Hill Climbing?

Also, leg presses provide a significant boost to recumbent muscle groups.

--
Gator Bob Siegel EasyRacers Ti Rush "Bobinator" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Danielle,

With all of the excitement about lowracers, highracers, etc., the one bike that still outclimbs
them all is the Lightning P-38. I have a Lightning Phantom II (same component package as the base
P-38) and it climbs well also. In a recent ride with a friend on a body-socked Ti-Rush, I smoked
him on every climb. Of course, he smoked me going down.

Even with that, it still depends on the engine. I have outclimbed a couple of Litespeeds going
uphill. Is my Phantom a better climber than a sub-20 lb Litespeed? I doubt it. Was I better than
the out of shape guy on it? Yes. Don't forget your engine. You will need to build up your hill
climbing legs. With practice, you will be fast enough.

Bob

[email hidden] (Mich) wrote in message

news:<[email hidden]>...

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

I am considering becoming a 'bent' owner BUT I live in the hilly mountainous State of New
Hampshire. There are several very looong hills with 7 degree or more grades on some of my
favorite loops. My question is, would a recumbent be practical for this kind of terrain? Thank
You. Danielle

I live in Bloomington, Indiana, home of the fairly famous Hilly Hundred.

I'm an fat guy in my 50's. A few years I bought a Penninger Voyager. It is what is known as a Delta
recumbent tricycle. That is one wheel in the front and two wheels in the back, but it has the
recumbent seating, not like the old Schwinn adult trikes. The website is:

penninger.comPenninger%20Recumbents.htmOpen ↗

They offer a variety of gearing options. I would suggest the lowest gearing option they have.

There are also a style of trike known as a tadpole configuration. This configuration has two wheels
in the front and one in the back. Tadpoles sit much lower then the Delta configurations.

The advantage of trikes is you don't run into balance problems when your speed drops below your
balance point. With my RANS tailwind which is a two wheel recumbent, I have to get off and walk
when the speed drops below 3 mph. On my Penninger, I can crawl at a snail pace and not have to get
off the bike.

Jim Ek

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

Quoted message said:

I am considering becoming a 'bent' owner BUT I

live in the hilly

Quoted message said:

mountainous State of New Hampshire. There are

several very looong hills

Quoted message said:

with 7 degree or more grades on some of my

favorite loops. My question

Quoted message said:

is, would a recumbent be practical for this kind

of terrain?

Quoted message said:

Thank You. Danielle

Danielle:

Like most bent riders, I'm a bit slower on hills than on a conventional frame.

The people with whom I most like to ride tend to be just a bit slower than I on longish grades. The
bent evens things out.

I will never be a racer and don't do a long commute, so average speed is much less important than
average enjoyment.

Even though I'm slower on a bent, I willingly ride longer distances because of the comfort and fun
factors. I would probably go miles out of my way to avoid a long 7 degree hill on a conventional
road bike, but would tend to happily spin away on my TerraTrike and enjoy the view.

On the other hand, I would tend to heat up the brakes on many of your New Hampshire downhills!

George

Quoted message said:

I am considering becoming a 'bent' owner BUT I live in the hilly mountainous State of New
Hampshire. There are several very looong hills with 7 degree or more grades on some of my favorite
loops. My question is, would a recumbent be practical for this kind of terrain? Thank You. Danielle

Its Baaaaaak. The hill climbing thread. SSDT.
--
Jude....///Bacchetta AERO St. Michaels and Tilghman Island.. Maryland Wheel Doctor Cycle and Sports,
Inc 1-800-586-6645 "Vol" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Danielle:

Like most bent riders, I'm a bit slower on hills than on a conventional frame.

The people with whom I most like to ride tend to be just a bit slower than I on longish grades.
The bent evens things out.

I will never be a racer and don't do a long commute, so average speed is much less important than
average enjoyment.

Even though I'm slower on a bent, I willingly ride longer distances because of the comfort and fun
factors. I would probably go miles out of my way to avoid a long 7 degree hill on a conventional
road bike, but would tend to happily spin away on my TerraTrike and enjoy the view.

On the other hand, I would tend to heat up the brakes on many of your New Hampshire downhills!

George

Quoted message said:

I am considering becoming a 'bent' owner BUT I live in the hilly mountainous State of New
Hampshire. There are several very looong hills with 7 degree or more grades on some of my
favorite loops. My question is, would a recumbent be practical for this kind of terrain? Thank
You. Danielle

He won't be fast enough, on a bent, in New Hampshire no matter how in shape he gets.

Gene

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

Quoted message said:

Danielle,

With all of the excitement about lowracers, highracers, etc., the one bike that still outclimbs
them all is the Lightning P-38. I have a Lightning Phantom II (same component package as the base
P-38) and it climbs well also. In a recent ride with a friend on a body-socked Ti-Rush, I smoked
him on every climb. Of course, he smoked me going down.

Even with that, it still depends on the engine. I have outclimbed a couple of Litespeeds going
uphill. Is my Phantom a better climber than a sub-20 lb Litespeed? I doubt it. Was I better than
the out of shape guy on it? Yes. Don't forget your engine. You will need to build up your hill
climbing legs. With practice, you will be fast enough.

Bob

[email hidden] (Mich) wrote in message

news:<[email hidden]>...

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

I am considering becoming a 'bent' owner BUT I live in the hilly mountainous State of New
Hampshire. There are several very looong hills with 7 degree or more grades on some of my
favorite loops. My question is, would a recumbent be practical for this kind of terrain? Thank
You. Danielle

Simple math:

Climb 4 miles at 4mph - descend 4 miles at 40mph total = 8 miles in 1hr 6min Avg. speed 8.25mph or
about twice the climbing speed

Gene

"Bill Hamilton" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Ron Levine <[email hidden]> wrote in :"]news:[email hidden]:

Quoted message said:

Cletus D. Lee said:

In article <[email hidden]>, [email hidden]
says...
> I am considering becoming a 'bent' owner BUT I live in the hilly mountainous State of New
> Hampshire. There are several very looong

hills

Quoted message said:

> with 7 degree or more grades on some of my favorite loops. My

question

Quoted message said:

> is, would a recumbent be practical for this kind of terrain? Thank You. Danielle

It would depend on what your want out of the bike. If you do no mind being a little slower up
the hills with an increase in overall performance, then yes.

Again, if you live in very hilly terrain, as I do (and as Cletus does not), then the greater
speed you can get with the bent on the flats and the not-too-curvy descents will NOT make up for
the penalty in climbing. In hilly terrain, climbing speed dominates average speed. Even if your
descending speed were infinite, your average speed could be at most twice your climbing speed.

Could you explain this? I think you'll turn the entire field of mathmatics on its head if you can
show a sound reasoning for your averaging above. If you manage 4 mph uphill, and 20 mph downhill,
then your average will be (4+20)/2=12 mph, far more than "twice your climbing speed". In fact, the
only way that your average will be twice your climbing speed is if your downhill speed is three
times your climbing speed.

-Bill Hamilton

Eugene Cottrell said:

Simple math:

Indeed. But you have made a mistake in your arithmetic

Quoted message said:

Climb 4 miles at 4mph - descend 4 miles at 40mph total =3D 8 miles in 1hr 6min Avg. speed 8.25mph
or about twice the climbing speed

8/1.1 =3D 7.27 mph

Under the assumption of equal distances climbing and descending and constant speeds for each, the
average speed will always be LESS THAN twice the climbing speed.

Ron

Quoted message said:

Gene

"Bill Hamilton" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Ron Levine <[email hidden]> wrote in :"]news:[email hidden]:

Quoted message said:

On Sun, 8 Jun 2003 22:08:14 -0500, Cletus D. Lee <[email hidden]> wrote:

>In article =

<[email hidden]>,

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

>[email hidden] says...
>> I am considering becoming a 'bent' owner BUT I live in the hilly mountainous State of New
>> Hampshire. There are several very looong
hills
>> with 7 degree or more grades on some of my favorite loops. My
question
>> is, would a recumbent be practical for this kind of terrain? Thank You. Danielle
>
>It would depend on what your want out of the bike. If you do no mind being a little slower up
>the hills with an increase in overall performance, then yes.

Again, if you live in very hilly terrain, as I do (and as Cletus =

does

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

not), then the greater speed you can get with the bent on the flats and the not-too-curvy
descents will NOT make up for the penalty in climbing. In hilly terrain, climbing speed
dominates average speed. Even if your descending speed were infinite, your average speed =

could

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

be at most twice your climbing speed.

Could you explain this? I think you'll turn the entire field of mathmatics on its head if you
can show a sound reasoning for your averaging above. If you manage 4 mph uphill, and 20 mph
downhill, =

then

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

your average will be (4+20)/2=3D12 mph, far more than "twice your =

climbing

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

speed". In fact, the only way that your average will be twice your climbing speed is if your
downhill speed is three times your climbing speed.

-Bill Hamilton

I don't believe that 'bents are slower uphill.

I've never climbed faster than on my RANS rocket.

On TOMRV last weekend, on big long hills, or short and steep, I didn't just pass a couple of folks
on fancier uprights, I passed dozens. (Only once was I ever overtaken by another biker--while I was
riding with my wife--but when she saw my anguish, she gave me permission to hammer the hills again.)

Granted, I was out to prove something to myself (and maybe to some of the fancy kits). But keep in
mind, these were guys with horse legs on $8,000, 17 pound uprights, and often, they were working as
a team. And believe me, most of them knew that we were racing up the hills. Their remarks like'good
run' further down the road made that clear.

But according to conventional wisdom, they should have been wiping the road with me (basic 'bent,
skinny little runner legs...)

I just wanted to get up the hill faster than they did, simple as that.

It's all in your head, so if you get the bike you like, and you want to fly up the hills, you will
fly up the hills.

Get a fun bike. Put in your miles, take your vitamins, and you will fly.

The last time I went near any sizeable hills was as part of a huge group of three recumbents.

Machine 1: Windcheetah. Not hugely reclined, fairly low BB. Machine 2: Davies low racer. Quite
upright as designed to live inside a full fairing. Machine 3: HP Velotechnik Speedmachine, seat at
~30 degrees.

I reached the top of Killhope (13% for a bit over half a mile) well ahead of the others. Does this
mean that the Speedmachine can climb well? Not necessarily. It just meant that I had the most
appropriate gears for the conditions. Machine #2, in spite of having the 2001 Word Champion at the
controls, was always going to be hard work, given a 559 rear wheel, an 11-34 cassette and a 48 tooth
single chain ring...

Dave Larrington - legslarry.beerdrinkers.co.uklegslarry.beerdrinkers.co.ukOpen ↗
===========================================================
Editor - British Human Power Club Newsletter
bhpc.org.ukbhpc.org.ukOpen ↗
===========================================================

On rides that involve hills, I routinely get passed by riders on DFs. However, I alway tak into
account "Who and what is passing me" So here I am riding a 25#+bike at 53 and 5'10" 180ish pounds
with a small aerobelly and lovehandles. I'm getting passed by guys and gals on <20# bikes, late
20's/30's with <5% BF. Gee it must be the bike! Oh yea I get passed by mid fifty guys also damm few,
but that have been athletic all their lives and are still competitive and look like stick figures We
are comparing two distinctly demographly different groups. I wonder what the result would be if the
draw pools were equal. I can only wonder because their not. When they are, which won't happen in my
lifetime, we may or may not have a horse race. Does anyone know a rider that is an athlete the at
age 15, started riding a recumbent competitivly and is now 30 and destroyong his DF counterparts? I
don't! I know and know of some DF racers in that catagory. Flame me, but IME even in my age catagory
there are more fit DF riders than benters. There are a few among us that are accomplished hill
climbers. Those I know are quite competitive with their DF counterparts.

--
Jude....///Bacchetta AERO St. Michaels and Tilghman Island.. Maryland Wheel Doctor Cycle and Sports,
Inc 1-800-586-6645 "Dave Larrington" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

The last time I went near any sizeable hills was as part of a huge group

of

Quoted message said:

three recumbents.

Machine 1: Windcheetah. Not hugely reclined, fairly low BB. Machine 2: Davies low racer. Quite
upright as designed to live inside a full fairing. Machine 3: HP Velotechnik Speedmachine, seat at
~30 degrees.

I reached the top of Killhope (13% for a bit over half a mile) well ahead

of

Quoted message said:

the others. Does this mean that the Speedmachine can climb well? Not necessarily. It just meant
that I had the most appropriate gears for the conditions. Machine #2, in spite of having the 2001
Word Champion at the controls, was always going to be hard work, given a 559 rear wheel, an

11-34

Quoted message said:

cassette and a 48 tooth single chain ring...

Dave Larrington - legslarry.beerdrinkers.co.uklegslarry.beerdrinkers.co.ukOpen ↗
===========================================================
Editor - British Human Power Club Newsletter
bhpc.org.ukbhpc.org.ukOpen ↗
===========================================================

Jude T. McGloin said:

I'm getting passed by guys and gals on <20# bikes, late 20's/30's with <5% BF. Gee it must be
the bike!

Returning from my Saturday 40 miler last week, I was passed by a guy with at least three 15's on me.
At least 15 years younger, 15 pound lighter body, and 15 pound lighter bike. He looked like a fit
recreational rider. As he went by he didn't say anything, but after he got about 20 feet ahead, he
glanced back, and 15 seconds later, he glanced back again. Hmmm...

I thought to myself, I wonder if I can keep up with him, so I picked up the pace and stayed about 40
feet behind him. He widened the gap to perhaps 75 feet on a hill climb and at the top, sat up and
shook his hands. As I topped the hill, I could have passed him, but merely closed the gap back to
about 40 feet. There's no way I would have been able to stay in front of him, but I hung with him.
Several times he sat up and shook his hands.

All the time, he kept glancing back. Heart rate well above my aerobic range, I tried not to look
like I was running completely out of gas. But after a couple of miles, I felt like the scene in
Princess Bride where the two sword fighters are dueling left-handed. I knew something he didn't
know,-- I was stopping in 1/2 mile. %^) I closed the gap to about 20 feet, and then turned off.

He on his bike was definitely faster than I was on mine!

He never even got off of his saddle. And who knows, he might have been finishing up a century ride
or just stringing me along.

Quoted message said:

even in my age catagory there are more fit DF riders than benters.

Very true. Some, perhaps even many of us are more fit, faster, and riding much more on our
recumbents than formerly on uprights, however. That we're not prototypical serious bicyclists shaped
in body, mind, and spirit, well who cares!

Speaking of which, there was an article on Robin Williams in a recent _Bicycling_ magazine. Not
exactly Fab's image of a serious bicyclist...

Jon Meinecke

Friends,

Quoted message said:

On rides that involve hills, I routinely get passed by riders on DFs. There are a few among us
that are accomplished hill climbers. Those I know are quite competitive with their DF
counterparts.

About five years ago I was in the best shape of my life. For several years I rode duathlons, hill
climbs and charity rides, in the Virginia mountains, on a 26/26 V-Rex. I ran 559-25 Contis at 120
psi, no power side idler, and a very tight body angle. The bike weighed 27 pounds with mid-range
components. I passed many roadies in those events. It was great fun! On 5-8% grades I was faster
than on my road bike. On 10-12% grades I was a match. Steeper than that, and I was definitely
slower. Your Aero should do even better on the climbs.

That said, the recumbent riding position is not as efficient/flexible for climbing.

I can ride my single speed Frejus in a 57" gear, from Front Royal to Big Meadows, in the Blue Ridge
Mountains. This is about 60 miles of mostly up and down. Much of it on 10-12% grades. I can tootle
along at a reasonable speed on the flatter bits, and still stand and creep up the biggest climbs,
just like riders did on the TDF for many years. I could never do this on a single speed recumbent.

Recumbents can be as fast overall, more comfortable, and safer than an upright. By insisting that
they have no disadvantages, compared to an upright, many recumbent riders come off as kooks and do
us all a disservice.

Warren

What Warren said too, bill g

Warren Berger said:

Recumbents can be as fast overall, more comfortable, and safer than an upright. By insisting that
they have no disadvantages, compared to an upright, many recumbent riders come off as kooks and do
us all a disservice.

Warren

What Ron said bill, paceline, g

Ron Levine said:

The benefits of riding recumbents are great. The benefits of riding uprights are also great, and
different. One of the shortcomings of riding recumbents that I find is that it does not provide
quite all the benefits of riding my upright road bike--specifically, it does not provide the same
quality of exercise, in particularl, a modicum of upper body exercise and a variety of exercise of
lower body muscle groups.

Some people think that riding upright bikes does not provide significant upper body exercise. My
experience is different. In a year and a half of riding recumbents exclusively, (and not doing any
other exercise consistently) I experienced a definite reduction of upper body muscle mass. Of
course, you can do lots of different kinds of exercise if you have the time. Rowing is the the
best all-round exericse I've done (on the water with a sliding-seat rig, but not on a machine in a
gym), but, as a daily routine, it is just not as convenient as riding a bike out my front door.
The differences in the quality of the exercise is the other of the two main reasons I've gone back
to riding my upright a lot of the time after riding the 'bent exclusively for a year and a half.

Further, I find that I enjoy working in all the different positions possible on an upright but
impossible on a recumbent, such as dancing on the pedals, or riding without hands.

I ride and enjoy both kinds of bikes--usually, the recumbent during the week for commuting and the
upright for club rides on weekends. I shall probably use the recumbent for most self-contained
touring, although I took my upright for a recent self-contained tour in Europe simply because the
bike transport issues were much simpler to deal with.

The greatest benefit of recumbents vis-a-vis uprights is superior comfort. Many people who ride
recumbents do so because they experience too much discomfort on uprights, enough to make riding
them unpleasant or even impossible.. I certainly find my recumbent more comfortable for very long
rides than my upright, but, for me, the discomforts of the upright are not fatal, and the
recumbent is not enirely without discomforts of its own.

Ron

Cletus Lee said:

In article <[email hidden]>, [email hidden] says...

Quoted message said:

Don't buy a 'bent specifically for climbing: buy one because they are a blast to ride.

However as you point out, Some are better than others. You make note of the poorer climbing ability
of the Bike E. I would suggest that the bent shopper look for a bent that does climb well and all
the other positives will be there. For a bent that climbs, I would look at the higher BB bents like
the Big wheel Bacchettas, Lightning P-38 and even my Bacchetta Giro. All climb better than a Bike E
or LWB bent.

I live in the foothills of South Carolina and started reading this newsgroup for all the great
advise 2 years ago before I bought my V-Rex (20 26 style). Unfortunately the V-Rex is the only
recumbent I have ever ridden.

Are the bikes noted above "meaningfully" faster than my V-Rex?

In article <[email hidden]>, [email hidden] says...

Quoted message said:

What Warren said too, bill g

Warren Berger said:

Recumbents can be as fast overall, more comfortable, and safer than an upright. By insisting
that they have no disadvantages, compared to an upright, many recumbent riders come off as kooks
and do us all a disservice.

Warren

Me too.
--
Cletus D. Lee Bacchetta Giro Lightning Voyager clee.orgclee.orgOpen ↗
- Bellaire, TX USA -

In article <[email hidden]>, Dave Miller <> says...

Quoted message said:

Cletus Lee said:

In article <[email hidden]>, [email hidden] says...

Quoted message said:

Don't buy a 'bent specifically for climbing: buy one because they are a blast to ride.

However as you point out, Some are better than others... For a bent that climbs, I would look at
the higher BB bents like the Big wheel Bacchettas, Lightning P-38 and even my Bacchetta Giro. All
climb better than a Bike E or LWB bent.

I live in the foothills of South Carolina and started reading this newsgroup for all the great
advise 2 years ago before I bought my V-Rex (20 26 style). Unfortunately the V-Rex is the only
recumbent I have ever ridden.

Are the bikes noted above "meaningfully" faster than my V-Rex?

I've only ridden a V-Rex once or twice. With that assessment, I chose the P-38 for my first SWB
bent. I think the V-Rex is a great (Mark Colliton (?) designed) bike. High BB SWB Bikes are
demonstratably better climbers than Low BB Bikes. The P-38 is lighter and its closed geometry seat
position (IMO) give it an edge over the V-Rex. The advantage is slight. I see the Mark Colliton
designed Big wheel Bacchettas as an evolutionary improvement over the V-Rex. They are the 'new &
improved' V-Rex.

I don't know that any of these bikes are 'meaningfully' faster than a V-Rex. There is too much
variation in the engines that abound in this world to make a definitive statement. There are some in
the IHPVA that have tinkered with the design of the V-Rex and produced big wheel adaptations of the
V-rex that were reported as faster than the OEM 20X26 version. These were the first big wheel
recumbents that I noticed.

Living in the foothills of SC, you might want to look at improving the gearing of your V-Rex if you
are having difficulty on the climbing in your area. If that does not help, then I would give a
Strada or a P-38 a try.

--

Cletus D. Lee Bacchetta Giro Lightning Voyager clee.orgclee.orgOpen ↗
- Bellaire, TX USA -

In article <[email hidden]>, [email hidden] says...

Quoted message said:

There are some in the IHPVA that have tinkered with the design of the V-Rex and produced big wheel
adaptations of the V-rex that were reported as faster than the OEM 20X26 version. These were the
first big wheel recumbents that I noticed.

itt.edu26 26VRex.jpgOpen ↗

Warren Berger (who may also post here)has made several variations on the V-Rex. I believe that
Warren lives near Charlottesville, VA. like you in the Piedmont.

More of his tinkerings with the V-Rex can be found here: itt.eduwarrenOpen ↗
--

Cletus D. Lee Bacchetta Giro Lightning Voyager clee.orgclee.orgOpen ↗
- Bellaire, TX USA -

Cletus, I would have to say my Aero is "meaningfully" faster than my Rex. I even put a 540(?) wheel
on the Rex to see if it was any faster and also to get used to having my feet higher in anticipation
of getting the Aero. I really didn't notice any difference, but I may not have been as laid back as
the Aero and when you raise the Rex that big seat pan exposes more surface to the wind. bill g

Cletus Lee said:

I've only ridden a V-Rex once or twice. With that assessment, I chose the P-38 for my first SWB
bent. I think the V-Rex is a great (Mark Colliton (?) designed) bike. High BB SWB Bikes are
demonstratably better climbers than Low BB Bikes. The P-38 is lighter and its closed geometry seat
position (IMO) give it an edge over the V-Rex. The advantage is slight. I see the Mark Colliton
designed Big wheel Bacchettas as an evolutionary improvement over the V-Rex. They are the 'new &
improved' V-Rex.

I don't know that any of these bikes are 'meaningfully' faster than a V-Rex. There is too much
variation in the engines that abound in this world to make a definitive statement. There are some
in the IHPVA that have tinkered with the design of the V-Rex and produced big wheel adaptations of
the V-rex that were reported as faster than the OEM 20X26 version. These were the first big wheel
recumbents that I noticed.

Living in the foothills of SC, you might want to look at improving the gearing of your V-Rex if
you are having difficulty on the climbing in your area. If that does not help, then I would give a
Strada or a P-38 a try.

--

Cletus D. Lee Bacchetta Giro Lightning Voyager clee.orgclee.orgOpen ↗
- Bellaire, TX USA -

In article <[email hidden]>, [email hidden] says...

Quoted message said:

Cletus, I would have to say my Aero is "meaningfully" faster than my Rex.

A Ti Aero might be. It was not in my mind for in the list of 'better' climbing 'bents that I gave.
Not to be discounted, I have just not had an opportunity to ride one.

--

Cletus D. Lee Bacchetta Giro Lightning Voyager clee.orgclee.orgOpen ↗
- Bellaire, TX USA -