I agree and disagree. On the one hand, one of the great things over the years has been the economy of bicycling entertwined with the athleticism. Last I figured, it has saved me an average of 2K per year over car expenses. I've been riding the same TREK for 25 years and am looking to expand the stable and, although it seems expensive to me, 3-4K for a machine that saves that much money also makes sense.

If you want your cycling to be inexpensive then yeah it can be, if you don't then the sky is the limit. To each his own....my road bike costs more than my car....shows where my priorities are eh?

amen!

Why is there talk of hydraulic disc brakes (or mechanical for that matter) on a Riv thread? Why is this thread even still going? I love it!
Fact of that matter is, alot of bike frames cost $2k plus, ALOT. I'm not sure why Riv takes the brunt of the criticism when they are just one of who knows how many bike manufactures who make nice bikes that cost a good deal of money. Yes there are cheaper options, but it is this way with everything in life. To some people buying a new $20k car is a waste of money when used ones are available for cheaper. Others can afford a $50k car. All cars will get you to your destination.
Some people can afford and enjoy the finer things in life, while others don't feel the need or can't afford those same things. Don't argue the value and reliability of a LHT vs. the Atlantis. They both work great and both do there job well, but they are different. My $60 Eddie Bauer watch tells time just as well as a $500 Seiko, which tells time just as well as a $2500 Tag Heuer.
All things being equal, sometimes the higher price tag makes the bike more desirable because less people can afford them, which makes them more rare.

We got some additional exposure to the discrepancy between the commodity price of something, the cost of getting the job done, vs the cost of value added, when we had to justify the dollar difference between xmart bike for $80 and a $1000 LBS bike to an insurance adjuster.

Why not argue that?

People often argue that the extra expense of something has a rational/practical purpose. When a particular example of ths argument is shown to be false, people argue that people are free to spend whatever they want. The rational/practical purpose of a thing is an interesting discussion. The fact that people have enough money to be foolish/irrational about what they spend it on is not an interesting discussion.

But what if you are interested in what things have a practical purpose? "To each his own" provides no knowledge!

???

What happened to the bike? I don't think BMW owners are required to make a similar justification!

I run v-brakes, cantis, mechanical discs and hydraulic discs on my various bikes. I'd add that besides the road lever issue the problem I have with hydraulic discs on a touring bike is that I can replace a broken damaged wire brake cable easily. If I rip off a hydraulic brake hose the repair is not so trivial.

If we were talking about a commuter bike used in town I'd agree because I could just ride to the nearest LBS and get them to fix the problem.

I own a LHT, but have spent some time surfing the Riv site. Nice looking bikes. If my GF bought me one for my birthday I'd happily ride it!

Well, that LHT provides 99.999% of the same thing as the Riv. Might there be something else that she could spend the same amount on that would change your life more than 0.001%?

But you need to understand, I am not interested, as are many others. Some people are, that is one of the joys of being human, we are all allowed to be different

And while your zeal for your LHT is admirable remember, other people think differently than you and might have other opinions.

Have to say... I dont like the LHT. Lots of friends have it. Nothing I can really pin down as wrong with it. Just isnt' my bag, dont like the ride. A matter of fact, the last group tour I was on, two of the three on the LHT had small issues here and there with comfort. Not that it was the bike per se just that it was strange to me that they had some of the issues they had. All experienced riders also. Them or bike? who knows, I just found the situation strange.

I have toured on a Fuji Cross Comp and have a Trek 540. Nope, neither are Rivendell bikes nor LHT. I would love to try some extended riding on the Atlantis though just to compare. The 3 miles I have done just aren't enough to really get a feel for it.

How does such steadfast devotion for the LHT end up in the Rivendell thread anyway. Sort of like a Yankee fan at a Tigers or Mets game I suppose.

It seems odd that you and other people have no interest in what makes a bicycle (any bicycle) better in a practical/rational way.

It's quite fine that people are different and people are quite free to buy any bicycle they want. It's just not that interesting.

I don't actually have a "zeal" for the LHT (I'm only using it as an example). And, as far as I can tell, the only problem with the Rivendells is their cost! (Other than the cost, there is quite a lot to like about the Rivendells!)

If somebody can make a rational argument about why the Rivendells are better in a rational/practical way (probably easy to do) or why that advantage is worth the cost, I'd be interested in hearing it. The fact that some people justify buying a Rivendell (or any bicycle) merely because they can afford it isn't interesting.

============

Fortunately, there are alternatives to the LHT! One bad thing about the LHT is that many people appear to think it's the only thing!

I understand the point but isn't this really subjective? Sort of like selecting an old CJ7 or D90. Mozart over MC Hammer...

I don't know that I have ever seen a practical or rational way to define one bike frame style over another. One brake system over another, One rack style over another. I have seen bandwagon and Brand lovers but nothing conclusive as to what makes one "product" better than another. In the touring world the only things I can come up with off hand for sure are.. we covet the simple, the durable, the fixable and if we can throw in some style to boot... heck give me a splash of that too but it ain't all that important overall.

If anyone wants to play with the idea of what makes the perfect bike or defines one bike better over all to all others... I am game. Meet me at the virtual coffee shop, first cup is on me... let us break out into velo-tour-philosophy. Just know that any such effort though entertaining doesn't get us an inch further down the lane.

If somebody can make a rational argument about why the Rivendells are better in a rational/practical way (probably easy to do) or why that advantage is worth the cost, I'd be interested in hearing it.

The difference between a Riv frame and, just for comparisons sake, an LHT, is the same difference between a Chevy and an Acura—materials, craftsmanship and styling. Pretty simple.

Note that an Acura costs more than a Chevy of the same type.

I forgot to add engineering (not so big a point here) and number of units produced.

Yes, there is some subjectivity in choosing a bicycle but it isn't the same thing as choosing music. Note that there's nothing wrong with selecting a bicycle for subjective reasons! It's even interesting to hear about those reasons. But "to each his own" is the answer to everything and the answer to nothing. It doesn't say anything!

The fact that there aren't "conclusive" ways of making the determination of "rational/practical" benefits doesn't mean that those types of benefits don't exist or that discussing them doesn't have a value.

Those are rational/practical things, which are knowable to some extent (if not "conclusively").

Nothing wrong with some style!

But there won't be a better bike "over all others". People have different needs and require different bicycles.

Really? You mean discussions about practical reasons one bicycle might be better than another doesn't "get us further"? If that was true, we'd be riding the same bicycles that people did over 100 years ago!

Exactly!

Other than these kinds of subjective arguments are pointless. To some people cycling is utilitarian, to others it is artistic, to others it is spiritual, and to others it is something I can't describe (or even they can't describe), which is why we have so many choices, because we are all different.

Why say it then?

Actually I elaborated.....but in this case mostly because I have 40 minutes left of work before I leave for my GAP tour and I am slacking hardcore.

See my posts don't have to be utilitarian either

Don't take the internet too seriously, you know what they say about arguing on it.

I don't want a Rivendell particularly badly [or I'd own one], but I can't imagine why anyone would argue that owning a Rivendell and owning a LHT are equivalent. They are different on a number of different levels - including stuff like the social groups that have formed around the companies that bike ownership allows you to participate in.

If you like a Rivendell, the lugs, the paint, the ride, the Rivendell club, etc.. Go for it. It's your money.

The argument could go the other way with a Windsor Tourist owner asking a LHT owner why bother waste the extra money on a boutique brand like Surly? After all they both have two wheels, you can tour on 'em, they are mass produced overseas, but one costs way more.

A garage fell in on it. While BMW owners don't have to quantify the performance characteristics of their replacement car, the car being replaced is specified in the policy covering it.

My point was just that, I don't know if my adjuster would have as hard a time grasping the difference between a $1k bike and a $3k bike, as he did between an $80 bike and a $1000 bike. The latter is a much bigger leap, percentage-wise.

Can someone please explain to me why red is better than yellow?

My bike is yellow. Therefore, yellow is bettah like buttah...

There is another point though in all this, if you are spending $3,000 on a bicycle, you should really check with some of the local custom builders, some of them can build a very nice bike for $3,000. Because they are making the frame, they can build it to fit the rider, rather then trying to fit a mass produced bicycle from overseas. Mind you, for me I would have to win the lotto first, and even then I would keep my current bike for shopping and beating on, and just use the nice bike for touring longer distance day rides. Problem is it would really cost me $6,000 because I would need to get one for the better half as well......

Restricting this to the frame, does any of this make the Riv stronger? Even the Riv site says the lugs are just there to be pretty. I'm not bashing, I'm thinking of upgrading from my LHT as it's a bit bendy for a big guy, but I haven't heard any objective reason to suspect that the the Riv is less so.

Funny. Next time, pick a better garage!

There is that, but regardless the recovery for a loss is based on what is lost not the cheapest imaginable replacement.

The "why not a $80 bike?" question can be applied to nearly everything that one can lose (think of furniture).

Yes, but the performance gap is bigger too! Anyway, your adjuster is just being dumb or your insurance company is bad. If your Rolex was the thing that was crushed, the adjustor would really not get anywhere suggesting that a $10 watch is equivalent. If you can establish (ie, document) that what you lost cost $1000, then that is what the insurance should pay.

===========================

I think what Rivendell is saying is just that the lugs aren't going to be any stronger than a well-build welded frame.

For your situation, I would not expect any particular magic from any frame unless it says that it is intending to solve your particular problem (being a "big guy"). I'd be hesitant in your situation not to be able to try the thing being purchased. One advantage of a custom (or semi-custom) frame, is that the builder can modify the frame to address your particular issues. I wonder if looking into Seven frames might be the way to go for you.

https://www.sevencycles.com/

Rivendell is targetting a person who wants a good frame with a particular style (nothing wrong with that). If you don't care about that style aspect, then there are other manufacturers to consider. Look at what Bruce Gorden has. The Cannondale T1/T2 might even work for you.

You might even look at (try) some "stiff" racing bicycles to see what kind of BB flex you experience with them. If these have a similar problem, it might mean your expectations aren't reasonable. The fact is, that there's flex in every frame especially when standing and pedalling hard.

The idea of a custom bike is a valid idea, but I have followed a number of custom bike stories from idea through construction and in a significant number of cases the resulting bike isn't exactly what the buyer had in mind. Sometimes the difference caused problems and sometimes it was not a problem, but a difference of expectations between the builder and the customer. In any case one nice thing about production bikes is you can validate how you feel about a specific model based on reviews, owners reports, test rides, etc.. and when you get the bike you can expect the product to be the same as the bikes you researched.

I bought an expensive touring frame recently - the cost was at the lower end of the custom frame spectrum. I considered a custom bike, but realized that since my body is normally proportioned that I preferred to have a nice production frame I could count on than a custom frame that might suit me a bit better, but also might disappoint me. In the end I've been happy with my choice.