CyclingForums
A community for cyclists, gear, training and racing.
Recumbent bicycles · Public discussion
This thread is locked and is currently read-only.
Thread details
The navigation and discussion metadata provide context. Posts remain in their original chronological order.
I am looking to get me and my spouse into recumbency, I see a Vision 42, 1998 for sale. Any thoughts
on how it differs from the current models? Is it to be avoided or sought.
My crietria are USS, SWB, not too dear. My wife is short and light, I am neither.
Thanks,
Stuart Friedman East Montpelier, VT
In article <[email hidden]>, [email hidden] says...
Quoted message said:
I am looking to get me and my spouse into recumbency, I see a Vision 42, 1998 for sale. Any
thoughts on how it differs from the current models? Is it to be avoided or sought.My crietria are USS, SWB, not too dear. My wife is short and light, I am neither.
As I recall the '98 and earlier models had a slightly shorter wheelbase than the '99 and
after models. (2"?) This made the handling a bit more twitchy and responsive, but otherwise
about the same.
However, if your wife is short she probably won't be able to get her feet on the ground unless the
bike has the 16" front wheel option. My 5'2" wife can't ride my '99 VR-42 at all for that reason.
Steve Christensen Midland, MI
Active in the last 60 minutes
0 users · 0 guests ·0 bots ·0 total
No signed-in users are active right now.
No known search crawlers active right now.