New Mtn Bike = Clem L for Me?

[Kiley Demond]

Wow, I was in California working for a couple of weeks (sixteen straight days), and alas had no time to go to Riv just to see the haps (yes, I'm that old), AND upon my return saw/read how the impending new bike lit up a thread. (BTW, I would approach trying to figure out the name, not as an anagram, but attempted logic: what is the name of the bike it is most like, and does that name have offspring or other associations? That said, I have no idea of the answers, so I am tapping out right away.)

Anyhow, I know there are probably some Clem L owners that will buy the new bike, therefore, I am putting my forth my 'WTB' for a 59 Orange Clem. I might be able to see my way clear to another color, but not at the moment;-).  Frame only is fine.

Thanks!

Kiley

[Doug H.]

I’ve been wondering what the appeal is of the L as opposed to the H Clem. Is it just the ease of stepping through/onto and off of the bike?
Doug

[Zed Martinez]

Hey Doug, having owned one of each:

If for you (the generic you, not necessarily actually you) the Clem is a trail/rough-road bike, and you have good flexibility, the H makes more sense. It's more rigid, and very obviously shows its old MTB inspiration.

If for you the Clem is a commuter and city bike, the L offers the easier step-through, an easier way to carry it through doors (by grabbing the loop of the frame. This has actually been way handier than I expected when I switched), and somewhat less often mentioned is it makes the bike look a lot more laid back for the same geometry and at least where I am drivers are considerably more likely to stop and yield for me, and I get more smiles from people. It gives that more 'urbane' look and there are benefits to that.

If you like nice details, the newer Clem L frames have the heart lug at the seat tube, and that's a fancier touch.

[Doug Hansford]

That makes perfect sense Zed. So, you currently ride the L?

Doug. 

Sent from my iPhone

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the Google Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group.
To unsubscribe from this topic, visit https://groups.google.com/d/topic/rbw-owners-bunch/PVZh4xzisz8/unsubscribe.
To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to rbw-owners-bun...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owne...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[phil k]

Ahh did you replace the H for the L?  I remember you did a lovely write up about the H.

[Zed Martinez]

Yeah. I bought one of the 52cm Hs during the original preorder, figuring I liked hauling weight so the extra rigidity would be better. After a couple years and some recurring wrist and knee issues I admitted the 52 was just too big (I'm right on the cusp of the 45 and 52, sizewise), and decidedI needed to go the size down. Since I had the chance I opted to try the L this time, since I only ever took my H on trails once but I had several instances where I almost knocked the bike over trying to get a leg up over some tall and heavy loads on the rear rack. So far, I haven't regretted the switch, but, like I said, for me the Clem is my commuter and most days my car, so...

[phil k]

Thanks for the update Zed, what a nice car to have!

[Kiley Demond]

Well, for me, it’s partly because I'm a “gurl” who never had a girl’s bike. As a young tomboy, I never wanted a girl’s bike and being tall, by the time I would consider one, no one made one large enough. However, men’s bikes geometry worked against me, as I am built the opposite of men: long in the leg, and shorter in arm and body, so I was always too spread out, needing the seat way back so my foot was in the correct spot in relation to the pedal (I forget the name for this), and the handlebars even further back so I could actually reach them without all but laying down on the top tube. It pushed bikes out of their designed range and made for awkward riding, especially as chain stays got shorter and shorter. Eventually, some manufacturers made large WSD road bikes, my Trek Pilot was the first bike I had that was truly a comfortable fit. But, I was tired of riding the roads in the Bay Area with the million and ten other riders, and wanted to just use my bike to avoid traffic. That launched the search for a do-it-all bicycle that fit.

The much shorter answer would have been to say, yes, the ease of stepping through is part of it. It keeps one from beheading a child or dog when mounting or dismounting. 

On Sep 13, 2018, 10:46 AM -0700, Doug H. <dhansf...@gmail.com>, wrote:

I’ve been wondering what the appeal is of the L as opposed to the H Clem. Is it just the ease of stepping through/onto and off of the bike?
Doug

[Tom Wyland]

Funny I had the exact same thought about a looking out for a second-hand Clem when the new Mountain Bike starts shipping.  I'm looking for a complete 59 L or even 52 Clem H. I have a very sturdy and Dutch-heavy step-over now, a Torker Cargo T. The Clem would be a lighter and more sporty alternative overall, I think. 

Maybe I'll be blow away by the mountain bike instead.  I guess we'll know soon enough.

[Jamo.]

Can any riders speak to the main differences between the Cheviot and the Clem L?  I am looking for a step through commuter.

[Doug H.]

Joe Bernard could provide that comparison..

Doug

[Joe Bernard]

Cheviot: Full lugs, lighter tubing, higher stepover, sidepull (or center-pull) road brakes.

Clem L: Mostly TIGed, thicker tubes, lower stepover, v-brakes (or cantis).

Chev is noticeably lighter (objective), L has the prettier curve in the middle of the frame (subjective).

[Paul Choi]

Just be mindful of the length of the Clem if you are going to take your bike on a bus or train for your commute. The Clem is a really long bike. 

[Kiley Demond]

I rode both when I went to Riv to pick a bike in 2015. I liked the Clem L, but I loved the Cheviot. I would have adored the Clem if I had never gotten on the Cheviot. The Cheviot handles a bit better and has lovely lugs to look at. Cheviot has the appearance of being longer, whether or not it is; they are both long bikes. What I didn’t realize was the Clem can take wider tires and has better fender clearance. I went through all kinds of gyrations to fit 52s on the Cheviot with fenders, I could have done 60s on a Clem easily. I also admit, being a visual person, I was swayed by the nicer shade of orange on the Cheviot than on the Clem, but once again, if Cheviot hadn’t been there I would have been happy with that orange, and richer, and maybe still had a bike;-). This is my do-over.

Cheviot would be better for longer rides, touring and a full day out and about. Clem is more of let’s go for a spin or an afternoon. As far as Mixte vs. ‘L’, Cheviot has a bit more ‘manliness’ than a Clem L. I preferred the straight angle of the Cheviot (if you look at the different sizes, the upper tube has different attachment points; the 60cm looks great because it is a continuous line) than the curve of the Clem. (I prefer that look in cars as well; boxier shapes over curves; I used to call some cars as looking like they came through a birth canal.) 

On Thursday, September 13, 2018 at 1:53:20 PM UTC-7, Jamo. wrote:

[Adam Leibow]

I just bought a clem L for mountain bike/heavy duty rides. Keven (who used to work at Rivendell) is my neighbor and one day got me excited about the idea of a clem L for mountain biking because of the extremely low toptube, and the ability to literally step through and out of the frame during a bail on tricky terrain. The weekend after that, I bought one, and have been riding it since. It's quite a plush ride, especially with tubeless Compass Antelope Pass, and works great as a heavy duty offroad frame as well as an all arounder / commuter. wouldn't hesitate to MTB o

[Kiley Demond]

Kill the thread! Why? Because I love the new bike and want one. Sorry, Clem. We're done again. Always the bridesmaid, never the bride. How was I supposed to know Hill was going to be the perfect bike for Arizona? How was I supposed to know Grant was going to pen my exact thoughts about mountain biking becoming mountain racing? My "real" mountain biking experience consisted of going on a date with the author of local mountain biking trails guides for a ride on a trail that I would have hiked, somewhere above Woodside or Los Gatos. Thing is, the trail was about 18" wide and to the right, was a serious drop into brambles with undoubtedly a lot of poison oak. I was a good road rider, but this was nuts. I quit road riding "for sport" when I was clipped by a Winnebago going up Kings Mountain Road, and similarly, my mountain bike riding 'career' ended very quickly because the introduction seemed so rude: to hikers, to the scenery, to my common sense. That said, I enjoyed riding on paths, fire trails, raw land, on any bike, and there is such an abundance of that in AZ. 

Bring 'er on! (in a shade of deep orange or rust, please)

On Thursday, September 13, 2018 at 10:38:22 AM UTC-7, Kiley Demond wrote: