Say it ain't so Joe! (er Randy)

Edward Dolan wrote:
"Tom Sherman" wrote in message
...
Edward Dolan wrote:
"Tom Sherman" wrote in message
...
Edward Dolan wrote:
"Tom Sherman" wrote in message
...
First the Tailwind and Wave are discontinued, and now the Rocket.
USians are too prejudiced against proper sized [1] wheels for RANS to
sell their best value models.

[1] ISO 406 and 305 millimeter.

The Rocket was doomed from the moment RANS came up with the V-Rex. The
Rocket was a good run around town sort of recumbent, but so is the
V-Rex with the added advantage that it is also good for touring. A
small rear Log
wheel does not really make much sense.

Sorry Ed, but the V-Rex came first. The Rocket was conceived as a less
expensive alternative.

The Rocket is better for touring than the V-Rex, since it has the same
size wheels and a stiffer rear triangle.
The Rocket is NOT better for touring. A small rear wheel means a big
chain wheel up front in order to get proper gearing for the road. The
V-Rex is a solidly built bike and is an ideal recumbent for touring if
you like short wheelbase (which I don't). Besides, big guys look
ridiculous on the Rocket.

Touring requires lower gears than general road riding. A standard 52/42/30
triple crank on a Rocket is fine for touring.

See http://www.phred.org/~alex/bikes/rocket.html for a touring Rocket.

Yes, it is good for lower gears, but not so good for higher gears without
getting into shifting difficulties. It is also easier to carry some gear on
a V-Rex than on a Rocket, a not unimportant consideration.

A 52/11 with a 47-406 tire is fine for pedaling up to about 30-mph. Any
faster, and one is better off coasting anyways. We are considering
touring here, not sprinting at the end of a race.

The Rocket carries gear just as well as the V-Rex, and has better weight
distribution to boot.

--
Tom Sherman - 42.435731,-83.985007
If you are not a part of the solution, you are a part of the precipitate.

"Tom Sherman" wrote in message
...
[...]
Touring requires lower gears than general road riding. A standard 52/42/30
triple crank on a Rocket is fine for touring.

See http://www.phred.org/~alex/bikes/rocket.html for a touring Rocket.

This is an interesting web page and goes to show what can be done with a
short wheelbase set up for touring. However I can't help but think that
there is no advantage to the Rocket over the V-Rex when it comes to touring.
I have ridden both bikes briefly and they handle and feel about the same,
but the larger rear wheel confers an advantage on the V-Rex. I think the
Rocket sold for about $600 less than the V-Rex and that is the only
advantage it ever had. RANS made the right decision to phase it out.

Regards,

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

"Tom Sherman" wrote in message
...
gotbent aka FRT rider wrote:
"Tom Sherman" wrote in message
...
"Luddite Wacko" wrote:
Tom Sherman wrote:
} First the Tailwind and Wave are discontinued, and now the Rocket. }
USians are too prejudiced against proper sized [1] wheels for RANS
to } sell their best value models.
}
} [1] ISO 406 and 305 millimeter.
} Add to that the downsizing of Rotator. 20/20s are becoming few and
far between.
Yes, the "bigger is better" USian attitude is hard to overcome.

--
Tom Sherman - 42.435731,-83.985007
If you are not a part of the solution, you are a part of the
precipitate.

Still a few 20-20-20 and 16-16-20 and 16-16-16 trikes around.

The lateral loads multi-track vehicles apply to wheels make large
diameters problematic.

If you ride a trike conservatively, those lateral loads do not matter. On
the other hand if you want to race a trike, then they do matter.

Regards,

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

Edward Dolan wrote:
"Tom Sherman" wrote in message
...
[...]
Touring requires lower gears than general road riding. A standard 52/42/30
triple crank on a Rocket is fine for touring.

See http://www.phred.org/~alex/bikes/rocket.html for a touring Rocket.

This is an interesting web page and goes to show what can be done with a
short wheelbase set up for touring. However I can't help but think that
there is no advantage to the Rocket over the V-Rex when it comes to touring.
I have ridden both bikes briefly and they handle and feel about the same,

Nonsense! I went to a shop intending to buy a V-Rex, but came home with
a Rocket because it handled more intuitively.

but the larger rear wheel confers an advantage on the V-Rex.

The larger rear wheel makes getting a wider gear range easier with
conventional components, but there is no other real advantage.

I think the
Rocket sold for about $600 less than the V-Rex and that is the only
advantage it ever had. RANS made the right decision to phase it out.

The better weight distribution of the Rocket makes the handling and
braking superior to that of the V-Rex.

--
Tom Sherman - 42.435731,-83.985007
1999 RANS Wave to Tailwind conversion
2000 RANS Rocket

"Tom Sherman" wrote in message
...
Edward Dolan wrote:
[...]

but the larger rear wheel confers an advantage on the V-Rex.

The larger rear wheel makes getting a wider gear range easier with
conventional components, but there is no other real advantage.

Do not larger wheels roll more efficiently? In other words, don't you get a
better flywheel effect? Also, do not larger wheels smooth out the road
better?

I think the Rocket sold for about $600 less than the V-Rex and that is
the only advantage it ever had. RANS made the right decision to phase it
out.

The better weight distribution of the Rocket makes the handling and
braking superior to that of the V-Rex.

You do not get ideal weight distribution on any short wheelbase recumbent.

Regards,

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

Edward Dolan wrote:
"Tom Sherman" wrote in message
...
Edward Dolan wrote:
[...]
but the larger rear wheel confers an advantage on the V-Rex.
The larger rear wheel makes getting a wider gear range easier with
conventional components, but there is no other real advantage.

Do not larger wheels roll more efficiently? In other words, don't you get a
better flywheel effect? Also, do not larger wheels smooth out the road
better?

Do not confuse rolling resistance with angular momentum. The angular
momentum of a bicycle wheel is minimal.

To demonstrate, put a bicycle in a work stand and spin the rear wheel up
to the equivalent rotational speed for 30-mph on the road. Squeeze the
rear brake lever and notice how the wheel stops almost instantaneously.
Now try stopping the bicycle and rider when traveling at 30-mph. Takes
quite a bit longer, no?

As for ride comfort, use a properly wide tire at reasonable inflation
pressure, and the ride is fine.

I think the Rocket sold for about $600 less than the V-Rex and that is
the only advantage it ever had. RANS made the right decision to phase it
out.

The better weight distribution of the Rocket makes the handling and
braking superior to that of the V-Rex.

You do not get ideal weight distribution on any short wheelbase recumbent.

Long wheelbase recumbents have the weight distribution issue, with the
front wheels too lightly loaded. The longer wheelbase also makes
low-speed balance more difficult.

--
Tom Sherman - 42.435731,-83.985007
If you are not a part of the solution, you are a part of the precipitate.

"Tom Sherman" wrote in message
...
Edward Dolan wrote:
"Tom Sherman" wrote in message
...
Edward Dolan wrote:
[...]
but the larger rear wheel confers an advantage on the V-Rex.
The larger rear wheel makes getting a wider gear range easier with
conventional components, but there is no other real advantage.

Do not larger wheels roll more efficiently? In other words, don't you get
a better flywheel effect? Also, do not larger wheels smooth out the road
better?

Do not confuse rolling resistance with angular momentum. The angular
momentum of a bicycle wheel is minimal.

To demonstrate, put a bicycle in a work stand and spin the rear wheel up
to the equivalent rotational speed for 30-mph on the road. Squeeze the
rear brake lever and notice how the wheel stops almost instantaneously.
Now try stopping the bicycle and rider when traveling at 30-mph. Takes
quite a bit longer, no?

As for ride comfort, use a properly wide tire at reasonable inflation
pressure, and the ride is fine.

I think the Rocket sold for about $600 less than the V-Rex and that is
the only advantage it ever had. RANS made the right decision to phase
it out.

The better weight distribution of the Rocket makes the handling and
braking superior to that of the V-Rex.

You do not get ideal weight distribution on any short wheelbase
recumbent.

Long wheelbase recumbents have the weight distribution issue, with the
front wheels too lightly loaded. The longer wheelbase also makes low-speed
balance more difficult.

Yes, I think you are correct in everything you say, but it does not explain
why I prefer a long wheelbase to a short wheelbase. The bottom line is that
I do not feel as safe and secure on a short wheelbase as I do on a long
wheelbase. Something is obviously being overlooked.

Regards,

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

Edward Dolan wrote:
"Tom Sherman" wrote in message
...
Edward Dolan wrote:
"Tom Sherman" wrote in message
...
Edward Dolan wrote:
[...]
but the larger rear wheel confers an advantage on the V-Rex.
The larger rear wheel makes getting a wider gear range easier with
conventional components, but there is no other real advantage.
Do not larger wheels roll more efficiently? In other words, don't you get
a better flywheel effect? Also, do not larger wheels smooth out the road
better?

Do not confuse rolling resistance with angular momentum. The angular
momentum of a bicycle wheel is minimal.

To demonstrate, put a bicycle in a work stand and spin the rear wheel up
to the equivalent rotational speed for 30-mph on the road. Squeeze the
rear brake lever and notice how the wheel stops almost instantaneously.
Now try stopping the bicycle and rider when traveling at 30-mph. Takes
quite a bit longer, no?

As for ride comfort, use a properly wide tire at reasonable inflation
pressure, and the ride is fine.

I think the Rocket sold for about $600 less than the V-Rex and that is
the only advantage it ever had. RANS made the right decision to phase
it out.

The better weight distribution of the Rocket makes the handling and
braking superior to that of the V-Rex.
You do not get ideal weight distribution on any short wheelbase
recumbent.

Long wheelbase recumbents have the weight distribution issue, with the
front wheels too lightly loaded. The longer wheelbase also makes low-speed
balance more difficult.

Yes, I think you are correct in everything you say, but it does not explain
why I prefer a long wheelbase to a short wheelbase. The bottom line is that
I do not feel as safe and secure on a short wheelbase as I do on a long
wheelbase. Something is obviously being overlooked.

Personal preference in handling characteristics, which is not easily
quantified. Prof. Bill Patterson has tried, but there is not general
agreement on his methods, (much less his preferences).

--
Tom Sherman - 42.435731,-83.985007
If you are not a part of the solution, you are a part of the precipitate.