Disc Brakes Are Amazing!!!

"NYC XYZ" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

* Speed sucks!!! I'm over 5 mph slower than my upright! This is
definitely the case. With a change of tires and more developed
'bent-muscles that might narrow a mile or two, but unfortunately I'll
always be far slower than on an upright. Sigh!

So what is your new average speed?

"NYC XYZ" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...
[...]

Quoted message said:

* Speed sucks!!! I'm over 5 mph slower than my upright! This is
definitely the case. With a change of tires and more developed
'bent-muscles that might narrow a mile or two, but unfortunately I'll
always be far slower than on an upright. Sigh!

You will always be somewhat slower on a recumbent than you will be on an
upright, all things being equal. However, some recumbent riders actually do
get faster than they ever were on their uprights, but that is because they
ride their recumbents more and hence get stronger. But overall it is more
work to go fast on a recumbent, especially uphill.

For many years when I wanted a good workout I would ride my upright in
preference to my recumbent, but eventually I settled on the recumbent as it
was just more enjoyable to ride.
[...]

Quoted message said:

* A real work-out! I still haven't met a hill I can't yet climb on the
'bent, but I am definitely breathing harder -- and I'm a B-grade
athelete! I enjoy the work-out, but it's rather embarrassing huffing
and puffing, giving a less-than-stellar impression of the 'bent.

You will be much slower going uphill on a recumbent. I have known several
guys who gave up on recumbents for precisely that one reason. I would rather
be slow and comfortable than fast and uncomfortable. The older you get, the
more important this becomes.

Regards,

Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
aka
Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota

Edward Dolan said:

"NYC XYZ" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...
[...]

Quoted message said:

* Speed sucks!!! I'm over 5 mph slower than my upright! This is
definitely the case. With a change of tires and more developed
'bent-muscles that might narrow a mile or two, but unfortunately I'll
always be far slower than on an upright. Sigh!

You will always be somewhat slower on a recumbent than you will be on an
upright, all things being equal. However, some recumbent riders actually do
get faster than they ever were on their uprights, but that is because they
ride their recumbents more and hence get stronger. But overall it is more
work to go fast on a recumbent, especially uphill.

For many years when I wanted a good workout I would ride my upright in
preference to my recumbent, but eventually I settled on the recumbent as it
was just more enjoyable to ride.
[...]

Quoted message said:

* A real work-out! I still haven't met a hill I can't yet climb on the
'bent, but I am definitely breathing harder -- and I'm a B-grade
athelete! I enjoy the work-out, but it's rather embarrassing huffing
and puffing, giving a less-than-stellar impression of the 'bent.

You will be much slower going uphill on a recumbent. I have known several
guys who gave up on recumbents for precisely that one reason. I would rather
be slow and comfortable than fast and uncomfortable. The older you get, the
more important this becomes.

I always read 'bent threads because I can always count on the last
statement.....uprights by definition, are not 'uncomfortable' and the
older you get(I'm 55), it is not automatically important that you get a
'bent....My upright is comfy, I see no need to get a bent because of my
upright's comfort or my age...

Quoted message said:

Regards,

Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
aka
Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota

Qui si parla Campagnolo said:

I always read 'bent threads because I can always count on the last
statement.....uprights by definition, are not 'uncomfortable' and the
older you get(I'm 55), it is not automatically important that you get a
'bent....My upright is comfy, I see no need to get a bent because of my
upright's comfort or my age...

My Trek 1000c is the most comfortable upright I've ever had! In two
months I had 700 miles on it already. But nothing is as comfortable as
my SMGTe! It's like the difference between night and day.

The Trek is now relegated to errand-running in the neighborhood, etc.
For long rides where I don't have to leave my bike out of site, I am
definitely riding 'bent!

Qui si parla Campagnolo said:

I always read 'bent threads because I can always count on the last
statement.....uprights by definition, are not 'uncomfortable' and the
older you get(I'm 55), it is not automatically important that you get a
'bent....My upright is comfy, I see no need to get a bent because of my
upright's comfort or my age...

While I have several upright bikes that I ride happily in comfort, the
simple fact of the matter is my 'bent is considerably /more/
comfortable. While I do not *need* that level of comfort, it is
certainly something I greatly appreciate when covering any sort of distance.

Given the choice of something quite comfortable or extremely
comfortable, assuming both will otherwise do the jobs I need and I can
afford my preference, I see no reason to put up with 2nd best when it
makes a difference to my overall enjoyment of touring.

Pete.
--
Peter Clinch Medical Physics IT Officer
Tel 44 1382 660111 ext. 33637 Univ. of Dundee, Ninewells Hospital
Fax 44 1382 640177 Dundee DD1 9SY Scotland UK
net [email hidden] http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/

Mark Leuck said:

So what is your new average speed?

It seems to be 15 mph. =(

Even on a clear and all-out downhill run I've only been able to post 29
mph on this 'bent. On the same slope with my Trek 1000c I've reached
top speeds of 36 mph! Also, the 'bent feels noticeably unstable at its
top speeds. The upright, hardly.

I'm curious how a faster 'bent would perform....

NYC XYZ said:

Even on a clear and all-out downhill run I've only been able to post 29
mph on this 'bent. On the same slope with my Trek 1000c I've reached
top speeds of 36 mph! Also, the 'bent feels noticeably unstable at its
top speeds.

IME most people reporting wibbles on an SMGT have not been relaxed. A
friend reported a shimmy he got at around 30 on a test bike, I found the
exact same machine rock solid, /but/ I had a couple if years' 'bent
experience at that point.

I've found if you keep a very light touch on the bars the bike is rock
solid past 40 mph with or without full touring gear, even through bends
on bumpy roads.

Pete.
--
Peter Clinch Medical Physics IT Officer
Tel 44 1382 660111 ext. 33637 Univ. of Dundee, Ninewells Hospital
Fax 44 1382 640177 Dundee DD1 9SY Scotland UK
net [email hidden] http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/

I also have a couple of uprights and they are comfortable for the first
few minutes and then I can't stand to ride them. My recumbents are
definately more comfortable. Not only that but, I don't have to worry
about my prostate like I would on an upright. I know that there are
riders out there that have ridden uprights all of there lives and never
had a problem just like there are people that have smoked all of their
lives and never had a problem but, why take the chance?
Gary

Peter Clinch said:

Qui si parla Campagnolo said:

I always read 'bent threads because I can always count on the last
statement.....uprights by definition, are not 'uncomfortable' and the
older you get(I'm 55), it is not automatically important that you get a
'bent....My upright is comfy, I see no need to get a bent because of my
upright's comfort or my age...

While I have several upright bikes that I ride happily in comfort, the
simple fact of the matter is my 'bent is considerably /more/
comfortable. While I do not *need* that level of comfort, it is
certainly something I greatly appreciate when covering any sort of distance.

Given the choice of something quite comfortable or extremely
comfortable, assuming both will otherwise do the jobs I need and I can
afford my preference, I see no reason to put up with 2nd best when it
makes a difference to my overall enjoyment of touring.

Pete.
--
Peter Clinch Medical Physics IT Officer
Tel 44 1382 660111 ext. 33637 Univ. of Dundee, Ninewells Hospital
Fax 44 1382 640177 Dundee DD1 9SY Scotland UK
net [email hidden] http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/

Gary said:

I also have a couple of uprights and they are comfortable for the first
few minutes and then I can't stand to ride them. My recumbents are
definately more comfortable. Not only that but, I don't have to worry
about my prostate like I would on an upright. I know that there are
riders out there that have ridden uprights all of there lives and never
had a problem just like there are people that have smoked all of their
lives and never had a problem but, why take the chance?

FUD for thought.

Gary said:

I also have a couple of uprights and they are comfortable for the first
few minutes and then I can't stand to ride them. My recumbents are
definately more comfortable. Not only that but, I don't have to worry
about my prostate like I would on an upright.

You /have/ to worry about your prostate on an upright? Ummm, why?
Unless you've deliberately selected a terrible saddle that doesn't fit
you at all this has long been known to be a non-issue.

Quoted message said:

why take the chance?

Because it's long been known to be a non-issue. Does NL and Denmark
have a huge prostate problem striking down half of the population? Not
that I'm aware.

Pete.
--
Peter Clinch Medical Physics IT Officer
Tel 44 1382 660111 ext. 33637 Univ. of Dundee, Ninewells Hospital
Fax 44 1382 640177 Dundee DD1 9SY Scotland UK
net [email hidden] http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/

In article <[email hidden]>,

Gary said:

I also have a couple of uprights and they are comfortable for the
first few minutes and then I can't stand to ride them. My recumbents
are definately more comfortable. Not only that but, I don't have to
worry about my prostate like I would on an upright. I know that
there are riders out there that have ridden uprights all of there
lives and never had a problem just like there are people that have
smoked all of their lives and never had a problem but, why take the
chance?

Because there is a known cause-and-effect relationship between smoking
and lung diseases like COPD and cancer, but there is no known cause and
effect relationship between bicycling and prostate disease.

Peter Clinch said:

NYC XYZ said:

Even on a clear and all-out downhill run I've only been able to post 29
mph on this 'bent. On the same slope with my Trek 1000c I've reached
top speeds of 36 mph! Also, the 'bent feels noticeably unstable at its
top speeds.

IME most people reporting wibbles on an SMGT have not been relaxed. A
friend reported a shimmy he got at around 30 on a test bike, I found the
exact same machine rock solid, /but/ I had a couple if years' 'bent
experience at that point.

I've found if you keep a very light touch on the bars the bike is rock
solid past 40 mph with or without full touring gear, even through bends
on bumpy roads.

Might this have something to do with rider size and the fore-aft weight
balance on the bike? I've never ridden a 'bent but I have been
considering it. I was leaning toward a SWB USS but if long heavy legs
sticking way out over the front wheel contributes to instability, I'll
reconsider LWB. The fact that the seat is fixed more or less on most
'bents and they are supposed to suit a wide range if rider sizes by
extending the boom seems to me to be creating a wide range of rider
center of gravity positions relative to the contact patches.

Is this an issue?

Joseph

"Qui si parla Campagnolo" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Edward Dolan said:

"NYC XYZ" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...
[...]

Quoted message said:

* Speed sucks!!! I'm over 5 mph slower than my upright! This is
definitely the case. With a change of tires and more developed
'bent-muscles that might narrow a mile or two, but unfortunately I'll
always be far slower than on an upright. Sigh!

You will always be somewhat slower on a recumbent than you will be on an
upright, all things being equal. However, some recumbent riders actually
do
get faster than they ever were on their uprights, but that is because
they
ride their recumbents more and hence get stronger. But overall it is more
work to go fast on a recumbent, especially uphill.

For many years when I wanted a good workout I would ride my upright in
preference to my recumbent, but eventually I settled on the recumbent as
it
was just more enjoyable to ride.
[...]

Quoted message said:

* A real work-out! I still haven't met a hill I can't yet climb on the
'bent, but I am definitely breathing harder -- and I'm a B-grade
athelete! I enjoy the work-out, but it's rather embarrassing huffing
and puffing, giving a less-than-stellar impression of the 'bent.

You will be much slower going uphill on a recumbent. I have known several
guys who gave up on recumbents for precisely that one reason. I would
rather
be slow and comfortable than fast and uncomfortable. The older you get,
the
more important this becomes.

I always read 'bent threads because I can always count on the last
statement.....uprights by definition, are not 'uncomfortable' and the
older you get(I'm 55), it is not automatically important that you get a
'bent....My upright is comfy, I see no need to get a bent because of my
upright's comfort or my age...

Ride your upright for about 8 hours a day for an entire week and then get
back to me on the comfort issue.

Regards,

Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
aka
Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota

"Tim McNamara" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

In article <[email hidden]>,

Gary said:

I also have a couple of uprights and they are comfortable for the
first few minutes and then I can't stand to ride them. My recumbents
are definately more comfortable. Not only that but, I don't have to
worry about my prostate like I would on an upright. I know that
there are riders out there that have ridden uprights all of there
lives and never had a problem just like there are people that have
smoked all of their lives and never had a problem but, why take the
chance?

Because there is a known cause-and-effect relationship between smoking
and lung diseases like COPD and cancer, but there is no known cause and
effect relationship between bicycling and prostate disease.

On the other hand, there are definitely all kinds of problems for the human
groin with the conventional bike saddle, no matter its' configuration.
Racing type saddles are killers and there is nothing good to say about them
except that they look cool and are light weight.

By the way, I am not so sure about there being no connection between bike
saddles and prostate cancer and/or testicular cancer. Women also need to
very wary around the conventional bike saddle. Our nether parts are really
designed for seats, not saddles.

Regards,

Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
aka
Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota

Quoted message said:

Might this have something to do with rider size and the fore-aft weight
balance on the bike?

The SMGT is a very rider-centred machine. Touring luggage can have the
heavy stuff under the rider between the wheels so it has very little
effect on handling. Only by stacking up weight purely on the back will
the steering get light.

Quoted message said:

I've never ridden a 'bent but I have been
considering it. I was leaning toward a SWB USS but if long heavy legs
sticking way out over the front wheel contributes to instability, I'll
reconsider LWB.

My advice is don't get hung up on where the steering is or what the
wheelbase configuration is, shortlist for functionality (tourer, racer
etc.) and then ride everything you can in that category irrespective of
the bars and wheel positions. Then you'll see what works best for you
much better than you can ever decide on paper.

Quoted message said:

The fact that the seat is fixed more or less on most
'bents and they are supposed to suit a wide range if rider sizes by
extending the boom seems to me to be creating a wide range of rider
center of gravity positions relative to the contact patches.

Because of the recline the only bit that's "fixed" is your backside. As
the legs extend forward, so the torso and head extend further backwards
to help balance the whole. Probably more weight in the torso, but it's
not going back so far as it's at an angle.

Quoted message said:

Is this an issue?

Not that I've ever noticed. I'm 5'8" and have never had trouble riding
German and Dutch bikes which are mainly designed for Dutch and German
riders, who are generally quite a bit taller than I am.

But b personally testing as many machines in the functional category
you're looking for, you stand the best chance of a good match. I
personally find tiller bars a bit twitchy, I've yet to dial in to them,
including on bikes where I've found superman or USS bars no trouble.
Plenty of people using them no problems, so it's just me and that
particular thing. You can only find these things out by trying in person.

Pete.
--
Peter Clinch Medical Physics IT Officer
Tel 44 1382 660111 ext. 33637 Univ. of Dundee, Ninewells Hospital
Fax 44 1382 640177 Dundee DD1 9SY Scotland UK
net [email hidden] http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/

NYC XYZ said:

Qui si parla Campagnolo said:

I always read 'bent threads because I can always count on the last
statement.....uprights by definition, are not 'uncomfortable' and the
older you get(I'm 55), it is not automatically important that you get a
'bent....My upright is comfy, I see no need to get a bent because of my
upright's comfort or my age...

My Trek 1000c is the most comfortable upright I've ever had! In two
months I had 700 miles on it already. But nothing is as comfortable as
my SMGTe! It's like the difference between night and day.

700 miles for me is about 3 weeks on my upright. Once more, 'bents
answer no question, solve no problem with regard to a well fitting
upright ridden by a cyclist with no physical problems that dictate only
a 'bent ride.

Quoted message said:

The Trek is now relegated to errand-running in the neighborhood, etc.
For long rides where I don't have to leave my bike out of site, I am
definitely riding 'bent!

Peter said:

FUD for thought

FUD = ? (Please?)

Thanks, John

Qui si parla Campagnolo said:

700 miles for me is about 3 weeks on my upright. Once more, 'bents
answer no question, solve no problem with regard to a well fitting
upright ridden by a cyclist with no physical problems that dictate only
a 'bent ride.

This is true, but it still doesn't mean there's no point in riding one.
You can make exactly the same argument about any transmission system
with more than about 5 well spaced gears, yet /many/ cyclists choose far
more elaborate setups because optimising gearing makes a lot of sense
rather than just choosing something adequate.

Just because you don't *require* a recumbent does not mean it won't be
more comfortable or better in some respect. There's no *requirement* to
sleep in beds rather than on the floor. They solve no problems for a
sleeper with no physical problems that dictate a bed, so do you always
sleep on the floor?

Pete.
--
Peter Clinch Medical Physics IT Officer
Tel 44 1382 660111 ext. 33637 Univ. of Dundee, Ninewells Hospital
Fax 44 1382 640177 Dundee DD1 9SY Scotland UK
net [email hidden] http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/

john said:

FUD = ? (Please?)

Fear Uncertainty and Doubt.

Coincidentally in this thread, often a reason not to try a recumbent...

Pete.
--
Peter Clinch Medical Physics IT Officer
Tel 44 1382 660111 ext. 33637 Univ. of Dundee, Ninewells Hospital
Fax 44 1382 640177 Dundee DD1 9SY Scotland UK
net [email hidden] http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/