Grant Peterson and Riv bikes
 

I know this my be a dead horse but... It seems GP brings out opinions from everyone. I was wondering is it just his attitude or his outlook about bikes? How do you guys like the Rivendell bikes if you take Peterson out of the equation?

Mutt

I find most of what Peterson says seems to make sense to me.

The bikes look well thought out from every perspective, to me.

I would love a Rivendell. Probably a Hilsen.

Is there any part of the horse left to beat. :p

I really don't care to Bring the whole GP thing up again. I'm wanting to know if peoples strong opinions about GP affect the way they think of Riv bikes. Would you own and ride a Riv bike in spite of ones feelings about GP?

Mutt

I'm not really interested in Riv bikes because there are plenty of older, just as good, for cheaper, bikes still around.

Grant has some odd ideas, but he is a terrific bike frame designer. I bought a Bombadil last year, and it's the best-handling bike I have ever ridden. It's quick without being twitchy, fully stable at speed going down hills, yet very easy to maneuver and a delight to ride with no hands. It's a very graceful bicycle. I don't know what he does with the geometry, but it works.

Quality Tube Set, investment cast lugs, BB fork crown it's all good ..
so are bikes by others that build with those ingredients..

He gives permission not to look like, be like a bike racer.

There is a "be like us" message in his communication too.

I've no opinion of GP one way or the other. If cost wasn't an issue I would definitely own a Rivendell Bike.

I've seen very few vintage bikes with lug work and paint as nicely done as the bikes I've seen in their little showroom in Walnut Creek.

I just read his "Just Ride" book and I gotta say, we think alike!

I love Rivendells, but can't really afford one, so I'm stuck with the originals as substitutes. I don't especially like the extended headlug thing, but understand the concept. I've met Grant, and he's a pretty sensible guy if a little.. ah, interesting.

nice bikes. that's all.

20 page thread.

I like him. I find what he says to be 95% sensible and he's an entertaining writer, whether it's catalog blurbs, or his personal newsletter (OK, the Rivendell Reader, but it's basically GP's personal newsletter), or random stuff on the blog. After 25 years, he does repeat himself a little bit, but mostly not.

Full disclosure - I do own one of his frames.

If money wasn't an issue, I'd own a couple of Rivendale bikes (Rodeo, and Bombadil come to mind).
I like a lot of what GP has to say, the stuff I don't agree with is just a difference of opinion ;-)

Cheers,
Chris

Without this company, and this voice, the bicycle industry would be a smaller place.

I love the company and think Grant's opinions are fairly close to mine regarding biking. I think the bike industry is better off with Rivendell than without. I don't agree with everything that would be considered "rivendell philosophy", but the beauty of Riv's bikes is that they can be set up so many different ways. So, if you want to ride clipless and quicker, you can set it up to do that. Mine could work fine as my only bike, but really, what fun would that be?

This is mine. I love the way it rides and the way it looks. I am not a fan of the double top tube frames, so much. I think they are overkill and different for different's sake.

[IMG]http://i91.photobucket.com/albums/k2...ar13/005-2.jpg[/IMG]

I think that Grant has got some good ideas, and I tend to agree with him about how the big bike companies are selling racing bikes to people who will never race and won't be comfortable on that kind of ride. I will likely never own a Rivendell bike because of the cost, but certainly wouldn't turn one away if someone gave it to me.
I've got a Fuji Touring Series V that is configured much like Fender1's Rivendell above, and am certain that it is of comparable quality and utility without the trendy cost (which I couldn't afford if I wanted to).

Some of his bikes are pretty good, others are just plain dorky. But for what I could have bought an Atlantis for I got a truly custom built to my measurements Mercian plus a bunch of options the Atlantis cannot be ordered with, and better frame tubing and components. Rivendell bikes are overpriced non custom bikes, plain and simple, and that's why he will always be struggling. Now there's a sort of new player in town called Shamrock Cycles that they too can build a bike anyway you want it built and be about the same as the Atlantis in price, and Shamrock can build using Sachs lugs.

How do you know it is better tubing? Has Rivendell ever said what the tubing was on the Atlantis?

Innovative but expensive = not for the thrifty guy. I have not bought a new bike since 1975, and even a used Rivendell is well outside my meager budget. Now if a deal fell in my lap within my budget, sure, I would be all over it.

All I could ever get out of Rivendell that it was mixture of 2 different tubes, including 520 for the stays and fork and tubes from Touhoku which is Miyata, but the new Miyata tubeset is not the same high quality as the older splined tubing, plus it's not the same as the stuff they use for their Koga line of bikes, it's a lower level tube set used in the Atlantis. This was back before Waterford started making the Atlantis. Rivendell also would change the tubesets used depending on best price, at one time they used as many as 3 or 4 different manufactures on one bike and wouldn't tell anyone what the tubes were only to say they were the best to be found and to trust Grant and that's all that matters. What was found out later was they used Toyo (Taiwan) steel for the forks, 501 for the stays, and Tange for the main tubes but Grant wouldn't say which Tange, I did read somewhere some time ago that Grant used 2 different Tange tubes to make the triangle and the best Tange was used on just one tube the downtube, the others got the lower end Tange...not sure if that was correct info that I read.

Please note; I'm not saying that the Atlantis is junk, far be it, it's a very good bike and it was a bike that I was seriously considering back in 07, what I am saying is that there are better choices for the same amount of change like the Mercian, Shamrock, and others as well.

Here we go again.

His passion for bikes is clear enough. Sure, they're expensive, but I bet he's not getting rich or anything resembling rich. He does things his way, which isn't popular, so I give him a lot of credit. Nice website, too. I'm sad he removed the "click to embiggen" captions.

He's definitely not getting rich and neither are his employees, and living and owning a business in the Bay area is very expensive. I'm sure his prices reflect the cost of living needed just to survive there, never mind becoming rich. I do know he has, or use to have, one or two financial partners that helped support his business, he discussed that one time in one of his newsletters I use to get.

I agree, he does have a lifelong strong passion for cycling, and I understand he markets to a unique and/or quirky consumer base; but some of his bikes are just plain odd like the three twin top tube models. Twin top tubes? Really? He goes on and on about how their designed to take on fire roads with touring gear, but so are a lot of bikes with just single top tubes. Maybe I could see the reason if the bike was solely designed for people 6' 4" and taller, they may need a more rigid frame due to the enlarged triangle, but not for shorter people. Maybe if he sold less quirky stuff and was looked at as a more serious bike designer then maybe his sales would increase? Maybe he's not interested in more sales?