what r the pros/cons of recumbent bikes

The BikeForums Team

-adv-

This is an archived thread, you can find the full version of this thread, with images, links and more content here.

Ready to buy? Check out these two online bike stores:
- http://www.nashbar.com (you can find the latest bike nashbar coupons in this thread)
- http://www.performancebike.com (you can find the latest performance bike coupons in this thread)

Cya on the forums,
- The BikeForums Team
- http://www.bikeforums.net

BlazingPedals

I originally got into recumbents for the comfort factor. Lying in a recliner is incomparably more comfortable than perching on a saddle and resting a considerable % of your body weight on your hands, which are placed on a 7/8" metal tube. It was only a few years later that I discovered how fast recumbents could be. Whereas I used to ride my upright with the 'B' group in my club, now I ride with the 'A' group - and drop them like stones when I get bored with their pace.

Rather than saying that bents are at a disadvantage climbing, I prefer to think of it as uprights being disadvantaged everywhere else: flat ground, downhills, tailwinds, headwinds - heck they're even disadvantaged on a lot of hills. At the end of the day, no matter how hilly the route, my overall average speed is much higher on my bents than it ever was on my uprights.

dty

what about if you have to stop suddenly and put your feet down, how hard is that to do?

what about on the bumps?

megaman

Many bents are lower to the ground and it's so easy just to drop your feet. The thing with a bent is that I've had to stop suddenly less often on a bent cause I'm looking forward not down so I can see things coming up.

cat0020

Recumbents are not "hard" to climb hill, they are different then regular bicycles, require less options in muscles to use to get yourself up the hills.. no option to get "off the saddle" or "use your whole body" to climb. It may seems that you are spending more time climbing than a regular bicycle, that's why most people think recumbent are "harder" to climb.
Just like anything else, once you're used to it and get your recumbent legs and lungs built up, it makes little difference.

funbun

what about if you have to stop suddenly and put your feet down, how hard is that to do?

what about on the bumps?

It's easier than a DF really. You have to dismount a DF and try to get one foot down at the same time. You just put your feet down on a recumbent. Even on a highracer you just sit up and put both feet down. Plan on 500 to 2,000 miles to get used to the differences. You have to learn to relax and trust the bike. I'm surprised at how maneuverable I've become.

Bumps? Just go over them like any other bicycle. You can't bunny hop of course, so what? Bents are more maneuverable that you may think.

Bents are different. That's all. If you had started on a recumbent when you were eight years old, you'd be asking the same question about the DF.

Shaman

I ride a trike and ther eis nothing easier riding uphill than a trike. I put it in super-granny and spin. Follow a nice straight line and never fall over :)

countersTrike

what about if you have to stop suddenly and put your feet down, how hard is that to do?

I never put my feet down while riding (leg suck hurts on a tadpole trike, but that is another subject for another thread). Darn tourists today walked right in front of me- so I locked all 3 wheels with disc brakes. No problem. Annoying, but I just faked a smile. I hate having to shift back down after a stop from high!

And when I got to the kayak event; just pulled up, gripped the rear brake firmly - pushed the emergency brake pin in, had my own front row chaise lounge, stereo, umbrella.

countersTrike

Mooo

Bents are different. That's all. If you had started on a recumbent when you were eight years old, you'd be asking the same question about the DF.

Well put.

vik

I ride a trike and ther eis nothing easier riding uphill than a trike. I put it in super-granny and spin. Follow a nice straight line and never fall over :)

I can definitely see the allure of trikes - they sound like a lot of fun and hopefully I'll get my first trike test ride soon now that I know someone with a Catrike. However, I gotta say I am not sure they are easier to ride uphill than a 2 wheel bent and on my SWB dual 26 bent I have never come close to falling over. Going to fast uphill I guess....:D

Shaman

I can definitely see the allure of trikes - they sound like a lot of fun and hopefully I'll get my first trike test ride soon now that I know someone with a Catrike. However, I gotta say I am not sure they are easier to ride uphill than a 2 wheel bent and on my SWB dual 26 bent I have never come close to falling over. Going to fast uphill I guess....:D

You must not have a problem with leg cramps... I was at the end of a ride yesterday and several muscles were at the verge of locking up. The last stretch included a pretty steep climb... not long, but long enough that had I not had 14 gear-inches available, I would have pulled something. No, you can't ride a two wheeler that slow without falling over. The effort was no more than level ground (just took a lot longer). It's the climbs that set off my cramps. Need lots more training :p

bkaapcke

For the LWB's, it's waaaay more comfort in exchange for some of the speed. You sit up straight, with some lumbar support, the neck and shoulders are straight and relaxed. The wrists don't carry any weight. Less speed because of fatter tires and heavier bike. On the uphills, you won't be passing your df friends when you ride a LWB.

N_C

Not to play devils advocate here but may I ask why are you asking dtv? Are you looking at getting a recumbent? Did you get into a debate with a recumbent rider & you ride a diamond frame bike? Are you doing research for a article or school assignment?

We don't mind answering your questions but perhaps if you give us some clarification as to why you are asking it may make it easire for us to answer you & guide you in the right direction.

dty

reason: just curious.

i would probably never buy 1 because they cost more and less available 2nd hand i imagine.

N_C

reason: just curious.

i would probably never buy 1 because they cost more and less available 2nd hand i imagine.

I don't know what you mean by less available. But they do not cost anymore then a good road bike. I spent $1,100 on mine when I bought it. I could have easily spent that much or more on a good road bike. they cost about the same as a road bike in comparison. So your thinking of they cost more is a myth.

Are there anymore myths about recumbents you'd like to have cleared up?

BlazingPedals

It's true at the low end they'll cost more. You won't find a 20 year old, $100 recumbent on ebay. The comparison is much more equal if you're comparing new $1500 or $2000 bents vs uprights of equal value.

HngUpNDrv

Less speed because of fatter tires and heavier bike. On the uphills, you won't be passing your df friends when you ride a LWB.

I have a TE and I pass people all the time on up hills on df's. As far as speed they are following me on club rides, and I dont mean drafting either. They always tell me I give them a good work out.

funbun

reason: just curious.

i would probably never buy 1 because they cost more and less available 2nd hand i imagine.

Don't say that until you ride one. Take a day off work and go to a recumbent shop and test ride everything they've got. Ride it around town even, then you'll have a better idea if you want to buy one.

Trust me you'll find ways to get one. I had Bentech build me a frame, and I just transfered components from my Trek 800 MTB.

Don't let cost stop you. Compare a $1,500 DF touring bike to a $1,500 Stratus or something.

Plus, check out Bentrider's For sale section. There is a Rans Strauts for sale for $750: http://www.bentrideronline.com/messageboard/forumdisplay.php?f=10

FlyingAnchor

I'm sending my payment tomorrow for my "FIRST" bent, my excitement level is way off the chart. I have been sold on them for about a year now and it is finally coming to be.
Steven

funbun

I'm sending my payment tomorrow for my "FIRST" bent, my excitement level is way off the chart. I have been sold on them for about a year now and it is finally coming to be.
Steven

That's how is was for me. I sold on them a long time before I got one. Waiting just made the moment I got one all the better.

jeff-o

I've written all about it: http://www.rebel-cycles.com/newride.html

dty

Recumbomatic

Wikipedia has a good summary of the pros/cons. Scroll down, the article is a little long:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Recumbent_bicycle

VegasTriker

One CON I can think of that can be looked at as a PRO is the amount of time recumbent riding can consume. The more a regular bike hurt, the less riding I did as I got older. The recumbents are so much more comfortable and fun to ride that it is a very time consuming hobby.

If you are looking for a sub $100 used recumbent then you really are dreaming. I regularly ride with several other recumbent riders. Among us we have 12 recumbents, 11 bought used. Our four trikes were all well over $1K but most of the two wheelers were well below $1,000 and several were in the $400 to $500 range. None are entry level bikes or worn out junkers. I did come across one fellow who told me he had found his Tour Easy recumbent in a second hand store for $100 but I bet the likelyhood of that is about as good as getting struck by lightning.

Doug5150

reason: just curious.
i would probably never buy 1 because they cost more and less available 2nd hand i imagine.
Pro #1: They are much more comfortable than upright bikes are. People who have only had uprights and insist that "they're perfectly comfortable" don't know what they're talking about. You could probably comfortably ride a recumbent at least 2 or 3 times farther than you could on an upright bike, and padded shorts and gloves aren't required--many high-mileage recumbent riders don't even own any padded shorts at all. There's no hand pressure or neck strain, and little or no seat pain at all (most recumbent models are only available with one seat, unlike upright bikes, where the shop has a wall-of-seats for you to choose from in the hopes that you'll buy a bike).
Pro #2: They can be faster than an upright bike, for the same pedaling effort. Most of the faster recumbents are not the cheaper ones however (but not the most expensive ones either).
--------
Con #1: they generally do weigh more, and don't have the "lively" feel an upright bike does.
Con #2: they can be more hassle to transport; many recumbents won't fit on standard car-mount bike carriers.
Con #3: (semi-related to #2) if you use your bike with public transportation, then be aware that recumbents may not fit on public-transportation bike racks either (this is a limiting factor for many people who bike/train or bike/bus to work).
~

DaveTaylor

I think Doug5150 has given a pretty fair evaluation of the pros and cons of recumbents.

I am one of the few on this forum who has tried a recumbent after getting very excited about them and buying one only to find it did not live up to my expectations. Doug has mentioned a couple of problems; if you are currently riding a decent road bike you will find your 'bent to be heavy and not as responsive. You will have trouble keeping up with your riding buds on long climbs and bents are definitely more difficult to transport if you don't own a pickup truck. (However, SWB bents will fit on standard roof racks). My biggest problem after the transportation issue was the fact that for me, cycling is a social activity done mostly with one or more friends, none of whom has or wants a recumbent. I did not find it "fun" riding with others on their road bikes. Conversation is difficult looking up, speed profiles are different, etc.

On the other hand, if you enjoy long solo rides out on those quiet country roads, you will see more things out there along the road from your bent than you ever thought existed.

I think if you are older, losing your flexibility and no longer enjoying your road bike, then definitely, try a bent, the pros that everyone has mentioned are very real. Do not expect to be as fast nor have the power that you have on an up-right bike until after many weeks and miles, it takes quite a while to develop your recumbent legs. Those on the forum that claim to be as fast or faster than those around them on road bikes have either spent a lot of time on conditioning and have invested in expensive equipment or are blowing some smoke. You may be able to do what they claim, but, don't expect to jump on any old bent and do it the first day.

BlazingPedals

You may be able to do what they claim, but, don't expect to jump on any old bent and do it the first day.

I'll take it one step further and say don't expect to jump on any old bent and expect the same results I have seen - ever. "Any old bent" will not confer superior speeds. For that you need a racing-oriented bent. Most bents have at most a 10% reduction in frontal area and air resistance, and the low-end models that first-timers are likely to buy have even less advantage; so the best reason for getting a bent is comfort. Speed is one of those Zen things - if you go looking for it, you won't find it; but if you're wise, it'll find you.

funbun

On the other hand, if you enjoy long solo rides out on those quiet country roads, you will see more things out there along the road from your bent than you ever thought existed.

That's the whole reason I ride a bent. Riding in groups ain't my thing.

aikigreg

*shrug* many of the pros and cons are valid. I race and ride both uprights and bents, and by far I prefer bents. Both the bents and the uprights I own are "high performance" and expensive models. Over a short hilly course I am slightly faster on the upright. Anything with length is faster and more comfortable on the bent, of course. I have no trouble mixing in with groups of any size. Talking and chatting on the bent is different, since I get to see the person's face more often. On the p-38 I can mix in with pacelines no problem. On the lowracer I am either on the back and resting because I am coasting more than pedalling, or I am in the front and riding easily with the leader. Stepping on the gas leaves the paceline a distant dot in my rearview. I don't get mid-pack with the lowracer because the guys behind me can't draft me.

I almost never ride solo, and have never found it to be a problem. Sometimes at first the group doesn't want to accept me, but once I step up the rpms and show that I've got as much or more speed than they do, they just see it as another bike.

Having ridden enough bents now though, I can definately say that unlike uprights, it *IS* all about the bike. On uprights, a stronger rider will win even on a rusted out steel frame. On a bent, performance seems to be key. I'm not sure exactly why just yet.

Opedaler

As someone who is still in the looking mode (and will be until I've tried a number of different bents) I've found this thread very interesting. I couldn't help noticing that you asked the first two questions that I initially asked.It may be that's where everyone starts. I'm going the throw out a couple of things that some friends of mine threw out at me.

1) What are your goals in riding?

If you're going to ride with uprights and compete with them you're going to want an upright. Even if you're faster, it might not be satisfying because the field isn't level. If all you want to do is to beat them, then get a motorcyle. On the other hand, if you want to ride with DF's on a noncompetitive level and just compete with yourself or race against time it seems to work great for those who related this to me.

Or maybe you just want to ride with someone while staying with the pack and most of your buds are upright riders. In hilly terrain this doesn't seem to work so well with them. They start together and end up together but between start and finish they are more alone than with the pack....ie slower going up, faster going down and if the ride is quite long they (benters) usually usually end up ahead of the pack towards the end of the ride. According to them if you want to converse and like having someone by your side it's better to pair up bents with bents and DF's with DF's.

One thing that has been brought up is that bent riding is for fogs (fat,old guys). And it is, but it is also for young, middle aged and anyone that enjoys riding. If all you want to do is ride to get in shape, I might give the edge to uprights. If seems to give a certain tension to the upper body that bents don't. But it also gives stress. Tension be good and stress be bad. If you're like me and use riding as a cardio and fun element and use resistance training for the structure building aspect, then ,like me, you might want to consider a bent. It is supposed to (I can't verify yet) eliminate to stress part while accentuating the fun part.

BlazingPedals

If you're going to ride with uprights and compete with them you're going to want an upright. Even if you're faster, it might not be satisfying because the field isn't level. If all you want to do is to beat them, then get a motorcyle.

I don't see it that way at all. Club rides aren't divided up in age groups or equipment classes. They're all muscle-powered, but beyond that there's no equipment specifications. I choose the platform I think I'll be fastest on, and so does everyone else. The difference is, they all choose poorly based on peer pressure. ;) Or to put it another way, they are not prevented from riding the same bike as me, as they would be in organized racing; they just choose not to.

I think by now most of my club-mates recognize the advantage I have, and even when I win virtually every sign sprint, they still count the first upright across the line as the *contested* race; i.e. who takes second place is the real issue. So although it makes a statement, it does not mean I'm a better athlete than them.

GreenGrasshoppr

One of the main cons of riding a bent is all the people staring at you.

BlazingPedals

One of the main cons of riding a bent is all the people staring at you.

LOL - you must not be an extrovert. Believe it or not, some people like that aspect. Strangers wave at you all the time, and there's always someone to talk to you at rest stops.

N_C

One of the main cons of riding a bent is all the people staring at you.

Kind of makes you feel like a circus freak doesn't it?

Dchiefransom

One of the main cons of riding a bent is all the people staring at you.

coming back from my first club ride on my Stratus, I wasn't triggering a left turn lane sensor. Someone in a car next to me hadn't noticed that the light cycled three times while he was looking.

From the original post, and following posts by the OP I suspect:

Opedaler

I don't see it that way at all. Club rides aren't divided up in age groups or equipment classes. They're all muscle-powered, but beyond that there's no equipment specifications. I choose the platform I think I'll be fastest on, and so does everyone else. The difference is, they all choose poorly based on peer pressure. ;) Or to put it another way, they are not prevented from riding the same bike as me, as they would be in organized racing; they just choose not to.

I think by now most of my club-mates recognize the advantage I have, and even when I win virtually every sign sprint, they still count the first upright across the line as the *contested* race; i.e. who takes second place is the real issue. So although it makes a statement, it does not mean I'm a better athlete than them.
Point well made Blaze, but I might ask are you competing AGAINST them or WITH them. I have an aquaintance who races on a bent and is timed along with upright riders. Considering that he is nearly 60 years young and they are mostly in their 20's and 30's he does quite well. In fact he often wins or comes in near the top. However, when talking to him the test of his ride is against his old times and himself, not necessarily the other contestants. He does relay his success but only to prove, as you have, that bents can be VERY efficient machines. His analogy of "applesto apples"and "applesto oranges"proves that he is not competing against them but with them and against himself.

lowracer1

I for one can say that I do compete against them. I'm not competing against single riders. That would be way unfair. I'm competing against a large pack with riders taking short pulls. I generally ride solo the entire 32 miles of the club ride with the pack hot on my heels. Once I get into prime condition, the pack has to work very hard to keep me in sight. There are a few areas of the course which are rolling and uphill grades which do tend to slow me down a bit and gives the pack a chance to either catch me or close the gap. I'm the rabbit and they accept it as well as expect me to be the rabbit. Since myself and blazing pedals started showing up to the ride every wednesday night, the pack has consistently done better course times than they ever had in the past. A few guys told me that it was great to have a target out front to push themselves harder. A few times I had to miss the ride and when I showed up the next week, I was told that I was missed.

Elkhound

teamcompi

The only downside of a bent is my mouth hurts from all the smiling!

Shaman

Tadpoles are sports cars and Delta's are Cadilacs.
Tadpoles usually have higher bottom brackets which some people don't like...
Deltas don't corner as well as tadpoles but are considered more comfortable...
Tadpoles are hard to get out of... (to much fun!)
Deltas (some) can be joined together to make tandems.

I'm thinking about getting a tricumbent. Which is better--a delta or a tadpole? Or, rather, what are the pros and cons of each design?

(Our LBS does not regulary carry 'bents. I'd have to special order so I want to find out as much as I can about them first.)

Opedaler

I'm thinking about getting a tricumbent. Which is better--a delta or a tadpole? Or, rather, what are the pros and cons of each design?

(Our LBS does not regulary carry 'bents. I'd have to special order so I want to find out as much as I can about them first.)
As Shaman says that tadpoles are harder to get out of, but I've also heard that they are harder for some individuals, with bad hips,knees,etc, to get into because of their low seat height. Of course, some tadpoles like the Trice T are taller.

I've also been told that since I plan to use mine on trails,some of which are not paved, to consider "ground clearance". Some tadpoles frames run within a couple of inches of the ground. For example, the Greenspeed GT5's ground clearance is 2.6" while the Greenspeed GTO is 5" and the ICE T's is 7".