Path: ...!3.eu.feeder.erje.net!feeder.erje.net!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: AMuzi Newsgroups: rec.bicycles.tech Subject: Re: New wide platform spd pedals Date: Sun, 1 Sep 2024 09:59:32 -0500 Organization: Yellow Jersey, Ltd. Lines: 114 Message-ID: References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Injection-Date: Sun, 01 Sep 2024 16:59:32 +0200 (CEST) Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="c4c706ecca62e540ab02291934f2c4f2"; logging-data="1610272"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1/ZvCq6XyDldtTBS2TaGy4x" User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Cancel-Lock: sha1:wZjnwQPJl7uYBGUm+VysEEqls74= Content-Language: en-US In-Reply-To: Bytes: 5914 On 8/31/2024 8:08 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote: > On 8/31/2024 4:07 PM, Roger Merriman wrote: >> Catrike Ryder wrote: >>> On Sat, 31 Aug 2024 08:30:45 -0700, NFN Smith >>> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> Roger Merriman wrote: >>>>>> Stranely enough, since I have stopped seeking higher >>>>>> speeds, my >>>>>> cadence has speeded up a bit, but alas, my legs do not >>>>>> acommodate high >>>>>> cadence for very long. I've gone from the low sixties >>>>>> to the low >>>>>> seventies >>>>>> >>>>> Doesn’t sound particularly mashy cadence either low 60’s >>>> >>>> Is there a difference between riding a recumbent and >>>> riding a >>>> traditional diamond frame? >>>> >>>> Smith >>> >>> big difference. Try one out. You'll see. >>> >> >> I’d assume much like traditional diamond framed bikes they >> differ >> themselves, I’ve only used myself big heavy recumbent >> tandem bikes. >> >> Do see the semi framed two wheels ones as is a racetrack >> and recumbent club >> near work! > > I've done test rides on maybe 6 or 7 various models of > recumbents. I've also had about 6 friends who, for varying > amounts of time, rode recumbents. And for a while, I owned a > low recumbent tricycle that was given to me by a friend. My > impressions: > > I found two wheel recumbents more difficult to balance than > normal bikes. I think the main reason is lower polar moment > of inertia with respect to the ground. (That's for the > engineers reading this.) A recumbent bike tends to tip > faster, just as a 6" ruler balanced on end tips much faster > than a yardstick balanced on end. (Extending that idea: I've > done test rides on at least two Ordinaries, or high wheel or > "penny farthing" bikes. They were amazingly easy to balance > at almost zero speed.) > > Long wheelbase recumbents have another balance detriment, > which is slower lateral reactions due to the long wheelbase. > But short wheelbase recumbents may react quicker laterally > than a standard upright bike. > > I didn't do any serious hill climbing on any recumbent, but > all the friends who rode them claimed they were much slower > uphill. I'm not positive of the reason, besides the typical > weight disadvantage. Since one's back is against the seat, > it seems one should be able to generate more leg force than > on an upright bike, where one's own weight is pretty much > the limit. I suspect the inability to get one's entire body > into the action is a partial explanation, but I don't know > for sure. > > I think recumbents are at a disadvantage in traffic. A low > bike is much less conspicuous. Many recumbents sport tall > "safety flags" for that reason, but I can't say how much > those might help. The low position also reduces one's view > of surrounding traffic and upcoming hazards. > > With a recumbent, hauling loads can be more of a problem, > mostly because typical panniers, bags, etc. are not designed > for them. This doesn't need to be the case (one student of > mine rode, in competition, a recumbent that won the IHPVA > "Practical Vehicle" contest one year) but as with almost > anything, custom or low production bags will be much more > expensive than standard issue bags. > > Most riders seem to feel that recumbents are more > comfortable than upright bikes. That's an advantage. > > Aerodynamics seem to be a bit better on a recumbent, but not > greatly better. The friend who rode a recumbent most > recently would coast the same speed I would when I was on my > aero bars or in a full tuck. Of course, I'd have to come out > of the tuck to pedal, when he would just resume pedaling. > But some have claimed that the churning of the out-front > cranks and legs imposes extra drag. A partial nose fairing > may help that. > > I'm told a recumbent is typically much tougher to transport > than a normal bike. (So is our tandem, BTW.) A couple of my > recumbent friends bought vans specifically to haul those bikes. > > I think a very significant point is that all my mentions of > friends riding recumbents are past tense. I don't know > anyone who rides a recumbent today. Every one of them > eventually decided the disadvantages exceeded the advantages. > > +1 to all that, good overview. I might add that when things go awry in traffic, when push comes to shove, regular bicycles have better, quicker maneuverability /in extremis/. -- Andrew Muzi am@yellowjersey.org Open every day since 1 April, 1971