Low Cost SWB Comments?

Hey guys -

Sorry for the extra message to you newreader types. I'm
just bumping this thread back up ahead of the latest
round of SPAM from the anonymous jerk, who will hopefully
now consider his duty done till March at least.

Regards,
Wayne

"32GO" wrote in message
ups.com...
Hey gang -

PW (echoed by similar suggestions) wrote:

If you can find a used Haluzak Horizon Buy it...

Thanks for the replies. I was purposely a little vague
about 'WHY' I was looking for a lowl-cost SWB, not
being devious, but more in the way of playing it down.
However, that seems to have confused the issue. I have
a retail storefront trike shop, and although we're not
(nearly) looking to expand into a more general 'bent
store or 'real' LBS, we do get a number of requests for
the type of bike I mentioned.

There are now a number of new trikes listing for under
$2000, with several available from dealers. Given the
much simpler construction of (essentially two-dimensional)
bike frames versus trikes, it seems to me that we should
be seeing a good $1000 SWB on the market, ala Lightning's
discontinued Thunderbolt and others. Marketing is a
confusing mess, and there are lots of reasons why good
designs fail, while others with less 'value' succeed, and
recumbent bikes in general seem to having a hard time
lately. Anyway, I am interested in suggestions for 'my
idea of the right SWB', available via a dealer network as
new bikes in small quantities. Please keep suggestions
and comments coming.

If you want a SWB bike to carry in your shop, get the RANS Rocket and don't
look back. I have never heard anything but good reports on this bike and
even Tom Sherman liked it a lot. I think it sells retail for around $1000.

By the way, the Lightning P-38 was always vastly overrated - and not
everyone liked that bike by any means. The high BB bothered many, but I
think the high cost of it was what finally killed it.

Regards,

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

PS. Bike riding has already reached its glory days and it will now be on the
decline into the foreseeable future. We are becoming more and more sedentary
in our lifestyles and the roads and highways are a mess everywhere. The only
thing that can somewhat save the bicycle are the many bike trails that are
being built. But this may just be the last gasp for an adult toy that never
really was popular. Most folks just do not like to peddle.

"32GO" wrote in message
oups.com...
Hey guys -

Sorry for the extra message to you newreader types. I'm
just bumping this thread back up ahead of the latest
round of SPAM from the anonymous jerk, who will hopefully
now consider his duty done till March at least.

You do not understand the SPAMMING TROLL. The reason you do not understand
him is because you do not have a sufficiently deep appreciation of just how
foul human nature can be. It really does take someone like me who has been
around for awhile to give you some insight on these types.

They are basically criminal scum. As such, they belong in very small prison
cells with other criminal scum where they can prey on one another. Their
lives tend to be nasty, poor, brutish and short. They are not civilized nor
are they even socialized. In short, they are criminal scum.

There! Now that you are up to speed, let us hope that you do not waste your
time playing games with him. I think he is Ed Gin, but if not him, then one
of his associates. Jim McNamara is the expert on this tribe of criminal
scum. He is NOT one of them, but it seems he knows them to his eternal
discredit. Trust me on this Wayne, you do not ever want to know them, let
alone get anywhere close to them.

Regards,

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

On Feb 1, 11:14 pm, "Edward Dolan" wrote:
snip

If you want a SWB bike to carry in your shop, get the RANS Rocket and don't
look back. I have never heard anything but good reports on this bike and
even Tom Sherman liked it a lot. I think it sells retail for around $1000.

snip

I would tend to agree. As far as value for the consumer, ease of
riding for those unfamiliar with 'bents, and (IME) good customer
service, the Rocket seems hard to beat. I can't speak to how favorable
the _dealer_ experience is, of course...

One caveat; although not a universal rule, the whole "slipping seat"
problem with the RANS seat does exist (at least for fat guys like me),
so stocking your shop with the new Memory Loc seat position retention
devices (http://www.shoprans.com/proddetail.asp?prod=BPST0233) may be
a wise idea, if you go the Rocket or V-Rex route.

Also be aware that many standard rear racks will not easily fit, so
you'd need to look at interesting adaptation efforts or ordering the
seat-specific racks from RANS, if you wished to provide rear racks as
an accessory option.

Best,

Dan

Dan wrote:

... the Rocket seems hard to beat.

Except... as I noted in my first post, and I've spelled
out a bit more in depth in the 'Availability of Better
Wheel and Tire Sizes' thread, the Rocket has a 406 rear
(drive) wheel, which limits its top gear. I've struggled
with that limitation on trikes way too much to welcome
it on a bike that we might sell.

I'm a bit of a spinner; for me, like a whole lot of
other cyclists, especially those who rarely see speeds
above 20 MPH except on steep downhills where they're
more concerned with braking than with gearing, a 90"
high gear (2.85 m development) isn't a huge negative.
But lots of other folks, for whatever reasons, whether
real and practical or largely emotional, want gears some
15 to 20 per cent taller. I'd really like to find one
bike that could satisfy as many customers as possible.

Regards,
Wayne

On Feb 2, 11:48 am, "32GO" wrote:
Dan wrote:
... the Rocket seems hard to beat.

Except... as I noted in my first post, and I've spelled
out a bit more in depth in the 'Availability of Better
Wheel and Tire Sizes' thread, the Rocket has a 406 rear
(drive) wheel, which limits its top gear. I've struggled
with that limitation on trikes way too much to welcome
it on a bike that we might sell.

I'm a bit of a spinner; for me, like a whole lot of
other cyclists, especially those who rarely see speeds
above 20 MPH except on steep downhills where they're
more concerned with braking than with gearing, a 90"
high gear (2.85 m development) isn't a huge negative.
But lots of other folks, for whatever reasons, whether
real and practical or largely emotional, want gears some
15 to 20 per cent taller. I'd really like to find one
bike that could satisfy as many customers as possible.

Regards,
Wayne

Hmmm...did you factor the Rocket's stock 62/52/39 and 11/32 cassette
into the calculations? The gear range on the Rocket is 26"-113",
according to their website. That would seem to satisfy the criteria of
"15-20% taller". ;-)

Without actually doing the math, I think a 62-11 combo on a nominal
406 tire at 100 rpm is what, 30-33 mph? I know that's roughly where I
start spinning out...those who spin better than I might see high 30s
in mph.

Best,

Dan

In article 2007013118085416807-SPAMTRAPian@trikesandstuffDOTcoDOTuk,
k says...

Be aware that 451 rims mean being restricted to Schwalbe Stevio or
Primo Comets.

And IRC Roadlites...

--
Dave Larrington - http://www.legslarry.beerdrinkers.co.uk/
Maffeo Barberini (1568-1644) was made entirely of salmon.

As Dan was posting this:

... did you factor the Rocket's stock 62/52/39 and 11/32
cassette into the calculations? The gear range on the
Rocket is 26"-113", according to their website.

I was mentioning in a private email to him that I had
forgotten to note that the current (and maybe all?)
Rockets have oversize chainrings, although not all of
them are still running around wearing them.

I (the critical engineer) am not fond of big chainrings
as a workaround for small drive wheels. Lots of folks
have tried and some still use them as aftermarket bits
on tadpoles, of course. But they're not nearly perfect.
No front derailleur I've seen is made with the radial
curvature to match oversize rings, and (maybe especially
when their mounting posts are tilted backward to span a
wider difference in ring sizes) the actual path of the
chain doesn't align with that the lateral contours (ramps)
of the cage were designed for.

It's not as big a problem for bikes as for trikes, which,
with their low speed stability, can use a wider gear
range, but another problem with big chainrings is that
the same difference in size from small to large gives you
a smaller gear range. For example, 23 teeth going from a
39 to a 62 tooth ring is a 1.59 ratio, while from a 30
to a 53 ring is a 1.76 ratio. The bottom line is that as
you increase the top gear, the low end takes a sort of
double whammy. In this example, while top gear goes up
less 20 per cent, the low gear is 30 per cent higher.

A third reason I like a larger wheel is that the super
long cage rear derailleurs really should have a bit more
ground clearance than they get with a 406 rear wheel.
And finally, huge chainrings are simply more obtrusive
and fragile.

All that said, so far the RANS Rocket may be the best
choice for this type of bike in its price range. Their
V-Rex (with a 559 rear wheel) lists for $800 more.

Regards,
Wayne

On 2007-02-02 18:20:29 +0000, Dave Larrington
said:

In article 2007013118085416807-SPAMTRAPian@trikesandstuffDOTcoDOTuk,
k says...

Be aware that 451 rims mean being restricted to Schwalbe Stevio or
Primo Comets.

And IRC Roadlites...

If you can find them.


--
Three wheels good, two wheels ok

www.catrike.co.uk