Outside Magazine Recumbent View

[minnesotamike]

This link is to another antibent diatribe from Outside magazine. Apparently, because ONE guy sometimes comes to their club rides and can't keep up on hills, all recumbents are slow.

I wish that I could make such N of one judgements.

Mike

http://outside.away.com/outside/gear/gearguy/200310/20031008.html

 

[Pat O'Malley]

minnesotamike <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:<[email protected]>...
> This link is to another antibent diatribe from Outside magazine. Apparently, because ONE guy
> sometimes comes to their club rides and can't keep up on hills, all recumbents are slow.
>
> I wish that I could make such N of one judgements.
>
> Mike
>
> http://outside.away.com/outside/gear/gearguy/200310/20031008.html

Hey, I didn't bother to read the article, but will trust your summary: that bents are slow on hills
according to the author. And I can't disagree. Now before everyone gets bent out of shape, let's
all dogmatically agree that all bents are faster down hill, faster into the wind, and faster on
flats. My point is, if we are going to reasonably boast about bents' superior design, we should
also acknowledge that nothing is perfect--even a bent.

 

[Wolverbob]

I used to subscribe to Outside a number of years ago but let it run out as the magazine seemed to be
consumed with either articles about "treking in Nepal" (something I am sure all of us do every other
week) or the latest fashions that Buffy and Todd were wearing.

Outside editors seem to be living in la la land so the ignorant tirade against recumbents is not
surprising.

Bob Krzewinski

 

[John Foltz]

minnesotamike wrote:

> This link is to another antibent diatribe from Outside magazine. Apparently, because ONE guy
> sometimes comes to their club rides and can't keep up on hills, all recumbents are slow.
>

Just exactly where does Gear Guy live? Seems he could use a friendly visit from Team Bacchetta(tm)
or the Chicagoland group. Rolling hills are good places to absolutely destroy uprights. 'Tis true,
though, that 'bents and uprights don't mix well in the hills. I find it's easier to dump them and
ride off the front rather than try to hang back and ride with them. To turn the tables on what Gear
Guy wrote, I'd say, "friends don't let friends ride wedgies." After all, their speed profile makes
them all wrong for riding in recumbent groups. :lol
--

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

 

[Rocketman58]

Ah yes, another briliant article based on complete ignorance. glad I canceled my subscrition years
ago - due to a lack of accurate information (glad to see they haven't changed.)

Only a fool bases thier opinion on a single example. About the only thing he got right was that
bent's do not climb as well as a 17lb DF racing bike - as should be expected.

As an ex hard core DF rider, I can offer the following: Back in my mid to late 20s, I was riding
over 150 miles a week. Neck and butt pain never went away with increased milage, you just learned to
deal with it. I was participating in a number of Century rides. By the time I finished a ride like
the Solvang Century(very very hilly), all I wanted to do was crawl into a hot tub, and then into
bed. I was often sore for days after.

Last year I completed it again after not having done a Century in over 8 years (now in my mid 40s
and weighing 30lbs more). I rode a faired Stratus. It was the 2nd fastest time I ever completed the
ride. Even more amazing was that after I packed the bent in the van, the wife and I strolled the
town shops for the rest of the afternoon. The next day, only my legs were a little sore. That's is
the big difference that most DF rider can not see.

Rocketman58

minnesotamike <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:<[email protected]>...
> This link is to another antibent diatribe from Outside magazine. Apparently, because ONE guy
> sometimes comes to their club rides and can't keep up on hills, all recumbents are slow.
>
> I wish that I could make such N of one judgements.
>
> Mike
>
> http://outside.away.com/outside/gear/gearguy/200310/20031008.html

 

[Geob]

> although the sore butt and shoulders you mention typically dissipate with riding time.

I could say, "When the afflicted pieces go permanently numb from neuropathy, and dry up and fall off
from lack of blood". But I won't stoop to his level.

> I think many recumbent riders secretly hate their bikes, and put up with them only because they've
> sunk $3,000 or $4,000 into them and can't bear to admit they're wrong. That, or they just want to
> be different.

> And all you recumbent riders out there, save your breath and your hate mail…

He isn't satisfied by delivering his judgement on the machine we ride, which he is unfamiliar with,
but he goes on to insult us directly by judging our character.

1) We aren't big enough to admit when we are wrong
2) we are too stupid to buy a good bike
3) we are bitter hateful people

Which was unprofessional and unnecessary. I don't read this rag, is this guy like Rush, and simply
*intends* to be obnoxius? I don't think I like this guy.

 

[Scott]

minnesotamike <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:<[email protected]>...
> This link is to another antibent diatribe from Outside magazine. Apparently, because ONE guy
> sometimes comes to their club rides and can't keep up on hills, all recumbents are slow.
>
> I wish that I could make such N of one judgements.
>
> Mike
>
> http://outside.away.com/outside/gear/gearguy/200310/20031008.html

Mike: I almost responded to the idiot--ignoring his plea to not send hate mail. Then I though,
What's the use? He's an idiot.

Scott

 

[Steve Fox]

I note that the writer doesn't answer the guy's (gal's?) question about comfort. Takes the cheap
shot instead. Original sin, IMHO.

minnesotamike wrote:

>This link is to another antibent diatribe from Outside magazine. Apparently, because ONE guy
>sometimes comes to their club rides and can't keep up on hills, all recumbents are slow.
>
>I wish that I could make such N of one judgements.
>
>Mike
>
>http://outside.away.com/outside/gear/gearguy/200310/20031008.html
>

--
Steve Fox McKinleyville, CA http://SoTier2003.crazyguyonabike.com

O \ _____,%) (*)-'------------(*)

 

[Protactical]

This guy just writes the piece to show everyone how great he is at climbing hills. He really doesn't
answer the guy's question at all, except to recomend he tries a few different bikes. What a genius,
gosh, I never thought of that.

 

[Ben Fox]

I don't agree that bents are slower on hills. I rode a P-38 and now a Bacchetta Corsa and I am as
fast or faster on hills than upright bike riders who average about the same speed as me. Granted I
can't stay with the "animals" in my club on hills or flats ,but I couldn't stay with them if I rode
an upright. It did take me a full year when I started riding to get good on hills ,but I was also
new to biking and wasn't in "riding" condition. Now if you're riding a 35 or 40 lb bent you may be a
little slower on hills,but if you're in decent shape and ride a sub 30lb bent you should be able to
climb as well as anybody in your speed group. Ben fox "Pat O'Malley" <[email protected]> wrote in
message news:[email protected]...
> minnesotamike <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:<[email protected]>...
> > This link is to another antibent diatribe from Outside magazine. Apparently, because ONE guy
> > sometimes comes to their club rides and can't keep up on hills, all recumbents are slow.
> >
> > I wish that I could make such N of one judgements.
> >
> > Mike
> >
> > http://outside.away.com/outside/gear/gearguy/200310/20031008.html
>
> Hey, I didn't bother to read the article, but will trust your summary: that bents are slow on
> hills according to the author. And I can't disagree. Now before everyone gets bent out of shape,
> let's all dogmatically agree that all bents are faster down hill, faster into the wind, and
> faster on flats. My point is, if we are going to reasonably boast about bents' superior design,
> we should also acknowledge that nothing is perfect--even a bent.

 

[Bentrider]

I calmly responded to him and then asked if they would be willing to have me write and article about
recumbents for Outside. Think they'll say yes? Neither do I.

I actually do subscribe to Outside and do like the articles about exotic places. The writing is
excellent.

Bryan J. Ball Editor/Publisher www.bentrideronline.com

 

[Jon Meinecke]

"John Foltz" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...

> Just exactly where does Gear Guy live? Seems he could use a friendly visit from Team Bacchetta(tm)
> or the Chicagoland group. Rolling hills are good places to absolutely destroy uprights.

The online Gear Guy archives don't go back far enough to include it, but Gear Guy Doug answered my
recumbent bike question a number of years ago (1998) with much less posturing. Though not not much
more infromation.

He's obviously now a "Fab"-ulous cyclist. %^)

http://outside.away.com/gear/gearguy/doug_bio.html

Douglas Gantenbein, better known to many as the Gear Guy, has been hiking, biking, skiing,
and climbing in Washington State and the West Coast for 25 years.

It is interesting and probably calculated to provoke, at least a bit. He takes a question from
someone who wants a comfortable bike for exercise and turns it into a bash of all bikes recumbent.
The only purpose he can imagine for riding a bike is to keep up with the Jones.

Scatologically speaking, perhaps someone should point out if he keeps riding uprights long enough,
he may have problems with the Jones keeping up! %^P That might be considered hitting below the
belt, though.

I wonder exactly what $4000 recumbent bike is extremely low profile, heavy, and wobbly. Being from
Seattle, perhaps it's a Bigha! %^)

Jon Meinecke

 

[Ralph Bean]

"Pat O'Malley" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> ... let's all dogmatically agree that all bents are faster down hill, faster into the wind, and
> faster on flats. My point is, if we are going to reasonably boast about bents' superior design,
> we should also acknowledge that nothing is perfect--even a bent.

Pat -

You are being facetious, right?

Ralph

 

[Stratrider]

You are absolutely right. The questioner was focused on comfort! He never mentioned speed! The
respondent went off on speed in typical fashion as if speed is the only legitimate issue when
choosing the bike! What an ignorant ass!

 

[Fred]

It is too bad that Jerry from Champaign IL does not have a better source and too bad that we cannot
identify him. Instead of sending the "hate mail" to the writer, our community would be better off
sending the positive kind to Jerry!

 

[Chris Crawford]

Bryan - I know we're wasting our time but you might want to point him to a few of the analytic
models such as analyticcycling.com sop he can run some numbers ... oh what am I talking about ....

Chris

'BentRider wrote:
> I calmly responded to him and then asked if they would be willing to have me write and article
> about recumbents for Outside. Think they'll say yes? Neither do I.
>
> I actually do subscribe to Outside and do like the articles about exotic places. The writing is
> excellent.
>
> Bryan J. Ball Editor/Publisher www.bentrideronline.com

 

[Joseph Kochanow]

"Jon Meinecke" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:<[email protected]>...
> "John Foltz" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
>
> > Just exactly where does Gear Guy live? Seems he could use a friendly visit from Team
> > Bacchetta(tm) or the Chicagoland group. Rolling hills are good places to absolutely destroy
> > uprights.
>
> The online Gear Guy archives don't go back far enough to include it, but Gear Guy Doug answered my
> recumbent bike question a number of years ago (1998) with much less posturing. Though not not much
> more infromation.
>
> He's obviously now a "Fab"-ulous cyclist. %^)
>
> http://outside.away.com/gear/gearguy/doug_bio.html
>
> Douglas Gantenbein, better known to many as the Gear Guy, has been hiking, biking, skiing,
> and climbing in Washington State and the West Coast for 25 years.
>
> It is interesting and probably calculated to provoke, at least a bit. He takes a question from
> someone who wants a comfortable bike for exercise and turns it into a bash of all bikes recumbent.
> The only purpose he can imagine for riding a bike is to keep up with the Jones.
>
> Scatologically speaking, perhaps someone should point out if he keeps riding uprights long enough,
> he may have problems with the Jones keeping up! %^P That might be considered hitting below the
> belt, though.
>
> I wonder exactly what $4000 recumbent bike is extremely low profile, heavy, and wobbly. Being from
> Seattle, perhaps it's a Bigha! %^)
>
> Jon Meinecke

Since I live in Seattle I must apologise for the anti-bent bike riders here. Perhaps too many people
are spending more time improving their real estate values instead of tinkering with bents. There are
a lot of bike activities year round. From what I think, the bike riders here may not have the time
to fuss with a bike like a bent that requires more skill to understand. The same way that there are
no muscle cars, homebuilt airplanes, and sports car enthuasists here, there are not many bent riders
either. Although there are many framebuilders and bike wholesalers here, there are not many
innovators. With all the good outdoor activities involving mountains,snow,water and wilderness there
is not much time to spend indoors. Most bike riders I know would rather ride instead of trying to
figure out a new kind of bike. I am totally opposite of everyone here. My house looks like a dump. I
thrive on all the unfashionable bike stuff that guys like Doug throw out because it is just too hard
to fix bikes. Thank you Doug for all the great bike parts that I get for almost nothing. I have more
fun experimenting with bikes instead of riding them. I do not argue with guys like Douglas
Gantenbein about bents. I just quietly pass them on hills whenever I see them.