Entry level recumbent purchase very soon

bicycle-forum.net
Promoting biking discussion.

Main

Date: 01 Jan 2006 10:55:06
From: Ken M
Subject: Entry level recumbent purchase very soon

I posted a message here "Short wheel base for beginner" a little over a
week ago, and I got some good advise. However from some recent net
research most seem to recommend a different type of bike. So now I am
more leaning towards a lwb or a clwb model. There are three that I have
found so far that seem to be in my "entry level" price range. The SUN
EZ-1SC and the CYCLE GENIUS STARLING and the CYCLE GENIUS SPARROW. I am
really leaning towards the EZ-1. My reasoning on this one is the
reputation of SUN. And the fact that most (all?) the EZ models were
designed by the folks at EASY RACERS. Does any one own a EZ-1SC? If so
how do you like it? I am test riding one on Tuesday. How about the two
CYCLE GENIUS bikes? The dealer I am going to test ride the SUN is also a
CYCLE GENIUS dealer.

Ken
--
[T]he bicycle is the most efficient machine ever created: Converting
calories into gas, a bicycle gets the equivalent of three thousand miles
per gallon. ~Bill Strickland, The Quotable Cyclist

Homepage: http://kcm-home.tripod.com/

Date: 02 Feb 2006 16:38:48
From: Peter Clinch
Subject: Re: Entry level recumbent purchase very soon

Date: 02 Feb 2006 09:25:01
From: DougC
Subject: Re: Entry level recumbent purchase very soon

Ken M wrote:
> I posted a message here "Short wheel base for beginner" a little over a
> week ago, and I got some good advise. However from some recent net
> research most seem to recommend a different type of bike. So now I am
> more leaning towards a lwb or a clwb model. There are three that I have
> found so far that seem to be in my "entry level" price range. The SUN
> EZ-1SC and the CYCLE GENIUS STARLING and the CYCLE GENIUS SPARROW. I am
> really leaning towards the EZ-1. My reasoning on this one is the
> reputation of SUN. And the fact that most (all?) the EZ models were
> designed by the folks at EASY RACERS. Does any one own a EZ-1SC? If so
> how do you like it? I am test riding one on Tuesday. How about the two
> CYCLE GENIUS bikes? The dealer I am going to test ride the SUN is also a
> CYCLE GENIUS dealer.
>
> Ken
Well I'm a bit late maybe but anyway--I started out on a SWB as my first
recumbent. A Sun EZ-Speedster, exactly. The reason for going to a
recumbent at all was for comfort; the reason for the SWB was that it
would fit into the back of an SUV. I don't tour or usually go over 50
miles per local ride, and I tend to ride alone, so speed wasn't an issue.

The Speedster is way more comfortable than any upright I ever had (and I
had $1500 road and MTB's) but it is rather more twitchy than I'd like. I
don't think there's anything *wrong* with how it's made, and I have
ridden a few other bents and the feeling (of SWB twitchiness) was pretty
consistent. CLWB's and LWB's seemed far more relaxed-handling. Having to
be concerned with where the wheels always are takes quite a bit out of
just enjoying the ride.

Also at 6'2", the Speedster has turned out to really be a bit too short
for me. The farther I move the seat back the more my legs like it, but
the seat is all the way back, can't go any further. I'm looking at
getting a Cycle Genius Falcon (LWB) and a hitch rack, when I have the
money. I know the Falcon is long enough because when the Falcon seat is
all the way back, I can't even keep my feet on the pedals. ~~~~~

Date: 06 Jan 2006 03:22:45
From: Vytautas
Subject: Re: Entry level recumbent purchase very soon

Hello,
Please say where I can download and see this video where recumbents
kills DF bikes uphill?
Thanks a lot.

Date: 07 Jan 2006 09:55:50
From: Mike Rice
Subject: Re: Entry level recumbent purchase very soon

On 6 Jan 2006 03:22:45 -0800, "Vytautas" <laiskai@gmail.com > wrote:

>Hello,
>Please say where I can download and see this video where recumbents
>kills DF bikes uphill?
>Thanks a lot.

Here's the link for the video:

http://www.lightningbikes.com/cyber.htm

I guess I should caveat that it does appear to be on the
manufacturer's websight.

You might be interested in seeing what the Bicicle Man had to say
about his experiences with the Lightning P-38 Recumbent here:

http://www.bicycleman.com/recumbents/lightning/lightning_p38_f40.htm

Indiana Mike

PS- I haven't had the pleasure of riding a P-38. I would like to, but
unfortunately I am not one of those wealthy enough to own a stable of
recumbents.I have daydreamed of one, or at least a V-Rex to give me a
different slant than my Tour Easy.

Date: 07 Jan 2006 19:11:30
From: Edward Dolan
Subject: Re: Entry level recumbent purchase very soon

"Mike Rice" <jodymike@gte.net > wrote in message
news:9u3vr112i22alsvt4lo1dqv49ei1cdgaf7@4ax.com...
> On 6 Jan 2006 03:22:45 -0800, "Vytautas" <laiskai@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>Hello,
>>Please say where I can download and see this video where recumbents
>>kills DF bikes uphill?
>>Thanks a lot.
>
> Here's the link for the video:
>
> http://www.lightningbikes.com/cyber.htm
>
> I guess I should caveat that it does appear to be on the
> manufacturer's websight.
>
> You might be interested in seeing what the Bicicle Man had to say
> about his experiences with the Lightning P-38 Recumbent here:
>
> http://www.bicycleman.com/recumbents/lightning/lightning_p38_f40.htm
>
> Indiana Mike
>
> PS- I haven't had the pleasure of riding a P-38. I would like to, but
> unfortunately I am not one of those wealthy enough to own a stable of
> recumbents.I have daydreamed of one, or at least a V-Rex to give me a
> different slant than my Tour Easy.

I rode the P-38 briefly once and I did not like it at all. It felt as though
your legs were coming back into your gut. Also, the crank is too high.
However, I think a recumbent bike like this will climb hills better than
most other types of recumbents.

But all recumbents are the pits on uphills. The sooner we admit this and
stop pretending otherwise the better off we will be. Upright cyclists will
have nothing to do with us when we lie about being fast going uphill. It is
just so absurd!

Regards,

Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
aka
Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota

PS. Mike, get the V-Rex and forget about the P-38. RANS is a much better
company in every respect than Lightning.

Date: 03 Jan 2006 22:05:05
From: Johnny Sunset
Subject: Re: Entry level recumbent purchase very soon

Edward Dolan wrote:
> ...
> All recumbents are not much good at very slow speeds and they are all
> terrible on loose surfaces. If you want to go slow on bad surfaces, get a
> mountain bike....

Ed Dolan must have never ridden a BikeE FX. I spent some time on one
riding through soft gravel patches on purpose, without any problems.

My recumbent Dragonflyer is easy to balance while sitting still, going
slowly and on loose surfaces. ;)

--
Tom Sherman - Fox River Valley

Date: 04 Jan 2006 01:03:07
From: Edward Dolan
Subject: Re: Entry level recumbent purchase very soon

"Johnny Sunset" <sunsetss0003@yahoo.com > wrote in message
news:1136354705.252409.22410@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>
> Edward Dolan wrote:
>> ...
>> All recumbents are not much good at very slow speeds and they are all
>> terrible on loose surfaces. If you want to go slow on bad surfaces, get a
>> mountain bike....
>
> Ed Dolan must have never ridden a BikeE FX. I spent some time on one
> riding through soft gravel patches on purpose, without any problems.

But still, it can't compare to any garden variety mountain bike. Recumbents
just don't work very well off of a paved road.

> My recumbent Dragonflyer is easy to balance while sitting still, going
> slowly and on loose surfaces. ;)

Yes, Mr. Sherman and I know all about the advantages of a recumbent trike.
There is presently an inch of ice covering the streets and walks here in
town today and I am actually safer on my trike than I am walking. The one
thing you have to watch out for though are cars sliding into you. Anyone who
rides a two wheeler when the streets are icy is simply crazy.

But recumbent trikes overall are slower than two wheel recumbents. That is
the major trade off that you have to be willing to make for their
advantages. I do not mind making it at all when I am by myself, but when I
am on a bike ride with others, it is just too slow. Then I have to be on my
two wheelers.

Regards,

Ed Dolan - Minnesota

Date: 03 Jan 2006 21:57:31
From: Johnny Sunset
Subject: Re: Entry level recumbent purchase very soon

Edward Dolan wrote:
> ...
> It will be close on the flats, but I believe an upright will win in the end.
> A windy condition is essentially the same as going uphill, unless it is a
> steady tailwind.

Ed Dolan makes no sense here - his comparison is only valid in that a
rider on a closed loop will spend more time riding uphill and against
headwinds (assuming steady wind) than riding downwind and downhill.

Saying that a recumbent that is slower than an upright uphill also
means the recumbent will have a similar disadvantage against a headwind
is so ridiculous that it does not deserve detailed rebuttal.

> Recumbents slow down amazingly even on very slight grades.
> I have to walk up 6% grades when I am riding a recumbent, but I know several
> upright cyclists who can climb 9% grades. Try that on a recumbent sometime!

Check out these results from a Masters National Time Trial. [1] Scroll
down to "Sorted by fastest time ridden". Yep, the winner AA was on his
carbon fiber composite splitter plate lowracer Velokraft NoCom [The
Fastest Unfaired Bike in the Known Universe]. Note that many of the
competitors were younger that AA.

[1] <http://www.ambikerace.com/2005/results/masters.nat.tt.05.pdf >.

--
Tom Sherman - Fox River Valley

Date: 04 Jan 2006 00:49:04
From: Edward Dolan
Subject: Re: Entry level recumbent purchase very soon

"Johnny Sunset" <sunsetss0003@yahoo.com > wrote in message
news:1136354251.105581.213110@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>
> Edward Dolan wrote:
>> ...
>> It will be close on the flats, but I believe an upright will win in the
>> end.
>> A windy condition is essentially the same as going uphill, unless it is a
>> steady tailwind.
>
> Ed Dolan makes no sense here - his comparison is only valid in that a
> rider on a closed loop will spend more time riding uphill and against
> headwinds (assuming steady wind) than riding downwind and downhill.

That is correct, but when you riding against a headwind or a crosswind, it
is as if you are riding uphill. Only a tailwind is helpful for an increase
in speed. To tell the truth, I would rather ride in hills than to constantly
have to put up with the kind of wind we have here in SW Minnesota.

> Saying that a recumbent that is slower than an upright uphill also
> means the recumbent will have a similar disadvantage against a headwind
> is so ridiculous that it does not deserve detailed rebuttal.

No, it is the same. I am not any faster riding against a headwind than I am
riding up a hill. Recumbent cyclists make way too much of the aerodynamic
advantage. It is very slight and is nonexistent in a headwind just as it is
in going up a hill. Even a fairing does not add much advantage although it
does help a bit in a headwind situation.

Mr. Sherman knows nothing of wind. You have to get out on the wide open
plains to know what wind is like. The one thing that has always ruined
cycling for me is the wind. It takes all the fun out of it. I would prefer
hills to the wind, but an upright is better in both those conditions.
Recumbents really suck on uphills. All bikes suck in the wind, including
uprights.

>> Recumbents slow down amazingly even on very slight grades.
>> I have to walk up 6% grades when I am riding a recumbent, but I know
>> several
>> upright cyclists who can climb 9% grades. Try that on a recumbent
>> sometime!
>
> Check out these results from a Masters National Time Trial. [1] Scroll
> down to "Sorted by fastest time ridden". Yep, the winner AA was on his
> carbon fiber composite splitter plate lowracer Velokraft NoCom [The
> Fastest Unfaired Bike in the Known Universe]. Note that many of the
> competitors were younger that AA.
>
> [1] <http://www.ambikerace.com/2005/results/masters.nat.tt.05.pdf>.

I am way too lazy to go to any links.

The fact is that recumbents are horrible climbing hills and everyone knows
this except for those few who have axes to grind for one reason or another.
I recommend that Mr. Sherman take his recumbent bike and go to near Jackson,
Wyoming and try to get up Teton Pass. That is a 9% grade. Lots of luck!

Regards,

Ed Dolan - Minnesota

Date: 03 Jan 2006 18:50:30
From: Johnny Sunset
Subject: Re: Entry level recumbent purchase very soon

NYC XYZ wrote:
> Edward Dolan wrote:
> >
> >
> > My main objection to SWB recumbents is that they do not handle as well as
> > LWB. You can easily get into difficulties on a SWB that you can avoid on a
> > LWB.
>
> Please explain. They seem like they should be easier to turn with,
> given their shorter length, for one thing! USS also seems more
> "natural" and thus should "handle better." (Not that I really know my
> physics, understand....)

I disagree. SWB bikes are much easier to balance at low speed,
especially when climbing and on loose surfaces. However, LWB bikes
generally have greater directional stability at speed. (It should be
noted that the handling of LWB bikes is also sensitive to the amount of
steering tiller.)

To balance, the imaginary line formed by the two tire contact patches
has to be brought under the combined center of gravity of the rider and
bicycle. With a short wheelbase, this requires less motion of the
rider, contributing to low speed handling.

I (and many others) find "true" USS to be rather awkward. The normal
hand position for making precise motions is in front of the chest
(where primates naturally hold objects they are manipulating). The much
better arrangement is Beside Seat Steering (BSS) "side-sticks" as seen
on this HP Velotechnik Street Machine GT. In fact, true USS is rare to
see, as it has been replaced by BSS.

[1] <http://www.hpvelotechnik.com/produkte/sm/gt/index_e.html >.

--
Tom Sherman - Fox River Valley

Date: 03 Jan 2006 22:21:56
From: gotbent
Subject: Re: Entry level recumbent purchase very soon

"Johnny Sunset" <sunsetss0003@yahoo.com > wrote in message
news:1136343030.821760.126910@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>
> NYC XYZ wrote:
>> Edward Dolan wrote:
>> >
>> >
>> > My main objection to SWB recumbents is that they do not handle as well
>> > as
>> > LWB. You can easily get into difficulties on a SWB that you can avoid
>> > on a
>> > LWB.
>>
>> Please explain. They seem like they should be easier to turn with,
>> given their shorter length, for one thing! USS also seems more
>> "natural" and thus should "handle better." (Not that I really know my
>> physics, understand....)
>
> I disagree. SWB bikes are much easier to balance at low speed,
> especially when climbing and on loose surfaces. However, LWB bikes
> generally have greater directional stability at speed. (It should be
> noted that the handling of LWB bikes is also sensitive to the amount of
> steering tiller.)
>
> To balance, the imaginary line formed by the two tire contact patches
> has to be brought under the combined center of gravity of the rider and
> bicycle. With a short wheelbase, this requires less motion of the
> rider, contributing to low speed handling.
>
> I (and many others) find "true" USS to be rather awkward. The normal
> hand position for making precise motions is in front of the chest
> (where primates naturally hold objects they are manipulating).

From spending a lot of time in the primate house for a drawing class, I
would say that the object most manipulated by primates is their joint.

The much
> better arrangement is Beside Seat Steering (BSS) "side-sticks" as seen
> on this HP Velotechnik Street Machine GT. In fact, true USS is rare to
> see, as it has been replaced by BSS.
>
> [1] <http://www.hpvelotechnik.com/produkte/sm/gt/index_e.html>.
>
> --
> Tom Sherman - Fox River Valley
>
>

----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

Date: 03 Jan 2006 22:35:04
From: Edward Dolan
Subject: Re: Entry level recumbent purchase very soon

"gotbent" <gofast@golow.com > wrote in message
news:1136348628_1135@spool6-east.superfeed.net...
>
> "Johnny Sunset" <sunsetss0003@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:1136343030.821760.126910@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
[...]
The normal
>> hand position for making precise motions is in front of the chest
>> (where primates naturally hold objects they are manipulating).
>
> From spending a lot of time in the primate house for a drawing class, I
> would say that the object most manipulated by primates is their joint.

Maybe if you were locked up all of your life in a cage open to the
inspection of other primates, that is about all you would ever do too.

Regards,

Ed Dolan - Minnesota

Date: 03 Jan 2006 21:52:19
From: Edward Dolan
Subject: Re: Entry level recumbent purchase very soon

"Johnny Sunset" <sunsetss0003@yahoo.com > wrote in message
news:1136343030.821760.126910@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>
> NYC XYZ wrote:
>> Edward Dolan wrote:
>> >
>> >
>> > My main objection to SWB recumbents is that they do not handle as well
>> > as
>> > LWB. You can easily get into difficulties on a SWB that you can avoid
>> > on a
>> > LWB.
>>
>> Please explain. They seem like they should be easier to turn with,
>> given their shorter length, for one thing! USS also seems more
>> "natural" and thus should "handle better." (Not that I really know my
>> physics, understand....)
>
> I disagree. SWB bikes are much easier to balance at low speed,
> especially when climbing and on loose surfaces. However, LWB bikes
> generally have greater directional stability at speed. (It should be
> noted that the handling of LWB bikes is also sensitive to the amount of
> steering tiller.)

All recumbents are not much good at very slow speeds and they are all
terrible on loose surfaces. If you want to go slow on bad surfaces, get a
mountain bike.

> To balance, the imaginary line formed by the two tire contact patches
> has to be brought under the combined center of gravity of the rider and
> bicycle. With a short wheelbase, this requires less motion of the
> rider, contributing to low speed handling.

A LWB is OK at slow speeds once you get used to all the tiller. Damned if I
don't always feel safer (less likely to fall) on LWB than I do on SWB. Maybe
you could explain that? I think it is due priily to the lower BB of most
LWB.

> I (and many others) find "true" USS to be rather awkward. The normal
> hand position for making precise motions is in front of the chest
> (where primates naturally hold objects they are manipulating). The much
> better arrangement is Beside Seat Steering (BSS) "side-sticks" as seen
> on this HP Velotechnik Street Machine GT. In fact, true USS is rare to
> see, as it has been replaced by BSS.

USS is always way too twitchy. It just never feels quite right.

Regards,

Ed Dolan - Minnesota

"The normal hand position for making precise motions is in front of the
chest (where primates naturally hold objects they are manipulating)." - Tom
Sherman

Date: 03 Jan 2006 18:37:39
From: Johnny Sunset
Subject: Re: Entry level recumbent purchase very soon

gotbent wrote:
> "Ken M" <kencmjr@netzero.net> wrote in message
> news:b4KdnRIv5LDhxyTeRVn-hQ@giganews.com...
> ...OTOH I know a guy who rides a Rebike and terrorizes
> the lycra kit boys. Of course he looks like a Studabaker on the outside, but
> he has a souped up Caddy engine inside.

This rider wouldn't also happen to own a "low" Optima Baron?

> ... Just buy a Tailwind, dude!

Channeling Bob Cardone? [1]

Here is how to make a RANS Tailwind go faster. [2]

[1] <http://www.ransbikes.com/Gallery/Archive/Cordone.htm >.
[2] < http://www.ransbikes.com/Gallery/Archive/Sherman.htm >.

--
Tom Sherman - Fox River Valley

Date: 03 Jan 2006 22:19:22
From: gotbent
Subject: Re: Entry level recumbent purchase very soon

"Johnny Sunset" <sunsetss0003@yahoo.com > wrote in message
news:1136342259.054024.167000@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>
> gotbent wrote:
>> "Ken M" <kencmjr@netzero.net> wrote in message
>> news:b4KdnRIv5LDhxyTeRVn-hQ@giganews.com...
>> ...OTOH I know a guy who rides a Rebike and terrorizes
>> the lycra kit boys. Of course he looks like a Studabaker on the outside,
>> but
>> he has a souped up Caddy engine inside.
>
> This rider wouldn't also happen to own a "low" Optima Baron?

It's rumored that he also has a Cobra Bike for when he wants to go realllly
faaaassssssssttttttt.
>
>> ... Just buy a Tailwind, dude!
>
> Channeling Bob Cardone? [1]

I kinda miss him on the group.
>
> Here is how to make a RANS Tailwind go faster. [2]
>
> [1] <http://www.ransbikes.com/Gallery/Archive/Cordone.htm>.
> [2] < http://www.ransbikes.com/Gallery/Archive/Sherman.htm>.
>
> --
> Tom Sherman - Fox River Valley
>

----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

Date: 03 Jan 2006 18:29:02
From: Johnny Sunset
Subject: Re: Entry level recumbent purchase very soon

NYC XYZ wrote:
> Edward Dolan wrote:
> >
> > <SNIP>
> >
> >
> > Recumbents are all about comfort for the vast majority of us. Speed is
> > incidental. It is never fair to compare uprights with recumbents when it
> > comes to the comfort factor.
>
> That, and my doctor says to get one. I've got a herniated vertebra
> from the Army twelve years ago that's finally caught up with me!

You should strongly consider a recumbent with rear suspension, as it
will greatly reduce the shock transmitted to your spine, unless you do
something stupid like getting "big air" and bottom out the suspension.

> > I continue to believe that uprights are faster than recumbents over all. The
> > only time I was ever faster on any of my many recumbents was going downhill.
> > If you aren't faster going uphill, you will eventually get dropped by
> > uprights every time.
>
> According to the local 'bent LBS -- 300 miles away!!! -- 'bents are
> naturally faster:
>
> http://www.bicycleman.com/recumbents/recumbent_faqs.htm

Some recumbents are faster overall that some uprights and some are
slower.

For instance, a CLWB with an upright, high seat and low bottom bracket
(e.g. BikeE) will be slower overall than a drop-bar road bike in most
conditions.

A state of the art lowracer (e.g. Velokraft NoCom) will be faster
uphill to a certain grade depending on rider strength (probably as
steep as 10% for a very strong rider) and will be considerably faster
than an upright TT bike under normal conditions. [1]

A recumbent such as a Burley HepCat or RANS Rocket will be faster than
a drop bar road bike on flat to rolling terrain and in windy
conditions, but will be slower if a lot of climbing at grades > 6% is
involved.

[1] Riding in a foot (30.5 cm) of standing water would put the NoCom at
a definite disadvantage compared to a regular road bike or highracer.
;)

--
Tom Sherman - Fox River Valley

Date: 03 Jan 2006 21:35:56
From: Edward Dolan
Subject: Re: Entry level recumbent purchase very soon

"Johnny Sunset" <sunsetss0003@yahoo.com > wrote in message
news:1136341742.109576.177210@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...
[...]

> Some recumbents are faster overall that some uprights and some are
> slower.
>
> For instance, a CLWB with an upright, high seat and low bottom bracket
> (e.g. BikeE) will be slower overall than a drop-bar road bike in most
> conditions.

These type of bikes wil be considerably slower than uprights. Just no
comparison at all.

> A state of the art lowracer (e.g. Velokraft NoCom) will be faster
> uphill to a certain grade depending on rider strength (probably as
> steep as 10% for a very strong rider) and will be considerably faster
> than an upright TT bike under normal conditions. [1]

Nope - don't believe it! I have never seen a recumbent that was faster going
uphill than an upright. Again, all conditions must be equal respecting the
strength of the riders and the quality of the bikes.

I would love to see a Tour de France type of ride that pitted uprights
against recumbents, with or without drafting permitted. And it would have to
include mountains too. My feeling is that it would be no contest at all.

> A recumbent such as a Burley HepCat or RANS Rocket will be faster than
> a drop bar road bike on flat to rolling terrain and in windy
> conditions, but will be slower if a lot of climbing at grades > 6% is
> involved.

It will be close on the flats, but I believe an upright will win in the end.
A windy condition is essentially the same as going uphill, unless it is a
steady tailwind. Recumbents slow down amazingly even on very slight grades.
I have to walk up 6% grades when I am riding a recumbent, but I know several
upright cyclists who can climb 9% grades. Try that on a recumbent sometime!

Regards,

Ed Dolan - Minnesota

Date: 03 Jan 2006 14:07:41
From: NYC XYZ
Subject: Re: Entry level recumbent purchase very soon

Edward Dolan wrote:
>
>
> My main objection to SWB recumbents is that they do not handle as well as
> LWB. You can easily get into difficulties on a SWB that you can avoid on a
> LWB.

Please explain. They seem like they should be easier to turn with,
given their shorter length, for one thing! USS also seems more
"natural" and thus should "handle better." (Not that I really know my
physics, understand....)

> <SNIP>
>
> Regards,
>
> Ed Dolan - Minnesota

Date: 04 Jan 2006 00:38:00
From: Mike Rice
Subject: Re: Entry level recumbent purchase very soon

On 3 Jan 2006 14:07:41 -0800, "NYC XYZ" <jack_foreigner@yahoo.com >
wrote:

>
>Edward Dolan wrote:
>>
>>
>> My main objection to SWB recumbents is that they do not handle as well as
>> LWB. You can easily get into difficulties on a SWB that you can avoid on a
>> LWB.
>
>Please explain. They seem like they should be easier to turn with,
>given their shorter length, for one thing! USS also seems more
>"natural" and thus should "handle better." (Not that I really know my
>physics, understand....)
>
>> <SNIP>
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Ed Dolan - Minnesota

From my test rides I believe that a SWB will have a steeper learning
curve. Once you get past that there are some very nice handling SWB's
out there. And I bet there are some LWB models with handling less
refined than the Tour Easy I ride (or the Tour Easy clone of Mr.
Dolan's).

Indiana Mike

Indiana MIke

Date: 03 Jan 2006 20:59:16
From: Edward Dolan
Subject: Re: Entry level recumbent purchase very soon

"Mike Rice" <jodymike@gte.net > wrote in message
news:e36mr15b39tnjlhu96g8urv3fj2khlhmc1@4ax.com...
> On 3 Jan 2006 14:07:41 -0800, "NYC XYZ" <jack_foreigner@yahoo.com>
> wrote:
>
>>
>>Edward Dolan wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> My main objection to SWB recumbents is that they do not handle as well
>>> as
>>> LWB. You can easily get into difficulties on a SWB that you can avoid on
>>> a
>>> LWB.
>>
>>Please explain. They seem like they should be easier to turn with,
>>given their shorter length, for one thing! USS also seems more
>>"natural" and thus should "handle better." (Not that I really know my
>>physics, understand....)
>
> From my test rides I believe that a SWB will have a steeper learning
> curve. Once you get past that there are some very nice handling SWB's
> out there. And I bet there are some LWB models with handling less
> refined than the Tour Easy I ride (or the Tour Easy clone of Mr.
> Dolan's).

I have several SWB recumbents and I regard them as a lot of fun and more for
sport riding than any kind of serious touring. For that, I will insist on a
LWB. When I am touring, I do not want to be distracted by the peculiarities
of SWB handling. I want the security and stability that only a LWB can
provide.

Even quite bad LWBs are superior to SWBs in the above respect. In fact, I
don't believe I ever met a LWB that I didn't like. I sure can't say the same
for SWB.

Regards,

Ed Dolan - Minnesota

Date: 03 Jan 2006 16:50:12
From: Edward Dolan
Subject: Re: Entry level recumbent purchase very soon

"NYC XYZ" <jack_foreigner@yahoo.com > wrote in message
news:1136326061.810570.182380@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>
> Edward Dolan wrote:
>>
>>
>> My main objection to SWB recumbents is that they do not handle as well as
>> LWB. You can easily get into difficulties on a SWB that you can avoid on
>> a
>> LWB.
>
> Please explain. They seem like they should be easier to turn with,
> given their shorter length, for one thing! USS also seems more
> "natural" and thus should "handle better." (Not that I really know my
> physics, understand....)

I am not talking about steering, but balancing. You want to be between the
two wheels with lots of space to boot. A SWB does not give you much leeway.
You are essentially sitting over two wheels which are not very far apart.

In order to appreciate this distinction. you should have a Vision set up SWB
and then set it up LWB. You will be struck by how much easier it is to
handle in the LWB mode.

The chief advantage of a SWB is that they are easier to transport than a
LWB. This is important to many recumbent cyclists and is the main reason why
they get them.

Regards,

Ed Dolan - Minnesota

Date: 03 Jan 2006 13:58:59
From: NYC XYZ
Subject: Re: Entry level recumbent purchase very soon

Edward Dolan wrote:
>
> <SNIP>
>
>
> Recumbents are all about comfort for the vast majority of us. Speed is
> incidental. It is never fair to compare uprights with recumbents when it
> comes to the comfort factor.

That, and my doctor says to get one. I've got a herniated vertebra
from the Army twelve years ago that's finally caught up with me!

> I continue to believe that uprights are faster than recumbents over all. The
> only time I was ever faster on any of my many recumbents was going downhill.
> If you aren't faster going uphill, you will eventually get dropped by
> uprights every time.

According to the local 'bent LBS -- 300 miles away!!! -- 'bents are
naturally faster:

http://www.bicycleman.com/recumbents/recumbent_faqs.htm

> <SNIP>

Date: 03 Jan 2006 17:17:25
From: Ken M
Subject: Re: Entry level recumbent purchase very soon

NYC XYZ wrote:

>>Recumbents are all about comfort for the vast majority of us. Speed is
>>incidental. It is never fair to compare uprights with recumbents when it
>>comes to the comfort factor.
>
>
> That, and my doctor says to get one. I've got a herniated vertebra
> from the Army twelve years ago that's finally caught up with me!
>
AYE! Well I have some old injuries from a couple of MV accicdents years
ago (10+) and that is why I am going bent.

>
>>I continue to believe that uprights are faster than recumbents over all. The
>>only time I was ever faster on any of my many recumbents was going downhill.
>>If you aren't faster going uphill, you will eventually get dropped by
>>uprights every time.
>
>
> According to the local 'bent LBS -- 300 miles away!!! -- 'bents are
> naturally faster:
>
> http://www.bicycleman.com/recumbents/recumbent_faqs.htm

I have read that too, but I think it may be more of a myth. Unless you
start adding things like front windscreens / fairings and tailsocks and
wheel disc. I just want a recumbent to make riding more comfortable so I
do it more. And maybe with more riding I will become faster.

Ken
--
[T]he bicycle is the most efficient machine ever created: Converting
calories into gas, a bicycle gets the equivalent of three thousand miles
per gallon. ~Bill Strickland, The Quotable Cyclist

Homepage: http://kcm-home.tripod.com/

Date: 04 Jan 2006 00:35:33
From: Mike Rice
Subject: Re: Entry level recumbent purchase very soon

On Tue, 03 Jan 2006 17:17:25 -0500, Ken M <kencmjr@netzero.net > wrote:

>NYC XYZ wrote:
>
>>>Recumbents are all about comfort for the vast majority of us. Speed is
>>>incidental. It is never fair to compare uprights with recumbents when it
>>>comes to the comfort factor.
>>
>>
>> That, and my doctor says to get one. I've got a herniated vertebra
>> from the Army twelve years ago that's finally caught up with me!
>>
>AYE! Well I have some old injuries from a couple of MV accicdents years
>ago (10+) and that is why I am going bent.
>
>>
>>>I continue to believe that uprights are faster than recumbents over all. The
>>>only time I was ever faster on any of my many recumbents was going downhill.
>>>If you aren't faster going uphill, you will eventually get dropped by
>>>uprights every time.
>>
>>
>> According to the local 'bent LBS -- 300 miles away!!! -- 'bents are
>> naturally faster:
>>
>> http://www.bicycleman.com/recumbents/recumbent_faqs.htm
>
>I have read that too, but I think it may be more of a myth. Unless you
>start adding things like front windscreens / fairings and tailsocks and
>wheel disc. I just want a recumbent to make riding more comfortable so I
>do it more. And maybe with more riding I will become faster.
>
>Ken

A truly laid back recumbent is much more aerodynamic than an upright,
and should be faster on the flats and in rolling terrain.

Everybody passes me on my Tour Easy going uphill. Nobody passes me n
my Tour Easy going Downhill. I'm sure I've just not been around the
right combination of rider & bike or AI couldn't say that. Most of my
riding is solo, I'm basing the above generalizations on my experience
riding the Hilly Hundred.

When I was researching & test riding I asked the local bent dealer if
bents wree faster than uprights, he said 'faster on the flasts, faster
down hills, two out of three ain't bad' ;-)

Indiana Mike

Date: 03 Jan 2006 20:49:46
From: Edward Dolan
Subject: Re: Entry level recumbent purchase very soon

"Mike Rice" <jodymike@gte.net > wrote in message
news:vp5mr1doibfif2uhsop5fd8gqot7ldk7f1@4ax.com...
[...]

> A truly laid back recumbent is much more aerodynamic than an upright,
> and should be faster on the flats and in rolling terrain.

Aerodynamics is the one big advantage that recumbents have over uprights.
But even so, it cannot make up for the more aggressive position of the rider
on an upright bike, most especially going uphill.

> Everybody passes me on my Tour Easy going uphill. Nobody passes me n
> my Tour Easy going Downhill. I'm sure I've just not been around the
> right combination of rider & bike or AI couldn't say that. Most of my
> riding is solo, I'm basing the above generalizations on my experience
> riding the Hilly Hundred.
>
> When I was researching & test riding I asked the local bent dealer if
> bents wree faster than uprights, he said 'faster on the flasts, faster
> down hills, two out of three ain't bad' ;-)

I don't believe they are faster on the flats despite the aerodynamic
advantage. I have done many week long tours which consist of hundreds of
riders on all kinds of bikes, and recumbents do not fare well on these day
long rides with respect to speed as compared to uprights. But they are fast
enough and the comfort is priceless.

Regards,

Ed Dolan - Minnesota

PS. Recumbents can get faster than uprights when they are faired, especially
if a complete body fairing is used.

Date: 03 Jan 2006 16:38:28
From: Edward Dolan
Subject: Re: Entry level recumbent purchase very soon

"Ken M" <kencmjr@netzero.net > wrote in message
news:jpednWuWsuFmaifeRVn-qQ@giganews.com...
> NYC XYZ wrote:
[...]

Edward Dolan wrote:

>>>I continue to believe that uprights are faster than recumbents over all.
>>>The
>>>only time I was ever faster on any of my many recumbents was going
>>>downhill.
>>>If you aren't faster going uphill, you will eventually get dropped by
>>>uprights every time.
>>
>>
>> According to the local 'bent LBS -- 300 miles away!!! -- 'bents are
>> naturally faster:
>>
>> http://www.bicycleman.com/recumbents/recumbent_faqs.htm
>
> I have read that too, but I think it may be more of a myth. Unless you
> start adding things like front windscreens / fairings and tailsocks and
> wheel disc. I just want a recumbent to make riding more comfortable so I
> do it more. And maybe with more riding I will become faster.
>
> Ken

I have noted that recumbent cyclists ride their bikes much more than upright
cyclists ride theirs. As a result of all this riding, recumbent cyclists get
stronger and eventually become faster. But everything else being equal,
uprights will always be faster than recumbents. Recumbents don't climb hills
worth a damn - and the world is full of hills.

Regards,

Ed Dolan - Minnesota

Date: 04 Jan 2006 00:30:33
From: Mike Rice
Subject: Re: Entry level recumbent purchase very soon

On Tue, 3 Jan 2006 16:38:28 -0600, "Edward Dolan" <edolan@iw.net >
wrote:
<snip >
>
>I have noted that recumbent cyclists ride their bikes much more than upright
>cyclists ride theirs. As a result of all this riding, recumbent cyclists get
>stronger and eventually become faster. But everything else being equal,
>uprights will always be faster than recumbents. Recumbents don't climb hills
>worth a damn - and the world is full of hills.
>
>Regards,
>
>Ed Dolan - Minnesota
>
>
HI Ed,

Have you seen the video of a P-38 blowing by the diamond frames going
uphill?

Indiana Mike
>

Date: 03 Jan 2006 19:51:22
From: HH
Subject: Re: Entry level recumbent purchase very soon

"Mike Rice" <jodymike@gte.net > wrote in message
news:bn5mr1hnf0f27jppa257t2v513pudhh1dj@4ax.com...
> On Tue, 3 Jan 2006 16:38:28 -0600, "Edward Dolan" <edolan@iw.net>
> wrote:
> <snip>
>>
>>I have noted that recumbent cyclists ride their bikes much more than
>>upright
>>cyclists ride theirs. As a result of all this riding, recumbent cyclists
>>get
>>stronger and eventually become faster. But everything else being equal,
>>uprights will always be faster than recumbents. Recumbents don't climb
>>hills
>>worth a damn - and the world is full of hills.
>>
>>Regards,
>>
>>Ed Dolan - Minnesota
>>
>>
> HI Ed,
>
> Have you seen the video of a P-38 blowing by the diamond frames going
> uphill?
>
> Indiana Mike
>>
>

Please note bicycle frames don't blow by anything unless there is a really
strong wind blowing.

In the video you reference might the differing capabilities and motivations
of the riders have been a factor in who made it to the top of the hill
first? I suspect this would be especially so if the P-38 rider was being
video taped for promotional purposes.

Date: 02 Jan 2006 08:15:31
From: Johnny Sunset
Subject: Re: Entry level recumbent purchase very soon

Ken M wrote:
> Johnny Sunset wrote:
>
> >
> > There is nothing wrong with the bikes mentioned, as long as one accepts
> > that their lower price comes at the expense of weight and component
> > quality. In addition, unlike a bike such as the RANS Rocket which will
> > be faster than an upright road bike in flat to rolling and windy
> > conditions, the bicycles mentioned above will be slower than a normal
> > drop-bar upright in most conditions.
> >
> Well speed is not the most important thing for me. I like to ride some
> longer rides, but due to some old back injuries from MV accidents, I
> feel discomfort on a diamond frame bike with bars positioned much below
> two inches above the saddle. In other words (in case I didn't explain
> that right) when the bars go below two inches below the height of the
> saddle I have discomfort. So that kind of makes me like a big air dam. I
> usually start to feel the resistance at about 14 mph, with my average
> speed on rides of 10+ miles hovering around the 12 to 13mph range.
>
> > If the limitations of the entry level CLWB's bikes do not interfere
> > with the intended use of the potential owner, they are excellent values
> > for the money. If riding fast and/or long distances is expected, there
> > are much better choices (that cost considerably more).
> >
> Ah yes a better bike can always be had for more money!

Ken,

Since you mention aerodynamic drag on longer rides as a deficiency of
riding an upright bicycle with higher handlebars, it is my opinion that
a CLWB may not be the best bicycle for you. CLWB bikes with the
relatively high seat, low BB and upright seating position are not that
aerodynamic, and may be no better than riding a drop bar upright "on
the hoods".

I am not suggesting that you need to get a lowracer, highracer or fully
faired bike, but a SWB bike with a reasonably high BB and seat recline
will do much better in windy conditions. A LWB bicycle with a front
fairing can also perform well.

The used ket may be the better alternative. Bikes such as the RANS
Rocket and Vision R-40 (1999 and later R-40's are better) are/were made
in relatively large quantities, and if not damaged by crashing or
abuse, will likely only require minor work to be fully functional.
There are other less common SWB models that occasionally show up on the
used ket.

There are also some older LWB bikes (e.g. RANS Stratus, Easy Racers
Tour Easy) that may fall into your price range. Just be aware that
since these bikes were expensive when new, those selling for less than
$1,000 will be quite old. The main concern here will be that they might
be equipped with things like 6-speed freewheels, so upgrading to modern
drive trains could be expensive. And of course, with any older
bicycles, the frame should be inspected for signs of damage and fatigue
cracking. Also, these bicycles perform much better with front fairings,
so I would look for a used bike with the fairing included.

--
Tom Sherman - Fox River Valley

Date: 02 Jan 2006 12:19:30
From: Edward Dolan
Subject: Re: Entry level recumbent purchase very soon

"Johnny Sunset" <sunsetss0003@yahoo.com > wrote in message
news:1136218531.435753.176390@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
[...]
> I am not suggesting that you need to get a lowracer, highracer or fully
> faired bike, but a SWB bike with a reasonably high BB and seat recline
> will do much better in windy conditions. A LWB bicycle with a front
> fairing can also perform well.

My main objection to SWB recumbents is that they do not handle as well as
LWB. You can easily get into difficulties on a SWB that you can avoid on a
LWB.

I have often thought that for someone who is not a fanatic about cycling
that a CLWB is the best choice. You will get some comfort and some handling
ease. You will not be as fast as you would be on other configurations, but I
am assuming that most who come to recumbents are not all that interested in
being fast. If they are, then it is a whole different ball game.

By the way, I have been on many week long bike tours that had quite a few
Bike E's. They seemed to do just fine, but slower. But I do agree, it is not
the optimum recumbent for long tours.

Regards,

Ed Dolan - Minnesota

Date: 02 Jan 2006 11:53:10
From: Ken M
Subject: Re: Entry level recumbent purchase very soon

Johnny Sunset wrote:

> Ken,
>
> Since you mention aerodynamic drag on longer rides as a deficiency of
> riding an upright bicycle with higher handlebars, it is my opinion that
> a CLWB may not be the best bicycle for you. CLWB bikes with the
> relatively high seat, low BB and upright seating position are not that
> aerodynamic, and may be no better than riding a drop bar upright "on
> the hoods".
>
Well I think my diamond frame rides even higher, more upright than a
road bike "on the hoods".

> I am not suggesting that you need to get a lowracer, highracer or fully
> faired bike, but a SWB bike with a reasonably high BB and seat recline
> will do much better in windy conditions. A LWB bicycle with a front
> fairing can also perform well.
>
Well I know that some swb bikes have a lower frontage area, due to
higher bb and more reclined seat. I experimented with a home-brew swb
last winter. Due to my lack of knowledge of frame geometry it was a bit
unstable, plus heavy steel frame made it weight in at over 40+pounds,
and I had gearing problems as well. But OTOH I did get to ride it enough
to appreciate the swb layout, which is my I inquired in an earlier post
about swb bikes for beginners. I don't know much about fairings,except
that I have read that they improve aerodynamic efficiency.

> The used ket may be the better alternative. Bikes such as the RANS
> Rocket and Vision R-40 (1999 and later R-40's are better) are/were made
> in relatively large quantities, and if not damaged by crashing or
> abuse, will likely only require minor work to be fully functional.
> There are other less common SWB models that occasionally show up on the
> used ket.
>
Well the lbs here that is a dealer for both SUN & CYCLE GENIUS
supposedly also has some used models. I will inquire about them on
Tuesday when I go for a test ride.

> There are also some older LWB bikes (e.g. RANS Stratus, Easy Racers
> Tour Easy) that may fall into your price range. Just be aware that
> since these bikes were expensive when new, those selling for less than
> $1,000 will be quite old. The main concern here will be that they might
> be equipped with things like 6-speed freewheels, so upgrading to modern
> drive trains could be expensive. And of course, with any older
> bicycles, the frame should be inspected for signs of damage and fatigue
> cracking. Also, these bicycles perform much better with front fairings,
> so I would look for a used bike with the fairing included.
>

Thanks for the advise.

Ken
--
[T]he bicycle is the most efficient machine ever created: Converting
calories into gas, a bicycle gets the equivalent of three thousand miles
per gallon. ~Bill Strickland, The Quotable Cyclist

Homepage: http://kcm-home.tripod.com/

Date: 03 Jan 2006 17:47:00
From: gotbent
Subject: Re: Entry level recumbent purchase very soon

"Ken M" <kencmjr@netzero.net > wrote in message
news:b4KdnRIv5LDhxyTeRVn-hQ@giganews.com...
> Johnny Sunset wrote:
>
>> Ken,
>>
>> Since you mention aerodynamic drag on longer rides as a deficiency of
>> riding an upright bicycle with higher handlebars, it is my opinion that
>> a CLWB may not be the best bicycle for you. CLWB bikes with the
>> relatively high seat, low BB and upright seating position are not that
>> aerodynamic, and may be no better than riding a drop bar upright "on
>> the hoods".
>>
> Well I think my diamond frame rides even higher, more upright than a road
> bike "on the hoods".
>
>> I am not suggesting that you need to get a lowracer, highracer or fully
>> faired bike, but a SWB bike with a reasonably high BB and seat recline
>> will do much better in windy conditions. A LWB bicycle with a front
>> fairing can also perform well.
>>
Ken, don't forget that this is only your first bent. Don't overthink this
too much. Buy something you like the looks of, and if you have the chance to
ride it so much the better. If you want something with the potential for
speed, it's gonna cost. OTOH I know a guy who rides a Rebike and terrorizes
the lycra kit boys. Of course he looks like a Studabaker on the outside, but
he has a souped up Caddy engine inside.

If you'd be satisfied with something more utilitarian, a little less sporty
and heavier, it's gonna be a LOT cheaper. Used bents happen (see
www.recumbents.com for a good selection of used bents. If you buy a used
bent that doesn't blend with your objectives, sell it and try something
else. You should be able to recover your investment less freight.

> Well I know that some swb bikes have a lower frontage area, due to higher
> bb and more reclined seat. I experimented with a home-brew swb last
> winter. Due to my lack of knowledge of frame geometry it was a bit
> unstable, plus heavy steel frame made it weight in at over 40+pounds, and
> I had gearing problems as well. But OTOH I did get to ride it enough to
> appreciate the swb layout, which is my I inquired in an earlier post about
> swb bikes for beginners. I don't know much about fairings,except that I
> have read that they improve aerodynamic efficiency.
>
>> The used ket may be the better alternative. Bikes such as the RANS
>> Rocket and Vision R-40 (1999 and later R-40's are better) are/were made
>> in relatively large quantities, and if not damaged by crashing or
>> abuse, will likely only require minor work to be fully functional.
>> There are other less common SWB models that occasionally show up on the
>> used ket.

Good advice. See link above for a source.
>>
> Well the lbs here that is a dealer for both SUN & CYCLE GENIUS supposedly
> also has some used models. I will inquire about them on Tuesday when I go
> for a test ride.
>
>> There are also some older LWB bikes (e.g. RANS Stratus, Easy Racers
>> Tour Easy) that may fall into your price range. Just be aware that
>> since these bikes were expensive when new, those selling for less than
>> $1,000 will be quite old. The main concern here will be that they might
>> be equipped with things like 6-speed freewheels, so upgrading to modern
>> drive trains could be expensive.
Of course, when these were new, they were state of the art, and probably
work well enough for a first time bike. You can still buy six (6) speed
chain.

And of course, with any older
>> bicycles, the frame should be inspected for signs of damage and fatigue
>> cracking. Also, these bicycles perform much better with front fairings,
>> so I would look for a used bike with the fairing included.
>>
>
> Thanks for the advise.
>
> Ken
> --
> [T]he bicycle is the most efficient machine ever created: Converting
> calories into gas, a bicycle gets the equivalent of three thousand miles
> per gallon. ~Bill Strickland, The Quotable Cyclist
>
> Homepage: http://kcm-home.tripod.com/
>
>
>

Just buy a Tailwind, dude!

----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

Date: 01 Jan 2006 18:58:40
From: Johnny Sunset
Subject: Re: Entry level recumbent purchase very soon

Ken M wrote:
> I posted a message here "Short wheel base for beginner" a little over a
> week ago, and I got some good advise. However from some recent net
> research most seem to recommend a different type of bike. So now I am
> more leaning towards a lwb or a clwb model. There are three that I have
> found so far that seem to be in my "entry level" price range. The SUN
> EZ-1SC and the CYCLE GENIUS STARLING and the CYCLE GENIUS SPARROW. I am
> really leaning towards the EZ-1. My reasoning on this one is the
> reputation of SUN. And the fact that most (all?) the EZ models were
> designed by the folks at EASY RACERS. Does any one own a EZ-1SC? If so
> how do you like it? I am test riding one on Tuesday. How about the two
> CYCLE GENIUS bikes? The dealer I am going to test ride the SUN is also a
> CYCLE GENIUS dealer.

There is nothing wrong with the bikes mentioned, as long as one accepts
that their lower price comes at the expense of weight and component
quality. In addition, unlike a bike such as the RANS Rocket which will
be faster than an upright road bike in flat to rolling and windy
conditions, the bicycles mentioned above will be slower than a normal
drop-bar upright in most conditions.

If the limitations of the entry level CLWB's bikes do not interfere
with the intended use of the potential owner, they are excellent values
for the money. If riding fast and/or long distances is expected, there
are much better choices (that cost considerably more).

--
Tom Sherman - Fox River Valley

Date: 02 Jan 2006 09:05:27
From: Ken M
Subject: Re: Entry level recumbent purchase very soon

Johnny Sunset wrote:

>
> There is nothing wrong with the bikes mentioned, as long as one accepts
> that their lower price comes at the expense of weight and component
> quality. In addition, unlike a bike such as the RANS Rocket which will
> be faster than an upright road bike in flat to rolling and windy
> conditions, the bicycles mentioned above will be slower than a normal
> drop-bar upright in most conditions.
>
Well speed is not the most important thing for me. I like to ride some
longer rides, but due to some old back injuries from MV accidents, I
feel discomfort on a diamond frame bike with bars positioned much below
two inches above the saddle. In other words (in case I didn't explain
that right) when the bars go below two inches below the height of the
saddle I have discomfort. So that kind of makes me like a big air dam. I
usually start to feel the resistance at about 14 mph, with my average
speed on rides of 10+ miles hovering around the 12 to 13mph range.

> If the limitations of the entry level CLWB's bikes do not interfere
> with the intended use of the potential owner, they are excellent values
> for the money. If riding fast and/or long distances is expected, there
> are much better choices (that cost considerably more).
>
Ah yes a better bike can always be had for more money!

Ken
--
[T]he bicycle is the most efficient machine ever created: Converting
calories into gas, a bicycle gets the equivalent of three thousand miles
per gallon. ~Bill Strickland, The Quotable Cyclist

Homepage: http://kcm-home.tripod.com/

Date: 01 Jan 2006 08:58:10
From: Stonegrift
Subject: Re: Entry level recumbent purchase very soon

I do own an EZ-1 SC. Yes you do sit upright. I'm 5'8" and it sits
about like riding in a truck with a bench seat. Only the slightest of
recline. This is my first recumbent and the only issues I've come up
against so far are that you have to hunt a bit to find a cycle
computer that will work with the bike. I ended up mounting mine using
the front wheel for speed and making a stand-off to mount the cadence
sensor. The other issue I have found is the rear derailer height.
This is definitely a road bike and you don't want to approach a bump
at a narrow angle on the right side. The rear derailer will hit. So
also be careful of soft ground. The rear wheel is a 20 inch wheel and
the derailer hangs down close to 8 inches. The ride on chip sealed
(tar and gravel) roads can be a bit rough (to me) but I put that down
to the fact I'm sitting with no suspension.

I will agree though that the EZ series of recumbents are good starter
bikes that won't break your wallet. (I know I'm quoting that from
someplace) I like the bike,

On Sun, 01 Jan 2006 10:55:06 -0500, Ken M <kencmjr@netzero.net > wrote:

>I posted a message here "Short wheel base for beginner" a little over a
>week ago, and I got some good advise. However from some recent net
>research most seem to recommend a different type of bike. So now I am
>more leaning towards a lwb or a clwb model. There are three that I have
>found so far that seem to be in my "entry level" price range. The SUN
>EZ-1SC and the CYCLE GENIUS STARLING and the CYCLE GENIUS SPARROW. I am
>really leaning towards the EZ-1. My reasoning on this one is the
>reputation of SUN. And the fact that most (all?) the EZ models were
>designed by the folks at EASY RACERS. Does any one own a EZ-1SC? If so
>how do you like it? I am test riding one on Tuesday. How about the two
>CYCLE GENIUS bikes? The dealer I am going to test ride the SUN is also a
>CYCLE GENIUS dealer.
>
>Ken

Date: 01 Jan 2006 12:24:16
From: Ken M
Subject: Re: Entry level recumbent purchase very soon

Stonegrift wrote:
> I do own an EZ-1 SC. Yes you do sit upright. I'm 5'8" and it sits
> about like riding in a truck with a bench seat. Only the slightest of
> recline. This is my first recumbent and the only issues I've come up
> against so far are that you have to hunt a bit to find a cycle
> computer that will work with the bike. I ended up mounting mine using
> the front wheel for speed and making a stand-off to mount the cadence
> sensor. The other issue I have found is the rear derailer height.
> This is definitely a road bike and you don't want to approach a bump
> at a narrow angle on the right side. The rear derailer will hit. So
> also be careful of soft ground. The rear wheel is a 20 inch wheel and
> the derailer hangs down close to 8 inches. The ride on chip sealed
> (tar and gravel) roads can be a bit rough (to me) but I put that down
> to the fact I'm sitting with no suspension.
>
Well I have a diamond frame that I will continue to use for short hops
around town and on my commute (3 miles one way). I want to use a
recumbent for longer rides. I have back issues that give me discomfort
on longer rides on upright road bikes. My diamond frame is a hybrid /
comfort type bike and the upright position is comfortable, but the
aerodynamic drag is high, so from what I have been reading a recumbent
may be a better bike for me for longer rides.

> I will agree though that the EZ series of recumbents are good starter
> bikes that won't break your wallet. (I know I'm quoting that from
> someplace) I like the bike,
>

I think that is a quote from the SUN website. Thanks I appreciate the
feedback.

Ken
--
[T]he bicycle is the most efficient machine ever created: Converting
calories into gas, a bicycle gets the equivalent of three thousand miles
per gallon. ~Bill Strickland, The Quotable Cyclist

Homepage: http://kcm-home.tripod.com/

Date: 02 Jan 2006 06:33:47
From: Mike Rice
Subject: Re: Entry level recumbent purchase very soon

On Sun, 01 Jan 2006 12:24:16 -0500, Ken M <kencmjr@netzero.net > wrote:

>Stonegrift wrote:
>> I do own an EZ-1 SC. Yes you do sit upright. I'm 5'8" and it sits
>> about like riding in a truck with a bench seat. Only the slightest of
>> recline. This is my first recumbent and the only issues I've come up
>> against so far are that you have to hunt a bit to find a cycle
>> computer that will work with the bike. I ended up mounting mine using
>> the front wheel for speed and making a stand-off to mount the cadence
>> sensor. The other issue I have found is the rear derailer height.
>> This is definitely a road bike and you don't want to approach a bump
>> at a narrow angle on the right side. The rear derailer will hit. So
>> also be careful of soft ground. The rear wheel is a 20 inch wheel and
>> the derailer hangs down close to 8 inches. The ride on chip sealed
>> (tar and gravel) roads can be a bit rough (to me) but I put that down
>> to the fact I'm sitting with no suspension.
>>
>Well I have a diamond frame that I will continue to use for short hops
>around town and on my commute (3 miles one way). I want to use a
>recumbent for longer rides. I have back issues that give me discomfort
>on longer rides on upright road bikes. My diamond frame is a hybrid /
>comfort type bike and the upright position is comfortable, but the
>aerodynamic drag is high, so from what I have been reading a recumbent
>may be a better bike for me for longer rides.
>
>> I will agree though that the EZ series of recumbents are good starter
>> bikes that won't break your wallet. (I know I'm quoting that from
>> someplace) I like the bike,
>>
>
>I think that is a quote from the SUN website. Thanks I appreciate the
>feedback.
>
>Ken

My old Schwinn beat me up pretty good after 30 miles or so. My tour
Easy is comfortable on rides of 50-70 miles.

Indiana Mike

Date: 02 Jan 2006 08:58:01
From: Ken M
Subject: Re: Entry level recumbent purchase very soon

Mike Rice wrote:

>>>I will agree though that the EZ series of recumbents are good starter
>>>bikes that won't break your wallet. (I know I'm quoting that from
>>>someplace) I like the bike,
>>>
>>
>>I think that is a quote from the SUN website. Thanks I appreciate the
>>feedback.
>>
>>Ken
>
>
> My old Schwinn beat me up pretty good after 30 miles or so. My tour
> Easy is comfortable on rides of 50-70 miles.
>
Yeah my Raleigh hybrid (32pounds, upright bars, sus fork) is comfortable
up to about 40 miles or so. But the position I am forced to ride in
make me and the bike like a sail in the wind. Most any given day riding
in south Florida my average speed is limited to about 13mph.

Ken
--
[T]he bicycle is the most efficient machine ever created: Converting
calories into gas, a bicycle gets the equivalent of three thousand miles
per gallon. ~Bill Strickland, The Quotable Cyclist

Homepage: http://kcm-home.tripod.com/

Date: 01 Jan 2006 10:35:36
From: Edward Dolan
Subject: Re: Entry level recumbent purchase very soon

"Ken M" <kencmjr@netzero.net > wrote in message
news:kKydnSyr3sf9ZirenZ2dnUVZ_s6dnZ2d@giganews.com...
>I posted a message here "Short wheel base for beginner" a little over a
>week ago, and I got some good advise. However from some recent net research
>most seem to recommend a different type of bike. So now I am more leaning
>towards a lwb or a clwb model. There are three that I have found so far
>that seem to be in my "entry level" price range. The SUN EZ-1SC and the
>CYCLE GENIUS STARLING and the CYCLE GENIUS SPARROW. I am really leaning
>towards the EZ-1. My reasoning on this one is the reputation of SUN. And
>the fact that most (all?) the EZ models were designed by the folks at EASY
>RACERS. Does any one own a EZ-1SC? If so how do you like it? I am test
>riding one on Tuesday. How about the two CYCLE GENIUS bikes? The dealer I
>am going to test ride the SUN is also a CYCLE GENIUS dealer.

The SUN EZ-1 is a great recumbent. The only criticisms I have ever heard
about it are that it is a little on the heavy side and it sits you fairly
upright because of the low crank. This could possibly effect comfort. But
the seat seems to be quite good. Also, some do not like the 16" front wheel,
preferring a 20" front wheel. I rode it briefly once and it handled like a
dream. Why spend more when you can get a very good recumbent for less? I
even like the looks of it.

By the way, I am very much in favor of a company like SUN. They make
recumbents that are not going to cost you an arm and a leg. Unless you are
into racing you do not need a light super fast recumbent. Let's face it,
most of us just ride our bikes around town for some fun and some exercise.
You need a $2000. recumbent to do this?

Regards,

Ed Dolan - Minnesota

Date: 01 Jan 2006 12:16:43
From: Ken M
Subject: Re: Entry level recumbent purchase very soon

Edward Dolan wrote:

>
> The SUN EZ-1 is a great recumbent. The only criticisms I have ever heard
> about it are that it is a little on the heavy side and it sits you fairly
> upright because of the low crank. This could possibly effect comfort. But
> the seat seems to be quite good. Also, some do not like the 16" front wheel,
> preferring a 20" front wheel. I rode it briefly once and it handled like a
> dream. Why spend more when you can get a very good recumbent for less? I
> even like the looks of it.
>
It looks better than the CYCLE GENIUS models I was looking at, although
I haven't seen either of them up close yet. I had the pleasure of riding
one of SUNs other (more $$$) models and it was like limo ride. Well the
way I figure it, you start out at an entry level type bike, and then if
you continue to enjoy it you step up at the next bike purchase.

> By the way, I am very much in favor of a company like SUN. They make
> recumbents that are not going to cost you an arm and a leg. Unless you are
> into racing you do not need a light super fast recumbent. Let's face it,
> most of us just ride our bikes around town for some fun and some exercise.
> You need a $2000. recumbent to do this?
>
The model I test rode at the bike shop where I bought my latest diamond
frame bike, I think it was a EZ-SPORT price tag was ked $1599.00 I
thought that was a bit pricey for a first bike. My current price range
is $500-$750 which, to me seems more reasonable for a first 'bent'.

Ken

--
[T]he bicycle is the most efficient machine ever created: Converting
calories into gas, a bicycle gets the equivalent of three thousand miles
per gallon. ~Bill Strickland, The Quotable Cyclist

Homepage: http://kcm-home.tripod.com/

Date: 01 Jan 2006 11:45:58
From: Edward Dolan
Subject: Re: Entry level recumbent purchase very soon

"Ken M" <kencmjr@netzero.net > wrote in message
news:QsWdnVLpu84ckyXeRVn-hQ@giganews.com...
> Edward Dolan wrote:
[...]
>> By the way, I am very much in favor of a company like SUN. They make
>> recumbents that are not going to cost you an arm and a leg. Unless you
>> are into racing you do not need a light super fast recumbent. Let's face
>> it, most of us just ride our bikes around town for some fun and some
>> exercise. You need a $2000. recumbent to do this?
>>
> The model I test rode at the bike shop where I bought my latest diamond
> frame bike, I think it was a EZ-SPORT price tag was ked $1599.00 I
> thought that was a bit pricey for a first bike. My current price range is
> $500-$750 which, to me seems more reasonable for a first 'bent'.

Ken, I can't believe the way prices of bikes have gone sky high in the past
30 years or so. I got my first upright for a little over $100. (a very nice
French one). Now you have to pay at least several hundred in order to get a
fairly good upright bike.

But recumbents exist in another universe than uprights. They are all just so
damn expensive. $500. - $750. is an excellent price point for recumbents.
Many on this group are into super expensive recumbents. Even I worked my way
up to a couple of $2000. recumbents, but I have a very bad conscience about
it.

I have little respect for manufacturers who only know how to bring our very
expensive recumbents. I will save my respect and admiration for those
manufacturers who have the sts to figure out how to bring out a recumbent
for a few hundred instead of a few thousand. I am of the opinion that any
dumbbell can bring out a recumbent if price is no object. The trick is to be
able to do it cheaply. That is why I rather like SUN. They have more sts.

Regards,

Ed Dolan - Minnesota

Date: 02 Jan 2006 20:19:16
From: Slugger
Subject: Re: Entry level recumbent purchase very soon

In article <jaOdnQmH7sfCiCXenZ2dnUVZ_sCdnZ2d@prairiewave.com >, Edward
Dolan <edolan@iw.net > wrote:

> "Ken M" <kencmjr@netzero.net> wrote in message
> news:QsWdnVLpu84ckyXeRVn-hQ@giganews.com...
> > Edward Dolan wrote:
> [...]
> >> By the way, I am very much in favor of a company like SUN. They make
> >> recumbents that are not going to cost you an arm and a leg. Unless you
> >> are into racing you do not need a light super fast recumbent. Let's face
> >> it, most of us just ride our bikes around town for some fun and some
> >> exercise. You need a $2000. recumbent to do this?
> >>
> > The model I test rode at the bike shop where I bought my latest diamond
> > frame bike, I think it was a EZ-SPORT price tag was ked $1599.00 I
> > thought that was a bit pricey for a first bike. My current price range is
> > $500-$750 which, to me seems more reasonable for a first 'bent'.
>
> Ken, I can't believe the way prices of bikes have gone sky high in the past
> 30 years or so. I got my first upright for a little over $100. (a very nice
> French one). Now you have to pay at least several hundred in order to get a
> fairly good upright bike.
>
> But recumbents exist in another universe than uprights. They are all just so
> damn expensive. $500. - $750. is an excellent price point for recumbents.
> Many on this group are into super expensive recumbents. Even I worked my way
> up to a couple of $2000. recumbents, but I have a very bad conscience about
> it.
>
> I have little respect for manufacturers who only know how to bring our very
> expensive recumbents. I will save my respect and admiration for those
> manufacturers who have the sts to figure out how to bring out a recumbent
> for a few hundred instead of a few thousand. I am of the opinion that any
> dumbbell can bring out a recumbent if price is no object. The trick is to be
> able to do it cheaply. That is why I rather like SUN. They have more sts.
>
> Regards,
>
> Ed Dolan - Minnesota
>

This is basic economics 101.
Supply and Demand. These small recumbent companies run a tight ship to
stay afloat. They don't make many bikes so they must sell them at a
high gin. Sun and Easy have worked out a great deal here that is
beneficial to the entire industry. Cheap bents means more riders and
more interested parties.

Skip the EZ1 and go straight to the EZ-Sport. Its a champ and doesn't
look like something that just came out of the welding shop class at the
local highschool. Dolan is right, it does handle nice but its fugly.

Date: 02 Jan 2006 06:30:13
From: Mike Rice
Subject: Re: Entry level recumbent purchase very soon

On Sun, 1 Jan 2006 11:45:58 -0600, "Edward Dolan" <edolan@iw.net >
wrote:
<snip >
>
>I have little respect for manufacturers who only know how to bring our very
>expensive recumbents. I will save my respect and admiration for those
>manufacturers who have the sts to figure out how to bring out a recumbent
>for a few hundred instead of a few thousand. I am of the opinion that any
>dumbbell can bring out a recumbent if price is no object. The trick is to be
>able to do it cheaply. That is why I rather like SUN. They have more sts.
>
>Regards,
>
>Ed Dolan - Minnesota
>
>

It doesn't hurt that Gardner tin had worked out the basic geometry
with the Easy Racer line for many years before creating the Sun line.
Sun bikes are an import ine, aren't they? I imagine the price would be
considerably higher if the bikes were built in the US.

I liked the ride of the Sun Sport model, but didn't feel that I was
getting much of a noticable improvement over my old Shcwinn Varsity
(in terms of travel for effort expended in only one test ride, comfort
was certainly better on the Sun). The Tour Easy, though at least twice
as costly as the Sun, did feel like less effort than the Shcwinn and I
have no regrets about parting with the cash to get the bike I chose.

Indiana Mike

Date: 02 Jan 2006 12:05:52
From: Edward Dolan
Subject: Re: Entry level recumbent purchase very soon

"Mike Rice" <jodymike@gte.net > wrote in message
news:achhr19hl24f6ogaanp9drs6iqr2ok24pa@4ax.com...
[...]
> I liked the ride of the Sun Sport model, but didn't feel that I was
> getting much of a noticable improvement over my old Shcwinn Varsity
> (in terms of travel for effort expended in only one test ride, comfort
> was certainly better on the Sun). The Tour Easy, though at least twice
> as costly as the Sun, did feel like less effort than the Shcwinn and I
> have no regrets about parting with the cash to get the bike I chose.
>
> Indiana Mike

Recumbents are all about comfort for the vast majority of us. Speed is
incidental. It is never fair to compare uprights with recumbents when it
comes to the comfort factor.

I continue to believe that uprights are faster than recumbents over all. The
only time I was ever faster on any of my many recumbents was going downhill.
If you aren't faster going uphill, you will eventually get dropped by
uprights every time.

I agree with you about the Tour Easy. The Varsity was an unbelievably heavy
bike. Most recumbents are going to weigh around 30 pounds. I think that
Varsity of yours weighed around 45 pounds!

Regards,

Ed Dolan - Minnesota

Date: 02 Jan 2006 08:53:16
From: Ken M
Subject: Re: Entry level recumbent purchase very soon

Mike Rice wrote:

>
> It doesn't hurt that Gardner tin had worked out the basic geometry
> with the Easy Racer line for many years before creating the Sun line.
> Sun bikes are an import ine, aren't they? I imagine the price would be
> considerably higher if the bikes were built in the US.
>
From what I have read they are made in Asia somewhere. And yeah I would
think they would be considerable higher if they were made in the U.S.

> I liked the ride of the Sun Sport model, but didn't feel that I was
> getting much of a noticable improvement over my old Shcwinn Varsity
> (in terms of travel for effort expended in only one test ride, comfort
> was certainly better on the Sun). The Tour Easy, though at least twice
> as costly as the Sun, did feel like less effort than the Shcwinn and I
> have no regrets about parting with the cash to get the bike I chose.
>

Well that SPORT model did ride nice, but this being my first recumbent
purchase I think I would like to stick to something a little less
pricey, just in case I can't stand the bike. Not that I think that will
happen, but sometimes it's hard to tell on a relatively short "test
ride". Bike shops shop take a deposit, and then let you take the bike
home and ride it for a couple of days of something. I don't know of any
around here that do that though.

Ken
--
[T]he bicycle is the most efficient machine ever created: Converting
calories into gas, a bicycle gets the equivalent of three thousand miles
per gallon. ~Bill Strickland, The Quotable Cyclist

Homepage: http://kcm-home.tripod.com/

Date: 02 Jan 2006 23:19:57
From: Mike Rice
Subject: Re: Entry level recumbent purchase very soon

On Mon, 02 Jan 2006 08:53:16 -0500, Ken M <kencmjr@netzero.net > wrote:

>Mike Rice wrote:
>
>
>>
>> It doesn't hurt that Gardner tin had worked out the basic geometry
>> with the Easy Racer line for many years before creating the Sun line.
>> Sun bikes are an import ine, aren't they? I imagine the price would be
>> considerably higher if the bikes were built in the US.
>>
> From what I have read they are made in Asia somewhere. And yeah I would
>think they would be considerable higher if they were made in the U.S.
>
>> I liked the ride of the Sun Sport model, but didn't feel that I was
>> getting much of a noticable improvement over my old Shcwinn Varsity
>> (in terms of travel for effort expended in only one test ride, comfort
>> was certainly better on the Sun). The Tour Easy, though at least twice
>> as costly as the Sun, did feel like less effort than the Shcwinn and I
>> have no regrets about parting with the cash to get the bike I chose.
>>
>
>Well that SPORT model did ride nice, but this being my first recumbent
>purchase I think I would like to stick to something a little less
>pricey, just in case I can't stand the bike. Not that I think that will
>happen, but sometimes it's hard to tell on a relatively short "test
>ride". Bike shops shop take a deposit, and then let you take the bike
>home and ride it for a couple of days of something. I don't know of any
>around here that do that though.
>
>Ken

Ken. if you happen to be here now (6:18 pm EDT) there is a Sun Sport
on E-bay closing in 15 minutes that is currently at $450.

http://cgi.ebay.com/Black-EZ-Sport-Recumbent-Large-GREAT-SHAPE_W0QQitemZ7207282907QQcategoryZ98084QQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem

Indiana Mike

Date: 02 Jan 2006 23:23:05
From: Mike Rice
Subject: Re: Entry level recumbent purchase very soon

On Mon, 02 Jan 2006 23:19:57 GMT, Mike Rice <jodymike@gte.net > wrote:

>On Mon, 02 Jan 2006 08:53:16 -0500, Ken M <kencmjr@netzero.net> wrote:
>
>>Mike Rice wrote:
>>
>>
>>>
>>> It doesn't hurt that Gardner tin had worked out the basic geometry
>>> with the Easy Racer line for many years before creating the Sun line.
>>> Sun bikes are an import ine, aren't they? I imagine the price would be
>>> considerably higher if the bikes were built in the US.
>>>
>> From what I have read they are made in Asia somewhere. And yeah I would
>>think they would be considerable higher if they were made in the U.S.
>>
>>> I liked the ride of the Sun Sport model, but didn't feel that I was
>>> getting much of a noticable improvement over my old Shcwinn Varsity
>>> (in terms of travel for effort expended in only one test ride, comfort
>>> was certainly better on the Sun). The Tour Easy, though at least twice
>>> as costly as the Sun, did feel like less effort than the Shcwinn and I
>>> have no regrets about parting with the cash to get the bike I chose.
>>>
>>
>>Well that SPORT model did ride nice, but this being my first recumbent
>>purchase I think I would like to stick to something a little less
>>pricey, just in case I can't stand the bike. Not that I think that will
>>happen, but sometimes it's hard to tell on a relatively short "test
>>ride". Bike shops shop take a deposit, and then let you take the bike
>>home and ride it for a couple of days of something. I don't know of any
>>around here that do that though.
>>
>>Ken
>
>Ken. if you happen to be here now (6:18 pm EDT) there is a Sun Sport
>on E-bay closing in 15 minutes that is currently at $450.
>
>http://cgi.ebay.com/Black-EZ-Sport-Recumbent-Large-GREAT-SHAPE_W0QQitemZ7207282907QQcategoryZ98084QQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem
>
>Indiana Mike

Excuse me, it's at $415.

Indiana Mike

Date: 03 Jan 2006 08:25:40
From: Ken M
Subject: Re: Entry level recumbent purchase very soon

Mike Rice wrote:

>>
>>Ken. if you happen to be here now (6:18 pm EDT) there is a Sun Sport
>>on E-bay closing in 15 minutes that is currently at $450.
>>
>>http://cgi.ebay.com/Black-EZ-Sport-Recumbent-Large-GREAT-SHAPE_W0QQitemZ7207282907QQcategoryZ98084QQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem
>>
>>Indiana Mike
>
>
> Excuse me, it's at $415.

Man I tell you I miss all the good deals on E-Bay! I didn't see that
until this morning, I just checked it and it went for the $415, and that
would have been a SUPER deal.

Ken
--
[T]he bicycle is the most efficient machine ever created: Converting
calories into gas, a bicycle gets the equivalent of three thousand miles
per gallon. ~Bill Strickland, The Quotable Cyclist

Homepage: http://kcm-home.tripod.com/

Date: 01 Jan 2006 16:38:43
From: Ken M
Subject: Re: Entry level recumbent purchase very soon

Edward Dolan wrote:

> Ken, I can't believe the way prices of bikes have gone sky high in the past
> 30 years or so. I got my first upright for a little over $100. (a very nice
> French one). Now you have to pay at least several hundred in order to get a
> fairly good upright bike.
>
Yes, and for the several hundred dollars you only get an entry level
bike these days.

> But recumbents exist in another universe than uprights. They are all just so
> damn expensive. $500. - $750. is an excellent price point for recumbents.
> Many on this group are into super expensive recumbents. Even I worked my way
> up to a couple of $2000. recumbents, but I have a very bad conscience about
> it.
>
I suppose recumbents are in their own universe because they are not
produced in numbers that diamond frames are. Super expensive bikes are
nice, but may or may not be suitable for a beginner. I have been
searching websites left and right looking for entry level type bikes,
and have found several in my price range. RANS makes a couple I could
stretch the price range to, SUN looks good, ACTIONBENT makes a couple of
models but they have no local dealers. CYCLE GENIUS makes a couple in
the my beginners bracket.

> I have little respect for manufacturers who only know how to bring our very
> expensive recumbents. I will save my respect and admiration for those
> manufacturers who have the sts to figure out how to bring out a recumbent
> for a few hundred instead of a few thousand. I am of the opinion that any
> dumbbell can bring out a recumbent if price is no object. The trick is to be
> able to do it cheaply. That is why I rather like SUN. They have more sts.
>

I agree with you on that point. If more companies would make and ket
lower price range bikes more people would buy them and expand the
overall ket of recumbents.

Ken
--
[T]he bicycle is the most efficient machine ever created: Converting
calories into gas, a bicycle gets the equivalent of three thousand miles
per gallon. ~Bill Strickland, The Quotable Cyclist

Homepage: http://kcm-home.tripod.com/