| |
Main
Date: 23 May 2007 15:06:27
From: bfd
Subject: 650B movement is growing!
|
Check it out, SOMA, a bicycle mfr (www.somafab.com) is very
"interested" in the 650B conversion by Ed Bradley:
http://www.flickr.com/photo_zoom.gne?id=496876397&size=o
In fact, some have stated that SOMA and other mfrs are now
"influenced" by the 650B movement and some new 650B goodies are
coming. Keep your eyes OPEN@!#$%
Another biggie - the Kirk Pacenti's 650B mt bike:
http://www.frameforum.net/forum2/index.php?showtopic=3034
http://www.singletrackworld.com/article.php?sid=2349
http://www.smugmug.com/keyword/all/pacenti#133877457
Get ready, its coming! What's not to like?!!!
|
|
| |
Date: 27 May 2007 18:49:45
From: Ozark Bicycle
Subject: Re: 650B movement is growing!
|
On May 27, 5:35 pm, A Muzi <a...@yellowjersey.org > wrote:
> > On May 26, 4:16 pm, "datak...@yahoo.com" <datak...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >> ah yes as sheldon brown once suggested, the 26" tire range is a
> >> touring best choice for searching for 650B at Continental
> >> there are many 26" tread designs from flooded red clay subbase to
> >> Glaze and with 700c 33 in all one with Vectran!! aerospace material
> >> and one 650B !
> >> TourRide 42-584
> >> the ledge!!
> >> say anyone see dick pound up
> >> here?
> Ozark Bicycle wrote:
> > Just one!?! Does that imply a certain, ahem, lack of committment to
> > the 650B size? ;-)
> > Over the ledge, over the edge......the world has been waiting for a
> > 650B mountain bike!
>
> Been done - that's so 1980s!
"Plus ca change, plus c'est la meme chose." - Jean-Baptiste Alphonse
Karr
> And 700-D as well, both to their owners' general chagrin.
The public has a short memory; hustlers count on it.
|
| |
Date: 27 May 2007 16:08:57
From: datakoll@yahoo.com
Subject: Re: 650B movement is growing!
|
Tour and ride stability
http://www.sheldonbrown.com/harris/tires/587.html
http://www.bicycleman.com/recumbents/bacchetta/bacchetta.htm
ran into one-tubers leaned on the suoerduper's wall, one a tandem with
enclosed rear disc. couldn't track down the roders!?
|
| |
Date: 27 May 2007 00:37:15
From: lightninglad
Subject: Re: 650B movement is growing!
|
On May 24, 3:00 pm, Tim McNamara ....snip.....
>
> Now that doesn't mean that 650B is a good set of compromises for you.
> But IMHO it's good to have options- the point is to ride bike.
Thanks for injecting reasoned sanity into the discussion. I recently
ordered one of them funny high racer bikes from Holland (Challenge
Seiran SL) and specified 650 rather than 559. Delivery soon I
hope......
>"private opulence and public
> squalor."
Yes - we're getting that here in Oz. Spray a bit of tar, throw down
some stone chips and call it road repair. Basically it's forcing
cyclists to ride 'off road' wheels and tyres to survive the appalling
surfaces, loose gravel and broken edges.
|
| |
Date: 26 May 2007 18:14:40
From: datakoll@yahoo.com
Subject: Re: 650B movement is growing!
|
i read one as wlcome to the club and conti has the resources to give
650B a shot
TourRide - place TR in Word then space bar the symbols across the
page heheheh forgive me
http://www.conti-online.com/generator/www/de/en/continental/bicycle/themes/tires/city/tourride/tourride_en.html
that's drinedwall ,right? TourRide
M. Press goes on at length that the 650B may be more than TourRide but
the flooded red clay subase and bog crew may not be ready to switch
until superman rides in and beat the SXXX out of the 26" crowd with a
650B.
that should be drovendwall's next move: a factory team!! sponsored by
superglucose, the IV of champions!!
|
| |
Date: 26 May 2007 15:25:39
From: Ozark Bicycle
Subject: Re: 650B movement is growing!
|
On May 26, 4:16 pm, "datak...@yahoo.com" <datak...@yahoo.com > wrote:
> ah yes as sheldon brown once suggested, the 26" tire range is a
> touring best choice for searching for 650B at Continental
> there are many 26" tread designs from flooded red clay subbase to
> Glaze and with 700c 33 in all one with Vectran!! aerospace material
> and one 650B !
Just one!?! Does that imply a certain, ahem, lack of committment to
the 650B size? ;-)
>
> TourRide 42-584
>
> the ledge!!
Over the ledge, over the edge......the world has been waiting for a
650B mountain bike!
>
> say anyone see dick pound up
> here?
|
| | |
Date: 27 May 2007 17:35:46
From: A Muzi
Subject: Re: 650B movement is growing!
|
> On May 26, 4:16 pm, "datak...@yahoo.com" <datak...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> ah yes as sheldon brown once suggested, the 26" tire range is a
>> touring best choice for searching for 650B at Continental
>> there are many 26" tread designs from flooded red clay subbase to
>> Glaze and with 700c 33 in all one with Vectran!! aerospace material
>> and one 650B !
>> TourRide 42-584
>> the ledge!!
>> say anyone see dick pound up
>> here?
Ozark Bicycle wrote:
> Just one!?! Does that imply a certain, ahem, lack of committment to
> the 650B size? ;-)
> Over the ledge, over the edge......the world has been waiting for a
> 650B mountain bike!
Been done - that's so 1980s!
And 700-D as well, both to their owners' general chagrin.
--
Andrew Muzi
www.yellowjersey.org
Open every day since 1 April, 1971
|
| |
Date: 26 May 2007 14:16:14
From: datakoll@yahoo.com
Subject: Re: 650B movement is growing!
|
ah yes as sheldon brown once suggested, the 26" tire range is a
touring best choice for searching for 650B at Continental
there are many 26" tread designs from flooded red clay subbase to
Glaze and with 700c 33 in all one with Vectran!! aerospace material
and one 650B !
TourRide 42-584
the ledge!!
say anyone see dick pound up
here?
|
| |
Date: 26 May 2007 13:20:01
From: datakoll@yahoo.com
Subject: Re: 650B movement is growing!
|
after reading mike press, the idea of manufacturers responding with a
tire threshold as an indicator for 650B design acceptance in the
consumer market took hold but I don't know if there are:
contemporary hi tech 650B leading edge ahead of the
curve gotta have one at any cost tire and show it to us uniformed
pavement people!
the panaracers with the thread sidewall may have kevlar
circumferential belts but maybe not-there's TG and a regular-I forget
wether both or only the regular has the thread sidewall.
In 27", the Panaracer made and ridden on the Japanese Islands, is one
of the last 27" tires available MO-the reverse of the potential 650B
threshold scenario
the 27" tend to be technologically out of date around the block tires
for out of date around the block people who will not be around much
longer and are consumerwise out of it completely. (whew theres an
opinion!)
are 650B tires now available "out of date"
|
| | |
Date: 26 May 2007 23:06:18
From: Sandy
Subject: Re: 650B movement is growing!
|
Dans le message de
news:1180210801.446376.79270@p47g2000hsd.googlegroups.com,
datakoll@yahoo.com <datakoll@yahoo.com > a réfléchi, et puis a déclaré :
> after reading mike press, the idea of manufacturers responding with a
> tire threshold as an indicator for 650B design acceptance in the
> consumer market took hold but I don't know if there are:
> contemporary hi tech 650B leading edge ahead of the
> curve gotta have one at any cost tire and show it to us uniformed
> pavement people!
>
> the panaracers with the thread sidewall may have kevlar
> circumferential belts but maybe not-there's TG and a regular-I forget
> wether both or only the regular has the thread sidewall.
> In 27", the Panaracer made and ridden on the Japanese Islands, is one
> of the last 27" tires available MO-the reverse of the potential 650B
> threshold scenario
> the 27" tend to be technologically out of date around the block tires
> for out of date around the block people who will not be around much
> longer and are consumerwise out of it completely. (whew theres an
> opinion!)
>
> are 650B tires now available "out of date"
Press really lets you call him Mike ?!
|
| |
Date: 26 May 2007 09:51:20
From: Ozark Bicycle
Subject: Re: 650B movement is growing!
|
On May 26, 11:16 am, "datak...@yahoo.com" <datak...@yahoo.com > wrote:
<snipped >
- on Rivendell Bicycles -
>
> drivendwell takes heat constantly from posters but off course deserves
> hi praise for forging ahead on their own planet . Conquore is not
> their game: being in the game is their game.
IMO, an ideal situation exists when a company can act in their
customers interests and their own interests. At it's inception, that
truly seemed to be what Rivendell strived to do. Recently, the
interests of Rivendell seem to be served at the expense of the best
interests of the customer. Anyone who thinks bikes like the Saluki and
the Bombadil, with their oddball sized wheels and tires, are anything
other than self-serving niche marketing is just being naive.
|
| |
Date: 26 May 2007 09:25:36
From: datakoll@yahoo.com
Subject: Re: 650B movement is growing!
|
so drag out a contemporary hi tech 650B leading edge ahead of the
curve gotta have one at any cost tire and show it to us uniformed
pavement people!
|
| |
Date: 26 May 2007 09:16:17
From: datakoll@yahoo.com
Subject: Re: 650B movement is growing!
|
panaracer's pasela is built with a white sidewall? the sidewall is
poly or cotton thread?
700c was a legislated size from manufacturers, effectively stopping
production and development of 27"
The nature of the move away from 27 for example the 3800 Conti TT
once stockpiled at east XXXXX were all made before 6 BC and are
nooooo more.
How cum? all you need is a few molds, skilled tire builders, someone
to cut the fabric, someone to keep track of in and out and return-soon
you're talkin' real money here! 650B in reverse.
drivendwell takes heat constantly from posters but off course deserves
hi praise for forging ahead on their own planet . Conquore is not
their game: being in the game is their game.
its kinda like the racer who asks: "I'm getting old and slow what can
I do"? and the answer is not win but build confidence.
with a sweet spot. GO FORT UND DIFFUSE!
bake sum Logan B! a pound perhaps?
|
| |
Date: 26 May 2007 07:04:59
From: datakoll@yahoo.com
Subject: Re: 650B movement is growing!
|
On May 26, 9:53 am, Ozark Bicycle
<bicycleatel...@ozarkbicycleservice.com > wrote:
> On May 26, 2:50 am, "datak...@yahoo.com" <datak...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> <snipped>
>
> - on weird tire size fads -
>
> > like whose gonna stake their career family mortgage on a 650B tire?
>
> Grant "I wish I were Tolkien" Petersen?
http://www.google.com/search?q=grant+petersen&rls=com.microsoft:*:IE-SearchBox&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&sourceid=ie7&rlz=1I7GGLJ
|
| |
Date: 26 May 2007 06:53:01
From: Ozark Bicycle
Subject: Re: 650B movement is growing!
|
On May 26, 2:50 am, "datak...@yahoo.com" <datak...@yahoo.com > wrote:
<snipped >
- on weird tire size fads -
> like whose gonna stake their career family mortgage on a 650B tire?
Grant "I wish I were Tolkien" Petersen?
|
| |
Date: 26 May 2007 00:50:03
From: datakoll@yahoo.com
Subject: Re: 650B movement is growing!
|
On May 26, 12:56 am, A Muzi <a...@yellowjersey.org > wrote:
> > "* * Chas" <verktygj...@aol.spamski.com> wrote:
> >> Today 26" and 700c (29") are the standards. You can find them from
> >> 19mm/3/4" to well over 50mm/2" widths. It's hard to find good 27" tires in
> >> most bike shops around the US and when you do locate them there's only a
> >> choice of 1 or 2 styles or brands of tires.
> Michael Press wrote:
> > Serfas continues to offer good 630x32 (measured 28 mm) tires
> > with an almost wholly slick tread.
> > <URL:http://www.serfas.com/tires/STK-27.shtml>
> > I whine until my LBS gets them in.
>
> YGBSM.
>
> Don't have to settle for offbrand or private label second tier tires.
> 27" in widths from IRC, Panaracer, Michelin, Kenda * are available
> through a host of major and minor distributors to all LBS. If they
> bother to pick up a phone and buy them.
>
> [* as Bruce Gordon rants, these are PWAMS, people who actually make stuff]
> --
> Andrew Muziwww.yellowjersey.org
> Open every day since 1 April, 1971
GOOD TIRES! eg the 74# pasela is made with a cotton or polyester
thread covering on the sidewall: 1936! tech. A great feeling tire for
around the block but nooooo hazrdresistance. nada.
BUT NOT GREAT TIRES. tech development for a dinosaur is economic
corporate suicide same for a stillborn idea unless the diffusion of
ideas reached a stage where a 650B sweet spot explosion for dwarfed
cyclists reaches critititititical mass: 5-10 craxed consumers outside
the LBS each morning waiting to buy a 650B. keep us posted
more newton FAQ
like whose gonna stake their career family mortgage on a 650B tire?
|
| | |
Date: 26 May 2007 10:17:35
From: A Muzi
Subject: Re: 650B movement is growing!
|
>>> "* * Chas" <verktygj...@aol.spamski.com> wrote:
>>>> Today 26" and 700c (29") are the standards. You can find them from
>>>> 19mm/3/4" to well over 50mm/2" widths. It's hard to find good 27" tires in
>>>> most bike shops around the US and when you do locate them there's only a
>>>> choice of 1 or 2 styles or brands of tires.
>> Michael Press wrote:
>>> Serfas continues to offer good 630x32 (measured 28 mm) tires
>>> with an almost wholly slick tread.
>>> <URL:http://www.serfas.com/tires/STK-27.shtml>
>>> I whine until my LBS gets them in.
> A Muzi <a...@yellowjersey.org> wrote:
>> YGBSM.
>> Don't have to settle for offbrand or private label second tier tires.
>> 27" in widths from IRC, Panaracer, Michelin, Kenda * are available
>> through a host of major and minor distributors to all LBS. If they
>> bother to pick up a phone and buy them.
>>
>> [* as Bruce Gordon rants, these are PWAMS, people who actually make stuff]
datakoll@yahoo.com wrote:
> GOOD TIRES! eg the 74# pasela is made with a cotton or polyester
> thread covering on the sidewall: 1936! tech. A great feeling tire for
> around the block but nooooo hazrdresistance. nada.
> BUT NOT GREAT TIRES. tech development for a dinosaur is economic
> corporate suicide same for a stillborn idea unless the diffusion of
> ideas reached a stage where a 650B sweet spot explosion for dwarfed
> cyclists reaches critititititical mass: 5-10 craxed consumers outside
> the LBS each morning waiting to buy a 650B. keep us posted
> more newton FAQ
> like whose gonna stake their career family mortgage on a 650B tire?
Gene, I'm not sure I understood all of that but Panaracer (and AFAIK
everyone else's, too) clincher tire casings are all synthetic. And have
been for many long years, 'senza cotone'. We no longer suffer
'starburst' tears under the tread, which were common to cotton casings.
--
Andrew Muzi
www.yellowjersey.org
Open every day since 1 April, 1971
|
| | | |
Date: 26 May 2007 12:05:34
From: Tim McNamara
Subject: Re: 650B movement is growing!
|
In article <135gjsl4do18aa@corp.supernews.com >,
A Muzi <am@yellowjersey.org > wrote:
> Gene, I'm not sure I understood all of that but Panaracer (and AFAIK
> everyone else's, too) clincher tire casings are all synthetic. And
> have been for many long years, 'senza cotone'. We no longer suffer
> 'starburst' tears under the tread, which were common to cotton
> casings.
I have read that Deda Tre uses cotton casings, but I've never seen any
so that's hearsay. IIRC the only cotton tires I have personally used in
many years were tubulars. Jeez, I don't recall if I have ever used a
cotton clincher- maybe in the early 1970s when I rode a Hercules 3 speed.
|
| |
Date: 25 May 2007 11:27:31
From: Ozark Bicycle
Subject: Re: 650B movement is growing!
|
On May 25, 1:13 pm, Tim McNamara <tim...@bitstream.net > wrote:
> In article <rubrum-89A869.18020424052...@newsclstr02.news.prodigy.com>,
> Michael Press <rub...@pacbell.net> wrote:
>
> > In article <QI-dnS8e8PNdXsjbnZ2dnUVZ_gadn...@comcast.com>,
> > "* * Chas" <verktygj...@aol.spamski.com> wrote:
>
> > > Today 26" and 700c (29") are the standards. You can find them from
> > > 19mm/3/4" to well over 50mm/2" widths. It's hard to find good 27"
> > > tires in most bike shops around the US and when you do locate them
> > > there's only a choice of 1 or 2 styles or brands of tires.
>
> > Serfas continues to offer good 630x32 (measured 28 mm) tires with an
> > almost wholly slick tread.
>
> > <URL:http://www.serfas.com/tires/STK-27.shtml>
>
> > I whine until my LBS gets them in.
>
> The Pasela 27" tire also ought to be very good.
The casings are the usual high quality, but the last 630/27" ones I
saw had a raised center ridge on the tread, almost (but not quite)
like the old Specialized tires from way back when. IOW, the tread is
(or, at least, was) different than it is on the 622/700c versions. If
that bothers you, avoid them.
|
| | |
Date: 25 May 2007 14:00:58
From: * * Chas
Subject: Re: 650B movement is growing!
|
"Ozark Bicycle" <bicycleatelier@ozarkbicycleservice.com > wrote in message
news:1180117651.443439.120580@p47g2000hsd.googlegroups.com...
> On May 25, 1:13 pm, Tim McNamara <tim...@bitstream.net> wrote:
> > In article
<rubrum-89A869.18020424052...@newsclstr02.news.prodigy.com >,
> > Michael Press <rub...@pacbell.net> wrote:
> >
> > > In article <QI-dnS8e8PNdXsjbnZ2dnUVZ_gadn...@comcast.com>,
> > > "* * Chas" <verktygj...@aol.spamski.com> wrote:
> >
> > > > Today 26" and 700c (29") are the standards. You can find them from
> > > > 19mm/3/4" to well over 50mm/2" widths. It's hard to find good 27"
> > > > tires in most bike shops around the US and when you do locate them
> > > > there's only a choice of 1 or 2 styles or brands of tires.
> >
> > > Serfas continues to offer good 630x32 (measured 28 mm) tires with an
> > > almost wholly slick tread.
> >
> > > <URL:http://www.serfas.com/tires/STK-27.shtml>
> >
> > > I whine until my LBS gets them in.
> >
> > The Pasela 27" tire also ought to be very good.
>
> The casings are the usual high quality, but the last 630/27" ones I
> saw had a raised center ridge on the tread, almost (but not quite)
> like the old Specialized tires from way back when. IOW, the tread is
> (or, at least, was) different than it is on the 622/700c versions. If
> that bothers you, avoid them.
>
I bought some of the 27" x 1 1/8" Paselas for a friend a few months ago.
They have the old style raised ridge in the center of the tread which
tends to make them roll from one side of the tread to the other.
Too bad because all of the other sizes of Paselas have the newer tread
design which is great.
700c x 25 Paselas ride and handle very similar to the old Clement
Paris-Roubaix 300g cotton sewups which were my all time favorite tires.
The Paselas have the same skippy, bouncy feel.
Chas.
|
| |
Date: 24 May 2007 20:40:09
From: Ozark Bicycle
Subject: Re: 650B movement is growing!
|
On May 24, 9:36 pm, Michael Press <rub...@pacbell.net > wrote:
> In article
> <1180057179.606913.195...@g4g2000hsf.googlegroups.com>,
> Ozark Bicycle <bicycleatel...@ozarkbicycleservice.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On May 24, 8:02 pm, Michael Press <rub...@pacbell.net> wrote:
> > > In article <QI-dnS8e8PNdXsjbnZ2dnUVZ_gadn...@comcast.com>,
> > > "* * Chas" <verktygj...@aol.spamski.com> wrote:
>
> > > > Today 26" and 700c (29") are the standards. You can find them from
> > > > 19mm/3/4" to well over 50mm/2" widths. It's hard to find good 27" tires in
> > > > most bike shops around the US and when you do locate them there's only a
> > > > choice of 1 or 2 styles or brands of tires.
>
> > > Serfas continues to offer good 630x32 (measured 28 mm) tires
> > > with an almost wholly slick tread.
>
> > > <URL:http://www.serfas.com/tires/STK-27.shtml>
>
> > > I whine until my LBS gets them in.
>
> > Any chance those are made in China by Cheng Shin?
>
> They have relief lettering that reads
> `Made in Taiwan'.
> What do you make of that?
>
I shouldhave asked "Any chance those are made in Taiwan by Cheng
Shin?".
At any rate, they look very similar to Cheng Shin, Taiwan made tires
sold under a variety of brands, including the Nashbar Primo name
(available with or without the "puncture resistant" layer, often for
as little as $7.) The Primos have a seemingly identical tread and the
"630 x 32" size measures 28mm. Hmmm.......
|
| | |
Date: 25 May 2007 06:09:26
From: Michael Press
Subject: Re: 650B movement is growing!
|
In article
<1180064409.473279.123270@u30g2000hsc.googlegroups.com >,
Ozark Bicycle <bicycleatelier@ozarkbicycleservice.com > wrote:
> On May 24, 9:36 pm, Michael Press <rub...@pacbell.net> wrote:
> > In article
> > <1180057179.606913.195...@g4g2000hsf.googlegroups.com>,
> > Ozark Bicycle <bicycleatel...@ozarkbicycleservice.com> wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > > On May 24, 8:02 pm, Michael Press <rub...@pacbell.net> wrote:
> > > > In article <QI-dnS8e8PNdXsjbnZ2dnUVZ_gadn...@comcast.com>,
> > > > "* * Chas" <verktygj...@aol.spamski.com> wrote:
> >
> > > > > Today 26" and 700c (29") are the standards. You can find them from
> > > > > 19mm/3/4" to well over 50mm/2" widths. It's hard to find good 27" tires in
> > > > > most bike shops around the US and when you do locate them there's only a
> > > > > choice of 1 or 2 styles or brands of tires.
> >
> > > > Serfas continues to offer good 630x32 (measured 28 mm) tires
> > > > with an almost wholly slick tread.
> >
> > > > <URL:http://www.serfas.com/tires/STK-27.shtml>
> >
> > > > I whine until my LBS gets them in.
> >
> > > Any chance those are made in China by Cheng Shin?
> >
> > They have relief lettering that reads
> > `Made in Taiwan'.
> > What do you make of that?
> >
>
> I shouldhave asked "Any chance those are made in Taiwan by Cheng
> Shin?".
>
> At any rate, they look very similar to Cheng Shin, Taiwan made tires
> sold under a variety of brands, including the Nashbar Primo name
> (available with or without the "puncture resistant" layer, often for
> as little as $7.) The Primos have a seemingly identical tread and the
> "630 x 32" size measures 28mm. Hmmm.......
Thanks for pointing this out to me.
--
Michael Press
|
| | | |
Date: 25 May 2007 07:16:19
From: Tom Nakashima
Subject: Re: 650B movement is growing!
|
Rock N' Road tires sold by Bruce Gordon 700 x 43c, you'll
probably need cantilever brakes and good clearance in the fork
and rear stay.
The quote:
"Best ride on any surface...except cactus." - A Satisfied Texan.
Link to the tire:
http://www.bgcycles.com/images/tires_image.jpg
The link to with info and to order:
http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://www.bgcycles.com/images/tires_image.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.bgcycles.com/access.html&h=304&w=288&sz=25&hl=en&start=1&um=1&tbnid=9Punat7zBQmLaM:&tbnh=116&tbnw=110&prev=/images%3Fq%3DRock%2BN%2527%2BRoad%2BTires%26svnum%3D10%26um%3D1%26hl%3Den
-tom
|
| |
Date: 24 May 2007 18:39:39
From: Ozark Bicycle
Subject: Re: 650B movement is growing!
|
On May 24, 8:02 pm, Michael Press <rub...@pacbell.net > wrote:
> In article <QI-dnS8e8PNdXsjbnZ2dnUVZ_gadn...@comcast.com>,
> "* * Chas" <verktygj...@aol.spamski.com> wrote:
>
> > Today 26" and 700c (29") are the standards. You can find them from
> > 19mm/3/4" to well over 50mm/2" widths. It's hard to find good 27" tires in
> > most bike shops around the US and when you do locate them there's only a
> > choice of 1 or 2 styles or brands of tires.
>
> Serfas continues to offer good 630x32 (measured 28 mm) tires
> with an almost wholly slick tread.
>
> <URL:http://www.serfas.com/tires/STK-27.shtml>
>
> I whine until my LBS gets them in.
>
> --
Any chance those are made in China by Cheng Shin?
|
| | |
Date: 25 May 2007 02:36:18
From: Michael Press
Subject: Re: 650B movement is growing!
|
In article
<1180057179.606913.195740@g4g2000hsf.googlegroups.com >,
Ozark Bicycle <bicycleatelier@ozarkbicycleservice.com > wrote:
> On May 24, 8:02 pm, Michael Press <rub...@pacbell.net> wrote:
> > In article <QI-dnS8e8PNdXsjbnZ2dnUVZ_gadn...@comcast.com>,
> > "* * Chas" <verktygj...@aol.spamski.com> wrote:
> >
> > > Today 26" and 700c (29") are the standards. You can find them from
> > > 19mm/3/4" to well over 50mm/2" widths. It's hard to find good 27" tires in
> > > most bike shops around the US and when you do locate them there's only a
> > > choice of 1 or 2 styles or brands of tires.
> >
> > Serfas continues to offer good 630x32 (measured 28 mm) tires
> > with an almost wholly slick tread.
> >
> > <URL:http://www.serfas.com/tires/STK-27.shtml>
> >
> > I whine until my LBS gets them in.
>
> Any chance those are made in China by Cheng Shin?
They have relief lettering that reads
`Made in Taiwan'.
What do you make of that?
--
Michael Press
|
| |
Date: 24 May 2007 18:05:52
From: datakoll@yahoo.com
Subject: Re: 650B movement is growing!
|
try?
http://www.cowkool.com/?gclid=COXhhcSPqIwCFSQNgQodwgzLKQ
|
| |
Date: 24 May 2007 16:33:46
From: Chalo
Subject: Re: 650B movement is growing!
|
Chas wrote:
>
> When you go to the male products section of the drugstore you can get
> "MAGNUM" size devices.
And what a good development that is! I remember the desperation of
trying to deploy one of those "Kimono" brand things in a pinch. Pinch
is about the right word for it, too. Maybe I should have brought some
snap ring pliers.
Chalo
|
| |
Date: 24 May 2007 11:24:38
From: Ozark Bicycle
Subject: Re: 650B movement is growing!
|
On May 24, 1:02 pm, "* * Chas" <verktygj...@aol.spamski.com > wrote:
> "Ozark Bicycle" <bicycleatel...@ozarkbicycleservice.com> wrote in message
>
> news:1179970457.282530.200330@p47g2000hsd.googlegroups.com...
>
>
>
>
>
> > On May 23, 5:57 pm, bfd <bfd...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > <snipped>
>
> > - on silly tire size fads -
>
> > > Further, Rivendell, one of the founders of the 650B movement, is
> > > coming out with its 650B Mt Bike - the Bombadil:
>
> > Of course they are; the Riv business plan has become "let's sell lotsa
> > different bikes to the same bunch of people". All-Rounder? Check!
> > Fixie? Check! Mixte? Check! Country Bike (whatever the **** that
> > means)? Check! 650B bike? Check! MTB? Check! "Be the most popular guy
> > on the RBW list, own all the Riv models!"
>
> Make sure that they come with cutesy-wootsy tiresy-wiresies.
Will Riv call the new MTB tire the "Wanker Spanker"?
>
> (And a Ted Kaczynski hoodie)
>
>
Made of woolen tweed with leather trim and brass buckles, of course.
Only $295 (MEMBER PRICE). Waxed canvas stuff sack sold seperately.
|
| |
Date: 24 May 2007 09:41:20
From: philcycles
Subject: Re: 650B movement is growing!
|
Tim McNamara wrote:
> 650B is not a new standard, it has been around for decades. Using an
> existing standard can hardly be considered "splintering" of the market.
>
> You might remember that there were once French standard sizes 700A, 700B
> and 700C having progressively fatter tires- the 700C standard width was
> about 39 mm and was considered a utility bike wheel. Similarly there
> was 650A, 650B and 650C again having progressively larger tire sizes.
>
> The 650B was settled on as the usual size rim and tire for touring
> bikes, porteur bikes and tandems. The reason was that many if not most
> paved French roads, especially in cities, were normally cobbled until
> the post-WWII reconstruction and the larger tire made this more
> comfortable. As roads improved with asphalt and or concrete pavement,
> smaller tires became more widely used.
>
> The 26" wheel mountain bike was supposed to be the savior of the bike
> industry and was to render 700C road bikes obsolete. But it too has
> problems. Knobby tires suck on the road. "Skinny" tires for MTB rims
> tend to be heavier that their 700C cousins with higher rolling
> resistance. The smaller diameter means that bumps and road surface
> irregularities are more jarring for the rider (hence dual suspension
> motorless motorcycles becoming the MTB norm). In a return to the
> defunct Bianchi models of 15 years ago, which used 700C rims and failed
> utterly in the marketplace, we now have "29ers" with wheels that are
> hard to design a frame around and tires that are astonishingly heavy.
> The 4" wide Endomorph tire on the Large Marge rims on the Surly Puglsey
> may be the logical culmination (I've ridden the Pugsley, it's actually a
> hoot but I wouldn't want to ride it all day). Well, one more step: the
> 36" wheel MTB which is being produced in southern Minnesota for a bike
> shop in Faribault. I believe this has become argumentum ad absurdum.
>
> Enter the 650B with an outer diameter only a few mm smaller than the au
> courant 700 x 23, with a larger air chamber and allowing bikes to be
> converted to have room for fenders and less toe overlap. There has been
> an organization in France promoting the 650B standard for many years,
> and interest in that size has spread to other countries including the US.
I did some editing to Tim's post but just as an aside there were, in
the early days of 1980 and 81, 650B mountain bikes before the 559
wheel took over. Also there were 20" mountain bikes built around BMX
wheels. Doug White in Fairfax and Victor Vincente in LA built them.
The experimentation of the early days is one of the saddest losses of
the onset of standards.
Phil Brown.
|
| |
Date: 24 May 2007 09:39:47
From: Ozark Bicycle
Subject: Re: 650B movement is growing!
|
On May 24, 11:14 am, "* * Chas" <verktygj...@aol.spamski.com > wrote:
> "A Muzi" <a...@yellowjersey.org> wrote in message
>
> news:135aafmj2ec4d48@corp.supernews.com...
>
>
>
>
>
> > >> bfd <bfd...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > >>>> Check it out, SOMA, a bicycle mfr (www.somafab.com) is very
> > >>>> "interested" in the 650B conversion by Ed Bradley:
> > >>>>http://www.flickr.com/photo_zoom.gne?id=496876397&size=o
> > -snip-
> > >>> Btw, some have stated that the Kirk Pacenti 650B mt bike was the
> > >>> biggest thing at this year's NAHMBS! Now, that's saying
> something...
>
> > > "Ozark Bicycle" <bicycleatel...@ozarkbicycleservice.com> wrote
> > >> .....something rather sad about the whole NAHMBS. If a mountain bike
> > >> with a weird wheel size (talk about a "solution in search of a
> > >> problem"!) is the biggest thing at the show, I guess there wasn't
> much
> > >> going on. Sad.
>
> > * * Chas wrote:
> > -snip-
> > > Now 29" (700c) is finally becoming popular in MTBs.
> > > The problem with folks who support eccentric equipment is that most of
> > > them never ran a retail or wholesale business and had to manage
> inventory.
> > > The LBS that has one of the best selections of tires keeps close to
> 100
> > > different varieties from 12" to sewups. That's a lot of money to keep
> tied
> > > up in inventory.
>
> > Only a hundred?
> > Dream on. 100 tire SKU's is _so_ 20th century.
>
> > --
> > Andrew Muzi
>
> I don't know how many tires..... they have a wall at least 50' long by 20'
> high with tires sitting upright in bins. 100 seemed like a defensible
> number. ;-)
>
> Back in the day we stocked 10-15 kinds of sewups and maybe 8-10 kinds of
> clinchers.
>
Those were the same days when there were 2-3 brands of potato chips,
and 3 kinds (regular, ridged and bar-b-q) in each brand. Now, they
take up a whole aisle!
We live in the age of too much....
To carry Chalo's comments further, "where are my 171.25 cranks? The
170s are too short and the 172.5s are too long."
|
| | |
Date: 24 May 2007 11:06:54
From: * * Chas
Subject: Re: 650B movement is growing!
|
"Ozark Bicycle" <bicycleatelier@ozarkbicycleservice.com > wrote in message
news:1180024787.759136.76440@p77g2000hsh.googlegroups.com...
> On May 24, 11:14 am, "* * Chas" <verktygj...@aol.spamski.com> wrote:
> > "A Muzi" <a...@yellowjersey.org> wrote in message
> >
> > news:135aafmj2ec4d48@corp.supernews.com...
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > > >> bfd <bfd...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > > >>>> Check it out, SOMA, a bicycle mfr (www.somafab.com) is very
> > > >>>> "interested" in the 650B conversion by Ed Bradley:
> > > >>>>http://www.flickr.com/photo_zoom.gne?id=496876397&size=o
> > > -snip-
> > > >>> Btw, some have stated that the Kirk Pacenti 650B mt bike was the
> > > >>> biggest thing at this year's NAHMBS! Now, that's saying
> > something...
> >
> > > > "Ozark Bicycle" <bicycleatel...@ozarkbicycleservice.com> wrote
> > > >> .....something rather sad about the whole NAHMBS. If a mountain
bike
> > > >> with a weird wheel size (talk about a "solution in search of a
> > > >> problem"!) is the biggest thing at the show, I guess there wasn't
> > much
> > > >> going on. Sad.
> >
> > > * * Chas wrote:
> > > -snip-
> > > > Now 29" (700c) is finally becoming popular in MTBs.
> > > > The problem with folks who support eccentric equipment is that
most of
> > > > them never ran a retail or wholesale business and had to manage
> > inventory.
> > > > The LBS that has one of the best selections of tires keeps close
to
> > 100
> > > > different varieties from 12" to sewups. That's a lot of money to
keep
> > tied
> > > > up in inventory.
> >
> > > Only a hundred?
> > > Dream on. 100 tire SKU's is _so_ 20th century.
> >
> > > --
> > > Andrew Muzi
> >
> > I don't know how many tires..... they have a wall at least 50' long by
20'
> > high with tires sitting upright in bins. 100 seemed like a defensible
> > number. ;-)
> >
> > Back in the day we stocked 10-15 kinds of sewups and maybe 8-10 kinds
of
> > clinchers.
> >
>
> Those were the same days when there were 2-3 brands of potato chips,
> and 3 kinds (regular, ridged and bar-b-q) in each brand. Now, they
> take up a whole aisle!
>
> We live in the age of too much....
>
> To carry Chalo's comments further, "where are my 171.25 cranks? The
> 170s are too short and the 172.5s are too long."
>
It's called "Feature Sprawl".
When you go to the male products section of the drugstore you can get
"MAGNUM" size devices.
Chas.
|
| |
Date: 24 May 2007 07:12:17
From: datakoll@yahoo.com
Subject: Re: 650B movement is growing!
|
OHNO! not longer lower wider
|
| |
Date: 24 May 2007 05:25:54
From: Ozark Bicycle
Subject: Re: 650B movement is growing!
|
On May 23, 11:11 pm, Pikachu <pika...@pokemon.org > wrote:
> In article <1179970457.282530.200...@p47g2000hsd.googlegroups.com>,
> Ozark Bicycle <bicycleatel...@ozarkbicycleservice.com> wrote:
>
> > Of course they are; the Riv business plan has become "let's sell lotsa
> > different bikes to the same bunch of people". All-Rounder? Check!
> > Fixie? Check! Mixte? Check! Country Bike (whatever the **** that
> > means)? Check! 650B bike? Check! MTB? Check! "Be the most popular guy
> > on the RBW list, own all the Riv models!"
>
> Wow, those are some fairly mean-spirited words. I've spoken to Grant
> before in person, and he came across as someone who just wants to get
> people riding comfortably on bikes. I am not defending his seemingly
> eccentric push for fairly odd ERD sizes, and I do agree the sizes we
> have now suit my purposes well; but I am not sure Grant/Rivendell
> deserves such sarcastic remarks.
>
> Let me ask you this: have you had a dialogue with Grant before?
Personally? No. But I'm neither an awe-struck, credulous bootlicker
nor an "easy sale"; I doubt he'd be interested.
> Would
> you say what you wrote to him personally?
Without a moments hesitation. What Rivendell was (or, at least,
alleged to be) at it's inception and what it has become are two *very*
different things.
> If not, why do it here?
>
> Not a Rivendell owner,
> Pikachu
|
| |
Date: 24 May 2007 01:21:57
From: Gary Young
Subject: Re: 650B movement is growing!
|
On Thu, 24 May 2007 00:00:33 -0500, Tim McNamara wrote:
> In article <MZudnfDa0tqNRMnbnZ2dnUVZ_hKdnZ2d@giganews.com>,
> Gary Young <garyyoung3@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Of course there's nothing magic about 26" wheels. If there was a wheel
>> size that was magic we wouldn't need standards because all producers
>> would gravitate to the magic size. Standards are almost always somewhat
>> arbitrary. That doesn't mean the standards are any less important for
>> keeping costs down and making the widest variety of rims and tires
>> available at retail stores. Granted, 650B is not a propriety standard,
>> but it's still a needless splintering of the market. It's needless
>> because I've never heard any cogent argument in its favor (with the
>> exception of using it to restore and make more comfortable old racing
>> bikes).
>
> 650B is not a new standard, it has been around for decades. Using an
> existing standard can hardly be considered "splintering" of the market.
As I understand it, 650B was dying even in France and was all but
nonexistent in this country. 27" wheels was once the standard for
non-racing road bikes in this country. But I consider it only a good thing
that that standard was abandoned in favor of more universal use of 700C.
If someone tried to revive 27" wheels, I would have the same objections I
have toward 650B. In short, I see no reason why revival of a dead standard
shouldn't be considered a splintering.
> You might remember that there were once French standard sizes 700A, 700B
> and 700C having progressively fatter tires- the 700C standard width was
> about 39 mm and was considered a utility bike wheel. Similarly there
> was 650A, 650B and 650C again having progressively larger tire sizes.
>
>
So? Are we destined to repeat the mistakes of the past?
> The 650B was settled on as the usual size rim and tire for touring
> bikes, porteur bikes and tandems.
In France.
> The reason was that many if not most
> paved French roads, especially in cities, were normally cobbled until
> the post-WWII reconstruction and the larger tire made this more
> comfortable. As roads improved with asphalt and or concrete pavement,
> smaller tires became more widely used.
>
> Eventually the 700 x 23 inflated to a bone-jarring 120 psi became the
> norm, as racing bikes became the generic model for bikes for non-racers.
> Heck, I had a well-known local builder look at my bike with 700 x 23
> tires and proclaim that I was riding fatties (compared to his 18 mm
> tubulars). But as road surfaces deteriorate in America, since far more
> money is spent on building new roads than repairing the ones that
> already exist, the 700 x 23 standard is less satisfactory for many
> people.
>
>
You're setting up a straw man. The standard is 700C and not 700x23. I own
two 700C road bikes that accept 32mm and 40mm tires. If road conditions
are deteriorating, then a better response would be to encourage the
manufacture of more wide-tired 700C bikes. I applaud Rivendell's past
efforts in that regard.
> The 26" wheel mountain bike was supposed to be the savior of the bike
> industry and was to render 700C road bikes obsolete. But it too has
> problems. Knobby tires suck on the road. "Skinny" tires for MTB rims
> tend to be heavier that their 700C cousins with higher rolling
> resistance.
Is it impossible to improve 26" road tires? Are 26" road tires necessarily
heavier than 700C (I would have thought just the opposite). I applaud
Rivendell's efforts to make more comfortable road tires and see no reason
it couldn't have done the same for 26" tires.
> The smaller diameter means that bumps and road surface irregularities
> are more jarring for the rider (hence dual suspension motorless
> motorcycles becoming the MTB norm).
Oh come on. I'm not a mountain biker, but I think it's more likely that
dual suspension became the norm because of off-road conditions.
> In a return to the
> defunct Bianchi models of 15 years ago, which used 700C rims and failed
> utterly in the marketplace, we now have "29ers" with wheels that are
> hard to design a frame around and tires that are astonishingly heavy.
Are they necessarily that heavy? I have to admit that I tend to look
favorably on the 29" trend because I have a substantial investment in 700C
wheels. If I were to start mountain biking, I would probably get a 29"
frame and use a couple of my touring wheels with wide rims. But it could
be that I would reconsider if I knew more about 29" tires. In any event,
it's to the favor of the 29" movement that they adopted a widespread rim
diameter.
> The 4" wide Endomorph tire on the Large Marge rims on the Surly Puglsey
> may be the logical culmination (I've ridden the Pugsley, it's actually a
> hoot but I wouldn't want to ride it all day).
It seems to me that the Pugsley sticks to a widespread standard to the
extent possible consistent with its very specialized purpose. Without
super-wide tires, it wouldn't be the Pugsley. By contrast, the purported
purposes of reviving the 650B standard could be achieved with the
standards we already have.
> Well, one more step: the
> 36" wheel MTB which is being produced in southern Minnesota for a bike
> shop in Faribault. I believe this has become argumentum ad absurdum.
>
I'm not familiar with that and if it were marketed as anything other than
a novelty or fit for a specialized purpose, then I would object. I'm
curious, though -- does the bike use existing unicycle rims and tires?
If this were pushed for widespread adoption, then I would agree that it
would be an argumentum ad absurdum. But it's not clear to me why you would
say so. Isn't more choice always better in your view?
> Enter the 650B with an outer diameter only a few mm smaller than the au
> courant 700 x 23, with a larger air chamber and allowing bikes to be
> converted to have room for fenders and less toe overlap.
As I said, I'm willing to compromise on the 650B standard to the extent it
makes it possible to make old bikes more comfortable -- that is, safely
ensconced in a small niche market.
> There has been
> an organization in France promoting the 650B standard for many years,
> and interest in that size has spread to other countries including the
> US.
>
The spread of a dumb idea doesn't make it any the less dumb.
> Now, it may not interest you. I don't own a 650B bike and find that my
> 700 x 25 road bike and my 26 x 1.25 All-Rounder suit my needs pretty
> well. But I know a number of people- locally and via the Internets- who
> ride 650B and love them. They find them to be a better compromise on
> pavement than 26 x 1.25 or 1.50 and a better compromise off-road than a
> 700 x 23 or even a 700 x 25 or 28.
How about a 700x32 or 700x35 or even wider? In any event, I would probably
be more sympathetic to the 650B movement if its fans could do a better job
of explaining what makes 650B wheels so great. The lameness of their
arguments suggest that they're kidding themselves.
> They take the sting out of the
> neglected roadway infrastructure and crumbling suburbanity- low taxes
> being considered more important than an intact public infrastructure,
> resulting in what one social critic called "private opulence and public
> squalor."
>
I doubt that's really the impetus behind the 650B movement. Even if it
were, see above about 700x35 tires.
> Now that doesn't mean that 650B is a good set of compromises for you.
> But IMHO it's good to have options- the point is to ride bike.
More options are not necessarily better -- that's why standards are so
important. More choices in one dimension -- more choices of proprietary or
oddball products -- can actually result in less choice in other, often
more important dimensions (e.g., being locked in to a single or a small
group of suppliers and higher prices). That's a message that Grant
Peterson used to preach back when he used to decry fads that tended to
push tried and true products out of the marketplace.
|
| | |
Date: 25 May 2007 00:09:20
From: Michael Press
Subject: Re: 650B movement is growing!
|
In article <t5SdnbaPA_GYssjbnZ2dnUVZ_szinZ2d@giganews.com >,
Gary Young <garyyoung3@gmail.com > wrote:
> How about a 700x32 or 700x35 or even wider? In any event, I would probably
> be more sympathetic to the 650B movement if its fans could do a better job
> of explaining what makes 650B wheels so great. The lameness of their
> arguments suggest that they're kidding themselves.
This is the only cogent argument I know. ISO 584 tires can be fit
into a frame that was built for ISO 622, leaving room in the forks
and stays for wider higher tires.
--
Michael Press
|
| | |
Date: 24 May 2007 09:57:52
From: Tim McNamara
Subject: Re: 650B movement is growing!
|
In article <t5SdnbaPA_GYssjbnZ2dnUVZ_szinZ2d@giganews.com >,
Gary Young <garyyoung3@gmail.com > wrote:
> On Thu, 24 May 2007 00:00:33 -0500, Tim McNamara wrote:
>
> > In article <MZudnfDa0tqNRMnbnZ2dnUVZ_hKdnZ2d@giganews.com>,
> > Gary Young <garyyoung3@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >> Of course there's nothing magic about 26" wheels. If there was a
> >> wheel size that was magic we wouldn't need standards because all
> >> producers would gravitate to the magic size. Standards are almost
> >> always somewhat arbitrary. That doesn't mean the standards are any
> >> less important for keeping costs down and making the widest
> >> variety of rims and tires available at retail stores. Granted,
> >> 650B is not a propriety standard, but it's still a needless
> >> splintering of the market. It's needless because I've never heard
> >> any cogent argument in its favor (with the exception of using it
> >> to restore and make more comfortable old racing bikes).
> >
> > 650B is not a new standard, it has been around for decades. Using
> > an existing standard can hardly be considered "splintering" of the
> > market.
>
> As I understand it, 650B was dying even in France and was all but
> nonexistent in this country. 27" wheels was once the standard for
> non-racing road bikes in this country. But I consider it only a good
> thing that that standard was abandoned in favor of more universal use
> of 700C. If someone tried to revive 27" wheels, I would have the same
> objections I have toward 650B. In short, I see no reason why revival
> of a dead standard shouldn't be considered a splintering.
700C is "universal" only in a few places: the US, Europe and Japan.
The 26" (ERTRO 559) has much better universality. Go to India or China,
which have the majority of bikes in the world, and 28" wheels are the
norm. ISTR Holland tends towards that wheel size as well.
> > You might remember that there were once French standard sizes 700A,
> > 700B and 700C having progressively fatter tires- the 700C standard
> > width was about 39 mm and was considered a utility bike wheel.
> > Similarly there was 650A, 650B and 650C again having progressively
> > larger tire sizes.
> >
> So? Are we destined to repeat the mistakes of the past?
>
> > The 650B was settled on as the usual size rim and tire for touring
> > bikes, porteur bikes and tandems.
>
> In France.
And other places. The English use that size as well, albeit by a
different name. Scandinavians have that size commonly available too, I
am told. We don't have it here because Arnold, Schwinn and Co. decided
to create proprietary standard for their products when they took
inspiration from the French to create the "balloon tire" marketing drive.
> > The reason was that many if not most paved French roads, especially
> > in cities, were normally cobbled until the post-WWII reconstruction
> > and the larger tire made this more comfortable. As roads improved
> > with asphalt and or concrete pavement, smaller tires became more
> > widely used.
> >
> > Eventually the 700 x 23 inflated to a bone-jarring 120 psi became
> > the norm, as racing bikes became the generic model for bikes for
> > non-racers. Heck, I had a well-known local builder look at my bike
> > with 700 x 23 tires and proclaim that I was riding fatties
> > (compared to his 18 mm tubulars). But as road surfaces deteriorate
> > in America, since far more money is spent on building new roads
> > than repairing the ones that already exist, the 700 x 23 standard
> > is less satisfactory for many people.
> >
> You're setting up a straw man. The standard is 700C and not 700x23. I
> own two 700C road bikes that accept 32mm and 40mm tires. If road
> conditions are deteriorating, then a better response would be to
> encourage the manufacture of more wide-tired 700C bikes. I applaud
> Rivendell's past efforts in that regard.
If you go to a bike shop and look at road bikes, you'll see that the
standard is 700 x 23. That's what virtually every road bikes comes with
and many if not most road bikes have clearances so tight that larger
tires are not feasible. I'm not setting up a straw man, I am observing
what is the de facto standard in the marketplace. 'Cross bikes and
hybrids offer clearance for larger tires but not road bikes.
"If" road conditions are deteriorating? In what rational place do you
live that they aren't? Around here the roads are falling apart- we can
pay billions of dollars for new highways and new subdivisions, but
taking care of existing roads is too expensive and not "growth
oriented." I am reminded of my mother refusing to let me have another
pet until I showed I could take care of the ones I already had- a lesson
Minnesota's politicians have not learned.
> > The 26" wheel mountain bike was supposed to be the savior of the
> > bike industry and was to render 700C road bikes obsolete. But it
> > too has problems. Knobby tires suck on the road. "Skinny" tires
> > for MTB rims tend to be heavier that their 700C cousins with higher
> > rolling resistance.
>
> Is it impossible to improve 26" road tires? Are 26" road tires
> necessarily heavier than 700C (I would have thought just the
> opposite). I applaud Rivendell's efforts to make more comfortable
> road tires and see no reason it couldn't have done the same for 26"
> tires.
Look at catalogs and such. 26" road tires should be lighter than 700C
tires, but usually they are 25-50% heavier. There are a few exceptions,
but in general bike tire makers seem to treat road-suitable 26" tires as
bastard stepchildren.
> > The smaller diameter means that bumps and road surface
> > irregularities are more jarring for the rider (hence dual
> > suspension motorless motorcycles becoming the MTB norm).
>
> Oh come on. I'm not a mountain biker, but I think it's more likely
> that dual suspension became the norm because of off-road conditions.
I see lots and lots of them being ridden on the street, even as obvious
commuting bikes that never see dirt. MTBs are liked SUVs- they look
like they could be used off-road but rarely are. However, the same
problems for small wheels apply off-road as well as on-road. Had the
"29er" standard been adopted from the beginning of MTBs, then there'd be
much less of a market for suspension.
> > In a return to the defunct Bianchi models of 15 years ago, which
> > used 700C rims and failed utterly in the marketplace, we now have
> > "29ers" with wheels that are hard to design a frame around and
> > tires that are astonishingly heavy.
>
> Are they necessarily that heavy? I have to admit that I tend to look
> favorably on the 29" trend because I have a substantial investment in
> 700C wheels. If I were to start mountain biking, I would probably get
> a 29" frame and use a couple of my touring wheels with wide rims. But
> it could be that I would reconsider if I knew more about 29" tires.
> In any event, it's to the favor of the 29" movement that they adopted
> a widespread rim diameter.
400-600 gr are weights I have seen quoted for these tires.
> > The 4" wide Endomorph tire on the Large Marge rims on the Surly
> > Puglsey may be the logical culmination (I've ridden the Pugsley,
> > it's actually a hoot but I wouldn't want to ride it all day).
>
> It seems to me that the Pugsley sticks to a widespread standard to
> the extent possible consistent with its very specialized purpose.
> Without super-wide tires, it wouldn't be the Pugsley. By contrast,
> the purported purposes of reviving the 650B standard could be
> achieved with the standards we already have.
>
> > Well, one more step: the 36" wheel MTB which is being produced in
> > southern Minnesota for a bike shop in Faribault. I believe this
> > has become argumentum ad absurdum.
>
> I'm not familiar with that and if it were marketed as anything other
> than a novelty or fit for a specialized purpose, then I would object.
> I'm curious, though -- does the bike use existing unicycle rims and
> tires?
Yes. And there has been so much demand that the frame builder is
swamped. Go figure.
> If this were pushed for widespread adoption, then I would agree that
> it would be an argumentum ad absurdum. But it's not clear to me why
> you would say so. Isn't more choice always better in your view?
Have you ever designed a frame? Wheel diameter rapidly becomes a
limiting factor that results in compromised fit and handling. The
larger the wheel diameter, the larger the frame size at which
interference from the wheels becomes a problem.
> > Enter the 650B with an outer diameter only a few mm smaller than
> > the au courant 700 x 23, with a larger air chamber and allowing
> > bikes to be converted to have room for fenders and less toe
> > overlap.
>
> As I said, I'm willing to compromise on the 650B standard to the
> extent it makes it possible to make old bikes more comfortable --
> that is, safely ensconced in a small niche market.
>
> > There has been an organization in France promoting the 650B
> > standard for many years, and interest in that size has spread to
> > other countries including the US.
>
> The spread of a dumb idea doesn't make it any the less dumb.
Your prejudice is showing. In fact your whole argument is circular and
comes back to this.
> > Now, it may not interest you. I don't own a 650B bike and find
> > that my 700 x 25 road bike and my 26 x 1.25 All-Rounder suit my
> > needs pretty well. But I know a number of people- locally and via
> > the Internets- who ride 650B and love them. They find them to be a
> > better compromise on pavement than 26 x 1.25 or 1.50 and a better
> > compromise off-road than a 700 x 23 or even a 700 x 25 or 28.
>
> How about a 700x32 or 700x35 or even wider? In any event, I would
> probably be more sympathetic to the 650B movement if its fans could
> do a better job of explaining what makes 650B wheels so great. The
> lameness of their arguments suggest that they're kidding themselves.
>
> > They take the sting out of the neglected roadway infrastructure and
> > crumbling suburbanity- low taxes being considered more important
> > than an intact public infrastructure, resulting in what one social
> > critic called "private opulence and public squalor."
>
> I doubt that's really the impetus behind the 650B movement. Even if
> it were, see above about 700x35 tires.
>
> > Now that doesn't mean that 650B is a good set of compromises for
> > you. But IMHO it's good to have options- the point is to ride bike.
>
> More options are not necessarily better -- that's why standards are
> so important. More choices in one dimension -- more choices of
> proprietary or oddball products -- can actually result in less choice
> in other, often more important dimensions (e.g., being locked in to a
> single or a small group of suppliers and higher prices). That's a
> message that Grant Peterson used to preach back when he used to decry
> fads that tended to push tried and true products out of the
> marketplace.
The difference here being that 650B is a tried and true standard. It's
just not one that was familiar in the US.
Ah well, it's ultimately moot. At the rate things are going, we'll all
be using whatever standard the Chinese want once they have replaced the
US as the dominant world economy.
|
| | | |
Date: 25 May 2007 22:22:40
From: A Muzi
Subject: Re: 650B movement is growing!
|
-snip 650B-
> Gary Young <garyyoung3@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> The 650B was settled on as the usual size rim and tire for touring
>>> bikes, porteur bikes and tandems.
>> In France.
Tim McNamara wrote:
> And other places. The English use that size as well, albeit by a
> different name. Scandinavians have that size commonly available too, I
> am told. We don't have it here because Arnold, Schwinn and Co. decided
> to create proprietary standard for their products when they took
> inspiration from the French to create the "balloon tire" marketing drive.
Schwinn's 584mm "26x1-3/4" is also a 584mm "650B"
The formerly standard British touring size EA1 597mm became the odd man
out when most majors, except Schwinn, moved to EA3 590mm for 'sports'
models. I believe that's what you were thinking about.
--
Andrew Muzi
www.yellowjersey.org
Open every day since 1 April, 1971
|
| | | |
Date: 24 May 2007 10:49:38
From: * * Chas
Subject: Re: 650B movement is growing!
|
"Tim McNamara" <timmcn@bitstream.net > wrote in message
news:timmcn-3BA860.09575224052007@news.iphouse.com...
> In article <t5SdnbaPA_GYssjbnZ2dnUVZ_szinZ2d@giganews.com>,
> Gary Young <garyyoung3@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On Thu, 24 May 2007 00:00:33 -0500, Tim McNamara wrote:
> >
> > > In article <MZudnfDa0tqNRMnbnZ2dnUVZ_hKdnZ2d@giganews.com>,
> > > Gary Young <garyyoung3@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > >> Of course there's nothing magic about 26" wheels. If there was a
> > >> wheel size that was magic we wouldn't need standards because all
> > >> producers would gravitate to the magic size. Standards are almost
> > >> always somewhat arbitrary. That doesn't mean the standards are any
> > >> less important for keeping costs down and making the widest
> > >> variety of rims and tires available at retail stores. Granted,
> > >> 650B is not a propriety standard, but it's still a needless
> > >> splintering of the market. It's needless because I've never heard
> > >> any cogent argument in its favor (with the exception of using it
> > >> to restore and make more comfortable old racing bikes).
> > >
> > > 650B is not a new standard, it has been around for decades. Using
> > > an existing standard can hardly be considered "splintering" of the
> > > market.
> >
> > As I understand it, 650B was dying even in France and was all but
> > nonexistent in this country. 27" wheels was once the standard for
> > non-racing road bikes in this country. But I consider it only a good
> > thing that that standard was abandoned in favor of more universal use
> > of 700C. If someone tried to revive 27" wheels, I would have the same
> > objections I have toward 650B. In short, I see no reason why revival
> > of a dead standard shouldn't be considered a splintering.
>
> 700C is "universal" only in a few places: the US, Europe and Japan.
> The 26" (ERTRO 559) has much better universality. Go to India or China,
> which have the majority of bikes in the world, and 28" wheels are the
> norm. ISTR Holland tends towards that wheel size as well.
>
> > > You might remember that there were once French standard sizes 700A,
> > > 700B and 700C having progressively fatter tires- the 700C standard
> > > width was about 39 mm and was considered a utility bike wheel.
> > > Similarly there was 650A, 650B and 650C again having progressively
> > > larger tire sizes.
> > >
> > So? Are we destined to repeat the mistakes of the past?
> >
> > > The 650B was settled on as the usual size rim and tire for touring
> > > bikes, porteur bikes and tandems.
> >
> > In France.
>
> And other places. The English use that size as well, albeit by a
> different name. Scandinavians have that size commonly available too, I
> am told. We don't have it here because Arnold, Schwinn and Co. decided
> to create proprietary standard for their products when they took
> inspiration from the French to create the "balloon tire" marketing
drive.
>
> > > The reason was that many if not most paved French roads, especially
> > > in cities, were normally cobbled until the post-WWII reconstruction
> > > and the larger tire made this more comfortable. As roads improved
> > > with asphalt and or concrete pavement, smaller tires became more
> > > widely used.
> > >
> > > Eventually the 700 x 23 inflated to a bone-jarring 120 psi became
> > > the norm, as racing bikes became the generic model for bikes for
> > > non-racers. Heck, I had a well-known local builder look at my bike
> > > with 700 x 23 tires and proclaim that I was riding fatties
> > > (compared to his 18 mm tubulars). But as road surfaces deteriorate
> > > in America, since far more money is spent on building new roads
> > > than repairing the ones that already exist, the 700 x 23 standard
> > > is less satisfactory for many people.
> > >
> > You're setting up a straw man. The standard is 700C and not 700x23. I
> > own two 700C road bikes that accept 32mm and 40mm tires. If road
> > conditions are deteriorating, then a better response would be to
> > encourage the manufacture of more wide-tired 700C bikes. I applaud
> > Rivendell's past efforts in that regard.
>
> If you go to a bike shop and look at road bikes, you'll see that the
> standard is 700 x 23. That's what virtually every road bikes comes with
> and many if not most road bikes have clearances so tight that larger
> tires are not feasible. I'm not setting up a straw man, I am observing
> what is the de facto standard in the marketplace. 'Cross bikes and
> hybrids offer clearance for larger tires but not road bikes.
>
> "If" road conditions are deteriorating? In what rational place do you
> live that they aren't? Around here the roads are falling apart- we can
> pay billions of dollars for new highways and new subdivisions, but
> taking care of existing roads is too expensive and not "growth
> oriented." I am reminded of my mother refusing to let me have another
> pet until I showed I could take care of the ones I already had- a lesson
> Minnesota's politicians have not learned.
>
> > > The 26" wheel mountain bike was supposed to be the savior of the
> > > bike industry and was to render 700C road bikes obsolete. But it
> > > too has problems. Knobby tires suck on the road. "Skinny" tires
> > > for MTB rims tend to be heavier that their 700C cousins with higher
> > > rolling resistance.
> >
> > Is it impossible to improve 26" road tires? Are 26" road tires
> > necessarily heavier than 700C (I would have thought just the
> > opposite). I applaud Rivendell's efforts to make more comfortable
> > road tires and see no reason it couldn't have done the same for 26"
> > tires.
>
> Look at catalogs and such. 26" road tires should be lighter than 700C
> tires, but usually they are 25-50% heavier. There are a few exceptions,
> but in general bike tire makers seem to treat road-suitable 26" tires as
> bastard stepchildren.
>
> > > The smaller diameter means that bumps and road surface
> > > irregularities are more jarring for the rider (hence dual
> > > suspension motorless motorcycles becoming the MTB norm).
> >
> > Oh come on. I'm not a mountain biker, but I think it's more likely
> > that dual suspension became the norm because of off-road conditions.
>
> I see lots and lots of them being ridden on the street, even as obvious
> commuting bikes that never see dirt. MTBs are liked SUVs- they look
> like they could be used off-road but rarely are. However, the same
> problems for small wheels apply off-road as well as on-road. Had the
> "29er" standard been adopted from the beginning of MTBs, then there'd be
> much less of a market for suspension.
>
> > > In a return to the defunct Bianchi models of 15 years ago, which
> > > used 700C rims and failed utterly in the marketplace, we now have
> > > "29ers" with wheels that are hard to design a frame around and
> > > tires that are astonishingly heavy.
> >
> > Are they necessarily that heavy? I have to admit that I tend to look
> > favorably on the 29" trend because I have a substantial investment in
> > 700C wheels. If I were to start mountain biking, I would probably get
> > a 29" frame and use a couple of my touring wheels with wide rims. But
> > it could be that I would reconsider if I knew more about 29" tires.
> > In any event, it's to the favor of the 29" movement that they adopted
> > a widespread rim diameter.
>
> 400-600 gr are weights I have seen quoted for these tires.
>
> > > The 4" wide Endomorph tire on the Large Marge rims on the Surly
> > > Puglsey may be the logical culmination (I've ridden the Pugsley,
> > > it's actually a hoot but I wouldn't want to ride it all day).
> >
> > It seems to me that the Pugsley sticks to a widespread standard to
> > the extent possible consistent with its very specialized purpose.
> > Without super-wide tires, it wouldn't be the Pugsley. By contrast,
> > the purported purposes of reviving the 650B standard could be
> > achieved with the standards we already have.
> >
> > > Well, one more step: the 36" wheel MTB which is being produced in
> > > southern Minnesota for a bike shop in Faribault. I believe this
> > > has become argumentum ad absurdum.
> >
> > I'm not familiar with that and if it were marketed as anything other
> > than a novelty or fit for a specialized purpose, then I would object.
> > I'm curious, though -- does the bike use existing unicycle rims and
> > tires?
>
> Yes. And there has been so much demand that the frame builder is
> swamped. Go figure.
>
> > If this were pushed for widespread adoption, then I would agree that
> > it would be an argumentum ad absurdum. But it's not clear to me why
> > you would say so. Isn't more choice always better in your view?
>
> Have you ever designed a frame? Wheel diameter rapidly becomes a
> limiting factor that results in compromised fit and handling. The
> larger the wheel diameter, the larger the frame size at which
> interference from the wheels becomes a problem.
>
> > > Enter the 650B with an outer diameter only a few mm smaller than
> > > the au courant 700 x 23, with a larger air chamber and allowing
> > > bikes to be converted to have room for fenders and less toe
> > > overlap.
> >
> > As I said, I'm willing to compromise on the 650B standard to the
> > extent it makes it possible to make old bikes more comfortable --
> > that is, safely ensconced in a small niche market.
> >
> > > There has been an organization in France promoting the 650B
> > > standard for many years, and interest in that size has spread to
> > > other countries including the US.
> >
> > The spread of a dumb idea doesn't make it any the less dumb.
>
> Your prejudice is showing. In fact your whole argument is circular and
> comes back to this.
>
> > > Now, it may not interest you. I don't own a 650B bike and find
> > > that my 700 x 25 road bike and my 26 x 1.25 All-Rounder suit my
> > > needs pretty well. But I know a number of people- locally and via
> > > the Internets- who ride 650B and love them. They find them to be a
> > > better compromise on pavement than 26 x 1.25 or 1.50 and a better
> > > compromise off-road than a 700 x 23 or even a 700 x 25 or 28.
> >
> > How about a 700x32 or 700x35 or even wider? In any event, I would
> > probably be more sympathetic to the 650B movement if its fans could
> > do a better job of explaining what makes 650B wheels so great. The
> > lameness of their arguments suggest that they're kidding themselves.
> >
> > > They take the sting out of the neglected roadway infrastructure and
> > > crumbling suburbanity- low taxes being considered more important
> > > than an intact public infrastructure, resulting in what one social
> > > critic called "private opulence and public squalor."
> >
> > I doubt that's really the impetus behind the 650B movement. Even if
> > it were, see above about 700x35 tires.
> >
> > > Now that doesn't mean that 650B is a good set of compromises for
> > > you. But IMHO it's good to have options- the point is to ride bike.
> >
> > More options are not necessarily better -- that's why standards are
> > so important. More choices in one dimension -- more choices of
> > proprietary or oddball products -- can actually result in less choice
> > in other, often more important dimensions (e.g., being locked in to a
> > single or a small group of suppliers and higher prices). That's a
> > message that Grant Peterson used to preach back when he used to decry
> > fads that tended to push tried and true products out of the
> > marketplace.
>
> The difference here being that 650B is a tried and true standard. It's
> just not one that was familiar in the US.
>
> Ah well, it's ultimately moot. At the rate things are going, we'll all
> be using whatever standard the Chinese want once they have replaced the
> US as the dominant world economy.
It's not once, it's now! (dominant world economy)
I visit LBSs all up and down the left coast and other parts of the
country. The new road bikes that I've seen have every size tire from 700c
x 20 to 700c x 28 tires. I'm talking about the average bike sold to
joeblow customer not the $4000+ carbon fiber models.
I started riding off road with 700c sized wheels on modified road bikes in
1976. I originally used both cyclocross sewups and 700c x 32 or 700c x 35
tires. In the early 1990s larger 700c tires became available and I still
have some 700c x 41 non knobby tires and 700c x 47 knobbies.
Last year I bought a 1987 vintage Colnago MTB with a Shimano Deore grupo
in almost new condition. I have several sets of 26" "road" wheels for it.
Panaracer makes some nice lightweight Pasela road tires in 26" x 1.25",
1.5" and 1.75" sizes.
After riding off road on 700c wheels for 30 years, the 26" wheels feel
weird. They are not as stable as the larger wheel plus the Colnago handles
like a criterium bike.
People with shorter stature have problems finding bikes that fits them. We
had some 48cm bikes and frames built for our shop that used 700c wheels
and had a 28" standover height.
The crowns were modified for shorter fork length and they used cantilever
brakes. We used 65mm or 70mm stems, 160mm TA cranks, short toeclips and
short reach brake levers from Mafac, Weinman or CLB.
Many small framed bikes are built with long fork rakes or relaxed head
tube angles. They feel like steering a wheel barrow. these bikes handled
very well.
There are more than enough varieties and sizes of tires to last for the
cycling needs of the next 10-20 years. Let 650b die a vainglorious death.
Chas.
|
| | | | |
Date: 24 May 2007 17:26:01
From: Tim McNamara
Subject: Re: 650B movement is growing!
|
In article <ndGdnZTRcYFOUsjbnZ2dnUVZ_rKvnZ2d@comcast.com >,
"* * Chas" <verktygjunk@aol.spamski.com > wrote:
> It's not once, it's now! (dominant world economy)
Re: China. Not quite yet, but within my lifetime. I really thought
that India would come up first to pass us by and then China, but India
has stagnated and China has not.
> I visit LBSs all up and down the left coast and other parts of the
> country. The new road bikes that I've seen have every size tire from
> 700c x 20 to 700c x 28 tires. I'm talking about the average bike sold
> to joeblow customer not the $4000+ carbon fiber models.
The LBS I go to is owned by a guy who thinks that 700 x 32 is a skinny
tire. He likes 700 x 50s.
> I started riding off road with 700c sized wheels on modified road
> bikes in 1976. I originally used both cyclocross sewups and 700c x 32
> or 700c x 35 tires. In the early 1990s larger 700c tires became
> available and I still have some 700c x 41 non knobby tires and 700c x
> 47 knobbies.
>
> Last year I bought a 1987 vintage Colnago MTB with a Shimano Deore
> grupo in almost new condition. I have several sets of 26" "road"
> wheels for it. Panaracer makes some nice lightweight Pasela road
> tires in 26" x 1.25", 1.5" and 1.75" sizes.
I have just switched my 26" bike (a Rivendell All-Rounder) to the
Paselas and have been very pleased with them. I think they are the best
readily available 26 x 1.25 tire. I have some 700 x 25 Paselas and have
liked them, too. Wish they were slicks, but you can't have everything.
> After riding off road on 700c wheels for 30 years, the 26" wheels
> feel weird. They are not as stable as the larger wheel plus the
> Colnago handles like a criterium bike.
>
> People with shorter stature have problems finding bikes that fits
> them. We had some 48cm bikes and frames built for our shop that used
> 700c wheels and had a 28" standover height.
That is one of the problems with large wheels. 700C is really just the
largest wheel that will conveniently fit in a bike designed for an
average height man. But it makes bikes hard to design without
significant compromises in fit and handling under about a 56 cm frame
size.
> The crowns were modified for shorter fork length and they used
> cantilever brakes. We used 65mm or 70mm stems, 160mm TA cranks, short
> toeclips and short reach brake levers from Mafac, Weinman or CLB.
>
> Many small framed bikes are built with long fork rakes or relaxed
> head tube angles. They feel like steering a wheel barrow. these bikes
> handled very well.
Yup. Trying to reduce toe clip overlap to something manageable with a
700C wheel creates exactly that- a shallow head angle and large fork
offset with all the attendant handling issues.
> There are more than enough varieties and sizes of tires to last for
> the cycling needs of the next 10-20 years. Let 650b die a
> vainglorious death.
Except that its use can address some of those exact problems, as well as
retrofitting to old road bikes and reviving them for new uses. You can
get a 38-40 mm wide tire on a bike designed for a 700 x 25 or 28
maximum, and maybe even add room for fenders.
That said, I think that the adoption of 650B is lower than its fans
would like to think that it is.
|
| | | | | |
Date: 24 May 2007 17:07:25
From: * * Chas
Subject: Re: 650B movement is growing!
|
"Tim McNamara" <timmcn@bitstream.net > wrote in message
news:timmcn-BAD2AA.17260124052007@news.iphouse.com...
> In article <ndGdnZTRcYFOUsjbnZ2dnUVZ_rKvnZ2d@comcast.com>,
> "* * Chas" <verktygjunk@aol.spamski.com> wrote:
>
> > It's not once, it's now! (dominant world economy)
>
> Re: China. Not quite yet, but within my lifetime. I really thought
> that India would come up first to pass us by and then China, but India
> has stagnated and China has not.
>
> > I visit LBSs all up and down the left coast and other parts of the
> > country. The new road bikes that I've seen have every size tire from
> > 700c x 20 to 700c x 28 tires. I'm talking about the average bike sold
> > to joeblow customer not the $4000+ carbon fiber models.
>
> The LBS I go to is owned by a guy who thinks that 700 x 32 is a skinny
> tire. He likes 700 x 50s.
>
> > I started riding off road with 700c sized wheels on modified road
> > bikes in 1976. I originally used both cyclocross sewups and 700c x 32
> > or 700c x 35 tires. In the early 1990s larger 700c tires became
> > available and I still have some 700c x 41 non knobby tires and 700c x
> > 47 knobbies.
> >
> > Last year I bought a 1987 vintage Colnago MTB with a Shimano Deore
> > grupo in almost new condition. I have several sets of 26" "road"
> > wheels for it. Panaracer makes some nice lightweight Pasela road
> > tires in 26" x 1.25", 1.5" and 1.75" sizes.
>
> I have just switched my 26" bike (a Rivendell All-Rounder) to the
> Paselas and have been very pleased with them. I think they are the best
> readily available 26 x 1.25 tire. I have some 700 x 25 Paselas and have
> liked them, too. Wish they were slicks, but you can't have everything.
>
> > After riding off road on 700c wheels for 30 years, the 26" wheels
> > feel weird. They are not as stable as the larger wheel plus the
> > Colnago handles like a criterium bike.
> >
> > People with shorter stature have problems finding bikes that fits
> > them. We had some 48cm bikes and frames built for our shop that used
> > 700c wheels and had a 28" standover height.
>
> That is one of the problems with large wheels. 700C is really just the
> largest wheel that will conveniently fit in a bike designed for an
> average height man. But it makes bikes hard to design without
> significant compromises in fit and handling under about a 56 cm frame
> size.
>
> > The crowns were modified for shorter fork length and they used
> > cantilever brakes. We used 65mm or 70mm stems, 160mm TA cranks, short
> > toeclips and short reach brake levers from Mafac, Weinman or CLB.
> >
> > Many small framed bikes are built with long fork rakes or relaxed
> > head tube angles. They feel like steering a wheel barrow. these bikes
> > handled very well.
>
> Yup. Trying to reduce toe clip overlap to something manageable with a
> 700C wheel creates exactly that- a shallow head angle and large fork
> offset with all the attendant handling issues.
>
> > There are more than enough varieties and sizes of tires to last for
> > the cycling needs of the next 10-20 years. Let 650b die a
> > vainglorious death.
>
> Except that its use can address some of those exact problems, as well as
> retrofitting to old road bikes and reviving them for new uses. You can
> get a 38-40 mm wide tire on a bike designed for a 700 x 25 or 28
> maximum, and maybe even add room for fenders.
>
> That said, I think that the adoption of 650B is lower than its fans
> would like to think that it is.
A 650b x 38-40 is about the same overall diameter as a 700c x 25. Pedal
overlap is the same...
Chas.
|
| |
Date: 24 May 2007 00:24:27
From: Gary Young
Subject: Re: 650B movement is growing!
|
On Wed, 23 May 2007 21:11:18 -0700, Pikachu wrote:
> In article <1179970457.282530.200330@p47g2000hsd.googlegroups.com>,
> Ozark Bicycle <bicycleatelier@ozarkbicycleservice.com> wrote:
>
>> Of course they are; the Riv business plan has become "let's sell lotsa
>> different bikes to the same bunch of people". All-Rounder? Check!
>> Fixie? Check! Mixte? Check! Country Bike (whatever the **** that
>> means)? Check! 650B bike? Check! MTB? Check! "Be the most popular guy
>> on the RBW list, own all the Riv models!"
>
> Wow, those are some fairly mean-spirited words. I've spoken to Grant
> before in person, and he came across as someone who just wants to get
> people riding comfortably on bikes. I am not defending his seemingly
> eccentric push for fairly odd ERD sizes, and I do agree the sizes we
> have now suit my purposes well; but I am not sure Grant/Rivendell
> deserves such sarcastic remarks.
Sarcasm aside, there's a lot of truth to what Ozark says. It's pretty
tough to be an occasional customer of Rivendell. The on-line catalog seems
always to be out of date. News about new products seem to be transmitted
through the Rivendell Reader, the printed catalog, and buzz on listserves
frequented by dedicated fans. There have been a number of times when I've
wanted a product that I knew Rivendell had carried at one time, only to
find that it was no longer in the catalog or out of stock (to a greater
extent than with other retailers).
What often seems to happen is that Rivendell produces a new product and it
is snapped up by dedicated fans very quickly. I suspect that the reason
Rivendell has trouble keeping inventory is that it doesn't have the
financial resources to ensure a steady stream of goods, particularly the
products custom made for Rivendell, which no doubt have to be bought in
large batches.
Given Rivendell's size, I really can't fault it for playing to its
strength and aiming its marketing at dedicated fans. Furthermore, the fact
that Rivendell has negotiated deals with QBP for distribution of its
products (e.g., frames and tires) suggests that it is interested in
marketing beyond its core fans.
In short, I agree with Ozark about Rivendell's business plan, but believe
it's more a matter of necessity than of choice. Furthermore, if you visit
some of the fan sites, you will find lots of people who do seem to buy
everything that comes down the pike and I wouldn't object to some sarcasm
directed at them.
>
> Let me ask you this: have you had a dialogue with Grant before? Would
> you say what you wrote to him personally? If not, why do it here?
>
> Not a Rivendell owner,
> Pikachu
|
| | |
Date: 24 May 2007 12:51:28
From: Tim McNamara
Subject: Re: 650B movement is growing!
|
In article <t5SdnbePA_EWvMjbnZ2dnUVZ_szinZ2d@giganews.com >,
Gary Young <garyyoung3@gmail.com > wrote:
> On Wed, 23 May 2007 21:11:18 -0700, Pikachu wrote:
>
> > In article <1179970457.282530.200330@p47g2000hsd.googlegroups.com>,
> > Ozark Bicycle <bicycleatelier@ozarkbicycleservice.com> wrote:
> >
> >> Of course they are; the Riv business plan has become "let's sell
> >> lotsa different bikes to the same bunch of people". All-Rounder?
> >> Check! Fixie? Check! Mixte? Check! Country Bike (whatever the ****
> >> that means)? Check! 650B bike? Check! MTB? Check! "Be the most
> >> popular guy on the RBW list, own all the Riv models!"
> >
> > Wow, those are some fairly mean-spirited words. I've spoken to
> > Grant before in person, and he came across as someone who just
> > wants to get people riding comfortably on bikes. I am not
> > defending his seemingly eccentric push for fairly odd ERD sizes,
> > and I do agree the sizes we have now suit my purposes well; but I
> > am not sure Grant/Rivendell deserves such sarcastic remarks.
>
> Sarcasm aside, there's a lot of truth to what Ozark says. It's pretty
> tough to be an occasional customer of Rivendell. The on-line catalog
> seems always to be out of date. News about new products seem to be
> transmitted through the Rivendell Reader, the printed catalog, and
> buzz on listserves frequented by dedicated fans. There have been a
> number of times when I've wanted a product that I knew Rivendell had
> carried at one time, only to find that it was no longer in the
> catalog or out of stock (to a greater extent than with other
> retailers).
The Web site is supposed to be up-to-date now after an extensive
overhaul. I don't know if it really is up-to-date or not, though. I
think Grant is not entirely comfortable with the Web site approach to
selling things. This is a problem given that the paper catalog comes
out twice a year if that and the Reader comes out two or three times a
year. The RBW listserv is gone at Rivendell's request, there is a
Google Groups list going instead. The iBOB list is still going but it
is not specifically Rivendell-centric.
> What often seems to happen is that Rivendell produces a new product
> and it is snapped up by dedicated fans very quickly. I suspect that
> the reason Rivendell has trouble keeping inventory is that it doesn't
> have the financial resources to ensure a steady stream of goods,
> particularly the products custom made for Rivendell, which no doubt
> have to be bought in large batches.
I think that is exactly right, plus it's suppliers tend to be artisanal
type places in Japan and elsewhere: Nitto, Toyo, Duluth Pack, etc.
> Given Rivendell's size, I really can't fault it for playing to its
> strength and aiming its marketing at dedicated fans. Furthermore, the
> fact that Rivendell has negotiated deals with QBP for distribution of
> its products (e.g., frames and tires) suggests that it is interested
> in marketing beyond its core fans.
>
> In short, I agree with Ozark about Rivendell's business plan, but
> believe it's more a matter of necessity than of choice. Furthermore,
> if you visit some of the fan sites, you will find lots of people who
> do seem to buy everything that comes down the pike and I wouldn't
> object to some sarcasm directed at them.
Yes, there are people who belong to the Church of Rivendell, to be sure.
And there are people who use Rivendell's stuff because it suits their
needs and preferences well. I get along better with the latter group.
But then there are people who belong to the Church of Lance and buy
replica Treks and all the clothes and stuff. There are people who
belong to the Church of Carbon Fiber. That's just as silly but tends to
get less hassle here because it's seen as progressive rather than retro.
|
| |
Date: 23 May 2007 21:33:23
From: Chalo
Subject: Re: 650B movement is growing!
|
G.T. wrote:
>
> YATS? Excuse me while I fall asleep at this news. A 650b mtn bike? BFD.
> 700c mtn bikes are already established, unfortunately, why do we need Yet
> Another Tire Size inbetween 26" and 700c?
It's for all the folks who can't get through a day without their
172.5mm cranks, of course. If this one takes root, you can count on
somebody thinking it would be a good idea to make a new MTB tire in
ISO 571, or ISO 597. Perhaps we'll see a revival of GT's late,
unlamented 700D size.
The people who do these things either need to lay off the drugs, or
increase their dosage until these unwanted side effects go away.
Chalo
|
| |
Date: 23 May 2007 20:41:27
From: Mark
Subject: Re: 650B movement is growing!
|
bfd wrote:
> In fact, some have stated that SOMA and other mfrs are now
> "influenced" by the 650B movement and some new 650B goodies are
> coming. Keep your eyes OPEN@!#$%
I always thought it would be nice to retire to a place whose street
address was "650B Randonneur Way"
Mark J.
|
| |
Date: 23 May 2007 19:13:30
From: datakoll@yahoo.com
Subject: Re: 650B movement is growing!
|
>
> IMO, a "small time" fad. It will all be forgotten in ~5 years.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
(&^&$%!!!$$$#)
there's a second bike shop intown...the 650B shop
walmart? or vecchios of the sidebar?
local noise whines about CG or CG choices
does 650B offer a different CG than 26"?
|
| |
Date: 23 May 2007 19:01:55
From: Ozark Bicycle
Subject: Re: 650B movement is growing!
|
On May 23, 8:08 pm, "Bellsouth Ijit 2.0 - Hayfever Edition =AE"
<b...@bellsouth.net > wrote:
> "bfd" <bfd...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>
> news:1179957987.891797.176200@q66g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...
>
>
>
>
>
> > Check it out, SOMA, a bicycle mfr (www.somafab.com) is very
> > "interested" in the 650B conversion by Ed Bradley:
>
> >http://www.flickr.com/photo_zoom.gne?id=3D496876397&size=3Do
>
> > In fact, some have stated that SOMA and other mfrs are now
> > "influenced" by the 650B movement and some new 650B goodies are
> > coming. Keep your eyes OPEN@!#$%
>
> > Another biggie - the Kirk Pacenti's 650B mt bike:
>
> >http://www.frameforum.net/forum2/index.php?showtopic=3D3034
>
> >http://www.singletrackworld.com/article.php?sid=3D2349
>
> >http://www.smugmug.com/keyword/all/pacenti#133877457
>
> > Get ready, its coming! What's not to like?!!!
>
> Is this a "movement" or a fad?
IMO, a "small time" fad. It will all be forgotten in ~5 years.
|
| |
Date: 23 May 2007 18:41:19
From: Ozark Bicycle
Subject: Re: 650B movement is growing!
|
On May 23, 6:28 pm, "datak...@yahoo.com" <datak...@yahoo.com > wrote:
> > Now, it seems like things have continued to evolve to the point where
> > it
> > makes sense to try some 650B knobbies on some well-designed bikes and
> > get
> > some real-world feedback. I don't think it makes too much sense to
> > decide
> > it won't work without that."
>
> > Further,
>
> Further, let's consolidate here and get knobbies on 700c with wider
> rims and BB
> what the arguement against 700ck and then for 650bk?
gRant sez they're cool! 26" and 700c is so.....so mainstream, so
common, so easy to find. Doncha wanna be special?
> more great american bicycle industrialist know how?
> aerodynamics at 16 mph? a cross section threshold there like flat
> earth?
> too many midgets and dwarfs running around in california?
> did you miss your meds this morning?
> do you own drivendwell stock?
> is that feedback?
> you and drivendwell want a monopoly in excluesievity for less material
> costs at higher prices?
> is this a frame fits into your beem cooper?
|
| |
Date: 23 May 2007 18:34:17
From: Ozark Bicycle
Subject: Re: 650B movement is growing!
|
On May 23, 5:57 pm, bfd <bfd...@yahoo.com > wrote:
<snipped >
- on silly tire size fads -
>
> Further, Rivendell, one of the founders of the 650B movement, is
> coming out with its 650B Mt Bike - the Bombadil:
>
Of course they are; the Riv business plan has become "let's sell lotsa
different bikes to the same bunch of people". All-Rounder? Check!
Fixie? Check! Mixte? Check! Country Bike (whatever the **** that
means)? Check! 650B bike? Check! MTB? Check! "Be the most popular guy
on the RBW list, own all the Riv models!"
|
| | |
Date: 24 May 2007 11:02:22
From: * * Chas
Subject: Re: 650B movement is growing!
|
"Ozark Bicycle" <bicycleatelier@ozarkbicycleservice.com > wrote in message
news:1179970457.282530.200330@p47g2000hsd.googlegroups.com...
> On May 23, 5:57 pm, bfd <bfd...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> <snipped>
>
> - on silly tire size fads -
> >
> > Further, Rivendell, one of the founders of the 650B movement, is
> > coming out with its 650B Mt Bike - the Bombadil:
> >
>
> Of course they are; the Riv business plan has become "let's sell lotsa
> different bikes to the same bunch of people". All-Rounder? Check!
> Fixie? Check! Mixte? Check! Country Bike (whatever the **** that
> means)? Check! 650B bike? Check! MTB? Check! "Be the most popular guy
> on the RBW list, own all the Riv models!"
>
Make sure that they come with cutesy-wootsy tiresy-wiresies.
(And a Ted Kaczynski hoodie)
Chas.
|
| | |
Date: 23 May 2007 21:11:18
From: Pikachu
Subject: Re: 650B movement is growing!
|
In article <1179970457.282530.200330@p47g2000hsd.googlegroups.com >,
Ozark Bicycle <bicycleatelier@ozarkbicycleservice.com > wrote:
> Of course they are; the Riv business plan has become "let's sell lotsa
> different bikes to the same bunch of people". All-Rounder? Check!
> Fixie? Check! Mixte? Check! Country Bike (whatever the **** that
> means)? Check! 650B bike? Check! MTB? Check! "Be the most popular guy
> on the RBW list, own all the Riv models!"
Wow, those are some fairly mean-spirited words. I've spoken to Grant
before in person, and he came across as someone who just wants to get
people riding comfortably on bikes. I am not defending his seemingly
eccentric push for fairly odd ERD sizes, and I do agree the sizes we
have now suit my purposes well; but I am not sure Grant/Rivendell
deserves such sarcastic remarks.
Let me ask you this: have you had a dialogue with Grant before? Would
you say what you wrote to him personally? If not, why do it here?
Not a Rivendell owner,
Pikachu
|
| | | |
Date: 24 May 2007 06:23:20
From: Ryan Cousineau
Subject: Re: 650B movement is growing!
|
In article
<pikachu-6C3C02.21111823052007@sn-indi.vsrv-sjc.supernews.net >,
Pikachu <pikachu@pokemon.org > wrote:
> In article <1179970457.282530.200330@p47g2000hsd.googlegroups.com>,
> Ozark Bicycle <bicycleatelier@ozarkbicycleservice.com> wrote:
>
> > Of course they are; the Riv business plan has become "let's sell lotsa
> > different bikes to the same bunch of people". All-Rounder? Check!
> > Fixie? Check! Mixte? Check! Country Bike (whatever the **** that
> > means)? Check! 650B bike? Check! MTB? Check! "Be the most popular guy
> > on the RBW list, own all the Riv models!"
>
> Wow, those are some fairly mean-spirited words. I've spoken to Grant
> before in person, and he came across as someone who just wants to get
> people riding comfortably on bikes. I am not defending his seemingly
> eccentric push for fairly odd ERD sizes, and I do agree the sizes we
> have now suit my purposes well; but I am not sure Grant/Rivendell
> deserves such sarcastic remarks.
>
> Let me ask you this: have you had a dialogue with Grant before? Would
> you say what you wrote to him personally? If not, why do it here?
The moment he revived the 650B size with new frames, he incurred our
wrath. WRATH, I tell you!
His brand of retrogrouchiness has no place in this world. Barcons? Lugs?
Stems without pop-off fronts? Moustache bars, for heaven's sake??
Ten-speed brifters should be good enough for anyone! All other options
are romantic frippery!!
-RjC, prefers the Raichu form,
--
Ryan Cousineau rcousine@sfu.ca http://www.wiredcola.com/
"I don't want kids who are thinking about going into mathematics
to think that they have to take drugs to succeed." -Paul Erdos
|
| | | |
Date: 24 May 2007 05:26:54
From: Michael Press
Subject: Re: 650B movement is growing!
|
In article
<pikachu-6C3C02.21111823052007@sn-indi.vsrv-sjc.supernews.net >,
Pikachu <pikachu@pokemon.org > wrote:
> In article <1179970457.282530.200330@p47g2000hsd.googlegroups.com>,
> Ozark Bicycle <bicycleatelier@ozarkbicycleservice.com> wrote:
>
> > Of course they are; the Riv business plan has become "let's sell lotsa
> > different bikes to the same bunch of people". All-Rounder? Check!
> > Fixie? Check! Mixte? Check! Country Bike (whatever the **** that
> > means)? Check! 650B bike? Check! MTB? Check! "Be the most popular guy
> > on the RBW list, own all the Riv models!"
>
> Wow, those are some fairly mean-spirited words. I've spoken to Grant
> before in person, and he came across as someone who just wants to get
> people riding comfortably on bikes. I am not defending his seemingly
> eccentric push for fairly odd ERD sizes, and I do agree the sizes we
> have now suit my purposes well; but I am not sure Grant/Rivendell
> deserves such sarcastic remarks.
>
> Let me ask you this: have you had a dialogue with Grant before? Would
> you say what you wrote to him personally? If not, why do it here?
>
> Not a Rivendell owner,
Of _course_ he is plausible. He is a salesman. Sheesh!
--
Michael Press
|
| | | |
Date: 23 May 2007 23:33:57
From: Tim McNamara
Subject: Re: 650B movement is growing!
|
In article
<pikachu-6C3C02.21111823052007@sn-indi.vsrv-sjc.supernews.net >,
Pikachu <pikachu@pokemon.org > wrote:
> In article <1179970457.282530.200330@p47g2000hsd.googlegroups.com>,
> Ozark Bicycle <bicycleatelier@ozarkbicycleservice.com> wrote:
>
> > Of course they are; the Riv business plan has become "let's sell
> > lotsa different bikes to the same bunch of people". All-Rounder?
> > Check! Fixie? Check! Mixte? Check! Country Bike (whatever the ****
> > that means)? Check! 650B bike? Check! MTB? Check! "Be the most
> > popular guy on the RBW list, own all the Riv models!"
>
> Wow, those are some fairly mean-spirited words. I've spoken to Grant
> before in person, and he came across as someone who just wants to get
> people riding comfortably on bikes. I am not defending his seemingly
> eccentric push for fairly odd ERD sizes,
Ummm. 26" (559 mm) and 700C (622 mm) are odd ERTRO sizes? Compared to
what? Perhaps you are referring to 650B, which has been a standard
wheel size for many decades- just not in the US.
> and I do agree the sizes we have now suit my purposes well; but I am
> not sure Grant/Rivendell deserves such sarcastic remarks.
Grant Petersen is and has been a lightning rod in the bike industry for
a long time. Oddly enough, though, he is also generally highly regarded
within the more mainstream segments of the industry and paid attention
to by them.
He's a favorite target for some Usenet kooks, too. Other than
entertainment value, there's not much reason to pay attention to them.
|
| | | | |
Date: 23 May 2007 22:35:27
From: Pikachu
Subject: Re: 650B movement is growing!
|
In article <timmcn-7DBAFF.23335723052007@news.iphouse.com >,
Tim McNamara <timmcn@bitstream.net > wrote:
> In article
> <pikachu-6C3C02.21111823052007@sn-indi.vsrv-sjc.supernews.net>,
> Pikachu <pikachu@pokemon.org> wrote:
>
> > In article <1179970457.282530.200330@p47g2000hsd.googlegroups.com>,
> > Ozark Bicycle <bicycleatelier@ozarkbicycleservice.com> wrote:
> >
> > > Of course they are; the Riv business plan has become "let's sell
> > > lotsa different bikes to the same bunch of people". All-Rounder?
> > > Check! Fixie? Check! Mixte? Check! Country Bike (whatever the ****
> > > that means)? Check! 650B bike? Check! MTB? Check! "Be the most
> > > popular guy on the RBW list, own all the Riv models!"
> >
> > Wow, those are some fairly mean-spirited words. I've spoken to Grant
> > before in person, and he came across as someone who just wants to get
> > people riding comfortably on bikes. I am not defending his seemingly
> > eccentric push for fairly odd ERD sizes,
>
> Ummm. 26" (559 mm) and 700C (622 mm) are odd ERTRO sizes? Compared to
> what? Perhaps you are referring to 650B, which has been a standard
> wheel size for many decades- just not in the US.
Yes, I meant the 650B/584mm size. It is, and I quote myself, "fairly
odd" simply because parts for this size cannot be easily found in a lot,
if not most, bike shops around me. Yes, I understand QBP carries them,
and I can pick up at least 4 or 5 different 584 tires from Rivendell,
but those factors still, IMHO, do not qualify the 650B as a "normal"
size now, at least in the USA. Perhaps in a few years, but certainly
not now.
As for the term "sizes", in one of his recent Readers, Grant did elude
to working on a new size between 622 and 584.
> Grant Petersen is and has been a lightning rod in the bike industry for
> a long time. Oddly enough, though, he is also generally highly regarded
> within the more mainstream segments of the industry and paid attention
> to by them.
I really look forward to his Rivendell Readers. They're interesting,
and easy to read, rather like Grant is interesting and easy to talk to.
It is quite unfortunate that Grant is cutting the quarterly output to
something less frequent.
An RR subscriber,
Pikachu
|
| | | | | |
Date: 24 May 2007 11:18:24
From: Marcus Coles
Subject: Re: 650B movement is growing!
|
650b is never going to be more than a niche market.
I think everybody is missing the 650a, 390mm or 26" x 1 3/8", EA3 size.
There is a tire that needs a revival, currently low end rubber is still
readily available for this wheel across North America, in Mal-Warts,
hardware stores, bike shops, alloy rims are available from Sun (CR18).
Still popular in various countries in Europe and I hear it's big in
Japan :-)
Face it folks the Raleigh Sports made more sense than most people are
willing to admit.
Marcus
|
| | | | | | |
Date: 24 May 2007 12:42:00
From: Tim McNamara
Subject: Re: 650B movement is growing!
|
In article <4655ac8b$0$8775$c3e8da3@news.astraweb.com >,
Marcus Coles <marcoles@ody.ca > wrote:
> 650b is never going to be more than a niche market.
>
> I think everybody is missing the 650a, 390mm or 26" x 1 3/8", EA3
> size. There is a tire that needs a revival, currently low end rubber
> is still readily available for this wheel across North America, in
> Mal-Warts, hardware stores, bike shops, alloy rims are available from
> Sun (CR18).
A friend of mine rebuilt his Raleigh Sports with those rims and seems to
have found decent quality tires from somewhere.
> Still popular in various countries in Europe and I hear it's big in
> Japan :-)
>
> Face it folks the Raleigh Sports made more sense than most people are
> willing to admit.
Amen to that! I think it's still the perfect bike for 90% of bike
riders.
There is quite a thriving "3 speed culture" here in Minnesota:
http://www.3speedtour.com/
http://www.abcetour.com/
|
| | | | | |
Date: 24 May 2007 09:27:24
From: Tim McNamara
Subject: Re: 650B movement is growing!
|
In article
<pikachu-54F743.22352723052007@sn-indi.vsrv-sjc.supernews.net >,
Pikachu <pikachu@pokemon.org > wrote:
> In article <timmcn-7DBAFF.23335723052007@news.iphouse.com>,
> Tim McNamara <timmcn@bitstream.net> wrote:
>
> > In article
> > <pikachu-6C3C02.21111823052007@sn-indi.vsrv-sjc.supernews.net>,
> > Pikachu <pikachu@pokemon.org> wrote:
> >
> > > In article
> > > <1179970457.282530.200330@p47g2000hsd.googlegroups.com>,
> > > Ozark Bicycle <bicycleatelier@ozarkbicycleservice.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Of course they are; the Riv business plan has become "let's
> > > > sell lotsa different bikes to the same bunch of people".
> > > > All-Rounder? Check! Fixie? Check! Mixte? Check! Country Bike
> > > > (whatever the **** that means)? Check! 650B bike? Check! MTB?
> > > > Check! "Be the most popular guy on the RBW list, own all the
> > > > Riv models!"
> > >
> > > Wow, those are some fairly mean-spirited words. I've spoken to
> > > Grant before in person, and he came across as someone who just
> > > wants to get people riding comfortably on bikes. I am not
> > > defending his seemingly eccentric push for fairly odd ERD sizes,
> >
> > Ummm. 26" (559 mm) and 700C (622 mm) are odd ERTRO sizes?
> > Compared to what? Perhaps you are referring to 650B, which has
> > been a standard wheel size for many decades- just not in the US.
>
> Yes, I meant the 650B/584mm size. It is, and I quote myself, "fairly
> odd" simply because parts for this size cannot be easily found in a
> lot, if not most, bike shops around me. Yes, I understand QBP
> carries them, and I can pick up at least 4 or 5 different 584 tires
> from Rivendell, but those factors still, IMHO, do not qualify the
> 650B as a "normal" size now, at least in the USA. Perhaps in a few
> years, but certainly not now.
Well, I'm old enough that I can remember when it was hard to find bikes
with 700C wheels in many bike shops in the US. 27" was the standard.
Now it's almost hard to find a 27" tire. How about a 26 x 1 3/8 or 26 x
1 1/2 for one of the millions of English three speeds? Some shops don't
stock those at all.
> As for the term "sizes", in one of his recent Readers, Grant did
> elude to working on a new size between 622 and 584.
Yes, the 601 BSD size. That was a joke, son. Grant periodically takes
a gentle little poke at those who lose perspective and regard what he
writes as gospel. Often his jokes are taken seriously, which IMHO makes
it funnier.
> > Grant Petersen is and has been a lightning rod in the bike industry
> > for a long time. Oddly enough, though, he is also generally highly
> > regarded within the more mainstream segments of the industry and
> > paid attention to by them.
>
> I really look forward to his Rivendell Readers. They're interesting,
> and easy to read, rather like Grant is interesting and easy to talk
> to. It is quite unfortunate that Grant is cutting the quarterly
> output to something less frequent.
The Reader is always worth a perusal, although it was a more interesting
read a few years back when it covered a broader set of topics than it
does now. However, the Reader is a marketing tool and not an actual
magazine and the content has shifted to reflect this. That's not a
criticism.
There are a few bike magazines worth reading: the Reader, Bicycle
Quarterly, A to B Magazine, Velovision. Other 'n' that the rest of the
bicycle magazine industry is pretty much dreck. I used to like Dirt Rag
until Elaine left, she counterbalanced Maurice... and that's a while
back.
|
| |
Date: 24 May 2007 01:08:35
From: Bellsouth Ijit 2.0 - Hayfever Edition ®
Subject: Re: 650B movement is growing!
|
"bfd" <bfd853@yahoo.com > wrote in message
news:1179957987.891797.176200@q66g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...
> Check it out, SOMA, a bicycle mfr (www.somafab.com) is very
> "interested" in the 650B conversion by Ed Bradley:
>
> http://www.flickr.com/photo_zoom.gne?id=496876397&size=o
>
> In fact, some have stated that SOMA and other mfrs are now
> "influenced" by the 650B movement and some new 650B goodies are
> coming. Keep your eyes OPEN@!#$%
>
> Another biggie - the Kirk Pacenti's 650B mt bike:
>
> http://www.frameforum.net/forum2/index.php?showtopic=3034
>
> http://www.singletrackworld.com/article.php?sid=2349
>
> http://www.smugmug.com/keyword/all/pacenti#133877457
>
> Get ready, its coming! What's not to like?!!!
>
Is this a "movement" or a fad?
|
| |
Date: 23 May 2007 19:15:12
From: Gary Young
Subject: Re: 650B movement is growing!
|
On Wed, 23 May 2007 15:57:48 -0700, bfd wrote:
> On May 23, 3:21 pm, "G.T." <getne...@dslextreme.com> wrote:
>> "bfd" <bfd...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>>
>> news:1179957987.891797.176200@q66g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> > Check it out, SOMA, a bicycle mfr (www.somafab.com) is very
>> > "interested" in the 650B conversion by Ed Bradley:
>>
>> >http://www.flickr.com/photo_zoom.gne?id=496876397&size=o
>>
>> > In fact, some have stated that SOMA and other mfrs are now
>> > "influenced" by the 650B movement and some new 650B goodies are
>> > coming. Keep your eyes OPEN@!#$%
>>
>> > Another biggie - the Kirk Pacenti's 650B mt bike:
>>
>> >http://www.frameforum.net/forum2/index.php?showtopic=3034
>>
>> >http://www.singletrackworld.com/article.php?sid=2349
>>
>> >http://www.smugmug.com/keyword/all/pacenti#133877457
>>
>> > Get ready, its coming! What's not to like?!!!
>>
>> YATS? Excuse me while I fall asleep at this news. A 650b mtn bike? BFD.
>> 700c mtn bikes are already established, unfortunately, why do we need Yet
>> Another Tire Size inbetween 26" and 700c?
>>
> Here's what someone said on the RBW list:
>
> "700C wheels used off-road have great rolling momentum, but by the
> time you
> fatten 'em up for serious rocks, they get pretty heavy (and people
> start
> calling them "29ers").
If weight is such a concern, why not just stick to 26" wheels? That way he
wouldn't have to suffer the indignity of having his bike called a "29er."
(Is "650Ber" any better.)
> Most of the folks who really like the 29er
> approach
> of- road (as opposed to the CX/Country bike size) tend to be big,
> lanky
> people.
Is this really true?
> At 5'11", I feel like it makes a bit larger bike than I
> want.
>
Meaning what? The size effects performance? He doesn't like the look of a
"bit larger" bike? (One of the reasons offered in favor of 650B wheels on
the iBob list is that they look more well-proportioned in certain frame
sizes.)
Presumably people who are 6' are going to want wheels slightly larger than
650B. Likewise for 6'1", 6'2", etc. However many wheel sizes we have,
there's always room for something "in between."
>
> 26" wheels feel smallish to me, though right now it's a necessary evil
> to
> get the big profile that eats up rocky topography.
>
>
Feel smallish? Again, what does he mean by that?
> Something in the middle makes sense for me.
Maybe, assuming "a bit larger" and "smallish" point to something of real
significance and aren't just excuses to jump on the latest fad.
> 650B/584 is a blast on fire
> roads, dirt paths and similar conditions.
More of a blast than 26" or 29"? If so, is 650B such a blast only for
riders of his size? If 650B is a blast for all riders regardless of size,
then he hasn't explained why, since his explanations are mostly tied to
the size of the rider.
> And that's just on a
> conversion
> with a seriously low BB...
> http://www.cyclofiend.com/cc/2006/cc060r2-cc-jim0506.html
>
>
> There's nothing magic about 26", other than that's what the
> cruisers-cum-klunkerz used and it became a de facto standard.
Of course there's nothing magic about 26" wheels. If there was a wheel
size that was magic we wouldn't need standards because all producers
would gravitate to the magic size. Standards are almost always somewhat
arbitrary. That doesn't mean the standards are any less important for
keeping costs down and making the widest variety of rims and tires
available at retail stores. Granted, 650B is not a propriety standard, but
it's still a needless splintering of the market. It's needless because
I've never heard any cogent argument in its favor (with the exception of
using it to restore and make more comfortable old racing bikes).
> In the
> mid-90's, when that first catalog came out, it was reasonably difficult
> to
> find a shop with a broad selection of 700C road tires, let alone
> 584/650B.
> I don't think it on anyone's radar.
>
>
> Now, it seems like things have continued to evolve to the point where it
> makes sense to try some 650B knobbies on some well-designed bikes and
> get
> some real-world feedback.
The fad is gaining momentum. Time to jump on before it's too late.
> I don't think it makes too much sense to
> decide
> it won't work without that."
A red herring. I don't know of anyone who thinks 650B "won't work." The
standards we have are arbitrary to some extent and could well have been
otherwise with little or no effect on performance. The real reason
anti-650B people object to its revival is that we already have wheel sizes
that work just fine.
>
> Further, Rivendell, one of the founders of the 650B movement, is coming
> out with its 650B Mt Bike - the Bombadil:
The fact that a fad is gaining momentum is not a very reliable sign that
it's a good idea.
This 650B fad wouldn't bother me if it were confined to making old racing
bikes more comfortable. I hope the momentum stops there.
>
> http://www.cyclofiend.com/rbw/bombadil07.html
>
> Scroll down for another pic of the Bombadil:
> http://www.cyclofiend.com/rbw/#latest
|
| | |
Date: 24 May 2007 09:58:06
From: * * Chas
Subject: Re: 650B movement is growing!
|
"Gary Young" <garyyoung3@gmail.com > wrote in message
news:MZudnfDa0tqNRMnbnZ2dnUVZ_hKdnZ2d@giganews.com...
<snip >
> The fact that a fad is gaining momentum is not a very reliable sign that
> it's a good idea.
>
> This 650B fad wouldn't bother me if it were confined to making old
racing
> bikes more comfortable. I hope the momentum stops there.
>
Are fixies becoming passe? Are the marketiods looking for the next hot
fad? What ever happened to all those little aluminum scooters with the 4"
wheels that were the rave a few years ago?
In the US (the UK, Canada and OZ too???) from the 1960s until the early
1980s, 27" wheels were the standard size for most imported or better
quality derailleur bikes.
The majority of the bikes we sold in the 1970s were equipped with sewups.
In the early 1970s we saw a few 700c wheels on bikes from the continent
but 700c tires were always scarce until the late 1970s. We started
importing 700c tires, rims and wheels for our customers who wanted a set
of clincher wheels for their sewup bikes.
We sold a few 650b French touring bikes and tandems during those years for
people who wanted larger tires for rough roads: 27" x 1 1/4" and 700c x 32
were the largest clincher tires commonly available.
Today 26" and 700c (29") are the standards. You can find them from
19mm/3/4" to well over 50mm/2" widths. It's hard to find good 27" tires in
most bike shops around the US and when you do locate them there's only a
choice of 1 or 2 styles or brands of tires.
Except for the Flat World Society, the SCA (the Society for Creative
Anachronism) and fellow travelers, 650b was almost dead.
Start listening for the squeals of anguish when the folks with 650b wheels
can't find a replacement tire in the middle of Podunk.
Chas.
|
| | | |
Date: 25 May 2007 01:02:04
From: Michael Press
Subject: Re: 650B movement is growing!
|
In article <QI-dnS8e8PNdXsjbnZ2dnUVZ_gadnZ2d@comcast.com >,
"* * Chas" <verktygjunk@aol.spamski.com > wrote:
> Today 26" and 700c (29") are the standards. You can find them from
> 19mm/3/4" to well over 50mm/2" widths. It's hard to find good 27" tires in
> most bike shops around the US and when you do locate them there's only a
> choice of 1 or 2 styles or brands of tires.
Serfas continues to offer good 630x32 (measured 28 mm) tires
with an almost wholly slick tread.
<URL:http://www.serfas.com/tires/STK-27.shtml >
I whine until my LBS gets them in.
--
Michael Press
|
| | | | |
Date: 25 May 2007 23:56:56
From: A Muzi
Subject: Re: 650B movement is growing!
|
> "* * Chas" <verktygjunk@aol.spamski.com> wrote:
>> Today 26" and 700c (29") are the standards. You can find them from
>> 19mm/3/4" to well over 50mm/2" widths. It's hard to find good 27" tires in
>> most bike shops around the US and when you do locate them there's only a
>> choice of 1 or 2 styles or brands of tires.
Michael Press wrote:
> Serfas continues to offer good 630x32 (measured 28 mm) tires
> with an almost wholly slick tread.
> <URL:http://www.serfas.com/tires/STK-27.shtml>
> I whine until my LBS gets them in.
YGBSM.
Don't have to settle for offbrand or private label second tier tires.
27" in widths from IRC, Panaracer, Michelin, Kenda * are available
through a host of major and minor distributors to all LBS. If they
bother to pick up a phone and buy them.
[* as Bruce Gordon rants, these are PWAMS, people who actually make stuff]
--
Andrew Muzi
www.yellowjersey.org
Open every day since 1 April, 1971
|
| | | | |
Date: 25 May 2007 13:13:52
From: Tim McNamara
Subject: Re: 650B movement is growing!
|
In article <rubrum-89A869.18020424052007@newsclstr02.news.prodigy.com >,
Michael Press <rubrum@pacbell.net > wrote:
> In article <QI-dnS8e8PNdXsjbnZ2dnUVZ_gadnZ2d@comcast.com>,
> "* * Chas" <verktygjunk@aol.spamski.com> wrote:
>
> > Today 26" and 700c (29") are the standards. You can find them from
> > 19mm/3/4" to well over 50mm/2" widths. It's hard to find good 27"
> > tires in most bike shops around the US and when you do locate them
> > there's only a choice of 1 or 2 styles or brands of tires.
>
> Serfas continues to offer good 630x32 (measured 28 mm) tires with an
> almost wholly slick tread.
>
> <URL:http://www.serfas.com/tires/STK-27.shtml>
>
> I whine until my LBS gets them in.
The Pasela 27" tire also ought to be very good.
|
| | | |
Date: 24 May 2007 10:11:17
From: Tom Nakashima
Subject: Re: 650B movement is growing!
|
"* * Chas" <verktygjunk@aol.spamski.com > wrote in message
news:QI-dnS8e8PNdXsjbnZ2dnUVZ_gadnZ2d@comcast.com...
>
> In the US (the UK, Canada and OZ too???) from the 1960s until the early
> 1980s, 27" wheels were the standard size for most imported or better
> quality derailleur bikes.
> Chas.
Thought most of the serious riders back then rode sew-ups (tubulars) which
were 700C.
-tom
|
| | | | |
Date: 24 May 2007 12:16:34
From: * * Chas
Subject: Re: 650B movement is growing!
|
"Tom Nakashima" <tom@slac.stanford.edu > wrote in message
news:f34gvl$rlg$1@news.Stanford.EDU...
>
> "* * Chas" <verktygjunk@aol.spamski.com> wrote in message
> news:QI-dnS8e8PNdXsjbnZ2dnUVZ_gadnZ2d@comcast.com...
> >
> > In the US (the UK, Canada and OZ too???) from the 1960s until the
early
> > 1980s, 27" wheels were the standard size for most imported or better
> > quality derailleur bikes.
> > Chas.
>
> Thought most of the serious riders back then rode sew-ups (tubulars)
which
> were 700C.
> -tom
>
>
Yep, modern sewups use 700c size rims (except for 20", 24" and other
oddball sizes). A lot of early bikes used sewup style tires. I've seen 28"
and larger wheel sewups on antique bikes.
Nope the majority of the 10 speed bikes imported into the US during that
time came with 26" or 27" clincher rims.
Here's a breakdown of bike sales in the US from 1970-1975
1970 - 7 million bikes, 5.5 million kids bikes
1971 - 9 million bikes, 3.7 million "lightweights" (beginning of Bike
Boom)
1972 - 14 million bikes, 5.2 million imported 10 speeds
1973 - 15 million bikes, 5 million imported 10 speeds
1974 - 14.1 million bikes, 4 million imported 10 speeds (end of Bike Boom)
1975 - 7 million bikes, 2.2 million Hi-Rise and BMX bikes
The 40+ Lb. Schwinn 10 speeds were classified as "Lightweights".
In 1974 US domestic production reached 10 million with a large percentage
of those bikes being gas pipe 'kid killers" with 26" x 1 3/8" tires.
The sales of bikes with sewups never amounted to more than a few percent
of the total number of bikes sold.
Around 1975 IRC brought out 100 PSI 27 x 1 1/8" clinchers and Michelin
introduced their 20mm wide Elan tires with the "hair net" casings. Later
Wolber started selling better HP tires than the Elans. These high pressure
clinchers mounted on lighter weight alloy rims resulted in many cyclist
moving away from tubular tires.
Chas.
|
| | | | | |
Date: 24 May 2007 17:11:27
From: Tim McNamara
Subject: Re: 650B movement is growing!
|
In article <Nb2dnYvzYc6pecjbnZ2dnUVZ_jSdnZ2d@comcast.com >,
"* * Chas" <verktygjunk@aol.spamski.com > wrote:
> "Tom Nakashima" <tom@slac.stanford.edu> wrote in message
> news:f34gvl$rlg$1@news.Stanford.EDU...
> >
> > "* * Chas" <verktygjunk@aol.spamski.com> wrote in message
> > news:QI-dnS8e8PNdXsjbnZ2dnUVZ_gadnZ2d@comcast.com...
> > >
> > > In the US (the UK, Canada and OZ too???) from the 1960s until the
> > > early 1980s, 27" wheels were the standard size for most imported
> > > or better quality derailleur bikes. Chas.
> >
> > Thought most of the serious riders back then rode sew-ups
> > (tubulars) which were 700C. -tom
> >
> Yep, modern sewups use 700c size rims (except for 20", 24" and other
> oddball sizes). A lot of early bikes used sewup style tires. I've
> seen 28" and larger wheel sewups on antique bikes.
>
> Nope the majority of the 10 speed bikes imported into the US during
> that time came with 26" or 27" clincher rims.
If memory serves- and it often doesn't- those 26" wheels were 26 x 1 3/8
and not the 26" mountain bike size (ERTRO 559). And didn't the "BMA/6"
(Columbia, Huffy, Free Spirit, etc) bikes tend to use 26 x 1 3/8 wheels?
> Here's a breakdown of bike sales in the US from 1970-1975
>
> 1970 - 7 million bikes, 5.5 million kids bikes
> 1971 - 9 million bikes, 3.7 million "lightweights" (beginning of Bike
> Boom)
> 1972 - 14 million bikes, 5.2 million imported 10 speeds
> 1973 - 15 million bikes, 5 million imported 10 speeds
> 1974 - 14.1 million bikes, 4 million imported 10 speeds (end of Bike Boom)
> 1975 - 7 million bikes, 2.2 million Hi-Rise and BMX bikes
Great numbers.
> The 40+ Lb. Schwinn 10 speeds were classified as "Lightweights".
My first 10 speed was a Schwinn Continental with a ~25" frame, weighed
42 pounds. Funny thing is that I didn't notice it when riding it at the
time.
> In 1974 US domestic production reached 10 million with a large
> percentage of those bikes being gas pipe 'kid killers" with 26" x 1
> 3/8" tires.
Ah, yeah, those were the "BMA/6" bikes I referred to above: Huffy,
Columbia, Free Spirit and a few other brands I can't recall. "Bicycle
Manufacturers of America" of which IIRC Schwinn was notably not a part.
Was the BMA some leftover remnant of Colonel Pope's monopolistic trust?
> The sales of bikes with sewups never amounted to more than a few
> percent of the total number of bikes sold.
I think within certain markets that was less true, such as the
California Bay area. But around Chicago it was pretty much all Schwinn
all the time. "Schwinn" was a synonym for "bicycle" where I grew up.
> Around 1975 IRC brought out 100 PSI 27 x 1 1/8" clinchers and
> Michelin introduced their 20mm wide Elan tires with the "hair net"
> casings. Later Wolber started selling better HP tires than the Elans.
> These high pressure clinchers mounted on lighter weight alloy rims
> resulted in many cyclist moving away from tubular tires.
My Viscount, bought in 1976 to replace the Schwinn when it was stolen,
came with IRC 27" clinchers. I remember those as good tires for the
time. They were certainly nicer than the "gumwalls" on my Schwinn!
|
| | | | | | |
Date: 25 May 2007 07:08:07
From: Tom Nakashima
Subject: Re: 650B movement is growing!
|
"Tim McNamara" <timmcn@bitstream.net > wrote in message
news:timmcn-A73E88.17112724052007@news.iphouse.com...
> In article <Nb2dnYvzYc6pecjbnZ2dnUVZ_jSdnZ2d@comcast.com>,
> "* * Chas" <verktygjunk@aol.spamski.com> wrote:
>
>> The sales of bikes with sewups never amounted to more than a few
>> percent of the total number of bikes sold.
>
> I think within certain markets that was less true, such as the
> California Bay area. But around Chicago it was pretty much all Schwinn
> all the time. "Schwinn" was a synonym for "bicycle" where I grew up.
>
Indeed much less true Tim,
The CA Bay area had a fine taste for high-end bikes. Back in the late 60's
early 70's. The "in" thing was to have a light steel frame, Reynolds 531 or
Columbus SL outfitted with Campagnolo Record. A lot of us painted over the
frames with a brush to make it look inconspicuous, I never did, just never
left the bike out of sight. It was good transportation for us college
commuting students
I purchased my first high-end bike, a coffee brown Italvega. At that time
$375 was a lot of money for a part-time working college kid. I remember
putting the bike on "lay-away" not sure if lay-away even exist today, but it
took me 5 months to pay it off.
There was about 20 of us high-end bike owners around San Jose St.
back then. The bikes I remember were Raleigh Professionals, Bob Jackson's,
Cinelli's, Masi's, Peugeot PX-10's, Schwinn Paramount's, Ron Cooper's, and
wool jerseys with turned-up cycling hats. In 1977 I was given a Reynolds 531
Angel Rodriguez frame for doing photography work in trade with Wheelsmith
Bicycles. I still own and ride it daily.
Some great memories back then.
-tom
|
| | | | | | | |
Date: 25 May 2007 13:35:16
From: Tim McNamara
Subject: Re: 650B movement is growing!
|
In article <f36qk7$5gv$1@news.Stanford.EDU >,
"Tom Nakashima" <tom@slac.stanford.edu > wrote:
> "Tim McNamara" <timmcn@bitstream.net> wrote in message
> news:timmcn-A73E88.17112724052007@news.iphouse.com...
> > In article <Nb2dnYvzYc6pecjbnZ2dnUVZ_jSdnZ2d@comcast.com>,
> > "* * Chas" <verktygjunk@aol.spamski.com> wrote:
> >
> >> The sales of bikes with sewups never amounted to more than a few
> >> percent of the total number of bikes sold.
> >
> > I think within certain markets that was less true, such as the
> > California Bay area. But around Chicago it was pretty much all Schwinn
> > all the time. "Schwinn" was a synonym for "bicycle" where I grew up.
> >
>
> Indeed much less true Tim,
> The CA Bay area had a fine taste for high-end bikes. Back in the late 60's
> early 70's. The "in" thing was to have a light steel frame, Reynolds 531 or
> Columbus SL outfitted with Campagnolo Record. A lot of us painted over the
> frames with a brush to make it look inconspicuous, I never did, just never
> left the bike out of sight. It was good transportation for us college
> commuting students
If that culture was anywhere around the western suburbs of Chicago (I
grew up in Elmhurst) I pretty much missed it until the very late 70s.
There were of course some well-known shops in the area- Wastyn's,
Lickton's, etc. that did sell high end stuff- but I never actually met
anyone who rode bikes like that until I was in college. And even then
it was only a couple of people (including one of the biggest crushes in
my life, a beautiful girl who rode a Zeus with tubulars. But I never
got anywhere with her other than friendship and some nice bike rides.
She could kick my ass up hills).
It was in the early 1980s that I started to find people riding nice
bikes and then in the 1990s when I started racing I met more. In the
80s I worked in a bike shop in Winona MN (a place that should be a
cycling mecca) for a guy that used to build frames for Trek, Ken
Lawrence. Got to meet a lot of riders on nice bikes that way. The
nicest bikes in town were owned by the two brothers who owned the Dairy
Queen. They were rolling in money and loved to ride bikes; they were a
great resource for recommending good roads.
> I purchased my first high-end bike, a coffee brown Italvega. At that time
> $375 was a lot of money for a part-time working college kid. I remember
> putting the bike on "lay-away" not sure if lay-away even exist today, but it
> took me 5 months to pay it off.
Mine was a Viscount Pro with clinchers and fork o' death, $275 brand
spanking new in 1976 or 1977 IIRC. Rode it until the frame cracked at
the seat tube/BB joint, had it patched, rode it until it cracked again
and just kept riding it. I still have the rear derailleur and the
Brooks saddle I bought for it. In 1984 the BB axle broke at the circlip
groove on the left side and dat was dat. I bought a Raleigh Super
Course that was my only bike until 1992 and rode it as the hack bike
until the frame cracked in 1994.
> There was about 20 of us high-end bike owners around San Jose St.
> back then. The bikes I remember were Raleigh Professionals, Bob Jackson's,
> Cinelli's, Masi's, Peugeot PX-10's, Schwinn Paramount's, Ron Cooper's, and
> wool jerseys with turned-up cycling hats.
You were a few years ahead of me on the curve and probably the whol eBay
Area was way ahead of the 'burbs of Chicago. There were Paramounts of
course, but the only "nice" bike in my neighborhood was my friend
Blair's Motobecane. I looked at buying a Gitane before I settled on the
Viscount.
> In 1977 I was given a Reynolds 531 Angel Rodriguez frame for doing
> photography work in trade with Wheelsmith Bicycles. I still own and
> ride it daily.
A friend of mine has a Rodriguez built by Angel before he sold the
business. Great bike.
> Some great memories back then.
Yeah! But thankfully there's still great riding to be done now and good
equipment is easier to find. It's not as "clubby" as it was, maybe, but
it's still good. Keeps us from being nostalgic all the time. ;-)
|
| | | | | |
Date: 24 May 2007 12:59:49
From: Tom Nakashima
Subject: Re: 650B movement is growing!
|
"* * Chas" <verktygjunk@aol.spamski.com > wrote in message
news:Nb2dnYvzYc6pecjbnZ2dnUVZ_jSdnZ2d@comcast.com...
>
> "Tom Nakashima" <tom@slac.stanford.edu> wrote in message
> news:f34gvl$rlg$1@news.Stanford.EDU...
>>
>> "* * Chas" <verktygjunk@aol.spamski.com> wrote in message
>> news:QI-dnS8e8PNdXsjbnZ2dnUVZ_gadnZ2d@comcast.com...
>> >
>> > In the US (the UK, Canada and OZ too???) from the 1960s until the
> early
>> > 1980s, 27" wheels were the standard size for most imported or better
>> > quality derailleur bikes.
>> > Chas.
>>
>> Thought most of the serious riders back then rode sew-ups (tubulars)
> which
>> were 700C.
>> -tom
>>
>>
> Yep, modern sewups use 700c size rims (except for 20", 24" and other
> oddball sizes). A lot of early bikes used sewup style tires. I've seen 28"
> and larger wheel sewups on antique bikes.
>
> Nope the majority of the 10 speed bikes imported into the US during that
> time came with 26" or 27" clincher rims.
>
> Here's a breakdown of bike sales in the US from 1970-1975
>
> 1970 - 7 million bikes, 5.5 million kids bikes
> 1971 - 9 million bikes, 3.7 million "lightweights" (beginning of Bike
> Boom)
> 1972 - 14 million bikes, 5.2 million imported 10 speeds
> 1973 - 15 million bikes, 5 million imported 10 speeds
> 1974 - 14.1 million bikes, 4 million imported 10 speeds (end of Bike Boom)
> 1975 - 7 million bikes, 2.2 million Hi-Rise and BMX bikes
>
> The 40+ Lb. Schwinn 10 speeds were classified as "Lightweights".
>
> In 1974 US domestic production reached 10 million with a large percentage
> of those bikes being gas pipe 'kid killers" with 26" x 1 3/8" tires.
>
> The sales of bikes with sewups never amounted to more than a few percent
> of the total number of bikes sold.
>
> Around 1975 IRC brought out 100 PSI 27 x 1 1/8" clinchers and Michelin
> introduced their 20mm wide Elan tires with the "hair net" casings. Later
> Wolber started selling better HP tires than the Elans. These high pressure
> clinchers mounted on lighter weight alloy rims resulted in many cyclist
> moving away from tubular tires.
> Chas.
>
I remember in 1978 or so, Specialized introduced their high quality foldable
clincher tire called the Turbo. Quite a few of us racers started switching
over. The advertisement in the bicycle magazines as I recall, one could
mount them true. Still didn't feel as good as a Clement Criterium Seta.
-tom
|
| | |
Date: 24 May 2007 00:16:41
From: G.T.
Subject: Re: 650B movement is growing!
|
Gary Young wrote:
> On Wed, 23 May 2007 15:57:48 -0700, bfd wrote:
>
> This 650B fad wouldn't bother me if it were confined to making old racing
> bikes more comfortable. I hope the momentum stops there.
Precisely.
>
>> http://www.cyclofiend.com/rbw/bombadil07.html
>>
Nice. But even if there were mass tire availability 650b doesn't make
me any more or less inclined to buy a Rivendell mtn bike. And with zero
or almost zero knobbie availability I am completely uninclined to buy one.
Greg
--
The ticketbastard Tax Tracker:
http://www.ticketmastersucks.org/tracker.html
Dethink to survive - Mclusky
|
| | | |
Date: 24 May 2007 09:31:39
From: Tim McNamara
Subject: Re: 650B movement is growing!
|
In article <135aeuv5mbauaee@corp.supernews.com >,
"G.T." <getnews1@dslextreme.com > wrote:
> Gary Young wrote:
> > On Wed, 23 May 2007 15:57:48 -0700, bfd wrote:
> >
> > This 650B fad wouldn't bother me if it were confined to making old
> > racing bikes more comfortable. I hope the momentum stops there.
>
> Precisely.
>
> >> http://www.cyclofiend.com/rbw/bombadil07.html
> >>
>
> Nice. But even if there were mass tire availability 650b doesn't
> make me any more or less inclined to buy a Rivendell mtn bike. And
> with zero or almost zero knobbie availability I am completely
> uninclined to buy one.
Depends on how knobbly you want yer knobbies. The now-discontinued
Mitsuboshi Trimline and the Panaracer Col de la Vie are knobbly enough
for most off-road riding. But then again, slicks are knobbly enough for
an awful lot of off-road riding.
650B would be perfect for that gravel road race across Iowa. Works well
on the road and on dirt.
|
| | |
Date: 24 May 2007 00:00:33
From: Tim McNamara
Subject: Re: 650B movement is growing!
|
In article <MZudnfDa0tqNRMnbnZ2dnUVZ_hKdnZ2d@giganews.com >,
Gary Young <garyyoung3@gmail.com > wrote:
> Of course there's nothing magic about 26" wheels. If there was a
> wheel size that was magic we wouldn't need standards because all
> producers would gravitate to the magic size. Standards are almost
> always somewhat arbitrary. That doesn't mean the standards are any
> less important for keeping costs down and making the widest variety
> of rims and tires available at retail stores. Granted, 650B is not a
> propriety standard, but it's still a needless splintering of the
> market. It's needless because I've never heard any cogent argument in
> its favor (with the exception of using it to restore and make more
> comfortable old racing bikes).
650B is not a new standard, it has been around for decades. Using an
existing standard can hardly be considered "splintering" of the market.
You might remember that there were once French standard sizes 700A, 700B
and 700C having progressively fatter tires- the 700C standard width was
about 39 mm and was considered a utility bike wheel. Similarly there
was 650A, 650B and 650C again having progressively larger tire sizes.
The 650B was settled on as the usual size rim and tire for touring
bikes, porteur bikes and tandems. The reason was that many if not most
paved French roads, especially in cities, were normally cobbled until
the post-WWII reconstruction and the larger tire made this more
comfortable. As roads improved with asphalt and or concrete pavement,
smaller tires became more widely used.
Eventually the 700 x 23 inflated to a bone-jarring 120 psi became the
norm, as racing bikes became the generic model for bikes for non-racers.
Heck, I had a well-known local builder look at my bike with 700 x 23
tires and proclaim that I was riding fatties (compared to his 18 mm
tubulars). But as road surfaces deteriorate in America, since far more
money is spent on building new roads than repairing the ones that
already exist, the 700 x 23 standard is less satisfactory for many
people.
The 26" wheel mountain bike was supposed to be the savior of the bike
industry and was to render 700C road bikes obsolete. But it too has
problems. Knobby tires suck on the road. "Skinny" tires for MTB rims
tend to be heavier that their 700C cousins with higher rolling
resistance. The smaller diameter means that bumps and road surface
irregularities are more jarring for the rider (hence dual suspension
motorless motorcycles becoming the MTB norm). In a return to the
defunct Bianchi models of 15 years ago, which used 700C rims and failed
utterly in the marketplace, we now have "29ers" with wheels that are
hard to design a frame around and tires that are astonishingly heavy.
The 4" wide Endomorph tire on the Large Marge rims on the Surly Puglsey
may be the logical culmination (I've ridden the Pugsley, it's actually a
hoot but I wouldn't want to ride it all day). Well, one more step: the
36" wheel MTB which is being produced in southern Minnesota for a bike
shop in Faribault. I believe this has become argumentum ad absurdum.
Enter the 650B with an outer diameter only a few mm smaller than the au
courant 700 x 23, with a larger air chamber and allowing bikes to be
converted to have room for fenders and less toe overlap. There has been
an organization in France promoting the 650B standard for many years,
and interest in that size has spread to other countries including the US.
Now, it may not interest you. I don't own a 650B bike and find that my
700 x 25 road bike and my 26 x 1.25 All-Rounder suit my needs pretty
well. But I know a number of people- locally and via the Internets- who
ride 650B and love them. They find them to be a better compromise on
pavement than 26 x 1.25 or 1.50 and a better compromise off-road than a
700 x 23 or even a 700 x 25 or 28. They take the sting out of the
neglected roadway infrastructure and crumbling suburbanity- low taxes
being considered more important than an intact public infrastructure,
resulting in what one social critic called "private opulence and public
squalor."
Now that doesn't mean that 650B is a good set of compromises for you.
But IMHO it's good to have options- the point is to ride bike.
|
| | | |
Date: 24 May 2007 08:05:12
From: Ryan Cousineau
Subject: Re: 650B movement is growing!
|
In article <timmcn-9C6AE7.00003324052007@news.iphouse.com >,
Tim McNamara <timmcn@bitstream.net > wrote:
> 650B is not a new standard, it has been around for decades. Using an
> existing standard can hardly be considered "splintering" of the market.
Oh, you're going to love my 27" revival plan.
Tim, I have to call you on the following paragraph, which seems to be
making a rather large number of curious assumptions.
> The 26" wheel mountain bike was supposed to be the savior of the bike
> industry and was to render 700C road bikes obsolete. But it too has
The 26" wheel (at least when attached to mountain bikes) sold like
gangbusters because it tapped into a huge, sudden interest in taking
bicycles off-road. My guess is that the key to the MTB revolution was
that for the first time rugged yet relatively lightweight bicycles
suitable for terrain previously considered unrideable (no seriously,
Sheldon tells of shock upon being encountered on certain trails with his
proto-MTB (a Raleigh 20 or some similarly absurd adaptation)).
The wheel size change wasn't the saviour per se. The wheel size merely
suited (along with some accident of history issues) off-roading better,
mainly because it was a bit sturdier, and as Jobst has noted, the tread
diameter of a fat 26" is not hugely different from the tread diameter of
a typical skinny 700C.
> problems. Knobby tires suck on the road. "Skinny" tires for MTB rims
> tend to be heavier that their 700C cousins with higher rolling
> resistance. The smaller diameter means that bumps and road surface
> irregularities are more jarring for the rider (hence dual suspension
> motorless motorcycles becoming the MTB norm). In a return to the
The Knobby tires problem led to the recent resurgence of road bikes. But
the real problem here is your theory about "dual suspension motorless
motorcycles" as an MTB norm.
Those had nothing to do with jarring road surface irregularities, or the
relative suitability of 26" wheels for coping with such. They came about
because riders started attempting ridiculously big obstacles, and only
big hit bikes were able to handle this stuff. The standard for what is
considered rideable these days is pretty fantastic compared to the start
of the mountain bike era. I have a 50-something colleague who routinely
sends me photos of him rolling off the top of some 15-foot drop with a
good transition. Yes, he uses a "motorless motorcycle."
Indeed, there was a brief (and still extant) trend to run 24" wheels or
24 rear/26 front wheelsets for certain types of big-hit bikes (it is
here I might make a grudging but distracting digression into the world
of big-hit hardtails, but I shall not). Durability started defeating
other issues.
FS bikes have sort-of clawed their way into the pure XC world; they
compete and even thrive on certain courses, and then on other courses
the pros fall back to their hardtails. Oddly, none of them seem inclined
to use a cyclocross bicycle, and the FS bikes in XC racing are all
spare, short-travel, minimal-bob specialty stuff. Purposeful, but the
antithesis of the "motorless motorcycle" movement.
In the trailbike world, 6" (or so) FS bikes currently compromise between
being rideable up hills and fun on some pretty substantial drops.
> defunct Bianchi models of 15 years ago, which used 700C rims and failed
> utterly in the marketplace, we now have "29ers" with wheels that are
> hard to design a frame around and tires that are astonishingly heavy.
> The 4" wide Endomorph tire on the Large Marge rims on the Surly Puglsey
> may be the logical culmination (I've ridden the Pugsley, it's actually a
> hoot but I wouldn't want to ride it all day). Well, one more step: the
> 36" wheel MTB which is being produced in southern Minnesota for a bike
> shop in Faribault. I believe this has become argumentum ad absurdum.
Is your thought that the 29er and the wider 26 are parallel trends?
Because the Pugsley is a 26" wheeled bike. If the problem with 29ers is
that the rims are too heavy, isn't the Large Marge with Endomorph tires
the logical alternative to the 650B?
BTW, I would love to see this analysis applied to the rise and fall of
the 650C wheel size. Ironically, that's a size I think could have legs!
* * *
I wrote this because I thought that this wheel-size-ist history of
recent developments in cycling was...odd. And, without wanting to be
mean about it, I think it's wrong.
It's no skin off my nose (well, minimal skin...) if the 650B rises
again. But I think the crack about these wheels having about the same
justification as 172.5 mm cranks is pretty sharp. There's a fine-ness of
distinction between 26", 650B, and 700C that makes one question the
interest in encouraging a third standard for big-wheeled bicycles*.
Meanwhile, you failed to mention one of the big growth areas in cycling
right now: cyclocross. You could see this as a parallel to the 29er
movement, but I think a lot of the fun of CX bicycles comes from these
middling fat knobby tires that seem to roll over everything in sight
while still letting the bike be pretty darned fast (at least compared to
other non-road bikes) on pavement. A bit of exposure to CXing has led me
into complete CX dementia; I'm this close to entering MTB races with the
thing (a sure-fire loss, but I'll have fun trying).
CX, of course, is implicitly (in the tire-size-centric view) a movement
to take the 700C wheel and make it bigger. So perhaps it is doomed to
the land of 36" wheels. (It's Coker Tire that sells 36" tires; they
apparently make a cruiser bicycle around them; ironically, this means
the 36" MTB is tapping into an extant supply of consumables!)
*Yes, I know, 27" is really common and you can still buy wheels and
tires for it. But nobody is trying to revive them**, they're trying to
support the huge quantity of bike-boom equipment built to that spec,
some of it really good stuff, like my delightful Miyata 210, which,
while it might be even nicer if it was compatible with 700C stuff, is
still lovely as it is.
**NAHBS 2008. You know it.
--
Ryan Cousineau rcousine@sfu.ca http://www.wiredcola.com/
"I don't want kids who are thinking about going into mathematics
to think that they have to take drugs to succeed." -Paul Erdos
|
| | | | |
Date: 24 May 2007 12:30:04
From: Tim McNamara
Subject: Re: 650B movement is growing!
|
In article <rcousine-916931.01051224052007@news.telus.net >,
Ryan Cousineau <rcousine@sfu.ca > wrote:
> In article <timmcn-9C6AE7.00003324052007@news.iphouse.com>,
> Tim McNamara <timmcn@bitstream.net> wrote:
>
> Tim, I have to call you on the following paragraph, which seems to be
> making a rather large number of curious assumptions.
>
> > The 26" wheel mountain bike was supposed to be the savior of the
> > bike industry and was to render 700C road bikes obsolete. But it
> > too has
>
> The 26" wheel (at least when attached to mountain bikes) sold like
> gangbusters because it tapped into a huge, sudden interest in taking
> bicycles off-road.
Initially that was true. But the majority of MTB sales after the first
few years were to people who were never going to ride off road. The
sales were largely to people who wanted an upright position and fat
cushy tires. The percentage of MTB buyers who actually rode their bikes
off-road was fairly small.
It's the same phenomenon that we saw with SUVs. Very few people who buy
an SUV have any intention of off-roading. Most people really wanted a
station wagon (estate wagon to the UK contingent), but cooler, and also
bought into the illusion of safety that driving an outsized vehicle
brings.
If you cast your mind back to the breathless hype-filled days of
mountain biking, there were predictions all over the cycling media and
the trade magazines that MTBs were the future and that 700C was
obsolete, a done deal, soon to go the way of tubulars and chromed steel
rims.
The perfect bike for the majority of the bike-buying public IMHO is the
classic Raleigh 3 speed.
|
| | | | |
Date: 24 May 2007 01:34:06
From: G.T.
Subject: Re: 650B movement is growing!
|
Ryan Cousineau wrote:
> In article <timmcn-9C6AE7.00003324052007@news.iphouse.com>,
> Tim McNamara <timmcn@bitstream.net> wrote:
>
>> 650B is not a new standard, it has been around for decades. Using an
>> existing standard can hardly be considered "splintering" of the market.
>
> Oh, you're going to love my 27" revival plan.
Do tell! I've been working on one too. Love those Club Roost
CrossTerra Tire 27" x 1 3/8" tires.
>
> Tim, I have to call you on the following paragraph, which seems to be
> making a rather large number of curious assumptions.
>
>> The 26" wheel mountain bike was supposed to be the savior of the bike
>> industry and was to render 700C road bikes obsolete. But it too has
>
> The 26" wheel (at least when attached to mountain bikes) sold like
> gangbusters because it tapped into a huge, sudden interest in taking
> bicycles off-road. My guess is that the key to the MTB revolution was
> that for the first time rugged yet relatively lightweight bicycles
> suitable for terrain previously considered unrideable (no seriously,
> Sheldon tells of shock upon being encountered on certain trails with his
> proto-MTB (a Raleigh 20 or some similarly absurd adaptation)).
>
Actually Victor Vincente built some of his Topanga!s with 20" wheels
back in the early 80s.
Greg
--
The ticketbastard Tax Tracker:
http://www.ticketmastersucks.org/tracker.html
Dethink to survive - Mclusky
|
| | | | | |
Date: 24 May 2007 09:42:36
From: Ryan Cousineau
Subject: Re: 650B movement is growing!
|
In article <135ajfv45375956@corp.supernews.com >,
"G.T." <getnews1@dslextreme.com > wrote:
> Ryan Cousineau wrote:
> > In article <timmcn-9C6AE7.00003324052007@news.iphouse.com>,
> > Tim McNamara <timmcn@bitstream.net> wrote:
> >
> >> 650B is not a new standard, it has been around for decades. Using an
> >> existing standard can hardly be considered "splintering" of the market.
> >
> > Oh, you're going to love my 27" revival plan.
>
> Do tell! I've been working on one too. Love those Club Roost
> CrossTerra Tire 27" x 1 3/8" tires.
First, we move on the CX market. We sell them as "29ers for 'cross"
Then, we convince the road market that just as 650c was driven out of
the market before, now 27" will drive 700c out of the market. The key
moment will be when we convince 27" roadies to start referring to 700c
wheels as "triathlete wheels." All good things follow from that.
Finally, we get Grant to just Haaate 27" wheels. That should ensure
their triumphant arrival, atop cheesy replicas of expensive road bikes,
at the gates of the department stores.
> > Tim, I have to call you on the following paragraph, which seems to be
> > making a rather large number of curious assumptions.
> >
> >> The 26" wheel mountain bike was supposed to be the savior of the bike
> >> industry and was to render 700C road bikes obsolete. But it too has
> >
> > The 26" wheel (at least when attached to mountain bikes) sold like
> > gangbusters because it tapped into a huge, sudden interest in taking
> > bicycles off-road. My guess is that the key to the MTB revolution was
> > that for the first time rugged yet relatively lightweight bicycles
> > suitable for terrain previously considered unrideable (no seriously,
> > Sheldon tells of shock upon being encountered on certain trails with his
> > proto-MTB (a Raleigh 20 or some similarly absurd adaptation)).
>
> Actually Victor Vincente built some of his Topanga!s with 20" wheels
> back in the early 80s.
Believeable. I just took apart my BMX 7-speed, but once it gets back
together as a singlespeed BMX (heh), I shall take it up a mountain bike
path or two.
Could be fun,
--
Ryan Cousineau rcousine@sfu.ca http://www.wiredcola.com/
"I don't want kids who are thinking about going into mathematics
to think that they have to take drugs to succeed." -Paul Erdos
|
| | | | | | |
Date: 24 May 2007 12:02:39
From: G.T.
Subject: Re: 650B movement is growing!
|
Ryan Cousineau wrote:
> In article <135ajfv45375956@corp.supernews.com>,
> "G.T." <getnews1@dslextreme.com> wrote:
>
>> Ryan Cousineau wrote:
>>> In article <timmcn-9C6AE7.00003324052007@news.iphouse.com>,
>>> Tim McNamara <timmcn@bitstream.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>> 650B is not a new standard, it has been around for decades. Using an
>>>> existing standard can hardly be considered "splintering" of the market.
>>> Oh, you're going to love my 27" revival plan.
>> Do tell! I've been working on one too. Love those Club Roost
>> CrossTerra Tire 27" x 1 3/8" tires.
>
> First, we move on the CX market. We sell them as "29ers for 'cross"
>
> Then, we convince the road market that just as 650c was driven out of
> the market before, now 27" will drive 700c out of the market. The key
> moment will be when we convince 27" roadies to start referring to 700c
> wheels as "triathlete wheels." All good things follow from that.
>
> Finally, we get Grant to just Haaate 27" wheels. That should ensure
> their triumphant arrival, atop cheesy replicas of expensive road bikes,
> at the gates of the department stores.
>
Excellent strategy!
Greg
--
The ticketbastard Tax Tracker:
http://www.ticketmastersucks.org/tracker.html
Dethink to survive - Mclusky
|
| |
Date: 23 May 2007 16:28:53
From: datakoll@yahoo.com
Subject: Re: 650B movement is growing!
|
>
> Now, it seems like things have continued to evolve to the point where
> it
> makes sense to try some 650B knobbies on some well-designed bikes and
> get
> some real-world feedback. I don't think it makes too much sense to
> decide
> it won't work without that."
>
> Further,
Further, let's consolidate here and get knobbies on 700c with wider
rims and BB
what the arguement against 700ck and then for 650bk?
more great american bicycle industrialist know how?
aerodynamics at 16 mph? a cross section threshold there like flat
earth?
too many midgets and dwarfs running around in california?
did you miss your meds this morning?
do you own drivendwell stock?
is that feedback?
you and drivendwell want a monopoly in excluesievity for less material
costs at higher prices?
is this a frame fits into your beem cooper?
|
| |
Date: 23 May 2007 15:57:48
From: bfd
Subject: Re: 650B movement is growing!
|
On May 23, 3:21 pm, "G.T." <getne...@dslextreme.com > wrote:
> "bfd" <bfd...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>
> news:1179957987.891797.176200@q66g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...
>
>
>
>
>
> > Check it out, SOMA, a bicycle mfr (www.somafab.com) is very
> > "interested" in the 650B conversion by Ed Bradley:
>
> >http://www.flickr.com/photo_zoom.gne?id=496876397&size=o
>
> > In fact, some have stated that SOMA and other mfrs are now
> > "influenced" by the 650B movement and some new 650B goodies are
> > coming. Keep your eyes OPEN@!#$%
>
> > Another biggie - the Kirk Pacenti's 650B mt bike:
>
> >http://www.frameforum.net/forum2/index.php?showtopic=3034
>
> >http://www.singletrackworld.com/article.php?sid=2349
>
> >http://www.smugmug.com/keyword/all/pacenti#133877457
>
> > Get ready, its coming! What's not to like?!!!
>
> YATS? Excuse me while I fall asleep at this news. A 650b mtn bike? BFD.
> 700c mtn bikes are already established, unfortunately, why do we need Yet
> Another Tire Size inbetween 26" and 700c?
>
Here's what someone said on the RBW list:
"700C wheels used off-road have great rolling momentum, but by the
time you
fatten 'em up for serious rocks, they get pretty heavy (and people
start
calling them "29ers"). Most of the folks who really like the 29er
approach
of- road (as opposed to the CX/Country bike size) tend to be big,
lanky
people. At 5'11", I feel like it makes a bit larger bike than I
want.
26" wheels feel smallish to me, though right now it's a necessary evil
to
get the big profile that eats up rocky topography.
Something in the middle makes sense for me. 650B/584 is a blast on
fire
roads, dirt paths and similar conditions. And that's just on a
conversion
with a seriously low BB...
http://www.cyclofiend.com/cc/2006/cc060r2-cc-jim0506.html
There's nothing magic about 26", other than that's what the
cruisers-cum-klunkerz used and it became a de facto standard. In the
mid-90's, when that first catalog came out, it was reasonably
difficult to
find a shop with a broad selection of 700C road tires, let alone
584/650B.
I don't think it on anyone's radar.
Now, it seems like things have continued to evolve to the point where
it
makes sense to try some 650B knobbies on some well-designed bikes and
get
some real-world feedback. I don't think it makes too much sense to
decide
it won't work without that."
Further, Rivendell, one of the founders of the 650B movement, is
coming out with its 650B Mt Bike - the Bombadil:
http://www.cyclofiend.com/rbw/bombadil07.html
Scroll down for another pic of the Bombadil:
http://www.cyclofiend.com/rbw/#latest
|
| | |
Date: 24 May 2007 01:50:12
From: Steve Gravrock
Subject: Re: 650B movement is growing!
|
On 2007-05-23, bfd <bfd853@yahoo.com > wrote:
> Further, Rivendell, one of the founders of the 650B movement, is
> coming out with its 650B Mt Bike - the Bombadil:
>
> http://www.cyclofiend.com/rbw/bombadil07.html
>
> Scroll down for another pic of the Bombadil:
> http://www.cyclofiend.com/rbw/#latest
Other than the bottom bracket height, the frame and fork geometry looks
like it's straight out of the 80s. Lose the moustache bars and throw on
a chainstay-mounted roller cam, and it could pass for just about any
manufacturer's 1985 offering. The biggest thing that jumped out at me
was the fork. That much rake hasn't been common on mountain bikes for
quite a long time.
If I'm not completely mistaken, those are friction bar-end shifters. I
wonder how well that works off-road.
|
| | | |
Date: 24 May 2007 00:09:06
From: Tim McNamara
Subject: Re: 650B movement is growing!
|
In article <slrnf59rqk.7rl.usenet@panix2.panix.com >,
Steve Gravrock <usenet@sdg.users.panix.com > wrote:
> On 2007-05-23, bfd <bfd853@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > Further, Rivendell, one of the founders of the 650B movement, is
> > coming out with its 650B Mt Bike - the Bombadil:
> >
> > http://www.cyclofiend.com/rbw/bombadil07.html
> >
> > Scroll down for another pic of the Bombadil:
> > http://www.cyclofiend.com/rbw/#latest
>
> Other than the bottom bracket height, the frame and fork geometry
> looks like it's straight out of the 80s. Lose the moustache bars and
> throw on a chainstay-mounted roller cam, and it could pass for just
> about any manufacturer's 1985 offering. The biggest thing that jumped
> out at me was the fork. That much rake hasn't been common on mountain
> bikes for quite a long time.
Sure it is. The rake (offset) is located at the fork crown rather than
the ends of the fork blades, and of course since you *have* to have 5"
of travel the fork blades are much longer on suspension forks. That
gives about the same amount of rake (offset), it's just disguised by the
straight fork legs.
MTBs have been locked into 73 degree seat tubes with 71 degree head
tubes for ages- the so-called "NORBA geometry." Most MTBs use pretty
much the same steering geometry.
> If I'm not completely mistaken, those are friction bar-end shifters.
> I wonder how well that works off-road.
Having used that type of shifter for years off-road on my mountain bikes
(which I equipped with drop bars as I hate flat bars and didn't like
moustache bars) and cyclo-cross bikes, I can testify that they work
fine.
I have never figured out what is so difficult about friction shifting.
I went back to downtube friction shifters from Ergo/STI shortly after I
stopped racing.
|
| | | | |
Date: 24 May 2007 19:09:39
From: Steve Gravrock
Subject: Re: 650B movement is growing!
|
On 2007-05-24, Tim McNamara <timmcn@bitstream.net > wrote:
> In article <slrnf59rqk.7rl.usenet@panix2.panix.com>,
> Steve Gravrock <usenet@sdg.users.panix.com> wrote:
>
>> On 2007-05-23, bfd <bfd853@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>> > Further, Rivendell, one of the founders of the 650B movement, is
>> > coming out with its 650B Mt Bike - the Bombadil:
>> >
>> > http://www.cyclofiend.com/rbw/bombadil07.html
[...]
>> The biggest thing that jumped
>> out at me was the fork. That much rake hasn't been common on mountain
>> bikes for quite a long time.
>
> Sure it is. The rake (offset) is located at the fork crown rather than
> the ends of the fork blades, and of course since you *have* to have 5"
> of travel the fork blades are much longer on suspension forks. That
> gives about the same amount of rake (offset), it's just disguised by the
> straight fork legs.
Compare to the upper bike in this picture, which appears to have quite a
bit less rake: <http://www.panix.com/~sdg/usenet/mtbs.jpg >. I don't have
a direct side-on photo to show you, but the upper fork legs are parallel
to and in line with the head tube (not offset forward). There is quite a
bit less forward bend in the fork legs.
Flipping through <http://www.firstflightbikes.com/vintage.htm > a bit, it
looks to me like forks started to look less like the Bombadil's and more
like mine in the late 80s.
>> If I'm not completely mistaken, those are friction bar-end shifters.
>> I wonder how well that works off-road.
>
> Having used that type of shifter for years off-road on my mountain bikes
> (which I equipped with drop bars as I hate flat bars and didn't like
> moustache bars) and cyclo-cross bikes, I can testify that they work
> fine.
>
> I have never figured out what is so difficult about friction shifting.
> I went back to downtube friction shifters from Ergo/STI shortly after I
> stopped racing.
I'm not arguing that friction shifting is difficult, but I do think it
requires more attention than indexed shifting. I've never used friction
off-road, but I can't imagine that it would be helpful in some of the
situations I encounter.
Consider this scenario: You come around a corner and find a steep slope
right in front of you. The trail is rooted and maybe a little rocky.
Unless you're a lot stronger than me, you need to downshift three or
four cogs *right now*, and do it while keeping the vast majority of your
attention on the trail surface. While friction shifting isn't rocket
science, it does require a bit more attention than jamming a button with
your thumb once or twice.
Now, it may very well be that Grant Peterson is a far better rider than
me. It may also be that the Bombadil is set up for trails that have
fewer obstacles and longer lines of sight, like this:
<http://www.cyclofiend.com/Images/rbw/tetsu01.jpg >
|
| | | | | |
Date: 24 May 2007 17:34:53
From: Tim McNamara
Subject: Re: 650B movement is growing!
|
In article <slrnf5bonj.4o9.usenet@panix1.panix.com >,
Steve Gravrock <usenet@sdg.users.panix.com > wrote:
> On 2007-05-24, Tim McNamara <timmcn@bitstream.net> wrote:
> > In article <slrnf59rqk.7rl.usenet@panix2.panix.com>,
> > Steve Gravrock <usenet@sdg.users.panix.com> wrote:
> >
> >> On 2007-05-23, bfd <bfd853@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> > Further, Rivendell, one of the founders of the 650B movement, is
> >> > coming out with its 650B Mt Bike - the Bombadil:
> >> >
> >> > http://www.cyclofiend.com/rbw/bombadil07.html
>
> [...]
>
> >> The biggest thing that jumped out at me was the fork. That much
> >> rake hasn't been common on mountain bikes for quite a long time.
> >
> > Sure it is. The rake (offset) is located at the fork crown rather
> > than the ends of the fork blades, and of course since you *have* to
> > have 5" of travel the fork blades are much longer on suspension
> > forks. That gives about the same amount of rake (offset), it's
> > just disguised by the straight fork legs.
>
> Compare to the upper bike in this picture, which appears to have
> quite a bit less rake: <http://www.panix.com/~sdg/usenet/mtbs.jpg>. I
> don't have a direct side-on photo to show you, but the upper fork
> legs are parallel to and in line with the head tube (not offset
> forward). There is quite a bit less forward bend in the fork legs.
Sure they are offset forward, juts look at the fork crown. MTBs with
suspension forks tend to use one of two approaches: one is to keep the
fork blade sockets even with the steerer tube socket and slope the fork
legs forward; the other is to move the fork leg sockets ahead of the
steerer tube socket and keep the fork legs parallel with the steerer.
The suspension fork in this example does the latter.
> Flipping through <http://www.firstflightbikes.com/vintage.htm> a bit,
> it looks to me like forks started to look less like the Bombadil's
> and more like mine in the late 80s.
Road bikes also saw much less curl in the fork blades around then. Some
simple went for a longer "banana bend" shape and some sloped the blades
at an angle at the fork crown (a la the Henry James fork crown, which
slopes the fork blades forward 3 degrees). Some even went to straight
fork blades with all the offset given at the fork crown.
> >> If I'm not completely mistaken, those are friction bar-end
> >> shifters. I wonder how well that works off-road.
> >
> > Having used that type of shifter for years off-road on my mountain
> > bikes (which I equipped with drop bars as I hate flat bars and
> > didn't like moustache bars) and cyclo-cross bikes, I can testify
> > that they work fine.
> >
> > I have never figured out what is so difficult about friction
> > shifting. I went back to downtube friction shifters from Ergo/STI
> > shortly after I stopped racing.
>
> I'm not arguing that friction shifting is difficult, but I do think
> it requires more attention than indexed shifting. I've never used
> friction off-road, but I can't imagine that it would be helpful in
> some of the situations I encounter.
>
> Consider this scenario: You come around a corner and find a steep
> slope right in front of you. The trail is rooted and maybe a little
> rocky. Unless you're a lot stronger than me, you need to downshift
> three or four cogs *right now*, and do it while keeping the vast
> majority of your attention on the trail surface. While friction
> shifting isn't rocket science, it does require a bit more attention
> than jamming a button with your thumb once or twice.
Not much more and I find that button-pushing sifting usually requires
that you get the pressure off the chain to complete the shift. But I
don't ride that stuff off-road at all any more. It was never that much
fun as far as I was concerned and I saw way too much erosion damage from
riders who placed a much higher emphasis on having their "extreme"
sports experience than over stewardship and good citizenship.
> Now, it may very well be that Grant Peterson is a far better rider
> than me. It may also be that the Bombadil is set up for trails that
> have fewer obstacles and longer lines of sight, like this:
> <http://www.cyclofiend.com/Images/rbw/tetsu01.jpg>
By reputation (I have never met the man) Grant is a very skilled rider.
|
| | | | | | |
Date: 25 May 2007 01:30:16
From: Steve Gravrock
Subject: Re: 650B movement is growing!
|
On 2007-05-24, Tim McNamara <timmcn@bitstream.net > wrote:
> In article <slrnf5bonj.4o9.usenet@panix1.panix.com>,
> Steve Gravrock <usenet@sdg.users.panix.com> wrote:
>
>> On 2007-05-24, Tim McNamara <timmcn@bitstream.net> wrote:
>> > In article <slrnf59rqk.7rl.usenet@panix2.panix.com>,
>> > Steve Gravrock <usenet@sdg.users.panix.com> wrote:
>> >
>> >> On 2007-05-23, bfd <bfd853@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> > Further, Rivendell, one of the founders of the 650B movement, is
>> >> > coming out with its 650B Mt Bike - the Bombadil:
>> >> >
>> >> > http://www.cyclofiend.com/rbw/bombadil07.html
[...]
>> Compare to the upper bike in this picture, which appears to have
>> quite a bit less rake: <http://www.panix.com/~sdg/usenet/mtbs.jpg>. I
>> don't have a direct side-on photo to show you, but the upper fork
>> legs are parallel to and in line with the head tube (not offset
>> forward). There is quite a bit less forward bend in the fork legs.
>
> Sure they are offset forward, juts look at the fork crown. MTBs with
> suspension forks tend to use one of two approaches: one is to keep the
> fork blade sockets even with the steerer tube socket and slope the fork
> legs forward; the other is to move the fork leg sockets ahead of the
> steerer tube socket and keep the fork legs parallel with the steerer.
> The suspension fork in this example does the latter.
You have accurately described the fork of the bike on the bottom. I was
talking about the one on the top. Perhaps I could have been more clear.
[...]
>> Consider this scenario: You come around a corner and find a steep
>> slope right in front of you. The trail is rooted and maybe a little
>> rocky. Unless you're a lot stronger than me, you need to downshift
>> three or four cogs *right now*, and do it while keeping the vast
>> majority of your attention on the trail surface. While friction
>> shifting isn't rocket science, it does require a bit more attention
>> than jamming a button with your thumb once or twice.
>
> Not much more and I find that button-pushing sifting usually requires
> that you get the pressure off the chain to complete the shift. But I
> don't ride that stuff off-road at all any more. It was never that much
> fun as far as I was concerned and I saw way too much erosion damage from
> riders who placed a much higher emphasis on having their "extreme"
> sports experience than over stewardship and good citizenship.
I'm not surprised that you don't find current mountain bikes
particularly appealing, since you have no interest in the sort of riding
that they are designed for. That many of them never see dirt is
certainly true, but it doesn't mean that things like indexed shifting
and suspension aren't awfully nice to have in certain situations.
As to the impact of mountain biking, I won't ever discuss that here or
anywhere else on Usenet for fear of attracting a particular troll who
did a lot of damage to rec.bicycles.* in the past.
|
| | | | |
Date: 24 May 2007 00:26:17
From: G.T.
Subject: Re: 650B movement is growing!
|
Tim McNamara wrote:
> In article <slrnf59rqk.7rl.usenet@panix2.panix.com>,
> Steve Gravrock <usenet@sdg.users.panix.com> wrote:
>
>> On 2007-05-23, bfd <bfd853@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Further, Rivendell, one of the founders of the 650B movement, is
>>> coming out with its 650B Mt Bike - the Bombadil:
>>>
>>> http://www.cyclofiend.com/rbw/bombadil07.html
>>>
>>> Scroll down for another pic of the Bombadil:
>>> http://www.cyclofiend.com/rbw/#latest
>> Other than the bottom bracket height, the frame and fork geometry
>> looks like it's straight out of the 80s. Lose the moustache bars and
>> throw on a chainstay-mounted roller cam, and it could pass for just
>> about any manufacturer's 1985 offering. The biggest thing that jumped
>> out at me was the fork. That much rake hasn't been common on mountain
>> bikes for quite a long time.
>
> Sure it is. The rake (offset) is located at the fork crown rather than
> the ends of the fork blades, and of course since you *have* to have 5"
> of travel the fork blades are much longer on suspension forks. That
> gives about the same amount of rake (offset), it's just disguised by the
> straight fork legs.
>
> MTBs have been locked into 73 degree seat tubes with 71 degree head
> tubes for ages- the so-called "NORBA geometry."
Actually before it was "NORBA geometry" it was "Bridgestone geometry".
That's one reason I'm very grateful for Sr. Peterson's stint at
Bridgestone. They were the first production bike to run a 71 degree
head angle. The "innovators" of the sport were still stuck at 68/69.
Greg
--
The ticketbastard Tax Tracker:
http://www.ticketmastersucks.org/tracker.html
Dethink to survive - Mclusky
|
| | | | | |
Date: 24 May 2007 12:36:08
From: Tim McNamara
Subject: Re: 650B movement is growing!
|
In article <135afgqfpbql479@corp.supernews.com >,
"G.T." <getnews1@dslextreme.com > wrote:
> Tim McNamara wrote:
> > In article <slrnf59rqk.7rl.usenet@panix2.panix.com>,
> > Steve Gravrock <usenet@sdg.users.panix.com> wrote:
> >
> >> On 2007-05-23, bfd <bfd853@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>> Further, Rivendell, one of the founders of the 650B movement, is
> >>> coming out with its 650B Mt Bike - the Bombadil:
> >>>
> >>> http://www.cyclofiend.com/rbw/bombadil07.html
> >>>
> >>> Scroll down for another pic of the Bombadil:
> >>> http://www.cyclofiend.com/rbw/#latest
> >> Other than the bottom bracket height, the frame and fork geometry
> >> looks like it's straight out of the 80s. Lose the moustache bars
> >> and throw on a chainstay-mounted roller cam, and it could pass for
> >> just about any manufacturer's 1985 offering. The biggest thing
> >> that jumped out at me was the fork. That much rake hasn't been
> >> common on mountain bikes for quite a long time.
> >
> > Sure it is. The rake (offset) is located at the fork crown rather
> > than the ends of the fork blades, and of course since you *have* to
> > have 5" of travel the fork blades are much longer on suspension
> > forks. That gives about the same amount of rake (offset), it's
> > just disguised by the straight fork legs.
> >
> > MTBs have been locked into 73 degree seat tubes with 71 degree head
> > tubes for ages- the so-called "NORBA geometry."
>
> Actually before it was "NORBA geometry" it was "Bridgestone
> geometry". That's one reason I'm very grateful for Sr. Peterson's
> stint at Bridgestone. They were the first production bike to run a
> 71 degree head angle. The "innovators" of the sport were still stuck
> at 68/69.
I forgot about that. And of course 73 degree head angles work fine
off-road- that's about what most cyclo-cross bikes have.
|
| |
Date: 23 May 2007 15:21:31
From: G.T.
Subject: Re: 650B movement is growing!
|
"bfd" <bfd853@yahoo.com > wrote in message
news:1179957987.891797.176200@q66g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...
> Check it out, SOMA, a bicycle mfr (www.somafab.com) is very
> "interested" in the 650B conversion by Ed Bradley:
>
> http://www.flickr.com/photo_zoom.gne?id=496876397&size=o
>
> In fact, some have stated that SOMA and other mfrs are now
> "influenced" by the 650B movement and some new 650B goodies are
> coming. Keep your eyes OPEN@!#$%
>
> Another biggie - the Kirk Pacenti's 650B mt bike:
>
> http://www.frameforum.net/forum2/index.php?showtopic=3034
>
> http://www.singletrackworld.com/article.php?sid=2349
>
> http://www.smugmug.com/keyword/all/pacenti#133877457
>
> Get ready, its coming! What's not to like?!!!
YATS? Excuse me while I fall asleep at this news. A 650b mtn bike? BFD.
700c mtn bikes are already established, unfortunately, why do we need Yet
Another Tire Size inbetween 26" and 700c?
Greg
|
| |
Date: 23 May 2007 15:15:58
From: Ozark Bicycle
Subject: Re: 650B movement is growing!
|
On May 23, 5:08 pm, bfd <bfd...@yahoo.com > wrote:
> On May 23, 3:06 pm, bfd <bfd...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > Check it out, SOMA, a bicycle mfr (www.somafab.com) is very
> > "interested" in the 650B conversion by Ed Bradley:
>
> >http://www.flickr.com/photo_zoom.gne?id=496876397&size=o
>
> > In fact, some have stated that SOMA and other mfrs are now
> > "influenced" by the 650B movement and some new 650B goodies are
> > coming. Keep your eyes OPEN@!#$%
>
> > Another biggie - the Kirk Pacenti's 650B mt bike:
>
> >http://www.frameforum.net/forum2/index.php?showtopic=3034
>
> >http://www.singletrackworld.com/article.php?sid=2349
>
> >http://www.smugmug.com/keyword/all/pacenti#133877457
>
> > Get ready, its coming! What's not to like?!!!
>
> Btw, some have stated that the Kirk Pacenti 650B mt bike was the
> biggest thing at this year's NAHMBS! Now, that's saying something...
.....something rather sad about the whole NAHMBS. If a mountain bike
with a weird wheel size (talk about a "solution in search of a
problem"!) is the biggest thing at the show, I guess there wasn't much
going on. Sad.
|
| | |
Date: 23 May 2007 16:01:48
From: * * Chas
Subject: Re: 650B movement is growing!
|
"Ozark Bicycle" <bicycleatelier@ozarkbicycleservice.com > wrote in message
news:1179958558.473037.241360@k79g2000hse.googlegroups.com...
> On May 23, 5:08 pm, bfd <bfd...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > On May 23, 3:06 pm, bfd <bfd...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > > Check it out, SOMA, a bicycle mfr (www.somafab.com) is very
> > > "interested" in the 650B conversion by Ed Bradley:
> >
> > >http://www.flickr.com/photo_zoom.gne?id=496876397&size=o
> >
> > > In fact, some have stated that SOMA and other mfrs are now
> > > "influenced" by the 650B movement and some new 650B goodies are
> > > coming. Keep your eyes OPEN@!#$%
> >
> > > Another biggie - the Kirk Pacenti's 650B mt bike:
> >
> > >http://www.frameforum.net/forum2/index.php?showtopic=3034
> >
> > >http://www.singletrackworld.com/article.php?sid=2349
> >
> > >http://www.smugmug.com/keyword/all/pacenti#133877457
> >
> > > Get ready, its coming! What's not to like?!!!
> >
> > Btw, some have stated that the Kirk Pacenti 650B mt bike was the
> > biggest thing at this year's NAHMBS! Now, that's saying something...
>
>
> .....something rather sad about the whole NAHMBS. If a mountain bike
> with a weird wheel size (talk about a "solution in search of a
> problem"!) is the biggest thing at the show, I guess there wasn't much
> going on. Sad.
>
Big deal... I built a lugged frame 700c MTB back in 1976. Rode it for
years with cyclocross sewups or 700c x 35 clinchers until it got stolen in
1982. I built another one in 1992, almost the same thing except I used
heavy gage 531 and Shimano Deore components.
Now 29" (700c) is finally becoming popular in MTBs.
The problem with folks who support eccentric equipment is that most of
them never ran a retail or wholesale business and had to manage inventory.
The LBS that has one of the best selections of tires keeps close to 100
different varieties from 12" to sewups. That's a lot of money to keep tied
up in inventory.
Chas.
|
| | | |
Date: 24 May 2007 01:00:01
From: A Muzi
Subject: Re: 650B movement is growing!
|
>> bfd <bfd...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>> Check it out, SOMA, a bicycle mfr (www.somafab.com) is very
>>>> "interested" in the 650B conversion by Ed Bradley:
>>>> http://www.flickr.com/photo_zoom.gne?id=496876397&size=o
-snip-
>>> Btw, some have stated that the Kirk Pacenti 650B mt bike was the
>>> biggest thing at this year's NAHMBS! Now, that's saying something...
> "Ozark Bicycle" <bicycleatelier@ozarkbicycleservice.com> wrote
>> .....something rather sad about the whole NAHMBS. If a mountain bike
>> with a weird wheel size (talk about a "solution in search of a
>> problem"!) is the biggest thing at the show, I guess there wasn't much
>> going on. Sad.
* * Chas wrote:
-snip-
> Now 29" (700c) is finally becoming popular in MTBs.
> The problem with folks who support eccentric equipment is that most of
> them never ran a retail or wholesale business and had to manage inventory.
> The LBS that has one of the best selections of tires keeps close to 100
> different varieties from 12" to sewups. That's a lot of money to keep tied
> up in inventory.
Only a hundred?
Dream on. 100 tire SKU's is _so_ 20th century.
--
Andrew Muzi
www.yellowjersey.org
Open every day since 1 April, 1971
|
| | | | |
Date: 24 May 2007 09:14:21
From: * * Chas
Subject: Re: 650B movement is growing!
|
"A Muzi" <am@yellowjersey.org > wrote in message
news:135aafmj2ec4d48@corp.supernews.com...
> >> bfd <bfd...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >>>> Check it out, SOMA, a bicycle mfr (www.somafab.com) is very
> >>>> "interested" in the 650B conversion by Ed Bradley:
> >>>> http://www.flickr.com/photo_zoom.gne?id=496876397&size=o
> -snip-
> >>> Btw, some have stated that the Kirk Pacenti 650B mt bike was the
> >>> biggest thing at this year's NAHMBS! Now, that's saying
something...
>
> > "Ozark Bicycle" <bicycleatelier@ozarkbicycleservice.com> wrote
> >> .....something rather sad about the whole NAHMBS. If a mountain bike
> >> with a weird wheel size (talk about a "solution in search of a
> >> problem"!) is the biggest thing at the show, I guess there wasn't
much
> >> going on. Sad.
>
> * * Chas wrote:
> -snip-
> > Now 29" (700c) is finally becoming popular in MTBs.
> > The problem with folks who support eccentric equipment is that most of
> > them never ran a retail or wholesale business and had to manage
inventory.
> > The LBS that has one of the best selections of tires keeps close to
100
> > different varieties from 12" to sewups. That's a lot of money to keep
tied
> > up in inventory.
>
> Only a hundred?
> Dream on. 100 tire SKU's is _so_ 20th century.
>
> --
> Andrew Muzi
I don't know how many tires..... they have a wall at least 50' long by 20'
high with tires sitting upright in bins. 100 seemed like a defensible
number. ;-)
Back in the day we stocked 10-15 kinds of sewups and maybe 8-10 kinds of
clinchers.
Chas.
|
| |
Date: 23 May 2007 15:14:04
From: Hank Wirtz
Subject: Re: 650B movement is growing!
|
On May 23, 3:06 pm, bfd <bfd...@yahoo.com > wrote:
> Check it out, SOMA, a bicycle mfr (www.somafab.com) is very
> "interested" in the 650B conversion by Ed Bradley:
>
> http://www.flickr.com/photo_zoom.gne?id=496876397&size=o
>
Man, that Speedster frame is _so_ pretty-looking.
I really, really want one.
|
| |
Date: 23 May 2007 15:08:30
From: bfd
Subject: Re: 650B movement is growing!
|
On May 23, 3:06 pm, bfd <bfd...@yahoo.com > wrote:
> Check it out, SOMA, a bicycle mfr (www.somafab.com) is very
> "interested" in the 650B conversion by Ed Bradley:
>
> http://www.flickr.com/photo_zoom.gne?id=496876397&size=o
>
> In fact, some have stated that SOMA and other mfrs are now
> "influenced" by the 650B movement and some new 650B goodies are
> coming. Keep your eyes OPEN@!#$%
>
> Another biggie - the Kirk Pacenti's 650B mt bike:
>
> http://www.frameforum.net/forum2/index.php?showtopic=3034
>
> http://www.singletrackworld.com/article.php?sid=2349
>
> http://www.smugmug.com/keyword/all/pacenti#133877457
>
> Get ready, its coming! What's not to like?!!!
Btw, some have stated that the Kirk Pacenti 650B mt bike was the
biggest thing at this year's NAHMBS! Now, that's saying something....
|
|
