Recumbent - Question about small-wheeled recumbents

I'm starting to do some research on recumbents, and I've been wondering about some of the lower-priced ones such as the Cycle Genius CGX. I'm looking for something I can use to commute to work (18 miles round trip) and ride on occasional longer rides like the MS 150 next fall. So, here are several questions:

1.) Will a bike with 20"/16" wheels carry me comfortably in a ride like the MS 150 (75 miles a day)?
2.) Does the size of the wheels affect speed? (Would the other MS 150 riders run off without me?)
3.) Are there other drawbacks to the small wheels? Advantages?

The Cycle Genius bikes (and the EZ's too) get good reviews, and they look cool--but those front wheels look awfully small. But then, I'm not sure whether or not that makes much difference.

My commute is through rolling hills in farm country. The roads are all paved, but sometimes a bit rough. Every now and then I need to ride in the grass beside the road to make way for farm equipment, etc.

Other information that might be relevant: I'm currently riding a low-end DF bike with 26x1.75 tires, on which I can average about 14 mph. I'm not interested in racing, but I'd like to go a bit faster than I do now. I'm a middle-aged non-athlete in reasonably good shape, and not especially large (5'9', 175 lbs.), so I could probably fit on a small recumbent pretty well.

Any thoughts?

Have you looked at www.actionbent.com ? There are plenty of bikes with a 20/26" wheel combo. A smaller wheel on the front may result in "twitchier" steering. A small wheel in the back will limit your top speed. It's also harder to find tubes and tires for 16" wheels, though any bike shop will probably have 20" and 26" tires.

Once you get your "bent legs" (ie. retrained your legs) you'll be just as fast, if not faster, than you are on the MTB.

Have you looked at www.actionbent.com ? There are plenty of bikes with a 20/26" wheel combo. A smaller wheel on the front may result in "twitchier" steering. A small wheel in the back will limit your top speed. It's also harder to find tubes and tires for 16" wheels, though any bike shop will probably have 20" and 26" tires.

Once you get your "bent legs" (ie. retrained your legs) you'll be just as fast, if not faster, than you are on the MTB.

I hadn't looked at Action Bent. Thanks!

For the upteenth time, I will make the bemused observation that first-time bent buyers almost universally set their budgets low and wind up looking exclusively at the low-end models. Only after they've discovered that they like bents but can't keep up with their friends do they open up the budget and get a better one.

OK, on to the questions.

1. It's axiomatic that any bent is more comfortable than a DF, even a bent with 16/20" wheels.
2. This is a source of endless debate in some circles, but I'm a 'big wheel chauvinist' who is of the opinion that small wheels are usually slower.
3.a. Advantages: small wheels are stronger.
b. Disadvantages: harsher ride, achieving normal gearing is harder to accomplish, faster tire wear,
limited tire choices. Smaller front wheels will be more suseptible to 'bump steer,' on rough roads.

Observations: Your current bike has 26x1.75 tires. That spells mountain bike or 'comfort bike.' (There's a certain irony to that designation.) The 16/20 bents that you find will be the bent equivalent of the same thing. They won't be fast, but should be capable of 13-14 mph averages; especially if being more comfortable causes you to ride more.

Standard advice applies here. Test ride everything you can lay your hands on, including models you know are out of your price range, or are different styles from what you think you want. Find owners in your area and beg for test rides. Visit any shop you can find with different models. That's the only way you can build up an experiential database to know for sure what you want. When I was first looking, I *knew* I wanted a Vision R-40. Only after actually test riding one did I discover that I *hated* R-40s. Likewise, test rides will tell you the differences between a TourEasy and an EZ-1, or between a Cycle Genius and a Burley.

BlazingPedals, I think you hit the nail on the head.

Yeah, you're absolutely right--I do need to build up my experiential database. And I admit I've been drawn instinctively to the low-end models; I'm a natural-born tightwad--something I need to get over if I'm going to do this right.

The LBSs in my area are overwhelmingly devoted to DF bikes; the nearest recumbent dealers are all a pretty good drive, and I just haven't had the chance to get to them. I've also found that manufacturer websites often claim certain LBSs as dealers, but then those LBS websites don't claim to carry those manufacturers. So I'm trying to find out what I can online before I go running around the country. (Again, this may be the tightwad in me.) It happens that I have relatives in the State College, PA area, so if I go up for Christmas, I may stop by RBR in State College and have a look around.

Anyway--thanks for you input.

When I looked into buying my recumbent trike, I decided to look at the market to see what was available and did not limit my focus to cost. I read as much as I could find on the subject and made a list of features available on the different models, compared them and made a Pro/Con list based on what I was looking for. Once I found the best fit considering my circumstances, I purchased the trike. I did this without the luxury of test riding. This was in 2002 and have been happy with my purchase.

I have a Trice Micro, and have over 15,000 miles, and have ridden four Seattle to Portland one day rides...

13-14 mph on 16/20 bents will be pushing it i have rode my gf,s ez1 and it takes me a bit to get and keep that speed and the steering is twitchy but it might work for you i have a 27/20 homebuilt lwb that coasts while my gf has to pedal her ez 1, we weigh about the same, hope this helps

I have a Trice Micro, and have over 15,000 miles, and have ridden four Seattle to Portland one day rides... That's impressive! I'd like to be able to do that kind of ride someday.



13-14 mph on 16/20 bents will be pushing it i have rode my gf,s ez1 and it takes me a bit to get and keep that speed and the steering is twitchy but it might work for you i have a 27/20 homebuilt lwb that coasts while my gf has to pedal her ez 1, we weigh about the same, hope this helps That's exactly the kind of thing I was wondering about. Thanks for the input!

Mild Al,
I'm in NC too. Contact me off list and maybe I can help you find some 'bent shops.

Oops, pbgvgsecr at aol dot com

small wheels can really slow you down on rough road.

small wheels can really slow you down on rough road.
Continuous 16mile/hr on 'rough' minor road tarmac is OK the Mistral (suspended 20/20 SWB) - said moderately fit 57yr old ;)

You can't go wrong starting with the Tour Easy design, it's easy to learn and comfortable to ride .


If you are really a tightwad, home built is the only way to go. If you don't weld or braze, contact recycled recumbents. He builds Tour Easy Clone frames for sale. His prices are real reasonable.

Then, you add your wheels and running gear and hit the road.

Miles of Smiles
Tom

This is the one I want. I searched the internet a LOT and I like this design the best.

http://www.radiks.net/%7Eladue/plans.html

What type of MTB do you have? You could always do a conversion from here:

www.cruzbike.com

I did this to a 24" Honda yframe and it rides like a dream. A bit weird at first (you'll see why in the pic ;)) but fun! A good climber too.

http://i26.photobucket.com/albums/c148/pcrx/Fenders1.jpg

pcrx, how do you do a tighter turn besides taking your feet off the pedals, when banking isn't going to be enough?

I'd recommend the Bacchetta Cafe. It's unbelieveably affordable for such a quality bike. Where do you live in NC? If your a professor at a university, chances are you're in the triangle, check out The Clean Machine in Carrboro, they're a Bacchetta dealership.

pcrx, how do you do a tighter turn besides taking your feet off the pedals, when banking isn't going to be enough?

Ahhh the $10,000 dollar question! :)

Actually it is pretty easy.... I can position my feet at 6 and 12 and coast around a 90 degree corner easily. Actually i had thought that turning sharp would be the biggest hassle yet it has turned out to not be the case...if anything when I have gotten in trouble in a slow turn I simply can pedal on and pull myself back up out of trouble.

The Clean Machine, in Carrboro, NC, carries Rans and Bachetta.

Speed depends mostly on the motor of course, secondly on the weight and functionality of the bike. My Rotator pursuit Ti has dual 406 wheels (nominal 20") and works well with tires between 23mm (Stelvio) and 35mm (Primo Comet). I can keep up with groups going 16-19mph. 406 wheels have more tire options than either 16" or the 'other 20" ' wheel, the 451 which is closer to 22" overall diameter. The main draw back in my experience is the drop off on the edge of the pavement where roads have been repaved. If it is above 1" in height it can be hazardous to get the bike back up on the main pavement: the front wheel may climb the jump up but the rear may hang. This has only happened once to me on a road with a 1.5" step to the new asphalt level but the bike slowed dramatically and rotated about 60D with the front 4' out into the main road. No crash but car traffic was nonplused and I hate to think what a following cyclist might have done. Larger wheels and shorter wheel bases would be less susceptible to this. 650 size wheels have a lot more choices in wheel and tires. OTOH you are hard put to get seat height under 22" with dual 650 or larger wheels. Note that 650 and 700c wheels can get into trouble with pavement dropoffs as well, this is less likely and bike geometry contributes with SWB/DF being safer than LWB. Disclaimer: my last crash with road rash was on a pavement level change on a busy road where I was crowded by a car and the bike (DF dual 700c) failed to negotiate a 1.5" level change in the pavement. You turn the front wheel and the bike starts to lean but the wheel hangs on the stepup and down you go.
Steve

The main draw back in my experience is the drop off on the edge of the pavement where roads have been repaved. If it is above 1" in height it can be hazardous to get the bike back up on the main pavement: the front wheel may climb the jump up but the rear may hang. This has only happened once to me on a road with a 1.5" step to the new asphalt level but the bike slowed dramatically and rotated about 60D with the front 4' out into the main road. No crash but car traffic was nonplused and I hate to think what a following cyclist might have done. Larger wheels and shorter wheel bases would be less susceptible to this.
Steve

This is one of the things in the back of my mind when I originally posted the question. On perfectly smooth roads, with perfectly frictionless bearings, all wheels would (it seems to me) perform equally well. But on roads that are pitted and have drops at the edges, it seems as if the 16-inch wheels would be more likely to hang up, or bounce, even.

I live somewhat south of the Triangle area, but Carrboro's not a bad drive from here. Maybe over Christmas break I'll get a chance to have a look at The Clean Machine. Both the Rans and the Bacchetta bikes look good online, but of course I'd like to see them in person.

And yes, one of these days, I'd like to do a homebuilt--partly because I'm a tightwad and partly because it would give me an excuse to buy welding equipment and learn to use it.

Speed depends mostly on the motor of course, secondly on the weight and functionality of the bike. My Rotator pursuit Ti has dual 406 wheels (nominal 20") and works well with tires between 23mm (Stelvio) and 35mm (Primo Comet).

Stelvio are marked as 28mm and Comets are 37mm. Although I've heard that Stelvios may be slightly narrower than 1 1/8" in real life, I don't think they're less than an inch.


...406 wheels have more tire options than either 16" or the 'other 20" ' wheel, the 451 which is closer to 22" overall diameter.

The first part of that is true - there are many more tires for 406. Although it could be argued that most of those choices are for less-than-speedy tires. Where 406 size really shines is in the choices for non-racing tires, i.e. touring, commuting, even dirt. But no tire combination for the 451 rim is close to 22 inches. The range of sizes available for a 451 rim are 7/8" (roughly 22mm) to 1 3/8 (37mm.) That makes for a diameter of 19.5 to 20.6 inches. OTOH, tire sizes for 406 run from 1.125 (28mm) on through 2.00 (52+mm,) which translates into wheel diameters of 18.1" through 20+".

I've got both on different bikes, I wish my lowracer had the 451. It just seems stupid to me that a bike built for speed has a bmx wheel on the front and a mountain bike wheel on the back.

This is one of the things in the back of my mind when I originally posted the question. On perfectly smooth roads, with perfectly frictionless bearings, all wheels would (it seems to me) perform equally well. But on roads that are pitted and have drops at the edges, it seems as if the 16-inch wheels would be more likely to hang up, or bounce, even.

I live somewhat south of the Triangle area, but Carrboro's not a bad drive from here. Maybe over Christmas break I'll get a chance to have a look at The Clean Machine. Both the Rans and the Bacchetta bikes look good online, but of course I'd like to see them in person.

And yes, one of these days, I'd like to do a homebuilt--partly because I'm a tightwad and partly because it would give me an excuse to buy welding equipment and learn to use it.


Definately try the Bacchetta's. :) I just picked up a 2005 Corsa and love it. I'm 2-3mph faster on average than with my go fast road bike. Went from a 19-20 mph avg on the flats to 22-23 mph on the same roads for the same percieved effort. If your running 14mph on a comfort bike then you'd probably cruise around 17 or so on a full road bike. I'm guessing that you would probably do around 19-20 on a Corsa.

The Corsa is faster than the Giro and Strada mainly due to the more aero position of the seating, and narrower tires. The euromesh seat is very comfortable, and you can run a 22-28 degree seat angle compared to a more upright 35-50 degree angle with the "recurve" seat. The Corsa was surprisingly light, tipping the LBS scale at just under 24lbs with pedals. I got it with a Brainbag, and fastback hydration system. Couldn't be happier. Check my sig for links to it.

One thing to make sure to check is your X-Seam. I originally picked up medium Strada, and was at the upper end of the fit range for it by height. My X seam had me a couple inches over the fit range. Bike was fine until I got into the 22-28 degree seat position, then the steering seemed skitish. Once I checked, I found I only had about 30% of the weight on the front wheel. So, I sold it and got the Corsa in Large which is way more stable as my weight is moved forward changing the balance, and handling. Xseam measurement is shown here: http://www.bacchettabikes.com/b-setup.htm

Blaze: decided to measure mine and you are right, the Stelvios are 28mm (actual 27.75) but surprise the Comet nominal 1.35" measures at just under 33mm. (?) (actual 32.72mm) which is about 1.35". They seemed bigger to me. I use the comet on the rear which takes most of the weight and the stelvio on the front. 451 selection is better than it was in '00 but it is still a bit of an orphan, not as much as the 16" though.
Steve

I'm a little suprised, not that the Comet is smaller than stated, but that it's that much smaller. Wow, that makes it closer to an inch and a quarter.

You want an orphan tire size - try to find a road tire for 507. When my current Vee Rubber 24x1.25 wears out I'll be presented with a problem. Do I change back to the original 520, for which there's 2 or 3 tires, or to 540, for which there's only a few tires, or do I maybe say to heck with it & convert the bike to dual-26"?

I think 20" rear wheels are to be avoided because they make it really difficult to achieve a good/normal gear ratio. If you would like to still pedal on a slight downhill slope you can't, even with a 65 tooth chain ring. Those are expensive, hard to find, and require superb front derailleurs.
On the rear wheel the derailleur is very close to the ground, once bent you need a new one. SRAMs DualDrive might help but is not commonly used in the US and expensive.

I think the best all around bike would have a 26/559 rear wheel for ride and gearing ease and for the front a 26"/559 for ride quality and tire choice, unfortunately very few production bikes are spec'd this way so a 406 front would be best in this regard. As a homebuilder I'm giving up on small wheels and building a dual 559 this year.

Tom Porter

Thanks to everyone for your advice--including these two new posts. Since my OP, I've read your comments and taken a few test rides, and my thinking has evolved a little. Here's what I'm thinking now:

The few times I've ridden bents with 20" rear wheels, they seemed slow to me. I'm not ever going to race--I personally am not built for speed, anyway--but I'd like to be able to pedal downhill. My current MTB has a top gear of 100 gear inches, and there are times when I'd like to go higher than that. So, I've pretty much ruled out the 20/20 designs--not completely, but pretty much.



I think the best all around bike would have a 26/559 rear wheel for ride and gearing ease and for the front a 26"/559 for ride quality and tire choice, unfortunately very few production bikes are spec'd this way so a 406 front would be best in this regard. As a homebuilder I'm giving up on small wheels and building a dual 559 this year.

It looks to me as if a 26/26 recumbent is either going to have a high BB, like a highracer, or else a LONG wheelbase and overall length. I don't quite trust myself on a highracer, and I'm not sure whether a long bike would store well in my office if I used my bent for commuting.

So, I'm leaning toward a 26/20 design. So far, my best ride was on a Bacchetta Giro 20, but I'm hoping to try some other 26/20's as well, both SWB and LWB.

But of course, it's entirely possible that I'm misinformed and/or irrational here. I continue to welcome advice and correction.

As a homebuilder I'm giving up on small wheels and building a dual 559 this year.
Tom PorterInteresting. As a homebuilder I'm giving up on 26/20 too. Given the advances in tires lately, I'm sold on fat 20/16s. Besides the handling and packaging advantages, as one who likes to maintain a nice high cadence, I find it easier to get good gearing with small wheels.

Mild Al,

If you google : tom porter recumbents, you will be led to my extensive musings as I build this seasons bikes explaining all my conclusions and advice on what I have used for years, this might be helpful explaining my thought process. This is on the WISIL site and is an ongoing project.

Tom Porter

If you wander over to the General Cycling Discussion forum, you'll find a thread entitled, "Large wheels and Unsprung (non leather) saddles are a lie?!" The OP is pretty rabidly pro-small wheel, although from his viewpoint everyone should be riding folders. Not my cuppa. IMHO most of the claims he makes are somewhat misleading, and they look like they are all stripped from a promotional page. You get the 'other' viewpoint from mine, at least.

If you wander over to the General Cycling Discussion forum, you'll find a thread entitled, "Large wheels and Unsprung (non leather) saddles are a lie?!" The OP is pretty rabidly pro-small wheel, although from his viewpoint everyone should be riding folders. Not my cuppa. IMHO most of the claims he makes are somewhat misleading, and they look like they are all stripped from a promotional page. You get the 'other' viewpoint from mine, at least.

I saw that thread, and I was struck by how ardently some people defend 20-inch wheels. They almost convinced me--but not quite. It seems to me that it's going to be well-nigh impossible to get a high-enough top gear on a bike with a 20-inch drive wheel. My test rides (admittedly brief) have seemed to support this idea; the EZ-1 and CG Sparrow were fun, easy-to-learn bikes, but they just didn't seem to get up and go the way the 26/20 bikes did.

My current DF bike has 559 wheels, and I see no reason to change, except that I might feel more comfortable on a bent if it had a 406 front wheel. In any case, I don't buy the idea that "large wheels are a lie." (It did make an interesting thread, though.)

If you wander over to the General Cycling Discussion forum, you'll find a thread entitled, "Large wheels and Unsprung (non leather) saddles are a lie?!" The OP is pretty rabidly pro-small wheel, although from his viewpoint everyone should be riding folders.

Ha ha ha, sorry mate but here is that OP...

Rabbidly Pro Small wheels? Most definately, for myself and quite some others.. not everyone or for everything!

Everyone should be riding folders? Nah, i would like if many people did, but not all, as i also state in the thread numerous times.

Not my cuppa.

Fair enough.

IMHO most of the claims he makes are somewhat misleading,

Well, that's an opinion, fair enough once again, you can guess my opinion on that opinion. ;)

and they look like they are all stripped from a promotional page.

Nope must respectfully disagree with that estimation, much of my own thinking, experiences and learning, but also others people's writings and opinions. But if you mean i am very vocal and convinced about what i write, yes you are 100% right. I will say here as i have there that i could be all wrong and might be missing some things, but at present little to nothing makes me feel that that is the case. It works for me is all i can say.

You get the 'other' viewpoint from mine, at least.

Always good to have different points of views. I know little about bents so i do not presume to speak about them overly much. But i will repeat what i have said many times, inform yourself (good thread this one by the way) try out some different bents and wheel sizes and go with what feels right.

I'm a little suprised, not that the Comet is smaller than stated, but that it's that much smaller. Wow, that makes it closer to an inch and a quarter.

You want an orphan tire size - try to find a road tire for 507. When my current Vee Rubber 24x1.25 wears out I'll be presented with a problem. Do I change back to the original 520, for which there's 2 or 3 tires, or to 540, for which there's only a few tires, or do I maybe say to heck with it & convert the bike to dual-26"?

The Schwalbe marathons come in 1.25 and 1.75 size in 507...... the 1.25's are 100psi also. Nice tire.

The Schwalbe marathons come in 1.25 and 1.75 size in 507...... the 1.25's are 100psi also. Nice tire.

Thanks for trying. I was a little vague. By 'road tire' I meant high pressure racing-type tires. Marathons, which are a touring tire, come in 40x507 and 47x507. That's 1.5 inches and 1.75 inches. No psi rating listed for the 1.5" version but the 1.75 version is rated for 45-70 psi. They start at 545 grams, which is right up there with a 54x507 IRC Metro (out of production AFAIK) that I have hanging in the garage.

http://www.schwalbetires.com/recumbent.php?Nickname=MARATHON&Image=TireImages/marathon.jpg#

Unless you are saying that there is a narrower version available that's not on the website? If so I might consider trying one before resorting to putting a new size wheel on the bike.

Have you looked at Calhoun Cycle? I just skimmed the posts, maybe this was mentioned already:

http://www.calhouncycle.com/productcart/pc/viewCat_h.asp?idCategory=50