Vehicular Cycling (VC) - Forester has no problem speaking against recumbents.

snipped

Of course you have no reason to expect the class differance between DF's & 'bents. You know very little if anything about recumbents. At least you finally admit a fault in something. But as a former DF bike rider who has ridden a recumbent for the past 6 years I assure you there is a huge differance. I know Diane & other recumbent riders can back me on that one. Especially if they still ride a DF bike.

NC, your animosity has now reached a truly exaggerated volume. Be careful of it, it might carry you away!

You jeered at my statement that I see no reason to expect a class difference in steering stability between diagonal-frame and recumbent bicycles, saying that I had too little information to make such a statement. I am more careful about my statements than you are to your imaginations. I made that statement precisely because I know of stable and unstable diamond-frame bicycles and of stable and unstable recumbent bicycles. I know because I have tested them. All were regular production machines, too.

NC, your animosity has now reached a truly exaggerated volume. Be careful of it, it might carry you away!

You jeered at my statement that I see no reason to expect a class difference in steering stability between diagonal-frame and recumbent bicycles, saying that I had too little information to make such a statement. I am more careful about my statements than you are to your imaginations. I made that statement precisely because I know of stable and unstable diamond-frame bicycles and of stable and unstable recumbent bicycles. I know because I have tested them. All were regular production machines, too.

It is not that you tested them, I know you did that. But you did not ride a recumbent long enough to form any sort of opinion about them. You judged them based on the short time you did ride them. Not good enough. Ride one longer then come back & form your opinion. Until then STFU about recumbents because you know not of what you speak about when it comes to the subject.

snipped
Everything Forester says about riding a recumbent & the problem associated with one is for the most part a myth or false. I can get started while on a hill if I have to stop on one. Yes it is harder, but possible. Yes it is slower to ride up a hill, but it is possible.

When I first started riding mine I would not have ridden it in the manner I describe above. Why? Well I did not have the experience I do now with it. It took me time to learn how to ride & control it. It took a whole week of riding it on a high school track, then an empty parking lot to learn how to control it enough before I took it out onto the roadways. A recumbent is just not the type of bike you jump on & expect to handle like a diamond frame bike. I think John expected this when he rode the ones he did.

NC, you must be a very clumsy cyclist to take that long to solo a recumbent on the road. Of course, I don't suppose that you see your words as admitting your clumsiness.

The first time I tried a recumbent, I just got on and rode it, because it handled just like I expected a recumbent to handle. For that matter, the first time I leaped onto an ordinary (that's the motion that is required), I just mounted and rode it, because it handled as I expected an ordinary to handle.

To emphasize the point, I never expected a recumbent to handle just like a diamond-frame bike. I am not so stupid.

Stability test are the norm when designing any vehicle, be it bicycle, motorcycle, car, truck, boat, ship, plane or rocket. Some of these stability test include the effects of an instantaneous perturbation to the steering control system or the steering surfaces. Some of these test include the operator as part of the steering system in the test, while others only test the vehicle without the operator actions. Different industries use different terms for these stability test. JF’s term “steering displacement test” is a reasonable description of some of these test. Even if it does not show up in google searches, so what.


JF states “I have no reason to expect that diamond-frame bicycles and recumbents have any class differences in this. Each one is different.”
I agree with this provided the test does not include the operator as part of the steering system.
When the operator is included as part of the steering system, there is at least one factor which differentiates a bent from a diamond frame. On a diamond frame, the cyclist can lift his butt off the saddle and disconnect the center of mass from the lean of the bicycle (in other words - the cyclist can significantly change the lean of the bicycle without significantly changing the center of mass). On a bent, I do not, and know of no other bent rider who lifts their butt off the seat and then leans the bicycle independent of the center of mass.
The lack of this tool is one reason a bent requires more cyclist skill and more practice to ride with the same precision.

Mostly correct, except that I think that it would be only in some really exceptional series of experiments, for which I do not now see the need, that one would perform a steering displacement test while raising one's butt off the saddle (and hence standing on the pedals). I think that doing so would increase any tendency to steering instability, by allowing the frame of the bicycle greater lateral flexibility, or, to use another phrase, by reducing the mass of the frame subject to lateral acceleration (by removing the mass of the cyclist's pelvis and attachments).

NC, you must be a very clumsy cyclist to take that long to solo a recumbent on the road. Of course, I don't suppose that you see your words as admitting your clumsiness.

The first time I tried a recumbent, I just got on and rode it, because it handled just like I expected a recumbent to handle. For that matter, the first time I leaped onto an ordinary (that's the motion that is required), I just mounted and rode it, because it handled as I expected an ordinary to handle.

To emphasize the point, I never expected a recumbent to handle just like a diamond-frame bike. I am not so stupid.

The first time I rode mine I was a bit clumsy, sure. After a while I got very good at it, took me a week before I decided to take it out into traffic, I rode in empty parking lots & paved high school tracks to see how it would handle & learn how to control it. Once I gained experience & confidence I started riding in traffice. The more I rode it the better I got.

After 6 yrs. I am now a very experienced recumbent rider. I have not had an accident, due to a mistake in control on my part, in over 5 yrs. Good for you if the first time you got on one you had an easy time riding it, do you want a cookie or something? Some of us take to it naturally, some don't. I bet if you ask any recumbent rider in the recumbent forum room there will be some like me & some who took to it naturally right away. So what?

That does not mean you rode one long enough to form the opinions you did about it. Bottom line you didn't.

If you did not expect a recumbent to handle like a wedgie bike why did you try to test the same way? If I am not mistaken in your book, (In)Effective Cycling you stated as much.

You still haven't answered the questions as to why this is even needed. Or at least why an end consumer would want to or even need to do this. I can see if the manufacturer would need to perform such a test & then only when they are trying to produce a new line of bicycles.



Steering instability is a well-known cause of cycling accidents. I have had to investigate such myself.

Now, now, NC, let's not get all bent out of shape over one man's opinion.

Al

Now, now, NC, let's not get all bent out of shape over one man's opinion.

Al

Sweet pun.

Hey John Forester I highly recommend you go to this forum & post the same thing there as you post here. These people really need to be educated. They are a bunch of people who need some education & direction on how to interact with & treat cyclists while dirving on the roadways.

http://gwamp.com/offtopic/index.php

NC, you must be a very clumsy cyclist to take that long to solo a recumbent on the road. Of course, I don't suppose that you see your words as admitting your clumsiness.

The first time I tried a recumbent, I just got on and rode it, because it handled just like I expected a recumbent to handle. For that matter, the first time I leaped onto an ordinary (that's the motion that is required), I just mounted and rode it, because it handled as I expected an ordinary to handle.

To emphasize the point, I never expected a recumbent to handle just like a diamond-frame bike. I am not so stupid.

Was it a long wheel base, or short wheel base recumbent? It can take a bit of time to get used to the extra-responsive steering of the short wheel base bikes. I switched to long wheel base because of that.
As for the steering, it's interesting that most folks on 'bent forums admit that they cannot ride hands free on their 'bents, so there are definitely differences.

SBHikes, you need to try a Lightfoot Ranger. Offroad 'bent.

Was it a long wheel base, or short wheel base recumbent? It can take a bit of time to get used to the extra-responsive steering of the short wheel base bikes. I switched to long wheel base because of that.
As for the steering, it's interesting that most folks on 'bent forums admit that they cannot ride hands free on their 'bents, so there are definitely differences.

SBHikes, you need to try a Lightfoot Ranger. Offroad 'bent.

The first recumbent that I rode was a short wheelbase machine with underseat steering, owned by David Gordon Wilson (we were cycling associates), professor of mechanical engineering at MIT and co-author of "Bicycling Science". I think that he had designed it, also, and a few were built.

So what the hell is steering displacement? My search on the internet has yielded no results for a definition. Sounds like another bull**** term made up. Anyone can answer, not just HH & JF.

Steering displacement is when the nut that connects the handlebars to the seat is loose.:D

I interject as I have the impresssion, but not the facts, that a bent can stop faster than a diamond due to longer wheel base and lower COG. (at least the ones that have the longer wheelbase and lower COG)

Bents get right hooked too, I watched this guy slow down very quicky to avoid collision (hard to tell in vid due to quality and rear view angle, but in person it was an emergency slowing, the 2nd turning car, not the first)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hir5oY-h10Y

Al

I have avoided several right hooks on my Rans Stratus, as I can see the driver much more easily than on an upright bicycle. Situational awareness on a recumbant is easier, as we are not looking to the ground, but around. Mirrors work better too for over-the-seat steering.

Yes, the LWB recumbant can stop very quickly, as we don't need to worry about going over the handlebars.

John

I have avoided several right hooks on my Rans Stratus, as I can see the driver much more easily than on an upright bicycle. Situational awareness on a recumbant is easier, as we are not looking to the ground, but around. Mirrors work better too for over-the-seat steering.

Yes, the LWB recumbant can stop very quickly, as we don't need to worry about going over the handlebars.

John

Thats interesting, I thought a drawback to the recumbant would be that they are lower and auto drivers would be less likely to see them. John is saying it is more important for him to see them.

Situational awareness on a recumbant is easier, as we are not looking to the ground, but around. Mirrors work better too for over-the-seat steering.

I've never ridden a bent (would like to someday) but I find the characterization of non-bent riding as looking at the ground quite odd - my 'natural' look is ahead toward the horizon. I look and maintain situational awareness for all the places I do driving any vehicle, including sides and rear. Maybe the assumption here is that non-bent riders don't use mirrors? I use one.
Al

I have avoided several right hooks on my Rans Stratus, as I can see the driver much more easily than on an upright bicycle. Situational awareness on a recumbant is easier, as we are not looking to the ground, but around. Mirrors work better too for over-the-seat steering.

Yes, the LWB recumbant can stop very quickly, as we don't need to worry about going over the handlebars.

John

The assertion that riders of diamond-frame bicycles, or, I suppose, riders of diamond-frame bicycles equipped with drop bars, ride by looking down at the road is ludicrous. One more of the utterly foolish assertions that are so frequently made on this VC section of Bike Forums. This statement is associated with the assertion that a cyclist on a recumbent can more easily see the driver of a motor vehicle to his left than can a cyclist on a diamond-frame bicycle. I would suggest that the head of the cyclist on the diamond frame is more nearly on the level to look into the side window and across the motor vehicle than is the head of the cyclist on the recumbent, who, I suggest, is likely to be below the window level and hence less able to see across the motor vehicle to observe its driver. Anybody with actual measurements?

How does your Vision R40 SWB/OSS handle during a steering displacement test at speeds of over 40 mph?

So..........Mr. Forester, what information am I to take from this magnificent post.

You stated in a later post that some recumbant bikes are stable and some are not, and you said the same thing for conventional bikes.
You addressed the Vision R40 SWB/OOS in particular.
Is this recumbant less stable than other SWB recumbants?
What happens to make this bike suddenly become unstable at speeds above 40mph?
Are OSS recumbants less stable?
Are recumbants that much faster than diamond shaped bikes, that they spend a much larger percent of their riding time above 40 mph.?

Give us some information we can use.
Don't just ask a question and leave us hanging.:rolleyes:

Situational awareness on a recumbant is easier, as we are not looking to the ground, but around. Mirrors work better too for over-the-seat steering.

I only look at the ground if there is the chance spare change might be found. How much spare change have you found riding a hammock, John, huh, huh? ;)

Well, riding on a low trike I can actually pick up the spare change as I roll along.

Well, riding on a low trike I can actually pick up the spare change as I roll along.
Hmmm, ya mean I wouldn't have to stop and dismount to pick up deposit cans and bottles or bungee cords? I might have to give this some thought.

You might have to stop, but you never have to dismount!

Well, riding on a low trike I can actually pick up the spare change as I roll along.

Don't be scarfing my change...I'll fight you!

Hmmm, ya mean I wouldn't have to stop and dismount to pick up deposit cans and bottles or bungee cords? I might have to give this some thought.

get something like a butterfly net and a trailer and that could be lucrative.

I would suggest that the head of the cyclist on the diamond frame is more nearly on the level to look into the side window and across the motor vehicle than is the head of the cyclist on the recumbent, who, I suggest, is likely to be below the window level and hence less able to see across the motor vehicle to observe its driver. Anybody with actual measurements?
Depends on the 'bent. On my LWB -- a Tour Easy from Easyracers -- my eyes are level with or slightly above those of a driver in a normal-sized auto. (Whereas on a diamond-frame, I would be 30 cm or so above the driver's eye level.)

If I were riding a low-racer, on the other hand, I suppose I would need prehensile eyestalks if I wanted to look a driver levelly in the eye.