I was disappointed by the undertube as well, especially on a bike identified as "road-only."
Philip Philip Williamson www.biketinker.com On Apr 17, 10:47 am, Ron MH <visio...@gmail.com> wrote: > "It's basically a roady frame, not a country bike, not a touring bike, > just a really nice and versatile road frame kind of the way the > Rambouillet was, and the Roadeo would be if it were a hair heavier and > had rack mounts. A ROAD bike with clearance for tires up to 33mm with > fenders, or 35mm without. The kind of bike you'd get for road riding, > club rides, charitable centuries, and occasional careful smooth fire > roading. The kind of bike guys who buy $6,000 carbon frames should've > gotten instead, but they don't think so." > > And this bike needs a second top tube?... that's nuts. It's a road > bike, not an off-road bike. It simply doesn't need a second top tube > in large sizes. Look at the tens of thousands of large steel road > bikes out there; do any have double top tubes? Look at the > Rambouillet. And are these bikes prone to collapsing like a deck of > cards for the lack of a second top tube?... of course not! Are they so > flexy that they're unstable? Ask any of the RBW or iBOB readers who > ride larger (60cm +) steel road bikes. The second top tube idea is > just silly and will keep many from buying this bike. "Hey let's add > some extra weight to the bike without any reasonable benefit and see > if people will buy it?" Yeah, these will just fly off the showroom > floor! > > On Apr 17, 9:53 am, bfd <bfd...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > On Apr 17, 9:09 am, newenglandbike <matthiasbe...@gmail.com> wrote:> I > > guess there is no accounting for taste, because I have always dug > > > the second top-tube (I prefer the name 'innertube' to 'undertube', but > > > i digress) ever since the bombadil came out, although I agree it > > > probably works better on a mountain/all-purpose bike. I was also > > > drawn to the plain-gauge tubing. I still like the bombadil's > > > concept, even though now it is changed, but the original parallel > > > second tube is hard to beat in my book. > > > I agree in part. There are many, like yourself, who like the double > > top tube look. That's great and with only 15 framesets per size, it > > should easily sell. However, Grant is not marketing to you or those > > who like it. Instead, he specifically said the frame is aimed at "bike > > guys who buy $6,000 carbon frames." That's ridiculous. People in the > > market for $6K carbon bikes are not looking at either 650b or double > > top tubes. The only way either of those things get popular with the > > $6K carbon crowd is if someone in the Tour de Frances wins on one. Now > > THAT will get people's attention and sell these kind of bikes. Of > > course, its not going to happen.... > > > > FWIW, I was in Harris Cyclery the yesterday, and they have a 58cm > > > Hunqapillar built-up in the show room. It has the gray/red paint > > > job. All I can say is, pictures don't do that bike justice. > > > I haven't seen one of those yet and I live in San Francisco! I'm sure > > there's a few around as I do see alot of Riv bikes. Good Luck! -- 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-bunch@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.
