ARBR has gone downhill

Sounds like describing the shape of a Jetson space vehicle! Nice
idea, but look out for the Spacelys.....
;-)
I am in the middle of putting a "roof" and smoke tint fairing (already
there) on my Catrike; and so far it has cost me $5.-roll of bendable
aluminum tubing, and a free surfboard packing foam, so that has not
been a costly project to try.

Chris Jordan
Santa Cruz, CA.

Dean Arthur wrote in message ...
What comes to mind is a rotating fairing. Fixed on the off-side to top
center and rotating from top down to fasten to rail running front to
rear on the side one mounts from. A lexan or flexible bubble on top to
provide 360 degree visibility. So many neat ideas - so little money to
try them!

(Kurt Fischer) wrote in message ...

wrote:

The Windcheetah doesn't have a very laid back seat IMO
though it has fairly aerodynamic steering. Dunno how much there is
to the trike's reputation of being a speedy vehicle.

The other name of the (faired) Windcheetah was "Speedy", that should
tell something about its reputation. ;-)

As far as I remember the most common vehicles in hpv-racing in UK for
quite a while were Windcheetahs and Kingcycles, but Dave surely is more
competent to tell about it.

For a more recent record of the WC see:
http://www.windcheetah.co.uk/record.htm

Regards,
Kurt

Kurt, I have decided not to get into any more discussions with the
go-fast contingent here an ARBR because I do not fall into that group
and it may be that I do not know what I am talking about. I have
enormous respect for those who are able to go fast on their bikes but
they may as well be from another planet as far as I am concerned.

I am a go-slow recumbent rider and I do not understand what all the
hype is about. I have often thought that the chief advantage of a
recumbent bike is that you can go slow and there are no downsides to
it as far as the comfort factor is concerned. That is not necessarily
true with uprights. And so I go slow and am comfortable forever. I
think I spend more time on my bike as a result of the comfort factor
and so I reap the benefits of health and fitness just the same as
those who go fast. But I ride mainly for the fun of it. If it weren't
for that factor, I would never ride at all.

Ed Dolan - Minnesota

Edward Dolan wrote:

I am a go-slow recumbent rider and I do not understand what all the
hype is about. I have often thought that the chief advantage of a
recumbent bike is that you can go slow and there are no downsides to
it as far as the comfort factor is concerned. That is not necessarily
true with uprights. And so I go slow and am comfortable forever. I
think I spend more time on my bike as a result of the comfort factor
and so I reap the benefits of health and fitness just the same as
those who go fast. But I ride mainly for the fun of it. If it weren't
for that factor, I would never ride at all.

I'm also not a racer and I've always considered comfort the biggest
advantage of recumbents. The German HPV association was founded in 1985
and from the beginning there were quarrels and animosities between two
different groups.
On the one side the "speed freaks", who were simply into racing and
going fast at all costs, and on the other side riders with beards and
Birkenstocks(sandals) who rode their recumbents for every-day-use,
mainly concerned about environmental issues.
Of course that's a vast simplification, but probably you will get the
point.
I'm sure the energy lost in these quarrels could have been used more
intelligent in letting the others be and riding more for the own
pleasure. ;-)

However, in the medias recumbents almost always were associated with
speed, aerodynamics and records, which led to a very annoying
side-effect. Many times I ended up chased down by almost anybody on two
wheels, trying to keep up with or to overtake one of these "incredibly
fast" vehicles. Sometimes I got the feeling I had to prove something and
to defend the reputation of recumbents by riding fast, or even
"incredibly" fast, and that can get quite tiresome on a 50+lbs LWB or
trike in a hilly region. ;-)

Meanwhile I don't care anymore. I ride as fast or as slow as I want and
ignore riders trying to challenge me. The vast majority of cyclists is
not into speed, they simply want to ride along and have their fun. This
group will look at moderate recumbents, preferably with suspension and a
seat position like an easy-chair.

Of course there are also more competitive riders, who are into speed and
lightweight. Highracers and lowracers for them, to each their own. But
even on the really fast models it's possible to ride comparably
comfortable and to enjoy simply the view on the surroundings at a slower
pace, that's IMO a unique feature of recumbents.

So I don't see why there should be any longer animosities between these
groups. Each will attract different people and after all there should be
room enough for all of them.


Regards,
Kurt

Edward Dolan wrote:


I am ashamed of my tactics sometimes but the American liberal contingent
here deserve no less. It is kill or be killed.

Okay, I see your point now. Good luck! And may the toughest [1] survive.
;-)

Regards,
Kurt


[1] recumbent rider, that is, of course. ;-)

(Kurt Fischer) wrote in message ...
However, in the medias recumbents almost always were associated with
speed, aerodynamics and records, which led to a very annoying
side-effect. Many times I ended up chased down by almost anybody on two
wheels, trying to keep up with or to overtake one of these "incredibly
fast" vehicles. Sometimes I got the feeling I had to prove something and
to defend the reputation of recumbents by riding fast, or even
"incredibly" fast, and that can get quite tiresome on a 50+lbs LWB or
trike in a hilly region. ;-)

If it wasn't for speed freaks the recumbent movement would have never
taken off. The quest for top speed and breaking barriers like the
DuPont prize is what captured the medias attention in the first place.
Thats how a lot of you found out about recumbents and it's progessed
from there. A case can be made where the IHPVA set the sport back
years by ignoring fast bikes for bikes that can carry luggage just so
they could try and convince people that recumbents were all purpose
vehicles. Just simply boring...you don't get many articles on how much
milk you can carry on a bike. However, go 81mph and now you get
peoples attention.
Freddy

wrote:



If it wasn't for speed freaks the recumbent movement would have never
taken off.

I hope you didn't misinterpret my post, Freddy. It was not my intention
to mock at the racing crowd, I just can't see any sense in animosities
between the fast and the slow riders. They could get along very well
with each other, most probably they will even profit from each other.


The quest for top speed and breaking barriers like the DuPont prize is what
captured the medias attention in the first place.

Yes, that's one side of the medal. In Germany it was Wolfgang Gronen,
building up a racing team around the three-wheeled Vector imported from
America. It's speed was hard to beat in the eighties and the beginning
nineties.

But on the other side don't forget David Gordon Miller's AVATAR 2000.
AFAIR it was planned and built under the aspects of safety, not with
speed in mind. This LWB was the ancestor of the first available
recumbents in Germany: Radius, Pichler and FATEBA(Suisse) being the most
prominent manufacturers. So on the streets recumbency in Germany started
with quite slow, heavy and minor aerodynamic recumbents, appropriate for
touring, commuting and recreational rides. Real racers were a
diminishing minority till the birth of the first lowracers like the
Kreuzotter, the ancient Flux Z-Pro or the Aeroproject ultralow.

Since the German HPV-Club was not willing and/or not able to support the
racing scene sufficiently, a racing club was founded:
http://www.speedbikebgl.de/
Open for all racing enthusiasts, not only recumbents. Meanwhile a
considerable racing scene has formed, including race series and regular
training sessions at velodromes.


Thats how a lot of you found out about recumbents and it's progessed
from there. A case can be made where the IHPVA set the sport back
years by ignoring fast bikes for bikes that can carry luggage just so
they could try and convince people that recumbents were all purpose
vehicles. Just simply boring...you don't get many articles on how much
milk you can carry on a bike. However, go 81mph and now you get
peoples attention.

Yes, that's true. People are fascinated by speed, but these high-speed
events like Battle Mountain correspond with Formula I in Indianapolis,
they are not that relevant for riding on the roads and streets, and
that's what most of us want to do. So you need both: Fast vehicles
attracting public attention and showing the speed potential of
recumbents and riders on more moderate recumbents, appropriate for
touring and commuting in traffic and on public roads.

The upcoming highracers could be a welcomed compromise: They are fast
and aero enough to attract the interest of roadies and "civilized"
enough for daily use. BTW, your Stiletto could be another synthesis of
speed on the one and moderate handling on the other hand.

After all, you don't have to be a racer to fall in love with a light and
fast bike. ;-)

Kurt

It's not just for Formula One anymore!
I used this years Battle Mt. event to see what we, Coyote & I, could
do speed wise. My focus has primarily been on finding the streamliner
that is both fast and useful.
The posts seem to reflect polar views,.... speedbikes = everyday
uselessness and practical vehicles don't have much speed potential.
Rotator built a hybred called the Coyote years ago and I have ridden
it over 15,000 miles during it's 12 years. Club rides, week long
tours, century rides, and just to town. It fullfills my needs as a
commuter bike nicely. It also went 54 mph at Battle Mt. Next year I
will over inflate the tires like everyone else and hope I'm fit enough
for 60 mph!
World record top speeds are great but it's so esoteric that it will
never be for more than a select few.
It is a shame that so few have had or even want the experience of
full streamlined biking. There are a handful of riders out there that
know what it's like and it's a completely different beast, both good
and bad.
It's interesting that people can disect the height of the bottom
bracket, seat position, USS, ASS, and god knows what else, but the one
thing that would return the most performance, comfort, and possibly be
the next evolutionary stage for cycling is conspicuously absent!

(Kurt Fischer) wrote in message ...
[...]
After all, you don't have to be a racer to fall in love with a light and
fast bike. ;-)

Kurt


Kurt, you have had the last word on this subject because you, like Fox
News, are fair and balanced. If you ever decide to publish a
newsletter on recumbents I will be the first to subscribe. I have
always greatly admired Robert Bryant's RCN publication because he has
always had a very balanced view of the recumbent scene. Without
balance, we would all of us go astray.

Regards,

Ed Dolan - Minnesota

Jay wrote:

Actually ALL media articles that I have been involved in focused entirely in
discussing non-speed qualities of my 7 recumbents (ie. comfort, hauling
ability, ease of use, adaptability for disabilities, etc)
So far, that involved media ( radio, TV , film, internet and print) in
Canada, the USA and Australia.

Maybe due to the fact that you're a woman? ;-)

Also, when it comes to trikes, people seem to be more prone to realize
their advantages concerning safety and utility than for example looking
at comparably low two-wheeled recumbents. While seeing the stability and
practicability for every-day use, many of them are surprised that trikes
don't have to be slow at all.

I see one big disadvantage in advertising recumbents via high speed and
superior aerodynamics: Most available recumbents don't have
significantly better aerodynamics than racing-bikes, so the customers
soon will realize they still have to pedal and are far from reaching
effortless speeds of 30 miles per hour or more. Even a very fast bike
needs in the first line a strong rider to go fast, so I don't consider
it a good idea to waken unrealistic expectations which will lead
inevitably to frustrations.

Comfort and fun - on the other hand - are hard to beat and nearly
impossible to deny, the famous recumbent grin says it all. ;-)


Regards,
Kurt

dogboy wrote:

It's not just for Formula One anymore!
I used this years Battle Mt. event to see what we, Coyote & I, could
do speed wise. My focus has primarily been on finding the streamliner
that is both fast and useful.

I'm glad to hear that, high speed certainly attracts attention, but most
of the involved vehicles are far from being practical for riding on the
streets, esp. riding head first looking in mirrors. ;-)


The posts seem to reflect polar views,.... speedbikes = everyday
uselessness and practical vehicles don't have much speed potential.

I consider it one of the biggest advantages of recumbents that you don't
have to decide between these two goals, you can have them both - records
left aside. Best example in my eyes are tail boxes. Able to carry
luggage and making the bike faster - if formed properly.
Most riders of the Kreuzotter low racer didn't use it only for racing,
but also for commuting and touring. And looking at the carbon Kreuzotter
you will see another possibility for combining speed and utility: The
rear part of the frame serves as fender and luggage rack for Radical
bags and the wheel fairing keeps away water and improves aerodynamics.
And - not to forget - it looks good, at least to me. ;-)
http://www.kreuzotter.de/english/eko5pur.htm


Rotator built a hybred called the Coyote years ago and I have ridden
it over 15,000 miles during it's 12 years.

Any pictures?

Club rides, week long tours, century rides, and just to town. It fullfills my
needs as a commuter bike nicely. It also went 54 mph at Battle Mt. Next year I
will over inflate the tires like everyone else and hope I'm fit enough for 60
mph!

Good luck!



It is a shame that so few have had or even want the experience of
full streamlined biking. There are a handful of riders out there that
know what it's like and it's a completely different beast, both good
and bad.
It's interesting that people can disect the height of the bottom
bracket, seat position, USS, ASS, and god knows what else, but the one
thing that would return the most performance, comfort, and possibly be
the next evolutionary stage for cycling is conspicuously absent!

Velomobiles seem to catch on quite well in the Netherlands, some of them
are real streamliners, on some designs the head is outside. But all of
them are rather pricey and not easy available. I suspect in our hilly
region they would lose quite a lot of their speed potential, of course
weather
protection still remaining a reason for buying. I'm guessing we're
standing just at the beginning here, in a few years probably
streamliners will be far more common than today.

Regards,
Kurt