recumbent seating position

[aseenan]

Hi im currently designing a recumbent bike for a university project.
The bike is for a parent and child to use on the school run. Does
anyone have any suggestions for safe and practical seating positions
for both the adult and child. The adult will be the sole operater.
Also, what are the main benifits of a recumbant bike compared to an
upright? i know the eye line would be considerably lower on a
recumbent. how does this affect your vunerability on the road?

Cheers, Andy.

 

[Peter Clinch]

aseenan wrote:
> Hi im currently designing a recumbent bike for a university project.
> The bike is for a parent and child to use on the school run. Does
> anyone have any suggestions for safe and practical seating positions
> for both the adult and child. The adult will be the sole operater.

If the adult is to be the sole operator there's no design to be done.
Take any recumbent bike that can tow a child trailer and that's your
work done.
Beyond that, the Hase Pino is an existing example of a near perfect
tandem for this sort of thing with the captain upright behind a
recumbent stoker, and standard extras for shortening the distance to the
cranks for child stokers. So the parent always has the child in their
view and the child can see where they're going and do some useful work
to. The machine is also more compact than a full recumbent tandem which
is a useful point for storage and riding it back home without the stoker.

See http://kinetics.org.uk/html/pino.shtml

> Also, what are the main benifits of a recumbant bike compared to an
> upright?

Comfort, comfort and comfort. Aerodynamic drag may be less depending on
design, but that's not a given. Issues of superior braking and less
tendency to fly over handlebars are mainly for solo machines rather than
tandems.

> i know the eye line would be considerably lower on a
> recumbent. how does this affect your vunerability on the road?

This is mainly FUD. My eyeline on a touring example is pretty much
exactly the same as a typical motorist's, and examples exist with a
higher eyeline than that. If people can see other cars easily, they can
see me (/if/ they look!). Beyond that my standard view is a head's up
view of where I'm going, compared to many bikes with a crouch position
where the default view is the tarmac just in front.

But back to my earlier paragraphs, it's already been done (and is sold
commercially) by people with a background in recumbent design, so why
are you trying to reinvent their work without the same background?
Seems a bit like trying to do something new to replace wheels, but
ultimately arriving at something sort of round...

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/

 

[Mike]

Peter Clinch wrote:
>
> This is mainly FUD. My eyeline on a touring example is pretty much
> exactly the same as a typical motorist's, and examples exist with a
> higher eyeline than that. If people can see other cars easily, they can
> see me (/if/ they look!). Beyond that my standard view is a head's up
> view of where I'm going, compared to many bikes with a crouch position
> where the default view is the tarmac just in front.

My Limbo is high - I feel that I can see over many of the smaller cars,
thus I can see and avoid traffic, both wheeled, and on foot, lots better.
Having only the closest driver see me isn't enough. I also have to avoid
what's lurking on the other side of his/her monster.

 

[Peter Clinch]

Mike wrote:

> My Limbo is high - I feel that I can see over many of the smaller cars,
> thus I can see and avoid traffic, both wheeled, and on foot, lots better.
> Having only the closest driver see me isn't enough. I also have to avoid
> what's lurking on the other side of his/her monster.

While this is certainly not a bad thing, it isn't /necessary/. Or you'd
be doomed any time you were behind a van, for example.

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/

 

[Jeff Wills]

Peter Clinch <[email protected]> wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...
> Mike wrote:
>
> > My Limbo is high - I feel that I can see over many of the smaller cars,
> > thus I can see and avoid traffic, both wheeled, and on foot, lots better.
> > Having only the closest driver see me isn't enough. I also have to avoid
> > what's lurking on the other side of his/her monster.
>
> While this is certainly not a bad thing, it isn't /necessary/. Or you'd
> be doomed any time you were behind a van, for example.
>
> Pete.

Same thing's true if you're *driving*. Defensive driving/riding is always best.

Jeff

 

[aseenan]

Peter Clinch wrote
>
> But back to my earlier paragraphs, it's already been done (and is sold
> commercially) by people with a background in recumbent design, so why
> are you trying to reinvent their work without the same background?
> Seems a bit like trying to do something new to replace wheels, but
> ultimately arriving at something sort of round...
>

Thanks a lot for some useful information. Hopefully i'll be able to
approach this project from a different angle to those in the
'recumbent design' business, and come up with plenty of new ideas and
concepts. I dont see why someone, who might not have years of
experience in a particular field, shouldn't try it anyway. you never
know, i might come up with something new!! obviously there are people
who know a lot more about these bikes than me, thats why i'm
researching. theres a wealth of young design talent out there and if
they all had your attitude, they might as well give up.

Andy

 

[Peter Clinch]

aseenan wrote:

> Thanks a lot for some useful information. Hopefully i'll be able to
> approach this project from a different angle to those in the
> 'recumbent design' business, and come up with plenty of new ideas and
> concepts. I dont see why someone, who might not have years of
> experience in a particular field, shouldn't try it anyway.

Maybe they want to make some successful products and maybe even some
money? There have been mould breakers working on their own, it's true:
people like Dyson beating Hoover at their own game, Bayliss putting
radios into places Sony never managed, but they are few and far between.

But though I don't want to put a damper on genuine talent, what concept
and idea do you have so far that is actually new? There already are
tandems perfect for the school run, I sometimes see a kiddyback pass me
as I walk into work in the morning. Making it recumbent for a short
trip like the school run is just a way of making it more expensive and
less accessible, because you can't use standard parts so easily.

> know, i might come up with something new!! obviously there are people
> who know a lot more about these bikes than me, thats why i'm
> researching. theres a wealth of young design talent out there and if
> they all had your attitude, they might as well give up.

In this case it appears that you've decided on your project /before/
you've done the research though. Where have you seen a need that is not
fulfilled satisfactorily by existing products?

You can just dismiss what I'm saying as negative stuck in the mud
moanings, but they're questions that you really should be answering
before embarking on a design project unless it's just for your personal
gratification. I assume if it's a university project then it's for a
degree of some sort, so your external examiner is going to be asking
similar at the end.

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/

 

[WivFam]

>
>Hi im currently designing a recumbent bike for a university project.
>The bike is for a parent and child to use on the school run. Does
>anyone have any suggestions for safe and practical seating positions
>for both the adult and child. The adult will be the sole operater.
>Also, what are the main benifits of a recumbant bike compared to an
>upright? i know the eye line would be considerably lower on a
>recumbent. how does this affect your vunerability on the road?
>
>Cheers, Andy.

Typically, however, no recumbents are safe for children, only adults with full
responsibility. One must accept the full responsibility that the driver will
not be suprised by odd shapes and flags and run you over. Overall, you must
conclude that rucumbents are not safe for children, but that any suspension in
the seat should be required for children who can easily damage their prostates
or whatever by a large bump. Thank you. By the way the recumbent powering
seems to have no proper inuendo. It is mainly glutes and hams. No proper
address of the quads in this equation. Glutes are strong, but hams are not.
Quads are great. Therefore, you should compare the angles which you impose upon
yourself in the weight-lifting squat as it is important to you. This squat is
entirely efficiently against gravity. If you are actually a student, you may
then compare horizontal gravity to vertical gravity and arrive at a proportion
of the proportion. don't think anyone has done this. I think they were all
hoping they could get only their asses into it. This helped them.

30 seconds on a recumbent.
Dave ([email protected])

Dave is not akin to and avoidant of most occult fraternities, despite
maintaining his interest in life and conversation, because they have only
harmed or hindered that which was precious to him. Thank you.

 

[Peter Clinch]

WivFam wrote:

> Typically, however, no recumbents are safe for children, only adults with full
> responsibility. One must accept the full responsibility that the driver will
> not be suprised by odd shapes and flags and run you over.

This is ridiculous. Of course no recumbent is fully safe for /anybody/,
and neither is any other sort of cycle. Or car, or main battle tank.

> Overall, you must
> conclude that rucumbents are not safe for children

Then presumably the manufacturers of the KMX "must" have concluded this
and are thus negligent and open for business from lawyers? I think not...

> but that any suspension in
> the seat should be required for children who can easily damage their prostates
> or whatever by a large bump.

And this isn't an issue with conventional saddles?

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/

 

[Edward Dolan]

"Peter Clinch" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> WivFam wrote:
[...]
>> but that any suspension in
>> the seat should be required for children who can easily damage their
>> prostates
>> or whatever by a large bump.
>
> And this isn't an issue with conventional saddles?

I have often wondered if the conventional bicycle saddle used extensively
over many years does not cause bladder and prostate problems. There is no
chance whatever that a recumbent seat would cause these problems, but I not
so sure about saddles. Testicular cancer is another possible casualty of
bike saddles. And possibly hydroceles too. All that pressure in the groin
area caused by sitting on a conventional bike saddle cannot be good for the
human anatomy. Maybe some who claims to be an expert in medical physics
could enlighten us.

--
Regards,

Ed Dolan - Minnesota

 

[Peter Clinch]

Edward Dolan wrote:

> I have often wondered if the conventional bicycle saddle used extensively
> over many years does not cause bladder and prostate problems. There is no
> chance whatever that a recumbent seat would cause these problems, but I not
> so sure about saddles. Testicular cancer is another possible casualty of
> bike saddles. And possibly hydroceles too. All that pressure in the groin
> area caused by sitting on a conventional bike saddle cannot be good for the
> human anatomy.

Conventional saddles support the sit bones, not the groin. Or at least
/should/ support the sit bones and not the groin. If the saddle is the
right shape for the rider (and that may be a big "if") then there should
be no pressure on anything that will cause any more problem than sitting
on the ground. This is not to say it will necessarily be /comfortable/
over a long time, but there should be no particular reason for bladder,
testicular or prostate problems. But there's no guarantee that a Brand
X saddle will be the right shape for a particular rider and the wrong
one could well cause all sorts of problems, starting with considerable
discomfort and escalating from there.

> Maybe some who claims to be an expert in medical physics
> could enlighten us.

Maybe they could, maybe they couldn't. Though I've never claimed to be
an expert in the field I do know what medical physics /is/, so I know
there's no particular link between anatomical problems caused by saddles
and medical physics, so whether some or other expert in the field would
know about saddles you'd have to take on a case by case basis.

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/

 

[john riley]

[email protected] (WivFam) wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...
> >
> >Hi im currently designing a recumbent bike for a university project.
> >The bike is for a parent and child to use on the school run. Does
> >anyone have any suggestions for safe and practical seating positions
> >for both the adult and child. The adult will be the sole operater.
> >Also, what are the main benifits of a recumbant bike compared to an
> >upright? i know the eye line would be considerably lower on a
> >recumbent. how does this affect your vunerability on the road?

Again from Hase:

http://www.hase-bikes.com/ens/trets/index.php

I think this would be more stable than the one wheel trailer bikes. It
could be hooked behind _anything_ and locked up at the school.

 

[john riley]

Hase P.S. , note the photo combining the Pino Peter mentioned, and the Trets:

http://www.hase-bikes.com/ens/trets/index.php?bild=B2

 

[Jon Meinecke]

"Peter Clinch" <[email protected]> wrote
>
> Conventional saddles support the sit bones, not
> the groin. Or at least /should/ support the sit bones
> and not the groin. If the saddle is the right shape for
> the rider (and that may be a big "if") then there should
> be no pressure on anything that will cause any more
> problem than sitting on the ground. [...]

There are some studies that suggest bike seat/saddle
design/usage/fit may play a role in certain medical problems.

http://www.emedicine.com/sports/topic12.htm
http://www.bycycleinc.com/pages/article_MTJ.html (see references)

And there's an industry built around "special" seats to address
the 'problems'.

http://www.spongywonder.com/ %^)

Marketing copy on one special bike seat at LBS read something
like "Our design reduces penile numbness...". Made me wonder
what is the desired/acceptable level of that condition... %^P

> > Maybe some who claims to be an expert in medical physics
> > could enlighten us.
>
> Maybe they could, maybe they couldn't. Though I've
> never claimed to be an expert in the field I do know
> what medical physics /is/ [...]

The chances of the lately perennial persona and self-
imagined master baiter of ARBR ever knowing what
it is, or even knowing what IT is are small, but seemingly
significantly larger than the possibility he will contribute
meaningful and/or insightful content or make a logical,
cogent argument about anything.

There's a Monty Python sketch in here, somewhere,
perhaps several. The argument, dead parrot, Piranha
brothers, black knight,... Take your pick.

Jon Meinecke

 

[Edward Dolan]

"Peter Clinch" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Edward Dolan wrote:
>
>> I have often wondered if the conventional bicycle saddle used extensively
>> over many years does not cause bladder and prostate problems. There is no
>> chance whatever that a recumbent seat would cause these problems, but I
>> not so sure about saddles. Testicular cancer is another possible casualty
>> of bike saddles. And possibly hydroceles too. All that pressure in the
>> groin area caused by sitting on a conventional bike saddle cannot be good
>> for the human anatomy.
>
> Conventional saddles support the sit bones, not the groin. Or at least
> /should/ support the sit bones and not the groin. If the saddle is the
> right shape for the rider (and that may be a big "if") then there should
> be no pressure on anything that will cause any more problem than sitting
> on the ground. This is not to say it will necessarily be /comfortable/
> over a long time, but there should be no particular reason for bladder,
> testicular or prostate problems. But there's no guarantee that a Brand X
> saddle will be the right shape for a particular rider and the wrong one
> could well cause all sorts of problems, starting with considerable
> discomfort and escalating from there.
>
>> Maybe someone who claims to be an expert in medical physics could
>> enlighten us.
>
> Maybe they could, maybe they couldn't. Though I've never claimed to be an
> expert in the field I do know what medical physics /is/, so I know there's
> no particular link between anatomical problems caused by saddles and
> medical physics, so whether some or other expert in the field would know
> about saddles you'd have to take on a case by case basis.

Still, an awful lot of cyclists seem to have problems with organs and
tissues located in the groin area, including Lance Armstrong who developed
testicular cancer which almost killed him. Your bit about the sit bones is
right on, but the fact is that most of us are not on our sit bones to the
exclusion of not being on anything else. Very many cyclists complain of
penile numbness, so that right there tells you they are doing something
wrong. Do you think kids know about that sit bone business?

We can't be sure that there is no connection between bike saddles and
medical problems in the groin area, despite what this particular expert in
medical physics has to say about it.

--
Regards,

Ed Dolan - Minnesota

 

[Edward Dolan]

"Jon Meinecke" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:1098365700.KbG/nubnDa8LqatGdHhGNw@teranews...
> "Peter Clinch" <[email protected]> wrote
>>
>> Conventional saddles support the sit bones, not
>> the groin. Or at least /should/ support the sit bones
>> and not the groin. If the saddle is the right shape for
>> the rider (and that may be a big "if") then there should
>> be no pressure on anything that will cause any more
>> problem than sitting on the ground. [...]
>
> There are some studies that suggest bike seat/saddle
> design/usage/fit may play a role in certain medical problems.
>
> http://www.emedicine.com/sports/topic12.htm
> http://www.bycycleinc.com/pages/article_MTJ.html (see references)
>
> And there's an industry built around "special" seats to address
> the 'problems'.
>
> http://www.spongywonder.com/ %^)
>
> Marketing copy on one special bike seat at LBS read something
> like "Our design reduces penile numbness...". Made me wonder
> what is the desired/acceptable level of that condition... %^P
>
>> > Maybe some who claims to be an expert in medical physics
>> > could enlighten us.
>>
>> Maybe they could, maybe they couldn't. Though I've
>> never claimed to be an expert in the field I do know
>> what medical physics /is/ [...]
>
> The chances of the lately perennial persona and self-
> imagined master baiter of ARBR ever knowing what
> it is, or even knowing what IT is are small, but seemingly
> significantly larger than the possibility he will contribute
> meaningful and/or insightful content or make a logical,
> cogent argument about anything.

I am determined never to look up what medical physics is about. Instead, it
is my aim to goad this donkey from Scotland to tell us what medical physics
is. Either that or I will continue to poke fun at him and his occupation
until hell freezes over. He has made his occupation an issue by telling us
what it is that he does with his every signature. Like Kerry, he never knows
when to shut up about himself.

Meinecke is mostly just jealous of me. I don't blame him though as there is
a lot here to be jealous of. He would like to be able to engender posts like
I do, but it is beyond him. You have to have a broad education to do what I
do. Narrow minded skunks like him can only do one thing and that is to stay
on topic, even if the topic is boring enough to drive a numskull out of his
skull. But it takes a special skill too to be that kind of boring. But a
dullard like him I never was.

> There's a Monty Python sketch in here, somewhere,
> perhaps several. The argument, dead parrot, Piranha
> brothers, black knight,... Take your pick.

Only a screw ball like Meinecke would watch something so stupid as Monty
Python. That is for the English, who as all the world knows have a very
weird sense of humor. Hey, you English ... move over - here is another
American nut case for you! But his name looks German, so he may not really
fit in all that well.

--
Regards,

Ed Dolan - Minnesota

 

[Peter Clinch]

Edward Dolan wrote:

> Still, an awful lot of cyclists seem to have problems with organs and
> tissues located in the groin area, including Lance Armstrong who developed
> testicular cancer which almost killed him. Your bit about the sit bones is
> right on, but the fact is that most of us are not on our sit bones to the
> exclusion of not being on anything else. Very many cyclists complain of
> penile numbness, so that right there tells you they are doing something
> wrong. Do you think kids know about that sit bone business?

I doubt it in a large number of cases, and I also think that the fact
that a lot of people are labouring under the misapprehension that a $70
bike from Walmart will somehow represent the acme of comfort and
technical sophistication won't help either, as said items will probably
have appalling saddles, albeit with "Gel Comfort" written on them to
show how good they must be.

If it's an intrinsic problem we would find a hugely greater percentage
of these problems in nations with a cycling culture such as NL and
Denmark. I'm not aware of any such disproportionate incidence rate and
in the absence of any such obvious trends it looks like an awareness
problem that's best treated by education to remove ignorance.

> We can't be sure that there is no connection between bike saddles and
> medical problems in the groin area, despite what this particular expert in
> medical physics has to say about it.

What expert in medical physics? I've never claimed to be any such
thing, but as I've already pointed out medical physics is not especially
concerned with anatomy. This seems to be an awareness problem for you,
that would be best treated by education to remove ignorance.

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/

 

[Edward Dolan]

"Jon Meinecke" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:1098365700.KbG/nubnDa8LqatGdHhGNw@teranews...
> "Peter Clinch" <[email protected]> wrote
>>
>> Conventional saddles support the sit bones, not
>> the groin. Or at least /should/ support the sit bones
>> and not the groin. If the saddle is the right shape for
>> the rider (and that may be a big "if") then there should
>> be no pressure on anything that will cause any more
>> problem than sitting on the ground. [...]
>
> There are some studies that suggest bike seat/saddle
> design/usage/fit may play a role in certain medical problems.
>
> http://www.emedicine.com/sports/topic12.htm
> http://www.bycycleinc.com/pages/article_MTJ.html (see references)
>
> And there's an industry built around "special" seats to address
> the 'problems'.
>
> http://www.spongywonder.com/ %^)
>
> Marketing copy on one special bike seat at LBS read something
> like "Our design reduces penile numbness...". Made me wonder
> what is the desired/acceptable level of that condition... %^P

Everyone on the group who thinks bike saddles have nothing to do with
medical problems in the groin area should carefully read the above articles.

I found this to be particularly interesting:

"Bicycle seat design (eg, shape) may be the major extrinsic factor for the
development of bicycle seat neuropathy. Results of computer modelling
reported by Spears et al in 2003 have shown that wider bicycle seats that
support the ischial tuberosities decrease pressure on the perineal area."
[see first link above for attribution]

Hells Bells! I have been saying that from day one, over 25 years ago. Those
narrow racing saddles are murder. I knew from the beginning that you had to
have a wider platform in the rear of the saddle for those sit bones to rest
on. Damn racers are all crazy anyway! Screw them!

--
Regards,

Ed Dolan - Minnesota

 

[Edward Dolan]

"Peter Clinch" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Edward Dolan wrote:
>
>> Still, an awful lot of cyclists seem to have problems with organs and
>> tissues located in the groin area, including Lance Armstrong who
>> developed testicular cancer which almost killed him. Your bit about the
>> sit bones is right on, but the fact is that most of us are not on our sit
>> bones to the exclusion of not being on anything else. Very many cyclists
>> complain of penile numbness, so that right there tells you they are doing
>> something wrong. Do you think kids know about that sit bone business?
>
> I doubt it in a large number of cases, and I also think that the fact that
> a lot of people are labouring under the misapprehension that a $70 bike
> from Walmart will somehow represent the acme of comfort and technical
> sophistication won't help either, as said items will probably have
> appalling saddles, albeit with "Gel Comfort" written on them to show how
> good they must be.

Open any bike catalog and you will see literally several pages devoted to
bike saddles. Those Wal-Mart bikes with their comfort saddles on them are an
honest attempt to address a problem that you claim hardly exists. The only
numskulls in this scenario are the racers with their narrow racing style
saddles on their $2000. bikes.

> If it's an intrinsic problem we would find a hugely greater percentage of
> these problems in nations with a cycling culture such as NL and Denmark.
> I'm not aware of any such disproportionate incidence rate and in the
> absence of any such obvious trends it looks like an awareness problem
> that's best treated by education to remove ignorance.

Those Europeans who cycle a lot are most likely just commuting short
distances and not putting on many miles at all. A lot of this stuff only
kicks in on all day week long types of rides.

The way to solve a problem is by designing out what is causing the problem
in the first place, not by so-called education. I blame the designers of
bike saddles for the discomfort and medical problems they cause, not the end
user.

>> We can't be sure that there is no connection between bike saddles and
>> medical problems in the groin area, despite what this particular expert
>> in medical physics has to say about it.
>
> What expert in medical physics? I've never claimed to be any such thing,
> but as I've already pointed out medical physics is not especially
> concerned with anatomy. This seems to be an awareness problem for you,
> that would be best treated by education to remove ignorance.

I am waiting for you to explain your mysterious occupation. Is it even a
profession or is it like calling a janitor a sanitation engineer? Perhaps
you sweep the corridors in the hospital and empty the trash containers?

While education is important, it is not the answer to most of the problems
that plague human kind. The eternal question is how to make people better,
not how to make them smarter. I am sure you do not have a clue.

--
Regards,

Ed Dolan - Minnesota

 

[magpie83]

It appears there are many different attitudes to the problems
encountered by recumbent cycle users. Clearly, therefore, design is
still to be done. To iron out these problems with safety and powering
etc.

Perhaps, like Dyson himself concluded, there is a much more efficient
way of doing a job machines have been doing for years. Vacuum cleaners
used bags, this was the norm, and was never questioned. Look how wrong
we were! My point being, have we taken the recubent vehicle as far as
we ever can?! Or are we just at a happy medium, like we were with our
vacuum cleaners!

I therefore think it is a good idea to look at the possibilities of
improving safety, powering, weather protection and any other problems
your research uncovers! (Maybe it will replace the car! Perhaps you
won't, but who are we to judge!)

So, lets all try and help out, and give andy our own experiences of
using these vehicles. As who better to ask about making improvements
than the people who use the vehicles!

Good Luck with your research and design.