The last single speed I had was as a kid and his StingRay. Getting a bike with gears was a revelation. I remember actually riding, not pushing the bike, up 73rd in Oakland with a big smile on my face. I doubt, in fact I know, I'd never get a single speed. I can get the same effect by not changing gears for a while. Maybe if it had all the braze ons for a Rohloff or something like that. Some people seem to like them, just not for me.
On Apr 9, 7:11 pm, ted <ted.ke...@comcast.net> wrote: > Jim writes: "People think "single-speed" and in the same thought they > > think "beater" or "winter bike" or "bar bike" or whatever other > utilitarian, un-romantic category applies." > > I figure Jim's dealt with way more folks buying bikes than I have so I > wouldn't take issue with him about what "people" in the aggregate > think. But I sure don't think that way. When I got my first ss/fixed > bike (after grade school that is), I was concerned about winter in the > midwest. I didn't want rear derailers freezing up packed full of > slush. I wanted fenders so I wouldn't get covered with slush. I > thought the 1/8th inch chain would lower the loads and wear better. > But I wasn't particularly thinking cheep. I got campi track hubs, > moderate weight tubular rims, suntour superbe cranks, lyotard platform > pedals (ok they weren't expensive but they were nice), and chinelli > bar and stem. If I could have afforded a better frame I think I would > have. > > I understand fear of theft driving a desire for cheep. But not fear of > the elements. I have never hesitated to take a nice bike out into the > rain or snow because I was afraid it would get wrecked. I also see no > conflict between utilitarian and aesthetics/elegance/beauty etc. Have > you ever used snap-on tools? > > Clearly not enough people will pay 1k for a dedicated SS frame and > fork to support the SO/QB in the marketplace. I just find it odd if > thats not because almost nobody (outside of hipsterdom which, as noted > previously, has a different aesthetic) really knows they like riding > em. Of course I think lots of things are odd. > > On Apr 9, 3:16 am, Jim Thill - Hiawatha Cyclery <thill....@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > > > > > > > Also, in reference to Ted's comment about the Cross-check being more an > > analog to the Hillborne than to the SO: > > > That's definitely true if you're talking about the Cross-check as a geared > > bike. In that case, the two bikes have a lot of similarities, except one > > looks fancier and costs $600 more (for the frameset only). The price > > difference is more profound if you compare the CC stock complete bike to a > > similarly equipped Hillborne, which is not available as a mass-market > > complete bike. But lots of people, for various reasons, think the price > > difference on the Riv is plenty acceptable. Lots of people are willing to > > shell out for a special bike. Cool. > > > But single-speeds are different. People think "single-speed" and in the > > same thought they think "beater" or "winter bike" or "bar bike" or whatever > > other utilitarian, un-romantic category applies. In that case, you look at > > that $600 price difference and you think about rust and dents, and that > > Surly, what it lacks in panache, it makes up in ruggedness and, ultimately, > > in the worst case scenario, replaceability. In the case of single-speeds, > > the preciousness that many of us assign to Rivendell bicycles is a > > drawback. And that's why I say more mundane frames like the CC make it hard > > to sell the QB/SO. -- 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.
