Speed: LWB vs SWB

Don, Rans HAS the potential for such a performance bike, (26/20 Ti Tailwind)
BUT... Well I don't want to insult any Church Of Rans Parishioners out
there.
EZ Biker :-) Pompano Beach, Fl. (GRR Ti and SOON, Bacchetta Aero Pilot)



"Don" wrote in message
om...
EZ, That would NOT do it for me. Seat is already too high with 20/20
wheels.

"EZ Biker :-)" wrote in message
...
cbb, I actually had an M5 low racer for a couple of months. Nice bike,
great
speed, BUT TOO LOW for the in city streets here in South Florida, that I
ride. Nearly got run over 4+ times, on one particular ride, going down
A1A.
EZ Biker :-) Pompano Beach, Fl. (GRR Ti and SOON, Bacchetta Aero Pilot)


"cbb" wrote in message
om...
If you feel the need for speed then go low.

I own an Optima Baron but the only time I don't feel like someone can
possibly not see me is in a crowded parking lot, haven't had a problem yet
on city streets, if anything it appears to be the opposite, people slow down
and look...and look...

"EZ Biker :-)" wrote in message
...
cbb, I actually had an M5 low racer for a couple of months. Nice bike,
great
speed, BUT TOO LOW for the in city streets here in South Florida, that I
ride. Nearly got run over 4+ times, on one particular ride, going down
A1A.
EZ Biker :-) Pompano Beach, Fl. (GRR Ti and SOON, Bacchetta Aero Pilot)


"cbb" wrote in message
om...
If you feel the need for speed then go low.

I own an Optima Baron but the only time I don't feel like someone can
possibly not see me is in a crowded parking lot, haven't had a problem yet
on city streets, if anything it appears to be the opposite, people slow down
and look...and look...

.....That would NOT do it for me (Tailwind). Seat is already too high
with 20/20
wheels. The BB is also--I am planning for my old age. I know that
when I sat on a GRR it felt so right. Of course, when I rode it, it
felt so (wrong)long and ornery. I opted for a Giro instead. Someday
some company (maybe a brand new company) will make a quality mid or
CLB that can rival a GRR in performance but be shorter than a school
bus....

You want a low seat and low bb on a CLWB? We this might work if you
make the bike for someone under 5' tall. If you are average height,
in order to have a low seat and low bb, you will have to have the
wheel base of a "school bus".

So you opted for a Giro? Huh? ... Well, the seat is no lower than a
Tailwind, and the BB is way higher! ... I don't get it.

As far as a CLWB performance bent: If you want a fast 20/26 Tailwind,
it will need a longer wheelbase or a higher seat in order to
accomidate the 26" rear wheel. The longer wheelbase will make it into
a LWB. The higher seat will be bad for performance. The only
advantage to such a bike would be if you like the seat/BB ratio.

RANS already has a couple of high performance LWB 20/26" recumbents.
If you want a low BB, get the Stratus. If you want a higher BB, get
the V-2. I would imagine that either would be faster than a 20/26
Tailwind. [Note, I have owned both a Tailwind and a Stratus, and have
ridden a V-2 a few timed. Results - Tailwind: Fast. - Stratus:
Faster. - V-2: Fastest.]

As an additional note, the new RANS LWB bents may no longer feel so
"long" with the new bar options.

.....That would NOT do it for me (Tailwind). Seat is already too high
with 20/20
wheels. The BB is also--I am planning for my old age. I know that
when I sat on a GRR it felt so right. Of course, when I rode it, it
felt so (wrong)long and ornery. I opted for a Giro instead. Someday
some company (maybe a brand new company) will make a quality mid or
CLB that can rival a GRR in performance but be shorter than a school
bus....

You want a low seat and low bb on a CLWB? We this might work if you
make the bike for someone under 5' tall. If you are average height,
in order to have a low seat and low bb, you will have to have the
wheel base of a "school bus".

So you opted for a Giro? Huh? ... Well, the seat is no lower than a
Tailwind, and the BB is way higher! ... I don't get it.

As far as a CLWB performance bent: If you want a fast 20/26 Tailwind,
it will need a longer wheelbase or a higher seat in order to
accomidate the 26" rear wheel. The longer wheelbase will make it into
a LWB. The higher seat will be bad for performance. The only
advantage to such a bike would be if you like the seat/BB ratio.

RANS already has a couple of high performance LWB 20/26" recumbents.
If you want a low BB, get the Stratus. If you want a higher BB, get
the V-2. I would imagine that either would be faster than a 20/26
Tailwind. [Note, I have owned both a Tailwind and a Stratus, and have
ridden a V-2 a few timed. Results - Tailwind: Fast. - Stratus:
Faster. - V-2: Fastest.]

As an additional note, the new RANS LWB bents may no longer feel so
"long" with the new bar options.

I'm with the desenters on the low racer thing. Even after I had my Speed
Machine Clone dialed in, I wasn't comfortable on the road. The low, laid
back position made startup and looking back difficult for me.

More power to those who are not bothered by this. The higher position of a
highracer cures these problems. Plus, the easy rolling nature of those large
700C wheels is real nice. I think I'm a convert. (

But, being fickle, I MAY just jump on the next fad to come through also.

Parts are stacking up for a 20/20 FWD low racer. I'm thinking full
streamlining. For trail only use.

I will travel 20 miles in an hour before I die.



--
Miles of Smiles,

Tom Blum
Winter Haven, Florida
Homebuilts: SWB
Tour Easy Clone
Speed Machine Clone
High Racer Clone
www.gate.net/~teblum

I'm with the desenters on the low racer thing. Even after I had my Speed
Machine Clone dialed in, I wasn't comfortable on the road. The low, laid
back position made startup and looking back difficult for me.

More power to those who are not bothered by this. The higher position of a
highracer cures these problems. Plus, the easy rolling nature of those large
700C wheels is real nice. I think I'm a convert. (

But, being fickle, I MAY just jump on the next fad to come through also.

Parts are stacking up for a 20/20 FWD low racer. I'm thinking full
streamlining. For trail only use.

I will travel 20 miles in an hour before I die.



--
Miles of Smiles,

Tom Blum
Winter Haven, Florida
Homebuilts: SWB
Tour Easy Clone
Speed Machine Clone
High Racer Clone
www.gate.net/~teblum

"Tom Blum" wrote in message ...
I'm with the desenters on the low racer thing. Even after I had my Speed
Machine Clone dialed in, I wasn't comfortable on the road. The low, laid
back position made startup and looking back difficult for me.

More power to those who are not bothered by this. The higher position of a
highracer cures these problems. Plus, the easy rolling nature of those large
700C wheels is real nice. I think I'm a convert. (

I don't quite understand. What made you uncomfortable, on the road,
on the Speed Machine clone. Was it the overall height of the bike,
which is higher that a true lowracer, or was it the seatin position
which you said made startup and looking back difficult?

I ride a lowracer, and have ridden a highracer, and personally feel
stopping and startup is easier on the lowracer. Admittedly, with more
experience on a highracer, I would probably be more comfortable
starting and stopping but I find dropping one leg to the ground on a
lowracer, or just putting down one hand, to be much easier than
dropping one leg, twice the distance, on a highracer. Same with
starting. If just dropping a hand and staying clipped in, it is quite
easy to start pedalling a lowracer from a stop. If starting from a
dropped leg, I find it easier to raise the leg the shorter distance to
clip in than the highracer requires.

As far as looking back is concerned, I can see no difference. A
highracer, using the same seat, with a similar seating angle as a
lowracer, offers no better rear viewing than on a lowracer, that I
could discern. I didn't feel that the higher overall height of the
highracer was enough to offer any better rear view. The angle of the
head and neck is what makes turning one's head rearwaed difficult and
that is virtually the same on both styles of bikes.

Being comfortable with overall height is a different matter. Some
people will never feel comfortable with the low height of a lowracer,
though I do find it interesting that some I have spoken with are
uncomfortable about the height of a lowracer, but have no problem with
a trike, which can be just as low. Obviously, there are other
perceptions influencing these people. Also, the roads and traffic one
normally rides can have an influence. Still, I believe it mainly
comes down to one's individual perception of how visible and
therefore, how safe, they are on a lowracer.

Harry Jiles

"Tom Blum" wrote in message ...
I'm with the desenters on the low racer thing. Even after I had my Speed
Machine Clone dialed in, I wasn't comfortable on the road. The low, laid
back position made startup and looking back difficult for me.

More power to those who are not bothered by this. The higher position of a
highracer cures these problems. Plus, the easy rolling nature of those large
700C wheels is real nice. I think I'm a convert. (

I don't quite understand. What made you uncomfortable, on the road,
on the Speed Machine clone. Was it the overall height of the bike,
which is higher that a true lowracer, or was it the seatin position
which you said made startup and looking back difficult?

I ride a lowracer, and have ridden a highracer, and personally feel
stopping and startup is easier on the lowracer. Admittedly, with more
experience on a highracer, I would probably be more comfortable
starting and stopping but I find dropping one leg to the ground on a
lowracer, or just putting down one hand, to be much easier than
dropping one leg, twice the distance, on a highracer. Same with
starting. If just dropping a hand and staying clipped in, it is quite
easy to start pedalling a lowracer from a stop. If starting from a
dropped leg, I find it easier to raise the leg the shorter distance to
clip in than the highracer requires.

As far as looking back is concerned, I can see no difference. A
highracer, using the same seat, with a similar seating angle as a
lowracer, offers no better rear viewing than on a lowracer, that I
could discern. I didn't feel that the higher overall height of the
highracer was enough to offer any better rear view. The angle of the
head and neck is what makes turning one's head rearwaed difficult and
that is virtually the same on both styles of bikes.

Being comfortable with overall height is a different matter. Some
people will never feel comfortable with the low height of a lowracer,
though I do find it interesting that some I have spoken with are
uncomfortable about the height of a lowracer, but have no problem with
a trike, which can be just as low. Obviously, there are other
perceptions influencing these people. Also, the roads and traffic one
normally rides can have an influence. Still, I believe it mainly
comes down to one's individual perception of how visible and
therefore, how safe, they are on a lowracer.

Harry Jiles

Harryo,

Those who love them just don't understand those who don't.

I don't hate the bike, it's just wasn't ideal for me. It also wasn't faster
than the tour easy, for some combination of factors that I never figured
out.

It sits too high to do the 'just drop a hand" trick. The low overall stance
results in low moment of inertia. I have a bit of trouble getting started.

On the high racer, I can easily swing forward and put my feet down. This
lets me look around 'normally'. the higher position results in slower
tipping (higher moment of inertia).

I'm not saying I "just couldn't" ride the thing. I'm saying that since it
wasn't faster than my tour easy clone, why bother.


--
Miles of Smiles,

Tom Blum
Winter Haven, Florida
Homebuilts: SWB
Tour Easy Clone
Speed Machine Clone
High Racer Clone
www.gate.net/~teblum