| |
Main
Date: 27 Aug 2006 07:21:52
From:
Subject: Test ride P38,Strada,Corsa
|
I'm new to recumbents and I test rode 3 bikes yesterday.
P38 - I really liked the seat and the handlebars. I thought the
handling was twitchy.
Strada - My shins hit the handlebars, and the guy at the bike shop said
there was no adjustment. I like the euromesh seat and the handling. The
tires looked way to thin and fragile for the kind of riding I want to
do.
Corsa - Hate the recurve seat, I don't like the seat horn. Handling was
good. No problem with the high BB. I didn't like the handle bars as
much as the P38 but maybe if I adjusted them I'd like them better. The
handlebars were pointing back horizontally compared to the P38 which
was pointing down.
I want something I can ride thru parking lots and sidewalks, something
that can handle bumpy conditions. I'm not really interested in going
fast. So far I'm leaning towards a Giro 20 with wider tires (65psi?)
and a euromesh seat. Does that sound like a good choice?
|
|
| |
Date: 12 Sep 2006 13:10:17
From: K_S_ONeill
Subject: Re: Test ride P38,Strada,Corsa
|
cr113@hotmail.com wrote:
> Kevin O'Neill wrote:
> > I, personally, think the glide flex thing on the Corsa stem sucks. I
> > know a lot of people like it. I can't imagine why. I think it makes
> > the bike feel flakey. Try to ride an Aero to get an idea of what the
> > bike should feel like, I hated the Corsa until I rode the Aero. The
> > glideflex seemed to me to put a lot of slop in the steering, it felt
> > very unsure of itself even when the stem was set up parallel to the
> > steer tube.
>
> What is the glideflex? I just ordered a Giro 20, but I still have time
> to make adjustmemts since I have to wait a month for the 2007s. One of
> my concerns is the bars. I want the bike to be as manuverable as
> possible at slow speeds. I'm worried about my legs hitting the bars on
> slow turns and making quick adjustments.
The glideflex is the bit on the stem that allows you to pivot the stem
forward out of the way when getting on the bike, and to adjust the
angle of the stem. Like this:
http://makeashorterlink.com/?U3A6130CD
Look at the Giro 20:
http://makeashorterlink.com/?P2B6320CD
and compare the base of the stem to the Aero:
http://makeashorterlink.com/?Y1C6130CD
Actually, I see that the current version of the Corsa doesn't have the
glideflex thing either, according to the picture, anyway.
The guy at one of the bike shops I test rode at said more or less what
someone out here has said, that angling the stem back towards you makes
the bike feel odd at low speeds but is very stable at high speeds.
Both our fellow arbr-er and the bike shop guy no doubt have lots more
miles on a bent than I do, so you should take my experience with a
grain of salt, but that was not my experience. I rode about 200 miles
on my Corsa with the glideflex on and set to various angles, and it
felt so funky I couldn't even bring myself to take a drink of water
while riding, I was scared to let go of the bars. I was very sad. I
really thought I'd spent a lot of money (for me, it was used, but it
still wasn't free) to get a bike I didn't like to ride. Taking the
glideflex off transformed the bike, it feels now like I get better at
handling it every time I ride it, and it feels like more of my DF
skills transfer when it's like this.
You could go ask to test ride a bike without the glideflex, and if you
don't want it they should be able to build you a Giro without one.
They have to leave the steer tube uncut, so they'll have to do it at
the factory or send you a new fork, but it will save them a part so you
might even get some money back.
--
Kevin
|
| | |
Date: 12 Sep 2006 21:15:17
From: Zebee Johnstone
Subject: Re: Test ride P38,Strada,Corsa
|
> grain of salt, but that was not my experience. I rode about 200 miles
> on my Corsa with the glideflex on and set to various angles, and it
> felt so funky I couldn't even bring myself to take a drink of water
> while riding, I was scared to let go of the bars. I was very sad. I
I find this weird.... I don't know if it's because the Corsa and Giro
20 are such different bikes, if I'm just terminally slow, or if it's
because I hven't ridden a Df in years, but I don't find this problem.
ON the flat or down hill at speeds up to 50kmh I haven't had a problem
with the bike feeling wrong. Haven't gone over those speeds because I
don't bother pedalling down hills on a commute.
I've ridden a bent where it was dead twitchy at speed, and this one
isn't.
I like the glideflex as I have short legs so its hard to get in and
out of the bike without it. I dislike it because I find it flops down
and upsets the balance of the thing when I'm getting it through doors.
But not enough to change it.
Zebee
|
| |
Date: 12 Sep 2006 08:18:30
From: amakyonin
Subject: Re: Second Class Facilities for Cyclists
|
Bill Z. wrote:
> It isn't a path - it is a road crossing. While not ideal, there might
> not have been room for a bike to wait in the center of the road
> unless aligned parallel to traffic, and traffic levels could be such
> that it would take a very long time to find a gap in traffic in
> both directions at once
The solution for this situation is to get off the bike and become a
pedestrian. Peds have a supreme right of way that cannot be usurped by
impatient cagers. Peds with an established ROW only have to yield to
emergency vehicles. If the traffic is so heavy that no one will stop
and I can't get a gap after waiting a while then I will start to inch
my way into the crosswalk until they have to stop to avoid hitting me.
This is provided that there is a normal intersection with a crosswalk
(ked or unked) and not a special MUP intersection which is left
in a legal gray zone.
|
| | |
Date: 12 Sep 2006 17:27:35
From: Bill Z.
Subject: Re: Second Class Facilities for Cyclists
|
"amakyonin" <amakyonin-u1@yahoo.com > writes:
> Bill Z. wrote:
>
> > It isn't a path - it is a road crossing. While not ideal, there might
> > not have been room for a bike to wait in the center of the road
> > unless aligned parallel to traffic, and traffic levels could be such
> > that it would take a very long time to find a gap in traffic in
> > both directions at once
>
> The solution for this situation is to get off the bike and become a
> pedestrian.
... irrelevant - the issue was what I presume to be a divider or
island in the center of the road, without enough width for a bike to
fit perpendicular to the street and that is not dependent on whether
you are riding the bike or walking it across.
It is sometimes much easier to cross each direction of traffic
independently, waiting for gaps at a center divider, than to have to
find a gap in both directions large enough for you to get all the way
across - and that is even more of an issue if you walk the bike
because the gap you need is longer due to needing more time to cross
the street as a pedestrian.
Finally, the ramps to get onto the divider may be used by bikes, but
they can also be required for ADA compliance (i.e., wheelchair
access).
--
My real name backwards: nemuaZ lliB
|
| | |
Date: 12 Sep 2006 12:51:08
From: sfb
Subject: Re: Second Class Facilities for Cyclists
|
Cemeteries are full of pedestrians who had the right of way.
"amakyonin" <amakyonin-u1@yahoo.com > wrote in message
news:1158074310.054176.225710@h48g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
>
> Bill Z. wrote:
>
>> It isn't a path - it is a road crossing. While not ideal, there might
>> not have been room for a bike to wait in the center of the road
>> unless aligned parallel to traffic, and traffic levels could be such
>> that it would take a very long time to find a gap in traffic in
>> both directions at once
>
> The solution for this situation is to get off the bike and become a
> pedestrian. Peds have a supreme right of way that cannot be usurped by
> impatient cagers. Peds with an established ROW only have to yield to
> emergency vehicles. If the traffic is so heavy that no one will stop
> and I can't get a gap after waiting a while then I will start to inch
> my way into the crosswalk until they have to stop to avoid hitting me.
> This is provided that there is a normal intersection with a crosswalk
> (ked or unked) and not a special MUP intersection which is left
> in a legal gray zone.
>
|
| |
Date: 11 Sep 2006 17:31:56
From: Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman
Subject: Second Class Facilities for Cyclists
|
Zebee Johnstone wrote:
> ...
> As an example, one of the local bike paths has a chicane effect at
> road crossings. You go off the path down a ramp to the road, cross
> the one lane of traffic to the middle of the road, then there's a big
> lump of concrete in the middle of the road. It has an entrance for
> the bike, you go 90deg left then you have a couple of feet more than a
> bike length, then you have a 90deg right to exit and cross the other
> side of the road....
The above has no business being called a bicycle path.
--
Tom Sherman - Behind the Cheddar Curtain
|
| | |
Date: 12 Sep 2006 02:34:32
From: Bill Z.
Subject: Re: Second Class Facilities for Cyclists
|
"Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman" <sunsetss0003@yahoo.com > writes:
> Zebee Johnstone wrote:
> > ...
> > As an example, one of the local bike paths has a chicane effect at
> > road crossings. You go off the path down a ramp to the road, cross
> > the one lane of traffic to the middle of the road, then there's a big
> > lump of concrete in the middle of the road. It has an entrance for
> > the bike, you go 90deg left then you have a couple of feet more than a
> > bike length, then you have a 90deg right to exit and cross the other
> > side of the road....
>
> The above has no business being called a bicycle path.
It isn't a path - it is a road crossing. While not ideal, there might
not have been room for a bike to wait in the center of the road
unless aligned parallel to traffic, and traffic levels could be such
that it would take a very long time to find a gap in traffic in
both directions at once (e.g., heavy traffic with 3 lanes in each
direction, but with traffic signals causing gaps in the flow of
traffic).
It may look silly on a weekend and pretty useful during rush hour
traffic if it at least lets you get across the street without waiting
five minutes to find a gap.
--
My real name backwards: nemuaZ lliB
|
| | | |
Date: 12 Sep 2006 21:21:30
From: Zebee Johnstone
Subject: Re: Second Class Facilities for Cyclists
|
In alt.rec.bicycles.recumbent on Tue, 12 Sep 2006 02:34:32 GMT
Bill Z. <nobody@nospam.pacbell.net > wrote:
>
> It isn't a path - it is a road crossing. While not ideal, there might
> not have been room for a bike to wait in the center of the road
> unless aligned parallel to traffic, and traffic levels could be such
> that it would take a very long time to find a gap in traffic in
> both directions at once (e.g., heavy traffic with 3 lanes in each
> direction, but with traffic signals causing gaps in the flow of
> traffic).
I think it's more about space for bikes to wait, given that the paths
are used a hell of a lot by recreational riders with dodgy traffic
skills. The roads aren't heavily trafficked really, and only one lane
each way. It might also be to make riders stop, wait, and look,
rather than barrel out of the path and trust to God.
I was mistaken about the length, I said "a bike length and a couple of
feet" but I think it's more like about 2 bike lengths. So there's
room for a couple of people to wait.
Experienced cyclists find them annoying and bypass them if possible.
Did give me the opportunity to learn low speed tight turns though.
Now, if I can only get that damn bridge over the river right! U
shaped bridge with a 180 deg turn at entrance and exit. I think one
side is just too short for the bent to make it round, but I think I
can do the other with more practice.
Zebee
|
| | | | |
Date: 13 Sep 2006 00:19:52
From: Bill Z.
Subject: Re: Second Class Facilities for Cyclists
|
Zebee Johnstone <zebeej@gmail.com > writes:
> In alt.rec.bicycles.recumbent on Tue, 12 Sep 2006 02:34:32 GMT
> Bill Z. <nobody@nospam.pacbell.net> wrote:
> >
> > It isn't a path - it is a road crossing. While not ideal, there might
> > not have been room for a bike to wait in the center of the road
> > unless aligned parallel to traffic, and traffic levels could be such
> > that it would take a very long time to find a gap in traffic in
> > both directions at once (e.g., heavy traffic with 3 lanes in each
> > direction, but with traffic signals causing gaps in the flow of
> > traffic).
>
> I think it's more about space for bikes to wait, given that the paths
> are used a hell of a lot by recreational riders with dodgy traffic
> skills. The roads aren't heavily trafficked really, and only one lane
> each way. It might also be to make riders stop, wait, and look,
> rather than barrel out of the path and trust to God.
I think we are talking about different situations. Something in the
center of the road is useful when traffic is so heavy that it is
hard to find a safe gap to cross the street at once. If you can
go half way, you can find a gap in each direction of traffic
independently. That is only important when traffic is fairly heavy
such as during commute hours. If you use the road at a different
time of the day, you may find it all rather pointless.
> I was mistaken about the length, I said "a bike length and a couple of
> feet" but I think it's more like about 2 bike lengths. So there's
> room for a couple of people to wait.
>
> Experienced cyclists find them annoying and bypass them if possible.
Well, I wouldn't find them annoying for the situation described above,
which is a special case. We have a few paths in town that have some
sharp turns to get people to stop at a road crossing, but in this case
it is not unreasonable - the path has heavy vegetation on the sides
and the road is narrow, making it easy to not notice that you are
approaching a roadway. In addition, the path is used by children
going to school and without something to slow then down, they would
just go as fast as they could and shoot out into the intersection,
thinking very light traffic means non-existent traffic (in fact, the
curves were put in after people complained that the kids were shooting
out of the path and ending up in front of their cars).
Also, I once road along a path connecting my town to an adjacent one,
mostly to see where it went. At our end, there was a stop sign, which
also served to warn you that you were approaching a road. In the
neighboring town, there was nothing. The path curved a lot and I
ended up having to do a fairly quick stop to avoid shooting out into a
cross street. With all the vegetation on the sides of the path, it
was difficult to tell that one was approaching a roadway, and the path
and roadway were the same color with no sidewalk.
--
My real name backwards: nemuaZ lliB
|
| | |
Date: 11 Sep 2006 20:59:19
From: Earl Bollinger
Subject: Re: Second Class Facilities for Cyclists
|
"Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman" <sunsetss0003@yahoo.com > wrote in message
news:1158021116.713298.83610@i42g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>
> Zebee Johnstone wrote:
>> ...
>> As an example, one of the local bike paths has a chicane effect at
>> road crossings. You go off the path down a ramp to the road, cross
>> the one lane of traffic to the middle of the road, then there's a big
>> lump of concrete in the middle of the road. It has an entrance for
>> the bike, you go 90deg left then you have a couple of feet more than a
>> bike length, then you have a 90deg right to exit and cross the other
>> side of the road....
>
> The above has no business being called a bicycle path.
>
> --
> Tom Sherman - Behind the Cheddar Curtain
>
I remember reading somewhere about that being a engineering feature
(non-cyclists obviously) where they force you to slow down at traffic
crossing points, in order to minimize accidents occurring. Other features
are lots of curves and twists in the path to prevent someone from riding
along at a fast pace. The intention being to keep everyone below 10 mph or
some such speed. Thus cyclists are less of a hazard to pedestrians,
strollers, runners and joggers.
There were some other "fun" features but I forget what they are at the
moment.
So they did that on purpose.
|
| |
Date: 11 Sep 2006 17:25:59
From: Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman
Subject: Re: Test ride P38,Strada,Corsa
|
cr113@hotmail.com wrote:
> Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman wrote:
> > Unless the RANS V-Rex has changed, you should be able to fit a set of
> > Schwalbe Big Apple [1] tires, which will provide reasonable rolling
> > resistance while fulfilling your other requirements.
> >
> > Note as the Lightning P-38 is being considered, certain Lightning forks
> > do not have clearance for fat tires. The rear of the P-38 is fairly
> > tight, and the choice in wide tires in the ISO 622-mm size [2] is
> > restricted compared to the ISO 559-mm ATB size.
>
> Thanks for the info. I was wondering about that.
>
> I talked with a guy who works for Bacchetta and he recommended 1.5" 100
> psi tires for bumpy conditions as opposed to 65 psi. He said the 65 psi
> were prone to pinch flats. I'm not going to be mtn biking but I want to
> at least be able to handle bumps and hard packed dirt trails.
Resistance to pinch flatting depends on BOTH tire pressure and tire
volume. Although there is no readily available test data to prove it, I
suspect that a 60-599 Schwalbe Big Apple at 4.5-bar (65 psi) is more
pinch flat resistant than a 40-599 Primo Racer at 6.9-bar (100 psi).
The Schwalbe will also have similar or lower rolling resistance.
The Primo would be the faster tire on road due to lighter weight and
lower frontal area, and therefore a better choice for "hammerheads"
interested priily in speed. The Big Apple would be the better choice
for a commuter or someone riding on mixed surfaces.
If you buy a recumbent with an ISO 406-mm (BMX 20") front wheel, get a
bike with adequate fork and brake clearance to use a wider tire in the
width range of 40 to 60-mm, unless you plan only to ride on well
maintained paved roads. (Some "performance" forks will only allow a
28-406 tire, which is not adequate for commuting, touring or unpaved
surfaces.)
--
Tom Sherman - Behind the Cheddar Curtain
|
| |
Date: 11 Sep 2006 11:31:50
From:
Subject: Re: Test ride P38,Strada,Corsa
|
Kevin O'Neill wrote:
> I, personally, think the glide flex thing on the Corsa stem sucks. I
> know a lot of people like it. I can't imagine why. I think it makes
> the bike feel flakey. Try to ride an Aero to get an idea of what the
> bike should feel like, I hated the Corsa until I rode the Aero. The
> glideflex seemed to me to put a lot of slop in the steering, it felt
> very unsure of itself even when the stem was set up parallel to the
> steer tube.
What is the glideflex? I just ordered a Giro 20, but I still have time
to make adjustmemts since I have to wait a month for the 2007s. One of
my concerns is the bars. I want the bike to be as manuverable as
possible at slow speeds. I'm worried about my legs hitting the bars on
slow turns and making quick adjustments.
|
| | |
Date: 11 Sep 2006 21:45:48
From: Zebee Johnstone
Subject: Re: Test ride P38,Strada,Corsa
|
In alt.rec.bicycles.recumbent on 11 Sep 2006 11:31:50 -0700
cr113@hotmail.com <cr113@hotmail.com > wrote:
>
> What is the glideflex? I just ordered a Giro 20, but I still have time
> to make adjustmemts since I have to wait a month for the 2007s. One of
> my concerns is the bars. I want the bike to be as manuverable as
> possible at slow speeds. I'm worried about my legs hitting the bars on
> slow turns and making quick adjustments.
When I first got my Giro 20 I found slow tight turns almost impossible.
After a deal of practice I was able to do them, but it's no DF bike!
As an example, one of the local bike paths has a chicane effect at
road crossings. You go off the path down a ramp to the road, cross
the one lane of traffic to the middle of the road, then there's a big
lump of concrete in the middle of the road. It has an entrance for
the bike, you go 90deg left then you have a couple of feet more than a
bike length, then you have a 90deg right to exit and cross the other
side of the road.
I had to duckwalk that at first, now I can ride through it.
Sometimes I just drop the inside leg straight, sometimes I have to
unclip it, depends on speed and turn.
It isn't a trials bike, you won't be able to do fancy stuff at slow
speeds as you can on a DF. If you want that, get a delta trike!
You can adjust the bars up a fair way if you want, I haven't felt the
need to. The glideflex allows you to move them to get in and out, I
hear some people move the bars forward in slow turns to get leg
clearance. I tried it and it was awkward but with practice it would
probably work.
Zebee
|
| |
Date: 11 Sep 2006 07:48:18
From: K_S_ONeill
Subject: Re: Test ride P38,Strada,Corsa
|
Jeff Wills wrote:
> Kevin O'Neill wrote:
>
> > I have the carbon seat since it came with the bike and it feels good
> > to me, but I like the euromesh seat too. I rather agree that the
> > tweener bars are ugly, I was just thinking today I might take some
> > aluminum tube to a plumbing shop and get some custom bars bent,
> > something like tweener bars but with the flat sections bent out in an
> > arc to give my shins more clearance when turning.
> >
>
> Kevin: Terracycle offers bars in a variety of bends:
> http://www.terracycle.com/Merchant2/merchant.mvc?Screen=CTGY&Store_Code=T&Category_Code=H
> and they could probably custom bend a set of bars if none of those
> match your "ideal".
Thanks. I looked there, but I don't see what I'm after. That may mean
that what I'm after is a dumb idea, who can say. I'm thinking of
something like the moustache bar shown here about halfway down the
page:
http://www.biowheels.com/Outfitter/Shop_ProductList.asp?C=130&P=129&N=Handlebars
but with a narrower center section, to let me keep my knees closer
together.
> Also- did you try increasing the tension on the Glideflex pivot? I
> found that the increase in friction made a difference in how the bike
> feels.
I did, and it helped a little, but it still felt mushy to me. I went
from a fair amount of angle to no angle, to no angle and the glideflex
torqued down as much as I could manage, to thinking "hey, if it's not
angling the stem and I'm trying to get it to act like it's one solid
bit, perhaps it's a half pound of hardware I don't need to haul around,
forsooth." And the bike does seem to me to handle better without it.
I know lots of people like it, though. Maybe I'll sell mine to one of
them, it's just sitting on a shelf and I'm not likely to put it back
on.
To be fair, I'm sure it's useful if you have long legs and short arms,
to allow you to slide the seat back and still reach the bars. I have
monkey arms, so I don't need it.
--
Kevin
|
| |
Date: 10 Sep 2006 20:53:23
From: Jeff Wills
Subject: Re: Test ride P38,Strada,Corsa
|
Kevin O'Neill wrote:
> I have the carbon seat since it came with the bike and it feels good
> to me, but I like the euromesh seat too. I rather agree that the
> tweener bars are ugly, I was just thinking today I might take some
> aluminum tube to a plumbing shop and get some custom bars bent,
> something like tweener bars but with the flat sections bent out in an
> arc to give my shins more clearance when turning.
>
Kevin: Terracycle offers bars in a variety of bends:
http://www.terracycle.com/Merchant2/merchant.mvc?Screen=CTGY&Store_Code=T&Category_Code=H
and they could probably custom bend a set of bars if none of those
match your "ideal".
Also- did you try increasing the tension on the Glideflex pivot? I
found that the increase in friction made a difference in how the bike
feels.
Jeff
|
| |
Date: 10 Sep 2006 21:33:37
From: Kevin O'Neill
Subject: Re: Test ride P38,Strada,Corsa
|
On 27 Aug 2006 07:21:52 -0700, cr113@hotmail.com wrote:
>I'm new to recumbents and I test rode 3 bikes yesterday.
>
>P38 - I really liked the seat and the handlebars. I thought the
>handling was twitchy.
>
>Strada - My shins hit the handlebars, and the guy at the bike shop said
>there was no adjustment. I like the euromesh seat and the handling. The
>tires looked way to thin and fragile for the kind of riding I want to
>do.
>
>Corsa - Hate the recurve seat, I don't like the seat horn. Handling was
>good. No problem with the high BB. I didn't like the handle bars as
>much as the P38 but maybe if I adjusted them I'd like them better. The
>handlebars were pointing back horizontally compared to the P38 which
>was pointing down.
>
>I want something I can ride thru parking lots and sidewalks, something
>that can handle bumpy conditions. I'm not really interested in going
>fast. So far I'm leaning towards a Giro 20 with wider tires (65psi?)
>and a euromesh seat. Does that sound like a good choice?
I'm a fairly new bent rider, but I'll chime in anyway since you're
doing more or less exactly what I did. Thus:
The monotube designs bugged me until I rode one. I couldn't make the
Corsa frame flex noticably, and I know what frame flex feels like, my
DF bike is a '79 Bertin, so I forgot about it. It's plenty stiff for
me. And they're pretty.
I thought the undersized front wheels to be a freakin' menace in any
sort of rough riding. There was some pavement ripple near the bike
shop where I rode a RANS, and you could feel it a lot more through the
20" wheel.
I, personally, think the glide flex thing on the Corsa stem sucks. I
know a lot of people like it. I can't imagine why. I think it makes
the bike feel flakey. Try to ride an Aero to get an idea of what the
bike should feel like, I hated the Corsa until I rode the Aero. The
glideflex seemed to me to put a lot of slop in the steering, it felt
very unsure of itself even when the stem was set up parallel to the
steer tube.
I ended up getting a Corsa with a spare cromoly mountain bike fork
that had an uncut steer tube. I took the glideflex thing off and
mounted a short stem right on the steer tube and used the Bacchetta
gadget to tension the headset, it works fine and handles like an Aero.
I put a set of narrow mtb wheels and Specialized kevlar 1.25" 100 psi
slick tires on it. I like it a lot, it's the best handling bent I've
ever been on, and I don't have to worry about moderately bad pavement
or riding over a curb.
I have the carbon seat since it came with the bike and it feels good
to me, but I like the euromesh seat too. I rather agree that the
tweener bars are ugly, I was just thinking today I might take some
aluminum tube to a plumbing shop and get some custom bars bent,
something like tweener bars but with the flat sections bent out in an
arc to give my shins more clearance when turning.
--
Kevin
|
| |
Date: 03 Sep 2006 17:57:45
From:
Subject: Re: Test ride P38,Strada,Corsa
|
Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman wrote:
> Unless the RANS V-Rex has changed, you should be able to fit a set of
> Schwalbe Big Apple [1] tires, which will provide reasonable rolling
> resistance while fulfilling your other requirements.
>
> Note as the Lightning P-38 is being considered, certain Lightning forks
> do not have clearance for fat tires. The rear of the P-38 is fairly
> tight, and the choice in wide tires in the ISO 622-mm size [2] is
> restricted compared to the ISO 559-mm ATB size.
Thanks for the info. I was wondering about that.
I talked with a guy who works for Bacchetta and he recommended 1.5" 100
psi tires for bumpy conditions as opposed to 65 psi. He said the 65 psi
were prone to pinch flats. I'm not going to be mtn biking but I want to
at least be able to handle bumps and hard packed dirt trails.
|
| |
Date: 01 Sep 2006 17:07:43
From: Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman
Subject: Re: Test ride P38,Strada,Corsa
|
cr113@hotmail.com wrote:
> ...
> I'm still leaning towards the Giro 20 but a VRex is a close 2nd. Can
> you put slightly wider tires on the VRex? The specs say 100psi but I
> was thinking about 65psi. I want something that can handle bumps, like
> riding off a curb for example....
Unless the RANS V-Rex has changed, you should be able to fit a set of
Schwalbe Big Apple [1] tires, which will provide reasonable rolling
resistance while fulfilling your other requirements.
Note as the Lightning P-38 is being considered, certain Lightning forks
do not have clearance for fat tires. The rear of the P-38 is fairly
tight, and the choice in wide tires in the ISO 622-mm size [2] is
restricted compared to the ISO 559-mm ATB size.
[1]
<http://schwalbetires.com/bike_tires/road_tires/fatty/big_apple_details >.
[2] Known to Luddites as 700C.
--
Tom Sherman - Behind the Cheddar Curtain
|
| |
Date: 01 Sep 2006 07:33:49
From:
Subject: Re: Test ride P38,Strada,Corsa
|
Jon S. wrote:
>
> My best suggestion re the RANS seat is to start with a completely stock bike
> and a fairly upright position that is probably best for a newish recumbent
> rider since it most closely mimics riding a diamond frame bike, and
> gradually recline the seat. As you begin to lean back, the seat horn
> becomes less significant and soon is no longer an issue. As you gather bent
> experience you can recline more and more. Eventually, there is a trade off
> between aero benefit - greatest with the most reclined position, and the
> best power transfer position. Here's what I mean: We require at least 45
> degrees of bend at the waist to engage the powerful gluteal muscles for hip
> extension in the pedalling action. Less than about 45 degrees of flex and
> there is incrementally less gluteal involvement, forcing you to rely on
> quadriceps more and more. Thighs are strong, but not as strong as quads
> plus glutes. And, this is when some recumbists run into knee problems from
> pressing themselves back against the seat to try to deliver power to the
> pedals. You will find your sweet spot eventually. Also, your musculature
> will adapt to the recumbent - essentially, the inner thigh muscles need time
> to develop.
That's interesting stuff. Another reason I'd like to have the seat more
vertical is that I have very tight hamstrings and that helps stretch
them. I agree that the more you lean back the less pressure you get
from the horn but I would still have to modify the RANS seat. I would
either have shave off some foam or somehow remove the plastic
underneath.
I'm still leaning towards the Giro 20 but a VRex is a close 2nd. Can
you put slightly wider tires on the VRex? The specs say 100psi but I
was thinking about 65psi. I want something that can handle bumps, like
riding off a curb for example. One time I borrowed my friend's Colnago
and I crumpled the front rim when I rode off a curb. Luckily the rims
had a lifetime warranty!
|
| |
Date: 30 Aug 2006 16:56:44
From: Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman
Subject: Re: Test ride P38,Strada,Corsa
|
Victor Kan wrote:
> ...
>
> How does a triangulated design make "more sense"?
Calculate the moment of inertia for a monotube and a properly designed
truss of the same weight, keeping in mind an adequate factor of safety
against buckling, and the answer becomes clear. A truss puts the frame
material where it does the most good - priily loaded in tension and
compression. With a monotube, there is greater "wasted" material near
the neutral axis of bending.
> The proof is in the riding and the building. If an easier/cheaper to
> manufacture monotube frame can perform well in terms of speed, comfort,
> long-term durability (and not just well, but better than some
> triangulated designs as seems to be the case for me, perhaps with the
> exception of durability since the current, popular monotubes are still
> relatively young so that's an unknown), then they make "more sense"....
Don't try to pull a single wheel trailer with most monotube bicycles.
--
Tom Sherman - Behind the Cheddar Curtain
Post Free or Die!
|
| |
Date: 30 Aug 2006 08:16:42
From:
Subject: Re: Test ride P38,Strada,Corsa
|
Jon S. wrote:
> I don't like the monotube bikes. From an aesthetic perspective I think they
> are just ugly. From a mechanical perspective, a triangulated design makes
> more sense. Try a RANS VRex. It ia a OSS SWB and most likely will fit in
> your truck. Triangulated frame means no flex. Possible to sit upright or
> laid back. Room for chubby tires for shock absorption and lotsa choices
> with handlebar configuration. Or put a chock fork or suspension hub on it.
> I have a Pantour hub now and really like it a lot. Downside - The stock
> VRex is geared too high - for somewhere without hills. But that issue is
> endemic to many bents. You can regear the bike for cheap, or have the
> dealer do it as part of the sale.
Are there any seat options? The RANS seat in uncomfortable for me
because of the nose. Do they make a flat seat?
|
| | |
Date: 31 Aug 2006 20:30:47
From: Jon S.
Subject: Re: Test ride P38,Strada,Corsa
|
>
> Are there any seat options? The RANS seat in uncomfortable for me
> because of the nose. Do they make a flat seat?
>
Sorry - I was out of touch a few days.
Here are a couple of links to the RANS site:
http://www.ransbikes.com/ITRSeat.htm Maximizing Recumbent Seat Comfort
http://www.ransbikes.com/ITRHotrod.htm Making a Hot Rod VRex - includes a
carbon seat pan option
http://www.ransbikes.com/ITRseating%20options-27.htm The M5 option works on
the VRex (I am also interested in this option)
My best suggestion re the RANS seat is to start with a completely stock bike
and a fairly upright position that is probably best for a newish recumbent
rider since it most closely mimics riding a diamond frame bike, and
gradually recline the seat. As you begin to lean back, the seat horn
becomes less significant and soon is no longer an issue. As you gather bent
experience you can recline more and more. Eventually, there is a trade off
between aero benefit - greatest with the most reclined position, and the
best power transfer position. Here's what I mean: We require at least 45
degrees of bend at the waist to engage the powerful gluteal muscles for hip
extension in the pedalling action. Less than about 45 degrees of flex and
there is incrementally less gluteal involvement, forcing you to rely on
quadriceps more and more. Thighs are strong, but not as strong as quads
plus glutes. And, this is when some recumbists run into knee problems from
pressing themselves back against the seat to try to deliver power to the
pedals. You will find your sweet spot eventually. Also, your musculature
will adapt to the recumbent - essentially, the inner thigh muscles need time
to develop.
RE why I prefer a trussed frame: Tom described moment arms and material
distribution. Remember Visions? They had significant design problems with
their tandems as chainstays separated from the monotubes at the point of
greatest unrelieved stresses. As the monotube flexed under the weight and
torque of 2 riders, some of their frames failed at the most vulnerable point
which also happens to be the point of greatest torque transfer. Granted, a
dramatic case, but illustrative. I am certain that the Bacchetta designers
have calculated material strength and more importantly, tube diameter to
provide sufficient reinforcement for anticipated stresses, but it would
still bug me. They sell a lot of bikes to informed cyclists though and I
have not heard of frame failures. I would imaging that monotube advantages
include cheaper manufacturing costs and simpler chainlines. And some folks
do like the way they look. And SWB Bacchetta wheelbases are about 4 inches
longer than SWB RANS wheelbases, leading to a potentially smoother and more
stable ride at speed.
Bottom line - we all have our preferences and they are all good. .
I'm leaving in the morning for a week away and will pick up this thread when
I return - if there is anything to pick up.
Jon Shinefeld
PhilaPA
|
| |
Date: 30 Aug 2006 07:03:24
From:
Subject: Re: Test ride P38,Strada,Corsa
|
Victor Kan wrote:
> Recurve on a Corsa? The current Corsa comes with the EuroMesh
> standard, the Strada with the Recurve standard. Maybe you've mixed the
> two of them up (the current Corsa also has the fixed angle steerer
> while the Strada has a tilt stem).
Oops! Good catch. I mixed them up.
> > > I want something I can ride thru parking lots and sidewalks, something
> > > that can handle bumpy conditions. I'm not really interested in going
> > > fast. So far I'm leaning towards a Giro 20 with wider tires (65psi?)
> > > and a euromesh seat. Does that sound like a good choice?
>
> Sounds like a great choice!
My only remaining question is whether I will want to ride in too much
of a vertical position for the euromesh seat. I'm going to try to test
ride the Corsa one more time with the seat in the most vertical
position.
> To each their own. I find many monotube bikes to be simply beautiful,
> beautifully simple, especially ones without frame bends that still
> manage to get a comfortable position that rides great with minimal
> chain noise.
Same here. It seems like the most logical design.
|
| | |
Date: 30 Aug 2006 21:21:54
From: Zebee Johnstone
Subject: Re: Test ride P38,Strada,Corsa
|
In alt.rec.bicycles.recumbent on 30 Aug 2006 07:03:24 -0700
cr113@hotmail.com <cr113@hotmail.com > wrote:
>
> My only remaining question is whether I will want to ride in too much
> of a vertical position for the euromesh seat. I'm going to try to test
> ride the Corsa one more time with the seat in the most vertical
> position.
Not sure how upright the euromesh gets. I have dropped the recurve on
my Giro 20 back a notch or two as I got more comfortable with the
thing but I don't know I'd want it much more back because most of my
riding is in traffic.
Zebee
|
| |
Date: 30 Aug 2006 05:33:50
From: Victor Kan
Subject: Re: Test ride P38,Strada,Corsa
|
> > Strada - My shins hit the handlebars, and the guy at the bike shop said
> > there was no adjustment. I like the euromesh seat and the handling. The
> > tires looked way to thin and fragile for the kind of riding I want to
> > do.
Sounds like the guy at the bike shop doesn't know what he's talking
about.
> > Corsa - Hate the recurve seat, I don't like the seat horn. Handling was
> > good. No problem with the high BB. I didn't like the handle bars as
> > much as the P38 but maybe if I adjusted them I'd like them better. The
> > handlebars were pointing back horizontally compared to the P38 which
> > was pointing down.
Recurve on a Corsa? The current Corsa comes with the EuroMesh
standard, the Strada with the Recurve standard. Maybe you've mixed the
two of them up (the current Corsa also has the fixed angle steerer
while the Strada has a tilt stem).
> > I want something I can ride thru parking lots and sidewalks, something
> > that can handle bumpy conditions. I'm not really interested in going
> > fast. So far I'm leaning towards a Giro 20 with wider tires (65psi?)
> > and a euromesh seat. Does that sound like a good choice?
Sounds like a great choice!
> I don't like the monotube bikes. From an aesthetic perspective I think they
> are just ugly.
To each their own. I find many monotube bikes to be simply beautiful,
beautifully simple, especially ones without frame bends that still
manage to get a comfortable position that rides great with minimal
chain noise. Some don't like it, that's fine.
> From a mechanical perspective, a triangulated design makes
> more sense.
How does a triangulated design make "more sense"?
The proof is in the riding and the building. If an easier/cheaper to
manufacture monotube frame can perform well in terms of speed, comfort,
long-term durability (and not just well, but better than some
triangulated designs as seems to be the case for me, perhaps with the
exception of durability since the current, popular monotubes are still
relatively young so that's an unknown), then they make "more sense".
> Triangulated frame means no flex.
I assume you're looking to this as a benefit in terms of power
transmission efficiency. My monotube bike (a Strada) does not lack one
iota in that respect as far as I can tell.
I'm willing to be convinced that my Strada is robbing me of efficiency
due to frame flex. I'd love to own a bike that rides as well and as
comfortably that makes even better use of whatever wattage I can
generate (no fairings and body socks though, please--well, maybe a
tailbox with usable storage would be good).
|
| |
Date: 29 Aug 2006 18:03:09
From: Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman
Subject: Re: Test ride P38,Strada,Corsa
|
cr113@hotmail.com wrote:
> Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman wrote:
> > Hull 697 wrote:
> > > ...
> > > > P38 - I really liked the seat and the handlebars. I thought the
> > > > handling was twitchy.?Same experience. I have read many places that you need to have a case of
> > > tinkeritous to own a P-38, endless adjusting to get it right...
> >
> > I rode a metric century on a borrowed large P-38 with an XL F-40 boom.
> > The boom would not go in far enough for me, so I temporarily attached a
> > Therm-a-Rest pad to the seat back with an ace bandage. It actually
> > worked fine. The main concern was remembering NOT to do low speed turns
> > to the right, as this applied the front brake (boom to brake
> > interference).
>
> A moving boom does not seem like a good idea to me. Doesn't that screw
> up the chain length? Plus it seems like you are creating a weak spot in
> a critical area.
Unless one adds cost, weight and drivetrain friction by using an extra
chain tensioner [1], all but minor boom adjustments required
lengthening or shortening the chain. Therefore, bikes with adjustable
booms are best suited for use by one rider (and a pain for dealers
offering test rides). In addition, proper tensioning [2] creates a
moment in the fastening bolts, which are usually made of high-strength,
low-ductility steel. The bolts need to be replaced after a couple of
adjustments, or there will be significant risk of breaking a bolt,
requiring removal by drilling and tapping.
The advantage of a fixed seat and movable boom is that the center of
gravity of the bike will remain relatively unchanged for riders of
different leg length.
[1] Such as was done on several SWB bikes from ATP Vision during their
final years of production.
[2] During a test ride of a Vision R-40 SWB, the boom rotated
approximately 90 degrees when I started pedaling due to insufficient
retaining bolt tension.
--
Tom Sherman - Behind the Cheddar Curtain
Post Free or Die!
|
| |
Date: 29 Aug 2006 17:50:39
From: Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman
Subject: Re: Test ride P38,Strada,Corsa
|
Jon Shinefeld wrote:
>
> I don't like the monotube bikes. From an aesthetic perspective I think they
> are just ugly. From a mechanical perspective, a triangulated design makes
> more sense....
Agreed, with the exception of "Z" frame lowracers, where there is not
space between the seat and the ground for a truss.
The real benefit of a monotube "stick" bike is that manufacturing costs
are significantly decreased by eliminating several tube cutting,
mitering and welding operations.
> Try a RANS VRex. It ia a OSS SWB and most likely will fit in
> your truck. Triangulated frame means no flex. Possible to sit upright or
> laid back. Room for chubby tires for shock absorption and lotsa choices
> with handlebar configuration. Or put a [s]hock fork or suspension hub on it.
> I have a Pantour hub now and really like it a lot. Downside - The stock
> VRex is geared too high - for somewhere without hills. But that issue is
> endemic to many bents. You can regear the bike for cheap, or have the
> dealer do it as part of the sale.
The V-Rex is a very good "all-around" bike. However, if one is visiting
a RANS dealer, one should test ride the Rocket also. I visited a RANS
dealer seriously considering purchasing a V-Rex, and ended up bringing
a Rocket home instead because I preferred the handling of the Rocket.
--
Tom Sherman - Behind the Cheddar Curtain
Post Free or Die!
|
| |
Date: 29 Aug 2006 19:07:26
From: Jon S.
Subject: Re: Test ride P38,Strada,Corsa
|
<cr113@hotmail.com > wrote in message
news:1156688512.117704.253370@m79g2000cwm.googlegroups.com...
> I'm new to recumbents and I test rode 3 bikes yesterday.
>
> P38 - I really liked the seat and the handlebars. I thought the
> handling was twitchy.
>
> Strada - My shins hit the handlebars, and the guy at the bike shop said
> there was no adjustment. I like the euromesh seat and the handling. The
> tires looked way to thin and fragile for the kind of riding I want to
> do.
>
> Corsa - Hate the recurve seat, I don't like the seat horn. Handling was
> good. No problem with the high BB. I didn't like the handle bars as
> much as the P38 but maybe if I adjusted them I'd like them better. The
> handlebars were pointing back horizontally compared to the P38 which
> was pointing down.
>
> I want something I can ride thru parking lots and sidewalks, something
> that can handle bumpy conditions. I'm not really interested in going
> fast. So far I'm leaning towards a Giro 20 with wider tires (65psi?)
> and a euromesh seat. Does that sound like a good choice?
>
I don't like the monotube bikes. From an aesthetic perspective I think they
are just ugly. From a mechanical perspective, a triangulated design makes
more sense. Try a RANS VRex. It ia a OSS SWB and most likely will fit in
your truck. Triangulated frame means no flex. Possible to sit upright or
laid back. Room for chubby tires for shock absorption and lotsa choices
with handlebar configuration. Or put a chock fork or suspension hub on it.
I have a Pantour hub now and really like it a lot. Downside - The stock
VRex is geared too high - for somewhere without hills. But that issue is
endemic to many bents. You can regear the bike for cheap, or have the
dealer do it as part of the sale.
Regards
Jon Shinefeld
PhilaPA
|
| |
Date: 29 Aug 2006 06:57:03
From:
Subject: Re: Test ride P38,Strada,Corsa
|
Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman wrote:
> Hull 697 wrote:
> > ...
> > > P38 - I really liked the seat and the handlebars. I thought the
> > > handling was twitchy.?Same experience. I have read many places that you need to have a case of
> > tinkeritous to own a P-38, endless adjusting to get it right...
>
> I rode a metric century on a borrowed large P-38 with an XL F-40 boom.
> The boom would not go in far enough for me, so I temporarily attached a
> Therm-a-Rest pad to the seat back with an ace bandage. It actually
> worked fine. The main concern was remembering NOT to do low speed turns
> to the right, as this applied the front brake (boom to brake
> interference).
A moving boom does not seem like a good idea to me. Doesn't that screw
up the chain length? Plus it seems like you are creating a weak spot in
a critical area.
|
| |
Date: 28 Aug 2006 18:52:10
From: Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman
Subject: Re: Test ride P38,Strada,Corsa
|
Zebee Johnstone wrote:
> In alt.rec.bicycles.recumbent on 27 Aug 2006 20:15:55 -0700
> Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman <sunsetss0003@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >
> > This is an opinion and the tastes of others may vary - the way to
> > improve the "tweener" bars is to convert them into "T" bars with a
> > pipe cutter and add adjustability with a riser hinge, e.g.
>
> heh.
>
> Me, I don't like T bars at all, I find tweeners better than both T and
> USS - must more relaxed than T, and less twitchy than USS.
>
> If you want to convert tweener to T, don't hacksaw them, too difficult
> to switch back when you realise you've made a mistake...
I have cut-down "T" handlebars on Sunset 0003, and I have no intention
of changing to anything else (Thank you, Earl).
--
Tom Sherman - Behind the Cheddar Curtain
Post Free or Die!
|
| |
Date: 28 Aug 2006 18:38:05
From: Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman
Subject: Re: Test ride P38,Strada,Corsa
|
Hull 697 wrote:
> ...
> > P38 - I really liked the seat and the handlebars. I thought the
> > handling was twitchy.?Same experience. I have read many places that you need to have a case of
> tinkeritous to own a P-38, endless adjusting to get it right...
I rode a metric century on a borrowed large P-38 with an XL F-40 boom.
The boom would not go in far enough for me, so I temporarily attached a
Therm-a-Rest pad to the seat back with an ace bandage. It actually
worked fine. The main concern was remembering NOT to do low speed turns
to the right, as this applied the front brake (boom to brake
interference).
> Bars - social and bicycle - are a matter of choice. I like the
> tweeners, the T bars I tried massively contributed to twitchy (the
> tiller effect on some bikes) and I find the "praying hamster" position
> postively hilarious. I do not voice any of this humor, am far too happy
> to have someone on a bent to ride with and IMO one of the attractions of
> the bent world is the variety of models and geometries to choose from.
> If you like riding that way, great, you are out on a bike, not turning
> to mush in front of the well-named idiot box....
Greater "tiller" makes low speed handling more difficult, but improves
directional stability at speed.
The first time I saw the "tweener" bars on a Bacchetta, I had a "what
the Hell?" reaction. They look like something off an oversize beach
cruiser. The aerodynamics and handling of "tweener" bars (positive or
negative) in not of consequence - I am not looking at something like
that when riding.
--
Tom Sherman - Behind the Cheddar Curtain
Post Free or Die!
|
| |
Date: 29 Aug 2006 04:36:29
From: Hull 697
Subject: Re: Test ride P38,Strada,Corsa
|
cr113@hotmail.com Wrote:
> I'm new to recumbents and I test rode 3 bikes yesterday.Good start. We rode over 20 models, driving over 1,000 miles to do so
Expensive in terms of gas, cheap in terms of getting the right bikes
the first time, and loads of fun. I'd avoid the shop that told you
Strada stem was not adjustable, or find the owner and see if he/she i
that ignorant
> P38 - I really liked the seat and the handlebars. I thought th
> handling was twitchy.?Same experience. I have read many places that you need to have a case o
tinkeritous to own a P-38, endless adjusting to get it right. That said
when I set up my Strada I started with the bars more vertical, simila
to the P-38 angle. As experience built I changed to a much mor
horizontal angle. I don't understand how you could like that seat an
hate the Recurve, but it's not my butt.:D
> Strada - My shins hit the handlebars, and the guy at the bike shop sai
> there was no adjustment. I like the euromesh seat and the handling. Th
> tires looked way to thin and fragile for the kind of riding I want t
> do.?Unless they have replaced the stem that comes with the bike, the for
and aft adjustment is one screw at the pivot, very easy. The angle o
the bars is also adjustable. If you live in the potholes probabl
should look for something with more variables on tires than an '0
Strada. It's pretty specialized now, a road bike.
> Corsa - Hate the recurve seat, I don't like the seat horn. Handling wa
> good. No problem with the high BB. I didn't like the handle bars a
> much as the P38 but maybe if I adjusted them I'd like them better. Th
> handlebars were pointing back horizontally compared to the P38 whic
> was pointing down.?You can easily adjust the handlebars from straight down to straight u
and anything in between
> I want something I can ride thru parking lots and sidewalks, somethin
> that can handle bumpy conditions. I'm not really interested in goin
> fast. So far I'm leaning towards a Giro 20 with wider tires (65psi?
> and a euromesh seat. Does that sound like a good choice?Since the high BB doesn't bother you, check out the Giro 26. It's a ver
good bike with lots of choices on tire/rim sizes.
For myself, the heavy, clunky suspended bikes I rode felt like drivin
a 50's model Chevy. The Strada feels like a sports car. To each hi
own. I don't mind the rough ride, am so laid back now (on my comf
Recurve seat) that the mesh absorbs most of the rough - that said,
avoid washboard roads because they slow me down
_If_that_was_the_norm_for_surfaces_around_here_I'd_darn_sure_have_a_fully_suspended_something_-_but_it_would_not_be_one_of_the_suspended_bikes_I_test_rode_
Bars - social and bicycle - are a matter of choice. I like th
tweeners, the T bars I tried massively contributed to twitchy (th
tiller effect on some bikes) and I find the "praying hamster" positio
postively hilarious. I do not voice any of this humor, am far too happ
to have someone on a bent to ride with and IMO one of the attractions o
the bent world is the variety of models and geometries to choose from
If you like riding that way, great, you are out on a bike, not turnin
to mush in front of the well-named idiot box
A "not so obvious at first ride" comment on bar position/type: I woul
have to wear my bifocals to ride if the bars were up close or I woul
not be able to read the computer. That would mean my head would b
craned forward to see the road over the reading portion. I don't rid
bent to find a new source of neck pain. With the tweener bars I ca
read everything I need to, wear single vision and my neck is happy.
Best of luck, happy 'bent hunting.:D
Charli
--
Hull 697
|
| |
Date: 27 Aug 2006 20:15:55
From: Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman
Subject: Re: Test ride P38,Strada,Corsa
|
Zebee Johnstone wrote:
> In alt.rec.bicycles.recumbent on 27 Aug 2006 07:21:52 -0700
> cr113@hotmail.com <cr113@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >
>
> > Corsa - Hate the recurve seat, I don't like the seat horn. Handling was
> > good. No problem with the high BB. I didn't like the handle bars as
> > much as the P38 but maybe if I adjusted them I'd like them better. The
> > handlebars were pointing back horizontally compared to the P38 which
> > was pointing down.
> >
>
> You can get the Corsa with a euromesh seat, and the tweener bars
> adjust easily enough.
This is an opinion and the tastes of others may vary - the way to
improve the "tweener" bars is to convert them into "T" bars with a
pipe cutter and add adjustability with a riser hinge, e.g.
<http://www.terracycle.com/Merchant2/merchant.mvc?Screen=CTGY&Store_Code=T&Category_Code=GS >.
--
Tom Sherman - Behind the Cheddar Curtain
Post Free or Die!
|
| | |
Date: 28 Aug 2006 12:57:00
From: Zebee Johnstone
Subject: Re: Test ride P38,Strada,Corsa
|
In alt.rec.bicycles.recumbent on 27 Aug 2006 20:15:55 -0700
Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman <sunsetss0003@yahoo.com > wrote:
>
> This is an opinion and the tastes of others may vary - the way to
> improve the "tweener" bars is to convert them into "T" bars with a
> pipe cutter and add adjustability with a riser hinge, e.g.
heh.
Me, I don't like T bars at all, I find tweeners better than both T and
USS - must more relaxed than T, and less twitchy than USS.
If you want to convert tweener to T, don't hacksaw them, too difficult
to switch back when you realise you've made a mistake...
Zebee
|
| |
Date: 27 Aug 2006 21:02:46
From: Zebee Johnstone
Subject: Re: Test ride P38,Strada,Corsa
|
In alt.rec.bicycles.recumbent on 27 Aug 2006 07:21:52 -0700
cr113@hotmail.com <cr113@hotmail.com > wrote:
>
> Corsa - Hate the recurve seat, I don't like the seat horn. Handling was
> good. No problem with the high BB. I didn't like the handle bars as
> much as the P38 but maybe if I adjusted them I'd like them better. The
> handlebars were pointing back horizontally compared to the P38 which
> was pointing down.
>
You can get the Corsa with a euromesh seat, and the tweener bars
adjust easily enough.
Zebee
|
| |
Date: 27 Aug 2006 11:15:37
From:
Subject: Re: Test ride P38,Strada,Corsa
|
Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman wrote:
> For only a few hundred more dollars than the "stick bikes" and
> considerably less than the P-38, you could get a bike with full
> suspension, such as the Grasshopper [1].
>
> A much less expensive solution would be a RANS Rocket [2] with Schwalbe
> "Big Apple" [3] tires. The ride will not be as comfortable as a fully
> suspended bicycle, but still acceptable over most surfaces.
I can't handle the RANS seat because of the nose. Do they make a flat
seat? I'd seriously consider it if they do.
> If speed is not really a concern, a more upright seating position is
> helpful for low speed balance, and make stopping and starting easier. A
> fully suspended CLWB bike, such as the HP Velotechnik Spirit [4] can
> work well in these situations.
I want a bike that will fit in the back of my small pickup. I tried a
Bacchetta Cafe with a wheelbase of 57" and it was slightly too big. I
probably need a wheelbase of 50" or less.
> Try riding bikes with "T" bars before purchasing. They do not have the
> interference issues of "C" bars, weigh less, make the bike easier to
> walk, store and transport in a motor vehicle, and are much more
> pleasant to look at from the rider's perspective.
I think the Cafe had T bars and I liked them.
|
| |
Date: 27 Aug 2006 09:47:03
From: Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman
Subject: Re: Test ride P38,Strada,Corsa
|
cr113@hotmail.com wrote:
> I'm new to recumbents and I test rode 3 bikes yesterday.
>
> P38 - I really liked the seat and the handlebars. I thought the
> handling was twitchy.
>
> Strada - My shins hit the handlebars, and the guy at the bike shop said
> there was no adjustment. I like the euromesh seat and the handling. The
> tires looked way to thin and fragile for the kind of riding I want to
> do.
>
> Corsa - Hate the recurve seat, I don't like the seat horn. Handling was
> good. No problem with the high BB. I didn't like the handle bars as
> much as the P38 but maybe if I adjusted them I'd like them better. The
> handlebars were pointing back horizontally compared to the P38 which
> was pointing down.
>
> I want something I can ride thru parking lots and sidewalks, something
> that can handle bumpy conditions. I'm not really interested in going
> fast. So far I'm leaning towards a Giro 20 with wider tires (65psi?)
> and a euromesh seat. Does that sound like a good choice?
For only a few hundred more dollars than the "stick bikes" and
considerably less than the P-38, you could get a bike with full
suspension, such as the Grasshopper [1].
A much less expensive solution would be a RANS Rocket [2] with Schwalbe
"Big Apple" [3] tires. The ride will not be as comfortable as a fully
suspended bicycle, but still acceptable over most surfaces.
If speed is not really a concern, a more upright seating position is
helpful for low speed balance, and make stopping and starting easier. A
fully suspended CLWB bike, such as the HP Velotechnik Spirit [4] can
work well in these situations.
Try riding bikes with "T" bars before purchasing. They do not have the
interference issues of "C" bars, weigh less, make the bike easier to
walk, store and transport in a motor vehicle, and are much more
pleasant to look at from the rider's perspective.
[1] <http://www.hpvelotechnik.com/produkte/ghp/index_e.html >.
[2] <http://www.ransbikes.com/Rocket.htm >.
[3] <http://schwalbetires.com/node/61/ok >.
[4] <http://www.hpvelotechnik.com/produkte/spirit/index_e.html >.
--
Tom Sherman - Behind the Cheddar Curtain
Post Free or Die!
|
|
