Warning: mysqli::__construct(): (HY000/1203): User howardkn already has more than 'max_user_connections' active connections in D:\Inetpub\vhosts\howardknight.net\al.howardknight.net\includes\artfuncs.php on line 21
Failed to connect to MySQL: (1203) User howardkn already has more than 'max_user_connections' active connections
Warning: mysqli::query(): Couldn't fetch mysqli in D:\Inetpub\vhosts\howardknight.net\al.howardknight.net\index.php on line 66
Article <vb0eqj$17bvt$1@dont-email.me>
Deutsch   English   Français   Italiano  
<vb0eqj$17bvt$1@dont-email.me>

View for Bookmarking (what is this?)
Look up another Usenet article

Path: ...!feeds.phibee-telecom.net!news.mixmin.net!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Frank Krygowski <frkrygow@sbcglobal.net>
Newsgroups: rec.bicycles.tech
Subject: Re: New wide platform spd pedals
Date: Sat, 31 Aug 2024 21:08:35 -0400
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 87
Message-ID: <vb0eqj$17bvt$1@dont-email.me>
References: <kt63dj9hvaba7faaff8sv6vp2eplqi7atq@4ax.com>
 <wXjAO.19613$I0k6.2152@fx02.ams4>
 <s8m3dj9b4ikb49qtvothiofmk3pcchteiq@4ax.com>
 <o_kAO.154478$rzOa.37837@fx13.ams4> <vavcv6$12b78$1@dont-email.me>
 <h4l6djp7li296raj3t3mklij8sgh0c4fod@4ax.com>
 <mKKAO.150637$I0k6.86260@fx02.ams4>
Reply-To: frkrygow@gmail.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Sun, 01 Sep 2024 03:08:36 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="c6bbbb1c4dc04d53fa8a0e75c9842edd";
	logging-data="1290237"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX19LMM5zS9EhtndEjLP24zcqGMT+QYu6cSE="
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:Z/qdXUsWaKWk9inKL83MGH5n/ec=
In-Reply-To: <mKKAO.150637$I0k6.86260@fx02.ams4>
Content-Language: en-US
Bytes: 5436

On 8/31/2024 4:07 PM, Roger Merriman wrote:
> Catrike Ryder <Soloman@old.bikers.org> wrote:
>> On Sat, 31 Aug 2024 08:30:45 -0700, NFN Smith <worldoff9908@gmail.com>
>> 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.


-- 
- Frank Krygowski