Recumbent - Debate on road cycling

:beer: Iv started a debate on impotence and recumbents.
It started of on the subject that if some cyclists are worried about impotence why dont they convert to recumbents?
Its opened up a good debate,as i suggested that recumbents will leave uprights in the dust:p Why dont you all take a look and get your pennys worth in.

For the most part, the thead is opinionated (as are all of the threads in bikeforums) and worse - the opinions are stated as facts (especially those claiming that our compaints are "not true"). What you have generated (flame bait! :D) is an outlet for roadies to malign bents. Same kind of people as those who drive past in cars and question our sexual orientation and things of that nature. They seem to be pretty much intolerant of "difference" as many are. Sad, huh?

Personally, I tried very hard to work the discomfort out of my upright before going to a bent. Not because I didn't want to ride a bent, but rather because I wanted to ride a bicycle - any bicycle. I couldn't manage it so I started building bents. I have absolutely no desire to ride an upright now, cool as some of them are. And I have never had a desire to ride a road bike, the posture just sucks, in my opinion. They can have it and their dorky wannabe jerseys that go with em.

I'm bent and happy. Not faster, just happier and I can ride my bicycle as much as I like without ending up with numb nuts. Also, (it just occured to me)...I get to hack up road bikes to build my bents! Hell...even road bike parts are good enough for building bents! Just the other day I chopped most of a set of drop bars up to make a post for mounting my heart rate monitor and my cyclocomputer on...worked great! :D

So recumbents have made continuing cycling possible/comfortable for me with the added advantage of allowing me the creative outlet of modifying or creating pretty much whatever I want to in a human powered vehicle. I don't feel any need whatsover to conform to a "code" or whatever it is that roadies have. With bents, anything and everything is accepatble and encouraged.

I don't believe that one style of bicycle is better than another. To each his own. For those who want to believe different...hey! We're all entitled to our opinions and those that need to believe...well...they need to believe (poor things);)!

Life is good!
Feet first and forward :D

Let's not forget our friends with hemeroids.:crash: Many a roadie with this problem would do well for themselves to take the bent plunge. I did and I am glad for it.:p

Originally posted by Nobby
Same kind of people as those who drive past in cars and question our sexual orientation and things of that nature. They seem to be pretty much intolerant of "difference" as many are. Sad, huh?



Originally posted by Nobby
They can have it and their dorky wannabe jerseys that go with em.


:D

Perhaps saddest of all is that I have been toying with the notion of getting myself a road bike. Why, after all of the pain and discomfort in struggling to adapt myself to an upright, would I want to do that? I dunno...but anyway...I'm holding off until the urge passes. I find that that works wells for "honey do's"...oughta work for this too...right? Right!

Feet first and onward!

Let's not have a debate. It will prove nothing.

I ride an upright and probably always will.

However, I am interested in the reasons that bent riders ride bents. They sound well reasoned and I'm sure that you have found a ride that suits you. Excellent.

What do we acheive by throwing mud at each other?

If bent riders continue to provide well reasoned discussion on the benefits of riding bents you'll probably win some people over. I know that some of the comments made by bent riders on this forum have changed my perception of bents for the better.

However if we try to argue with a 'we're right, you're wrong' attitude, no matter which side we're on, we will only cause friction.

Lets agree to disagree and get on with welcoming everyone who rides, whatever kind of ride it is.

Don't say you will never ride a recumbent. What if it was recumbent of not riding. I went to a recumbent because I crushed the tip of a vertibrae in my uper/mid back and broke the radial head in my elbow. I was a serious roadie, rode a Treck 5500, Have a full suspension Pro Flex mountain bike, A fully equiped Cannondale ST1000 touring bike. And a road tandum with 387 miles on it. They sat in a back bedroom for a six years while I got fat and out of shape. I now ride two different recumbents and a hand powered trike (and am now broke) and am not sure I would go back to a wedgie if I could, although I do miss the fast pace lines. Karl

Originally posted by p38karl
Don't say you will never ride a recumbent. What if it was recumbent of not riding. I went to a recumbent because I crushed the tip of a vertibrae in my uper/mid back and broke the radial head in my elbow. I was a serious roadie, rode a Treck 5500, Have a full suspension Pro Flex mountain bike, A fully equiped Cannondale ST1000 touring bike. And a road tandum with 387 miles on it. They sat in a back bedroom for a six years while I got fat and out of shape. I now ride two different recumbents and a hand powered trike (and am now broke) and am not sure I would go back to a wedgie if I could, although I do miss the fast pace lines. Karl
I'm not saying I'd never ride one at all. I'd like to give one a try but feel that I probably wouldn't ever make a permanent change. I'm just saying that well reasoned comment like yours is what makes me see bents as a real alternative. If I needed to switch for whatever reason I would. Thanks for your input.

The reason for my post is that I wouldn't like to see a flame war escalate between upright and bent riders. I hope that this thread doesn't encourage an unhealthy debate.

We're all riders. Let's celebrate the things that make riding so great whatever kind of ride we prefer.

I think that most recumbent riders are or where serious road cyclists anyway.They ride recumbents because they either,need to because of medical reasons,or they just love riding bikes ,and a recumbent is just another bike to enjoy.I ride my recumbent
and my upright,it just depends how I feel at the time.But I will say riding a recumbent is the closest thing to flying there is.

I am a road bike rider, having an old Schwinn LeTour and a Trek 1440. But in four years, I've been in two serious bicycle/car accidents. I'm right now healing up from the second, and have been modifying my uprights to better monitor traffic. Both accidents occured because I was unable to monitor traffic.

I'll get into specifics later, but I am considering purchasing a recumbant because of the riding position. This is the position that car drivers are in, and it allows watching ahead, to the sides, and behind (with mirrors) continuously.

When fatigued, an upright bicycle rider will drop his or her line of sight to right in front of the wheel. This is normal, and is also how we walk and run. But this split second (or many seconds, depending upon how fatigued one is) inattention has landed me in the hospital twice, and I'm not going to allow that to happen again.

Sitting back, even fatigued a recumbant rider is watching the areas around and not simply concentrating on the roadway in front of his/her wheel. That may be enough to sell me on recumbants.

I've also been injured in bicycle falls in the past. Falling from a recumbant is a lower fall, less likely to involve the head (I have a helmet in pieces now), and a fall is probably less likely. My past injuries have left me with a back muscle which fatigues easily, and the recumbant seat would make that situation less a problem.

I still have not committed, but these would be my major reasons for going recumbant if I elect to do so. Also, they are simply fun to ride.

John

Orbit, you bring up this topic again as if it was an intellectual debate you had started while it was nothing more than a flame bait.

The reason it got so many replies was that you shoved the "impotence" urban myth right into the very clearly labled "road cycling" section.

Here is what you sounded like:
"Ummm.. duh... armgh... I knaw that ya'all have been having issues in bed and yer boys jest ain't flowin no more, why not give up the epright and go for the 'bent, erghmmm?"

You are not the first to start a recumbent vs. upright discussion in this forum. There have been dozens in the past, most of which had been much more intelligent than that. In fact, I remember that I myslef had started a thread asking about benefits of recumbents a while back.

Sometimes to get a reply you have to rattle a few cages.Its a bit like questioning somebodys intelligence,your bound to get a answer.As for the impotence thing it has become a issue for some cyclists,but it is only one reason to ride a recumbent.
I put it in the road section because putting it in the recumbent section is like shouting at the converted.
Do you shine so dim,that you have to turn of the lights around
you to be noticed?

I think most keen cyclists would like to own a recumbent at some time.

I still lust after the Hurricane? I saw crossing on one of the ferries over the Amstel last year. Suspension, joystick control and v fast.

Only thing puts me off is that the level you sit at in a bent is a bit too low in traffic.

Originally posted by ORBIT

Sometimes to get a reply you have to rattle a few cages.

Kinda like that monkey that throws poop at people passing by in the zoo?

The monkeys probably more intelligent.

Originally posted by Amir R. Pakdel
The reason it got so many replies was that you shoved the "impotence" urban myth right into the very clearly labled "road cycling" section.


Amir, you have made reference to this "myth" on several occasions recently. One must assume then, that you have hard facts to support that. Care to post them?

There is no bike type that is better or worse (brands are another matter entirely). We ride what we want to ride, what appeals to us. Some, more fortunate than most of us, have one (or more) of everything. Makes no difference. What matters is that we ride.

I ride recumbents. There is nothing cooler or more enjoyable on two wheels, IMHO.

Originally posted by ORBIT
:beer: Iv started a debate on impotence and recumbents.
It started of on the subject that if some cyclists are worried about impotence why dont they convert to recumbents?
Its opened up a good debate,as i suggested that recumbents will leave uprights in the dust:p Why dont you all take a look and get your pennys worth in.
I have never been worried being impotent, biking has done wonders of my sex life, its like a viagra pill for me when I bike, I have full of energy

This may have been debated for years here. But some of us have not been here for years.

And we are not remotely interestedin the monkey throwing thread which should probably be in another forum.

John Ratliff wrote:


Sitting back, even fatigued a recumbant rider is watching the areas around and not simply concentrating on the roadway in front of his/her wheel. That may be enough to sell me on recumbants.

I switched to a recumbent last summer....its fast....its fancy looking especialy with the fairing....and when you ride it, nothing hurts. But.....John, before you invest the money, be aware that visibility is NOT improved and should NOT be your reason for going recumbent.

This season I am back on a wedgie. I want the more rigorous work of riding a wedgie.....but mostly....I want to be able to see clearly all the cars at every crowded intersection. I could see about 10% of them on a good day on my bent. My ass hurts...my hands hurt....my feet hurts.....all road riders know the story. But I just couldn't handle not being visually HIGHER than the automobile drivers.

Congrats to all bent riders who have dealt with this well. I have a couple bents in the 'for sale' forum for you to check out......I don't have your skill or courage.

Peter

300 miles and you know all about recumbents. Karl

With all due respect, Karl.

I never claimed to know 'all about recumbents.' I claimed that I couldn't see over the cars when I was at a corner, and therefore returned to my wedgie. Perhaps I am just too short. Or my bent was too short. Or the cars were too tall.

Actually I claimed to to know more....that bents are often fast, very comfortable, and that I have a great respect for those who ride them.

Peter

The view on a recumbent is great when you are traveling on a road and looking ahead your head does not drop and you have always got you eyes on the road,but it is true that in traffic and certain road conditions view on a recumbent can be really restricted.As a example i was riding my recumbent not too long back,and i came to a junction and wanted to turn right,to do this i had to get across to the other side of the road to be on the correct side of the road when carrying on with my ride,but there
was a van parked on the right side of me, i could not see over the
top of the van,and because of the recumbent position it was difficult to move forward so that i could see around it because my feet are out in front,it took me a long time to get across the road.
Also road works can restrict your view.
The interesting point that has been raised however is that Peter
tried a recumbent,found it fast and comfortable,and yet changed
back to his upright,most comments that are made that people that try recumbents and get used to them find it difficult to back to a upright,but is this really true?How many cyclists try recumbents for sometime and then go back to uprights?

Originally posted by ORBIT
The monkeys probably more intelligent.

Ah yes, ignorance is bliss. I've lurked here in 'bent land for some time. I'm curious. I'm just not Bisiketual yet (pronounced By sike chew ul). I like my road bike. I've gotten comforatable. However it'd be REALLY COOL to try one one day.

Problem with the internet is people like me. Fanatical about things they know nothing of.

But I'm watching, and learning. One day, perhaps I'll ride one. and maybee, I'll get one. We will see.

did someone say Bisiketual?!

I love recumbents!

Originally posted by RacerX
did someone say Bisiketual?!

I love recumbents!



And I'd always thought he'd prefer the view in an upright paceline...

Originally posted by John C. Ratliff
... I've been in two serious bicycle/car accidents. ... Both accidents occured because I was unable to monitor traffic.

I'll get into specifics later, but I am considering purchasing a recumbent because of the riding position. This is the position that car drivers are in, and it allows watching ahead, to the sides, and behind (with mirrors) continuously.

When fatigued, an upright bicycle rider will drop his or her line of sight to right in front of the wheel. ...

... Falling from a recumbent is a lower fall, less likely to involve the head (I have a helmet in pieces now), and a fall is probably less likely.

Uprights and 'bents have slightly different safety issues, but I am not yet convinced that either has an overall safety advantage over the other. I agree that 'bent riders do not go "over the handlebars," but I reject your argument that a 'bent rider can monitor traffic better than an upright rider.

Advantage 'bent:
1) no "over the handlebars" injuries (this is the big issue);
2) comfort (for some riders).

Advantage upright:
1) less likely to go under a motor vehicle instead of over the bonnet (this may be an equally big issue);
2) better visibility;
3) faster on climbs, slower on descents = better average speed and safety in hills;
4) better maneuverability and collision avoidance capability.

I dont agree that a recumbent has a lower average speed than a
upright.Recumbents can achieve far faster average speed than uprights.Though I will agree that in heavy traffic the upright has a great advantage,

sorry for the aside....hey nobby, is canada as tax ridden as everyone says it is?????I heard it's now the poorest of of the G8 countries with the exclusion of Russia. How did the country get so messed up??I heard Mexico's living standard will be as high as Canada's within the next decade.

Let's see...50% income tax...7% federal tax on everything...nawww...we're not overtaxed :D

I don't know where you are from or where you are getting your information, but the standard of living in Canada is second to none that I'm aware of, unless you consider the winters...

Canada is easily the best place in the world to live! (I may be biased)

Anyway...I sure don't want to get into another political thread! :D

Who cares which is better?

A couple of decades ago I had this Aha! phenomenon. I think it was after watching an especially annoying L'Oreal commercial. And I said to myself, "Why should I care about making the best decision? Especially about things that are not very important? And in situations where what's 'the best' is debatable and it's not even clear that it's a meaningful concept?"

I think that, in fact, you are playing the big corporations' game if they can trick you into CARING much about whether you drink Coke or Pepsi, use a Mac or a PC, wear Nikes or Adidas... or... dare I say it... ride a DF or a recumbent?

If you see someone doing something that you think is suboptimal, you do NOT have any sacred duty to try to convert them.

One day, we needed a new TV, and we were in a big electronics store staring at a row of TV sets ranging in price from $500 to $1000 with subtly different sets of features, etc. and we were starting to get consumer angst, fearing that we would make the wrong decision, wondering whether to ask a salesperson to tell us about them... and I suddenly said to my wife, "You know, I believe that every single one of those is a television set. It DOESN'T REALLY MATTER. Let's just buy the cheapest." And I felt this enormous feeling of liberation, of weight being lifted from me.

I don't know where the idea came from that we have an OBLIGATION to try to make the best decision in ANY given situation.

Originally posted by Nobby
"...honey do's..." WHAT THE HELL IS A HONEY DO?

Anyway...I don't really care what you ride; road bike, fixie, mountain bike, car, motorcycle, recumbent, skateboard...well, now that I thnk about it, roller bladers kinda piss me off, but that's a different topic altogether...You guys are pathetic trying to jockey for the top of the bicycle mountain. And some wonder where folks find the nerve to call cyclists "bike nerds." Ride what you ride and let go of the beef.

Oh, and roadies got impotence? Trust me, your girl knows differently.

payroll...lover of the art.

WHAT THE HELL IS A HONEY DO?

The actual term is a "honey do list" - "Honey, do this , honey, do that,... When your significant other has things they want done that are nowhere near the top of your own list of things to do. (like going riding no matter what kind of bike it is)

This is my first ever post to this forum. Chances are, I've jumped in at an inappropriate point. What else is new?

I've never owned a bent. I'm likely to purchase a Rans Rocket tomorrow. I also own a Cannondale DF that I like better than any other DF I've owned. Very stiff. Very light. I once raced DF for the San Jose Bicycle Club.

I have been as much a weight-trainer as a bicyclist over the past 3 decades. As such, and as someone who takes an engineering approach to most things, I've had a longstanding interest in the design of gym machines, issues of power generation and the implementation of mechanical advantage.

Even before I became interested in bents, I had a growing dissatisfaction with the DF design. If the recumbent didn't already exist, I probably would have invented it. javascript:smilie(':)')

On a DF bike you are simply in a very poor configuration for generating power and applying strength. For instance. In the gym setting, onsider the SQUAT versus the INCLINE PRESS.

A DF bike puts you in a position analogous to performing a squat in the gym. When the squat is performed, one presses the resistance up, the feet pressing downward against an immovable plane, the floor. Unfortunately, when the press occurs on the DF bike, the rider has no immovable plane to press against. Fortunately, the movement is more complex than a simple pressing movement and the lack of a backing resistance is mitigated. Therefore, granted: it is a grotesque oversimplification to try to brand riding a DF bike as nothing more than a pressing movement.

A recumbent puts you in a position analogous to performing an incline press in the gym. And like the incline press, the recumbent provides a backing plane against which to exert pressure.

It is telling that, whereas a man squatting 1000-pounds for one-rep in the gym is rare, pressing 1000-pounds on an incline press FOR REPS is relatively routine. Of course, there are other issues: balance, inherent mechanical advantage, etc.

It is also easier to breathe using an incline press, the advantage varying with the angle the incline makes with the backing plane.

Which brings us to this: the position a rider is forced into on a DF bike is wildly inefficient if you like to do such arcane things as BREATHE. You're virtually doubled-up on a DF; movement of the diaphragm is constricted. A rider becomes anaerobic much quicker on a DF.

Those of you who claim that you prefer the DF because it works you harder could go a step further and also drag a boat anchor behind you! That would REALLY create some stress!! But seriously, rather than nominating Inefficiency as a training technique, perhaps you could simply ride the recumbent harder? You'll probably find yourself going much faster at an equivalent exertion, gearing notwithstanding, and recovering more quickly.

Some of us, depending on our builds and sleekness, when we "kick-it" on a DF, at some point come up off the drops trying to get air. Why? Again, depending on one's frame and build, because the less doubled-up a rider is, the easier it is for him to breathe; the harder it is to breathe, the slower the recovery; the slower the recovery, the less the overall average exertion; the less the exertion, the less the speed, etc.

Blah blah--and I do mean--blah.