|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
Ads |
#52
|
|||
|
|||
Recumbent bikes (was: "Liquid Drive" bike prototype at auction)
In article
, Ted Bennett wrote: They usually travel in pairs along the river trail, possibly feeding on berries or hiding from predators. Their plumage is somewhat drab, but in the evening I've seen a few around my neighborhood with blinking red lights in back. Their flight may be described as somewhat slow and wobbly, but cheerful, much like my basset hound. Possibly these are immature specimens and improve with age? Carl Fogel Some exceedingly rare specimens have evolved to optimize speed, to the extent that their speed far exceeds that of the common diamond frame bicycle. They are delicate and nervous creatures, and require specialized care and feeding, but some have been reliably clocked at well over 80 miles per hour. No, that's not a typo. That's over 80 mph, level ground, pedal power, no energy storage device, and no tailwind. See: http://www.wisil.recumbents.com/wisi...02/results.htm Well, more like "two have been reliably clocked at over 80 mph", one being the Varna Diablo II, at 81.00 mph, and the other being the Varna Diablo I, at 80.55 mph. http://www.ihpva.org/hpva/hpvarec7.html#nom01 130 km/h over a 200m course is nothing to sneeze at, but to give you an idea of how much better than the others George Georgiev's Varna machines are, the last time someone set a flying 200m record (which, for all practical purposes, is the HPV land speed record trial) in something other than a Varna was in 1992, and the speed was 68.72 mph. Bents are wonderful machines, with some very interesting attributes, including huge top speeds. But even a non-lowracer bent tends to involve a lot of compromises over the safety bicycle design. The saddest part is a lot of the non-lowracer bent designs don't even have an aerodynamic advantage over conventional bikes, leaving them only with the advantage of a different seating position to compensate for being heavier, more ponderous, and less agile. I like the idea of recumbents, and would love to own a really aerodynamic, fairly lightweight one. But the price and the compromises make my collection of cheap wedgie bikes look pretty good. -- Ryan Cousineau, http://www.sfu.ca/~rcousine President, Fabrizio Mazzoleni Fan Club |
#53
|
|||
|
|||
Recumbent bikes (was: "Liquid Drive" bike prototype at auction)
Carl Fogel wrote: ... As for speed, all joking aside, the few recumbents that I see are piloted by people out for a pleasant stroll, so to speak, on the most basic of entry-level machines, which I'm sure accounts for the wobbling and low speed (I've seen runners pass them). I expect that any serious recumbent rider would pass me with barely time for a friendly wave. As Ted Bennett points out elsewhere in this thread, the Human Powered Vehicle high-speed crowd at Battle Mountain is exclusively recumbent and none of their annual reports that I've read ever mention wobble as a problem. Here are the results [1] from a race near where I live. Mr. Ariail was the winner of the 6-hour event on a Challenge Jester [2], and is the only person in the history of the event to complete 7 19-mile laps within the allotted 6-hours. This was accomplished without drafting. I do not believe that Mr. Ariail had problems with excessive wobbling during the race. Speaking of the body-sock streamlining, I see that your second bike has the clear plastic snoot often grown by more advanced specimens of these enchanting creatures. Am I correct in thinking that this nose-cone not only provides combined streamlining and visibility, but also keeps the wind and rain from blowing up your pants? I've read of rain being a problem for touring recumbents, but have seen nothing in the current thread about rain gear about it. Last year, only two inches of water fell from the skies here in Pueblo, Colorado, so my interest is largely theoretical. On a club ride of a couple of years past, we encountered a typical Midwestern thunderstorm. I was the only rider that had dry feet at the end of the ride. I believe that the bicycle that I was riding was responsible for my relative state of dryness. [3] [1] http://www.ultracycling.com/results/iowa2002.html [2] http://www.challenge-ligfietsen.nl/ch-01/pages/ch-fold-modl/ch-jester-en.html [3] http://www.ransbikes.com/Gallery/Archive/Sherman.htm Tom Sherman - Planet Earth |
#54
|
|||
|
|||
Odd bikes
Tom Sherman wrote:
It would be helpful if the number of conventional road bikes in the club was stated. Bikes or riders? I ask because for most tandem couples, they each also have their own 'half bikes.' There are about 800 active riders in the club. It's not uncommon to have 4 or 5 tandems on a weekend ride. And in August, when everybody's gearing up for DALMAC, we can get a dozen of them at the start, with 4 or 5 in the lead group alone. On a tour a few years back which was 95% club members, 11% were tandems and another 11% were recumbents. -- John Foltz --- O _ Baron --- _O _ V-Rex 24 --- _\\/\-%) _________(_)`=()___________________(_)= (_)_____ |
#55
|
|||
|
|||
Recumbent bikes
Vincent Wilcox wrote:
I went for a ride with a local cycling group on a local loop with a varied route, ie. getting off the road at points. We kept having to wait for the groups recumbent rider to catch up as he rode the longer road route because it was impossible for him to lift his bike over fences and ride on some bumpy offroad track. I imagine he only did it to increase his mileage. It sounds like your ride was almost a cyclocross event in places. Definitely not a good venue for a bike that is essentially meant for roads only. There is very little public land around here for doing that stuff, so rather than trespass we stick to the pavement. -- John Foltz --- O _ Baron --- _O _ V-Rex 24 --- _\\/\-%) _________(_)`=()___________________(_)= (_)_____ |
#56
|
|||
|
|||
Recumbent bikes
Carl Fogel wrote:
Speaking of the body-sock streamlining, I see that your second bike has the clear plastic snoot often grown by more advanced specimens of these enchanting creatures. To be accurate, that is not me nor is it my bike. The Super ZZipper (tm) fairing on it is so common, it's rare to see one without a fairing. I have a homemade fairing for my V-Rex (the first picture) that does a very good job at preventing sunburn on my legs, as well as provides a significant speed boost on the order of 7-10% at 20 mph. Lessee, here's the project page where I built it, some good pics of it at the bottom: http://www.biketcba.org/TRICORR/proj.../fairing4.html Am I correct in thinking that this nose-cone not only provides combined streamlining and visibility, but also keeps the wind and rain from blowing up your pants? I've read of rain being a problem for touring recumbents, but have seen nothing in the current thread about rain gear about it. Last year, only two inches of water fell from the skies here in Pueblo, Colorado, so my interest is largely theoretical. Yes, they protect against wind and rain somewhat. More specifically, they keep the rain off your chest and put it in your face instead. This isn't the problem you might think; as long as you have riding glasses the water just flies off after hitting you. But it's not perfect. Eventually the rider gets wet no matter what. Fairings are also good for keeping stinging insects away from the rider. And in more northerly areas, they help fend off the cold. Disadvantages of a fairing like mine or the one in the second pic: they add 3-4 pounds to the bike, and they have to be removed for transport. Mine is designed to come off in less than 30 seconds. The clear ones come off by removing 4 nylon wingnuts. While I love riding with it, I haven't used it at all this year. Sometimes the feeling of riding a lighter bike is good, too. -- John Foltz --- O _ Baron --- _O _ V-Rex 24 --- _\\/\-%) _________(_)`=()___________________(_)= (_)_____ |
#57
|
|||
|
|||
Recumbent bikes
Ryan Cousineau wrote:
Well, more like "two have been reliably clocked at over 80 mph", one being the Varna Diablo II, at 81.00 mph, and the other being the Varna Diablo I, at 80.55 mph. http://www.ihpva.org/hpva/hpvarec7.html#nom01 130 km/h over a 200m course is nothing to sneeze at, but to give you an idea of how much better than the others George Georgiev's Varna machines are, the last time someone set a flying 200m record (which, for all practical purposes, is the HPV land speed record trial) in something other than a Varna was in 1992, and the speed was 68.72 mph. Bents are wonderful machines, with some very interesting attributes, including huge top speeds. But even a non-lowracer bent tends to involve a lot of compromises over the safety bicycle design. The saddest part is a lot of the non-lowracer bent designs don't even have an aerodynamic advantage over conventional bikes, leaving them only with the advantage of a different seating position to compensate for being heavier, more ponderous, and less agile. I like the idea of recumbents, and would love to own a really aerodynamic, fairly lightweight one. But the price and the compromises make my collection of cheap wedgie bikes look pretty good. Most of what you write above is true, IMHO. Most, but not all, recumbent riders get into recumbents because they have a comfort issue with safety bicycles. The recumbent design works for 90+% of them. Most US recumbents are, at best, the equivalent of riding an upright on the hoods. Bike-E in particular, liked to quote recumbent speed advantages, glossing over the fact that their design was actually *worse* than a typical road bike. BTW, I don't consider recumbent designs "compromises," but rather they are optimized for the kind of riding I do. YMMV. For the majority of riders who don't have a significant comfort issue with their bikes, there is no compelling reason to get a recumbent. Unless of course they just want one. :-) -- John Foltz --- O _ Baron --- _O _ V-Rex 24 --- _\\/\-%) _________(_)`=()___________________(_)= (_)_____ |
#58
|
|||
|
|||
Recumbent bikes (was: "Liquid Drive" bike prototype at auction)
Tom Sherman wrote in message ...
Richard wrote: Tom Sherman wrote in message ... I occasionally see recumbents wobbling along on my local bicycle path, but have never inspected a dead one's anatomy--possibly there is a secret recumbent graveyard. I certainly did not write the above text. Please be more careful with your attributions when quoting. Tom Sherman - Planet Earth My apologies, Tom. I lost track of which post I snipped out a part to respond to. Richard |
#59
|
|||
|
|||
Recumbent bikes (was: "Liquid Drive" bike prototype at auction)
Tom Sherman wrote in message ...
[snip all relevant matter] [3] http://www.ransbikes.com/Gallery/Archive/Sherman.htm Tom Sherman - Planet Earth Dear Tom, How do you scratch your nose in that impressive body-sock? Carl Fogel |
#60
|
|||
|
|||
Recumbent bikes (was: "Liquid Drive" bike prototype at auction)
Carl Fogel wrote: Tom Sherman wrote in message ... [snip all relevant matter] [3] http://www.ransbikes.com/Gallery/Archive/Sherman.htm Tom Sherman - Planet Earth Dear Tom, How do you scratch your nose in that impressive body-sock? There are zippered armholes in each side for hand signaling and there is also a zipper along the top of the sock. Tom Sherman - Planet Earth |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
buying my first road bike | Tanya Quinn | General | 28 | June 17th 10 10:42 AM |
How old were you when you got your first really nice bike? | Brink | General | 43 | November 13th 03 10:49 AM |
my new bike | Marian Rosenberg | General | 5 | October 19th 03 03:00 PM |
Single Speed Cruiser vs. Mountain/All Terrain Bike for Commuting? | Luigi de Guzman | General | 2 | August 21st 03 05:02 PM |