3500 watt per wheel.

[None]

Whatever, the hill climbing is moot with a motor anyway.

and why bother bring it up then?

 

[Chalo]

It is pretty funny to hear Chalo making the case for the "invisible hand" as Q.E.D.

Iteration is why normal bikes are normal. It's why features that are no good don't stick around in the long term, and why designs that are optimized become ubiquitous. Bikes are a rare case in which the age, production volume, and amount of innovation of a machine have refined it to so high a degree. It's difficult to make a defensible patent on substantial bicycle tech because so many things have already been tried a long time ago. Cycle manufacturing is not a very profitable industry, so that also helps keep nonsense at bay. There aren't cartels determining what we can and can't get.

People keep trying recumbents, but they don't take hold because there are problems. All most people need to do to learn they don't want one, is to try one. That's how I figured it out a long time ago, after being really excited by how cool they seemed.

 

[RunForTheHills]

Whatever, the hill climbing is moot with a motor anyway.

and why bother bring it up then?

Because it is one of the main things that people used to criticize about bents before ebikes hit the scene and was a factor that prevented them from becoming popular. At any rate, it is a waste of time to discuss it with you. You won't acknowledge any disadvantage a recumbent has.

 

[Warren]

That's how I figured it out a long time ago, after being really excited by how cool they seemed.

Blah, blah, blah. The short version is you don't like recumbents.

Most people don't like bicycles, and want them off "their" roads. They won, and you didn't.

 

[None]

Because it is one of the main things that people used to criticize about bents before ebikes hit the scene and was a factor that prevented them from becoming popular. At any rate, it is a waste of time to discuss it with you. You won't acknowledge any disadvantage a recumbent has.

So you called me dishonest, brought up a moot point yourself and only seem to offer disadvantages of recumbents but it's a waste of time to discuss it with me.
I would acknowledge if they were legit, factual, and without calling me dishonest.

 

[www.recumbents.com]

That's one of the bikes I built, and it is by far the fastest. No it's not made to go around sharp corners on bike trails, it's a racer made to cruise at 25+ MPH and that it excels at.

I had Chalo blocked for several years because he's an anti-recumbent snob, please don't make me do it again.

 

[ZeroEm]

Trying to wrap my mind around a low racer doing a technical or a off road bike on a race track! Different people, roads, trails, tracks there is a two or three wheel ike for you!

 

[Chalo]

Trying to wrap my mind around a low racer doing a technical or a off road bike on a race track! Different people, roads, trails, tracks there is a two or three wheel ike for you!

Thing is, a time trial bike or a track bike may be designed for going fast without maneuvering, but it can still easily U-turn inside one lane, do a quick evasive maneuver, or hop over a road hazard. But even a general purpose street recumbent can't do any of that.

 

[Warren]

I had Chalo blocked for several years because he's an anti-recumbent snob, please don't make me do it again.

The bicycle version of the soup nazi, the bike nazi....where fashion meets fascism. lol

https://youtu.be/qAau2pC_Nxw?list=TLPQMjcwNjIwMjIDunPqFDS4KQ

 

[None]

Thing is, a time trial bike or a track bike may be designed for going fast without maneuvering, but it can still easily U-turn inside one lane, do a quick evasive maneuver, or hop over a road hazard. But even a general purpose street recumbent can't do any of that.

U-turn inside one lane? I have no problem doing that on my SWB recumbent.
Quick evasive maneuver? sure, I can do that, too. Quick enough that I don't have to hop over road hazard.
How often do you hop over road hazard on your road bike or time trial bike? every ride? once a week? once a month?
Are you not able to maneuver around the hazard?

 

[Chalo]

Thing is, a time trial bike or a track bike may be designed for going fast without maneuvering, but it can still easily U-turn inside one lane, do a quick evasive maneuver, or hop over a road hazard. But even a general purpose street recumbent can't do any of that.

U-turn inside one lane? I have no problem doing that on my SWB recumbent.
Quick evasive maneuver? sure, I can do that, too. Quick enough that I don't have to hop over road hazard.
How often do you hop over road hazard on your road bike or time trial bike? every ride? once a week? once a month?
Are you not able to maneuver around the hazard?

Okay. You say so, but not only can't I tightly U-turn a 'bent, but none of the regular 'bent riders I've known or observed could either. One guy I used to work with can handle his Vision SWBs almost competently, but he hates them and consistently warns folks away from them when he gets questions. He only rides them because his back and neck are too knackered for a real bike.

Bike lanes around here have plenty of sunken service covers, concrete slops, poorly repaired cuts, construction debris etc. It's not always prudent to pop out into the main traffic lane when speeders are bearing down on you, and there are enough things to divide your attention that you can be taken almost unawares, especially at e-bike speed. I lift the front wheel to avoid slamming something an average of more than once per ride. Smacking the rear wheel by itself is somewhat less eventful, because usually I've stood up to take the impact. That's something else 'bent riders can't do.

 

[Dui ni shuo de dui]

Again, incorrect for single track vehicles. The lower the center of mass, the more difficult it is to maneuver a two wheeler. That's why bikes aren't set up like that (except lowracer recumbents, which are hard to ride and incompetent at maneuvering).

Well my experience conflicts with this statement.
I just removed my very, very heavy APT controller and installed a much lighter fardriver controller in its place, just under the gas tank. I can tell you it is way, wayyyyyyy easier to maneuver now. Makes a huge difference.

I also experienced the same on my scooter, its center of mass is now as low as it can gets, and this thing is the most maneuverable thing I've ever ridden, it can change direction in a heartbeat.

Not sure where you got this idea.
I think the correct way would be to say something like: The further the the center of mass is from the wheel axis line, the more difficult it is to maneuver a two wheeler.

 

[None]

Okay. You say so, but not only can't I tightly U-turn a 'bent, but none of the regular 'bent riders I've known or observed could either. One guy I used to work with can handle his Vision SWBs almost competently, but he hates them and consistently warns folks away from them when he gets questions. He only rides them because his back and neck are too knackered for a real bike.

And just how long have this person been riding his recumbent?
Does he ever practice slow speed, tight turns on his recumbent for hours?
If the only way a person can ride and avoid back & neck pain is on a recumbent, I think that's an advantage to recumbent.
IME, for most rides more than two hours in the saddle, I prefer riding my recumbent because it is far more comfortable than an upright bicycle.
Doesn't everyone prefer to be comfortable on longer rides?

Bike lanes around here have plenty of sunken service covers, concrete slops, poorly repaired cuts, construction debris etc. It's not always prudent to pop out into the main traffic lane when speeders are bearing down on you, and there are enough things to divide your attention that you can be taken almost unawares, especially at e-bike speed. I lift the front wheel to avoid slamming something an average of more than once per ride. Smacking the rear wheel by itself is somewhat less eventful, because usually I've stood up to take the impact. That's something else 'bent riders can't do.

I don't have designated bike lanes for most of the roads around my resident, single lane roads are mostly where I ride my recumbents & road bikes. IME, drivers give me far more space on the road when I ride my recumbent vs my road bike.
Recumbent have large seating area, no need to stand up, large seating area can distribute the impact force instead of a tiny upright bikes; but more than often, I simply avoid the impact when I'm riding my recumbent, because it has better maneuverability.

 

[Hummina Shadeeba]

My mini bike with 20” wheels and a low battery has me standing whenever I need to be in complete control. I attribute it to the low center of gravity making it harder to balance at slow speeds especially. Not that I’m at risk of falling over but I can’t keep the same control as on a regular bike. There’s other variables of course but I’m in agreement that recumbents suck and largely because their center of gravity is so low and they handle poorly. I challenge u to ride a tight course at 2mph with both and it becomes obvious which is easier.


Other reasons I’m not a contraption captain: I don’t want to get squished by someone who can’t see me, you can’t stand, it weighs a ton, it’s huge.

The one big plus is it’s aero.


Going at high speed I think is likely a much different experience and maybe with the speed comes the greater ease of control.

 

[Chalo]

Again, incorrect for single track vehicles. The lower the center of mass, the more difficult it is to maneuver a two wheeler.

Not sure where you got this idea.

From spending 35 years on two wheels, ranging from pedal only to 100+ HP. From making lots of bikes, both ordinary and weird.

I think the correct way would be to say something like: The further the the center of mass is from the wheel axis line, the more difficult it is to maneuver a two wheeler.

No, because the bike doesn't roll around the wheel axis line. It rolls around the center of mass, and the contact patches have to traverse laterally. I think you could make the case that concentrating mass along a line from the rear hub to the head tube would give optimum maneuverability, but since you can't practically put the rider's mass there without crippling the bike, the working center of mass will have to be higher for best results.

Moto GP machines can't be too far off from ideal, for a heavy powerful bike, and UCI World Tour bikes can't be too far off from ideal for lightweight low powered bikes. Neither one makes any effort to locate mass as low as they could. In both cases it's pretty high.

 

[Dui ni shuo de dui]

No, because the bike doesn't roll around the wheel axis line. It rolls around the center of mass,

I haven't said otherwise, so not sure why you said "No".

I think you could make the case that concentrating mass along a line from the rear hub to the head tube would give optimum maneuverability,

That looks more like what I said, indeed.

but since you can't practically put the rider's mass there without crippling the bike, the working center of mass will have to be higher for best results.

That's why you have, in most cases, to get the bike 's mass lower, because the rider's mass is generally being too high. Goal is for both to compensate for each other and getting the final CoM somewhere in the middle, at the right spot as close as possible to the roll axis. What matters is where the CoM is with the rider on it, the CoM of just the bike itself is just half of the story (ok, maybe 2/3rds :wink: ).

Moto GP machines can't be too far off from ideal, for a heavy powerful bike, and UCI World Tour bikes can't be too far off from ideal for lightweight low powered bikes. Neither one makes any effort to locate mass as low as they could. In both cases it's pretty high.

MotoGP have other considerations than just maneuverability, they must remain stable at very high speeds, they need to load their tires to get grip so there are a lot of complex weigh transfert considerations, they need crazy lean angles which dictate having the engine higher, they have to somewhat look like street bikes for marketing purposes and follow a shitton of rules, ... I guess what I'm trying to say is that they are not designed to avoid potholes at 35 mph. You're comparing very different things. :wink:

 

[BalorNG]

Eh, here we go again.

Every argument must start with definition of terms.

Higher center of mass is more STABLE indeed, and in a pretty narrow sense of the term - a singletrack bicycle topples slower, giving you a much wider window to correct for imbalance, or even for self-stability forces (which is a whole can of worms entirely) to do it for you, so you experience a wonderful sense of stability.

There is also stability in a sense 'resisting unintended steering inputs while maintain direction'.
This mostly has to do with wheelbase, and very short wheelbase (like most scooters have) will be 'unstable' no matter how low your CG is. But being able to 'turn on a dime' is something you cannot have on a very stable platform, and it can be quite useful on a city bike.

In fact, scooters have pretty low CG anyway - riding standing on low deck of a apparatus that has very low center of mass likely puts overall somewhere around a typical bicycle, does standing up on pedals on the bicycle feel unstable? It does not to me!

The general question of 'handling' is actually much, much more complex than simplistic notion of height of CG (and a bike that his high CG but low polar moment should be stable and manueverable - think penny-farthing... just beware of faceplants).

Problems with e-scooters come, I think, from reasons that are entirely unrelated to CG height and standing up position per se.

First, they have narrow deck - which is stupid and greatly limits your ability to affect balance by weight shifting from leg to leg.
Ditto for very narrow bars! Slap a much wider bars can you lean on and forcefully 'manhandle' the bike from under you, and give your legs a much wider, stabler platform - problem solved without touching the bike's CG.

Also, most e-scooters do not have a seat. When I've experimented with saddle-less bike, I've also noted a very peculiar lack stability.

- which feel very different with a saddle.
What do you think saddle noses are for? And why noseless saddles are not exactly popular?
https://forum.slowtwitch.com/forum/Slowtwitch_Forums_C1/Triathlon_Forum_F1/Noseless_saddles_difficult_to_handle_P5712965/

A bicycle is a very complex, nonlinear system by itself, and it's interaction with a rider is several order of magnitude more complex - because human biomechanics play a direct role in it, and human is a mind-bogglingly complex tensegrity system of levers... and we have not even started on the fact that 'stability' is mostly in the *mind*, and human brain is literally the most complex object in known universe (yea, even one of a patent imbecile).

So yea, this one will likely be *better handling* than a typical standing scooter with narrow deck and narrow bars, but for reasons mostly unrelated to height of CG. (And would be stabler yet if they'd give it more wheelbase).

Same goes for recumbents, btw. A recumbent with a high OR low Cg can be made stable or unstable by cockpit configuration, and given plenty of grip and high speed - even extreme lowracers are quite stable at high speed (most of them have quite long wheelbases).

At SLOW speed and in situation of low grip, 'body english' is paramount and recumbents, with rare exceptions (like my Rinzler) lack it... and for a typical person, small size, low weight, SLOW speed stability, cheap take much greater precedent than being able to cruise 2 kmh faster or being able to ride all day in comfort.

Horn created a moto-recumbent that is designed around conditions that maximise recumbent benefits, minimise flaws by either technical (very smart!) trickery or simple disregard (why care about 'body english' on track with extremely grippy tires, high-powered motor and recumbent form-factor?), for instance:
https://www.odd-bike.com/2019/07/guest-post-robert-horns-rohorn-two.html

I think he's making a 'version two', but his budget is very limited (his ultimate goal would be an AWD electric racer).

 

[None]

My mini bike with 20” wheels and a low battery has me standing whenever I need to be in complete control. I attribute it to the low center of gravity making it harder to balance at slow speeds especially. Not that I’m at risk of falling over but I can’t keep the same control as on a regular bike. There’s other variables of course but I’m in agreement that recumbents suck and largely because their center of gravity is so low and they handle poorly. I challenge u to ride a tight course at 2mph with both and it becomes obvious which is easier.

Have you ever gone on a 2 hour ride with your mini bike with 20" wheels?
Is it comfortable?
do you get pain & muscle aches after?
When you stand on your pedals, where do you think your body weight is being transferred to, in order to maintain complete control?

Low CoG is the reason you stand on your pedals, low CoG is the reason you feel that you have complete control.
On a recumbent, you don't even need to stand on your pedals to achieve low CoG.
Challenge me to ride a tight course at 2mph, bring it, let's see if you can do it sitting in your saddle.

Other reasons I’m not a contraption captain: I don’t want to get squished by someone who can’t see me, you can’t stand, it weighs a ton, it’s huge.

The one big plus is it’s aero.

Going at high speed I think is likely a much different experience and maybe with the speed comes the greater ease of control.

Yes, recumbents are cumbersome, they can be huge, but drivers notice recumbents on the road more so than upright bikes in general. It's a safety feature, too.

When you're comfortable in your seat, with the benefit of low CoG; you don't have to stand.

Being aerodynamic only comes to benefit above 15 mph.
If your ride is generally above 15-18 mph, you could benefit from being more aero.

Control comes with practice, regardless what type of bike you ride; spend 5-6 hours to learn how a vehicle operates, you can also master it to cruise through an tight course at 2mph, but is that what you ride for?

Moto GP machines can't be too far off from ideal, for a heavy powerful bike, and UCI World Tour bikes can't be too far off from ideal for lightweight low powered bikes. Neither one makes any effort to locate mass as low as they could. In both cases it's pretty high.

As if you have a clue what Moto GP machines do? 20 years in the moto industry, I've been inside Moto GP pit twice and countless track days for motorcycles.
Have you even tried riding a track racing motorcycle on the street?
Racing motorcycles are not meant for day to day riding; they are terrible at it
Even heard of 'mass centralization' on motorcycles? why do you think they moved away from high-mount tail exhaust to under-belly exhaust in recent years?

 

[Warren]

If you watched the video of Mike Burrows, that I posted above, you know how hard it is to get the bike industry, and especially the sports industry, to change. Like the motorcycle, and car industries, they have had every incentive not to change. Global warming, and wars for more costly oil, are now changing the calculus for motor vehicles.

John Schlitter has been building, racing, and selling recumbent bikes longer than anyone in the US. He and his brother started building and selling pedaled delta recumbent sail trikes in 1974. John built their first recumbent bikes.

https://schlitter.bike/about-us

He is a first class racer. He won an off-road event, admittedly not technical single track, on a dual 26" MWB recumbent decades ago. He won crits, RAAM, etc., more than once. Ask him about the reception he got at those events. A tiny handful of people still build and sell recumbent bicycles, despite systemic bias.

 

[BalorNG]

There are plenty of people that gave recumbents a honest try and found them wanting. Very poor offroad/poor road performance without suspension (and still subpar even with one!), limited vision/visibility, totally not THAT much faster when you compare 'apples to apples' (throughtbred racing bike to racing bents piloted by trained athletes) - because bents might be more aero, but very, very few people can output same power as on upright bike... I certainly cannot, despite many years of experience!

However, high-powered, electric recumbents do make a lot of sense - as in FortNine video about FF ebikes taking electrom into example.
They also make for a great fully faired platform - at least in a form of velomobile - now THAT is something that indeed lives up to 'much faster than upright bike' hype!

There is no less amount of bigotry regarding 'upright platform' coming from recumbent side - after all, recumbents are usually ridden by humans, and ingroup loyalty/outgroup hostility is.
A properly set up upright bike is about as fast, quite comfortable (maybe not as 'effortlessly' comfortable - you'll need need, but than you have an OPTION to, switch positions, use aerobars, pedal standing, etc) even over ultra-distances for people that are not world-class athletes and, of course, MUCH better handling.
Yea, if you are clinically obese a recumbent makes much more sense. With e-assist if you have any hills around worth the name. That's why I have one, ehehe, instead of switching back to upright - because I cannot ride long distances on upright bike anymore

A long wheelbase recumbent is a great platform for touring with solar roof. That's why I'm building one (almost finished).
Yea, a recumbent is a special needs bicycle and I have absolutely no problem with that.

 

[Hummina Shadeeba]

My mini bike with 20” wheels and a low battery has me standing whenever I need to be in complete control. I attribute it to the low center of gravity making it harder to balance at slow speeds especially. Not that I’m at risk of falling over but I can’t keep the same control as on a regular bike. There’s other variables of course but I’m in agreement that recumbents suck and largely because their center of gravity is so low and they handle poorly. I challenge u to ride a tight course at 2mph with both and it becomes obvious which is easier.

Have you ever gone on a 2 hour ride with your mini bike with 20" wheels?
Is it comfortable?
do you get pain & muscle aches after?
When you stand on your pedals, where do you think your body weight is being transferred to, in order to maintain complete control?

Low CoG is the reason you stand on your pedals, low CoG is the reason you feel that you have complete control.
On a recumbent, you don't even need to stand on your pedals to achieve low CoG.
Challenge me to ride a tight course at 2mph, bring it, let's see if you can do it sitting in your saddle.

I’m raising my center of mass when I stand. The analogy of a pencil balancing in the palm I like. A ruler balancing on the palm is easier than a pencil. Pencil,sitting;ruler,standing.

 

[None]

I’m raising my center of mass when I stand. The analogy of a pencil balancing in the palm I like. A ruler balancing on the palm is easier than a pencil. Pencil,sitting;ruler,standing.

Someone needs to go back to physics class. :lol:

 

[BalorNG]

I’m raising my center of mass when I stand. The analogy of a pencil balancing in the palm I like. A ruler balancing on the palm is easier than a pencil. Pencil,sitting;ruler,standing.

Someone needs to go back to physics class. :lol:

Ok, that's just ebike4healthandfitness in disguise (was he banned or something?), no more troll feeding I guess.

 

[BalorNG]

My mini bike with 20” wheels and a low battery has me standing whenever I need to be in complete control. I attribute it to the low center of gravity making it harder to balance at slow speeds especially. Not that I’m at risk of falling over but I can’t keep the same control as on a regular bike. There’s other variables of course but I’m in agreement that recumbents suck and largely because their center of gravity is so low and they handle poorly. I challenge u to ride a tight course at 2mph with both and it becomes obvious which is easier.

Have you ever gone on a 2 hour ride with your mini bike with 20" wheels?
Is it comfortable?
do you get pain & muscle aches after?
When you stand on your pedals, where do you think your body weight is being transferred to, in order to maintain complete control?

Low CoG is the reason you stand on your pedals, low CoG is the reason you feel that you have complete control.
On a recumbent, you don't even need to stand on your pedals to achieve low CoG.
Challenge me to ride a tight course at 2mph, bring it, let's see if you can do it sitting in your saddle.

I’m raising my center of mass when I stand. The analogy of a pencil balancing in the palm I like. A ruler balancing on the palm is easier than a pencil. Pencil,sitting;ruler,standing.

Just stop wasting your time on him, this guy an obvious narcissistic nutjob. Million miles, my ass.

 

[Chalo]

Even heard of 'mass centralization' on motorcycles?

Yes, I first heard of that in the late 1980s as an explanation for why Honda and others were tilting their engines more upright and putting the heavy cylinder heads higher than necessary, raising the bike's center of mass (which was confusing to mouth breathers, but not to me as a cyclist).