Lightning F-40
12-20-14, 10:07 AM
#101
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Scalarville
Posts: 1,454
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 4 Times
in
4 Posts
You're close enough to Tim to just go to the factory to try one out. He's in Lompoc. the issue you mention is the general problem with recumbents- too few shops to try them out.
12-23-14, 09:34 AM
#102
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Huntington Beach, CA
Posts: 7,085
Bikes: Cervelo Prodigy
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 478 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 87 Times
in
67 Posts
Directions says its 181 miles from my house and 3 hour drive. Close but worth staying a while in Santa Barbara county to do some riding while I'm at it.
12-23-14, 07:07 PM
#104
Senior Member
Earlier, delcrossv mentioned that his M5 was a handful. Just to be contrary, here's a video of me on my M5 CHR (his is steel, but similar geometry.) Notice at 2:54 I can coast no-handed.
No-hand-ability on a bent seems to be related to many factors, including weight distribution, recline, tiller (which affects flop) and cabling, as well as all the traditional things an upright rider would think about.
No-hand-ability on a bent seems to be related to many factors, including weight distribution, recline, tiller (which affects flop) and cabling, as well as all the traditional things an upright rider would think about.
04-30-15, 08:37 AM
#106
Junior Member
Join Date: Dec 2014
Posts: 8
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
Hey Garfield Cat - Did you ever get a test ride on a Lightning bike? Any impressions, for good and/or ill?
Safe riding,
Joel Dickman
These three prevent most accidents: seeing, being seen, & (usually) common sense.
04-30-15, 01:15 PM
#107
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Huntington Beach, CA
Posts: 7,085
Bikes: Cervelo Prodigy
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 478 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 87 Times
in
67 Posts
Some human powered vehicle trivia for you: Don Guichard (director of engineering at Cervelo) collaborated with Tim Brummer of Lightning in the design of the Lightning recumbent bikes. They were students together at Northrup University in the seventies. They designed a tandem called the White Lightning that was the first cycle to exceed 55mph, winning the Abbott Prize.
Hey Garfield Cat - Did you ever get a test ride on a Lightning bike? Any impressions, for good and/or ill?
Safe riding,
Joel Dickman
These three prevent most accidents: seeing, being seen, & (usually) common sense.
Hey Garfield Cat - Did you ever get a test ride on a Lightning bike? Any impressions, for good and/or ill?
Safe riding,
Joel Dickman
These three prevent most accidents: seeing, being seen, & (usually) common sense.
What else is fun? A super light, well thought-out gravel bike.
04-24-16, 04:08 PM
#108
Junior Member
Join Date: Dec 2014
Posts: 8
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
Velomobile vs. Lightning F40 compare and contrast
A major change in the minor niche of recumbent cycling over the past ten years or so has been the growing popularity of trikes and the seeming stagnation - or maybe even decline - of bikes. At least here in the USA - I don't know about other parts of the world. There is a shop close to where I live in Niles Illinois called Amling's, and they bill themselves as the only recumbent-exclusive shop in the greater Chicago area. They tell me that they sell about eight recumbent trikes for every recumbent bike sold.
Although velomobiles - fully faired recumbent trikes - are still extremely rare animals, they seem to be enjoying more popularity than streamlined recumbent bikes like the Lightning F40. Why? Some possible explanations:
1) Velomobiles do not require balancing skills in the same way that bikes do. For middle-aged riders returning to cycling after a very long spell away from bikes, three wheeled vehicles - whether faired or unfaired - do not present the challenge of learning how to balance on an unfamiliar type of bike. My guess is that this is the main reason for the comparative growth in popularity of three wheelers in general.
2) A velomobile is better adapted to Winter riding than a two wheeler. If you run over a patch of icy road, you have a far better chance of keeping the rubber side down. But how many velo riders really use their machines during the Winter when the roads are icy? Or worse still, when roads are both icy and snowy? In my youth I owned a very low sporty car called a Pontiac Firebird. Whenever we had a rough Michigan Winter with deep snow, my very low car would repeatedly get stuck. It was a major pain in the ass. I imagine that a velomobile is a few more inches lower to the ground than my impractical Firebird of yesteryear.
The Lightning F40 has advantages too:
1) It weighs about half as much as a velo. If a velo can average around 70 pounds, a Lightning F40 with light components can be close to 35. I think that the traditional cyclist obsession with light weight is foolish. Unless you are a skinny competitive hill climber, counting grams and ounces is of no real-world benefit. But thirty five pounds is not small change. It makes an easy to detect difference when you encounter hills, even small ones. The F40 will climb far faster than a velo. Though with three wheels, you can climb at a snail's pace without falling over.
2) The F40 is far easier to store and transport. I used to live in old apartment buildings with narrow circular stairways. I was able to take my F40 up and down the stairs to store the thing in my apartment. My impression is that velo owners need to have garage space for storage.
3) An F40 can be put together for much less money. You can find a used Lightning P-38 fairly easily. They have been in production for over 30 years. A used F40 or a used F40 fairing is hard to find, though they do turn up once in awhile. But a new F40 fairing can be purchased from Lightning for about $2000. Joined with a used P-38, you could be rolling for between three and four thousand dollars. That is still a lot of money, but it is a fraction of the cost of a new Quest. I think a new Quest has a base price of over $7000 from the Canadian outfit Blue Velo, and that is for the bare bones model. Start adding options and the velo can end up costing as much as a decent used car.
A cyclist on a tight budget could find a used Lightning Phantom (the working person's P-38) and build a Coroplast shell around it. A used Lightning Phantom (or the older version of the bike, called the Stealth) could be found for $500 to $800. The Coroplast shell could be made for less than $100 and some labor time. The homebrew F40 functional equivalent bike would not look as slick as the professionally made F40 with a compound-curved fiberglass nosecone. It would have a more faceted appearance instead of a pretty rounded shape. But if it was designed and constructed with care, the homebrew faux-40 would yield most of the performance of the much more costly Lightning F40. Google "Lee Wakefield fairings" for some well-crafted examples.
4) Some people just like the feeling of leaning into turns, and do not enjoy the go-kart quality of trikes. I suppose this is a matter of personal taste. A leaning vehicle can certainly go around turns faster than a trike though, and the main appeal of fully faired bikes and trikes is going fast. The completely different "feel" of cycling on two wheels versus three strikes me as the single most important contrast between bikes and trikes. The rest is the details.
5) The Lightning F40 is modular, and thus can be configured in multiple ways: a) naked P-38, b) P-38 plus F40 nosecone alone, or P-38 plus tail fairing alone, c) nosecone and tailfairing, but no Spandex middle, and d) Full F40 style. The bike can be tailored to different wind conditions, different types of riding, or just your whim of the moment. This flexibility strikes me as a real advantage over the velomobile. You can't peel the fairing off a Quest. Being able to remove the fairing also makes it much easier to do maintenance.
6) The F40 places your eyeballs about a foot or more higher than they are in a Quest. All other things being equal, being higher up will give you an advantage in both seeing and being seen. It is easier to see over obstacles, and easier for motorists to see you as well. The taller machine also is less likely to go under the wheels of a high bumper truck or SUV in event of a collision. I would rather ride a taller and more heads-up recumbent like a Lightning in heavy motor traffic than a land-luge low racer or an extremely low velomobile. (But that is just me. I have only been riding recumbents in urban traffic for 35 years. What do I know?)
7) The F40 is built around a recumbent bike (the Lightning P-38) known for very nimble handling. My understanding is that the Quest has a seriously large turning circle because of the faired-in front wheels. So the F40 will be far more maneuverable. Other velos may have smaller turning circles, but they still will be less agile in close quarters than a faired bike.
There are some riders who have experience with both the Lightning F40 and various velomobiles such as the Quest. I know that Bill Hannon, Carl Murdock, Dan Hansen, Gary Bernstein, and Doug Grosjean have put in miles on both machines. There must be other people too that I do not know about. I am not one of them. I have had a few rides on unfaired recumbent trikes, but no time in a velo.
My brief comparison clearly favors the Lightning F40 over the velomoblile, at least for riders who are not balance-challenged. So why the greater interest in velomobiles? Maybe there is something magical about them that you can only appreciate by riding one. Is it that trikes are easier than bikes to ride? That may be a big part of the explanation. What else is going on?
Safe riding,
Joel Dickman
These three prevent most accidents: seeing, being seen, & (usually) common sense.
Although velomobiles - fully faired recumbent trikes - are still extremely rare animals, they seem to be enjoying more popularity than streamlined recumbent bikes like the Lightning F40. Why? Some possible explanations:
1) Velomobiles do not require balancing skills in the same way that bikes do. For middle-aged riders returning to cycling after a very long spell away from bikes, three wheeled vehicles - whether faired or unfaired - do not present the challenge of learning how to balance on an unfamiliar type of bike. My guess is that this is the main reason for the comparative growth in popularity of three wheelers in general.
2) A velomobile is better adapted to Winter riding than a two wheeler. If you run over a patch of icy road, you have a far better chance of keeping the rubber side down. But how many velo riders really use their machines during the Winter when the roads are icy? Or worse still, when roads are both icy and snowy? In my youth I owned a very low sporty car called a Pontiac Firebird. Whenever we had a rough Michigan Winter with deep snow, my very low car would repeatedly get stuck. It was a major pain in the ass. I imagine that a velomobile is a few more inches lower to the ground than my impractical Firebird of yesteryear.
The Lightning F40 has advantages too:
1) It weighs about half as much as a velo. If a velo can average around 70 pounds, a Lightning F40 with light components can be close to 35. I think that the traditional cyclist obsession with light weight is foolish. Unless you are a skinny competitive hill climber, counting grams and ounces is of no real-world benefit. But thirty five pounds is not small change. It makes an easy to detect difference when you encounter hills, even small ones. The F40 will climb far faster than a velo. Though with three wheels, you can climb at a snail's pace without falling over.
2) The F40 is far easier to store and transport. I used to live in old apartment buildings with narrow circular stairways. I was able to take my F40 up and down the stairs to store the thing in my apartment. My impression is that velo owners need to have garage space for storage.
3) An F40 can be put together for much less money. You can find a used Lightning P-38 fairly easily. They have been in production for over 30 years. A used F40 or a used F40 fairing is hard to find, though they do turn up once in awhile. But a new F40 fairing can be purchased from Lightning for about $2000. Joined with a used P-38, you could be rolling for between three and four thousand dollars. That is still a lot of money, but it is a fraction of the cost of a new Quest. I think a new Quest has a base price of over $7000 from the Canadian outfit Blue Velo, and that is for the bare bones model. Start adding options and the velo can end up costing as much as a decent used car.
A cyclist on a tight budget could find a used Lightning Phantom (the working person's P-38) and build a Coroplast shell around it. A used Lightning Phantom (or the older version of the bike, called the Stealth) could be found for $500 to $800. The Coroplast shell could be made for less than $100 and some labor time. The homebrew F40 functional equivalent bike would not look as slick as the professionally made F40 with a compound-curved fiberglass nosecone. It would have a more faceted appearance instead of a pretty rounded shape. But if it was designed and constructed with care, the homebrew faux-40 would yield most of the performance of the much more costly Lightning F40. Google "Lee Wakefield fairings" for some well-crafted examples.
4) Some people just like the feeling of leaning into turns, and do not enjoy the go-kart quality of trikes. I suppose this is a matter of personal taste. A leaning vehicle can certainly go around turns faster than a trike though, and the main appeal of fully faired bikes and trikes is going fast. The completely different "feel" of cycling on two wheels versus three strikes me as the single most important contrast between bikes and trikes. The rest is the details.
5) The Lightning F40 is modular, and thus can be configured in multiple ways: a) naked P-38, b) P-38 plus F40 nosecone alone, or P-38 plus tail fairing alone, c) nosecone and tailfairing, but no Spandex middle, and d) Full F40 style. The bike can be tailored to different wind conditions, different types of riding, or just your whim of the moment. This flexibility strikes me as a real advantage over the velomobile. You can't peel the fairing off a Quest. Being able to remove the fairing also makes it much easier to do maintenance.
6) The F40 places your eyeballs about a foot or more higher than they are in a Quest. All other things being equal, being higher up will give you an advantage in both seeing and being seen. It is easier to see over obstacles, and easier for motorists to see you as well. The taller machine also is less likely to go under the wheels of a high bumper truck or SUV in event of a collision. I would rather ride a taller and more heads-up recumbent like a Lightning in heavy motor traffic than a land-luge low racer or an extremely low velomobile. (But that is just me. I have only been riding recumbents in urban traffic for 35 years. What do I know?)
7) The F40 is built around a recumbent bike (the Lightning P-38) known for very nimble handling. My understanding is that the Quest has a seriously large turning circle because of the faired-in front wheels. So the F40 will be far more maneuverable. Other velos may have smaller turning circles, but they still will be less agile in close quarters than a faired bike.
There are some riders who have experience with both the Lightning F40 and various velomobiles such as the Quest. I know that Bill Hannon, Carl Murdock, Dan Hansen, Gary Bernstein, and Doug Grosjean have put in miles on both machines. There must be other people too that I do not know about. I am not one of them. I have had a few rides on unfaired recumbent trikes, but no time in a velo.
My brief comparison clearly favors the Lightning F40 over the velomoblile, at least for riders who are not balance-challenged. So why the greater interest in velomobiles? Maybe there is something magical about them that you can only appreciate by riding one. Is it that trikes are easier than bikes to ride? That may be a big part of the explanation. What else is going on?
Safe riding,
Joel Dickman
These three prevent most accidents: seeing, being seen, & (usually) common sense.
Last edited by Joel Dickman; 05-13-16 at 07:42 AM.
04-24-16, 07:02 PM
#109
Zircon Encrusted Tweezers
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: high ground
Posts: 1,348
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 261 Post(s)
Liked 132 Times
in
84 Posts
A major change in the minor niche of recumbent cycling over the past ten years or so has been the growing popularity of trikes and the seeming stagnation of bikes. At least here in the USA - I don't know about other parts of the world. There is a shop close to where I live in Niles Illinois called Amling's, and they bill themselves as the only recumbent-only shop in the greater Chicago area. They tell me that they sell about eight recumbent trikes for every recumbent bike sold.
Although velomobiles - fully faired recumbent trikes - are still very rare animals, they seem to be enjoying more popularity than streamlined recumbent bikes like the Lightning F40. Why? Some possible explanations:
1) Velomobiles do not require balancing skills in the same way that bikes do. For middle-aged riders returning to cycling after a very long spell away from bikes, the three wheeled vehicles - whether faired or unfaired - do not represent the challenge of learning how to balance on an unfamiliar type of bike. My guess is that this is the big reason for the comparative growth of three wheelers in general.
2) A velomobile is better adapted to Winter riding than a two wheeler. If you run over a patch of icy roadway, you have a much better chance of keeping the rubber side down. But how many velo riders really use their machines during the Winter when the roads are icy?
3) There must be other nice things about velomobiles I am not aware of, not being a velo guy.
The Lightning F40 seems to have a group of advantages too:
1) It weighs about half as much as a velo. If a velo can average around 70 pounds, a Lightning F40 with light components can be close to 35. I think that the traditional cyclist obsession with light weight is foolish - unless you are a skinny competitive hill climber. But thirty five pounds makes an easy to detect difference when you encounter hills, even small ones.
2) The F40 is much easier to store and transport. I used to live in old apartment buildings with narrow circular stairways. I was able to take my F40 up and down the stairs to store the thing in my apartment. My impression is that velo owners need to have garage space for storage.
3) An F40 can be put together for much less money. You can find a used Lightning P-38 fairly easily, since they have been in production for over 30 years. A used F40 or a used F40 fairing is hard to find, though they do turn up once in awhile. But a new F40 fairing can be purchased from Lightning for about $2000. Joined with a used P-38, you could be rolling for between three and four thousand dollars. That is around half the cost of a new velomobile.
4) Some people just like the feeling of leaning into turns, and do not enjoy the go-kart quality of trikes. I guess this is a matter of personal taste. A leaning vehicle can certainly go around turns faster than a trike though, and a big part of the appeal of fully faired bikes and trikes is going fast.
5) The Lightning F40 is modular, and thus can be configured in multiple ways: a) naked P-38, b) P-38 plus F40 nosecone alone, or P-38 plus tail fairing alone, and c) Full F40 style. The bike can be tailored to different wind conditions, different types of riding, or just your whim of the moment. This flexibility strikes me as a real advantage over the velomobile. You can't peel the fairing off a Quest.
There are some riders who have experience with both the Lightning F40 and various velomobiles such as the Quest. I know that Bill Hannon, Carl Murdock, Dan Hansen, Gary Bernstein, and Doug Grosjean have put in miles on both machines. There must be other people too that I do not know about. I am not one of them. I have substantial two-wheeled streamliner experience, but no time in a velo.
So why the increased interest in velos compared to the F40? It can't just be that trikes are easier than bikes to ride. That may be a big part of the explanation. What else is going on?
Safe riding,
Joel Dickman
These three prevent most accidents: seeing, being seen, & (usually) common sense.
Although velomobiles - fully faired recumbent trikes - are still very rare animals, they seem to be enjoying more popularity than streamlined recumbent bikes like the Lightning F40. Why? Some possible explanations:
1) Velomobiles do not require balancing skills in the same way that bikes do. For middle-aged riders returning to cycling after a very long spell away from bikes, the three wheeled vehicles - whether faired or unfaired - do not represent the challenge of learning how to balance on an unfamiliar type of bike. My guess is that this is the big reason for the comparative growth of three wheelers in general.
2) A velomobile is better adapted to Winter riding than a two wheeler. If you run over a patch of icy roadway, you have a much better chance of keeping the rubber side down. But how many velo riders really use their machines during the Winter when the roads are icy?
3) There must be other nice things about velomobiles I am not aware of, not being a velo guy.
The Lightning F40 seems to have a group of advantages too:
1) It weighs about half as much as a velo. If a velo can average around 70 pounds, a Lightning F40 with light components can be close to 35. I think that the traditional cyclist obsession with light weight is foolish - unless you are a skinny competitive hill climber. But thirty five pounds makes an easy to detect difference when you encounter hills, even small ones.
2) The F40 is much easier to store and transport. I used to live in old apartment buildings with narrow circular stairways. I was able to take my F40 up and down the stairs to store the thing in my apartment. My impression is that velo owners need to have garage space for storage.
3) An F40 can be put together for much less money. You can find a used Lightning P-38 fairly easily, since they have been in production for over 30 years. A used F40 or a used F40 fairing is hard to find, though they do turn up once in awhile. But a new F40 fairing can be purchased from Lightning for about $2000. Joined with a used P-38, you could be rolling for between three and four thousand dollars. That is around half the cost of a new velomobile.
4) Some people just like the feeling of leaning into turns, and do not enjoy the go-kart quality of trikes. I guess this is a matter of personal taste. A leaning vehicle can certainly go around turns faster than a trike though, and a big part of the appeal of fully faired bikes and trikes is going fast.
5) The Lightning F40 is modular, and thus can be configured in multiple ways: a) naked P-38, b) P-38 plus F40 nosecone alone, or P-38 plus tail fairing alone, and c) Full F40 style. The bike can be tailored to different wind conditions, different types of riding, or just your whim of the moment. This flexibility strikes me as a real advantage over the velomobile. You can't peel the fairing off a Quest.
There are some riders who have experience with both the Lightning F40 and various velomobiles such as the Quest. I know that Bill Hannon, Carl Murdock, Dan Hansen, Gary Bernstein, and Doug Grosjean have put in miles on both machines. There must be other people too that I do not know about. I am not one of them. I have substantial two-wheeled streamliner experience, but no time in a velo.
So why the increased interest in velos compared to the F40? It can't just be that trikes are easier than bikes to ride. That may be a big part of the explanation. What else is going on?
Safe riding,
Joel Dickman
These three prevent most accidents: seeing, being seen, & (usually) common sense.
Most velomobiles have lower CdAs than the F-40. So if the route is flat and open, a velo will be faster. CdA certainly isn't the only variable in the speed equation, but it's probably the single most important one.
Sidewind vulnerabilities give some people pause. I still remember watching Bill Hannon on his F-40 pass me at high speed at the 2010 Calvin's Challenge in a crosswind section riding straight down the road but leaned over about 30 degrees from vertical. Then the wind would suddenly abate and he'd pop back up straight again, but with a good 1 foot swerve in the process. I watched that happen twice as he receded into the distance. Those were tough conditions, no doubt, but Bill has a reputation as quite a pilot. It made me realize that there would be certain days I'd have to keep such a machine in the garage.
That all said, for my needs and riding environs, I will take an F-40 over a velo any day. I am building up the bike fund once again (after buying a nice, but somewhat pricey Moulton last year). Maybe by next summer I will be ready.
04-24-16, 10:38 PM
#110
Insane Bicycle Mechanic
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: other Vancouver
Posts: 9,843
Mentioned: 34 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 809 Post(s)
Liked 712 Times
in
380 Posts
Because publicity creates its own groundswell of interest. The F-40 isn't "new" and "interesting" so there's no reason to talk about it.
__________________
Jeff Wills
Comcast nuked my web page. It will return soon..
Jeff Wills
Comcast nuked my web page. It will return soon..
05-09-16, 04:27 AM
#111
Junior Member
Join Date: Dec 2015
Posts: 12
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
Ok ---
I happen to own P38 (actually 3 of them, 1 of which is a voyager ) and a F90 which is a carbon R84 with a F40 shell .. I also own two velomobiles. A mango and a milan GT. I've crossed the US on the R84 following the 2004 RAAM route, and did the 2001 Pactour ridge of the rockies on my P38. (probably the highest amount of climbing on any single pay tour, and why I bought a R84 right after it -- haha) Thats me on the back row, 3rd from the left, white helmet and here's my two velos I have literally hundreds of thousands of miles on lightning bikes as I've been riding them since 1997. I've got about 8,000 miles on my Mango at the moment and about 2,500 on the Milan. (both of these are relatively new)
The R84/F40 combination is a fine machine, but its simply no match for a velo in pure flat out speed, even with the hills .. Given I've got the same engine I can easily compare them (and frequently do as I ride all of them at times)
As a comparison, my F90 weighs in at 34 pounds before loading (gear, water, etc) The carbon fiber mango in at 53 pounds (not counting the cap which I rarely ride with) and the Milan at 58 pounds. I've not rigged up a P38 with the F40 fairing, but I'd guess it would be closer to 40 pounds not the 33 as suggested in the website unless you have uber-light everything else component wise as the bulk of the weight is that Darlex material and fiberglass nose.
I'm not going to directly address some of the comments previously posted, but I'll address some of the topics.
Overall Speed
So far the Milan wins in virtually every situation except "rabbit-start" club rides. Our locals have this fetish for blasting away at lights as hard as possible. My theory on this is that Strava and the all mighty KOM has created a F1 style of riding mentality. Accelerate hard, and don't brake to the last possible moment. Its become pervasive in the club rides. Since I get flagged all the time I quite caring about KOMs as much
The point being that acceleration of the mass of a velo is not going to be that of a tinkerbell weight carbon fiber stick-bike, or for that matter a bare R84. However, once rolling, and especially when you can get into rolling hills, the momentum of a velo along with the significantly superior aerodynamics makes all the difference.
Climbing
Like acceleration above, the extra weight of the velo is a disadvantage, though not as much. I find that I can climb on my velos faster in the shallow climbs 2-4% mainly because I can keep the speed high enough where the areodynamic advantage still helps. Above 4% though if I loose momentum its a grind/spin contest. Though there really isn't a stall speed on a velo. I've never had to walk a P38 or R84 up a hill, but I can tell you a few climbs (wolf creek pass for example) things got a might twitchy at times. On the velo, like any trike, you can stop, or just switch to a high-speed "spin climb" in a low gear and low speed, which helps the ailing knees that old age and decrepitude has brought on.
Descending
All of these bikes drop like a stone when going down hill, with crosswinds though the F90 and the Mango will fight with you to various degrees. The Milan doesn't really seem to notice crosswinds, or at least I've not been in any significant enough for it to notice. The F90 I've got to tack into the wind like a sailboat at times to keep it from being pushed on the side, that can be tricky in wet/rainy weather and typically I've got to slow it down a lot to overcome the fear factor of buffeting winds. The Mango likes to lift its nose in cornering (front corner) cross winds, you can feel it lift up on the suspension. Touching the brakes will drop the nose back down and regain stability.
Maneuverability
The F90 / P38s and Mango are all in the same class .. at speed they will all turn about the same, at "parking lot speeds" the F90/P38 will turn quicker, but suffer from balance issues pretty quickly making you want to unclip and 'dangle a leg' in some maneuvers. Where in the Mango you'd just turn sharply and slowly. The Milan has enclosed wheels and needs about 1.5 lanes to turn around in when using narrow tires.. roughly about 16 feet. Not bad unless you plan on sidewalk riding in which case it sucks, but that bike is too fast for sidewalks (or bike paths)
Weather resistance
Don't kid yourself about the F90/F40s .. They suck in the weather. Perhaps in some opinions they are slightly better than an unfaired bike but that spandex fills up with water fast (think bath towel) and you get covered inside fairly quickly. The Milan with the race cap on is basically dry inside when sealed properly .. you get a little spray in the face when you are going into the wind and water flys through the windscreen or the NACA duct, but otherwise its fine -- shoving a sponge into the NACA duct fixes that if it bothers you . Likewise the Mango with the tourkap or racekap will allow very limited exposure to the elements when sealed up properly.
Likewise in cold weather there really isn't much help with the F90/F40 fairing.. its open in lots of places and only slightly protective to the winter wind. Having ridden the Mango down to -2F with the racecap on and the footwells closed up I can attest it was fine, other than the fogging which I later solved with some cat crap as recommended by a BROL posting. I've not had a chance yet to ride the Milan in that kind of weather but I will most likely do so in the next year when it turns cold again. I have a full set of studded tires for the Mango and it was fine on the ice/snow streets though not all that fast as cowardice took over and I didn't push it as hard as it would probably actually go.
Being seen
I completely and utterly reject the idea that a velo is somehow harder to see than a roadbike/high-racer/etc. These things are the size of a refrigerator they are brightly colored -- one of mine is adorn with hundreds of LEDs along the shell and the top is not all that low to the ground, compared to say a Carbon trike or Catrike 700 (both of which I also own and have experience riding) They are very quickly noticed by drivers - even more so than a trike with a flag -- unfortunately sometimes that in-itself is a problem as drivers frequently want to take pictures of them sometimes at the expense of their driving skills .. In fact this is the most common sight you see when riding a velo - the back of a smart phone I have yet to have anyone "not" see me .. though I'm sure that will be the claim someday when I get hit by a car, but then again they'd just as likely make the same claim if I was riding my USPS Trek bike and wearing my lycra-stud kit.
Transport
If you want to disassemble the F40/F90 it can be easier to transport, certainly easier to ship. Though its not 5 minutes as the website cites .. Its really about 30 minutes to take it down and about an hour or so to put it back together and work out all the bugs/alignment issues that are created in the process. I've been that damm thin-wall aluminum "door" member several times by sure accident, even once just by sitting the frame down on it. The velos on the other hand need a crate/van .. There are people that mount them in roof racks and that appears to work, but I've been afraid to try something like that and just haul them around in a transit van. Shipping a crated velo on the airlines can be $400-900 depending on the destination / distance .. if you need someone to come get the velo/crate and all, that price can easily double. Where as shipping a F40/F90 isn't going to be anywhere close to that as disassembled you can put it in a couple of cardboard boxes and a bike box.
Rider -- Visibility
These all have mirrors, you can see behind yourself just as easily in a velo, perhaps more as you don't need to turn your head, as you can with any other bike .. There's not really any blind spots anywhere once its set up properly. On my P38s and the F90 I use a helmet mirror to a similar effect but still have to turn my head.
I think thats all the items I read in this thread - but feel free to ask me anything about the bikes or velo and I'll answer the best I can
I happen to own P38 (actually 3 of them, 1 of which is a voyager ) and a F90 which is a carbon R84 with a F40 shell .. I also own two velomobiles. A mango and a milan GT. I've crossed the US on the R84 following the 2004 RAAM route, and did the 2001 Pactour ridge of the rockies on my P38. (probably the highest amount of climbing on any single pay tour, and why I bought a R84 right after it -- haha) Thats me on the back row, 3rd from the left, white helmet and here's my two velos I have literally hundreds of thousands of miles on lightning bikes as I've been riding them since 1997. I've got about 8,000 miles on my Mango at the moment and about 2,500 on the Milan. (both of these are relatively new)
The R84/F40 combination is a fine machine, but its simply no match for a velo in pure flat out speed, even with the hills .. Given I've got the same engine I can easily compare them (and frequently do as I ride all of them at times)
As a comparison, my F90 weighs in at 34 pounds before loading (gear, water, etc) The carbon fiber mango in at 53 pounds (not counting the cap which I rarely ride with) and the Milan at 58 pounds. I've not rigged up a P38 with the F40 fairing, but I'd guess it would be closer to 40 pounds not the 33 as suggested in the website unless you have uber-light everything else component wise as the bulk of the weight is that Darlex material and fiberglass nose.
I'm not going to directly address some of the comments previously posted, but I'll address some of the topics.
Overall Speed
So far the Milan wins in virtually every situation except "rabbit-start" club rides. Our locals have this fetish for blasting away at lights as hard as possible. My theory on this is that Strava and the all mighty KOM has created a F1 style of riding mentality. Accelerate hard, and don't brake to the last possible moment. Its become pervasive in the club rides. Since I get flagged all the time I quite caring about KOMs as much
The point being that acceleration of the mass of a velo is not going to be that of a tinkerbell weight carbon fiber stick-bike, or for that matter a bare R84. However, once rolling, and especially when you can get into rolling hills, the momentum of a velo along with the significantly superior aerodynamics makes all the difference.Climbing
Like acceleration above, the extra weight of the velo is a disadvantage, though not as much. I find that I can climb on my velos faster in the shallow climbs 2-4% mainly because I can keep the speed high enough where the areodynamic advantage still helps. Above 4% though if I loose momentum its a grind/spin contest. Though there really isn't a stall speed on a velo. I've never had to walk a P38 or R84 up a hill, but I can tell you a few climbs (wolf creek pass for example) things got a might twitchy at times. On the velo, like any trike, you can stop, or just switch to a high-speed "spin climb" in a low gear and low speed, which helps the ailing knees that old age and decrepitude has brought on.
Descending
All of these bikes drop like a stone when going down hill, with crosswinds though the F90 and the Mango will fight with you to various degrees. The Milan doesn't really seem to notice crosswinds, or at least I've not been in any significant enough for it to notice. The F90 I've got to tack into the wind like a sailboat at times to keep it from being pushed on the side, that can be tricky in wet/rainy weather and typically I've got to slow it down a lot to overcome the fear factor of buffeting winds. The Mango likes to lift its nose in cornering (front corner) cross winds, you can feel it lift up on the suspension. Touching the brakes will drop the nose back down and regain stability.
Maneuverability
The F90 / P38s and Mango are all in the same class .. at speed they will all turn about the same, at "parking lot speeds" the F90/P38 will turn quicker, but suffer from balance issues pretty quickly making you want to unclip and 'dangle a leg' in some maneuvers. Where in the Mango you'd just turn sharply and slowly. The Milan has enclosed wheels and needs about 1.5 lanes to turn around in when using narrow tires.. roughly about 16 feet. Not bad unless you plan on sidewalk riding in which case it sucks, but that bike is too fast for sidewalks (or bike paths)
Weather resistance
Don't kid yourself about the F90/F40s .. They suck in the weather. Perhaps in some opinions they are slightly better than an unfaired bike but that spandex fills up with water fast (think bath towel) and you get covered inside fairly quickly. The Milan with the race cap on is basically dry inside when sealed properly .. you get a little spray in the face when you are going into the wind and water flys through the windscreen or the NACA duct, but otherwise its fine -- shoving a sponge into the NACA duct fixes that if it bothers you . Likewise the Mango with the tourkap or racekap will allow very limited exposure to the elements when sealed up properly.
Likewise in cold weather there really isn't much help with the F90/F40 fairing.. its open in lots of places and only slightly protective to the winter wind. Having ridden the Mango down to -2F with the racecap on and the footwells closed up I can attest it was fine, other than the fogging which I later solved with some cat crap as recommended by a BROL posting. I've not had a chance yet to ride the Milan in that kind of weather but I will most likely do so in the next year when it turns cold again. I have a full set of studded tires for the Mango and it was fine on the ice/snow streets though not all that fast as cowardice took over and I didn't push it as hard as it would probably actually go.
Being seen
I completely and utterly reject the idea that a velo is somehow harder to see than a roadbike/high-racer/etc. These things are the size of a refrigerator they are brightly colored -- one of mine is adorn with hundreds of LEDs along the shell and the top is not all that low to the ground, compared to say a Carbon trike or Catrike 700 (both of which I also own and have experience riding) They are very quickly noticed by drivers - even more so than a trike with a flag -- unfortunately sometimes that in-itself is a problem as drivers frequently want to take pictures of them sometimes at the expense of their driving skills .. In fact this is the most common sight you see when riding a velo - the back of a smart phone I have yet to have anyone "not" see me .. though I'm sure that will be the claim someday when I get hit by a car, but then again they'd just as likely make the same claim if I was riding my USPS Trek bike and wearing my lycra-stud kit.
Transport
If you want to disassemble the F40/F90 it can be easier to transport, certainly easier to ship. Though its not 5 minutes as the website cites .. Its really about 30 minutes to take it down and about an hour or so to put it back together and work out all the bugs/alignment issues that are created in the process. I've been that damm thin-wall aluminum "door" member several times by sure accident, even once just by sitting the frame down on it. The velos on the other hand need a crate/van .. There are people that mount them in roof racks and that appears to work, but I've been afraid to try something like that and just haul them around in a transit van. Shipping a crated velo on the airlines can be $400-900 depending on the destination / distance .. if you need someone to come get the velo/crate and all, that price can easily double. Where as shipping a F40/F90 isn't going to be anywhere close to that as disassembled you can put it in a couple of cardboard boxes and a bike box.
Rider -- Visibility
These all have mirrors, you can see behind yourself just as easily in a velo, perhaps more as you don't need to turn your head, as you can with any other bike .. There's not really any blind spots anywhere once its set up properly. On my P38s and the F90 I use a helmet mirror to a similar effect but still have to turn my head.
I think thats all the items I read in this thread - but feel free to ask me anything about the bikes or velo and I'll answer the best I can
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
MissMarina
Folding Bikes
8
03-17-19 11:49 PM
dekindy
Recumbent
22
09-01-14 10:54 AM
