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.

On Mon, Apr 12, 2010 at 4:54 PM, Jeremy Till <jeremy.t...@gmail.com> wrote:

> 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.
>
> On Apr 12, 3:26 pm, William <tapebu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > 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.
> >
> > On Apr 12, 3:15 pm, JoelMatthews <joelmatth...@mac.com> wrote:
> >
> > > 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.
> >
> > > On Apr 12, 4:56 pm, William <tapebu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > > 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?
> >
> > > > On Apr 8, 7:22 am, JoelMatthews <joelmatth...@mac.com> wrote:
> >
> > > > > > 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:
> >
> > > > > > From: Garth <garth...@gmail.com>
> > > > > > Subject: [RBW] Re: Diagonapillar
> > > > > > To: "RBW Owners Bunch" <rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com>
> > > > > > Date: Tuesday, April 6, 2010, 9:05 AM
> >
> > > > > > 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.
> >
> > > > > > --
> > > > > > 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-owners-bu...@googlegroups.com.
> > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com<rbw-owners-bunch%2bunsubscr...@googlegroups.com>
> .
> > > > > > For more options, visit this group athttp://
> groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=en.-Hidequoted text -
> >
> > > > - Show quoted text -
>
> --
> 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-owners-bu...@googlegroups.com.
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com<rbw-owners-bunch%2bunsubscr...@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

-- 
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-owners-bu...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=en.

Reply via email to