I replaced my LHT with a Hunqapillar. My experience with it is filed under Hunqapillar on blog.The LHT is similar to the Hunq in function but the Hunq is more nimble and more comfortable. I'd say the Cross Check is closer to the Hilson. The LHT and Cross Check are both great bikes,my '86 Trek 560 is a great bike but there just isn't a "poor man's Riv." Their geometry is different enoughto make them a completely different animal.
Originally Posted by corwin1968
Thank you very much for this great list! I appreciate your help.
Originally Posted by mbmuller
I found the basis for my "poor man's rivendell"! I try not to drink any particular brand of Kool-Aid too deeply but I also try to keep an open mind so I'm willing to try out some of Grant's ideas. I've been a fan of hybrids since 1995 and feel that they embody many of the elements that Grant advocates....wide tires, upright riding position, multi-use, etc... I've had a Trek 730 since 1995 and considered using it as a basis for a new build but it is a bit too small (19" frame...other than that, I love it) and my dad has been using it to pull my nephew in a trailer and the newer bike I gave him doesn't work in that role so I want to give it back to him. I thought about buying an LHT or Cross Check frame and gradually building it up with all new components but I also spent time looking for older bikes.
Originally Posted by chriswrong
This week, Craigslist yielded solid gold for me! I guy in the subdivision next door had a 1995 Trek 730 in a 21" frame size which is EXACTLY my dream bike for a build. It was also less than $200 and in much better shape than my 19" 730 so I snatched it up. It was literally "love at first ride". The combination of the bigger frame and the fatter tires is just heavenly for me.
The plan is to powdercoat it (probably black), add pull-back handlebars, maybe a Brooks sprung seat and eventually a silver crankset (I like the looks but the current black one has lot's of life left in it). The bike already has fat 700 x 38c's on it which make a huge difference from the 700 x 35c's on my original bike. I'll eventually try even fatter tires and I'm pretty sure it will take Schwalbe Big Apples. There's tons of clearance even with the 38's on there. The frame is Made in the USA butted Cro-moly and since I've been riding the same year and model since 1995, I have complete confidence in it for my purposes.
Any old (1980s) sport touring bike will do. I had my Raleigh Marathon set up as a backup commuter and it did a creditable job.
I wrecked that one, but have since gotten a Super Course that would be even better, I think, if I decided to outfit it similarly. Schwinn Travellers are great for the purpose as well as all the other bikes suggested in the thread. The way I see it, you can buy a new Rivendell, or you can pay a lot less for a bike that the Rivendells seek to imitate.
1. find a nice sport-touring frameset (or whole bike) on CL or Ebay
2. Renovate to your liking
[QUOTE=canyoneagle;13608378]1. find a nice sport-touring frameset (or whole bike) on CL or Ebay
2. Renovate to your liking
+1 Before and after
My version. No fancy lugs though.
' bought the frameset for $190 and then built it from parts, mostly from CL.
Sadly, I no longer own it.
When I built my Atlantis up from a bare frame back in (I think) 1998, the Atlantis *was* the poor man's Rivendell. Mine was one of the first of the Atlantis frames built in Japan.
Glad I was reading the whole thing, I was going to post the Nishiki GT Riv as a candidate also. Mine is not that good looking though,
Originally Posted by sonatageek
The real deal. Cost a lot--too much. But I wanted one for more than a decade, and bought some nice but less then ideal bikes for almost as much but was not satisfied.
Bob Jackson custom Special Tourist purchased on local craiglist for under $1000. Close to Riv in a lot of ways.
Lotus Eclair. Traded for it with a bike I paid $100 for--so let's say I got it for $100. Very Riv-ish/Bobish. Suppose I could add barcons. Fine as is.
Recent purchase. The geometry of this bike is pretty close to the Riv. (72/71). I suppose I could add a Brooks as well as drop bars or mustache bars and barcons to make it closer to a Riv--but functionally it's scary close: steel, relaxed geometry, handles wide tires, low gears, and handlebars higher than saddle. Less than $100. Yikes!
So you need to ask yourself--what is it about a Riv that you want? The vibe? The function? Or something else?
At first, I was in love with the appearance of Rivendell bicycles but over several months of obsessively reading about bikes while riding my own, my desire switched over to the functional aspects of a Riv, although I still REALLY like their styling.
Originally Posted by Mercian Rider
I rode a Trek 730 Multi-track from 1995 to 2007 and loved it. I bought a Trek 7.2 FX in 2007 and rode it until a few months ago when I discovered Rivendell. I put the "steel vs Aluminum" debate to the test and steel won, hands down. This led me to looking for a steel bike that I could have a lot of flexibility to modify. I was really close to committing to a Surly LHT or Cross Check frame but the threadless headset and modern stem were a nagging and significant concern. I'm a big fan of classic looks and modern stems just don't cut it for me. My ideal bike is influenced by the old English 3-speeds as much as anything. I just want a lighter, multi-geared version.
I'm a super-clydesdale with degenerative disc disease so Grant's ideas on bicycle comfort really appealed to me. I've run high handlebars since 1995 but until a few months ago, my only inclination towards tire size was to go smaller! I was planning to try a fatter tire on my new build and luckily the 21" 730 I just bought has 700 x 38c's which feel amazingly different (and better) than the 700 x 35c's on my 19" 730. Score another one for Grant!
Basically, I'm looking for a functional bike with at least semi-classical styling. Lugs are cool and if I could have found an early 90's Trek multi-track with lugs I would have grabbed it but their absence on this bike doesn't bother me in the slightest.
The A.H.H was the first Rivendell to really grab my interest, primarily from watching the video of one being assembled from the box. After learning more about Riv's bikes and e-mailing Grant a few times, my interest switched more towards the Huqapillar/Bombadil/Atlantis side of things. Back in 1996 I thought I wanted a "roadie" bike so I bought one and ended up selling it within a year. I like sub one hour rides on bike paths with lots of scenery and people, not riding mile after mile on a highway or road. That bores me to death! I really think the new "Bosco Rubbe" might be the ultimate Rivendell bike for me, if I could put a triple on it. I might consider springing for the production version if for no other reason than there may not be a high quality bike of that type on the market.
I recently submitted to an overdose of fairy dust and bought a Hunqapillar. I've never ridden anything as comfortable,
but powdercoating my old Trek
And raising the handlebarsbrought it to a whole new level of comfort and usefulness also.
I guess my current ride could be considered somewhat of a poor man's retrogrouch bike. The geometry is likely wrong for it to be a Fauxindell.
Man thats pretty! Beautiful lugs and love the double top tube in my size. I wish they offered one with Canti mounts and I might just wip out the card and order one..
Originally Posted by Barrettscv
Am I the only person who thinks that it's just wrong for a company named Rivendell to be preaching that weight doesn't matter. I'm not saying that weight does matter, particularly in the style of bikes they make. I'm just saying that things made at Rivendell should be extremely light, almost magically so.
Well, your wallet will become magically light after you buy a Rivendell.
Originally Posted by Andy_K
For me I'd say that's the best modern example in the thread.
Great looking bike.
Originally Posted by michaelnel
I added another faux Rivendell to my stable in late summer. It's a Waterford RST-22, which normally would not be considered a poor-man's alternative, except I bought the frame,fork and headset used for about half the price of Rivendell's cheapest model. I could never afford a lugged Waterford at today's prices but you can get some great deals on used bikes if you are patient. This one was the perfect size and geometry for me, so I snapped it up as soon as I saw it.
Your DC looks great. Here's a shot of my A. Fauxmer Hilsen.
Originally Posted by michaelnel
Triple crank, 32mm tires, leather saddle, front rack.....not that much more than I can ask for.
Here is one in the Flavor of the old XO's that I picked up over the weekend.
1984 Trek 890 for "the Urban Canyon" The bike came on 26x1.5 RADIAL Panasonic tires. One year only bike from Trek. Its street biased Geometry.
Plan to go with a Mustache or Dirt drops, LX Derailleurs and 28/36/48 LX crank. 9 speed bar end shift with a real deal "Baggins bag" on a Nitto rack on the front I picked up a couple weeks ago.
Catalog picture http://www.vintage-trek.com/TrekBroc...Terrain.htm#27
Originally Posted by tarwheel
My poor man's Rivendell is my Surly, and I expect that'll be my only bike for the foreseeable future. Between financial constraints, storage constraints, and soon-to-be-born baby constraints my n+1 is more like nx1...
It seems that there is some feeling here that any bike that favors comfort and utility over looking like a race bike is a "poor man's Rivendell." While that probably is the core value, it's undeniable that there is also an aesthetic element that is lacking in many of the bikes posted in this thread. Nevertheless, I'm going to continue that trend by posting my MUP bike here (a made-over 1989 Specialized Rockhopper).
I tried to make Kool Aid, but I didn't have all the ingredients.
* Steel frame and fork
* Ability to fit very wide tires with fenders
* Comfortable handlebars (bonus points for them being oddly styled)
* Bars higher than the saddle
* Wheels appropriately sized for my lack of height
* Threaded headset with quill stem
* Non-racing geometry
* A bell
* Well thought out geometry
* A tall head tube
* A nice saddle
* A beautiful head badge
* A nice paint job
* A curb weight over 30 pounds
I've thought about having it powder coated and getting a Brooks saddle for it. Someone on the ss-fg forum once suggested (in a context unrelated to this bike) the idea of making faux lugs from JB Weld. I could probably get my powder coater to do something like that. He likes to play around. I'm afraid I can't fix the geometry, though it honestly isn't bad with a tall enough quill stem. I wish it had a taller head tube and lower bottom bracket.
As it sits, I've got less than $500 into it, and most of that was for the wheels and tires. No one will ever look at it and think, "Is that a Rivendell?" I can say, though, that I was influenced by Grant's ideas as I put it together.
Nice find!! I didn't know the old TREK MTB's had wheelbases that long!
Originally Posted by Grim
I think your bike meets the "Poor Man's Rivendell" category as well as any on this thread. Getting an old mountain bike and building it up is one of my pet projects. My first choice would be a mid-80's Stumpjumper. Recently there was a link on the Rivendell owner's groups where a guy had an old Bridgestone MB-x that he had powdercoated and retro-fitted with much of Rivendell's basic build (Sugino cranks, fenders, Albatross bar, bar-end shifters, etc..) and it looked great! There were a couple of pictures of Grant checking it out and riding it.
Originally Posted by Andy_K
I'll be doing the same thing as you in that I'll be utilizing some of Grant's ideas in my build. Very few bikes will equal the aesthetics of a Rivendell but we can aspire to coming close to the comfort level of one.