Recumbent Hill Climbing ??

[Edward Dolan]

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

> On 11 Jan 2004 11:20:13 -0800, [email protected] (Edward Dolan) wrote:
>
> >Most folks who ride recumbents are not ever going to improve themselves much physically or any
> >other way. Therefore, it is extremely interesting to hear what neophytes have to say about
> >recumbents. Yes, they will improve their riding skills and their conditioning to some small
> >extent, but they are not ever going to turn into world class hill climbers and racers. I am
> >really put off by all the advice that newbies receive from some of the old hands here on ARBR.
> >Most of it is very bum advice for newbies and is only suitable for hard core recumbent cyclists.
>
> Uhm, this is simply an assertion without any facts or logic to back it up. The sort of thing one
> might expect to see on Indymedia. In other words, it reeks of ideology.
>
> But whatever, eh? Listen to novices if that's what turns you on. It's a free country, and a matter
> of almost infinitesimal import.

I do not know why you are taking my posts apart paragraph by paragraph when you could just have
easily responded to them in toto all in one post. I am not going to bother to follow your lead as it
just creates needless confusion and redundancy. Besides which, you are not making any worthwhile
points anyway.

Most of the time what I am saying does not require any "facts" as I am merely stating a common
observation. I am always perfectly logical, but one man's logic is another man's total confusion.
There is no ideology connected with cycling for heaven's sake! Let us reserve that term for
political posts.

I will take a novice over an "expert" like you any day when I want to know what the general reaction
is to recumbent bicycles. You are hard core. I am not interested in your views because of that fact
alone. But you might at least have the good sense to realize that you are hard core and that much of
what you have to say to the novice and the newbie is therefore crackpot and just plain bum advice.

Yes, it certainly is a free country and everyone in it can read what you have to say about
recumbents and they can read what I have to say about recumbents and then they can choose whom to
believe. Does any of this matter in the grand scheme of things. Of course not! But in the grand
scheme of things, nothing matters - not you, not me, not even
Mr. Sherman!

Ed Dolan - Minnesota

 

[Edward Dolan]

Cletus Lee <[email protected]> wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...

> In article <[email protected]>, "TimH" <timh at nospam.com> says...
> >
> > The average bent is 10lbs heavier than a DF. The average bent rider is probably 20lbs heavier.
> > Begin from there. Cut down the weight of both and you'll be competitive with DF's.
> >
> > As someone said, this ain't rocket science.
> >
>
> You might want to talk 'apples to apples'. True the _average_ bent is 10 lbs heavier than the
> _lightest_ DF. But you can find 'bents that can compete ounce for ounce and I would guess that
> there are more heavy DF sold that heavy 'bents. So without any statistics to back me up, the true
> statement is that the _average_ bent is probably lighter than the _average_ DF.
>
> Also the average 20 lb overweight bent rider is not any more competetive than the _average_ 20 lb
> overweight DF rider.
>
> Give me a 'recumbent trained' competetive DF rider and a typical 25-35lb racing recumbent. and you
> will find that person much faster than his/her DF peers.

What gets me is that Cletus is just as stubborn and pigheaded as I am, but he is revered on this
newsgroup whereas I am excoriated. I wonder if that is because maybe he is reflecting all the biases
and prejudices that prevail here whereas I am not. Something to think about.

I have known many recumbent cyclists who get into recumbents because they are too fat to ride any
other kind of bike. Cletus gets all confused about the word "average".

To claim that performance recumbents (which is what this discussion is all about) are just as light
as performance uprights is ridiculous. His beloved P-38 is close to 30 lbs I believe. Most
performance uprights are now less than 20 lbs.

But why should I bother to discuss anything with someone who has kill filed me. He is an ostrich and
likes to be deaf, blind and dumb.

Ed Dolan - Minnesota

 

[Scott]

[email protected] (Edward Dolan) wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...
> Freewheeling <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:<[email protected]>...
>
> > On Fri, 9 Jan 2004 20:56:01 -0600, Cletus D. Lee <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > >I have spent a fair amount of time 'bent climbing in the Appalachians and Carpathians. I did 86
> > >miles of 105 in the 2002 Mountains of Misery. I averaged 13 mph. Three other 'bents completed
> > >the century that involved over 12,000 feet of climbing.
> >
> > As one of those three (with Cletus' support and company) I'll weigh in by saying than for any
> > longish climbs of more than 12%, unless you're as fit and light as Rich Pinto, there's a demon
> > that grabs hold of the back of the bike and digs in his heels. But if the hills aren't long, or
> > are less than 12%, you just might find that you're faster on a recumbent than an upright. And
> > it's ridiculous of those guys to toss it in after one ride! It takes at least a season to build
> > up the right muscles and technique for recumbent climbing.
>
> There it is again! More nonsense about the "right muscles" and technique. Does anyone take any of
> this serious? A word to one and all who have not been totally brainwashed by this folderol: when
> anyone starts talking about lower gears, spinning and the right muscles, that is your cue that you
> are hearing excuses for why recumbents don't climb worth a damn! And I am not talking about 12%
> grades either. I am talking about 6% grades! The only way you are going to be fast climbing a hill
> on a recumbent is if you work at it like an athlete possessed. There is no other way.
>
> Ed Dolan - Minnesota

Face it, Ed You're just a lazy, flaccid slob. Flaccid, flaccid, flaccid. Riders with just a
reasonable amount of enthusiasm (not fanatics) can become reasonably proficient at hill climbing.
You just can't handle the truth. Lots of people climb hills perfectly well, but *YOU* can't. You're
flaccid, Ed. Embrace that inner slug. Love the limp thighs you foster. Watch that cellulite congeal.
The rest of us will be out climbing hills, using proper gearing and developed 'bent muscles AND
getting that huge payoff of the descent, the icing on the cake.

Scott

 

[Tom Sherman]

Freewheeling wrote:

> ... Rowing is precisely the opposite. Most people start at a stroke rate that's far too high, and
> have to be taught to slow things down and pull harder. You can tell the novices in the boathouse
> by their stroke rate, usually. They look like they're sprinting all the time, but their speed is
> abysmal. Of course, those are the folks you'd need to consult if you were thinking about rowing
> seriously without injury. Just stay away from Carl Douglas, for heaven sake. And remember to kick
> forward and pull like hell just before the catch.

The TRUE HPV PERSON would build a screw driven boat with pedals and go much faster than the rowers
that have significantly better conditioning than he or she does.

Tom Sherman - Quad Cities

 

[Edward Dolan]

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

> On 10 Jan 2004 15:33:55 -0800, [email protected] (Edward Dolan) wrote:
>
> >> GC: Ed is just a congenital slacker. In his own words, anyone who seeks out and enjoys hill
> >> climbing is an "idiot."
> >
> >I stand by my statement 100%!
>
> Well that's a tipoff you don't know what you're talking about, right there. No one stands by a
> judgment call 100% in an area where they have minimal expertise unless they'd just rather be right
> than happy.

You are a funny fellow Freewheeling! I have all the expertise I need in hill climbing to know that I
do not like it at all. I am also perfectly within my rights to regard anyone who does like to hill
climb on a recumbent as an idiot. So, you like to hill climb on a recumbent. So, I think you are an
idiot. What is there about that you do not understand? And more importantly, why is it that I never
know what the hell you are talking about anyway? Maybe it is because you think the same way you post
- in bits and pieces.

Ed Dolan - Minnesota

 

[Tom Sherman]

Freewheeling wrote:

> ... This reminds me of a fellow named Swale from Chicago who used to ask directions and then
> always go the opposite way. He just figured everyone was lying to him, so he'd outsmart them....

He must have spent too much time talking to his alderman.

Tom Sherman - Quad Cities

 

[Tom Sherman]

Scott wrote:

> ... Face it, Ed You're just a lazy, flaccid slob. Flaccid, flaccid, flaccid....

This sentence would have made more sense if it had read, "Face it, E.D. You're just a lazy, flaccid
slob. Flaccid, flaccid, flaccid."

Tom Sherman - Quad Cities

 

[Joe Keenan]

[email protected] (Edward Dolan) wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...
> [email protected] (Joe Keenan) wrote in message
> news:<[email protected]>...
>
> > [email protected] (Edward Dolan) wrote in message
> > >
> > > > <SNIP) > There it is again! More nonsense about the "right muscles" and
> > > technique. Does anyone take any of this serious? A word to one and all who have not been
> > > totally brainwashed by this folderol: when anyone starts talking about lower gears, spinning
> > > and the right muscles, that is your cue that you are hearing excuses for why recumbents don't
> > > climb worth a damn! And I am not talking about 12% grades either. I am talking about 6%
> > > grades! The only way you are going to be fast climbing a hill on a recumbent is if you work at
> > > it like an athlete possessed. There is no other way.
> > >
> > > Ed Dolan - Minnesota <SNIP
> >
> > You're right Ed. You're only here to cause chaos and be disruptive. Recumbents are slower on
> > long and steep hills for a myriad of reasons and workin' your a** off isn't going to get you
> > back to what you could do on a DF. Go back to politics......
> >
> > Slow Joe
>
> Jeez, the guy agrees with me and then accuses me of causing chaos and being disruptive. You can't
> win with some folks!
>
> Slow Ed Dolan - Minnesota

As Mary says in the movie "Something About Mary". Ah Ed, I'm just f****** with ya."

Slowing Down Joe

 

[Larry Varney]

Edward Dolan wrote:
>I have done the Wisconsin week long bike tour many times (GRABAAWR) and I have never seen so many
>heavy cyclists in my life.

Were you on GRABAAWR 2000?

--
Larry Varney Cold Spring, KY http://home.fuse.net/larryvarney

 

[Tom Sherman]

Cletus Lee wrote:

> ... You might want to talk 'apples to apples'. True the _average_ bent is 10 lbs heavier than the
> _lightest_ DF. But you can find 'bents that can compete ounce for ounce and I would guess that
> there are more heavy DF sold that heavy 'bents. So without any statistics to back me up, the true
> statement is that the _average_ bent is probably lighter than the _average_ DF.

If we include all the Flying Pigeons in China, the average recumbent is likely lighter than the
average upright.

It appears that comparable recumbents are still heavier than uprights. For example, a Bacchetta Aero
is about 5 pounds heavier than a titanium alloy DF with Ultegra components.

Tom Sherman - Quad Cities

 

[Larry Varney]

Edward Dolan wrote:

> But everyone is the world's foremost expert on their own body - what it can do and what it
> can't do.
>

The discussion was not about anyone's body, but about the fact that the best information
comes from those with experience, not from those with inexperience. You claim the latter. Or
do you disagree?

> You are constantly being amazed by what I say. And then you are always accusing me of not meeting
> your arguments properly. We have a total disconnect apparently. You need to get outside the box of
> conventional thinking about things and try an alternative path occasionally. There is always more
> than one way to think about something.
>
> Ed Dolan - Minnesota

Yes, there are more than one way to think about something. And, it is obvious that many of
those ways are incorrect. You claim that the best information about something - in this
particular case, recumbents - comes from those with no experience, while I maintain that the
best information comes from those with experience. Ignorance may be bliss, but I'll take
knowledge any day.
--
Larry Varney Cold Spring, KY http://home.fuse.net/larryvarney

 

[Tom Sherman]

Edward Dolan wrote:

> ... I have never yet heard Mr. Sherman say anything complimentary about the Quad Cities and I have
> heard him say many very negative things about the State of Iowa (home of RAGBRAI, the oldest and
> biggest week long organized group bike tour in the country)....

When one lives in Illinois, it is part of ones civic duty to make fun of Iowa and Indiana.

Tom Sherman - Quad Cities

 

[Bentbiker]

Living in Illinois with the Bulls, Bears, Cubs and white sox, I wouldn't
be making fun of any other state

Tom Sherman wrote:
> Edward Dolan wrote:
>
>> ... I have never yet heard Mr. Sherman say anything complimentary about the Quad Cities and I
>> have heard him say many very negative things about the State of Iowa (home of RAGBRAI, the oldest
>> and biggest week long organized group bike tour in the country)....
>
>
> When one lives in Illinois, it is part of ones civic duty to make fun of Iowa and Indiana.
>
> Tom Sherman - Quad Cities

 

[Tom Sherman]

bentbiker wrote:
> Living in Illinois with the Bulls, Bears, Cubs and white sox, I wouldn't be making fun of any
> other state

WAIT 'TILL NEXT YEAR!

Tom Sherman - Quad Cities

 

[Mark Leuck]

"Tom Sherman" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> bentbiker wrote:
> > Living in Illinois with the Bulls, Bears, Cubs and white sox, I wouldn't be making fun of any
> > other state
>
> WAIT 'TILL NEXT YEAR!
>
> Tom Sherman - Quad Cities

Illinois has been saying that one for years

 

[Edward Dolan]

[email protected] (Scott) wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...

[...]

> Face it, Ed You're just a lazy, flaccid slob. Flaccid, flaccid, flaccid. Riders with just a
> reasonable amount of enthusiasm (not fanatics) can become reasonably proficient at hill climbing.
> You just can't handle the truth. Lots of people climb hills perfectly well, but *YOU* can't.
> You're flaccid, Ed. Embrace that inner slug. Love the limp thighs you foster. Watch that cellulite
> congeal. The rest of us will be out climbing hills, using proper gearing and developed 'bent
> muscles AND getting that huge payoff of the descent, the icing on the cake.
>
> Scott

Heck! If I lived in the Mountain West I would have to learn to love the hills too. But I live in the
flats of Minnesota and so I can disdain all the effort that is required in order to surmount those
dog gone hills! Yea, I can cruise along with very little effort and enjoy the experience without
turning it into some kind of god awful exercise. The only thing I have against my present locale is
the dang blasted wind, which in my humble opinion is even worse than hills. They are not building
all these wind power generator farms in this region for nothing.

One point for young Scott to ponder though. One of these days he is going to be old Scott and then
he will just naturally gravitate to any flat areas that he can find there in the Mountain West. It
will be the beginning of wisdom for him.

Has anyone but me ever noticed how many amusements in the world are built around gravity and
centrifugal force. Apparently, the world is nothing but a carnival park for some. Many cyclists get
themselves killed going too fast downhill - all just for the thrill of a bit of gravity. Scott might
really enjoy jumping out of airplanes too, with a chute on of course.

Let us all now worship at the altar of speed. Frankly, when I want to go fast, I go to the airport
and buy a ticket for a ride on a jet airplane.

Ed Dolan - Minnesota

 

[Edward Dolan]

Tom Sherman <[email protected]> wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...

> Scott wrote:
>
> > ... Face it, Ed You're just a lazy, flaccid slob. Flaccid, flaccid, flaccid....
>
> This sentence would have made more sense if it had read, "Face it, E.D. You're just a lazy,
> flaccid slob. Flaccid, flaccid, flaccid."
>
> Tom Sherman - Quad Cities

One of these nuts lives in Arizona and the other nut lives in Illinois. How can we unite these two
nuts so they can have a love feast together? As long as they both stay the hell out of Minnesota I
will be content.

Ed Dolan - Minnesota

 

[Edward Dolan]

[email protected] (Joe Keenan) wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...

> [email protected] (Edward Dolan) wrote in message
> news:<[email protected]>...
[...]

> > > You're right Ed. You're only here to cause chaos and be disruptive. Recumbents are slower on
> > > long and steep hills for a myriad of reasons and workin' your a** off isn't going to get you
> > > back to what you could do on a DF. Go back to politics......
> > >
> > > Slow Joe
> >
> > Jeez, the guy agrees with me and then accuses me of causing chaos and being disruptive. You
> > can't win with some folks!
> >
> > Slow Ed Dolan - Minnesota
>
> As Mary says in the movie "Something About Mary". Ah Ed, I'm just f****** with ya."
>
> Slowing Down Joe

Well, me too Joe! Do I have to put a smiley after every sentence?

Just Barely Moving Ed Dolan - Minnesota

 

[Edward Dolan]

Larry Varney <[email protected]> wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...

> Edward Dolan wrote:
>
> > But everyone is the world's foremost expert on their own body - what it can do and what it
> > can't do.

> The discussion was not about anyone's body, but about the fact that the best information comes
> from those with experience, not from those with inexperience. You claim the latter. Or do you
> disagree?

No, the discussion was about what one is an expert on. Expertise does not relate to a particular
experience in this context, unless it is a generalized experience from the mere fact of having
lived. It is just God given if you will. And I was stating that everyone is an expert on their own
body, what it can do and what it can't do. That relates directly to the factor of what such a person
is going to think about a recumbent after he has a ride or two on it. I don't want such a person to
become experienced as he will then no longer have a pristine impression of a recumbent as it
compares to an upright.

The best discussions I have ever had about recumbents were with newbies who were just getting their
riding legs so to speak. I have almost forgotten what my first impressions of recumbents were they
were so long ago. But when I talk to a newbie it all comes back to me. They are always correct in
their impressions as I was too when it was all new to me and I don't try to talk them out of their
impressions. When I advise newbies I try to remember all of this and not talk about esoteric stuff
which may or may not turn out to be true for them. They all of them tell me that recumbents are
slower and are especially slower going up hill. They also tell me that recumbents don't handle as
well. I believe them.

So very many on this newsgroup are super athletes and are into speed above all else. I have never
known any new recumbent cyclist who got into it for any other reason than comfort. We need to always
remember that prime fact. Speed may or may not come. Hill climbing ability may or may not come. I do
not like the constant hype that goes on with respect to those two parameters. Comfort yes!
Everything else, maybe!

> > You are constantly being amazed by what I say. And then you are always accusing me of not
> > meeting your arguments properly. We have a total disconnect apparently. You need to get outside
> > the box of conventional thinking about things and try an alternative path occasionally. There is
> > always more than one way to think about something.
> >
> > Ed Dolan - Minnesota
>
> Yes, there are more than one way to think about something. And, it is obvious that many of
> those ways are incorrect. You claim that the best information about something - in this
> particular case, recumbents - comes from those with no experience, while I maintain that the
> best information comes from those with experience. Ignorance may be bliss, but I'll take
> knowledge any day.

Well, no, I am not exactly claiming what you say I am. But what I am saying is that it is very
valuable to listen to those with just a little experience of recumbents because they will often
times tell us things that we have forgotten. Even some one with absolutely no experience of
recumbents can still have some valuable insights.

It is possible to think about something and come to a correct and sound judgement without having to
actually have hands on experience. If it were not, the world and all of us in it would be in a
terrible mess. Mostly I grant you that we rely on the reports of others more knowledgeable than
ourselves for our information. But we muse on our own too, and we can do it abstractly without any
experience in reality. All the arts are mostly based on this kind of thinking once you get beyond
the technicalities of the art. It can either be very good or very bad, but it is not to be
discounted because it is mostly imagined as opposed to being anchored in experience.

I imagined what it would be like to ride a recmunbent long before I actually bought one - and I was
not too far off either. If I had not been able to imagine it, I would never have gotten one. I only
learned what all the experts had to say about recumbents after I had already accumulated several of
my own. Most of what the experts had to say about recumbents agreed with my own impressions, but I
quickly learned to separate the gonzo athletes from myself. Hell, I am lucky to be alive let alone
still riding any kind of bicycle. Above all else, I have to listen to my own body and act
accordingly. I am an expert on my own body because I have a world of experience of my own body. I
think that is about all I was ever trying to say.

Ed Dolan - Minnesota

 

[Edward Dolan]

Larry Varney <[email protected]> wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...

> Edward Dolan wrote:

> >I have done the Wisconsin week long bike tour many times (GRABAAWR) and I have never seen so many
> >heavy cyclists in my life.
>
> Were you on GRABAAWR 2000?

I refuse to answer that question on the grounds that I might incriminate myself! But the correct
answer is ... yes!

GRABAAWR is a great ride by the way for anyone who loves Wisconsin. It helps if the weather
cooperates which is not always the case. It is relatively flat for the most part, although each
and every year that I have ever done it I end up walking the same four hills. Each year I think
maybe I will be able to make those hills but I never do. Let's face it! As you get older you do
not get any stronger.

The main problem with GRABAAWR is that you can count on at least one day of solid rain. And
occasionally the temp can be in the high 90's with a humidity to match. But the scenery never stops
and before you know it you are back in Prairie du Chien from whence you initially departed for Eagle
River in far Northern Wisconsin. You have in essence followed the entire length of the Wisconsin
River all the way through the State from the Upper Peninsula of Michigan to its merging with the
mighty Mississippi River. Ah! those were the days!

Ed Dolan - Minnesota