Let's talk about lowracers... (lengthy)

[Freewheeling]

bill:

Well, not exactly a scientific test. I don't think there's a bicycle made that would allow me to
keep up with Rich Pinto, unless it had a motor. But I'll take that Aero off your hands if you're
getting tired of it.

--
--Scott [email protected] Cut the "tail" to send email.

"a&b" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
> Scott, Somehow that seems to all to equivocate in actual riding. One of my riding buds on a 20"
> rotator seems to readily coast and stay with me on my 650c Aero. bill g
>
> Freewheeling wrote:
> >
> > All else being equal, smaller wheels will be more aerodynamic while
larger
> > wheels will have less rolling resistance. On typical asphalt roadways,
with
> > lots of irregularities, decreased rolling resistance will compensate for
the
> > loss in aerodynamics.
> >
> > --
> > --Scott [email protected] Cut the "tail" to send email.
> >
> > <[email protected]> wrote in message
> > news:[email protected]...
> > > B. Sanders <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > : From my experience, the 406mm wheels have lower rolling resistance,
too.
> > I
> > > : can out-coast any DF bike, with any tires, on almost any surface.
It's
> > very
> > > : obvious in a group ride. Aero advantage + skinny, hi-pressure tires
+
> > small
> > > : wheels = superior coasting.
> > >
> > > I find it rather ironic that people claim that both large and small wheels are the more
> > > aerodynamically efficient in the same thread
> > >
> > > IME, tyres are important. Semislicks on my hybrid give a rather different, easy rolling
> > > feeling from the stock semiknobs. Race bikes would be even better. Recumbents seem to have
> > > wider tyres than racing DF bikes, maybe because of the small wheels, so I'm doubting the tyre
> > > advantage of lowracers a bit.
> > >
> > > Tyres are especially important at low speeds, when the aerodynamics wither in significance. So
> > > if you do long rides...
> > >
> > > --
> > > Risto Varanka | http://www.helsinki.fi/~rvaranka/ varis at no spam please iki fi

 

[Bg]

Scott, Hey, I didn't report a p ;-) Yeah I realize it's highly armchair, uh, I mean, carbonchair
analysis. What's interesting is that we seem to have aero and/or rolling advantages at different
speeds. He may coast away initially, then I catch up and pass, then he returns the favor as we go
faster kind of thing. It's hard for me to separate the aero effects from the rolling resistance
effects. bill g

Freewheeling wrote:

> bill:
>
> Well, not exactly a scientific test. I don't think there's a bicycle made that would allow me to
> keep up with Rich Pinto, unless it had a motor. But I'll take that Aero off your hands if you're
> getting tired of it.
>
> --
> --Scott [email protected] Cut the "tail" to send email.
>
> "a&b" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
> > Scott, Somehow that seems to all to equivocate in actual riding. One of my riding buds on a 20"
> > rotator seems to readily coast and stay with me on my 650c Aero. bill g
> >
> > Freewheeling wrote:
> > >
> > > All else being equal, smaller wheels will be more aerodynamic while
> larger
> > > wheels will have less rolling resistance. On typical asphalt roadways,
> with
> > > lots of irregularities, decreased rolling resistance will compensate for
> the
> > > loss in aerodynamics.
> > >
> > > --
> > > --Scott [email protected] Cut the "tail" to send email.
> > >
> > > <[email protected]> wrote in message
> > > news:[email protected]...
> > > > B. Sanders <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > > : From my experience, the 406mm wheels have lower rolling resistance,
> too.
> > > I
> > > > : can out-coast any DF bike, with any tires, on almost any surface.
> It's
> > > very
> > > > : obvious in a group ride. Aero advantage + skinny, hi-pressure tires
> +
> > > small
> > > > : wheels = superior coasting.
> > > >
> > > > I find it rather ironic that people claim that both large and small wheels are the more
> > > > aerodynamically efficient in the same thread
> > > >
> > > > IME, tyres are important. Semislicks on my hybrid give a rather different, easy rolling
> > > > feeling from the stock semiknobs. Race bikes would be even better. Recumbents seem to have
> > > > wider tyres than racing DF bikes, maybe because of the small wheels, so I'm doubting the
> > > > tyre advantage of lowracers a bit.
> > > >
> > > > Tyres are especially important at low speeds, when the aerodynamics wither in significance.
> > > > So if you do long rides...
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Risto Varanka | http://www.helsinki.fi/~rvaranka/ varis at no spam please iki fi

--
real email [email protected]

 

[Tom Sherman]

"B. Sanders" wrote:
>
> ... The Alley Cat looks interesting. Do the tiny 305mm front wheels work well on less-than-perfect
> streets?
>
> I've read reports from lowracer owners that they are not getting the speed gains that they had
> hoped for. So what's the big deal about lowracers, and why do people swear by them?...

Barry,

I believe a lowracer with an ISO 305-mm front wheel would work fine on most of the streets in C-U
and most of the paved county roads except for fresh "chip seal", as long as the rider is not
excessively heavy and the weight distribution is not too far forward. A Pantour hub would be an
option if the bike has a regular fork.

As for speed, I was faster on my Sunset in 2002 than I was on my Rocket in 2000, despite being in
much better condition in 2000. The aerodynamic advantage becomes very significant at wind speeds
above 15 mph (~25 kph).

I should point out that the Sunset works very well for me in terms of power production and comfort,
while will help me to achieve a greater level of performance for a given level of conditioning.

The other reason for preferring a lowracer is the responsiveness attained through a low center of
gravity (CG). [1] Not everyone will find this positive, however.

[1] All other factors being equal, a low single-track vehicle will achieve a given lean angle
(faster roll rate) more rapidly than a high CG single-track vehicle since the CG moves along a
smaller radius arc. Since single-track vehicles steer by camber thrust, roll rate will determine
rate of directional change.

Tom Sherman - Quad Cities USA (Illinois side) RANS "Wavewind" and Rocket, Earth Cycles Sunset and
Dragonflyer "It is about the bike!" - HPV Racer

 

[John Foltz]

[email protected] wrote:
>
> What kind of experiences do you LR owning people have on the safety issues? Have you gone
> unnoticed, ignored? Do other people comment on safety? Any close calls?
>
> Where do you ride? I was thinking lowracers might have enough visibility for road riding, but not
> for commuting in (semi)urban environment.
>

I find it amazing that every time the subject of lowracers comes up, the thread seems to take off on
a visibility tangent. Kinda like wedgie riders who don't know anything about recumbents except that
they can't do hills. I can't believe that many people are that worried about it, or are they just
trying to scare us off ours so they can buy them at fire sale prices? ;-)
--

John Foltz --- O _ Baron --- _O _ V-Rex 24/63 --- _\\/\-%)
_________(_)`=()___________________(_)= (_)_____

 

[A&B]

Just, Wait till you get hit. All the "nearly's" will be cancelled and pale in the Monopoly of
riding. Visibility counts, and although the uniqueness of a low racer may make it more noticeable in
lesser density traffic, you're much more likely to get nailed in the 5 o'clock stuff if you are at
or below their visual sight line or bumper. bill "waiting for my neck to gel after a rear shot by an
old gal who "Didn't see me" g

"Just zis Guy, you know?" wrote:

> If I had a pound for all the people who say they "nearly" didn't see me riding my Stinger I'd be a
> rich man. And if I had another pound for everyone who says how dangerous it must be and how surely
> nobody can see me I'd be a very rich man.
>
> It hasn't passed me by that all these people not only *did* see me, but saw me sufficiently well
> that when they see me again in another context (maybe without the bike) they recognise me. And
> that, I think, tells me everything I need to know about how conspicuous a low bike /really/ is.
>
> Wedgies are the true stealth vehicle. Nobody gives those a second glance.
>
> Guy
> ===
> ** WARNING ** This posting may contain traces of irony. http://www.chapmancentral.com (BT ADSL and
> dynamic DNS permitting)
> NOTE: BT Openworld have now blocked port 25 (without notice), so old mail addresses may no longer
> work. Apologies.

 

[Tom Sherman]

harryo wrote:
>
> I agree completely. You should always ride any bicycle defensively and sensibly. I just take care
> to so at all times on my Baron. Most of my riding is on rural roads and in two years, I have never
> had a situation where I believe that motorists failed to see my lowracer because of it's low
> profile. I do wear a yellow helmet, yellow, white or orange jersey and have placed reflective
> strips on the back and sides of my seat....

As I posted to the NG some time ago, Harry's yellow helmet is the most visible/attention attracting
part of the bike/rider combination when viewed from behind.

Tom Sherman - Quad Cities USA (Illinois side) RANS "Wavewind" and Rocket, Earth Cycles Sunset and
Dragonflyer

 

[Tom Sherman]

a&b wrote:
>
> Just, Wait till you get hit. All the "nearly's" will be cancelled and pale in the Monopoly of
> riding. Visibility counts, and although the uniqueness of a low racer may make it more noticeable
> in lesser density traffic, you're much more likely to get nailed in the 5 o'clock stuff if you are
> at or below their visual sight line or bumper. bill "waiting for my neck to gel after a rear shot
> by an old gal who "Didn't see me" g

A co-worker of mine got hit by a driver who "failed to see him". At the time he was driving a Chevy
TopKick [1] pulling an ATV drill rig on a trailer (the ATV rig is painted yellow and is about 25
feet long and stands about 12 feet high when on the trailer). I guess he should have been driver
something taller and more visible.

[1] Medium size commercial truck.

Tom Sherman - Quad Cities USA (Illinois side) RANS "Wavewind" and Rocket, Earth Cycles Sunset and
Dragonflyer

 

[Tom Sherman]

Al Kubeluis wrote:
>
> ... Does someone know of non-streamliner bent faster than say, an M5 or Baron? ~ Al Kubeluis ~
> Bacchetta Corsa ~ Maryland ~ USA ~

This bike would be faster than the Optima Baron or M5 Lowracer on a flat course (Sean Costin won the
1999 200-m flying start unfaired class World Championship on it) but it is not a practical street
bike, although Sean did ride the 2001 Udder Century invitational on it.

< http://www.wisil.recumbents.com/wisil/costin/fmonkey.jpg >

Tom Sherman - Quad Cities USA (Illinois side) RANS "Wavewind" and Rocket, Earth Cycles Sunset and
Dragonflyer "It is about the bike!" - HPV Racer

 

[Burt Rothberg]

Here's a sick lowracer traffic jam story. Me and my Baron was with a group of DFs in downtown New
York when the DFs were suddenly gone. I was caught in the jam leading to the Holland Tunnel to
Jersey. The thing was about a square mile of trapped angry drivers with no clear organization into
lanes. Since they seemed to be going real slow I slithered around them. Howevery every so often the
jam broke and the cars could move 30 or 40 feet. Everyone went as fast as they could without looking
at anything except the car in front. Had to be careful. Soon after that the fumes got to me and I
went onto the sidewalk. Once out of the tunnel jam, I got back on the street. I then had to go
through the midtown canyons to my place on the Upper East Side. Practically stopped the city; every
vehicle operator in town was gawking, yelling; cops pulled me over to ask if I made it or bought it,
etc. Never again.

"Just zis Guy, you know?" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:<[email protected]>...
> On 21 Jan 2003 22:15:27 GMT, [email protected] wrote:
>
> >What kind of experiences do you LR owning people have on the safety issues? Have you gone
> >unnoticed, ignored? Do other people comment on safety?
>
> If I had a pound for all the people who say they "nearly" didn't see me riding my Stinger I'd be a
> rich man. And if I had another pound for everyone who says how dangerous it must be and how surely
> nobody can see me I'd be a very rich man.
>
> It hasn't passed me by that all these people not only *did* see me, but saw me sufficiently well
> that when they see me again in another context (maybe without the bike) they recognise me. And
> that, I think, tells me everything I need to know about how conspicuous a low bike /really/ is.
>
> Wedgies are the true stealth vehicle. Nobody gives those a second glance.
>
> Guy
> ===
> ** WARNING ** This posting may contain traces of irony. http://www.chapmancentral.com (BT ADSL and
> dynamic DNS permitting)
> NOTE: BT Openworld have now blocked port 25 (without notice), so old mail addresses may no longer
> work. Apologies.

 

[Bg]

Tom, Well I'm making the assumption that the driver is paying attention, not watching tv or yakking
on the phone or reading a book. If you don't see a 12 yellow obstacle, you aren't paying attention
or you're blind. A guy passed me on the interstate last week steering with his knees with a book
propped on the top of the steerring wheel. He locked his brakes, smoking the tires, twice in a 5
mile stretch after almost rear ending 18-wheelers. In my situation we were shielded by the vehicle
in front of the old gal, while we we all in a left bend on a 4-lane road. She came around on the
right, outer lane. I think it's much more likely she would have seen us had we been above hood level
of the lead vehicle. bill g

Tom Sherman wrote:

> a&b wrote:
> >
> > Just, Wait till you get hit. All the "nearly's" will be cancelled and pale in the Monopoly of
> > riding. Visibility counts, and although the uniqueness of a low racer may make it more
> > noticeable in lesser density traffic, you're much more likely to get nailed in the 5 o'clock
> > stuff if you are at or below their visual sight line or bumper. bill "waiting for my neck to gel
> > after a rear shot by an old gal who "Didn't see me" g
>
> A co-worker of mine got hit by a driver who "failed to see him". At the time he was driving a
> Chevy TopKick [1] pulling an ATV drill rig on a trailer (the ATV rig is painted yellow and is
> about 25 feet long and stands about 12 feet high when on the trailer). I guess he should have been
> driver something taller and more visible.
>
> [1] Medium size commercial truck.
>
> Tom Sherman - Quad Cities USA (Illinois side) RANS "Wavewind" and Rocket, Earth Cycles Sunset and
> Dragonflyer

--
real email [email protected]

 

[Freewheeling]

It can't be that difficult to do some sort of study to determine the factors involved in being
"noticable" to a motorist. There are some who contend that width is more important than height, but
I haven't seen any research that supports that contention (though it might be true). But to the
extent that height *is* important, why can't you just use a flag? Or two flags, to enhance the
visual effect and get some width dimension? Of course that would add a little drag...

Maybe just send up a flare if you notice someone approaching from behind?

--
--Scott [email protected] Cut the "tail" to send email.

"Just zis Guy, you know?" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> On 21 Jan 2003 22:15:27 GMT, [email protected] wrote:
>
> >What kind of experiences do you LR owning people have on the safety issues? Have you gone
> >unnoticed, ignored? Do other people comment on safety?
>
> If I had a pound for all the people who say they "nearly" didn't see me riding my Stinger I'd be a
> rich man. And if I had another pound for everyone who says how dangerous it must be and how surely
> nobody can see me I'd be a very rich man.
>
> It hasn't passed me by that all these people not only *did* see me, but saw me sufficiently well
> that when they see me again in another context (maybe without the bike) they recognise me. And
> that, I think, tells me everything I need to know about how conspicuous a low bike /really/ is.
>
> Wedgies are the true stealth vehicle. Nobody gives those a second glance.
>
> Guy
> ===
> ** WARNING ** This posting may contain traces of irony. http://www.chapmancentral.com (BT ADSL and
> dynamic DNS permitting)
> NOTE: BT Openworld have now blocked port 25 (without notice), so old mail addresses may no longer
> work. Apologies.

 

[Freewheeling]

bill:

I am somewhat more interested in highracers than lowracers because of the social implications
when riding with DF cyclists, as well as other issues of safety (though I recognize that
lowracers have an advantage in a fall). I feel that the highracer is a more versatile design,
overall. Wish I had one.
--
--Scott [email protected] Cut the "tail" to send email.

"bg" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
> Scott, Hey, I didn't report a p ;-) Yeah I realize it's highly armchair, uh, I mean, carbonchair
> analysis.
What's
> interesting is that we seem to have aero and/or rolling advantages at
different
> speeds. He may coast away initially, then I catch up and pass, then he
returns
> the favor as we go faster kind of thing. It's hard for me to separate the aero effects from the
> rolling resistance effects. bill g
>
> Freewheeling wrote:
>
> > bill:
> >
> > Well, not exactly a scientific test. I don't think there's a bicycle
made
> > that would allow me to keep up with Rich Pinto, unless it had a motor.
But
> > I'll take that Aero off your hands if you're getting tired of it.
> >
> > --
> > --Scott [email protected] Cut the "tail" to send email.
> >
> > "a&b" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
> > > Scott, Somehow that seems to all to equivocate in actual riding. One of my riding buds on a
> > > 20" rotator seems to readily coast and stay with me
on
> > > my 650c Aero. bill g
> > >
> > > Freewheeling wrote:
> > > >
> > > > All else being equal, smaller wheels will be more aerodynamic while
> > larger
> > > > wheels will have less rolling resistance. On typical asphalt
roadways,
> > with
> > > > lots of irregularities, decreased rolling resistance will compensate
for
> > the
> > > > loss in aerodynamics.
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > --Scott [email protected] Cut the "tail" to send email.
> > > >
> > > > <[email protected]> wrote in message
> > > > news:[email protected]...
> > > > > B. Sanders <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > > > : From my experience, the 406mm wheels have lower rolling
resistance,
> > too.
> > > > I
> > > > > : can out-coast any DF bike, with any tires, on almost any
surface.
> > It's
> > > > very
> > > > > : obvious in a group ride. Aero advantage + skinny, hi-pressure
tires
> > +
> > > > small
> > > > > : wheels = superior coasting.
> > > > >
> > > > > I find it rather ironic that people claim that both large and small wheels are the more
> > > > > aerodynamically efficient in the same thread
> > > > >
> > > > > IME, tyres are important. Semislicks on my hybrid give a rather different, easy rolling
> > > > > feeling from the stock semiknobs. Race bikes would be even better. Recumbents seem to have
> > > > > wider tyres than racing DF bikes, maybe because of the small wheels, so I'm doubting the
> > > > > tyre advantage of lowracers a bit.
> > > > >
> > > > > Tyres are especially important at low speeds, when the aerodynamics wither in
> > > > > significance. So if you do long rides...
> > > > >
> > > > > --
> > > > > Risto Varanka | http://www.helsinki.fi/~rvaranka/ varis at no spam please iki fi
>
> --
> real email [email protected]

 

[Bg]

Scott, Kinda my same rationale for the Aero. Actually with my VRex bars on the Aero I tend to
have the coasting advantage on the Pursuit. Perhaps Steven will add his observations...eh Steven
;-) bill g

Freewheeling wrote:

> bill:
>
> I am somewhat more interested in highracers than lowracers because of the social implications
> when riding with DF cyclists, as well as other issues of safety (though I recognize that
> lowracers have an advantage in a fall). I feel that the highracer is a more versatile design,
> overall. Wish I had one.
> --
> --Scott [email protected] Cut the "tail" to send email.
>
> "bg" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
> > Scott, Hey, I didn't report a p ;-) Yeah I realize it's highly armchair, uh, I mean, carbonchair
> > analysis.
> What's
> > interesting is that we seem to have aero and/or rolling advantages at
> different
> > speeds. He may coast away initially, then I catch up and pass, then he
> returns
> > the favor as we go faster kind of thing. It's hard for me to separate the aero effects from the
> > rolling resistance effects. bill g
> >
> > Freewheeling wrote:
> >
> > > bill:
> > >
> > > Well, not exactly a scientific test. I don't think there's a bicycle
> made
> > > that would allow me to keep up with Rich Pinto, unless it had a motor.
> But
> > > I'll take that Aero off your hands if you're getting tired of it.
> > >
> > > --
> > > --Scott [email protected] Cut the "tail" to send email.
> > >
> > > "a&b" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
> > > > Scott, Somehow that seems to all to equivocate in actual riding. One of my riding buds on a
> > > > 20" rotator seems to readily coast and stay with me
> on
> > > > my 650c Aero. bill g
> > > >
> > > > Freewheeling wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > All else being equal, smaller wheels will be more aerodynamic while
> > > larger
> > > > > wheels will have less rolling resistance. On typical asphalt
> roadways,
> > > with
> > > > > lots of irregularities, decreased rolling resistance will compensate
> for
> > > the
> > > > > loss in aerodynamics.
> > > > >
> > > > > --
> > > > > --Scott [email protected] Cut the "tail" to send email.
> > > > >
> > > > > <[email protected]> wrote in message
> > > > > news:[email protected]...
> > > > > > B. Sanders <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > > > > : From my experience, the 406mm wheels have lower rolling
> resistance,
> > > too.
> > > > > I
> > > > > > : can out-coast any DF bike, with any tires, on almost any
> surface.
> > > It's
> > > > > very
> > > > > > : obvious in a group ride. Aero advantage + skinny, hi-pressure
> tires
> > > +
> > > > > small
> > > > > > : wheels = superior coasting.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I find it rather ironic that people claim that both large and small wheels are the more
> > > > > > aerodynamically efficient in the same thread
> > > > > >
> > > > > > IME, tyres are important. Semislicks on my hybrid give a rather different, easy rolling
> > > > > > feeling from the stock semiknobs. Race bikes would be even better. Recumbents seem to
> > > > > > have wider tyres than racing DF bikes, maybe because of the small wheels, so I'm
> > > > > > doubting the tyre advantage of lowracers a bit.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Tyres are especially important at low speeds, when the aerodynamics wither in
> > > > > > significance. So if you do long rides...
> > > > > >
> > > > > > --
> > > > > > Risto Varanka | http://www.helsinki.fi/~rvaranka/ varis at no spam please iki fi
> >
> > --
> > real email [email protected]
> >
> >

--
real email [email protected]

 

[Carl]

in article [email protected], Freewheeling at [email protected]
wrote on 1/23/03 12:13 PM:

> bill:
>
> I am somewhat more interested in highracers than lowracers because of the social implications
> when riding with DF cyclists, as well as other issues of safety (though I recognize that
> lowracers have an advantage in a fall). I feel that the highracer is a more versatile design,
> overall. Wish I had one.

This turned out to be one of the major benefits of going from the Rocket to the Strada. Most of the
people I ride with are on wedgies, and it's nice to be "up there" with them to socialize while
riding - which is the reason I ride with them in the first place.

-Carl

 

[Just Zis Guy]

On Wed, 22 Jan 2003 20:34:32 -0600, a&b <[email protected]> wrote:

>Wait till you get hit. All the "nearly's" will be cancelled and pale in the Monopoly of riding.

Well, you see, it's like this: I reckon that SMIDSYs[1] are deluding themselves. They may *think*
they didn't see the cyclist / motorcycle / whatever that they hit, but actually what usually happens
(except in some well-known circumstances like certain types of roundabout) is that they *see* the
object, but fail to *perceive* it. Any recumbent is sufficiently unusual that it doesn't fit any of
the standard road-based object profiles in the driver's brain (if you doubt this look at the
reaction from horses some time!). The result is that they have to consciously decide what sort of
thing this is, rather than unconsciously filing you as "bike, stationary, non-threatening" and
immediately pulling out into the path of the manifestly non-stationary bike.

Of course there is some risk, but I reckon it's no higher than for an upright bike.

[1] SMIDSY: British term for a cager[2] who, after he's hit you, says "sorry, mate, I didn't see
you" in the mistaken belief that this is an excuse rather than an admission of liability

[2] Cager: driver of a MDG[3]

[3] MDG: Mobile Death Greenhouse

Guy
===
** WARNING ** This posting may contain traces of irony. http://www.chapmancentral.com (BT ADSL and
dynamic DNS permitting)
NOTE: BT Openworld have now blocked port 25 (without notice), so old mail addresses may no longer
work. Apologies.

 

[Tom Sherman]

Freewheeling wrote:
> ... But to the extent that height *is* important, why can't you just > use a flag?...

I recall slowly overtaking a Greenspeed trike in rolling terrain. When I crested a small hill, the
trike was climbing a higher hill several hundred meters ahead of me. This particular hill had a
false crest about halfway up the slope. I "saw" a dark colored trike and rider on the lower slope,
and what appeared to be a bright orange cyclist on the upper slope. However, as I closed the gap, I
realized the "orange cyclist" was actually a flag on the trike.

Has anyone else experienced a similar visual disconnect while viewing a flag equipped HPV?

Tom Sherman - Quad Cities USA (Illinois side) RANS "Wavewind" and Rocket, Earth Cycles Sunset and
Dragonflyer

 

[Rob Kopp]

Guy,

Man, you love those footnotes. Spend too much time in Grad school, or is this just your particular
British eccentricity?

Rob (it takes one to know one) "Just zis Guy, you know?" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> On Wed, 22 Jan 2003 20:34:32 -0600, a&b <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> >Wait till you get hit. All the "nearly's" will be cancelled and pale in the Monopoly of riding.
>
> Well, you see, it's like this: I reckon that SMIDSYs[1] are deluding themselves. They may *think*
> they didn't see the cyclist / motorcycle / whatever that they hit, but actually what usually
> happens (except in some well-known circumstances like certain types of roundabout) is that they
> *see* the object, but fail to *perceive* it. Any recumbent is sufficiently unusual that it doesn't
> fit any of the standard road-based object profiles in the driver's brain (if you doubt this look
> at the reaction from horses some time!). The result is that they have to consciously decide what
> sort of thing this is, rather than unconsciously filing you as "bike, stationary, non-threatening"
> and immediately pulling out into the path of the manifestly non-stationary bike.
>
> Of course there is some risk, but I reckon it's no higher than for an upright bike.
>
> [1] SMIDSY: British term for a cager[2] who, after he's hit you, says "sorry, mate, I didn't see
> you" in the mistaken belief that this is an excuse rather than an admission of liability
>
> [2] Cager: driver of a MDG[3]
>
> [3] MDG: Mobile Death Greenhouse
>
> Guy
> ===
> ** WARNING ** This posting may contain traces of irony. http://www.chapmancentral.com (BT ADSL and
> dynamic DNS permitting)
> NOTE: BT Openworld have now blocked port 25 (without notice), so old mail addresses may no longer
> work. Apologies.

 

[Dave Larrington]

Scott wrote:

> I recognize that lowracers have an advantage in a fall

Except that you're probably travelling faster when you fall, so slide further and lose more skin :-(

Dave "With The Scars To Prove It" Larrington - http://legslarry.crosswinds.net/
===========================================================
Editor - British Human Power Club Newsletter
http://www.bhpc.org.uk/
===========================================================

 

[Mark Van Gorkom]

Freewheeling wrote:

>It can't be that difficult to do some sort of study to determine the factors involved in being
>"noticable" to a motorist. There are some who contend that width is more important than height, but
>I haven't seen any research that supports that contention (though it might be true). But to the
>extent that height *is* important, why can't you just use a flag? Or two flags, to enhance the
>visual effect and get some width dimension? Of course that would add a little drag...

I do believe I got overlooked more often on a Jouta (very low trike) than I get overlooked on my
Baron. As for flags,wonder if a half circular flag would give less drag than the more usual pennant
style? Or something rigid? (with a streamlined pole, of course, and built-in LED's!)

Mark van Gorkom.

 

[Risto Varanka]

Just zis Guy, you know? <[email protected]> wrote:
: Well, you see, it's like this: I reckon that SMIDSYs[1] are deluding themselves. They may *think*
: they didn't see the cyclist / motorcycle / whatever that they hit, but actually what usually
: happens (except in some well-known circumstances like certain types of roundabout) is that they
: *see* the object, but fail to *perceive* it. Any recumbent is sufficiently unusual that it doesn't
: fit any of the standard road-based object profiles in the driver's brain

Heh, didn't realize this before. So being visible is just part of
it... I've read some stuff on perception research on Swedish fighter pilots, the researchers were of
the opinion that people have a number of defense mechanisms (anybody into psychoanalysis?
that prevent them from really seeing things. Drivers could sort
of automatically think "oh, it's just a bicycle, nothing dangerous" and fail to react accordingly.
Bents wouldn't have that disadvantage...

Hmm, I guess people would drive less if they realized all the risks they are taking, most of
us included.

: Of course there is some risk, but I reckon it's no higher than for an upright bike.

I guess that as we gather experience over the years, we'll be able to assess bent and (semi)lowracer
safety with the same extreme reliability as people assess upright safety.

--
Risto Varanka | http://www.helsinki.fi/~rvaranka/ varis at no spam please iki fi