I'm really fond of the Davinci Crank which is mfg. by White. (their web
page shows it in polished black but I have two in silver and think that is
still available) Like the TA it comes with interchangeable spiders, low Q
& good looks, double or triple. Not cheap but not crazy expensive either.
Last Nov., when in CA, I visited RBW and bad mouthed the rings they sold.
I especially pointed out that on a tandem or on rough roads eventually the
FD will move enough to cause an over shift and without a stud behind the
crank arm it will most likely cause the chain to wrap. They told me abou
I envision RBW's crankset with tentacular arms, perhaps with a diagacrank
for 172.5 and up.
Jeff Hagedorn
Warragul, VIC Australia
--
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
That should read: "... 86 down to *28*...".
On Fri, Dec 20, 2013 at 5:23 PM, Patrick Moore wrote:
>
> The virtue of the smaller BCD is that you can run very compact doubles in
> the outer two positions; 54 down to 26 and, IIRC, 86 down to 26.
>
--
You received this message because you are subs
If Rivendell makes its own cranks, how many say 110/74 and how many say
smaller -- 86 or 54 or whatever the old Cyclotourist is?
The virtue of the smaller BCD is that you can run very compact doubles in
the outer two positions; 54 down to 26 and, IIRC, 86 down to 26. I use a
XD2 as a 38/24, but I
>
> If RBW makes their own crankset, I hope they design it so that all
> the chainrings can be taken off and reinstalled without having to pull of
> the crank arm.
>
That would be handy for un-mechanics.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW
Owner
I believe this is more a product of certain manufacturer failures, rather
than the design itself. Sugino makes many cranks, and the XD is the only 1
that uses the hidden bolt design !
This includes the 75, RD , Alpina and Mighty series of cranks ... all
"traditional" or whatever we can call
The hidden chainring bolt, while a pain in the ass and kind of ugly, is a
result of getting rid of a pair of stress risers - on cranks where two of
the spider arms straddle the crank arm, there's a small angle where cracks
can start, because the web is thin and is subject to constant stress cycl
At every shop I worked at, we kept the price of tubes constant, even though
the wholesale price we paid varied a fair bit. We even charged the same
price for many sizes, even though each size had its own different wholesale
price. At one shop we even priced tubes specifically so that it would
Oh, I understand economy of scale to mean bulk manufacturing, packaging and
transportation streamlining of a product to minimize the per-item cost, but
I thought it was a cute and apropos use of the term here, to the per-tooth
example.
Anton
On Wednesday, December 18, 2013 1:58:57 PM UTC-5, B
Anton
I'm don't think "economy of scale" means what you think it means. ;-) At
any rate, I think you are right, they *should* be charging significantly
more for the smaller rings than they are. I'm grateful for the discount
and amused they have a pricing model that is both clever and logical
Perhaps, but probably doesn't reflect economy of scale. i.e., does a 50T
ring cost twice as much to manufacture as a 25T ting?
Anton
On Tuesday, December 17, 2013 5:23:52 PM UTC-5, Bill Lindsay wrote:
>
> $1/tooth is brilliant.
>
> On Tuesday, December 17, 2013 1:56:10 PM UTC-8, dougP wrote:
>>
Weren't these supposed to be stainless? I rebuilt 15k-mile+ drivetrain last
winter and for my surly/andel crankset I used surly stainless chainrings and
think it's a great option for year 'round riding and me being here in Chicago.
There not ramped for shifting but the 48tther does just fine.
"Half good" ain't good enough for Rivendell (chuckle, grin). Don't need
'em right now but should probably pick up a set before prices head up (see
earlier thread re: "what deals").
dougP
On Tuesday, December 17, 2013 6:13:54 PM UTC-8, Matthew J wrote:
>
> > $1/tooth is brilliant.
>
> Yes
> $1/tooth is brilliant.
Yes indeed. And if these are even half good, a pretty decent price.
On Tuesday, December 17, 2013 4:23:52 PM UTC-6, Bill Lindsay wrote:
>
> $1/tooth is brilliant.
>
> On Tuesday, December 17, 2013 1:56:10 PM UTC-8, dougP wrote:
>>
>> Reading between the lines it sound
$1/tooth is brilliant.
On Tuesday, December 17, 2013 1:56:10 PM UTC-8, dougP wrote:
>
> Reading between the lines it sounds like "let's have some fun with the
> tooth counts". Like it says, what's a tooth here or there? With wide
> range cassettes, you're always bound to find a gear somewhere
Those cnc chain rings are hot, totally unnecessary but hot.
On Dec 17, 2013 4:56 PM, "dougP" wrote:
> Reading between the lines it sounds like "let's have some fun with the
> tooth counts". Like it says, what's a tooth here or there? With wide
> range cassettes, you're always bound to find a ge
Reading between the lines it sounds like "let's have some fun with the
tooth counts". Like it says, what's a tooth here or there? With wide
range cassettes, you're always bound to find a gear somewhere that works.
Pricing is in line with plain flat rings and they're made from 7075 alloy
so s
Shoji noted "(I hope it doesn't have that hidden chainring bolt!)"
+1 on that! I fancy myself good at figuring out mechanical stuff, but have
always been baffled at whatever logic (or lack thereof) went into that
idea. I have a Deore crankset on another bike and when I look at the
Sugino on m
BW] Re: New RBW Silver brand chainrings available!
That would be cool if they have a crankset with the "RBW" built into it like
the old Raleighs had the goosenecks, or whatever bird that was...
http://www.flickr.com/photos/70237737@N00/8955519536/in/set-72157633937039591
--
You received thi
On Monday, December 16, 2013 10:32:45 PM UTC-8, Michael wrote:
>
> Very cool.
> Wouldn't it be cool if they had a whole line of "Silver" branded
> components?
> Could deck out the whole frameset with complete Silver build.
>
> Wonder if they will only sell these rings from now on at RBW?
> Gla
Nowadays that would most likely mean cnc machining which would probably
make it cost prohibitive. Cool idea but does it mean you only get the one
chain ring.?
On Dec 17, 2013 12:19 PM, "Michael" wrote:
> That would be cool if they have a crankset with the "RBW" built into it
>> like the old Ralei
>
> That would be cool if they have a crankset with the "RBW" built into it
> like the old Raleighs had the goosenecks, or whatever bird that was...
>
http://www.flickr.com/photos/70237737@N00/8955519536/in/set-72157633937039591
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the G
I'm waiting for the crankset to come out. I vaguely remember a mention in
Blug or somewhere Riv that Mark A. was designing a Silver crank. (I hope it
doesn't have that hidden chainring bolt!)
On Tuesday, December 17, 2013 8:50:40 AM UTC-5, Ron Mc wrote:
>
> very cool indeed. They look sharp.
Not Silver, S!LVER
I like it.
On Monday, December 16, 2013 10:32:45 PM UTC-8, Michael wrote:
>
> Very cool.
> Wouldn't it be cool if they had a whole line of "Silver" branded
> components?
> Could deck out the whole frameset with complete Silver build.
>
> Wonder if they will only sell these r
very cool indeed. They look sharp. I hope everybody has that Park tool in
their toolkit. http://www.rivbike.com/product-p/tl011.htm
On Tuesday, December 17, 2013 12:32:45 AM UTC-6, Michael wrote:
>
> Very cool.
> Wouldn't it be cool if they had a whole line of "Silver" branded
> components?
>
26 matches
Mail list logo
