Author Topic: The march of progress?  (Read 2068 times)

Si

The march of progress?
« on: 16 September, 2011, 09:09:14 am »
Currently I'm riding a 'classic'* recumbent bicycle (PDQ).  Looks quite dated compared to modern offerings but it gets me from A to B in comfort, and can carry a bit of luggage.

Having never tried another 'bent I'm wondering what advantages a fully up to date, modern recumbent bicycle might offer over my PDQ?  Maybe something like a Bacchettta midracer model, or there abouts.

Looking at the specs of such machines they certainly seem to be a tad lighter with their carbon or Alu frames, but apart from that, why would I want to upgrade (assuming that my PDQ is still in good working order)?

If I do a similar comparison for uprights then really I can't see any reason why I'd want to swap my old 631 road bike for the modern equivalent.  Sure, the modern one is a tad lighter and might have aero rims, or STI or 30 gears, but I don't really need a lighter bike or aero wheels as I don't race, 21 gears has always done me just fine, and STI is just another expensive bit to go wrong - DT is cheap and reliable and I have no problem using it.  With road bikes, for people that use them like I do - just to get around and have some fun on, the only real changes to them over the last decade or so has been advances in sales and marketing strategies.  Would it be fair to say the same for 'bents?

*i.e. old and cheap

Kim

  • Timelord
    • Fediverse
Re: The march of progress?
« Reply #1 on: 16 September, 2011, 09:15:16 am »
You appear to be overlooking the n+1 rule :)

Re: The march of progress?
« Reply #2 on: 16 September, 2011, 03:29:35 pm »
Damn, you got there before me ;)

The main changes are weight, suspension (arguable, it's been around since before 2000), and use of newer components (possibly better brakes, more gear ratios). I guess there's a few different wheel sizes too.

The 'bent I have (HPV speedmachine) hasn't changed hugely in the decade or more that it's been made, other than seat type/position and some manufacturing changes.
Challenge, for example, have produced some pretty light machines in recent years, down to light road bike weights in the case of some of their range.

One change in recent years seem to have been for portability - there's several 'bents that now are available in a folding form.

Re: The march of progress?
« Reply #3 on: 18 September, 2011, 11:53:08 am »
My first recumbent was PDQ bought new from Pashley(they let me have a test ride).I dearly loved it but upgraded to a SMGT and sold it to finance the new bike. I had a few niggles with the steerer but other wise nothing.I was told there were maybe some issues with welds around the steerer area but I had nothing. Suspension on SMGT is wonderful and the bike is faster downhill as a consequence especially on poor (Tarmac) surfaces and personally I like USS.I also love bar end shifters and light powerful stoppers.
But SMGT is rather heavy.
What I loved about PDQ was it's compactness. Take the boom off and dismantle the seat and it would pass as a folder on any train. The 3X7 hub allows easy removal of the boom compared with a chainwheel changer.I took it like that to Majorca and had a blast burning off carbon fibre roadies on twisty decents in the mountains. I also took it round the Marin mountain bike trail in N.Wales to general disbelief. My neck was stiff for a week but SMGT would stuggle to do that. Not sure why - just less nippy and more "cruisey" I think.
If you upgrade and can afford it I would keep PDQ. Just my 2penneth.

Si

Re: The march of progress?
« Reply #4 on: 18 September, 2011, 09:03:59 pm »
thanks for the answers.  overall it makes me think that I'm less likely to change for a while.

suspension I think that I can do without now that I've got the tyres sorted, and a reasonable technique for speed bumps.

lightness - well, probably ought to fix me before I fix the bike.

different wheel sizes - I'm guessing that bigger ones  are chosen because they roll better, however, my other bike is a folder so I'm used to the ride of smaller wheels than the big 20inchers on the PDQ.

And mine came with Avid Vs which stop me fine so no need to upgrade in that department.

I was just wondering if trends had changed or been refined with regard to seat types and angles, and to the geometry of the various bits of the bike?  But with my uncultured eye, looking at modern bents, they still seem to be all shapes and sizes!

Re: The march of progress?
« Reply #5 on: 28 September, 2011, 11:02:06 am »
Re seats, I can only talk about my Q-NT but the new seat cover is a vast improvement (the old one was damn comfy anyway).
   ICE have fine tuned many parts (ask the Oracle - Kevin @ D-tek for proper info) and the newer machines are more refined even while admitting the older ones weren't shabby.
    Difficult time when one might be lusting after a new one
                                      :facepalm:
The problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so sure of themselves, and wiser men so full of doubt.

Kim

  • Timelord
    • Fediverse
Re: The march of progress?
« Reply #6 on: 28 September, 2011, 01:46:53 pm »
I was just wondering if trends had changed or been refined with regard to seat types and angles, and to the geometry of the various bits of the bike?  But with my uncultured eye, looking at modern bents, they still seem to be all shapes and sizes!

I think the same could be said for uprights.

I suppose there's a trend towards specialism for a particular purpose, which massively influences basics like wheel size and geometry.  Also different engineering approaches to the same problems, for example telescopic booms vs movable seat mountings, both having their advantages and disadvantages.

While I love my SMGT, it's something of a truism that it can do everything except fast.  n+1 (of radically different geometry, though I haven't decided what) is required for getting places sooner than "eventually".

And there's a lot of user preference, of course.  Hardshell vs mesh seats.  Steering configuration.  That sort of thing.
And as henshaw11 says, folding is a current trend, for good practical reasons, and tends to lead to related design decisions (wheel size, etc).

Having spent some time with Kevin and his collection of ICE trikes, the steady trickle of refinements is apparent.  Some are dramatic, like the folding ability, or the seat material.  Others are a bit more subtle (have you seen how many different handlebar shapes they've used over the years?).  It's all good.  :thumbsup:

Re: The march of progress?
« Reply #7 on: 30 September, 2011, 05:14:32 pm »
The only difference I think it makes is when you're riding alongside a new-fangled bespangled machine like Kim's and think yours looks decidedly less than glossy!

Kim

  • Timelord
    • Fediverse
Re: The march of progress?
« Reply #8 on: 30 September, 2011, 05:23:08 pm »
It's not that newfangled (see above re Speedmachine).  Just has a chain arrangement that isn't designed with the primary goal of covering the rider in as much oil as possible :)

Tim

Re: The march of progress?
« Reply #9 on: 30 September, 2011, 11:22:57 pm »
I think the the biggest difference, like that of uprights, is in the controls, drivetrain and brakes. OK some of the frames look shinier and are made in the modern fashionable materials of the day, but quick shifting indexed gears on integrated levers, and brakes that stop you fast with just a gentle squeeze of a lever is the big change.

There are some trends, but I suspect in the next ten years fashion will have changed again.

If you would be happy riding a well maintained 80's steel-framed upright, then there is no point moving on. It's still just a bicycle with pedals and handlebars that you can ride from a to b.