What do you miss least.



Status
Not open for further replies.
wafflycathcsdirtycatlitter wrote:

> And many find it strangely enjoyable ...

I used to do it myself, and carried on because I found the *overall experience* of the ride good.
However, the individual discomforts were never enjoyable themselves.

But OTOH, maybe that S&Mish suggestion explains the wearing of, ummmm, you know! ;-)

Pete.
--
Peter Clinch University of Dundee Tel 44 1382 660111 ext. 33637 Medical Physics, Ninewells Hospital
Fax 44 1382 640177 Dundee DD1 9SY Scotland UK net [email protected]
http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/
 
Colin Blackburn wrote:

> But then some of us don't find it uncomfortable and actually enjoy it

Thought experiment for you Colin... You're led into a friend's sitting room, where you are to watch
a 3 hour movie while sat down. While he goes off to fix drinks you are invited to "take a seat,
make yourself comfy for the movie". Aside from a couple of reclining armchairs, his turbo trainer
is in there with a bike (fitted with good quality saddle) on it. Do you take one of the chairs, or
sit on the bike?

Comfort is a relative thing. I know I can be comfortable *enough* on my upright to enjoy riding it
for several hours. I also know I can be far *more* comfortable on my recumbent, with no aches or
pains in my back, neck, arms, wrists or backside to date. I don't miss those pains, even if they're
not bad enough to render the ride a bad experience overall.

I enjoyed cycling my upright a lot. I enjoy cycling my 'bent a lot more, mostly because comfort goes
from being "good enough" to simply not being an issue at all. For short hops comfort isn't an issue
on an upright, so I use the Brompton for those. Several hours riding though, I want cosseting!

Pete.
--
Peter Clinch University of Dundee Tel 44 1382 660111 ext. 33637 Medical Physics, Ninewells Hospital
Fax 44 1382 640177 Dundee DD1 9SY Scotland UK net [email protected]
http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/
 
"Peter Clinch" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
>
> Comfort is a relative thing. I know I can be comfortable *enough* on my upright to enjoy riding it
> for several hours. I also know I can be far *more* comfortable on my recumbent, with no aches or
> pains in my back, neck, arms, wrists or backside to date. I don't miss those pains, even if
> they're not bad enough to render the ride a bad experience overall.

During a long ride I will suffer a few tingles in the hands -- no great problem, change position on
the drops. On a VERY long ride my bum may get a little sore -- though bum and saddle are in near
perfect harmony up to more miles than I normally do in a day. I am fortunate not generally to suffer
from back or neck pain while cycling.

Maybe a bent is more comfortable. While no easy chair my bike is like a good quality desk chair --
suitable for 8+ hours or so hard labour.

What you cannot offer (other than perhaps a small reduction in wind resistance) is any relief
for the legs.

Where would I gain from riding a bent -- other than a different experience and danger to my
immortal soul???

T
 
On Sun, 9 Feb 2003 00:43:30 -0000, "Tony W" <[email protected]> wrote:

>Where would I gain from riding a bent -- other than a different experience and danger to my
>immortal soul???

You'd find that instead of seeing a hundred miles of your front wheel you could take in the
scenery :-D

Guy
===
** WARNING ** This posting may contain traces of irony. http://www.chapmancentral.com (BT ADSL and
dynamic DNS permitting)
NOTE: BT Openworld have now blocked port 25 (without notice), so old mail addresses may no longer
work. Apologies.
 
"Just zis Guy, you know?" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> On Sun, 9 Feb 2003 00:43:30 -0000, "Tony W" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> >Where would I gain from riding a bent -- other than a different
experience
> >and danger to my immortal soul???
>
> You'd find that instead of seeing a hundred miles of your front wheel you could take in the
> scenery :-D

mmm, excellent views of plastic bags in verges.

The lesson is, don't buy a really low recumbent (eg greenspeed) and ride it in areas with walls.

cheers, clive
 
On Sun, 09 Feb 2003 13:07:04 +0000, "Just zis Guy, you know?" <[email protected]> wrote:

>On Sun, 9 Feb 2003 00:43:30 -0000, "Tony W" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>Where would I gain from riding a bent -- other than a different experience and danger to my
>>immortal soul???
>
>You'd find that instead of seeing a hundred miles of your front wheel you could take in the
>scenery :-D
>
But you can't see over hedges. Today we were on a tandem club run, on our Pino. I'm in an upright
position, whilst the boss is recumbent. I pointed out something or other in the wildlife side of
things in a field, but she couldn't see it as she's that much lower down than me.

Tim
--

fast and gripping, non pompous, glossy and credible.
 
Tony W wrote:

> Where would I gain from riding a bent -- other than a different experience and danger to my
> immortal soul???

Possibly nothing. But OTOH I'd have made exactly the same arguments that you just have before I got
used to a 'bent. And then I found out that though I *thought* I'd been riding a comfortable bike for
years, I really hadn't.

Was out on a CTC run-ette yesterday. If we stopped for more than a minute I just put my feet down
and sat where I was as it was the most comfortable place around. Everyone else got off...

Pete.
--
Peter Clinch University of Dundee Tel 44 1382 660111 ext. 33637 Medical Physics, Ninewells Hospital
Fax 44 1382 640177 Dundee DD1 9SY Scotland UK net [email protected]
http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/
 
Tim Hall wrote:

> But you can't see over hedges.

Depends on the hedges. With the sort in a lot of the lanes around North Devon, for example, a
giraffe uni would be about the only way to see over a lot of them. Round here I haven't noticed many
rides, if any, where I'm thinking I used to see a lot more countryside.

I imagine there are areas where you're at the magic critical cutoff, though it also depends on the
bike design. Many CLWB 'bents have a head position just as high as a drop bar bike, and looking out
rather than down.

Pete.
--
Peter Clinch University of Dundee Tel 44 1382 660111 ext. 33637 Medical Physics, Ninewells Hospital
Fax 44 1382 640177 Dundee DD1 9SY Scotland UK net [email protected]
http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/
 
"Peter B" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...
>
> Definately cotter pins, oh and toeclips

Can't say I miss toeclips at all. Only had to endure them for a couple of years on my first "proper"
road bike, until some Look pedals turned up one Christmas. Goodness knows how 'cross riders used to
manage with toeclips - I'd be lost without Time ATACs! Other things I'm glad to have left behind;
chromed steel rims with no chance of the brake blocks being able to "bite", especially in the wet!
Oh, and down-tube gear shifting. It still has its fans, but I prefer Ergopower, which has the added
benefit of being comfier for my big hands when 'on the hoods' thanks to the enlarged lever body!
Things which ought to be still with us; high-quality 5 or 6 speed transmissions, with decent
bar-end/Ergo levers to suit - probably catering for a minority, though. Modern 8+ speed clusters are
all very well, but the narrower spacing seems to clog up too easily when used on a 'cross bike.

David E. Belcher

Dept. of Chemistry, University of York
 
In article <[email protected]>, [email protected] says...
> Colin Blackburn wrote:
>
> > But then some of us don't find it uncomfortable and actually enjoy it
>
> Thought experiment for you Colin...

I very rarely watch films on my bike, I normally use mine to get somewhere. Though I am pleased that
you have found a use for your recumbent.

Colin
 
Colin Blackburn wrote:

> I very rarely watch films on my bike, I normally use mine to get somewhere. Though I am pleased
> that you have found a use for your recumbent.

A couple of weeks ago my brother was playing rubgy in Dundee. I cycled to the pitch, and when I got
there I had a chair to sit in to watch the game. It does both.

I often watch scenery on my bike. It's so much nicer when I don't have my eyes guided to the road
just beyond the front wheel.

And more comfort when I'm in the process of going somewhere is nice too.

Too much comfort just isn't really something I can see ever being a problem.

Pete.
--
Peter Clinch University of Dundee Tel 44 1382 660111 ext. 33637 Medical Physics, Ninewells Hospital
Fax 44 1382 640177 Dundee DD1 9SY Scotland UK net [email protected]
http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/
 
Tim Hall <[email protected]> writes:

>On Sun, 09 Feb 2003 13:07:04 +0000, "Just zis Guy, you know?" <[email protected]> wrote:

>>On Sun, 9 Feb 2003 00:43:30 -0000, "Tony W" <[email protected]> wrote:

>>>Where would I gain from riding a bent -- other than a different experience and danger to my
>>>immortal soul???
>>
>>You'd find that instead of seeing a hundred miles of your front wheel you could take in the
>>scenery :-D

>But you can't see over hedges. Today we were on a tandem club run, on our Pino. I'm in an upright
>position, whilst the boss is recumbent. I pointed out something or other in the wildlife side of
>things in a field, but she couldn't see it as she's that much lower down than me.

I might get a 'bent for country touring one day, but I'd never use it in town. I've developed
excellent traffic monitoring and prediction skills which make crucial use of the fact that I can see
over the tops of most cars. In urban traffic that gives me an important edge which I'd be loth to
give up. It wouldn't make me less safe to be without it, because I'd simply adapt to my increased
ignorance of nearby conditions by going more slowly. Seeing over cars in also handy when searching
for a particular shop, etc.

--
Chris Malcolm [email protected] +44 (0)131 650 3085 School of Artificial Intelligence, Division of
Informatics Edinburgh University, 5 Forrest Hill, Edinburgh, EH1 2QL, UK
[http://www.dai.ed.ac.uk/daidb/people/homes/cam/ ] DoD #205
 
In article <[email protected]>, [email protected] says... [...]
> Too much comfort just isn't really something I can see ever being a problem.

Don't get me wrong, I like the idea of a recumbent and my next bike (well, trike probably) will be a
recumbent. However, I do find evangelism off-putting wherever it shows itself. I am not
uncomfortable on my bike regardless of how much people tell me I am. I have toured long distances
without any discomfort. I have absolutely no doubts that recumbents are very, very comfotable but my
bike isn't uncomfotable and I enjoy using it. I will, I imagine find a recumbent so comfortable that
I won't be able to live without it. However, when I do get to that stage I sincerely hope that I
don't end up telling other people how uncomfortable their lives must be.

At a party yesterday I arrived on a Brompton. One of the guys ther was a Brompton rider and we got
chatting, as you do. Turns out he has a recumbent bike in the loft. He can't be arsed using it.
Apparently it's no more comfortable an experience than his usual bike (not a Brommie.)

Colin
 
Colin Blackburn wrote:
> However, when I do get to that stage I sincerely hope that I don't end up telling other people how
> uncomfortable their lives must be.

Why hope that? If it turns out they don't realise they could be more comfortable, you really could
be doing them a service. A while ago I was being an Awful Evangelist for avoiding the default riding
position of looking at the road. Guy, who hadn't yet Seen The Dark, pointed out this could be
avoided by the simple precaution of looking up, something he'd never found a problem. Look at him
now: finding out there really *is* a better way of doing something can be a bit of an eye opener.

> At a party yesterday I arrived on a Brompton. One of the guys ther was a Brompton rider and we got
> chatting, as you do. Turns out he has a recumbent bike in the loft. He can't be arsed using it.
> Apparently it's no more comfortable an experience than his usual bike (not a Brommie.)

First point is anything can be implemented badly. Second point is I generally use my Brompton for
short hops, when comfort frankly is a non-issue. "Comfortable enough" isn't as good as "as
comfortable as possible" if all other things are more or less equal, but the convenience and extra
security the Brompton's fold gives means they're *not* more or less equal for those short hops.

Presumably you'd never point out the advantages of a Brompton to anyone else at the party who might
have asked, as that would be telling them how inconvenient their lives might be?

True evangelism would have had me creating the thread and then telling you. As it was it's just a
reaction, and a truthful one at that, and information that's potentially useful to a lot of people
for whom cycling could be more enjoyable if it was more comfortable.

Pete.
--
Peter Clinch University of Dundee Tel 44 1382 660111 ext. 33637 Medical Physics, Ninewells Hospital
Fax 44 1382 640177 Dundee DD1 9SY Scotland UK net [email protected]
http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/
 
In article <[email protected]>, [email protected] says...
> Colin Blackburn wrote:
> > However, when I do get to that stage I sincerely hope that I don't end up telling other people
> > how uncomfortable their lives must be.
>
> Why hope that?

Because, and I repeat this because it obviously isn't getting through, my bike is comfortable. I
enjoy riding it and I suffer no discomfort. I would therefore accept that there are cyclists out
there who are happy with their bikes.

> > At a party yesterday I arrived on a Brompton. One of the guys ther was a Brompton rider and we
> > got chatting, as you do. Turns out he has a recumbent bike in the loft. He can't be arsed using
> > it. Apparently it's no more comfortable an experience than his usual bike (not a Brommie.)
>
> First point is anything can be implemented badly. Second point is I generally use my Brompton for
> short hops, when comfort frankly is a non-issue. "Comfortable enough" isn't as good as "as
> comfortable as possible" if all other things are more or less equal, but the convenience and extra
> security the Brompton's fold gives means they're *not* more or less equal for those short hops.

Erm, I was saying that he found his bike (which happened not to be a Brompton) more comfortable than
his bent. His Brompton didn't come into the equation, I merely mentioned it to clarify that I wasn't
talking about his Brompton. Which I obviously haven't.
>
> Presumably you'd never point out the advantages of a Brompton to anyone else at the party who
> might have asked, as that would be telling them how inconvenient their lives might be?

No, I would tell them the advantages of a Bromton, if they asked. I wouldn't tell them that
their bike was somehow wrong because it wasn't a Brompton if they told me they had a bike that
wasn't a Brompton.

> True evangelism would have had me creating the thread and then telling you. As it was it's just a
> reaction, and a truthful one at that, and information that's potentially useful to a lot of people
> for whom cycling could be more enjoyable if it was more comfortable.

The reaction that my bike is uncomfortable is a truthful one?

Colin
 
Colin Blackburn wrote:

> Because, and I repeat this because it obviously isn't getting through, my bike is comfortable.

And I repeat that comfort is relative. Guy had no trouble looking up from a crouch. Now he doesn't
have to do it, he finds he likes that more, even though it was never a problem. "Uncomfortable" and
"could be more comfortable" are *not* the same thing.

> Erm, I was saying that he found his bike (which happened not to be a Brompton) more comfortable
> than his bent. His Brompton didn't come into the equation, I merely mentioned it to clarify that I
> wasn't talking about his Brompton. Which I obviously haven't.

I was talking about *mine* as it's an upright I'm happy to ride as well as my 'bent. And as I said,
anything can be implemented badly, and as I often have said before, "recumbent" is *not* a general
class of bicycle. Sensible uses of a BikeE are not the same as sensible uses of an M5 Lowracer, yet
they're talked about in the same breath as if a Dutch cruiser would have the same features (comfort
included) as a full on TT bike. Not so. So "a particular recumbent is more comfortable than a
particular upright" is not useful data.

> No, I would tell them the advantages of a Bromton, if they asked. I wouldn't tell them that their
> bike was somehow wrong because it wasn't a Brompton if they told me they had a bike that wasn't a
> Brompton.

How about if they said, Brompton unseen, "I've looked into a folding bike, it looks really handy,
it's one of those Ridgeback ones that just folds in two, it would be easier to store"? Any mention
then that they could do better?

> The reaction that my bike is uncomfortable is a truthful one?

No, the reaction that *I* found the ****les of riding upright, which I'd happily dealt with for
years and not felt a real issue, was something I really didn't miss when I was used to a bike that
highlighted the effect they actually had, even if I didn't realise at the time. It may be you find a
bicycle saddle more comfortable than a well designed chair, but from the lack of any widespread use
of saddles outside of on bikes it does appear very unusual.

Pete.
--
Peter Clinch University of Dundee Tel 44 1382 660111 ext. 33637 Medical Physics, Ninewells Hospital
Fax 44 1382 640177 Dundee DD1 9SY Scotland UK net [email protected]
http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/
 
On Mon, 10 Feb 2003 13:39:46 +0000, Peter Clinch
<[email protected]> wrote:

>Colin Blackburn wrote:
>
>> I very rarely watch films on my bike, I normally use mine to get somewhere. Though I am pleased
>> that you have found a use for your recumbent.
>
>A couple of weeks ago my brother was playing rubgy in Dundee. I cycled to the pitch, and when I got
>there I had a chair to sit in to watch the game. It does both.
>
>I often watch scenery on my bike. It's so much nicer when I don't have my eyes guided to the road
>just beyond the front wheel.

You should try one of those necks that move. Allows you to tilt your head up or down at will.

TBH whilst I wouldn't mind, say, a Windcheetah or a Stinger or whatever, the constant banging on by
the Dark Side is getting a bit boring. Give it a break for 5 minutes, please.
>

Tim
--

fast and gripping, non pompous, glossy and credible.
 
"Tim Hall" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> TBH whilst I wouldn't mind, say, a Windcheetah or a Stinger or whatever, the constant banging on
> by the Dark Side is getting a bit boring. Give it a break for 5 minutes, please.

Here's an idea: Don't read posts that don't interest you, so easy it should be illegal :)

Pete
 
Peter B wrote:
> Here's an idea: Don't read posts that don't interest you, so easy it should be illegal :)
>
> Pete

This is a good idea. It would be even better if the subject line gave even the slightest indication
that the discussion had wandered wildly off thread.
--
Michael MacClancy
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

T
I miss Englands country side.
Replies
10
Views
718
UK and Europe
swampy1970
swampy1970
B
How did you all miss this
Replies
12
Views
445
UK and Europe
JNugent
J
N
Near Miss
Replies
7
Views
361
UK and Europe
Allan
A
D
Re: Did Duhg miss this
Replies
1
Views
279
UK and Europe
The other view point, there is one you know...
T
prk
Entries Flood In - Don't Miss Closing Date
Replies
0
Views
2K
UK and Europe
prk
prk
Top Bottom Back