Ive been reading posts about how recumbent are slower on the hills by all the upright riders out there... its true they can be slower on the hills but the uprights refuse to admit how much more aero they are .....I've passed many a paceline on my recumbent.... it seems upright riders can't achieve any real speed or distance solo because of the grossly un aero riding position they ride in.. uprights are better on the hills but recumbent are better on the rest of the road

Plus you have the comfort and the view. I have both a recumbent and a trike. Any more I almost always ride the trike while in town. No unclipping when you stop, and no wobbling around trying to clip in when you ride off. The fact is a trike has to be the most relaxing way to cycle there is.

I find it amazing how many people are still wed to the 1890 DF bike design. It of course is good for single tracking and mountain biking.

Df bikes riders ride in such an un aero position..... that's why the need to shed every gram possible

I always wondered about how the design has not changed much. Just the materials the frame , etc is made from. I always wondered is there a better design more in the line of a running man style, lower and utilizing both the upper body and lower body to propel you. My idea is more of a body suit , or like a custom made suit / wheels and propulsion prosthetic... Some day I will design it. (Some day means never) heheehe

This is a direct result of 1934 UCI regulations, which were intended to eliminate racing advantages based on technology like aerodynamic fairings, unconventional rider positioning, etc. (i.e. recumbents). UCI felt that competition should be between riders and not tech magic. Of course there have been tech developments that have provided a real advantage, but these were within the scope of the UCI rules. These include the requirement that a bike frame have a main triangle with 3 tubes.

It would be interesting to see what might have been if the UCI never adopted these restrictive rules. I'd guess that we'd be seeing a lot more bent riders.

If restrictive rules were applied to cars trains and airplanes, we would be driving Model Ts, riding trains with steam engines, and flying bi-wing planes.

But the UCI who was bought off by DF MFGs needs only to understand that if riders had a choice, it would be equal if all riders could chose the type of bike for the terrain.

Uci is ridiculous..... all df bikes are essentially the same no differences other than material or manufacturing process.......rediculous riding position for guys trying to go fast....sooo much air drag

How come I get passed by so many DF's, then? Ridden by men, women and children, it would seem. In spite of my aero advantage.

That notion usually sources from the recumbent riders, though, and the DF riders are just repeating what they hear. For example:

That's why uprights use the paceline to achieve speed and overcome all the air drag... one guy works hard while the others rest waiting for their turn at the front of the line.....

Why u get passéd by df riders Is something only u can tell why...,. no amount of aero will make up for a lack of leg muscles or ability

I always figured that my lowracer was the equivalent of a 3-man paceline of uprights. So, 1-on-1 is my advantage; 5-on-1 is theirs. I've done a 5-on-5 once; we dropped the uprights on a climb. One of them inched past me about 2/3 up, but collapsed into the ditch as soon as he cleared my bike. It was comical.

Most recumbents, including trikes, do not enjoy any aero advantage over a good upright road bike.

The body is 80%of all air drag.....a lowracers frontal profile is tiny compared to an upright

Don't know of any train-racing organizations, but there are certainly formal racing organizations for cars and airplanes that do impose strict regulations on the competitors (and yes, there is a category for racing biplanes). I've never heard complaints that the existence of these highly regulated competitive events has somehow stunted the development of better designs of the more mundane cars we drive nor of the aircraft used in either general aviation or by the airline industry.

It frankly strikes me as a bit far-fetched that UCI rules which only apply to the tiny fraction of bike riders who engage in the highest levels of racing has somehow prevented new designs of the vast majority of bikes that are sold from the big-box outlets - or even of the smaller volume of sales from bike shops which still would only rarely have customers who are restricted by UCI rules.

A test for the upright riders here. What is the Hour record for an unfaired bike?

Now you're getting it, that's the whole point point. The rules are intended to make the race a contest among the riders rather than the designers. Pretty much all sports have rules regarding equipment. That's all it is.

I'd have to look it up but I know that it's not very high. The rules for riding position keep being tweaked too to make it a contest among the riders rather than among the designers. The thing I'm wondering about is how fast the world record hour rider would be able to ride one of those fully faired human powered vehicles.

Its half the recumbent time

Wiggins holds the current UCI record at 54.526 Km. Matthias Konig, a virtual nobody in the cycling world, has 2 recorded times for the Hour that beat Wiggins: 56.696 Km and 57.637 Km. Both were on an M5 highracer. Why is Wiggins in the book under "Unified Hour Record?" Wiggins did it on a bike, Konig did not.

A recumbent is not a bicycle according to the UCI, that's why.

Uci is a joke...... the object of a bike race is to go as fast as possible... why does it matter if its on an upright or recumbent

How is that any different than NASCAR or formula 1?

Really u can't tell the difference between a car race and a bicycle race... were talking about a riding position not fully fairing bikes.... upright df riders need to admit that their riding position is not the fastest

Exactly. Or RAAM vs. UCI vs. whatever the international triathlon governing body is. Different organizations can have whatever rules that they deem fit, including what design of bike that they use.

As a long time recumbent rider (15 years), I'm often amazed that this is even a topic except to breed animosity between recumbentists and upright riders who really don't care until goaded into it.