Disc Brakes Are Amazing!!!

[[email protected]]

On 12 May 2006 15:14:28 -0700, "Tuschinski"
<[email protected]> wrote:

>Actually Carl... These numbers are rather favorable to the Bents.
>
>1. A RACE-upright ridden with hands in the drops marginably beats a
>Commuter-bent. How long can you ride with your hands in the drops? I am
>a pretty good cyclists (decent course experience) and I cannot ride a
>whole hour in the drops on my course-bike without getting
>uncomfortable. Even pro's dont ride hours upon ends in the drops.

[snip]

Dear T.,

I tend to think of my upright as a touring bike, not a
racer. Someone will probably remind us that one advantage of
an upright touring bike is that you can ride on the drops,
on the hoods, on the bars, or sitting up no-hands, while a
recumbent offers pretty much only one position.

But I ride on the drops pretty much all the time, barring
the rare tailwind as I head up the ridge west of town on my
daily ride. It's only only 45-50 minutes at my normal pace,
but I occasionally do it twice a day, once with visiting
friends who like the scenery, and then again lest my
spreadsheet suffer from lack of data.

I never found standing up and bending over on trials
motorcycles uncomfortable, either, even on long trail rides,
probably because that's what I grew up riding.

Cheers,

Carl Fogel

 

[Peter Clinch]

Tuschinski wrote:

> To Pete: Compare a Trek 600 city bike against the bents you mention.
> Bent vs. uprights is always apples and oranges, but at least compare
> racing models or commuter models, dont mix and match.

Though my point was "Buy an M5, they're fast" is giving someone a
mixed crate of apples and opranges and saying "this fruit is
juicier than those pears"! "M5" as a collective brand /is/ mix and
match (as is Optima, Challenge, HP vel, Nazca etc. etc.)

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 [email protected] http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/

 

[Qui si parla Campagnolo]

Gary wrote:
> I also have a couple of uprights and they are comfortable for the first
> few minutes and then I can't stand to ride them. My recumbents are
> definately more comfortable. Not only that but, I don't have to worry
> about my prostate like I would on an upright. I know that there are
> riders out there that have ridden uprights all of there lives and never
> had a problem just like there are people that have smoked all of their
> lives and never had a problem but, why take the chance?
> Gary

Here we go.....riding an upright is like smoking and also causes
cancer......I'm out


>
>
> Peter Clinch wrote:
> > Qui si parla Campagnolo wrote:
> >
> > > I always read 'bent threads because I can always count on the last
> > > statement.....uprights by definition, are not 'uncomfortable' and the
> > > older you get(I'm 55), it is not automatically important that you get a
> > > 'bent....My upright is comfy, I see no need to get a bent because of my
> > > upright's comfort or my age...
> >
> > While I have several upright bikes that I ride happily in comfort, the
> > simple fact of the matter is my 'bent is considerably /more/
> > comfortable. While I do not *need* that level of comfort, it is
> > certainly something I greatly appreciate when covering any sort of distance.
> >
> > Given the choice of something quite comfortable or extremely
> > comfortable, assuming both will otherwise do the jobs I need and I can
> > afford my preference, I see no reason to put up with 2nd best when it
> > makes a difference to my overall enjoyment of touring.
> >
> > 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 [email protected] http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/

 

[Qui si parla Campagnolo]

Edward Dolan wrote:
> "Qui si parla Campagnolo" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
> >
> > Edward Dolan wrote:
> >> "NYC XYZ" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> >> news:[email protected]...
> >> [...]
> >> > * Speed sucks!!! I'm over 5 mph slower than my upright! This is
> >> > definitely the case. With a change of tires and more developed
> >> > 'bent-muscles that might narrow a mile or two, but unfortunately I'll
> >> > always be far slower than on an upright. Sigh!
> >>
> >> You will always be somewhat slower on a recumbent than you will be on an
> >> upright, all things being equal. However, some recumbent riders actually
> >> do
> >> get faster than they ever were on their uprights, but that is because
> >> they
> >> ride their recumbents more and hence get stronger. But overall it is more
> >> work to go fast on a recumbent, especially uphill.
> >>
> >> For many years when I wanted a good workout I would ride my upright in
> >> preference to my recumbent, but eventually I settled on the recumbent as
> >> it
> >> was just more enjoyable to ride.
> >> [...]
> >>
> >> > * A real work-out! I still haven't met a hill I can't yet climb on the
> >> > 'bent, but I am definitely breathing harder -- and I'm a B-grade
> >> > athelete! I enjoy the work-out, but it's rather embarrassing huffing
> >> > and puffing, giving a less-than-stellar impression of the 'bent.
> >>
> >> You will be much slower going uphill on a recumbent. I have known several
> >> guys who gave up on recumbents for precisely that one reason. I would
> >> rather
> >> be slow and comfortable than fast and uncomfortable. The older you get,
> >> the
> >> more important this becomes.
> >
> > I always read 'bent threads because I can always count on the last
> > statement.....uprights by definition, are not 'uncomfortable' and the
> > older you get(I'm 55), it is not automatically important that you get a
> > 'bent....My upright is comfy, I see no need to get a bent because of my
> > upright's comfort or my age...
>
> Ride your upright for about 8 hours a day for an entire week and then get
> back to me on the comfort issue.

Silly point...how many people ride 40 hrs per week?

I can ride for 4 hours, easily, many timer per week...and it is NOT
uncomfortable..riding any more isn't a comfort issue but cycling
stength issue, I'm just not strong enough to ride 40 hrs per week,
being on a 'bent' wouldn't change that, still gotta pedal the thing.

But if like yer bent, groovey, I would rather walk than ride one. I
broke my back 4 years ago-L1, L3, C-5, after getting hit by a pickup
from behind, while riding...and my quack mentioned it might be a 'bent
only for me...I said then, I'll walk, thanks...but I can ride my
upright w/o any problem or issues...
>
> Regards,
>
> Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
> aka
> Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota

 

[Tuschinski]

Qui si Parla,

I'm talking about a Racer, with a horizontal back position (in the
drops). There are very very few people in the peloton who comfortably
ride like that for longer periods with no problems. With a low-rider
bent the position is always aerodynamically good.

I do not like bents, but I do comment that a bent should be faster on
the flats and that the shown list proves that(while the insinuation was
that it wasn't shown). I add to that that the "in the drops" position
isn't used as much as the on the hoods. Sure, there are limber riders
who can keep that position for hours, but that's rare.

For the record, I am racing courses on a decent level, so I am more an
upright racer than anything else

Peter,

Agreed, I was simplifying there, but I remain to say that a similar
purpose bent(so race vs. race) should be a tad faster. And yeah, a bent
ain't the second coming Everyone their own preference! And mine is...
upright racer all the way. But that wasn't the point of the
discusion/question, wich was surprise that a bent was slower than an
upright on the flats.

 

[[email protected]]

Edward Dolan wrote:

[snip]

> Ride your upright for about 8 hours a day for an entire week and then get
> back to me on the comfort issue.
>
> Regards,
>
> Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
> aka
> Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota

Dear Ed,

The well-known Freddie Hoffman has been riding an upright 8 hours per
day for 30 years.
He seems fairly comfortable with it.

"For what it's worth, the few folks who put in a multiple of that
mileage mostly ride bikes that you probably think wouldn't hack it for
you. Freddie Hoffman, just to name an extreme example, has /averaged/
something like 100 miles per day over the last 30 years. He rides a
50-pound Schwinn with roadster bars."

http://groups.google.com/group/rec.bicycles.tech/msg/1238df6e59563c92

Cheers,

Carl Fogel

 

[Bill Baka]

Tuschinski wrote:
> Qui si Parla,
>
> I'm talking about a Racer, with a horizontal back position (in the
> drops). There are very very few people in the peloton who comfortably
> ride like that for longer periods with no problems. With a low-rider
> bent the position is always aerodynamically good.
>
> I do not like bents, but I do comment that a bent should be faster on
> the flats and that the shown list proves that(while the insinuation was
> that it wasn't shown). I add to that that the "in the drops" position
> isn't used as much as the on the hoods. Sure, there are limber riders
> who can keep that position for hours, but that's rare.

I never could get used to riding in the drops. That opinion covers about
45 years of riding since I got my first Peugot in early 1962. It does
not matter whether I am overweight or down to 140 pounds racing trim, as
in so skinny my neighbors thought I had cancer. It just does not feel
good unless maybe you want to devote your life to it. I can coast
downhill with my back in the drop position, or laying my chin on the
bars on my MTB but pedaling that way just doesn't get it. I am out for
fun and exercise when I ride, not just a workout with pain.
>
> For the record, I am racing courses on a decent level, so I am more an
> upright racer than anything else
>
> Peter,
>
> Agreed, I was simplifying there, but I remain to say that a similar
> purpose bent(so race vs. race) should be a tad faster. And yeah, a bent
> ain't the second coming Everyone their own preference! And mine is...
> upright racer all the way. But that wasn't the point of the
> discusion/question, wich was surprise that a bent was slower than an
> upright on the flats.
>

I still don't think that any kind of bent is for a serious fun cyclist
who likes the ability to take side roads of any kind, dirt, rock, mud,
carry the bike spots even.
For a fast (maybe) commute they might make sense on a level stretch of
good road, but not for my kind of riding.
Bill Baka

 

[Tom Keats]

In article <[email protected]>,
Bill Baka <[email protected]> writes:

> That opinion covers about
> 45 years of riding since I got my first Peugot in early 1962.
^^^^^^
Ahh, I remember lusting after those things as a kid stuck
with a CCM coaster-brake thingie, and then my Raleigh 3-speed.

Now I lust after bikes like my old Raleigh. Fortunately, my
Raleigh Twenty sorta fills that bill.

Speaking of old French bikes, I just scored a Mercier 12-spd
(6-spd freewheel) which sports decals saying "Special Tour
de France" and Greece colours. I dunno what I'm gonna do
with the damn'd thing. What with the cottered cranks, weird
threading, the stupid Pivo stem and the chromed rims, I'm half
inclined to just make a bong out of it.

I spent 10 bux for it. I can use the saddle on my main bike,
though -- it's in better shape than my current one.


cheers,
Tom

--
-- Nothing is safe from me.
Above address is just a spam midden.
I'm really at: tkeats [curlicue] vcn [point] bc [point] ca

 

[Edward Dolan]

"NYC XYZ" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...

ALL TOP POSTERS ARE IDIOTS!

> That reminds me...I've always wondered whether athletes tend to wear
> themselves out more...I'm definitely athletic compared to the average
> American (and *look* like an Olympian -- but had a fat sailor beat me
> in a sprint once, fair and square), but maybe it really is old age and
> wear and tear that's got me preferring the comfort of my 'bent over the
> speed and agility of my upright.

Your unbound enthusiasms indicate to me that you are not yet old. You will
know that you are old when, like me, you no longer give a damn about
anything. Details are no longer interesting and your mind only lingers on
the great generalities - like life and death. You become as one finally with
the poet.

"I grow old . I grow old .
I shall wear the bottoms of my trousers rolled.

Shall I part my hair behind? Do I dare to eat a peach?
I shall wear white flannel trousers, and walk upon the beach.
I have heard the mermaids singing, each to each.

I do not think that they will sing to me.

I have seen them riding seaward on the waves
Combing the white hair of the waves blown back
When the wind blows the water white and black.

We have lingered in the chambers of the sea
By sea-girls wreathed with seaweed red and brown
Till human voices wake us, and we drown."

T. S. Eliot - The Love Song of J. Alfred Prufrock

Regards,

Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
aka
Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota



> Edward Dolan wrote:
>>
>>
>> It is largely a matter of age. If you are indeed an athlete, you may
>> never
>> need a recumbent bicycle. But look around you. How many of us are
>> athletes.
>> Almost everyone by the time they are in their 50's will benefit from a
>> recumbent.
>>
>> Recumbents are mostly about comfort, but they are also more fun to ride
>> than
>> uprights once you get rid of your sport mentality.

 

[Edward Dolan]

"Bill" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...

Newsgroups restored.

> Edward Dolan wrote:
>
>>
>> "Qui si parla Campagnolo" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>> news:[email protected]...
>>>
>>> NYC XYZ wrote:
>>>> Qui si parla Campagnolo wrote:
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> > I always read 'bent threads because I can always count on the last
>>>> > statement.....uprights by definition, are not 'uncomfortable' and the
>>>> > older you get(I'm 55), it is not automatically important that you get
>>>> > a 'bent....My upright is comfy, I see no need to get a bent because
>>>> > of
>>>> > my upright's comfort or my age...
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> My Trek 1000c is the most comfortable upright I've ever had! In two
>>>> months I had 700 miles on it already. But nothing is as comfortable as
>>>> my SMGTe! It's like the difference between night and day.
>>>
>>> 700 miles for me is about 3 weeks on my upright. Once more, 'bents
>>> answer no question, solve no problem with regard to a well fitting
>>> upright ridden by a cyclist with no physical problems that dictate only
>>> a 'bent ride.
>>
>> It is largely a matter of age. If you are indeed an athlete, you may
>> never
>> need a recumbent bicycle. But look around you. How many of us are
>> athletes. Almost everyone by the time they are in their 50's will benefit
>> from a recumbent.
>
> Damn,
> I finally am provoked enough to answer a 'Dolan' post.
> I am 57 and would not consider a bent for anything. MTB and rough roads
> and
> exploring are where it's at for me, not playing sissy and old. Not even
> when I hit 70+ do I plan on acting over 50, not like the 'great' Ed
> suggests.

Recumbents do not work at all well on rough roads. They are for paved
surfaces only.

Bill, you are still a young whippersnapper, but trust me on this, each and
every year takes its' toll. By the time you are 70 you will find that your
get up and go has got up and gone. Welcome to the world of the old and the
dying.

When I was in my 50's I thought those kind of years would go on forever too,
but they don't. Enjoy them while you can. The Grim Reaper is right around
the corner waiting for you and for me.

> He missed the whole point of having fun on a bike. I still take my grand
> kids out and since one is just turning 5 I will have ten years more to
> take
> him out, then there will be great grand kids to take riding, and I don't
> plan on letting them down either.
>>
>> Recumbents are mostly about comfort, but they are also more fun to ride
>> than uprights once you get rid of your sport mentality.
>
> DUH?
> Ed seems to have an 'old' mentality.

The advantage of a recumbent is that you will ride it longer into your old
age than you ever will an upright. Old Bill Baka will one of these days get
himself a recumbent. Nothing is more certain than that provided he wants to
continue cycling into his 70's.

Regards,

Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
aka
Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota

 

[Edward Dolan]

"Jasper Janssen" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> On Thu, 11 May 2006 23:15:08 -0500, "Edward Dolan" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>By the way, I am not so sure about there being no connection between bike
>>saddles and prostate cancer and/or testicular cancer. Women also need to
>>very wary around the conventional bike saddle. Our nether parts are really
>>designed for seats, not saddles.
>
> Funny how I never hear about those old-time knights (lit: Horseman)
> fathering no bastards at all on all those commoners they slept with.

There can be no doubt at all that the conventional bike saddle causes all
kinds of problems in the groin area.

> Also funny how the Chinese and the Dutch haven't died out yet.

The Chinese and the Dutch do not ride their bikes for sport. They ride them
for utility purposes. It is the sport rider who is most at risk of
developing groin problems from a bike saddle.

Regards,

Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
aka
Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota

 

[Edward Dolan]

"Tim Lines" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Edward Dolan wrote:
>
>> By the way, I am not so sure about there being no connection between bike
>> saddles and prostate cancer and/or testicular cancer.
>
> It's about as accurate as the claim that riding a recumbent causes your
> brain to fall out. The evidence to support either supposition is about as
> strong.

There is tons of anecdotal evidence. Ever had a numb penis from riding your
bike? Maybe Lance Armstrong got his testicular cancer from all his cycling.
The fact is that the groin area has many nerves concentrated there. How is
the pressure from a bike saddle good for that? Try to get some common sense,
why don't you?

The casual occasional rider has nothing to worry about, but if you ride your
bike many hours a day year around, who knows?

Regards,

Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
aka
Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota

 

[Edward Dolan]

"Qui si parla Campagnolo" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> Edward Dolan wrote:
>> "Qui si parla Campagnolo" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>> news:[email protected]...
>> >
>> > Edward Dolan wrote:
>> >> "NYC XYZ" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>> >> news:[email protected]...
>> >> [...]
>> >> > * Speed sucks!!! I'm over 5 mph slower than my upright! This is
>> >> > definitely the case. With a change of tires and more developed
>> >> > 'bent-muscles that might narrow a mile or two, but unfortunately
>> >> > I'll
>> >> > always be far slower than on an upright. Sigh!
>> >>
>> >> You will always be somewhat slower on a recumbent than you will be on
>> >> an
>> >> upright, all things being equal. However, some recumbent riders
>> >> actually
>> >> do
>> >> get faster than they ever were on their uprights, but that is because
>> >> they
>> >> ride their recumbents more and hence get stronger. But overall it is
>> >> more
>> >> work to go fast on a recumbent, especially uphill.
>> >>
>> >> For many years when I wanted a good workout I would ride my upright in
>> >> preference to my recumbent, but eventually I settled on the recumbent
>> >> as
>> >> it
>> >> was just more enjoyable to ride.
>> >> [...]
>> >>
>> >> > * A real work-out! I still haven't met a hill I can't yet climb on
>> >> > the
>> >> > 'bent, but I am definitely breathing harder -- and I'm a B-grade
>> >> > athelete! I enjoy the work-out, but it's rather embarrassing
>> >> > huffing
>> >> > and puffing, giving a less-than-stellar impression of the 'bent.
>> >>
>> >> You will be much slower going uphill on a recumbent. I have known
>> >> several
>> >> guys who gave up on recumbents for precisely that one reason. I would
>> >> rather
>> >> be slow and comfortable than fast and uncomfortable. The older you
>> >> get,
>> >> the
>> >> more important this becomes.
>> >
>> > I always read 'bent threads because I can always count on the last
>> > statement.....uprights by definition, are not 'uncomfortable' and the
>> > older you get(I'm 55), it is not automatically important that you get a
>> > 'bent....My upright is comfy, I see no need to get a bent because of my
>> > upright's comfort or my age...
>>
>> Ride your upright for about 8 hours a day for an entire week and then get
>> back to me on the comfort issue.
>
> Silly point...how many people ride 40 hrs per week?

It is common as mud. The summers are just chock full of folks riding on
supported group tours that last for a week with about 70 miles per day.
Each day's ride can be anywhere from 4 to 8 hours, depending on speed and
distance. I have done more of these kind of tours than I can count. Ever
hear of RAGBRAI?

> I can ride for 4 hours, easily, many timer per week...and it is NOT
> uncomfortable..riding any more isn't a comfort issue but cycling
> stength issue, I'm just not strong enough to ride 40 hrs per week,
> being on a 'bent' wouldn't change that, still gotta pedal the thing.

Yes, you could do it on a bent. I am not a strong person at all and I can
easily do it on a bent, but there is no way in this world I could do it on
an upright. If you get the right bent you are so damn comfortable that the
miles and the hours just seem to fly by. And nothing hurts at the end of the
day. It's like some kind of miracle. You suffer on an upright if you ride it
all day.

> But if like yer bent, groovey, I would rather walk than ride one. I
> broke my back 4 years ago-L1, L3, C-5, after getting hit by a pickup
> from behind, while riding...and my quack mentioned it might be a 'bent
> only for me...I said then, I'll walk, thanks...but I can ride my
> upright w/o any problem or issues...

I can see that you are considering a bent. That is the way it is at first
with all of us. We began to think about it and once we take the plunge and
get one we are hooked for the rest of our lives. Most of us end up with more
than one bent because they are all so different from one another.

Regards,

Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
aka
Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota

 

[Edward Dolan]

<[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> Edward Dolan wrote:
>
> [snip]
>
>> Ride your upright for about 8 hours a day for an entire week and then get
>> back to me on the comfort issue.
>
> Dear Ed,
>
> The well-known Freddie Hoffman has been riding an upright 8 hours per
> day for 30 years.
> He seems fairly comfortable with it.
>
> "For what it's worth, the few folks who put in a multiple of that
> mileage mostly ride bikes that you probably think wouldn't hack it for
> you. Freddie Hoffman, just to name an extreme example, has /averaged/
> something like 100 miles per day over the last 30 years. He rides a
> 50-pound Schwinn with roadster bars."
>
> http://groups.google.com/group/rec.bicycles.tech/msg/1238df6e59563c92

The person you describe above is obviously an iron man and not typical at
all of the kind of cyclists who each summer embark on week long supported
tours on their upright bikes. They suffer enormously as they are not use to
putting in 70 or more miles each day for a week. We recumbent cyclists are
not used to that either, but we do not suffer like they do. That is because
we have comfortable and sensible bikes. Yes, we are slower going uphill and
therefore slower over all, but who cares about that. I certainly don't. I
ride at my own pace, enjoy every mile and at the end of the day nothing
hurts.

For every Freddie Hoffman, there are ten thousand like me. Please get real!

Regards,

Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
aka
Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota

 

[[email protected]]

On Sun, 14 May 2006 00:03:04 -0500, "Edward Dolan"
<[email protected]> wrote:

>
><[email protected]> wrote in message
>news:[email protected]...
>>
>> Edward Dolan wrote:
>>
>> [snip]
>>
>>> Ride your upright for about 8 hours a day for an entire week and then get
>>> back to me on the comfort issue.
>>
>> Dear Ed,
>>
>> The well-known Freddie Hoffman has been riding an upright 8 hours per
>> day for 30 years.
>> He seems fairly comfortable with it.
>>
>> "For what it's worth, the few folks who put in a multiple of that
>> mileage mostly ride bikes that you probably think wouldn't hack it for
>> you. Freddie Hoffman, just to name an extreme example, has /averaged/
>> something like 100 miles per day over the last 30 years. He rides a
>> 50-pound Schwinn with roadster bars."
>>
>> http://groups.google.com/group/rec.bicycles.tech/msg/1238df6e59563c92
>
>The person you describe above is obviously an iron man and not typical at
>all of the kind of cyclists who each summer embark on week long supported
>tours on their upright bikes. They suffer enormously as they are not use to
>putting in 70 or more miles each day for a week. We recumbent cyclists are
>not used to that either, but we do not suffer like they do. That is because
>we have comfortable and sensible bikes. Yes, we are slower going uphill and
>therefore slower over all, but who cares about that. I certainly don't. I
>ride at my own pace, enjoy every mile and at the end of the day nothing
>hurts.
>
>For every Freddie Hoffman, there are ten thousand like me. Please get real!
>
>Regards,
>
>Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
>aka
>Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota

Dear Ed,

You said to ride an upright for 8 hours a day for a week and
get back to you--Freddie does it for us.

Cheers,

Carl Fogel

 

[Lou Holtman]

Edward Dolan wrote:

>
>>Also funny how the Chinese and the Dutch haven't died out yet.
>
>
> The Chinese and the Dutch do not ride their bikes for sport. They ride them
> for utility purposes. It is the sport rider who is most at risk of
> developing groin problems from a bike saddle.
>
> Regards,


I don't know about the Chinese but a LOT of the Dutch ride their bikes
ALSO for sports.

Lou
--
Posted by news://news.nb.nu

 

[Edward Dolan]

"Lou Holtman" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Edward Dolan wrote:
>
>>
>>>Also funny how the Chinese and the Dutch haven't died out yet.
>>
>>
>> The Chinese and the Dutch do not ride their bikes for sport. They ride
>> them for utility purposes. It is the sport rider who is most at risk of
>> developing groin problems from a bike saddle.
>
> I don't know about the Chinese but a LOT of the Dutch ride their bikes
> ALSO for sports.

The last time I was in Holland I noted that 9 out of 10 bikes were total
klunkers, good for nothing but the briefest kind of rides. A sport rider
will ride his bike for maybe a couple of hours a day year around. This is
the kind of bike rider who will likely experience groin problems related to
the saddle. He will normally end up acquiring several different kinds of
saddles to try to alleviate the problem, but the only real solution is to
get a recumbent style of bicycle. Most cyclists simply give up if the saddle
causes them too many problems. After all, who rides a bike to experience
pain?

Regards,

Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
aka
Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota

 

[Lou Holtman]

Edward Dolan wrote:
> "Lou Holtman" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>
>>Edward Dolan wrote:
>>
>>
>>>>Also funny how the Chinese and the Dutch haven't died out yet.
>>>
>>>
>>>The Chinese and the Dutch do not ride their bikes for sport. They ride
>>>them for utility purposes. It is the sport rider who is most at risk of
>>>developing groin problems from a bike saddle.
>>
>>I don't know about the Chinese but a LOT of the Dutch ride their bikes
>>ALSO for sports.
>
>
> The last time I was in Holland I noted that 9 out of 10 bikes were total
> klunkers, good for nothing but the briefest kind of rides. A sport rider
> will ride his bike for maybe a couple of hours a day year around. This is
> the kind of bike rider who will likely experience groin problems related to
> the saddle. He will normally end up acquiring several different kinds of
> saddles to try to alleviate the problem, but the only real solution is to
> get a recumbent style of bicycle. Most cyclists simply give up if the saddle
> causes them too many problems. After all, who rides a bike to experience
> pain?
>
> Regards,

Lots of the Dutch, like me, have more than one bike. The klunkers as you
call them we use to go around in the cities and go to work/school. Our
good sporty bikes we ride in our free time, after work and in the
weekend. All of my ride buddy's can ride them for more than 3 hours
every day without problems.

Lou
--
Posted by news://news.nb.nu

 

[Qui si parla Campagnolo]

Edward Dolan wrote:
> "Qui si parla Campagnolo" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
> >
> > Edward Dolan wrote:
> >> "Qui si parla Campagnolo" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> >> news:[email protected]...
> >> >
> >> > Edward Dolan wrote:
> >> >> "NYC XYZ" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> >> >> news:[email protected]...
> >> >> [...]
> >> >> > * Speed sucks!!! I'm over 5 mph slower than my upright! This is
> >> >> > definitely the case. With a change of tires and more developed
> >> >> > 'bent-muscles that might narrow a mile or two, but unfortunately
> >> >> > I'll
> >> >> > always be far slower than on an upright. Sigh!
> >> >>
> >> >> You will always be somewhat slower on a recumbent than you will be on
> >> >> an
> >> >> upright, all things being equal. However, some recumbent riders
> >> >> actually
> >> >> do
> >> >> get faster than they ever were on their uprights, but that is because
> >> >> they
> >> >> ride their recumbents more and hence get stronger. But overall it is
> >> >> more
> >> >> work to go fast on a recumbent, especially uphill.
> >> >>
> >> >> For many years when I wanted a good workout I would ride my upright in
> >> >> preference to my recumbent, but eventually I settled on the recumbent
> >> >> as
> >> >> it
> >> >> was just more enjoyable to ride.
> >> >> [...]
> >> >>
> >> >> > * A real work-out! I still haven't met a hill I can't yet climb on
> >> >> > the
> >> >> > 'bent, but I am definitely breathing harder -- and I'm a B-grade
> >> >> > athelete! I enjoy the work-out, but it's rather embarrassing
> >> >> > huffing
> >> >> > and puffing, giving a less-than-stellar impression of the 'bent.
> >> >>
> >> >> You will be much slower going uphill on a recumbent. I have known
> >> >> several
> >> >> guys who gave up on recumbents for precisely that one reason. I would
> >> >> rather
> >> >> be slow and comfortable than fast and uncomfortable. The older you
> >> >> get,
> >> >> the
> >> >> more important this becomes.
> >> >
> >> > I always read 'bent threads because I can always count on the last
> >> > statement.....uprights by definition, are not 'uncomfortable' and the
> >> > older you get(I'm 55), it is not automatically important that you get a
> >> > 'bent....My upright is comfy, I see no need to get a bent because of my
> >> > upright's comfort or my age...
> >>
> >> Ride your upright for about 8 hours a day for an entire week and then get
> >> back to me on the comfort issue.
> >
> > Silly point...how many people ride 40 hrs per week?
>
> It is common as mud. The summers are just chock full of folks riding on
> supported group tours that last for a week with about 70 miles per day.
> Each day's ride can be anywhere from 4 to 8 hours, depending on speed and
> distance. I have done more of these kind of tours than I can count. Ever
> hear of RAGBRAI?
>
> > I can ride for 4 hours, easily, many timer per week...and it is NOT
> > uncomfortable..riding any more isn't a comfort issue but cycling
> > stength issue, I'm just not strong enough to ride 40 hrs per week,
> > being on a 'bent' wouldn't change that, still gotta pedal the thing.
>
> Yes, you could do it on a bent. I am not a strong person at all and I can
> easily do it on a bent, but there is no way in this world I could do it on
> an upright. If you get the right bent you are so damn comfortable that the
> miles and the hours just seem to fly by. And nothing hurts at the end of the
> day. It's like some kind of miracle. You suffer on an upright if you ride it
> all day.

Yep, sit in the lawn chair all day and pedal for 8hrs and what, cover
50-60 miles?
>
> > But if like yer bent, groovey, I would rather walk than ride one. I
> > broke my back 4 years ago-L1, L3, C-5, after getting hit by a pickup
> > from behind, while riding...and my quack mentioned it might be a 'bent
> > only for me...I said then, I'll walk, thanks...but I can ride my
> > upright w/o any problem or issues...
>
> I can see that you are considering a bent. That is the way it is at first
> with all of us. We began to think about it and once we take the plunge and
> get one we are hooked for the rest of our lives. Most of us end up with more
> than one bent because they are all so different from one another.

I guarantee I will never buy, ride or work on a 'bent. Of that I am
sure.
>
> Regards,
>
> Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
> aka
> Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota

 

[NYC XYZ]

Edward Dolan wrote:
>
>
> ALL TOP POSTERS ARE IDIOTS!

What's top-posting?

> Your unbound enthusiasms indicate to me that you are not yet old. You will
> know that you are old when, like me, you no longer give a damn about
> anything. Details are no longer interesting and your mind only lingers on
> the great generalities - like life and death. You become as one finally with
> the poet.

Are you kidding -- I'm so "old" I don't even bother making conversation
with all the pretty girls who tell me what nice cool bike I have! It's
weird, but the older I get the less interested in girls I become.
Unfortunately, it ain't total lack of interest, yet, but I hope to get
there soon! Far too much time is wasted on females and trying to get
in their pants -- I think I could've invented the cure for cancer by
now, if only...if only....

> "I grow old . I grow old .
> I shall wear the bottoms of my trousers rolled.
>
> Shall I part my hair behind? Do I dare to eat a peach?
> I shall wear white flannel trousers, and walk upon the beach.
> I have heard the mermaids singing, each to each.
>
> I do not think that they will sing to me.
>
> I have seen them riding seaward on the waves
> Combing the white hair of the waves blown back
> When the wind blows the water white and black.
>
> We have lingered in the chambers of the sea
> By sea-girls wreathed with seaweed red and brown
> Till human voices wake us, and we drown."
>
> T. S. Eliot - The Love Song of J. Alfred Prufrock

Let them think I love them more than I do,
Let them think I care, though I go alone,
If it lifts their pride, what is it to me
Who am self-complete as a flower or a stone?

It is one to me that they come or go
If I have myself and the drive of my will,
And strength to climb on a summer night
And watch the stars swarm over the hill.

My heart has grown rich with the passing of years,
I have less need now than when I was young
To share myself with every comer,
Or shape my thoughts into words with my tongue.

>From "Two Songs for Solitude: The Solitary" by Sara Teasdale

> Regards,
>
> Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
> aka
> Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota