I'm all for conservation, but it seems like you'd be far better off just getting a cheap small used car than investing in one of these.

Why? I can certainly see the advantages to someone who doesn't want a bicycle. Not sure I'd want to use it on busy roads though because you'd effectively be taking up a whole lane.

Richard

Okay seeing that you getting nothing but pessimism for an answer from folks who may have not have ridden a trike since breaking out their long britches. I'll step up. I own an '07 Schwinn Town and Country which is three speed conventional cruiser styled trike. I use mine for limited commuting. Specifically I use it to commute to my weekend job at a Mom and Pop computer shop about 2 miles away. What are the advantages to using a trike? You can carry very large and bulky items that ordinarily you wouldn't be able to carry on a regular bike without either xtracycling it or hitching a trailer. I can carry either one desktop PC with a monitor on my trike or two desktops. I really could not do that on a regular bike without a trailer (which negates the whole "jumping curbs" argument of two wheeler in this sort of scenario as if you hop a curb the trailer is going to snag you to the curb like a giant anchor in a bugs bunny cartoon.) So in a heavy and bulky loads scenario a trike and a heavily loaded bike are about the same.

1. What laws govern trikes?
A. The same ones that govern bikes.

2. How well does a tricycle lend itself to commuting in general and with busy traffic on narrow roads in particular?

A. Trikes tend to be slower. I average around 8.5 MPH on my T&C compared to 12MPH plus on my other bikes. If I can avoid roads with high speed traffic I generally do; however, if I'm on the road I take ownership of the space. If the cagers decide to throw a temper tantrum I let them, but by law I'm entitled
to be there in he right hand lane. Trikes are also faster off the line compared to a bike. No need to come out of the saddle or unclip at a light. As for how it lends itself to commuting it's not any worse that a bike; however, keep in mind it's larger so if you have a really small office or cubicle you probably will be parking the trike outside then hauling your gear inside. Your also going to have to compensate for the slower speeds with longer saddle time. I've only done short commutes on my T&C because I don't trust it's rear axle design. So far it's failed once every 6 months. If I had a different make of trike I might be more inclined to try longer commutes.

3. Assuming careful and slow biking, I would think three wheels stay up on ice better than two – right, wrong?

A. The stability might be better with a trike, but if you loose traction on your power wheel you won't be going anywhere fast. Most trikes are single power wheel designs with the exception of the '79-80's Schwinn Town and Country.


4. I know there are lots of recumbent trike fans, but being that low in heavy traffic would seem to make it hard to see and be seen. I’d prefer an upright tricycle design. Pros, cons?

A. The conventional wisdom is that because of their unusual layout recumbent trikes tend to stand out to motorists. Would I ride one? Sure if I had testicles the size of bowling balls; unfortunately, I'm not full of that sort of manly courage. I'm more inclined to the conventional designs where I'm sitting at bumper level or higher.

You just gave enough of a reason for me. If you lived somewhere where you could ride with zero traffic, sure. But I'd be even less likely to use one of these on a trafficked road than I would a regular bike. You're basically describing a vehicle that consumes an entire lane, everywhere, all the time, yet is incapable of exceeding 15 or so mph, and leaves the occupants wholly exposed to the elements. If you think you'd be unwelcome on the road when riding an upright, I think you'd be in for a nasty surprise when using one of these.

Correction the Rhodes car is the epitome of dorkiness compared to an upright trike. I'll take a fleet of either Schwinn Town & Countrys, Meridians, or Worksman Trikes before I put myself on a Rhodes.

Just trying to help the OP with an option he possibly was not aware of.

I believe what no1mad was alluding to was that on a diamond-frame bike, assuming proper saddle adjustment, one cannot put both feet on the ground while in the saddle; they'd have to move to over the top tube and even then due to the weight shift that can be scary when doing it in an emergency. Meanwhile on most (all?) crank-forward setups, you can plant both feet down without moving your butt out of the seat. This might be enough for the OP to be satisfied without having to go to the wider stance of a trike, or it may not.

This sounds like a good way to break both legs if done on a recumbent during an emergency stop.

Check out crankforward.com.

Now i'm confused. I could be wrong, but i'm going to go ahead and say what I think they're talking about.

I think they are talking about upright bikes with "flat foot technology" like the Electra bikes. The cranks are forward of the seat post, allowing the saddle to be much lower to the ground, so you can put both feet on the ground when you stop.

The point is, a LOT of people won't ride because they have difficulty leaning the bike over so they can plant one tippy-toe on the ground. Or they ride with the seat much too low, and then get fatigued and sore when they ride around the block. It seems strange to us--leaning over when we stop is instinctive to us--but it is a MAJOR block to cycling for many people. Electra is making big sales because they're one of the first American manufacturers to understand the problem.

http://www.electrabike.com/04/images...age/2_feet.jpg

I'll wear the flat foot thing.

My gf is very uneasy on bikes. After a lot of trips, I put her saddle up a bit for her. She immediately felt stronger and less tired while riding, but found that she wanted the saddle back down again for starting and stopping. Pity we don't see that sort of bike in the shops here.

However, on this part of the discussion, it's time for the OP to chime in. Just what is bothering him? If it's the traffic, I'll agree whole heartedly, I go to silly extremes to avoid playing with cars, but I've spent all my life either on push bikes or motorbikes or both and am a tad wary of the ineptitude of your average driver.

Richard

it is not even much forward compared to the rans. I may have gotten one over a bent if they had come out when I bought my first bent. but I tried one after being bent and they felt strange.
the delta trikes are higher then the tadpoles and far lighter then the clunky adult trikes.

OK, I'll chime. I'm enjoying the discussion, but coming to the realization that perhaps I'm looking to solve a non-existent problem. More likely than not I simply just need more time on the road to further build my confidence and biking skills. What originally launched my thoughts in the trike direction is cold weather and probability of ice. That got me to thinking about what happens if I fell in traffic, etc. and I started to worry myself about stability on two wheels. There are people at work who stare at me in amazement every day I arrive by bike - they simply can't believe I haven't been run over yet, given the local traffic. Now that it's cold and dark, they think I'm insane and have talked about an "intervention" to stop me from bike commuting...

My recreational bike is a modest crank forward design and it is a true pleasure to ride. I can't stand the bent over position on more traditional bikes - hurts my back and neck and I can't see/enjoy what's around me as well. I'm just an upright kind of guy. I know it's not aerodynamic, but I don't care about high speed. That said, I don't think the crank forward bike makes me feel any more stable than my Electrec. In fact, the mass of the Electrec seems to make it feel more stable than a light, non-electric bike if that makes sense to you.

Concerning my route, I've spent unbelievable hours scanning Google maps, driving and biking to seek alternate routes to avoid heavy traffic. I have found a few shortcuts through developments with low speed roads, but that only helps a little. Between my home and work, I have to cross an Interstate highway (I-95) and a busy state highway (NJ Rt. 33). There are only a few points to do that safely (overpasses and lights, respectively) and those crossings dictate which roads I can take to and from. The busiest, narrow road I travel doesn't even have sidewalks should I be inclined to use them. The few dedicated bike paths and trails that exist around here are in the opposite, more rural, direction from home. In NJ, they put bike trails where they might be fun or scenic to ride, but not useful to commuters in most cases.

Nothing wrong with that. I find most motorists give me double the space when I'm on my trike and I'll never complain about that. :)

The scorpion recumbent trike is very hot. The seat looks so comfy you could probably sleep on it as you tour. If I bought one I may never leave the bike. I would live on it :D The price is about 3-4k though.

1. The same law applies to tricycles, as it does to bicycles.

2. A tricycle will not do good for commuting. It will make the motorists(who don't like cyclists) even angrier. Because they will be shouting things like, 'GET OFF THE ROAD!!!!' and, 'THE ROAD IS FOR CARS, NOT BICYCLES(even though yours would be a tricycle)!!!!!'.

3. Three wheels would stay on the ice better than two, but not in traffic. While three wheels will keep you from crashing on the ice, the MUCH SLOWER speed will make you a bigger annoyance to motorists, especially the ones' that don't like cyclists being on the road.

4. Recumbent bikes are also not good in traffic. I bet, an angry motorist, that doesn't like cyclists, would want to run you over, as if, you were a squirrel, bird, snake(depending on what region of the U.S. you live in) or, dog.

Please don't continue to entertain the thought? I imagine you becoming 'road-kill', on your first day of riding in traffic.

It sounds like you think drivers are frequently and deliberately smashing into cyclists. That would be first degree murder, or at least extreme recklessness. It just isn't very likely to happen and isn't something that a reasonable cyclist worries about.

Have you ever considered a mountain bike? That might be a good compromise between speed and uprightness.

My oldest bike is a non-suspension mountain bike of mid-90s vintage. With the handlebars all the way up and seat in proper height, bars and seat are about even. If find this bike very difficult and uncomfortable to ride. I fitted it with a comfort saddle and changed out the knobbies for smooth road tires and it still sucks. The Electrec and my "comfort" bike (K2 Easy Street) are adjusted so the handlebars are higher than the seat and I find them both very comfortable. They also have suspension, which helps of course.

The yellow one reminds me of a tractor.:thumb:

I can identify with this.

Be wary about using Google maps and the like though. They're useful but give a distorted concept of distance. A loop away from the direct route can look horrendous on the map even though the additional distance is only minor. Distance is a funny thing.

The only effective way to scout a route is by bike. Watch other cyclists - you'd be amazed where they disappear and where they take you. Take the time now and then to investigate even the most daft looking options. Remember that you're on a bike and don't need to follow traditional roads or paths. One short cut I know that unfortunately doesn't go where I want, is a narrow strip between a railway fence and a retaining wall - years ago, some cyclist pushed through and long useage has established it as a route. Another I know of is essentially a gap in a hedge, 10 ft of mud track and a kerb hop. A third cuts across a playing field, through a strip of bush and over a set of railway lines. You'll find none of these on maps and they aren't immediately obvious on aerial photos, you really only discover them when you see someone using them. Often the improvements come not in time or distance saved but in less traffic or a different traffic flow - safety can be an intangible thing at times.

There's probably room for the thought that if you stop tinkering with your route, you've stopped thinking about the ride and probably stopped thinking about what's happening around you.

Another option that I use is to drive to a point and ride from there. This allows me to avoid a particularly dangerous part of the route. When I was getting back into commuting at the start of this year, I was highly stressed with what else was happening in my life and didn't need cycling to make it any worse. I approached this by driving well away from the direct route which was inefficient as far as car useage goes, but dropped me at the end of a bike track. This meant that I had a safe and stress free ride into the city, which is what I needed at the time. I am now back on a more direct route which involves a lot of playing in the traffic, but it's efficient. Even so, I'm avoiding a really nasty bit of multi-lane road and a steep, long hill on the way home by driving to the end of them and cycling from there. Commuting doesn't mean you have to ride all the way.

Richard

To me there seems like there is another issue here that is being skirted around and that is riding on ice. I have lived in the Northern climate all my life and that is not something I have done since I was about 23. Ridding on snow and ice is a higher risk activity no matter what you do. The trike will not stop other cars from sliding into you. There is nothing wrong with taking the winter off.

I rode my Worksman reverse-trike on one of the charity rides here in town, did the 16-mile route on it (took 2 hours, btw). Driving it on a street was very informative. You are pretty much going to "take the lane" whether you want to or not. It wasn't a problem on the charity ride because there were a lot of other cyclists out, but is a consideration.

That Rhoads car with the upright position reminds me of two things. First, is Ford's Quadricycle. Secondly, when I was a kid, my G.I. Joe had this go-cart looking car that would fold up into a giant backpack (an amazingly stupid idea, now that I think of it, but was neat at the time!) But from what I read, the Rhoads cars are rather slow, and not well suited to riding in traffic. It would be neat for a bike trail, such as where I use my Worksman trike. Also, those Rhoads cars are not cheap- adult upright trikes are far far less.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ewOLn9U-rrk

They call it a truck.

http://www.rhoadescar.com/goboy-q2.jpg