Bicycle evolution and recumbents...

"live_evil" wrote in message
...
Edward Dolan wrote:
I think they are about equal on the flats

My homebuilt recumbent is faster than most normal bikes.

I seriously doubt that. Is your homebuilt 16 lbs light?

It is why you will never see any recumbents in the mountains.


I saw recumbents in the mountains, I also have been been in the mountains
on my recumbent.

Well, I spent many summers in Aspen and saw all kinds of bikes there, but
never any recumbents. I can't think of anything more miserable than crawling
up a mountain pass on a recumbent.

Regards,

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

Edward Dolan pisze:
"live_evil" wrote in message
...
Edward Dolan wrote:
I think they are about equal on the flats
My homebuilt recumbent is faster than most normal bikes.

I seriously doubt that. Is your homebuilt 16 lbs light?


Do you suggest lighter bike is always faster that heavier one?
My homebuilt is ~28lbs heavy.

It is why you will never see any recumbents in the mountains.

I saw recumbents in the mountains, I also have been been in the mountains
on my recumbent.

Well, I spent many summers in Aspen and saw all kinds of bikes there, but
never any recumbents. I can't think of anything more miserable than crawling
up a mountain pass on a recumbent.



Maybe because there are not many recumbents in the US?
Come to Europe, to Alps or Tatra mountains, you've got a better chance
to see a recumbent here.
--
Lower, faster...
My homebuilt FWD recumbent, a welder's prank :-)
-- http://piotrowiak.info/poziom
jid:live_evil[]jabber.ru gg:6373907

"live_evil" wrote in message
...
Edward Dolan pisze:
"live_evil" wrote in message
...
Edward Dolan wrote:
I think they are about equal on the flats
My homebuilt recumbent is faster than most normal bikes.

I seriously doubt that. Is your homebuilt 16 lbs light?

Do you suggest lighter bike is always faster that heavier one?
My homebuilt is ~28lbs heavy.

Yes, that is invariably the case. The lighter the bike, the greater the
potential for being faster - especially going uphill.

It is why you will never see any recumbents in the mountains.

I saw recumbents in the mountains, I also have been been in the
mountains on my recumbent.

Well, I spent many summers in Aspen and saw all kinds of bikes there, but
never any recumbents. I can't think of anything more miserable than
crawling up a mountain pass on a recumbent.

Maybe because there are not many recumbents in the US?
Come to Europe, to Alps or Tatra mountains, you've got a better chance to
see a recumbent here.

Human nature is everywhere the same. Only a dope would prefer to ride a
recumbent in the mountains. Recumbents are for the flats - period!

Regards,

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

wrote:

God, I used to get asked the old "but I didn't think recumbents
climbed hills?" question a lot, normally whilst overtaking a normal
bike on a hill. Recumbent are fast down hill a bit faster on the flat
and climb if you have the technique right as you have something to
push against.
Just comes down to skill and fitness.

Ed is assuming that since he can't climb hills worth a damn then it must
be about the bike and not him. He's wrong (again).

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/

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

God, I used to get asked the old "but I didn't think recumbents
climbed hills?" question a lot, normally whilst overtaking a normal
bike on a hill. Recumbent are fast down hill a bit faster on the flat
and climb if you have the technique right as you have something to
push against.
Just comes down to skill and fitness.

Ed is assuming that since he can't climb hills worth a damn then it must
be about the bike and not him. He's wrong (again).

Ed Dolan the Great is never wrong about anything. And the main thing he is
never wrong about is what a numbskull Peter Clinch is (see his signature for
confirmation of this). Pete has never once given any good advice to these
honorable cycling newsgroup members. That is quite a record that has not
been equaled by anyone even though this group is replete with idiots of all
description.

Recumbents can climb hills, but they are not happy doing so because it is so
much more work than doing it on an upright. Thus spake Zarathustra.

Regards,

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

On Sep 1, 3:39*am, "Edward Dolan" wrote:
"Peter Clinch" wrote in message

...

wrote:

God, I used to get asked the old "but I didn't think recumbents
climbed hills?" question a lot, normally whilst overtaking a normal
bike on a hill. Recumbent are fast down hill a bit faster on the flat
and climb if you have the technique right as you have something to
push against.
Just comes down to skill and fitness.

Ed is assuming that since he can't climb hills worth a damn then it must
be about the bike and not him. *He's wrong (again).

Ed Dolan the Great is never wrong about anything. And the main thing he is
never wrong about is what a numbskull Peter Clinch is (see his signature for
confirmation of this). Pete has never once given any good advice to these
honorable cycling newsgroup members. That is quite a record that has not
been equaled by anyone even though this group is replete with idiots of all
description.

Recumbents can climb hills, but they are not happy doing so because it is so
much more work than doing it on an upright. Thus spake Zarathustra.

How anthropomorphic of you. In Sherman-like style, I have to ask ...
recumbents have emotions/feelings?

Regards,

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