Has anyone tried Powercranks on a recumbent? Would it be harder or easier than on a conventional bike?
Potential crosstraining benefits include less pressure from the seat and a more open hip angle.
Has anyone tried Powercranks on a recumbent? Would it be harder or easier than on a conventional bike?
Potential crosstraining benefits include less pressure from the seat and a more open hip angle.
Yes, users have put them on recumbents. In general PC’s are easier on a recumbent than a regular bike. Don’t have to lift the heavy thigh as much against gravity and generally a more open hip angle.
Don’t have to lift the heavy thigh as much against gravity
Does that take away any of the training benefit?
Don't have to lift the heavy thigh as much against gravity
Does that take away any of the training benefit?
The coordination benefit should be the same but the HF’s would not become as “aerobically trained” as when you are working them harder on an ordinary bike. One could not expect to train on a recumbent and then expect the training to carry over to allow racing on an ordinary bike without fatiguing sooner than one does on the recumbent.
Make sense?
The coordination benefit should be the same but the HF’s would not become as “aerobically trained” as when you are working them harder on an ordinary bike. One could not expect to train on a recumbent and then expect the training to carry over to allow racing on an ordinary bike without fatiguing sooner than one does on the recumbent.
Make sense?
Yes, it does make sense.
If I understand you correctly, the more recumbent you are, the less you have to lift your leg against gravity. As you move up to a semirecumbent like the Rans fusion (http://www.ransbikes.com/Fusion07.htm), which appears to have a seat angle of about 40+ degrees, you have to lift your leg slightly more against gravity. Then when you get to a more conventional geometry such as 73 deg, the lifting of the leg against gravity is much more. So when you go to a steeper position such as 78 or 80, aren’t the gravitational effect on the leg even more? Could this explain why some triathletes find it harder to spin when in the tri position?
The coordination benefit should be the same but the HF’s would not become as “aerobically trained” as when you are working them harder on an ordinary bike. One could not expect to train on a recumbent and then expect the training to carry over to allow racing on an ordinary bike without fatiguing sooner than one does on the recumbent.
Make sense?
Yes, it does make sense.
If I understand you correctly, the more recumbent you are, the less you have to lift your leg against gravity. As you move up to a semirecumbent like the Rans fusion (http://www.ransbikes.com/Fusion07.htm), which appears to have a seat angle of about 40+ degrees, you have to lift your leg slightly more against gravity. Then when you get to a more conventional geometry such as 73 deg, the lifting of the leg against gravity is much more. So when you go to a steeper position such as 78 or 80, aren’t the gravitational effect on the leg even more? Could this explain why some triathletes find it harder to spin when in the tri position?
That sounds about right to me.