TdF and recumbents
 

On Jul 29, 7:15*am, "Edward Dolan" wrote:
"Qui si parla Campagnolo" wrote in ...
On Jul 27, 11:01 am, Tom Sherman
wrote:

aka Andres Muro wrote:

There are a couple of guys that ride recumbents and show up to up to
our weekend rides occasionally. One of them would never be able to
keep up with our group and the other could on regular bikes. With
recumbents they keep up with the group without problems. One of them
takes pulls at 25+ mile per hour without braking a sweat. On flats,
recumbents transform average cyclists into animals. The lower the
recumbents the faster these guys become. One has a very low racing
recumbents and he built an aero contraption in the back. He goes
really fast in that apparatus and because he is very low, it is hard
to draft him. He makes a great training partner. It's sort of like
motor pacing. On hills, he slows down quite a bit though. It is not
just the weight. His racing recumbent is not that heavy.

For the sake of argument, let us assume that that a particular recumbent
is 20% faster on the flats and equal on the climbs to the group members'
uprights. If the recumbent rider is just the equal of the group on the
flats, that means he is a considerably weaker rider, so it is no wonder
he gets dropped on the hills. What is being demonstrated is not the poor
climbing ability of the recumbent (which is typically the false
conclusion made by the upright riders), but rather its performance
advantage on flatter terrain.

"For the sake of argument"..boy, that speaks volumes.........

There is no recumbent that is 20% faster than an upright on the flats
everything else being equal. At best, it is possible that a recumbent will
be only ever so slightly faster than an upright on the flats, but even that
is debatable. What is not debatable is how freaking slow they are climbing
hills, even small hills. Case closed as far as I am concerned.

Regards,

Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
aka
Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota

I guess that sound is the my point whizzing over you head

TdF and recumbents
 

On Tue, 29 Jul 2008 12:09:35 GMT, John Forrest Tomlinson
wrote:

On Tue, 29 Jul 2008 02:52:13 -0500, Ben C wrote:

If recumbents weren't better why would they be banned?

Just because.

UCI bikes at least mean that all the bikes are pretty much the same,
they handle much the same, they crash much the same. Useful when you
have a 180 of cyclists.

Imagine a racing peleton of 180 bents, high and low racers and all the
variations. The dynamics would be "interesting".
Not to mention the expanded neutral support complications.

TdF and recumbents
 

"Ben C" wrote in message
...
On 2008-07-29, Tom Kunich cyclintom@yahoo wrote:
"Tom Sherman" wrote in message
...

Whats up with bringing off-road cycling into the discussion?

Lost track of which thread I was in. Nevertheless it is perfectly fine in
my
book to try to race the Tour de France with a recumbent. Just try to ride
down those Alps roads fast enough to make up for the time lost on the
climb.

If recumbents weren't better why would they be banned?

Because they're dangerous around uprights in a pack?

TdF and recumbents
 

"Zebee Johnstone" wrote in message
...

If the bikes aren't good enough then no one would choose them.

Some sorts of recumbents are fast on flats and downhills. But they are
dangerous in a close pack and they are slow up hills.

TdF and recumbents
 

"Tom Sherman" wrote in message
...

How many paved roads are steep enough to slow an average rider down to
2-mph? Almost none.

Then complete the deathride on your recumbent and we'll talk.

TdF and recumbents
 

"Qui si parla Campagnolo" wrote in message
...
On Jul 27, 11:01 am, Tom Sherman
wrote:

For the sake of argument, let us assume that that a particular recumbent
is 20% faster on the flats and equal on the climbs to the group members'
uprights.

"For the sake of argument"..boy, that speaks volumes.........

You have that one dead centered.

TdF and recumbents
 

Qui si parla Campagnolo wrote:
On Jul 29, 7:15 am, "Edward Dolan" wrote:

There is no recumbent that is 20% faster than an upright on the flats
everything else being equal. At best, it is possible that a recumbent will
be only ever so slightly faster than an upright on the flats, but even that
is debatable. What is not debatable is how freaking slow they are climbing
hills, even small hills. Case closed as far as I am concerned.

I guess that sound is the my point whizzing over you head

Ed was never one to let things like mere facts confuse him...

However, if he bothered to look at the UCI hour record and the IHPVA
hour record he'd find a lot more than 20% difference.

Pete.
--
Peter Clinch Medical Physics IT Officer
Tel 44 1382 660111 ext. 33637 Univ. of Dundee, Ninewells Hospital
Fax 44 1382 640177 Dundee DD1 9SY Scotland UK
net http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/

TdF and recumbents
 

"Peter Clinch" wrote in message
...
Qui si parla Campagnolo wrote:
On Jul 29, 7:15 am, "Edward Dolan" wrote:

There is no recumbent that is 20% faster than an upright on the flats
everything else being equal. At best, it is possible that a recumbent
will
be only ever so slightly faster than an upright on the flats, but even
that
is debatable. What is not debatable is how freaking slow they are
climbing
hills, even small hills. Case closed as far as I am concerned.

I guess that sound is the my point whizzing over you head

Ed was never one to let things like mere facts confuse him...

However, if he bothered to look at the UCI hour record and the IHPVA
hour record he'd find a lot more than 20% difference.

Pete.

Now _that's_ mixing apples and oranges.

What is the _unfaired_ recumbent hour record?

TdF and recumbents
 

"Peter Clinch" wrote in message
...

However, if he bothered to look at the UCI hour record and the IHPVA
hour record he'd find a lot more than 20% difference.

If you'd like to get one of the recumbent hour record bikes and race me on
my upright over a course of my choosing you could certainly demonstrate that
20% difference.

TdF and recumbents
 

Tom Kunich wrote:
"Peter Clinch" wrote in message
...

However, if he bothered to look at the UCI hour record and the IHPVA
hour record he'd find a lot more than 20% difference.

If you'd like to get one of the recumbent hour record bikes and race me
on my upright over a course of my choosing you could certainly
demonstrate that 20% difference.

OTOH, why don't you look at the end to end record in the UK, over 800
miles on real roads. The record is held on a faired recumbent, the
holder beat his own upright record by almost 10%. certainly a useful
margin.

But Ed's point was under any circumstances, not just of your choosing.
And, as he so often is, he was wrong.

Pete.
--
Peter Clinch Medical Physics IT Officer
Tel 44 1382 660111 ext. 33637 Univ. of Dundee, Ninewells Hospital
Fax 44 1382 640177 Dundee DD1 9SY Scotland UK
net http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/