From: dlp@km6pr.Eng.Sun.COM (Dan Pritchett - SunSoft Engineer)
Newsgroups: rec.bicycles.misc
Subject: Re: recumbents, winters, and training wheels...
Date: 14 Oct 1992 18:30:19 GMT
Organization: Sun Microsystems Inc., Mountain View, CA, USA
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: km6pr
Keywords: recumbent

People interested in recumbents should send mail to hpv-request@sonoma.edu
and join the mailing list. It is quite informative.

In article <Bw4ABo.Lt5@fc.hp.com>, koren@fc.hp.com (Steve Koren) writes:
|>   * What are the relative merits of short vs. long wheelbase recumbents?
|>     I know there are some with a short wheelbase where the pedals sit
|>     out in front of the rider on some sort of stem.  Then some have a
|>     longer wheelbase that permits the pedals to be mounted near or in
|>     the frame.  The advantages I see of the short wheelbase design
|>     include lighter weight (is this true?), but it seems like the longer
|>     wheelbase design is better, since it has more stability, and the
|>     pedals might be better supported and sturdier.  Anything I'm missing
|>     here?  Are the long wheelbase designs the way to go?
|> 
Long wheelbase bikes have the advantage of better stability. Short wheel
base bikes have the advantage of better maneuverability. After that, it
is a matter of choice. I ride a LWB bike (the Ryan Vanguard) and I rarely
have a problem with turning radius, even when negotiating the car stopping
posts at the start of bike trails. A LWB bike might be slightly heavier,
but my Ryan is less than 30 lbs which isn't bad for a big chro-moly bike.

|>   * I mostly commute with a little sport riding thrown in, and I want to
|>     ride faster with the same amount of effort.  If I buy a partial
|>     fairing for the recumbent, how much speed increase can I expect?
|>     One complicating factor is that I have several hills on my commute -
|>     one is short (0.2 mi) but steep (~ 6%), and another is long (1.3 mi)
|>     and shallow (~ 3%).  Will I loose more time on the hills with the
|>     recumbent than I'll make up in 3 or 4 flat miles?  What about
|>     headwinds?  I gather a partially faired recumbent should be faster
|>     into a headwind than a diamond frame bike?  I'm just trying to get
|>     feel for about how much faster I can expect to ride on flat ground.
|>     2 MPH?  5 MPH?  Which brands of recumbents are a good compromise
|>     between speed and practicality?
|> 
For speed the high handlebar LWB bikes like the Tour Easy are the clear
winners. A fully faired Tour Easy with a recumbent conditioned rider will
probably be about 5 mph faster than the same rider on a diamond frame.
This is probably best case unless you start getting exotic. Also keep
in mind that it takes ~500 miles for a well conditioned rider to develop
the muscles required to ride a recumbent fast. You will use your quads
more and in a slightly different way. Your first few hundred miles will
be slower than you are now on your diamond frame.

And here we go with the standard myth on recumbents. If you climb hills
by getting out of the saddle and hammering up them standing the entire
way, then you will be slower on a recumbent. If like the other 90% of
the cycling population you sit on your seat and find a low gear to climb
a hill then you will be no slower and possibly faster on a recumbent
on hills. I have done over 4,000 feet of climbing in a single day on
my Ryan on a charity ride and I finished in the middle of the pack. I
don't climb any slower on my recumbent than I did on my old sport/tour
bike. Most people are very impressed when I tell them the hills I've
taken the bike up, and even more impressed when I tell them the average
speed. Contrary to popular myth RECUMBENTS CAN CLIMB HILLS!

|>   * Is buying tires for recumbents a problem?  Most brands of tires make
|>     27" and 700c sizes, but I rarely see small ones.  How about tubes?
|>     Do you have to make long chains by buying several shorter chains and
|>     combining them?
|> 
The rear tire on all LWB bikes is some vanilla size that is readily available.
Most bikes also use a 20" front tire. Tubes for these is no problem because
you can get BMX tubes quite readily (or even cheaper kid tubes if necessary).
Tires on the other hand are problematic. I would recommend you get a
Cyclopedia catalog (517-263-5803) at the same time you get the bike.

Most bikes use 2 standard bike chains. This hasn't been much of a problem,
and you typically get twice the life out of the chain because it hits
the gears half as often. So, chain cost is the same as a regular bikes
(i.e. 2 chains that last twice as long equals 1).

|>   * What are the relative merits of "low" vs "high" steering?  The only
|>     recumbent I have ridden was back in 1982, and it had low steering.
|>     This seems somehow to be "better" than high steering, but I can't
|>     quite seem to find a reason for why I believe this.
|> 
Low steering is more comfortable with less rider fatigue. High steering
is faster because it pulls your arms into a more aerodynamic position.
Stability is the same.

|>   * When I rode a recumbent a long time ago, it seemed to lack low speed
|>     stability.  Was this just my lack of skill, and something that would
|>     get better as I gained familiarity with it?
|> 
They lack low speed stability. It does get better with practice, but you
will never do a track stand on a recumbent.

|>   * Can you easily put a rack and panniers on recumbents?  I need this
|>     ability, and I don't want to buy new panniers.
|> 
The Ryan (and I believe most other bikes) will accept standard racks and
panniers. Actually I find putting panniers on my Ryan much easier because
I don't have to be concerned with my feet hitting the bags if I don't
load them back far enough on the rack and load them a certain way.


|>
|>   * How do recumbents handle winters?  I currently use a Trek 930 to
|>     commute in the winter.  A recumbent has a lower CG than my 930, but
|>     it seems like it might be harder to control on slippery surfaces.
|>     Is this true, or false?  Since bicycles have the disadvantage that
|>     they can fall over on slippery surfaces, I've been thinking of some
|>     arrangement where a set of "training wheels" is put on the back of a
|>     recumbent, but they don't touch the ground for normal riding.  Only
|>     if you start to tip over do they make contact.  This would let you
|>     ride over slippery surfaces and not fall completely over.  Has
|>     anyone experimented with such a thing?
|>
I would suggest you stay with the 930 for wet riding unless you have to
ride the recumbent. A lot of your balance depends on the traction of your
rear tire instead of both tires on a regular bike. Recovery is harder so
if your rear tire looses it, you will go down 99% of the time.
 
|>   * How much is a decent recumbent?  $1000?  $1500?  How much do they
|>     weigh?
|> 
I would say that range will get you a good bike with average components.
If you can buy a bike frame and put on your own components you will probably
be happier and spend a few more dollars. The bikes usually weigh in 
around 30 lbs depending on size and material.

|>   * How do you find some to test ride?  Bike stores around here don't
|>     seem to carry them.
|> 
That's tough. I'm fortunate to live in the SF Bay Area where we always
seem to have someplace that has one available for a ride. Perhaps you
can find an owner in your area.

|>   * Anything else I should know?
|> 
Yeah, do you like attracting a lot of attention when you go out for
a ride. You will get to explain everything about the bike several times
per month. Going to a cash machine can take a half an hour if anyone
else is there, particularly on a Saturday morning when lots of people
have nothing much happening. This isn't necessarily bad, but you need
to keep in mind that you will get asked the same questions a whole bunch
(How do you steer that thing? Is it comfortable? Where do you get it?
Did you build it yourself?...)


Dan Pritchett               | ARPA/Internet: dlp@zule.Eng.Sun.COM
SunSoft Desktop Prod. Tools | GEnie: D.PRITCHET3
                            | Packet: KM6PR@N0ARY.#NOCAL.CA.USA.NA
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
I used to think that I was cool.
Running around on fossil fuel.
Until I saw what I was doing.
Was driving down the road to ruin.
            James Taylor

Newsgroups: rec.bicycles.misc