Indeed - I'd be happy to dispose of them properly, just email directly for my shipping address :-)
Bill On Wed, Sep 1, 2010 at 2:35 PM, William <tapebu...@gmail.com> wrote: > The Single TT one (Maxway?) has no BB cable guide installed!! Send it > back! > The Double TT one has a seatstay bridge that is not threaded > underneath for a fender!! Send it back! > > On Sep 1, 12:14 pm, Bill Connell <bconn...@gmail.com> wrote: >> I also thought that someone else (not Maxway) was doing the forks, but >> can't remember who. Given that the lugs appear identical otherwise, >> i'm surprised in the differences in the forks, especially that the >> canti version seems to have narrower tapered legs. The fork bend looks >> the same on both, which is nice (i'm a fan of Riv's nice forks). >> Unless it's a trick of the light, the orange on the Waterford version >> looks a bit deeper. I agree, both are nice frames. >> >> >> >> On Wed, Sep 1, 2010 at 2:03 PM, Bruce <fullylug...@yahoo.com> wrote: >> > Did I read somewhere that the Maxway frame uses a Toyo built fork? Toyo >> > did >> > a fine job on prior forks, so one wonders why the one pictured by Bryan >> > seems "stockier." >> >> > To be honest, both bikes look great to me. I like the paint on the Maxway a >> > bit better, but agree that the Waterford crown is nicer. >> >> > ________________________________ >> > From: William <tapebu...@gmail.com> >> > To: RBW Owners Bunch <rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com> >> > Sent: Wed, September 1, 2010 1:55:35 PM >> > Subject: [RBW] Re: 1 Toptube or 2 -- Comparing the Two Versions of the >> > Hillborne >> >> > I'll vote (kind of). I'm surprised at how close the weights are. I >> > think the double TT looks cool, and I'd find useful. On BART I have >> > to grab hard on the seat tube to portage the bike up stairs, because >> > I'd get a handful of frame pump if I grabbed the TT. A second TT >> > would be a portage handle for me. I cannot think of another solution >> > to that for under 8 ounces. Frame strength and stiffness-wise, I >> > think the second TT is unnecessary. But, pretty lugs and a gorgeous >> > headbadge aren't necessary either. I personally prefer cantilevers >> > for a touring setup and sidepulls for a brevet/roadie setup. I >> > wouldn't call either one 'better'. >> >> > The thing I feel strongly about is the fork. I really don't like the >> > fork on the single TT bike. I vastly prefer the curly crown, the >> > curveback wings and especially the narrow tapered fork blades. The >> > blades on the single TT one look clumsy and chubby. Ick. My 56cm >> > Hillborne has a fork like the double TT version. >> >> > Bottom line, if someone offered me a free trade of my single TT >> > hillborne for a double TT hillborne, I'd probably take it. I would >> > not pay $250 for the upgrade. Mine is perfectly fine. If I had to >> > buy one of those two framesets from RenBikes today, I would absolutely >> > pick the double TT one, and I would pay the $250 extra because A/ the >> > fork is way nicer looking B/ I personally prefer cantilevers for my >> > Hillborne setup and C/ I like the double TT. >> >> > On Sep 1, 11:04 am, "Bryan @ Renaissance Bicycles" >> > <renaissancebicyc...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> In the Shop we happen to have two 56cm Hillbornes. One is the >> >> Taiwanese made Maxway, the other is the Waterford version from WI. >> >> >> Of course, we couldn't help but take >> >> photos:http://www.renaissancebicycles.com/gallery/?album=7&gallery=66 >> >> >> Obviously, the double toptuber is the Waterford version. It also >> >> includes braze-ons for cantilever brakes, and a rear bridge for the >> >> cable stop. The fork crowns are different. >> >> >> Because I know people will ask ... the weight difference between the >> >> frames is 8 ounces. For perspective, that is about the difference >> >> between a full water bottle and one that is 3/4 full. >> >> >> Both bikes are in our "build queue"; we'll post pictures when they are >> >> complete. >> >> >> Now, let the debate begin ... >> >> >> Bryan >> >> > -- >> > 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. >> >> > -- >> > 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. >> >> -- >> Bill Connell >> St. Paul, MN > > -- > 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. > > -- Bill Connell St. Paul, MN -- 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.
