4 ms·
> Or throw out the UCI rules and build a fast, comfortable bike for customers who don't care about competing in sanctioned races. Recumbents are exactly that,
by flyinghamster 7y ago
> Or throw out the UCI rules and build a fast, comfortable bike for customers who don't care about competing in sanctioned races.
Recumbents are exactly that, but it's still very much a niche market. Furthermore, at any given component grade, a recumbent will cost more - and add a further premium if it's a trike.
- dreamcompiler 7y agoI love recumbents but they're too expensive because they're almost all built by hand by a guy in a garage; never at scale. And that guy tends to go out of business fairly quickly and then you're stuck with an unsupported bike. I wish it weren't so but it is.
- nradov 7y agoRecumbents have terrible visibility (can't see over cars), suck for really steep climbs and sprinting, and are kind of unsafe for fast group rides with multiple cyclists packed close together.
- Tepix 7y agoAlso the air you breathe is closer to the exhausts of the cars. We really need more recumbent bikes where the head of the rider is in a higher position.
- usrusr 7y agoI think the main problem with recumbents is failing harder in borderline unridable conditions. On a conventional bike you can temporarily move body support to the feet for a section of pave, jump over potholes, fluidly transition to walking and back if necessary. Just imagine recumbent cyclocross, that mental picture is all you need for understanding why recumbents are a niche. Most real life transportation use of bicycles is full of lesser versions of similar challenges.