da_shimano_05

As far as i heard about recumbents. I think they are better than conventional upright bikes in all aspects.
they are faster, more comfortable, and safer. I don't know why people aren't riding as many recumbents as uprights?
I'm planning on buying one soon.

seely

They handle like a semi and have the visibility of someone laying on the ground. If they were so fast, I think we'd see a lot more recumbents on the tour... they are very inefficient for hillclimbs and any fast maneuver. Its a trade off of performance vs. comfort as with anything. That being said I do like to ride a bent from time to time, but the maintenance is enough to keep me away.

Bolo Grubb

don't forget they tend to be more expensive to buy and harder to put on a bike rack to drive to a ride

twahl

They aren't better in all aspects, but for some people the benefits outweigh the negative aspects. All bicycles are a compromise. Contrary to seely's reply, since there are so many different types of recumbents, you can't make broad statements like that. Some handle superbly. Some are very twitchy to ride. Some accelerate well, and some are indeed very fast. In general you can't climb well on any recumbent because you can't stand up and apply your weight to the pedals.

And the tour, like most bicycle races, specify conventional design frames. Lance was once quoted as saying that if they were legal, his team would be giving them a try...if Trek would manufacture it.

da_shimano_05

very nice quote, how ever... i wonder how it feel like going over 65 mph on the commuting road... lol.

77Univega

--- Speaking for myself, since I already have a perfectly functional upright I'm not in a hurry to get rid of it. However, as my body ages and as my bicycle wears out, a recumbent will be next for me.

nitropowered

They are more aerodynamic and faster on the flats but you really can't stand up and climb can you. Or go sprint for the sign. Or bunnyhop over curbs and potholes while cutting in and out of traffic.

twahl

The average, or even faster than average cyclist will never hit anywhere near 65 MPH anywhere. 50 is pushing it. I've been near 40 on my Allez, and my wife was right there with me on her recumbent. That's on significant downhill runs, although not mountainous.

She has no problem cruising right around 23-24 MPH on flat, smooth pavement, and hers is a more relaxed recumbent, the EZ-Sport.

lilHinault

Properly riding a recumbent requires filling the "cockpit" with ham radios, and wearing a propeller-beanie-helmet.

Dahon.Steve

24 mph on an EZ-Sport is impressive. That's not a low racer or a light bike by any means. Good for her.

Dahon.Steve

There's a certain stigma attached with a recumbent and people tend to think you're disabled or crazy. It's similar to riding a folding bike where people think you're strange or crazy. The bottom line is that cost and peer pressure are keeping millions from riding recumbent bicycles.

twahl

Thanks...she really does stroke it out pretty well. We have some spots on our "daily" 12-14 mile route that are flat, or maybe a little downhill, and very smooth, so the opportunity to fly cannot be neglected. We did the ride twice today, once with the kids and once without, first run was 14.1 miles in under and hour. She topped out around 28, and according to my computer there's nothing more than a -1% grade.

da_shimano_05

i heard the world record of recumbent bike speed is 80mph. (with out drag)

grolby

The 80 MPH HPV recumbents bear the same resemblance to a practical recumbent bicycle that a Ferrari F50 bears to a baby carriage.

In any case, I don't quite understand what's up with this post. Are you deliberately trying to get people riled up? That's not exactly regarded as a cool thing to do. The way you're asking the question implies that there is no good reason to not ride a recumbent, despite their clear superiority to upright bicycles. That's a foolish leading question there. There are a few reasons why most people don't ride 'bents. A lot of it has to do with a certain degree of discrimination and stereotyping, but probably at least as much is due to the fact they are still seen as pretty new-fangled. Most folks don't really see a need for one. After all, why have a recumbent when you already have a perfectly good upright bicycle? When you break it down, a 'bent doesn't offer the sort of clear and immediate superiority that would be required for a mass exodus from the wedgies. Speed is a non-argument for a real bicycle on real roads in real conditions, so there is no sense in making it. I myself have ridden a recumbent and loved it, but I see no good reason to buy one for myself. It really comes down to personal preference.

I have no doubt that, in time, recumbents will become more popular as the "fringe" discrimination against them vanishes, but I highly doubt that they will surpass or even equal upright bicycles in popularity in the forseeable future.

If you want a recumbent, ride one. One of the commuting forum regulars rides one, and loves it. Why? I haven't asked, but it's presumably because she likes it - the same reason that someone would ride any bike. Is it better? Clearly you think so. I happen to like them, but I don't think that they're better enough to really warrant my owning one right now. Better, in this case, is subjective.

MichaelW

On a clear open road, 'bents have the advantage but as nitropowered noted, you can't do all the moves required in the urban jungle. You can't shoulder the 'bent to carry over a footbridge. Storing the bike requires more room, OK in the suburbs but not in an apartment.

jharte

I want one. A recumbent would be nice, too.

Cyclaholic

I never really thought much of recumbents to be honest, that is untill I saw a trike at the last CM ride... wow! i'm in love with that machine! The trike config just makes more sense to me as it puts you in the lowest position possible and eliminates the balance issue so you can wrap it in a carbon fiber/kevlar aerodynamic shell and set up as a pedal/electric hybrid. I think it would absolutely fly and be so very energy efficient. It's the car of the post-oil future.

same time

I see lots of people riding recumbents on my commute - especially the year-round commuters. On the coldest winter days, it's probably 40 percent recumbents out there. (I have a reverse commute, live in the city and work in the 'burbs, so I have a good perspective.)

I think the reason you don't see more of them is that regular bikes are much more readily available. Walk into any bike shop, and you might see one recumbent, but you'll see 50 or so regular bikes, in all different price ranges. The sales people are likely to know a lot about those bikes, and be motivated to sell them, and very little about recumbents.

I have no interest in getting one because I ride in city traffic and like sitting up taller than the cars (and at least as tall as the suv's).

recursive

Yeah. You would.

If they were legal. The bikes are very strictly regulated. Not even aero bars are permitted on non tt stages, so bents are definitely out.

bnet1

What's wrong with commuitng on a 'bent? I do it regularly. Seems that traffic gives me more respect than when I'm on a DF. Get lots of positive comments too. I find the 'bent far more comfortable and about as fast as my road bike. Hill climbing is easier but albeit a bit slower.

Dahon.Steve

I noticed this too on a group this weekend. A guy on a bent took the lane yet the cars didn't honk! Bent riders in general have to take the lane just about because they're much wider. They would easily be in the door zone by riding the same line as a road bike.

filtersweep

I don't have a beard, so I can't ride a recumbent.

Since the original post is rather trollish, I'll respond in kind:

My theory is that most 'bent riders never knew how to properly set up a road bike- hence they believe they are uncomfortable.

Frankly, I commute on an old fixed gear conversion. No fussy parts to break or adjust. I'm usually slower going up hill and downhill - compared to a geared bike.

stumpjumper

damn, beat me to it.

Why I dont ride a recombent:

(First: a disclaimer. I'm not writing this to inflame anyone. If you love your bent, fine by me. These are my personal views )


I like to be able to see over the hood of the suv next to me at the stoplight, not looking at my reflection in its huge chrome bumper. In turn, I like to be seen by the aforementioned suv as well

I can carry more stuff on a conventional racked and bagged bike

Smaller wheelbases handle better

Lighter

ease of general maintenance, expense of parts

ease of maintenance in the field

Hills suck (and yes, I have indeed tried a bent on a reasonable hill. I dont mind going slow, but I genuinely did not care for going up on a bent)

The classic lines of a traditional bicycle are far mor attractive than a pod with an ugly crank out front

Trust me, its not peer pressure. I dont care how widely accepted bents ever become, if I wanted to sit in a lawn chair, I'd be on my back porch with a beer and a bratwurst

That all said, if I end up with a medical issue that prevents me form riding an upright, I will most certainly get a bent or trike or whatever I need to keep riding

DerekU2

If space and money weren't as limited, I own a recombent. But alas, both are limited and I must limit bike ownership to two. The recumbent didn't make the cut....

konageezer

It's the puddles that keep me from even condsidering it. It's bad enough trying to keep my legs dry when it's pouring—I can only imagine what it would be like with my butt 12" (33 cm) off the ground. I'd be wringing a half a bucket of water and sand out of my shorts every day. Maybe a nice recumby with a floorpan…