![]() |
Originally Posted by HD3andMe
(Post 21880889)
Have you tried cannibalism? How about swimming in lava?
|
Originally Posted by mdarnton
(Post 21880786)
it is certainly true that some disgraced politicians have been telling many lies about my town recently.
https://www.smartertravel.com/wanna-...safest-cities/ |
Originally Posted by Paul Barnard
(Post 21880695)
I long for the day when I don't care if I look and act like a nerd.
Personally I'm trying to put that day off as long as I can! |
DF? Double Friangle?
|
Originally Posted by unterhausen
(Post 21880755)
Moved to 'bents from General cycling. We don't allow 'bent evangelism outside of this forum. Sorry I didn't read through it to see if there is any anti-bent bigotry.
|
Originally Posted by tomato coupe
(Post 21880671)
They have, and recumbents aren't the answer. End of story. Bottom line. The fat lady has sung. In the books. Time expired. Finito.
|
Originally Posted by rydabent
(Post 21881507)
Have you ever ridden one over 100 miles, and not liked it.
Despite your baseless arguments, the reason that traditional road bikes are much more popular has nothing to do with people being closed-minded. Recumbents have been around for more than a century. A century of cycling has shown that traditional road bikes are, for most people, the better option. |
Originally Posted by tomato coupe
(Post 21881522)
No, I've never ridden a recumbent for more than 100 miles.
|
Originally Posted by tomato coupe
(Post 21881522)
No, I've never ridden a recumbent for more than 100 miles. But, I've ridden a road bike over 100 miles many, many times without any problems.
Despite your baseless arguments, the reason that traditional road bikes are much more popular has nothing to do with people being closed-minded. Recumbents have been around for more than a century. A century of cycling has shown that traditional road bikes are, for most people, the better option. I will leave you with this--------------------------as they say we get too soon old and too late smart. After some 60 years I for one got smart. |
|
Originally Posted by rydabent
(Post 21882321)
After some 60 years I for one got smart.
|
Originally Posted by rosefarts
(Post 21881092)
DF? Double Friangle?
|
Originally Posted by BlazingPedals
(Post 21882431)
Diamond Frame. I prefer to use, "Upright" since it makes a nice counterpart to, "Recumbent." Besides, some sensitive individual might think DF stands for something objectionable.
|
Originally Posted by tomato coupe
(Post 21882362)
No. You've just convinced yourself that something that works best for you (and a small fraction of cyclists) is the best choice for everyone. It's an old song, and everybody is tired of hearing it. Give it a rest.
|
Originally Posted by BlazingPedals
(Post 21882431)
Diamond Frame. I prefer to use, "Upright" since it makes a nice counterpart to, "Recumbent." Besides, some sensitive individual might think DF stands for something objectionable.
|
Originally Posted by tomato coupe
(Post 21882362)
No. You've just convinced yourself that something that works best for you (and a small fraction of cyclists) is the best choice for everyone. It's an old song, and everybody is tired of hearing it. Give it a rest.
|
Originally Posted by rydabent
(Post 21883229)
And the push back against bents is just as objectionable.
Originally Posted by rydabent
(Post 21883221)
All well and good, but some day you too will get old and insufferable too ...
|
I took Prof. David Wilson's recumbent for a spin 1976. Knew right away that bike was the real deal; that had it been equipped with race gear and wheels, it would be fine ride. (Also caught up to him and rode with him several times. He as not slow. I was faster because I was a mid 20s in form racer and he was middle aged.) But that recumbent lacked on feature that I live for. The dance. (Out of the saddle climbing. My happy place.) Gotta solve that or I have to become unable to ride DFs for me to switch.
Oh, and ever since that ride I have known that a small front wheeled, short wheelbase under the knees steerer was it. I don't see a lot of those. |
Originally Posted by tomato coupe
(Post 21883253)
There's very little pushback against recumbents – there are just a lot of people who are tired of your constant proselytizing.
Fixed that typo for you ... you're welcome. |
It doesn't have to be an either/or thing. I bought a used recumbent two seasons ago and rode it exclusively for about 6 weeks @ 200-300 miles a week including a late season 400k. I like riding my recumbent a lot, but I still prefer my uprights for brevets because it's more fun to ride with other people who are on the same kind of bike. So last season I rode uprights pretty much exclusively until the Fall. I would ride my recumbent a lot more, but the muscles it uses are a lot different and I'm afraid it will make me slower on my uprights if I spend too much time on the recumbent early in the season.
|
Originally Posted by rydabent
(Post 21880601)
Or something about the people that "live" in Chicago.
|
Originally Posted by rydabent
(Post 21883281)
This thread was moved over here to the recumbent thread. I see that you followed it over here to continue your incessant snotty attacks.
|
Originally Posted by tomato coupe
(Post 21882362)
No. You've just convinced yourself that something that works best for you (and a small fraction of cyclists) is the best choice for everyone. It's an old song, and everybody is tired of hearing it. Give it a rest.
Do you get angry when a high racer passes you when riding into the wind? Bottom line sticking to an 1890 style of bike is kind of dumb. Time moves on. Dont be an old fud new and better things do get invented you know. |
Originally Posted by shelbyfv
(Post 21883719)
You should have posted it here in the first place. But you know that....
|
| All times are GMT -6. The time now is 01:16 PM. |
Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.