My DF friends say...

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

Quoted message said:

Don't get a recumbent because they can't climb hills worth
#$%$#. Is that right? If I get one with the 26" rear
wheel, wouldn't that help with the hill climbing?

No, in my opinion climbing hills is in the engine not what
type of bike you ride,

Quoted message said:

Another guy said, "I'd never buy one because I don't want
my face to be at the same level as a big dog's mouth!"
That one doesn't bother me, though.

I

Quoted message said:

can deal with the dogs.

I'm even lower but I outrun them 🙂

Pat said:

Don't get a recumbent because they can't climb hills worth
#$%$#. Is that right? If I get one with the 26" rear
wheel, wouldn't that help with the hill climbing?

This is a common topic of discussion and in the Bacchetta
mailing list, there seems to be some consensus that it's not
so much that 'bents are no good on hills, but that they're
so good everywhere else that you can hang with a faster
crowd on those other parts only to get dropped on the hills
because the hills represent your actual cycling level, and
that the recumbent's superiority in other aspects does not
help you overcome your level in that one specific area
(climbing).

I think there's some truth to that, but I think it ignores
the fact that a lot of riders of a given fitness level who
are acclimated to both bents and uprights, as I am, can
climb significantly faster on the upright than the
recumbent.

Basically, I think the bent-is-making-you-better-than-you-are-except-on-
hills view ignores the same rider's actual ability on hills
on an upright bike. It may well be 100% correct for some
people because they've given up entirely on uprights cannot
(or will not) ride them, period, so their climbing ability
on uprights is zero.

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

I'm sure that you will get many answers on this subject.
Some will tell you they are faster on the hills, while
others will tell you they are much slower.

On modest hills I seem to be faster on my recumbent. On the
steep hills I am slower. A large part of the hill climbing
is the right gearing. I find that the RANS Rocket with a 20"
rear wheel seems a bit more nimble on steep hills than does
my Vision R-50 with a 26" rear wheel.

My overall speed is faster on the recumbent as compared to
my DF. When riding with my DF friends I usually pull away as
we approach the hill, they pass me going up the hill, and I
blow by them going down the hill. At the end of the ride I
am not having to ice down my tender bits nor do I walk funny
for the next few hours.

Before the recumbent I was riding for my health. Now that I
am bent I ride for fun (and put in more miles to boot).

William Higley, Sr. Vision R-50 RANS Rocket "Pat"
<[email hidden]> wrote in message -"]news:[email hidden]-
berlin.de...

Quoted message said:

Don't get a recumbent because they can't climb hills worth
#$%$#. Is that right? If I get one with the 26" rear
wheel, wouldn't that help with the hill climbing?

Another guy said, "I'd never buy one because I don't want
my face to be at the same level as a big dog's mouth!"
That one doesn't bother me, though.

I

Quoted message said:

can deal with the dogs.

Pat

Mark Leuck said:

No, in my opinion climbing hills is in the engine not what
type of bike you ride,

Saying it's just the engine is incomplete at best.

It should be self-evident that the vehicle does matter, in
addition to the engine propelling it.

Put a Porsche turbo engine in a 911 and you've got a high
performance speed machine on any road you'd care to drive,
hills, flats, whatever.

Put it in a Kenworth lugging a load of logs and you not
going to climb over a speedbump much less a twisty
mountain pass.

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

Well, judging from the age and size of the majority of
Bentriders, we probably are slower up hill. I'm 250 pounds
and I climb just about anything, but I can't hang with the
160 pound whippits on uphills, I fly by them on the
downhills though. Even when I rode uprights ( and I did
alot) I couldn't keep with them on climbs. I think a fit
Road Biker and a Fit Recumbent rider of same size weight and
ability will be pretty even at the end of the day. Indeed
I've witnessed it in a road race. The dog issue, try to look
tough, hard to chew and not that tasty. Denny in Sayre,Pa
"Bent but not Broken"

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

Quoted message said:

Don't get a recumbent because they can't climb hills worth
#$%$#. Is that right? If I get one with the 26" rear
wheel, wouldn't that help with the hill climbing?

They will be slower on hills. Properly geared and with good
spinning techniques, you will be marginally worse than you
are on a DF. But this is not 'right out of the box'. The
mistake I think most people make in making the transition to
recumbents is gaging their climbing ability in the first few
rides. It takes several hundred miles to develop the
different 'bent conditioned muscles. I am a much better
climber now than when I started in '99. Also some 'bents
climb better than others. The P-38 is a good example. It
climbs slightly better than my Giro. Both are far ahead of
the LWB that I used to own.

Quoted message said:

Another guy said, "I'd never buy one because I don't
want my face to be at the same level as a big dog's
mouth!" That one doesn't bother me, though. I can deal
with the dogs.

Actually it is my horizontal leg that is mouth high to BMF
dogs. Since I can out distance almost any DF around me, I
just need to ride in dog country with a few DF friends.

Also my face is about the same level as the DF riders butt.
This has its good points and bad points depending on the
gender of the butt.
--
Cletus D. Lee Bacchetta Giro Lightning Voyager
clee.orgclee.orgOpen ↗
- Bellaire, TX USA -

Dogs? Like they say, ride with someone slower.
"Denny Voorhees" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Well, judging from the age and size of the majority of
Bentriders, we probably are slower up hill. I'm 250 pounds
and I climb just about

anything,

Quoted message said:

but I can't hang with the 160 pound whippits on uphills, I
fly by them on the downhills though. Even when I rode
uprights ( and I did alot) I

couldn't

Quoted message said:

keep with them on climbs. I think a fit Road Biker and a
Fit Recumbent rider of same size weight and ability will
be pretty even at the end of the day. Indeed I've
witnessed

it

Quoted message said:

in a road race. The dog issue, try to look tough, hard
to chew and not that tasty. Denny in Sayre,Pa "Bent but
not Broken"

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

<snip>

Quoted message said:

Don't get a recumbent because they can't climb hills worth
#$%$#. Is that right?

For whatever it's worth my average riding speed on long
hilly / mountain rides (rest stop time excluded from
calculation) is virtually identical on my touring lwb
recumbent and my touring diamond frame. However my
total elapsed ride time from point to point is lower on
the recumbent because of fewer and shorter rest stops.
As a tourist it's irrelevant to me which bike climbs
faster - my concern is elapsed time and how I feel at
the end of the day.

I remember riding up what must be the steepest hill in
Tennessee. It was long, straight up, and steep, real steep.
Naturally it came at the end of the days ride. I was on a
recumbent and next to me was a guy on a DF. We were both in
our lowest gear, seated, and spinning away. We went up the
hill exactly together at about 2 mph. I figure I would have
been faster walking the bike. In fact, I even considered
walking just so I could claim I can walk a recumbent up a
hill faster than you can ride a diamond frame. But the
diamond frame guy and I persevered and we made it to the top
together. Neither of us felt much like discussing df vs.bent
stuff at that particular moment.

Going down this hill was no bargain either. At the bottom,
after a short roll out, was a stop sign for a major highway.

skip

Pat said:

Another guy said, "I'd never buy one because I don't want
my face to be at the same level as a big dog's mouth!" That
one doesn't bother me, though. I can deal with the dogs.

In a ride at one of the last GEARs for LAB, at East
Tennessee a few years ago, I was the more experienced
cyclist when a couple of dogs came charging out. Slammed on
the brakes on my Vision and came to a stand in one motion,
making a roaring noise. Something about a 'victim' growing
in front of their eyes to about 6'1" - 6'2" put their tailes
between their legs and we didn't see them on the way back.

I don't feel all that vulnerable on a recumbent.

Curtis L. Russell Odenton, MD (USA) Just someone on
two wheels...

"Mark Leuck" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:<fB1dc.214665$Cb.1855141@attbi_s51>...

Quoted message said:

"Pat" <[email hidden]> wrote in message -"]news:[email hidden]-
berlin.de...

Quoted message said:

Don't get a recumbent because they can't climb hills
worth #$%$#. Is that right? If I get one with the 26"
rear wheel, wouldn't that help with the hill climbing?

No, in my opinion climbing hills is in the engine not what
type of bike you ride,

Quoted message said:

Another guy said, "I'd never buy one because I don't
want my face to be at the same level as a big dog's
mouth!" That one doesn't bother me, though.

I

Quoted message said:

can deal with the dogs.

I'm even lower but I outrun them 🙂

Hills and Bents: Probably could fill the New York Library
with all the words written about this. :o)

Personal opinion is that a recumbent is slower on long or
steep hills, but that overall you'll end up the ride in the
same time or slightly less, but feel a whole lot better.

When I first started riding a long time recumbent rider
said: "You won't be able to do long hilly rides with your DF
friends anymore unless you both want to be slower overall:
They'll wait for you going up hills and you'll wait for them
going down and on the flats." To this day I find that to be
true. If we want to finish a ride like this fast, we do the
Leap Frog ride: I pull away on the flats, they catch me on
hills, I pull away on the down hills and flat, they catch me
on the hills.....

From personal experience, I can tell you that the dual 26"
new highracer bikes are much better climbers. I'm going up
hills faster on my Strada then I ever did on my V-REX. It
may not be a whole hilluva lot of difference, but the Strada
does make a difference. The bike can and does make a
difference.

There are a few riders who are as fast on a recumbent up
hills as they were on a DF. These to me are special people
who are blessed with marvelous engines. I can only
wish.....and keep worki'n...

Slow, but faster on my Strada, Joe Recumbo

Like many of the other comments I cannot climb as fast on a
recumbent. I have been riding them about 8 years so there is
no break-in problem. Hill climbing is just one of those
comprimises I make to gain the superior ergonomics.

As far as being on a lower level on a recumbent repulsing
people, I have suspected for a long time that this relates
to the "SUV" effect; people like to be up high. This applies
to cars, trucks, bicycles, and even buildings
(e.g., Trump Towers). It may be better visibility - nicer
view, or some ego/superiority thing. I don't know.
"Pat" <[email hidden]> wrote in message -"]news:[email hidden]-
berlin.de...

Quoted message said:

Don't get a recumbent because they can't climb hills worth
#$%$#. Is that right? If I get one with the 26" rear
wheel, wouldn't that help with the hill climbing?

Another guy said, "I'd never buy one because I don't want
my face to be at the same level as a big dog's mouth!"
That one doesn't bother me, though.

I

Quoted message said:

can deal with the dogs.

Pat

On a DF bike, you can get your whole body into climbing,
tossing the frame from side to side, powering up the hill.
If one rides in this manner, an old-fashioned upright road
bike definitely has the advantage. But most people cannot
sustain this intense level of exercise for very long (I know
I can't). I have always been a seated climber, no matter the
style of bike, so for me my recumbent is not noticeably
slower on hills than my old DF road bike, especially now
that my leg muscles have grown accustomed to the laid-back
riding position. If you like to climb out of the seat and
regularly ride with a group, and you don't mind neck, back,
groin, and hand pain and numbness, then keep your upright
road bike. If you want comfort and ergonomics while giving
away a little a little bit of hill climbing ability, if you
like to ride long distances in comfort, then get a
recumbent. It's no sin to have one of each, either.

As for dogs, this was more of an issue for me when I had
USS, with my hands right at doggie mouth level. Since
converting to OSS, I'm much more comfortble around
canines. I find at least 90% of rural dogs around here
just want to bark at you and run alongside. Sometimes
(when I have a tailwind) I just blow them away. Sometimes
I ignore them. Sometimes (and this really works!) I come
to a complete stop and yell at them, at which point they
lower their head and go home. Depending on the dog, this
last method may be useful for "training" the dogs on your
regular route. The other day I was being chased by a dog
who was following to my left rear quarter (over the double-
stripe). A car coming the other way laid on the horn and
went into the grass to avoid hitting the dog. I checked my
rear-view; turned out the driver was the dog's owner. Boy
did that pooch catch hell!
--
Bill Anton 2001 Vision R-40 26x26 SWB OSS Lubbock, TX, USA

"Pat" <[email hidden]> wrote in message -"]news:[email hidden]-
berlin.de...

Quoted message said:

Don't get a recumbent because they can't climb hills worth
#$%$#. Is that right? If I get one with the 26" rear
wheel, wouldn't that help with the hill climbing?

Another guy said, "I'd never buy one because I don't want
my face to be at the same level as a big dog's mouth!"
That one doesn't bother me, though.

I

Quoted message said:

can deal with the dogs.

Pat