Diagonapillar

[Grant Petersen]

Midpoint of headtube to midpoint of seat tube. Sorta mixte-like. (Jim Thrill/Hiawatha said...)

Keven loves the 62 Betty/Yves, and rides it a lot, and rode it with weight, and remarked how well it carried it, not what you'd expect from a mixte. But the design like that works, and that lead to the diagonalization of the 2tt (second top tube, I'm tired of typing it all out), and some friendly turmoil here. It's Keven's call, which way it goes, but I think it's looking diagonal. That's where I'd put my puka-shells.

G

--
Grant
Rivendell Bicycle Works
www.rivbike.com
925 933 7304

[Esteban]

Fits the bike. Truly unique.

Esteban
San Diego, Calif.

[cyclotourist]

No Kevin, don't do it.....

> 925 933 7304

--
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

"Bicycling is a big part of the future. It has to be. There is something wrong with a society that drives a car to workout in a gym."  ~Bill Nye, scientist guy

[William]

I like the idea.

> > rbw-owners-bun...@googlegroups.com<rbw-owners-bunch%2Bunsubscrib e...@googlegroups.com>

[andrew hill]

parallel with the down tube might look pretty snazzy.

best,

andrew

[cm]

I wonder if there is a drawing, mock up, or other bike out there with
this config? It sounds kinda weird to me, but seeing it might change
everything.

cheers!
cm

[Ron MH]

Much like the old camping bikes of the 50s. Fine enough. But doesn't
that mean a diagonal lug(s) at the seat tube and head tubes?

On Apr 4, 9:30 pm, Grant Petersen <gr...@rivbike.com> wrote:

[james black]

On Sun, Apr 4, 2010 at 21:30, Grant Petersen <gr...@rivbike.com> wrote:
> Midpoint of headtube to midpoint of seat tube. Sorta mixte-like. (Jim
> Thrill/Hiawatha said...)

Have you all considered running the 2tt from bottom of head tube to
top of seat tube?

This arrangement would give the best triangulation, and avoid putting
a bending stress on the middle of any tubes, where the stresses of
bending moments would be highest. I also think this would give a
better appearance (primarily because it would have the most
triangulated appearance - it's the most direct way to cut that front
diamond-shape in the frame into two triangles, and optimum engineering
solutions just have a way of looking right).

James Black
Los Angeles, CA

[EricP]

Will wait until a photo is there before getting too depressed by it.
However, it's turning into a different bike than the one I ordered.
Really hoping that it is going to be worth the extra wait. And since
the seat tube won't be able to take a bottle cage, the shifted 2nd tt
will hopefully have cage bosses?

Yes, yes, am complaining and whining about this way too much.

But now, a 29er mixte. That would be cool. And something I'd ride.
A lot.

Eric Platt
St. Pau, MN

[Marty]

Here's my crude mock-up to show what seems to be the diagonal
direction, with water bottle bosses and graphics relocated. Kind of
liking it...but keep in mind this is only my interpretation of what
has been mentioned. As Grants says, it's Keven's call.

http://tinyurl.com/yebexd2

Marty

[newenglandbike]

It sounds very cool. I'm glad to hear it's a real thing- it'll make
the Hunqapillar that much more unique.

[Rene Sterental]

That is quite an interesting concept... and I like your mock-up! Doesn't seem crude at all.

 

René

[Bruce]

Good effort. Now, how would it look with the mixte stays added in as well? Pretty good I think and a better support for the seat tube when going trail bombing under big loads

---

From: Marty <mgi...@mac.com>
To: RBW Owners Bunch <rbw-owne...@googlegroups.com>
Sent: Mon, April 5, 2010 7:06:11 AM
Subject: [RBW] Re: Diagonapillar

[Marty]

OK - here you go - even added a second rear brake like the Singer -
which BTW is one of my favorite designs...

http://tinyurl.com/ydcalff

Marty

On Apr 5, 8:29 am, Bruce <fullylug...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Good effort. Now, how would it look with the mixte stays added in as well? Pretty good I think and a better support for the seat tube when going trail bombing under big loads
>
> ________________________________

> From: Marty <mgie...@mac.com>

[Scott G.]

Here you go, Raleigh X frame, back to the future!!!

http://oldbike.wordpress.com/1931-raleigh-cross-frame-gents/

I do like Marty's version, maybe a add water bottle bridge on the
extra stays.

[Bruce]

I love it. I'd put $ down on one, made like that. :)

Thanks for the Monday morning pick-me-up.

---

From: Marty <mgi...@mac.com>

To: RBW Owners Bunch <rbw-owne...@googlegroups.com>

Sent: Mon, April 5, 2010 7:38:52 AM
Subject: [RBW] Re: Diagonapillar

OK - here you go - even added a second rear brake like the Singer -
which BTW is one of my favorite designs...

http://tinyurl.com/ydcalff

Marty

On Apr 5, 8:29 am, Bruce <fullylug...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Good effort. Now, how would it look with the mixte stays added in as well? Pretty good I think and a better support for the seat tube when going trail bombing under big loads
>
> ________________________________
> From: Marty <mgie...@mac.com>
> To: RBW Owners Bunch <rbw-owne...@googlegroups.com>
> Sent: Mon, April 5, 2010 7:06:11 AM
> Subject: [RBW] Re: Diagonapillar
>
> Here's my crude mock-up to show what seems to be the diagonal
> direction, with water bottle bosses and graphics relocated. Kind of
> liking it...but keep in mind this is only my interpretation of what
> has been mentioned. As Grants says, it's Keven's call.
>
> http://tinyurl.com/yebexd2
>
> Marty

--
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-bunch+unsub...@googlegroups.com.

[newenglandbike]

Dude! Marty, you are like, stupid fast with photoshop (or are you
using GNU?). Nice work man. Either one looks good IMHO. I've
always thought the Alex Singer design was cool.

But, if Rivendell does change the design, maybe they should contact
the folks who have plunked down their money, and talk to them about it
a bit. I think most folks would probably be enthusiastic about the
change, but some folks might not be.

Matt

[William]

Marty those are off the chain. That Hunq has a trunq of funq. Make
sure you let Keven know those exist. Your mockups could shape the
future!

[Mike]

Marty's "Campeur Hunqa" actually looks pretty good. The other one...
not so much. I have a feeling the "Campeur" model would be a little
more complicated to produce and so would jack up the price. I also
like the bike the way it is with parallel TTs. It'll be interesting to
see how this pans out.

Here's a picture of a Alex Singer camping bike from VBQ:

http://www.vintagebicyclepress.com/images/CascadeBlewett.jpg

--mike

[Bruce]

whatever the Hunq might go for, it will be less than say, and Alex Singer campeur, or a Rene Herse.

Thanks for the vintage pic and I agree with you that they both look good.

---

From: Mike <mjaw...@gmail.com>

To: RBW Owners Bunch <rbw-owne...@googlegroups.com>

Sent: Mon, April 5, 2010 8:43:20 AM
Subject: [RBW] Re: Diagonapillar

Marty's "Campeur Hunqa" actually looks pretty good. .. I have a feeling the "Campeur" model would be a little

more complicated to produce and so would jack up the price.

Here's a picture of a Alex Singer camping bike from VBQ:

http://www.vintagebicyclepress.com/images/CascadeBlewett.jpg

--mike

[Bill M.]

Mid-head tube to mid-seat tube makes more sense to me than the
parallel top tubes. Imagine a frame built with only the diagonal
tube, no top tube or down tube. If you grabbed the head tube and seat
tube and tried to twist them side to side so that they were not
parallel, the diagonal tube would be in the best place to resist that
force. Moving that tube higher or lower on the seat tube would make
it less effective. In a tandem, that is the function of a 'marathon'
tube that runs from the head tube to the middle of the rear seat tube
- it keeps the stoker's seat tube in plane with the head tube by
resisting twist.

Adding the down and top tubes back to that imaginary frame would keep
the seat and head tubes from flexing fore-and-aft, and keep the BB
stable under pedaling loads.

Most modern tandems followed Santana's lead and went away from using
the marathon tube. They use a 'direct lateral' tube from the head
tube to the stoker's bottom bracket instead. That arrangement is
better at keeping the captain's bottom bracket from swaying, and
allowed more convenient bottle placement (no telling which factor was
more important). An oversized top tube is used to resist the twisting
forces. That arrangement has no place in a single IMO, as BB
stiffness is not a real issue. Calfee's CF tandems have no middle
tubes at all, they use huge top and boom tubes to keep everything
stiff enough.

The question to me is, how big does a rider or a touring load need to
be to need the extra stiffness of the diagonal tube? At what point
does the weight of the diagonal tube become less than the extra
thickness / diameter of the top and down tubes needed to achieve
comparable stiffness in a plain diamond frame?

Moot point for me, I'd fit a 54 Hunka so no diagonal tube for me.

Bill

On Apr 4, 10:03 pm, andrew hill <neurod...@gmail.com> wrote:
> parallel with the down tube might look pretty snazzy.
>
> best,
> andrew
>
> On Apr 4, 2010, at 9:52 PM, cyclotourist wrote:
>
>
>
> > No Kevin, don't do it.....
>

> > On Sun, Apr 4, 2010 at 9:45 PM, Esteban <proto...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Fits the bike.  Truly unique.
>
> > Esteban
> > San Diego, Calif.
>
> > On Apr 4, 9:30 pm, Grant Petersen <gr...@rivbike.com> wrote:
> > > Midpoint of headtube to midpoint of seat tube. Sorta mixte-like. (Jim
> > > Thrill/Hiawatha said...)
>
> > > Keven loves the 62 Betty/Yves, and rides it a lot, and rode it with weight,
> > > and remarked how well it carried it, not what you'd expect from a mixte. But
> > > the design like that works, and that lead to the diagonalization of the 2tt
> > > (second top tube, I'm tired of typing it all out), and some friendly turmoil
> > > here. It's Keven's call, which way it goes, but I think it's looking
> > > diagonal. That's where I'd put my puka-shells.
>
> > > G
>
> > > --
> > > Grant
> > > Rivendell Bicycle Workswww.rivbike.com
> > > 925 933 7304
>
> > --
> > 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 athttp://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=en.

[Bill Connell]

The mockups are really helpful, thanks for putting them together. I
have to say, i greatly prefer the look of parallel top tubes, if a
double TT is the plan, but i'm not on the Hunq list, so my vote is
more theoretical.

Two other observations in this discussion though:
This is the second Riv frame that seems to be getting significant
input from someone other than Grant (Rodeo designed by Mark, Keven at
least some decisions on this one). Maybe this has happened before with
less discussion, but it's interesting that it's part of the
conversation with these frames.

Also, if the 2nd top tube angle changes, will the decal have to change
so the 2nd line in the Hunq's H matches it? (in the 2tt world, i like
that this logo mirrors the frame)

--
Bill Connell
St. Paul, MN

[EricP]

Having looked at the first mockup, I'm not convinced. Jars my view
too much. Also makes it look like it's a "fatty" bike. Fine. I'm
fat. That's been established. Don't like the idea that I'm stuck
riding a "special" bike.

With full-length twin laterals, ala the Singer camping, or the
original Breezer, that might work. That's a copy of the Schwinn
Excelsior frame.

Also, on a slightly different note. With the center tube, would make
it difficult to sqeeze both a larger bottle and frame pump in without
interference. At least on a 58. And forget using a pump with a mount
like the Topeak Morph series.

Finally, it looks like a half hearted attempt to copy a Salsa Fargo.
Without the extra standover.

Yes, I'm upset about this. Will probably end up losing a lot of money
selling off my frame without building it up. Not something I can live
happily with.

Sigh.

Eric Platt
St. Paul, MN

> > For more options, visit this group athttp://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=en.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

[Dan Abelson]

On Mon, Apr 5, 2010 at 10:23 AM, EricP <eric...@aol.com> wrote:

Having looked at the first mockup, I'm not convinced.  Jars my view
too much.  Also makes it look like it's a "fatty" bike.  Fine.  I'm
fat.  That's been established.  Don't like the idea that I'm stuck
riding a "special" bike.

With full-length twin laterals, ala the Singer camping, or the
original Breezer, that might work.  That's a copy of the Schwinn
Excelsior frame.

Also, on a slightly different note.  With the center tube, would make
it difficult to sqeeze both a larger bottle and frame pump in without
interference.  At least on a 58.  And forget using a pump with a mount
like the Topeak Morph series.

Finally, it looks like a half hearted attempt to copy a Salsa Fargo.
Without the extra standover.

Yes, I'm upset about this.  Will probably end up losing a lot of money
selling off my frame without building it up.  Not something I can live
happily with.

Sigh.

Eric Platt
St. Paul, MN

 

Eric,

 

If Riv makes the change, I would just call them.  I would not be suprised if they were willing to refund your deposit if you are truly unhappy with the change to the top tube.

 

Dan Abelson

St. Paul, MN

[William]

No choice Grant and Keven make is going to make everybody happy.

On Apr 5, 8:27 am, Dan Abelson <d...@abelsons.net> wrote:

[Shaun Meehan]

Can't decide if I have a preference between the parallel vs. the
diagonal 2nd top tube. Aesthetically, I didn't like the 2nd top tube
at all when the first Bombadil pictures "dropped". Now I don't mind
it. In fact I kind of like how it looks. I kind of think that the
diagonal 2tt might grow on me in the same way.

Shaun Meehan

[Allingham II, Thomas J]

I don't post very often (Jim pointed out there's an endless footer attached to my messages when I do!), but let me offer the opinion of an Atlantis and Bombadil owner (which means that I ain't buying one no matter what the decision is): I think the diagonal 2tt (the Campeur approach) is extremely attractive, AND cool, AND very likely highly, highly functional. For those who agree with the first two judgments (and there will obviously be disagreements), it is a grand slam home run.

-----Original Message-----
From: rbw-owne...@googlegroups.com [mailto:rbw-owne...@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of happyriding
Sent: Monday, April 05, 2010 12:04 PM
To: RBW Owners Bunch
Subject: [RBW] Re: Diagonapillar

Just an opinion, and not meant to insult anyone...but that is the
ugliest bike I've ever seen. Sorry. Just one opinion.

I suspect one reason Rivendell might like to do the diagonal 2tt is
marketing: it helps differentiate the Hunaqpillar from the Bombadil--
even if it doesn't improve on it. But if Rivendell's goal is to
actually sell some frames, then I think a diagonal 2tt will be a tough sell. But then I thought the Bomadil would be a tough sell, too.

Also, unless Rivendell does some testing on the strength differences (do they even have the capability?), I think that using a diagonal 2tt would be a rash decision.

As for people like EricP, this new diagonal 2tt idea seems contrary to everything Rivendell said during the pre-order period:

1) Trust us
2) July delivery a good possibility
3) Only minor tweaks

I imagine Rivendell would be willing to return deposits--but that won't cure the disappointment.

--
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.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
****************************************************

To ensure compliance with Treasury Department regulations, we advise you that, unless otherwise expressly indicated, any federal tax advice contained in this message was not intended or written to be used, and cannot be used, for the purpose of (i) avoiding tax-related penalties under the Internal Revenue Code or applicable state or local tax law provisions or (ii) promoting, marketing or recommending to another party any tax-related matters addressed herein.
****************************************************
****************************************************

This email (and any attachments thereto) is intended only for use by the addressee(s) named herein and may contain legally privileged and/or confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient of this email, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this email (and any attachments thereto) is strictly prohibited. If you receive this email in error please immediately notify me at (212) 735-3000 and permanently delete the original email (and any copy of any email) and any printout thereof.

Further information about the firm, a list of the Partners and their professional qualifications will be provided upon request.
****************************************************
==============================================================================

[James Dinneen]

I may have missed this earlier in the discusion, but I assume that the 54 would still have only one top tube. Is that the current understanding as far as we know? Jim D                Massachusetts --- On Mon, 4/5/10, Bill Connell <bcon...@gmail.com> wrote:

> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsub...@googlegroups.com.

> For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=en. > > -- 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-bunch+unsub...@googlegroups.com.

[William]

When I portage my Hillborne up and down the long steps of the South
Hayward Bart station, I grab it hard on the seat tube and loop my
thumb into the top loop of the King cage that is bolted to the seat
tube. If I'm wearing knit gloves, it's hard to get a good grip. More
than once I've thought that it would be great to have a second top
tube about halfway down the seat tube to simplify urban portage.

On Apr 5, 9:12 am, "Allingham II, Thomas J"

<Thomas.Alling...@skadden.com> wrote:
> I don't post very often (Jim pointed out there's an endless footer attached to my messages when I do!), but let me offer the opinion of an Atlantis and Bombadil owner (which means that I ain't buying one no matter what the decision is):  I think the diagonal 2tt (the Campeur approach) is extremely attractive, AND cool, AND very likely highly, highly functional.  For those who agree with the first two judgments (and there will obviously be disagreements), it is a grand slam home run.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: rbw-owne...@googlegroups.com [mailto:rbw-owne...@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of happyriding
> Sent: Monday, April 05, 2010 12:04 PM
> To: RBW Owners Bunch
> Subject: [RBW] Re: Diagonapillar
>
> Just an opinion, and not meant to insult anyone...but that is the
> ugliest bike I've ever seen.   Sorry.  Just one opinion.
>
> I suspect one reason Rivendell might like to do the diagonal 2tt is
> marketing: it helps differentiate the Hunaqpillar from the Bombadil--
> even if it doesn't improve on it.   But if Rivendell's goal is to
> actually sell some frames, then I think a diagonal 2tt will be a tough sell.  But then I thought the Bomadil would be a tough sell, too.
>
> Also, unless Rivendell does some testing on the strength differences (do they even have the capability?), I think that using a diagonal 2tt would be a rash decision.
>
> As for people like EricP, this new diagonal 2tt idea seems contrary to everything Rivendell said during the pre-order period:
>
> 1) Trust us
> 2) July delivery a good possibility
> 3) Only minor tweaks
>
> I imagine Rivendell would be willing to return deposits--but that won't cure the disappointment.
>
> --
> 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 athttp://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=en.

[Matt Critchlow]

I agree, great job marty!

I'm also with Matt on this for those who pre-ordered, and I'm one of
them. It would be a substantial change to the design that was
presented to early adopters and therefore if they're going to go
through with this they need to contact each of those people. It sounds
like an interesting design change, possibly for the better(looking and
functioning) but it's a much bigger change than adding lining to
lugs.. I'm sure they'll do the right thing though.

Now back to speculation!!

On Apr 5, 6:17 am, newenglandbike <matthiasbe...@gmail.com> wrote:

[Michael_S]

speaking as a person who did/does not like the original design, either
of the "Marty Photoshop" designs are way better and lend a unique
quaulity to the bike. Just sayin".

~Mike~

> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------­---

> > ****************************************************
>
> > To ensure compliance with Treasury Department regulations, we advise you that, unless otherwise expressly indicated, any federal tax advice contained in this message was not intended or written to be used, and cannot be used, for the purpose of (i) avoiding tax-related penalties under the Internal Revenue Code or applicable state or local tax law provisions or (ii) promoting, marketing or recommending to another party any tax-related matters addressed herein.
> > ****************************************************
> > ****************************************************
>
> > This email (and any attachments thereto) is intended only for use by the addressee(s) named herein and may contain legally privileged and/or confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient of this email, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this email (and any attachments thereto) is strictly prohibited. If you receive this email in error please immediately notify me at (212) 735-3000 and permanently delete the original email (and any copy of any email) and any printout thereof.
>
> > Further information about the firm, a list of the Partners and their professional qualifications will be provided upon request.
> > ****************************************************

> > ===========================================================================­===- Hide quoted text -

[cm]

Wow-- great mock up! I'll admit that it is much better than I expected
it to look, but i still don't get it. I am sure it is stronger, but
how much and is it necessary and isn't the Bomba pretty darn strong
with the parallel tt's? There are definite disadvantages to the
design, including bottle placement and carrying-- but how would they
ever quantify the advantages with out extremely complicated testing?
It seems a bit gimmicky and a bit different for the sake of being
different. Seem a bit out of left field...major last minute design
change.

Cheers!
cm

[Bill Connell]

On Mon, Apr 5, 2010 at 11:48 AM, William <tape...@gmail.com> wrote:
> When I portage my Hillborne up and down the long steps of the South
> Hayward Bart station, I grab it hard on the seat tube and loop my
> thumb into the top loop of the King cage that is bolted to the seat
> tube.  If I'm wearing knit gloves, it's hard to get a good grip.  More
> than once I've thought that it would be great to have a second top
> tube about halfway down the seat tube to simplify urban portage.

Portaging a bike is a main thing that gives me pause with the 2tt
designs. I may be wrong, but from your description, it sounds like
you're carrying the bike like a large piece of luggage, which might be
a lot simpler in a train station setting. In my case, there are at
least a couple of places around town where trail access involves a
long staircase or (on one offroad trail) a long log crossing, so i
shoulder the bike, cyclocross-style. I don't use a tt-mounted pump on
most bikes for this reason, and the smaller triangle of a 2tt would
make it more difficult. Of course, i recognize most people probably
don't generally have reason carry their bikes like this.

[William]

Bill

Yeah, luggage style. My BART bike tends to be in the 45-50lb range
loaded with all my work related stuff. My shoulder couldn't take
that.

other Bill

On Apr 5, 10:14 am, Bill Connell <bconn...@gmail.com> wrote:

[Bill Connell]

Luggage style makes sense in that scenario, no matter the weight -
having a bike swinging around near head height in crowds might make
people nervous :-)

> --
> 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.
>
>

--

[Garth]

Eric,

Riv isn't going to make any drastic changes to the Hunq, or else
they'd have to call it something else.

What you see here is pure fantasy. One thought about TT's not being
parallel and all of the sudden we have a whole new frame?
Nah.

[Frederick, Steve]

Personally I like all the options shown better than two parallel toptubes. They all look like reinforcing structures to me whereas the paralle TT's just look redundant...what's that thing that's in the eye of the be-whatsits?

Steve

-----Original Message-----
From: rbw-owne...@googlegroups.com
[mailto:rbw-owne...@googlegroups.com]On Behalf Of happyriding
Sent: Monday, April 05, 2010 1:49 PM
To: RBW Owners Bunch
Subject: [RBW] Re: Diagonapillar

Did you see the name of the op? It's not April 1 anymore, either.

Oh, yeah. Here is james black's suggested tube orientation--the two
triangles are better than one geometry:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/49416858@N00/4494282750/

[james black]

On Mon, Apr 5, 2010 at 10:48, happyriding <happy...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Oh, yeah.  Here is james black's suggested tube orientation--the two
> triangles are better than one geometry:
> http://www.flickr.com/photos/49416858@N00/4494282750/

Thanks for mocking that up! It doesn't look as good as I had imagined
when I described it - with a longer headtube, it would only improve.
But I still think it looks better, more sensible and organic in a way,
than any of the other schemes - except for the the campeur-style with
the added stays, which I think would be a brilliant choice!

James Black
Los Angeles, CA

[Joe Bunik]

Danged! If that diagonal tube had been on the docket last week during
the pre-deal, it might well have pushed me over the edge!

FWIW, I saw a campeur in a (cool) shop in Paris last year - Rando Cycles
http://www.flickr.com/photos/66275745@N00/4494454218/
... I think it was the owner's bike. Big/tall dude... big/tall bike
(and, all Campy Euclid iirc)!

James: your triangulation suggestion reminded me of old
Koski/Trailmaster stuff... (Kinda hard to) see:
http://mombat.org/80Koski5.jpg
http://mombat.org/80Koski8.jpg
http://mombat.org/Koski.htm

=- Joe Bunik
Walnut Creek, CA

[Esteban]

I like all of the tt configurations imagined here, far better than the
parallel... This bike is meant to be a beast! The extra structure is
interesting and functional. Cool like interesting duthh bikes.
Unique l! Diagonal-ize!

On Apr 5, 11:08 am, james black <chocot...@gmail.com> wrote:

[William]

And here's the fantasy decal for the Diagonpillar:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/45758191@N04/4494550338/

[William]

.....and Grant posted about the various opinions, and indicated that
one refund was given already. I think that's too bad, but nobody
should buy a bike that they cannot like.

On Apr 5, 8:27 am, Dan Abelson <d...@abelsons.net> wrote:

[Matt Critchlow]

i hope there's no serious hard feeligns..

the new design is just that, a new design. it's different than what
was initially shown during the presale and all the here's da hunka
stuff. If someone doesn't like the changes ( i haven't made up my mind
yet ), I don't see anything wrong with them asking for a refund as it
is a different bike.

Losing a customer with a change like this is a possibility sure, but I
hope they're not losing "friends or fans" over this!

Matt

On Apr 5, 2:50 pm, happyriding <happyrid...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Just read that myself.   It seems like some hard feelings are being
> formed.

[Ian Dickson]

I think it's a waste of energy to get upset about something like
this. First, it's a bicycle. Bicycles are fun. Second, if you're
upset about it, give it a few days and see if you still feel the same
way. It's going to be a nice bike.

On Apr 5, 1:50 pm, happyriding <happyrid...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Just read that myself.   It seems like some hard feelings are being
> formed.
>
> On Apr 5, 3:28 pm, William <tapebu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>

[Beth]

Man...it sure must be nice to have a PBH above 75. All the choices you
75+ PBHers have in bike frames makes me delirious and jealous and
still not tall.

Meanwhile, on back on the little ol' Betty (which....funny isn't
it..the Hunq is beginning to ever-so-slightly
resemble...muhuhuwahahaha.....)

On Apr 5, 9:01 am, William <tapebu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> No choice Grant and Keven make is going to make everybody happy.

> > St. Paul, MN- Hide quoted text -

[Esteban]

If I had a deposit, I'd keep it in there until one of these comes off
the boat. I'll bet they'll look pretty awesome. Having ridden the
prototypes, I'll say that they are SOLID. This diagonal-fest will
only make them more solid. And more awesome.

And these were never svelte bikes. They are intended to be tanks,
plowers, mowers...anything that adds strength (and innovation to boot)
for this utility machine is welcomed... especially from Keven and
Grant who do a lot of tinkering and riding and experimenting.

Patience is a virtue. I'm liking this bike more and more.

Esteban
San Diego, Calif.

[EricP]

I'm owning up. It's me that has the refund. Mainly due to the
thought that this is not the bike I pre-ordered. It may be good, but
not what I was lead to expect from the inital .pdf. The new bike is
also too jarring to me visually.

Sorry to the list if I've made too much and lead to discord. Not my
wish. Do not want to alienate others because of my own stupid ideas.

Am not mad at Rivendell at all. The blame (if there is any) lies
squarely with me in this case.

Eric Platt
St. Paul, MN

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

[JL]

I don't like it. I view the functionality of any bike that I can't
throw over my shoulder and run with, or climb up and down stairs
easily, as pretty limited. This has a direct correlation with the
places I go and where I live though.

[William]

Eric

I don't think anyone should or would fault you for not wanting to
follow through on buying a bike that changed into something you don't
like.

Personally, the only thing you said that I thought was a bit unfair
was the statement that the bike seemed like a 'half-hearted copy' of
another bike. I don't know Grant or Keven well enough to really know
how they might feel about reading that, but I can't imagine it being
pleasant. I don't think Grant or Keven is a copycat, and I don't
think they approach bike design half-heartedly, and I bet you don't
either. It's fine being honest about subjective things like the
design is 'jarring' or even ugly if that's the way you feel.

[cm]

Eric-- I say good move and I think most people (including the people
at Riv (warning: speculation)) would do the same thing and that most,
good, honest businesses would WANT to give you your money back. There
is no blame here-- you ordered something and it changed and you no
longer wanted it. That is business. I also say that if you think
something is a half-hearted copy then you should say it, and we as
fans of Riv should listen. Not everything has to be cheerleading. As
long as it is said respectfully, then I think we need to be open to
the good and the bad.

I like the diagon-apillar 58% as much as the regul-apillar.And I dont
get it. And it doesnt seem necessary. And I am not sorry.

Cheers!
cm

[Dustin Sharp]

Details posted on the Flickr site:

http://tinyurl.com/yfqjuj9

And for those of you who don't like to click links, you will find the
details below:

OK, this is it folks, the rough riders ride to equal if not beat the best of
the best. You will not be sorry, unless you don't come.

We're going to do a version of the Boulder Creek Loop that the Rough Riders
did last July:

http://www.xo-1.org/2009_07_01_archive.html

This version will be shorter than the original RR version at "only" 40+
miles and 5000 feet of climbing, but will involve more dirt. About 80-85%
dirt.

We'll start in the hamlet of Descanso and head north up Boulder Creek Road,
as you can see on the map below. However, when we get to Lake Cuyamaca, we
we will head south using fire roads rather than the pavement on route 79.
(Those with skinnier tires or who are feeling tired can still opt for the
pavement of route 79 and end up in the same place).

http://ridewithgps.com/routes/51619

Basically, you get about half the ride on super smooth dirt road and the
second half on fire road with almost no traffic at all. It's about as good
as it gets. The ride itself takes about 5.5hrs+. You will not wish for more.
There is one stop for water and food refueling at the half way point.
Camelback or 3 bottles recommended.

You will climb.

If you want to take the fire roads in the second half of the ride, something
fatter than 35s is recommended. Otherwise, the pavement may be the better
option.

Yes, yes, Descanso is far from LA. But just pretend you are a hardened
mountain biker. We routinely drive 2.5 hrs up to do the Palm Canyon Epic or
SART. It's worth driving for an epic ride! Don't wuss out and make mountain
bikers laugh at you because you are afraid to drive or commit a whole day
for some nice dirt.

We may look into getting a University of San Diego apt/crash pad if folks
want to drive up the night before. This depends on folks committing to the
ride and expressing an interest in it. If you come the night before, dinner
and beer will be scheduled.

Finally, please let us know if it would make a difference if we do it on May
1 or 2. Thanks!

[Yogurt]

Wow! I like this idea, especially since it would be different from
other Rivendells and other bikes. I hope they do it. I wonder if
they'll do the same for the smaller sizes.

[Frederick, Steve]

It's your call, of course, and I don't personally hold it against you in any way. I'd point out though, that it seems a bit premature to me given that the final design decision has yet to be made, and no pictures of a prototype or first batch frameset has been published. (aside the photoshopped possibilities posted here)

I trust Grant to make this bike look great no matter what design is finalized. I think you gave up on Grant/Riv a bit too soon...

Steve

-----Original Message-----
From: rbw-owne...@googlegroups.com
[mailto:rbw-owne...@googlegroups.com]On Behalf Of EricP
Sent: Monday, April 05, 2010 7:58 PM
To: RBW Owners Bunch
Subject: [RBW] Re: Diagonapillar

[Garth]

If they're going diagonal ..... what do they do about water bottles ?
Design is one thing, but what about practicality?

While I agree with GP that triangles look better, and bicycles are all
about triangles ...... more of them doesn't necessarily mean better.
Double top tubes parallel
looks masculine...... works great for carrying and stand
mounting....... a diagonal or mixte tube doesn't.

I'm wondering out loud ... if extra diagonal type tubed frames were so
popular ..... why are they not sold in mass?
I see a warmish response here in this forum .... but you know how some
things go ..... people say they love the design ..... but when it
comes time to actually
buy and own one ..... "personal reality" checks in. . . . and they
may not want it. It's like seeing a fancy prototype at the bike
show .... it looks great .... you drool over it ...
but you just don't get one ..... for whatever reason..... usually it's
too far "out of the norm". What would so and so think? ... etc.

The mind is an never ending ride to nowhere.

[Rene Sterental]

I will apologize first, but do think this "triangapillar" is just
taking the discussion to a silly level.

As a Bombadil owner I didn't see the point of "copying" the design and
making it $500 cheaper in Taiwan, even though I wish the Bombadil
sizes were adjusted to match the new proposed Hunqa sizes.

The diagonal second tube ala "mixte" I find very charming and visually
appealing, as well as differentiating it from the Bombadil. Assuming
equal functionality, one can now choose the design they like best and
the price difference as well as origin of the frame can become
secondary.

That being said, I have no idea on the implications of these design
variations on the quality of the ride. I do love riding my Bombadil;
it's taught me to ride slow and enjoy the ride more. Before, it was
always a frustrating experience of trying to ride hard to lower my
average speed...

I'm very curious to see where the Hunqa takes us...

René

On 4/6/10, happyriding <happy...@yahoo.com> wrote:

> On Apr 5, 6:16 pm, William <tapebu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Eric
>>
>> I don't think anyone should or would fault you for not wanting to
>> follow through on buying a bike that changed into something you don't
>> like.
>>
>> Personally, the only thing you said that I thought was a bit unfair
>> was the statement that the bike seemed like a 'half-hearted copy' of
>> another bike.  I don't know Grant or Keven well enough to really know
>> how they might feel about reading that, but I can't imagine it being
>> pleasant.  I don't think Grant or Keven is a copycat,
>>
>

> As far as I can tell, there is nothing about the shape of Rivendell's
> bicycles that hasn't been done before. There are very few creative
> new bike designs. But, I think I have discovered one. I call it the
> Trianga-pillar:
>
> http://www.flickr.com/photos/49416858@N00/4495790421/
>
> Patent pending.

> --
> 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.
>
>

--
Sent from my mobile device

[JoelMatthews]

> As a Bombadil owner I didn't see the point of "copying" the design and
> making it $500 cheaper in Taiwan, even though I wish the Bombadil
> sizes were adjusted to match the new proposed Hunqa sizes.

With you on that. The Hilborne does Hilsen things but its design is
notably different. I had trouble getting the reason for the Hunqa
before the design change.

> The diagonal second tube ala "mixte" I find very charming and visually
> appealing, as well as differentiating it from the Bombadil. Assuming
> equal functionality, one can now choose the design they like best and
> the price difference as well as origin of the frame can become
> secondary.

Agree again. A proud and happy owner of a Bruce Gordon Rock n' Road,
I need one of these bikes as much as I need a new hole in my head.
Bringing back the diagonal second tube caught my attention. A lot of
great old builders used the concept to good effect in days gone by.
It would be fun to have a modern variation.

On Apr 6, 3:34 pm, Rene Sterental <orthie...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I will apologize first, but do think this "triangapillar" is just
> taking the discussion to a silly level.
>
> As a Bombadil owner I didn't see the point of "copying" the design and
> making it $500 cheaper in Taiwan, even though I wish the Bombadil
> sizes were adjusted to match the new proposed Hunqa sizes.
>
> The diagonal second tube ala "mixte" I find very charming and visually
> appealing, as well as differentiating it from the Bombadil. Assuming
> equal functionality, one can now choose the design they like best and
> the price difference as well as origin of the frame can become
> secondary.
>
> That being said, I have no idea on the implications of these design
> variations on the quality of the ride. I do love riding my Bombadil;
> it's taught me to ride slow and enjoy the ride more. Before, it was
> always a frustrating experience of trying to ride hard to lower my
> average speed...
>
> I'm very curious to see where the Hunqa takes us...
>
> René
>

> Sent from my mobile device- Hide quoted text -

[JoelMatthews]

> From what I've read that affects the handling--negatively. A
> large frame should have a 12, 13, or 14 cm stem so that one's weight
> is distributed properly between the front and rear. It seems like the
> Bombadil was designed for mustache bars that extend backwards, but how
> does that affect the handling?

Yes, we all know that Grant is a real slouch when it comes to
designing bikes that handle well.

On Apr 6, 4:22 pm, happyriding <happyrid...@yahoo.com> wrote:

> On Apr 6, 2:34 pm, Rene Sterental <orthie...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > I will apologize first, but do think this "triangapillar" is just
> > taking the discussion to a silly level.
>

> Somewhat.  But from an engineering standpoint, three triangles are
> stronger than two.  So technically, it is a stronger design than the
> diaga-piller.  Also, I question whether the diaga-piller, which I
> hereby dub the dragon-pillar because it rolls off the tongue easier,
> is actually stronger.  It creates two flattish somewhat triangular
> shapes.  The flatness is the problem, I think.  Not much strength in
> that.  And really, they aren't even triangles to begin with.  I would
> like to see some test results.
>
> I also wonder if someone can speak to the concept of using short stems
> on big frames to get the reach right.  The Bombadil has a longish top
> tube for me.  With drop bars, if I want to sit more upright than on a
> road bike, for example when touring, I would have to use a very short
> stem.  From what I've read that affects the handling--negatively.   A
> large frame should have a 12, 13, or 14 cm stem so that one's weight
> is distributed properly between the front and rear.  It seems like the
> Bombadil was designed for mustache bars that extend backwards, but how
> does that affect the handling?

[Dave Craig]

I have a 60cm Bombadil and it does indeed have a long top tube for me.
I seem to recall from the beginning that Grant designed the Bombadil
with the dirt drop stem in mind. There are few stems shorter than the
8cm dirt drop.

My Bombadil has an 8cm dirt drop stem and I've used it fully loaded
for long distance touring. With 48cm drop bars and front panniers, the
bike handled predictably and easily. I was amazed at the low speed
handling *and* stability on fast descents. I have noticed that
unloaded as an MTB, using relatively narrow flat bars (48cm flat end
to end), I'm not very comfortable with technical, off road trails. All
of these trails are ones that I can manage easily on other bikes. The
steering feels too responsive and I get a little sketched out. I'll be
putting wider bars on soon - extra bar width should compensate by
slowing down the steering response a bit.

Dave

On Apr 6, 2:22 pm, happyriding <happyrid...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> On Apr 6, 2:34 pm, Rene Sterental <orthie...@gmail.com> wrote:
>

> > I will apologize first, but do think this "triangapillar" is just
> > taking the discussion to a silly level.
>

[Jim M.]

48cm flat for off-road is very narrow. I use bars that are about 68cm
with a little sweep back on my MTB.

jim m
wc ca

[Jon Grant]

happyriding wrote desperately:

I'm going to start a new thread.

----------------------------------------

Good luck and Godspeed on your most noble but futile of quests.

My favorite part: When folks started treating Photoshop jokes like a done deal. Ah, didn’t we laugh -- didn’t we?

--
Jon “Klass Klown” Grant, adding as much useful information as always, in dark
Austin, Texas

[Mike]

Tilting at Hunqapillars?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tilting_at_windmills

[JoelMatthews]

> Of course, a longer stem would also slow the steering down. It's
> interesting that the Bombadil doesn't handle as well when used off-
> road--when it is marketed as a mountain bike.

Dave did not say the Bomba does not handle as well off road. Dave
said as he had it set up, the Bomba was too skittish for technical off
road riding. Dave will address that with proper handle bars. Dave
expects the Bomba to perform well once he does.

On Apr 6, 5:44 pm, happyriding <happyrid...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Hi,

>
> On Apr 6, 3:56 pm, Dave Craig <dcr...@prescott.edu> wrote:
>
> > I have a 60cm Bombadil and it does indeed have a long top tube for me.
>

> Thanks for posting.  That is the size I would slot into.

>
> > I seem to recall from the beginning that Grant designed the Bombadil
> > with the dirt drop stem in mind. There are few stems shorter than the
> > 8cm dirt drop.
>
> > My Bombadil has an 8cm dirt drop stem and I've used it fully loaded
> > for long distance touring. With 48cm drop bars and front panniers, the
> > bike handled predictably and easily. I was amazed at the low speed
> > handling *and* stability on fast descents. I have noticed that
> > unloaded as an MTB, using relatively narrow flat bars (48cm flat end
> > to end), I'm not very comfortable with technical, off road trails. All
> > of these trails are ones that I can manage easily on other bikes. The
> > steering feels too responsive and I get a little sketched out. I'll be
> > putting wider bars on soon - extra bar width should compensate by
> > slowing down the steering response a bit.
>

> Of course, a longer stem would also slow the steering down.  It's
> interesting that the Bombadil doesn't handle as well when used off-
> road--when it is marketed as a mountain bike.

[CycloFiend]

on 4/6/10 2:22 PM, happyriding at happy...@yahoo.com wrote:

> On Apr 6, 2:34 pm, Rene Sterental <orthie...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> I will apologize first, but do think this "triangapillar" is just
>> taking the discussion to a silly level.
>>
>
> Somewhat. But from an engineering standpoint, three triangles are
> stronger than two. So technically, it is a stronger design than the
> diaga-piller.

If you are talking about the photoshopped image with a triangle in the
middle of the mainframe, and claiming greater strength for a working bicycle
design, it's fun to look at, but I'd have to disagree.

That structure may bear more vertical weight, _if_ the tubes were uniform
wall thickness, but in terms of stresses which a bicycle encounters, it has
some drawbacks.

The "inner" triangle is attached where the wall thickness is thinnest. You
are adding a structure which focuses stress at the thinnest part of the
tube. Stress risers x 3.

The reason that we can use butted and double-butted tubing for bicycle
fabrication is that the center of the tube doesn't receive as much stress.
The main stresses operating on a frame are the torque from applying power to
the pedals and the impacts from uneven terrain directed into the headtube.

A second top tube, or an angled "second tube" (mixte-like, or something like
the early Breezers, modern tandems) creates two trusses in the area of the
front main triangle of the frame. What was a large open structure is now
segmented. This helps it to resist the torquing involved when a rider
stomps on the left pedal and pulls hard on the right handlebar.
Additionally, it will distribute frame shock down three vectors rather than
two.

- Jim

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

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

[James Dinneen]

Good point about the water bottles. In particular, a touring bike should have multiple, easily available water bottles.      Jim D.                   Massachusetts --- On Tue, 4/6/10, Garth <gart...@gmail.com> wrote:

-- 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-bunch+unsub...@googlegroups.com.

[Ethan]

I'm with Thomas on this one. I own a 66 CM Atlantis and frankly find
it to be a bit flexy when loaded. A double TT would help this I'm sure
but I really like the idea of the mid-head to mid-seat tube bisecting
that big empty space in the middle of the frame that often makes
larger frames seem kind of gangly and awkward (I had enough of that in
my teens don't need to be revisiting that period of my life). I think
the diagonal 2TT does a more attractive job of this than the parallel
2tt.

Unfortunately there is no way I can afford a Hunqapillar unless I sell
my Atlantis... :-/ Anybody in the market for a 66CM Atlantis?

Ethan

On Apr 5, 12:12 pm, "Allingham II, Thomas J"
<Thomas.Alling...@skadden.com> wrote:
> I don't post very often (Jim pointed out there's an endless footer attached to my messages when I do!), but let me offer the opinion of an Atlantis and Bombadil owner (which means that I ain't buying one no matter what the decision is):  I think the diagonal 2tt (the Campeur approach) is extremely attractive, AND cool, AND very likely highly, highly functional.  For those who agree with the first two judgments (and there will obviously be disagreements), it is a grand slam home run.

>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: rbw-owne...@googlegroups.com [mailto:rbw-owne...@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of happyriding
> Sent: Monday, April 05, 2010 12:04 PM
> To: RBW Owners Bunch
> Subject: [RBW] Re: Diagonapillar
>

> Just an opinion, and not meant to insult anyone...but that is the
> ugliest bike I've ever seen.   Sorry.  Just one opinion.
>
> I suspect one reason Rivendell might like to do the diagonal 2tt is
> marketing: it helps differentiate the Hunaqpillar from the Bombadil--
> even if it doesn't improve on it.   But if Rivendell's goal is to
> actually sell some frames, then I think a diagonal 2tt will be a tough sell.  But then I thought the Bomadil would be a tough sell, too.
>
> Also, unless Rivendell does some testing on the strength differences (do they even have the capability?), I think that using a diagonal 2tt would be a rash decision.
>
> As for people like EricP, this new diagonal 2tt idea seems contrary to everything Rivendell said during the pre-order period:
>
> 1) Trust us
> 2) July delivery a good possibility
> 3) Only minor tweaks
>
> I imagine Rivendell would be willing to return deposits--but that won't cure the disappointment.

>
> --
> 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 athttp://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=en.
>

> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> ****************************************************
>
> To ensure compliance with Treasury Department regulations, we advise you that, unless otherwise expressly indicated, any federal tax advice contained in this message was not intended or written to be used, and cannot be used, for the purpose of (i) avoiding tax-related penalties under the Internal Revenue Code or applicable state or local tax law provisions or (ii) promoting, marketing or recommending to another party any tax-related matters addressed herein.
> ****************************************************
> ****************************************************
>
> This email (and any attachments thereto) is intended only for use by the addressee(s) named herein and may contain legally privileged and/or confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient of this email, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this email (and any attachments thereto) is strictly prohibited. If you receive this email in error please immediately notify me at (212) 735-3000 and permanently delete the original email (and any copy of any email) and any printout thereof.
>
> Further information about the firm, a list of the Partners and their professional qualifications will be provided upon request.
> ****************************************************
> ==============================================================================

[JoelMatthews]

> I'm wondering out loud ... if extra diagonal type tubed frames were so
> popular ..... why are they not sold in mass?
> I see a warmish response here in this forum .... but you know how some
> things go ..... people say they love the design ..... but when it
> comes time to actually
> buy and own one ..... "personal reality" checks in. . . . and they
> may not want it. It's like seeing a fancy prototype at the bike
> show .... it looks great .... you drool over it ...
> but you just don't get one ..... for whatever reason..... usually it's
> too far "out of the norm". What would so and so think? ... etc.

I missed this from Garth earlier. Couldn't one say the same about any
Riv design, or, for that matter, lugged steel bike? If lugged steel
bikes are sold in mass, I have yet to see them.

Bikes with extra tubes are more expensive to make, and thus buy. They
are also heavier than most bikes. Many people never ride with loads
and to places such a bike would be needed. For those few who do,
having some attractive priced options from Riv make sense.

On Apr 7, 6:40 pm, James Dinneen <jfxdinn...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Good point about the water bottles. In particular, a touring bike should have multiple, easily available water bottles.      Jim D.                   Massachusetts
>

> --- On Tue, 4/6/10, Garth <garth...@gmail.com> wrote:

> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rbw-owners-bun...@googlegroups.com.

[William]

So does the Hunqapillar qualify as a Monstercross bike? I wasn't
familiar with the term until recently. Why does everybody try to
categorize everything?

[JoelMatthews]

Never heard that term before.

Does Monster Cross refer to a cross county race in real rugged
conditions? Or does it mean real long self-supported tours?

I see the Hunq as possibly a very good candidate for the latter. I
think racers would be concerned about the weight - aren't racers
always obsessing about weight - of the Hunq.

As for water bottle placement - the old French diagonal campers found
room for multiple bottle cages. Not sure why a Hunq with a diagnoal
tube would not.

> Why does everybody try to categorize everything?

I read somewhere (maybe the NYTimes?) that most humans will
comfortably follow three sub-plots in a novel or movie. Any more,
they lose place and ultimately interest. Probably the need to plug
things into pigeon holes helps people keep to three sub-plots in life.

> > > For more options, visit this group athttp://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=en.- Hide quoted text -

[William]

As I understand it, a Monstercross is one of many alternative mountain
bikes. The key defining characteristics of a monstercross appear to
be:

700C wheels
No suspension
Drop or drop inspired handlebars
>45c tires

Clearly the Hunqapillar could easily have all the above, so I guess it
could be a monstercross. Put racks and smooth fatties on it, then
it's your new category, the monster tour. I guess there are Adventure
Touring and Expedition categories, though. Seth was right, there
really is nothing new.

> > > > For more options, visit this group athttp://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=en.-Hide quoted text -

[Jeremy Till]

That's generally correct, but i think the people who were using it
first (builders like Matt Chester and Wade at Vulture, among others)
used it to denote a cyclocross bike that had clearance for the early
29er tires, around 2". So not only 700c and no suspension, but no
suspension correction (i.e. no ability to run a suspension fork), thus
distinguishing it from a rigid 29'er MTB. Of course, it's been
interpreted many different ways, because in the end it's just a bike
that can be ridden on road and off, which isn't really new. Rivendell
is certainly not a stranger to this concept. Sure, you could probably
call the Hunqapillar (or the Bombadil; or the Atlantis; or the All-
Rounder; or the...) a "monster cross" bike, depending on how you built
it up, but I don't think the term is saying anything new.

> > > > > For more options, visit this group athttp://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=en.-Hidequoted text -

[cyclotourist]

You can think of them as a cross bike with fatter tires.  That about sums it up.

http://www.flickr.com/groups/monster-cross-bikes/

I think a rigid 29er with drops counts, too.  So yeah, about 2/5 of Rivendell's line up would make the cut.

--
Cheers,
David
Redlands, CA

"Bicycling is a big part of the future. It has to be. There is something wrong with a society that drives a car to workout in a gym."  ~Bill Nye, scientist guy

[JoelMatthews]

> Seth was right, there really is nothing new.

Can say that again:

http://www.auctionflex.com/showlot.ap?co=9768&weid=11890&weiid=4178986&mindate=20100319&maxdate=20110319&lso=lotnumasc&pagenum=1&lang=En

> > > > > For more options, visit this group athttp://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=en.-Hidequoted text -

[JoelMatthews]

> That's generally correct, but i think the people who were using it
> first (builders like Matt Chester and Wade at Vulture, among others)

Surprised to read Chester is one of the progenitors. The few things I
have read by him come across almost Zen like. Never would have
thought he was given to hyperbole.

> > > > > > For more options, visit this group athttp://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=en.-Hidequotedtext -

[P Merryman]

Sorry I'm a month late posting, I'm "catching up" on a few months of non-lurking.  Anyway, wanted to point out that, if I'm reading this right, Riv has done it before.  From the web-archive.org of the Riv site:

http://web.archive.org/web/20030804115752/www.rivendellbicycles.com/gallery/bigbike/bigbike.html

-Pete

On Sun, Apr 4, 2010 at 10:22 PM, cm <chrisp...@hotmail.com> wrote:

I wonder if there is a drawing, mock up, or other bike out there with
this config? It sounds kinda weird to me, but seeing it might change
everything.

cheers!
cm

--

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.

[Bruce]

Thanks for the link. Great looking bike

---

From: P Merryman <merr...@gmail.com>
To: rbw-owne...@googlegroups.com
Sent: Sat, May 8, 2010 5:57:40 PM
Subject: Re: [RBW] Re: Diagonapillar

Sorry I'm a month late posting, I'm "catching up" on a few months of non-lurking.  Anyway, wanted to point out that, if I'm reading this right, Riv has done it before.  From the web-archive.org of the Riv site:

http://web.archive.org/web/20030804115752/www.rivendellbicycles.com/gallery/bigbike/bigbike.html

-Pete

[James Warren]

To my untrained eye, this looks better than horizontal.

Thanks Pete!

-Jim W.

-----Original Message-----
From: P Merryman
Sent: May 8, 2010 6:57 PM
To: rbw-owne...@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: [RBW] Re: Diagonapillar

Sorry I'm a month late posting, I'm "catching up" on a few months of non-lurking.  Anyway, wanted to point out that, if I'm reading this right, Riv has done it before.  From the web-archive.org of the Riv site:

http://web.archive.org/web/20030804115752/www.rivendellbicycles.com/gallery/bigbike/bigbike.html

-Pete

On Sun, Apr 4, 2010 at 10:22 PM, cm <chrisp...@hotmail.com> wrote:

I wonder if there is a drawing, mock up, or other bike out there with
this config? It sounds kinda weird to me, but seeing it might change
everything.

cheers!
cm

--

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.

--
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.