texasphil

Let's take a hypothetical 10m commute with hills, throw in one small steep hill. Is a rec practical. Can it commute like a reg urban or road bike? Does your backside sweat more and can they handle road hazards like potholes and rough surfaces.

thdave

Recumbants, imo, are particularly nice if you get pain when you ride as they are more comfy. I think they are a pain to get up a hill. But, for your case, it sounds very applicable. Tires are usually thick so I think they'll be fine on potholes/rough surfaces.

N_C

First the slang or nickname term is 'bent. Second yes, it is practical.


Yes.

My back does not sweat more then on a wedgie bike. But I think it depends on the material the seat back or cover is made out of. Mine is mesh. I think they handle pot holes & rough surfaces like a road bike does. At least mine does. Again it depends on the type of 'bent you have. Make/model, brand, wheel size, etc.

BTW the only bike I have is a recumbent. It is a Vision R40 with Above Seat Steering, or ASS & Short Wheel Base, or SWB. The front wheel is 20", rear is 26".

MichaelW

Many 'bents have suspension and these can handle rough tracks as well, if not better than a light-touring style road bike.
Bent's usually have the advantage on the open road and 10 miles would be long enough to show some difference. If your commute includes some urban jungle the advantages of 'bents diminish rapidly. They cant bunny hop across curbs or weave around stationary traffic with the same ease.
Many 'bents have mesh seats for ventelation.
I see a couple of 'bent commuters on my ride to work every day.

N_C

Uh, tires are not usually think. It depends on what style & brand you purchase. I have used Kenda Kwest for recumbents, they are a thicker tire. I have used Continentials, which are a lot thinner. I prefer the Primo's, which are somewhere in the middle but allow the high pressure similar to the continentials.

N_C

Not true. Many 'bents do not have suspension, In fact typically they do not. The advantages dimishing in the urban jungle is a myth too. Riding a 'bent is just as comfortable as riding on the open road. While you can not bunny hop on a 'bent if you're an experianced 'bent rider you can easily weave around traffic. But if you're following the rules of the roadway you should NOT be doing this anyway. If you're to be considered a legal vehicle of the roadways then you should follow the same rules as everyone else.

I just love how people comment on recumbents when they no little about them. Before anyone else who knows nothing or very little about recumbents makes anymore comments about them I suggest you either read the threads in the recumbent forum or ask questions to educate yourself on the bikes.

acroy

My biggest concern on a 'bent would be visibility in traffic, how do you deal with that? on my bike I'm over 6' tall, guys on 'bents look like maybe 3-4'. Does a big orange flag cut it? any experiences out there with both standard and 'bents?

N_C

You can use an orange flag, some 'bent riders do. I did when I first got mine because I had the same concerns. Once I got my confidence with riding it in traffic I removed it. If anything in my experience recumbents get noticed more, because they are a bike people are not used to seeing. The style I ride allows me to be eye to eye with a person in a passenger car. I rode a wegie road bike for many years before I bought my 'bent over 5 yrs. ago.

godspiral

I wouldn't be too sure about a bent for:
going trough side streets rolling through stop signs. Being further back and lower hurting visibility.
Lack of an ability to avoid the pot holes or lift your butt off the seat going through them
I'm not sure about stop and go acceleration either, and I'm pretty sure slow speed weaving around a stopped car or open door, is not as easy.

For stretches of road where you'd like 20mph+ speeds, though, I'm sure is awesome.

Niles H.

Strong disagreement on one point here: recumbents absolutely suck on rough, dicey surfaces. (no flames please (or go ahead, if you must) -- I love recumbents (and I'm not just saying that) -- but I also believe in honesty and full disclosure, and in not painting a distortedly rosy picture, especially when it could quite literally be a dangerous distortion as well.)

I've done it, and I've talked with a lot of other riders who have also tried it. They (recumbents) are not even close to a mountain bike over potholes and rough surfaces. You are much, much more likely to go down (trikes excepted).

They aren't so great up steep hills either. (Some will dispute this, but go ahead and test ride both, up a steep hill, and see what you think.) With an upright bike you can stand.

With an upright, you can also stand up and off the saddle going over bumps, and absorb the bumps with your legs. You can use a lot body English to recover and to balance.

Otherwise, recumbents can be great.

Yes, even with mesh your backside sweats more. The seat is also wider, with larger contact areas, and it is hotter. (Some seats are better than others, but none are equal to an upright in this regard.)

There is a lot more air circulation with an upright.

No. Not quite. They are different.

You can do it, yes. But they are different.

Why not take some test rides, and compare for yourself?

old and new

I don't own a recumbent.I'm from a mountain region originally,unlike Iowa for example.The tie-breaker is the hill issue. I never saw a recumbent rider succeed or even try on the majority of terrain I speak of.I saw thousands of riders over 50 years,NEVER saw one on a major hill in the NYC surrounding area.I'd see a few on flat or semi-flat terrain.OP, you know your part of Texas,think about the hills,traffic,I've no comment.

texasphil

They kind of stick in the back of your mind but i've never got the actual nerve to buy one. Partly because where I live there is no north south east west, only Uphill or Downhill. Yep away from the center of the earth or towards it. I have a short hill in front of the house but it's 40mph hill if your pedaling and 30+ coasting downhill. Would that even be possible on a recumbent.

CBBaron

Another person with no experience trying to make comments.
First I will admit a recumbent is likely to climb slower than you will on an upright. A bent is definitely going to require a lower gear to get up the steepest hills. However I have climbed numerous hills in western MA and the Finger Lakes region of NY. I am definitely not some super athlete but I am fairly fit and enjoyed the challenge of the harder hills.

As for ridiculously rough roads that might cause a MTB to go down, yep an MTB is better suited. MTBs are also going to
be easier to jump curbs a other off road type situations. However most recumbents that I would recommend for city streets will be more stable than road bikes on rough pavement and other road obstacles.

For urban riding a more upright sitting position is better than the extremely laid back bikes. The seat should also be high enough that you can see over the hoods of most SUVs. I also recommend running a wider tire than you maybe used to. A 1.5"/35mm should be the minimum. Many bents have suspension which makes for a more comfortable ride but is not necessary. I think a long wheelbase bike like a TourEasy or RANS Stratus are excellent commuters. Less expensive bikes like the Sun EZ-Sport also work well. Short wheelbase bikes like RANS Rocket or Bacchetta Giro are a little smaller and lighter and work well in an urban setting but the higher crank height may make stop and go riding a little more difficult.

I commuted for a couple years through Cleveland on a high crank height really laid back bike. I have since switched to a fixed gear mostly due to cost and maintenance requirements. A coworker has been riding a Sun EZ-Sport every day the roads are not icy. Comfort is definitely improved with the recumbent and in most cases so will the commute time. I shave 5-10 minutes off of my 40min commute with my recumbent. And my commute involves much stop and go. On less urban roads the differences would be greater.

Craig

Niles H.

Absolutely possible, especially with the more stable LWB recumbents -- they can be very stable at high speeds (though not so great if the surface is rough -- better to have a fully suspended mountain bike beyond a certain level of roughness).

A lot of these things depend greatly on the exact conditions you will be encountering.

It is very difficult to evaluate those without seeing them or riding them.

Photos would help. More exact descriptions would help.

Riding the route(s) yourself on different bikes would help.

***
One other note: if you really want to ride a recumbent, and some part of the riding is too rough (or too steep, or too ________), then you can probably solve it by slowing down, or taking some extra precautions, or walking the bike for short stretches if necessary.

CBBaron

Yes it is possible. And for some it may even be preferable. However the aero advantage of a recumbent is nearly negated if your hills are such you are braking down hill and struggling up hill. Also recumbents are going to be heavier in addition to requiring a bigger gear range. I guess if I lived in an area with crazy hills I'd probably stick with an upright.
However moderate hills like central MA are still great places to ride recumbents. And if aero dynamics or comfort is the limitation to your biking then recumbents are great.
Craig

Oh and BTW I regularly exceed 45MPH on my recumbent and have exceeded 55 on several occasions. I don't usually bother pedaling much over 35 as I am usually faster leveling the pedals and letting it coast. I used to ride an Optima Baron that was excellent at these high speeds. My current Bacchetta Strada handles just fine but is a little twitcher and doesn't have the awesome brakes the Baron had.

CBBaron

If you are dodging traffic like the messengers in NYC, or cutting through park, over curbs, or other urban commando techniques then a bent is not for you. However if you are follow road rules then there is very little down side. Stop and goes are easier on many recumbents because you remain seated with you off foot firmly planted on the road and you on foot ready to go. Your head is up improving your ability to see and your height is still tall enough to see over cars an truck hoods. Handling is not much different than upright bikes and even if you do hit potholes dead on the impact with fat tires and a wide seat is much less jarring.

Most recumbent seats will make your back sweat more than it will on an upright with out a backpack/mess bag. However the mesh seats are pretty airy and if you are not sweating heavily otherwise you probably won't have a wet back. The hardshell seats are a little more likely to leave a wet back but I have never found them to be hot. I don't realize my back is wet until I get off.

Craig

SSP

I'm of the opinion that recumbents are not as nimble as uprights. In traffic, I like to be able to quickly change my line if need be (yes, I have control issues!). I also like the fact that I'm up a lot higher than most recumbents - allowing me to see and be seen better (IMO).

JanMM

I switched commuting on a hybrid to a compact long wheelbase (20" wheels) recumbent about a year ago. Can't easily turn around at look at traffic behind you, so you must use and trust a mirror/mirrors. That's important in traffic. No problem with a 18 mile round trip suburban/urban commute. Much more comfortable. In my experience, a bit faster. I might be lower, but I can see ahead much better.

martianone

i commute about 17 km (one way) wiith both a bent and upwrong bike,
about halfway the roads are dirt/gravel and the topography is quite hilly.
prefer the bent (HPV SMGTe) during good weather and the DF (CrossCross)
during winter and muddy days; optimal tool to match the job.
the bent is a more comfortable & satisfying ride, the DF is more pragmatic
on messy days or just after they grade the dirt roads; i prefer the bent.
bent advantages- better ride, you can see the traffic flow on your sides and in
front of you more easily (a mirror is required to see behind you- got to have a mirror).
DF advantages- more effective climbing hills and on icy, muddy, messy roads;
still suggest a mirror to see behind you better.
takes several months to get your "bent" legs, however i'm probably 5 min faster
on the bent than DF- so not really a huge difference.
A RANS Rocket is a great starter bent, especially for commuting (wish i had not sold
mine). they are short wheel base bent, easy to handle; but do make sure your feet are
comfortably on the ground when stopped. get wider tires, 47 mm marathons or 50 mm
big apples work well. A rocket's wheels are both 406, so carrying a tube is easier;
rather two sizes as i do for the 406/559 SMGTe. The 406 wheel makes the Rocket easier
to store at your place of work. Most bents need lower that stock gearing, a Rocket is
no exception, especially if you live in a hilly area. A Rocket is just a fun sporty ride
that happens to be a very effective commuter, i guess the same could be said for
the DF Cross Check. Still prefer the bent.

EnigManiac

I commute everywhere, long and short distances (depending on my assignment for the day), on my BikeE AT semi-reucmbent. Mine is a long wheelbase with small thin tires, but it is 21-speed with terrific range (at least for me), hydraulic shock absorber and the most comfortable seat/backrest I've ever tried. It handles dense, downtown traffic with ease, maneuveres as easy as any upright and can manage respectable speed when appropriate. On hills, it is a tad slow, but I am willing to sacrifice speed going uphill for the speed and comfort of flat and downhill sections. While I do sit lower than upright bike riders (which is good if you fall, not that I ever have) and that may make me less visible to motorists, a mounted flag addresses the visibility issue. And I completely agree that mirrors are an absolute necessity. Properly equipped, I'd strongly recommend a bent for commuting. Personally, I love it.

MB4

I think that all recumbent riders are required to grow a beard. You might want to keep that in mind when making your decision.

banerjek

There are some bents that handle well on loose stuff, but they are often slow. Having said that, bents arent as nimble as a DF, so if dodging stuff really is an issue, it's probably not the best choice.

Starting tends to be a bit slower and low speed maneuvering is not as good as a DF so bents aren't the greatest in heavy traffic. However, they are OK.

As far as height goes, again it's OK, but some are low enough that there are issues when you are next to SUVs. Flags can help visibility considerably, but I think they are a poor choice for heavy traffic.

On the good side, they look strange enough that you tend to provoke more curiosity and less hostility by some of the demographics not associated with love of cyclists.

Some bents climb great. I can drop plenty of roadies as can some of my riding buddies.

Artkansas 

A 10 meter commute?

vik 

+1 I ride my DF bikes in town and my recumbents on long distance rides outside the city for that very reason.

Recumbents can climb hills just fine, but I think a DF is superior when dealing with traffic and all the stop & go stuff in town.

I should add this assumes you can ride the DF bike pain free for that distance. If you have any medical conditions that make that impossible or undesirable you can definitely make a bent work. I'd rather commute on a bent in the city than not at all.

wheel

Well I never ridden a bent but I will comment on it.

I never seen a good bent for a hundred dollars. So unless I have some great secure parking it wouldn't be an option for me on the less secure commutes.