Howdy folks,
Late reply here. Funny but the Rotrax lugs look, to me, like a lot of olde r British lugs and I think the curly bits seem too large in proportion to the overall lug. I have a '99 Rivendell (Joe Starck) and have always liked the original lugs better then the new curvier ones. It's all good, and to each his own :^)
Doug Van Cleve Chandler, AZ
On 12/15/05, C. Andrews <chasds@mindspring.com> wrote:
>
> I was looking at this absolutely lovely Rotrax Hilary is
> selling:
>
> http://tinyurl.com/
>
> ..wishing it was my size, when it dawned on me.
>
> This is what Rivendell lugs should have looked like. Was
> this what Grant
> was going for, and instead ended up with..well..ended up
> with what we see now?
>
> I have a Rivendell made in 2000; I think it's a nice
> frame--the ride is superb, for the type, imho--but the lugs
> seem ill-proportioned, and too thick. I suppose it's just
> a taste-thing... but does anyone else here think that the
> earlier lugs that Richard Sachs designed for Grant were
> better looking, and all subsequent lug-patterns have been
> less than ideal from an aesthetic point-of-view?
>
> I will say the lugs for the Glorius and Wilbury frames have
> a certain appeal..kinda like old Torpado lugs, if I remember
> right.
>
> Looking at this Rotrax made me realize what Rivendell lugs
> *could* have looked like.. and that seems sad to me. If
> one is going to go to the trouble and expense to design and
> make fancy cast lugs of the kind Grant seems to prefer, the
> Rotrax proportions seem about perfect.
>
> I'm talking purely about the shorelines and proportions of
> the lugs. The nice filing seen on the Rotrax lugs would be
> tough to do on the cast Riv lugs..
>
> Charles "rivendell will probably ban me from their list for
> this" Andrews
> SoCal