Grant Petersen: So Fun to Read, but Rivendell Doesn't Appeal To Me
 

I just re-read "Just Ride" for a second time. It's such a fun, entertaining, and often hilarious read. It's deliberately provocative, which accounts for a large part of the fun factor.

Two things: I disagree with almost all of his arguments and claims. I am much, much more comfortable in cycling specific gear, nearly 100% of the time. I definitely benefit from having more than 8 gears. I have no doubt lifting kettle bells increases strength, but I'm not inclined to use them any time soon. And on it goes.

I've perused the limited selection of rivendells and not surprisingly, the bikes look like old fashioned slugs to me. Even though they're brand new, they reek of garage sale rust and cobwebs.

How can a cyclist's ideas be so much fun to entertain yet be so unappealing when applied to actual bike design?

Blocked and reported.





(kidding)

For me, the appeal is the difference between a consumerist approach to cycling and a more hands on approach.

Clothing apart (I too like the function of kit) the modern direction in cycling is overpriced and overly complicated to the point where riders no longer build or maintain their own bikes. Todays must have latest and greatest is next years has been obsolescence. The talked about marketing and price point is now aimed at the financially well off and I feel a little sad for young people who may want to get into the sport but face the perception that you need a 5-10K CF electronically shifted niche bike to be relevant.

GP breaks from that mold and offers a different POV. Wear normal clothes, have a simple bike you can afford and adjust yourself. Try to be real and avoid the plastic ego imagery.

Having said that, Riv bikes tend to be overpriced themselves, like the boutique version of homespun ideas, and the anti establishment flannel vibe can be as constraining as the neon lycra one. I tend to flow between both worlds. I like the Riv aesthetic but would probably never buy one because I could build my own far cheaper (and enjoy the process). I wear flannel and lycra depending and don't mind modern technology if it facilitates a goal.

Garage sale rust and cobwebs to me sounds like someone who is unfamiliar with doing and too familiar with buying. Pick up a hex wrench and get your hands a little dirty. Or avoid it all and get virtual high fives on the Peleton.

His bikes hold little appeal for me because I'm pretty comfortable doing century -plus rides on old steel racing bikes, so I get the beautiful lugged steel look at a fraction of the cost. I also love brifters and don't understand his aversion to them at all. But I don't see why agreeing or not agreeing with him has much to do with finding him an entertaining writer.

As to the clothes, I have no problem with people finding them more comfortable, I just get sick of people who put on airs just because I have no interest in cycling specific kit.

The made-in-Taiwan Rivendells are bargains: beautiful lugged steel, wonderful paint work, and many very fine aesthetic details. Depending on the model, you can pick up a frameset (frame, fork, headset, BB, and seatpost) for about $1500, which is a bargain for that kind of craftsmanship.

I can see both sides.

If you don't want to do a lot of prep work a ready made frameset is nice. With a good eye, patience and elbow grease you can strip and refinished an old school rigid mtb for $50-$100. That savings allows me to add components to my bikes like Brooks saddles, good tires and nice grips if I choose.

I enjoy the process of the latter as a hobby in itself so the price differential is too great for me, but I don't look down on others who see it different.

I would think a lot of the appeal is generational. The appeal of a lot of vintage items breaks along generational lines where they peak as that generation looks back with more disposable income and wanes when the next generation has their perspective on what appeals to them.

30 or 40 years from now the golden age of gravel bikes will be the sought after vintage bike.

John

I have heard Grant say something like: he knows he's a niche player, and feels he needs to stay a niche player - he doesn't want to compete with the big brands because he'd lose on economies of scale. I imagine it's getting more difficult for Riv now that gravel bikes are encroaching on their territory.

Sure, of course, old frames are usually perfectly roadworthy. But if you look at a Riv, and look at the alternatives, they are downright bargains - if you want a new frame, and you like their frames. (Rim brakes, loads of tire clearance, etc.) I wouldn't mind having one just for the "wow" factor, because they really are gorgeous -- and for a particular set of preferences, they are terrific machines. But I already have a bike to fill that niche.

I'm gonna bet that the OP has never seen a Riv in person. I've never seen one that was short of stunning.

What a sad topic for the BF !
Why do you want to trash Rivendell ? We get it that you don't like his bikes and you don't agree with Grant Petersons philosophy but no need to try and undermine his enterprise. They reek of garage rust and cobwebs, really ? Find a "constructive" topic.

I think the fact it was this persons first post speaks volumes.

Never heard of the book before reading this thread, so I downloaded a copy and read it. For those that haven't read it, it reads like a collection of troll thread topics. Let's just say I'm glad I didn't pay anything for the book.

I, for one, am glad that I live in a world with people like Grant Petersen in it. There's still plenty of carpet fiber racing bikes, lycra kit, watts meters, and bike bro attitude for those who are into it. I think it's great to have at least one company that flips the bird at modernity.

I think the entertaining part brings us back to when cycling was simpler kind of like the rotary telephone. It has that nostalgic feel and on some level makes sense. Unfortunately life changes, styles evolve and new needs are created. The beauty is we can have both. It doesn't have to be an either or proposition. Some days I ride my Rivendell in a pair of shorts, t shirt and running shoes and enjoy the simpler side of cycling. Other days I ride my Trek Domane in full kit (it would feel sacrilegious if I didn't wear it) and enjoy everything that carbon fiber and ISO Speed can muster.

I also would like to say I love the bolded text above. Those are great descriptors and gave me a chuckle.

Happy cycling.

This silly post is poorly written and deliberately provocative :rolleyes:

So write your own book on cycling, and start your own bike company.

Rivbike and that book have been out for decades by now. Where have you been?

What I find most interesting is that Rivendell was way ahead of the curve 30 years ago, and just because they don't have carbon or alum frames and forks they are considered old looking and garage sale worthy. Grant Peterson created the gravel road category back in the 90's and every Riv is capable of such riding plus so much more. They are the definitive bike for gravel and all others constantly attempt to meet that definition. Race bike they are not, but seriously, how many of BF readers are race worthy themselves and utilize a race bike to its full potential? 10% at the very most?

+1

Another loser added to the ignore list. It's been growing at a healthy pace in recent months.

Which might have been the intent of the original post.

I enjoyed the book. The guy got whiny and preachy at times, but if one can't handle that than don't hang out on this web site.

As for his approach to riding as the saying goes don't stretch the seams in trying on the coat. I feel his biggest message was just enjoy riding and don't get so caught up in what others think.

You may laugh at his advise for kettle balls/yoga, but I can barely walk these days due to too much riding and not enough alternative exercises. Things change as you get older, I'm in PT to rehab tight hip muscles. Sucks, this honestly has me worrying if I will ever ride week long tours again.

Why do people brag about their ignore list?

Honestly, what do you gain by that?

Oops, guess I just made the list, huh Francis.

Yep Grant Peterson designed some of the XO series bikes to be "fire" road bikes. They have road geometry and 26 inch wheels with room for a fat tire. Back in the 90s, if you wanted a fat tire road bike, 26 inch was the way to go. This is my "modernized" 1993 Bridgestone XO 2 with brifters and 3 x 8 gearing.

https://cimg6.ibsrv.net/gimg/bikefor...6083d2710e.jpg

There are some who love Rivindel Bikes and others that do not. I am another vintage road bike rider so I can get a classic with full Campagnolo for a lot less. This is just me, I like cleaning up and getting neglected racers back on the road. I like the way the bikes(Riv) look but it just is not my style. Grant has always been very supportive of the cycling community and is a great writer, although with a strong opinion, I find his work enjoyable. Bike forums is about information and opinion and the OP just stated his opinion. As long as we don't bash someone I see no harm. Rivendel is a niche bike and attracts criticisms from time to time.

You've been on it for quite a while already :)

Smugness

"Likes" from Fellow Smugsters

I have a copy of that book that I found in a Goodwill a couple years ago. I like much of the content in that book since I'm truly an unracer/uncyclist and have been my entire life on bikes. Too bad that Rivendell bikes are out of my budget, otherwise I'd really entertain the idea of owning one.

Funny thing about Petersen's commentary on 8 gears. My current two bikes are an 8-speed and a 1-speed, and I really only use up to 4 gears on that 8-speed since it isn't hilly here. Plenty of wind, though.

Some of his bodily health ideas don't jibe with mine, but others do. Not everyone is built the same, so one example is that I have to hydrate before a ride and not "wait until I'm thirsty". I'd pass the hell out otherwise.

The funny thing is, I bet that many of the riders that Mr. Petersen wrote that book for never read the book or even know that it exists.