A Cycling & bikes forum. CycleBanter.com

Go Back   Home » CycleBanter.com forum » rec.bicycles » Recumbent Biking
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

BikeE? (was: So we were drooling over the 09 Kona catalog as I stoppedby the LBS for coffee)



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old September 4th 08, 03:30 AM posted to rec.bicycles.tech,alt.rec.bicycles.recumbent
Tom Sherman[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 9,890
Default BikeE? (was: So we were drooling over the 09 Kona catalog as I stoppedby the LBS for coffee)

Chalo Colina wrote:
[...]
What a non-cyclist considers fun and functional in a bike is likely to
prove a whole lot less than fun or functional, to say nothing of
reliable, for an actual cyclist. When the industry listens to non-
cyclists, we get things like Autobike/Landrider, "Spongy Wonder"
seats, BikeEs, and other anti-functional abortions.

What is wrong with the BikeE [1] that a few minor tweaks could not have
fixed?

[1] The bikes that is, not the deceptive advertising nor the way the
management handled going out of business.

--
Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia
“Mary had a little lamb / And when she saw it sicken /
She shipped it off to Packingtown / And now it’s labeled chicken.”
  #2  
Old September 4th 08, 04:40 AM posted to rec.bicycles.tech,alt.rec.bicycles.recumbent
Chalo
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 5,093
Default BikeE? (was: So we were drooling over the 09 Kona catalog as Istopped by the LBS for coffee)

Tom Sherman wrote:

Chalo Colina wrote:
[...]
What a non-cyclist considers fun and functional in a bike is likely to
prove a whole lot less than fun or functional, to say nothing of
reliable, for an actual cyclist. *When the industry listens to non-
cyclists, we get things like Autobike/Landrider, "Spongy Wonder"
seats, BikeEs, and other anti-functional abortions.


What is wrong with the BikeE [1] that a few minor tweaks could not have
fixed?

[1] The bikes that is, not the deceptive advertising nor the way the
management handled going out of business.


Where do you "tweak" a bike that handles like you're trying to ride it
backwards?

Chalo
  #3  
Old September 4th 08, 04:51 AM posted to rec.bicycles.tech,alt.rec.bicycles.recumbent
Tom Sherman[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 9,890
Default BikeE?

Chalo Colina wrote:
Tom Sherman wrote:
Chalo Colina wrote:
[...]
What a non-cyclist considers fun and functional in a bike is likely to
prove a whole lot less than fun or functional, to say nothing of
reliable, for an actual cyclist. When the industry listens to non-
cyclists, we get things like Autobike/Landrider, "Spongy Wonder"
seats, BikeEs, and other anti-functional abortions.

What is wrong with the BikeE [1] that a few minor tweaks could not have
fixed?

[1] The bikes that is, not the deceptive advertising nor the way the
management handled going out of business.


Where do you "tweak" a bike that handles like you're trying to ride it
backwards?

I found the BikeE (particularly the FX) very easy to ride. The only
exception was the E2 tandem, which was very easy to ride solo, but scary
with a stoker.

I suspect that Chalo's problem with the BikeE was related to being too
heavy and tall. The BikeE's were not designed for 99.9999th percentile
sized people.

--
Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia
“Mary had a little lamb / And when she saw it sicken /
She shipped it off to Packingtown / And now it’s labeled chicken.”
  #4  
Old September 4th 08, 04:50 AM posted to rec.bicycles.tech,alt.rec.bicycles.recumbent
A Muzi
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 4,551
Default BikeE?

Chalo Colina wrote:
[...]
What a non-cyclist considers fun and functional in a bike is likely to
prove a whole lot less than fun or functional, to say nothing of
reliable, for an actual cyclist. When the industry listens to non-
cyclists, we get things like Autobike/Landrider, "Spongy Wonder"
seats, BikeEs, and other anti-functional abortions.


Tom Sherman wrote:
What is wrong with the BikeE [1] that a few minor tweaks could not have
fixed?
[1] The bikes that is, not the deceptive advertising nor the way the
management handled going out of business.


Chalo wrote:
Where do you "tweak" a bike that handles like you're trying to ride it
backwards?


I'm no expert but for starts, the usual chaise lounge format is with 2
rails, one on either side, not one down the middle.
--
Andrew Muzi
www.yellowjersey.org/
Open every day since 1 April, 1971
** Posted from http://www.teranews.com **
  #5  
Old September 4th 08, 12:39 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech,alt.rec.bicycles.recumbent
Jon[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 118
Default BikeE?

"A Muzi" wrote
Chalo wrote:
What a non-cyclist considers fun and functional in a bike is likely to
prove a whole lot less than fun or functional, to say nothing of
reliable, for an actual cyclist.


What is an "actual cyclist"?

How was BikeE design not reliable? (implementation had its
glitches with some recalls for forks and swing arms, etc...)

Tom Sherman wrote:
What is wrong with the BikeE [1] that a few minor tweaks could not have
fixed?


Chalo wrote:
Where do you "tweak" a bike that handles like you're trying to ride it
backwards?


I never experienced a feeling of "handles like you're trying to ride it
backwards" on my BikeE. Nor did apparently and of the dozens
of people from age 7 to 70 who tried mine. All able to ride it
within minutes of starting...

Of my three recumbents, the BikeE has the best low-speed tight
handling characteristics. For me it seems a matter of center of
gravity, wheelbase and lack of heel strike...

I'm no expert but for starts, the usual chaise lounge format is with 2
rails, one on either side, not one down the middle.


The mesh back seat is well proven by bikes from Easy Racers,
RANS, etc.

Jon


  #6  
Old September 4th 08, 07:48 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech,alt.rec.bicycles.recumbent
Chalo
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 5,093
Default BikeE?

Jon wrote:

A Muzi wrote


Chalo wrote:
What a non-cyclist considers fun and functional in a bike is likely to
prove a whole lot less than fun or functional, to say nothing of
reliable, for an actual cyclist.


What is an "actual cyclist"?


Someone who actually rides actual bicycles, often and long enough to
have a good sense of what a bike actually does.

How was BikeE design not reliable? *(implementation had its
glitches with some recalls for forks and swing arms, etc...)


It is reliable in that you know with absolute certainty that you are
completely hosed if your hands leave the grips for a fraction of a
second. That much I know from trying to make a BikeE CT my around-
town transportation during my first stay in Seattle.

Tom Sherman wrote:
What is wrong with the BikeE [1] that a few minor tweaks could not have
fixed?

Chalo wrote:
Where do you "tweak" a bike that handles like you're trying to ride it
backwards?


I never experienced *a feeling of "handles like you're trying to ride it
backwards" on my BikeE. *Nor did apparently and of the dozens
of people from age 7 to 70 who tried mine. *All able to ride it
within minutes of starting...


I have built and ridden enough choppers and other improvised vehicles
to make a distinction between a bike that _can_ be ridden and a bike
that rides well. The BikeE can be ridden. So can these bikes:

http://dclxvi.org/chunk/meet/springy/index.html

Of my three recumbents, the BikeE has the best low-speed tight
handling characteristics. *


That pretty much sums it up, doesn't it? "Of my three genital
piercings, the Prince Albert is the most comfortable and
convenient."

Chalo
  #7  
Old September 5th 08, 08:25 AM posted to rec.bicycles.tech,alt.rec.bicycles.recumbent
Peter Clinch
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 4,852
Default BikeE?

Chalo wrote:

It is reliable in that you know with absolute certainty that you are
completely hosed if your hands leave the grips for a fraction of a
second.


That's true of many bicycle designs with no or very limited trail, which
includes a lot of recumbents.

"Doctor! Doctor! It hurts when I do this!"
"Then don't do that."

I have built and ridden enough choppers and other improvised vehicles
to make a distinction between a bike that _can_ be ridden and a bike
that rides well.


Differrent people have different ideas of rides well. The Brompton has
minimal trail and many riders complain it is twitchy. I like it because
I find the steering responsive. One man's meat, etc. That /you/ don't
personally like it doesn't make it an objectively bad machine.

Of my three recumbents, the BikeE has the best low-speed tight
handling characteristics.


That pretty much sums it up, doesn't it? "Of my three genital
piercings, the Prince Albert is the most comfortable and
convenient."


Well, no, not really. "Best low speed tight handling" could well mean
"star of the show in dense urban traffic".

Pete.
--
Peter Clinch Medical Physics IT Officer
Tel 44 1382 660111 ext. 33637 Univ. of Dundee, Ninewells Hospital
Fax 44 1382 640177 Dundee DD1 9SY Scotland UK
net http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/
  #8  
Old September 5th 08, 12:28 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech,alt.rec.bicycles.recumbent
Jon[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 118
Default BikeE?

"Chalo" wrote
Jon wrote:

Chalo wrote:
to say nothing of reliable, for an actual cyclist.


What is an "actual cyclist"?


Someone who actually rides actual bicycles, often and long enough to
have a good sense of what a bike actually does.


How about more than 15,000 miles of recumbent cycling?
Is that an actual cyclist?

But you tell me, what does a bike "actually do"?

How was BikeE design not reliable? (implementation had its
glitches with some recalls for forks and swing arms, etc...)


It is reliable in that you know with absolute certainty that you are
completely hosed if your hands leave the grips for a fraction of a
second.


How come my son and wife, and many other riders have fallen
for exactly that reason on while riding upright bikes?

That much I know from trying to make a BikeE CT my around-
town transportation during my first stay in Seattle.


I'm certainly willing to believe that for some people, perhaps
many, for some applications, a BikeE CT wouldn't be the best
bike. All bicycle designs represent compromises. Are there
upright bike designs better suited for self supported touring
than others? Are there upright bike designs better suited
for gravel roads or muddy trails than others?

Where do you "tweak" a bike that handles like you're
trying to ride it backwards?


I never experienced a feeling of "handles like you're
trying to ride it backwards" on my BikeE.


Again you offer no meainingful support for the assertion
that the BikeE "handles like you're trying to ride it backwards".
If there were true, how is that so many people found it so
easy to ride mine the first time without any problems?

distinction between a bike that _can_ be ridden and a bike
that rides well.


The BikeE has different handling characteristics than an upright
bike. I can and did ride it well for a number of years as my
only bike. And I still do ride mine. For a jump on and go
bicycle, for short errands, 4-5 miles, it's hard to beat. For
self-supported touring, it's not my first choice, my Tour
Easy is. For 60 mile hilly rides, the BikeE is not my first
choice, my Voale is. But I did self-supported weekend
tours with my BikeE and I road it on many long rides with
upright riding friends.

The BikeE can be ridden. So can these bikes:

http://dclxvi.org/chunk/meet/springy/index.html


Ok, so now I know you're not serious.

Of my three recumbents, the BikeE has the best low-speed tight
handling characteristics.


That pretty much sums it up, doesn't it? "Of my three genital
piercings, the Prince Albert is the most comfortable and
convenient."


Once again, a demonstration of your intent to avoid actual
discussion.

You assert the BikeE is an unqualified failed design
inspired by non-cyclists, but the only substantiation you
can offer is that the BikeE cannot be ridden hands free?

Come on. I *like* the BikeE and I can make better
design criticisms than that! Nothing, however, that
makes it not fun, not functional, or not reliable, though.

Jon


  #9  
Old September 6th 08, 01:25 AM posted to rec.bicycles.tech,alt.rec.bicycles.recumbent
DougC
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,276
Default BikeE?

Chalo wrote:
....
It is reliable in that you know with absolute certainty that you are
completely hosed if your hands leave the grips for a fraction of a
second. That much I know from trying to make a BikeE CT my around-
town transportation during my first stay in Seattle.
....

Chalo


I'd agree that most recumbents have poor steering that is impractical to
ride no-handed--but then again--with no hand pressure to cause hand
numbness, there's not a lot of reason to ride no-handed either.
~
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Ha Ha Ha Ha Hee - BikeE [email protected] Recumbent Biking 6 September 15th 08 03:11 AM
So we were drooling over the 09 Kona catalog as I stopped by the LBSfor coffee landotter Techniques 62 September 7th 08 02:36 AM
BikeE Bad? Jeff Grippe Recumbent Biking 6 February 3rd 07 10:32 PM
rigid fork kona joe murray project two 2 ti titanium, kona hei hei. natiturner Marketplace 0 October 21st 06 12:16 PM
Bikee Richard Greenberg Recumbent Biking 16 October 26th 05 01:37 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 06:51 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 CycleBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.