4 ms·

I think we've been holding back so many bike records by requiring an upright posture. Recumbent bikes, especially ones with aero shells, would smash a great ma

I think we've been holding back so many bike records by requiring an upright posture. Recumbent bikes, especially ones with aero shells, would smash a great many bicycle records if they were allowed to compete. It's not even against the spirit of the competition. We allow all sorts of crazy composite carbon fiber frames with specialized drivetrains, but don't allow people to change their seating position.

Waterluvian 4y ago
Oh that’s true. We could be more aerodynamic AND safe. I’m guessing this would be a different sport rather than cycling evolving.
PaulDavisThe1st 4y ago
I have no desire to support the UCI, but I need to add that the main reason for not allowing e.g. faired recumbents in races is the reduction in awareness that comes with the change in position (and being enclosed). Although crashes do happen in races held under UCI rules, in generals cyclists all being seated at about the same height and in the same general position heightens everybody's awareness when the peloton is moving fast and tight, and makes crashes somewhat less likely. Same sort of reason that prevents the use of full-length aero-bars in events where pelotons or just regular pace lines may form. If you want mass-start races where riders can agglomerate to reduce required power, then you're probably stuck with rules that make the bikes all much more alike than they are different. If you want bicycle innovation, you have to go to time trial or endurance events, where drafting isn't a thing and thus the equipment could be anything.
chrisfosterelli 4y ago
The human-powered landspeed record was set in a recumbent bike. It was around 145km/hr. I think, for better or worse, the rules keep cycling an interesting sport. For example, if the tour de france allowed recumbent bikes the course would need to change massively to support anywhere near that speed safely. Crashes become far more deadly. Technology becomes far more critical than race strategy and individual rider performance. Races would be won on the flats instead of the hills. I think it'd be a less interesting sport altogether. Triathlon is a good example of how small rule changes can drastically change the dynamics of a race. They relax a lot of the UCI rules such as by allowing aerobars, but as a result you can't safely allow drafting, and the bike component of the races become far more spread out than a cycling race would be with a lot less importance laying on attacking or defending a position and group strategy becomes nonexistent. Some of that is due to the fact that there's still a run to go afterwards, but I'm pretty sure the average person would find the bike component of a triathlon less interesting than a cycling race to watch. For those who want it, as PaulDavisThe1st mentioned, we have stuff like TT races, recumbent TT races, velo, etc. There's a lot of options in cycling depending on the niche you like.
- csa 4y ago
  > Races would be won on the flats instead of the hills. I don’t know much about recumbent bikes. Why is this statement true? It seems to me that hills are still tough for recumbent bikes. Are efficient flats riders (maybe sprinters?) able to make up that much time over climbers in the flats?
  - plorkyeran 4y ago
    With upright bikes, a race on flat terrain is much like a racing game with incredibly overly aggressive rubberband ai. If you're in the lead you have to work twice as hard as the person behind you, so you don't actually want to pull ahead until the very end. On hills this is much less true, as you're going slower and wind resistance is less of a factor. A recumbent bike greatly reduces wind resistance and makes it so that the person in second does 10% less work rather than 50% (numbers are made up). It's not that hills are easier, but that pulling ahead on flats would actually be viable.
  - jandrese 4y ago
    Imagine seeing bike races on Formula 1 tracks instead of being spread across mountain ranges like they normally are.
- nradov 4y ago
  Most triathlons ban drafting not just for safety, but because it's supposed to be an individual effort. Organizers don't want races to turn into farces where some athletes show up with pacers who drag them into the lead. Some short course triathlons do allow drafting (including the Olympics), but those events also ban extended aero bars for safety. Athletes who compete in those events specifically practice riding in a peloton and know how to hold their lines in order to prevent crashes.
- mariusor 4y ago
  > For example, if the tour de france allowed recumbent bikes the course would need to change massively to support anywhere near that speed safely. Not just for speed, but recumbents are terrible at cornering and are terrible for going uphill. Half the fun in large cycling races are the mountain stages where people go slowly uphill and then really fast and technical on downhills with many corners taken at high speeds. Recumbents would be terrible for that.

Waterluvian 4y ago

Oh that’s true. We could be more aerodynamic AND safe. I’m guessing this would be a different sport rather than cycling evolving.

PaulDavisThe1st 4y ago

I have no desire to support the UCI, but I need to add that the main reason for not allowing e.g. faired recumbents in races is the reduction in awareness that comes with the change in position (and being enclosed). Although crashes do happen in races held under UCI rules, in generals cyclists all being seated at about the same height and in the same general position heightens everybody's awareness when the peloton is moving fast and tight, and makes crashes somewhat less likely. Same sort of reason that prevents the use of full-length aero-bars in events where pelotons or just regular pace lines may form. If you want mass-start races where riders can agglomerate to reduce required power, then you're probably stuck with rules that make the bikes all much more alike than they are different. If you want bicycle innovation, you have to go to time trial or endurance events, where drafting isn't a thing and thus the equipment could be anything.

chrisfosterelli 4y ago

The human-powered landspeed record was set in a recumbent bike. It was around 145km/hr. I think, for better or worse, the rules keep cycling an interesting sport. For example, if the tour de france allowed recumbent bikes the course would need to change massively to support anywhere near that speed safely. Crashes become far more deadly. Technology becomes far more critical than race strategy and individual rider performance. Races would be won on the flats instead of the hills. I think it'd be a less interesting sport altogether. Triathlon is a good example of how small rule changes can drastically change the dynamics of a race. They relax a lot of the UCI rules such as by allowing aerobars, but as a result you can't safely allow drafting, and the bike component of the races become far more spread out than a cycling race would be with a lot less importance laying on attacking or defending a position and group strategy becomes nonexistent. Some of that is due to the fact that there's still a run to go afterwards, but I'm pretty sure the average person would find the bike component of a triathlon less interesting than a cycling race to watch. For those who want it, as PaulDavisThe1st mentioned, we have stuff like TT races, recumbent TT races, velo, etc. There's a lot of options in cycling depending on the niche you like.

csa 4y ago
> Races would be won on the flats instead of the hills. I don’t know much about recumbent bikes. Why is this statement true? It seems to me that hills are still tough for recumbent bikes. Are efficient flats riders (maybe sprinters?) able to make up that much time over climbers in the flats?
- plorkyeran 4y ago
  With upright bikes, a race on flat terrain is much like a racing game with incredibly overly aggressive rubberband ai. If you're in the lead you have to work twice as hard as the person behind you, so you don't actually want to pull ahead until the very end. On hills this is much less true, as you're going slower and wind resistance is less of a factor. A recumbent bike greatly reduces wind resistance and makes it so that the person in second does 10% less work rather than 50% (numbers are made up). It's not that hills are easier, but that pulling ahead on flats would actually be viable.
- jandrese 4y ago
  Imagine seeing bike races on Formula 1 tracks instead of being spread across mountain ranges like they normally are.
nradov 4y ago
Most triathlons ban drafting not just for safety, but because it's supposed to be an individual effort. Organizers don't want races to turn into farces where some athletes show up with pacers who drag them into the lead. Some short course triathlons do allow drafting (including the Olympics), but those events also ban extended aero bars for safety. Athletes who compete in those events specifically practice riding in a peloton and know how to hold their lines in order to prevent crashes.
mariusor 4y ago
> For example, if the tour de france allowed recumbent bikes the course would need to change massively to support anywhere near that speed safely. Not just for speed, but recumbents are terrible at cornering and are terrible for going uphill. Half the fun in large cycling races are the mountain stages where people go slowly uphill and then really fast and technical on downhills with many corners taken at high speeds. Recumbents would be terrible for that.