long wheel base vs short wheel base recumbents

JKimmel wrote:
I wouldn't

Quoted message said:

recommend selecting a bike, even a first bike based on wheelbase. The
best way is to ride a few and go with the one you like best. The next
best way is to go for the cheapest.

Ditto. I spent 12 years riding a SWB Lightning until I switched to a
LWB Tour Easy three years ago. Both are fine, fast bikes, and I would
have a hard time recommending one over the other.

Jeff

I am planning to buy a recumbent bicycle. The long wheel base kind look like
they will be easier to learn to ride for someone used to a diamond frame.
Can experienced riders give me their opinions of these two kinds of
recumbents and what I should consider in choosing between them?
Phil

PB said:

I am planning to buy a recumbent bicycle. The long wheel base kind look like
they will be easier to learn to ride for someone used to a diamond frame.
Can experienced riders give me their opinions of these two kinds of
recumbents and what I should consider in choosing between them?

While touted as a Major Difference I think that in practice the
variation between models in either format is just as great as the
basic differences between the two.

While some 'bents are easier to learn on than others, even a tricky
one will be mastered by anyone that can ride a normal bike after
not too much time, after which you want a bike for reasons other
than "easier to learn on".

I'd decide what functional area you want ("tourer", "racer" etc.
are functional definitions, "recumbent" and "df" aren't) and then
look over what's available, try them out see how you like them. If
lwb or swb is better for you will depend on you and your purpose
and the specific examples, so don't worry too much about where the
wheels go!

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/

Recumbent designs are not as standardized as diamond frames and you
will see more difference between brands and types than you might
expect.

The advice to decide what type of rider you are and then ride bikes of
that type is very good.

The other key is to decide why you want to ride a recumbent. If you
want to go fast, you will probably be disappointed. Yes, there are very
fast recumbents but it takes some time to get fast because they use
different muscles and a differnt riding style than you are used to on a
diamond frrame.

If you want the pain to go away, LWB USS are probably the most
comfortable but most folks pick LWB OSS because it is easier to adjust
to and quicker on the hills. Plus they are used to having their hands
out in front. The USS give the best views when Touring but are hard to
find and expensive.

SWB/MWB recumbents feel quick and are much easier to transport. I think
they have a much sportier feel than a LWB. I like riding them on day
rides but when I tour I ride a LWB. It handles the load better and
feels more reliable.

If you want the fun of feeling like a kid again, just buy anyone that
feels good when you ride it. The Sun bikes are inexpensive and a nice
way to start with a moderate design and a moderate price tag. The
classic names like Easy Racers, Vision and Rans are dependable choices
but if you are looking for something different there are a lot of other
choices.

Don't try to make the ultimate purchase. Don't make the Perfect the
enemy of the Good. Find a bike that you will enjoy now and that
includes price. If you become hooked you won't have any problem
justifying a new bike that fits your more specialized and better
understood needs. A excellent bike still costs less than a good set of
golf clubs ... smile.

Get out and enjoy the ride and don't worry about all of the arguments
about what is the best bike. If you are riding and having fun, that is
the best bike.

Roland
www.ebent.com

PB said:

I am planning to buy a recumbent bicycle. The long wheel base kind look like
they will be easier to learn to ride for someone used to a diamond frame.
Can experienced riders give me their opinions of these two kinds of
recumbents and what I should consider in choosing between them?

If you want something that handles similarly to a DF bike, then a dual
big wheel SWB (often referred to as a "high racer"😉 is as close as
you're going to get. I have a Bacchetta Strada and think it's a great bike.

There are bikes in this configuration that range from touring machines
to all-out speed demons. The main thing going against them is that some
models (especially those more geared toward touring) may be too tall for
someone with shorter legs. Some also don't like the "tweener" or
"superman" handlebar configuration, though alternatives are available,
some don't like the high bottom bracket (there are some with lower BB
height, e.g. the ActionBent HiRacer, but they compromise elsewhere).

The best (and obvious) advice is of course to try bikes and see which
work best for you for the type of riding you do or expect to do. Other
considerations, like overall length of the bike, fitting onto transport
racks on your car, storage space in your garage, etc. are secondary.

--
I do not accept unsolicited commercial e-mail. Remove NO_UCE for
legitimate replies.

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

Quoted message said:

PB said:

I am planning to buy a recumbent bicycle. The long wheel base kind look
like
they will be easier to learn to ride for someone used to a diamond frame.
Can experienced riders give me their opinions of these two kinds of
recumbents and what I should consider in choosing between them?
Phil

I have two Vision R-40's. One lwb, the other swb. The LWB is more stable
(I can almost ride with my hands off the handle bar) and has a softer
ride.

Yes, the LWB Vision is a much better bike than the SWB Vision, but there is
no way you can ride either of them with hands off the handle bars.

The swb can go on a bus rack, and looks a lot cooler. The

Quoted message said:

LWB isn't any easier to ride than the SWB, but I feel more comfortable
riding at the edge of the pavement.

I think you have better control on the LWB which is why you can ride it at
the edge of the pavement. I rode my SWB Vision on a couple of tours once and
it was a misery. Now, my only bike for touring is my Vision LWB OSS.

It's a lot more awkward to

Quoted message said:

transport and store, and I can't take it on the bus with me. I wouldn't
recommend selecting a bike, even a first bike based on wheelbase.

The wheelbase is a very important consideration when it comes to recumbents.
The shorter the wheel base, the more difficult they are to control That is
why most SWBs' have gotten longer and longer wheel bases lately. The Vision
SWB was a very short wheel base.

The

Quoted message said:

best way is to ride a few and go with the one you like best. The next
best way is to go for the cheapest.

Test riding a recumbent is vastly overrated. You really can't tell much
about a bike by riding it for a few hours. But it is something that
everyone says in order not to be pinned down. I got into many a heated
argument with Larry Varney on ARBR (now of BROL) about all this test riding
crapola business.

Almost all recumbents are outrageously priced. Get the right frame
configuration with a comfy seat and forget about pricey components. That is
for the suckers who have more money than brains.

Frankly, I do not like SWB and I will gladly tell anyone who asks why I
don't like them.

Regards,

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

In article <[email hidden]>, Peter Clinch

() said:

While some 'bents are easier to learn on than others, even a tricky
one will be mastered by anyone that can ride a normal bike after
not too much time, after which you want a bike for reasons other
than "easier to learn on".

FSVO "anyone". When I first tried an Avatar, I just could /not/ get the
thing to remain upright and remained on three wheels for a further six
years. Then Miles Kingsbury brought the prototype Kingcycle to the 1989
BHPC AGM and I was able to hop on and do a couple of high-speed laps
straight away. Seventeen further years of SWB use later, I still find
LWBs to be something of a handful...

--
Dave Larrington - <http://www.legslarry.beerdrinkers.co.uk/>
My other motto is in Latin.

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

Quoted message said:

In article <[email hidden]>, Peter Clinch

() said:

While some 'bents are easier to learn on than others, even a tricky
one will be mastered by anyone that can ride a normal bike after
not too much time, after which you want a bike for reasons other
than "easier to learn on".

FSVO "anyone". When I first tried an Avatar, I just could /not/ get the
thing to remain upright and remained on three wheels for a further six
years. Then Miles Kingsbury brought the prototype Kingcycle to the 1989
BHPC AGM and I was able to hop on and do a couple of high-speed laps
straight away. Seventeen further years of SWB use later, I still find
LWBs to be something of a handful...

I think my Infinity is like the Avatar. It too does not handle as well as I
could wish. By and large, I do not like underseat steering. After I had my
Infinity for a year, I got a Tour Easy and my troubles were over.

USS LWB will have a very quick steering input compared to OSS. Btu I do not
like USS even in connection with a SWB. It is always just too damn quick.

I will say this for SWB - they are more fun to ride, but you have to stay
focused. You cannot really relax on them like you can on a LWB OSS.

Regards,

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

quote='Peter Clinch'PB said:

I am planning to buy a recumbent bicycle. The long wheel base kind look like
they will be easier to learn to ride for someone used to a diamond frame.
Can experienced riders give me their opinions of these two kinds of
recumbents and what I should consider in choosing between them?

While touted as a Major Difference I think that in practice the variation between models in either format is just as great as the basic differences between the two.[/QUOTE]Would have to agree. I went with a CroMo frame because I felt the aluminum was too "springy"/"rough"/"active"? Kind of hard to quantify exactly what I did not like about the ride.

Peter Clinch said:

While some 'bents are easier to learn on than others, even a tricky one will be mastered by anyone that can ride a normal bike after
not too much time, after which you want a bike for reasons other
than "easier to learn on".

Bang on there. The GF, who has minimal riding experience with ANY bicycle took to bents right away. After riding a few LWB's she also said "these are like riding dinosaurs, what's all that bike doing out in front of me anyway?"

Peter Clinch said:

I'd decide what functional area you want ("tourer", "racer" etc. are functional definitions, "recumbent" and "df" aren't) and then
look over what's available, try them out see how you like them. If
lwb or swb is better for you will depend on you and your purpose
and the specific examples, so don't worry too much about where the
wheels go!

Again, the Scots' analysis is correct. What do you want to do? We rode many bents and drove approx. 1,000 miles to make up our minds. After several months and hundreds of miles we are very happy with our choices.

Since well stocked bent stores are few and mostly far between, a few pointers if you have to travel.

1. Find out where and how long you will be allowed to ride, and what deposit they want to turn you loose. I have no problem with leaving my car keys to take off for an hour or two on someone elses' $2,000 bike. Some go ballistic at such a suggestion.

2. OTOH if all I can do is ride around the parking lot, well, that is not much test riding and I would not drive very far to do it.

3. Call and make sure they have the bikes you want to test the day you depart. Getting 3 hours down the road and finding the Aero you were salivating to ride was sold yesterday is a downer.

4. Be aware that as you test ride, you are building skills you did not have when you started. This means the bikes you liked or disliked when you started may need a second look based primarily on what you intend to do with the bike.

Have fun doing this! One of the best things about the world of bents is there is so much variation. One man's poison is another man's spice.

If travelling is not in the equation, then I would look at the used market after careful consideration of what I intend to use the bike for and a lot of reading on the various 'bent forums. A good used bent should not depreciate much and you may be able to balance the shipping costs vs. the travelling costs and potentially the sales tax savings.

PB said:

I am planning to buy a recumbent bicycle. The long wheel base kind look like
they will be easier to learn to ride for someone used to a diamond frame.
Can experienced riders give me their opinions of these two kinds of
recumbents and what I should consider in choosing between them?
Phil

A properly designed SWB will handle just as well as a LWB.

A SWB is more maneuverable and easier to store and ride slowly. Riding
slowly is one of those things you will do at the end of the day on that
long hill. The disadvantage is the ability to hang panniers for touring.

Try SWB first. If they are too twitchy, turn the front fork around.

Bill

--
See bikes at: http://home.earthlink.net/~wm.patterson/index.html

See bikes and the first human powered helicopter at:

http://www.calpoly.edu/~wpatters/

Reply to [email hidden]
[email hidden]
[email hidden]

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

Quoted message said:

PB said:

I am planning to buy a recumbent bicycle. The long wheel base kind look
like
they will be easier to learn to ride for someone used to a diamond frame.
Can experienced riders give me their opinions of these two kinds of
recumbents and what I should consider in choosing between them?
Phil

A properly designed SWB will handle just as well as a LWB.

A SWB is more maneuverable and easier to store and ride slowly. Riding
slowly is one of those things you will do at the end of the day on that
long hill. The disadvantage is the ability to hang panniers for touring.

Try SWB first. If they are too twitchy, turn the front fork around.

If a SWB base is too twitchy, then forget about it and get a LWB. The only
reason to get a SWB is for ease of transportation and for a more sporty
riding experience. Otherwise, LWB is the only way to go.

The SWB is a very badly designed recumbent from square one whereas a LWB is
just so logical and reasonable. Read the history of the development of
recumbents and you will see that LWB has always been the preferred
configuration. You always want to be sitting between the wheels including
your legs, not having one wheel behind your legs. Just how freaking crazy
can you get! Besides, grown men look like clowns and fools on SWB, most
especially if you are a bit overweight (as almost all Americans are).

Regards,

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

Edward Dolan said:

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

Quoted message said:

PB said:

I am planning to buy a recumbent bicycle. The long wheel base kind look
like
they will be easier to learn to ride for someone used to a diamond frame.
Can experienced riders give me their opinions of these two kinds of
recumbents and what I should consider in choosing between them?
Phil

I have two Vision R-40's. One lwb, the other swb. The LWB is more stable
(I can almost ride with my hands off the handle bar) and has a softer
ride.

Yes, the LWB Vision is a much better bike than the SWB Vision, but there is
no way you can ride either of them with hands off the handle bars.

I was mistaken when I said I could almost ride my LWB Vision hands off.
In fact, I can ride my LWB Vision hands off quite comfortably, with
both hands clasped across my ample belly. I can also ride my SWB Vision
hands off, but it requires more arm waving.

As to why I would ride any bike hands off: To pull up my sleeve and
read my watch, to zip or unzip my jacket, or put it on or take it off,
to remove the bug that flew into my helmet etc. I can check my watch
while riding a recumbent hands off, but that's about it.

I do like my SWB better than my LWB, mainly for the practicality, but
also because it's more fun to ride.

I recommend you (the OP) buy the R-40 posted for sale yesterday morning
in this newsgroup.
--
John Kimmel
[email hidden]

GET YER STINKING PAWS OFF ME YOU DAMN DIRTY APE!

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

Quoted message said:

Edward Dolan wrote:

[...]

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Yes, the LWB Vision is a much better bike than the SWB Vision, but there
is no way you can ride either of them with hands off the handle bars.

I was mistaken when I said I could almost ride my LWB Vision hands off.
In fact, I can ride my LWB Vision hands off quite comfortably, with
both hands clasped across my ample belly. I can also ride my SWB Vision
hands off, but it requires more arm waving.

As to why I would ride any bike hands off: To pull up my sleeve and
read my watch, to zip or unzip my jacket, or put it on or take it off,
to remove the bug that flew into my helmet etc. I can check my watch
while riding a recumbent hands off, but that's about it.

[...]

There is no recumbent ever made that can be ridden hands off. Why is Mr.
Kimmel telling us tall tales?

Regards,

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

As a lifetime, hard core DF rider I can tell you this:

There are plenty of good reasons either way, but it is safe to say that
if you are ready for the switch, chances are you would be happy on
either a SWB or LWB, and will probably wind up with one of each
someday. In a month you will be used to anything (even a Lightning).
Personally I felt like a geek on a LWB, even though I think some of the
bikes are really cool looking. I can't explain why. Popularity means
nothing. LWB is king in the US, and is all but dead on the contenent.

Make up your own mind and don't be swayed by any argument but what
feels right to you.

One more thing: keep your back relaxed against the seat and do not lean
forward trying to apply power to the pedals. LWB masks this mistake
while SWB exaggerates it and feels very unstable, but only at first.

Bill Patterson said:

A SWB is more maneuverable and easier to store and ride slowly.

Depends on the bike. I would imagine a LWB Hase Taigun would be rather
easier to ride at walking pace than a SWB Varna Diabolo, for example.

Quoted message said:

slowly is one of those things you will do at the end of the day on that
long hill. The disadvantage is the ability to hang panniers for touring.

Again, depends on the bike. My SWB Streetmachine is designed for 4
conventional panniers and takes them with with no problems, and in any
case a pair of 'bent specific panniers like the ones Radical make mean
you can get big loads onto most SWB designs with no great problem.

Quoted message said:

Try SWB first. If they are too twitchy, turn the front fork around.

Just try everything you reasonably can.

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/

"Edward Dolan" <[email hidden]> wrote >

Quoted message said:

There is no recumbent ever made that can be ridden hands off. Why is

Mr.

Quoted message said:

Kimmel telling us tall tales?

http://www.python-lowracer.de/

"Bill Patterson" <[email hidden]> wrote > >

Quoted message said:

A properly designed SWB will handle just as well as a LWB.

Yes, if the backrest angle is the same. But the backrest of LWB tends
to be more upright than for SWB, because their bottom bracket (BB)
does not have to be above the front wheel. Thus as a class I think LWB
is easier to ride. Other dimensions of "Handling" like high-speed
cornering etc I am not referring to; I am only referring to ease of
ease of stopping, starting, going up steep hills.

Quoted message said:

A SWB is more maneuverable and easier to store and ride slowly.

Riding

Quoted message said:

slowly is one of those things you will do at the end of the day on

that

Quoted message said:

long hill.

My experience with riding slowly is that the 2 big factors (assuming
effective steering geometry) are an upright backrest angle and
above-seat steering. Any recumbent with both of those should be OK. My
Wilson is a good example, which just happens to be LWB. Tiny photo on
page 6 at http://www.ozhpv.org.au/huff/docs/huff19.pdf (maker now
defunct).

"nowater" <[email hidden]> wrote in news:443ef409$1_3
@news.melbourne.pipenetworks.com:

Quoted message said:

"Edward Dolan" <[email hidden]> wrote >

Quoted message said:

There is no recumbent ever made that can be ridden hands off. Why is

Mr.

Quoted message said:

Kimmel telling us tall tales?

http://www.python-lowracer.de/

I ride my Marauder lowracer hands off all the time. Even have a video of
it for proof.

Brad

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

Quoted message said:

"nowater" <[email hidden]> wrote in news:443ef409$1_3
@news.melbourne.pipenetworks.com:

Quoted message said:

"Edward Dolan" <[email hidden]> wrote >

Quoted message said:

There is no recumbent ever made that can be ridden hands off. Why is

Mr.

Quoted message said:

Kimmel telling us tall tales?

http://www.python-lowracer.de/

I ride my Marauder lowracer hands off all the time. Even have a video of
it for proof.

Brad

I have 12 recumbent bikes sitting around my house and I cannot ride any of
them hands off, not even for a second. Who I am going to believe - myself or
some nut who calls himself BioHazard?

Regards,

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