Originally Posted by Grand Bois

It's ridiculous to say that about a company that has always made a specialty of selling parts to make old racing bikes more comfortable for non-racers.

Originally Posted by Loose Chain

I am an A&P and work in the aviation industry. I also have Level III NDI training and various other training in composite manufacturing and more importantly inspection. There are problem with inspection of composite structures and engineers have great difficulty specifying inspection procedures and more importantly criteria for rejection of a component from inevitable damage.

It is very difficult to inspect composite structures. Metal is, speaking as an actual expert, much easier to inspect. This is in part because metal tends to fail from a visible defect or stress riser and it fails in a predictable manner of which we have hundreds of years behind us and good, reliable methods of inspection. Composite does not have this "field experience" but it is developing.

Composite material have fantastic properties, can be very strong and durable and have huge life cycles. We just have to get better at inspection and to inspect a material we have to have some way of quantifying the degradation. Therein lies the issue, carbon fiber tends to fail, bam, all at once. One inspection method the part, when new is mapped using XXXXXX (I removed this info on edit).

The bicycle industry needs an inspection procedure for highly stressed, damage prone parts like cf forks, bars, stems, seat posts etc.

I am a steel guy, aluminum as well, these are well understood materials. Steel and aluminum can be recycled and with a bicycle can be built in a manner which has huge life cycle duration and low potential for catastrophic failure, cf is just quite there yet and IMO should remain a material for those seeking the ultimate performance knowing full well the life cycle is limited, ultimate performance comes at a price that is not just measured in dollars. But, as I said, slowly we will learn to build and inspect these new materials.

Originally Posted by KonAaron Snake

That's exactly what I don't understand either. Why buy a $1,000-$2,000 dedication to a frame that sells for a tenth of that on the current market? You can easily get a Reynolds 531 or Columbus SL frame for under $300 if you know what you're looking for, and I assume anyone interested in steel enough to buy a Riv does know what they're looking for. If one of the advantages of steel is that it lasts safely, there doesn't seem to be much need for buying a new steel bike at that price.

I understand what Soma and Surly do...it makes sense. You can get a new bike, with all the bells and whistles, at a reasonable complete price ... I do not understand the market for Rivendell.

Originally Posted by robatsu

That is a central part of the paradox for me. One of the core tenets of Rivendell stuff is that a lot of the old ways are good - the usual stuff about clearances, lugs, that sort of thing. But somehow, you then have to sell the idea that it is worth paying a lot more for the new manifestations of the old designs.

Back when Riv was starting off, this actually made more economic sense. Sure, there were still cheap old bikes like there are now. But there was no ebay, craigslist, etc. So there was a lot more overhead in finding what you specifically needed in a used bike example - you'd basically have to travel to see the bike, spend a lot of afternoons at garage sales, and so forth. For those who don't particularly enjoy that sort of thing, that is a formidable barrier, spending a month of Sundays with no assurance that you'll hit paydirt.

I think that the emergence of these technologies that make buying an old bike much easier & more of a sure bet have had a lot to do with where Riv's products have gone. Back then, Riv's bikes really were much more faithful replicas of 70's road bikes than they are now becoming. But now, the originals are literally available at your fingertips - if I weren't really picky about brands, at any moment I can probably browse at least 100 bikes on CL/ebay that fit me and are along the lines of what I'm looking for.

Hence Riv's move into esoterica like 650b, double top tubes, unusual stuff that really isn't widely available anywhere. Communications technology has really forced them to move beyond selling new renditions of the old. Up to a point, buying new commands a premium, and the makers of these frames can capitalize on that so long as they stay, I dunno, I'm just pulling a figure out of my hat, maybe around 1k. Custom ones can go higher for the fact that they are custom. Riv was selling boatloads of Bleriots for $750, but for whatever reasons they abandoned that.

And that, folks, is ultimately why the Internet was invented. No, not to put Riv out of business, but to make it easy to buy old bikes.

Originally Posted by repechage

So, a new business plan for Riv' would be to buy up old 531 frames, Raleigh Internationals, Paramount touring, Mondias and other bike of "reasonable" geometry and rehab them the Riv' way... "we are green, we reCycle"

Originally Posted by KonAaron Snake

That's a very interesting post and I think it makes a lot of sense. Since I wasn't collecting bikes prior to the internet, I never considered that it might present challenges where a Rivendell could provide answers.

Originally Posted by robatsu

Riv was selling boatloads of Bleriots for $750, but for whatever reasons they abandoned that.

Originally Posted by robatsu

Whenever I go to LBS, I'm always both surprised smugly contemptuous of the able-bodied/able minded adults bringing in bikes to have really trivial things like flats fixed and brakes adjusted.

Originally Posted by Mos6502

I remember reading that it was because online retailers were selling the frames for well below the MRSP and Rivendell got their panties in a bunch. I guess selling the bikes for reasonable prices just didn't feed into the "image" they wanted.

Originally Posted by altersego

my rambling 2¢:snip... I'd say Petersen has a well-earned place in the sandbox and can do whatever the **** he wants.

Originally Posted by illwafer

thanks for reminding me to check out what's new over at:

https://www.bustedcarbon.com/

Originally Posted by altersego

A big problem is that most people probably buy bikes that are ill-suited for their cycling needs. They want a racing bike because they got pumped watching the Tour de France or something.

Originally Posted by JohnDThompson

I'm sure carbon fiber forks work just fine, but they sure are ugly.

Originally Posted by clubman

Offering straight blades isn't a bad marketing decision if he expects to replace carbon forks. It works better aesthetically with modern bikes.

Those cast fork ends would look beautiful on a traditional fork though.