Why haven't bent bike caught on?

bicycle-forum.net
Promoting biking discussion.

Main

Date: 31 May 2007 19:32:04
From: Steve
Subject: Why haven't bent bike caught on?

I was so impressed with my first test drive of a recumbent bicycle
that I was in disbelief that the world has been dominated by uprights
for the better part of a century when an alternative, better design
has existed.

Why is it in all that time that some big business or marketing firm
hasn't tried to push recumbent bikes on the public? 2 minutes on
one will convince most people it is a better product. The only bad
thing about them is the price. I think a bike company putting some
money into a well done marketing campaign could increase sales,
justify mass production and drive the price down. I'm amazed that
this hasn't happened.

Sure, there are a lot of designs to choose from, but the guys at the
bike shop I went to were able to narrow things down to two designs for
me as a begginer to try. A bike company could do the same thing.

I firmly believe that an affordable recumbent bicycle would get many
regular who would not take up biking to do so.

Date: 21 Jun 2007 22:38:45
From: Bill Patterson
Subject: Re: Why haven't bent bike caught on?

Steve wrote:

> I was so impressed with my first test drive of a recumbent bicycle
> that I was in disbelief that the world has been dominated by uprights
> for the better part of a century when an alternative, better design
> has existed.
>
> Why is it in all that time that some big business or marketing firm
> hasn't tried to push recumbent bikes on the public? 2 minutes on
> one will convince most people it is a better product. The only bad
> thing about them is the price. I think a bike company putting some
> money into a well done marketing campaign could increase sales,
> justify mass production and drive the price down. I'm amazed that
> this hasn't happened.
>
> Sure, there are a lot of designs to choose from, but the guys at the
> bike shop I went to were able to narrow things down to two designs for
> me as a begginer to try. A bike company could do the same thing.
>
> I firmly believe that an affordable recumbent bicycle would get many
> regular who would not take up biking to do so.
>
I believe that the reluctance of most bike riders to take to riding
recumbents is the strange handling of some of the early lay down bikes.
The builders didn't have a good technical model to use so that a rider
of an upright could easily transition to the recumbent. Hopefully we
have rectified the problem and future bikes won't be so twitchy.

See bike urls in the sig file below

Bill Patterson

--
Some thoughts on Apache helicopter avionics
http://home.earthlink.net/~wm.patterson/helicopterthoughts/
http://home.earthlink.net/~wm.patterson/helicopterthoughts/id17.html
http://home.earthlink.net/~wm.patterson/helicopterthoughts/id16.html

See bikes and the first human powered helicopter at:
http://www.calpoly.edu/~wpatters/
Single Track controls at:
http://home.earthlink.net/~wm.patterson/

Reply to wm.patterson@earthlink.net
wpatters@calpoly.edu
william.patterson@1962.usna.com

Date: 28 Jun 2007 17:16:33
From: Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman
Subject: Re: Why haven't bent bike caught on?

On Jun 25, 11:41 am, Edward Dolan wrote:
> ...
> I second everything Mr. Sherman says above. Leonard L. Love of this
> newsgroup is also an expert on this subject of the BikeE and the BigHa.

When will E.D. learn the name of the person in question is Lorenzo L.
Love [1] and not Leonard L. Love? It is not the first time Mr. Dolan
has made this mistake.

[1] <http://groups.google.com/group/alt.rec.bicycles.recumbent/msg/
cb1422bf04695d36?dmode=source&hl=en >.

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

Date: 28 Jun 2007 20:06:57
From: Edward Dolan
Subject: Re: Why haven't bent bike caught on?

"Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman" <sunsetss0003@yahoo.com > wrote in message
news:1183076193.245981.161290@q75g2000hsh.googlegroups.com...
> On Jun 25, 11:41 am, Edward Dolan wrote:
>> ...
>> I second everything Mr. Sherman says above. Leonard L. Love of this
>> newsgroup is also an expert on this subject of the BikeE and the BigHa.
>
> When will E.D. learn the name of the person in question is Lorenzo L.
> Love [1] and not Leonard L. Love? It is not the first time Mr. Dolan
> has made this mistake.

There is not one person in a thousand who will ever know the difference.
Lorenzo is way too Italian to suit me. He would be better off with a more
American name like Leonard. I urge Lorenzo to change his freaking name in
order to suit the Great Ed Dolan.

Regards,

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

Date: 28 Jun 2007 22:38:29
From: Luigi de Guzman
Subject: Re: Why haven't bent bike caught on?

On Thu, 28 Jun 2007 22:24:38 +0000, Fabrizio Mazzoleni wrote:

> "Edward Dolan" <edolan@iw.net> wrote in message
> news:HLSdncKU6ap_sxnbnZ2dnUVZ_sapnZ2d@prairiewave.com...
>> Hey, Fab, you doing the fucking Tour de France this year?
>>
>
> Not this year, I'm still suspended by the Italian cycling federation (FCI)
> and Italian Olympic Committee (CONI) for my Erythropoietin and
> Salbutamol abuse.

Say it ain't so, Fab.

--
Luigi de Guzman
http://ouij.livejournal.com

Date: 28 Jun 2007 18:33:48
From: dlhii
Subject: Re: Why haven't bent bike caught on?

Luigi de Guzman <luigi12081@cox.net > wrote:

>On Thu, 28 Jun 2007 22:24:38 +0000, Fabrizio Mazzoleni wrote:
>
>> "Edward Dolan" <edolan@iw.net> wrote in message
>> news:HLSdncKU6ap_sxnbnZ2dnUVZ_sapnZ2d@prairiewave.com...
>>> Hey, Fab, you doing the fucking Tour de France this year?
>>>
>>
>> Not this year, I'm still suspended by the Italian cycling federation (FCI)
>> and Italian Olympic Committee (CONI) for my Erythropoietin and
>> Salbutamol abuse.
>
>Say it ain't so, Fab.

Looks like we need a reminder about kill filing a troll and also not
responding to trolls

Please

Date: 28 Jun 2007 20:10:18
From: Edward Dolan
Subject: Re: Why haven't bent bike caught on?

"dlhii" <dlhii@fake.net > wrote in message
news:k7h883lv9q3lrkbb2k5kmv00uo8n1qnfj0@4ax.com...
> Luigi de Guzman <luigi12081@cox.net> wrote:
>
>>On Thu, 28 Jun 2007 22:24:38 +0000, Fabrizio Mazzoleni wrote:
>>
>>> "Edward Dolan" <edolan@iw.net> wrote in message
>>> news:HLSdncKU6ap_sxnbnZ2dnUVZ_sapnZ2d@prairiewave.com...
>>>> Hey, Fab, you doing the fucking Tour de France this year?
>>>>
>>>
>>> Not this year, I'm still suspended by the Italian cycling federation
>>> (FCI)
>>> and Italian Olympic Committee (CONI) for my Erythropoietin and
>>> Salbutamol abuse.
>>
>>Say it ain't so, Fab.
>
> Looks like we need a reminder about kill filing a troll and also not
> responding to trolls
>
> Please

Fab is worth reading because he has some wit and some humor, unlike most of
the slobs to be found on these freaking cycling newsgroups.

Regards,

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

Date: 24 Jun 2007 05:04:12
From: Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman
Subject: Re: Why haven't bent bike caught on?

On Jun 24, 12:42 am, Edward Dolan wrote:
> Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman wrote:
>
> > On Jun 23, 12:16 am, Zebee Johnstone wrote:
> >> In alt.rec.bicycles.recumbent on Fri, 22 Jun 2007 19:08:29 -0700
> >> Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman wrote:
>
> >> > The lesson that should be learned is that any recumbent dealer that
> >> > wants to sell to new riders should have an easy to ride bike on hand
> >> > (e.g. Sun EZ-1 SC) for new riders to acclimate to, before trying to
> >> > sell them a bike that might be more suited to their long-term needs
> >> > (e.g. RANS Rocket).
>
> >> Hmm.. would a TWbent SWB 26/20 be "twitchy"? What about a Bacchetta
> >> Giro 20?
>
> >> My first bent ride on two wheels was the former, I rode it up and down
> >> a quiet street for a bit, then home. It was certainly a little
> >> nervous on fast downhills, but most of the time it was fine. The Giro
> >> is rock steady everywhere.
>
> >> I keep finding myself so at odds with other people's first experience
> >> of bents. I can only put it down to not being a bicycle rider! I
> >> used to commute on unpowered two wheels but had not swung a leg over a
> >> bicycle for 10 years when I tried the TW.
>
> >> So I had no preconceptions about what it should be like. No idea that
> >> it should be hard to ride a high BB bike, no idea that it should
> >> handle funny or be slow or anything.
>
> >> If you want more 'bent riders, forget the people who are doing 100
> >> miles a week, get the ones who haven't been on a bike for years. Then
> >> don't tell them it's hard and they can't do it without a lot of
> >> practice. Tell 'em it is easy and they'll never have so much fun.
>
> > Many regular upright bicycle riders dismiss the comfort advantages of
> > recumbents, since they are comfortable on their bikes. However, these
> > upright riders are not a representative sample of the overall
> > population, since except for the odd masochist, people do not partake
> > in unpleasant activities by choice. Those who find uprights
> > uncomfortable usually find another activity.
>
> > The real market for recumbents may well be those who would like to
> > cycle, but can not comfortably ride an upright.
>
> When Mr. Sherman speaks on the subject of recumbents, I listen. I only
> disagree with him on certain aspects of the genre, but overall I can second
> almost everything he says. He is as expert on the subject as Bob Bryant, the
> editor of RCN.
>
> Yes, recumbents are all about being comfortable, something that most of us
> can never get on an upright. I also believe the Bike E was not such a bad
> bike as anyone could ride it easily. I have some recumbents which others
> cannot ride. Nope, they fall over every time they have to make a turn. Go
> figure!

The real problems with the BikeE had to do with the company selling
it, and very little to do with the bike itself. The BikeE should have
been marketed as a more comfortable alternative to upright hybrid and
cruiser bicycles, not as a higher performance alternative to upright
road bikes, which it decidedly was not.

The behavior of the principles at BikeE (some now at BigHa) at the end
was also dishonest, telling dealers and customers (and the readers of
this newsgroup) everything was fine, while planning to fold the
company.

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

Date: 25 Jun 2007 11:41:54
From: Edward Dolan
Subject: Re: Why haven't bent bike caught on?

"Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman" <sunsetss0003@yahoo.com > wrote in message
news:1182686652.488266.16380@p77g2000hsh.googlegroups.com...
> On Jun 24, 12:42 am, Edward Dolan wrote:
>> Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman wrote:
>>
>> > On Jun 23, 12:16 am, Zebee Johnstone wrote:
>> >> In alt.rec.bicycles.recumbent on Fri, 22 Jun 2007 19:08:29 -0700
>> >> Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman wrote:
>>
>> >> > The lesson that should be learned is that any recumbent dealer that
>> >> > wants to sell to new riders should have an easy to ride bike on hand
>> >> > (e.g. Sun EZ-1 SC) for new riders to acclimate to, before trying to
>> >> > sell them a bike that might be more suited to their long-term needs
>> >> > (e.g. RANS Rocket).
>>
>> >> Hmm.. would a TWbent SWB 26/20 be "twitchy"? What about a Bacchetta
>> >> Giro 20?
>>
>> >> My first bent ride on two wheels was the former, I rode it up and down
>> >> a quiet street for a bit, then home. It was certainly a little
>> >> nervous on fast downhills, but most of the time it was fine. The Giro
>> >> is rock steady everywhere.
>>
>> >> I keep finding myself so at odds with other people's first experience
>> >> of bents. I can only put it down to not being a bicycle rider! I
>> >> used to commute on unpowered two wheels but had not swung a leg over a
>> >> bicycle for 10 years when I tried the TW.
>>
>> >> So I had no preconceptions about what it should be like. No idea that
>> >> it should be hard to ride a high BB bike, no idea that it should
>> >> handle funny or be slow or anything.
>>
>> >> If you want more 'bent riders, forget the people who are doing 100
>> >> miles a week, get the ones who haven't been on a bike for years. Then
>> >> don't tell them it's hard and they can't do it without a lot of
>> >> practice. Tell 'em it is easy and they'll never have so much fun.
>>
>> > Many regular upright bicycle riders dismiss the comfort advantages of
>> > recumbents, since they are comfortable on their bikes. However, these
>> > upright riders are not a representative sample of the overall
>> > population, since except for the odd masochist, people do not partake
>> > in unpleasant activities by choice. Those who find uprights
>> > uncomfortable usually find another activity.
>>
>> > The real market for recumbents may well be those who would like to
>> > cycle, but can not comfortably ride an upright.
>>
>> When Mr. Sherman speaks on the subject of recumbents, I listen. I only
>> disagree with him on certain aspects of the genre, but overall I can
>> second
>> almost everything he says. He is as expert on the subject as Bob Bryant,
>> the
>> editor of RCN.
>>
>> Yes, recumbents are all about being comfortable, something that most of
>> us
>> can never get on an upright. I also believe the Bike E was not such a bad
>> bike as anyone could ride it easily. I have some recumbents which others
>> cannot ride. Nope, they fall over every time they have to make a turn. Go
>> figure!
>
> The real problems with the BikeE had to do with the company selling
> it, and very little to do with the bike itself. The BikeE should have
> been marketed as a more comfortable alternative to upright hybrid and
> cruiser bicycles, not as a higher performance alternative to upright
> road bikes, which it decidedly was not.
>
> The behavior of the principles at BikeE (some now at BigHa) at the end
> was also dishonest, telling dealers and customers (and the readers of
> this newsgroup) everything was fine, while planning to fold the
> company.

I second everything Mr. Sherman says above. Leonard L. Love of this
newsgroup is also an expert on this subject of the BikeE and the BigHa.

Regards,

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

Date: 22 Jun 2007 22:51:04
From: Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman
Subject: Re: Why haven't bent bike caught on?

On Jun 23, 12:16 am, Zebee Johnstone wrote:
> In alt.rec.bicycles.recumbent on Fri, 22 Jun 2007 19:08:29 -0700
> Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman wrote:
>
> > The lesson that should be learned is that any recumbent dealer that
> > wants to sell to new riders should have an easy to ride bike on hand
> > (e.g. Sun EZ-1 SC) for new riders to acclimate to, before trying to
> > sell them a bike that might be more suited to their long-term needs
> > (e.g. RANS Rocket).
>
> Hmm.. would a TWbent SWB 26/20 be "twitchy"? What about a Bacchetta
> Giro 20?
>
> My first bent ride on two wheels was the former, I rode it up and down
> a quiet street for a bit, then home. It was certainly a little
> nervous on fast downhills, but most of the time it was fine. The Giro
> is rock steady everywhere.
>
> I keep finding myself so at odds with other people's first experience
> of bents. I can only put it down to not being a bicycle rider! I
> used to commute on unpowered two wheels but had not swung a leg over a
> bicycle for 10 years when I tried the TW.
>
> So I had no preconceptions about what it should be like. No idea that
> it should be hard to ride a high BB bike, no idea that it should
> handle funny or be slow or anything.
>
> If you want more 'bent riders, forget the people who are doing 100
> miles a week, get the ones who haven't been on a bike for years. Then
> don't tell them it's hard and they can't do it without a lot of
> practice. Tell 'em it is easy and they'll never have so much fun.

Many regular upright bicycle riders dismiss the comfort advantages of
recumbents, since they are comfortable on their bikes. However, these
upright riders are not a representative sample of the overall
population, since except for the odd masochist, people do not partake
in unpleasant activities by choice. Those who find uprights
uncomfortable usually find another activity.

The real market for recumbents may well be those who would like to
cycle, but can not comfortably ride an upright.

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

Date: 28 Jun 2007 20:53:14
From: Fabrizio Mazzoleni
Subject: Re: Why haven't bent bike caught on?

"Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman" <sunsetss0003@yahoo.com > wrote in message
> Those who find uprights
> uncomfortable usually find another activity.

Good, that keeps the fat FREDS out of road cycling.

If your're not riding a compact carbon frame then you
need to keep off the road.

Date: 28 Jun 2007 16:57:47
From: Edward Dolan
Subject: Re: Why haven't bent bike caught on?

"Fabrizio Mazzoleni" <jmaars@comcast.com > wrote in message
news:_cVgi.70481$xq1.25863@pd7urf1no...
>
> "Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman" <sunsetss0003@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>> Those who find uprights
>> uncomfortable usually find another activity.
>
> Good, that keeps the fat FREDS out of road cycling.
>
> If your're not riding a compact carbon frame then you
> need to keep off the road.

Hey, Fab, you doing the fucking Tour de France this year?

I keep telling all these recumbent cyclists that there is no way a recumbent
bike can go up a hill at all fast and that they are not that much better on
the flats either, but they continue to live fantasyland despite my
admonitions. The main thing with us recumbent cyclists is that we be
comfortable. We leave the speed thing to upright idiots like you!

Regards,

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

Date: 28 Jun 2007 22:24:38
From: Fabrizio Mazzoleni
Subject: Re: Why haven't bent bike caught on?

"Edward Dolan" <edolan@iw.net > wrote in message
news:HLSdncKU6ap_sxnbnZ2dnUVZ_sapnZ2d@prairiewave.com...
> Hey, Fab, you doing the fucking Tour de France this year?
>

Not this year, I'm still suspended by the Italian cycling federation (FCI)
and Italian Olympic Committee (CONI) for my Erythropoietin and
Salbutamol abuse.

Date: 24 Jun 2007 00:42:43
From: Edward Dolan
Subject: Re: Why haven't bent bike caught on?

"Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman" <sunsetss0003@yahoo.com > wrote in message
news:1182577864.927176.58110@n2g2000hse.googlegroups.com...
> On Jun 23, 12:16 am, Zebee Johnstone wrote:
>> In alt.rec.bicycles.recumbent on Fri, 22 Jun 2007 19:08:29 -0700
>> Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman wrote:
>>
>> > The lesson that should be learned is that any recumbent dealer that
>> > wants to sell to new riders should have an easy to ride bike on hand
>> > (e.g. Sun EZ-1 SC) for new riders to acclimate to, before trying to
>> > sell them a bike that might be more suited to their long-term needs
>> > (e.g. RANS Rocket).
>>
>> Hmm.. would a TWbent SWB 26/20 be "twitchy"? What about a Bacchetta
>> Giro 20?
>>
>> My first bent ride on two wheels was the former, I rode it up and down
>> a quiet street for a bit, then home. It was certainly a little
>> nervous on fast downhills, but most of the time it was fine. The Giro
>> is rock steady everywhere.
>>
>> I keep finding myself so at odds with other people's first experience
>> of bents. I can only put it down to not being a bicycle rider! I
>> used to commute on unpowered two wheels but had not swung a leg over a
>> bicycle for 10 years when I tried the TW.
>>
>> So I had no preconceptions about what it should be like. No idea that
>> it should be hard to ride a high BB bike, no idea that it should
>> handle funny or be slow or anything.
>>
>> If you want more 'bent riders, forget the people who are doing 100
>> miles a week, get the ones who haven't been on a bike for years. Then
>> don't tell them it's hard and they can't do it without a lot of
>> practice. Tell 'em it is easy and they'll never have so much fun.
>
> Many regular upright bicycle riders dismiss the comfort advantages of
> recumbents, since they are comfortable on their bikes. However, these
> upright riders are not a representative sample of the overall
> population, since except for the odd masochist, people do not partake
> in unpleasant activities by choice. Those who find uprights
> uncomfortable usually find another activity.
>
> The real market for recumbents may well be those who would like to
> cycle, but can not comfortably ride an upright.

When Mr. Sherman speaks on the subject of recumbents, I listen. I only
disagree with him on certain aspects of the genre, but overall I can second
almost everything he says. He is as expert on the subject as Bob Bryant, the
editor of RCN.

Yes, recumbents are all about being comfortable, something that most of us
can never get on an upright. I also believe the Bike E was not such a bad
bike as anyone could ride it easily. I have some recumbents which others
cannot ride. Nope, they fall over every time they have to make a turn. Go
figure!

Regards,

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

Date: 23 Jun 2007 06:50:57
From: Zebee Johnstone
Subject: Re: Why haven't bent bike caught on?

In alt.rec.bicycles.recumbent on Fri, 22 Jun 2007 22:51:04 -0700
Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman <sunsetss0003@yahoo.com > wrote:
>
> The real market for recumbents may well be those who would like to
> cycle, but can not comfortably ride an upright.

Or aren't hooked enough to spend the effort needed to get comfortable.

Garages are full of unused pushbikes, I had one for the 10 years I
wasn't commuting.

I wasn't comfortable on my bicycle when I was commuting the way I am
comfortable on the 'bent. I didn't ride for the hell of it on a
weekend, I didn't use it for anything but riding to work for the
exercise. I wasn't *un*comfortable on it, but I much preferred the
motorcycle.

Nowadays the motorcycle is only used for the longer trips. I will use
the Giro in preference if I can.

"uncomfortable" isn't the right word really. Most people aren't
uncomfortable, they just aren't really happy. I suspect that once
they learn there's a better way, they'll use it!

Back to the problem of cost. You have to be a weirdo like me to
decide to drop a lot of money on an unknown quantity.

I had two advantages - I already knew that commuting by bicycle was
doable but that I'd not do 20km each way on an upright so if I wanted
to do it for exercise I'd have to be more comfortable, and I already
knew someone who had been doing 25km each way on a Greenspeed two
wheeler (now, sadly, an ex-bicycle) and was always saying how pleasant
it was.

So I had an idea it was going to work. And the money to drop, don't
forget that!

It was also an incentive. SPend 3 grand on something, you are going
to bloody well *make* it work :)

Zebee

Date: 22 Jun 2007 19:08:29
From: Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman
Subject: Re: Why haven't bent bike caught on?

On Jun 22, 5:43 pm, Prof. Bill Patterson wrote:
> Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman wrote:
>
> > Some of us like bicycles that Prof. Patterson might find to have too
> > responsive handling or too light control forces; in my case the RANS
> > Rocket [1] and Lightning P-38 [2].
>
> > What I dislike are bicycles that have a non-linear response to control
> > inputs, such as the pre-1999 APT Vision 40 series with USS and the
> > BikeE E2 [3] with a stoker.
>
> =snip snip
>
> I think that many of us learned to ride very responsive recumbent bikes.
> Now we think that recumbents should be twitchy. Then we bitch when
> upright riders don't come over and ride recumbents with us.

Much of the resistance to recumbents from upright riders has nothing
to do with control responsiveness. Try asking over a
rec.bicycles.tech. The most virulent anti-recumbent comments come from
those who have never ridden one.

> I remember visiting with 2 past presidents of the IHPVA at Battle
> Mountain. They were also upset that recumbents haven't been accepted,
> yet they said that the most successful recumbent, the Tour Easy, was not
> responsive enough. Could it be that they both ride P-38's and have
> decided that twitch is laudable? They are asking new recumbent riders
> to have to learn a whole new set of responses to join the club.
>
> That just isn't going to happen.

I failed on the first attempt to ride a recumbent (Vision R-40 SWB
USS). However, I was able to ride the same exact bicycle a couple
months later with no problems after putting a few hundred miles on my
newly purchased RANS Wave.

The lesson that should be learned is that any recumbent dealer that
wants to sell to new riders should have an easy to ride bike on hand
(e.g. Sun EZ-1 SC) for new riders to acclimate to, before trying to
sell them a bike that might be more suited to their long-term needs
(e.g. RANS Rocket).

> That's why I wrote the "Lords". I was trying to short cut the old boy
> incestuous bunch of twitchy lovers. Hopefully, the next generation of
> builders will conduct market research tests with upright riders, and
> build bikes which handle acceptably to more people.

I hope not. Being able to steer by leaning one's head is part of the
fun. It is even better on a lowracer, where the center of mass has to
swing through a shorter arc for a given lean angle (and therefore
change in direction).

FWIW, I feel perfectly comfortable at 90 kph (55 mph) on a Sunset
Lowracer.

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

Date: 24 Jun 2007 00:29:20
From: Edward Dolan
Subject: Re: Why haven't bent bike caught on?

"Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman" <sunsetss0003@yahoo.com > wrote in message
news:1182564509.593379.42150@m36g2000hse.googlegroups.com...
> On Jun 22, 5:43 pm, Prof. Bill Patterson wrote:
>> Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman wrote:
>>
>> > Some of us like bicycles that Prof. Patterson might find to have too
>> > responsive handling or too light control forces; in my case the RANS
>> > Rocket [1] and Lightning P-38 [2].
>>
>> > What I dislike are bicycles that have a non-linear response to control
>> > inputs, such as the pre-1999 APT Vision 40 series with USS and the
>> > BikeE E2 [3] with a stoker.
>>
>> =snip snip
>>
>> I think that many of us learned to ride very responsive recumbent bikes.
>> Now we think that recumbents should be twitchy. Then we bitch when
>> upright riders don't come over and ride recumbents with us.
>
> Much of the resistance to recumbents from upright riders has nothing
> to do with control responsiveness. Try asking over a
> rec.bicycles.tech. The most virulent anti-recumbent comments come from
> those who have never ridden one.
>
>> I remember visiting with 2 past presidents of the IHPVA at Battle
>> Mountain. They were also upset that recumbents haven't been accepted,
>> yet they said that the most successful recumbent, the Tour Easy, was not
>> responsive enough. Could it be that they both ride P-38's and have
>> decided that twitch is laudable? They are asking new recumbent riders
>> to have to learn a whole new set of responses to join the club.
>>
>> That just isn't going to happen.
>
> I failed on the first attempt to ride a recumbent (Vision R-40 SWB
> USS). However, I was able to ride the same exact bicycle a couple
> months later with no problems after putting a few hundred miles on my
> newly purchased RANS Wave.
>
> The lesson that should be learned is that any recumbent dealer that
> wants to sell to new riders should have an easy to ride bike on hand
> (e.g. Sun EZ-1 SC) for new riders to acclimate to, before trying to
> sell them a bike that might be more suited to their long-term needs
> (e.g. RANS Rocket).
>
>> That's why I wrote the "Lords". I was trying to short cut the old boy
>> incestuous bunch of twitchy lovers. Hopefully, the next generation of
>> builders will conduct market research tests with upright riders, and
>> build bikes which handle acceptably to more people.
>
> I hope not. Being able to steer by leaning one's head is part of the
> fun. It is even better on a lowracer, where the center of mass has to
> swing through a shorter arc for a given lean angle (and therefore
> change in direction).
>
> FWIW, I feel perfectly comfortable at 90 kph (55 mph) on a Sunset
> Lowracer.

I seriously doubt that Mr. Sherman has ever gone 55 mph on any bike in his
entire life. In any event, that is way too fast and I strongly advise him
never to do it again.

Regards,

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

Date: 23 Jun 2007 05:16:17
From: Zebee Johnstone
Subject: Re: Why haven't bent bike caught on?

In alt.rec.bicycles.recumbent on Fri, 22 Jun 2007 19:08:29 -0700
Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman <sunsetss0003@yahoo.com > wrote:
>
> The lesson that should be learned is that any recumbent dealer that
> wants to sell to new riders should have an easy to ride bike on hand
> (e.g. Sun EZ-1 SC) for new riders to acclimate to, before trying to
> sell them a bike that might be more suited to their long-term needs
> (e.g. RANS Rocket).

Hmm.. would a TWbent SWB 26/20 be "twitchy"? What about a Bacchetta
Giro 20?

My first bent ride on two wheels was the former, I rode it up and down
a quiet street for a bit, then home. It was certainly a little
nervous on fast downhills, but most of the time it was fine. The Giro
is rock steady everywhere.

I keep finding myself so at odds with other people's first experience
of bents. I can only put it down to not being a bicycle rider! I
used to commute on unpowered two wheels but had not swung a leg over a
bicycle for 10 years when I tried the TW.

So I had no preconceptions about what it should be like. No idea that
it should be hard to ride a high BB bike, no idea that it should
handle funny or be slow or anything.

If you want more 'bent riders, forget the people who are doing 100
miles a week, get the ones who haven't been on a bike for years. Then
don't tell them it's hard and they can't do it without a lot of
practice. Tell 'em it is easy and they'll never have so much fun.

Zebee

Date: 21 Jun 2007 17:29:18
From: Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman
Subject: Re: Why haven't bent bike caught on?

On Jun 21, 5:38 pm, Prof. Bill Patterson wrote:
> ....
> I believe that the reluctance of most bike riders to take to riding
> recumbents is the strange handling of some of the early lay down bikes.
> The builders didn't have a good technical model to use so that a rider
> of an upright could easily transition to the recumbent. Hopefully we
> have rectified the problem and future bikes won't be so twitchy....

Some of us like bicycles that Prof. Patterson might find to have too
responsive handling or too light control forces; in my case the RANS
Rocket [1] and Lightning P-38 [2].

What I dislike are bicycles that have a non-linear response to control
inputs, such as the pre-1999 APT Vision 40 series with USS and the
BikeE E2 [3] with a stoker.

[1] The Earth Cycles Sunset Lowracer falls into this category, but it
is not a bicycle many have ridden compared to the Rocket and P-38.
[2] I have issues with the P-38, but they are not related to handling.
[3]
[3] Prof. Patterson and I disagree vehemently on this one.

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

Date: 22 Jun 2007 22:43:38
From: Bill Patterson
Subject: Re: Why haven't bent bike caught on?

Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman wrote:

>
> Some of us like bicycles that Prof. Patterson might find to have too
> responsive handling or too light control forces; in my case the RANS
> Rocket [1] and Lightning P-38 [2].
>
> What I dislike are bicycles that have a non-linear response to control
> inputs, such as the pre-1999 APT Vision 40 series with USS and the
> BikeE E2 [3] with a stoker.

=snip snip

I think that many of us learned to ride very responsive recumbent bikes.
Now we think that recumbents should be twitchy. Then we bitch when
upright riders don't come over and ride recumbents with us.

I remember visiting with 2 past presidents of the IHPVA at Battle
Mountain. They were also upset that recumbents haven't been accepted,
yet they said that the most successful recumbent, the Tour Easy, was not
responsive enough. Could it be that they both ride P-38's and have
decided that twitch is laudable? They are asking new recumbent riders
to have to learn a whole new set of responses to join the club.

That just isn't going to happen.

That's why I wrote the "Lords". I was trying to short cut the old boy
incestuous bunch of twitchy lovers. Hopefully, the next generation of
builders will conduct market research tests with upright riders, and
build bikes which handle acceptably to more people.

--
Some thoughts on Apache helicopter avionics
http://home.earthlink.net/~wm.patterson/helicopterthoughts/
http://home.earthlink.net/~wm.patterson/helicopterthoughts/id17.html
http://home.earthlink.net/~wm.patterson/helicopterthoughts/id16.html

See bikes and the first human powered helicopter at:
http://www.calpoly.edu/~wpatters/
Single Track controls at:
http://home.earthlink.net/~wm.patterson/

Reply to wm.patterson@earthlink.net
wpatters@calpoly.edu
william.patterson@1962.usna.com

Date: 22 Jun 2007 19:35:51
From: Edward Dolan
Subject: Re: Why haven't bent bike caught on?

"Bill Patterson" <wm.patterson@earthlink.net > wrote in message
news:467C509A.409@earthlink.net...
> Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman wrote:
>
>>
>> Some of us like bicycles that Prof. Patterson might find to have too
>> responsive handling or too light control forces; in my case the RANS
>> Rocket [1] and Lightning P-38 [2].
>>
>> What I dislike are bicycles that have a non-linear response to control
>> inputs, such as the pre-1999 APT Vision 40 series with USS and the
>> BikeE E2 [3] with a stoker.
>
> =snip snip
>
> I think that many of us learned to ride very responsive recumbent bikes.
> Now we think that recumbents should be twitchy. Then we bitch when upright
> riders don't come over and ride recumbents with us.
>
> I remember visiting with 2 past presidents of the IHPVA at Battle
> Mountain. They were also upset that recumbents haven't been accepted, yet
> they said that the most successful recumbent, the Tour Easy, was not
> responsive enough. Could it be that they both ride P-38's and have decided
> that twitch is laudable? They are asking new recumbent riders to have to
> learn a whole new set of responses to join the club.
>
> That just isn't going to happen.
>
> That's why I wrote the "Lords". I was trying to short cut the old boy
> incestuous bunch of twitchy lovers. Hopefully, the next generation of
> builders will conduct market research tests with upright riders, and
> build bikes which handle acceptably to more people.

Twitchy bikes can be fun to ride for short distances, but they are murder on
long rides. I had to learn this the hard way. I now ride my twitchy
recumbents just around town when I want to focus on my riding, but when I do
a long tour, I want a recumbent bike that I do NOT have to focus on. This
means a long wheelbase recumbent with above seat steering, i.e., a bike like
the Tour Easy.

Regards,

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

Date: 05 Jun 2007 12:32:41
From: Jim
Subject: Re: Why haven't bent bike caught on?

Steve came up with this when s/he headbutted the keyboard a moment ago in
alt.rec.bicycles.recumbent:

> I was so impressed with my first test drive of a recumbent bicycle
> that I was in disbelief that the world has been dominated by uprights
> for the better part of a century when an alternative, better design
> has existed.
>

It's like why do boxshifters like PC World sell PCs with Microsoft preloaded
on them? Answer: it's what people are used to, and because they got a great
deal on a bulk OEM licensing deal.

Same for uprights vs. recumbents: people are used to uprights, that's what
they grew up riding. Takes a bit to get used to a bent on the road,
particularly considering a driver who's actually looking out for bikes (OK,
now I'm in Dreamland!) isn't going to be looking for low-down vehicles.
Chopper flags still rock!

> Why is it in all that time that some big business or marketing firm
> hasn't tried to push recumbent bikes on the public? 2 minutes on
> one will convince most people it is a better product. The only bad
> thing about them is the price. I think a bike company putting some
> money into a well done marketing campaign could increase sales,
> justify mass production and drive the price down. I'm amazed that
> this hasn't happened.
>

I'm doing my bit: got mine covered in electronics, including 2.1 osund
system, GPS, alarm, quad beams and full indicator set, not to mention the
0.8BHP motor and tacho that goes up to 99mph (not that I ever go above 30),
makes a great ad for comfy bikes. :)

> Sure, there are a lot of designs to choose from, but the guys at the
> bike shop I went to were able to narrow things down to two designs for
> me as a begginer to try. A bike company could do the same thing.
>
> I firmly believe that an affordable recumbent bicycle would get many
> regular who would not take up biking to do so.

surprisingly enough, my 'bent was the cheapest frame in the shop (£199 as
opposed to a Y-frame at £899) - I was desperate for a bike (crank shell had
collapsed on my old one) - and I was pleasantly surprised at the ride
comfort. I'll never go upright again.
--
If you can read this -
The bitch fell off!

Date: 01 Jun 2007 13:41:52
From: Peter Clinch
Subject: Re: Why haven't bent bike caught on?

Steve wrote:
> I was so impressed with my first test drive of a recumbent bicycle
> that I was in disbelief that the world has been dominated by uprights
> for the better part of a century when an alternative, better design
> has existed.

First, the degree to which it's "better" depends what you want from it.
To many, a bike is a general purpose device and while the diamond
frame upright might not /excel/ at very much, it does do a lot of things
reasonably well in a single package.

For the most part though, people are generally conservative and will
resist change. It's often in a bit of a circular argument: obviously a
normal bike is better than that weird thing, that's why everyone rides
normal bikes!

Often, the resistance to change is quite sensible: faced with spending >
$1,000 on your first Really Good Bike, do you buy something which you
are 100% certain will be better than your current mount (the design is
broadly the same, but the implementation is much better), or do you risk
an unknown which /might/ be considerably better, but might be > $1,000
down the drain.

Also the case that facing something different, people will naturally
tend to rationalise why what they already do is right and better. I am
often told it must be dangerous being so low. I point out my head is
the same height on my 'bent as it is in my (standard sub-compact) car,
so that's a bit of a non-issue, but they will insist that it /must/ be
dangerous, and you can't confuse them with facts when their minds are
made up.

> Why is it in all that time that some big business or marketing firm
> hasn't tried to push recumbent bikes on the public? 2 minutes on
> one will convince most people it is a better product.

Back to the first point, define "better". I ride a'bent for distance
touring as I personally find it's better for that, but around town I use
an upright Brompton folder. Not as comfy as the 'bent, but a damn site
more convenient and it's only for a few minues and is comfy /enough/, so
the other conveniences win out. For local freight jobs I use a Burrows
8 Freight, where again it's the case that lower but adequate comfort is
less of an issue than how much stuff I can easily cart around (the
builder, Mike Burrows, makes recumbents as well, but figured upright
suited this job more, and I think I agree).

> The only bad thing about them is the price.

More to it than that. As well as the price, the degree to which they
are an unknown is /very/ bad: will this do what I want? ...maybe. Will
this upright do what I want? Experience says yes.
Also there are other bad things: weight, storage space, ease of
manhandling (I used to stay in a 2nd floor flat with a narrow, cornered
stair leading up to it and no external storage, and I would *not* have
had my current bike if I was still living there), degree of
standardisation of general accessories (for example, lights often clamp
onto handlebars with "standard" mounts, but try that with underseat
steering...).

> Sure, there are a lot of designs to choose from, but the guys at the
> bike shop I went to were able to narrow things down to two designs for
> me as a begginer to try. A bike company could do the same thing.
>
> I firmly believe that an affordable recumbent bicycle would get many
> regular who would not take up biking to do so.

Part of the problem is that people think of 'bents as a distinct class
of bike in the same way they think of tourers, racers, mountain bikes
etc., but that's really unhelpful. My touring 'bent should, IMHO, be
primarily thought of as a touring bike, not a recumbent bike, and it
should be compared to other tours, not necessarily recumbents. It would
be no use to someone wanting a sports machine, but other recumbent
designs would be.
Because of the way they're thought of, many cyclists don't really
realise what 'bents are /for/... "I have a tourer for touring, a racer
for fast days out, a folder for around town, a cargo bike for freight, I
don't see what I'd *do* with a recumbent". The point is it isn't an end
in itself, but a certain class of recumbent may be a better alternative
than their existing upright implementation.

In a related way, I don't think a "beginner recumbent" is a helpful
concept. No experienced cyclist would think of getting a "beginner
upright", and it's likely only experienced cyclists will fork out for a
'bent. Getting a "beginner" model, whatever that may be, is quite
possibly just going to convince that 'bents are a comfortable curiosity.
If you want to go touring, get a touring model, if you want fast, get
a fast model, don't worry about "beginner" as if you can ride a bike it
shouldn't take long to get past your newbiness.

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: 31 May 2007 20:59:36
From: Steve
Subject: Re: Why haven't bent bike caught on?

On May 31, 11:33 pm, MLB5...@webtv.net (Michael Baldwin) wrote:
> ..in asking "caught on" do you mean acceptance or dominance?...give it
> time...in 2 decades, todays kids who are riding recumbents from WalMart
> (the new Schwinn StingRay and the OCC bikes) will usher in the great
> bent wave so many folks look distantly toward the horizon for...

That comment was worth the trouble to post alone. WalMart sells
recumbents? I wouldn't have thought so with the prices I have seen so
far.

I don't mean dominance, just widespread enough so that they are
affordable. A lot of people enjoy biking as an end in itself and I
think many of those regular people would prefer recumbents if they
found them in bike shops so they would know about them, have the
opportunity to try them and could afford them......especially young
people.

Date: 31 May 2007 23:33:31
From: Michael Baldwin
Subject: Re: Why haven't bent bike caught on?

..in asking "caught on" do you mean acceptance or dominance?...give it
time...in 2 decades, todays kids who are riding recumbents from WalMart
(the new Schwinn StingRay and the OCC bikes) will usher in the great
bent wave so many folks look distantly toward the horizon for...

Best Regards Always

Mike Baldwin

Date: 01 Jun 2007 18:09:40
From: Michael Baldwin
Subject: Re: Why haven't bent bike caught on?

FYI - Technically the NEW Schwinn StingRay and Orange County Chopper
(OCC) bicycles, both marketed by WalMart, ARE recumbents. As designed
their are meant to be ridden SEATED.

Granted, the average multi-speed LWB or SWB recumbent rider may not
recognize these bike as such, but they are...

The point in posting my original thoughts on the subject still
stand...15 to 20 years from now the "30 somethings" will embrace
multi-speed LWB/SWB recumbents as they refamiliarize themselves (and
their muscle memory) with the simple pleasures of their youth.

An overly simplistic POV for most I'm sure.

Best Regards Always

Mike Baldwin

Date: 02 Jun 2007 10:28:25
From: Dart70ca
Subject: Re: Why haven't bent bike caught on?

Speaking from my own personal experience getting a recumbent bike
just last year, I'll add this bit;

I'm 38. I rode a diamond frame all my life. Didn't even know about
recumbents (I don't think) until the www came along. I always thought
they were kind of neat-looking and thought they'd be a pretty cool
thing to test ride to see what they were like. I think that comes from
when I was a kid and liked to ride different things. The Big-Wheel and
Green-Machine toys were great fun. My first bike was a CCM cruiser-
type thing and my last was a diamond-frame mountain-bike hybrid. None
were of any great quality that I noticed; I was just your basic
recreational user. Used it to get to school and hang out with friends
on sunny days and later on I rode it to work many times (+15km).
Year-before-last that bike was stolen and, since I had a small
family then and money was somewhat tight, I didn't contemplate getting
another right away. The kids were too young to ride and I really
didn't have any enthusiasm for it.
Last year in late summer I came across a couple of Sun EZ Sport
recumbents in the local Craigslist with prices in a range I could
afford (especially for soemthing as neat as a recumnet!). They were
asking $600 each. They guys had bought one each for he and his wife a
few years back on a trip through California. He'd ridden his quite a
bit but the wife hadn't taken to hers quite so well. Had barely ridden
it in fact. The flash was still on the tires. I bought hers for the
asking price and I love it.
I admit, it has it's drawbacks. It's so long (about 72") that it
doesn't fit in my shortbox S10 very well. It's too long to fit on a
bike carrier on the local buses. It won't fit inside the bus or on any
of the transit trains here (I guess it COULD fit, but I'd have to get
it up and down several flights of stairs and inconvenience a lot of
pedestrians on the train to do it). It's not overly fast on the road
(maybe 5km/hr faster on the flats than I am on a diamond-frame MTB-
hybrid).
What it IS good at is being absolutely the most comfortable thing I
have ever ridden. I can commute 25 km at the beginning and end of a
12hr day (I'm a machinist) and not be overly tired in the morning. My
legs might be a little wobbly at the end (there are two hwy
overpasses, one major high suspension bridge and a very steep hill on
this ride) but I recover almost overnight. I am not a regular rider of
a bicycle. Might only get out on it once a month sometimes. I'm pretty
sure if I did that commute on a diamond-frame I'd be pretty well
bushed for a couple days after that.
If I get another one I think it'll be a SWB as I've tried one of
those and liked it a lot.
As another point, my family came from one of those little East-Coast
fishing villages here in Canada. No roads, no cars and no bikes. I
never had a bike until I was probably 7 or 8 and we moved from there.
My parents never had bikes nor learned how to ride them. My mother
wanted to ride with the grandkids recently and, not really wanting to
have to go through the worry of my near-60 yr.-old mother learning to
ride a bike in traffic, I suggested maybe a trike. I found her one of
those old Norco upright-types one day at a garage sale. She felt silly
on it and it was heavy and tippy. I rode it and hated it myself. When
i got my recumbent I had not hears of Sun recumbents before and so did
a little looking at their other machines. They have a tadpole trike
that they offer and showed her that one. "Ooh, that looks sporty!"
I hooked her up with a test ride at the local recumbent shop on
Catrike and HPVelotchnik machines and she was really happy with that
style. We bought the Sun tadpole and she's having a ball with it and I
don't have to worry about her busting a hip or collar bone learning to
ride it. She and the bike are not fast by any stretch of the
imagination but that doesn't matter. She's out on the thing and
exploring a whole new world of exercise and parts of the city she
never knew existed. She doesn't get tired on it either. She says she
breaks a sweat once in a while but the after-ride recovery time is
almost not noticeable.
These are machines that the average practically non-bike-rider can
get on and ride 20-40 km without too much preparation or regular
practice and still have no lingering sore joints or muscles.
I rode a diamond frame to work the other day and it wasn't too
pleasant. Numb hands, sore shoulders and neck, the butt thing. The
ride wasn't even enjoyable. You end up staring down at the road a lot.
There is a lot of traffic along a long section of my route and no
shoulder to speak of. Two-lane road with quite a bit of heavy truck
traffic. On the recumbent I am much more aware of where I am and where
the cars are than on the diamond-frame. The handlebar mirror on the
recumbent is sorely missed on the upright as I guess I don't have the
mobility in my neck that i used to have for constantly having to look
up and around. While I can't shoulder-check too well in the 'bent, I
don't really need to, either.

I guess what it comes down to is that I believe that if kids get the
'bent bug then they'll be more accepting of it when they're older.
There aren't many 'bent's around here and I get some funny looks
when i'm on the thing. Guy's sometimes laugh or throw out a derisive
comment or two, ladies will either stare or giggle. Kids, for the most
part, seem to love it. They don't look at me riding the bike; they
look to the bike first. They're eyes look the whole thing over in a
second and then up at me. If they have a question or comment at all
it's usually one of 3 things; "Cool bike man.", "Is that a chopper?",
or (turning to group of oblivious companions) "Hey! Look at that
bike!"
I wish there were more choice in 'bents for children. They would
definitely want them for the 'cool' factor alone. I'm sure the Chinese
could turn out cheap kids' 'bents almost as cheaply as they do those
pieces of 12-inch-wheeled pieces of scrapmetal that they do now. I'm
surprised that, market demands aside, one of them hasn't already tried
to sell a line of recumbents on the premise that their different shape
and style will appeal to the little ones. I know i can't get my two
(or my little nephew) off my Mother's tadpole when we visit. I am
considering building a trike for them for this reason. The ones on the
market for kids (that i've seen and shown to them) don't "look like a
real bike" they say. Too much like toys.
Sorry for the long post. This a subject that I'm curious about as
well and I've enjoyed reading the posts on it.

Thanks,

Keith Green

Surrey, BC

Canada.

Date: 02 Jun 2007 20:13:57
From: dlhii
Subject: Re: Why haven't bent bike caught on?

Dart70ca <ksgg@telus.net > wrote:
>
> Speaking from my own personal experience getting a recumbent bike
>just last year, I'll add this bit;
>
> I wish there were more choice in 'bents for children. They would
>definitely want them for the 'cool' factor alone. I'm sure the Chinese
>could turn out cheap kids' 'bents almost as cheaply as they do those
>pieces of 12-inch-wheeled pieces of scrapmetal that they do now. I'm
>surprised that, market demands aside, one of them hasn't already tried
>to sell a line of recumbents on the premise that their different shape
>and style will appeal to the little ones. I know i can't get my two
>(or my little nephew) off my Mother's tadpole when we visit. I am
>considering building a trike for them for this reason. The ones on the
>market for kids (that i've seen and shown to them) don't "look like a
>real bike" they say. Too much like toys.
> Sorry for the long post. This a subject that I'm curious about as
>well and I've enjoyed reading the posts on it.
>
>
>Thanks,
>
>Keith Green
>
>Surrey, BC
>
>Canada.

If your thinking about building check out
http://www.atomiczombie.com/index.htm

I'm building one of the DeltaWolfs' right now, he's going to have
plans for a tadpole later this year.

Also http://kb7mxu2.home.mindspring.com/trikes6.htm has a lot of home
build able recumbent.

Don

Date: 01 Jun 2007 21:46:30
From: Michael Baldwin
Subject: Re: Why haven't bent bike caught on?

..oops...their should be thar...THEY'RE :)

Date: 01 Jun 2007 01:12:49
From: DougC
Subject: Re: Why haven't bent bike caught on?

Michael Baldwin wrote:
> ..in asking "caught on" do you mean acceptance or dominance?...give it
> time...in 2 decades, todays kids who are riding recumbents from WalMart
> (the new Schwinn StingRay and the OCC bikes) will usher in the great
> bent wave so many folks look distantly toward the horizon for...
>
> Best Regards Always
>
> Mike Baldwin
>

It is true that the bicycles commonly sold in the US are moving away
from UCI-road racing types--and I see this as a generally-good thing.
First it happened with MTB's, then hybrids, and now comfort bikes.
Although a comfort bike is something closer to a semi-recumbent I
suppose. As the Chines factories retool, I think we'll see cheapo US
bicycles get seat-tube angles that are lazier and lazier.

....I have a RANS Fusion and almost everyone who's tried it thinks it's
great (except the guy with a bad back, who said the back-angle caught
him exactly wrong). It still looks pretty normal and is easy to ride,
but is still a *big* improvement in comfort over a regular bicycle.

-----

First reason is that bents are expensive, much more so than a upright
bike with comparable component levels. /Why/ that is don't matter--it's
simply a fact that matters to the buyer's wallet, especially if they
don't really expect to use it a whole lot.

Second reason (I think) is that the long-distance riding that recumbents
excel at isn't the sort of riding that most people who buy bikes for
occasional-recreational use are really inclined to do.
~

Date: 01 Jun 2007 07:11:54
From: Jon
Subject: Re: Why haven't bent bike caught on?

"DougC" <dcimper@norcom2000.com > wrote
>>[Why haven't bent bike caught on?]
>
> First reason is that bents are expensive, much more so than a upright bike
> with comparable component levels. /Why/ that is don't matter--it's simply
> a fact that matters to the buyer's wallet, especially if they don't really
> expect to use it a whole lot.

Recumbents are a nique market, and will likely stay that way. One
might argue any bike costing more than a department store bike is
a nique product. Consider the fate of small-medium sized local
bike shops in competition with *Mart, etc...

Most people prepared to spend, say $500+ on a bike, generally have
some specific idea of what they want in a bike. People spending $1000+
on a bike almost certainly have an application in mind. They want to
go on club rides or be on a team or race. Or they want to do mountain
biking or touring or benefit rallies... For these activities, even more
basically, they need a bike to "fit in". In some cases, that simply
cannot be a recumbent,-- UCI racing, by rule, -- technical off-road
biking, perhaps by design constraints.

In other cases the fitting in is more cultural. Recumbent bikes aren't
"normal bikes"! For those of us who appreciate them, that's good! %^)

> Second reason (I think) is that the long-distance riding that recumbents
> excel at isn't the sort of riding that most people who buy bikes for
> occasional-recreational use are really inclined to do.

Not all recumbents excel at long distances, of course. But the point
is well taken. Most people don't ride long or often enough for the
cost/comfort issues of a recumbent bike to make much difference.
Also for someone who rides, say 4 times a year, the familiarity of an
upright bike is an asset.

If there were recumbent bikes targeted at kids, priced low enough
to compete with commodity bikes, we might see a more dramatic
increase in market presence of recumbents across the line in 10-20
years. But breath holding probably isn't advisable!

Jon

Date: 31 May 2007 21:11:03
From: doofy
Subject: Re: Why haven't bent bike caught on?

Date: 31 May 2007 19:55:40
From: Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman
Subject: Re: Why haven't bent bike caught on?

On May 31, 9:32 pm, Steve (who?) wrote:
> I was so impressed with my first test drive of a recumbent bicycle
> that I was in disbelief that the world has been dominated by uprights
> for the better part of a century when an alternative, better design
> has existed.
>
> Why is it in all that time that some big business or marketing firm
> hasn't tried to push recumbent bikes on the public? 2 minutes on
> one will convince most people it is a better product. The only bad
> thing about them is the price. I think a bike company putting some
> money into a well done marketing campaign could increase sales,
> justify mass production and drive the price down. I'm amazed that
> this hasn't happened.
>
> Sure, there are a lot of designs to choose from, but the guys at the
> bike shop I went to were able to narrow things down to two designs for
> me as a begginer to try. A bike company could do the same thing.
>
> I firmly believe that an affordable recumbent bicycle would get many
> regular who would not take up biking to do so.

Post this to rec.bicycles.* and see what reaction you get from most of
the regulars. That should answer your question.

Hint: most bike shop employees are racers who work at the LBS to get
stuff at wholesale. They have no interest in anything that is not UCI
legal.

Many bike shops tried to sell recumbents in the late 1990's. Most
failed. The few that succeeded had the common factor of ownership/
management AND key sales employees being committed to selling
recumbents.

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