Quality feedback on these bikes

bicycle-forum.net
Promoting biking discussion.

Main

Date: 14 May 2007 08:55:54
From: duh
Subject: Quality feedback on these bikes

I'm going to be looking at a RANS Rocket, Bacchetta Cafe, Baccheta Giro
20 or 26, and an Easy Racer Javelin.

What are the quality/durability factors for these bikes? I will be
mostly commuting, but might want to do a little touring.

Date: 18 May 2007 18:28:43
From: Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman
Subject: Re: Quality feedback on these bikes

On May 18, 8:18 am, "Jon" wrote:
> ...
> I can do a U turn on my LWB in similar space and speed to
> my SWB.
>
> If I recall correctly, in the instruction video that came with
> my TourEasy, Garner Martin performs a very quick and tight
> U turn. It's been a long time since I watched it, but I
> think he let the bike "fall" into the turn and then recovered
> balance with power input. Definitely a skill.

Does anyone else find it easier to do tight turns in one direction,
and if so, is this to the side that you put your foot down on when
stopping?

I put my left foot down during planned stops (unless in the unusual
situation of being on a slope with the left side higher), and fine
turning to the left much more comfortable.

--
Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia
The weather is here, wish you were beautiful

Date: 21 May 2007 06:18:15
From: Jon
Subject: Handling [was: Quality...]

"Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman" wrote
> Does anyone else find it easier to do tight turns in one direction,
> and if so, is this to the side that you put your foot down on when
> stopping?

I find U-turns left are more practiced,-- maybe due to riding on the
right hand side of road.

It is easier for me to do low speed tight turns if I apply my brakes
enough to create continous drag throughout the turn. Something to
do with modulating uneven pedal input, I think.

Jon

Date: 20 May 2007 02:31:56
From: Edward Dolan
Subject: Re: Quality feedback on these bikes

"Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman" <sunsetss0003@yahoo.com > wrote in message
news:1179538123.391240.279570@y80g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...
> On May 18, 8:18 am, "Jon" wrote:
>> ...
>> I can do a U turn on my LWB in similar space and speed to
>> my SWB.
>>
>> If I recall correctly, in the instruction video that came with
>> my TourEasy, Garner [Gardner] Martin performs a very quick and tight
>> U turn. It's been a long time since I watched it, but I
>> think he let the bike "fall" into the turn and then recovered
>> balance with power input. Definitely a skill.
>
> Does anyone else find it easier to do tight turns in one direction,
> and if so, is this to the side that you put your foot down on when
> stopping?
>
> I put my left foot down during planned stops (unless in the unusual
> situation of being on a slope with the left side higher), and fine
> turning to the left much more comfortable.

Yes, turning to the left is much more comfortable than ever turning to the
right. But I wonder if this is not a function of being right-handed and
right-footed?

Regards,

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

Date: 21 May 2007 12:35:56
From: Peter Clinch
Subject: Re: Quality feedback on these bikes

Edward Dolan wrote:
> "Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman" <sunsetss0003@yahoo.com> wrote in message

>> Does anyone else find it easier to do tight turns in one direction,
>> and if so, is this to the side that you put your foot down on when
>> stopping?

yes and yes (to the left)

> Yes, turning to the left is much more comfortable than ever turning to the
> right. But I wonder if this is not a function of being right-handed and
> right-footed?

Could be... I also find it easier to turn left on skis and skates.

Pete.
--
Peter Clinch Medical Physics IT Officer
Tel 44 1382 660111 ext. 33637 Univ. of Dundee, Ninewells Hospital
Fax 44 1382 640177 Dundee DD1 9SY Scotland UK
net p.j.clinch@dundee.ac.uk http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/

Date: 16 May 2007 21:10:23
From: Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman
Subject: Re: Quality feedback on these bikes

On May 16, 10:18 am, "gotbent" wrote:
> Fenders (mudguards), did anyone mention fenders (mudguards). If you commute,
> or ride bike trails covered with goose shit, you will need fenders
> (turdguards)....

The geese do like the grassy area by Funway.

RANS sells fenders for the Rocket. I cut off the front one about 6
inches in front of the fork and took off the front set of fender
struts after catching the struts with the pedals a couple of times
during low speed turns (and one related crash at Meadowbrook Park).
The fender is still long enough to keep water (and goose poop) from
spraying onto the BB/crank area.

--
Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia
The weather is here, wish you were beautiful

Date: 16 May 2007 20:59:26
From: Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman
Subject: Re: Quality feedback on these bikes

On May 16, 8:22 am, "rocketman" wrote:
> "duh" wrote in message
>
> news:46488661$0$27219$742ec2ed@news.sonic.net...
>
> > I'm going to be looking at a RANS Rocket, Bacchetta Cafe, Baccheta Giro 20
> > or 26, and an Easy Racer Javelin.
>
> > What are the quality/durability factors for these bikes? I will be mostly
> > commuting, but might want to do a little touring.
>
> I bought a used 2000 RANS Rocket about 4 years ago, just to see if I'd like
> it. I ended up selling my other fancy recumbents (M5 Lowracer and Ryan
> Vanguard) and keeping the RANS Rocket. It's bombproof reliable, lots of
> fun, small, quick, light, versatile, easy to haul, capable of fitting in a
> car trunk (with tiller and wheels removed), etc. Just a great bike all
> around. I recommend getting the fitted nylon briefcase that clips to the
> back of the seat. It converts the Rocket into a perfect commuter bike.
>
> I have test ridden a Bacchetta Giro, expecting to like it very much (and to
> buy one); but I found it *very* twitchy (and the Rocket is pretty "sporty",
> so I'm used to quick steering). Nice bike, though.

I would expect the Giro to be less twitchy if the "C" bars were
replaced with "T" bars that had more tiller. The handling of the
Rocket can be changed by simply adjusting the tilt (and therefore
tiller) of the Flip-It riser.

> The Bacchetta Cafe looks like it could be a great bike. I have in the past
> been tempted by the very similar Burley Koosah and Jett Creek bikes, which
> have many fans. Burley bikes are very sure-footed and stable, and quite
> comfortable to ride. I recommend that you test ride a Burley before making
> your decision.
>
> I guess which one you pick depends on what features you need/want. Flat-out
> speed? Need to haul it up a narrow flight of stairs? Price/performance?
> Maximum versatility? For me, the Rocket ended up doing everything well.
> It's *not* a "sexy" bike (though I get plenty of attention from pretty girls
> while riding it);...

Not my experience in that locale - although I did almost spear a semi-
brain dead girl that ran out into the street while I was coming down
the hill on 4th Street towards Green (northbound). An air horn is an
excellent option.

Another semi-brain dead girl asked me if I was paraplegic while riding
my Rocket. DUH!

--
Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia
The weather is here, wish you were beautiful

Date: 18 May 2007 00:21:51
From: rocketman
Subject: Re: Quality feedback on these bikes

"Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman" <sunsetss0003@yahoo.com > wrote in message
news:1179374366.869023.284950@o5g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...
> On May 16, 8:22 am, "rocketman" wrote:
>> "duh" wrote in message
>>
>> news:46488661$0$27219$742ec2ed@news.sonic.net...
>>
>> > I'm going to be looking at a RANS Rocket, Bacchetta Cafe, Baccheta Giro
>> > 20
>> > or 26, and an Easy Racer Javelin.
>>
>> > What are the quality/durability factors for these bikes? I will be
>> > mostly
>> > commuting, but might want to do a little touring.
>>
>> I bought a used 2000 RANS Rocket about 4 years ago, just to see if I'd
>> like
>> it. I ended up selling my other fancy recumbents (M5 Lowracer and Ryan
>> Vanguard) and keeping the RANS Rocket. It's bombproof reliable, lots of
>> fun, small, quick, light, versatile, easy to haul, capable of fitting in
>> a
>> car trunk (with tiller and wheels removed), etc. Just a great bike all
>> around. I recommend getting the fitted nylon briefcase that clips to the
>> back of the seat. It converts the Rocket into a perfect commuter bike.
>>
>> I have test ridden a Bacchetta Giro, expecting to like it very much (and
>> to
>> buy one); but I found it *very* twitchy (and the Rocket is pretty
>> "sporty",
>> so I'm used to quick steering). Nice bike, though.
>
> I would expect the Giro to be less twitchy if the "C" bars were
> replaced with "T" bars that had more tiller. The handling of the
> Rocket can be changed by simply adjusting the tilt (and therefore
> tiller) of the Flip-It riser.
>
>> The Bacchetta Cafe looks like it could be a great bike. I have in the
>> past
>> been tempted by the very similar Burley Koosah and Jett Creek bikes,
>> which
>> have many fans. Burley bikes are very sure-footed and stable, and quite
>> comfortable to ride. I recommend that you test ride a Burley before
>> making
>> your decision.
>>
>> I guess which one you pick depends on what features you need/want.
>> Flat-out
>> speed? Need to haul it up a narrow flight of stairs? Price/performance?
>> Maximum versatility? For me, the Rocket ended up doing everything well.
>> It's *not* a "sexy" bike (though I get plenty of attention from pretty
>> girls
>> while riding it);...
>
> Not my experience in that locale - although I did almost spear a semi-
> brain dead girl that ran out into the street while I was coming down
> the hill on 4th Street towards Green (northbound). An air horn is an
> excellent option.

Yikes! That intersection is pretty busy these days. The
cell-phone-addicted students walk right into the street, oblivious to the
"Don't Walk" sign, never once even glancing at traffic. It's like they have
a death wish. It has gotten much worse in recent years.

> Another semi-brain dead girl asked me if I was paraplegic while riding
> my Rocket. DUH!

ROFL! You probably remember, though, that in this town, drivers are
frequently treated to the sight of packs of wheelchair racers (who look like
they're riding lowracer delta trikes with no pedals). There are also
several non-racing handtrikes in town. But I know exactly what you mean.

Date: 18 May 2007 20:53:43
From: duh
Subject: Re: Quality feedback on these bikes

rocketman wrote:
> "Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman" <sunsetss0003@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:1179374366.869023.284950@o5g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...
>
>>On May 16, 8:22 am, "rocketman" wrote:
>>
>>>"duh" wrote in message
>>>
>>>news:46488661$0$27219$742ec2ed@news.sonic.net...
>>>
>>>
>>>>I'm going to be looking at a RANS Rocket, Bacchetta Cafe, Baccheta Giro
>>>>20
>>>>or 26, and an Easy Racer Javelin.
>>>
>>>>What are the quality/durability factors for these bikes? I will be
>>>>mostly
>>>>commuting, but might want to do a little touring.
>>>
>>>I bought a used 2000 RANS Rocket about 4 years ago, just to see if I'd
>>>like
>>>it. I ended up selling my other fancy recumbents (M5 Lowracer and Ryan
>>>Vanguard) and keeping the RANS Rocket. It's bombproof reliable, lots of
>>>fun, small, quick, light, versatile, easy to haul, capable of fitting in
>>>a
>>>car trunk (with tiller and wheels removed), etc. Just a great bike all
>>>around. I recommend getting the fitted nylon briefcase that clips to the
>>>back of the seat. It converts the Rocket into a perfect commuter bike.
>>>
>>>I have test ridden a Bacchetta Giro, expecting to like it very much (and
>>>to
>>>buy one); but I found it *very* twitchy (and the Rocket is pretty
>>>"sporty",
>>>so I'm used to quick steering). Nice bike, though.
>>
>>I would expect the Giro to be less twitchy if the "C" bars were
>>replaced with "T" bars that had more tiller. The handling of the
>>Rocket can be changed by simply adjusting the tilt (and therefore
>>tiller) of the Flip-It riser.

I test drove a RANS Rocket along with the Cafe and Bacchetta Giro 20 and
26 yesterday. The Rocket had a LOT of tiller effect. Can't remember
the Cafe, except that the bike was too long for my likes. I'm down to
considering the Giro 20 against the 26. For some reason, I was able to
crank a little bit better with the 20 than I was with the 26. Same
route, same headwind. Perhaps there was a slight difference in the gear
inches between the two bikes. I need to check that.

Date: 23 May 2007 01:09:27
From: rocketman
Subject: Re: Quality feedback on these bikes

"duh" <nope@notme.com > wrote in message
news:464e74b7$0$14145$742ec2ed@news.sonic.net...
> rocketman wrote:
>> "Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman" <sunsetss0003@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>> news:1179374366.869023.284950@o5g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...
>>
>>>On May 16, 8:22 am, "rocketman" wrote:
>>>
>>>>"duh" wrote in message
>>>>
>>>>news:46488661$0$27219$742ec2ed@news.sonic.net...
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>I'm going to be looking at a RANS Rocket, Bacchetta Cafe, Baccheta Giro
>>>>>20
>>>>>or 26, and an Easy Racer Javelin.
>>>>
>>>>>What are the quality/durability factors for these bikes? I will be
>>>>>mostly
>>>>>commuting, but might want to do a little touring.
>>>>
>>>>I bought a used 2000 RANS Rocket about 4 years ago, just to see if I'd
>>>>like
>>>>it. I ended up selling my other fancy recumbents (M5 Lowracer and Ryan
>>>>Vanguard) and keeping the RANS Rocket. It's bombproof reliable, lots of
>>>>fun, small, quick, light, versatile, easy to haul, capable of fitting in
>>>>a
>>>>car trunk (with tiller and wheels removed), etc. Just a great bike all
>>>>around. I recommend getting the fitted nylon briefcase that clips to
>>>>the
>>>>back of the seat. It converts the Rocket into a perfect commuter bike.
>>>>
>>>>I have test ridden a Bacchetta Giro, expecting to like it very much (and
>>>>to
>>>>buy one); but I found it *very* twitchy (and the Rocket is pretty
>>>>"sporty",
>>>>so I'm used to quick steering). Nice bike, though.
>>>
>>>I would expect the Giro to be less twitchy if the "C" bars were
>>>replaced with "T" bars that had more tiller. The handling of the
>>>Rocket can be changed by simply adjusting the tilt (and therefore
>>>tiller) of the Flip-It riser.
>
> I test drove a RANS Rocket along with the Cafe and Bacchetta Giro 20 and
> 26 yesterday. The Rocket had a LOT of tiller effect.

Adjustment of the tiller/steerer makes a huge difference on the Rocket, as I
learned early on. I run my steerer about 5 degrees behind the headtube,
just enough to add a little bit of tiller for steering feedback. I have the
original tiller/steerer, not the "superman" type (which I do not prefer).

> Can't remember the Cafe, except that the bike was too long for my likes.
> I'm down to considering the Giro 20 against the 26. For some reason, I
> was able to crank a little bit better with the 20 than I was with the 26.

Smaller wheels = lower rotational inertia = quicker acceleration

> Same route, same headwind. Perhaps there was a slight difference in the
> gear inches between the two bikes. I need to check that.

Sure, gear inches matter at the upper and lower extremes; but for most
riding, the smaller wheels offer the bigger payoffs. They're also extremely
durable. I've hit potholes that would have destroyed 700c rims, and they
didn't even throw my 20"/406mm Rocket wheels out of true. I've never had to
fine-true them in 4 years of riding. The Giro 20 is actually a 20/26"
setup, right?

Date: 23 May 2007 17:13:46
From: doofy
Subject: Re: Quality feedback on these bikes

rocketman wrote:

>>Can't remember the Cafe, except that the bike was too long for my likes.
>>I'm down to considering the Giro 20 against the 26. For some reason, I
>>was able to crank a little bit better with the 20 than I was with the 26.
>
>
> Smaller wheels = lower rotational inertia = quicker acceleration
>

Hmmm....you may have something there.

>
>>Same route, same headwind. Perhaps there was a slight difference in the
>>gear inches between the two bikes. I need to check that.
>
>
> Sure, gear inches matter at the upper and lower extremes; but for most
> riding, the smaller wheels offer the bigger payoffs. They're also extremely
> durable. I've hit potholes that would have destroyed 700c rims, and they
> didn't even throw my 20"/406mm Rocket wheels out of true. I've never had to
> fine-true them in 4 years of riding. The Giro 20 is actually a 20/26"
> setup, right?
>
>

Yes, 20/26.

Date: 14 May 2007 15:47:47
From: gotbent
Subject: Re: Quality feedback on these bikes

Date: 16 May 2007 08:22:19
From: rocketman
Subject: Re: Quality feedback on these bikes

"duh" <nope@notme.com > wrote in message
news:46488661$0$27219$742ec2ed@news.sonic.net...
> I'm going to be looking at a RANS Rocket, Bacchetta Cafe, Baccheta Giro 20
> or 26, and an Easy Racer Javelin.
>
> What are the quality/durability factors for these bikes? I will be mostly
> commuting, but might want to do a little touring.

I bought a used 2000 RANS Rocket about 4 years ago, just to see if I'd like
it. I ended up selling my other fancy recumbents (M5 Lowracer and Ryan
Vanguard) and keeping the RANS Rocket. It's bombproof reliable, lots of
fun, small, quick, light, versatile, easy to haul, capable of fitting in a
car trunk (with tiller and wheels removed), etc. Just a great bike all
around. I recommend getting the fitted nylon briefcase that clips to the
back of the seat. It converts the Rocket into a perfect commuter bike.

I have test ridden a Bacchetta Giro, expecting to like it very much (and to
buy one); but I found it *very* twitchy (and the Rocket is pretty "sporty",
so I'm used to quick steering). Nice bike, though.

The Bacchetta Cafe looks like it could be a great bike. I have in the past
been tempted by the very similar Burley Koosah and Jett Creek bikes, which
have many fans. Burley bikes are very sure-footed and stable, and quite
comfortable to ride. I recommend that you test ride a Burley before making
your decision.

I guess which one you pick depends on what features you need/want. Flat-out
speed? Need to haul it up a narrow flight of stairs? Price/performance?
Maximum versatility? For me, the Rocket ended up doing everything well.
It's *not* a "sexy" bike (though I get plenty of attention from pretty girls
while riding it); but it doesn't give up much over the sleek-n-sexy (and
horribly expensive) recumbents.

Hope that helps.

Date: 15 May 2007 06:25:58
From: stratrider
Subject: Re: Quality feedback on these bikes

On May 14, 11:55 am, duh <n...@notme.com > wrote:
> I'm going to be looking at a RANS Rocket, Bacchetta Cafe, Baccheta Giro
> 20 or 26, and an Easy Racer Javelin.

I have been commuting on a 99 RANS Stratus and now on a 2003 Baccetta
Strada since the summer of 1999. I did a loaded tour through the
Finger Lakes of NY on my Stratus 3 years ago. You could commute and/
or tour on any of these bikes if properly set up. Personally, I would
go with an EasyRacers TE before the Javelin. The TE is a time tested,
proven touring machine. Between the Giro 20 and 26, I like a lower BB
bike for touring so I would go with Giro 20. As for the Cafe, I
would lean towards the Giro. In my opinion the Cafe is not
Bacchetta's finest bike. This is a bike that rounds out their line
up. I continue to be a fans of RANS. They build great bikes. The
Rocket is time tested, well built with a triangulated frame, and uses
dual 20 inch tires, which limits the need to carry two different size
tubes and tires with you on a tour. Plus it's got a great price tag!
Ride the TE, Giro 20 (and 26 if you like), and the Rocket. You WILL
have a preference after you ride each. Finally, before you buy,
consider whether you intend to use packs (panniers) or a trailer.
That may also influence you final decision.

Good Luck.
Jim

Date: 15 May 2007 07:01:03
From: duh
Subject: Re: Quality feedback on these bikes

stratrider wrote:
> On May 14, 11:55 am, duh <n...@notme.com> wrote:
>> I'm going to be looking at a RANS Rocket, Bacchetta Cafe, Baccheta Giro
>> 20 or 26, and an Easy Racer Javelin.
>
> Finally, before you buy,
> consider whether you intend to use packs (panniers) or a trailer.
> That may also influence you final decision.

Thanks for all the input. Everyone. My uninformed, inexperienced
preference would be for panniers. However, I'm open to feedback on the
plus and minus of each route, and which bikes lend themselves to each route.

Date: 15 May 2007 07:22:45
From: duh
Subject: Re: Quality feedback on these bikes

duh wrote:
> stratrider wrote:
>> On May 14, 11:55 am, duh <n...@notme.com> wrote:
>>> I'm going to be looking at a RANS Rocket, Bacchetta Cafe, Baccheta Giro
>>> 20 or 26, and an Easy Racer Javelin.
>>
>> Finally, before you buy,
>> consider whether you intend to use packs (panniers) or a trailer.
>> That may also influence you final decision.
>
>
> Thanks for all the input. Everyone. My uninformed, inexperienced
> preference would be for panniers. However, I'm open to feedback on the
> plus and minus of each route, and which bikes lend themselves to each
> route.

Ok, I did a quick study of the good and bad of single wheel trailers.
However, feedback on which bikes work best with a trailer would be
great. I see that then Rans Rocket does.

Date: 15 May 2007 04:22:19
From: Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman
Subject: Re: Quality feedback on these bikes

On May 15, 12:13 am, duh <n...@notme.com > wrote:
> Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman wrote:
>
>
>
> > On May 14, 10:55 am, duh <n...@notme.com> wrote:
>
> >>I'm going to be looking at a RANS Rocket, Bacchetta Cafe, Baccheta Giro
> >>20 or 26, and an Easy Racer Javelin.
>
> >>What are the quality/durability factors for these bikes? I will be
> >>mostly commuting, but might want to do a little touring.
>
> > The RANS Rocket was a very good all-around bike when introduced a
> > decade ago, and has been improved and refined since.
>
> > The only necessary change for touring would be smaller chainrings
> > unless the route is very flat or the rider very strong. The under-seat
> > pannier rack is mandatory, unless the rider is "credit card touring"
> > with very light loads.
>
> I like that, credit card touring. Of course, I've been honing my
> routine for backpacking, so I think I can carry less weight.
>
> I was talking to the shop today, and they said the RANS might set me up
> for a rougher ride, and more rolling resistance, but more wheel strength
> and the ability to carry more weight.
>
> Maybe I need to mount some hydraulics in my butt.

Having only one size of tire and tube is an advantage while trying to
limit weight during touring.

If one ever plans to pull a single wheel trailer (e.g. B.o.B.), the
RANS Rocket is one of the best bicycles, due to its triangulated frame
and short chain and seat stays. Pulling a single wheel trailer with a
monotube ("stick") bike is generally a bad idea (and the manufacturers
typically recommend against it).

--
Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia
The weather is here, wish you were beautiful
2000 RANS Rocket

Date: 14 May 2007 20:31:29
From: Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman
Subject: Re: Quality feedback on these bikes

On May 14, 10:55 am, duh <n...@notme.com > wrote:
> I'm going to be looking at a RANS Rocket, Bacchetta Cafe, Baccheta Giro
> 20 or 26, and an Easy Racer Javelin.
>
> What are the quality/durability factors for these bikes? I will be
> mostly commuting, but might want to do a little touring.

The RANS Rocket was a very good all-around bike when introduced a
decade ago, and has been improved and refined since.

The only necessary change for touring would be smaller chainrings
unless the route is very flat or the rider very strong. The under-seat
pannier rack is mandatory, unless the rider is "credit card touring"
with very light loads.

--
Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia
The weather is here, wish you were beautiful

Date: 16 May 2007 10:18:28
From: gotbent
Subject: Re: Quality feedback on these bikes

Fenders (mudguards), did anyone mention fenders (mudguards). If you commute,
or ride bike trails covered with goose shit, you will need fenders
(turdguards).

Carry on.

"Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman" <sunsetss0003@yahoo.com > wrote in message
news:1179199889.874591.320340@w5g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...
> On May 14, 10:55 am, duh <n...@notme.com> wrote:
>> I'm going to be looking at a RANS Rocket, Bacchetta Cafe, Baccheta Giro
>> 20 or 26, and an Easy Racer Javelin.
>>
>> What are the quality/durability factors for these bikes? I will be
>> mostly commuting, but might want to do a little touring.
>
> The RANS Rocket was a very good all-around bike when introduced a
> decade ago, and has been improved and refined since.
>
> The only necessary change for touring would be smaller chainrings
> unless the route is very flat or the rider very strong. The under-seat
> pannier rack is mandatory, unless the rider is "credit card touring"
> with very light loads.
>
> --
> Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia
> The weather is here, wish you were beautiful
>

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

Date: 14 May 2007 22:13:32
From: duh
Subject: Re: Quality feedback on these bikes

Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman wrote:
> On May 14, 10:55 am, duh <n...@notme.com> wrote:
>
>>I'm going to be looking at a RANS Rocket, Bacchetta Cafe, Baccheta Giro
>>20 or 26, and an Easy Racer Javelin.
>>
>>What are the quality/durability factors for these bikes? I will be
>>mostly commuting, but might want to do a little touring.
>
>
> The RANS Rocket was a very good all-around bike when introduced a
> decade ago, and has been improved and refined since.
>
> The only necessary change for touring would be smaller chainrings
> unless the route is very flat or the rider very strong. The under-seat
> pannier rack is mandatory, unless the rider is "credit card touring"
> with very light loads.

I like that, credit card touring. Of course, I've been honing my
routine for backpacking, so I think I can carry less weight.

I was talking to the shop today, and they said the RANS might set me up
for a rougher ride, and more rolling resistance, but more wheel strength
and the ability to carry more weight.

Maybe I need to mount some hydraulics in my butt.

Date: 14 May 2007 20:54:02
From: Zebee Johnstone
Subject: Re: Quality feedback on these bikes

In alt.rec.bicycles.recumbent on Mon, 14 May 2007 08:55:54 -0700
duh <nope@notme.com > wrote:
> I'm going to be looking at a RANS Rocket, Bacchetta Cafe, Baccheta Giro
> 20 or 26, and an Easy Racer Javelin.
>
> What are the quality/durability factors for these bikes? I will be
> mostly commuting, but might want to do a little touring.

I've got a Giro 20, commute 20km each way on it, mostly in traffic.

Works for me. Reliable, comfortable, easy to live with.

Bar end shifters I find more comfortable and easier in the wet than
gripshifters, that's about the only complaint I have. So I made thre
change.

A 20" front is probably easier to get the feet down at stops than a
26". As I've only ridden 20/26 I can't say from personal experience.

SWB vs LWB seems to be a personal preference thing.

Zebee

Date: 14 May 2007 12:29:28
From: Roger Zoul
Subject: Re: Quality feedback on these bikes

duh wrote:
:: I'm going to be looking at a RANS Rocket, Bacchetta Cafe, Baccheta
:: Giro 20 or 26, and an Easy Racer Javelin.
::
:: What are the quality/durability factors for these bikes? I will be
:: mostly commuting, but might want to do a little touring.

Personally, from all that I've read about these bikes, I doubt you could go
wrong with any one of them. Of course, the higher priced models tend to have
better components, I think, and I'd worry more about q/d factors on the
lower priced models. I wonder if a 20 in front might be better for
commuting.

It would seem that a $1000 'bent is like a $600 DF, roughly.

Have you been over to bentrideronline.com w/ this question?

Date: 14 May 2007 09:52:07
From: duh
Subject: Re: Quality feedback on these bikes

Roger Zoul wrote:
> duh wrote:
> :: I'm going to be looking at a RANS Rocket, Bacchetta Cafe, Baccheta
> :: Giro 20 or 26, and an Easy Racer Javelin.
> ::
> :: What are the quality/durability factors for these bikes? I will be
> :: mostly commuting, but might want to do a little touring.
>
> Personally, from all that I've read about these bikes, I doubt you could go
> wrong with any one of them. Of course, the higher priced models tend to have
> better components, I think, and I'd worry more about q/d factors on the
> lower priced models. I wonder if a 20 in front might be better for
> commuting.

I was wanting the 20 front, but the guy local only has a Giro 26 in
stock. Can't remember what the Cafe has out front.

I'm not really wanting to have my feet above my head while trying to
navigate traffic. This would be my first bent anyway.

>
> It would seem that a $1000 'bent is like a $600 DF, roughly.
>
> Have you been over to bentrideronline.com w/ this question?
>
>

I've been looking over there, but haven't found the right slot yet to
post in.

Date: 14 May 2007 14:03:52
From: Roger Zoul
Subject: Re: Quality feedback on these bikes

duh wrote:
:: Roger Zoul wrote:
::: duh wrote:
::::: I'm going to be looking at a RANS Rocket, Bacchetta Cafe, Baccheta
::::: Giro 20 or 26, and an Easy Racer Javelin.
:::::
::::: What are the quality/durability factors for these bikes? I will
::::: be mostly commuting, but might want to do a little touring.
:::
::: Personally, from all that I've read about these bikes, I doubt you
::: could go wrong with any one of them. Of course, the higher priced
::: models tend to have better components, I think, and I'd worry more
::: about q/d factors on the lower priced models. I wonder if a 20 in
::: front might be better for commuting.
::
:: I was wanting the 20 front, but the guy local only has a Giro 26 in
:: stock. Can't remember what the Cafe has out front.
::
:: I'm not really wanting to have my feet above my head while trying to
:: navigate traffic. This would be my first bent anyway.
::

I have a dual 26 LWB (Rans Stratus) but the BB is lower so the effect isn't
so great. However, a SWB is thought by many to better for commuting, though
a 20/26 w/ low BB LWB is also thought to be good for that, too. Having your
feet closer to the ground is helpful in stop/go traffic, and being able to
move in/out/through tight spots easily is very important, I think.

:::
::: It would seem that a $1000 'bent is like a $600 DF, roughly.
:::
::: Have you been over to bentrideronline.com w/ this question?
:::
:::
::
:: I've been looking over there, but haven't found the right slot yet to
:: post in.

I'd suggest in the New To Recumbents forum under General Discussions forum.
Don't be shy, though, people are glad to help there.

Date: 16 May 2007 08:27:59
From: Jon
Subject: Re: Quality feedback on these bikes

"Roger Zoul" <rogerzoul2@hotmail.com > wrote
> duh wrote:
> :: I'm not really wanting to have my feet above my head while trying to
> :: navigate traffic. This would be my first bent anyway.

My feet are below eye level by several inches on my Volae.

> [...] However, a SWB is thought by many to better for commuting, though a
> 20/26 w/ low BB LWB is also thought to be good for that, too. Having your
> feet closer to the ground is helpful in stop/go traffic,

This depends on rider comfort level/experience with the higher bottom
bracket. And maybe with seating position...

I ride with mirrors on all my recumbents, but the more upright seats
of the TourEasy and BikeE make looking over my shoulder before
changing lanes easier (e.g., when moving across multiple lanes to make
left turn).

> and being able to move in/out/through tight spots easily is very
> important, I think.

Hmmm. I prefer not to be riding through "tight spots" when interfacing
with vehicles (stop and go, commuting, etc...) Any route designed
for motor vehicles shouldn't present "tight spot" problems for
bikes including LWB recumbents. What sort of these situations do
you regularly encounter when riding in traffic?

In my experience, there's not much difference in between low bottom
bracket and high, LWB and SWB, in terms of "in/out/through tight spots."
There might be some difference in smallest turning radius for short vs.
long, but heel strike can be an issue for tight low speed turns on many
SWB recumbents.

I do find my CLWB BikeE somewhat better at low speed, tight quarters
handling than either my LWB TourEasy (406/622) or my SWB Volae
(571/571). I attribute this mainly to the BikeE's steering responsiveness
and higher center of gravity.

Jon Meinecke

Date: 16 May 2007 11:26:12
From: Roger Zoul
Subject: Re: Quality feedback on these bikes

Jon wrote:
:: "Roger Zoul" <rogerzoul2@hotmail.com > wrote
::: duh wrote:
::::: I'm not really wanting to have my feet above my head while trying
::::: to navigate traffic. This would be my first bent anyway.
::
:: My feet are below eye level by several inches on my Volae.
::
::: [...] However, a SWB is thought by many to better for commuting,
::: though a 20/26 w/ low BB LWB is also thought to be good for that,
::: too. Having your feet closer to the ground is helpful in stop/go
::: traffic,
::
:: This depends on rider comfort level/experience with the higher bottom
:: bracket. And maybe with seating position...

The OP is a newbie to recumbents. Also, I think having your feet closer to
the ground is helpful period, but that doesn't mean that you can't be
comfortable & proficient on a bike with a higher BB.

::
:: I ride with mirrors on all my recumbents, but the more upright seats
:: of the TourEasy and BikeE make looking over my shoulder before
:: changing lanes easier (e.g., when moving across multiple lanes to
:: make left turn).
::
::: and being able to move in/out/through tight spots easily is very
::: important, I think.
::
:: Hmmm. I prefer not to be riding through "tight spots" when
:: interfacing with vehicles (stop and go, commuting, etc...) Any
:: route designed
:: for motor vehicles shouldn't present "tight spot" problems for
:: bikes including LWB recumbents. What sort of these situations do
:: you regularly encounter when riding in traffic?

Tight spots don't have to be in traffic...you could be riding to the store
and want to do some cut throughs in a parking lot, while on the way home
from work. You could be forced to ride around something in the road that you
encounter suddenly. Many situations can arise that aren't routine.
Sometimes simply being "nimble" is good.

::
:: In my experience, there's not much difference in between low bottom
:: bracket and high, LWB and SWB, in terms of "in/out/through tight
:: spots." There might be some difference in smallest turning radius
:: for short vs. long, but heel strike can be an issue for tight low
:: speed turns on many SWB recumbents.

I find it really hard to do a U turn on most two-lane roads I ride on on my
LWB. It's usually easier to simply stop on the other side, get off, and turn
the bike around. Maybe it's a skill issue, though.

::
:: I do find my CLWB BikeE somewhat better at low speed, tight quarters
:: handling than either my LWB TourEasy (406/622) or my SWB Volae
:: (571/571). I attribute this mainly to the BikeE's steering
:: responsiveness and higher center of gravity.

Date: 18 May 2007 08:18:35
From: Jon
Subject: Re: Quality feedback on these bikes

"Roger Zoul" <rogerzoul2@hotmail.com > wrote:
> Jon wrote:
> :: This depends on rider comfort level/experience with
> :: the higher bottom bracket. [...]
>
> The OP is a newbie to recumbents.

Ack. My bikes in order of acquisition are CLWB BikeE AT, LWB
TourEasy, and SWB Volae Sport ('high racer"). Lower bottom
bracket designs may make a recumbent look and feel a bit
less "alien".

> Also, I think having your feet closer to the ground is helpful period,
> but that doesn't mean that you can't be comfortable & proficient
> on a bike with a higher BB.

Define "helpful". %^)

All bike designs represent compromises of various sorts. For
a "low racer", being able to put a hand down when stopped
might be considered a helpful advantage. Being able to go
fast may be helpful.

The big storage box behind the seat of my BikeE is helpful
as is the rear shock absorber.

The front fairing on my TourEasy is helpful as well as the
fenders and underseat rack.

The lighter weight of my Volae is helpful as also are the
narrow tires (depending on road condition).

> Tight spots don't have to be in traffic...you could be riding
> to the store and want to do some cut throughs in a parking lot,
> while on the way home from work.

Not much real world difference in my experience comparing
TourEasy and Volae for this sort of "tight spot". Most places
where bike length might be an issue require slow speeds.

> You could be forced to ride around something in the road that you
> encounter suddenly.

At road speeds, I find the LWB may have a very slight advantage
in dodging potholes or road debris. I think this is a funciton
of the "crusing stability" feel... For me, it recovers better from
and perhaps more predictably to large steering input at speed
and the more upright seating positions means it's easier to
shift body weight.

> Many situations can arise that aren't routine.
> Sometimes simply being "nimble" is good.

"Nimblest" for me it my BikeE. The TourEasy and Volae are
about equally "nimble",-- different, but overall about equal.

> I find it really hard to do a U turn on most two-lane roads
> I ride on my LWB. It's usually easier to simply stop on the
> other side, get off, and turn the bike around. Maybe it's
> a skill issue, though.

I can do a U turn on my LWB in similar space and speed to
my SWB.

If I recall correctly, in the instruction video that came with
my TourEasy, Garner Martin performs a very quick and tight
U turn. It's been a long time since I watched it, but I
think he let the bike "fall" into the turn and then recovered
balance with power input. Definitely a skill.

Jon

Date: 18 May 2007 09:50:31
From: Roger Zoul
Subject: Re: Quality feedback on these bikes

Jon wrote:
:: "Roger Zoul" <rogerzoul2@hotmail.com > wrote:
::: Jon wrote:
::::: This depends on rider comfort level/experience with
::::: the higher bottom bracket. [...]
:::
::: The OP is a newbie to recumbents.
::
:: Ack. My bikes in order of acquisition are CLWB BikeE AT, LWB
:: TourEasy, and SWB Volae Sport ('high racer"). Lower bottom
:: bracket designs may make a recumbent look and feel a bit
:: less "alien".

That translates to easier to ride, IME, since, as you say, it feels a bit
less "alien". Not to say that one cannot adapt, mind you. I think initial
comfort is important and where a person sees h/im/er-self riding after
getting the bike home makes a world of difference in that comfort level.

::
::: Also, I think having your feet closer to the ground is helpful
::: period, but that doesn't mean that you can't be comfortable &
::: proficient
::: on a bike with a higher BB.
::
:: Define "helpful". %^)

Well, I'm thinking in terms of a newbie, mostly. But even someone who
mainly rides a high BB high racer ought to find that getting on a low BB
bike easy to adjust too (though maybe not prefered), whereas one coming from
experience with a low BB bike will likely find moving to a high BB high
racer harder. Now, given time, I do think those issues can be worked
through by most who are willing to try. Do you really disagree with that?

::
:: All bike designs represent compromises of various sorts. For
:: a "low racer", being able to put a hand down when stopped
:: might be considered a helpful advantage. Being able to go
:: fast may be helpful.

Being able to go fast is always helpful, too, IMO. Now, being so low to the
ground may be uncomfortable for many.

::
:: The big storage box behind the seat of my BikeE is helpful
:: as is the rear shock absorber.
::

Same on my Stratus XP (I guess - I hadn't thought about shock absorption).

:: The front fairing on my TourEasy is helpful as well as the
:: fenders and underseat rack.

:)

Of course. However, I don't see why it's such a leap that a low BB would be
helpful to a newbie.

::
:: The lighter weight of my Volae is helpful as also are the
:: narrow tires (depending on road condition).
::

Narrow tires might not always be helpful. Rolling downhill fast is not
helped much with a light bike.

I'm just throwing possibilities out here, though. I like light on a bike,
but not necessarily narrow tires.

::: Tight spots don't have to be in traffic...you could be riding
::: to the store and want to do some cut throughs in a parking lot,
::: while on the way home from work.
::
:: Not much real world difference in my experience comparing
:: TourEasy and Volae for this sort of "tight spot". Most places
:: where bike length might be an issue require slow speeds.

True. However, I find my "SWB" DF to be a bit easier to zoom through/around
things in parking lots than is it for me on my LWB 'bent. Maybe that's not
a fair comparison, though.

::
::: You could be forced to ride around something in the road that you
::: encounter suddenly.
::
:: At road speeds, I find the LWB may have a very slight advantage
:: in dodging potholes or road debris. I think this is a funciton
:: of the "crusing stability" feel... For me, it recovers better from
:: and perhaps more predictably to large steering input at speed
:: and the more upright seating positions means it's easier to
:: shift body weight.

I can buy that. But I find many times that on the roads I'm not always
going road speeds....intersections, near slow moving vehicles, people, etc.

::
::: Many situations can arise that aren't routine.
::: Sometimes simply being "nimble" is good.
::
:: "Nimblest" for me it my BikeE. The TourEasy and Volae are
:: about equally "nimble",-- different, but overall about equal.

Do you really find your Sport to be as easy as your TE in a lot of
stop/go/turning riding? Perhaps on an obstacle course where you know you can
keep moving forward they are equal, but is that so when you need to move
around something, perhaps stop, and then get back to speed again? You're
likely a skilled rider, though that may indeed mean they are equal for you.
But what about for me?

::
::: I find it really hard to do a U turn on most two-lane roads
::: I ride on my LWB. It's usually easier to simply stop on the
::: other side, get off, and turn the bike around. Maybe it's
::: a skill issue, though.
::
:: I can do a U turn on my LWB in similar space and speed to
:: my SWB.

Would you try it on either on a narrow two-lane road where traffic may
appear suddenly? Also, which do you ride most frequently? Do you think
skill level relates more to total miles on a bike or to some combination of
total miles and frequency of riding or something else?

I have thought about how to develop skill on a bent. Since there seem to be
all of these differences, it seems as if the skill sets might differ somehow
among them. What are you thoughts on this?

::
:: If I recall correctly, in the instruction video that came with
:: my TourEasy, Garner Martin performs a very quick and tight
:: U turn. It's been a long time since I watched it, but I
:: think he let the bike "fall" into the turn and then recovered
:: balance with power input. Definitely a skill.

I have found that I can make a tigher turn if I let the bike fall a bit
while powering through the pedal strokes. IOW, appling power through the
turn seems to help. However, it's a little unnerving to do these under real
life conditions, or, under "real life road" conditions where cars maybe
around.

I probably should practice this some more! :)

Date: 22 May 2007 07:14:54
From: Jon
Subject: Re: Quality feedback on these bikes

"Roger Zoul" <rogerzoul2@hotmail.com > wrote
> ::: Also, I think having your feet closer to the ground is helpful
> ::: period,
>
> ::: Jon wrote:
> :: Define "helpful". %^)
>
> Well, I'm thinking in terms of a newbie, mostly. But even someone who
> mainly rides a high BB high racer ought to find that getting on a low BB
> bike easy to adjust too (though maybe not preferred), whereas one coming
> from experience with a low BB bike will likely find moving to a high BB
> high racer harder. Now, given time, I do think those issues can be worked
> through by most who are willing to try. Do you really disagree with that?

No disagreement with lower BB being more approachable for many.
It's the "period" that I would rather qualify, and the degree of working-
through required... I had no starting, stopping, balance or low-speed
maneuverability issues on my first (26x26) SWB test ride. Some
cyclists with no other recumbent experience have test ridden my
Volae without serious challenge.

> [...] I don't see why it's such a leap that a low BB
> would be helpful to a newbie.

Not a leap. It's part of the picture. The BikeE is one of the easiest
'bents to first ride, I think. Upright seating, low bottom bracket,
higher center of gravity,... all contribute to ease. But if someone
bought a BikeE to go fast and far, they likely found some BikeE
attributes not as helpful as perhaps a different design, whether low
or high bottom bracketed.

> :: The lighter weight of my Volae is helpful as also are the
> :: narrow tires (depending on road condition).
>
> Narrow tires might not always be helpful.

As I said, helpful,-- depending on road conditions... That's why I have
three recumbent bikes. %^)

> Rolling downhill fast is not helped much with a light bike.

Yes, me and my TE do have superior potential energy over lighter
riders and lighter bikes after I've spun it up a hill, particularly
with touring gear on board!

> I'm just throwing possibilities out here, though. I like light on a bike,
> but not necessarily narrow tires.

On the right surface, the Volae with high-pressure narrow tires feels
like it is floating/flying.

> True. However, I find my "SWB" DF to be a bit easier to zoom
> through/around things in parking lots than is it for me on my LWB 'bent.
> Maybe that's not a fair comparison, though.

I find zooming through parking lots not compatible with my own
safety. %^O

But again, for going "around things" at any given speed, I find my SWB
and LWB very similar. Perhaps I'm just slower or not interested in
testing traction/handling limits! %^)

> Do you really find your Sport to be as easy as your TE in a lot of
> stop/go/turning riding?

Yes. There are difference, as I said. The Volae accelerates faster.
That's helpful. The TE makes looking over shoulder easier. That's
helpful. %^)

If I were commuting by bike (I wish I could), I'd probably choose
the Volae or the TE mainly based on the weather. Fenders, fairing,
wider tires, for cold or wet weather. Lighter frame and narrow tires
for fairer weather. The high/low BB is well down in deciding
factors.

> Would you try [U turn] on either on a narrow two-lane road
> where traffic may appear suddenly?

Given sufficient line of sight, I do.

> Also, which do you ride most frequently?

The BikeE gets use once or twice a week for short trips/errands. It
also gets occasional off-road use. It has the fewest miles overall.

Last year, I rode mostly the Volae for other rides (15-60 miles). It's
faster, for me, for the same effort by 10% or so than the Tour Easy,
particularly on hilly routes. Lately, I've been riding the TourEasy
mainly. I'm training for an extended tour, sometime. the TE is also
my choice for the packed/semi-hard multi-use path riding. I have
about twice the miles on the TE than on the Volae, but I've owned
the TE longer.

> Do you think skill level relates more to total miles on a bike or to
> some combination of total miles and frequency of riding or
> something else?
>
> I have thought about how to develop skill on a bent. Since there seem to
> be all of these differences, it seems as if the skill sets might differ
> somehow among them. What are you thoughts on this?

Hmmm. I haven't thought much about this. If there's an adjustment
for the handling/skill differences among my bikes, it's automatic
now. As I said, I don't test the limits too much,-- though I've done
so unintentionally in the past and have the road rash scars to show
for it. %^P All of those cases involved "surface traction" issues.
I've yet to go down hard riding the Volae.

Jon

Date: 14 May 2007 12:01:49
From: duh
Subject: Re: Quality feedback on these bikes

Roger Zoul wrote:

>
> I'd suggest in the New To Recumbents forum under General Discussions forum.
> Don't be shy, though, people are glad to help there.
>
>

h'okay. Thanks Rog. (I can call you Rog, now that we've been
introduced, right?) ;-)