|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Unhappy bentriders ?
I may consider buying a bent in the next months. I hesitate because it is
expensive and I'm not sure I will really like it in the long term. I've read a lot of stuff explaining all the advantages of the bent thing. As a skeptical person I would like to have the cons too. I don't think I will find them on alt.rec.bicycles.recumbent. Is there somebody here who has owned a recumbent, not liked it, and stopped using it ? If so, why ? Thanks for the advice Jacques |
Ads |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Unhappy bentriders ?
|
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Unhappy bentriders ?
"jacques" wrote in
news Is there somebody here who has owned a recumbent, not liked it, and stopped using it ? If so, why ? I have a recumbent that I use only occassionally. I use my upright road bike most of the time. Some reasons, in no particular order, why I don't like the recumbent: 1. Low seat position makes you less visible in heavy traffic 2. You can't turn around to look at traffic behind you. Most recumbent riders rely heavily on mirrors (often multiple mirrors), but looking back on an upright bike gives you a much better view. This is a big problem when you're trying to merge/turn left through multiple lanes of high speed traffic. 3. Acceleration is poor. This can be a big problem when you're trying to cross a busy street at a 2-way stop (you have a stop sign and cross traffic doesn't). This is especially a problem on uphills. 4. The longer wheelbase makes recumbents difficult to maneuver through the various types of barriers on bike paths. I often have to pick the bike up and carry it over the barriers. 5. Fixed seating position and long wheelbase make recumbents more difficult to maneuver in traffic. You can't use "body english" to make quick turns. 6. The acceleration profile of a recumbent is different from upright bikes. On group rides, I always get dropped at stoplights and hills and have to work hard to catch up. You can't really draft an upright bike either. 7. Any claims that recumbents are *always* faster than upright bikes is BS. Recumbents are faster when fully faired, but fully faired upright bikes are really fast, too. Unfaired recumbents are no faster than unfaired upright bikes at recreational speeds. You may gain an aero advantage at 30mph, but I don't hit that very often. Recumbents are great if you're going on long rides on low traffic rural roads. The big seat is really comfortable on century rides. If you ride in a big city or in the suburbs during rush hour, recumbents can be pretty exciting. That's just my personal experience. I'm sure others have different experiences. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Unhappy bentriders ?
"jacques" wrote in message
news ...Is there somebody here who has owned a recumbent, not liked it, and stopped using it ? If so, why ? Jacques Jacques - I ride a recumbent and like it, but recognize that there is too much pro-recumbent hype in the recumbent news groups. Here are some drawbacks that I have noticed, but weren't noted by Mr. Kerber or George. + Weight. Recumbents weigh more than an upright bicycle of equivalent cost or quality. The extra weight is primarily in the seat, chain, and steering. I don't know what the typical recumbent weight 'penalty' is, but it is probably on the order of 5 pounds (2 kg.). + Recumbent butt. Some riders never have a problem with this, but some riders cannot ride certain models for more than 20 minutes without getting an ache in the sit region. I am one of the latter. I found a recumbent style that I like, but other styles don't work for me. + Numb toes and feet. This is fairly common among recumbent cyclists. Many recumbent owners claim that various remedies (wiggling toes, wider shoes, sandals, orthodics, different style of seat, etc.) solve the problem for them, but some riders continue to have this problem. + Sore knees. This seems to be more of a problem with recumbents than with upright styles, especially in the first 2-3 weeks. Part of the reason for this is the inability to stand up when the steepness/fitness quotient exceeds the bicycle's lowest gearing. As a result, recumbent cyclists try to always spin and are much more likely to install shorter cranks than are cyclists in general. + Quality of design and manufacture. These days, most recumbents no longer look like they were made in your neighbor's garage with a welder, but the quality of design and manufacture is still far behind that of upright bicycles. There are reasonably widespread problems in the recumbent world, such as slipping seat clamps or idler wheels that only last a few hundred miles, that really do not have analogous issues in the upright world. + Low-speed stability. Most recumbents don't handle well at very low speeds. Depending upon the model and style, the minimum 'steerable' speed may be 3-4 mph. Speed/aerodynamics is a complex topic. Many recumbent models truly are not fast. Many others are about as aero as an upright bicycle wtih an aero bar. A few (low riders) are truly faster than upright bicycles. The way I look at it, recumbents and upright bicycles have approximately the same number/severity of strengths and weaknesses. For folks who simply cannot get comfortable on an upright bicycle, whether due to injury, body structure, or other reason, a recumbent may make sense. My advice is to try many different recumbents styles and put as many miles on them as possible before you buy. If you read the recumbent chat groups, you will notice that many recumbent cyclists buy new models practically as often as most of us change underwear. Think about it. Good luck. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Unhappy bentriders ?
jacques wrote:
I may consider buying a bent in the next months. I hesitate because it is expensive and I'm not sure I will really like it in the long term. I've read a lot of stuff explaining all the advantages of the bent thing. As a skeptical person I would like to have the cons too. I don't think I will find them on alt.rec.bicycles.recumbent. Is there somebody here who has owned a recumbent, not liked it, and stopped using it ? If so, why ? Try doing a Google Groups search on "recumbents" and read the first article in the list. You don't mention why you're thinking of trying a recumbent, what model recumbent you're thinking of, where you live, or what kind of riding you plan to do. My general suggestion is to do your research, which you seem to be doing, and then try as many different models (long, short, high, low, faired, unfaired) as possible before making a decision. You'll like some better than others, but they're all going to feel different. -- Bill Bushnell |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Unhappy bentriders ?
"David Kerber" wrote in message
... In article , says... I may consider buying a bent in the next months. I hesitate because it is expensive and I'm not sure I will really like it in the long term. I've read a lot of stuff explaining all the advantages of the bent thing. As a skeptical person I would like to have the cons too. I don't think I will find them on alt.rec.bicycles.recumbent. Is there somebody here who has owned a recumbent, not liked it, and stopped using it ? If so, why ? Very good question. I've owned 4 recumbents so far. They're the most fun you can have on two wheels, IMO. There are some down sides, however: - Lowered stance means reduced visibility (so get an orange flag...) - Some 'bent's are hard to pick up and carry - Harder to transport, in some cases, than upright bikes (varies a lot) - Non-standard tires are hard to find (so buy some spares) - They're pretty expensive (but so are good upright bikes) - Can't hop curbs on a 'bent - Can't stand to climb or sprint (but you can sprint) - LWB 'bents have a large turning radius (SWB's can turn on a dime) - Not welcome in roadie pelotons (due to "buzz saw" up front) - Slower when climbing hills (but only slightly) That's a pretty good outline of the possible criticisms of recumbent bikes. Recumbents vary wildly in their handling, transportability, price, performance, height, etc. They're not all alike (as uprights tend to be). Thus, it's hard to make blanket statements about them. However, I think most of the above statements are largely true for most 'bents, to varying degrees. There are exceptions to every rule, naturally. That said, I'm very glad to own and ride a recumbent (two, actually). I've owned 5 of them, including the world's fastest production bike, an M5 Low Racer (holds half a dozen world speed and distance records). My RANS Rocket is one of my favorite bikes, and always puts a smile on my face. In fact, I liked the Rocket so much that I sold the M5 Low Racer, which was a beast to ride (but fun, and fast). The next recumbent I buy will probably have underseat steering, which I prefer. I've never ridden one, but one thing which I think might bother me a bit is the lower height-of-eye, making it more difficult to see over or through other vehicles. I've found that if a vehicle is too tall for me to see over on my DF bike, I can usually see through its windows, so I'm not completely blocked. I doubt most bents would be high enough to do that. You'd be correct. It is an issue that I notice while riding 'bents, especially low racers and trikes. Whether that would be enough to turn me off of a 'bent completely, I wouldn't know without trying it. You should ride one, just to see what you think. I can almost guarantee that the ride will put a smile on your face, if nothing else. I ride 'bents mostly because they're a hoot, and because they're comfy. Oh, and they're pretty fast too. -=B=- |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Unhappy bentriders ?
Bill Bushnell wrote:
jacques wrote: I may consider buying a bent in the next months. I hesitate because it is expensive and I'm not sure I will really like it in the long term. I've read a lot of stuff explaining all the advantages of the bent thing. Another thing to think about - recumbents generally require some kind of specialized carrier for your car - they don't fit on the standard roof rack or hitch mount. -- Check out my bike blog! http://diabloscott.blogspot.com -------------------------- Posted via cyclingforums.com http://www.cyclingforums.com |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Unhappy bentriders ?
"jacques" wrote:
I may consider buying a bent in the next months. I hesitate because it is expensive and I'm not sure I will really like it in the long term. I've read a lot of stuff explaining all the advantages of the bent thing. All I can tell you is, be sure to test ride before laying down your money. I have not owned a 'bent, but I have spent long enough with two different 'bents to get to know them. The ones I tried were dreadful, with quirky and unpredictable handling characteristics that never allowed me to relax and enjoy the ride. I ride chopper bikes often, and these recumbents were worse handling than most choppers. Fortunately for you, I don't think either kind I tried is still being manufactured (one was an Infinity LWB and the other was a BikeE). Remember that there is good handling, and there is handling "you can get used to". They are not the same. Chalo Colina |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Unhappy bentriders ?
On Thu, 25 Sep 2003 19:30:58 -0500, "B. Sanders"
wrote: That said, I'm very glad to own and ride a recumbent (two, actually). I've owned 5 of them, including the world's fastest production bike, an M5 Low Racer (holds half a dozen world speed and distance records). My RANS Rocket is one of my favorite bikes, and always puts a smile on my face. In fact, I liked the Rocket so much that I sold the M5 Low Racer, which was a beast to ride (but fun, and fast). The next recumbent I buy will probably have underseat steering, which I prefer. I was in a shop yesterday and looked at the Rans Rocket. I was kinda put off by the 20" rear wheel, but I feel like it's just an visual thing with me. Are there any practical advantages to the matched 20" setup over the traditional bent wheel setup of a larger rear/smaller front? The only thing I could come up with is that the 20" rear wheel would be a little tougher, as I'm no lightweight. Why do you prefer USS? Thanks, __________________ -= ®atzofratzo =- ®emove The fleA to reply |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Unhappy bentriders ?
Are there any practical advantages to the matched 20"
You only have to carry one size spare tube. B (remove clothes to reply) |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|