Why Do People Fall Down?

Zoot Katz said:

Tom Sherman said:

Quoted message said:

I have an open mind about trikes. I'm just wondering aloud here, even
given what very little I think I might know about them.

We need more attitudes like this.

I've mixed feeling about bent trikes.

I dread the day I may be confined to one but am nevertheless thankful
they exist in case that day does dawn.

Come on, trikes are not that bad! However, the recumbent seat would not
work well with the dinosaur suit.

Quoted message said:

That it's the only configuration available for those who must crank
with their arms increases their worth, IMO.

Not so. See <http://www.mobilityeng.com/> and click on "HandBike".

--
Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia
When did ignorance of biology become a "family value"?

aka Frank Krygowski said:

Roger Zoul said:

<[email hidden]> wrote

Quoted message said:

Perhaps the one hanging in my garage isn't well designed... but the
original owner rode it on only a few occasions before giving it up for
his normal bike.
The next owner took only a couple test rides and stored it in his
basement.

I'd venture a guess that neither of these people really gave it a
chance....either feeling too isolated since most riders are on uprights
(lots of people just feel uncomfortable being "the only one"😉...or really
not so much into riding to begin with. It seems strange to me that someone
would really drop dime on an expensive trike and then not ride it. That
seems like someone not committed to exercise or cycling to me. Afterall,
how often does that happen with regular bikes?

The original owner was absolutely not the kind of guy to worry about
being "the only one." In fact, I think he enjoyed the attention. And
as far as "committed to cycling," we're talking about a very
experienced long-distance tourist. For example, he rode the entire Al-
Can highway to Alaska, solo.

The very experience upright cyclist is generally the one with the most
ingrained habits and the least able to adapt to something different.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

The guy he gave it to passed it on to me.

Perhaps you'll pass it on to me, since you're obviously not a fan. I'd love
to have a free trike! 🙂

Nice try! There are two other worthy causes in line ahead of you,
though.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

My wife, a couple friends, and I each took our turns at test rides.
For all of us, it failed the test.

These other people cycle a lot I take it?

Yes. My wife and I (and our daughter) have toured extensively,
including a self-contained, self-led coast to coast. One of the
friends is our club's mileage leader. The other has done at least one
double century, and does a lot of utility riding as well.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

The low-racer configuration seems good only for "toy" use. The
turning circle is inconveniently large (you can't do a U-turn on a 20'
road)

Toy use? I've ridden several centuries and I never needed to do a U-turn.

Well, your centuries are different from mine. I do like to stop (or
go back) to smell the flowers, observe a soaring hawk, help with a
repair, etc etc.

Most recumbent bicycles AND trikes can do a U-turn in a normal 2-lane
road. Many delta trikes can almost rotate in place.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

And if I did, I could just stop and turn the bike around 180degs. On my
'bent I can just put my foot down quickly to easily get turned around.

Yes, but on this trike, you absolutely could not!

This is not at all typical of current production tadpole trikes.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Those
who ride "low-racers" mainly use them for riding fast and don't focus on
distance, from my observation (the two-wheel lowracer isn't my style,
though). But, I have to ask you -- what's wrong with that?

There's nothing at all wrong with it, if that's what you like. My
point isn't that nobody would ever like this trike. My point is that
nobody who's ridden it liked it enough to want to keep riding it.
Different strokes and all that, yes?

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

and getting in and out of the trike is an extreme yoga
exercise.

That's curious. I was at my local bike shop on Saturday and saw two total
noob riders get in and out of a trike with no difficulty whatsoever.

And it probably depends on the trike! With this one, your butt is
about 6" off the ground, and your feet are much higher. You are
_very_ reclined. That's why I describe it as a low-racer - although
it predates that term.

Very reclined is having the seat back at 25° or less from the
horizontal. A high bottom bracket is one that is more than 25 cm above
the seat height.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

But that's true on most road bikes too since the pedals/saddle
height prevents the both feet from touching the ground at the same time.

Sorry, but it's not even close. This thing requires a sort of extreme
abdominal "crunch," while searching for something to hold onto. When
my wife stalled at that intersection, it took her quite a while to
wiggle out of it. That was an embarrassment for her.

Proper mounting/dismounting technique can be learned.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

The need for three tracks through the potholes, plus it's
low visibility, seems risky for the roads, and the extra width makes
it inconvenient on MUPs.

the extra width isn't that much extra and the low visibility is really just
your opinion from not really riding one, I think.

I have ridden quite a few recumbents. (More on that later.) I've
ridden this trike. I'm speaking from my experience. I'd not be
willing to take this out in the kind of heavy traffic I negotiate on
my other bikes.

When I ride, I want to be able to see what's happening around me.
With this, I'd be literally looking at adjacent hubcaps. And I can't
imagine I'd be conspicuous to, say, oncoming left-turn motorists.

I have ridden a lowracer (as have several others) in urban Chicago
traffic without problems.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

And of course, you'd better have a pickup
truck to take it anywhere.

Hmm...some trikes fold into the trunk,...

Are we talking about "some trikes," or "most trikes," or "this
trike?"

Why are you using what appears to be a one-off custom as representative
of the category?

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

I have
a rack for my upright and my bent and wouldn't consider transport any other
way.

My bikes almost always ride inside my hatchback, if I need to haul
them. But I'm sure none of my three bike racks could haul this
trike.

Most production tadpole trikes will fit inside a subcompact hatchback
with the rear seat folded down.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

It's interesting as a design exercise. But that's its only virtue,
from what I can tell.

Your view is very limited, Frank. I'm rather disappointed in you. Bike
prejudice is what you're displaying here. It's kinda sad, if you ask me.

What an odd conclusion! I'm describing my personal experiences with
this machine, and the experiences of good friends and family. We all
agreed that the trike isn't worth riding much. Is there _no_
possibility that we are correct??

Greater emphasis should have been made in the original post by Frank
that this trike was not a current production trike (or similar), but an
unidentified low volume production (or unique) trike.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

So I suppose the whole crew of us are lost causes!

I would tend to agree, yes. It's not hard to understand, though, as we as
humans all seem to have our own biases built up from pre-conceived notions.
These notions can be very very hard for us to overcome. For some reason,
though, I expect more from you! 🙂

Again, you need to question who is judging from experience and who is
judging based on pre-conceived notions. Examine your conscience!

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Let me tell you a bit more about me and recumbents in general.

I first heard of these things in about 1973, in an article in a
paperback book, _The Best of Bicycling_. I was immediately
fascinated. I'm a mechanical engineer, and I was very interested in
vehicle aerodynamics ever since high school. Recumbents seemed like a
great idea - but I wasn't able to afford one.

Still, I read all I could. I joined the IHPVA. I subscribed to Human
Power. I rode my first recumbent, the Avatar 2000, in 1980, I think.
That was the beginning of my doubts, since I found the handling a bit
weird, and realized how ungainly long it was.

A few years later, four of the most active members of our bike club
either bought or built recumbents. I rode with them on many rides,
and tested their bikes. I watched them coast away on the downhills...
and watched everyone pass them on the uphills. And I noted that,
within three or four years, they all retired the recumbents for almost
all rides, preferring their uprights. It was clear the machines
weren't magic carpets.

Judging recumbents by what was available in the early 1980's is like
judging automobiles by the Ford Model A.

Quoted message said:

As an engineer, I still find the designs interesting, partly because
they are still evolving... or, perhaps, looking for a configuration
that really works. I worked for a while on designing my own. I test-
rode many more - long WB, short WB, taller ones, lower ones, different
wheel sizes. I've ridden with - and waited for - friends who still
own them and like them. I've talked to recumbent riders I've met on
country roads. I even had a couple friends who won an IHPVA award
with one, in the Practical Vehicle competition.

I eventually realized that, interested though I am, I don't want one.
For me, a recumbent's advantages aren't likely to offset its
disadvantages. When I splurged on a "different" bike, I got a Bike
Friday instead, and it's already proven far, far more valuable than
any recumbent would have.

And BTW, I think Green Gear has discontinued its recumbent version.
Same for Cannondale and Trek, I understand.

The Trek was an odd-ball design, that lost its champion within the
company prior to going into production. Almost no one on the Trek
marketing staff or individual Trek dealers (Mike J. excepted?) wanted
anything to do with it.

The Cannondale was not a bad design, but was priced about one-third more
than the comparable HP Velotechnik Spirit, so it was not competitive in
the market. I doubt than many Cannondale dealers wanted to or knew how
to sell it either.

Quoted message said:

Recumbent fans need to understand that not everyone likes their choice
of machine - and in my case, at least, it's certainly not prejudice!
If anything, I was prejudiced in favor of them!

It was mostly the riding that changed my mind.

Upright riders need to consider that they are a self-selected group of
people that do not have comfort problems with the upright design, and
there is an under served market that could be filled by crank-forward
uprights and recumbents that would get more cyclists on the road. Is
more cyclists a bad thing, even if the are riding funny bikes?

--
Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia
When did ignorance of biology become a "family value"?

aka Frank Krygowski said:

Roger Zoul said:

[email hidden] wrote:

:: On Oct 29, 10:36 pm, "Roger Zoul" <[email hidden]> wrote:
::::
::: Ah....I didn't get the fact that you were referring to a certain
::: type of trike. It sounds like a racing model, with a very low seat
::: angle.
:::
:: ...
:::
::: I see. I thought you were talking about a low-racer recumbent, not a
::: low-racer trike. The low angle could definitely make things harder
::: to ride. Certainly, this is a more specialized version of a trike -
::: made for going fast.
::
:: Definitely.
::
::: How old is it? It must be way long, too, if you can't do a u-turn.
::
::
:: Here's my first attempt at using Flickr.com:
::
::http://www.flickr.com/photos/16972296@N08/
::
:: The trike was made sometime in the mid-1980s. Again, no manufacturer
:: info is on it. I know it was expensive. And again, the original
:: owner is deceased.
::

Hard for me to tell from looking, but it just looks uncomfortable. The seat
looks like cloth hung loosely over metal at two ends. perhaps it's not
that, though.

That pretty well describes it. The seat - or sling, or hammock, or
whatever you'd call it - doesn't feel too bad, actually. But as with
a hammock, there's a feeling of being sunk into it, not knowing if
you'll ever get out.

Based on appearances, modern production tadpoles have much better seats.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

However, it doesn't appear to be as low as I thought it woud
be. With that big 700c (is that 700c?) wheel back there.

Close. Originally came with 3 tubulars, but the back rim corroded and
failed in storage. I put an old 27" clincher wheel on it to enable
riding.

Quoted message said:

But I can't
really tell how one is positioned in that thing. there a lot of bending
metal bits there too. Once you're in it and riding, how does it feel?

The riding position makes me feel pretty much like a turtle on its
back. My feet are way high in front of me, so I'm kind of peering
around them at times. I can put considerable pressure on the pedals,
and that makes it scoot, but spinning seems awkward. Handling is
twitchy - one has to concentrate on not oversteering. Even riding a
straight line takes some concentration.

Laid back with feet up is a great riding position - my favorite by far.

Quoted message said:

The most unusual feature is the steering linkage. I've never seen
anything like it. The two joysticks actually act on the _rear_ wheel,
banking it left or right. The intent is to prevent side loading of
the rear wheel. Other linkages go from there to the tie rods and
activate the front wheels.

Much of that is adjustable. I gave some thought to tuning out the
twitchiness, but a) I'm buried in much more important projects, and b)
I really have no desire to ride this thing very much.

Modern tadpole have much less complicated steering linkages, and the
better designed trikes have good direction stability, to the point they
go straight with only one front wheel braked.

--
Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia
When did ignorance of biology become a "family value"?

Zoot Katz said:

On Tue, 30 Oct 2007 15:06:56 -0000, [email hidden] wrote of his
recumbent trike:

Quoted message said:

Here's my first attempt at using Flickr.com:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/16972296@N08/

The trike was made sometime in the mid-1980s. Again, no manufacturer
info is on it. I know it was expensive.

/
How does one pedal in a wet-suit? I mean, it looks like this thing
is missing pontoons or a snorkel or something for the puddles.

At least the bar-cons and hub brakes give it some redeeming features.

Bar-end shifters are great on a recumbent with beside-seat steering
(BSS) - one can shift AND brake without changing hand position, without
the need for expensive, less reliable brifters.

Braking on a tadpole trike is much stronger than can be achieved on a
normal single upright bicycle, which is limited to somewhere between
0.6g and 0.7g before overturning occurs.

--
Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia
When did ignorance of biology become a "family value"?

Bill 'Sorni' Sornson said:

Quoted message said:

... I do know that some moderated NGs
even state that quoting is unnecessary due to thread-tree views and
googlegroups archives.

Citation?

See
<http://www.aoc.noaa.gov/images/Cessna%20Citation%20Photos/aircraft_cessna_update_clip_image002.jpg>.

For the more budget minded:
<http://www.geocities.com/citation_x11/car1.jpg>. 😉

--
Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia
When did ignorance of biology become a "family value"?

aka Frank Krygowski said:

gotbent said:

Quoted message said:

Frank, I think you might have a MASA Slingshot. Historically interesting
but very archaic compared to a modern trike of the
ICE/Catrike/Wizwheels/Greenspeed flavors. You folks know how to work
search engines and I don't have time to post a link.

Ok, here's a link from Recumbents.com of a restored MASA Slingshot. I think
this trike was prone to rolling over. Not a very good selling feature.http://www.flickr.com/photos/justinandcharmin/272462965/in/set-721575...

Nope, that's not it. Frame design is completely different, etc, etc,
etc.

But regarding the desirability of low trikes, this is interesting from
a "MASA Slingshot For Sale or Trade" post I googled up"

"My husband, neighbor and I have been riding it and it is a blast. Why
then you ask am I willing to part with it? Because I need something
that I can ride on the road. Ground clearance on the Slingshot is just
too limited for going over railroad tracks (which I have to do all the
time)"

I, too, prefer vehicles I can ride on the road!

I have ridden over pretty rough railroad tracks at speed on my Earth
Cycles Dragonflyer tadpole trike. The rear suspension make the bumps
very tolerable, and there is no worry about losing balance. I can even
cross wet tracks at an angle with no real concern - do not try that on a
bicycle.

The (very rare and long out of production) MASA Slingshot is one of the
only long-wheel base tadpole trikes ever built. While some of the racing
tadpoles have low ground clearance, even they will go across most
railroad tracks without grounding out. Non-racing short wheelbase
tadpoles will handle anything up to fire roads.

--
Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia
When did ignorance of biology become a "family value"?

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

Quoted message said:

gotbent said:

Quoted message said:

Frank, I think you might have a MASA Slingshot. Historically
interesting
but very archaic compared to a modern trike of the
ICE/Catrike/Wizwheels/Greenspeed flavors. You folks know how to work
search engines and I don't have time to post a link.

Ok, here's a link from Recumbents.com of a restored MASA Slingshot. I
think
this trike was prone to rolling over. Not a very good selling
feature.http://www.flickr.com/photos/justinandcharmin/272462965/in/set-721575...

Nope, that's not it. Frame design is completely different, etc, etc,
etc.

But regarding the desirability of low trikes, this is interesting from
a "MASA Slingshot For Sale or Trade" post I googled up"

"My husband, neighbor and I have been riding it and it is a blast. Why
then you ask am I willing to part with it? Because I need something
that I can ride on the road. Ground clearance on the Slingshot is just
too limited for going over railroad tracks (which I have to do all the
time)"

I, too, prefer vehicles I can ride on the road!

- Frank Krygowski

Sorry, I missed the non hot linked ref to the image on Flikr. Definately not
a MASA. Modern trikes are amazing vehicles. My ICE QNT is quite dependable
and the most relaxed pleasurable ride I ever owned, and my past stable
included a Raleigh Grand Prix, Raleigh Super-Tourer a Raleigh Portage, a
Schwinn Super Sport SP frame turned into a Campi-Japanolo bike, a
Diamondback Ridgerunner, a Proflex 856, and RANS V-Rex. I also own an HPVelo
Speedmachine, an Earthcycles Sunset and the ICE QNT.

--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

gotbent said:

Sorry, I missed the non hot linked ref to the image on Flikr.

??

I don't understand the "non hot linked" part.

This is my first use of Flickr, so maybe I did something wrong. But
doesn't http://www.flickr.com/photos/16972296@N08/ take you there?

Works for me!

- Frank Krygowski

Ridiculous, even for you.

Bill "SEE???" S.

Tom Sherman said:

Quoted message said:

I dread the day I may be confined to one but am nevertheless thankful
they exist in case that day does dawn.

Come on, trikes are not that bad! However, the recumbent seat would not
work well with the dinosaur suit.

You're right, I regard them more as sexy wheelchairs but they do look
faster and more stable than an upright trike.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

That it's the only configuration available for those who must crank
with their arms increases their worth, IMO.

Not so. See <http://www.mobilityeng.com/> and click on "HandBike".

OMG.
Okay, let's change that to the _best_ configuration available for
most people who must hand crank.

<http://www.varnahandcycles.com/handcycles/handcycle.htm>

Marc Herremans, 2007 Crocodile Trophy race:
<http://www.cyclingnews.com/photos/2007/oct07/croctrophy07/croctrophy077/DSC_0027.jpg>
--
zk

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

Quoted message said:

gotbent said:

Sorry, I missed the non hot linked ref to the image on Flikr.

??

I don't understand the "non hot linked" part.

This is my first use of Flickr, so maybe I did something wrong. But
doesn't http://www.flickr.com/photos/16972296@N08/ take you there?

Works for me!

- Frank Krygowski

That will, but this won't,
"...feature.http://www.flickr.com/photos/justinandcharmin/272462965/in/set-721575...",
which was the ref I saw when I went back up the thread to see what I was
missing.

--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

"gotbent" <[email hidden]> wrote

Quoted message said:

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

Quoted message said:

gotbent said:

Sorry, I missed the non hot linked ref to the image on Flikr.

??

I don't understand the "non hot linked" part.

This is my first use of Flickr, so maybe I did something wrong. But
doesn't http://www.flickr.com/photos/16972296@N08/ take you there?

Works for me!

- Frank Krygowski

That will, but this won't,
"...feature.http://www.flickr.com/photos/justinandcharmin/272462965/in/set-721575...",
which was the ref I saw when I went back up the thread to see what I was
missing.

I wonder why you saw that...it's not what I saw...the link worked fine for
me.

Bill Sornson said:

Quoted message said:

... I do know that some moderated NGs
even state that quoting is unnecessary due to thread-tree views and
googlegroups archives.

Citation?

soc.history.world.war.ii

Didn't think so. (Gee, POW's anonymous AND a liar -- what a surprise!
LOL )

Bill "posting style proves the point" S.

I just met a coworker yesterday like you. He's a friendly guy, but
given to manufacturing arguments out of nothing over nothing. Very
friendly, but prattles on about nothing for no reason, the kind of
person who disagrees that the sky is blue because it's gray to certain
animals, which he knows 'cause he had a pet rat once that a pet store
gave him for Halloween, never understood why people are afraid of
rats, people have such irrational phobias, like the GWOT right now,
which he can understand but thinks is being handled badly, blah blah
blah....

You people are kind of scary.

Brian Broderick said:

As to why people fall down:

One fine afternoon, I was riding along the right side of the road on
the Gettysburg College campus, with the curb on the right. There's a
steep incline for about 10 seconds, and I stood up in the pedals so I
could just power up through it. Suddenly, a girl in the French class
I was avoiding walked out of a classroom, and waved at me.
Unthinkingly, I took my hand off the bars, to wave (being the suave,
debonair gentleman I am). Sadly, when standing in the pedals, a lot
of your force is resisted by your arms on the bars. With one hand
off, I imbalanced myself, swinging the bike directly into the curb,
and myself over the bars. Que trauma.

Hey, didn't that racing movie from the '70s end almost jsut like that,
when the guy riding on his bike on campus meets a girl riding on her
bike and she's French....

See, I just can't imagine that. I can't remember ever forgetting that
I'm on a bike, such that I take my hands off the handlebars without
thinking, etc. I mean, I can ride without hands, and even make fairly
sharp turns at low speeds without hands (on an upright), but I'd never
simply forget that I'm on a bike and take my hands off without meaning
to.

I just don't get it. I guess you must have liked that girl a lot!

gotbent said:

Too low to the ground? I've had people in gigantic landbarges stopped next
to me at a traffic light and shout out of their window at me that I was too
low to see. I ask them who they're talking to. "You", they answer. I tell
them that either they're crazy for talking to something invisible, or I'm
not invisible after all. I don't think most of them get it.

Heh...I had a well-meaning old fellow pull up next to me in his car
one night and say that I should have lights on my 'bent. I told him
he should just slow down. He didn't say anything more; I hope he
agreed!

Quoted message said:

I know a fellow that used to ride a NoCom in Chicago, on the streets! I know
a another fellow that rode a Bacchetta Strada in Chicago, too. He got hit by
a car, as high and visible as he was.

Well, those things are not all that high, in "absolute terms," and
maybe folks are worse drivers in Chicago than NYC. I've actually
commuted with my SMGTe many, many times without incident.

Quoted message said:

I own your bike's cousin, the Speedmachine. She can be a trecherous [censored] at
times. Mostly a quick and comfortable ride, but let your attention waver for
a moment and you'll find yourself dumped, unceremoniuosly, out on your ass.
I admit to being a member of the clan klutz and I don't chew gum and walk
simultaneously and remaining in control on two wheels is not totally
intuitive for me. I admit to hammering through turns more consertvatively
than excellent bike handlers, but still, I go through the twisties a lot
faster than the average schmo I pass on the bike trail.

The trike takes the balance thing right out of the equation.

But on turns, etc., you still have to watch out! Besides, balance is
so second-nature, it's almost not a factor for me (and I suspect for
most "serious" cyclists). I wonder if trike fans are maybe, um, less
competent cyclists, as it were....

Quoted message said:

On the trike I
pedal like mad and all I need to do is pay attention to what's around me.

Same thing on any bike, for those who are good cyclists.

Quoted message said:

I
ride with a friend on Wednesday nights, usually a few blocks away from his
house in the land of garage-mahals and green lawns and smooth low traffic
streets. We do five mile circuitous loops. The first time, a few weeks ago,
when we did the ride with lights I noticed that my cheeks hurt. The ride was
so much fun that I was unconsciously grinning in the dark.

But how's that unique to a trike? I still grin on my 'bent. (I'm
always grinning anyway; it's all too cute and funny, everything is, in
life.) I'm sure I'd grin on a trike, too. But I don't see what makes
them really special.

I was actually thinking of getting my old dad one, just so he gets
more physical than simply walking the dog. But other than that, I
really don't see the big deal.

Quoted message said:

I'm not a bent newbe either. I bought my first bent in '99. I still have a
SM and an Earthcycles Sunset and I bought a Trice in February and I ride
about 2000-3000 miles a year.

I'm not trying to put down trikes. Just chit-chatting here. I'm sure
they're fun for me, too. I'll probably get one one day, too.

Tom Sherman said:

It is fun to cross after the train goes by, while everyone else is
waiting for the gate to rise.

I hope it's not a multi-track crossing. That second train hidden
behind the first one can ruin your day.

Brilliant.

(WHHHOOOSSHHHHHHHHH!)

gotbent aka FVTR said:

...
Sorry, I missed the non hot linked ref to the image on Flikr. Definately not
a MASA. Modern trikes are amazing vehicles. My ICE QNT is quite dependable
and the most relaxed pleasurable ride I ever owned, and my past stable
included a Raleigh Grand Prix, Raleigh Super-Tourer a Raleigh Portage, a
Schwinn Super Sport SP frame turned into a Campi-Japanolo bike, a
Diamondback Ridgerunner, a Proflex 856, and RANS V-Rex. I also own an HPVelo
Speedmachine, an Earthcycles Sunset and the ICE QNT.

Only a weird person would own an Earth Cycles Sunset Lowracer. We will
not even consider the implication of owning two (2) such bicycles.

--
Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia
Red and Purple Earth Cycle Sunset Lowracers