recumbent frustration

Victor Kan wrote:
Anyway, here's a long reply
that at least tangentially has something to do with the original post :-).

Oh, and in case it wasn't clear, I was making fun of my own post being
only tangetially related to the original post, not what others have
written, all of which pretty much has been directly related to the
original post.


--
I do not accept unsolicted commercial e-mail. Remove NO_UCE for
legitimate replies.

Many things can keep you from being faster.
Probably the biggest factor would be your conditioning. How long did
you train on the bent before starting that big tour? If it was less
than two weeks, that would explain a lot of your frustration. And I
know very few folks who will get faster during a thousand mile tour.

I've never ridden a phantom, but I have a RANS rocket, and it's pretty
easy for me to keep that bike at a 17-19mph clip, especially with
another rider to draft. (Yes, you can draft with uprights and they can
draft off you.)

A strada will almost certainly be a faster bike, but it sounds to me
like the problem isn't the bike.

Many things can keep you from being faster.
Probably the biggest factor would be your conditioning. How long did
you train on the bent before starting that big tour? If it was less
than two weeks, that would explain a lot of your frustration. And I
know very few folks who will get faster during a thousand mile tour.

I've never ridden a phantom, but I have a RANS rocket, and it's pretty
easy for me to keep that bike at a 17-19mph clip, especially with
another rider to draft. (Yes, you can draft with uprights and they can
draft off you.)

A strada will almost certainly be a faster bike, but it sounds to me
like the problem isn't the bike.

Gary,

My V-Rex did the same thing. If you call RANS they will send you a
shim for your seat free of charge that will help keep the seat from
moving. It worked for me.

Scott.

Gary Fritz wrote in message . ..
Cletus Lee wrote:
In addition to spinning, you need to fine tune the
seat to pedal distance. a change of 1/4" can make a big difference.

This has always bothered me. On my V-Rex seat, my butt slides all over the
place. I'd say there's at least 1", probably more like 2" of travel while
I ride. How can I fine-tune the seat/pedal distance by 1/4" if my "seat"
is moving 1-2" all the time??

Gary

Gary,

My V-Rex did the same thing. If you call RANS they will send you a
shim for your seat free of charge that will help keep the seat from
moving. It worked for me.

Scott.

Gary Fritz wrote in message . ..
Cletus Lee wrote:
In addition to spinning, you need to fine tune the
seat to pedal distance. a change of 1/4" can make a big difference.

This has always bothered me. On my V-Rex seat, my butt slides all over the
place. I'd say there's at least 1", probably more like 2" of travel while
I ride. How can I fine-tune the seat/pedal distance by 1/4" if my "seat"
is moving 1-2" all the time??

Gary

My experience is opposite from yours, though I'm not responding in
order to preach about recumbents. Whether you had enough development
time or not, 1600 miles should have shown a difference from your
Bianchi days. That's a real bummer. I hope the next bent draws more
positive results for you. It's a tribute to your own perseverance that
you haven't dismissed recumbents altogether. It really is a different,
and improved (in my opinion), biking experience from a Bianchi or any
cafe racer, but that impression is only relevant if it is yours and
not mine.

My experience is opposite from yours, though I'm not responding in
order to preach about recumbents. Whether you had enough development
time or not, 1600 miles should have shown a difference from your
Bianchi days. That's a real bummer. I hope the next bent draws more
positive results for you. It's a tribute to your own perseverance that
you haven't dismissed recumbents altogether. It really is a different,
and improved (in my opinion), biking experience from a Bianchi or any
cafe racer, but that impression is only relevant if it is yours and
not mine.

I stand corrected, I should have used the term "relatively" The Bianchi is
relatively expensive compared to the gamut of df bikes, but the Phantom is
relatively inexpensive for a recumbent.
However, I don't think your tangent actually is a tangent at all. How are
trikes, your experience with fit related to various df bikes, and advocating
owning both styles of bike related to the question posted, which was "Can I
expect similar speeds on my bent as compared to my df?"? I gave my opinions
on this question, while you went on a multi topic ramble, never answering
the question posted.

"Victor Kan" wrote in message
. com...
baronn1 wrote:
Typically, it takes many hundreds of miles to train your bent legs. And
you
are correct that thePahntom is much heavier, with a less efficient drive
train. So, you got off a fairly expensive, very light road bike, onto a
heavier bike that uses different muscles than what you've been
conditioning
these many years.I

You should also describe the Phantom as a "fairly expensive" bike, being
priced at $1450 with low end components. Anyway, here's a long reply
that at least tangentially has something to do with the original post :-).

My experience these past few months has been in the opposite direction
of most folks in this newsgroup. Back in May, I purchased an upright
bike, a Specialized Sequoia Sport road bike with various, alleged
comfort features (some are really to make it easier to manufacture and
stock fewer models to cover a wider range of potential buyers), like:

- carbon fork with some shock absorbing elastomer embedded
in the middle of each blade
- suspension seat post
- Body Geometry (tm) saddle with center channel cutaway and
substantial, though firm, padding
- anatomic handle bars and cushy tape
- two sets of brake levers (the usual Shimano dual-control
brake+shifter levers, plus MTB style levers on the flats
- longer chain stays
- adjustable stem
- compact frame geometry, good for fitting to shorter riders
- road triple crank

For the most part, I'm loving it, confirming that my discomfort with my
first "real bike", a Trek 2x6-speed road bike, was likely more due to
bad sizing than anything else. It was a 56cm frame, and a little to big
for me, while the Specialized is a "compact" frame in the medium size,
which is supposedly the equivalent of a 54cm.

That's not to say that I don't also love my recumbent (a Wicks Trimuter
tadpole trike, and before that, a Linear Mach III, which I gave to my
cousin since I stopped riding it once I got the trike). I do love it.
But I have different goals for the two HPVs.

A few years ago, I gave up cycling because of pain, from pretty much all
over--back, neck, shoulders, arms, hands, butt, 'nads, you name it, it
hurt. Then a few months later I got the bug again and decided to "do it
right" and get properly sized for a bike. Then I heard about recumbents
and figured I'd try something completely different instead.

After trying a few bikes at Larry Black's annual Bent Event in Mt. Airy,
MD, I fell in love with the Linear Mach III CLWB. When I got it home, I
took it out on my usual bike commuting route, 10 miles of rolling hills
in both directions. I was able to do it at pretty much the same average
speed, maybe one MPH less. I quickly got to the same average.

Then I tried a local triker's Greenspeed GTR, fell in love with that
("gotta get me one of those!" was my reaction after about five seconds
on the thing), and got a Wicks Trimuter clone of the GTS. Switching
from the ~30 pound Mach III to the 50+ lb Trimuter (nominally 42 lbs
stock, but I carry a bit too much stuff in the panniers, just because I
can :-), I started out at the same average speed instantly, and even
gained one MPH eventually.

The trike is wonderful for "just riding" (don't think about tipping over
into traffic, ignoring most minor road hazards, etc.). It's wonderful
for pulling G's in fast turns. It's amazing if there's a long, steep
downhill where I can reach a very stable 40+ mph with the SRAM 3x7 hub
in overdrive. It's great for towing a trailer or carrying loads. But
the darned thing is bulky and heavy. When I get it to work I have to do
a hysterical ballet of sorts to open both doors just to get the thing
through the portal.

So I wanted to get a more petite, lighter HPV (couldn't get much heavier
than the Trimuter+panniers_full_of_stuff if I tried) that I could go
faster with, and move around more easily, that didn't take up so much
floor space. In looking around at what's available, I figured I'd be
happy only with something like a Windcheetah, Trice Micro (though I
might not fit into one :-), a Catrike Speed, or on the bike front, a
Reynolds T-Bone (gotta luv that USS!) or a Bacchetta Corsa (maybe a
Giro) or a Volae Club (maybe a Tour).

But the price tags were a bit on the high side, even for the lower end
big+small wheel variants of the bikes. So I figured I'd go with my
original plan of a few years ago and try an upright road bike that
really fit me well.

Well, the Sequoia Sport fit the bill. It's not a weight weenie kind of
bike (I think it was like 25 or 26 pounds with all the gizmos). It fits
me very well. The saddle pretty much works. I feel no butt pain (at
least no different than recumbent butt), though I occasionally get a
"nutcracker" kind of feeling that I hope to adjust away with some saddle
realignment (yeah right! Dream on, I can hear everyone saying).

And my hands do get numb if I keep them in the same position for a few
miles, which is OK for my intended use of this bike, mainly for
occasional short rides during the work day, or when I want to ride home
on a day I drove into work, or where I rode the trike into work, but
want to get home faster for some reason (like today where thunderstorms
were threatening and I left work later than I should have).

Yep, to get home faster. Short of having an all downhill route where
the recumbent's aerodynamics easily win out over its weight and other
inefficiency disadvantages, the upright road bike is significantly
faster for me. I've been recumbent-only for years now, yet when I took
my first rides on the upright, I was instantly at least 2 MPH faster
over the same routes of rolling hills, no special training of "upright
muscles" needed. Yes, my computers were calibrated right.

I really did fly up hills vs. the trike. Some hills I'd have to work at
to get up at reasonable speed on the trike I could almost coast up with
the bike, and at higher speeds.

Today I had special motivation with the thunder clouds blowing in and
did a personal best on my commute route home, reaching 19.3 MPH average
on the bike based on real clock time (I must have moved my wheel magnet
when pumping the tires 'cuz the computer wasn't working properly
tonight), whereas when I rode to work on the trike this morning, I eeked
out a 15.1 MPH ride on the slightly easier route (about a mile longer,
but fewer big hills) coming into work, based on auto-start ride time.

Granted, I was really, really motivated to get home without being rained
on--the last time I rode home in the rain on the Mach III, I was so
"traumatized" that I didn't ride it for several months afterward.

So what does all this rambling on mean?

For me, and likely other folks, a relatively inexpensive, but properly
fitting upright road bike is a good complement to a good recumbent that
cost a heck of a lot more (about 3x in my case), weighs a lot more (2x
in my case), with a less efficient chain line, but better aerodynamics
and overall greater comfort.

I've decided to platoon these two HPVs of mine. Ride one into work,
ride the other one home. I think maintaining "recumbent muscles" along
with "upright muscles" is working out well for me, improving my pedaling
technique on both, and motivating me to ride more.

Phew, that was a long post!

--
I do not accept unsolicted commercial e-mail. Remove NO_UCE for
legitimate replies.

I stand corrected, I should have used the term "relatively" The Bianchi is
relatively expensive compared to the gamut of df bikes, but the Phantom is
relatively inexpensive for a recumbent.
However, I don't think your tangent actually is a tangent at all. How are
trikes, your experience with fit related to various df bikes, and advocating
owning both styles of bike related to the question posted, which was "Can I
expect similar speeds on my bent as compared to my df?"? I gave my opinions
on this question, while you went on a multi topic ramble, never answering
the question posted.

"Victor Kan" wrote in message
. com...
baronn1 wrote:
Typically, it takes many hundreds of miles to train your bent legs. And
you
are correct that thePahntom is much heavier, with a less efficient drive
train. So, you got off a fairly expensive, very light road bike, onto a
heavier bike that uses different muscles than what you've been
conditioning
these many years.I

You should also describe the Phantom as a "fairly expensive" bike, being
priced at $1450 with low end components. Anyway, here's a long reply
that at least tangentially has something to do with the original post :-).

My experience these past few months has been in the opposite direction
of most folks in this newsgroup. Back in May, I purchased an upright
bike, a Specialized Sequoia Sport road bike with various, alleged
comfort features (some are really to make it easier to manufacture and
stock fewer models to cover a wider range of potential buyers), like:

- carbon fork with some shock absorbing elastomer embedded
in the middle of each blade
- suspension seat post
- Body Geometry (tm) saddle with center channel cutaway and
substantial, though firm, padding
- anatomic handle bars and cushy tape
- two sets of brake levers (the usual Shimano dual-control
brake+shifter levers, plus MTB style levers on the flats
- longer chain stays
- adjustable stem
- compact frame geometry, good for fitting to shorter riders
- road triple crank

For the most part, I'm loving it, confirming that my discomfort with my
first "real bike", a Trek 2x6-speed road bike, was likely more due to
bad sizing than anything else. It was a 56cm frame, and a little to big
for me, while the Specialized is a "compact" frame in the medium size,
which is supposedly the equivalent of a 54cm.

That's not to say that I don't also love my recumbent (a Wicks Trimuter
tadpole trike, and before that, a Linear Mach III, which I gave to my
cousin since I stopped riding it once I got the trike). I do love it.
But I have different goals for the two HPVs.

A few years ago, I gave up cycling because of pain, from pretty much all
over--back, neck, shoulders, arms, hands, butt, 'nads, you name it, it
hurt. Then a few months later I got the bug again and decided to "do it
right" and get properly sized for a bike. Then I heard about recumbents
and figured I'd try something completely different instead.

After trying a few bikes at Larry Black's annual Bent Event in Mt. Airy,
MD, I fell in love with the Linear Mach III CLWB. When I got it home, I
took it out on my usual bike commuting route, 10 miles of rolling hills
in both directions. I was able to do it at pretty much the same average
speed, maybe one MPH less. I quickly got to the same average.

Then I tried a local triker's Greenspeed GTR, fell in love with that
("gotta get me one of those!" was my reaction after about five seconds
on the thing), and got a Wicks Trimuter clone of the GTS. Switching
from the ~30 pound Mach III to the 50+ lb Trimuter (nominally 42 lbs
stock, but I carry a bit too much stuff in the panniers, just because I
can :-), I started out at the same average speed instantly, and even
gained one MPH eventually.

The trike is wonderful for "just riding" (don't think about tipping over
into traffic, ignoring most minor road hazards, etc.). It's wonderful
for pulling G's in fast turns. It's amazing if there's a long, steep
downhill where I can reach a very stable 40+ mph with the SRAM 3x7 hub
in overdrive. It's great for towing a trailer or carrying loads. But
the darned thing is bulky and heavy. When I get it to work I have to do
a hysterical ballet of sorts to open both doors just to get the thing
through the portal.

So I wanted to get a more petite, lighter HPV (couldn't get much heavier
than the Trimuter+panniers_full_of_stuff if I tried) that I could go
faster with, and move around more easily, that didn't take up so much
floor space. In looking around at what's available, I figured I'd be
happy only with something like a Windcheetah, Trice Micro (though I
might not fit into one :-), a Catrike Speed, or on the bike front, a
Reynolds T-Bone (gotta luv that USS!) or a Bacchetta Corsa (maybe a
Giro) or a Volae Club (maybe a Tour).

But the price tags were a bit on the high side, even for the lower end
big+small wheel variants of the bikes. So I figured I'd go with my
original plan of a few years ago and try an upright road bike that
really fit me well.

Well, the Sequoia Sport fit the bill. It's not a weight weenie kind of
bike (I think it was like 25 or 26 pounds with all the gizmos). It fits
me very well. The saddle pretty much works. I feel no butt pain (at
least no different than recumbent butt), though I occasionally get a
"nutcracker" kind of feeling that I hope to adjust away with some saddle
realignment (yeah right! Dream on, I can hear everyone saying).

And my hands do get numb if I keep them in the same position for a few
miles, which is OK for my intended use of this bike, mainly for
occasional short rides during the work day, or when I want to ride home
on a day I drove into work, or where I rode the trike into work, but
want to get home faster for some reason (like today where thunderstorms
were threatening and I left work later than I should have).

Yep, to get home faster. Short of having an all downhill route where
the recumbent's aerodynamics easily win out over its weight and other
inefficiency disadvantages, the upright road bike is significantly
faster for me. I've been recumbent-only for years now, yet when I took
my first rides on the upright, I was instantly at least 2 MPH faster
over the same routes of rolling hills, no special training of "upright
muscles" needed. Yes, my computers were calibrated right.

I really did fly up hills vs. the trike. Some hills I'd have to work at
to get up at reasonable speed on the trike I could almost coast up with
the bike, and at higher speeds.

Today I had special motivation with the thunder clouds blowing in and
did a personal best on my commute route home, reaching 19.3 MPH average
on the bike based on real clock time (I must have moved my wheel magnet
when pumping the tires 'cuz the computer wasn't working properly
tonight), whereas when I rode to work on the trike this morning, I eeked
out a 15.1 MPH ride on the slightly easier route (about a mile longer,
but fewer big hills) coming into work, based on auto-start ride time.

Granted, I was really, really motivated to get home without being rained
on--the last time I rode home in the rain on the Mach III, I was so
"traumatized" that I didn't ride it for several months afterward.

So what does all this rambling on mean?

For me, and likely other folks, a relatively inexpensive, but properly
fitting upright road bike is a good complement to a good recumbent that
cost a heck of a lot more (about 3x in my case), weighs a lot more (2x
in my case), with a less efficient chain line, but better aerodynamics
and overall greater comfort.

I've decided to platoon these two HPVs of mine. Ride one into work,
ride the other one home. I think maintaining "recumbent muscles" along
with "upright muscles" is working out well for me, improving my pedaling
technique on both, and motivating me to ride more.

Phew, that was a long post!

--
I do not accept unsolicted commercial e-mail. Remove NO_UCE for
legitimate replies.

OK, you got me...;-)

"Victor Kan" wrote in message
. com...
Victor Kan wrote:
Anyway, here's a long reply
that at least tangentially has something to do with the original post
:-).

Oh, and in case it wasn't clear, I was making fun of my own post being
only tangetially related to the original post, not what others have
written, all of which pretty much has been directly related to the
original post.


--
I do not accept unsolicted commercial e-mail. Remove NO_UCE for
legitimate replies.