Yet Another Cycling Forum
General Category => Freewheeling => Topic started by: Blodwyn Pig on 17 January, 2020, 01:38:32 pm
-
Just a bit of a fun questionaire, in the poll above.
-
I went for the 50:50 option (though it's probably more like 70:30 at the moment), but "obsessed with all things bent" would have been a reasonable option. I think recumbents are brilliant, but upright bikes have their place on account of low cost, superior manoeuvrability and ability to see over cars.
Probably need a "I can't right an upright" option in the poll.
-
I went for the 50:50 option (though it's probably more like 70:30 at the moment), but "obsessed with all things bent" would have been a reasonable option. I think recumbents are brilliant, but upright bikes have their place on account of low cost, superior manoeuvrability and ability to see over cars.
Probably need a "I can't right an upright" option in the poll.
Done ;)
-
I went for the 50:50 option (though it's probably more like 70:30 at the moment)
Just looked at my strava stats and it's more like 80:20 recumbent to upright by distance, though less by time as I do much slower riding (due to the journey, not the cycle) on uprights.
-
I ticked "tried but not for me". I have tried probably every basic type of recumbent you can think of. Tricycle in both configurations, long and short wheelbase bicycles. I first tried a recumbent bicycle way back in 1971, a home made short wheelbase. They don't work for me, but because I am a CYCLIST I want to try anything that is on offer.
My particular obsession is with upright tricycles and I get pee'd off when people write as if tricycle means recumbent. Very few here will have tried that particular deviant velocipede, and even fewer will have managed more than a few yards. My upright tricycle versus upright bicycle mileage in the last 20 years is something like 98:2 and I currently have 6 trikes and 3 bikes.
-
My upright tricycle versus upright bicycle mileage in the last 20 years is something like 98:2
I expect you've almost got the hang of steering in the right direction then... ;)
A few years ago at Mildenhall, Arabella OTP was kind enough to let me play with hers for long enough to get to the point where I could ride it at a decent cycling speed and steer correctly, but only for as long as I concentrated on pretending that the handlebars were skis[1].
I'm always impressed by the upright tricyclists keeping things (mostly) rubber-side-down on the fast corners at BHPC races. Recumbentists talk about the dark side, but *that's* really using the force...
because I am a CYCLIST I want to try anything that is on offer.
Absolutely this. :thumbsup:
[1] For some reason this is what made sense to my muscle memory.
-
Need another option.
Tried a bent, liked it, bought TWO and ride them occasionally.
You need at least one three wheeler and one two wheeler to really enjoy riding recumbents.
-
because I am a CYCLIST I want to try anything that is on offer.
(https://image.spreadshirtmedia.com/image-server/v1/compositions/104702083T111A4PC1017954399PA178PT17X0Y31S35/views/1,width=300,height=300,appearanceId=4,version=1478496810/bikesexual-ill-ride-just-about-anything-men-s-hoodie.jpg)
-
You probably also need another poll option!
Tried a bent, liked it, bought one. After a few years worked out what I liked and didn’t like. Bought a second bent better suited to needs. Ride the second bent mostly, followed by upright.
I think most riders initially come to bents from a comfort point of view. The comfort is great but they don’t really know how to get exactly what they want or what to be looking for. So they get the first bent and love it, but after a while they find it’s lacking in some way or in certain circumstances. Only from the point of view of what they want to do with it of course . It takes that first bent to work out what it is they want from it beyond the comfort. You won’t really get that from a test ride. Once the eyes are opened to how different bents are, they make much better choices for the characteristics of their second or third bent.
I think it’s Kim who said bents aren’t a functional class. She’s dead right and there are huge variances in recumbents and what each model is good at / suited to.
-
They don't work for me, but because I am a CYCLIST I want to try anything that is on offer.
Am I NOT-A-CYCLIST because I've no inclination to ride them let alone try them?
I get why other people like/love them but can't see the fascination myself. £ for £ they're heavier than DF bikes, they're less practical for the vast majority of riding I do, and I live in a 1st floor flat with limited external storage space so even storing one would be a major problem.
They solve a bunch of problems I don't have. (Things may change in later life I'm sure, and I reserve the right to change my mind.)
-
They don't work for me, but because I am a CYCLIST I want to try anything that is on offer.
Am I NOT-A-CYCLIST because I've no inclination to ride them let alone try them?
I get why other people like/love them but can't see the fascination myself. £ for £ they're heavier than DF bikes, they're less practical for the vast majority of riding I do, and I live in a 1st floor flat with limited external storage space so even storing one would be a major problem.
They solve a bunch of problems I don't have. (Things may change in later life I'm sure, and I reserve the right to change my mind.)
You’re option 1 surely?
-
Yep
-
I get why other people like/love them but can't see the fascination myself. £ for £ they're heavier than DF bikes, they're less practical for the vast majority of riding I do, and I live in a 1st floor flat with limited external storage space so even storing one would be a major problem.
They solve a bunch of problems I don't have. (Things may change in later life I'm sure, and I reserve the right to change my mind.)
Fair enough, but no inclination to try them means you're missing out on an excellent source of short-term fun. I challenge anyone to hoon around a car park on a Kettwiesel for 5 minutes without acquiring a tremendous grin. (Bicycles are harder to learn to ride, but have their own novelty factor.) Do have a play if the opportunity presents itself, if only for a laugh.
But yeah, they're a pain to store[1], and if you don't need the ergonomics or comfort there's little advantage in the real world[2], unless you live in the flatlands where aerodynamics always trumps weight.
FWIW, I'm fairly meh about recumbent trikes, and not through lack of experience. They're initially great fun, they make cycling possible for many people, and they make excellent touring machines. But my recumbent touring bike is also an excellent touring machine, markedly more efficient, better at dodging potholes, much easier to wheel and lift, and I can fit it on trains - the only thing the trike really does for me is immunity to ice without resorting to studded tyres, and having the brakes and gearing to cope with *really* heavy trailer loads. It's a lot like the Brompton - very good at a couple of specific things, and has a certain charm, but not what I generally want to be riding. (And similarly, I reserve the right to change my mind should my power output, arm functionality or ability to balance change.)
[1] Foldable tadpole trikes are a pain to store in a very different way to DF bikes, which can sometimes be an advantage (they're easier to fit in cars, for example).
[2] Fast recumbents being about as practical as DF time trial bikes.
-
I'd like a definition of 'tried' before I could answer. I've 'tried' a few recumbents – bikes and trikes, can't remember what except one of them was Kim's – but only for a minute or two at a time in fields and such like (actually mostly in College Green – sort of urban park – when a now-extinct LBS organised a try-out session several decades ago).
-
Ah, LB bikes are more practical, but trikes are more fun. FWIW I like my LB but my DF is more practical in 95% of my rides.
-
I tried a secondhand recumbent cycle (Kingcycle) because I was struggling with shoulder and wrist pain, even with the full suspension on a Moulton. That was about four years ago. It did take a while to get used to recumbent riding and for my leg muscles to acclimatise. I suppose you wouldn't get the full benefit from a short try out - my first attempts were quite comical.
Still use the Kingcycle and since then I've built up a new recumbent bike which I use on long rides including 200k audaxes. Benefits for me are comfort, and the continued ability to complete audax rides, admittedly as a 'full value' rider.
For short rides in town, shopping, going to the gym, I use a vintage Moulton.
-
What does DF stand for?
-
Diamond Frame.
-
Diamond Frame.
Thanks!
-
Diamond Frame.
Thanks!
Except, confusingly, when it's a type of velomobile.
-
DF could also refer to a hard tail or fat bike or touring bike. But in most contexts related to vs. Recumbents it tends to be used as a proxy for a racing bike.
-
DF could also refer to a hard tail or fat bike or touring bike. But in most contexts related to vs. Recumbents it tends to be used as a proxy for a racing bike.
That's not how I use it. Like 'recumbent', it's a broad geometry, not a functional class of bike. It also excludes Moultons, most folding bikes, step-through frames and so on, and I'm just as likely to use it for comparisons in those contexts. In practice, since most recumbents are touring bikes, they (should) usually get compared to DF touring bikes.
-
Indeed and then the weights of most recumbents start to become comparable when looking at touring bikes.
-
DF could also refer to a hard tail or fat bike or touring bike. But in most contexts related to vs. Recumbents it tends to be used as a proxy for a racing bike.
was genuinley meant to include all DF bikes, per se, ie like for like, touring DF /touring 'bent, not just lightweight racers.
ps, I've never been fast, quick by some standards, but never fast. ;)
-
I went for #2, "but interested" although at only about a 10% level.
College friend went to bents decades ago, loves them.
Me - I see the photos and videos and it sure looks like a major portion of the view from a bent is thrashing kneecaps and feet. How does that impression compare with reality?
-
In this context I took DF to mean Upwrong.
I don't know where I stand - I built a recumbent trike, but I've barely ridden it and I'm not convinced I like it. On the other hand, I'd like a go at some recumbent bikes (and I'm still obsessed with the Windcheetah)...
-
Me - I see the photos and videos and it sure looks like a major portion of the view from a bent is thrashing kneecaps and feet. How does that impression compare with reality?
that's a strange one, as on a DF one never sees any leg movement, I too think the videos look odd.
-
I went for #2, "but interested" although at only about a 10% level.
College friend went to bents decades ago, loves them.
Me - I see the photos and videos and it sure looks like a major portion of the view from a bent is thrashing kneecaps and feet. How does that impression compare with reality?
Nothing like it. Videos are often shot below the bars and get the feet in, partly to say look I’m in my bent. The view is above the bars and ahead and up to the sky. Much better than DF view where your staring at the road a lot in the head down position.
-
Me - I see the photos and videos and it sure looks like a major portion of the view from a bent is thrashing kneecaps and feet. How does that impression compare with reality?
On the really laid back ones, yes (to the point that it can be difficult to make sense of potholes and debris before they disappear under the boom). In a more upright position of a typical touring-oriented 'bent your view is mostly of where you're going, rather than the bit of ground immediately in front of your wheel as it tends to be on all but the most sit-up-and-beg uprights.
The other view issue is that it's hard to turn your head more than 90 degrees to the side when you're reclined in a seat, hence most recumbent riders use mirrors. (With a few exceptions, most recumbents have better places to attach mirrors to than drop-barred uprights.)
-
Needs a “but haven’t turned 50 yet” option.
-
Tried a bent loved it but the shed is not big enough . Not with an up wrong trike in there .
-
Tried a bent (trike), loved it, had to sell it, built/bought 6 upwrongs, in the process of building a bent (bike) from a frame.
Should be good to go March/April time.
-
Bought a bent, liked it, kept it. Ditched the upwrong. Won't be going back by choice.
-
On my third two wheel bent, two built from framesets. Love riding them, cannot see me not having one in the shed. As said to me at the weekend on the Kelvedon Oyster "that looks really comfy, and you can shift on it!".
I'm trike curious, but not had a chance to play yet.
There will always be room in the shed though for an upwrong or three. One on the turbo, a 90's no-sus MTB as a railway station hack, and I'm looking at an airnimal as a bike to take on my travels. There will always be rides, routes, conditions where one bike will be a better choice than the other
-
My DF is seeing serious neglect of late. Will be interesting to see if I still want to keep it in a years time. It would certainly free up some much needed space in the “bike” utility room. That would leave the recumbent and the Brompton.