Unfaired Recumbent vs. Upright Speed Comparisons



Status
Not open for further replies.
Tom Sherman must be edykated coz e writed:

>
> "B. Sanders" wrote:
>> ... Anyone who has tried to learn how to ride a lowracer knows how squirrelly they are. You need
>> quick reflexes to learn to ride them well....
>
> It took me less than half a lap at the indoor test ride area at CABDA 2000 to adjust to riding an
> Earth Cycles Sunset Lowracer [TM]. [1] I believe that steering geometry is much more important
> that seat height for handling qualities.
>
> [1] And anyone who thinks that this was due to superior reflexes or balance never saw my first
> unsuccessful attempt to ride a 1998 Vision R-40 SWB USS.
>
> Tom Sherman - Recumbent Curmudgeon
I heard it was all down to trainer wheels attached to your large over starched handlebar moustache.

--
Ian

http://www.catrike.co.uk
 
"B. Sanders" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:<RLbpb.86662$Tr4.221501@attbi_s03>...
>
> correct height for socializing with DF road bike riders. This makes high racers more acceptable
> for riding in pace lines [with hypercompetitive males], where physical stature establishes
> dominance.

I have heard this point before but I have my doubts. Do many high racer owners really want to
socialize with DF bikes while riding in a pace line? I doubt it. Most bent riders I know hate pace
lines. I believe that most high race owners who do wish to ride in a pace line would prefer to ride
with other high racers, not DFs. If I want to establish dominance over a pace line of DFs, I would
do it by pulling away from them solo, not riding a taller bike with them.

> Visibility in Traffic High racers are taller and more visible than lowracers. Visibility is
> absolutely crucial for safety when riding along roads populated with cars (which means pretty much
> everywhere). Lowracers, and tadpole trikes, are very low and not nearly as visible to tall
> vehicles such as SUV's and 18-wheelers.

IMO, this is a total fallacy and based on one's personal perception, not facts. High racers may be
taller but why would taller be more visible? A motor vehicle operator has to be able to see the road
surface in order to stay on the road and drive safely on it. Anything as tall as a lowracer on a
road should be easily visible, if a driver is as alert as he should be. In 3 years of riding my
Baron on many miles of busy, open roads, I haven't had a single instance where I feel someone didn't
see me because of the height of my bike.

> Limited Steering and Steep Learning Curve

Maybe, but my Baron has very good road manners and impecable handling. My transition from my V-Rex
to my Baron was pretty rapid and involved no falls. I wouldn't classify the learning curve for it as
steep by any means.

> Balance Stability

Same as above. You had a bad experience with your M5 but my experience with my Baron totally
different. Yes, I agree that the balance is "quicker" on lowracers but I, and other lowracer riders
that I know, adapted to it very quickly and with few problems. I, too, have heard that the M5 is a
"beast" and that could certainly havew been a factor in your case, but could the rider perhaps be as
much of a factor?

> I'm not surprised at the popularity of high racers. I don't think it's really about speed, since
> lowracers are faster. It's because of the much shallower learning curve, taller stature, better
> stability and better visibility of high racers. And high racers are still fast bikes. Look at the
> chart again. The difference in aero efficiency between high racers and low racers is very slight.
> Of course, as speed increases, the differences become magnified; but most riders never those high
> speeds anyway, except on downhill runs.

I think the high racer's popularity has more to do with the names of the individuals involved with
Bacchetta, the perception that 2 big wheels are better and/or look "cooler" than the 20/26
configuration and the facts that the new high racers are well designed, well built performance bikes
from excellent companies. I do believe that some riders who would never consider a lowracer, because
of some of the same factors you mentioned, which I consider to be common misconceptions, or at the
very least, differences in personal perception, do buy high racers because they offer high
performance in what they feel is a more "streetable" configuration. I just don't think it is the
main reason.

I believe it is clear that lowracers offer the best performance potential for open road riding, on
good, flat to rolling roads. The aero efficiency of lowracers increases when riding into headwinds
because of the lower wind velocity near the ground surface. Because of this, I think my Baron is the
ideal performance bike for the riding I do, on mostly flat to rolling terrain and fair to good
roads. However in other areas, in real, everyday riding on varied road surfaces and more hilly
terrain, the high racers might offer a more balanced alternative. I know I am looking hard at them
for those very reasons.

Harry
 
Harry, Interesting summation and for what its worth I agree with most of it. I do however on
occasion ride in pace lines with my HighRacer. Where I ride a LowRacer would be just fine. I am
considering a Baron. I mentioned to the Dutch Optima rep that I didn't want a disk brake and he
smiled and said that they will be again available shortly without disks. I don't care to drag
anything up a hill I don't have to. I see no use for disks on a performance bike. Oh yea I have been
lectured about how good disks are in inclement weather. Answer....a disk braked, fendered, racked
and wide tire commuter bent or trike comes to mind. Different bike for different purpose. Cheers!!!
--
Jude....///Bacchetta AERO St. Michaels and Tilghman Island.. Maryland Wheel Doctor Cycle and Sports,
Inc 1-800-586-6645 "harryo" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> "B. Sanders" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:<RLbpb.86662$Tr4.221501@attbi_s03>...
> >
> > correct height for socializing with DF road bike riders. This makes
high
> > racers more acceptable for riding in pace lines [with hypercompetitive males], where physical
> > stature establishes dominance.
>
> I have heard this point before but I have my doubts. Do many high racer owners really want to
> socialize with DF bikes while riding in a pace line? I doubt it. Most bent riders I know hate pace
> lines. I believe that most high race owners who do wish to ride in a pace line would prefer to
> ride with other high racers, not DFs. If I want to establish dominance over a pace line of DFs, I
> would do it by pulling away from them solo, not riding a taller bike with them.
>
> > Visibility in Traffic High racers are taller and more visible than lowracers. Visibility is
> > absolutely crucial for safety when riding along roads populated with
cars
> > (which means pretty much everywhere). Lowracers, and tadpole trikes, are very low and not nearly
> > as visible to tall vehicles such as SUV's and 18-wheelers.
>
> IMO, this is a total fallacy and based on one's personal perception, not facts. High racers may be
> taller but why would taller be more visible? A motor vehicle operator has to be able to see the
> road surface in order to stay on the road and drive safely on it. Anything as tall as a lowracer
> on a road should be easily visible, if a driver is as alert as he should be. In 3 years of riding
> my Baron on many miles of busy, open roads, I haven't had a single instance where I feel someone
> didn't see me because of the height of my bike.
>
> > Limited Steering and Steep Learning Curve
>
> Maybe, but my Baron has very good road manners and impecable handling. My transition from my V-Rex
> to my Baron was pretty rapid and involved no falls. I wouldn't classify the learning curve for it
> as steep by any means.
>
> > Balance Stability
>
> Same as above. You had a bad experience with your M5 but my experience with my Baron totally
> different. Yes, I agree that the balance is "quicker" on lowracers but I, and other lowracer
> riders that I know, adapted to it very quickly and with few problems. I, too, have heard that the
> M5 is a "beast" and that could certainly havew been a factor in your case, but could the rider
> perhaps be as much of a factor?
>
> > I'm not surprised at the popularity of high racers. I don't think it's really about speed, since
> > lowracers are faster. It's because of the much shallower learning curve, taller stature, better
> > stability and better visibility of high racers. And high racers are still fast bikes. Look
at
> > the chart again. The difference in aero efficiency between high racers
and
> > low racers is very slight. Of course, as speed increases, the
differences
> > become magnified; but most riders never those high speeds anyway, except
on
> > downhill runs.
>
> I think the high racer's popularity has more to do with the names of the individuals involved with
> Bacchetta, the perception that 2 big wheels are better and/or look "cooler" than the 20/26
> configuration and the facts that the new high racers are well designed, well built performance
> bikes from excellent companies. I do believe that some riders who would never consider a lowracer,
> because of some of the same factors you mentioned, which I consider to be common misconceptions,
> or at the very least, differences in personal perception, do buy high racers because they offer
> high performance in what they feel is a more "streetable" configuration. I just don't think it is
> the main reason.
>
> I believe it is clear that lowracers offer the best performance potential for open road riding, on
> good, flat to rolling roads. The aero efficiency of lowracers increases when riding into headwinds
> because of the lower wind velocity near the ground surface. Because of this, I think my Baron is
> the ideal performance bike for the riding I do, on mostly flat to rolling terrain and fair to good
> roads. However in other areas, in real, everyday riding on varied road surfaces and more hilly
> terrain, the high racers might offer a more balanced alternative. I know I am looking hard at them
> for those very reasons.
>
> Harry
 
"Jude T. McGloin" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Harry, Interesting summation and for what its worth I agree with most of
it.
> I do however on occasion ride in pace lines with my HighRacer. Where I ride a LowRacer would be
> just fine. I am considering a Baron. I mentioned to the Dutch Optima rep that I didn't want a disk
> brake and he smiled and said that they will be again available shortly without disks. I don't care
> to drag anything up a hill I don't have to. I see no
use
> for disks on a performance bike. Oh yea I have been lectured about how
good
> disks are in inclement weather. Answer....a disk braked, fendered, racked and wide tire commuter
> bent or trike comes to mind. Different bike for different purpose. Cheers!!!
> --
> Jude....///Bacchetta AERO St. Michaels and Tilghman Island.. Maryland Wheel Doctor Cycle and
> Sports, Inc 1-800-586-6645

I would not consider a Baron (or any other bike )without disc brakes, the weight difference is
almost nil
 
Quoth "Mark Leuck" <[email protected]>:
| "Jude T. McGloin" <[email protected]> wrote in message
| news:[email protected]...
...
|> Where I ride a LowRacer would be just fine. I am considering a Baron. I mentioned to the
|> Dutch Optima rep that I didn't want a disk brake and he smiled and said that they will be
|> again available shortly without disks. I don't care to drag anything up a hill I don't
|> have to. I see no use for disks on a performance bike. Oh yea I have been lectured about
|> how good disks are in inclement weather. Answer....a disk braked, fendered, racked and
|> wide tire commuter bent or trike comes to mind. Different bike for different purpose.

| I would not consider a Baron (or any other bike )without disc brakes, the weight difference is
| almost nil

Interesting, when I read up on these a few years back (or was that decades), it seems to me they
were mainly a third brake for tandems, not an especially powerful brake but more like a drag to help
out the main cantilever brakes. But without rim brakes it would be a lot easier to put on chains for
snow, so that's something.

Donn
 
"Donn Cave" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:1067835124.276392@yasure...
> Quoth "Mark Leuck" <[email protected]>:
> | "Jude T. McGloin" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> | news:[email protected]...
> ...
> |> Where I ride a LowRacer would be just fine. I am considering a Baron. I mentioned to
> |> the Dutch Optima rep that I didn't want a disk
brake
> |> and he smiled and said that they will be again available shortly
without
> |> disks. I don't care to drag anything up a hill I don't have to. I see
no use
> |> for disks on a performance bike. Oh yea I have been lectured about how
good
> |> disks are in inclement weather. Answer....a disk braked, fendered,
racked
> |> and wide tire commuter bent or trike comes to mind. Different bike for different purpose.
>
> | I would not consider a Baron (or any other bike )without disc brakes,
the
> | weight difference is almost nil
>
> Interesting, when I read up on these a few years back (or was that decades), it seems to me they
> were mainly a third brake for tandems, not an especially powerful brake but more like a drag to
> help out the main cantilever brakes. But without rim brakes it would be a lot easier to put on
> chains for snow, so that's something.
>
> Donn

The difference between the standard brakes on my Vision and the discs on the Baron is amazing
 
Donn Cave <[email protected]> wrote:
> Interesting, when I read up on these a few years back (or was that decades), it seems to me they
> were mainly a third brake for tandems, not an especially powerful brake but more like a drag to
> help out the main cantilever brakes. But without rim brakes it would be a lot easier to put on
> chains for snow, so that's something.

You're thinking of drum brakes, specifically the Arai drum that is especially intended for use as a
drag brake on tandems.

There are other drums that are used as primary brakes (e.g. Sturmey-Archer, Sachs VT5000, Shimano
Nexus "roller brakes"). I'm not so sure that they'd be appropriate for tandems, though.

I haven't heard of a disc brake being intended for use as a drag brake.

--
Russ [email protected] the wabbit to despam "...remember that
shrink-wrapping the average stick-built suburban bung- alow against anthrax, VX and radioactive
fallout is akin to rolling a rubber on before diving naked into a shark tank full of blood."
-Patrick O'Grady
 
"Jude T. McGloin" wrote:
> ... I don't care to drag anything up a hill I don't have to. I see no use for disks on a
> performance bike....

Unless the bike is fully faired - there have been several reports of Lightning F-40 riders'
melting/burning the brake pads while riding in the mountains.

Tom Sherman - Recumbent Curmudgeon
 
Tom Sherman must be edykated coz e writed:

>
> "Jude T. McGloin" wrote:
>> ... I don't care to drag anything up a hill I don't have to. I see no use for disks on a
>> performance bike....
>
> Unless the bike is fully faired - there have been several reports of Lightning F-40 riders'
> melting/burning the brake pads while riding in the mountains.
>
> Tom Sherman - Recumbent Curmudgeon
Also on trikes with no forks.

--
Ian

http://www.catrike.co.uk
 
Scott wrote:
> I read some of the "negative" commentary by the long distance rider about his relative speeds
> ufaired bent vs. DF. When you consider he was riding an unfaired Tour Easy, it's no wonder he was
> a bit disappointed. He could have picked a MUCH faster unfaired bike. Something like a Ti Aero
> would give him the kind of performance he was looking for.

It might well have done, but for the slight inconvenience that there were no Ti Aeros on tha market
in 1994. I'm not sure what the state of the art in performance recumbents in the US was around that
time, but the first production low racers were only just starting to creep onto the European race
scene back then.

Dave Larrington - http://www.legslarry.beerdrinkers.co.uk/
===========================================================
Editor - British Human Power Club Newsletter
http://www.bhpc.org.uk/
===========================================================
 
According to the original published data, which I have in a copy of "HPV Nieuws" buried somewhere in
Newsletter Central, "Test conditions were the same in all cases, viz. smooth asphalt, no wind, air
pressure 1000 mbar, air temperature 20 deg. C, high-pressure tyres, rider wearing race-type
clothing. The rider (one of the Baron brothers, I believe - Ed), is 1.84 m tall and weighs 75 kg,
while the recumbent bikes have their bottom brackets approximately 20 cm above the seat, ASS of the
"arms-straight" persuasion and a seat-back angle of 25 degrees."

Dave Larrington - http://www.legslarry.beerdrinkers.co.uk/
===========================================================
Editor - British Human Power Club Newsletter
http://www.bhpc.org.uk/
===========================================================
 
> > Visibility in Traffic High racers are taller and more visible than lowracers. Visibility is
> > absolutely crucial for safety when riding along roads populated with cars (which means pretty
> > much everywhere). Lowracers, and tadpole trikes, are very low and not nearly as visible to tall
> > vehicles such as SUV's and 18-wheelers.
>
> IMO, this is a total fallacy and based on one's personal perception, not facts. High racers may be
> taller but why would taller be more visible? A motor vehicle operator has to be able to see the
> road surface in order to stay on the road and drive safely on it. Anything as tall as a lowracer
> on a road should be easily visible, if a driver is as alert as he should be. In 3 years of riding
> my Baron on many miles of busy, open roads, I haven't had a single instance where I feel someone
> didn't see me because of the height of my bike.

I have to disagree here. On an open road in a rural or similar area it is true but in an urban are
the ability to see over cars (or atleast through thier windows) comes in very useful. I can see the
car that wants to turn left in front of me and make sure he sees me on my Strada but when I rode the
Baron I had to be much more careful. It also helps to see over cars parked on the street an over
shrubs planted too close to the intersection corner. True there are still sometimes when vehicles or
obstacles are too tall to see over on the Strada but they are much less common than those I can't
see over on the Baron.
>
> > Limited Steering and Steep Learning Curve
>
> Maybe, but my Baron has very good road manners and impecable handling. My transition from my V-Rex
> to my Baron was pretty rapid and involved no falls. I wouldn't classify the learning curve for it
> as steep by any means.

I agree I found the Baron easier to ride than the Strada, Saber or Wishbone. It handled very nice at
slow speeds and loved curves at high speeds. Plus the disk brakes gave alot of confidence and
control when needing to arrest the exceptional speeds the lowracer was capable.
>
> I believe it is clear that lowracers offer the best performance potential for open road riding, on
> good, flat to rolling roads. The aero efficiency of lowracers increases when riding into headwinds
> because of the lower wind velocity near the ground surface. Because of this, I think my Baron is
> the ideal performance bike for the riding I do, on mostly flat to rolling terrain and fair to good
> roads. However in other areas, in real, everyday riding on varied road surfaces and more hilly
> terrain, the high racers might offer a more balanced alternative. I know I am looking hard at them
> for those very reasons.
>
> Harry

I've owned a Baron and a Strada so I've been on both ends of the high
vs. low argument. The Baron was faster for me in nearly all my riding. I didn't feel that I lost
anything climbing but I had much more confidence (and therefore faster) on the decent and the
Baron was a couple of mph faster on a flat cruise. However I commute 8.5 miles each way through
an urban area with ~40 stop lights/signs and many more intersections. I did not feel comfortable
rideing this route on the Baron but the Strada works very well. It would probably be easier on a
lower BB bike but I didn't want to give up that much performance.

Craig
 
"Jude T. McGloin" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:<[email protected]>...
> Harry, Interesting summation and for what its worth I agree with most of it. I do however on
> occasion ride in pace lines with my HighRacer. Where I ride a LowRacer would be just fine. I am
> considering a Baron. I mentioned to the Dutch Optima rep that I didn't want a disk brake and he
> smiled and said that they will be again available shortly without disks. I don't care to drag
> anything up a hill I don't have to. I see no use for disks on a performance bike. Oh yea I have
> been lectured about how good

I understand. My disc brakes do stop quicker than anything else I have used, are trouble free and
very low maintainance but you are carrying more hardware. Another problem I had this fall is when I
discovered a split front rim after a Saturday ride. It was the Labor Day weekend and I had a 3 day
ride starting the Tuesday after Labor Day. I spent all the rest of Saturday on the phone trying to
find a 406, 36 hole rim in any lbs within 100 miles of me, to no avail. I did find a couple of
prebuilt wheels but they didn't have a disc hub, of course. I rode the 3 day ride, in hilly terrain,
with a bmx bike wheel on the front and no brake.

I believe the new Barons come with the mounts for cantilever brakes on them, even though they are
disc equipped. Mine has the mount on the rear but not the fork but someone told me the forks now
have a mounting hole also.

I believe you will like the Baron. As I said, it handles very well, is comfortable on the roads and
can be very fast, especially in rollers and into headwinds. Interesting that you are considering one
for certain riding and i am considering a high racer for certain riding. The right tools for the
right job!

Harry
 
What Donn said. The stock Magura discs on the Baron are not particularly light (or effective, if
mine are typical of the marque), but something like a Hope Mini, Magura Marta or Formula B4
certainly is. Depending on Santa's generosity, Cosimo may yet sport a pair of Minis next year...

Dave Larrington - http://www.legslarry.beerdrinkers.co.uk/
===========================================================
Editor - British Human Power Club Newsletter
http://www.bhpc.org.uk/
===========================================================
 
Dave Larrington must be edykated coz e writed:

> What Donn said. The stock Magura discs on the Baron are not particularly light (or effective, if
> mine are typical of the marque), but something like a Hope Mini, Magura Marta or Formula B4
> certainly is. Depending on Santa's generosity, Cosimo may yet sport a pair of Minis next year...
>
> Dave Larrington - http://www.legslarry.beerdrinkers.co.uk/
> ===========================================================
> Editor - British Human Power Club Newsletter http://www.bhpc.org.uk/
> ===========================================================
>
>
The Mini s on the Catrike are wonderful beasties.

--
Ian

http://www.catrike.co.uk
 
>This chart clearly shows, as I have always suspected, that low racers are more efficient than high
>racers, regardless of rolling resistance, which only seems to be significant at low speeds. They
>should also be safer, turn better, and require less truing, although more frequent tire
>replacement. Why then, have high racers such as bacchetta and Volae gained such a following? George
>Reynolds went from his 20/20 to a 700/20 and now to a dual 700, and he certainly knows what he is
>doing. I am confused!
>
>--
>
>Joel Wilson Fort Lauderdale

Hi Joel

That chart is often used often to "prove" that lowracers are faster or more efficient than
all higher bikes. They are only valid for the exact bikes compared in that test, not all
higher bikes!

Bikes like the Aero can have a lower above the seat frontal area than most lowracers set at
equivalent seat angles because of the arm position. This frontal area is by far the biggest
aero drag factor on both types of bikes, and also uprights.

The remaining frontal area below the seat on an Aero is of much lower Cd (coefficient of
aero drag) than the above seat Cd, and much lower visual frontal also. The total drag
below the seat (called the effective frontal area) will be the product of the Cd times the
visual frontal.

There is also the lower rolling resistance of larger wheels, which Warren B covered well in a
previous post.

No need for all the theory though....we have a growing number former and present lowracers
owners who have posted on their actual on road results on both types of bikes, and would
be happy to share their results with you! They include recent US HPV lowracer winners
among them.

Some have been sustantially faster on their Aeros than their lowracers, depending (as always!)
on the courses and bikes involved.

Rich Pinto
Bacchetta Bicycles
 
"harryo" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> "B. Sanders" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:<RLbpb.86662$Tr4.221501@attbi_s03>...
> >
> > correct height for socializing with DF road bike riders. This makes
high
> > racers more acceptable for riding in pace lines [with hypercompetitive males], where physical
> > stature establishes dominance.
>
> I have heard this point before but I have my doubts. Do many high racer owners really want to
> socialize with DF bikes while riding in a pace line? I doubt it. Most bent riders I know hate pace
> lines. I believe that most high race owners who do wish to ride in a pace line would prefer to
> ride with other high racers, not DFs. If I want to establish dominance over a pace line of DFs, I
> would do it by pulling away from them solo, not riding a taller bike with them.

Pulling away from a pace line is definitely antisocial behavior. People ride bikes not only to go
fast, but also to socialize with a group. The group dynamics of a pace line - the feeling of running
wheel to wheel at high speeds - is a big part of the thrill of cycling for many cyclists. By
adopting many of the observable characteristics of conventional road bikes, high racers are much
more acceptable to traditional pace line cyclists. Of course, having a spinning buzz saw up front
can be fairly intimidating to the guy ahead of you. :)

> > Visibility in Traffic High racers are taller and more visible than lowracers. Visibility is
> > absolutely crucial for safety when riding along roads populated with
cars
> > (which means pretty much everywhere). Lowracers, and tadpole trikes, are very low and not nearly
> > as visible to tall vehicles such as SUV's and 18-wheelers.
>
> IMO, this is a total fallacy and based on one's personal perception, not facts. High racers may be
> taller but why would taller be more visible?

Why are taller people more visible in a crowd?

High racers present a larger and taller silhouette, closer to the eye-height of taller vehicles.
That's fact, not fallacy. Lowracers present a tiny silhouette when viewed from the rear. Crucial
driving decisions are made when bikes are still a small speck. The larger, taller and more visible a
bike is, the more likely it is to be seen by drivers. Fact, not fallacy.

> A motor vehicle operator has to be able to see the road surface in order to stay on the road and
> drive safely on it. Anything as tall as a lowracer on a road should be easily visible, if a driver
> is as alert as he should be.

That will make a nice epitaph for lowracer owners. "They should have seen me! It's their fault
I'm dead!"

> In 3 years of riding my Baron on many miles of busy, open roads, I haven't had a single instance
> where I feel someone didn't see me because of the height of my bike.

This is your personal perception.

On the other hand, I have experienced several instances where drivers did not see me, and I wasn't
even riding a lowracer! If I had been lower to the ground, I would have been killed (the drivers did
wake up at the last second, just before smashing into me). It's been said that in Champaign-Urbana,
people drive in a bubble, unaware of their surroundings. I can believe that quite easily, based upon
their actions. It's really scary. 4-way stops are like a Keystone Cops movie.

> > Limited Steering and Steep Learning Curve
>
> Maybe, but my Baron has very good road manners and impecable handling. My transition from my V-Rex
> to my Baron was pretty rapid and involved no falls. I wouldn't classify the learning curve for it
> as steep by any means.

Barons certainly have a great reputation. However, I'm talking about a wide variety of cycling skill
levels. For some people, riding *any* recumbent is hard enough. A lowracer is out of the question,
for a variety of reasons (which I've outlined). A highracer is more acceptable as a transition from
conventional DF bikes, since it looks more like a DF bike (same size wheels, for instance).

> > Balance Stability
>
> Same as above. You had a bad experience with your M5 but my experience with my Baron totally
> different. Yes, I agree that the balance is "quicker" on lowracers but I, and other lowracer
> riders that I know, adapted to it very quickly and with few problems. I, too, have heard that the
> M5 is a "beast" and that could certainly havew been a factor in your case, but could the rider
> perhaps be as much of a factor?

My experience is only one small datapoint. The "quicker" balance of lowracers is the problem that
high racers solve. We're not talking about absolutes. If you love your Baron, hats off to ya'. You
made a great choice. But other recumbent buyers, who only have a quick spin around the block to
inform their purchase decisions, may disagree with your assertion about balance stability.

> > I'm not surprised at the popularity of high racers. I don't think it's really about speed, since
> > lowracers are faster. It's because of the much shallower learning curve, taller stature, better
> > stability and better visibility of high racers. And high racers are still fast bikes. Look
at
> > the chart again. The difference in aero efficiency between high racers
and
> > low racers is very slight. Of course, as speed increases, the
differences
> > become magnified; but most riders never those high speeds anyway, except
on
> > downhill runs.
>
> I think the high racer's popularity has more to do with the names of the individuals involved with
> Bacchetta, the perception that 2 big wheels are better and/or look "cooler" than the 20/26
> configuration and the facts that the new high racers are well designed, well built performance
> bikes from excellent companies.

I'll bet only a small fraction of high racer buyers would use these criteria to make their choice
between a lowracer and a high racer. Only recumbent geeks would know or care about the designers of
the bikes. I'm sure that the "coolness factor" is important to some; but ultimately, with
recumbents, it is the ride that matters. Geometry is the single largest factor, IMO. High racers
sell well because they're fast, stable and comfortable. Build quality might make it easier to let go
of the $$$$.

> I do believe that some riders who would never consider a lowracer, because of some of the same
> factors you mentioned, which I consider to be common misconceptions, or at the very least,
> differences in personal perception, do buy high racers because they offer high performance in what
> they feel is a more "streetable" configuration. I just don't think it is the main reason.

I do think it's the main reason. The original question was "why don't people buy lowracers instead
of high racers, because low racers are faster?" I think I've answered that question adequately.

> I believe it is clear that lowracers offer the best performance potential for open road riding, on
> good, flat to rolling roads. The aero efficiency of lowracers increases when riding into headwinds
> because of the lower wind velocity near the ground surface.

It really is quite remarkable. I was amazed at how my M5 sliced through headwinds. The deep-section
aero wheels helped.

> Because of this, I think my Baron is the ideal performance bike for the riding I do, on mostly
> flat to rolling terrain and fair to good roads.

Sounds perfect.

> However in other areas, in real, everyday riding on varied road surfaces and more hilly terrain,
> the high racers might offer a more balanced alternative. I know I am looking hard at them for
> those very reasons.

Consider this: On rolling, rural roads, a high racer will let the pick-em-up truck drivers see you
*before* they pass the other truck in the oncoming shoulder, just before they crest the shallow
hill with you on the other side. On a lowracer, your chances of becoming roadkill are much higher
in that scenario.

-=Barry=-
 
"Dave Larrington" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:<[email protected]>...
> What Donn said. The stock Magura discs on the Baron are not particularly light (or effective, if
> mine are typical of the marque), but something like

The Magura Clara(200) brakes on my Baron are terrific. You can lock up the wheels with moderate
lever pull, yet the modulation is excellent. They are wonderful brakes, performance wise, especially
when needing to slow quickly on fast dowhill runs. I have no complaints abot their performance and
required adjustment and maintenance, which is virtually nil.

Harry
 
On 3 Nov 2003 05:29:12 -0800, [email protected] (cbb) wrote:

>> is as alert as he should be. In 3 years of riding my Baron on many miles of busy, open roads,
>> I haven't had a single instance where I feel someone didn't see me because of the height of
>> my bike.
>
>I have to disagree here. On an open road in a rural or similar area it is true but in an urban are
>the ability to see over cars (or atleast through thier windows) comes in very useful.

I agree. In addition, there are often low obstacles near the road which I'd like to see over and/or
can hide me, like guardrails and bushes. I once had a close call on my trike when a car coming out
of a side road failed to see me; I was blocked by the guardrails placed between the sidewalk and the
main road.

That said, this particular danger can be minimized by not riding too close to the edge of the road.

Ken Kobayashi [email protected] http://solarwww.mtk.nao.ac.jp/kobayashi/personal/
 
"B. Sanders" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:<FEwpb.70270$mZ5.435426@attbi_s54>...
>
> Pulling away from a pace line is definitely antisocial behavior. People ride bikes not only to go
> fast, but also to socialize with a group. The group dynamics of a pace line - the feeling of
> running wheel to wheel at high speeds - is a big part of the thrill of cycling for many cyclists.
> By adopting many of the observable characteristics of conventional road bikes, high racers are
> much more acceptable to traditional pace line cyclists. Of

DF pace lines offer me nothing. I can not take a turn pulling and will not draft others if I can't
help pull. I have tried to ride along side of DF pace lines and be sociable by engaging in
conversation but those in the pace line do not wish top socialize. Therefore, I find it best to ride
away from them. If I must choose to be more like them, for them to socially accdept me, then I will
pass(no pun intended).

> Why are taller people more visible in a crowd?

We aren't talking about picking one bike out of a crowd. I am talking about a single bike on
open roads.

> High racers present a larger and taller silhouette, closer to the eye-height of taller vehicles.
> That's fact, not fallacy. Lowracers present a tiny silhouette when viewed from the rear. Crucial
> driving decisions are made when bikes are still a small speck. The larger, taller and more visible
> a bike is, the more likely it is to be seen by drivers. Fact, not fallacy.

I believe that many motorists whom strike cyclists and claim they didn't see them actually did not
notice them, meaning they were inattentive and not looking for a cyclist. There is a difference
between this and actually not physically being able to see the cyclist. You assume that a taller
silhouette would make a cyclist more likely to be seen by an inattentive motorist and I doubt that.
My doubts are somewhat supported by auto-motorcycle accidents where the auto driver also claims they
didn't see the motorcycle, which has a taller profile. Unfortunately, there is no real evidence to
support either position.

> That will make a nice epitaph for lowracer owners. "They should have seen me! It's their fault
> I'm dead!"

It would be just nice for any other rider on any other type bike. You again assume that a taller
bike would change the results, with no real evidence that it really would.

> > In 3 years of riding my Baron on many miles of busy, open roads, I haven't had a single instance
> > where I feel someone didn't see me because of the height of my bike.
>
> This is your personal perception.

No, since I am writing this now, it is definately fact.

> On the other hand, I have experienced several instances where drivers did not see me, and I
> wasn't even riding a lowracer! If I had been lower to the ground, I would have been killed
> (the drivers did wake up at the last second, just before smashing into me). It's been said
> that in Champaign-Urbana, people drive in a bubble, unaware of their surroundings. I can
> believe that quite easily, based upon their actions. It's really scary. 4-way stops are like a
> Keystone Cops movie.

This supports what I said above about motorists not noticing any bike, not just lowracers. Also, you
again assume that if you had been on a lower bike, the driver wouldn't have noticed you at the last
second, with no real way to support that assumption. For what it is worth, I have ridden my Baron on
the streets of Champaign-Urbana, Bloomington-Normal, Chicago & suburbs and many other large cities
and have had no real problems. One must take extra precautions but I still don't see a problem.

> My experience is only one small datapoint. The "quicker" balance of lowracers is the problem that
> high racers solve. We're not talking about absolutes. If you love your Baron, hats off to ya'. You
> made a great choice. But other recumbent buyers, who only have a quick spin around the block to
> inform their purchase decisions, may disagree with your assertion about balance stability.

During the last year, I have ridden several different high racers and actually found myself to be
less stable and in control of the bike during those rides. It takes some time to become attuned to
any change of geometry but I don't think this means any particular one is by nature more balanced
and stable than the other. Seat height alone doesn't make a bike more stable than a nother and a
quick spin around the block really won't tell you anything.

> I'll bet only a small fraction of high racer buyers would use these criteria to make their choice
> between a lowracer and a high racer. Only recumbent geeks would know or care about the designers
> of the bikes. I'm sure that the "coolness factor" is important to some; but ultimately, with
> recumbents, it is the ride that matters. Geometry is the single largest factor, IMO. High racers
> sell well because they're fast, stable and comfortable. Build quality might make it easier to let
> go of the $$$$.

Here, we will just have to disagree.

> I do think it's the main reason. The original question was "why don't people buy lowracers instead
> of high racers, because low racers are faster?" I think I've answered that question adequately.

I thought the original question was just "why has high racers popularity taken off so fast?". Again,
we'll just have to disagree.

> It really is quite remarkable. I was amazed at how my M5 sliced through headwinds. The
> deep-section aero wheels helped.

I think one has to experience this to really comprehend it. I think some high racer owners and other
bent riders don't really believe it but there is a marked difference. Finally we can agree on
something! ;)

> Consider this: On rolling, rural roads, a high racer will let the pick-em-up truck drivers see you
> *before* they pass the other truck in the oncoming shoulder, just before they crest the shallow
> hill with you on the other side. On a lowracer, your chances of becoming roadkill are much higher
> in that scenario.

I don't believe 10-12 inches in seat height will change the outcome of that scenario.

Harry
 
Status
Not open for further replies.