Speed: LWB vs SWB

Well Robert, I'll be testing your views probably in about a week or so, when my Aero arrives, at
Bike Spot. I'm VERY Dialed in (And LOVE and won't be parting with) my GRR Ti, BUT just want to
really give a SWB, sub 23 lb bike a try. I also want to ride a bike without the use of a fairing
too. Although I've tried my GRR Ti with out the fairing and it seemed lacking. It just works better
with a fairing) So once my Aero arrives, I'll be posting some feedback on it, vs. my GRR Ti. The
High Front BB will be an immediate challenge, as I'm at least a 5+ year front (Easy Racer) LOW BB
kind of cyclist. EZ Biker :-) Pompano Beach, Fl. (GRR Ti and SOON, Bacchetta Aero Pilot)

"Robert Siegel" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]... Jude is a very smart, very
knowledgeable recumbent person who also is a serious recumbent rider. He rides an Aero a LOT and his
concerns about the Bacchetta design reflect mine EXACTLY. IMHO, his comments apply to all
two-big-wheel (26/26) recumbents, although less to the Vision R-65 than to the Aero/Corsa.

I think the 21-22-23 lb. spec for the Aero might be a tad optimistic - I have yet to get it to weigh
under 24 lbs. on any of the bikeshop scales I've tried. That's after replacing with a lighter fork
and lighter wheels. Of course, maybe the shops I frequent just have scales that weigh a little
heavy. I see quotes for roadbikes in the 16 lb. range. My Record-equipped Colnago C40 weighs 18 lbs
with Spinergy Xaero wheels, so take that as a baseline.

It's pretty daggonned light. If it were much lighter I wouldn't feel safe on it - so I have no
complaints - no need to lighten it any further.

I have a Fold Rush, a Gold Rush, and an Aero. The Aero will be a little faster, but it won't replace
your Gold Rush. I think the Gold Rush is pretty close to being the perfect bike. Don't get me wrong,
the Aero is wonderful, and will make you feel like your legs are 10 years younger, but....well, you
already know what I mean about the Gold Rush, because you have one.

But the Aero sure has the raw speed.

"EZ Biker :-)" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:HSh_a.132253$YN5.89367@sccrnsc01...

Quoted message said:

Well Robert, I'll be testing your views probably in about a week or so,

when

Quoted message said:

my Aero arrives, at Bike Spot. I'm VERY Dialed in (And LOVE and won't be parting with) my GRR Ti,
BUT just want to really give a SWB, sub 23 lb

bike

Quoted message said:

a try. I also want to ride a bike without the use of a fairing too.

Although

Quoted message said:

I've tried my GRR Ti with out the fairing and it seemed lacking. It just works better with a
fairing) So once my Aero arrives, I'll be posting some feedback on it, vs. my GRR

Ti.

Quoted message said:

The High Front BB will be an immediate challenge, as I'm at least a 5+

year

Quoted message said:

front (Easy Racer) LOW BB kind of cyclist. EZ Biker :-) Pompano Beach, Fl. (GRR Ti and SOON,
Bacchetta Aero Pilot)

"Robert Siegel" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]... Jude is a very smart, very
knowledgeable recumbent person who also is a serious recumbent rider. He rides an Aero a LOT and
his concerns about the Bacchetta design reflect

mine

Quoted message said:

EXACTLY. IMHO, his comments apply to all two-big-wheel (26/26)

recumbents,

Quoted message said:

although less to the Vision R-65 than to the Aero/Corsa.

I predict you will love the Aero because you WILL get the speed you want to ride with roadies. It'll
take a month before you feel at one in any SWB two big wheel design, though. I truly loved the
one-with-my-bike feel of my P-38 and its climbing speed ... but in the end I decided I simply prefer
the TiGRR's control, handling and comfort.

I wonder if you actually will go back to the Ti GRR. My personal experience is I ride what I like
best ... and my other bikes seem to gather dust.

"EZ Biker :-)" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:HSh_a.132253$YN5.89367@sccrnsc01...

Quoted message said:

Well Robert, I'll be testing your views probably in about a week or so,

when

Quoted message said:

my Aero arrives, at Bike Spot. I'm VERY Dialed in (And LOVE and won't be parting with) my GRR Ti,
BUT just want to really give a SWB, sub 23 lb

bike

Quoted message said:

a try. I also want to ride a bike without the use of a fairing too.

Although

Quoted message said:

I've tried my GRR Ti with out the fairing and it seemed lacking. It just works better with a
fairing) So once my Aero arrives, I'll be posting some feedback on it, vs. my GRR

Ti.

Quoted message said:

The High Front BB will be an immediate challenge, as I'm at least a 5+

year

Quoted message said:

front (Easy Racer) LOW BB kind of cyclist. EZ Biker :-) Pompano Beach, Fl. (GRR Ti and SOON,
Bacchetta Aero Pilot)

"Robert Siegel" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]... Jude is a very smart, very
knowledgeable recumbent person who also is a serious recumbent rider. He rides an Aero a LOT and
his concerns about the Bacchetta design reflect

mine

Quoted message said:

EXACTLY. IMHO, his comments apply to all two-big-wheel (26/26)

recumbents,

Quoted message said:

although less to the Vision R-65 than to the Aero/Corsa.

On my very accurate digital scale my size large Aero complete with pedals weighs 10.5 kg (23 lbs. 2
oz.). The claimed weight for a stock Aero is 22 lbs. but that would be for a standard size one. I'm
using some lighter parts than stock such as a Reynolds fork, SRAM PC-89R hollow pin chain and
lighter version of the FSA crankset but am also using some heavier parts than stock like HED Jet
559mm wheels with 27mm actual width Schwalbe Stelvio tyres. I think if I put very lightweight (but
less aero) 571mm wheels on with 23mm tyres the weight would drop down to about 21.5 lbs. It seems
like there are plenty of ways the Aero could be made lighter such as carbon fibre seat stays and a
one piece carbon fibre steering riser-handlebar. Still I climb faster on it than any of my other
recumbents and it makes the difference between getting passed by certain people on climbs on club
rides or passing them. I also have a Gold Rush. I always run mine with the body sock fairing and the
Aero is slightly slower than it on level ground and descents but the climbing advantage of the Aero
more than makes up for that as I ride in very hilly terrain so a large percentage of my riding time
is spent climbing. The two bikes complement each other nicely. Last Saturday I did a 135 km club
ride with 1370 metres of climbing on my Gold Rush with a 25.6 km/h average rolling speed. The
following day I rode the Aero on a 98 km club ride withh 1025 metres climbing and had a 29 km/h
average speed.

Zach Kaplan

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

Quoted message said:

I think the 21-22-23 lb. spec for the Aero might be a tad optimistic - I have yet to get it to
weigh under 24 lbs. on any of the bikeshop scales I've tried. That's after replacing with a
lighter fork and lighter wheels. Of course, maybe the shops I frequent just have scales that weigh
a little heavy. I see quotes for roadbikes in the 16 lb. range. My Record-equipped Colnago C40
weighs 18 lbs with Spinergy Xaero wheels, so take that as a baseline.

It's pretty daggonned light. If it were much lighter I wouldn't feel safe on it - so I have no
complaints - no need to lighten it any further.

I have a Fold Rush, a Gold Rush, and an Aero. The Aero will be a little faster, but it won't
replace your Gold Rush. I think the Gold Rush is pretty close to being the perfect bike. Don't get
me wrong, the Aero is wonderful, and will make you feel like your legs are 10 years younger,
but....well, you already know what I mean about the Gold Rush, because you have one.

But the Aero sure has the raw speed.

"EZ Biker :-)" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:HSh_a.132253$YN5.89367@sccrnsc01...

Quoted message said:

Well Robert, I'll be testing your views probably in about a week or so,

when

Quoted message said:

my Aero arrives, at Bike Spot. I'm VERY Dialed in (And LOVE and won't be parting with) my GRR
Ti, BUT just want to really give a SWB, sub 23 lb

bike

Quoted message said:

a try. I also want to ride a bike without the use of a fairing too.

Although

Quoted message said:

I've tried my GRR Ti with out the fairing and it seemed lacking. It just works better with a
fairing) So once my Aero arrives, I'll be posting some feedback on it, vs. my GRR

Ti.

Quoted message said:

The High Front BB will be an immediate challenge, as I'm at least a 5+

year

Quoted message said:

front (Easy Racer) LOW BB kind of cyclist. EZ Biker :-) Pompano Beach, Fl. (GRR Ti and SOON,
Bacchetta Aero Pilot)

"Robert Siegel" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]... Jude is a very smart, very
knowledgeable recumbent person who also is a serious recumbent rider. He rides an Aero a LOT and
his concerns about the Bacchetta design reflect

mine

Quoted message said:

EXACTLY. IMHO, his comments apply to all two-big-wheel (26/26)

recumbents,

Quoted message said:

although less to the Vision R-65 than to the Aero/Corsa.

Robert, I bought my Strada with the M5 seat about two months ago. I decided that I had to buy a
high racer and ride it alot before making a final judgement on that style of bike. While I am
having fun with this bike, and while it is FAST, it is a real adjustment for me coming from a 99
Stratus. The Strada is exteme. The bb is very high and the head forward position is awkward.
Conversely, there is something very natural about the riding position, stability, and handling of
a lwb low bb bike, particularly the GRR. Weeks before I committed to the Strada, I test rode a
GRR. I needed no adjustment period. It just fit! I loved it! Yet with a desire to satisfy my
curiosity about high racers and a desire to save $$$, I went with the Strada. And yes it is a
blast! But as I look forward (with no money at this time), I don't see an Aero. I see a GRR in my
future. It's my destiny.

Jim Reilly Reading, PA

I've tried out a number of recumbents and I found the LWB/low BB bikes to be very easy to ride. They
are probably more natural than even an UR. However to me they felt slow, and I suspected I would not
be comfortable sitting that upright on a seat for a fast paced ride. I found that I perfered bikes
that really laid back. The more the better. Once you start getting < 35 degrees on the seat you need
to start lowering the seat to allow an easy reach of the ground. So I ended up with a Baron (~20
degree seat angle and 12" seat height). However this year I am commuting in an urban area where I
don't feel safe on such a low vehicle. So I wanted a higher seat but I still feel faster on a laid
back high BB bike so now I have a high racer. I think everyones circumstances are different so the
best bike is probably different. I guess that is why there are so many different styles of bikes.
Someone said they expected highracers to go away except for a few people but I doubt it. As I see it
nearly every recumbent design that was successful at one time is still being sold and evolved. We
just keep adding different types for different markets.

Craig

[email hidden] (stratrider) wrote in message
news:<[email hidden]>...

Quoted message said:

Robert, I bought my Strada with the M5 seat about two months ago. I decided that I had to buy a
high racer and ride it alot before making a final judgement on that style of bike. While I am
having fun with this bike, and while it is FAST, it is a real adjustment for me coming from a 99
Stratus. The Strada is exteme. The bb is very high and the head forward position is awkward.
Conversely, there is something very natural about the riding position, stability, and handling of
a lwb low bb bike, particularly the GRR. Weeks before I committed to the Strada, I test rode a
GRR. I needed no adjustment period. It just fit! I loved it! Yet with a desire to satisfy my
curiosity about high racers and a desire to save $$$, I went with the Strada. And yes it is a
blast! But as I look forward (with no money at this time), I don't see an Aero. I see a GRR in my
future. It's my destiny.

Jim Reilly Reading, PA

[email hidden] (cbb) wrote in message
news:<[email hidden]>...

Quoted message said:

...I think everyones circumstances are different so the best bike is probably different. I guess
that is why there are so many different styles of bikes. Someone said they expected highracers to
go away except for a few people but I doubt it. As I see it nearly every recumbent design that was
successful at one time is still being sold and evolved. We just keep adding different types for
different markets.

There are recumbents for the performance oriented riders (wanna-go-fast) and then there are
recumbents for the rest of us. I think the recumbent for the rest of us will eventually turn out to
be a CLWB OSS Low BB. The BikeE showed the way as well as the EZ-1 but there is going to be a much
better such bike coming along one of these days. Ease of riding (handling) is critical. If there is
much of a learning curve you can forget about it. The high BB SWB will be relegated to strictly
performance cyclists. Most of the rest of us ride recumbents for fun and exercise and we want to be
comfy while were doing it and we do not want to experience any handling difficulties. CLWB does it
all better than any other type of recumbent except for the speed thing. Thus Spake Zarathustra!

Ed Dolan - Minnesota

I had to gulp when I saw Zach Kaplan's average speeds. How could anyone put together those kinds of
averages. Then I realized they were kilometers per hour, not miles, and I didn't feel like such a
slug. Whew.

I think an overlooked element of this speed argument, whether LWB or SWB, is the comfort factor. I
am faster on a bike I am comfortable on. My wife loves her Gold Rush. I think they are okay. She
does not like SWBs. I think my Barcroft Virginia is perfect. Whatever floats your boat. I agree that
some bikes are inherently faster due to design than others. A Ti Aero is going to be faster than a
BikeE. But if I am uncomfortable on a bike I will underperform and therefore not attain the speed
potential of the bike. So LWB, SWB, CLWB, OSS, USS, whatever feels right for the rider is the thing.
And with so many choices, its like being in a candy store. And, let us not forget, there is a large
segment out there where riding, not speed, is the thing. There's a recumbent out there for all of
us. Finding it is half the fun.

Mike S. (not a LWB fan) St. Louis, Mo.

Barcroft Virginia Barcroft Columbia RANS Rocket

Quoted post said:

Originally posted by Cbb
I think everyones circumstances are different so the best bike is probably different. I guess that is why there are so many different styles of bikes. Someone said they expected highracers to go away except for a few people but I doubt it. As I see it nearly every recumbent design that was successful at one time is still being sold and evolved. We just keep adding different types for different markets.

Craig,

You hit the nail on the head for this one. Everyone's ideal bike is not the same. It is very subjective. While I love SWB and LWB versions of my Canto, I do not seem to agree with the test rides that I have taken on a Strada or a Volae. The high BB does not seem to do anything for me.

But I love my Burley and feel very dialed into it. The only thing I want to add to my stable right now is a tadpole trike.

mike s said:

... Barcroft Virginia Barcroft Columbia RANS Rocket

Mike,

Did you trade in the Tiger for a Rocket?

Tom Sherman - Quad Cities USA (Illinois side)

Ed, I concur with your prediction. I think someone will eventually dial in a CLWB with improved
geometry, better components, and lighter weight. It may not be the fastest design but it will be
much improved over current offerings and will climb well also. It will be designed as a bike for
serious riders, just maybe not the most competitive. It will also be shorter than a school bus.

I look forward to the day when your prediction comes true. Don

[email hidden] (Edward Dolan) wrote in message
news:<[email hidden]>...

Quoted message said:

[email hidden] (cbb) wrote in message
news:<[email hidden]>...

Quoted message said:

...I think everyones circumstances are different so the best bike is probably different. I guess
that is why there are so many different styles of bikes. Someone said they expected highracers
to go away except for a few people but I doubt it. As I see it nearly every recumbent design
that was successful at one time is still being sold and evolved. We just keep adding different
types for different markets.

There are recumbents for the performance oriented riders (wanna-go-fast) and then there are
recumbents for the rest of us. I think the recumbent for the rest of us will eventually turn out
to be a CLWB OSS Low BB. The BikeE showed the way as well as the EZ-1 but there is going to be a
much better such bike coming along one of these days. Ease of riding (handling) is critical. If
there is much of a learning curve you can forget about it. The high BB SWB will be relegated to
strictly performance cyclists. Most of the rest of us ride recumbents for fun and exercise and we
want to be comfy while were doing it and we do not want to experience any handling difficulties.
CLWB does it all better than any other type of recumbent except for the speed thing. Thus Spake
Zarathustra!

Ed Dolan - Minnesota

Tom Sherman <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:<[email hidden]>...

Quoted message said:

mike s said:

... Barcroft Virginia Barcroft Columbia RANS Rocket

Mike,

Did you trade in the Tiger for a Rocket?

Tom Sherman - Quad Cities USA (Illinois side)

Yes I did Tom. I found out that my lower back couldn't handle an all mesh seat. I need a seat with a
solid seat pan. I have ridden with mesh backs for years (RANS) but the give of the seat bottom with
the shock cord on the Tiger played havoc with my back problem. I tried tightening it up,
substituting cords, etc., but my back just wasn't compatible with it. So, the Tiger had to go. I got
a Rocket for my commuting and have had no problem with the back. The RANS seat may be heavy, it may
be prone to slide, it may not dry out quickly after a rain, but it sure feels like home to my disks.
So, between the RANS seat on the Rocket and the tandem, and the M5 seat I put on (okay, Ben Fox put
on) the Virginia, my back is a happy camper.

Mike S.

Robert, I've made the MISTAKE of parting with my Easy Racer bikes before, when I moved onto a new
bike. I WON'T MAKE THAT MISTAKE AGAIN! I'm keeping my GRR Ti and will maintain it and ride it along
with the Aero. I think the Aero is that NEED FOR RAW SPEED, the key word here being RAW. EZ Biker
:-) Pompano Beach, Fl. (GRR Ti and SOON, Bacchetta Aero Pilot)

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

Quoted message said:

I predict you will love the Aero because you WILL get the speed you want

to

Quoted message said:

ride with roadies. It'll take a month before you feel at one in any SWB

two

Quoted message said:

big wheel design, though.

Jim, I've had the same experience coming from my TE and GRR Polished Alum to a Vision R-40, R-45 and
P-38. On my Easy Racer I just PLOP down and ride; but with a SWB, I feel like I'm climbing into a
cockpit and having to arrange myself and then get underway, in a more focused or attentive way. I
think this time though, I'll be sure and give myself plenty of ride and experience time on my Aero.
There's something about Bacchetta Bikes, that just makes it FUN to ride them. EZ Biker :-) Pompano
Beach, Fl. (GRR Ti and SOON, Bacchetta Aero Pilot)

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

Quoted message said:

Robert, I bought my Strada with the M5 seat about two months ago. I decided that I had to buy a
high racer and ride it alot before making a final judgement on that style of bike.

joeg, that's what I have the NEED for....... REAL RAW SPEED!!! EZ Biker :-) Pompano Beach, Fl. (GRR
Ti and SOON, Bacchetta Aero Pilot)

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

Quoted message said:

But the Aero sure has the raw speed.

Don I still believe a Rans Tailwind, with a 26 / 20 wheel setup could offer the potential of a good
performance bike. Throw in a Ti version and you could probably have something that could run with
various other bike groups; (SWB's and LWB's) not to mention being WAY COOL Looking TOO. EZ Biker :-)
Pompano Beach, Fl. (GRR Ti and SOON, Bacchetta Aero Pilot)

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

Quoted message said:

Ed, I concur with your prediction. I think someone will eventually dial in a CLWB with improved
geometry, better components, and lighter weight.

If you feel the need for speed then go low. Even if you are not faster on a lowracer than on the
Aero (unless you climb lots most likely you will be) you will feel faster laid back that far flying
inches off the ground. Hiracers are great platforms, I have a Strada for commuting, but I feel that
lowracers work better for going fast. If your looking for a bike to climb lots of hills, hang with a
DF paceline or even hilly brevets the highracer works very well.

"EZ Biker :-\)" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:<qV4%a.116198$cF.32599@rwcrnsc53>...

Quoted message said:

joeg, that's what I have the NEED for....... REAL RAW SPEED!!! EZ Biker :-) Pompano Beach, Fl.
(GRR Ti and SOON, Bacchetta Aero Pilot)

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

Quoted message said:

But the Aero sure has the raw speed.

Quoted message said:

I agree that some bikes are inherently faster due to design than others.

I have a SWB R40. I ride with another old coot who has an expensive DF, a Kestrel, and rides *really
fast* compared to me. He completed the Climb to Kaiser (14,500' total climb, 160 miles) 1.5 years
after he got his bike. He rode 5000 miles that year.

When we ride together I expect him to be faster than me. I am getting faster but not as soon as I
had expected. I am still a newbie I guess, 1900 total 'bent miles.

<The Question> The real question I have been wondering about is... WHY can he pedal only once in a
while, and coast, while I am stroking away constantly? I hear that blame Campy freewheel chattering
lots more than I hear/see him pedaling. What exactly makes the difference? Lots of things, I know.
But this is a giant difference! Is it tires? Do taller tire really make a big difference? Higher
pressure? Is it better bearings? Maybe the aerodynamic CF frame! :-)

I guess the scales at the bikeshops I've weighed it at just weigh heavy. I'd love to replace the
RANS flutes on the back with some carbon or titanium stays - but I'm finding that I keep having to
fiddle with the positioning adjustment - I'm the same way on upright bikes - over the course of a
season my seat height will vary a centimeter or so - don't know why this is.

Anyway, the Aero is a rockin' bike for sure, and the GRR also. Hard to imagine that it gets much
better than this.

"Zach Kaplan Cycles" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

On my very accurate digital scale my size large Aero complete with pedals weighs 10.5 kg (23 lbs.
2 oz.). The claimed weight for a stock Aero is 22 lbs. but that would be for a standard size one.
I'm using some lighter parts than stock such as a Reynolds fork, SRAM PC-89R hollow pin chain and
lighter version of the FSA crankset but am also using some heavier parts than stock like HED Jet
559mm wheels with 27mm actual width Schwalbe Stelvio tyres. I think if I put very lightweight (but
less aero) 571mm wheels on with 23mm tyres the weight would drop down to about 21.5 lbs. It seems
like there are plenty of ways the Aero could be made lighter such as carbon fibre seat stays and a
one piece carbon fibre steering riser-handlebar. Still I climb faster on it than any of my other
recumbents and it makes the difference between getting passed by certain people on climbs on club
rides or passing them. I also have a Gold Rush. I always run mine with the body sock fairing and
the Aero is slightly slower than it on level ground and descents but the climbing advantage of the
Aero more than makes up for that as I ride in very hilly terrain so a large percentage of my
riding time is spent climbing. The two bikes complement each other nicely. Last Saturday I did a
135 km club ride with 1370 metres of climbing on my Gold Rush with a 25.6 km/h average rolling
speed. The following day I rode the Aero on a 98 km club ride withh 1025 metres climbing and had a
29 km/h average speed.

Zach Kaplan

"joeg" <[email hidden]> wrote in message

news:<[email hidden]>...

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

I think the 21-22-23 lb. spec for the Aero might be a tad optimistic - I have yet to get it to
weigh under 24 lbs. on any of the bikeshop scales

I've

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

tried. That's after replacing with a lighter fork and lighter wheels.

Of

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

course, maybe the shops I frequent just have scales that weigh a little heavy. I see quotes for
roadbikes in the 16 lb. range. My Record-equipped Colnago C40 weighs 18 lbs with Spinergy Xaero
wheels, so take that as a baseline.

It's pretty daggonned light. If it were much lighter I wouldn't feel

safe

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

on it - so I have no complaints - no need to lighten it any further.

I have a Fold Rush, a Gold Rush, and an Aero. The Aero will be a

little

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

faster, but it won't replace your Gold Rush. I think the Gold Rush is pretty close to being the
perfect bike. Don't get me wrong, the Aero

is

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

wonderful, and will make you feel like your legs are 10 years younger, but....well, you already
know what I mean about the Gold Rush, because

you

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

have one.

But the Aero sure has the raw speed.

"EZ Biker :-)" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:HSh_a.132253$YN5.89367@sccrnsc01...

Quoted message said:

Well Robert, I'll be testing your views probably in about a week or

so,

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

when

Quoted message said:

my Aero arrives, at Bike Spot. I'm VERY Dialed in (And LOVE and won't

be

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

parting with) my GRR Ti, BUT just want to really give a SWB, sub 23 lb

bike

Quoted message said:

a try. I also want to ride a bike without the use of a fairing too.

Although

Quoted message said:

I've tried my GRR Ti with out the fairing and it seemed lacking. It

just

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

works better with a fairing) So once my Aero arrives, I'll be posting some feedback on it,
vs. my

GRR

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Ti.

Quoted message said:

The High Front BB will be an immediate challenge, as I'm at least a 5+

year

Quoted message said:

front (Easy Racer) LOW BB kind of cyclist. EZ Biker :-) Pompano Beach, Fl. (GRR Ti and SOON,
Bacchetta Aero

Pilot)

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

"Robert Siegel" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]... Jude is a very smart, very
knowledgeable recumbent person who also is

a

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

serious recumbent rider. He rides an Aero a LOT and his concerns about the Bacchetta design

reflect

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

mine

Quoted message said:

EXACTLY. IMHO, his comments apply to all two-big-wheel (26/26)

recumbents,

Quoted message said:

although less to the Vision R-65 than to the Aero/Corsa.