The most confortable saddle!

Ken Bradley said:

I tried for 30 years to find a really conformable saddle. I don't think the
thing exist, for a normal upright bike. Too much force on a small area,
pressure, if I remember my physics. My solution, about 5 years ago, is a
recumbent. I know they are expensive, but no more pain in ass or neck, and
you can see the scenery without strain. Great view of traffic too. You will
ride much more if your conformable.

I'm glad you found comfort through your recumbent and are riding it a
lot. I'm comfortable on my Lemond with my Brooks saddle and Rivendell
Noodle drop bars. That's the way it should be; no matter what you ride,
you should be comfortable. And as Eddy Merckx said "ride lots".

Smokey

A drunken college professor mistakenly said:

I tried for 30 years to find a really conformable saddle. I don't think the
thing exist, for a normal upright bike. Too much force on a small area,
pressure, if I remember my physics. My solution, about 5 years ago, is a
recumbent. I know they are expensive, but no more pain in ass or neck, and
you can see the scenery without strain.

Then go out and ride the damn thing instead of propagandizing like
your bearded hippie lot are want to do. Bring some tempeh snacks for
the hills. Don't forget your orange geek flag!

Quoted message said:

Great view of traffic too.

Yeah, it's fascinating under a Kenworth tire!

Ken Bradley said:

I tried for 30 years to find a really conformable saddle. I don't think the
thing exist, for a normal upright bike.

Sounds like what didn't exist for you is a proper fitiing bicycle.

Too much force on a small area,

Quoted message said:

pressure, if I remember my physics

Physics has nothing to do with it, Ergonomics and yer butt size does,
along with bike fit.

.. My solution, about 5 years ago, is a

Quoted message said:

recumbent. I know they are expensive, but no more pain in ass or neck, and
you can see the scenery without strain. Great view of traffic too. You will
ride much more if your conformable.

Unique, sometimes hard to find parts, heavy, complicated, hard to see
from(behind) and be seen on..if it works for you, fine, but it really
answers no questions or solves no problems with respect to a well
fitted upright. DOES add many issues not cfound on uprights, like
climbing.

Is a recumbent saddle, er, seat.

qui si parla Campagnolo said:

...if it works for you, fine, but it really
answers no questions or solves no problems with respect to a well
fitted upright.

How many times does a recumbent bike rider have to counter this "answers
no questions or solves no problem" response of yours with the question
answered for them before you'll believe it does answer a question or
solve a problem?

For me, the question was "how can I go faster overall for longer
distances with less effort on the routes I ride without training better,
losing 40 lbs, joining a paceline, etc.?".

The answer is I bought a "high racer" recumbent. I have a well fitted
upright bike. I like riding it. So far in 2006, I rode more miles on
it than my recumbent. About twice as many miles in fact.

If my recumbent is so great (on rolling hills routes where I average
~18mph on the upright, I average ~19.5mph on the recumbent with a lower
average heart rate), why did I ride my upright bike twice as much?

Because improving my speed on the upright bike is a challenge and I
enjoy challenges. It's more of a workout. I also enjoy the upright
bike riding position--it's a different cycling experience than riding
recumbent, which I also enjoy.

There are a few other reasons too, like the upright having better
handling (and bunny hopping potential) and right-in-front-of-the-bike
visibility that I felt I needed due to the road construction going on in
my area.

Quoted message said:

DOES add many issues not cfound on uprights, like climbing.

Even though my recumbent is heavier than my upright, I'm faster overall
on the former on my hilly routes, though in some steeper sections I wish
I had the DF under me.

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

One other huge advantage of riding recumbent is the wide open chest position
(does not apply to "hamster style" bars). The overall view is far superior
to upright, just not directly ahead of the bike. I love, er loved my upright
bikes, until I got my Trike. I ride further, faster, with less fatigue than
ever before. And, no more numb hands, achy neck, sore butt, etc. The biggest
disadvantage... Not being able to "unweight" on the rough stuff. I really do
still love my uprights, I just hardly ever ride them anymore.

Grolsch

"Victor Kan" <[email hidden]_UCEloopdrive.net> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

qui si parla Campagnolo said:

...if it works for you, fine, but it really
answers no questions or solves no problems with respect to a well
fitted upright.

How many times does a recumbent bike rider have to counter this "answers
no questions or solves no problem" response of yours with the question
answered for them before you'll believe it does answer a question or solve
a problem?

For me, the question was "how can I go faster overall for longer distances
with less effort on the routes I ride without training better, losing 40
lbs, joining a paceline, etc.?".

The answer is I bought a "high racer" recumbent. I have a well fitted
upright bike. I like riding it. So far in 2006, I rode more miles on it
than my recumbent. About twice as many miles in fact.

If my recumbent is so great (on rolling hills routes where I average
~18mph on the upright, I average ~19.5mph on the recumbent with a lower
average heart rate), why did I ride my upright bike twice as much?

Because improving my speed on the upright bike is a challenge and I enjoy
challenges. It's more of a workout. I also enjoy the upright bike riding
position--it's a different cycling experience than riding recumbent, which
I also enjoy.

There are a few other reasons too, like the upright having better handling
(and bunny hopping potential) and right-in-front-of-the-bike visibility
that I felt I needed due to the road construction going on in my area.

Quoted message said:

DOES add many issues not cfound on uprights, like climbing.

Even though my recumbent is heavier than my upright, I'm faster overall on
the former on my hilly routes, though in some steeper sections I wish I
had the DF under me.

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

Victor Kan said:

qui si parla Campagnolo said:

...if it works for you, fine, but it really
answers no questions or solves no problems with respect to a well
fitted upright.

How many times does a recumbent bike rider have to counter this "answers
no questions or solves no problem" response of yours with the question
answered for them before you'll believe it does answer a question or
solve a problem?

For me, the question was "how can I go faster overall for longer
distances with less effort on the routes I ride without training better,
losing 40 lbs, joining a paceline, etc.?".

Groovy but I object to the notion, so often put forth by 'bent addicts,
that uprights are uncomfortable, evil things and 'bents will solve all
the problems of cycling. I also don't like it when 'bent people think
that their rigs offer no tradeoffs with regard to vision, complexity,
weight and cost. If 'bents were the salvation to the problems of
upright bicycles, we would see them everywhere, sold everywhere, and
that is not the case. They are a sliver of bicycles and will remain so,
as long as uprights, fit well, exist.

Quoted message said:

The answer is I bought a "high racer" recumbent. I have a well fitted
upright bike. I like riding it. So far in 2006, I rode more miles on
it than my recumbent. About twice as many miles in fact.

If my recumbent is so great (on rolling hills routes where I average
~18mph on the upright, I average ~19.5mph on the recumbent with a lower
average heart rate), why did I ride my upright bike twice as much?

Because improving my speed on the upright bike is a challenge and I
enjoy challenges. It's more of a workout. I also enjoy the upright
bike riding position--it's a different cycling experience than riding
recumbent, which I also enjoy.

There are a few other reasons too, like the upright having better
handling (and bunny hopping potential) and right-in-front-of-the-bike
visibility that I felt I needed due to the road construction going on in
my area.

Quoted message said:

DOES add many issues not cfound on uprights, like climbing.

Even though my recumbent is heavier than my upright, I'm faster overall
on the former on my hilly routes, though in some steeper sections I wish
I had the DF under me.

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

qui si parla Campagnolo said:

Groovy but I object to the notion, so often put forth by 'bent addicts,
that uprights are uncomfortable, evil things and 'bents will solve all
the problems of cycling. I also don't like it when 'bent people think
that their rigs offer no tradeoffs with regard to vision, complexity,
weight and cost. If 'bents were the salvation to the problems of
upright bicycles, we would see them everywhere, sold everywhere, and
that is not the case. They are a sliver of bicycles and will remain so,
as long as uprights, fit well, exist.

If someone was interested only in riding as efficiently as possible alone
on quiet, smooth roads, and money was no object, I'd encourage them to look
at recumbents. But as soon as you want to ride with groups, competitively,
in heavy traffic or on less-than-perfect roads, they're not so great.

--
Home page: http://members.westnet.com.au/mvw

Michael Warner said:

qui si parla Campagnolo said:

Groovy but I object to the notion, so often put forth by 'bent addicts,
that uprights are uncomfortable, evil things and 'bents will solve all
the problems of cycling. I also don't like it when 'bent people think
that their rigs offer no tradeoffs with regard to vision, complexity,
weight and cost. If 'bents were the salvation to the problems of
upright bicycles, we would see them everywhere, sold everywhere, and
that is not the case. They are a sliver of bicycles and will remain so,
as long as uprights, fit well, exist.

So maybe the better statement is that "bents don't answer all questions,
and don't solve all problems". Only the hopelessly kool aid drunk would
disagree.

Quoted message said:

If someone was interested only in riding as efficiently as possible alone
on quiet, smooth roads, and money was no object, I'd encourage them to look
at recumbents. But as soon as you want to ride with groups, competitively,
in heavy traffic or on less-than-perfect roads, they're not so great.

I ride in heavy traffic (albeit not big city urban traffic with
homicidal cab drivers) all the time and don't have problems that are
recumbent induced. Granted, the roads in my area are pretty good for
the most part.

I have no interest in riding with groups, whether on a DF or a
recumbent, competitively or recreationally. But for those who do,
riding with groups of DFs can be a problem when done incorrectly (it
seems 'bents are OK if they either stay in the back or stay in the front
rather than rotating through with everybody else), but groups of 'bents
can surely work.

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

Victor Kan said:

I have no interest in riding with groups, whether on a DF or a
recumbent, competitively or recreationally.

I find that very hard to understand, but I suppose it fits with the
stereotype of recumbent lovers as loners. All of my serious riding is with
a partner or group - not necessarily in a tight formation, particularly in
the hills - because it's competitive, social, and there's safety and help
with repairs in numbers.

For me, riding alone is strictly for in-between recovery rides and
commuting, when I don't want to be tempted to compete with anyone
because I can't resist it :-)

--
Home page: http://members.westnet.com.au/mvw

Michael Warner said:

Victor Kan said:

I have no interest in riding with groups, whether on a DF or a
recumbent, competitively or recreationally.

I find that very hard to understand, but I suppose it fits with the
stereotype of recumbent lovers as loners. All of my serious riding is with
a partner or group - not necessarily in a tight formation, particularly in
the hills - because it's competitive, social, and there's safety and help
with repairs in numbers.

I find it equally hard to understand the appeal of being sociable while
riding a bike. I guess when I ride, I usually treat it like an
individual time trial.

I reserve my competitive and social athletic pursuits to another sport
where there's more opportunity for socializing as well as competing head
to head (as opposed to head to butt, or foot to head on recumbents, or
foot to butt in a mixed DF/bent group, in cycling :-).

Quoted message said:

For me, riding alone is strictly for in-between recovery rides and
commuting, when I don't want to be tempted to compete with anyone
because I can't resist it :-)

Since 90% of my riding is commuting, that may explain a lot as well.

But then if I'm riding to or from work and see a rabbit out in front, I
inevitably feel the urge to pursue and overtake. Only once have I
caught up with someone and formed a "group" out on the road during a
commute, but that was because the traffic was too heavy to pass safely,
and oh yeah, he was a stronger rider than I was anyway and I wouldn't
have been able to go any faster than we were already going.

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

Michael Warner said:

qui si parla Campagnolo said:

Groovy but I object to the notion, so often put forth by 'bent addicts,
that uprights are uncomfortable, evil things and 'bents will solve all
the problems of cycling. I also don't like it when 'bent people think
that their rigs offer no tradeoffs with regard to vision, complexity,
weight and cost. If 'bents were the salvation to the problems of
upright bicycles, we would see them everywhere, sold everywhere, and
that is not the case. They are a sliver of bicycles and will remain so,
as long as uprights, fit well, exist.

If someone was interested only in riding as efficiently as possible alone
on quiet, smooth roads, and money was no object, I'd encourage them to look
at recumbents. But as soon as you want to ride with groups, competitively,
in heavy traffic or on less-than-perfect roads, they're not so great.

Some will argue that having the cranks in front of you, and not below
you, is not efficient at all and 'bent' riders will say that the
'advantage' is in comfort but I agree, a very expensive, complicated
answer to a pretty simple and inexpensive question..how to properl
oneself on a two wheeled vechicle.
I'm out

Quoted message said:

--
Home page: http://members.westnet.com.au/mvw

Smokey said:

Ken Bradley wrote:

Quoted message said:

I'm comfortable on my Lemond with my Brooks saddle and Rivendell
Noodle drop bars. That's the way it should be; no matter what you ride,
you should be comfortable. And as Eddy Merckx said "ride lots".

Smokey

I've been happy with my Brooks as well (B17 Narrow), though it's
surprising. The saddle is very stiff and rigid (hasn't "softened up
much"😉 but is very supportive.

qui si parla Campagnolo said:

Some will argue that having the cranks in front of you, and not below
you, is not efficient at all and 'bent' riders will say that the
'advantage' is in comfort but I agree, a very expensive, complicated
answer to a pretty simple and inexpensive question..how to properl
oneself on a two wheeled vechicle.

Expensive is in the eye of the beholder and depends on where you are
looking.

You can buy a decent recumbent road bicycle new for ~$700 delivered
(unassembled). There are cheaper ones ($500+delivery), but I have no
experience with those. Yes, that's very expensive compared to a
Walmart BSO. But it's surely not sticker shocking to folks who've been
to a LBS and shopped road bikes.

What question or problem do megabuck upright bikes (or dare I say Campy
components) answer or solve? I suppose the custom made bikes can help
with unusual fit/comfort issues. Imagine that--an "expensive" purchase
that solves a fit/comfort problem. No way!

qui si parla Campagnolo said:

Sounds like what didn't exist for you is a proper fitiing bicycle.
........

Physics has nothing to do with it, Ergonomics and yer butt size does,
along with bike fit.
.....

Unique, sometimes hard to find parts, heavy, complicated, hard to see
from(behind) and be seen on..if it works for you, fine, but it really
answers no questions or solves no problems with respect to a well
fitted upright. DOES add many issues not cfound on uprights, like
climbing.

Well no.
The thing about recumbents is that they are comfortable to ride, in a
way that no upright is. And the more miles you ride, the more important
the comfort difference becomes.

Yes it is true that recumbents are generally heavier--but people
complain a lot more about riding discomfort than they do about their
bikes being a couple pounds too heavy.

Let me ask you this: if having a lighter bicycle is so important than
being comfortable, then why have a seat on an upright bicycle at all?
There are so many people who complain that they cannot find a
"comfortable" seat for their upright bicycles, why not just get rid of
the seat and seatpost totally, and save a couple pounds?.....

-end-

Quoted message said:

qui si parla Campagnolo said:

Some will argue that having the cranks in front of you, and not below
you, is not efficient at all and 'bent' riders will say that the
'advantage' is in comfort but I agree, a very expensive, complicated
answer to a pretty simple and inexpensive question..how to properl
oneself on a two wheeled vechicle.

Expensive is in the eye of the beholder and depends on where you are
looking.

You can buy a decent recumbent road bicycle new for ~$700 delivered
(unassembled). There are cheaper ones ($500+delivery), but I have no
experience with those. Yes, that's very expensive compared to a
Walmart BSO. But it's surely not sticker shocking to folks who've been
to a LBS and shopped road bikes.

My guess is that a recumbent that cheap is h-e-a-v-y and not much fun to
ride.

Quoted message said:

What question or problem do megabuck upright bikes (or dare I say Campy
components) answer or solve?

They're fun and pretty (and probably light).

Quoted message said:

I suppose the custom made bikes can help
with unusual fit/comfort issues. Imagine that--an "expensive" purchase
that solves a fit/comfort problem. No way!

With modern (and not so modern) frame geometry, the right stem and seat
post ($75 buck total, tops!) solves many a fit issue. Saddles are
another barrel of monkeys. But even with my hand built wheels and fancy
saddle, my bike came out to less than 600 bucks and is very light. Do
that with a good recumbent.

--
Paul M. Hobson
Georgia Institute of Technology
..:change the f to ph to reply:.

Paul Hobson said:

My guess is that a recumbent that cheap is h-e-a-v-y and not much fun to
ride.

It weighs about 30 lbs for a steel frame. But what is more important,
the weight on the scale, or the watts you have to put out to get the
performance you want on the roads you ride?

My current recumbent of choice weighs probably 28 lbs with a steel frame
and no carbon parts beyond the fork (blades only, and using a CF seat
would knock off another couple of pounds). It takes me less effort (as
measured by heart rate vs. my much lighter aluminum road bike) to go
faster on the routes I normally ride, which are mostly longish rolling
hills.

Fun? That's subjective and some like that 30lb $600 bike just fine,
and have much more fun on it than their upright bike
(which must have been ill-fitting if they weren't comfy and having fun
on it),
regardless of price.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

What question or problem do megabuck upright bikes (or dare I say Campy
components) answer or solve?

Quoted message said:

They're fun and pretty (and probably light).

I'm sure that's true. But what question do they answer, what problem do
they solve?

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

I suppose the custom made bikes can help
with unusual fit/comfort issues. Imagine that--an "expensive" purchase
that solves a fit/comfort problem. No way!

Quoted message said:

With modern (and not so modern) frame geometry, the right stem and seat
post ($75 buck total, tops!) solves many a fit issue. Saddles are
another barrel of monkeys. But even with my hand built wheels and fancy
saddle, my bike came out to less than 600 bucks and is very light.

What does that have to do with megabuck upright bikes and the lack of
questions answered and problems solved by them? Perhaps you've made my
point for me regarding Peter's consistent response to unnecessary,
expensive "solutions" like recumbents.

A good way to shut me up on this is for folks who dismiss recumbents to
respond as consistently to a discussion about $$$ upright bike frames
being a comfier platform than than a cheap, mass produced bike by
declaring that that custom job answers no question, solves no problem.

Quoted message said:

Do that with a good recumbent.

Unfortunately, the "very light" part hasn't been conquered yet by the
Taiwan manufacturers churning out those $600 bikes.

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

DougC said:

Yes it is true that recumbents are generally heavier--but people
complain a lot more about riding discomfort than they do about their
bikes being a couple pounds too heavy.

Not the skinny racer types I chase up hills. They're weight weenies
with bums of steels.

--
Home page: http://members.westnet.com.au/mvw

Quoted message said:

qui si parla Campagnolo said:

Some will argue that having the cranks in front of you, and not below
you, is not efficient at all and 'bent' riders will say that the
'advantage' is in comfort but I agree, a very expensive, complicated
answer to a pretty simple and inexpensive question..how to properl
oneself on a two wheeled vechicle.

Expensive is in the eye of the beholder and depends on where you are
looking.

You can buy a decent recumbent road bicycle new for ~$700 delivered
(unassembled). There are cheaper ones ($500+delivery), but I have no
experience with those. Yes, that's very expensive compared to a
Walmart BSO. But it's surely not sticker shocking to folks who've been
to a LBS and shopped road bikes.

What question or problem do megabuck upright bikes (or dare I say Campy
components) answer or solve? I suppose the custom made bikes can help
with unusual fit/comfort issues. Imagine that--an "expensive" purchase
that solves a fit/comfort problem. No way!

NEVER mentioned Campagnolo altho those that don't do research will see
that Mirage is very inexpensive.

MANY bike shop uprights, well designed and made in the $700 or so
range. Light, much lighter than any $700 'bent, and a bit of fit
expertise will make it comfy. Carbon frames and forks, triple
components, great brakes, shifters, wheels, in the 17-18 pound range no
sweat, compared to the $700 'bent(unassembled), with strange wheel
sizes, various sterring structure designs, probably in the what, 25+
pound range?? PLUS, try to find a bike shop that will work on it. Does
it come with technical expertise?, to assemble and then maintain?