4 ms·

i applaud you for your open mindedness. as a lover of bikes, and of recumbents, i kind of get annoyed at the very predictable 'recumbents are the fastest most

i applaud you for your open mindedness. as a lover of bikes, and of recumbents, i kind of get annoyed at the very predictable 'recumbents are the fastest most aerodynamic bikes' thing that you get alot from folks. there might be many reasons the uci banned recumbents. but there is one primary reason recumbents never have and never will sell well; they are invisible in urban riding environment due to low seat height. that and their problems with long chains, heavier weights, and poor climbing are all very good reasons to accept the generic superiority of the 20th century generic bicycle. some things are so perfect, they cannot really be improved upon.

mrob 11y ago
If that's the case then why don't we see more faired uprights? It should be possible to greatly improve aerodynamics without much harm to weight or safety. I think it's because most R&D is spent on bikes at the top end of the market, where most customers are pros or want the same bikes as the pros. Even partial fairings could make a big difference, but we don't see them because they're banned by the UCI.
- fian 11y ago
  Generally, adding fairings and other modifications to improve aerodynamics also increases the side-on area susceptible to crosswinds. For uprights the rider is seated such that the centre or mass is relatively high compared to the faired/aerodynamic frame/wheels. If the bike has fairings or wheels covers that increase the side-on profile then a strong wind gust can push the bike out from under the rider. For this reason front wheel disks are banned from time trials and triathlons. There is too much risk that a crosswind gust can destablise the bike and rider. For recumbents the rider's mass sits much lower to the ground, more centrally within this faired frame/wheels, so they are inherently more stable to the effect of crosswinds. While I don't agree with all the UCI rulings, some of them regarding aerodynamic modifications are made with safety in mind. For example, triathlon style aerobars are banned from the peleton. This is primarily because the rider has less control over the steering and braking performance while in the aero position.

mrob 11y ago

If that's the case then why don't we see more faired uprights? It should be possible to greatly improve aerodynamics without much harm to weight or safety. I think it's because most R&D is spent on bikes at the top end of the market, where most customers are pros or want the same bikes as the pros. Even partial fairings could make a big difference, but we don't see them because they're banned by the UCI.

fian 11y ago
Generally, adding fairings and other modifications to improve aerodynamics also increases the side-on area susceptible to crosswinds. For uprights the rider is seated such that the centre or mass is relatively high compared to the faired/aerodynamic frame/wheels. If the bike has fairings or wheels covers that increase the side-on profile then a strong wind gust can push the bike out from under the rider. For this reason front wheel disks are banned from time trials and triathlons. There is too much risk that a crosswind gust can destablise the bike and rider. For recumbents the rider's mass sits much lower to the ground, more centrally within this faired frame/wheels, so they are inherently more stable to the effect of crosswinds. While I don't agree with all the UCI rulings, some of them regarding aerodynamic modifications are made with safety in mind. For example, triathlon style aerobars are banned from the peleton. This is primarily because the rider has less control over the steering and braking performance while in the aero position.