Rivendell article in Forbes magazine now online

[rnhood]

Congratulations to Grant and the entire Rivendell staff.


http://www.forbes.com/business/forbes/2004/0419/094.html

[Louis]

Thanks for the link. It's interesting to see an article on Rivendell in that type of magazine.

Louis

[Kevan]

in the editor's letter of their 2004 bicycle guide.

[Andreu]

I love this quote on their website:
"A superlight steel road frame may weigh 3.5lb. A light aluminum frame is around 3lb, some even less. Some carbon fiber frames are down around 2.5lb. The percentage difference of the bare frame weights is up to 40 percent, which sounds considerable until you factor in the weight of the bike parts (another 17lbs), at which point it falls to about 9 percent. Add a 165lb rider, and the real, meaningful difference is less than 1 percent."

There is a refreshing, honest and common-sense approach to it all. Would I buy one?....probably not here in Europe, with a long lead time on delivery of frames....and the names of the frames are just too twee and would I also have to wear woollen tights? If I was in US and doing alot of touring I would think about it.
A

[Marco]

.......for making Grant's "cut".

[scrooge]

Anyone else having problems opening this link? :confused:

[dbrk]

Folks here probably know that I have a close and even personal relationship with Rivendell, that's no secret. I like this article but personally cannot abide the fact that every last effort to describe Rivendell or Grant must begin the obligatory declamation of his being the "retro-grouch." This merely compounds the notion that the current ways of cycling---skinny tires, clicking gears, essentially race bikes sold to non-racers _is_ the mainstream, which, come to think of it is true and not something that I think is all that great. Don't mistake me, I don't resent fun or fast riding or race bikes as such. I _lament_ that the vast majority of recreational riders don't know jack about other kinds of riding and that bike shops offer so few alternatives when it comes to road cycling. The bike shop alternative to the race bike is the hybrid. This is sorta' pathetic, as far as I am concerned, because these "professionals" are the folks who should know, understand, and encourage different _styles_ of cycling, different kinds of riding and bikes and what do we get? More of the samesame.

It takes a place like this Forum to bring together cyclists and cycling interests of all sorts. We are a diverse group and real diversity means thinking that difference is a good thing. Forbes and even cycling magazines make something quaint and quirky out of Rivendell but to me their bikes _are_ my mainstream for the simple reason that the vast majority of modern bikes with frames designed around no-clearance carbon forks are simply not fit for exploring the roads and trails where I live. Left only to smooth pavement and, well, you miss the glory of the Finger Lakes. Sure, I feel lucky to live in the middle of nowhere and there are likely more smooth roads here than anywhere else I have ever been in America (and that's mostly everywhere). I also feel lucky to have all sorts of weather and I like to ride on more than dry, warm days. Yes, I like the rain and the rest because those things too are cycling experiences to enjoy (there's weather too awful for cycling, of course!!) But what Rivendell offers are bicycles that are truly suited for riding in all weathers and nearly everywhere but the most technical mountain biking. About 99% of everything else in "serious" recreational cycling is skinny tire, fair weather, and smooth roaded and _that_ is the limited world, not the "quirky" riding style of Rivendell frames.

As for parts, well, I have no grudge against modern parts except for the stupit [sic] carbon stuff which looks to me ugly but is also expensive and no improvement. Clicking to shift is fine but those who never learn to friction or use dt shifters simply have fewer cycling skills and fewer cycling style experiences. I have brifter experiences and friction dt shifting ones: why must the industry "mainstream" one of these and effectively marginalize, ignore, or reduce to nostalgia the other? They do so to market you the expensive stuff of latestgreatest, not to offer you different cycling experiences.

As for Rivendell frames, that's easy. The steel customs that Curt Goodrich builds have ONLY peers. My Goodrich (and Starck) built frames are EVERY BIT the peer of Sachs and Nagasawa, as well as the DK-built Serotta CSi with TdF lugs (though I should have only taken my own sizing advice, stupid me...). I have seen other great steel builders too, most of them, in fact. There are other peers but never, ever have steel lugged frame been better. And in one more way too.

Rivendell's Toyo built frames are simply superb, so far beyond 99% of Italian builds (Dario being beyond any such implications) that it's not even fair to compare. How do I know this? I have seen them sawed apart. A blind man could tell the difference. For consistency, quality, and small production Toyo too has only peers, no superiors. American bikes should be so nice and occasionally they are. But a Toyo bike costs half what the custom costs. This is AMAZING for the quality. I have not seen Kogswells sawn in bits but their value for style and benefit seems unmatched right now in the cycling industry. Kogs, like Toyo-built Rivs, offer all the experience of a "real" and "serious" road bike but none of the liabilities.

Serotta now makes so few lugged bikes and at such a cost that I think they fall out of any consideration here except as another fine custom builder The CSi is still something to behold. How I wish they were still made with 1" top tubes, as complete customs! Lugs are an aesthetic. Personally I find TIG pretty much unattractive, though I am certain it takes tremendous skill because nice TIGs (IF comes to mind) are hard and lots of well-put-together TIGs look like mice have been nibbling at steel joints. Anyway, my point is this: there is really no hope that the cycling industry in America can conceive of real difference without creating the impression of marginality. In the 1950s, I think, there was hope still since there were lots of different kinds of cycling still sold in stores. But since the Bike Boom everything has been driven by corporate conformities, be they road bikes, the rise of mtn bikes, and now "hybrids." If Specialized made a 650B bike and Shimano made a real All-Around Group (say, 110bc crank, snappy 34tmax rear cog der., friction option stuff, brakes with REAL clearances...almost all of which they already make) instead of iterations of the same stuff at different price points then cycling would have real diversity. The frame companies do the same thing: they make the same bike over and over again in different materials and price points. This is diversity? People apparently don't want diversity, they want conformity.

dbrk

[Climb01742]

douglas, isn't it true that, in most all of life, true greatness -- genius even -- is found in the margins, or niches, or side streets, or however one chooses to describe it, not in the mainstream, or masses? which is not to marginalize anyone or any bike, but to say, as the talking heads did, same as it ever was. greatness comes by the thimbleful. mediocracy (sp?) by the bucketful.

[Kevin]

With a profit margin of 3.5% he is obviously doing it for the enjoyment.

Kevin

[davep]

If, as the article says, he paid off $200,000 in debt early, he has decent cash flow and margins should be much better with the debt paid off.