Ernie , For perspective ... of course you're going to hear that the
Sam frame is best for you because people here have them, I don't think
anyone owns a Hunqapillar yet. Who's going to tell you how great it is
if they don't own it?
I ride the Bombadil on the road with 42mm tires and it doesn't
On Sun, Aug 8, 2010 at 9:55 PM, ewb wrote:
> However, I am a little concerned by the posts that
> I've read (by a small minority of owners) that the Hillborne ride
> quality can degrade under load; the fact that the latest version of
> the Waterford 56cm Hillborne has 2 top tubes seems to confir
Thank you everyone for your helpful comments.
I should have said in my original post that I have a Merlin Cyrene,
which I like for riding roads. However, I cannot carry any load and I
am limited to 700c x 28 tires. I also have a mountain bike, but I may
cannibalize it to build up either the Hill
I go with the Hillborne too.
You should buy a bike that are you are going to ride not one you might like
to ride. Unless you have an actual non-supported long distance tour setup
then the Sam is the better bike. I rode mine from Hong Kong to Shanghai this
past summer and don't think that I could h
Hey.
I'd go Hillborne. Presuming the 10% non-road riding you describe is
*not* actual single-track, intentional-impediment, ascend/descend
barely-a-trail mountain-brand mountain biking, then the Hillborne is
well suited for your described riding.
If the 10% *is* that sort of riding, go Hunqa or B
Hey Ernie, I think Joel makes a good point about wheels and tires
having a significant effect on how the bike feels. It does seem like
the Hillborne is designed around mid sized tires (32 to 44) as
oppoesed the Hunqa which is designed around larger tires. Doesn't it
say somewhere that the smallest
Have a Hillborne. Currently weigh 220. Last year, when I got the
bike, was closer to 240. Did a couple of S24O camping trips with
about 20 pounds or so of stuff. No problem.
Then again, Patrick Moore has loaded his Hillborne up with 50 plus
pounds added to whatever his weight is (170ish?) and
I agree with Johnny ... what you described is the target use for the
Hillborne. The Hillborne certainly rides well on the pavement and
gravel.
My suggestion is to consider the double top-tube version available in
the 56cm+ sizes.
With the extra toptube, I don't think the total weight of rider + g
I think your description is exactly what the Hillborne is all about.
90% road with the ability to do light loads and GREAT for light off
road rails trails and such. The Hunqapillar can be made quicker but
is still designed to be a trail/heavy touring bike. The only thing
that would worry me is tha
> One concern that I have is whether the extra stoutness of the Hunqapillar
>will make it more sluggish (less
> zippy) than the Hillborne.
Riding characteristics are influenced far more by the geometry and
choice of tires/wheels. Assuming the geometry and specs are close,
you can make the Hunq a
I briefly had an Atlantis and test rode a Hillborne. Both unloaded.
I liked the feel of the Hillborne better--lighter and less stiff.
Ryan
On Aug 6, 8:54 pm, ewb wrote:
> I am trying to decide whether to purchase a Sam Hillborne or
> Hunqapillar.
>
> I currently do 90% of my riding on the road
11 matches
Mail list logo
