You either already know of Rivendell (purveyors of wool, 650B, and the country bike, among many other things) and their philosophy, or you don't, and if you do, you probably know a lot about them.
Grant P and Co. seem to be a lightning rod for controversy and strongly-held ideological beliefs, part of the 'war' for the heart of the cycling consumer, and framers of the debate over what is and is not appropriate technology.
Love 'em or hate 'em, they seem to be one of the most interesting bike companies out there, so... what's your opinion? Do you agree or disagree with their philosophy and products? And why or why not?
Hoping for an interesting discussion, not a flame war... *crosses fingers* :smilewinkgrin:
Yeah, I had an email convo with Grant, and while I agreed with him on many things, bike sizing wasn't one of 'em.
To me it's like, okay, if you want the bars level with the saddle (or even a bit higher), won't an up-angled stem take care of that? Why do I need a big honkin' frame? Just so I can run a traditional stem 'cuz it's oh-so-pretty?
1) I'm not the one that turned the frame materials poll into scorched earth; others did that, as anyone reading said thread can see.
2) Things are as controversial as ppl choose to make 'em. I simply do polls/threads on subjects I find interesting.
After all, while it'd be safely boring to do a poll on a subject that most ppl find noncontroversial (Ex: "Do you like gum?"), I'm not sure that you'd learn much. :frown2:
The 650b wheels especially strike me as just being difficult for the sake of being difficult. People would have a lot more choices of tires & tubes, and find them easier to replace in out-of-the-way locations, with 700c wheels.
I'm ok with the 650B phenomenon. It's almost smack dab in the middle between 26" and 700C, and it seems like it's going to become an accepted size on the mtn bike side of things. If it's accepted there, its got some kind of shot on the road side as well. And with acceptance would come more tires and rims. Tubes aren't a prob, 26" tubes (and I think 700C as well) will fit.
I like it 'cuz the whole 700C-to-650B conversion thing for road bikes makes perfect sense for some ppl... turn a single-purpose racing bike into a more practical all-around bike. It's also good for people who ride small frames... while some ppl insist that you can have great geometry plus good tire clearance with 700C on a small frame, for some reason very few of those ppl ever seem to be framebuilders...
Also, visually, and in how they feel/roll, they're closer to 700C than 26" is, and that may end up being important. 26" has never caught on as a road bike wheel size, despite the very wide abundance of tires and rims... prolly in part 'cuz it's just 'too different' from 700C.
Of course, leave it to Grant to take a pretty good idea and push it too far. He's apparently threatening to introduce yet ANOTHER wheel standard beyond 650B, this one with a 603mm bead-set diameter. Because, you know, 26", 650B, and 700C just aren't enough. :lol:
Now, the complaints- As much as I used to admire Rivendell, I think they've really jumped the rails. Their products have become ridiculously expensive- $1600 for a non-custom 4130 frame is just stupid. $250 for a non-waterproof wool tweed bag is crazy. And $80 for a pair of brakes that sell elsewhere for $35 is criminal.
I tend to agree. Rivendell's pricepoints are often cuckoo for cocoa puffs. ut:
To be fair, they do have the Bleriot, which is attainable price-wise. But of course they're now going to discontinue it. :lol:
I now hear Grant is going to be introducing four new bikes at the Bleriot's price point, or slightly below, in early-mid 2009. That's the good news.
The bad news, he apparently wants to offer them in far fewer sizes (like four), and with much more sloping top tubes, so that "a wider variety of riders can fit". :shocked:
Sorry, but I personally HATE the 'squashed, BMX bike look' you get with steeply sloping top tubes, and I don't want to ride a frame that's 2-3 cm off just because it's slightly inconvenient for the bike maker to offer enough sizes. So, I have my doubts that these new affordable Rivendells will appeal to me.
That's the frustrating thing about Riv... it always seems to be one step forward, one step back with them. :frown2: ...But I tend to like Riv even still. 'cuz the one step forward is usually one that no one else is willing to take first.
Grant has some ideas I agree with and some I don't. They are generally thoughtful and based in the desire to make owning and riding bikes enjoyable. IMO, that is a more respectable way to sell product than pretending that your bikes are going to make people race (or train) like pros.
I like that he is putting his opinion out there without all the apologies and YMMVs that some of the "wahhhh, he's too preachy!" folks seem to need. Pi$$es off all the right people. His opinion is there to take or leave -- pick one and go ride.
Grant's a harmless crank. Unfortunately, like so many harmless cranks throughout history, he's picked up rabid followers.
And some of them are pretty insulting.
I've been told by raging grant-o-phyles that my opinion of my rivendell bike is not valid, and that if I don't think it's perfect, I should just "sell it and buy the latest carbon whatever."
I've never owned a bike that I got so much grief for saying it wasn't as comfortable as promised. That's not Grant's fault, but again, some of his fans are a little on the rabid side of fanatical.
A forum community dedicated to Road Bike owners and enthusiasts. Come join the discussion about bike parts, components, deals, performance, modifications, classifieds, troubleshooting, maintenance, and more!