Unfaired recumbent hour record vs. upright



Status
Not open for further replies.
Ed Gin & Shirleen Kajiwara wrote:

> Yeah,
>
> Fab, the resident troll has just been added to my kill file.

Do all 'bent riders lack a sense of humor, or is it just the one above?
--
terry morse Palo Alto, CA http://www.terrymorse.com/bike/
 
Ed Gin & Shirleen Kajiwara <[email protected]> wrote:

> ...

Wow, that's a great way to win friends and influence people.

*plonked* forever with prejudice.

RFM
 
Warning, "reasonable discussion ahead, if that's possible at this point" and long post.....so move
on if wanted.......

Buck,

Data and studies are few and far apart. Definitive answers sometimes just doesn't exist. Each of
us have unique abilities and strengths. Agenda's may dictate preferences for riding style,
distances ridden, speed, and choice of bikes. So what's my point or is this just rambling? Hang on
for a bit, OK?

Consider the enormous time most DF riders spend on the platform. And along with that, the body
fully acclimates to the nuances and requirements to successfully "master" the bike. Here's my
first premise:

Because the bent platform requires differing muscle groups and sense of balance, you are essentially
"starting over." Many of us will say typically, give yourself a few weeks, you'll be back to what
you can do on a DF. I wholeheartedly disagree even though you will feel acclimated and balance fine,
consider that long term

muscle memory takes time/training/and patience to develop. Recall how long it took you to acclimate
to differing upright bikes and reach a "peak" in potential. The switch to a bent is very, very, new
to body to say the least. Herein, lies the problem to access "on a firsthand" basis, performance
comparisons.

The vast majority of DF riders may jump to immediate assessment, and correct they will be based
upon personal evaluation. Issues of poor handling, wobbling, lousy climbing ability (which would
be exacerbated by the previous) can and will be common as it is a new and entirely different
vehicle. The learning curve will vary with each but I believe mastering the platform takes much,
much, more time

than even seasoned bent riders realize.

To address your recommended AB switches on hills, bents vs. DF's, this may not

be a valid method for seasoned upright riders as both platforms requires specific muscle groups to
efficiently power the bike and you'll have little "bent specific" adaptation. The converse is true
also if a seasoned bent rider jumps on an upright to compare speeds. So is the solution to have a
rider whom spends equal time on each platform test the bikes? Unfortunately no, because the outcome
would be anecdotal at best. How about the observation of bents "personally" passed on hills? Alot of
this has to do with the aforementioned long time it takes to really get good at the platform
compounded by the excessive weight of the platform on a $$ basis.

The typical starter bent today will cost between $500 - $750 with weights ~36-45 lbs. With that same
amount, DF bikes can be purchased which could weigh as much as 40% less. And we all know climbing
hills at slow speeds dead weight contributes little to help performance, unless it is added muscle
mass with the aerobic capability backing it up.

So is the solution is to ride a granny gear to motor up the climbs with a heavy bike? You bet, I've
seen what the DF touring guys do with panniers fully loaded "spinning" up mountain passes, exactly
what heavy bent riders must face.

As a result of this weight difference, it is common to see benters climbing slower than the majority
of DF'er's on climbs. However, this has a beneficial effect

on the descents where greater mass, given similar aerodynamic windows, will allow quicker speeds
downhill similar to what is observed with Tandem riders whom inherantly descend the quickest within
the DF realm.

Just recently have the production of carbon and titanium bents closed some of this weight "window"
and the few examples ridden by strong riders produce much better climbing scenario's. It is
unfortunate as the vast majority of riders will never see these guys climb.

Buck you mentioned foot position, blood flow, and other interesting hypothesis.

However, I do believe if you rode a 20 lb. bent for several years developing the specific muscle
groups and cardio capacity to efficiently ride the platform you may find there is little difference
in climbing ability between the platforms.

I've got to stop now....thanks for reading this far. Gee, I've only touched this climbing
thing......

Ed - can be sensible at times - Gin

Buck wrote:

> "FasterthanUR" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:FasterthanUR-
> > >
> > > At least "FastBoy" has the decency to keep his insults to a person's
> bike or
> > > riding ability.
> >
> > Buck, All this stuff has gotten a bit old and out of hand. I'm starting to get bored with the
> > role of Fastboy in these threads.
>
> I'm glad to see that you are ready to have a discussion in a civil manner. You will find that the
> vast majority of the posters around here like to discuss the issues, debunk the myths and have a
> good-hearted exhange of ideas. As I relayed to you via private e-mail, Fabrizio is the one poseur
> around here who typifies the posters over in rec.bicycles.racing. Take whatever he writes with a
> big grain of salt. Get a good laugh out of it and move on.
>
> > Too bad we just can't discuss the pros and cons of aerodynamics on both the bent and DF platform
> > with no biases. There are plusses and minus no matter what the frame design is. I know that you
> > ride in terrain that requires a lot of versatility and what you are currently riding is the best
> > for the area you are in. Personally, I have no problems with what you are riding as it keep you
> > in shape and enjoying the experience.
>
> Now this is the kind of discussion that we are most interested in! There are several 'bents I
> would like to try out on a long-term basis when my budget (and space) constraints ease up a bit.
> I've had my eye on a Greenspeed trike, but can't justify the expense if I can't use it on my daily
> commute. As it is now, I rotate through four different bikes, all of which handle the commute
> well. Two are road, two are mountain. One of the mountain bikes is full suspension, but once was
> my everyday commuter with slicks, my weekend trail bomber with knobbies. The second has become a
> rainy-day bike with full theft deterrence (rusty paint scratches), full fenders, a rear rack, and
> mounts for lights.
>
> I would "need" two bents if I were to try them out - a weekday commuter and a weekend racer. Not
> for racing, mind you, but I like going fast for the thrill. Whether or not it would be faster is
> part and parcel to the discussion, but being just a few inches off the ground is certain to make
> the perceived speeds much higher.
>
> > The bents that Ed and I ride are European imports that were designed for racing and also to be
> > ridden on the street. The average bike shop will not have any knowledge about our bikes. The
> > fact is the Europeans have been designing recumbents for many many years now and have advanced
> > the efficiency of the design to a higher level than what is being produced regarding production
> > bents in the US. There is only one builder in the US at this point in time producing a speed
> > specific lowracer as opposed to the European recumbent builders. Most of the bents sold in the
> > US are used for touring and not racing.
>
> I've seen a number of the websites, but admit to seeing very few in person. I do have a
> 'bent-specific shop nearby, so I have access to a large number of 'bents and even have ridden most
> of their stock. But comfort is their thing, so lowracers aren't in their business plan.
>
> > The common impression most roadies have is that bents are slow, can't climb, etc.. and not all
> > of that is true. What they are witnessing is most likely a rider on a 35+ lb. touring bent
>
> While I can agree that most people's experience is with a limited range of 'bents, I still wonder
> about the physiology of climbing while on a 'bent. There is just something unnatural about the
> foot position relative to the body when going uphill on a 'bent. This is where people like Jon and
> I start throwing science at the question. We would test the climbing ability through a series of
> all-out efforts up a nice big hill and time the runs. I'd also like to physiological data during
> the rides. I'm guessing that blood pressure would be higher while climbing on the 'bent because of
> the body position. I would also bet that their respiration and heart rates would be lower. Since
> you have a 'bent (and probably a diamond frame too), you could run these tests yourself and get
> back to us with the results. Heck, I'm sure that we would be satisfied with a few well-timed
> sprints up your favorite hill switching back and forth between bikes between each run.
>
> > The amount of riders in the US that own and ride racing bents is quite small so the exposure is
> > very limited. The guys that are riding race specific bents are very fast. We hear the same old
> > rehashed digs like fat old guys ride bents, those things are not real bikes and all the other
> > **** constantly being posted on bike forums.
>
> I'm sure that there is plenty being dished out to you, but the only way to gain respect around
> here is to post some hard data, not use slash and burn tactics with the other posters. I have to
> admit, before this post, you were just about to be "plonked" into my killfile. If you want to get
> some folks here excited about trying out a lowracer, then show us the data. We have a large number
> of people in here that own a garage full of bikes and I'm sure a zippy little lowracer would find
> a good home among them if you can convince us that they are worth the big bundle of cash!
>
> > If you guys who own DFs would just accept the fact that there are performance oriented bents
> > that are as fast and sometimes faster than diamond frames, that performance bents can climb
> > efficiently and are also safe on the road then we would probably get along better and the acid
> > posts would vanish.
>
> No one here argues that lowracers are faster on the flats and downhill. Many of us have
> experienced this first hand as one passed us by. But most of us know being passed is no big deal,
> since experience has shown us that we will catch and pass that guy on the next big hill. It's just
> our experience. Safety and climbing efficiency are oft-discussed around here. Personally, I think
> some 'bents would make safe commuting machines. But it depends on where they are ridden and what
> 'bent we are talking about. Being lower than the passenger window cannot be a good thing.
>
> > Bents are a different platform than DF's. Some of us bent riders are using fairings to benefit
> > efficiency and there are other bent riders who build their own custom bikes for racing and those
> > are extremely low to the ground and other's are fully faired.
> >
> > If this thread ever becomes civil I'll be glad to share a lot of info with you and whoever else
> > is interested. But if I have to continually listen to my pal Fab and others with their degrading
> > opinions regarding speed specific performance bents and bents in general then no one here will
> > learn anything regarding efficiency or speed when riding.
>
> Provide us with some objective information and you will find that we will share as well. If you
> are willing to carry out some experiments with your machine, the data will be well-received. If
> you aren't comfortable with setting up an objective experiment, we will be glad to make
> suggestions. Post some results along with your opinion about why you think they came out that way
> and you will garner a lot of respect here!
>
> > Shall we continue this discussion Buck?
>
> I'm willing as are others. Let's see what we can all learn from each other.
>
> -Buck
>
> P.S., If you have a name that we could address other than "FastBoy," that might help with the
> civility. We all respect anonymity if you want to stay that way, but the name you have chosen
> can put readers on the defensive. Sort of like Fabrizio does to you. Many post with their real
> names, some post with their first names and a few remain anonymous.
 
In article <[email protected]>, "Buck" <j u n k m a i l @ g a l a x y c
o r p . c o m> wrote: I'm glad to see that you are ready to have a discussion in a civil manner.

Buck, you'll eventually fugure out who I am. I will post results of some races as this season
progresses.

"I would "need" two bents if I were to try them out - a weekday commuter and a weekend racer. Not
for racing, mind you, but I like going fast."

I've tried 7 different bents over the years and each had a completely different learning curve.
Trying to figure the right bent for your needs is similar to trying to find the right diamond frame
for your required riding goals. There are all kinds of compromises. I have a buddy that is an Ultra
rider who rides a Bachetta Aero which is a dual 26" 22 lb bent. Its not a race specific bent and was
designed to be used as a road bike. You can ride in pacelines with DF's on that bike as drafts can
be shared due to the rider height. The BB height on that bike is not excessivley high so you will
have good power transfer for climbing mountain grades.

The site for the Aero is http://www.x-eyed.com/

Two of the reasons why bents are difficult to climb with is total weight and BB height. Most of the
standard production bents weigh well over 30 lbs. Its difficult to climb steep mountain roads with a
heavy bike trying to do a race pace. Add a high BB height and there can be knee stress to deal with
if large gears are pushed. For most bents it is appropriate to spin in small gears as you will be in
a seated position. If you are going to be riding in TX, AZ, NM and areas where there are mountains
you need to consider the overall wieght factor if you are not the casual touring rider.

As for safety, its all a matter of personal opinion. I ride on rural highways with road traffic
going over 60 mph. I stay on the shoulder and never challenge a semi. I know whats in back with
the glasses mirror and I've survived out there for many years. There are also roads i will not
ride on due to the high density of high speed traffic. Everyone has an opinion to what is safe and
what is not.

> While I can agree that most people's experience is with a limited range of 'bents, I still wonder
> about the physiology of climbing while on a 'bent.
I'm guessing that blood pressure would be higher while climbing on the 'bent because of the body
> position. I would also bet that their respiration and heart rates would be lower. Since you have a
> 'bent (and probably a diamond frame too), you could run these tests yourself and get back to us
> with the results. Heck, I'm sure that we would be satisfied with a few well-timed sprints up your
> favorite hill switching back and forth between bikes between each run.

Buck my HR is similar to what it was when I use to race DFs. From what I've seen posted the aero
benefits of being lower in height will translate into lower watt output (compared to a DF positiion)
needed to maintain a mid 20's and above pace. When fairings are added it creates a different
scenario with a higerh efficiency rating.

This is one of the reasoon why older guys in decent shape can keep up with younger CAT racers. A lot
of it is aero smarts and watt output required to ride at higher speeds.

In regards to what I am currently riding, it is the lightest carbon lowracer in the world built by
one of the top Euro racers. The seat and angle position along with lower BB height and frame
stiffness allow for excellent power transfer and quick acceleeration. This is the fastest climbing
bike I have ever rode and that is what is expected with a sub 20 lb. bike. The Euro guys race in the
Alps with their bikes so they know what they are doing with wieght, power transfer ans aerodynamics.
This bike will be able to maintain speed with a DF pace on a climb.

You can't find this kind of stuff at the local bike store.

if you go to this site: http://www.wisil.recumbents.com/wisil/whatsnew.htm

click on quest for speed or fabric wheel disc cover

you'll know who I am. The FastBoy act is just something I throw out occassionally when I get ******
at some fool who has no respect for the bent platform or the athletes setting records on bents.
FastBoy, FasterthanUr is just a rude gimmick intended to tick off people just as offensive. However,
the bike and eficiency are not a gimmick.

like I said before I'll be glad to continue to share the info so you know what is going on and what
is posible with current bent designs that are racing.

AA
 
"Ed Gin & Shirleen Kajiwara" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Warning, "reasonable discussion ahead, if that's possible at this point"
and
> long post.....so move on if wanted.......
>
> Buck,
>
> Data and studies are few and far apart. Definitive answers sometimes just doesn't exist. Each of
> us have unique abilities and strengths. Agenda's
may
> dictate preferences for riding style, distances ridden, speed, and choice
of
> bikes. So what's my point or is this just rambling? Hang on for a bit,
OK?

Ed,

Glad to see you have a sensible side. I'm sure we can all figure out ways to run tests that isolate
different aspects of the comparison problem. For example, if we wanted to control for weight, we
could add weight to the DF platform. To control for training, we could take a random sample of
non-cycling people, give them a few weeks to acclimate to the bikes, then run the tests. The lack of
training and the random assignment to platforms would show how the machines work for the general
public and which would be the better entry-level platform.

The point is that we can control for each of the concerns you raise. Realistically, we would have to
generate research funds, etc. For now we will just have to work in the parameters we have. Maybe we
can find someone who puts in the same miles you do and set up a series of tests between you. You
have said that you know a lot of DF riders. Maybe one of them would be willing to do a few
head-to-head comparisons?

-Buck
 
Ed Gin & Shirleen Kajiwara <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:<[email protected]>...

> OTOH, I think Fastboy is like the Pete Pennsayes of the Bent World with a "total commitment" to
> training and serious riding as a priority.
>
That seems to confirm my suspicions as to his true identity. Looking forward to meeting the gang,
even if I don't end up riding with you.
 
What are you talking about? I expect you to share in the rotation! And so is Fastboy......

Ed - it'll be a blast - Gin

John Foltz wrote:

> Ed Gin & Shirleen Kajiwara <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:<[email protected]>...
>
> > OTOH, I think Fastboy is like the Pete Pennsayes of the Bent World with a "total commitment" to
> > training and serious riding as a priority.
> >
> That seems to confirm my suspicions as to his true identity. Looking forward to meeting the gang,
> even if I don't end up riding with you.
 
"FasterthanUR" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:FasterthanUR-

<snip>

> I've tried 7 different bents over the years and each had a completely different learning curve.
> Trying to figure the right bent for your needs is similar to trying to find the right diamond
> frame for your required riding goals. There are all kinds of compromises. I have a buddy that is
> an Ultra rider who rides a Bachetta Aero which is a dual 26" 22 lb bent. Its not a race specific
> bent and was designed to be used as a road bike. You can ride in pacelines with DF's on that bike
> as drafts can be shared due to the rider height. The BB height on that bike is not excessivley
> high so you will have good power transfer for climbing mountain grades.

I've tried a number of 'bents, so I understand how each has a unique learning curve. Tiller steering
was the one thing I hated. I still want to try under-seat steering on something other than a trike
just to see how it feels. I'm not ruling out 'bents by any means, but I do want to be fully aware of
all the pros and cons. You mention BB height as important. I have postulated why I think that 'bents
might be slower uphill - might that be exascerbated by additional inverted angle due to additional
BB height? Most of the 'bent riders say that it doesn't matter because the seat is being used as a
surface to push from. Are you saying that this might not be true?

>
> The site for the Aero is http://www.x-eyed.com/

Interesting bikes. Reminds me of some of the offerings from Yellowbike.

> Two of the reasons why bents are difficult to climb with is total weight and BB height. Most of
> the standard production bents weigh well over 30 lbs. Its difficult to climb steep mountain roads
> with a heavy bike trying to do a race pace. Add a high BB height and there can be knee stress to
> deal with if large gears are pushed. For most bents it is appropriate to spin in small gears as
> you will be in a seated position. If you are going to be riding in TX, AZ, NM and areas where
> there are mountains you need to consider the overall wieght factor if you are not the casual
> touring rider.

Weight has been discussed many times around here. Given equal riders of equal weights, ten pounds on
a bike will make a difference. But in the real world, bicycle weight is a non-issue. It is always
fun to talk to guys who post asking for the lightest components to save a few ounces. When we point
out that leaving their water bottles at home will save more weight than switching from 105 to
Ultegra, they usually aren't too happy.

Again, I see an issue being brought up about BB position. I'd like to be able to discuss rider
position and the differences in stress on the knees, but we need a good reference for measuring
relative positions. Setting the orientation to earth aside, how much difference does the body to leg
angle make? It is obviously more open on recumbents. Is this the source of the knee problems you
mention? Or is it more a function of the tendency to mash bigger gears because there is a support to
push against?

> As for safety, its all a matter of personal opinion. I ride on rural highways with road traffic
> going over 60 mph. I stay on the shoulder and never challenge a semi. I know whats in back with
> the glasses mirror and I've survived out there for many years. There are also roads i will not
> ride on due to the high density of high speed traffic. Everyone has an opinion to what is safe and
> what is not.

The road conditions make a huge difference. Most local cyclists ride rural two-lane roads with no
shoulders where the speed limits are 65mph. During my commutes, I used to ride a combination of
residential streets, 6 lane divided and non-divided roads, with and without bike lanes, a small park
with gravel trails, and in a campus environment with a combination of curbs, etc. Now my commute
involves many miles with the bike in the back of the truck followed by a few miles of two and four
lane roads. In the heavy traffic situations, I feel most comfortable being upright and on something
where I can jump obstacles. On the weekend rides, althought the traffic is at higher speeds,
visibility is less of an issue and a recumbent might be great fun.

<snip>

> Buck my HR is similar to what it was when I use to race DFs. From what I've seen posted the aero
> benefits of being lower in height will translate into lower watt output (compared to a DF
> positiion) needed to maintain a mid 20's and above pace. When fairings are added it creates a
> different scenario with a higerh efficiency rating.

Is this just an overall average, or are you comparing heart rates when you were climbing on the two
different platforms? I would expect heartrate to be lower for a given speed on the flats, but what
happens when the road goes up?

>
> This is one of the reasoon why older guys in decent shape can keep up with younger CAT racers. A
> lot of it is aero smarts and watt output required to ride at higher speeds.
>
> In regards to what I am currently riding, it is the lightest carbon lowracer in the world built by
> one of the top Euro racers. The seat and angle position along with lower BB height and frame
> stiffness allow for excellent power transfer and quick acceleeration. This is the fastest climbing
> bike I have ever rode and that is what is expected with a sub 20 lb. bike. The Euro guys race in
> the Alps with their bikes so they know what they are doing with wieght, power transfer ans
> aerodynamics. This bike will be able to maintain speed with a DF pace on a climb.
>
> You can't find this kind of stuff at the local bike store.

More about the BB height! Maybe you can share your knowledge about the effects of BB height. Have
you ridden a machine that allows you to adjust the BB height as well as the length? Does such a
bike exist?

>
> if you go to this site: http://www.wisil.recumbents.com/wisil/whatsnew.htm
>
> click on quest for speed or fabric wheel disc cover

Gotcha. Interesting bike. It looks like fun. But I have to wonder about its value as a commuter
machine! Where would you lock it up?

> you'll know who I am. The FastBoy act is just something I throw out occassionally when I get
> ****** at some fool who has no respect for the bent platform or the athletes setting records on
> bents. FastBoy, FasterthanUr is just a rude gimmick intended to tick off people just as offensive.
> However, the bike and eficiency are not a gimmick.

I understand the response to Fabs, but the rest of us were asking honest questions and pointing out
problems from our perspective. Why the hostility toward us?

> like I said before I'll be glad to continue to share the info so you know what is going on and
> what is posible with current bent designs that are racing.

Keep writing. I see that your focus is more on top speed. I hope that you can shift gears a bit and
discuss commuter-style 'bents as well.

-Buck
 
Buck wrote:

> "Ed Gin & Shirleen Kajiwara" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
> > Warning, "reasonable discussion ahead, if that's possible at this point"
> and
> > long post.....so move on if wanted.......
> >
> > Buck,
> >
> > Data and studies are few and far apart. Definitive answers sometimes just doesn't exist. Each of
> > us have unique abilities and strengths. Agenda's
> may
> > dictate preferences for riding style, distances ridden, speed, and choice
> of
> > bikes. So what's my point or is this just rambling? Hang on for a bit,
> OK?
>
> Ed,
>
> Glad to see you have a sensible side. I'm sure we can all figure out ways to run tests that
> isolate different aspects of the comparison problem. For example, if we wanted to control for
> weight, we could add weight to the DF platform. To control for training, we could take a random
> sample of non-cycling people, give them a few weeks to acclimate to the bikes, then run the tests.
> The lack of training and the random assignment to platforms would show how the machines work for
> the general public and which would be the better entry-level platform.

Yes that should work, however the testers "previous" cycling experience would tend to favor the
upright platform as retail bents have not been around for long and to find someone whom has never
ridden a bike may be difficult to do?

>
> The point is that we can control for each of the concerns you raise. Realistically, we would
> have to generate research funds, etc. For now we will just have to work in the parameters we
> have. Maybe we can find someone who puts in the same miles you do and set up a series of tests
> between you.

With all due respect, comparing different riders opinions are ultimately going

to be anecdotal as much as "controlling" parameters can be. And no two riders are going to have
similar performance ability with possibly the exception of identical twins, what do you think?

>
> You have said that you know a lot of DF riders. Maybe one of them would be willing to do a few
> head-to-head comparisons?

Unfortunately, few of them regularly ride bents, far from the required 50/50 ratio to even begin to
think about a test. I'm just not willing to go back on my crit bike and ride it for a long enough
time to fairly evaluate "properties and

differences" between the two platforms.

However, there is one interesting result I can address, and this is anecdotal at best. My century
times on the Festina lowracer when ridden alone with little drafting is quicker than the ones
completed on my crit bike 20-30 years ago when I was 20 lbs lighter on a less mass bike. Sub 5 hour
"total time" no drafting centuries were only accomplished the last few years on the lowracer.

My spouse saids, "Your faster speeds are attributable to a mid-life crisis." I disagree....

Ed Gin

Ed

>
>
> -Buck
 
"Ed Gin & Shirleen Kajiwara" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]... <snip>

> Yes that should work, however the testers "previous" cycling experience
would
> tend to favor the upright platform as retail bents have not been around
for
> long and to find someone whom has never ridden a bike may be difficult to do?

Agreed. These variables would be difficult to control.

> > The point is that we can control for each of the concerns you raise. Realistically, we would
> > have to generate research funds, etc. For now we will just have to work in the parameters we
> > have. Maybe we can find
someone
> > who puts in the same miles you do and set up a series of tests between
you.
>
> With all due respect, comparing different riders opinions are ultimately
going
>
> to be anecdotal as much as "controlling" parameters can be. And no two
riders
> are going to have similar performance ability with possibly the exception
of
> identical twins, what do you think?

I think I wasn't clear enough. Finding a rider that has a similar power output to you and stage a
series of timed races, each of you using your preferred platform. A TT style race, a hill climb from
standing and rolling starts, etc. It would be even more interesting to see how your heart rates
compare (standardized by your normal resting heart rates). I want to elminate opinions on platforms.
I want just the facts.

> > You have said that you know a lot of DF riders. Maybe one of them would
be
> > willing to do a few head-to-head comparisons?
>
> Unfortunately, few of them regularly ride bents, far from the required
50/50
> ratio to even begin to think about a test. I'm just not willing to go
back on
> my crit bike and ride it for a long enough time to fairly evaluate
"properties and
>
> differences" between the two platforms.

Again, I used the wrong phrase. I'm not suggesting switching bikes, I'm suggesting a series of tests
to see which of you performs better.

> However, there is one interesting result I can address, and this is
anecdotal
> at best. My century times on the Festina lowracer when ridden alone with little drafting is
> quicker than the ones completed on my crit bike 20-30 years
ago
> when I was 20 lbs lighter on a less mass bike. Sub 5 hour "total time" no drafting centuries were
> only accomplished the last few years on the lowracer.

Anecdotal, for sure. But it does give us a starting point.

> My spouse saids, "Your faster speeds are attributable to a mid-life
crisis." I
> disagree....

heheh.

-Buck
 
Buck wrote:

> "Ed Gin & Shirleen Kajiwara" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]... <snip>
>
> > Yes that should work, however the testers "previous" cycling experience
> would
> > tend to favor the upright platform as retail bents have not been around
> for
> > long and to find someone whom has never ridden a bike may be difficult to do?
>
> Agreed. These variables would be difficult to control.
>
> > > The point is that we can control for each of the concerns you raise. Realistically, we would
> > > have to generate research funds, etc. For now we will just have to work in the parameters we
> > > have. Maybe we can find
> someone
> > > who puts in the same miles you do and set up a series of tests between
> you.
> >
> > With all due respect, comparing different riders opinions are ultimately
> going
> >
> > to be anecdotal as much as "controlling" parameters can be. And no two
> riders
> > are going to have similar performance ability with possibly the exception
> of
> > identical twins, what do you think?
>
> I think I wasn't clear enough. Finding a rider that has a similar power output to you and stage a
> series of timed races, each of you using your preferred platform. A TT style race, a hill climb
> from standing and rolling starts, etc. It would be even more interesting to see how your heart
> rates compare (standardized by your normal resting heart rates). I want to elminate opinions on
> platforms. I want just the facts.

Buck, even if two riders tested the same wattage output on meters, the day to day variances will
negate the results of a comparison. There are days when I feel strong and some, just out of synch.
Heart rates can be a great adjunct to cycling and training, but the psyche and mind may have an
equal effect on performance. Mind over matter huh?

>
>
> > > You have said that you know a lot of DF riders. Maybe one of them would
> be
> > > willing to do a few head-to-head comparisons?
> >
> > Unfortunately, few of them regularly ride bents, far from the required
> 50/50
> > ratio to even begin to think about a test. I'm just not willing to go
> back on
> > my crit bike and ride it for a long enough time to fairly evaluate
> "properties and
> >
> > differences" between the two platforms.
>
> Again, I used the wrong phrase. I'm not suggesting switching bikes, I'm suggesting a series of
> tests to see which of you performs better.

I'd like to find some 50/50 riders of both platforms. Two different riders, IMO introduces too many
variables.

>
>
> > However, there is one interesting result I can address, and this is
> anecdotal
> > at best. My century times on the Festina lowracer when ridden alone with little drafting is
> > quicker than the ones completed on my crit bike 20-30 years
> ago
> > when I was 20 lbs lighter on a less mass bike. Sub 5 hour "total time" no drafting centuries
> > were only accomplished the last few years on the lowracer.
>
> Anecdotal, for sure. But it does give us a starting point.

Agreed.....

> > My spouse saids, "Your faster speeds are attributable to a mid-life
> crisis." I
> > disagree....
>
> heheh.

And her response to the news segment on the local news when I was pictured riding on the coldest day
of the year on the Chicago Lakefront, "I agree with Inez Pedroza commenting, are you are crazy?"

Ed - a secret publicity seeking hound - Gin

>
>
> -Buck
 
In article <[email protected]>, "Buck" <j u n k m a i l @ g a l a x y c
o r p . c o m> wrote: of the 'bent riders say that it doesn't matter because the seat is being
> used as a surface to push from. Are you saying that this might not be true?

Buck, BB is a very significant factor for climbing. It is not good to push the seat doing a hard
long mountain streep grade climb. There is always a trade off. lot of touring bents have low BB
height which reduces the chance of stressing the knees. Performance speed bents have high BBs to
create a narrow front rider profile and incerase aero efficiency. With the knees at a high level the
rider is positioning the knee joint at angle that extends forward more than a DF positiion. it is
rare that a performance race bent allows for a low BB height. both of the bikes that Ed and i ride
have low BB's which allow for efficient climbing with reduced knee strain.
>
> >
But in the real
> world, bicycle weight is a non-issue.

I used to preach the same thing to a fellow racer till I rode in a severe hill race in WI in his
area. Pushing a nearly 40 lb bike up steep long grades in a race was not good. Now that I've reduced
t"he total bike weight by nearly half I know that in my current "real world of riding the weight
reduction is a huge factor in climbing efficiency. that's just my opinion but there is vsome
validity to that as some of the serious pro DF racers are riding sub 15 lb bikes instead of 20+ lb
frames. the weight weinnies site even has a race bike listed that is 10 lbs.
>
> Or is it more a function of the tendency to mash bigger gears because there is a support to push
> against?

I can't answer that one Buck. I only use gears I can spin. I know from my expoerience of racing some
guys in the mountains in AZ on PACtour and then doing a severe hill race in WI that pushing big
gears on a heavy bike is not effective and will ultimatley lead to an overuse injury. again this is
partially due to the overall weight of the entire bike.
>

I can jump obstacles.

Buck I just use the lowracer to train for racing. If I were to do a social ride with kids or family
members I'd be using a MTB bike as there is more versatility for going over curbs and rail trails
compared to my racing bent. There are some bents out there that have suspension and can ride up
curbs and on gravel roads but they are very heavy weight bikes.
>
Is this just an overall average, or are you comparing heart rates when you
> were climbing on the two different platforms? I would expect heartrate to be lower for a given
> speed on the flats, but what happens when the road goes up?

Buck, when I train to race my HR is always higher than a longer distance or social ride. I'll push
the hills aggressivley and will redline at times. It's similar to what I was doing when I raced
DF's. Its just a different bike at this point in time.

>
> More about the BB height! Maybe you can share your knowledge about the effects of BB height. Have
> you ridden a machine that allows you to adjust the BB height as well as the length? Does such a
> bike exist?

I do not know of any bents that allow for adjustable BB height. Makes it difficlut to find the right
bent for your needs. One of the reasons I went through 7 bents prior. I was always looking for the
most effficient, best handling, proper BB height bike for my need to race. I would not use my bike
to commute as some of the roads where I live have no shoulder. I train durring the day when my
schedlule permits and traffic is at low volume. However the guy that built the bike uses it to
commute all over Europe as he owns no car.

Unlike me, Ed rides his bike daily with no less than 60 mi per ride and most rides usually being 100
mi per day 7 days per week. He rides on all types of roads even in downtown Chicago traffic. Its all
a matter of what the rider wants out of it all. I just prefer to ride for speed and not to use a
bike for commuting. I've got my training routes and enjoy occassionally traveling to a race that
will allow bents to participate.
>
>
I understand the response to Fabs, but the rest of us were asking honest
> questions and pointing out problems from our perspective. Why the hostility toward us?

My appologies. That Fastboy stuff leads to no value for anyone. We are now talking honestly and at
this point that is what matters. If someone wants to make a degrading comment I won't respond back
as the end result is pointless. As long as you guys are will to talk with an open mind about this
stuff there are no problems on my end. Bents are just another style of bike and there is not a lot
of info about them in the US like there is in Europe right now. Two completly different cultures.
It has taken me years to get a handle on bent aerodynamics and I'm willing to share what ever info
you request.

> Keep writing. I see that your focus is more on top speed. I hope that you can shift gears a bit
> and discuss commuter-style 'bents as well.

I might not be the best source for commuter style riding. If you go to this site:
http://www.bentrideronline.com/ you will learn a lot form other riders who are not into speed like I
am. As I've said earlier, the stuff I'm interested in is a rather small niche and I'm enjoying it at
this point in time but its not for everyone out there.

AA
 
Ed Gin <[email protected]> wrote:

> Want your data....here it is....and the stopwatch does not lie!!!!!
>
> Here's some more info for you duds on slow DFs. Go to http://www.speedbikebgl.de/eng/index.html
> Click on BeND result and pictures from race in Koln Scroll down to Hourrace. Thomas Schott 51.745
> km/h (32.08 mph)

Thomas Schott at that race, with his huge tail fairing:
http://www.speedbikebgl.de/pix/bendk02us03.jpg

> Albert Jacobs John Poot 51.53 km/h

Albert Jacobs and John Poot on their back-to-back *tandem* with pushme-pullyu seat fairing:
http://www.speedbikebgl.de/pix/bendk02hl02.jpg

> Marco Koedam 51.049 km/h

That very site has pictures of the guys you named riding *in that very event* with large fairings,
or even two-up! Is that what you call a fair comparison?

They are 5 klicks off of Boardman's record even so!

I have to point out that this does not support your assertion that 'bents are intrinsically faster.

While it does not prove that 'bents are necessarily _slower_ than regular racing bikes, it does show
that you, Ed Gin, will rely on some foolishly inappropriate material to try and make your case.

Chalo Colina
 
Ed Gin & Shirleen Kajiwara wrote:
>
> What are you talking about? I expect you to share in the rotation! And so is Fastboy......
>
> Ed - it'll be a blast - Gin

John,

If you ask nicely they will let you sit at the back and draft. I was able to get quite a good draft
off of double paceline with a Festina
w/tailbox (M5?) and a Razz-Fazz in the front row, and a Sunset w/tailbox (coroplast) and a Baron
w/tailbox (carbon fiber, Optima? copy) in the second row on the July 4th ride last year.

Tom Sherman - Quad Cities USA (Illinois side)
 
FasterthanUR wrote:
> ... There is only one builder in the US at this point in time producing a speed specific lowracer
> as opposed to the European recumbent builders....

Barcroft Oregon?

While I certainly respect FastBoy's speed (I went anaerobic after about 3 or 4 miles at his century
pace riding with him two years ago) and understand why he rides the types of bikes he does, there
are a few more practical lowracers that are still very fast such as the Challenge Taifun, Optima
Stinger, and regrettably out of production Earth Cycles Sunset. These might well be better choices
for non-competitive riders who still wish to go very fast.

Tom Sherman - Various HPV's Quad Cities USA (Illinois side)
 
Buck wrote:
>
> ... Fabrizio is the one poseur around here who typifies the posters over in rec.bicycles.racing.
> Take whatever he writes with a big grain of salt. Get a good laugh out of it and move on....

Even though the bikes I have ridden the most over the last 4 years are recumbents and the last 2
years are lowracers, I enjoy Fab's over-the-top posts. I do not take them seriously, however.

I still suspect that Fab is a middle age recumbent rider pretending to be the ultimate roadie.

Tom Sherman - Quad Cities USA (Illinois side)
 
Buck wrote:
> ... I would "need" two bents if I were to try them out - a weekday commuter and a weekend racer.
> Not for racing, mind you, but I like going fast for the thrill. Whether or not it would be faster
> is part and parcel to the discussion, but being just a few inches off the ground is certain to
> make the perceived speeds much higher....

Buck,

Lowracers of course have a shorter vertical moment arm from tire contact patches to the center of
gravity (of the combined bike and rider) than other recumbents and of course uprights. This leads to
a level of responsiveness (higher roll rate) that is not physically possible on a taller bike. This
had made some people describe lowracers as practically non-rideable while other become addicted to
minimal control inputs required.

A word of warning: Lowracers require a significantly different approach to riding than an upright
bike. A lowracer probably will be non-rideable if the rider applies the same amount of control force
and movement that he/she is used to from riding upright bikes. Depending on the particular
individual's adaptability, it can take from a few miles to several hundred miles for an upright
rider to adjust to riding a lowracer.

Tom Sherman - Quad Cities USA (Illinois side)
 
"Ed Gin & Shirleen Kajiwara" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]... <snip>

> > I think I wasn't clear enough. Finding a rider that has a similar power output to you and stage
> > a series of timed races, each of you using your preferred platform. A TT style race, a hill
> > climb from standing and
rolling
> > starts, etc. It would be even more interesting to see how your heart
rates
> > compare (standardized by your normal resting heart rates). I want to elminate opinions on
> > platforms. I want just the facts.
>
> Buck, even if two riders tested the same wattage output on meters, the day to day variances will
> negate the results of a comparison. There are days when I feel strong and some, just out of synch.
> Heart rates can be a great adjunct to cycling and training, but the psyche and mind may have an
> equal effect on performance. Mind over matter huh?

I suppose that's why we have multiple test over multiple days. There are always methods to control
such variables!

> I'd like to find some 50/50 riders of both platforms. Two different
riders,
> IMO introduces too many variables.

I still believe we can control the variables. Especially considering how difficult it will be to
find people who spend equal time on both platforms. Besides, won't these people be compromised on
either platform? Every agrees that 'bents and DFs either utilize different muscles or utilize the
same muscles differently.

<snip>

> And her response to the news segment on the local news when I was pictured riding on the
> coldest day of the year on the Chicago Lakefront, "I agree with Inez Pedroza commenting, are
> you are crazy?"
>
> Ed - a secret publicity seeking hound - Gin

I tried cycling in the ice and snow when I was younger. It was a good thing I selected thick
padding. I went down too many times to count. Maybe a recumbent trike with studded tires would have
been a good answer. On the other hand, how do those things work in a foot of snow? Snow plows were
rare in my neck of the woods.

-Buck
 
Buck,

When it is a foot thick, my MTB comes out. As much as my lowracer is like a luge, it can't slide
on snow. :)

Ed - rides all kinds of bikes - Gin

Buck wrote:

> "Ed Gin & Shirleen Kajiwara" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]... <snip>
>
> > > I think I wasn't clear enough. Finding a rider that has a similar power output to you and
> > > stage a series of timed races, each of you using your preferred platform. A TT style race, a
> > > hill climb from standing and
> rolling
> > > starts, etc. It would be even more interesting to see how your heart
> rates
> > > compare (standardized by your normal resting heart rates). I want to elminate opinions on
> > > platforms. I want just the facts.
> >
> > Buck, even if two riders tested the same wattage output on meters, the day to day variances will
> > negate the results of a comparison. There are days when I feel strong and some, just out of
> > synch. Heart rates can be a great adjunct to cycling and training, but the psyche and mind may
> > have an equal effect on performance. Mind over matter huh?
>
> I suppose that's why we have multiple test over multiple days. There are always methods to control
> such variables!
>
> > I'd like to find some 50/50 riders of both platforms. Two different
> riders,
> > IMO introduces too many variables.
>
> I still believe we can control the variables. Especially considering how difficult it will be to
> find people who spend equal time on both platforms. Besides, won't these people be compromised on
> either platform? Every agrees that 'bents and DFs either utilize different muscles or utilize the
> same muscles differently.
>
> <snip>
>
> > And her response to the news segment on the local news when I was pictured riding on the coldest
> > day of the year on the Chicago Lakefront, "I agree with Inez Pedroza commenting, are you are
> > crazy?"
> >
> > Ed - a secret publicity seeking hound - Gin
>
> I tried cycling in the ice and snow when I was younger. It was a good thing I selected thick
> padding. I went down too many times to count. Maybe a recumbent trike with studded tires would
> have been a good answer. On the other hand, how do those things work in a foot of snow? Snow plows
> were rare in my neck of the woods.
>
> -Buck
 
[email protected] (Bluto) wrote:

>While it does not prove that 'bents are necessarily _slower_ than regular racing bikes, it
>does show that you, Ed Gin, will rely on some foolishly inappropriate material to try and make
>your case.

Well, this IS the internet, after all.... ;-)

Mark Hickey Habanero Cycles http://www.habcycles.com Home of the $695 ti frame
 
Status
Not open for further replies.