SWB vs Easy Racer

[David Cambon]

Short Wheel-Base vs Easy Racer

Sorry for bringing this topic up again but I have seen a lot of discussion on this newsgroup that is
not all that clear. For the sake of newbies a few things should be clarified by you level-headed and
objective scientific types who read this list.

By SWB I mean all the highracers (eg Bacchetta Aero, Vision Saber etc) and all the non-lowracer
SWB's with the smaller front wheel (eg Burley HepCat, Lightning P-38, Rans V-Rex, Turner T-Lite,
Bachetta Giro, TerraCycle Terraza, Vision R40, Angletech etc).

By Easy Racer I mean the Tour Easy, GRR, TiGRR and all clones of that configuration made by
other people.

There has been a lot of foaming-at-the-mouth, drooling and just plain ga-ga over the new crop of
Bacchettas. I want one too so don't start flaming me just yet. That Bacchetta mesh seat is more
comfortable than my furniture at home. I love those bars too. However, the basic idea is not new.
Just go to Europe and have a look for yourself. The Bacchetta Aero even comes with Bram Moens seat
from the Netherlands.

The problem I have is the people on this list who are running out and buying a Bacchetta (or its
ilk) based on completely unscientific observations that have been posted on this group. I wouldn't
toss your TiGRR onto the composter based on what you have seen here.

You can't just go and try out a couple of bikes and declare one unequivocally faster based on your
"feelings" or even a trip around your test loop. There are many factors that determine the speed of
a bicycle. Yes, one factor is the coefficient of drag. Another factor is the cyclist! SWB's and
LWB's use different positions and physiological attributes. Each position takes time to acclimate
to. Some people apparently don't acclimate to sky-high bottom-brackets (I like the HepCat, for
instance, because it has a lower bottom-bracket).

I now submit myself for a manly third-degree flaming by saying this: some of you fat old guys ride
differently than skinny superathletes. A super-fit thin guy with no real job can make different
bikes go fast than a pasty-faced outta-shape desk jockey. There is also the issue of real-world
cycling conditions. Most people do not ride at a steady pace of 25mph (as some of the people on this
group seem to be doing). Most people actually ride slower - where wind resistance is much less
important.

Here's my 2 cents worth: I ride all types of bikes. My preference around here (in the Coast
Mountains of British Columbia) is a LWB because of the high-speed descents where it possible to hit
tremendous speeds for long periods of time (eg speed-trapped at 126kph). The LWB just feels better
than any SWB at speed. I am acclimated to both SWB's and LWB's. I am a strong, fast rider who weighs
225 pounds and I drop like a stone on descents. On flat ground riding all day I am faster on an
unfaired LWB than I am on a SWB. The explanation is not obvious. The LWB (a Recumbonie) is
undoubtedly more laterally flexy than a Tour Easy GRR and heavier too. However, the seat is lower so
it could be slightly more aerodynamically efficient (but I doubt that really makes any difference).
I also prefer the lower LWB pedals in stop-and-go city traffic. On the other hand, many SWB's fit
into transit bus racks (which the transit buses have around here).

I'd do a more scientific test with an Easy Racer but they are not readily available in this part of
the world.

Anyway, c'mon smarty-people, get your responses in!

 

[Al Kubeluis]

dave, you're 100% right ~~~al.kubeluis..md.usa.earth.sun.milkyway.universe..corsa~~~

"David Cambon" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Short Wheel-Base vs Easy Racer
>
> Sorry for bringing this topic up again but I have seen a lot of discussion on this newsgroup that
> is not all that clear. For the sake of newbies a few things should be clarified by you
> level-headed and objective scientific types who read this list.
>
> By SWB I mean all the highracers (eg Bacchetta Aero, Vision Saber etc) and all the non-lowracer
> SWB's with the smaller front wheel (eg Burley HepCat, Lightning P-38, Rans V-Rex, Turner T-Lite,
> Bachetta Giro, TerraCycle Terraza, Vision R40, Angletech etc).
>
> By Easy Racer I mean the Tour Easy, GRR, TiGRR and all clones of that configuration made by
> other people.
>
> There has been a lot of foaming-at-the-mouth, drooling and just plain ga-ga over the new crop of
> Bacchettas. I want one too so don't start flaming me just yet. That Bacchetta mesh seat is more
> comfortable than my furniture at home. I love those bars too. However, the basic idea is not new.
> Just go to Europe and have a look for yourself. The Bacchetta Aero even comes with Bram Moens seat
> from the Netherlands.
>
> The problem I have is the people on this list who are running out and buying a Bacchetta (or its
> ilk) based on completely unscientific observations that have been posted on this group. I wouldn't
> toss your TiGRR onto the composter based on what you have seen here.
>
> You can't just go and try out a couple of bikes and declare one unequivocally faster based on your
> "feelings" or even a trip around your test loop. There are many factors that determine the speed
> of a bicycle. Yes, one factor is the coefficient of drag. Another factor is the cyclist! SWB's and
> LWB's use different positions and physiological attributes. Each position takes time to acclimate
> to. Some people apparently don't acclimate to sky-high bottom-brackets (I like the HepCat, for
> instance, because it has a lower bottom-bracket).
>
> I now submit myself for a manly third-degree flaming by saying this: some of you fat old guys ride
> differently than skinny superathletes. A super-fit thin guy with no real job can make different
> bikes go fast than a pasty-faced outta-shape desk jockey. There is also the issue of real-world
> cycling conditions. Most people do not ride at a steady pace of 25mph (as some of the people on
> this group seem to be doing). Most people actually ride slower - where wind resistance is much
> less important.
>
> Here's my 2 cents worth: I ride all types of bikes. My preference around here (in the Coast
> Mountains of British Columbia) is a LWB because of the high-speed descents where it possible to
> hit tremendous speeds for long periods of time (eg speed-trapped at 126kph). The LWB just feels
> better than any SWB at speed. I am acclimated to both SWB's and LWB's. I am a strong, fast rider
> who weighs 225 pounds and I drop like a stone on descents. On flat ground riding all day I am
> faster on an unfaired LWB than I am on a SWB. The explanation is not obvious. The LWB (a
> Recumbonie) is undoubtedly more laterally flexy than a Tour Easy GRR and heavier too. However, the
> seat is lower so it could be slightly more aerodynamically efficient (but I doubt that really
> makes any difference). I also prefer the lower LWB pedals in stop-and-go city traffic. On the
> other hand, many SWB's fit into transit bus racks (which the transit buses have around here).
>
> I'd do a more scientific test with an Easy Racer but they are not readily available in this part
> of the world.
>
> Anyway, c'mon smarty-people, get your responses in!

 

[Stratrider]

David, I agree. I have been riding a lwb (Rans Stratus) for about 3 and 1/2 years. I still come down
off extended descents at speeds approaching 50 mph. The bike is rock solid. I have never trid a swb
at that speed. I wonder how it would feel?

Jim Reilly Reading, PA

 

[Dave Larrington]

Jim Reilly wrote:

> I have never tried a swb at that speed [50 mph]. I wonder how it would feel?

In my experience, fine, and that was the supposedly "twitchy" Kingcycle[1]. Except that the wind
under my helmet was doing its level best to tear my head off... It doesn't pay to think too closely
about what might transpire should the P*nct*r* Fairy choose this moment to pay a visit to the front
tyre, but that's the same for *any* bike.

1 - i.e. responsive

Dave Larrington - http://legslarry.crosswinds.net/
===========================================================
Editor - British Human Power Club Newsletter
http://www.bhpc.org.uk/
===========================================================

 

[Mike S]

[email protected] (David Cambon) wrote in message
news:<[email protected]>...
> Short Wheel-Base vs Easy Racer
>
>
>
>
> I now submit myself for a manly third-degree flaming by saying this: some of you fat old guys ride
> differently than skinny superathletes. A super-fit thin guy with no real job can make different
> bikes go fast than a pasty-faced outta-shape desk jockey. There is also the issue of real-world
> cycling conditions. Most people do not ride at a steady pace of 25mph (as some of the people on
> this group seem to be doing). Most people actually ride slower - where wind resistance is much
> less important.
>
> Here's my 2 cents worth: I ride all types of bikes. My preference around here (in the Coast
> Mountains of British Columbia) is a LWB because of the high-speed descents where it possible to
> hit tremendous speeds for long periods of time (eg speed-trapped at 126kph). The LWB just feels
> better than any SWB at speed. I am acclimated to both SWB's and LWB's. I am a strong, fast rider
> who weighs 225 pounds and I drop like a stone on descents. On flat ground riding all day I am
> faster on an unfaired LWB than I am on a SWB. The explanation is not obvious. The LWB (a
> Recumbonie) is undoubtedly more laterally flexy than a Tour Easy GRR and heavier too. However, the
> seat is lower so it could be slightly more aerodynamically efficient (but I doubt that really
> makes any difference). I also prefer the lower LWB pedals in stop-and-go city traffic. On the
> other hand, many SWB's fit into transit bus racks (which the transit buses have around here).
>
>

David: Before the flak starts flying around you I thought you laid out your position very well. The
slower you ride on average the less the aero advantage of the super low or laid back racers kicks
in. A super strong rider should do better on the most aerodynamically designed bike because he is
pushing less air. But how many of us are that kind of riders? And even the slower bikes have their
day. When we ride our Barcroft tandem down a long grade no Bacchetta (or any other single recumbent)
has been able to keep up with us (we leave them waaaaaaay behind, depending on the length of the
downhill) because we are much heavier and gravity comes to our assistance for a change. Of course,
the opposite is true uphill. And another factor is comfort. Some riders can't handle the high bb of
the SWBs so it makes no difference how aero they are, they can't perform with numb feet. I don't
think the issue should be what one bike is fastest overall but which bike is fastest (if this is
what the rider's concern
is) for that particular rider given his performance abilities, comfort requirements and riding
skills. there aren't many Freddie Markhams or Ed Gins out there (I couldn't beat those guys if I
rode a Wishbone and they rode Cannondales) That's why these discussions are nice to read in a
vacuum but have minimal impact in reality, except for gleaning from the experience of others, so
we may apply it to our own situation. And, these mass movements to a particular bike seems to
even out over time. There are a number of Bacchettas for resale now. The Bacchetta isn't a bad
bike, but there isn't a perfect recumbent for everyone.

This response is from a pasty faced older (not old) guy/desk jockey, not totally out of shape, who,
in his mind, is a young, thin, super rider.

 

[Cletus Lee]

In article <[email protected]>,
[email protected] says...
> Short Wheel-Base vs Easy Racer
>
> Sorry for bringing this topic up again...

Me too.
>
> By SWB I mean all the highracers (eg Bacchetta Aero, Vision Saber etc) and all the non-lowracer
> SWB's with the smaller front wheel (eg Burley HepCat, Lightning P-38, Rans V-Rex, Turner T-Lite,
> Bachetta Giro, TerraCycle Terraza, Vision R40, Angletech etc).

My experiences are limited to P-38 and Bacchetta Giro. I suspect that High Racers might be in a
separate category with different characteristics.

> By Easy Racer I mean the Tour Easy, GRR, TiGRR and all clones of that configuration made by
> other people.

And then there is the RANS Stratus which IMO stands out over all the LWBs

> There has been a lot of foaming-at-the-mouth, drooling and just plain ga-ga over the new crop of
> Bacchettas. I want one too so don't start flaming me just yet. That Bacchetta mesh seat is more
> comfortable than my furniture at home.

It probabaly is more comfortable than the M-5 I have yet to be convinced that there is a significant
advantage with the M-5 over the Bacchetta Mesh.

> I love those bars too.

These are not without problems. Knee clearance is an issue. The ends are so low, that slow turning
needs careful planning. I am about to cut an inch or so off of mine to see if this will result in
improved turning. The Lightning drop bar is a much better solution even with Barcons.
> The problem I have is the people on this list who are running out and buying a Bacchetta (or its
> ilk) based on completely unscientific observations that have been posted on this group. I wouldn't
> toss your TiGRR onto the composter based on what you have seen here.

I bought my Lightning Voyager based upon it's practical functionality. I bought my Giro after
considerable road testing of both it and the Strada. The Giro offers features that overcame
diffiencies in the Lightning design.

> You can't just go and try out a couple of bikes and declare one unequivocally faster based on
> your "feelings" or even a trip around your test loop. There are many factors that determine the
> speed of a bicycle. Yes, one factor is the coefficient of drag. Another factor is the cyclist!
> SWB's and LWB's use different positions and physiological attributes. Each position takes time to
> acclimate to.

It took me a year and a half to get the Voyager speeds up to those I routinely managed on the
Stratus. Once there, the Voyager became the faster bike. The Giro has yet to outshine the Voyager.

> I now submit myself for a manly third-degree flaming by saying this: some of you fat old guys ride
> differently than skinny superathletes.

As a formerly FOF, I can say that you will burn more calories if you ride. And the longer and more
that you ride, the less different you will appear from the super-fit thin guy.

It takes more than a Saturday afternoon ride once a week with the girls. If you put more into it
than that, it really doesn't matter whether it is a SWB or LWB.

> Here's my 2 cents worth: I ride all types of bikes. My preference around here (in the Coast
> Mountains of British Columbia) is a LWB because of the high-speed descents where it possible to
> hit tremendous speeds for long periods of time (eg speed-trapped at 126kph). The LWB just feels
> better than any SWB at speed. I am acclimated to both.

It depends on the SWB. The part you are missing about LWBS in the mtns is that you need to go up
before you go down. All the SWBs that I have ridden climb better that any LWB. There is not much
difference in 'pucker factor' with the right SWB.

--

Cletus D. Lee Bacchetta Giro Lightning Voyager http://www.clee.org
- Bellaire, TX USA -

 

[98gtw]

Like a sports car!

At those speeds I find myself thinking about the consequences of blowouts and road-crossing
squirrels and the like, and the basic stability and control of the bike are not an issue at all.

--
Dave 98GTW [email protected] (remove nospam to reply directly) Presto, Presto II, Screamer
[email protected] (stratrider) wrote in news:e4b0c94.0302060516.71e399f8 @posting.google.com:

> David, I agree. I have been riding a lwb (Rans Stratus) for about 3 and 1/2 years. I still come
> down off extended descents at speeds approaching 50 mph. The bike is rock solid. I have never trid
> a swb at that speed. I wonder how it would feel?
>
> Jim Reilly Reading, PA

 

[Cletus Lee]

In article <[email protected]>, [email protected] says...
> David, I agree. I have been riding a lwb (Rans Stratus) for about 3 and 1/2 years. I still come
> down off extended descents at speeds approaching 50 mph. The bike is rock solid. I have never trid
> a swb at that speed. I wonder how it would feel?

I've done it with both. Stratus: Pucker Factor = 7.6 Lightning Voyager: Pucker Factor = 7.7

These are the times when you know that 67 tpi tires are never going to be on your bike.

--

Cletus D. Lee Bacchetta Giro Lightning Voyager http://www.clee.org
- Bellaire, TX USA -

 

[Robert Siegel]

You guys really know how to hurt a guy. So my search for the holy grail of speed won't end if I buy
a new big-wheel racer or bodysock my TiGRR? You all tell me I have to ride, work out, train. Who
needs that kind of advice. ;-))

It's like the old lady in New York City who was asked by a tourist: "How do I get to Carnegie Hall?"
She answered: "Practice, practice, practice."

Gator Bob Siegel EasyRacers Ti Rush

 

[Robert Siegel]

A deeply regret to inform you that ... this is very painful ... I completely agree with Cletus. (I'm
a former P-38 XT and Challenge Taifun owner). ;-))

--
Gator Bob Siegel EasyRacers Ti Rush "Cletus Lee" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> In article <[email protected]>,
> [email protected] says...
> > Short Wheel-Base vs Easy Racer
> >
> > Sorry for bringing this topic up again...
>
> Me too.
> >
> > By SWB I mean all the highracers (eg Bacchetta Aero, Vision Saber etc) and all the non-lowracer
> > SWB's with the smaller front wheel (eg Burley HepCat, Lightning P-38, Rans V-Rex, Turner T-Lite,
> > Bachetta Giro, TerraCycle Terraza, Vision R40, Angletech etc).
>
> My experiences are limited to P-38 and Bacchetta Giro. I suspect that High Racers might be in a
> separate category with different characteristics.
>
> > By Easy Racer I mean the Tour Easy, GRR, TiGRR and all clones of that configuration made by
> > other people.
>
> And then there is the RANS Stratus which IMO stands out over all the LWBs
>
> > There has been a lot of foaming-at-the-mouth, drooling and just plain ga-ga over the new crop of
> > Bacchettas. I want one too so don't start flaming me just yet. That Bacchetta mesh seat is more
> > comfortable than my furniture at home.
>
> It probabaly is more comfortable than the M-5 I have yet to be convinced that there is a
> significant advantage with the M-5 over the Bacchetta Mesh.
>
> > I love those bars too.
>
> These are not without problems. Knee clearance is an issue. The ends are so low, that slow turning
> needs careful planning. I am about to cut an inch or so off of mine to see if this will result in
> improved turning. The Lightning drop bar is a much better solution even with Barcons.
> > The problem I have is the people on this list who are running out and buying a Bacchetta (or its
> > ilk) based on completely unscientific observations that have been posted on this group. I
> > wouldn't toss your TiGRR onto the composter based on what you have seen here.
>
> I bought my Lightning Voyager based upon it's practical functionality. I bought my Giro after
> considerable road testing of both it and the Strada. The Giro offers features that overcame
> diffiencies in the Lightning design.
>
> > You can't just go and try out a couple of bikes and declare one unequivocally faster based on
> > your "feelings" or even a trip around your test loop. There are many factors that determine the
> > speed of a bicycle. Yes, one factor is the coefficient of drag. Another factor is the cyclist!
> > SWB's and LWB's use different positions and physiological attributes. Each position takes time
> > to acclimate to.
>
> It took me a year and a half to get the Voyager speeds up to those I routinely managed on the
> Stratus. Once there, the Voyager became the faster bike. The Giro has yet to outshine the Voyager.
>
> > I now submit myself for a manly third-degree flaming by saying this: some of you fat old guys
> > ride differently than skinny superathletes.
>
> As a formerly FOF, I can say that you will burn more calories if you ride. And the longer and more
> that you ride, the less different you will appear from the super-fit thin guy.
>
> It takes more than a Saturday afternoon ride once a week with the girls. If you put more into it
> than that, it really doesn't matter whether it is a SWB or LWB.
>
> > Here's my 2 cents worth: I ride all types of bikes. My preference around here (in the Coast
> > Mountains of British Columbia) is a LWB because of the high-speed descents where it possible to
> > hit tremendous speeds for long periods of time (eg speed-trapped at 126kph). The LWB just feels
> > better than any SWB at speed. I am acclimated to
both.
>
> It depends on the SWB. The part you are missing about LWBS in the mtns is that you need to go up
> before you go down. All the SWBs that I have ridden climb better that any LWB. There is not much
> difference in 'pucker factor' with the right SWB.
>
> --
>
> Cletus D. Lee Bacchetta Giro Lightning Voyager http://www.clee.org
> - Bellaire, TX USA -

 

[Michael Devenis]

I made the decision to go with a SWB for just one reason: portability. I need to transport my bike
from my city home to open roads where I can ride. Therefore I bought a machine that can not only be
lifted up onto my Yakima rook rack without slipping a disc, but can easily be stored in a crowded
garage. My LBS let me ride all sorts of different design types and although I found the SWB to be a
bit twitchy in the handling dept. I felt (correctly) that I would adjust after some miles.

 

[Drrecumbnt]

The Easy Racer style LWB is the most classic, timeless, user friendly (rideability and performance)
recumbent there is. It's also the most popular style in N. America (and probably the world (by
overall sales numbers). While lowracer and highracers are the internet and industry buzz, thousands
of buyers opt for Easy Racers, Sun EZ's, Strati, and other LWB OSS recumbents. T On a personal note,
this style of recumbent still works best for me after 16 years of recumbent riding. Bob, RCN

 

[Robert Stevahn]

On Thu, 6 Feb 2003 08:11:43 -0600, Cletus Lee <[email protected]> wrote:

>It depends on the SWB. The part you are missing about LWBS in the mtns is that you need to go up
>before you go down. All the SWBs that I have ridden climb better that any LWB. There is not much
>difference in 'pucker factor' with the right SWB.

I only have an SWB, so can't comment on the uphill comparison except to say that I ride with a GRR
owner who can keep pace with me uphill (hi David). I'm more nimble and can accelerate faster, but
over the long haul David's right there with me. He may have a slightly better engine to work with
but I think we are relatively comparable. He rides more than I do (better specificity) but I also
run, spin & XC ski.

Going downhill, David kicks my butt on his faired GRR, but at least some of this is due to
acclimation and pucker factor.

Regarding pucker factor on my Saber, it is substantial at first but I think it's mostly mental. The
more I practice the easier it gets. At first I was uncomfortable above 30. Now I am perfectly fine
at 40 but will still tap my brakes above that, particularly if there is any kind of turn ahead. I
suspect I'll continue to improve for a couple of seasons.

-- Robert

 

[Bill Patterson]

IMHO the lwb designer has a much easier job. A lwb responds less to control displacement, so will
not overreact at higher speed. The SWB designer needs to have sufficient "Control Spring" or what
Mark Stonich calls "centering spring". THe added force on the controls reduces the bikes sensitivity
at high speed. Control spring increases with wheel mass, trail and tiller. THe designer should
adjust these values to get a bike that handles well for normal folks.

A big error is for the designer to use himself as the test rider. He gets so good at riding his own
bikes that he doesn't notice peculiarities. He should use df riders, as many as possible, as his
test riders.

I have a tandem with 5 inches of trail and a very stiff frame. It feels like a rail road train above
30. I must admit it is a handful at low speeds. Ride a motor cycle at 80 mph. Your bike can and
should feel the same, no matter what its wheelbase.
--
Bill "Pop Pop" Patterson Retired and riding my Linear, my front drive low racer and our M5 tandem.

 

[Ez Biker :-\)]

Well-stated David. YES, I'm one that has been smitten by the Temple Of Bacchetta. And YES, I
presently own a GRR Ti and NO; I have NO INTENTION of kicking my GRR Ti to the curb. (Made that
mistake before.) For me, I just want to finally experience a recumbent that is built from the ground
up, for PURE KICK ASS Performance. *(I guess some of my old DF Hammerhead tendencies are still
flowing) I want to experience a 22 lb bike and see just how fast or consistently fast I can really
be. (Not that I'm so POKEY on my GRR Ti) Maybe I can even find a USCF TT that will let me compete
and then have fun with some of the GO FAST Dfer's. See *() I don't want to have to add curtains,
socks, underwear or whatever to my bike, to achieve better performance. (Mind you, I'm not knocking
those additives; I just don't desire to be in a cocoon type of cover mass, when riding, PERIOD) I
want to get on a bike, in plain sight and know the performance is there; just add the engine power.

I have nothing BAD to say about my GRR Ti or Tailwind bikes. I LOVE them both and they both will be
ridden regularly along with my future B. Aero. (My clone bodies should be arriving soon.)

EZ Biker Pompano Beach, Fl. (GRR Ti, Tailwind and SOON, Bacchetta Aero Pilot)

PS: OK Tom Sherman and gang, have a party on my post!!!! <Laughter> ;-)

"David Cambon" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Short Wheel-Base vs Easy Racer

 

[Dave Larrington]

Not here though, Bob. In more that twenty years of Eurecumbing, I've met:

1 native Tour Easy (hi Andrew!) 1 home-built Tour Easy look-alike 2 Tour Easys visiting from the US

There may be one or two others, but they keep themselves well hidden. RANS (I've seen two, and
neither was LWB), Sun, etc. are virtually unknown this side of the Big Ditch, and the vast majority
of LWBs over here are USS. Moreover these days there are scarcely any LWBs being made in Europe at
all. Only Radius, with the Peer Gynt and Dino, ever had much of a market presence and look what
happened to them.

Dave Larrington - http://legslarry.crosswinds.net/
===========================================================
Editor - British Human Power Club Newsletter
http://www.bhpc.org.uk/
===========================================================

 

[Robert Siegel]

Robert --- Oh, thank you, thank you! You just may have saved me the cost of a new two-big-wheel SWB.
Every time I test ride or own a SWB I reach the same conclusion: for me... the GRR/TiGRR is the
"best" recumbent.

But I sure enjoyed powering up hills on my old P-38 and I thoroughly enjoyed my feet first in the
air fast rides on the Corsa/Aero and Vision R-64/65.

--
Gator Bob Siegel EasyRacers Ti Rush "DrRecumbnt" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> The Easy Racer style LWB is the most classic, timeless, user friendly (rideability and
> performance) recumbent there is. It's also the most
popular
> style in N. America (and probably the world (by overall sales numbers). While lowracer and
> highracers are the internet and industry buzz,
thousands of
> buyers opt for Easy Racers, Sun EZ's, Strati, and other LWB OSS
recumbents. T
> On a personal note, this style of recumbent still works best for me after
16
> years of recumbent riding. Bob, RCN

 

[Robert Siegel]

If you like your pre-2002 Saber do NOT test ride the new 2002-2003 two big wheel Saber R-64/65/68.
You will (want to) buy one on the spot.

--
Gator Bob Siegel EasyRacers Ti Rush "Robert Stevahn" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> On Thu, 6 Feb 2003 08:11:43 -0600, Cletus Lee <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> >It depends on the SWB. The part you are missing about LWBS in the mtns is that you need to go up
> >before you go down. All the SWBs that I have ridden climb better that any LWB. There is not much
> >difference in 'pucker factor' with the right SWB.
>
> I only have an SWB, so can't comment on the uphill comparison except to say that I ride with a GRR
> owner who can keep pace with me uphill (hi David). I'm more nimble and can accelerate faster, but
> over the long haul David's right there with me. He may have a slightly better engine to work with
> but I think we are relatively comparable. He rides more than I do (better specificity) but I also
> run, spin & XC ski.
>
> Going downhill, David kicks my butt on his faired GRR, but at least some of this is due to
> acclimation and pucker factor.
>
> Regarding pucker factor on my Saber, it is substantial at first but I think it's mostly mental.
> The more I practice the easier it gets. At first I was uncomfortable above 30. Now I am perfectly
> fine at 40 but will still tap my brakes above that, particularly if there is any kind of turn
> ahead. I suspect I'll continue to improve for a couple of seasons.
>
> -- Robert

 

[Jeff Wills]

[email protected] (David Cambon) wrote in message
news:<[email protected]>...
> Short Wheel-Base vs Easy Racer
>
<snip>
> Anyway, c'mon smarty-people, get your responses in!

Why? You seem to have made your case pretty well.

FWIW: I'm a large (6-foot-4, 210 pounds), somewhat fit rider. I've ridden a P-38 for 12 years and a
Tour Easy for 10 months. The Tour Easy now gets more mileage, mostly because I'm too lazy to give
the P-38 a complete rebuild.

Jeff

 

[Bentnut]

Thanks Bob, your check is in the mail!

Gabriel DeVault Terribly biased Easy Racers fan and employee


haha, it's a JOKE people.