Long-low for sale in SF Craigslist

[Thomas B]

I wanted to get some advice on a recent posting for a +10 year old
Long Low advertised on Bay area Craigslist. I've read some of the
older comments on this discussion group and it seems like a frameset
that has been offered and discussed before several times, albeit at
higher prices.

Please check out the post. 'Rivendell Long Low Preproduction - 60cm
Frame & Fork Only - $1350' - http://sfbay.craigslist.org/eby/bik/2694438431.html

The price seems a bit high to me seeing as the complete bike retailed
at ~$2450, back in the late 90's (?). Also note there is a small dent
in the TT.

I am new to bikes and RBW but would like a quality comfortable steel
bike. Any advice you guys could give would be appreciated. Does the
fact it is preproduction make it any less of a bike? Are canti brakes
any good?

[Forrest]

Thomas -- 

I have a '99 59 cm LongLow made for side/center-pull brakes. Others on this list will know better than I do, but I think pre-production means that the frames were made in standard sizes/configurations (not custom) but not necessarily in runs of sizes as they were later by the Toyo shop in Japan. My LongLow was built by Joe Starck and painted by Joe Bell.

Canti brakes are good. They can offer more clearance for fenders and/or larger tires, and some think they have better stopping power than sidepulls. That may be, but both kinds of brakes are good, and I wouldn't shy away from a frame like the one now on CL in SF because it was made for cantis.

-- Forrest (Iowa City)

[tdusky]

This an Atlantis, look at the picture.
They have been trying this for a while.

Tom Dusky
Huntington Woods MI

[Tim McNamara]

The production frames of the time went for $1100 up to $1400 by 1996, IIRC. A cream head tube was an extra $100 option and was later standard.

[Minh]

Thomas B,

It looks like others have you covered/warned on this particular
listing. Why don't we change the subject and talk about what you're
looking for? We can help you pick out a current Rivendell model or
guide you to a known seller if you give us some more info on the type
of bike you are looking for and how you want to use it.

[Lee Chae]

HI Thomas. How about visiting RIv (I'm assuming you're local given the SF Craigslist link) and checking out a new Sam Hillborne ($1050 frame/fork)? It would make for a great all-purpose bike and is quality, comfortable steel. And, with the extra $300 you save on the frame/fork, you can pick some useful accessories, like racks, lights, and fenders, etc.

Just my two cents.

Lee
SF, CA

--
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=en.

[Joe Bernard]

It is not an Atlantis, and I see no reason to consider this a scam. Considering all the variations we've seen in Rivendell models over the years, I have no reason to doubt that Grant/Waterford put together a canti-LongLow. If you think it's overpriced, make an offer. Treating it as BS seems unfair to me.

 

Joe Bernard

Fairfield, CA.

[Seth Vidal]

Well - to be fair it's been up and down on craigslist for about 2yrs
now - the price has changed a bit over time but nothing else has.

Most of the time that's evidence of something being priced wrong or
something _else_ being wrong which is scaring off other buyers.

-sv

[cyclotourist]

Get some full-sized pix from the seller.  Find out if it's a Waterford or Joe/Joe build.  Then at that point, go see it in person if you're in the Bay Area.  If it's Joe/Joe, it's pretty well priced.  W'ford, not so much so.

FYI, here's a tantalizing lead recently dropped on flickr:  http://www.flickr.com/photos/10076072@N03/6017878228/  Looks to be about the same size and with a better documented pedigree.

--
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=en.

--
Cheers,
David
Redlands, CA

[Forrest]

The LongLow on Flickr that cyclotourist refers to is mine.  -- fm

[Forrest]

RBW did indeed build several canti LongLows. You can see at least one on cyclofiend's Current Classics site.  -- Forrest (Iowa City)

[Jim M.]

On Nov 9, 11:40 pm, Thomas B <darcyspeedobot...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I wanted to get some advice on a recent posting for a +10 year old
> Long Low advertised on Bay area Craigslist.

If the Long Low was priced right, it would have sold by now with the
multiple postings. Have you seen the Bleriot on SF Craigslist? Half
the price of the Long Low.

[Greg J]

If you're interested and local, why not go take a look at it?

I was following Riv very closely in the late 90s to early 2000s, much more so than I do now, and there is nothing in the ad (or the fact that it's been up and down so many times) to suggest that there is something wrong with the bike.

The LLs were being made right around the time Riv transitioned from Waterford to Joe S so it could be either, and there are probably some details that will tell you which.  For instance, I know Waterford used its own serial numbering system (which you can find on their website).  I suspect Joe S used a different system.  Also, around this time may have been when Riv started using its own "Rivendell" casted bottom bracket shell (tho I'm not too sure about that).  A close up look at the lugs would also be helpful, as I think Waterford didn't do any custom modified lugs, and Riv was starting to do it.

As for the price, if this is a Waterford, it's a little high (I personally think if you like the bike, the color, and it fits, then around $1K is a fair price for a Waterford Riv).  If it's a Joe bike, I can see myself paying close to this price if I had the money and the bike fits.  It's true that to get something similar for anywhere near that price (handbuilt in the US with fancy lugs, Riv pedigree, by a well-respected and reputed builder --- and I'm not commenting on whether any of that affects the ride or build quality, but perceived value being what it is).

Greg

[SISDDWG]

"Most of the time that's evidence of something being priced wrong or
something _else_ being wrong which is scaring off other buyers."

The people searching Craigslist are looking for something for
nothing. Prices of 10+ years ago have no bearing on today's value.
What do you think that $1,100 Longlow would cost at today's dollar
value? My 1998 Joe/Joe Longlow is on cyclofiend's Current Classics. It
has canti's and they work great.

On Nov 10, 8:39 am, Seth Vidal <skvi...@gmail.com> wrote:

[Thomas B]

Thanks for the discussion. I am going to go give it a test ride
today.

To answer earlier threads, this would be my first 'good' bike. Using
it for commuting (14 mile RT) with a big hill in the EBay. But my hope
is to ride around the hills near my house on weekends as well.

I've been seriously considering a Jamis Quest in a 61cm - so the
handle bars are a bit higher up. Salsa Casserroll (a relaxed road
bike), with beefed up components. Gunnar sport also looks good,
although no tests so far and Traitor exile. The last kind of made me
notice how pretty lugs are and so I considered climbing the money tree
a bit further and started looking at RBW. I agree a visit to the RBW
shop would be a good idea!

[Andrew Johnson]

My '98 canti LongLow (Joe/Joe):

http://diesel.smugmug.com/Shiny-Things/Rivendell-LongLow/

- Andrew, Berkeley

[tdusky]

Look at the color.
The canti long-lows were called all all-arounders.
It sure looks like an Atlantis, just like mine
Unless it was a pre production Atlantis.

Tom Dusky
owner of 61cm atlantis just like the photo
Huntington Woods, MI

[Tim McNamara]

On Nov 10, 2011, at 12:35 PM, SISDDWG wrote:

> The people searching Craigslist are looking for something for nothing.

<grump>My observation is that the sellers on Craigslist tend to vastly overestimate the value of their stuff they want to flog. Calling it "vintage" adds about 50%. I look at bikes and guitars on the local CL and it's amazing how much overpriced crap there is in both categories. A 30 years old Raleigh Sports 3 speed is not worth $500. It sold for about $120 and it's not even worth that now, let alone four times what it cost new. A 20 year old entry level Ibanez guitar is not a "vintage closet classic" worth five times what it cost new. Etc. </grump>

Craigslist is basically a garage sale online. Used stuff just doesn't hold value very well except maybe for things like diamonds, precious metals and things that are actually rare.

> Prices of 10+ years ago have no bearing on today's value.

It's a point of reference that is useful to know. Why would this frame and fork, for example, be worth more than it sold for new? It's 15 years or more old, it's used, it's even been damaged albeit slightly. I think it's worth half of what the seller is asking at most.

But then I also think that there is an attitude that somehow a Rivendell or a Bridgestone hold value to a much greater degree than other marques. I have often seen people trying to sell something Rivendell from years back at the same price they paid for it new. If they can find someone who thinks that's a good deal, then more power to 'em I guess.

> What do you think that $1,100 Longlow would cost at today's dollar value?

What difference does that make in buying a *used* bike frame? The original price is useful information, the cost of a new similar item is irrelevant IMHO.

[William]

The comparison with custom is the big stretch.  That listing says "A custom Rivendell costs $3000 and you have to wait a year" and uses those facts to claim the value of his Rivendell.  That's simply absurd

[Tim McNamara]

On Nov 10, 2011, at 1:00 PM, tdusky wrote:

> The canti long-lows were called all all-arounders.

I have a 1996 All-Rounder and it is not the same bike as a Long-Low. The original All-Rounders were all 26" wheel bikes with cantis and were based on the ideas behind the Bridgestone XO-1. It was designed to allow the use of 2" knobbies down to 1" slicks. The All-Rounder was one of the first three original Rivendell models (Road, Mountain and All-Rounder). The A/R used (IIRC) larger a diameter top tube but I think the same diameter down tube as the Road, whereas I think the Mountain used oversize top and down tubes (could be wrong about that, my recollection about those details is fuzzy).

The Long-Lows came along a year or two later, I think about the time I placed my order (I vaguely recall Grant alerting me to the new model in between my placing the order and production starting. I stuck with the A/R but in retrospect should have gone with the Long-Low for the uses I have ended up putting it to). The Long-Lows were 700C bikes with long-reach sidepulls, although as some folks have mentioned they could be ordered with cantis; I don't remember if that was an option from the get-go. They were designed as road bikes with a lot of clearance for fenders and/or fat tires, much more so than the Road model of the day. They had a lower BB and a longer wheelbase (hence "Long-Low") than the Roads but used (IIRC) the same tubing.

None of the original 3 models or the Long-Low were initially conceived of as custom frames. However, Grant started doing tweaks for individual uyers early on and pretty quickly the bikes became customs. In those days it was all 753 with 531 forks <nostalgic sigh>.

The Atlantis is a several-years-later bike based mostly on the All-Rounder and the XO-1 before it. My recollection is that the first run or two of the Atlantis used 26" wheels on all sizes and then later 26" on the smaller bikes and 700C on the larger sizes (smart idea).

[James Warren]

Yeah, I have a good memory for this stuff. The first Reader that introduced the Longlow as a concept contained a detailed explanation of the philosophy behind the bike. Grant explained that they would make them with the option of either cantis for greater tire clearance or for standard reach sidepulls for greater tire clearance. At the time, the future of standard reach sidepulls was much more questionable, but Grant hadn't given up on them. So both cantis and standard reach sidepulls were specifically verbalized as options for the bike. This was in the late 90's.

 

I believe at this time the Road Standard had much less tire clearance than is now considered acceptable for a Rivendell.

 

I think the Rambouillet is essentially a Longlow, but when it came out in 2002, the future of standard reach sidepulls had become much more rosy. Hence the Ram and Rom were designed for sidepulls only. (Until that lovely error that produced the canti-Rom.)

 

-Jim W.

-----Original Message-----
From: Forrest
Sent: Nov 10, 2011 9:07 AM
To: rbw-owne...@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: [RBW] Long-low for sale in SF Craigslist

RBW did indeed build several canti LongLows. You can see at least one on cyclofiend's Current Classics site.  -- Forrest (Iowa City)

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msg/rbw-owners-bunch/-/ZP-IOCKaWoQJ.

[James Warren]

-----Original Message-----

>Subject: [RBW] Re: Long-low for sale in SF Craigslist

>
>>The canti long-lows were called all all-arounders.
>

This is not correct. The All-Rounder and the Longlow were two different frames with two different geometries. The All-Rounder was closer to proper touring with longer chainstays and 26" wheels in the smaller sizes. The Longlow was always considered a 700C road bike, "sport-touring" bike actually, with longer chainstays than the mainstream, but still shorter than a proper tourer like the All-Rounder. All-Rounder is like Atlantis and Longlow is like Rambouillet.

The fact that some Longlows came with cantis did not change the distinctions above, so a canti-Longlow was not called an All-Rounder, at least not with a capital A-R.

If stated lower case, as in all-rounder, then you could probably say that almost all Rivendells have had all-rounder qualities.

-Jim W.

[Jim Thill - Hiawatha Cyclery]

The bike in the picture sure LOOKS like an Atlantis to me...

On another point that was brought up: As far as I know, Atlantises have always had the 26"/700C split between 56 cm and 58 cm frame sizes. We had a very low serial-number 58 in here awhile back, and it was indeed 700c.

[Greg J]

Perhaps stating the obvious, but:

Just because it is that Atlantis color doesn't make it an Atlantis.  I doubt that the seller would call it a Long-Low if it says Atlantis on the downtube.  Atlantis was derived as a lower-cost A/R, built by Toyo in Japan and intentionally given a different name (Atlantis) to distinguish it from a Rivendell model.  And I think the 700c Atlantises came later; originally they were 26".  While it's possible that the geometry/ride of this particular bike may be similar to or even identical to an Atlantis, if it sports a Riv label on the downtube, it is not an Atlantis b/c it was not made in Japan.  

While we're on the subject, I'm looking at Riv Catalog No. 4 from Summer 1998/March 1999, and Catalog No. 5 from Summer-Winter 1999 in front of me, and both have pics of 2 different Long Lows with cantis, for you nonbelievers.  The LL is described as having a bigger tire clearance (up to 38c), longer stays, little relaxed angles, and cantis (because at that time, there were no std reach brakes available).  in fact, Cat. 5 has a std geometry table for the A/R, Road Std, and LL.  

So I think it's really unfair to keep on calling this an Atlantis.  There was a real Long Low model that was built by Joe S, and if this is one, then I think that's a very fair price for a great bike.

Greg

[Joe Bernard]

We have a winner! Besides, that's not the Atlantis color.

[Thomas B]

Checked out the bike. It is like new apart from the minor indentation.
The guy is friendly, no pressure, took it for a little ride. He says
it was the first complete Long low by Waterford/Grant, a run through
to make sure everything on the production line was set. I have no
reason to believe otherwise.

The bike fit well, but not a standout for the money being asked, then
again being new to this I have not got a particular preference for
RBW. I think if I offered something he might be offended by the
price, seeing as how high it started at. Nice bike for someone though.

[Andrew Johnson]

Good points, Greg. I've just tonight been going through some old RRs and catalogues... confirmed I still have all from the first few years, and only missing a couple of later issues (they must be around here somewhere!)

But this thread has been a trove of nuggets on the "early" years of Riv frames. And I'm enjoying every small detail that's brought forth.

- Andrew, Berkeley

-

[stevef]

Seller stresses in the ad that its a pre-production bike--I wonder, given the color and overall look if its a Prototype or precursor of the Atlantis, or a transitional test mule between the longlow and the Atlantis.  The add is a little be schizophrenic to me--seller stresses its uniqueness, it's non-stock/prototype origins but insists it is not for collectors.  He repeatedly points out the low mileage but also indicates that it is meant to be ridden and not hung in someones museum...strange. 

Steve

[Tim McNamara]

I *really* don't understand the problem people have with this ad, every time it comes up.

It's not an Atlantis and has nothing to do with the Atlantis as far as I can tell. It's not an All-Rounder of the era. If it is indeed a test run of the Long Low (e.g. between prototype and production) then it's from about 1995 or so. Grant did sell those frames- prototypes and such- as what they were via the catalog/Reader. No reason for him to keep them hanging around RWHQ taking up space and gathering dust. There's money tied up in them and the lifeblood of a business is cash flow.

I think the price is too high for what it is, as mentioned in another post, but that's the only issue I see with the ad. Someone else may think that it is a great value and snap it up. I bet it rides great, since every Riv I've ever been on rides great.

[Greg J]

While we're strolling down memory lane, I find it ironic that when Grant transitioned from Waterford to Joe S (and Curt G and other individual builders), he had to make a pretty hard sell.  I think back then, many people, myself included, saw Waterford as the established and having the best manufacturing facility, and questioned whether a less-known single builder would be up to the task.  Now we believe that Waterford is a "production" shop, and the single-builder artisan bikes show more craftsmanship, attention to detail, are one-offs, etc.  

Greg

[James Warren]

I think what a lot of us who were following didn't know at the time was that the frames called Rivendell were moving up to a higher level. During and before the switch away from Waterford for the frames called Rivendell, the frames were not called custom. In hindsight, it is easy to see the hierarchy of the frames that followed (custom, Toyo-built, eventual production-Waterford-built, etc.), but no way to see that at the time.

- Jim W.

On Nov 11, 2011, at 9:52 AM, Greg J wrote:

While we're strolling down memory lane, I find it ironic that when Grant transitioned from Waterford to Joe S (and Curt G and other individual builders), he had to make a pretty hard sell.  I think back then, many people, myself included, saw Waterford as the established and having the best manufacturing facility, and questioned whether a less-known single builder would be up to the task.  Now we believe that Waterford is a "production" shop, and the single-builder artisan bikes show more craftsmanship, attention to detail, are one-offs, etc.  

Greg

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msg/rbw-owners-bunch/-/4yFC7Hcc2qwJ.