Grudge Match Time: Recumbent vs DF



Status
Not open for further replies.
Eugene Cottrell wrote:
> In 2001 I put a little over 8,300 miles on my DF In the first 2 months on the bent, I put about
> 1500 miles on it, but then I gradually rode less and less because it just wasn't any fun and I
> couldn't keep up with the pack. Going ahead when you can and then catching up when you can, is not
> riding with your friends, it's starting and ending with them. I enjoy riding along with the group,
> talking and enjoying the ride. Biking is largely a social affair for me and the bent doesn't allow
> that. Someone said that the Bachetta Strada is a touring bike, I don't think they know what
> they're talking about. The Strada is suppose to be one of the high performance bents, which is why
> I bought it. Every (honest) bent rider I talked to warned me that keeping up with the DFs would be
> difficult on our hilly terrain and suggested that I get a high performance bike.
>
Gene,

I agree about the social thing. There's no doubt that a recumbent has a different 'speed profile'
than an upright. That means it's always hard on the recumbent rider to match pace with uprights. I
could write a book on the tribulations. That's one reason why recumbent riders tend to stick
together. They can all go fast at the right time, and they slow down when they're supposed to. I've
seen the advice before, even though it wasn't written with recumbents in mind: it's best to ride the
same kind of bike that the rest of your group rides. If everyone else followed your lead and got
recumbents too, the problem would be solved! ;-) I guess I'm lucky in that there is a high recumbent
population in my area.

IMHO 1500 miles isn't enough to train the new muscles to the same degree you've achieved over years
of riding in 'the other' position. According to my records, I was almost a mph slower the first full
year (3600 miles) on my V-Rex. It was mid-season in the next year before I achieved parity. And that
was in 'gently rolling' Michigan. Big hills would accentuate the difference. Moral: ya gotta
definitely commit to the platform if you want it to perform.

The Strada is one of the new breed of high recumbents. They're made to attract the DF crowd who want
larger, same-size wheels and relatively light weight. I'd rate it as slightly slower than my V-Rex,
which is also not a racer (but still fairly fast.)
--

John Foltz --- O _ Baron --- _O _ V-Rex 24/63 --- _\\/\-%)
_________(_)`=()___________________(_)= (_)_____
 
John Foltz wrote:
> ... The Strada is one of the new breed of high recumbents. They're made to attract the DF crowd
> who want larger, same-size wheels and relatively light weight. I'd rate it as slightly slower than
> my V-Rex, which is also not a racer (but still fairly fast.)

For what its worth, the primary designer of the Bacchetta Strada and the RANS V-Rex is the same
person, Mark Colliton.

Tom Sherman - Quad Cities USA (Illinois side)
 
John Foltz wrote:
>
> IMHO 1500 miles isn't enough to train the new muscles to the same degree you've achieved over
> years of riding in 'the other' position. According to my records, I was almost a mph slower the
> first full year (3600 miles) on my V-Rex. It was mid-season in the next year before I achieved
> parity. And that was in 'gently rolling' Michigan. Big hills would accentuate the difference.
> Moral: ya gotta definitely commit to the platform if you want it to perform.

Perhaps this is true. If so, it's a serious disadvantage for a lot of people.

Obviously, most cyclists consider the jury to still be out regarding recumbent advantages &
disadvantages, especially overall speed. You can't convince them by saying "Just try it yourself!
You'll see ... um, in about two years, providing you never ride anything but your recumbent."

Most people would consider that to be not worth the risk. And justifiably so. It would be like
telling a skilled guitar player that he'll eventually be way better if he switches to a
left-handed guitar.

--
Frank Krygowski [email protected]
 
Frank Krygowski wrote:
> John Foltz wrote:
>
>> ... Moral: ya gotta definitely commit to the platform if you want it to perform.
>>
>
> Perhaps this is true. If so, it's a serious disadvantage for a lot of people.
>
> Obviously, most cyclists consider the jury to still be out regarding recumbent advantages &
> disadvantages, especially overall speed. You can't convince them by saying "Just try it yourself!
> You'll see ... um, in about two years, providing you never ride anything but your recumbent."
>
> Most people would consider that to be not worth the risk. And justifiably so. It would be like
> telling a skilled guitar player that he'll eventually be way better if he switches to a
> left-handed guitar.
>
I agree. Most riders who pick up recumbent riding, do it for some other reason. While there's a
population of riders like me who discover they can be faster on a 'bent, there are plenty of others
who aren't. If you get a recumbent only for the speed, you're taking a chance that you might be one
of those who don't benefit.
--

John Foltz --- O _ Baron --- _O _ V-Rex 24/63 --- _\\/\-%)
_________(_)`=()___________________(_)= (_)_____
 
Jay <[email protected]> wrote:
: One slight negative is that at such events I literally get about 20 or more people an hour asking
: questions and wanting to ride it. For one guy who was oversensitive and wanting to date me- he was
: jealous of all the men asking questions and wanted me to leave it at home. Since it is my main
: transport- I dumped the guy - not the bike.

: Recumbents are slower than diamond frames. I get so many people stopping me and asking questions
: that it takes longer to get to any event.

The trike is probably just an excuse to talk to you ;)

--
Risto Varanka | http://www.helsinki.fi/~rvaranka/ varis at no spam please iki fi
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads