Recumbent bike, no helmets, ipods, OH MY!

Jun 2, 07 13:24

Post #1 of 21 (5467 views)

I spectated a race this morning while my girlfriend did her first duathlon and I saw some interesting things while having the time to sit and take it all in. First of all, I brought my bike along with the intention of squeezing in a quick ride before the race. But as we were setting up our bikes, I heard a guy next to us say "Oh Sh#t, I forgot my helmet". I decided to lend him mine and considered not doing my ride, but I went out anyways (I know I may take some heat for this, but it was that or sit around 2 and a half hours and watch). Plus, I was in a state that doesn't even require motorcyclists to wear helmets, so I figured I wouldn't have anyone yelling at me. Anyways, after a great ride, I went to watch the race, and within minutes, a freakin guy on a recumbent went by (with a number on). I made some comment to someone near me like "I can't believe that guy is on a recumbent!", and they gave me this look like "Why?", so I figured it wasn't worth trying to explain the reasons... I also witnessed 2 racers go by without a helmet on, and 20+ runners with ipods on. I didn't see any cyclists with ipods, but I didn't watch that long so there may have been. After the race my girlfriend said recumbent guy blazed by her on the bike, but when I checked the results for his number, his number wasn't listed. They didn't list any penalties or DNFs on the results though... I ALSO saw several racers cross the finish line without a timing chip on (it was chip-timed). What's up with that!?!?!?!?
Lastly, coming home, her VW bug died on the highway and we had to get towed 40 miles back to Boston. The guy who drove the truck was a riot. We had to drive up next to a 16-wheeler to make sure the bug with bikes on top sitting on the flatbed was not going to slam the bikes into an overpass (our bikes were as high as the 16-wheelers). Anyways, the truck driver recently returned from 3 years in Iraq where he had been shot twice, which led to him being paralyzed for 10 months. He had some interesting stories to tell about tow truck driving and Iraq. He was currently on a 48-hour shift! Well, I'm back home finally (had to bike the last 9 miles from the mechanic's). Fun day.

Re: Recumbent bike, no helmets, ipods, OH MY! [Triocd] [ In reply to ]

Jun 2, 07 13:54

Post #2 of 21 (5427 views)

Couple questions:

1. Why are recumbants a bad idea in a race?

2. Why do people feel like safety is the only parameter in life worth optimizing above all others? (I refer not to things like recumbants which perhaps endanger others, but things like not wearing helmets, which only endangers yourself)

Kat Hunter reports on the San Dimas Stage Race from inside the GC winning team
Aeroweenie.com -Compendium of Aero Data and Knowledge
Freelance sports & outdoors writer Kathryn Hunter

Re: Recumbent bike, no helmets, ipods, OH MY! [Triocd] [ In reply to ]

Jun 2, 07 14:20

Post #3 of 21 (5398 views)

In Reply To:

I made some comment to someone near me like "I can't believe that guy is on a recumbent!", and they gave me this look like "Why?", so I figured it wasn't worth trying to explain the reasons...

Was this a USAT sanctioned event? USAT and UCI have very clear rules that prevent the use of recumbents. It sounds as if this was a fairly loosely organized event which was not under the juristiction of USAT. If that was the case, they probably make their own rules. A freeforall like that can be exciting.

What were your reasons that you thought were not worth explaining?

Re: Recumbent bike, no helmets, ipods, OH MY! [jackmott] [ In reply to ]

Jun 2, 07 14:25

Post #4 of 21 (5391 views)

I'm with you, in principle, they are safer. How would you prefer to crash, head-first or feet-first? Especially since there should be no drafting, I don't see an issue. Even in a peloton a recumbent can be OK, but preferably if the other bikes are recumbents too. I miss recumbent racing, I used to go to them all the time when I was younger. An interesting crowd. And many great bike designers come from that world (Mike Burrows, the Project 96 crew, etc).

Gerard Vroomen
3T.bike
OPEN cycle

Re: Recumbent bike, no helmets, ipods, OH MY! [gerard] [ In reply to ]

Jun 2, 07 14:30

Post #5 of 21 (5381 views)

Aren't they quite a bit faster than a classical racing bike? It would seem like an unfair advantage especially if they have some of thet aero faring stuff..

_________________________________
I'll be what I am
A solitary man

Re: Recumbent bike, no helmets, ipods, OH MY! [last tri in 83] [ In reply to ]

Jun 2, 07 14:33

Post #6 of 21 (5374 views)

In Reply To:

Aren't they quite a bit faster than a classical racing bike? It would seem like an unfair advantage especially if they have some of thet aero faring stuff..

An advantage, yes. Unfair, why? Anybody can buy one. Anybody who has a faster bike than somebody else has an advantage, heck that's the whole principle our company is based on.

Gerard Vroomen
3T.bike
OPEN cycle

Re: Recumbent bike, no helmets, ipods, OH MY! [gerard] [ In reply to ]

Jun 2, 07 14:55

Post #7 of 21 (5344 views)

In Reply To:

In Reply To:

Aren't they quite a bit faster than a classical racing bike? It would seem like an unfair advantage especially if they have some of thet aero faring stuff..

An advantage, yes. Unfair, why? Anybody can buy one. Anybody who has a faster bike than somebody else has an advantage, heck that's the whole principle our company is based on.

I was thinking they are illegal due to safety and because they are significantly faster than traditional bikes. If I recall correctly, there is a cycling hour "record" of about 35-36 miles per hour set on a recumbent, but then the hour record was changed to only allow traditional bikes, resulting in about 30 mph for this traditional bike record. 5 mph faster is pretty significant. I also thought that crashing on a recumbent was more common due to a lower center of gravity, but obviously crashes are less severe (I'm no expert though). However, you could always take out others if you crash.

Re: Recumbent bike, no helmets, ipods, OH MY! [gerard] [ In reply to ]

Jun 2, 07 15:57

Post #8 of 21 (5303 views)

I guess I was thinking in terms of a real race not an "anything goes" event.

_________________________________
I'll be what I am
A solitary man

Re: Recumbent bike, no helmets, ipods, OH MY! [gerard] [ In reply to ]

Jun 2, 07 16:22

Post #9 of 21 (5287 views)

[reply][reply]
Aren't they quite a bit faster than a classical racing bike? It would seem like an unfair advantage especially if they have some of thet aero faring stuff.. [/reply]
An advantage, yes. Unfair, why? Anybody can buy one. Anybody who has a faster bike than somebody else has an advantage, heck that's the whole principle our company is based on.[/reply]

Could you imagine the impact over the next 6 months on Cervelo sales if recombant bikes became USAT legal. :)

Re: Recumbent bike, no helmets, ipods, OH MY! [RBR] [ In reply to ]

Jun 2, 07 16:26

Post #10 of 21 (5282 views)

I know, we would all buy cervelos *again* once they made their own!

Kat Hunter reports on the San Dimas Stage Race from inside the GC winning team
Aeroweenie.com -Compendium of Aero Data and Knowledge
Freelance sports & outdoors writer Kathryn Hunter

Re: Recumbent bike, no helmets, ipods, OH MY! [Triocd] [ In reply to ]

Jun 2, 07 17:22

Post #11 of 21 (5251 views)

In Reply To:

I was thinking they are illegal due to safety and because they are significantly faster than traditional bikes. If I recall correctly, there is a cycling hour "record" of about 35-36 miles per hour set on a recumbent, but then the hour record was changed to only allow traditional bikes, resulting in about 30 mph for this traditional bike record. 5 mph faster is pretty significant. I also thought that crashing on a recumbent was more common due to a lower center of gravity, but obviously crashes are less severe (I'm no expert though). However, you could always take out others if you crash.

You recall quite incorrectly. The hour record of 35.03 miles (the "ultimate" hour) was set by Chris Boardman on an "upright" bike in the "superman" position with all the aero technology, while the "athlete's hour record" set on a round-tubed, drop handlebar bike now stands at 30.882 miles, as set by Ondrej Sosenka. However, they both pale into insignificance when compared to the human powered vehicle hour record, which Sam Whittington improved to a distance of 53.917 miles in April this year.

Re: Recumbent bike, no helmets, ipods, OH MY! [Triocd] [ In reply to ]

Jun 2, 07 17:51

Post #12 of 21 (5226 views)

"I also thought that crashing on a recumbent was more common due to a lower center of gravity"

A lower center of gravity causes MORE crashes? Better not tell the F1 car designers.

Re: Recumbent bike, no helmets, ipods, OH MY! [Triocd] [ In reply to ]

Jun 2, 07 17:57

Post #13 of 21 (5215 views)

As I recall, the story goes something like this: In the early 1930's an inventive French gentleman by the name of Charles Mochet figured he could build a recumbent that would win le Tour de France, so he asked permission from the UCI to allow his bike in the race. "Knock yourself out" they told him (in French of course). A second-tier rider named Francis Faure or something similar rode the bike, and clobbered the field. The UCI, roundly embarassed, retroactively banned recumbents from le Tour and disallowed the win. The current bicycle speed record of 80 mph is held by Sam Whittington, who set the record on a recumbent. In HPV races, where UCI restrictions aren't in effect, only recumbents enter. Upright bikes would be slaughtered in these competitions.

Re: Recumbent bike, no helmets, ipods, OH MY! [Steve B] [ In reply to ]

Jun 2, 07 18:05

Post #14 of 21 (5203 views)

Not just recumbents - there are also prones in HPV racing, and even upright bikes with fairings.

Re: Recumbent bike, no helmets, ipods, OH MY! [RBR] [ In reply to ]

Jun 2, 07 18:05

Post #15 of 21 (5201 views)

Bents rock!

I have a Bacchetta Strada that's both faster and way more comfortable than my race-legal (and damn-comfy-for-a-tri-bike) Titanflex. Every time I get 5 hours into a training ride on the tri bike and my neck and shoulders start screaming, I daydream how much better things would be on a bent....

"100% of the people who confuse correlation and causation end up dying."

Last edited by: MOP_Mike: Jun 2, 07 18:13

Post deleted by Administrator [ In reply to ]

Martin C

Jun 2, 07 18:06

Post #16 of 21 (5197 views)

Re: Recumbent bike, no helmets, ipods, OH MY! [Martin C] [ In reply to ]

Jun 2, 07 18:43

Post #17 of 21 (5165 views)

Recumbents have been around for a very long time and there are many practical reasons why they have never come close to the numbers or popularity of traditional diamond-framed bikes.

One reason is that at the speeds 99.99% of the biking world ride (less than 15 to 16 mph), recumbents have absolutely no advantage.

Because recumbents have a less efficient drive train with all the chain and cogs and twisting, because the ergonomics are not optimum for developing power, and because they are heavier they don't climb too well. Even the best of recumbents lose any speed advantage when the grade exceeds a few percent. A recumbent has never entered the TDF, and wouldn't stand a chance of even making the time cut on any of the mountainous stages.

From a practical standpoint for everyday use, recumbents are lower to the ground and less visible, larger and more difficult to transport by car or plane, and hard to get parts for. They're also a little harder to hang panniers on and to stand upright and walk alongside when they're heavily loaded. Try pushing a lowracer up a hill.

What recumbents are good for is going fast on the flat or around a track, and most of the 1930's sucess of recumbents in racing came on a track. Recumbents are also good for people who for one reason or another can't tolerate a standard saddle or who have physical handicaps that preclude riding a diamond frame.

What people fail to consider when they note recumbent speed records is that these records are attained by faired bicycles in an artificial environment. If you want to consider faired bikes in artificial environments when you consider records, why not consider the ultimate bicycle speed record which was done by Ironman winner John Howard drafting in the tail fairing of the Vesco Streamliner at a speed of 152 mph. He rode a more or less traditional diamond frame (although I don't know how he got the balls it must have taken to go that fast on skinny tires comfortable on the saddle).

I'm no enemy of recumbents, but I'd just like to see some of the popular (but wrong) myths about them stifled.

Re: Recumbent bike, no helmets, ipods, OH MY! [Nigel Woodman] [ In reply to ]

Jun 2, 07 18:53

Post #18 of 21 (5153 views)

In Reply To:

Recumbents have been around for a very long time and there are many practical reasons why they have never come close to the numbers or popularity of traditional diamond-framed bikes.

One reason is that at the speeds 99.99% of the biking world ride (less than 15 to 16 mph), recumbents have absolutely no advantage.

They still are more comfortable than DD at 10 mph.

Because recumbents have a less efficient drive train with all the chain and cogs and twisting, because the ergonomics are not optimum for developing power, and because they are heavier they don't climb too well. Even the best of recumbents lose any speed advantage when the grade exceeds a few percent.

I agree with drivetrain loss and ergonomics (overly large hip angle and fewer muscles recruited for power production), but there are some 17-20 lb bents out there now.

A recumbent has never entered the TDF, and wouldn't stand a chance of even making the time cut on any of the mountainous stages.

TDF riders already change bikes for different stages -- they don't climb on their TT bikes for example. Outside of the UCI ban, there is no reason a rider couldn't ride a bent when and where it would be advantagous.

From a practical standpoint for everyday use, recumbents are lower to the ground and less visible, larger and more difficult to transport by car or plane, and hard to get parts for. They're also a little harder to hang panniers on and to stand upright and walk alongside when they're heavily loaded. Try pushing a lowracer up a hill.

You don't tour on a lowracer, which is a specialized piece of racing equipment. Touring bents can be loaded with panniers more easily and with better weight distribution than touring DD frames.

What recumbents are good for is going fast on the flat or around a track, and most of the 1930's sucess of recumbents in racing came on a track. Recumbents are also good for people who for one reason or another can't tolerate a standard saddle or who have physical handicaps that preclude riding a diamond frame.

Ok. Again this is a generalization. There are long wheelbase, short wheelbase, low racer, high racer, etc. bent configurations suited for different purposes, just like there are TT, tri, touring, etc. DD setups.

"100% of the people who confuse correlation and causation end up dying."

Last edited by: MOP_Mike: Jun 2, 07 18:56

Re: Recumbent bike, no helmets, ipods, OH MY! [10-4] [ In reply to ]

Jun 2, 07 19:48

Post #19 of 21 (5091 views)

In Reply To:

"I also thought that crashing on a recumbent was more common due to a lower center of gravity"

A lower center of gravity causes MORE crashes? Better not tell the F1 car designers.

PLEASE forgive me for referring to a wiki reference, but I think this is the general idea (I'm not sure I agree, but this is the idea at least)...
Balance. Balance is easier to effect with a higher centre of gravity, because of the "pendulum effect" (it is easier to minutely change the angle at which ordinary bicycles lean).[4] The lower center of gravity makes two-wheeled recumbents harder to balance, especially when moving slowly or on unstable surfaces. If a wheel slides, the bike will typically go down very fast. Where one can change one's weight from the seat to the pedals on an ordinary bicycle, one's weight is only on the seat while riding a recumbent. This ability to shift one's weight and place weight on one's feet is an important part of the difference in balancing an ordinary bicycle and balancing a recumbent. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Recumbent_bicycle

Re: Recumbent bike, no helmets, ipods, OH MY! [MOP_Mike] [ In reply to ]

Jun 2, 07 19:57

Post #20 of 21 (5084 views)

Nice bike! I have the same one.

I find it interesting that most cyclists are unaware of the advantages of these "high racer" recumbents. When riding in a group of conventional bikes many were surprized that I could keep up with them.
The high racers are higher above the ground than many of the other recumbents. Still lower than a conventional bike, but high enough to be seen easily by motorists.

http://www.bacchettabikes.com/community/teamb/article003.htm

My experience has been that they are less maneuverable in courses with a lot of turns. Other negatives are increased weight and the inability to stand on the pedals when climbing.

USAT races have divisions (fat tire, etc.) I see no reason why they can't include a recumbent division in the races. Someone with a disability such as severe back pain may not be able to ride a traditional bike.

Last edited by: Dreadnought: Jun 2, 07 20:22

Re: Recumbent bike, no helmets, ipods, OH MY! [Nigel Woodman] [ In reply to ]

Jun 2, 07 20:06

Post #21 of 21 (5075 views)

"A recumbent has never entered the TDF, and wouldn't stand a chance of even making the time cut on any of the mountainous stages"

But recumbents have participated in the RAAM, which does involve mountains. As I recall, they were about a day ahesd of the conventional bikes.

Our Partners

transition-DOT-area-AT-slowtwitch-DOT-com

Advertise with us

©1999-2024 Slowtwitch, Inc., and Slowtwitch.com
Reproduction of material from any Slowtwitch.com page
without written permission is strictly prohibited.