Singlespeed & Fixed Gear - does the rivendell quickbeam make anyone else drool?

http://www.rivendellbicycles.com/html/bikes_quickbeam.html

http://www.rivendellbicycles.com/images/QuickBeam_full.jpg

it's pretty, except for those ugly pully-style brakes.

not cc is it? why the cantis?

cc?

.

The Quickbeam is the cannonical four-speed bike. And darned nice, too.


http://www.bogeydog.net/pics/albums/album12/DSC_0001_001.sized.jpg

In a word, yes.

I think cc = cyclocross which is more traditionally abbreviated cx.

But the quickbeam is dead sexy like so much of what Riv does. Of course if I got one I'd have to immediately rebuild the rear wheel around a flip-flop hub. Sorry, gang, but I loves me a fixed gear.

As far as why canties instead of sidepulls... eh, why not? Frankly, they're the best rim brake out there. Actually, some will say that linear sidepulls (ie, v-brake) is, but that's just because centerpull cantis have been neutered for liability reasons.

On top of that, they allow for a nice fat tire if that's your thing and fenders for said fat tire, too.

Of course if I got one I'd have to immediately rebuild the rear wheel around a flip-flop hub.

The stock Quickbeam hub is flip/flop free/free.

And if any Quickbeam owners want to switch to a Kogswell rear hub, we have an upgrade program. Write us for details.
.

whats the kogswell f frame run?
anything in the 63cm area?

nice brakes ugh

The stock Quickbeam hub is flip/flop free/free.

Right, that's sort of what I meant. As I said, I'd like to run a fixed gear on that bike.

The answer is no. But you have to say it like John McLaughlin when he's yellin' at Eleanor Clift.

i really like rivendell's take on things in general, but their insistence that the quickbeam be equipped with two chainrings and no fixed hub strikes me as downright odd. I do like the frame and the innovative dropouts/"track" ends. i guess if i wanted to spend that much on a fixed gear frame (and i might, someday) I would get the frame and build it up myself.

i really like rivendell's take on things in general, but their insistence that the quickbeam be equipped with two chainrings and no fixed hub strikes me as downright odd.

Agreed. I'm often simultaneously impressed and annoyed at their insistence that if they're going to build a bike, it will be built in a particular way. I mean, it would be easy for them to ship a conventional fixed/free hub allowing the customer to run either two freewheels or a freewheel and a fixed gear. Or ever go fixed/fixed and allow any combination of single speeds.

Still, for the cash, it's probably no big deal to add in the cost of a set of spokes and hub to rebuild the wheel if that's your thing.

It occurs to me that they may have painted themselves into a corner with the two rings--after deciding to go that route, they couldn't very well put a fixed gear cog on it and (responsibly) sell it to a neophyte singlespeed user, since if you "shifted" to a different ring while riding fixed, the chainline would be too far off...causing death, dismemberment, and lawsuits.

when I look at that bike, all I can think: DIE.

I don't eat brie, I don't smoke a pipe, and I don't have a Sherlock Holmes cap.

whats the kogswell f frame run?
anything in the 63cm area?

The F has been replaced by the G.

http://kogswell.com/images/FmodGsm.jpg

Forum decorum prevents me from talking about prices.

And we dont have a 62 as such. But we add 2cm to the top head lug. And we cut the fork 2cm long. And since the head angle is steeper than the seat angle, as you move the stem and post up, the effective T/T length increases. So, the locknut on a 58 is where it would be on a normal 62. And if you trim the fork, where it would be on a 60. So our frames are 62/60 and 58/56, effectively.

uh...so this means if I like a 56/56, I should get the 54?

what about cash money? expensive?

Totally not into it the way they have it set up. I could fly with one if it was set up with cruiser bars, a big wicker basket, white walled tires and a Swallow. But only on nice days, to go to the store , and other such activities.

uh...so this means if I like a 56/56, I should get the 54?

Exactly.

']when I look at that bike, all I can think: DIE.

I don't eat brie, I don't smoke a pipe, and I don't have a Sherlock Holmes cap.You, good sir, wound me to the core. 'Tis toerags such as yourself that are bringing inestimable heartache to the cardigan wearing set. Good day.

The Quickbeam has the cantis because they refuse to build a production bike that can't be outfitted with really fat tires and fenders.

I've had a Riv QB for about six months now. It is unique, and my sense is that it is well thought out. The two chainrings are useful, and the chainline with the inner ring is obviously not quite 42 mm, but it works fine for off road riding. To me, the QB is closest to a SS cyclocross bike or a SS touring machine. It works well both on and off road, and is very stable on high speed descents (a Riv trademark). I can take my hands off the bars at 30 mph and it tracks straight and true. When I considered the purchase, I was concerned that it would be ponderous like a lot of touring machines because of the slack angles, but it's really quite a lot of fun.

Mine is set up as a bit more of a "go-fast" bike than many QB's. I've got a SSM Rolls saddle and the bars are an inch lower than the saddle. Initially I found the bike to be a bit "short" and I had difficulty getting really comfortable on it. This is probably because the Riv philosophy emphasizes getting the bars high for a more upright position. I ended up getting a longer stem and am now much more comfortable.

Another reservation I had was that the rims are fairly wide Araya touring types and the stock tires are Panaracer Pasela 32's. That's wider than I really need, and at some point I'll probably get some lighter and narrower wheels built up and run Pasela TG 28's instead. [Hey Kogswell, what's the deal on your "upgrade"?] That being said, the Pasela 32's don't seem to slow me down much. I've started taking the QB to all but the fastest club rides/practice races, and it seems to keep up fine. I quickly found the stock 18t freewheel to be too low for road riding, and am running a 16t instead. The 40x16 combination allows me to keep up with a group at 18-22 mph without much difficulty. Earlier today some fellows on a club ride wound it up to 28 in order to drop me and I totally ran out of gear at 26 mph. Fortunately they did not maintain it and I caught back up. You definitely learn to spin with a road SS or fixed.

I initially tried to run flat pedals as Grant Peterson suggests, but quickly discovered that I need some foot restraint. I abominate clips and straps, so I'm currently using some Shimano SPD's I borrowed from my son. The SPD's leave much to be desired so I have some Crank Bros Candy's on order.

The cheapo Shimano canti brakes work fine once you replace the pads with Kool Stops. They are easy to adjust, but the stock Shimano rubber is awful. Initially I got a lot of drive train noise, but that went away when I replaced the stock chain with a SRAM PC-58.

All in all, the QB is a lot of fun. Hope this helps.

Dr. Bill

You, good sir, wound me to the core. 'Tis toerags such as yourself that are bringing inestimable heartache to the cardigan wearing set. Good day.
:lol:

Hey Kogswell, what's the deal on your "upgrade"?

Email us and we'll give you the low-down: info@kogswell.com

rivindales are really nice but too relaxed for my taste. They should make a true track frame with all the fancy lugwork - that would be hot!

']when I look at that bike, all I can think: DIE.

I don't eat brie, I don't smoke a pipe, and I don't have a Sherlock Holmes cap.

but do you have a little jolly-boat?

C'mon, guys... what is cyclocross-like in that bike??? There isn't a sporty atom in that thing. It has the handlebars higher than the seat etc... And with that double crank... ugly as hell. What's the point, anyway? Does one ring line up with one side of the hub and the other with the other, or do they actually make a production bike with really bad chainline???

The bar/stem setup is a Rivendell trademark. You know what's beautiful about this country? You can change it if you don't like it!

As for the CX thing, according to Rivendell, it's built with a geometry somewhere between mountain and road, suitable for pavement and light trail use. It'll run some pretty fluffy tires, 40mm to be exact. That sounds a lot like CX geometry to me. It's hard to know for sure since they don't have the Quickbeam geometry published, but it doesn't look too far off.

Finally, the chainline thing... It's quite probable that they ship it with the setup so that a dead centered chainline would rest between the two rings, neither being great but neither being terrible either.

I hate to burst your bubble, but people used to race on setups like that. That's was the original Campagnolo derailleur, though they used a single ring and multiple cogs instead of the vice versa that the QB has going on.

i figured that most of the people on this forum would react exactly the way they did. the quickbeam isn't EXTREME enough for these people.

it makes too much sense to be cool.

if i had the scratch, i'd buy one.

maybe it will make me drool when I hit 75. but then I will probably drool anyway.

Slick marketing brochures can make almost anything look good. It won't be so "sexy" when the chain is black and it has scratches and dings here and there.

It'll still look elegant, like an old green British club racer.

I like it, but i would put TA cyclotouriste cranks and Honjo fenders on, and minimum 28mm tyres. also paul's neo retro canti's. It would make a great touring fixie.
http://store1.yimg.com/I/yhst-14044161843064_1851_670322

Man, I hope that brake setup is just for show, because the way cable is run through the hanger, I don't think it's going to stop anyone.

maybe it will make me drool when I hit 75. but then I will probably drool anyway.

8.65

If you like that bike, you would probably be happy with a Model-T, stiff collars, spats, suspenders, and pocket watches. To each his own.

Or perhaps a 1972 Volkswagen Super Beetle convertible. Check.

I just bought a pocket watch this morning. Really.

What an over-priced, over-hyped piece of junk. They must make a killing on those things.

Eh, you call it what you want but for a quality lugged frame hand built in a country with relatively decent wages and labor laws kitted out with decent mid-range components, I call it the going rate.

What would you expect to pay for a similarly outfitted Waterford? I don't think anyone's making a killing.

its a dorky looking bike with mismatches components. like the gaansari scorcher.
I think ANT gets the style right. its not a question of price.http://www.antbikemike.com/images/Bikes/lr1big.JPG

Ironically, everytime I've seen Mike he's been wearing an RBW cycling cap and has gone on record as saying that the Rambouillet is his perfect bicycle and that the Saluki is the bike he wished he'd built.

Then again, I once attended a talk by Sergio Pininfarina where he showed us video of his favorite car, a concept car that looked like a 90s Firebird that gained a bunch of weight in the hips. The thing was an oversized slice of cherry pie that barely fit in one lane.

pinanfarina is a freaking weirdo. i'd say more, but i don't want to draw this completely off topic.

back to the lecture at hand, the quickbeam isn't really my style, but that doesn't mean it's a bad bike.

I really like the Quickbeam, but I've been drinking Grant Peterson's Kool-Aid since I started fancying road bikes. It's an idiosyncratic design, and I'd personally prefer a Saluki with a fixed/free hub, but Rivendell rocks. As far as "making a killing," anyone who's interested should go to Riv's site and use the "Wayback Machine." I believe in '99 or '00, Peterson was literally begging people to buy one so that he didn't go bankrupt. Really.
I personally am a tinkerer, and I save a ton of money buying old 70's and 80's bikes and turning them into much the same thing, but if I had the extra money I would consider that a fair price. Just my 2 bits.

If we're gonna start posting pics of other bikes....I want an Ibis!

http://fixedgeargallery.com/nakashima2.jpg

I'd set mine up almost exactly like this one too, just with a Nitto Technomic stem.

That Ibis is drop-dead gorgeous.

That Ibis is drop-dead gorgeous.

Yeah, it looks almost exactly like a late 19th century and early 20th century racing bike. A replica perhaps? ;)

http://sheldonbrown.com/images/ranger-catalog.gif

http://sheldonbrown.com/images/ranger-duck.jpeg

The Quickbeam, like all Rivendells, has outstanding production values. And it is what it is, tautologically speaking. I joke about its four-speed setup, but many have embraced it.

And the ANT and Ibis Scorcher are both classics. Where did you find that Ibis photo?

Who's up for some butted steering tube action?

Found this (http://www.63xc.com/scorcher/scorcher.htm) about the Ibis Scorcher, by the way.