Rider Height, Wheel Size, and Not Compromising

Posted on January 7, 2020 by Beau Hart

A conversation we have with a lot of customers is about how the size of their bike can impact the handling and performance. This is an issue that mainly comes up with bikes for riders under 5’6″. The problems always stem from trying to fit 700c wheels into a small frame. Compromises have to be made and these compromises are felt by the rider.

The first problem is toe overlap. As the frame gets smaller the front wheel gets closer to the crankset and the rider’s feet. This can result in the toe hitting the wheel in a turn, aka toe overlap. To compensate for this, many manufacturers resort to a slacker head tube angle. This puts the wheel further in front of the bike and causes sluggish handling. If the bike is small enough, you can end up with both problems anyway.

The seat tube is similarly affected. It’s often steeper to reduce the overall rider reach. This puts the rider pretty far forward over the bottom bracket and can cause fit issues resulting in stress to the knee. None of this is good for the rider. Fortunately, there’s an obvious solution: smaller wheels.

While this seems like a no-brainer, it’s historically been a difficult sell to many customers. They have a lot of reasons, but they usually boil down to either “700c wheels are faster” or “My riding buddies will literally make fun of me if I show up with smaller wheels”. While we can dispel the myth of the first one, the second one can be harder to overcome.

The myth of 700c wheels being faster is an old one. There are a lot of factors that go into making a bike fast, and wheel size isn’t really one of them. Bikes that hold the world speed records do it on smaller wheels than any race bike comes with, and this is due to strength issues, not speed considerations. We have an in depth article about wheel size here, and you can read an outside opinion here that tackles this exact myth and explains effectively why it’s rubbish. Thankfully, the rise in popularity of the 650b/27.5″ wheel has made it much easier to sell customers on smaller wheels.

Take a look at the three photos in this post. While these bikes have very similar angles and proportions, they are for three people of very different heights. This because all three use a different wheel size. The top bike is a 700c Bandito, the middle bike is a 650b Bandito, and the bottom bike is a 26″ Phinney Ridge. The great thing is that all of these bikes have a trail of about 60mm, which means they all steer and handle the same. Now people can get a bike that handles properly no matter how tall they are. All this with no toe overlap issues and room for larger tires as well. (If you’re curious about larger tires, click here and here)

So now you know there’s no reason to own a bike that doesn’t handle well just because of your size. There’s more choice in wheel and tire size than ever before so you don’t have to compromise anything to get a bike that works just the way you want it to. As for friends who think they know better, there’s nothing wrong with educating them about their misconceptions. The proof will be in the riding.

Gears Galore: A Look At Current Drivetrain Options

Posted on October 30, 2019 by Beau Hart

In recent years, we’ve seen a rapid evolution in gearing options for bikes of all types. There are new options that have expanded choices for certain riders, and some options (arguably very useful options) have gotten pushed to the side. Rapid changes in “standards” are nothing new in the bike industry, and they tend to cause a lot of confusion for consumers and industry professionals alike. To clear things up, here’s an overview of your options as they stand going into 2020.

The Cassette

Over the past few decades, advances in cassette technology have mainly been aimed at squeezing in more cogs. In the 80s, even the highest-end drivetrains had just six cogs in the rear. 13-26 was considered standard. These days, high-end drivetrains use 11, 12, and even 13 cogs. This has created narrower cogs and chains as well as pushed road bikes to move to a wider rear triangle to accommodate more cogs and disc brakes. These thinner chains and cogs tend to wear out more quickly, however, so that’s been a bit of a trade-off. We’re starting to see some mountain bike drivetrains return to nine (and even seven) speed drivetrains to make them more robust.

As for the actual shifting performance, the woes of the 10 speed era have mainly been ironed out. Shifting is mostly excellent across the board. The new radical shift in cassette technology is range. Driven by mountain bike design, cassettes have ballooned in size. Just a few years ago, a cassette with a range from 11 teeth to 32 teeth was considered a large cassette. These days we’re seeing cassettes as wide as 9 teeth to 50 teeth. That’s a gear range of over 500%. The catch is that those are for single chainring drivetrains, also called 1X. All the shifting is in the cassette, so it needs to have a wide range. The only way to get that kind of range before was to use a triple chainring crankset. Why choose one over the other? Which is better for the rider? Well, that depends.

The cassette on the left has a huge range, but is meant for a single chainring up front. The one on the right has smaller steps between gears and is meant to be used with either two or three chainrings.

The rear derailleur has traditionally been used to fine tune your gear selection. Adding more cogs, like having eleven instead of nine, allows for smaller jumps between gears and therefore more control over the gear ratio. Large jumps are made by the double or triple chainring, then the rear was used to find a gear that was “just right”. The new selection of wide range cassettes have much bigger jumps between cog sizes. For some riders this can be frustrating when they can’t shift into a gear that feels perfect for the terrain they happen to be on at the moment. For other riders, this isn’t much of a big deal. They value the simplicity of using a single shifter and will either push harder or go slower when they can’t get the gearing perfect. There seem to be plenty of both types of riders so having multiple options is a good thing.

Chainrings

Chainring configuration has also seen a lot of change recently. We see three major shifts: an expansion in gearing options for double cranks, the emergence of “one-by” drivetrains, and the so-called death of the triple.

Double Chainring Drivetrains

a modern 46/30 “sub-compact” double crankset

Not so long ago, there were essentially three choices in front gearing for double cranks. The traditional choice, suitable for racers and the manliest of manly men, was the 53/39-tooth combo. “Compact” gearing, 50/34-tooth, was initially rolled out as an alternative to triple cranksets and effectively became the industry standard with its more forgiving gear range. Finally, cyclocross ended up with its own chainring standard of 48/36-tooth.

Compact gearing worked well for a lot of riders, but never really lived up to its intended purpose of replacing triple cranks. Triples offered the option of getting ridiculously low gear ratios, but the compact double’s 34-tooth small ring (smaller rings mean lower gears on the front) wasn’t actually all that low a gear.

Enter the All-Road Bike. A growing number of cyclists today want a bike that can go back and forth between paved roads, forest service roads, gravel roads, and single track. That’s a lot to ask and also part of what’s fueling all of this drivetrain evolution and mutation. While the 46/30 has become semi-standard on bikes like this, combinations as low as 42/24 are available. Higher gears are sacrificed for all-terrain capability. Many see it as worth the trade off, but drivetrains may not be done evolving just yet. The recently released GRX series from Shimano will shift an 11-42 in the back while keeping a compact double 50/34 in the front. That’s a lot of range and it’s developments like this that lead people to pronounce “the triple is dead”

The 1X (one-by), or Single Chainring Drivetrain

Like a lot of recent developments, the 1X drivetrain comes from the world of mountain biking. Riders who were pushing their mountain bikes to the limit over rough and varied terrain wanted to simplify things and take one variable for failure out of the equation altogether. The front derailleur was seen as the best part to go because when it did malfunction, it could stop a rider in their tracks. Thus, the 1X was born. It’s a little more complicated than just removing the derailleur. Chainrings were redesigned to retain the chain instead of letting it go for shifting. Rear derailleurs had clutch mechanisms added to keep the chain steady over bumpy terrain. This is also where the ultra-wide range cassettes began to develop. Mountain bikes need gearing that’s able to shift to a very low gear and do it quickly. Off-road terrain can become suddenly very steep and having just one control that moves the gear quickly and surely has been great for mountain bikers. They can make huge changes in gear ratio without the fear of dropping the chain off the chainring.

This drivetrain configuration has made the jump to all-road and gravel bikes now, for some of the same reasons. There’s something to be said for simplicity and dependability when your bike is covered in mud and you’re trying to make it up an 18% grade made of soft dirt. The trade off is the range, but cassettes that go from 10 to 50 teeth mitigate that aspect quite a bit. A 500% range is nothing to sneeze at. The disadvantages have to do with the cassette, as I discussed above. Big jumps between gears are not for everyone. Still, for some, the 1X fits their needs exactly. From a builder’s perspective, we just see it as one more tool in the toolbox for making someone a bike they love. It seems to be sticking around and we’ve met more than a few that don’t want to ride anything else.

Triple Chainring Drivetrains

Tales of the triple’s demise may be premature

Well, what about the triple? It’s death has been pronounced before, back in the 80’s. Back then, the triple (a crankset with three chainrings) fell out of favor on road bikes and was relegated to touring bikes and mountain bikes. “Compact” cranks with 50/34 tooth rings, the thinking went, provided plenty low gearing. It was only a few years before manufacturers again figured out that people still wanted to climb big hills on their road bikes without having to stand and mash a big gear, and the 34-tooth ring just wasn’t cutting it. Triples returned to full range of road groups. This is because no other configuration can match the gearing range of a triple drivetrain. That’s still currently true. A triple with a 53/39/28 chainring combination paired with an 11-36 cassette has a high gear of 122.3 inches and a low gear of 21.5 inches. That’s a range of 568%. That means the triple is still king in that category.

So why are so many people willing to declare the triple dead? A triple chainring drivetrain requires a bit more setup and adjustment, but just barely. A lot of people soured on triple shifting during the ten speed era I referenced above. During this time, manufacturers decided to make triple shifting “indexed” the way shifting in the rear was. One set movement of the shifter moved one gear with a click. Well, that didn’t go well at the time. The fledgling technology resulted in a lot of mis-shifts and dropped chains. It really wasn’t fun for anyone. By the time the problems got ironed out, the compact double appeared and people steered away from the triple altogether. And yet, the triple still refuses to go away. Certain riders still insist on one because they love the combination of range, flexibility, and adjustability. Up until recently, it was still the only way to get truly low gears on a road bike. That aspect may have changed, but we’re not ready to count the triple out just yet. A lot of our customers ask for it and we’re going to continue to provide it as best we can for those customers. In the end, we believe it’s worth keeping the option available. The mountainous climbs and long descents of the Pacific Northwest might have something to do with that choice.

We’ve put together a chart to help visualize what the differences between these options are in a linear perspective. Here, you can see not just the range, but what the jumps between gears look like as well. (Thanks to Logan for the chart and his input on this post)

I hope this answers any questions you might have had regarding what’s going on with bicycle drivetrains these days. Currently, we have more options than ever before and that’s not a bad thing. It helps us hone in on what will be best for each individual customer, and as a custom shop that’s exactly what we want. We’re not going to say goodbye to the triple anytime soon, but that doesn’t mean we won’t say a warm hello to the new developments out there.

Anatomy of a Custom Bike

Posted on October 9, 2019 by Beau Hart

What really makes a bike custom? Sometimes it’s the geometry. Sometimes it’s a special paint job. Sometimes, though, it’s literally everything. Some customers come to us with a good idea of what components they want, how they want the bike to handle under specific conditions, and what overall aesthetic they’re aiming for. These kind of customers want to make sure each component of the bike it optimized to fit their vision of the bike, and helping them fine tune their vision is one of the most satisfying parts of our job. When you help someone craft a bike that’s just right for their needs it’s a great feeling.

This blog post will be the first of many detailing the entirety of a bike like this. Not just a parts list, it will explain the logic behind each decision and hopefully serve as an inspiration for those who want to build just such a bike for themselves.

Today we’ll be taking a close look at Gary’s Bandito. Gary is a randonneur and he built this bike in large part to ride the 2019 Paris-Brest-Paris ride. For the uninitiated, that’s a 1200km (750 mile) ride that must be completed in under 90 hours. It’s the kind of ride that requires a trained athlete and a reliable bike. Gary also wanted a bike that was as gorgeous as it was functional, so it got a beautiful paint job as well. Let’s take a look at some of the details.

Let’s start with the wheels. Gary chose DT Swiss 180 hubs, so named because the rear hub weighs only 180 grams. These hubs come standard with high quality ceramic bearings which reduce both weight and rolling resistance. The rear hub is equipped with the DT Swiss patented Star Ratchet system freehub, which provides excellent engagement while being incredibly reliable and easy to service. These hubs may be the best combination of lightweight, reliability, and performace available. Perfect for a grueling long distance ride.

The rims are also DT Swiss. They’re the 700c XR 331 model, which is a well balanced disc-only rim that offers stiffness and strength in a lightweight package at only 380 grams per rim. The spokes are DT Swiss Competition double butted spokes with the DT Squorx nipples. Rounding out the package are a set of Compass (now Rene Herse) Stampede Pass Extralight tires. These are some of the lightest and fastest rolling clincher tires on the market and provide a famously supple ride. Overall, these wheels are very light without sacrificing durability or ride quality. They’re as light or lighter than most wheelsets with carbon rims and less expensinve. They’re also easily serviceable at any competent bike shop. They’re as close to “worry free” as a high performance wheelset gets.

The crankset and bottom bracket on this bike follow a similar theme, combining lightness, durability, and function. The Easton EC90 SL cranks are some of the lightest and stiffest cranks on the market. Gary went with a chainring combo of 46/30, which is a popular combination for randonneurs. The real prize, however, is the bottom bracket. The Enduro TorqTite with XD-15 bearings is one of the toughest, lightest bottom brackets on the market. Ultra smooth ceramic cartridge bearings that are nearly indestructible, it holds up to heavy use and abuse.

Believe it or not, this bike did not have an unlimited budget. Gary chose to save a little bit by going with Sram Rival instead of Sram Red shifters, derailleurs, and hydraulic brakes. This saved a bit of expense with only a minor weight penalty. That same thinking led to the choice of Shimano PRO alloy handlebars and a plain alloy stem. Some of that weight was mitigated, however, by using a traditional 1-1/8″ headtube and straight steertube Whisky No7 carbon fork. This setup saves a bit of weight over a tapered headtube and matching fork. The FSA Orbit X headset weighs about the same as a Chris king but at half the price so that was an easy choice for Gary.

All of this is to complement the Rodriguez Bandito frame we built for Gary. Made of our ultralight steel tubing blend and custom fit to Gary’s measurements, it’s the perfect frame for a rider that spends long hours in the saddle. The supple ride quality of a steel frame is legendary for a reason and is still the go to choice for many serious riders. We’ve been building custom steel frames since 1973 and we’ll be happy to keep doing it well into the future.

Gary’s bike is a good example of what goes into a fully custom bike. Every piece of the puzzle was considered as to how it fit with Gary’s overall vision of the bike he wanted. When Gary wasn’t sure about a component, he was able to draw on our experience and find the right choice from his many options. This kind of project can be deeply satisfying for everyone involved and in the end, we produced the bike Gary envisioned. To us that’s a job well done. In future blog posts, we’ll look at other dream bikes and see what decisions brought them to fruition. For a full gallery of Gary’s bike, go here. You can see a full list of Gary’s parts below:

shift/brake levers – Sram Rival 22 hydraulic
derailleurs – Sram Rival 22
brakes – Sram Rival hydraulic
rotors – Sram Centerline CL 160mm front 140mm rear
crankset – Easton EC90 SL
chainrings – Sram 46/30 double
bottom bracket – Enduro TorqTite w/XD-15 ceramic bearings
cog set – Sram 11-34 11 speed
chain – Sram 11 speed
hubs – DT Swiss 180 ceramic w/11 speed freehub
rims – DT Swiss XR331 700c alloy
spokes – DT Swiss Competition 14/15g double butted stainless
nipples – DT Swiss Squorx
tires – Compass (Rene Herse) Stampede Pass Extralight 700×32
skewers – Loaded Xlite titanium
headset – FSA Orbit X 1-1/8″
stem – basic alloy – custom painted
handlebars – Shimano PRO Vibe
bar tape – black cork
seatpost – FSA Energy alloy
seat collar – Salsa
saddle – Fabric Scoop titanium
fork – Whisky No7 1-1/8″ straight steertube carbon – custom painted
fenders – Portland Design Works Full Metal Fenders Road Plus

Tech Talk: Fenders

Posted on August 30, 2019 by Beau Hart

It’s that time of year again. The rainy season is almost here. For those of us in the Pacific Northwest, fenders are a fact of life if you want to ride all year long. If you don’t ride in the rain, you pretty much don’t get to ride between November and June. While some young riders resist fenders on aesthetic grounds, they eventually come around during a particularly miserable winter (looking at you, Alder!).

In this post, we are going to take a look at the ins and outs of fenders so you can make some informed decisions about what to put on your bike, why, and how. What’s the real-world difference between plastic and metal fenders? How much coverage do you need?

Plastic vs Metal

While the vast majority of bicycle fenders are made of polycarbonate plastic, metal fenders have seen a resurgence in recent years. There are practical reasons to argue for both materials, but many hold the opinion that metal fenders have the edge both functionally and aesthetically. Let’s look at the pros and cons of each.

Plastic fenders have a lot going for them. They’re easier to install, for one. Most come with all the hardware you could need and are designed to go on quickly and easily. They can flex during installation to match the wheel diameter without much hassle. Plastic fenders are also very durable and withstand certain types of damage quite well. So what’s the downside?

Plastic fenders flex a lot more than metal fenders, which can lead to more noise. The struts usually included with plastic fenders are also not as stiff as the style of strut many metal fenders use. This can result in a lot of wiggling and rubbing when riding over rough terrain. Hardware is riveted to the plastic so modifications can be difficult if you don’t have the proper tools. Plastic fenders also lose their shine over time and can become dull looking after a few seasons of use. This matters to some people, but not everyone.

One reason the plastic fenders move more easily is the way the struts are attached. A metal strap is riveted to the underside of the fender and the strut ends are then bolted to each side. This is much more flexible than the struts on metal fenders, which go around the outside in a continuous loop. The strap can also interfere with water flowing correctly out of the fender, causing drips. Minor stuff, but something to be aware of.

Metal fenders do have a lot going for them. They’re much more rigid than plastic and make less noise overall. The metal only ever needs a wipe down or maybe a polish to look as good as new. They’re very customizable to really fit them to your bike. They can also support a properly installed light system with a little modification.

The downside to metal fenders really lies entirely in the installation. It’s time consuming and laborious, especially if you lack either tools or experience, and can be expensive if you have a shop do it for you. Some of this depends on the brand of fender you choose. Honjo makes what most consider the best aluminum fenders. They’re light, stiff, and beautiful. They are also very time consuming to install because each piece of hardware requires drilling a hole into the fender to attach it. Some brands, like Velo Orange, come pre-drilled to make this step a bit easier.

Since metal fenders don’t generally flex, they may not match the radius of your tire. Some brands, like Honjo and Velo Orange, can be “re-radiused” to match your tire. (Velo Orange has a good blog post about that here) Some, like Portland Design Works metal fenders, cannot change the radius very easily. If you force a metal fender into a flexed position during installation, it will eventually crack from the stress. Metal fenders are also more susceptible to impact damage than plastic, especially the ultra-light versions like Honjo.

Planet Bike has a model of aluminum fender called the Cascadia ALX that tries to bridge the gap between plastic and metal. The hardware is pre-installed like a plastic fender and the shape of the aluminum allows more leeway to flex the fender to the proper radius. Not as much as plastic, but more than traditional aluminum. The fender moves more than traditional metal fenders during rough riding, but less than a plastic fender. It does have the underside mounted metal strap, which is a drawback, but a fixable one. If you’re looking for a metal fender but don’t feel comfortable with complicated installation, the ALX might be a good choice for you.

A Honjo lightweight aluminum fender with dynamo powered light attached

Measurements

Fenders come in lots of different sizes to fit your needs. Ideally, your fender should be 10mm wider than your tire and sit at least 20mm above your tire. Any less and debris can get caught between your fender and tire. If you can’t get those clearances on your bike, you may need to run a smaller tire to get the most out of your fenders.

The fender radius should be even with the tire all the way around. While aesthetically pleasing, this also eliminates tight spots that could catch debris or open areas where water can spray out.

All of this assumes you have room in your frame for fenders as well as proper mounting points on the frame. If you’re having trouble fitting fenders to your frame, seek advice from your local mechanic. There are lots of solutions and adapters that can help.

Mudflaps

The humble mudflap might seem like an afterthought, but they’re essential equipment. There’s almost no stock mudflap that does an adequate job. A good mudflap in the front keeps your feet from getting splashed with road muck as well as keeping your frame a bit cleaner. A proper rear mudflap is essential for group rides. Nobody likes water spraying up into their face and all over their bike and clothing, and they won’t like you if you’re the cause of it. Mudflaps should be made out of a semi-flexible material like rubber, plastic, or thick leather and hang very close to the ground. Too flexible and it won’t stay where you need it. Too stiff and you might catch it on something and break it. Tightly bolting the flap to the inside of the fender will force the flap to conform to the shape of the fender, adding some stiffness. Also, a bit of extra width is useful in the front to better handle splashes from standing water.

Hopefully all of this is helpful in your quest for dry feet and year-round cycling success. As the old saying goes, there’s no such thing as poor weather, only poor preparation.

For some general cost info, here’s what some of these options would cost in our service shop:

Planet Bike Cascadia plastic fenders – $55 (installation – $35-45)

Planet Bike Cascadia ALX aluminum fenders – $70 (installation – $35-45)

Velo Orange aluminum fenders – $80 (installation $45-75)

Portland Design Works aluminum fenders – $125 (installation $45-75)

Honjo aluminum fenders – $180 (installation – $75 and up)

For info on dynamo lighting, see this post.

For a comparison on frame materials, see Dan’s article.

Some Thoughts On Thru Axles and Quick Releases

Posted on August 1, 2019 by Beau Hart

One purpose of this blog is to take a fair look at how current trends are shaping the bike industry and bike design. How we see things is greatly influenced by our long experience as bike builders, and here we try to be as fair as we can.

Today, we’re going to take a look at the Thru Axle vs Quick Release debate that has been steadily providing snarky comments online for at least the past few years. First, a little history.

Traditional quick release dropouts have a slot that the hub axle slides into. A quiock release skewer then clamps the wheel in position.

The quick release skewer and axle system was patented in 1930 by Tullio Campagnolo. He came up with the idea when a misbehaving wingnut cost him precious time during a race. Using a combination of a hollow axle and a skewer with a cam lever on one end and a nut on the other, racers became able to change their wheels in seconds. It went on to become the standard wheel attachment system for road bicycles, and the overwhelming majority of bicycles come with quick release skewers to this very day.

One thing Tullio never got to see in his lifetime was a modern full suspension mountain bike with disc brakes. The combination of suspension forks, disc brakes, and the ever more punishing demands of downhill mountain bikers proved to be too much for the quick release system as it was designed. The legs of a suspension fork really like to move independently of one another, which led to broken axles, dislodged wheels, rotor misalignment, and poor tracking of the front wheel during turns. This changed about ten years ago with the invention of the thru axle system. It linked the two ends of the fork in a new way which stiffened the front end, improved handling, and prevented mechanical problems experienced with quick release systems. Sounds like a win in my book.
So what makes this controversial? This is where the disc brake equipped road bike enters the picture. (The use of disc brakes on road bikes is it’s own controversy that we will not get to today, thankfully.) Disc brakes work great for mountain bikes, so lots of people decided they’d be great for road bikes as well. The disc road bike has proliferated and is now one of the hottest selling types of bike in North America and Europe. Along with this change came a call to also bring the thru axle over from the mountain bike world. This brings us to the question we have today: was this an improvement for road bikes?

Thru axle dropouts form complete circles that the axle must be inserted through. One side is threaded for the axle to screw into, securing the wheel in place.

Road bikes use a rigid fork that doesn’t experience the same issues as a suspension fork on a mountain bike. It does, however, have similar forces to deal with in relation to the disc brake itself. When a disc brake is applied to a moving bike, the fork blade it’s attached to experiences a large amount of torsional force, which basically means it wants to twist and flex in ways that rim brakes don’t cause. The fork blade has to be beefed up to accommodate these forces or it can fail during hard braking. The thru axle is supposed to stiffen the entire fork and mitigate some of these forces. Benefits are said to include better brake rotor alignment, better handling, and less flex-related rotor rub. The reality is that while these things are true, the amount of improvement is marginal and the majority of riders wouldn’t notice the difference. That’s not to dismiss thru axle, but to say that while game changing for mountain bikes, thru axle is a minor change for road bikes.

I also wouldn’t write off the quick release just yet. It still has the advantage of being a lighter weight system overall. It’s easy to use, easy to replace parts, and you can find compatible parts all over the world. Disc brakes and thru axles carry a weight penalty that’s easily avoided with a traditional rim brake road bike with quick release wheels. Weight seems like less of a concern for new bikes than it did just five years ago, but I doubt that applies to everyone. The good news is you still have the choice, no matter how you choose to roll.

You may have noticed I haven’t said anything about the rear axle. That’s because it makes even less difference than in the fork. Results seem to be about even as far as performance in road bikes goes.

So what should you do as a consumer? As far as I can tell you’re good either way so don’t be overly concerned about it. If you’re thinking about a getting a bike, either quick release or thru axle will work fine. I do believe that most of us will end up with a thru axle bike eventually. I think it’s here to stay at this point, but you’ll still have a choice for some time to come. If you’re the type to get the newest version of things you probably already have thru axle and love it.

I can tell you what that means to Rodriguez bikes. As a builder that specializes in steel, thru axle represents some new challenges. The fork is actually the easy part. There’s a larger variety of forks on the market than ever before and we’re happy to use whichever one is best going to suit your needs when we build your custom bike. The rear triangle is more of a challenge. We’re happy to build a frame with thru axle dropouts, but it does take more time than traditional dropouts. Alignment needs to be maintained throughout the build and there’s less margin for adjustment. When building a frame, time definitely equals money, so thru axle frames will be more expensive. They will also be heavier, even with the lightest thru axle dropouts we can find. We wish that wasn’t the case. Our favorite thing is giving our customers exactly what they want and we wish all of these options were equal in both weight, time, and cost. That said, we’re a custom shop. We always find a way.

To learn more about our methods go to our website

Here’s another article about flat mount and post mount disc brakes

This is another blog post about whether or not tubeless tires are right for you

Are Tubeless Tires for You?

Posted on July 5, 2019 by Beau Hart

One of the ongoing conversations in cycling today is whether or not you should go with tubeless tires. As usual, the answer is: “it depends”. This article will hopefully give you enough information to choose the right option for your bike as well as your riding goals.

Tubeless started in the mountain bike world in 1999 and has since moved into the gravel/randonneur arenas and even made some headway into high pressure road tires. Tubeless gave mountain bikes the ability to run lower pressures without the fear of pinch flats, gaining added traction from a softer tire. The sealant also closes small punctures before the tire could go flat. These features were attractive to riders of all stripes, as it turned out.

Note: for tubeless to work properly, the tire, rim, and rim tape must all be tubeless compatible. Some products are clearly labeled, others not so much. If you’re not sure check the company’s website, or consult your favorite local bike shop.

some tubeless labels are clear, others not so much

Is tubeless right for you? Let’s look at the pros and cons to find out.

Good things about tubeless:

Sealant means fewer flats overall – The small cuts and punctures that could stop you on a normal tire and tube setup would seal automatically. Your tire will lose some air with each puncture, but topping off your pressure is quicker and easier than a full flat repair. This means more time in the saddle and less hassle on long rides.
“Tuning” your tires – Tubeless gives you a greater range at which to adjust your tire pressure depending on terrain. You can start your ride on the road with a reasonably firm tire, then let air out and run soft over rough terrain. You can also do this with tubes, but tubeless allows for even lower pressures. This is especially useful with supple tires without stiff sidewall casings. Stiff casings don’t run well at lower pressures as the sidewalls tend to collapse suddenly instead of flex smoothly.
No more pinch flats – This mainly affects off-road riders that want a large, low pressure tire for better traction on soft surfaces. This can be a real game changer for some riders, giving extra traction on demand.
You can always put in a tube if you need to – If your tire gets a cut or puncture too large for the sealant, you can use a traditional tube and boot to keep riding.

Tubeless drawbacks:

Setup can be difficult or messy for first-timers – While there are several instructional videos on the internet, becoming skilled at tubeless setup can be a mucky endeavor. Seating the tire without a tube can be tricky, liquid latex (what most sealant is) can make a mess, and the tolerances of bead and rim tape play a more crucial role. Weeping sealant can also be an issue if your sealant isn’t shaken properly or if you’re trying to convert an already ridden tire.
Sharp objects can become part of your tire – Remember that tiny piece of wire you ran over 300 miles ago? Probably not, since the puncture sealed in seconds. That wire is still there, though. If you end up having to install a tube out on a ride, that wire is going to pierce your tube as soon as you inflate it. The tire must be thoroughly checked for sealant-embedded debris before installing a fresh tube.
Tubeless isn’t faster – While not really a drawback, it’s something to keep in mind. In tests done by inquiring minds, tires with tubes were just a tiny bit faster than tubeless. Most of us probably wouldn’t notice the difference, so unless you’re a competitive racer that lives or dies by marginal gains, it’s a bit of a non-factor.
Roadside repairs can be very messy – If you do have to open up a tubeless tire in the middle of a ride, it’s likely to be a wet and dirty experience. Gloves are recommended.
Advantages are less noticeable with high pressure, low volume tires – A two inch wide tire running at 30PSI loses a much smaller percentage of air while sealing a small puncture than a 28mm tire running at 100PSI. By the time the hole seals on a tire like that, you’ve lost enough air to necessitate pulling over to reinflate the offending tire. While there is some time savings, it’s not the seamless experience you would get from tubeless on a larger, softer tire. This makes the effort of setup seem somewhat less attractive, especially when there’s no additional speed benefit.

So, are tubeless tires in your future? Probably? The trend towards larger tires will make tubeless an attractive option for more and more people, especially those looking to combine road and off-road riding. Still, the inner tube isn’t going anywhere anytime soon. The choice will be yours. We just want to give people enough information to make the best decision for themselves, without taking a particular “side” of an issue. Good luck, and have great rides.

Are Dynamo Hubs For You?

Posted on February 13, 2019 by Beau Hart

The dynamo hub has made a resurgence over the past decade. For those unfamiliar, a dynamo hub is a hub that uses a small internal generator to produce electricity as the bicycle wheel rotates. This electricity powers a light system and can charge a small electronic device with the right setup. Advances in magnet technology and the rise of efficient LED bulbs have made dynamo hubs smaller, lighter and more effective than ever before. Quality hubs are being made by Schmidt, Shimano, Shutter Precision, and others. If you’ve been considering a dynamo system, there’s never been a better time.

The three types of riders that most often use dynamo hubs are daily commuters, riders that do multi-day bike touring, and long distance Randonneur riders. For the commuter, dynamos provide a near maintenance free lighting system that they don’t have to think about. It’s just always there, never needing charging or fresh batteries. You can grab your bike and go with one less thing to worry about. Touring riders use their dynamos as a charging station that keeps their devices charged no matter how many days they’re on tour. Very handy when you’re using GPS as your guide or your phone is your only connection to civilization. Randonneurs can’t afford to have a light battery die in the middle of a 1200km ride so the dynamo hub system gives them a reliable, battery-free system they can depend on for the long haul.

This system with a Schmidt SON Delux hub and B+M Luxos U headlight provides both light and charging capability

There are some trade-offs for all of this convenience and reliability. Cost is one factor. The high end systems can be quite expensive, but there are entry level hubs and lights available as well. You must have a dedicated wheel built for the dynamo hub itself, then lights and wiring must be installed. While not terribly difficult, setting up the system can be time consuming. Adding a USB charger into the mix can add cost and complexity, depending on how you choose to do it. The good news is that you only have to do it once. There’s also a bit of a weight penalty, since dynamo hubs are heavier than a standard front hub. The dynamo magnets also produce a slight amount of drag when rolling, The amount of which depends on the hub and whether the light is turned on. For example, the Shimano Alfine dynamo requires 2.2 watts of additional force at 30 kph, while the Schmidt requires 1.2 watts at the same speed. That is with the light or charger turned off. Both hubs require between 6 and 7 watts when the light or charger is switched on at that speed.

Modern dynamo hubs are meant to be mostly maintenance free. Manufacturers require the hubs to be serviced by professionals and hubs must be shipped to service centers. Attempting to service any dynamo hub yourself is a dicey affair. Most require proprietary tools and also have delicate electronic parts that are easily damaged by inexperienced hands. This is where the longevity of a hub comes into play. As a general rule, the higher end hubs can travel farther before problems occur. Schmidt, for example, says you should get tens of thousands of kilometers out of one of their hubs before any maintenance is required.

Much of the best bicycle lighting available comes from dynamo specific lights. Companies like Busch+Mueller, Schmidt, Supernova, and Herrmans have headlights that provide wide, evenly illuminated light fields that cover a large swath of the road ahead while not blinding oncoming riders. Compared to the focused round beams of most battery powered lights, it’s almost no contest when it comes to road visibility. You can see some nice beam comparisons here.

This is just an introduction to dynamo systems. If they interest you, we’d love to help you put a system together. Our expert mechanics can have you up and running in no time. Whether you want a reliable lighting setup, or a full charging system, we can help you select what will fit your needs best.

For further reading we recommend the following pages:

Here’s a Rodriguez with a Schmidt hub and light system

Peter White’s page is a deep well of information on dynamo systems

Cycling About has some good info about chargers

Sheldon Brown has some dynamo history

Jan Heine’s blog has lots of different posts on this subject (mostly Schmidt-centric)

The New Rodriguez Bandito

Posted on November 16, 2016 by Dan T

The Lightest Road Bike with Disc Brakes!

Unleash the Beast!

For a decade now, we here at Rodriguez have been known for building some of the lightest bikes on the road. The amazing thing about these bikes is that they are made of good ol’ American steel! Well actually, they are made of the New American Steel. In 2006 we introduced our 13.5 pound Rodriguez Outlaw. That led to mass retirements of Trek Madone’s, Cervelo R3’s, Specialized Tarmac’s, and many many other overseas-made carbon frames. We love the look on people’s faces when they lift the Outlaw for the first time. Especially if they rode in on something they thought was ‘really light’.

Well, now we’d like to introduce something else equally spectacular. The Outlaw has a new cousin equipped with disc brakes, the Rodriguez Bandito. It took some time, and some planning to get this bike down to it’s fly-weight of just 15.9 pounds, but we’ve done it. The lightest disc brake bikes that we’ve been able to verify weight on are at least 2 pounds heavier than the Bandito.

“The Rodriguez Bandito offers the serious weight weenie some never before seen features available on a fly-weight disc brake road bike!”

Verified 15.9 pounds with disc brakes and 32c tires!

First up: 32c Tires

Now here’s an idea. One of the benefits to disc brakes on a road bike is that the brake caliper no longer limits your tire width. So, if the frame and fork are designed properly, you can put wide tires on your bike. Unfortunately, race bike manufacturers don’t realize that most ‘everyday’ riders would like this ability, and design their forks and frames for the same skinny tires that you could run with caliper brakes:-( We ask “where’s the fun in that?!”

The Bandito is the first ultra-light disc brake road bike designed for use with wide tires. As a matter of fact, we even did the weigh in with 32c tires on the bike. You can run up to 35c tires on this bike. We see the ability to run wide tires as the most important advantage to road disc brakes. Otherwise, why pay the weight penalty?

Next features: Lighter, more comfortable and more durable than your carbon bike

Now you won’t have to compromise weight, ride quality, comfort, or durability to own the sweetest ride in the pack. The Banditio comes with our lifetime warranty, just like all of our steel bikes (most carbon bikes have just 5 year limited warranties). Steel has a well deserved reputation as the smoothest riding material, but also is thought of as heavy:-( This is because most of us owned heavy steel bikes back in the 1970’s, and we associated the ‘heft’ with the frame material. We loved the ride, but were willing to sacrifice that smooth ride to save a few pounds on aluminum or carbon fiber. Well, steel has evolved, and now we can make a Rodriguez from steel that’s lighter than it’s carbon or aluminum counterparts. Some of you are probably ready to email us and schedule a test ride…right? Others out there, I know will be reading this and thinking “Bull Sh#$%” right? Well, read on then. I’ll explain a few things that will help you understand how we can pull this off.

Use your head:
Let’s talk about head tubes and head sets. This is the part of the bike where the fork is attached, and the bearings are referred to as the head set. Originally, carbon fiber bikes used the same sized head tubes and ISO head sets as titanium, aluminum and steel bikes. This part of the frame is under more stress, and carbon frames began to fail at this point. So, manufacturers began to ‘beef up’ this part of their carbon frames. Unlike aluminum, titanium and steel frames, it turns out carbon frames needed more material in this area in order to have the strength needed. To fit these bigger head tubes, bigger, non-standard head sets were used, and sometimes a proprietary fork. The issues of non-standard, or proprietary parts are many, but one thing is for sure. The bigger head tubes and head sets, and proprietary forks may have made the frame weight lower, but added weight to the full bike when built.

Bottoms up:
Now, let’s talk about bottom brackets. This is the part of your frame that holds the bearings for your cranks. Needless to say, this is also also weak point on a carbon bike. It’s a point of great stress on any frame. To fit the ultra-light, standard ISO bottom brackets that are used in steel, aluminum and titanium bikes, the carbon guys had to glue in a steel or aluminum shell so they could put threads in it. This added weight to a carbon frame. This was also a weak point as eventually the glue failed. To solve the problem, the carbon guys again abandoned the long held ISO standards, and adapted one of several different non-standards. Again, the frame had to be ‘beefed up’ and a heavier bottom bracket had to be used.

Let’s compare:
This brings us to an interesting point. Wether intentional or not, these evolutions artificially make a carbon frame seem lighter than it is. If one weighs just the carbon frame, without it’s required heavier bottom bracket and head set, the frame can be a little lighter than our steel Bandito. So a published frame weight is not the only thing to look at. If one weighs the carbon frame with it’s fork, required head set, and required bottom bracket, the result will be quite different. You see, an ultra-light Rodriguez steel frame, you can still use ultra-light ISO standard parts. This means that you can run much lighter head sets and bottom brackets, and in some cases forks. The result is very similar weights, or often, a lighter combined weight for the Rodriguez ultra-light.

So, no more weighing just the frame. You need to weigh the entire bike, or at least the frame with it’s bottom bracket, head set and fork to get a real comparison. If you do that, you’ll find the secret behind the Rodriguez ultra-light steel bikes like the new Bandito.

Added weight for no reason:
When designing the Bandito, we weighed a larger head tube and head set like the carbon bikes run. A lot of steel bike manufacturers run these, but I have no idea why. For instance, the weight difference between an ISO head tube set up and a 44mm head tube was just shy of 1/2 of a pound! On a steel bike, that’s completely unnecessary added weight, as a steel frame is strong enough without all of that ‘beef’.

Then, add to that the larger bottom brackets. The added weight again would be wasted on a steel frame, but none-the-less, a lot of steel bike builders use them.

If a steel bike has these larger head tubes, head sets, bottom bracket shells, and bottom brackets, it is a pretty heavy frame, and a really heavy bike. But, we don’t don’t use that stuff. I would put our ultra-light steel bikes up against any fly-weight on the market of any material.

In closing I’d like to say, if you love really light bikes, and you haven’t ridden a custom, American hand-made Rodriguez ultra-light, DO before you spend money on a carbon frame mass-produced overseas. If you already own a carbon bike, we challenge you to come in for a ride…but be careful…most who do wind up on a Rodriguez.

Thanks for reading – Dan 11-2016

Related Articles

Weight a Minute – Honesty in advertising
Steel vs. Carbon – Steel CAN be lighter
Chaos – Downside to abandoning ISO standards
The New Carbon… Carbon Steel!
Forever Bike – Proprietary parts 🙁

Double Trouble!

Posted on January 9, 2014 by Dan T

The lightest fork for a tandem bicycle

Choosing the right tandem fork

A voice of experience
For those who don’t know us, here at Rodriguez Bicycles we have been building tandems in the United States for over 40 years now. That makes us one of the oldest, if not the oldest tandem manufacturer still building tandems in the US.

All forked Up!
(Scary story of using the wrong fork in a tandem)
My first person experience with a road bike fork installed into a tandem dates back to 1995. It happened to be a carbon fork in this story, but my advice would’ve been the same if the fork were light steel or aluminum. Carbon forks were not nearly as good back then, and I would even say that they were unpredictable.

One of our bike representatives (we’ll call him Jim) was visiting the shop, and wanted to show me his new racing tandem. He worked for a very large company (we’ll call them Company X) that from time to time built tandems when the market was booming, and this was one of those times. When he showed me his tandem, he pointed out that he had installed a new carbon fork “like the ones that they ride in the Paris Roubaix”. I told him, “That is not a tandem fork.” He said, “Well, they ride them in the Paris Roubaix on cobblestone roads.” I said, “I don’t care, that fork will break in that tandem.” He replied, “The engineers at Company X said it will be strong enough.” I said, “From my experience, I think you’re NUTS if you race that tandem with that fork!” Jim decided to listen to the Company X engineers instead of me.

It was only a month or so later when Jim stopped by for his routine visit. It was kind of hard to talk with him as his jaw was wired shut. It was actually just as hard to recognize him as it looked like someone had taken a baseball bat to his entire face and head. As it turned out, the fork broke. Apparently a large part of the fork wound up entering Jim’s face underneath his chin, and exiting through his cheek (Ow! That’s gotta hurt!). I didn’t spend a long time with Jim at this visit as he was obviously uncomfortable, and I suppose embarrassed. Needless to say, he didn’t put another under-weight fork in his tandem though.

While it was really tempting to say “I told you so”, I felt so bad looking at Jim that I steered clear of that infamous saying. I did learn a valuable lesson about my instincts though, and I’ve never felt bad about telling someone that they are putting themselves in danger when they use under-weight critical parts on a bike or tandem.

Article overview:
We love our tandem customers. We love them so much that we want them to stay healthy and live a long time. The tandem industry has had a couple of boom years as of late, and so it goes that lots of newer companies have jumped in to try and take advantage while the gettin’ is good (history repeats itself). Some of these companies already build bicycles and are just now adding tandems to their line-up. Others are simply brand new companies that appeared in the last decade or so. These companies will be in the tandem world for a while, and then a lot of them will exit when sales slow back down in a few years.

Why would I write this article?
When a rider gets hurt (or worse) on a tandem, it hurts the whole tandem industry. I don’t want anybody to get hurt on their tandem whether they ride one of our bikes or not. I feel that our extensive record in the tandem world can help to steer us away from past mistakes (pun intended). A tandem is a completely different animal than a single bike (or half bike as I often refer to them). When it comes to underestimating the stresses on tandem components, there are several mistakes that some tandem riders and even some in the industry have made through the years. I’m hoping that an article like this one can help everyone to avoid making those same mistakes. Although we welcome every manufacturer to the fray, even if it’s just for a short while, we want to keep things safe and fun for those unique folks who enjoy riding tandems.

OK. With that in mind, let’s narrow our focus a bit for this article. The flagship of most tandem lines (including ours) is the uber-light tandem, right? (Even though most of them are ‘fudging’ their published weights).

A Fork in the Road
In this article, I will focus on one aspect of building a super light weight tandem….the light weight tandem fork. If you’ve been in this industry for as long as we have, you’ve learned that a fork has to be specifically designed for use on a tandem (some have learned the hard way). So, if you’re into high performance, uber-light tandems, or want to learn about the engineering challenges of building a tandem specific fork, this article is for you.

Building a super-light tandem takes a lot of heavy thinking
At Rodriguez, we’re certainly no stranger to building uber-light tandems. As a matter of fact, we’ve built probably some of the lightest verified tandems in the industry. Funny thing about tandems though, even if they are super-light, is that they are supposed to be built using components suitable for tandem riding. This is especially true for the fork. For instance, if a manufacturer specifically states that their forks are NOT recommended for a tandem, then it stands to reason that the fork shouldn’t go onto a tandem….right?

If you poke around on the websites of companies that have specialized in tandems for 20 years or more (including ours), you’ll find that they all recommend using a tandem worthy fork on a tandem.

About our Carbon Footprint:
In our shop, we use a lot of carbon forks. We have nothing against them, and we use them all the time on race and sport bikes. We probably sell as many single bikes with carbon forks as we do with steel forks. Over the years, we’ve used many carbon forks on tandems as well. We are not concerned about carbon as a material. Our concern is in educating the tandem cyclist about the need for a MUCH stronger fork than is required for use on a single bike. So Carbon Junkies, please don’t flame me.

Example:

Enve, one of the industries main manufacturers of carbon forks (and our favorite race forks), specifically states right on their main web page that their forks on NOT for tandem use.

How does all of this relate to tandems?
Most carbon fork makers dropped out of the tandem market over the last few years, including our favorite. There are still a few heavier carbon forks that are recommended for tandem use, so if you want a carbon tandem fork you can get one. In the absence of the really light carbon tandem forks, some riders (and manufacturers) are throwing caution to the wind and installing ultra-light carbon race forks on their tandems to save a few ounces. I’m here to tell you, if you’re looking to save weight on your tandem, there are plenty of ways to do that without resorting to an unsafe fork that isn’t designed for the rigors of tandem use.

See for yourself
A quick web search for images of ‘racing tandems’ will turn up literally hundreds of photos of tandems using the ENVE 2.0 fork pictured here, even though the Enve company specifically stresses that this fork is NOT for tandem use.

Weight for it……
The theory goes like this: “Enve puts a weight limit of 350 pounds on the fork, so as long as we don’t go over that limit, we’re golden!” Realize that this weight limit includes the rider, all the rider’s gear, clothing, water, etc.., and their bike. That same internet search (along with little common sense) will show that a huge portion of these tandem teams are certainly at, or even greatly exceeding that weight limit. The problem with that theory is that it doesn’t say “OK for tandems up to 350 pounds” and there’s a difference. Read on to see why a weight limit for a single bike is different than a tandem recommendation.

Realize, Enve is our favorite carbon fork manufacturer and we use a lot of their products. If Enve made a fork recommended for tandem use, we would use it on our tandems. We want to see this company thrive, and that gets difficult if someone gets hurt on one of their forks.

Now, after four decades in the business, we’ve just about seen it all. History seems to be repeating itself, and the mistakes along with it. We’ve seen companies (and customers) make these mistakes before with devastating results. Recently in our repair shop, we’ve seen some dangerous close calls (on other brands of bikes) and thought it was about time to write an article to educate you, the rider, as well as any in the industry who will listen about the dangers of using non-tandem forks on tandems. Some of these close calls were even on tandem recommended carbon forks that were just past their prime.

A Warning
When it comes to choosing a fork for your tandem, DO NOT choose one that the fork manufacturer will not recommend or warranty for tandem use. I strongly recommend that if you purchase a tandem (used or new) with a 3rd party carbon fork in it, research or email the fork manufacturer to verify that your carbon fork is tandem rated. If you’re not sure, don’t use it.

A broken fork is often a catastrophic event, and on a tandem it’s a horrifying thought. Take it from us, there are better ways to save weight than to sacrifice safety.

Something else everyone should know is that carbon fiber forks that use carbon fiber steering tubes are not designed to last forever. Tandem recommended or not, any fork that uses a carbon fiber steering tube should be inspected occasionally and replaced after its life expectancy is over.

Alright, on with the article

OK, so why isn’t the maximum weight limit the same as a tandem recommendation?

It would seem on the surface that the fork’s maximum weight rating would be the same for a tandem as for a single bike. Here’s the problem, and it’s actually a good problem. People ride faster on tandems. If you are a person who rides about 16 ~ 18 mph on your single bike, and your riding partner averages about the same, then on a tandem you will ride faster. You’ll probably ride more like 18 ~ 21 mph when you are riding together. If you’re a person who rides 45mph down long descents, then you’ll probably ride that same descent over 50mph on the tandem. That extra speed (velocity) amplifies the amount of energy impacting your fork greatly. Instead of a maximum weight limit, maybe the fork manufacturer should recommend a maximum energy limit, or at least a recommendation that takes into account weight and speed.

Some science and stuff
There are a lot of forces at work when trying to determine the amount of energy affecting your fork, and a lot of different equations to determine that. In all of them, there are more stresses on your fork when more speed and/or weight is applied. We need to select one formula to use here, and we used kinetic energy as it accounts for both weight and speed. The formula to determine kinetic energy is E=½MV² (Energy = ½Mass X (Velocity X Velocity) )

Now, I’m sure scientists who read this are thinking “what about acceleration, weight distribution, force, etc..”? Someone with more knowledge and time than I could write a paper on the subject, but for the sake of brevity, I had to boil it down to one easy equation. Rest assured that any equation used will show more stress on the fork if more weight and/or speed are applied.

Here’s how much it changes the mixture: 350 pounds traveling at 21 mph will impact the fork with 35% more energy than 350 pounds traveling at 18 mph. Rough surfaces, pot holes, braking, etc…. will all put 35% more impact on your fork with just that slight increase in speed. And this example is not really a very realistic one.

Now let’s visit the real world. Most people riding the uber-light fork on their single bike do not weigh anywhere near 350 pounds. Let’s use me as an example of the average uber-light fork rider as I ride a bike with one. 180 pound rider with 20 pounds of bike and gear = 200 pounds. As a tandem team, let’s say that a fit team could have a 180 pound captain, 135 pound stoker, and 35 pounds of bike and gear (helmets, wallets, sunglasses, clothing, shoes, phones, any accessories, etc…) = 350 pounds total weight. This even keeps our tandem team right at that weight limit of the Enve 2.0 fork.

Using our kinetic energy equation, the amount of force that the fork is subjected to in this tandem team is 270% more than me on my solo bike. This is assuming a modest average speed gain of just 3mph (18mph ~ 21mph). If we put the speeds at 45mph for the solo rider, and 55mph for the tandem team, the difference is even greater at 300%.

So, at the least, the fork is being subjected to 35% more force than it is designed to take. In a real life scenario, the fork is being pushed up to 300% over its design specifications. For some components, these extra forces may acceptable, but for a fork, I feel that there is no need to push those limits and to accept that risk.

The Wrap Up

Rodriguez uber-light steel tandem fork

Rodriguez Steel Light-weight Tandem Fork

We can build an extremely light weight tandem without compromising performance or safety. A lot of manufacturers eliminate the lateral stiffener tube to save weight, but that affects performance more than safety. Some use wheels that are built super-light for solo bikes, but that’s a durability issue. Using a fork that is too light is a safety issue and should not be done by a rider or a manufacturer.

What do we do at Rodriguez?
For the time being, we use exclusively steel tandem forks on all of our tandems, including our new uber-light 25.8 pound model. That weight is verified and guaranteed on our digital scale here in the shop. We have a full repair shop, and we service every make of tandem every year. We’ve seen every brand and every model here over time, and we’ve weighed all the light ones. Our Rodriguez uber-light steel tandem is lighter than any other tandem that’s ever been in our shop regardless of the frame/fork material. Our bike has no compromises, and even has a steel fork, aluminum cranks, a lateral stiffener tube and a tandem wheel set. There’s no reason to compromise performance, weight, or durability if you want an uber-light tandem from Rodriguez.

Visit us soon, we’d love to build your new ride!

Thanks for reading –Dan

The Rodriguez feather-weight tandem for 2014

Links in this article:

Rodriguez Featherweight Tandem
Rodriguez 41 year history
Weight-a-minute – Manufacturers lying about their bike weights
Rodriguez Home Page
Kinetic energy – Wikipedia
Enve Disclamer
‘racing tandems’ – Google Image Search

Bike and Pike: Best Party Ever!

Posted on March 8, 2013 by Dan T

Thank you all for coming!

I can’t express enough how much we all appreciate your support for our Bike and Pike event. The whole team here had a great time. Seeing you all was a great start to the 2013 cycling season! Bike and Pike has become a special even for us here at R+E Cycles, and this year it was more successful than ever. We raised almost 40% more than last year for Food Lifeline….enough for almost 10,000 meals to local food banks. Thank you all for attending and making this year a great success.

‘R+E United’

It had been almost 30 years since Angel Rodriguez and Glenn Erickson had seen each other. It was a special sight to see them reminisce, catch up on life, and share photos over their phones and various electronic media. A big thanks to both of them for making the trip for the 40th anniversary. We were all thrilled to see them both. They had a great time catching up with customers from the 1970’s, and meeting our new customers as well. I hope that you all enjoyed seeing them as much as they enjoyed seeing you.

“Will we see you at Seattle Bike Expo?”

Customers often ask if they’ll see us at Bike Expo, NAHBS or some other exposition show that other custom bike companies attend. We do not attend these shows any longer. We’re not crazy though, read on.

2013 marks the 5th year that R+E Cycles and Pike Brewing Company have put on our own fundraiser event instead of attending other exposition type events. The first year, we had some trepidation about doing this, but since then we’ve learned that we can serve our customers and our community better this way. Doing our own event means that the show comes to us, and we continue our mission of serving our customers relatively uninterrupted. Now we don’t have put our customer’s bikes on hold in order to spend a week or two building and painting special show bikes for display, only to close the shop for a weekend so that we can show them off. Instead, we can keep building and painting the bikes that have already been ordered, thereby keeping our delivery schedule on track. Customers with bikes on order can come by and see their bike in progress during the event, and know that they are truly our first priority. Add to that the fact that we can raise thousands for a local charity, and it really seems like a no-brainer.

With the smashing success of this year’s event, we know that the Bike and Pike is going to be around for a long time. Thanks again for your support. Have a great cycling season!