Today's Forum Topics
Set as homepage
|
View
New Forum Topics Today's Forum Topics Set as homepage |
 |
|
|||||||
| |
||||
Welcome to CyclingForums.com You are currently viewing our website as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions. You will have to register before you can post to this thread. By joining our free online community you will have access to post new topics, communicate privately with other cyclingforums.com members (PM), respond to polls, upload photos and access other special features like product reviews and classifieds. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread | Display Modes |
27-11.-2007, 02:11 PM
|
#1 |
|
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
Re: CruzBike?
(PeteCresswell) wrote:
> Never heard of it. > > Does anybody actually have one of these things? > http://www.cruzbike.com/ > Not me. > > Been flirting with the idea of a 'bent for a number of years - > Oh, the HORROR!!!  > > just for path riding but, being a statistical outlier > body-dimension-wise, have shied away from the cost of a custom. > My opinion is that recumbents are best on the open road, or ridden in a "vehicular cycling" mode. Path generally have too many features that need to be maneuvered at low speed with tight turns, which is not a forte of recumbent bicycles (trikes are a different matter). Describe more specifically how you differ from the norm, and perhaps suggestions for suitable bicycles could be made. Recumbent fit concerns are rather different than those of uprights. > > Cruz' attraction is that the drive system seems to lend itself to > fairly extreme leg length adjustments - yet fit on the average > trunk-mount bike rack. > I would hesitate to buy without a chance to ride one first. Moving bottom bracket bicycle can be rather odd in the handling department. Note that the number of dealers is sparse, so finding a test ride may not be practical. -- Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia "Localized intense suction such as tornadoes is created when temperature differences are high enough between meeting air masses, and can impart excessive energy onto a cyclist." - Randy Schlitter |
|
|
27-11.-2007, 04:46 PM
|
#2 |
|
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
Re: CruzBike?
On Nov 26, 8:11 pm, Tom Sherman <sunsetss0...@REMOVETHISyahoo.com>
wrote: > (PeteCresswell) wrote: > > Never heard of it. > > > Does anybody actually have one of these things? > >http://www.cruzbike.com/ > > Not me. > >> Been flirting with the idea of a 'bent for a number of years - > > > > Oh, the HORROR!!! > >> just for path riding but, being a statistical outlier > > body-dimension-wise, have shied away from the cost of a custom. > > > > My opinion is that recumbents are best on the open road, or ridden in a > "vehicular cycling" mode. Path generally have too many features that > need to be maneuvered at low speed with tight turns, which is not a > forte of recumbent bicycles (trikes are a different matter). > > Describe more specifically how you differ from the norm, and perhaps > suggestions for suitable bicycles could be made. Recumbent fit concerns > are rather different than those of uprights. > > > Cruz' attraction is that the drive system seems to lend itself to > > fairly extreme leg length adjustments - yet fit on the average > > trunk-mount bike rack. > > > > I would hesitate to buy without a chance to ride one first. Moving > bottom bracket bicycle can be rather odd in the handling department. > Note that the number of dealers is sparse, so finding a test ride may > not be practical. > > -- > Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia > "Localized intense suction such as tornadoes is created when temperature > differences are high enough between meeting air masses, and can impart > excessive energy onto a cyclist." - Randy Schlitter Labeling all recumbents as not suitable for bike paths is a massive generalization. My short-wheelbase Rans Rocket is very agile at low speeds and tight turns. My long-wheelbase Sun EZ-Sport is almost as good. |
|
|
|
28-11.-2007, 01:22 AM
|
#3 |
|
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
Re: CruzBike?
On Nov 27, 1:46 am, Joe Bernard <josephrbern...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
> On Nov 26, 8:11 pm, Tom Sherman <sunsetss0...@REMOVETHISyahoo.com> > wrote: > > > > > > > (PeteCresswell) wrote: > > > Never heard of it. > > > > Does anybody actually have one of these things? > > >http://www.cruzbike.com/ > > > Not me. > > >> Been flirting with the idea of a 'bent for a number of years - > > > Oh, the HORROR!!! > > >> just for path riding but, being a statistical outlier > > > body-dimension-wise, have shied away from the cost of a custom. > > > My opinion is that recumbents are best on the open road, or ridden in a > > "vehicular cycling" mode. Path generally have too many features that > > need to be maneuvered at low speed with tight turns, which is not a > > forte of recumbent bicycles (trikes are a different matter). > > > Describe more specifically how you differ from the norm, and perhaps > > suggestions for suitable bicycles could be made. Recumbent fit concerns > > are rather different than those of uprights. > > > > Cruz' attraction is that the drive system seems to lend itself to > > > fairly extreme leg length adjustments - yet fit on the average > > > trunk-mount bike rack. > > > I would hesitate to buy without a chance to ride one first. Moving > > bottom bracket bicycle can be rather odd in the handling department. > > Note that the number of dealers is sparse, so finding a test ride may > > not be practical. > > > -- > > Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia > > "Localized intense suction such as tornadoes is created when temperature > > differences are high enough between meeting air masses, and can impart > > excessive energy onto a cyclist." - Randy Schlitter > > Labeling all recumbents as not suitable for bike paths is a massive > generalization. My short-wheelbase Rans Rocket is very agile at low > speeds and tight turns. My long-wheelbase Sun EZ-Sport is almost as > good.- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - From looking at that cruzbike.com page, it dawned on me that recumbents must require more of a leap of faith handling-wise. Looks like there's no way to redistribute your weight, and I don't see much of a way to plant a foot to prevent a crash. /s |
|
|
|
28-11.-2007, 10:18 AM
|
#4 |
|
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
Re: CruzBike?
Joe Bernard wrote:
> On Nov 26, 8:11 pm, Tom Sherman <sunsetss0...@REMOVETHISyahoo.com> > wrote: >> (PeteCresswell) wrote: >>> ... >> >> Been flirting with the idea of a 'bent for a number of years - >> >> Oh, the HORROR!!! >> >> just for path riding... >> >> My opinion is that recumbents are best on the open road, or ridden in a >> "vehicular cycling" mode. Path generally have too many features that >> need to be maneuvered at low speed with tight turns, which is not a >> forte of recumbent bicycles (trikes are a different matter). > ... > > Labeling all recumbents as not suitable for bike paths is a massive > generalization. My short-wheelbase Rans Rocket is very agile at low > speeds and tight turns. My long-wheelbase Sun EZ-Sport is almost as > good. 1. I did not label all recumbents as unsuitable for riding on paths. Rather, I was contending the real strength of recumbents is being ridden on the open road. Using a recumbent only on paths (as the original poster suggested doing) would be a significant under utilization of the bicycle. 2. What is a "Rans Rocket"? Is it similar to the 2000 [1] RANS Rocket I have? 3. While most paths can be negotiated on a recumbent without dismounting, it is much easier to deal with the really poorly designed sections on an upright bicycle, particularly an ATB. Of course, the recumbent is vastly superior to the ATB in comfort and speed. [1] By serial number, the frame is a 1999, but it came with the 2000 seat, so I assume it was one of the leftover 1999 frames built up in 2000. -- Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia "Localized intense suction such as tornadoes is created when temperature differences are high enough between meeting air masses, and can impart excessive energy onto a cyclist." - Randy Schlitter |
|
|
|
28-11.-2007, 10:26 AM
|
#5 |
|
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
Re: CruzBike?
Scott Gordo wrote:
> On Nov 27, 1:46 am, Joe Bernard <josephrbern...@sbcglobal.net> wrote: >> On Nov 26, 8:11 pm, Tom Sherman <sunsetss0...@REMOVETHISyahoo.com> >> wrote: >> What up with Google - they need to fix their web interface to meet commonly accepted Usenet standards? The elimination of blank lines, the insertion of extra blank lines and ignoring the signature separator are all unacceptable. >> >>> (PeteCresswell) wrote: >>>> Never heard of it. >>>> Does anybody actually have one of these things? >>>> http://www.cruzbike.com/ >>> Not me. >>> >> Been flirting with the idea of a 'bent for a number of years - >>> Oh, the HORROR!!! >>> >> just for path riding but, being a statistical outlier >>>> body-dimension-wise, have shied away from the cost of a custom. >>> My opinion is that recumbents are best on the open road, or ridden in a >>> "vehicular cycling" mode. Path generally have too many features that >>> need to be maneuvered at low speed with tight turns, which is not a >>> forte of recumbent bicycles (trikes are a different matter). >>> Describe more specifically how you differ from the norm, and perhaps >>> suggestions for suitable bicycles could be made. Recumbent fit concerns >>> are rather different than those of uprights. >>>> Cruz' attraction is that the drive system seems to lend itself to >>>> fairly extreme leg length adjustments - yet fit on the average >>>> trunk-mount bike rack. >>> I would hesitate to buy without a chance to ride one first. Moving >>> bottom bracket bicycle can be rather odd in the handling department. >>> Note that the number of dealers is sparse, so finding a test ride may >>> not be practical. > >> Labeling all recumbents as not suitable for bike paths is a massive >> generalization. My short-wheelbase Rans Rocket is very agile at low >> speeds and tight turns. My long-wheelbase Sun EZ-Sport is almost as >> good.- Hide quoted text - >> >> - Show quoted text - > > From looking at that cruzbike.com page, it dawned on me that > recumbents must require more of a leap of faith handling-wise. Looks > like there's no way to redistribute your weight, and I don't see much > of a way to plant a foot to prevent a crash. The CruzBike does look to have the weight distribution too far forward. You can not do the same type of maneuvers on a recumbent as on a upright, but this is really only of concern in technical off-road riding or certain types of non-vehicular cycling. For many types of riding, these limitations are unimportant. You do not want to plant your foot while riding a recumbent. On the other hand, if you are going slow enough that you could attempt a foot plant, a fall from a recumbent will not really hurt anything. Falling over on a recumbent is much less hurtful than doing the same on an upright. -- Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia "Localized intense suction such as tornadoes is created when temperature differences are high enough between meeting air masses, and can impart excessive energy onto a cyclist." - Randy Schlitter |
|
|
|
28-11.-2007, 11:09 AM
|
#6 |
|
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
Re: CruzBike?
Per Tom Sherman:
>You can not do the same type of maneuvers on a recumbent as on a >upright, but this is really only of concern in technical off-road riding >or certain types of non-vehicular cycling. After I fired off the post, I realized that with the front wheel drive there might be difficulty negotiating something like a curb by raising the front wheel. -- PeteCresswell |
|
|
|
28-11.-2007, 11:22 AM
|
#7 |
|
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
Re: CruzBike?
(PeteCresswell) wrote:
> Per Tom Sherman: >> You can not do the same type of maneuvers on a recumbent as on a >> upright, but this is really only of concern in technical off-road riding >> or certain types of non-vehicular cycling. > > After I fired off the post, I realized that with the front wheel > drive there might be difficulty negotiating something like a curb > by raising the front wheel. Raising the front wheel is very difficult to impossible on a recumbent. As I wrote, recumbents are best when used for "vehicular cycling". For some, that trade-off is negligible compared to the advantages in comfort and aerodynamic drag, for others it is not. As always, YMMV. -- Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia "Localized intense suction such as tornadoes is created when temperature differences are high enough between meeting air masses, and can impart excessive energy onto a cyclist." - Randy Schlitter |
|
|
|
28-11.-2007, 06:02 PM
|
#8 |
|
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
Re: CruzBike?
On Nov 27, 9:22 am, Scott Gordo <blubberp...@gmail.com> wrote:
> From looking at that cruzbike.com page, it dawned on me that > recumbents must require more of a leap of faith handling-wise. Looks > like there's no way to redistribute your weight, and I don't see much > of a way to plant a foot to prevent a crash. > > /s DING DING DING DING DING!!! We have a winner! Yes, on an upright bicycle, you balance by moving your body, or even pull up to pop a wheelie or bunny hop a curb. Yes, on a recumbent, you cannot move very much. You must learn to steer the front wheel toward the balance point, where the line between the tire contact patches is underneath the center of mass, and altered by a deliberate turn. For practice, I will hold a pipe or chain link fence, and attempt to balance with as little push / pull effort as possible. When approaching a red light or busy stop sign, I can ride real slow, close to a track stand. It is difficult for first time riders to get used to this, but you get used to it after a few miles. |
|
|
|
30-11.-2007, 10:23 AM
|
#9 |
|
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
Re: CruzBike?
Joe Bernard wrote:
> ... > Aaaah I see. OK, settle it. Rans or RANS? Randy Schlitter says "RANS" is correct. End of argument. -- Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia "Localized intense suction such as tornadoes is created when temperature differences are high enough between meeting air masses, and can impart excessive energy onto a cyclist." - Randy Schlitter |
|
|
|
30-11.-2007, 06:08 PM
|
#10 |
|
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
Re: CruzBike?
On Nov 29, 4:23 pm, Tom Sherman <sunsetss0...@REMOVETHISyahoo.com>
wrote: > Joe Bernard wrote: > > ... > > Aaaah I see. OK, settle it. Rans or RANS? > > Randy Schlitter says "RANS" is correct. End of argument. > > -- > Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia > "Localized intense suction such as tornadoes is created when temperature > differences are high enough between meeting air masses, and can impart > excessive energy onto a cyclist." - Randy Schlitter What does he know? Oh, right. I knew it, too, and can't believe I typed it wrong the first time. Don't tell my Rocket. |
|
|
|
01-12.-2007, 05:43 AM
|
#11 | |
|
Registered User
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 16
|
Re: CruzBike?
Quote:
Balance AND navigation on both the upright bike and the recumbent, require steering inputs to remain balanced. Although the rider on the upright has marginally greater influence over balancing than the 'bent rider does, the same basic laws of physics apply equally to both platforms. |
|
|
|
|
01-12.-2007, 10:42 AM
|
#12 |
|
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
Re: CruzBike?
Joe Bernard wrote:
> On Nov 29, 4:23 pm, Tom Sherman <sunsetss0...@REMOVETHISyahoo.com> > wrote: >> Joe Bernard wrote: >>> ... >>> Aaaah I see. OK, settle it. Rans or RANS? >> Randy Schlitter says "RANS" is correct. End of argument. >> >> -- >> Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia >> "Localized intense suction such as tornadoes is created when temperature >> differences are high enough between meeting air masses, and can impart >> excessive energy onto a cyclist." - Randy Schlitter > > What does he know? Oh, right. I knew it, too, and can't believe I > typed it wrong the first time. Don't tell my Rocket. Get down on your knees facing Hays, Kansas, and say one-hundred (100) "Hail RANS". -- Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia "Localized intense suction such as tornadoes is created when temperature differences are high enough between meeting air masses, and can impart excessive energy onto a cyclist." - Randy Schlitter |
|
|
|
01-12.-2007, 10:46 AM
|
#13 |
|
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
Re: CruzBike?
cjengineer who? wrote:
> mike.a.schwab@gmail.com Wrote: >> On Nov 27, 9:22 am, Scott Gordo <blubberp...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> DING DING DING DING DING!!! >> We have a winner! >> >> Yes, on an upright bicycle, you balance by moving your body, Wrong! > > Balance AND navigation on _both_ the upright bike and the recumbent, > require steering inputs to remain balanced. Although the rider on the > upright has marginally greater influence over balancing than the 'bent > rider does, the same basic laws of physics apply equally to both > platforms. Yes, one does not see many (any?) upright bicycles without steering. -- Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia "Localized intense suction such as tornadoes is created when temperature differences are high enough between meeting air masses, and can impart excessive energy onto a cyclist." - Randy Schlitter |
|
|
|
01-12.-2007, 06:57 PM
|
#14 |
|
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
Re: CruzBike?
Tom Sherman wrote:
> > Scott Gordo wrote: > > > > From looking at that cruzbike.com page, it dawned on me that > > recumbents must require more of a leap of faith handling-wise. Looks > > like there's no way to redistribute your weight, and I don't see much > > of a way to plant a foot to prevent a crash. > > The CruzBike does look to have the weight distribution too far forward. The Cruzbike's traction probably benefits from it's weight bias to the drive wheel. I'm pretty sure that its handling suffers more from pedal-steering than it does from its weight distribution. But once you've made the decisive handling compromise of going to any kind of 'bent layout, the specific problems are just details. It's like complaining about a necktie that flaps in your face when you've already jumped out of a tall building. > You can not do the same type of maneuvers on a recumbent as on a > upright, but this is really only of concern in technical off-road riding > or certain types of non-vehicular cycling. For many types of riding, > these limitations are unimportant. You can call it "unimportant" to limit your bike travel only to places where you can take the lane (or a paved shoulder), but actually getting places is easier and much more versatile when you can also take to the sidewalk or the grassy margins as appropriate-- even if those facilities are not blessed with curb cuts. 'Bents don't appear to do well in city centers, or in well-populated suburbs. Judging by the places I ever see them riding more than once in a rare while, it looks like they are best suited to riding on multi- use paths and inconvenient byways avoided by motorists. I expect that they'd be OK on the open road, but I don't think I've ever seen one out in the countryside. Chalo |
|
|
|
01-12.-2007, 11:23 PM
|
#15 |
|
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
Recumbents useful?
Chalo Colina wrote:
> Tom Sherman wrote: >> Scott Gordo wrote: >>> From looking at that cruzbike.com page, it dawned on me that >>> recumbents must require more of a leap of faith handling-wise. Looks >>> like there's no way to redistribute your weight, and I don't see much >>> of a way to plant a foot to prevent a crash. >> >> The CruzBike does look to have the weight distribution too far forward. > > The Cruzbike's traction probably benefits from it's weight bias to the > drive wheel. I'm pretty sure that its handling suffers more from > pedal-steering than it does from its weight distribution. But once > you've made the decisive handling compromise of going to any kind of > 'bent layout, the specific problems are just details. It's like > complaining about a necktie that flaps in your face when you've > already jumped out of a tall building. With all due respect, commenting on the handling of recumbents would be better left to those that have some experience of the variety. I have ridden recumbents that require almost no effort to steer and balance, and poorly designed others that are barely controllable. There is a far greater variation in recumbents than there is in upright bicycles. >> You can not do the same type of maneuvers on a recumbent as on a >> upright, but this is really only of concern in technical off-road riding >> or certain types of non-vehicular cycling. For many types of riding, >> these limitations are unimportant. > > You can call it "unimportant" to limit your bike travel only to places > where you can take the lane (or a paved shoulder), but actually > getting places is easier and much more versatile when you can also > take to the sidewalk or the grassy margins as appropriate-- even if > those facilities are not blessed with curb cuts. I never found this to be a significant disadvantage. I prefer NOT to ride in these odd places, since both pedestrians and motorists will not be watching for potential conflicts coming from these areas, substantially increasing the risk of collisions. > 'Bents don't appear to do well in city centers, or in well-populated > suburbs. Huh? I have spent plenty of time riding a recumbent in such areas with not difficulty. Again, we have a non-recumbent riding "expert" on recumbents.  > Judging by the places I ever see them riding more than once > in a rare while, it looks like they are best suited to riding on multi- > use paths and inconvenient byways avoided by motorists. I expect that > they'd be OK on the open road, but I don't think I've ever seen one > out in the countryside. I have seen plenty (relative to their share of the bicycle market) of recumbents on the open road. In fact, due to the greater comfort and upright to slightly reclined head position, recumbents are an excellent choice for long-distance touring. -- Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia "Localized intense suction such as tornadoes is created when temperature differences are high enough between meeting air masses, and can impart excessive energy onto a cyclist." - Randy Schlitter |
|
|
Linear Mode
