Patrick, Answering your second question: I had 2.4 and 2.3 tires on my Clem, with fenders. It might have fit some 2.5 tires, but probably would have required ditching the fenders. I mostly used the excellent Schwalbe Super Motos, which you're fond of too if I recall correctly. Since these have shallow treads, most of that width is true casing volume, so they're good sand floatation tires. In fact as you probably know, that's why they were invented - for beach races popular in Europe. Having liked those, I wanted something similar but with even bigger volume for my Susie Longbolts, so I'm using V Speedsters. They're labeled 2.8 but measure 75mm even at moderate inflation pressures. This combination also fits fine, with way more than 3mm of clearance to the stays and fork blades. On both bikes though, be aware that it's actually the fork crown that is/was the tight clearance point. There's no way I'd be able to fit a 3" tire on the front - even without fenders.
Addressing but not answering your first question: I think one of the nice things about Rivendell's long-chainstay bikes is that you don't NEED to stand up and grind. I sort of wonder if I got in the habit of standing on climbs because my bikes always used to have too-short chainstays, and it was necessary in order to keep the front wheel planted. I can still stand (and occasionally like to) on the Rivs, but think they prefer to be ridden seated. They're generally more forgving though, and the fore-aft balance point isn't nearly as critical. Cockpit / handlebar choice is more important the the bike/frame design to me. If you're hell-bent on using 3" or wider tires, I have a Crust Scapegoat that I can't say enough good about. Very Riv-inspired fit (shallow seat tube/low bottom bracket), but conventionally short chainstays. And ugly as sin. And heavier. On that bike, I have 3.25 tires + 3X drivetrain + fenders, however! On Sunday, December 19, 2021 at 3:33:31 PM UTC-7 Patrick Moore wrote: > Slight tangent to thread -- but broad views are the sign of a liberally > educated person. > > I note that the Wolbis or whateverthehellitiscalled is described as a Gus > for lighter riders. Given Grant's penchant for overbuilding, I'd guess that > the Wolbis is fine for a 170-lb rider who never gets pinch flats. > > So, question to those of you who can compare the Wolbis, Gus, Clem, and > Platypus in a useful way, either because you've ridden several of them, or > because you can intelligently extrapolate from one to the other: > > ----->>> Question: If you want that signature Riv handling for upright > riding in sandy conditions with tire width maxed out (full2.8"/70 mm), you > tend to torque higher gears instead of twiddling lower gears, you want a > single speed drivetrain (~65" for flatland sandy riding, would rather stand > and grunt instead of downshifting and spinning), and you will not be > carrying loads (have other bikes for that -- no damned Wald baskets): which > model would you choose? And if you'd choose a model from another maker, > please explain why. > > And: Go beyond the published specs: Can any Riv model take a true 3"/76 mm > tire with at least 3 mm to stays? > > On Sun, Dec 19, 2021 at 9:56 AM iamkeith <keith...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> I hope Grant doesn't get mad at me, but I think this is one version: >> >> >> https://cdn.shopify.com/s/files/1/1403/7343/files/THIS_ONE_Hilliworker_October_9.pdf?364 >> > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/rbw-owners-bunch/9cc20b2e-8bbe-42e1-9157-641b56f7d16en%40googlegroups.com.
