Easy racers handlebars for their LWB's. The wrist angles were designed to fit their fairings and are so wrong for riders. Once you change the bars to fit you, it's a really nice bike. bk
Rebuilding a fork, then realizing that I forgot to install that tiny f'ing washer on the push rod.
Nothing better than a good chain lube thread...
The ever increasing number of sprockets on the cassettes.
And the fact that for money reasons recumbent bikes were outlawed by the UCI. It stopped bike development for 50 years.
Is the question about ones we have personal experience with, or any that we might be aware of?
Ride more. Fret less.
My home brewed worst idea was to modify the brakes on a 3 speed so that both caliper brakes were on the rear, one controlled by each lever.
I did it so that I could still brake in wet weather with the steel rims. While it could brake as well in wet as dry weather, the trade off was that it didn't stop very well in either case. It seemed like a good idea because us uninformed kids rarely touched a front brake anyway because we were afraid of doing an endo... of course now I realize that such an event was unlikely with the quality of calipers we had anyway.
On the positive side, I could skid with the best of the coaster brake crowd.
Yeah, I think we'll have to wait and see with the Copenhagen wheel. I was pretty against the whole idea at first but having given it more thought I can see its merits, and at this point I'm interested if it will become vaopurware or a practical piece of gear.
The Trek R200 was actually not a bad recumbent, just a little overpriced. I watched the evolution of it prior to production. It was designed by committee, and the thinking went something like:
1. We (TREK) are known (at the time) for aluminum bikes. That's our strength, so the bike we make will be Al.
2. Aluminum rides harshly.
3. Recumbent riders want comfort.
4. The only way to get comfort is dual suspension. (See the blind spot here?)
5. Them newfangled compact frames aren't taking off so we'd better make the top tube level.
6. Need gimmick, otherwise it's just another RANS V-Rex. Ahh! Mid-drive!
7. Too expensive! Lose the front shock. (The back one is for comfort, the front one is just for control.)
8. Still too tall. Use 20" wheels
In spite of the corporate group-think, and much to the chagrin of the powers-that-be inside TREK, the model sold out its first production run, then its second. There were some teething pains, especially with the mid-drive; but they were pretty much sorted out for the second year's production. The second year's production was selling well, but then the one supporter inside of TREK suddenly and unexpectedly died. TREK IMMEDIATELY dropped the model from its catalog. In a back-door deal, Dave Doty of Valley Bikes (Indianapolis area) made a deal to buy all of TREK's remaining stock, still in crates, which he drop-shipped to customers for $650 each. There was an R-200 in the showroom of every TREK dealer in the country, as per their standard dealership contract; and the deal effectively made everyone's stock worthless. I'm pretty sure they lost some dealers over that.
One of the guys in my club had one. [edit: he had the second one ever produced.] It wasn't fast, but it rode nicely and had a great gear range. The biggest problem with it was that it wasn't particularly sporty, but it was priced as if it were.
The Cannondale and the Giant were, IMHO, bordering on 'stinky' and even higher-priced than the TREK.
Burley bents weren't a failure. They were quite popular. In fact, the designs are still in production as Edge Recumbents.
Last edited by BlazingPedals; 02-20-14 at 06:32 PM.
Hornless saddles - check
auto-shifting - check
Electronics that put an image on the pavement are trying to join the list.
Why did the Giant EZB fail? Just really expensive? The rear wheel sounds like a NIGHTMARE to change if flatted, but what do I know?
My greatest fear is all of my kids standing around my coffin and talking about "how sensible" dad was.