Good wheels

Chalo said:

Ozark Bicycle said:

Tim McNamara wrote:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

While you may find this hard to believe, Brooks
saddles are very comfortable for many people- perhaps millions of
people, given how long Brooks has been in business. If the saddles were
such [censored] as you say, market forces would have driven the company out of
business. As it was, the weight-weeny attitude almost did put them out
of business a little over 10 years ago.

Quoted message said:

It wasn't "the weight weenie attitude" so much as the ready
availability of comfy, non-fussy saddles that also happened to be
lighter *and* less expensive. Saddles like the classic Selle Italia
Turbo, the San Marco Concor, Regal and Rolls and others from Avocet,
etc.

Those are all horribly narrow compared even to a B17, let alone a
B66.

The part of the B17 that you can actually sit on is as narrow--around
13cm on the Flyer I've got here. And if you try to slide back and use
the rear of the saddle you hit the rivets. I've got a bike with a WTB
type narrow saddle on it--it's a bit over 13cm, but you can ride the
rear in comfort. I've got a Selle Royal that's sort of a cross between
a Unicanitor and a Rolls and it's nearly 14cm wide. Both support my
bones perfectly, the latter being totally smooth leather and comfy
enough for centuries. I don't see a need for wider saddles--unless you
have a female anatomy. I like my bones supported, totally smooth
leather and traditional side skirts in the shell.

Quoted message said:

That doesn't work for everybody. What are the nylon equivalents
to the B17 and wider saddles like?

I don't consider the B17 to be wide as I mentioned before. I think a
Rolls is a pretty good substitute if set up right. I like 'em dead
level. Something like a Concor is indeed a bit too narrow for me as
well.

We certainly could use more simple and firm nylon shelled saddles on
the market that work like a leather saddle in the sense that the
comfort is in the shell, not the padding--but plain black leather
needs a new technical name for it to fly off the shelf.

Quoted message said:

Generally speaking, they're lumpy,
poofy, uncomfortable pieces of [censored].

Check the sales at Nashbar. They get lots of NOS saddles that are
pretty nice from time to time. My Selle Royal was only $4 on closeout--
though I'd have paid a hundred for the comfort.

Or use the Brooks if you like 'em. They drive me batty.

Quoted message said:

I ride a couple of B90-3 saddles, no longer in production. I'm not
enamored of their overdone springiness, and I would be glad to opt out
of their nearly 5-pound weight. Buy what I get from them is a nice
wide, firm, smooth top of normal saddle shape. I don't see what
exactly is so difficult about that for saddle manufacturers to get.
Why do all the firm, smooth, normally shaped plastic saddles only come
in suppository size? I don't know-- because real cyclists' butts (sit
bones included) come in lots of sizes.

I like the Electra Townie and Comfort saddles alright, but they still
leave something to be desired. While much firmer and better shaped
than most wide saddles, they are still overpadded and too short for
their width (which is wider than necessary). And the one with a
plain, unstitched top has a bunch of useless springs and junk between
it and the rails.

Some of the WTB saddles are pretty comfy, but I've not ridden one that
I wouldn't want firmed up.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

A friend who owns a bike shop
finds Brooks saddles to be one of his biggest selling items and his
customers have been almost without complaint about them.

Quoted message said:

Sure, because it's hard to find sensible alternatives in today's
market. It's either a Brooks or a ridiculous, pseudo-high-tech, form-
over function, over-priced POS ass hatchet such as a Fizik, or the
"modern" offerings from Selle Italia, San Marco, etc.

There would be a decent market, I believe, for something like a Turbo
or a Rolls that's 8+ inches wide rather than 5" to 6". Vetta used to
offer something sort of along those lines in the late '80s or early
'90s, but it still had more padding than optimum for comfort.

I know those old Vettas. They've enjoyed the distinction of putting my
[censored] to sleep many times in the late 80s. They were horrible.

Quoted message said:

Part of the blame must go to Specialized for poisoning the well by
getting ignorant people all fretful about their peckers if their
saddle doesn't have a fart slot. That has put all normal, smooth-
topped, potentially comfortable saddles at a marketing disadvantage.

Featuritis and gratuitous branding attempts on OEM and racing bike
saddles have resulted in normal, practical, comfortable plastic
saddles looking out-of-fashion. Not so for Brookses. They look cool
and authentic, like the real tack-and-harness stuff from which they
are descended. Lots of cool-kid bike messengers are using them. If
that's what you can buy to get an 8" wide saddle that isn't shaped
like a pie with a snout and isn't overly squishy, so be it.

I don't really mind a notch in the padding like my WTB clone has--but
the slots are dumbest looking things ever. Make the padding firm
enough and you won't sink in and get a cold [censored].

Tom Nakashima said:

Chalo said:

What are the nylon equivalents
to the B17 and wider saddles like? Generally speaking, they're lumpy,
poofy, uncomfortable pieces of [censored].

How about the Avocet Gelflex 20 Saddle?

Isn't that saddle ancient history? I had an Avocet Gel 30 back in the
day, but I haven't seen one in ages.

Anyway, those are a good example of what I'm talking about. They have
gel padding, which doesn't help, and they have "cheeks", which
definitely don't help.

I checked them out on the BikePro time capsule:

http://www.bikepro.com/products/saddles/avocet.shtml

The Vetta saddle page on bikepro.com pretty clearly illustrates what
I've been missing in currently available saddles:

http://www.bikepro.com/products/saddles/vetta.shtml

In the diagram, the Vetta ATB is the one on the upper left. Note that
the diagram is not to scale-- the ATB model was not only wider than
the "men's" or "racing" styles, it was also longer and generally
bigger. It was smooth-topped, flattish with a gently rounded crown,
and just a decent saddle overall-- no grooves, no bumps, no squishy
spots. Now that I've become accustomed to the Brooks B90, I'm not
sure that I would find it as tolerable as I did 15 to 18 years ago.
But among the saddles I used at that time, it was the most workable by
far. I wish somebody would make something similar today and sell it
for a low price (because an expensive plastic saddle is an insult to
the buyer's intelligence).

Chalo

You might want to look into Waterford as an

Quoted message said:

altenative to a RivenSchtick. Seems like it might be more up your
alley.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Waterfords just don't do it for me. I have a Rivendell Romulus
[production level Riv] which I'm very happy with. The only things I
would change is to carve up the lugs and take a weight weenie stick to
it, which is how the custom will work out. I'll keep the Rom around
and treat it like a mountain bike. That thing is waaay overbuilt for a
little guy like me.

Joe

Ozark Bicycle said:

It wasn't "the weight weenie attitude" so much as the ready
availability of comfy, non-fussy saddles that also happened to be
lighter *and* less expensive. Saddles like the classic Selle Italia
Turbo, the San Marco Concor, Regal and Rolls and others from Avocet,
etc.

Good point, to which I'll add that there are more recent saddle that
are as comfortable as those too -- for example Turbomatics are even
more comfy than Turbos. And there are some moderately expensive
saddles, like the Fizik Arione, that are getting rave reviews on
comfort.
--
JT
****************************
Remove "remove" to reply
Visit http://www.jt10000.com
****************************

Joe Bernard said:

You might want to look into Waterford as an

Quoted message said:

altenative to a RivenSchtick. Seems like it might be more up your
alley.- Hide quoted text -

Quoted message said:

- Show quoted text -

Waterfords just don't do it for me.

I wonder, where do you find a lugged Waterford to be lacking?

Quoted message said:

I have a Rivendell Romulus
[production level Riv] which I'm very happy with. The only things I
would change is to carve up the lugs

"carve up the lugs"? To change them in what way?

Quoted message said:

and take a weight weenie stick to
it, which is how the custom will work out.

What do you have in mind?

Quoted message said:

I'll keep the Rom around
and treat it like a mountain bike. That thing is waaay overbuilt for a
little guy like me.

Joe

landotter said:

Chalo said:

Ozark Bicycle wrote:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Tim McNamara wrote:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

> While you may find this hard to believe, Brooks
> saddles are very comfortable for many people- perhaps millions of
> people, given how long Brooks has been in business. If the saddles were
> such [censored] as you say, market forces would have driven the company out of
> business. As it was, the weight-weeny attitude almost did put them out
> of business a little over 10 years ago.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

It wasn't "the weight weenie attitude" so much as the ready
availability of comfy, non-fussy saddles that also happened to be
lighter *and* less expensive. Saddles like the classic Selle Italia
Turbo, the San Marco Concor, Regal and Rolls and others from Avocet,
etc.

Quoted message said:

Those are all horribly narrow compared even to a B17, let alone a
B66.

The part of the B17 that you can actually sit on is as narrow--around
13cm on the Flyer I've got here. And if you try to slide back and use
the rear of the saddle you hit the rivets.

You imply a person cannot sit on the rivets. Why can't you sit on the
rivets? You and Tim make this odd claim of Brooks saddle being narrow
because the rivets are back there. On all of my Brooks saddles the
rivets are highly polished. Meaning I've been sitting on them and
sliding all over them. Does not seem to bother me a bit. I've done
600km brevets straight through on the Brooks Professional with no
discomfort. If you and Tim's argument has any merit then no one could
sit on a curb or a rock or a stadium aluminum seat because they are
just as hard as the Brooks rivets. People sit for hours on stadium
seats and aren't paralyzed or harmed.

I've got a bike with a WTB

Quoted message said:

type narrow saddle on it--it's a bit over 13cm, but you can ride the
rear in comfort. I've got a Selle Royal that's sort of a cross between
a Unicanitor and a Rolls and it's nearly 14cm wide. Both support my
bones perfectly, the latter being totally smooth leather and comfy
enough for centuries. I don't see a need for wider saddles--unless you
have a female anatomy. I like my bones supported, totally smooth
leather and traditional side skirts in the shell.

Quoted message said:

That doesn't work for everybody. What are the nylon equivalents
to the B17 and wider saddles like?

I don't consider the B17 to be wide as I mentioned before. I think a
Rolls is a pretty good substitute if set up right. I like 'em dead
level. Something like a Concor is indeed a bit too narrow for me as
well.

We certainly could use more simple and firm nylon shelled saddles on
the market that work like a leather saddle in the sense that the
comfort is in the shell, not the padding--but plain black leather
needs a new technical name for it to fly off the shelf.

Quoted message said:

Generally speaking, they're lumpy,
poofy, uncomfortable pieces of [censored].

Check the sales at Nashbar. They get lots of NOS saddles that are
pretty nice from time to time. My Selle Royal was only $4 on closeout--
though I'd have paid a hundred for the comfort.

Or use the Brooks if you like 'em. They drive me batty.

Quoted message said:

I ride a couple of B90-3 saddles, no longer in production. I'm not
enamored of their overdone springiness, and I would be glad to opt out
of their nearly 5-pound weight. Buy what I get from them is a nice
wide, firm, smooth top of normal saddle shape. I don't see what
exactly is so difficult about that for saddle manufacturers to get.
Why do all the firm, smooth, normally shaped plastic saddles only come
in suppository size? I don't know-- because real cyclists' butts (sit
bones included) come in lots of sizes.

Quoted message said:

I like the Electra Townie and Comfort saddles alright, but they still
leave something to be desired. While much firmer and better shaped
than most wide saddles, they are still overpadded and too short for
their width (which is wider than necessary). And the one with a
plain, unstitched top has a bunch of useless springs and junk between
it and the rails.

Some of the WTB saddles are pretty comfy, but I've not ridden one that
I wouldn't want firmed up.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

> A friend who owns a bike shop
> finds Brooks saddles to be one of his biggest selling items and his
> customers have been almost without complaint about them.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Sure, because it's hard to find sensible alternatives in today's
market. It's either a Brooks or a ridiculous, pseudo-high-tech, form-
over function, over-priced POS ass hatchet such as a Fizik, or the
"modern" offerings from Selle Italia, San Marco, etc.

Quoted message said:

There would be a decent market, I believe, for something like a Turbo
or a Rolls that's 8+ inches wide rather than 5" to 6". Vetta used to
offer something sort of along those lines in the late '80s or early
'90s, but it still had more padding than optimum for comfort.

I know those old Vettas. They've enjoyed the distinction of putting my
[censored] to sleep many times in the late 80s. They were horrible.

Quoted message said:

Part of the blame must go to Specialized for poisoning the well by
getting ignorant people all fretful about their peckers if their
saddle doesn't have a fart slot. That has put all normal, smooth-
topped, potentially comfortable saddles at a marketing disadvantage.

Quoted message said:

Featuritis and gratuitous branding attempts on OEM and racing bike
saddles have resulted in normal, practical, comfortable plastic
saddles looking out-of-fashion. Not so for Brookses. They look cool
and authentic, like the real tack-and-harness stuff from which they
are descended. Lots of cool-kid bike messengers are using them. If
that's what you can buy to get an 8" wide saddle that isn't shaped
like a pie with a snout and isn't overly squishy, so be it.

I don't really mind a notch in the padding like my WTB clone has--but
the slots are dumbest looking things ever. Make the padding firm
enough and you won't sink in and get a cold [censored].- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Tim McNamara said:

In article <[email hidden]>,

landotter said:

Joe Bernard said:

Hi and - wow. I'm new to this group, I'm more of a Riv/i-bob type,
and just read through two threads about Mavic wheels. Apparently
y'all are accustomed to being called [censored] over here. My
developementally disabled clients might have a bone to pick with
that diagnosis! Anyway, my planned Rivendell 650B day tourer is
rapidly evolving into a 700c go-fast bike [bike fast, rider slow].
I think I've got a pretty good idea what the opinions of "Kry
Syriums" are, but what about other $500.00-and-under pre-builts?
Although I'm leaning toward traditional handbuilts, which would be
expected on a Riv, I think racy low-spoke wheels might be an
interesting choice for a bike like this.

Quoted message said:

By interesting, you really mean "retarded", no? Riding your new bike
exclusively while wearing lederhosen would be interesting as well!
Don't forget the alpen horn clamps--only $500--but beautifully forged
in our small sister factory in Japan!

It's hard to tell if you are trying to make a point here and, if so,
what it might be.

Quoted message said:

Are you going to go the Tressostar direction with bar tape like a lot
of Riv folks do? Here's a hint: shellacking the tape only makes it
hard and uncomfortable. BUT, if you sprinkle it with sand while wet
and shellac again--you can suffer both vibratory and tactile
discomfort--something that will offer tremendous exclusivity compared
to those pusillanimous bikes that your LBS sells.

There's something wrong with Tressostar? It and similar products have
been in use for a long time and work fine. Maybe you preferred the
Grab-On foam handlebar covers that were so popular in the late 1970s. I
installed a lot of that [censored] on Ross bikes at the shop. Or maybe you-
like me- prefer spending $20 for faux cork tape that shreds on
contact... oops, my bike fell over- another $20 for new tape.

$20? I get my cork tape on sale cheap from Nashbar and Performance.
Even oddly colored genuine Cinelli cork tape can be had every now and
then from Nashbar for $3 a roll or so. I have some yellow splotchy
color on the brevet bike now. And a few rolls of green splotchy color
in reserve. And some Sampson red/white colored stuff too. I've
considered putting on the foam grips and covering it with tape to get
some extra cushion. Going to try out the Aztec foam stuff since its
made for that purpose. I'm looking for a bit more comfort in the
drops than double cork can provide when I get into the 200-400 mile
range in a day.

About 20 people attempted the Rochester 600k last weekend. Tailwinds
both days. More than a few came down from the Twin cities.

Quoted message said:

I used Tressostar for many years and had no complaints. It's not very
padded, of course, hence my preference for cork, but OTOH cloth bar tape
is much more secure when your hands are sweaty on a 95 degree day or in
the rain. Shellac is best used when you don't use aero brake levers; I
use areo levers because I've got hands like hams and non-aero levers are
far too small for comfort- and therefore I don't shellac bar tape. If
you do shellac bar tape, the twine thing is unnecessary. I don't get
the twine thing.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Joe Bernard said:

Quoted message said:

Something in me wants to get a Rivendell, and put a Renn disc on the
back and a Hed Trispoke on the front, along with the skinniest Ti-rail
saddle on a carbon fiber seat post. It would also have a ten-speed
drivetrain with brifters.

I love it! But then I'm a '57 Chevy on a C6 Vette chassis kinda guy.

I would dearly love to have a modern high performance car with Datsun
B-210 "Honey Bee" bodywork. 🙂

Quoted message said:

That's pretty much my plan. Modern drivetrain, carbon seatpost,
lightweight wheels. There's no reason a lugged steel bike has to run
friction shifters, 7-speed freewheels and touring wheels. It's just a
frame-material and tube-joining choice. When I first got into road
bikes in the early '90s, most high-end bikes were lugged steel with
whatever components were the thing then. Mostly 8-speed Dura-Ace STI.
I have no use for the retro thing. I just like pretty lugs and the
ride and durability of steel.

I would love to see the look on the faces of the "Hobbits" when
someone commits "heresy" with a Rivendell Frame.

--
Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia
The weather is here, wish you were beautiful

Ozark Bicycle said:

Joe Bernard said:

Quoted message said:

Something in me wants to get a Rivendell, and put a Renn disc on the
back and a Hed Trispoke on the front, along with the skinniest Ti-rail
saddle on a carbon fiber seat post. It would also have a ten-speed
drivetrain with brifters.

Quoted message said:

I love it! But then I'm a '57 Chevy on a C6 Vette chassis kinda guy.

Quoted message said:

That's pretty much my plan. Modern drivetrain, carbon seatpost,
lightweight wheels. There's no reason a lugged steel bike has to run
friction shifters, 7-speed freewheels and touring wheels. It's just a
frame-material and tube-joining choice. When I first got into road
bikes in the early '90s, most high-end bikes were lugged steel with
whatever components were the thing then. Mostly 8-speed Dura-Ace STI.
I have no use for the retro thing. I just like pretty lugs and the
ride and durability of steel.

I couldn't agree more! You might want to look into Waterford as an
altenative to a RivenSchtick. Seem like it might be more up your
alley.

I have never found ornamentation attractive - Mies van de Rohe could
not have been more correct when he said "less is more". I find TIG
welded Gunnars more attractive than Waterfords, and have never cared
for fancy lug-work.

However, I do like the C. Itoh Kabuki Submariner frames attractive,
where the plain lugs contrast nicely with the stainless steel tubes.

--
Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia
The weather is here, wish you were beautiful

Tim McNamara said:

...
Should be "doable." After all, my wife's 53 cm Heron (a former
Rivendell spin-off company) weighs barely over 20 lbs with a steel fork
and "retro" components (Superbe crank, derailleurs, brakes and
freewheel; Phil hubs, 32 or 36 spokes, MA2 rims; 700 x 28 tires; Brooks
Pro S saddle; Nitto bars and stem). Todd Kuzma managed to get his Heron
down to 16 lbs or something like that- not bad for a bike made from
Reynolds 531....

Whatever happened to Todd - he used to be a RBT regular?

--
Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia
The weather is here, wish you were beautiful

Chalo Colina said:

...
I ride a couple of B90-3 saddles, no longer in production. I'm not
enamored of their overdone springiness, and I would be glad to opt out
of their nearly 5-pound weight....

Some of my recumbent seats weigh less than that!

--
Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia
The weather is here, wish you were beautiful

Ozark Bicycle said:

Joe Bernard said:

You might want to look into Waterford as an

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

altenative to a RivenSchtick. Seems like it might be more up your
alley.- Hide quoted text -

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

- Show quoted text -

Quoted message said:

Waterfords just don't do it for me.

I wonder, where do you find a lugged Waterford to be lacking?

Quoted message said:

I have a Rivendell Romulus
[production level Riv] which I'm very happy with. The only things I
would change is to carve up the lugs

"carve up the lugs"? To change them in what way?

Quoted message said:

and take a weight weenie stick to
it, which is how the custom will work out.

What do you have in mind?

Quoted message said:

I'll keep the Rom around
and treat it like a mountain bike. That thing is waaay overbuilt for a
little guy like me.

Quoted message said:

Joe- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

"Waterfords lacking" is too negative a reference. Instead of saying
Waterfords don't "do it" for me, I should have said I've always wanted
a custom Rivendell and nothing else will do. Waterford makes many
excellent bikes, including Gunnar, and if my bike boat ever comes in
I'll be more than happy to add one of each to my collection....and a
Rene Herse, and a carbon Merckx, a Moulton, maybe a nice RANS....

"Carving up lugs" means taking some metal out, dabbing some
contrasting paint in the spaces and just in general arting them up a
bit. And yes I know TIG is lighter, but if I was solely devoted to
lightness in a frame, I'd get that carbon Merckx.

The "weight weenie stick" will be applied with Deda Zero superlight
tubing and lightweight wheels primarily. I won't have the budget for
the full ti and carbon job in the components, but I'll do what I can.

As for the "wait 'til the Hobbits see it" comment that someone else
offered, that's half the fun. Hey, maybe some day I'll put friction
shifters, a Brooks saddle and canvas saddlebags on a Merckx. That
would be awesome!

Johnny Sunset said:

Ozark Bicycle said:

On Jun 22, 10:54 am, Joe Bernard wrote:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

> Something in me wants to get a Rivendell, and put a Renn disc on the
> back and a Hed Trispoke on the front, along with the skinniest Ti-rail
> saddle on a carbon fiber seat post. It would also have a ten-speed
> drivetrain with brifters.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

I love it! But then I'm a '57 Chevy on a C6 Vette chassis kinda guy.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

That's pretty much my plan. Modern drivetrain, carbon seatpost,
lightweight wheels. There's no reason a lugged steel bike has to run
friction shifters, 7-speed freewheels and touring wheels. It's just a
frame-material and tube-joining choice. When I first got into road
bikes in the early '90s, most high-end bikes were lugged steel with
whatever components were the thing then. Mostly 8-speed Dura-Ace STI.
I have no use for the retro thing. I just like pretty lugs and the
ride and durability of steel.

Quoted message said:

I couldn't agree more! You might want to look into Waterford as an
altenative to a RivenSchtick. Seem like it might be more up your
alley.

I have never found ornamentation attractive - Mies van de Rohe could
not have been more correct when he said "less is more". I find TIG
welded Gunnars more attractive than Waterfords,

I don't care for most welded frames - too industrial looking, more
farm equipment than bicycle.

Quoted message said:

and have never cared
for fancy lug-work.

Nor did I, until ~10 years ago. Now, I think it can look good on the
right frame. However, IMO, most of the RivenSchticks look 'forced' and
'faux' to me, like a cheap 'repli-car' (remember those fake MG T-
series bodies mounted on VeeDub pans?). The Cutsey poo names (Saluki?
Homer Hilson? GMAFB!) and over-the-top head badges complete the
unfortunate picture.

Quoted message said:

However, I do like the C. Itoh Kabuki Submariner frames attractive,
where the plain lugs contrast nicely with the stainless steel tubes.

Joe Bernard said:

On Jun 22, 5:38 pm, Ozark Bicycle

Quoted message said:

On Jun 22, 5:17 pm, Joe Bernard <[email hidden]> wrote:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

You might want to look into Waterford as an

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

> altenative to a RivenSchtick. Seems like it might be more up your
> alley.- Hide quoted text -

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

> - Show quoted text -

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Waterfords just don't do it for me.

Quoted message said:

I wonder, where do you find a lugged Waterford to be lacking?

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

I have a Rivendell Romulus
[production level Riv] which I'm very happy with. The only things I
would change is to carve up the lugs

Quoted message said:

"carve up the lugs"? To change them in what way?

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

and take a weight weenie stick to
it, which is how the custom will work out.

Quoted message said:

What do you have in mind?

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

I'll keep the Rom around
and treat it like a mountain bike. That thing is waaay overbuilt for a
little guy like me.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Joe- Hide quoted text -

Quoted message said:

- Show quoted text -

"Waterfords lacking" is too negative a reference. Instead of saying
Waterfords don't "do it" for me, I should have said I've always wanted
a custom Rivendell and nothing else will do. Waterford makes many
excellent bikes, including Gunnar, and if my bike boat ever comes in
I'll be more than happy to add one of each to my collection....and a
Rene Herse, and a carbon Merckx, a Moulton, maybe a nice RANS....

"Carving up lugs" means taking some metal out, dabbing some
contrasting paint in the spaces and just in general arting them up a
bit. And yes I know TIG is lighter, but if I was solely devoted to
lightness in a frame, I'd get that carbon Merckx.

The "weight weenie stick" will be applied with Deda Zero superlight
tubing and lightweight wheels primarily. I won't have the budget for
the full ti and carbon job in the components, but I'll do what I can.

As for the "wait 'til the Hobbits see it" comment that someone else
offered, that's half the fun. Hey, maybe some day I'll put friction
shifters, a Brooks saddle and canvas saddlebags on a Merckx. That
would be awesome!- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

No offense intended against the Hobbits, by the way. I clearly am one,
and have been since discovering the Bstone RB- and XO-1 back in the
day. My first new bike was an XO-3. Moustache bars!

Joe

In article
<[email hidden]>,

landotter said:

Tim McNamara said:

In article <[email hidden]>,

John Forrest Tomlinson said:

On Thu, 21 Jun 2007 19:46:24 -0000, landotter <[email hidden]>
wrote:

Quoted message said:

>I took two short rides on a Brooks saddle last night, and as
>always--they look great, but feel like [censored] and are fussy and
>inconsistent.

Quoted message said:

Not long enough -- give it three or five years of solid riding and
you'll have a lifetime companion.

If it takes more than a half dozen rides to be comfortable on a Brooks,
either it's set up seriously incorrectly or it's just not the saddle for
you. I find the Brooks Pro to be comfortable out of the box, maybe a
ride or three is necessary to dial it in. The Brooks Pro S is my wife's
favorite saddle (as in, she dislikes sitting one any other saddle).

I've put 10K on a couple of B17s and 5K on this particular Flyer and
waiting for the comfort to set in. The B17s were bearable, but never
comfy. It's just a horrible design to begin with. There is only one
place of a single square cm for each ischia to find comfort in. There
is the idiotic rail in back with the double idiotic exposed rivets.
You either slide forward, or tilt up the horn enough to ovalize your
urethra. Firmness changes according to the day's humidity. Seriously--
I'm at the point where I hate these things. I tried for a couple
months to get rid of my last Brooks, this particular Flyer by flogging
it on Craigslist for very very cheap, but fate means for me to have it
on my beer bike to remind me of what overrated vintage garbage is.
Well designed nylon saddle shells covered thinly in a mm of foam or
two and some leather are so far superior to Brooks, it's not even
funny.

You do not like them. Your generalizations are unfounded.

--
Michael Press

In article
<[email hidden]>
,

Chalo said:

Featuritis and gratuitous branding attempts on OEM and racing bike
saddles have resulted in normal, practical, comfortable plastic
saddles looking out-of-fashion. Not so for Brookses. They look cool
and authentic, like the real tack-and-harness stuff from which they
are descended. Lots of cool-kid bike messengers are using them. If
that's what you can buy to get an 8" wide saddle that isn't shaped
like a pie with a snout and isn't overly squishy, so be it.

Brooks saddles had all but disappeared,
but now I am seeing them regularly again.
Is this the hobbit effect?

--
Michael Press

Michael Press said:

In article
<[email hidden]>
,

Chalo said:

Featuritis and gratuitous branding attempts on OEM and racing bike
saddles have resulted in normal, practical, comfortable plastic
saddles looking out-of-fashion. Not so for Brookses. They look cool
and authentic, like the real tack-and-harness stuff from which they
are descended. Lots of cool-kid bike messengers are using them. If
that's what you can buy to get an 8" wide saddle that isn't shaped
like a pie with a snout and isn't overly squishy, so be it.

Brooks saddles had all but disappeared,
but now I am seeing them regularly again.
Is this the hobbit effect?

--
Michael Press

I kinda doubt it. I think it's parallel to the New Beetle/ PT Cruiser/
New '69 Mustang effect, and it's in tandem with the fixie effect,
which is kind of a retro back-to-the-simple-days thing itself. Of
course, Brooks saddles being anything but simple to care for,
something got lost in translation.

In article <[email hidden]>,

landotter said:

Tim McNamara said:

In article <[email hidden]>,

landotter said:

On Jun 22, 11:07 am, "David L. Johnson"
<[email hidden]> wrote:
> Ozark Bicycle wrote:
> >> Sorry to butt in, but what twine? I have trouble
> >> understanding how twine can be involved....

Quoted message said:

> >> --

Quoted message said:

> >>From the Official Cycling Hobbit source comes this:

Quoted message said:

> >http://tinyurl.com/2sgxxs

Quoted message said:

> Sheesh. I'm almost sorry I asked. God forbid that we should
> actually use electrical tape -- or any product developed in the
> 20th century, I suppose. I guess that goes with leather seats
> and leather (or cloth?) bar tape, but shouldn't you be using
> leather brake pads and wooden rims?

Quoted message said:

Yes, and use them humorlessly.

IME most Rivendell customers have far better senses of humor about
this stuff than do their critics. You, for example.

Aw, does a little ad hominem make you feel better, hon?

You've been dishing it, sweetie, I thought it was only neighborly to
make sure you got a portion too. Don't want you to feel left out.

And I had a serious point. I know a lot of folks who own and ride
Rivendell (and "Rivendell-type"😉 bikes. They've all got good senses of
humor and they all ride a lot- way more fun than the carbon fiber crowd,
who IME tend to be grim and more attentive to their HRMs than to the
world around them. When you get a flat, the CF types around here keep
going so as to not compromise their workout; the Riv types stop and lend
a hand. You can probably guess who I'd rather ride with.

A good 1/3 of the riders who turned up for the 200K and 300K brevets I
went to this spring were on Rivendell frames- Rambouillets and Romuluses
in particular. Some of them even had Shimano or Campy brifters and 10
speed cassettes. It's a crowd with a lot of variety. I'll put up with
a little twine- even though I didn't get in when I was a Scout and I
still don't get it- to have good company on a ride.

Quoted message said:

I have a grand sense of humor--but unlike a lot of people that buy
bikes to hang on the wall, I ride a lot, and gain strong opinions
about certain bits of gear.

Glad to hear you have a sense of humor. You must have parked it with
your bike when writing to this thread. The dudgeon that people get into
over Brooks saddles and steel frames and lugs is just hi-larious. I
like it that my bikes won't be any more obsolete next year than they are
this year.

Quoted message said:

It's unbelievable, for example, when a bike shop fails to stock what
I see as classic parts, things such as Rolls saddles and Kool Stop
brake shoes--classic moderately priced problem solvers, and instead
push overpriced junk like Aztec pads or overcomplicated and expensive
saddles, whose numerous seams and logos only cause more chafing and
redness.

On this we agree. I happily don't have to shop at those shops. I have
a good local bike shop and there is always the Internet, which has
really simpled up getting the stuff I like to use.

Quoted message said:

Rivendell does the same thing with their bits. There's a ton of great
stuff and advice at their site. Then there's also this phony folksy-
craftiness that's just as eye-roll inducing as the unnecessary
technology they eschew. Sell Brooks saddles--fine by me, they fit
some folks--but I find it quite silly that they're the only option in
their catalog. Grant has decided that's what you shall ride and you
must obey.

That's not it and I would hope you're smart enough to figure that out.
You can buy other saddles from many other places for cheaper than he can
afford to sell them. Grant generally eschews stocking stuff you can get
from Nashbar or at your LBS without difficulty. He can't compete with
the former on price and with the latter on convenience. Basically he
ain't got the cash to carry all that stuff in stock, so he sells the
products he likes and uses. I've never met Grant, but by those who have
I am told that the "folksy-craftiness" is just his personality.

In article <[email hidden]>,

Johnny Sunset said:

Joe Bernard said:

Quoted message said:

Something in me wants to get a Rivendell, and put a Renn disc on
the back and a Hed Trispoke on the front, along with the
skinniest Ti-rail saddle on a carbon fiber seat post. It would
also have a ten-speed drivetrain with brifters.

<snip>

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

That's pretty much my plan. Modern drivetrain, carbon seatpost,
lightweight wheels. There's no reason a lugged steel bike has to
run friction shifters, 7-speed freewheels and touring wheels. It's
just a frame-material and tube-joining choice. When I first got
into road bikes in the early '90s, most high-end bikes were lugged
steel with whatever components were the thing then. Mostly 8-speed
Dura-Ace STI. I have no use for the retro thing. I just like pretty
lugs and the ride and durability of steel.

I would love to see the look on the faces of the "Hobbits" when
someone commits "heresy" with a Rivendell Frame.

Too late, it's been done and there are photos on the Web somewhere.
Looked kinda silly to me- that clunky fat CF stuff contrasting weirdly
with a nice lugged frame- but hey, it's not my bike. Whatever makes you
happy to ride.

In article <[email hidden]>,

Chalo said:

Why do all the firm, smooth, normally shaped plastic saddles only
come in suppository size?

Sheee-it, that's the funniest thing I've read in this newsgroup in
months!