol.com> wrote:
> I have a Rivendell Road Standard, purchased in 1996, equipped with
> Suntour Superbe Pro sidepull brakes (reach: 49 MAX, 39 MIN).  The
> bicycle is presently fitted with Honjo hammered fenders (45mm width)
> and tires marked 700Cx28 (Panaracer Category Pro).  I've actually
> measured the tires and they are 25mm in width and height.  I believe,
> just eyeballing the present configuration, that I'd be able to fit a
> set of 28mm tires (Grand Bois Cerf, for example), while keeping the
> fenders mounted.  Certainly, there wouldn't be sufficient room to fit
> 32mm tires with fenders mounted.  Here's a link to a photo on flickr
> that shows the bike with fenders mounted:
>

> http://www.flickr.com/photos/37964304@N05/3633237391/in/set-721576197...

[Angus]

JL,

I had a first run Road Standard (late 95) and could not fit fenders
with a "real" 28mm tire.

With a 25mm tires (labeled 28mm) I could just BARELY get the fenders
to fit.

Angus

> > > Jason- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

[Bruce]

Angus:

Do you recall if the head tube on your '95 was extended or not? I'm trying to fix in my mind the point at which Riv started to supply extended head tubes. My early '95 has a short, Waterford style set up (although with the Sachs lug set). I wonder how early mine is in the production of road frames.

Since I converted mine to 650B, it takes fenders AND plump tires, using Tektro brakes. :)

Bruce

---

From: Angus <angus...@sbcglobal.net>
To: RBW Owners Bunch <rbw-owne...@googlegroups.com>
Sent: Fri, November 20, 2009 5:11:45 AM
Subject: [RBW] Re: fenders and short reach brakes

[Mojo]

Bruce,

My early '96 AllRounder has the Riv turtleneck, but it was a frame
option at the time.
I believe that is how it was with the first generation frames, an
upcharge for the headtube extension.

On Nov 20, 6:01 am, Bruce <fullylug...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Angus:
>
> Do you recall if the head tube on your '95 was extended or not? I'm trying to fix in my mind the point at which Riv started to supply extended head tubes. My early '95 has a short, Waterford style set up (although with the Sachs lug set). I wonder how early mine is in the production of road frames.
>
> Since I converted mine to 650B, it takes fenders AND plump tires, using Tektro brakes. :)
>
> Bruce
>
> ________________________________

> From: Angus <angusle...@sbcglobal.net>

[Bill M.]

My Road Std. has the extension. I bought it new in April of 1995.

On Nov 20, 5:01 am, Bruce <fullylug...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Angus:
>
> Do you recall if the head tube on your '95 was extended or not? I'm trying to fix in my mind the point at which Riv started to supply extended head tubes. My early '95 has a short, Waterford style set up (although with the Sachs lug set). I wonder how early mine is in the production of road frames.
>
> Since I converted mine to 650B, it takes fenders AND plump tires, using Tektro brakes. :)
>
> Bruce
>
> ________________________________

> From: Angus <angusle...@sbcglobal.net>

[Angus]

Bruce,

My Road Standard did have an extended heat tube, I specifically
remember they brazed on a "spacer" above the top head lug (looked
seamless once painted). This may have been an option, I don't recall;
it certainly could have been since it the extension was a separate
piece. I also had some extra headset spacers on the steerer tube.

I believe the extended head tubes started from the begining, my frame
was from the first "batch" delivered.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/16951387@N08/1982654041/

Angus

On Nov 20, 7:01 am, Bruce <fullylug...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Angus:
>
> Do you recall if the head tube on your '95 was extended or not? I'm trying to fix in my mind the point at which Riv started to supply extended head tubes. My early '95 has a short, Waterford style set up (although with the Sachs lug set). I wonder how early mine is in the production of road frames.
>
> Since I converted mine to 650B, it takes fenders AND plump tires, using Tektro brakes. :)
>
> Bruce
>
> ________________________________

> From: Angus <angusle...@sbcglobal.net>

[Jim Cloud]

The extended headtube was a "standard" feature of the Rivendell Road
Standard as early as 1996. Here's a quote from the Summer 1996
Rivendell Bicycle Works catalog: "The standard Rivendell frame has a
head tube 15mm taller than the top of the lug, and the steering tube
is 10mm extra longer (the difference is made up with a machined
spacer)..... If you know you won't want the high bar position, if you
understand its benefits but are set in your ways, we can build the
frame without the extension (it's easier to just leave it off, and
you'll save $10)."

My Rivendell Road Standard, built in 1996, has the extended head
tube. It obviously makes it easier to achieve a higher position of
the handlebars without having an extremely long stem. Here's a link
that shows the extension quite well:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/37964304@N05/3634095108/in/set-72157619758078965/

Jim Cloud
Tucson, AZ

[Joe Bartoe]

Hey Jim,

How did you get the fender line to look that good on that bike? How did you space it rearward near the bottom bracket?  Also what do you do for wheel removal? Do you have to deflate the tire?

Joe

> Date: Sat, 21 Nov 2009 08:59:00 -0800

> Subject: [RBW] Re: fenders and short reach brakes

> From: Clou...@aol.com
> To: rbw-owne...@googlegroups.com

> --
>
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group.
> To post to this group, send email to rbw-owne...@googlegroups.com.
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rbw-owners-bun...@googlegroups.com.
> For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=.
>
>

---

Windows 7: I wanted simpler, now it's simpler. I'm a rock star.

[Jim Cloud]

Hi Joe,
I used a nylon spacer on the bottom bracket to get the fender line
where I wanted it. The distance on the mounting at the brake bridge
was just what I could obtain using the standard fender brace and the
Sheldon Brown fender nuts. Removing the wheel doesn't require
deflating the tire, but I'm presently running a set of Panaracer
Category Pro I tires that I purchased from Rivendell some time back.
These are marked 700x28C, but the actual measurement of the tire is
25mm in width and height (from the rim). I imagine that a true 28mm
tire would not mount without partially deflating the tire. The
biggest problem with removing a wheel from the bike is actually the
Suntour Superbe Pro sidepull brake calipers, which don't open up very
wide.

Jim

On Nov 21, 10:33 am, Joe Bartoe <jbar...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> Hey Jim,
>
> How did you get the fender line to look that good on that bike? How did you space it rearward near the bottom bracket?  Also what do you do for wheel removal? Do you have to deflate the tire?
>
> Joe
>
>
>
> > Date: Sat, 21 Nov 2009 08:59:00 -0800
> > Subject: [RBW] Re: fenders and short reach brakes

> > From: Cloud...@aol.com

> > To: rbw-owne...@googlegroups.com
>
> > The extended headtube was a "standard" feature of the Rivendell Road
> > Standard as early as 1996.  Here's a quote from the Summer 1996
> > Rivendell Bicycle Works catalog:  "The standard Rivendell frame has a
> > head tube 15mm taller than the top of the lug, and the steering tube
> > is 10mm extra longer (the difference is made up with a machined
> > spacer)..... If you know you won't want the high bar position, if you
> > understand its benefits but are set in your ways, we can build the
> > frame without the extension (it's easier to just leave it off, and
> > you'll save $10)."
>
> > My Rivendell Road Standard, built in 1996, has the extended head
> > tube.  It obviously makes it easier to achieve a higher position of
> > the handlebars without having an extremely long stem.  Here's a link
> > that shows the extension quite well:
>

> >http://www.flickr.com/photos/37964304@N05/3634095108/in/set-721576197...

> _________________________________________________________________
> Windows 7: I wanted simpler, now it's simpler. I'm a rock star.http://www.microsoft.com/Windows/windows-7/default.aspx?h=myidea?ocid...