|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
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
|
|||
|
|||
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
|
|||
|
|||
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
|
|||
|
|||
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
|
|||
|
|||
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
|
|||
|
|||
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
|
|||
|
|||
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
|
|||
|
|||
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
|
|||
|
|||
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 | |
|
|
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 09:32 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 |