Recumbent - 20in rear wheel -soo many drawbacks!

Bikeforums.net is a forum about nothing but bikes. Our community can help you find information about hard-to-find and localized information like bicycle tours, specialties like where in your area to have your recumbent bike serviced, or what are the best bicycle tires and seats for the activities you use your bike for.
counterpoint
10-03-05, 12:43 AM
I wonder about all the recumbents out there (including my Counterpoint Presto) with 20in rear wheels because that severly restricts the gear choices. Because the wheel is so small you need to have either a huge front chainring or a combined internal hub with a 7or 9 speed cassette (SRAM DualDrive) to be on a par with regular bikes.
There also tends to be too little clearance for the rear derailleur, if fully extended for a 34teeth ring there are only inches to the ground, making it vulnerable to obstacles and dirt (clogging up in snow).
It's also claimed that 26in wheels provide a more stable and safer ride.
In a 26in rear wheel design one could build a bike with a single front chainwheel plus a DualDrive in the back (less chain guide hassle, no front derailleur) getting an excellent gear ratio from high to low.
Any comments?
I should add that I haven't bought new bike parts for ages, maybe I'm not aware of new affordable technology that renders these deficits obsolete.
There are some recumbents with 26 inch wheels, but I guess you haven't found them yet. There are even some trikes with 26 inch rears. Keep looking. ;)
squeaker
10-04-05, 03:47 AM
In a 26in rear wheel design one could build a bike with a single front chainwheel plus a DualDrive in the back (less chain guide hassle, no front derailleur) getting an excellent gear ratio from high to low. 20" rear wheel 'bents also offer this option (e.g. Challenge, HP Velotechnik), and I've not seen anything to say that the gear range is 'limited'. If you want a 'compact' bike then 20" front and rear is a good compromise, and means that you only have to carry one spare tube, or one spare tyre if you're getting serious ;)
Really a case of "different strokes" etc..
LRtrike
10-04-05, 08:12 AM
No, drawbacks are if you have a 16" or 18" inch rear wheel. I had trouble with the deraillure actually smacking the ground with an 18" wheel. Went to a 20" wheel and there's plenty of clearance. :o)
dougfoot
10-08-05, 07:29 PM
Recently I have made some major changes to my Trice Micro (a recumbent tadpole tricycle with 18" wheels)
The stock trike came with a Schlumpf Speed drive (a dual speed bottom bracket) with 34 and 56 chain rings, and a 9 speed Ultegra rear hub with a 11-28 cassette, gear inches from 19" - 135". I changed them out for a standard tripple (30, 42, 55) and a Shimano Capreo rear hub and 9-26 cassette, gear inches from 19" to 103".
The low end didn't change much, however, in reality, I didn't loose much on the high end either as the only time I could manage to turn over the top gear is when I went down hill.
With 2 months of riding, my averages remain about the same, and I am spinning more (my average cadence has gone up).
nedgoudy
10-08-05, 09:44 PM
I wonder about all the recumbents out there (including my Counterpoint Presto) with 20in rear wheels because that severly restricts the gear choices. Because the wheel is so small you need to have either a huge front chainring or a combined internal hub with a 7or 9 speed cassette (SRAM DualDrive) to be on a par with regular bikes.
I own 2 recumbents. An Easy Racers, SUN E-1,
and a Lightning Dynamics Thunderbolt.
The EZ-1 has 2.125 inch tires on em that
are Maxis Hookworms with Kevlar linings
and they have been on there forever and
never gone flat or blown out. The down
side in addition to the 20 inch tire in back
is the rolling resistance from the Gorilla tires.
I don't know physics, but I know that given
equal gearing ratios, I will move slower on my
EZ-1 than I can on the Thunderbolt which has
THIN TIRES front and back and a 26" tire in back
and a 16 1/3" tire in the front, both designed for
high performance and speed.
I rode the same 14 mile trip 'out' on a 28 miler
today and cut 20 minutes off my time using
the Thunderbolt rather than the EZ-1.
Weight is also a factor. The EZ-1 weighs
about 45 lbs stripped, where the Thunderbolt
weighs only about 36. (IIRC.)
I like both bikes and I use the EZ-1 for Shopping
and errands to post office and such, but for riding
to visit friends in other cities I ride the Thunderbolt.
Either way, I am still slow by young agile roadie standards
but I can enjoy the ride in either case. I can get either
bike on the Metrolink Trains that run all over Los Angeles,
and I can get the SWB Thunderbolt on any bus in any county
in Southern California, so I am good to go.
Ned Goudy
Glendora, CA USA