re: 2 top tubes - Y2TT plus (at the end of it) divisive cultural reference

[eflayer]

I think it is interesting, for lack of a better word, that GP is addressing double top tubes in his latest posting on the Riv site. I respect the living daylights out of him and thank him everytime I ride my coupled 58cm Riv Rambouillet. I even go out of my way to never abbreviate "Rambouillet."

 

On the other hand, my eyes and brain have never gotten together on the looks. I get the logic, I get the utility for bigger bikes. But without being an engineer, I really can't imagine anything smaller that a 62 cm, well built, would ever benefit from 2 tubes. Maybe a big big rider with lots o added baggage.

 

And it sounds as if in his posting, he is suggesting the 56cm ones (which must be the heart of the buying population) are not moving so well..

 

If I am interpreting his comments correctly, it makes me sad the inventory is not moving. And he sounds ready to eventually acknowledge that many of us are not ready to embrace the 2TT idea.

 

He is steadfast in a way that earns him my respect, and...

 

 

[Pondero]

As a relative lightweight, 2TT is beyond me.

I know the post was primarily about Sam's. However, I load my 150lbs,
with all my racks, bags, and camping gear, on my 56 A. Homer Hilsen
and it seems plenty stout to me. I don't know how many of us there
are out here, but some of us don't need a bike to be any stronger/
stiffer/more durable. If I ever fatigue this one,...well...I'll be
ready for something else anyway. And it will not be a 2TT frame,
whether for durability or aesthetics.

I LOVE my A. Homer Hilsen...just like it is.

[Ken Freeman]

For a lot of reasons I have remained on the fence regarding buying a Rivendell.  Any frame design in my size (54 neighborhood) will stay forever across the fence, as far as I'm concerned if it incorporates a dual top tube. 

How about at least some percentage assessment of improvement?  For example, "The dual TT improves feature X by Y % for our riders (probably meaning Grant and Mark) riding frames of sizes A, B, C, and F."  As it is, I'm supposed to believe this ugliness is an improvement just because Grant says so.

Nuuuuh uuhhhh!  Tell me why I should want it.

--
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.

--
Ken Freeman
Ann Arbor, MI USA

[rcnute]

For the record I'm 36 and I get the divisive cultural reference.

Ryan

[cyclotourist]

I think the DTT (undertubes!) look kinda' cool, although I wouldn't go out of my way to get one put on, and am not totally hung up on the extra weight (just a little).  I do wonder if they reduce the flex of the frame too much.  A little flex is good.  The whole planing thing, not to mention absorbing some of the high frequency vibration coming through.  As long as they don't give that up, then hey, why not.

And yeah, 41 and I get it.

--
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

...in terms of recreational cycling there are many riders who would probably benefit more from
improving their taste than from improving their performance. - RTMS

[charlie]

I personally dig the two top tube look. Listen, Grant gives very
sound reasons for them on that particular style and frame size. I'd
rather pay more, have two top tubes and buy American anyway.....in
fact I may just get another Riv but probably a Hunqua or heck maybe a
Sam with (two) top tubes. I know I'll never see 150 again and a
noodley frame that flexes under load and when loaded is no confidence
builder. I've had numerous ghost shifts on several frames with
perfectly clean and lubed cable guides etc. I want a stiff frame that
doesn't twist but I want a fork with (some) vertical compliance which
is where there should and can be some. Lets face it, Riv bikes are
made for more average riders with baggage and for variable surfaces
not just perfect straight line asphalt. I think these designs are
well thought out and result in a well built frame that will last. Go
Grant ! Just sayin.......

On Jul 8, 6:00 pm, eflayer <eddie.fla...@att.net> wrote:

[Forrest]

I'm with Charlie on the 2TT on the 56 Sam's.  Looks fine, distinctive even, and Grant has explained the function to my satisfaction. I had a 56 Sam with one top tube, and it was fine/good for what I was doing with it -- no problems. And I replaced that with a 58 Atlantis, but not because there was anything wrong (at all) with the Sam. (My reasons for the change weren't rational; I acknowledge that.) But if for some reason I was in the market again for a 56 Sam and it had 2TT, I wouldn't hesitate to get it. Probably would make me even more confident about bombing around with it with a decent-size load.

Forrest (Iowa City)

[PATRICK MOORE]

Two tts on a *56*? Me, I just don't get it. I use light gauge-tubed,
thin-tubed racing and randonneur bikes (old ones, with long stays) for
grocery loads and my Fargo off roader certainly doesn't need 2 tts.
And, fwiw, most of the third world roadsters have only 1 tt (I've seen
them in India, Pakistan and Kenya).

I think it's largely a fashion unless you weigh much more than average.

[Jay]

I emailed back and forth with Grant for about a week before deciding
that the undertube wasn't for me. His explanation, as far as I
understood, is that the unusually long head tube on the Sam reduces
the frame's resistance to twisting. The 2nd tube "re-triangulates" the
main triangle and eliminates this problem, which he acknowledged was
more theoretical than practical. And that is might be overkill in my
case - 56 cm Sam, 165 lbs. My feeling is that he wants the Sam to work
for everyone, including heavier riders on medium sized frames.

I went with a used single TT frame from this list (thank Forrest)
which I am currently having built. Can't wait to ride it.

Jay

[Michael Hechmer]

I think this does come down to how you use a bike.  The Hunqapillar and the Bombadill are both really designed for rough, single track riding. And for that application the 2TT solution probably has a slight advantage.  If you will be primarily riding on roads, even dirt roads the Atlantis or AHH should be the bike of choice.  Personally I have no desire for a mountain bike and don't much care for the looks of bikes with TTs that slope more than 2%.  I suppose if you are mostly an urban rider or have a strong preference for mustache bars and never stand up on the bike, or have a back that no longer bends, then the 6% lift can be a good solution, and the 2TT may also make sense.

My tandem has a sharply up sloped TT, which accommodates the smaller stoker compartment and I think that looks fine.  And, of course it has a middle tube which runs all the way to the stokers seat.  But fully loaded for B&B touring it weighs about 425 lbs!  It doesn't flex; it doesn't sway; it doesn't ghost shift.  For road riding I cant believe a 54 cm bike, even carrying about 225 lbs. needs that kind of reinforcement.

I live in a town with almost no paved roads, so much of my riding is on dirt roads.  I'm 6'1" tall and weigh (unfortunately) 192 lbs, but I find, depending on the road conditions, either 32 or 38 m tires are optimal for riding on dirt roads.  Some might prefer a bigger tire but I don't think anyone needs a 50 + mm tire for road riding, which is the big advantage of the Bombidill and Hunqapillar.

Michael 

[jimD]

My custom Riv is 63 cm, I ride mainly on roads and it is a very fine riding bike.
Were I ever to need and be able to get another Riv custom I wouldn't want the double parallel top tubes.

Something about parallel top tubes doesn't feel right to me. This is what happens when your paradigm
for nifty bikes is founded on '10 speed' bikes back in the ancient times.

The double tube approach that makes the most structural and aesthetic sense to me is the one used
on the Hunqapillars and Bombidils.
That seems to me to be a more elegant and complete implementation of added triangulation.

All that having been said I've test ridden many different Rivs at RBWHQ and they have all been great
riding bikes. Rivendell is like some great atelier where fine works of bicycling are created.
I'm happy the Riv doesn't follow the herd.

-JimD

[Aaron Thomas]

If the structural integrity issues produced by the 6 degree upsloping TT are such that Grant has to make a hard sell on 2TT or compromise on strength, why not go back to nearly horizontal top tubes? My Romulus and Bleriot both seem plenty stiff with their lesser 1-2 degree upsloping TTs. When the 6-degree upslope on the Sam was announced, it seemed to me to be something of solution in search of a problem. And I was never all that crazy about the aesthetics of the 6-degree upslope. Although it's grown on me somewhat, I still prefer the look of a horizontal (or nearly-so) TT. 

[cm]

I like the 2tt and would definitely want it if i were getting a Sam. I ride a 56 SH and weigh 160 lbs. I like the way it looks and didn't think it affected the ride at all. 

Cheers!

cm 

[James Warren]

My Atlantis is 64 cm and has a 2.5 degree TT slope.

My Hillborne is 60 cm and has a 6 degree TT slope.

My AHH is 65 cm and has a 1.5 degree TT slope.

The expanded frame geometry (with its 6 degree TT slope) was meant to allow fewer sizes to fit more people. A 60 cm Hillborne fits me well, while that size in AHH or Atlantis would be too small. (Most other companies, when showing a bike with the 60 cm Hillborne's dimensions on the geometry page, would actually name it a much larger size. Most of the companies that sell sloping TT frames list a size name that is much longer than the actual seat tube length. In my opinion, Rivendell's way of naming the frame size is far more informative and clear.)

This means that my Hillborne, has a headtube that is about as long as the headtubes of the AHH and Atlantis in my sizes. So I would conclude from this that for equivalent uses, these three models all would equally need or not need a second top tube.

Am I missing anything?

Note: the reality of my uses of the frames don't match the above theoretical considerations. My Hillborne is set up quite differently from my AHH.

-Jim W.

On Jul 9, 2011, at 9:18 AM, Aaron Thomas wrote:

If the structural integrity issues produced by the 6 degree upsloping TT are such that Grant has to make a hard sell on 2TT or compromise on strength, why not go back to nearly horizontal top tubes? My Romulus and Bleriot both seem plenty stiff with their lesser 1-2 degree upsloping TTs. When the 6-degree upslope on the Sam was announced, it seemed to me to be something of solution in search of a problem. And I was never all that crazy about the aesthetics of the 6-degree upslope. Although it's grown on me somewhat, I still prefer the look of a horizontal (or nearly-so) TT. 

--
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/-/MTL5kKe7pHoJ.

[James Warren]

Oh, I forgot to point out that for top tubes of the lengths in question here (60ish cm), every degree increase in TT slope raises the top of the head tube by about 1 cm. (Math solution is below.) This means that the 64 cm Atlantis and the 65 cm AHH put the handlebar at just about equal heights. By that logic, I guess the 60 cm Hillborne trails the other two in handlebar height by about 0.5 cm. (I'll have to get a stem riser.)

Math solution:  Arc length = radius*angle         where angle must be in radians.

Arc length = extra head tube height obtained

Radius = top tube length

Angle = (# of degrees)*(3.14) divided by 180

Head tube height increase = (60 cm)(1)(3.14)/180 = approximately 1 cm

Anybody want to do the prediction of how TT slope increases the effective TT length?

[William]

James W 

I'm not sure which side of the discussion you are arguing with this thought experiment, but as of July 9, 2011 it appears the Riv position is:

Your 64cm Atlantis.  They don't make it anymore, they recommend the Bombadil, which has a 2TT
Your 60cm Hillborne.  Has a 2TT if somebody goes to buy one today
Your 65cm A. Homer Hilsen.  Has a 2TT if somebody goes to buy one today (according to their latest Geometry Chart)

So the Rivendell position on your three bikes is consistent.  Assuming none of your bikes has a 2TT, we know that Grant's message back to you would be "Your bikes are fine, perfect.  The new ones are just differently perfect."

[Eric Daume]

It's funny, the Sam has always been on my radar, but I've always held back for one reason or another. But now that I can't get a 60cm single top tuber, it's suddenly much more desirable. I guess it's the old "wanting what you can't have" phenomenon. The double tubers are a non-starter for me. Too many mountain bike have been ridden for too many years with sloping top tubes and long head tubes for me to worry about the lack of triangulation at the head tube.

At age 39, I get the divisive cultural reference.

Eric Daume
Dublin, OH

--

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/-/EKMhX432dtgJ.

[Zack]

I am proud to have a 64cm 2TT on the way, and I can't wait for it to get here.  (seriously, the waiting game sucks!).  I didn't initially love the 2TT, but have done a total 180 on it.  I think it looks beautiful actually.  Seeing them in person, and seeing a few pics online which, to me, really show the bike off more than the stock riv pics do, sealed the deal.  

This post on eco velo displays a 56cm 2TT in all it's glory.   

At 36, I get the cultural reference.   

[Philip Williamson]

What if you could get a tweed bag that fit nicely between the top tube
and the undertube? Would anyone change their minds over the
aesthetics? Maybe it would be worse...

I made a mockup of a tweed frame bag with a photo of Jay's yellow
bike: http://bit.ly/tweed-frame-bag
Full URL: http://www.biketinker.com/2011/ephemera/rivendell-frame-bag-mockup/

Would anyone buy such a thing?

Philip

Philip Williamson
www.biketinker.com

On Jul 8, 6:00 pm, eflayer <eddie.fla...@att.net> wrote:

[cyclotourist]

That my friend, wins the internet award for cool idea of the day!  You are hereby dubbed, "King of the Internets, July 9th, 2011"!  Long may you reign*

Dustin showed me this bag previously, and while not tweed, is the basic design.  They do customs which I'm sure they would be happy to update for and under-bag design!








*Reign expires midnight, 7.9.11, some restrictions may apply.  Not valid in Puerto Rico, US Virgin Islands and North Dakota.  Contents may settle during shipping.

--
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.

[jamison brosseau]

i wish all of my bikes had at least two top tubes.  maybe even three.  i may do the wooden dowel trick, on my bombadil to see what it looks like. 
i prolly don't need em.  i like the way they look.  50mm tires in nyc on mostly roads is really one of the best choices i have ever made.  im not slower for the extra tubes or the big tires.  if you don't like the double tubes dont gettem.  none of this is necessary.  its all fun. 

[Mike]

On Jul 9, 12:16 pm, Philip Williamson <philip.william...@gmail.com>
wrote:

> What if you could get a tweed bag that fit nicely between the top tube

> and the undertube? >  Philip
>
>  Philip Williamsonwww.biketinker.com

Yes!!! All hail Philip, King of Ye Olde Internets!

I wonder if RBW will explore frame bags. A Sackville frame bag for
storing longer items such as tent poles would be great.

[Steve Palincsar]

On Sat, 2011-07-09 at 12:16 -0700, Philip Williamson wrote:
> What if you could get a tweed bag that fit nicely between the top tube
> and the undertube? Would anyone change their minds over the
> aesthetics? Maybe it would be worse...
>
> I made a mockup of a tweed frame bag with a photo of Jay's yellow
> bike: http://bit.ly/tweed-frame-bag
> Full URL: http://www.biketinker.com/2011/ephemera/rivendell-frame-bag-mockup/
>
> Would anyone buy such a thing?

Why make it out of fabric as an accessory? Wouldn't it be better made
out of metal, as a tank, where you could install an electric horn? On
the other side, you could put a trap door that would give access to the
concealed, protected storage area.

This:
http://www.retro.net/keywords/schwinn_phantom/schwinn_phantom_1.jpg
could be the next Rivendell!

[EricP]

The decision to put the second top tube on the 56cm Sam Hillborne was
the deciding factor to keep my early monotube. Was going to sell
because that bike can feel stiff and somewhat sluggish. (In reality,
it's the rider, not the bike.) But just not personally convinced the
56 needs the undertube. Not to say I don't like the concept. Just it
may be an undertube too far (my obscure cultural reference for the
day).

Actually, a frame bag idea for an undertube makes some sense, but
Revelate Designs does a pretty good bag, as is, without the need for
an undertube. (Bias alert - I have one.)

Eric Platt
St. Paul, MN

[Michael_S]

My point of view is ...that for a camping/heavy touring bike the double top tube seems OK, if it's the triangulated version like on the Hunqua.

The parallel version is not attractive to me.  (and I'm not fond of the larger upslope either).

 

For anything less than that it's just extra weight... on any bike less than ~64cm. 

 

I'm over 40 so I even use that phrase once in a while.

 

~mike

[PATRICK MOORE]

Oh, gawd! Tweed bags!

> --
> 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.
>
>

--
Patrick Moore
Albuquerque, NM
For professional resumes, contact
Patrick Moore, ACRW
patric...@resumespecialties.com

A billion stars go spinning through the night
Blazing high above your head;
But in you is the Presence that will be
When all the stars are dead.
(Rilke, Buddha in Glory)

[numbnuts]

But it sure is pretty. And a fella, or gal, could ride one for a very
long time and in many different iterations. It's not for me, at least
not now, but I consider it a Riv gem.

Says Chris, who rides a modern day klunker almost every day.
Redding, Ca.

[scott]

I got the quote, and I'm 29.

My 2TT hillborne showed up last week. Placed the order in March. I
can't stay off it.
One note: In pictures the 6 degree top tubes look pronounced, but
when not seeing the bike from a parallel photograph, but from a real
life angle (standing, not squating) it is tough to notice a huge
slant. Plus, when riding you don't see the slant or the undertube.
These things seem much more of a concern with those that like to sit
on a bench and admire their bikes, or photograph them I suppose. But
in real world riding the bike feels tough and stiff and super duper
awesome. I hope this bike takes me everywhere for a ton of years. I am
super hard on my stuff and the 2nd TT was a selling point for me in
hopes it will help with longevity. Anyway, I'm very happy.


Three other notes: My Waterford Hillborne came with a rear brake
hanger on the frame. I wasn't expecting that. Also, they threw in a
bottom bracket that I didn't ask for or know was coming. Very cool.
Last, the front dropouts are the same as the Hunq and Simpleone, not
like the earlier hillbornes, I think. Looks like devil horns. I likes
it.

[Montclair BobbyB]

Philip, I would buy one; otherwise I'm considering making my own.

BB

On Jul 9, 3:16 pm, Philip Williamson <philip.william...@gmail.com>
wrote:

[Leslie]

For my 'road bike', I love my Rambouillet as it is.  

I'm not a little fella; although I'm trying to get some weight off, I'm still hanging around 235, 6' tall... if I can get down to 200 I'll be better off, but still not a light weight.   So when I started thinking about an Atlantis to replace my old Nishiki MTB for more rigorous use than the Rambouillet, I was ready to jump, but then noticed the Bombadil.  Aside from liking the 650B aspect, I liked the 2TT on it, it was what sold me on it.     (Actually, when the Hillborne gained the 2TT, I was almost resentful of it, wished the 2TT was just for the AHH and the Bombadil, so you could more quickly tell them from the Hillborne.) 

But, then, when the Bombabil changed to the diaga-tube (a mixte with a top-tube), that to me made even more sense.  If you're 240 on a heavy week, and then have camping gear loaded onto it for a weekend or a week-long trip, it seemed as though the diagonal just can't hurt.

And, it's not like it's not been done before:

http://vintagebicycle.files.wordpress.com/2010/07/fit1490.jpg

Reminds me of a silver Bombadil frame that's been posted here before....

[Leslie]

Oh, at 39, I got the reference, too....

[Leslie]

Oh, BTW:  it was Marty's that I was thinkin' of...

http://www.flickr.com/photos/32306142@N07/5607132490/in/set-72157625382429018/lightbox/

[danmc]

I spent a lot of time considering the 56 2TT Sam. Ended up with a
lightly used single TT which allowed me to improve the drivetrain. For
the 56 the double seems ok. It gives you a great place to stash a
pump. I do a fair amount of pubic transit with the bike so having a
solid place to grab/hoist the bike seemed like a bonus.

For me it came down to a $ decision but the 2TT on a 56 was not an
aesthetic problem. With the larger frames I wanted something more
diagonal for the 2nd tube.

[CycloFiend]

The issue of double top tubes is an interesting one, and I'm not sure how it
will play out over time. Visually, they add a certain robustness to my eye,
and functionally, I'm cerainly prepared to take Grant's ideas on faith.

I'll add a couple of other thoughts.

The first is that I think the idea of front end bracing has been on GP's
mind for a while. For those of you who saw it, the first Bombadil was had
no additional tube or bracing, but I recall having a conversation with Grant
over in Walnut Creek when we were looking at the prototype.

http://cyclofiend.com/rbw/bombadil/

If you scroll down to the bottom, you can see that first proto, as well as
the 2007-era nascent idea of "how to better stabilize the front end of that
bike" which incorporated a bent tube. Now, that solution lacked both
elegance and lugs in my book. That morphed pretty quickly into the 2TT
version by 2008.

I'm not sure that the Bombadil has exactly the same upslope as the
Hillborne, and I know it doesn't use the same tubing choices as that or the
Hilsen. Maybe that makes a difference.

I do know that I see a ton of non-ferrous bikes on the road in my neck of
the woods which have incorporated a very tall headtube in their more recent
designs. As those pass by, to my eye the front end looks tall and
unsupported and weak - a "side of the polygon" as Grant calls it in the
recent post. And they are using taller headtubes and shorter seat posts than
Rivendell designs. They look decidedly weird to me.

Maybe too, I recall the days up on the mountain, when seeing an old Schwinn
Excelsior with its double top tubes was not uncommon. And those bikes were
30+ years old and had not been coddled.

Which is a roundabout way of saying the look doesn't bother me, and I
understand the design rationale. It doesn't seem like a capricious or
sudden choice, either.

Anyway, back to Sunday chores...

- Jim

--
Jim Edgar
Cyclo...@earthlink.net

Cyclofiend Bicycle Photo Galleries - http://www.cyclofiend.com
Current Classics - Cross Bikes
Singlespeed - Working Bikes

"You must be the change you want to see in the world."
Mahatma Gandhi

[Thomas Lynn Skean]

Just took my 2TT 60cm canti-studded Hillborne for a 20ish mile ride. Like I do 5-6 days/week (though sometimes it's interrupted by a day of work).

I love it. Would I love it as much if it had only one top tube? Maybe. Probably. Would I love it as much if it had a diag-a-tube? Maybe. Probably.

But I don't think I *could* love it more.

Thanks, Mr. Petersen. Thanks, Rivendell.

Yours,
Thomas Lynn Skean
this week: Moustache
next week: Noodle

[Joe Bernard]

I'm not a fan of the look (yet), but it's not an issue in my size, anyway.

[dweendaddy]

I think it is another way to distinguish Rivendells from other bikes.

Kind of like lugs - somewhat functional, somewhat fashionable.

 

For a guy my size, I love the idea of an overbuilt bike.

[Zack]

If you are tired of people pushing you around, putting you down, belittling you because you HEART the 2TT, do not fear.  You can now join your well-triangulated and appointed brethren and sistren in shouting your love for the 2TT from the mountaintops (or your cute boy shorts).  I hope you guys get as much of a kick out of this as I did making it!  

http://www.cafepress.com/DoubleTopTubesRule

(this is what happens while I am waiting for my Sam to get delivered lol)

[Garth]

I'm at a point in my life where I'm caring less and less about aesthetics of a bike. 2TT's seemed odd from afar ..... but after I got a Bombadil frame ....and loved the ride so much .... I forgot about the second TT. . .  .though it does make for a higher clamp position in my Park work stand which I really DO sing praises for every time it goes up there!! I'm still a bit choosy when it comes to color though .. lol.

Really, once I ride a bike .... I forget all the aesthetics .... it's about the feel of the ride ..... and this is where the Bombadil takes me away to bliss!  Yeah .... I get the traditional look of a bike(I'm about GP's age) ..... but so what .... this is now... not 1975. The ride and fit of this bike is so far and above say ... my now sold 1983 Stumpjumper it's not even a comparison... the Riv beats it in every way ... well .... except the the cool BB/chainstays that could take ANY chainring combo, road or mtb.

The sloping tubes just seem great to me ... as they allow for higher bars without any aids or noodly high stems. The only reason people object is because they're used to a flat TT ... but who decided a flat TT was so perfect?  It was just a choice someone made and many followed.... that doesn't make it any more "right". Cyclists ... like all humans .... can be so set in their ways!  Just because it was .... means it always must be the same.... hmm .... that feels like a boat anchor to me.  I love the creativity of the Riv designs .... I'm sure they have even more creative ideas but they have to scale back because because of the conservative nature of the customers.  I relish the changes, and look forward to getting a Hunqapillar and maybe even a Sam :)