Recumbents: extreme, unsuitable for purpose, dangerous, dull,overpriced

The point of a recumbent is a comfortable seat and saving your back,
right?

The point of a recumbent tricycle even more so, hmm? More comfort,
less stress, not so?

A recumbent trike would be the ideal geribike, one would think.

So how come the things are so low you have to contort yourself and
then drop 18 inches -- boing, boing -- to fall into the seat with
your bum four inches from the road?

So how come the entire thing is so low that you are stressed out from
fear of being splatted not by a bus but by a common low hatchback
because the driver didn't see you?

I've been looking into recumbents for a spot of speeding, and in
particular into trikes because I already have bikes that can go fast
downhill. Whatever else I buy or build must be different in some
significant way, not just more of the same. (I have several upright
bikes that are pretty near to perfect, for instance my Utopia Kranich
lacking only an automatic Rohloff hub gearbox to be a perfect bike.)

In the usual curse of bicycling, a bunch of deranged designers took a
good idea -- a bike that doesn't kill your back -- to ridiculous
lengths, all of course in the name of sport. Ha-ha.

Customers are offered virtually nothing but extremes, and at
outrageous prices.

I looked only at tricycles with two front wheels. The socalled deltas
with one front and two rear wheels are inherently unstable, flipovers
waiting to happen.

After spending an entire night on the net I found:

1. Catbike, a major offender of the splatable lower-is-better
paradigm, launching their Villager as a higher-seated, lower-priced
bent trike. Thoughtless fitting out, needs the boom replaced even to
swap out the useless single chainring for a triple, the old American
curse of extra charges for necessary equipment. Cat's idea of a
"higher" seat is still too low by a mile for their target market.

2. The *only* trike I found that doesn't suffer this stupid "sporting
image" deficit of a too-low seat is the Anthrotech from Germany,
intended for touring, commuting, even shopping. (Nobody is surprised
by now that the only good bikes I can find are German or Dutch --
sometimes it looks like the last American bike designer to have his
brain in gear was Keith Bontrager.)
Anthrotech:
http://anthrotech.de/index.html

3. The technology is probably mature, and the form of the tadpole
recumbent trike has settled into two ali beams at right angles for
chassis and front frame, with a swing arm for the rear suspension. A
dreadful dullness is creeping over the format, with only esoteric
details distinguishing the different brands, and then only to the
obsessed. The wheels are universally small and the ride no doubt
nasty.

4. The only technically interesting trikes I could find were the
Tripod from The Netherlands (surprise!) and the Tripendo from Germany
(surprise! surprise!), both tilting trikes, both technically
interesting on several levels, both too low for daily convenience.
Tripod:
http://www.tripod-bikes.com/
Tripendo:
http://www.tripendo.com/DEFAULT.htm

So much for the trikes market survey. In summary, there appear to be
only one genuine all-round multifunction bike by Anthrotech, and two
interesting tilting bikes by Tripod and Tripendo. The rest is a
heaving mass of undistinguished sameness.

Andre Jute
A little, a very little thought will suffice -- John Maynard Keynes

"Andre Jute" wrote in message
...

So how come the entire thing is so low that you are stressed out from
fear of being splatted not by a bus but by a common low hatchback
because the driver didn't see you?

I believe you're rather more likely to be noticed on a recumbent trike than
on a bike - ie your fear is misplaced.

3. The technology is probably mature, and the form of the tadpole
recumbent trike has settled into two ali beams at right angles for
chassis and front frame, with a swing arm for the rear suspension. A
dreadful dullness is creeping over the format, with only esoteric
details distinguishing the different brands, and then only to the
obsessed. The wheels are universally small and the ride no doubt
nasty.

That'll be experience speaking, will it? When you've actually tried the ride
on one, come back and tell us.

The lower you are on the trike, the faster you can go round corners. That's
an important feature of a high performance machine.

Andre Jute wrote:

The only technically interesting trikes I could find were the
Tripod from The Netherlands (surprise!) and the Tripendo from Germany
(surprise! surprise!), both tilting trikes, both technically
interesting on several levels, both too low for daily convenience.
Tripod:
*http://www.tripod-bikes.com/
Tripendo:
*http://www.tripendo.com/DEFAULT.htm

You might be intrigued by the German Culty trike. It rides quite high
and it tilts. Unfortunately for most of us, it is "blessed" with rear
steering.

http://www.culty.de/

Chalo

Andre Jute wrote:
snip

hey andre, thought you should know - some fraud is trolling with
pointless inflammatory bull**** using your name and posting headers
again. trying to discredit you obviously.

Clive George wrote:

Andre Jute wrote:

The wheels are universally small and the ride no doubt nasty.

That'll be experience speaking, will it? When you've actually tried the ride
on one, come back and tell us.

I've ridden 'bent bikes with 20"/27" and 16"/20" wheels. The big one
had a long floppy frame and gave a shaky but smooth ride. The small
one gave a treacherous and crappy ride that didn't get better despite
my days spent trying to make the best of it.

My experience with 20" wheeled trikes suggests that good quality 20 x
2.3" tires at modest pressures can ameliorate most of the ride quality
shortcomings of small wheels without exacting too large a penalty in
rolling resistance. Unfortunately, trikes suffer an intrinsically
bothersome ride that has nothing to do with wheel size. Trikes bump
you sideways at least as abruptly as they do vertically or fore-to-
aft, because the track width is usually much less than the wheelbase.
The higher the trike's seat, the more obtrusive is its sideways
thrashing.

The lower you are on the trike, the faster you can go round corners. That's
an important feature of a high performance machine.

Low ride height helps cope with off-camber surfaces, too. Tilting
trikes can deal with both cornering forces and cambered surfaces
without having to sit unusually low-- but they are expensive,
complicated, heavy, and complex to operate.

Chalo

Clive George wrote:
"Andre Jute" wrote in message
...

So how come the entire thing is so low that you are stressed out from
fear of being splatted not by a bus but by a common low hatchback
because the driver didn't see you?

I believe you're rather more likely to be noticed on a recumbent trike than
on a bike - ie your fear is misplaced.

Indeed, Jute is wrong.

3. The technology is probably mature, and the form of the tadpole
recumbent trike has settled into two ali beams at right angles for
chassis and front frame, with a swing arm for the rear suspension. A
dreadful dullness is creeping over the format, with only esoteric
details distinguishing the different brands, and then only to the
obsessed. The wheels are universally small and the ride no doubt
nasty.

If Jute pulled his head out of his posterior and/or had any knowledge of
engineering, he would realize the reason for the wheel size.
Furthermore, Jute is wrong about the ride comfort.

That'll be experience speaking, will it? When you've actually tried the ride
on one, come back and tell us.

The lower you are on the trike, the faster you can go round corners. That's
an important feature of a high performance machine.

I read Jute's original post in full, and it is nonsense to anyone with
experience of recumbent trikes.

--
Tom Sherman - 42.435731,-83.985007
I am a vehicular cyclist.

Chalo wrote:
Clive George wrote:
Andre Jute wrote:
The wheels are universally small and the ride no doubt nasty.
That'll be experience speaking, will it? When you've actually tried the ride
on one, come back and tell us.

I've ridden 'bent bikes with 20"/27" and 16"/20" wheels. The big one
had a long floppy frame and gave a shaky but smooth ride. The small
one gave a treacherous and crappy ride that didn't get better despite
my days spent trying to make the best of it.

There is no stock recumbent suitable for someone Chalo's size. Since
Chalo is in the 99.999th percentile in both height and weight, the
manufacturers are not missing much of a market.

My experience with 20" wheeled trikes suggests that good quality 20 x
2.3" tires at modest pressures can ameliorate most of the ride quality
shortcomings of small wheels without exacting too large a penalty in
rolling resistance. Unfortunately, trikes suffer an intrinsically
bothersome ride that has nothing to do with wheel size. Trikes bump
you sideways at least as abruptly as they do vertically or fore-to-
aft, because the track width is usually much less than the wheelbase.
The higher the trike's seat, the more obtrusive is its sideways
thrashing.

A long wheelbase makes the trike too easy to flip. Rear suspension make
for a better ride than any bicycle in my experience. And that it with
53-406 Maxxis Hookworm tires inflated to more than 7-bar.

The lower you are on the trike, the faster you can go round corners. That's
an important feature of a high performance machine.

Low ride height helps cope with off-camber surfaces, too. Tilting
trikes can deal with both cornering forces and cambered surfaces
without having to sit unusually low-- but they are expensive,
complicated, heavy, and complex to operate.

Indeed, I have not ridden a tilting trike with satisfactory high-speed
handling.

--
Tom Sherman - 42.435731,-83.985007
I am a vehicular cyclist.

"jim beam" wrote:
Andre Jute wrote:
snip

hey andre, thought you should know - some fraud is trolling with
pointless inflammatory bull**** using your name and posting headers
again. trying to discredit you obviously.


Hey "jim",

Since about everything in the original post by Jute was wrong, it is
likely not fraudulent.

--
Tom Sherman - 42.435731,-83.985007
I am a vehicular cyclist.

Andre Jute wrote:
The point of a recumbent is a comfortable seat and saving your back,
right?

Well duh!

The point of a recumbent tricycle even more so, hmm? More comfort,
less stress, not so?

Indeed, with the added bonus of not worrying about falling due to road
hazards.

A recumbent trike would be the ideal geribike, one would think.

So how come the things are so low you have to contort yourself and
then drop 18 inches -- boing, boing -- to fall into the seat with
your bum four inches from the road?

Gee, for a guy who wrote a book about building specialty cars, the
answer should be obvious.

So how come the entire thing is so low that you are stressed out from
fear of being splatted not by a bus but by a common low hatchback
because the driver didn't see you?

Drivers notice trikes much more than run of the mill bicycles in my
experience.

I've been looking into recumbents for a spot of speeding, and in
particular into trikes because I already have bikes that can go fast
downhill. Whatever else I buy or build must be different in some
significant way, not just more of the same. (I have several upright
bikes that are pretty near to perfect, for instance my Utopia Kranich
lacking only an automatic Rohloff hub gearbox to be a perfect bike.)

Do us a favor and stop looking.

In the usual curse of bicycling, a bunch of deranged designers took a
good idea -- a bike that doesn't kill your back -- to ridiculous
lengths, all of course in the name of sport. Ha-ha.

Customers are offered virtually nothing but extremes, and at
outrageous prices.

Let us see Mr. Jute build and sell one both at a profit and reasonable
price.

I looked only at tricycles with two front wheels. The socalled deltas
with one front and two rear wheels are inherently unstable, flipovers
waiting to happen.

No silly, see
http://www.hasebikes.com/29-1-recumbent-trike-kettwiesel-allround.html.

After spending an entire night on the net I found:

1. Catbike, a major offender of the splatable lower-is-better
paradigm, launching their Villager as a higher-seated, lower-priced
bent trike. Thoughtless fitting out, needs the boom replaced even to
swap out the useless single chainring for a triple, the old American
curse of extra charges for necessary equipment. Cat's idea of a
"higher" seat is still too low by a mile for their target market.

Jute can not even get the name right, that is "Catrike":
http://www.catrike.com/trk_villager.htm.

2. The *only* trike I found that doesn't suffer this stupid "sporting
image" deficit of a too-low seat is the Anthrotech from Germany,
intended for touring, commuting, even shopping. (Nobody is surprised
by now that the only good bikes I can find are German or Dutch --
sometimes it looks like the last American bike designer to have his
brain in gear was Keith Bontrager.)
Anthrotech:
http://anthrotech.de/index.html

The Hase trikes are also German. So much for Jute's web search skills.

3. The technology is probably mature, and the form of the tadpole
recumbent trike has settled into two ali beams at right angles for
chassis and front frame, with a swing arm for the rear suspension. A
dreadful dullness is creeping over the format, with only esoteric
details distinguishing the different brands, and then only to the
obsessed. The wheels are universally small and the ride no doubt
nasty.

If Jute thinks trikes are nearly as uniform as upright bicycles, he is
misinformed (what else is new?).

4. The only technically interesting trikes I could find were the
Tripod from The Netherlands (surprise!) and the Tripendo from Germany
(surprise! surprise!), both tilting trikes, both technically
interesting on several levels, both too low for daily convenience.
Tripod:
http://www.tripod-bikes.com/
Tripendo:
http://www.tripendo.com/DEFAULT.htm

Tilting trikes have their own negative issues.

So much for the trikes market survey. In summary, there appear to be
only one genuine all-round multifunction bike by Anthrotech, and two
interesting tilting bikes by Tripod and Tripendo. The rest is a
heaving mass of undistinguished sameness.

Another half-assed effort from André Jute.

--
Tom Sherman - 42.435731,-83.985007
I am a vehicular cyclist.

Tom Sherman wrote:

There is no stock recumbent suitable for someone Chalo's size. Since
Chalo is in the 99.999th percentile in both height and weight, the
manufacturers are not missing much of a market.

To judge by the number of 'bent models available versus market share
taken by 'bents, they are missing essentially the whole thing.

Chalo