If anyone has access to a scanner and the issue of The Rivendell Reader that contains a review of the Bianchi San Jose, would you mind terribly scanning it (just the San Jose review, not the whole magazine...) and sending it to me? I understand that they give one the Rivendell treatment, which I'd be interested in seeing.

Thanks!

I may have it at home. Let me check tonight when I get home. I remember reading a San Jose review in one of the issues, but I don't know if I still have it.

If you could post it here, that'd be cool too.

"we have determined that the san jose is a quickbeam at 1/3 the price, but is completely worthless because it won't fit 38 tires, honjo fenders, and a gigantic baggins bag full of camping gear. Plus the shellacked cork tape thing didn't work so well."

Lol

Re: posting it here, I would go easy on the IP theft from rivendell if we can, but the review was very favorable. I think they got big tires and fenders like they like on it, and even put one of their "Let's run drop bars way the deuce up in the sky because that's clearly what they're designed for" mega-long stems on there.

Don't get me wrong, generally I love them and their philosophy, but I get a little tired of their "if you don't ride the way we ride, you're riding wrong" attitude. Sorry man, but some of us want an experience that's different from what you get from a really, really nice 70's bike boom bike.

hahahaaha

this is so funny.

Not to turn this totally into a thread about Grant's attitute but...

He is a "retro-grouch" in a lot of ways, but he also has one of the best concepts of what a great normal person bike should be (minus the price tag). He is pretty spot on in a lot of catagories about bikes and where quality parts are most important. Remember that he and Bridgestone USA got squashed not because they were building an inferior product in any way, but just because they did not do a good job at keeping up with main stream bike builders and the new fashion of bikes. That would make a lot of people seem sour...

I generally have a soft spot for iconoclastic visionaries with terrible business sense.

In any case, photocopying/scanning one article within the catalog would clearly qualify as fair use, at least by Cdn standards.

Oh, I also have a soft spot for them in general and Grant/Rivendell in particular, but I also get annoyed with people who claim to be guided by clear and simple ideologies, but then you start looking closely and it's a never-ending series of "excepts." Simplicity is good, except when making singlespeed bikes, in which case we're going to make the most complicated singlespeed in the history of the universe. Synthetic fabrics are bad, except when the wind is whipping through the loosely-knit wool we sell, then you might want to add a shell. Brifters are disgustingly ergonomic, but brake levers with hoods like brifters are awesome. Basically, I think sometimes they end up confusing taste with principle.

Are you serious?

I am sympathetic to Rivendell's practical bike fit philosophy and retro-crabbiness, as opposed to the "let's put normal people on race bikes with all the latest tech" M.O. of most of the road bike industry. You just cannot **** with lugs (with non-ornate paint please), full fenders, a brooks and nitto noodles up high on a pearl stem. To repeat what landgolier said, though, like lots of people in the cycling world, Riv just seem to get a touch too far into a mentality of us vs them instead of "live and let live".

Theres plenty of old stuff that is more practical then it's replacement. Almost everything you mention(lugs, brooks, pearl stems and nitto noodles) doesn't fit into that category however. The newer is also more practical in every one of those cases. Fenders are great but 99% or cyclists don't ride in the rain and so fenders are pointless for them.

plz say more - what falls into this category in your opinion?

if you are touring bar end shifters for instance.

Well dutret, I guess my point had a lot to do with aesthetics but i do also find that setup highly practical and comfortable for my fixed commuting and LD riding. A pop top threadless stem is probably more functional than a quill (though much uglier), and you do have to cover a brooks in the rain; but other than that what points concerning relative practicality did you have in mind?

-Brooks despite what people say will put more pressure on vital regions then something with a cutout.
-Noodles are harder on nerves then modern ergo drops.
-lugs offer no practicality at all.
so with the exception of fenders your post was entirely based on aesthetics

dutret is gaining my favor every day...
2006 was a wake-up year for me. Hooray for threadless 1 1/8!


the only thing that is just as good today as was when it surfaced is 80s hardcore (DC/Chicago-wise)

Dutret I don't doubt that there is some weakened version of your claims that is correct. However there's lots of anecdotal counterevidence to them as is---for example, the cutout saddle and ergo bars that were on my tourer when I bought it caused numb pinkies and dong bone on rides over 75 km, and the noodles and b-17 that are now on that bike do neither. Anyhow, my first post was primarily about the practical riding position that Riv style setups afford. Of course Rivendell style retro tech may not be the best possible way to achieve that goal; but it does it pretty darn well relative to everything else on the market, and it's pretty to boot.

If I can jump in here, indexed front derailleurs are a PITA to set up and once you do, you're limited to one or two "trim" positions. On the other hand, friction shifters are infinitely trimmable.

Just bumping this in case someone actually has the Riv Reader in question and can hook me up.

not the "full rivendell treatment," but it looks like harris was selling san joses with 8 speed internal hubs. i'd really like to do something similar for touring...
https://www.sheldonbrown.com/harris/b...os8/index.html

I heard about that report also. I would love to read it also. If you get it please let me know.

Now that I think about it, mcatano. I could've sworn that I read that somewhere on BF. A better place to ask might be the commuter forum.

I'm sure we could find legions of riders who find Brooks to be one of the few saddles that does not cause numbness, and plenty of folks who find Ergo-bend bars to be anything but. Look closely at at least half the bikes in pro peloton, you will see traditional bend bars.

Lugs are for ascetics, not argument there.

Maybe more people would ride in the rain if they had practical bikes that could fit real fenders.