I was just logging on to make an argument similar to Jeremy's about the similarity of the LHT to the Atlantis/All-Rounder not being an indication that Surly somehow plagiarized RBW's designs when they made the LHT. That claim has been repeated again and again, but it simply doesn't hold water when you compare the large number of differences between the two models. The idea of touring bikes having relaxed geometry, sturdy tubing, lowish BBs, and long chainstays/wheelbase was not invented by either RBW or by Surly. I like to imagine that both companies thought that the touring bike market was in for a resurgence, after lying mostly dormant for 20 years. Both designs used classic touring bike angles and dimensions for the most part, but were tweaked to accommodate the larger tires that were becoming available. On the other hand, I feel that the Atlantis was a revolutionary bike and that its relative success may have encouraged some other companies to jump on the touring bandwagon. I also feel that a lot of people buy a LHT as a "poor (wo)man's Atlantis".
As for the perceived Surly/RBW rivalry vibe I mentioned, I guess I was just referring to the sense that a lot of people here feel that Surly is unwelcoming and hostile, while Riv is warm and fuzzy and inclusive. Maybe just my imagination. On Wednesday, December 11, 2013 10:36:26 AM UTC-6, Jeremy Till wrote: > > I agree that Surly took a page from Riv's book in the Long Haul Trucker, > and that has a lot to do with that bike's success, and why I myself bought > an LHT frame earlier this year. It's clear that they share a generally > Rivendellian view of what makes a good mostly paved-road tourer: generous > clearances, copius rack and fender braze-ons, long chainstays, slacker > angles, tall headtubes. It does, however, have some distinctively Surly > design aspects. 1 1/8" threadless headset is one, as well as the fact that > it is available in a disc brake version, or that even in sizes up to 64cm > you have the option of 700c or 26" wheels. > > However, I hardly think you can attribute Surly's success generally to > it's agreement with Rivendell in one of its models. Surly's early success > came from being being one of the first companies to cater to a number of > closely related niches that grew a lot during the 2000's: fixed gear road > riding (the Steamroller and their fixed gear hubs), singlespeed mountain > biking (their first product was the 1x1, which i think was the first > mass-produced dedicated SS MTB frame), and 29er's (the Karate Monkey). > When I first got into riding fixed gears ~10 years ago, they were the only > company making frames and components for the purpose of riding fixed gears > on the road, with more appropriate durability, clearances, etc than the > track racing stuff that had been available before. You could even argue > that Rivendell took a page out of Surly's book with the Quickbeam, a bike > for riding singlespeed or fixed gear on the road that came out after Surly > had been making the Steamroller and Cross Check (a singlespeedable cross > bike) for a number of years. I'm not arguing that, but you could. > > Since then, they've also invested in a number of other tiny niches and > reaped the rewards when they expanded: they basically invented mass-market > fat bikes, and were the first people to make a dedicated > Xtracycle-compatible longtail cargo bike, a market which is now growing > great guns. > > In summary, Surly's a cool company (or rather subsidiary of a company), > but not just because they agree with Grant on the topic of touring bikes. > I for one have always appreciated their somewhat irreverent marketing, > although I can understand it doesn't quite float everyone's boat. I'll > probably order a "Racing Sucks" patch. > > On Tuesday, December 10, 2013 1:07:26 PM UTC-8, iamkeith wrote: >> >> I guess I took it as pretty tounge-in-cheek. Spending as much time >> reading forums as I do, that are all way less civil than this one, >> I've probably forgotten how to be offended - though I can see how many >> would take it that way. It's DEFINITELY generational, however - which, >> though I didn't say it, is what I thought was so interesting about it. >> >> I've always felt that Surly could never have even existed had it not been >> for Rivendell. When they launched, the concept of a company focusing on >> building skinny-tubed, steel bikes with 1" headsets, provisions for racks, >> and room for fat tires and fenders was pretty "out there" to most >> mainstream consumers. Yet, for all this, they've thrived. And, partly, >> on the tails of bikes like the Long Haul Trucker which was a direct copy of >> the All Rounder. Not that there's anything wrong with that, but it makes >> it more ironic that they produced this patch so shortly after Riv quoined >> and started marketing the whole "Un-Racer" thing. >> >> What I find interesting though, is how two companies can be so eerlily >> *similar* - building no-nonsense bikes that work, are repairable, aren't >> going to go out of style, and don't require the newest ever-changing >> components - yet have such *different* marketplace personas. Even >> though BOTH companies are actually developing thought-provoking and >> useful products (together, arguably changing the face of modern bike design >> more than all other companies combined), ONE of those companies is often >> considered "retro-grouchy" while the other is considered "hip." >> >> Clearly it pays to be "offensive" on some level, depending on who your >> market is. I just like anything that reminds people not to take themselves >> too seriously. ;-) >> >> >> >> >>> -- 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 post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
