Comfy performance bikes

[Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman]

Doug Cimper wrote:
> Luigi de Guzman wrote:
>>
>> My ass isn't exactly the same as yours; why should my saddle be?
>
> Believe it or not--there are bicycles that basically only come available
> with ONE seat, and that seat is comfortable enough for the vast majority
> of humanity.
>
> The RANS Zenetic is one such bicycle (although I think there are plastic
> and carbon-fiber versions, so I suppose that's two seats).

I doubt that the Zenetic seat is as comfortable as the one on my RANS
Rocket.

--
Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia
The weather is here, wish you were beautiful

--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

 

[Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman]

Luigi de Guzman wrote:
> On Mon, 09 Jul 2007 11:14:56 -0500, Doug Cimper wrote:
>
>> Luigi de Guzman wrote:
>>> My ass isn't exactly the same as yours; why should my saddle be?
>>>
>> Believe it or not--there are bicycles that basically only come available
>> with ONE seat, and that seat is comfortable enough for the vast majority
>> of humanity.
>>
>> The RANS Zenetic is one such bicycle (although I think there are plastic
>> and carbon-fiber versions, so I suppose that's two seats).
>> ~
>
> RANS recumbents are not universally available. I can't justify the
> additional cost and hassle (won't fit on bike racks on buses/cars/trains,
> etc.)

Er, the RANS Zenetic is a "crank forward" upright, not a recumbent:
<http://www.ransbikes.com/07ZTour.htm>.

> They're perfectly sensible bicycles, I'm sure, but the fact is that saddle
> pain is not a problem if you learn to set up your (diamond-frame) bicycle
> correctly.

For many this may be true. For those who it is not, they likely give up
on cycling, which is unfortunate.

> In my case, it's a cheap fix: study, some time with an allen wrench, and
> off I go.

The proper generic term is "hex key" (right "gotbent").

--
Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia
The weather is here, wish you were beautiful


--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

 

[DougC]

Luigi de Guzman wrote:
>
> RANS recumbents are not universally available. I can't justify the
> additional cost and hassle (won't fit on bike racks on buses/cars/trains,
> etc.)
>
If you are one who is having comfort issues on a normal bike and you go
and buy another normal bike, you're going to get the same old aches and
pains. Bikes that LOOK the same, HURT the same to ride. Buying a
more-expensive bike doesn't even help; expensive bikes are lighter, but
they're not any more comfortable.

As for the bike rack issue, some have said these bikes fit into a
regular bike rack if you flip the front wheel around backwards--but for
many people, the transportation aspect may not even be an issue at all.

> They're perfectly sensible bicycles, I'm sure, but the fact is that saddle
> pain is not a problem if you learn to set up your (diamond-frame) bicycle
> correctly.
>

Sorry, not true.
We will know the bike companies have figured out how to make a
comfortable saddle when all the bike shops stop selling padded shorts.

> In my case, it's a cheap fix: study, some time with an allen wrench, and
> off I go.
>

How many riders in the TdF are using padded shorts this year?
Why don't you drop on by pre-race and bring your allen wrench, since
they seem to be too stupid to figure out things themselves.....
~

 

[Booker C. Bense]

In article <[email protected]>, DougC <[email protected]> wrote:

>
>How many riders in the TdF are using padded shorts this year?
>Why don't you drop on by pre-race and bring your allen wrench, since
>they seem to be too stupid to figure out things themselves.....
>~

I'm sorry Doug, but that just won't do. We have standards here at
rec.bicycling.* and if you wish to hold the position of resident
recumbent crank, you're going to have to do much better. Your
posts have gotten repetive and boring, they lack style and panache.
The padded shorts thing just isn't working in the long run. I
suggest adding some black helicopters and a touch of "UCI
conspiracy" to your posts.

It might be helpful to spend some time at the google archives
studying some of the master works of previous holders of the
position...

_ Booker C. Bense

 

[DougC]

Booker C. Bense wrote:
>
> I'm sorry Doug, but that just won't do. We have standards here at
> rec.bicycling.* and if you wish to hold the position of resident
> recumbent crank, you're going to have to do much better. Your
> posts have gotten repetive and boring, they lack style and panache.

I'd have engaged Luigi in a debate, but he doesn't seem to have ever
owned or even tried riding the bicycle in question, or anything like it.

The solution he offered was was "ride with [your] hands on the brake
hoods"... I haven't rode a Zenetic, but I do own a Fusion and I can say
that the difference goes way beyond "riding a regular bike on the hoods".

> The padded shorts thing just isn't working in the long run.
>

Yea, I know--it didn't work for me either. That's why I switched to
bicycles that don't require them.
~

 

[Luigi de Guzman]

On Tue, 10 Jul 2007 19:03:35 -0500, DougC wrote:

>
> The solution he offered was was "ride with [your] hands on the brake
> hoods"... I haven't rode a Zenetic, but I do own a Fusion and I can say
> that the difference goes way beyond "riding a regular bike on the hoods".

Don't get your shorts--padded or otherwise--in a twist. My reference to
my setup and riding position was just so you'd know where I was coming
from. It's hardly a *solution* for *you*. It's the set-up I like and
prefer and find actually very comfortable, thanks very much.

Obviously nothing short of a recumbent gets you on two wheels. More power
(and less wind resistance!) to you. If your preferred bicycle puts a grin
on your face without putting a crease in your shorts, then I'm happy for
you.

What I don't understand is the need to grimace with rage when anyone
suggests that one might be comfortable on anything but a recumbent
bicycle. I am comfortable enough on my ride to ride it all day with
a smile on my face--even in liquorbike clothes. If you don't believe
that, I don't know what else to tell you.

Would I like to try a recumbent one of these days? Sure, if the price is
right. I'm familiar with the usual upsides--comfort, aerodynamics, and so
forth. Many designs really intrigue me.


But here's the kicker: the barrier to entry is pretty high. Recumbents
are more expensive compared to comparable conventional diamond-frame
bicycles. And, again, since nothing compels me to consider a recumbent--I
get by very well with diamond-frame uprights--it's not a priority. If,
however, I was unable to ride anything but a recumbent for whatever
reason, it's a simple choice: I'd get the recumbent. I'd hate not to be
able to ride a bicycle *at all*.

Now you can argue till you're blue in the face about the reasons why
recumbents aren't more widespread--UCI conspiracies and the rest of it.
But none of that wishful thinking translates into dollars in my pocket or
shooting pains in my backside--the two things which, jointly or singly,
would make me consider a new type of bicycle.

=-Luigi

--
Luigi de Guzman
http://ouij.livejournal.com