P
Peter Clinch
Guest
Alan Braggins wrote:
> At least one poster here has a recumbent and some uprights, and finds
> an upright more appropriate for at least some journeys (not racing),
> so there can be genuine disadvantages too, beyond the price.
Absolutely: my fleet has a MTB, a folder and a freight bike alongside
the recumbent. There are folding 'bents, but none that fold as well as
a Brom, there are freight 'bents, but not in the niche the 8 Freight
sits in, and there are off-road 'bents, but none approaching the low
price I'm willing to pay for a MTB as I don't do much off road and not
really cut out for balance critical stuff in any case.
> as they go over a bump. Bike suspension can compensate for this, but is
> not free or weightless (and is available for uprights too, of course).
Though recumbents are often better suited to it. With the direction of
push being at right angles to the suspension travel there's far less
tendency to pogo and waste energy. It should be noted that suspension
is at least as much to do with efficiency as comfort, which is a useful
side benefit. If a bike hits a bump then the whole thing loses energy
as it travels up over it. If there's good suspension the wheel moves
but not the frame, rider or any luggage, so the rougher the surface and
heavier the load the more suspension actually makes the bike perform
/better/, despite the extra weight. Of course, that's why championship
MTBs have suspension, not to make life comfier!
> The huge range of recumbents means that not all of these disadvantages
> need be true for any particular machine - and no one upright bicycle
> is ideal for all possible uses, so expecting a recumbent to be better
> for all possible uses is unfair. (And all this is second hand, I don't
> have a recumbent.)
It's quite true though. I'd say that an upright has a better chance of
being a "do everything to some useful degree" bike, but there are many
jobs for which the /right/ recumbent is a better specific machine. If I
only had one bike it would probably be an upright, something like a
Birdy, Bike Friday or Moulton. But as it is I have space for several,
and when I'm touring I use the 'bent and wouldn't swap it for any
upright tourer I've come across to date.
> (I see from http://www.personal.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/cycling.htm
> that Peter finds an upright folder more convenient for "short hacks
> and errands",
And the 8 Freight is better for heavy loads, or compared to something
like a Brox much nimbler through traffic. And the MTB gets me serious
offroad places for minimal money.
And the Muni is better for Big Dumb Fun without having to travel more
than 500m from home!
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/
> At least one poster here has a recumbent and some uprights, and finds
> an upright more appropriate for at least some journeys (not racing),
> so there can be genuine disadvantages too, beyond the price.
Absolutely: my fleet has a MTB, a folder and a freight bike alongside
the recumbent. There are folding 'bents, but none that fold as well as
a Brom, there are freight 'bents, but not in the niche the 8 Freight
sits in, and there are off-road 'bents, but none approaching the low
price I'm willing to pay for a MTB as I don't do much off road and not
really cut out for balance critical stuff in any case.
> as they go over a bump. Bike suspension can compensate for this, but is
> not free or weightless (and is available for uprights too, of course).
Though recumbents are often better suited to it. With the direction of
push being at right angles to the suspension travel there's far less
tendency to pogo and waste energy. It should be noted that suspension
is at least as much to do with efficiency as comfort, which is a useful
side benefit. If a bike hits a bump then the whole thing loses energy
as it travels up over it. If there's good suspension the wheel moves
but not the frame, rider or any luggage, so the rougher the surface and
heavier the load the more suspension actually makes the bike perform
/better/, despite the extra weight. Of course, that's why championship
MTBs have suspension, not to make life comfier!
> The huge range of recumbents means that not all of these disadvantages
> need be true for any particular machine - and no one upright bicycle
> is ideal for all possible uses, so expecting a recumbent to be better
> for all possible uses is unfair. (And all this is second hand, I don't
> have a recumbent.)
It's quite true though. I'd say that an upright has a better chance of
being a "do everything to some useful degree" bike, but there are many
jobs for which the /right/ recumbent is a better specific machine. If I
only had one bike it would probably be an upright, something like a
Birdy, Bike Friday or Moulton. But as it is I have space for several,
and when I'm touring I use the 'bent and wouldn't swap it for any
upright tourer I've come across to date.
> (I see from http://www.personal.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/cycling.htm
> that Peter finds an upright folder more convenient for "short hacks
> and errands",
And the 8 Freight is better for heavy loads, or compared to something
like a Brox much nimbler through traffic. And the MTB gets me serious
offroad places for minimal money.
And the Muni is better for Big Dumb Fun without having to travel more
than 500m from home!
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/