Originally Posted by
Leisesturm
?? I've admitted to having no actual basis for my bias. Your use of "likely this or likely that" similarly show a bias uninformed by actual experience. And that's cool. But even without riding one I can assure you a semi-recumbent will not weigh any less or take up any less room than a full size standard tandem nor will it be any easier to transport. The Stoker having an unobstructed view is absolutely the main unarguable selling point. My Stoker being blind makes that less of a plus, but my observation that what is good for the goose (Stoker) is good for the gander (Captain) is pretty hard to argue with. After around 35 to 40 miles both my and my Stokers saddle to taint interfaces are pretty done in. Our legs and CV system are good for an unknown number more of miles. The recumbent seating position affords the promise of a pain free Century (100 miles) since when you are reclined at 25* your weight gets distributed more evenly across your back and bottom vs just your bottom alone.
Tandem riding is what I call a relationship accelerator; whether it be good or bad relationship, a tandem ride would accelerate it.. especially when pedal strokes are linked.
I have owned regular tandem and a Performer Family Tandem for nearly ten years.
I've carried many legally blind people on my Family Tandem and they all appreciate the open view from the recumbent seating; they not only can feel their pedaling efforts with wind in their faces, but also "see" it, too.
I know these experience do not apply to all, therefore I use terms "likely this, likely that"; absolutes term like: "pain-free Century" simply does not apply to anyone, even someone with top physical condition would feel some pain after pedaling for 100 miles.