Well the Hilbourne seems awfully close the AHH that I just bought.
Though it looks like I'm buying the wife one once we see what shade of
Red is available.
I have a 96.5 PBH Weight about 225 .. which is normally Feb weight..
bad year for weight. Wife cooks to good.
I go for week to 2 week lon
It's hard to spell "Rivendell" without the "e". So the answer is
"no". :) :) :)
dougP
On Oct 29, 5:18 pm, James Warren wrote:
> ...and can contributors stop using the character "e" in the posts that
> discuss good things about our Rivendell contraptions?
>
> : ) ; ) : )
>
>
...and can contributors stop using the character "e" in the posts that discuss
good things about our Rivendell contraptions?
: ) ; ) : )
-Jim W.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW
Owners Bunch" group.
To post to this group, sen
On Fri, Oct 29, 2010 at 7:16 PM, cyclotourist wrote:
> But if he orders it today it's $200 off that!
>
I thought that was only for frames on the frame-specials page.
-sv
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW
Owners Bunch" group.
To post to this grou
But if he orders it today it's $200 off that!
On Fri, Oct 29, 2010 at 4:13 PM, Thomas Lynn Skean <
thomaslynnsk...@comcast.net> wrote:
> Perhaps not a bummer at all! $1250 suggests double-top-tube. Gives the OP a
> choice of a less pricey, slightly-shorter theoretical top tube length
> (though it
Perhaps not a bummer at all! $1250 suggests double-top-tube. Gives the OP a
choice of a less pricey, slightly-shorter theoretical top tube length (though
it isn't clear to me how much difference it would make).
If the original consideration was a Hunqapillar, then $1250 is less than that,
let a
On Fri, 2010-10-29 at 15:51 -0700, doug peterson wrote:
> the Spitfire was arguably one of the most beautiful airplanes
Not much argument about that assessment!
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW
Owners Bunch" group.
To post to this group, send
When I hear Triumph I think of motorcycle and the Spitfire was
arguably one of the most beautiful airplanes long before it was used
to name a four wheeled, land based vehicle.
dougP
On Oct 29, 10:46 am, "Frederick, Steve"
wrote:
> "...we can draw analogies from something other than car culture,
I thought Kelly's using a car analogy to reference his size was a lot
more interesting than just saying "I'm a really big guy".
dougP
On Oct 29, 5:59 am, newenglandbike wrote:
> OK this post has nothing to do with the question at hand- but can
> we stop all the talk about cars? There was a
A 64cm. Bombadil may fit you, it depends on how long you need your TT
to be. The Bombadil is notable longer.
BTW, the 64cm. Sam frame on the web site is $1250, not $1000. Bummer.
Keven told me it had not been updated.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "
"...we can draw analogies from something other than car culture, can't we?"
This is America--what do you think? B-)
(Car analogies are the Cadillac of analogies)
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW
Owners Bunch" group.
To post to this group,
Oh, if they have parallel-tubed 64cm Bombadils, that seems it'd be worth a
shot. I haven't compared the geometries, but it can't be way far off the
theoretical Hunqa 65cm.
Consider the Hillborne carefully, though. I love mine to death. But It
certainly won't fit the range of tires that either a
I actually don't mind the look of the new Bombadil. I don't like the
water bottle cage.. my coffee will spill at that angle.
On Oct 29, 8:04 am, newenglandbike wrote:
> Kelly, I would call Rivendell and see if they have any 64cm Bombadil
> or 64cm Sam Hill frames in stock. Both have paralle
Huh?
"Can we stop all the talk about?"
Uh... no?
Referring to cars might get old if it happens all the time, just like composing
haiku might get old if it happens all the time. I don't think you'd ask, but
don't expect to bring a halt to haiku writing in the forum if you do.
"bicycle" doe
Kelly, I would call Rivendell and see if they have any 64cm Bombadil
or 64cm Sam Hill frames in stock. Both have parallel top-tubes and
size-wise, or bar-height-wise, they should be equal or greater than
your 67 AHH.
On Oct 28, 1:47 pm, Kelly wrote:
> Ok I never fit in a Triumph TR6 or a Spitf
OK this post has nothing to do with the question at hand-but can
we stop all the talk about cars?There was a 'Jaguar' reference in
another thread, here a 'Triumph' reference, somebody bought a new car
in yet another thread, and now we have the Pontiac Aztec. I mean
no disrespect nor to
I completely agree I should be taller. 6ft 1.25inches would be
perfect. And I should weigh about 195 after each of my four daily
meals.
I find that riding a too-small bike is just not as pleasant as riding
a right-sized bike. And I think the RBW notions of "right-sized" work
perfectly. I'll ha
17 matches
Mail list logo
