Is a bent really better than diamond frame bike in a good road conditions?



V

Vytautas

Guest
I have been reading this newsgroup for some time, and I still have one
main question left unanswered: Is a bent really better than diamond
frame bike in a good road conditions, when both bicycles are the same
type (say touring or road bikes) and the same quality? For me better
means more quickly, more speed, more comfortable (that is not so
important). In summary can you all guys who ride a bent now and earlier
rode a traditional bike to say truly and honestly that you can get from
point A to point B and back faster and easier with your bent that with
a DF bike?
And when you ride your bents of course you meet DF bike riders, so do
you easily overtake them?
Please share your experience, and note a bent you driving. To my mind
SWB bents more performance suited than the LWB's.
I appreciate all honest answers.

Vytautas, Lithuania
 
Vytautas wrote:
> I have been reading this newsgroup for some time, and I still have one
> main question left unanswered: Is a bent really better than diamond
> frame bike in a good road conditions, when both bicycles are the same
> type (say touring or road bikes) and the same quality?

That's an easy question to answer, once you've answered the rather
trickier question of defining "better"... In practice most bikes in
Real World (TM) use are a meeting point of all sorts of compromises, so
"better" for one rider may not be for another.

> For me better
> means more quickly, more speed, more comfortable (that is not so
> important).

My Streetmachine is a lot slower than most touring DF bikes up big hills
but a lot quicker down the other side. So which is better?

For me personally on a tourer, comfort is the ace (as long as I can get
where I'm wanting to go in the time available) so the 'bent is better
for me, but say I need to pop it in the back of a small car to get to
the touring base, I might well be sunk. There's all sorts of variables.

> In summary can you all guys who ride a bent now and earlier
> rode a traditional bike to say truly and honestly that you can get from
> point A to point B and back faster and easier with your bent that with
> a DF bike?

No, but having said that I'll point out I'm sufficiently disinterested
in speed that I don't even bother to use a cycle computer to find out
how fast I go and have deliberately chosen a leisurely bike, because I
like leisurely riding. If I'd wanted to go faster I'd have a
Speedmachine rather than a Streetmachine (I wouldn't mind one /as
well/...).

Speed isn't the reason why I use a 'bent, but the UK's ultimate speed
"touring" challenge, the Land's End to John o-Groats End to End has the
record held on a fully faired recumbent trike, and the rider broke his
own record set on a DF, so I guess for him at least the /right/ 'bent
really was quicker.

> And when you ride your bents of course you meet DF bike riders, so do
> you easily overtake them?

Not a useful sample base, because the engine matters more than the bike.
Keen roadies easily pass me, though on balance I pass more riders than
pass me. But then I can say the same about my Brompton folder...

> Please share your experience, and note a bent you driving. To my mind
> SWB bents more performance suited than the LWB's.
> I appreciate all honest answers.

SWB vs. LWB isn't really that useful. If you want speed then you want
better aerodynamics, fairings and lower frontal area will influence that
more than the wheelbase. Fairings are a two edged sword because they
add weight, and once you drop to low speeds (for example, climbing) then
they'll slow you down. If the subsequent descents have speeds limited
by safety issues such as sightlines on bends then the maximum possible
speed may be a moot point. The complexities and variabilities of real
roads riding make it very difficult to say what will categorically be
best on any given route.

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/
 
"Vytautas" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>I have been reading this newsgroup for some time, and I still have one
> main question left unanswered: Is a bent really better than diamond
> frame bike in a good road conditions, when both bicycles are the same
> type (say touring or road bikes) and the same quality? For me better
> means more quickly, more speed, more comfortable (that is not so
> important). In summary can you all guys who ride a bent now and earlier
> rode a traditional bike to say truly and honestly that you can get from
> point A to point B and back faster and easier with your bent that with
> a DF bike?
> And when you ride your bents of course you meet DF bike riders, so do
> you easily overtake them?
> Please share your experience, and note a bent you driving. To my mind
> SWB bents more performance suited than the LWB's.
> I appreciate all honest answers.
>
> Vytautas, Lithuania
>

The way you have put your question I would have to say No. My transition to
bent was part of a search for a more comfortable bike. I started riding
"touring" DF bikes, I switched to mountain bikes and set them up for road
riding, I decided to give bents a try and that was a huge improvement over
DF. Finally, a few years ago I switched to bent trikes and I've never looked
back. My search was entirely based on finding a more comfortable bike which
you say is least important to you. I like to tour. Spending a all day on my
bike (trike) is what I consider ideal. It doesn't matter that I'm slower
now. It also doesn't matter that I'm doing 60 - 80 Km days instead of the
120 - 140 Km days that I used to do in my DF days. I never overtake a DF
rider but I really don't care to.

Even when I commuted it wasn't about getting there fast. When coming home in
the summer I would actually look for ways to make the route longer.

If you are looking for speed and performance stick with your DF. If you are
looking for comfort, think bent.

Jeff
 
Vytautas wrote:
> I have been reading this newsgroup for some time, and I still have one
> main question left unanswered: Is a bent really better than diamond
> frame bike in a good road conditions, when both bicycles are the same
> type (say touring or road bikes) and the same quality? For me better
> means more quickly, more speed, more comfortable (that is not so
> important). In summary can you all guys who ride a bent now and earlier
> rode a traditional bike to say truly and honestly that you can get from
> point A to point B and back faster and easier with your bent that with
> a DF bike?
> And when you ride your bents of course you meet DF bike riders, so do
> you easily overtake them?
> Please share your experience, and note a bent you driving. To my mind
> SWB bents more performance suited than the LWB's.
> I appreciate all honest answers.
>
> Vytautas, Lithuania
>
While i do not own a 'bent yet, I am shopping for my first one, I have
come to the conclusion that "better" is all in the mind of the rider. If
your main concern is comfort, 'bent is the way to go, after riding
several models I have come to the conclusion that the recumbent position
is a more natural / ergonomic way to ride. On the other hand if speed is
more important to the rider then a road DF bike is the way to go.

Ken
--
You never have the wind with you - either it is against you or you're
having a good day. ~Daniel Behrman, The Man Who Loved Bicycles

Homepage: http://kcm-home.tripod.com/
 
Peter Clinch wrote:
>That's an easy question to answer, once you've answered the rather
>trickier question of defining "better"...
OK, let's define, I mean better is to go faster on a good pavement,
let's say on a mostly flat terrain, as a say from point A to B and back
so there will be no more hill or downhill road in sum. Then which bike
is better?


>My Streetmachine is a lot slower than most touring DF bikes up big hills
>but a lot quicker down the other side. So which is better?
So in sum you win or you loose against DF bikers?
I don't seek for a perfect comfort and I preffer just to be faster.
Probably I will need two bikes - one fast for commuting short distances
and one fast enough for touring (40 and more km per day).

As I have noticed, you all guys seek perfect comfort, of cource that is
good, but I would not like to change comfort to a speed.

And to make conclusion, I think that trikes could be very comfortable,
but they will be allways slower of all bikes, because they are heavier
and have a bigger rolling resistance.

>If I'd wanted to go faster I'd have a
>Speedmachine rather than a Streetmachine (I wouldn't mind one /as
>well/...).
Would you say Speedmachine will be faster than DF bike in conditions I
wrote above?

Anyway thanks for the answers!!!
Vytautas
 
> Vytautas wrote:
> > [...] In summary can you all guys who ride a bent now
> > and earlier rode a traditional bike to say truly and honestly
> > that you can get from point A to point B and back faster
> > and easier with your bent that with a DF bike?

Yes. But probably not because of the bike. I ride more now.
I haven't ridden a DF bike more than a few hundred feet in
almost eight years.

> > And when you ride your bents of course you meet DF
> > bike riders, so do you easily overtake them?

Some. A few, but I rarely try... It's not about the bike,
in any case. There are many riders faster than I am, some
on inherently "slower" bikes.

> > Please share your experience, and note a bent you driving. To
> > my mind SWB bents more performance suited than the LWB's.
> > I appreciate all honest answers.

A bike designed for speed could be either WB. It's probably
true that most production LWB recumbents are less performance
oriented than many SWB. Not all SWB are performance
oriented, though.

I ride a SWB "high-racer" Volae Sport and also a LWB Easy
Racers Tour Easy with a front fairing. Between the bikes, there's
at least 12 lbs difference in the weight, significant difference in
front profile (aerodynamics), riding position, tire width, handling,
and comfort. My speed difference? I'm maybe 10% faster on
the Volae under smooth-road circumstances and perhaps 15%
faster up hills.

I'm more confident and comfortable going faster down hills on
the Tour Easy, it is very stable. On rough road surfaces, the
Tour Easy with wider tires and LWB may be faster.

In a number of cases, my third recumbent, a BikeE CLWB
is actually the "best" bike for some rides. Is the BikeE faster?
Not likely. Is it sometimes better for a particular purpose?
Certainly.

"Ken M" <[email protected]> wrote
> I have come to the conclusion that the recumbent position
> is a more natural / ergonomic way to ride.

Yes, that's my experience. And by being more comfortable,
one may ride farther and perhaps become faster.

> On the other hand if speed is
> more important to the rider then a road DF bike is the way to go.

If speed is most important, then a light-weight low-racer recumbent
bike will give certain advantages over upright bikes,-- and represent
a different set of compromises.

But what's the point? To be a fast rider or to ride a faster bike?

Me, I just enjoy the ride and say "good day" to both those who
pass me and those I pass. I am seeking the "pollen path".

Jon Meinecke
 
Jon Meinecke wrote:

>
> "Ken M" <[email protected]> wrote
>
>>I have come to the conclusion that the recumbent position
>>is a more natural / ergonomic way to ride.
>
>
> Yes, that's my experience. And by being more comfortable,
> one may ride farther and perhaps become faster.
>
Sounds like a reasonable theory. I just started riding again a little
over a year ago, and have had a couple of used DF bikes, I bought a new
DF hybrid for a tour I had wanted to do, I DID ride about 1200 miles
with it loaded for touring, it is not an experience I would repeat on
that bike. I often found I was fatigued after just a few hours on the
bike. So my hope is that a recumbent will allow me to ride for more
hours in comfort and thus be in better shape for my next tour.

>
>>On the other hand if speed is
>>more important to the rider then a road DF bike is the way to go.
>
>
> If speed is most important, then a light-weight low-racer recumbent
> bike will give certain advantages over upright bikes,-- and represent
> a different set of compromises.
>
Yes you are probably right about that point, I had not even though of a
low racer.

> But what's the point? To be a fast rider or to ride a faster bike?
>
> Me, I just enjoy the ride and say "good day" to both those who
> pass me and those I pass. I am seeking the "pollen path".

Well said.

Ken

--
You never have the wind with you - either it is against you or you're
having a good day. ~Daniel Behrman, The Man Who Loved Bicycles

Homepage: http://kcm-home.tripod.com/
 
"Ken M" <[email protected]> wrote
> [...] I bought a new
> DF hybrid for a tour I had wanted to do, I DID ride about 1200 miles
> with it loaded for touring,

Where to? Do you have a tour report posted or available?
www.crazyguyonabike.com?
Are you on the phred touring mailing list?

> [...] it is not an experience I would repeat on that bike.
> I often found I was fatigued after just a few hours on the
> bike. So my hope is that a recumbent will allow me to ride for more
> hours in comfort and thus be in better shape for my next tour.

That's my experience. 4-5 hours hasn't been a problem,
and I'm no "spring chicken". I ride my age on my birthday.
So far, so good. If I can still do that in 20 years when I'm
70, then I'll consider that a success.

I'm planning a longish tour late this spring on my TE, "in shape"
or not,-- that's my shape, not the bike's. Year before last's
"mountain tour" four-night bike camping trip was only about
200 miles, but a couple of passes were pretty challenging.
I managed to keep up with two 18-year-olds.

Jon Meinecke
 
Jon Meinecke wrote:
> "Ken M" <[email protected]> wrote
>
>>[...] I bought a new
>>DF hybrid for a tour I had wanted to do, I DID ride about 1200 miles
>>with it loaded for touring,
>
>
> Where to? Do you have a tour report posted or available?
> www.crazyguyonabike.com?
> Are you on the phred touring mailing list?
>

Well the original plan was a coast to coast, but those plans were to
lofty for a novice tourist. It turned into a tour of Florida. Yes I am
on crazyguyon a bike here: http://afirsttour.crazyguyonabike.com/

>
>>[...] it is not an experience I would repeat on that bike.
>>I often found I was fatigued after just a few hours on the
>>bike. So my hope is that a recumbent will allow me to ride for more
>>hours in comfort and thus be in better shape for my next tour.
>
>
> That's my experience. 4-5 hours hasn't been a problem,
> and I'm no "spring chicken". I ride my age on my birthday.
> So far, so good. If I can still do that in 20 years when I'm
> 70, then I'll consider that a success.
>
Well I had finger numbness and hand pain sometimes in as little as two
or three hours on the bike, the upright geometry of the hybrid kept the
back pain to a minimum most of the time. I did suffer some discomfort in
the saddle contact areas.

> I'm planning a longish tour late this spring on my TE, "in shape"
> or not,-- that's my shape, not the bike's. Year before last's
> "mountain tour" four-night bike camping trip was only about
> 200 miles, but a couple of passes were pretty challenging.
> I managed to keep up with two 18-year-olds.
>

Well congrats on keeping up with the youngsters. I ride with my younger
brother once and a while and he out rides me almost all the time,
haven't done a longer ride with him, I might be able to ride longer.

Ken
--
You never have the wind with you - either it is against you or you're
having a good day. ~Daniel Behrman, The Man Who Loved Bicycles

Homepage: http://kcm-home.tripod.com/
 
Jon Meinecke wrote:

> > [...] it is not an experience I would repeat on that bike.
> > I often found I was fatigued after just a few hours on the
> > bike. So my hope is that a recumbent will allow me to ride for more
> > hours in comfort and thus be in better shape for my next tour.
>
> That's my experience. 4-5 hours hasn't been a problem,
> and I'm no "spring chicken". I ride my age on my birthday.
> So far, so good. If I can still do that in 20 years when I'm
> 70, then I'll consider that a success.
>

Jon: Norm Neiberlien is getting close to 70. He completed a cross-USA
tour last summer: http://ER2005.crazyguyonabike.com . I think he's
pretty neat.

Jeff
 
Greetings. My great-grandparents on my mother's side were from
Lithuania! Anyway, if speed is more important to you than comfort and
your typical bike route is hilly, go with a diamond frame. On flat to
rolling terrain, I find that I am faster on the recumbent. If comfort
matters, the recumbent is the only way!

Jim Reilly
Reading, PA
 
Ken M wrote:
> ...
> While i do not own a 'bent yet, I am shopping for my first one, I have
> come to the conclusion that "better" is all in the mind of the rider. If
> your main concern is comfort, 'bent is the way to go, after riding
> several models I have come to the conclusion that the recumbent position
> is a more natural / ergonomic way to ride. On the other hand if speed is
> more important to the rider then a road DF bike is the way to go....

There is no way any street useable upright [1] is faster on flat to
rolling terrain on good pavement [2] than a proper lowracer, highracer
or LWB bicycle with front fairing and bodysock - especially if it is
windy.

[1] A "superman" position upright is not street useable in the normal
sense.
[2] Vytautas's specified criteria.

--
Tom Sherman - Fox River Valley
 
Ken M wrote:
> ...
> Yes you are probably right about that point, I had not even though of a
> low racer.

HEATHEN!

--
Tom Sherman - Fox River
 
"Vytautas" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>I have been reading this newsgroup for some time, and I still have one
> main question left unanswered: Is a bent really better than diamond
> frame bike in a good road conditions, when both bicycles are the same
> type (say touring or road bikes) and the same quality? For me better
> means more quickly, more speed, more comfortable (that is not so
> important). In summary can you all guys who ride a bent now and earlier
> rode a traditional bike to say truly and honestly that you can get from
> point A to point B and back faster and easier with your bent that with
> a DF bike?
> And when you ride your bents of course you meet DF bike riders, so do
> you easily overtake them?
> Please share your experience, and note a bent you driving. To my mind
> SWB bents more performance suited than the LWB's.
> I appreciate all honest answers.
>
> Vytautas, Lithuania
>
>

With the right motor on board, and a good lowracer to pedal, I don't think
any diamond frame rider with equivalent power can keep up on the flats or
downhills. On bikes like Baron, Jester, Vk2 or NoCom, it would take a very
very strong diamond frame rider to keep up with a good rider on one of those
wonderful low bikes. Add a rear disk wheel and do some serious strength work
and you'll be ready to kick some serious Lithuanian roadie ass!

What's it like to ride in Lithuania, Vytautas? Are good quality bikes
available there? Are there any recumbents? How are the roads, what's the
weather like, many cars and heavy traffic to ride in?




----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! >100,000 Newsgroups
---= East/West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =---
 
Hello guys,
It's very nice to read all your post here concerning speed and
arguments what is faster:)
Of course the motor (the muscle) matters most. Check it out what I have
found in Lithuania!: http://www.velomr.projektas.lt/tekstai.php there
is a super bike with both wheels drive. And I didn't try it yet but I
am going to do it soon, maybe when it will get a little warmer here in
Lithuania (few days ago was below -20Celcius, now about -10C). This
page above is owned by a man in Lithuania who makes his recumbent by
his own. That bike with both wheels drive made by another lithuanian
man Edmundas Dagys from city Šiauliai. He states that his bike is ftom
10 to up 30% faster than an usual bike. And I start to believe him.
Especially this bike faster when riding in hard condition up into steep
hills, against head wind and so on, because you can add power by
pushing with hands, and when you want to rest, you just hold handlebars
like on a usual bike!
Have anybody seen something like this?

Ye I was thinking about lowracer to be the best choice for me. I like
Baron bent with both 26" wheels. Isn't it cute?
Mostly I ride in my native town Kaunas (population 360 000) and I do
some touring also. For being fast in a city I need still to be safe (is
lowracer safe enouch?), cause there allmost no bike roads, and I am
riding on the streets with regular cars. Pavement isn't too bad here,
you can easily ride a road bike on a street and you will not brake it.
There is not so many bikers in Lithuania, but every year the number is
increasing, still a lo of people prefer cars even in schort distances.
Few months ago I worked in Denmark and I was amazed how many bike
riders there are. And they don't care even about the weather! They ride
bikes during rain and in a winter time without any problem! Only I
haven't seen any recumbent on a road in Denmark either.

> What's it like to ride in Lithuania, Vytautas? Are good quality bikes
> available there? Are there any recumbents? How are the roads, what's the
> weather like, many cars and heavy traffic to ride in?
We have no problem byuing a good bike here cause we are in the EU
(European Uninion), and don't think Lithuania is like a third Word
country:)
Roads are good enouch to ride any bike you want, we have no big
mountains(highest 293.6m), but here is enough hills to climb and go
down:) In major cities there are heavy traffic and a lot of cars,
because everyone want to ride it own car:) (not a bicycle yet). But I
enjoy overtaking mass of cars in line when they are standing on a red
light, and then I almost allways faster arriving my destination than
the trolleybus.
Weather in Lithuania is hot in summer and a bit cold in winter (see
above), but you can ride a bike all seasons without big suprise. It is
a bit difficult in winter time, when we have some snow, or it is
freezing and a road is slippery, but I do it successfully even then.
And we quite often have rain here.

So best wishes to all descendant of Lithuania wide spreaded all over
the world!
Do you still speak some lithuanian (the guy who had a lithuanian
grandparent) ?
Good luck to all! Sekmes visiems!:)

Vytautas, Lithuania, Kaunas
 
Sorry made up a mistake, I had in mind the Bacchetta bike Aero, Corsa
or Strada with both 26" tires. Olso Baron Optima looks fast and good
too:) Anyone had ride them both?
Share your experience please.
Appreciate any answers.
 
Vytautas wrote:

> OK, let's define, I mean better is to go faster on a good pavement,
> let's say on a mostly flat terrain, as a say from point A to B and back
> so there will be no more hill or downhill road in sum. Then which bike
> is better?

A faired recumbent built for speed.

> As I have noticed, you all guys seek perfect comfort, of cource that is
> good, but I would not like to change comfort to a speed.

Note that the Velokraft NoCom is named as it is as it supposedly has no
compromises made that will lower its (unfaired) speed. It certainly
isn't designed for comfort, and frankly nor are Barons, M5 Lows etc.

> And to make conclusion, I think that trikes could be very comfortable,
> but they will be allways slower of all bikes, because they are heavier
> and have a bigger rolling resistance.

But despite that the UK end to end record /is/ held on a fully faired
trike, so while the case on typical courses, on big ones it isn't
necessarily the case.

> Would you say Speedmachine will be faster than DF bike in conditions I
> wrote above?

Perhaps, /if/ you run it with the carbon speed tail fairing, and more
likely if there's a front fairing too, though HPVel don't recommend the
Streamer on it for reasons of rider view (but Streamer clad
Speedmachines have been used on relatively quiet roads). A Baron or a
NoCom would be quicker, especially if partially faired.

But if you genuinely want to go fast above all else then fully faired is
the way to go. Fully faired bikes tend not to be especially practical
for day to day use, which is where trikes come in. A light velomobile
like a Quest will probably do consistent speed on a flattish road better
than most things.

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/
 

> A faired recumbent built for speed.

I don't think faired bent would be the way out because it is not
suitable for everyday use.
And I seek for bike I could be fast in real world situation, not for
braking speed records just to go 200 meters on a flat perfect road.
That is because I think faired bike is difficult to use in everyday
life.

> But despite that the UK end to end record /is/ held on a fully faired
> trike, so while the case on typical courses, on big ones it isn't
> necessarily the case.

interesting fact. But is it useful for daily use?


> But if you genuinely want to go fast above all else then fully faired is
> the way to go. Fully faired bikes tend not to be especially practical
> for day to day use, which is where trikes come in. A light velomobile
> like a Quest will probably do consistent speed on a flattish road better
> than most things.

Thanks for the suggestion, I will consider that. A lowracer won't be
faster than a light velomobile? Note that in real life there are mostly
not only flattish roads, but a lot of smaller and bigger hills most of
them:)

Vytautas
 
Vytautas wrote:

> I don't think faired bent would be the way out because it is not
> suitable for everyday use.

But velomobiles *are* made for everyday use, and used for everyday use.

> And I seek for bike I could be fast in real world situation, not for
> braking speed records just to go 200 meters on a flat perfect road.
> That is because I think faired bike is difficult to use in everyday
> life.

A Varna Diablo would be hopeless for day to day use, indeed, but a Quest
should be fine on a reasonably open road. They're designed and used for
day to day use.

> Thanks for the suggestion, I will consider that. A lowracer won't be
> faster than a light velomobile? Note that in real life there are mostly
> not only flattish roads, but a lot of smaller and bigger hills most of
> them:)

It's difficult to come up with an objective answer, because the Real
World is such a changeable place. But Quest users report being able to
easily sustain 40 km/h into headwinds, for example. Aerodynamics really
is the key to sustaining high speeds, but don't expect that up hills
because once you're down below 20 km/h then weight will play an
increasingly important role.

A prime advantage of a lowracer over a velomobile is it's a lot cheaper
and easier to import, and probably easier to sell on if it doesn't suit.
A lowracer with a tailfairing should be quicker than a plain one, at
least on the flat, and won't have quite so many usability issues as a
full fairing (in fact many serve as a useful place to stow some luggage).

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/
 
Thanks Pete, your answers is very useful for me. I will look now to
find more about the Quest.
Still thinking lowracers schould be faster than any velomobile trike:)
Of course easily sustaining 40km/h into headwinds with Quest makes very
good impression!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

R
Neede Advice on carbon fiber 'bent
Replies
7
Views
5K
Recumbent bicycles
Amyli
Amyli
SnowBiker
'Bent suitable for arm injury?
Replies
12
Views
3K
Recumbent bicycles
WheelSpinWes
W
SnowBiker
Off-Road on a 'Bent?
Replies
7
Views
3K
Recumbent bicycles
oldbobcat
oldbobcat
bigride
a great site for us buckeye bent riders
Replies
0
Views
5K
Recumbent bicycles
bigride
bigride
Z
Re: Considering a 'bent
Replies
3
Views
3K
Recumbent bicycles
Jon Bendtsen
J
Top Bottom Back