Eric F 

I rode my age in miles. Took me a couple of days, but I did it.

big john

Good job!

Polaris OBark

Dog-years?

rydabent

It is well known that many cyclist are back sliding old fuds. In about '34 bent were out lawed and were not to be called bikes. When click shifting came out in the mid '80s the "real cyclist" said it wouldnt work, and assured us they could shift better. Then along came disc brakes that dont scab up expensive rims, and again the "real cyclist" offered nothing but distain, and wont admit they stop better, especially in the wet.

Yet here I am 84 years old, and love all three of these advancements, and catch grief when I try to get the word out about them. And yes the word does still needs to be gotten out. My city is approx 300,000 people, and yet on the trails I get stopped and asked about my trike. People tell me all the time they never knew such a thing existed. I get stopped so often, I now hand out business carts for the local bent shop.

It really does seem that some people need to be dragged into the future kicking and screaming. The ones that are the most obstinate and the loudest against bents and trikes, HAVE NEVER EVEN RIDDEN ONE!!!!!! One guy even joked that if he ever came home on a bent his wife was to shoot him. Talk about a closed mind!!!

The bottom line her remains, why not have a stable of bike and trikes that are the best tool for the ride at hand. Oh, yes and carry a tool pack.

tomato coupe

Really? Will I get arrested if I call a recumbent a bike?
Recumbents first appeared about 130 years ago. That might be the "future" to you, but it isn't to anyone else.

Polaris OBark

What is the best chain lube for a recumbent?

Asking for a heavily bearded b'crat friend.

diphthong

dude, you're strong enuff. we're the same age. it's a matter of "clearing space and time." you're a busy guy.

3alarmer 

...have you considered that maybe the reason 'bents were "outlawed" in '34 is that someone, just like you, poisoned the well of discourse about them ?

Maelochs

Recumbents were banned from racing in 1934 .... probably because they were too fast on the flats but couldn't climb the hills.

As I understand it, 'bents were outlawed by UCI because they were too fast in velodromes (no hills) because of aero advantages .... but since not all bike races took place on track, and UCI didn't want to have to manage a huge range of potential designs .... the DF rule was instituted.

One reason not to allow mixed pelotons is that in a road race, some riders would be much lower than others, which could cause visibility issues in the peloton---too easy to ride over a bike which was below your handlebars if you were trying to watch the riders a few rows ahead. Also, 'bents were faster, due to aero, on the flats but not on the hills ... so how should courses be chosen? The layout of the course would determine the class of bike which would win.

Modern auto-racing sanctioning bodies have wrestled with the same issues---innovation is wonderful, but some innovation goes too far, and the rules have to maintain a level playing field. Modern race cars are very tightly defined by the rules, because to put on a good show, to offer the public a saleable product, everyone has to have the same chance to win. Also, teams wouldn't attend races if the courses didn't suit their machinery---why participate in a racing series (or enter a Grand Tour) if you know that you will lose because the courses don't favor your design?

Also, UCI wanted the bicycles racers rode to represent the bikes that ordinary people rode. The recumbent bike was Not popular, and almost everybody rode and recognized DF bikes. Since the sport is supported by (and benefits) bike manufacturers, it made sense to have "normal" bikes racing. Win on Sunday, sell on Monday.

Further, if the rules were wide open, people could (and used to) show up with all kinds of race-specific designs. (Think of time-trial bikes but even more outlandishly specific.) If frame design were free, people could design bikes just for particular races or particular purposes--which would make for unfair races and also would not help spread cycling (look at the 6-wheel F1 cars from Tyrell and also Alfa Romeo (i think)---totally removed from anything which would ever be practical on the street---or the various "fan cars" like the Chaparral 2J or the Brabham BT-46---great performers but totally outside the realm or reasonable transport devices. Look a Smokey Yunnick's pod-racer Indy car .... )

UCI didn't want to have to deal with tadpole trikes, bikes where the rider laid flat with tiny wheels, fully-faired bikes ... whatever oddities people could explore and exploit to win races---because bike racing was itself a product, and also there is a strong urge to "Give the people what they want," because if people don't want your product (be they bikes or bike races) then you go broke. And by and large, people still saw 'bents and bad options (possibly because in most parts of the world where the bike was actually viewed as Transport, there were hills.)

Mind you, people who wanted to could still buy 'bents .... just, most people didn't (and don't) want to. Both DFs and 'bents have strengths and weaknesses, design and functional compromises----not the crap which Rydabent imagines, but still both have their strengths and weaknesses---and most people choose DF bikes, which seem to offer the best solutions and the fewest compromises compared to 'bents.

Sorry, Ryda, but people aren't buying bikes based on a rule the UCI passed in 1934---they are buying bikes based on what they want. And yes, there is a publicity issue .... a lot of people have never seen a 'bent. Maybe part of the publicity issue is that the 'bent community has as its unofficial spokespersons, people who yell at clouds. I don't know. But 'bents and trikes and folding mini-bikes and a whole range of options exist---and still most people choose the type of bicycle---the so-called "Safety" bicycle---which has worked so very well for so very long under in many different situations.

Maybe people don't ride 'bents because they have options which do everything they want and are readily available, in a huge range of options. Maybe 'bents aren't really all that .... they are just more of that, and people are happy with just that. Maybe the slight advantages of 'bents (aero, comfort for some riders depending on physical condition and conditioning) are Not outweighed by the reduced climbing potential, and the inability to handle very mixed surfaces ...

By the way, I have watched video of MTB 'bents---the Azub Max---and it seems that yes, it can only handle mostly smooth, mostly flat trails .... like a crippled gravel bike. If I were riding a 'bent commuter in an urban setting---well, I wouldn't because years of experience have taught me that in urban riding, a lot of little MTB-style tricks like manuals and bunny-hops are often essential to survival because of debris and bad pavement and bike lanes which disappear into curbs and such.

So, yeah ... 'bents are a valid option for Some riders and in some situations. Not so much in others.

I am not going to get into the personality disorders which cause a person to feel superior because of dress, accessory, appearance, or which toys and games one plays .... we have had enough of that nonsense. But just in terms of the basic mechanical functions, 'bents and DFs have different strengths and weaknesses, and each person should choose based on what that person wants and needs.

Just as with trikes---great for what they are good for, bad for some other stuff. As I have said repeatedly I have wanted a trike for years---I just don't have anywhere to ride one. Are trikes better or worse? BOTH. Are 'bents better or worse? BOTH. Smart people choose the tool which best suits the job, and if some tools are much more adaptable--like DF bikes---then yes, more people are going to choose those tools. No matter who some people blame, the fact is, most people would rather get a sedan which can carry the whole family, perform well in traffic at urban, suburban, and highway speeds, and can haul the groceries or a few bags of mulch or whatever ... we might all dream of Lamborghinis, or Harleys or five-foot-tall lifted pick-ups ... but in the end we buy what is most useful most of the time.

Best thing bent riders can do if they really want to push the product, would be to do exactly that---advertise, push the product, put it in front of people. if 'bent riders really believe their bike choices are so very superior to everyone else's that once enlightened, everyone would switch .... then start doing large group 'bent rides, start making 'bent commercials ... Better still---start a 'bent company and produce a bunch of them and market them. If they are really that much better than every other kind of bike, then it is a no-brainer, right? Easy money to be made .... once people see how much "better" 'bents are, everyone will switch. Right?

Putting one's money where one's mouth is? Why not, if it is sure to pay off?

Daniel4

"Recumbents were banned from racing in 1934 .... probably because they were too fast on the flats but couldn't climb the hills."

So why couldn't incumbents have their own races? The luge doesn't compete in the same race as skeletons. Snowboarders don't compete with skiiers. There are blind ski races in the paralympics.

If climbing is challenging in incumbents, then races with hills will reveal the best climbers of recumbent bikes.

tomato coupe

Because a small fraction of cyclists ride recumbents, and only a small fraction of those want to race? A race with no entrants isn’t very interesting.

Maelochs

The question rather, is "Why should there be separate races for recumbents?" After all, racing is a sport and a business. If only a few people wanted to race recumbents, then the races wouldn't make enough money to actually hold those races.

If people aren't interested in watching, then the sport is a hobby.

Anyone who wants is free to create and promote a Recumbent Cycling League. It can feature mostly flat routes where the riders are faster (slightly) than UCI riders. And if a lot of people want to race, and a lot more want to watch .... there you are.

Don't buy into the "Anti-Recumbent" mythology. Market forces are real, yes .... and as I outlined above, there are real reasons why recumbents were not as popular for general usage. If there had been--or if there were now---large numbers of people who Wanted to race recumbents, and more who wanted to watch those races---those races would exist. People would do it because it would be fun and make money. But if it couldn't make money it would just be a hobby ....

there is no reason why someone could not start a recumbent bike company and a recumbent racing league right now, today. if anyone thought it would be a profitable venture .... they could just go do it.

Look ... there are people who spend a lot of money building racing Lawn Mowers, and people who pay money to watch lawn-mower races. if people wanted to race recumbents .....

Atlas Shrugged

You started here.

And took it here and managed to get a +350 posts thread along the way. Even tied the the tool pack comment at the end, a true master. You have learned a lot in your 84 years, impressed I am.

3alarmer 

...there was one year, a few years back, when I saw some guy on one of these regularly out on the paved MUP. Then it just disappeared. #Fascinating

3alarmer 

.....this guy, who started up Lightning Cycle Dynamics, has been making them and selling them for years out of his California business.
I suspect that rydabent has been reading his sales literature. There is a very small community of owners, and I've never seen one locally.

Trsnrtr

There are recumbent races, though more common in Europe than the United States. I agree with the analogy about luge racing. Recumbents and diamond frame bikes are two totally different animals.

Maelochs

"Unlike most bicycles sold today, Lightning recumbent bicycles are based on a modern, high-tech integrated design, resulting in a bicycle that is

"Three times more comfortable (some customers say 100 times!)
" Twice as safe
" 30% faster
" Much more fun"

Now that is some hard science, verified independently, we can be sure. After all that first claim only varies Very slightly ... . between 3 and 100 percent. And fun .... yeah, this is the same guy who invented the "Fun-o-meter?, right?

Also .... yes there are a lot more off-road trikes. They share some of the same drawbacks as 'bents when trying to ride trails meant for DF bikes---like, clearing almost any obstacle---but they are inherently more stable---where a 'bent will simple topple over, the trike will just stall. You won't see them on any blue trail or above .... basically great for gravel.

rydabent

Back in '34 there is a 99.993% chance that the UCI members took money under the table from some bike mfg, because they had so much invested in DF jigs and fixtures. If they had to start producing bents, they would need all new machinery.!!!! Racers could have ridden bents on the flats and DFs in the mountains, it would have been totally equal.

BTW bents hold all the speed records, and a couple of years back a woman rode a trike to to South Pole. BTW have you gone out and bought a bag for tube sand patches yet. Are you going to get CO2 or a mini pump????

badger1

You haven't the faintest idea what you are talking about when it comes to the UCI and its stance on recumbents and various other forms of 'HPVs'* (Human Powered Vehicles). You are demonstrably utterly ignorant of the historical and other contexts that underpinned -- and still underpin -- that decision. As I predicted quite a bit earlier in this ridiculous thread, it was only a matter of time before you trotted out your ridiculous conspiracy theory on this particular point. Kudos, though, for a most excellent troll.

*Gratuitous aside: I always find amusing the congruence between the acronym for Human Powered Vehicles, recumbents included, and that for a rather nasty little STD. Seems entirely apposite to me.

rydabent

I would suggest that you are the one that doesnt know much bike history. It was when a bent broke the one hour time held by Egg, that the cycling community became unhinged about bents. Money talks and you cant prove the member of the UCI were not influenced by bike mfg at the time.

livedarklions

Here's the thing, I talk to people all the time about their bents both on bf and irl. I don't think bents are for me for really good reasons that I've explained several times, but I'm a curious guy, and those people have been polite, patient and generous with their time.

Not a single one of them has been so rude, ignorant, and boorish as to tell me how they think I ride, call me a liar when their suppositions turned out to be wrong, suggest my bike was somehow obsolete, nor make stupid observations that demonstrated that they thought they knew a lot more about DF bikes than they actually did.

Your behavior has been inexcusable. You now have the nerve to suggest that all you've been advocating for is for people to augment their fleet of human powered vehicles. You've got wayyyyyyyyy too many posts that clearly have stated again and again that df bikes are awful and obsolete technologies to lie about what you've been pushing now.

You're literally the LAST person in the world that anyone on bf would turn to if they actually wanted to learn something about the differences between df and bents, largely because you are obviously completely ignorant and close-minded about how people actually do ride df bikes. Your credibility is squat, your accusations snide and stupid, and you have a victim complex that makes it actually impossible for you to rationally exchange information.

And the horse you rode in on.

tomato coupe

Can you imagine if bike manufacturers had to make new fixtures everytime they introduced a new bike model? How would they survive? Oh, wait ... they do survive.

Yeah, that's a brilliant idea.

livedarklions

Do you honestly think that UCI has the power to make popular types of bikes unpopular?
See a lot of UCI ebike, hybrid, beach cruiser, and gravel bike races anywhere? Any one of those categories outsell track bikes massively.

livedarklions

Thanks, I don't know about these. Are there leagues or circuit kind of events?

I know about the HPVA, but I was under the impression that's mostly record attempts rather than racing. Is that wrong?

genejockey 

There's nothing new under the sun.