I'm sorry, but aren't Rivendell frames off-topic for this newsgroup? After all, there were no Rivendells made before 1983.
on 08/23/2002 10:23 AM, John Price at jprice@2-10.com wrote:
> Hmm, well I'd say that if I had a larger chainring up front (than the 53 -
> not likely but possible) AND the derailleur clamp was rather fat (the Huret
> is a bit more petite here than many) then the bottom of the diamond could
> interfere. All this is rather unlikely but the room is there just in case.
>
> What I found interesting is that the water bottle mounts on the seat tube
> were as low as they are. There is room above the derailleur for them and
> most frames I've seen in the 55-56 cm range tend to do it this way.
> Rivendell's way here would appear to be a way to get the center of gravity a
> bit lower (as I've seen on some older French Randonneur bikes).
>
> John Price
> Denver CO
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: OROBOYZ@aol.com [mailto:OROBOYZ@aol.com]
> Sent: Thursday, August 22, 2002 8:24 PM
> To: jprice@2-10.com; classicrendezvous@bikelist.org
> Subject: Re: [CR]My Rivendell's pictures
>
>
> Why does your bike have "modified diamonds" for water bottle mounts? Looks
> like there was plenty of room for front derailleur mounting....
>
> Dale Brown
> Greensboro, North Carolina
> _______________________________________________
--
Steven L. Sheffield stevens at veloworks dot com veloworks at mac dot com aitch tee tea pea colon [for word] slash [four ward] slash double-you double-yew double-ewe dot veloworks dot com [four word] slash