Let's be Honest!

[Gene Cosloy]

I'm a newcomer to recumbents. Less than a year now and happy with the switch. I'm 64 and a serious
rider for 35 years now of DF's. After riding several recumbents for the better part of 8 months I've
come to some conclusions which I'd like to share for whatever and for whomever it's worth. Any
discussion on the relative speeds betwen recumbents and DF's must needs take into consideration the
terrain and the age of the rider. Even though I'm not as competetive as younger DF riders I can
still get up hills faster and if I'm challenged stand up and dust a lot of women and children. The
same rides on the recumbent however require me to lower the gears and spin my way up hills. I've
tried pushing hard against my seat back and powering up the hills but my knees give out long before
my muscles do. While you might attribute this to advancing age, I claim that DF's have an advantage
up hills because of the effect of gravity. A lot of gravitational force is being subjected which
does not torque the knee joint as much.

The benefit though is that I'm enjoying the ride more on the bent. In the past whenever I caught
site of a steep accent, I took it as a challenge to my manhood, grited my teeth and rose (literally)
to the occasion. Now with the bent the ups are treated no differently than the flats or downs, just
select the right gear and spin on. I come home less sore, with energy to spare. It's a whole
different style that is more reflective of working with nature rather than against it.

Of course, if your under 50, the above may not apply, you still have a few more aggressive hill
climbing years before your joints cry out for a change.

So when the debate rages over which bent is better on the hills, ask first about the rider. Is a P38
whith it's relatively stiff frame and closed seating position better suited to power up hills? Yes.
If your like me however and need to spin, that advantage dosen't get employed.

Gene Cosloy (Burley Taiko)

 

[Bill Marsh]

"Gene Cosloy" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> I'm a newcomer to recumbents. Less than a year now and happy with the switch. I'm 64 and a serious
> rider for 35 years now of DF's. After riding several recumbents for the better part of 8 months
> I've come to some conclusions which I'd like to share for whatever and for whomever it's worth.
> Any discussion on the relative speeds betwen recumbents and DF's must needs take into
> consideration the terrain and the age of the rider. Even though I'm not as competetive as younger
> DF riders I can still get up hills faster and if I'm challenged stand up and dust a lot of women
> and children. The same rides on the recumbent however require me to lower the gears and spin my
> way up hills. I've tried pushing hard against my seat back and powering up the hills but my knees
> give out long before my muscles do. While you might attribute this to advancing age, I claim that
> DF's have an advantage up hills because of the effect of gravity. A lot of gravitational force is
> being subjected which does not torque the knee joint as much.
>
> The benefit though is that I'm enjoying the ride more on the bent. In the past whenever I
> caught site of a steep accent, I took it as a challenge to my manhood, grited my teeth and rose
> (literally) to the occasion. Now with the bent the ups are treated no differently than the
> flats or downs, just select the right gear and spin on. I come home less sore, with energy to
> spare. It's a whole different style that is more reflective of working with nature rather than
> against it.
>
> Of course, if your under 50, the above may not apply, you still have a few more aggressive hill
> climbing years before your joints cry out for a change.
>
> So when the debate rages over which bent is better on the hills, ask first about the rider. Is a
> P38 whith it's relatively stiff frame and closed seating position better suited to power up hills?
> Yes. If your like me however and need to spin, that advantage dosen't get employed.
>
> Gene Cosloy (Burley Taiko)
Gene I agree with you whole heartidly. Only 61 but 25 yrs on Df and got tired of sore butt syndrome
a couple of years ago. Am slower on hills (up) faster down and on the flats and besides who cares I
enjoy riding more and seeing where I am going , not having sore shoulders and neck, Lets see , oh
yeah I can recover at a Sag stop where as on a df I couldn't until I was through riding. Strange how
the recovery time is so much shorter. Ride on old man and keep smiling people love it.

Bill V-rex

 

[John Foltz]

[email protected] (Gene Cosloy) wrote in message
news:<[email protected]>...
> ... I claim that DF's have an advantage up hills...
>

The recumbent speed advantage, if it exists, is due to aerodynamics. One of the great fallacies of
'bentdom is that bents are always more aerodynamic than uprights. Not true! If you don't have an
aerodynamic bike, and if you can't maintain at least 15 and more likely 18-20 mph when climbing,
then you lose the advantage. That means that smaller and/or easier hills belong to the fast 'bents,
but bigger ones belong to uprights. The middle territory belongs to whoever is in better shape.

>
> Of course, if your under 50, the above may not apply, you still have a few more aggressive hill
> climbing years before your joints cry out for a change.
>
I guess I have two more years to enjoy my hillclimbing. ;-)

 

[Bruce]

after riding a df for 10 years I switch to a bent because it is just more fun. After 3yr on my bent.
I find I am stronger and faster up the hills and on the flats. I attribute it to the fact That I
ride more and practice good climbing skills when ever I can . This 51 yr old engine works better the
more bent miles I put in. Bruce on the hhr "Gene Cosloy" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> I'm a newcomer to recumbents. Less than a year now and happy with the switch. I'm 64 and a serious
> rider for 35 years now of DF's. After riding several recumbents for the better part of 8 months
> I've come to some conclusions which I'd like to share for whatever and for whomever it's worth.
> Any discussion on the relative speeds betwen recumbents and DF's must needs take into
> consideration the terrain and the age of the rider. Even though I'm not as competetive as younger
> DF riders I can still get up hills faster and if I'm challenged stand up and dust a lot of women
> and children. The same rides on the recumbent however require me to lower the gears and spin my
> way up hills. I've tried pushing hard against my seat back and powering up the hills but my knees
> give out long before my muscles do. While you might attribute this to advancing age, I claim that
> DF's have an advantage up hills because of the effect of gravity. A lot of gravitational force is
> being subjected which does not torque the knee joint as much.
>
> The benefit though is that I'm enjoying the ride more on the bent. In the past whenever I
> caught site of a steep accent, I took it as a challenge to my manhood, grited my teeth and rose
> (literally) to the occasion. Now with the bent the ups are treated no differently than the
> flats or downs, just select the right gear and spin on. I come home less sore, with energy to
> spare. It's a whole different style that is more reflective of working with nature rather than
> against it.
>
> Of course, if your under 50, the above may not apply, you still have a few more aggressive hill
> climbing years before your joints cry out for a change.
>
> So when the debate rages over which bent is better on the hills, ask first about the rider. Is a
> P38 whith it's relatively stiff frame and closed seating position better suited to power up hills?
> Yes. If your like me however and need to spin, that advantage dosen't get employed.
>
> Gene Cosloy (Burley Taiko)

 

[g19glock1]

Originally posted by Bruce
after riding a df for 10 years I switch to a bent because it is just more fun. After 3yr on my bent.
I find I am stronger and faster up the hills and on the flats. I attribute it to the fact That I
ride more and practice good climbing skills when ever I can . This 51 yr old engine works better the
more bent miles I put in. Bruce on the hhr "Gene Cosloy" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> I'm a newcomer to recumbents. Less than a year now and happy with the switch. I'm 64 and a serious
> rider for 35 years now of DF's. After riding several recumbents for the better part of 8 months
> I've come to some conclusions which I'd like to share for whatever and for whomever it's worth.
> Any discussion on the relative speeds betwen recumbents and DF's must needs take into
> consideration the terrain and the age of the rider. Even though I'm not as competetive as younger
> DF riders I can still get up hills faster and if I'm challenged stand up and dust a lot of women
> and children. The same rides on the recumbent however require me to lower the gears and spin my
> way up hills. I've tried pushing hard against my seat back and powering up the hills but my knees
> give out long before my muscles do. While you might attribute this to advancing age, I claim that
> DF's have an advantage up hills because of the effect of gravity. A lot of gravitational force is
> being subjected which does not torque the knee joint as much.
>
> The benefit though is that I'm enjoying the ride more on the bent. In the past whenever I
> caught site of a steep accent, I took it as a challenge to my manhood, grited my teeth and rose
> (literally) to the occasion. Now with the bent the ups are treated no differently than the
> flats or downs, just select the right gear and spin on. I come home less sore, with energy to
> spare. It's a whole different style that is more reflective of working with nature rather than
> against it.
>
> Of course, if your under 50, the above may not apply, you still have a few more aggressive hill
> climbing years before your joints cry out for a change.
>
> So when the debate rages over which bent is better on the hills, ask first about the rider. Is a
> P38 whith it's relatively stiff frame and closed seating position better suited to power up hills?
> Yes. If your like me however and need to spin, that advantage dosen't get employed.
>
> Gene Cosloy (Burley Taiko)

I am 52 and have only become 'bent in the last 6 or 7 weeks. I can attest only to the fact that my ***** isn't sore anymore and my hands aren't numb for an hour after the ride, and my neck and shoulders don't ache like they did, and I recover from a long ride in much shorter time. I think that my per ride average speed has increased, however I am not able to properly evaluate it with only 1000 miles on the bike. I'll know more at the end of next riding season.

I do know that I enjoy the ride more. That is probably the most importent aspect of being bent. If you enjoy the exercise, you will exercise more. I absolutely love my bent, I see no reason to go back to riding a DF. I did the other day and was miserable.

Now if I can only convert my wife (riding partner). I did manage to get her to give it a go this week. She rode it for about 10 minutes and enjoyed herself, but I think that pride is yet in her way. She did ask if they came with the handle bars farther away?

 

[bentcruiser]

I would rather be comfortable and enjoy riding rather than concern myself with speed.

 

[Mike S]

[email protected] (John Foltz) wrote in message
news:<[email protected]>...
> [email protected] (Gene Cosloy) wrote in message
> news:<[email protected]>...
> > ... I claim that DF's have an advantage up hills...
> >
>
> The recumbent speed advantage, if it exists, is due to aerodynamics. One of the great fallacies
> of 'bentdom is that bents are always more aerodynamic than uprights. Not true! If you don't have
> an aerodynamic bike, and if you can't maintain at least 15 and more likely 18-20 mph when
> climbing, then you lose the advantage. That means that smaller and/or easier hills belong to the
> fast 'bents, but bigger ones belong to uprights. The middle territory belongs to whoever is in
> better shape.
>
> >
> > Of course, if your under 50, the above may not apply, you still have a few more aggressive hill
> > climbing years before your joints cry out for a change.
> >
> I guess I have two more years to enjoy my hillclimbing. ;-)

Great comment John. I entirely agree. My hill climbing has steadily improved despite my advancing
age (57). I attribute that to the engine getting better (I now try to ride all year and this year
hope to do 4000 miles). Small rollers I blaze over due to momentum and good spinning and shifting
techniques. Longer hills becomes the engine and while stronger, I don't generate the speed some of
the DFers do. My hill climbing should improve as I use the adapted M5 seat I just put on my Barcroft
Virginia as it is lighter (3 1/2 pounds) and provides a stiffer platform. But ultimately on the
longer hills it comes down to leg strength, not aerodynamics. However, on the flats and downhills,
watch out. Last Sunday I did Bike the Drive in Chicago. The 15 mile stretch from 57th St. South to
Bryn Mawr was into a steady northerly wind. I felt like a formula one driver moving around all those
DFers perched high on their bikes battling that headwind. The Virginia's low laidback stance didn't
eliminate the headwind, but it certainly reduced the frontal mass that had to move through it. As a
result, even at slower speeds, the recumbent had an advantage. And when we turned for home and had a
tailwind, it was 22
+ mph all the way.

Mike S. St. Louis, Mo.

 

[Tom Sherman]

mike s wrote:
>
> Great comment John. I entirely agree. My hill climbing has steadily improved despite my advancing
> age (57). I attribute that to the engine getting better (I now try to ride all year and this year
> hope to do 4000 miles). Small rollers I blaze over due to momentum and good spinning and shifting
> techniques. Longer hills becomes the engine and while stronger, I don't generate the speed some of
> the DFers do. My hill climbing should improve as I use the adapted M5 seat I just put on my
> Barcroft Virginia as it is lighter (3 1/2 pounds) and provides a stiffer platform. But ultimately
> on the longer hills it comes down to leg strength, not aerodynamics. However, on the flats and
> downhills, watch out. Last Sunday I did Bike the Drive in Chicago. The 15 mile stretch from 57th
> St. South to Bryn Mawr was into a steady northerly wind. I felt like a formula one driver moving
> around all those DFers perched high on their bikes battling that headwind. The Virginia's low
> laidback stance didn't eliminate the headwind, but it certainly reduced the frontal mass that had
> to move through it. As a result, even at slower speeds, the recumbent had an advantage. And when
> we turned for home and had a tailwind, it was 22
> + mph all the way.

Mike,

Did you ever mount the fairing on your Virginia?

Tom Sherman - Various HPV's Quad Cities USA (Illinois side)

 

[Harryo]

bentcruiser <[email protected]> wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...
> I would rather be comfortable and enjoy riding rather than concern myself with speed.

Good for you, if that is what makes you happy. However, one might read your post and conclude that
you think if one is concerned with speed, one is giving up comfort and enjoyment, which is certainly
not the case, especially if one rides a bent. Contrary to the belief of some, it is possible to ride
a bent fast, be comfortable and enjoy it immensely. which is what some of us seem to be continually
pointing out, whenever the subject of recumbent speed comes up in a thread.

Harry Jiles

 

[Torben Scheel]

"g19glock1" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...

> Now if I can only convert my wife (riding partner). I did manage to get her to give it a go this
> week. She rode it for about 10 minutes and enjoyed herself, but I think that pride is yet in her
> way. She did ask if they came with the handle bars farther away?

Keep trying - I'm chasing my (soon to be) wife out on her SWB every other day, preparing for a
vacation on the bikes in late July. She hasn't ridden much jet, but the spirit is getting there.