Advice about recumbents for newby?

Grolch wrote:
When I went to test ride all varieties of recumbents some 6 months ago, I
seemed to be alright, wobbly-wise, on most configs. But when I tried the
Trike I ended up buying it was love at first ride. I knew, without a doubt,
that I had found my next bike. Here's my opinion on why I like the Tadpole
Trike configuration. 1, stability, even loose gravel won't put you down. 2.
The wide handlebars on the Catrike direct steer system, It leaves my chest
wide open and I find I breathe and see easily. 3. No more numb wrists, achy
necks, tight shoulders, pressure-point butt or anything. 3. When I get to an
outdoor event, I have my concert seat with me. 4. Fun!!!

Downsides of the trike, 1. brake-steer, surprising at first but I have
learned to relax and it is no longer a problem. 2. Can't unweight on rough
stuff (true for all bents), so I put a set of Shwalbe 2" Big-Apples on the
bike and run 45psi. 3. Narrow doors are awkward, though it is "wheel-chair"
width. 4. Low. May be more diff for vehicles to spot me (true for most
bents) I put larger flags on and where loud colours.... call me paranoid.
Climbs a bit slower than my uprights, but, hey, why don't I feel so burnt up
after long rides?

The newer ICE (Trice) and Greenspeed trikes have minimal brake steer.

Ride quality is not a problem with rear suspension. It is usually easy
to straddle potholes with the front wheels, leaving the suspension to
deal with the shock when the rear wheel hits.

I suggest you try the Catrike Road model (about $ 2200 USD complete). One of
the lightest High performance trikes out there (31lbs).

If I bought a Catrike, I would seriously consider a Pantour rear hub
[1], since the ride of my Dragonflyer [2] has me spoiled.

[1] http://www.pantourhub.com/products.html.
[2] http://www.ihpva.org/incoming/2002/Dragonflyer/.

--
Tom Sherman - Here, not there.

Jon Meinecke wrote:
...
Above 5 mph, a Tour Easy should be quite stable, in my
experience. Above 8 mph, it should feel rock solid. I've
had many people test ride my Tour Easy and my BikeE
and most had little difficulty after maybe only a few
starts....

While I would agree that the Easy Racers's design (Tour Easy, Gold Rush
Replica) is one of the better handling long wheel-base (LWB) bicycles,
a properly designed short wheel-base (SWB) will always be easier to
handle at very low speed, since a smaller traverse motion of the
contact patch is needed to bring the centerline between the two contact
patches under the combined bicycle/rider center of gravity (CG).

--
Tom Sherman - Here, not there.

"Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman" wrote

While I would agree that the Easy Racers's design (Tour Easy, Gold Rush
Replica) is one of the better handling long wheel-base (LWB) bicycles,
a properly designed short wheel-base (SWB) will always be easier to
handle at very low speed, since a smaller traverse motion of the
contact patch is needed to bring the centerline between the two contact
patches under the combined bicycle/rider center of gravity (CG).

From a technical design point of view, it is true that most short wheelbase
designs require less movement of the front wheel contact patch to
obtain a balance point. But I'm not sure whether that translates
directly to "easier" low speed handling in all cases. There are other
factors in maintaining low speed balance and stability.

I can ride each of my recumbents and hold a decent line with good
stability at fairly low speeds, -- better now than when I first started,
particularly up hills. Of my BikeE (CLWB), Tour Easy (LWB), and
Volae (SWB), the BikeE is easiest for me to ride at *very* low speed.
The BikeE has quite responsive steering geometry. It has a higher
seating position and lower seatback than the Tour Easy. And it
has no heel interference at low-speed turns unlike the Volae.

However, the original poster seemed to be concerned not so much
with lowest speed balance but with perhaps moderately low-speed
tracking (wobble). SWB or LWB may be less important than rider
confidence and familiarity with how the bike responds to input.

Jon Meinecke

First, read about fitting your bike to you. IME few bike shops know how
to fit you properly and fit makes a huge difference.

Ride everything you can get your butt on! Then ride the ones you liked
again, and ride anything you "sort of" liked but felt twitchy/unstable
on a second time.

Your learning curve is very steep in the beginning. I rode perhaps 18
different models and brands and am really happy I bought a high racer
as my first bent. Had I gone with a CLWB or worse, a LWB, I would
already be selling it.

The advice about trikes is sound too. With all those back issues I
would sure look into it.

Good Luck!


--
Hull 697

Creatively retired

Jon Meinecke wrote:

From a technical design point of view, it is true that most short wheelbase
designs require less movement of the front wheel contact patch to
obtain a balance point. But I'm not sure whether that translates
directly to "easier" low speed handling in all cases. There are other
factors in maintaining low speed balance and stability.

.......

However, the original poster seemed to be concerned not so much
with lowest speed balance but with perhaps moderately low-speed
tracking (wobble). SWB or LWB may be less important than rider
confidence and familiarity with how the bike responds to input.

Jon Meinecke


I had a SWB as my first bent, it was wobbly.
Part of that was my own inexperience, holding the bars too tightly and
over-correcting.

The jittery steering I just credited to the short wheelbase. I tested a
few other SWB's before buying it, and none of them really felt a whole
lot different. I bought it over a LWB because it was ligher than LWB's,
and at that point I was concerned about the higher weight of bents in
general. I never crashed because of it, but it was tiring to steer and
the "quick" steering was never any advantage during my riding. If you
drop the front tire pressure down it deadens the steering sensitivity
somewhat (it came with front/rear 1.5" 100-psi tires, dropping the front
down to 60 psi helped the steering quite a bit, especially in gravel).
This makes the front tire "scrub" audibly when turned and some people
might find that disturbing. It also probably increases the rolling
resistance, but I never noticed that quite frankly.

What I found when letting a lot of people ride the SWB was that many
people had a problem with it sitting so high off the ground--and the BB
being so high, even with platform pedals. A number of people who tried
it gave up after a minute or two of not being able to "get going".
Conversely, when I bought a LWB, I noticed that after the seat was
adjusted properly for their height, EVERYONE who tried it could ride it.
They were a bit wobbly, but they could all do it.

I also got a RANS Fusion now as well. Everyone could ride that pretty
easily, it feels pretty close to an upright bike. It is not as
comfortable as the LWB but it weighs about 10 lbs less and is easier to
transport--and (after a few days of acclimatizing to it) it is much more
comfortable than a normal upright, so it is another possible option.

I do wobble more on bents than on uprights, even three years later. I
remember that on upright bikes it was pretty easy to ride down the side
of a striped road and keep both tires on the painted white line--but
it's very difficult to do that on any recumbent I've rode. I can stay
pretty close however, and the trade-off in comfort is much worth it.

I remember when I was first shopping, I was very much concerned with
recumbent weights--but now am not. The LWB is my main bike, and it's ~38
lbs I think, unloaded (Cycle Genius Falcon). A decent upright road bike
is much lighter and also much more /lively/-- but the lighter weight
doesn't do the garage any good if it's so uncomfortable to ride that you
won't use it as much as you'd like.

-end-

After many years of not riding, I found I could nolonger dismount from
my road bike with confidence. I read about recumbents, and thought
that I should try a trike.

I found a Sun EZ-3 USX on Craigslist.org and loved it from the first
two block trial. The almost new trike was advertised for $650 USD. I
loaded it into my van and drove it home.

I ride it with confidence on the streets of Coronado, and am looking to
ride longer distances.

The trike is no light weight, but I rode my last race 30 years ago.
There is a shock absorber in the frame and dual disk brakes on the rear
to control "brake steer"

WIth Underseat Steering there is no weight on my wrists.

Good Riding

I just went to traffic after buying a good mirror, suspension is nice
if streets are full of roles.


"Leonard Evens" wrote in message
. ..
I have been riding road bikes for almost 50 years, mainly for exercise.
I've been considering getting a recumbent because of back problems (4
herniated discs and spinal stenosis). I would like to ride 15 miles or
more every other day, but I don't need to go specially fast as long as I
get a workout.

I finally went to a local bike shop that sells recumbents, and the
saleperson set up an Easy Racer for me to try. After about half an
hour, I was able consistently to get started and traverse the length of
an alley without stopping, but I was still wobbling from side to side.
I was certainly not comfortable enough to try a street with traffic.

So my first question is how long might it take before I could
comfortably cycle in moderate street traffic? I generally avoid roads
and streets with heavy traffic. Will I quickly get to the point where I
feel as comfortable about that as I do now on my road bike?

Also, what type of recumbent should I consider? The bike I tried seemed
to deal with minor bumps quite well, but my road bike has a shock
absorbing seat post. Can I assume I don't need a fancy suspension with
a recumbent? What sort of wheelbase would be best for a beginner? And
how much difference does the position of the pedals make? The
recumbent I tried had pedals relatively low on the bike, and even with
that I had more trouble getting staarted than I had anticipated. Would
that be harder with pedals higher up?

What about price? I've seen prices ranging from $600 to over $5,000.
What does one get with a recumbent costing $2,000 that one doesn't get
in one costing $1,200 or less? I don't want to spend any more than I
have to, but at my age it is important that I be able to get up and
riding fairly quickly and that I not have any problems with the bike.

Any other useful advice would be appreciated.

Leonard Evens wrote:
I have been riding road bikes for almost 50 years, mainly for exercise.
I've been considering getting a recumbent because of back problems (4
herniated discs and spinal stenosis). I would like to ride 15 miles or
more every other day, but I don't need to go specially fast as long as I
get a workout.

I just ride for the exercise have back, knee, hip & heart problems
Been reading about recumbents for about 15years. From a safety
standpoint I'm now getting my first bent a Sun EZ-3 USX It's a long
Delta style trike. I tried some Bikes, but with the heart problems ICD
(Internal Defibulator), some dizzyness at times, I went for the trike.


I finally went to a local bike shop that sells recumbents,
I was still wobbling from side to side.
I was certainly not comfortable enough to try a street with traffic.

Try to find maybe a dealer with an area to ride longer distances.

So my first question is how long might it take before I could
comfortably cycle in moderate street traffic? I generally avoid roads
and streets with heavy traffic. Will I quickly get to the point where I
feel as comfortable about that as I do now on my road bike?

With a trike as soon as you are on it.

Any other useful advice would be appreciated.

With a delta style, you sit higher than a tadpole trike, easier to get
in and out of the seat. and the front axel is not in your way. Get on
and off the trikes a few times to see how it feels on your back
problems. Check this out here.
http://www.sunbicycles.com/sun/recumbents/ez3/ez3.htm
You will enjoy the ride no matter what bent you get.

Keith

Leonard Evens,

By now you've gotten so much advice it must be confusing. But sorting
through it, I see that several people did tell you the right general
advice: try out lots of different recumbents and get an idea of which
one feels right for you. Ask if you can take each one out for a long
test ride, not just 10 minutes.

I have a TourEasy which cost about $2,000, a huge sum for me. But it's
been worth it in terms of comfort, how well the mechanical components
work and how long they last, and the riding position (I finally
realized the position is almost the same as for driving my minivan; in
fact sometimes I find myself reaching for the seat belt!).

At the first ride I almost broke down and gave up when I couldn't get
it moving again after a stop - turned out it was uphill, and I had
neglected to click downgear before I stopped. And of course one can't
stand on the pedals as on an upright. So there are a few little new
bits to learn.

For the wobbly start I recommend leaning forward from the waist when
first pedaling (remember: start in a low gear), in order to balance
more easily straight over one's lower body, the way one balances on an
upright. Then you can lean back.

Tailwinds, Leonard. And have fun.

C.C.

wrote:
...
I have a TourEasy which cost about $2,000, a huge sum for me. But it's
been worth it in terms of comfort, how well the mechanical components
work and how long they last, and the riding position (I finally
realized the position is almost the same as for driving my minivan; in
fact sometimes I find myself reaching for the seat belt!)....

Still trying to clip into the pedals in the minivan [1] and adjust the
radio [2] on the Tour Easy?

P.S. What is Jeff Cowan up to - still riding Rufus the Blue V-Rex?

[1]
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.rec.bicycles.recumbent/msg/401fb104badce5b7?dmode=source.
[2]
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.rec.bicycles.recumbent/msg/6cda39990bd1296a?dmode=source.

--
Tom Sherman - Here, not there.