S40 questions
- Thread starter Layne
- Start date
ratz
Wielder of the Rubber Mallet
If it's in keeping with the rest of the line (code for I need to get my hands on a frame) it's goin to be 132.5mm meaning it can take either. This pretty much the standard now for bikes that are design for disc or rim brakes. That allows the widest range of tires road or mountain from a disc brake stand point.... I suspect that will fade over time to a standard but there are a lot of wheels in the wild and bike makers don't want to alienate the buy that has 2-3 sets of wheels.
tiltmaniac
Zen MBB Master
Likely redundant, but:
Ratz is describing the width of the fork holding the drive wheel. That is at the front of a Cruzbuke, and commonly called "rear" wheel on a diamond frame.
Ratz is describing the width of the fork holding the drive wheel. That is at the front of a Cruzbuke, and commonly called "rear" wheel on a diamond frame.
C-brakes: is this cantilever brakes? If so check with @Robert Holler to see if the S40 fork has studs for canti brakes.
The V20 does not have studs for canti brakes, but the S40 is new and has a new fork, so maybe it does...
Kencumbent
New Member
Layne,
that is a very sexy looking bike!
I'm interested in one of these. I used to have an M5 with a 20 degree seat angle which was insanely comfortable. Probably my biggest question with the 40 degree seat is if you notice there being more weight on your butt than spread across your back? Have you ridden enough yet to have formed an opinion?
Cheers,
Ken
that is a very sexy looking bike!
I'm interested in one of these. I used to have an M5 with a 20 degree seat angle which was insanely comfortable. Probably my biggest question with the 40 degree seat is if you notice there being more weight on your butt than spread across your back? Have you ridden enough yet to have formed an opinion?
Cheers,
Ken
dtseng
Well-Known Member
The front forks and both rear forks have holes for installing caliper brakes. The only thing I worry about is Shimano 105 road bike brake may be too short.
Recumbent bikes reduce the saddle pain and wind resistance. The only problem is recumbent has no benefit of a triangular structure, the main frame is a heavy tube. For persons like myself so used to 7 Kg road bike, switching to a bike 4 to 5 Kg heavier would definitely feel like riding a tank. You would feel a drag during acceleration and climbing hills. I am going to use S40 as a long distance touring bike.
Recumbent bikes reduce the saddle pain and wind resistance. The only problem is recumbent has no benefit of a triangular structure, the main frame is a heavy tube. For persons like myself so used to 7 Kg road bike, switching to a bike 4 to 5 Kg heavier would definitely feel like riding a tank. You would feel a drag during acceleration and climbing hills. I am going to use S40 as a long distance touring bike.
Last edited:
I really havnt ridden it enough to say yet ... but first impression are that it does put more weight on my butt than on my back but I havnt received my ventisit pad yet and the stock pad was terrible .... that said ....riding it without any pad at all seems like every ride the change in pressure has gotten better ... bothered me less ...
I also have ridden a V20 and while the V was more aerodynamic the s40 pretty much fixes my neck issues ... and to me it still lays back quit a bit or at least does not feel like you are sitting way up. I'll be putting more miles on soon with the ventisit... and will update here ...
Kencumbent
New Member
Thanks Layne!
I notice that replacing the stock seat is a thing. The seats people are using look just like the one I had on my M5, beautifully sculpted to the body and, as I said, insanely comfortable. I mention this because of your neck issues Layne. One of the wonderful thing about 'the other seat' similar to my ex-M5 is that it fully and evenly supported my entire spine from tailbone to base of skull, neck very much included. I also have some neck trouble and that setup was a panacea for me, so do consider it if the stock setup proves less than fully comfortable for you.
I notice that replacing the stock seat is a thing. The seats people are using look just like the one I had on my M5, beautifully sculpted to the body and, as I said, insanely comfortable. I mention this because of your neck issues Layne. One of the wonderful thing about 'the other seat' similar to my ex-M5 is that it fully and evenly supported my entire spine from tailbone to base of skull, neck very much included. I also have some neck trouble and that setup was a panacea for me, so do consider it if the stock setup proves less than fully comfortable for you.
yes i have upgraded a silvio and a vendetta with hardshell seats and it is a good option ! So yea i may do it on the s40 but want see how the stock seat does with the ventitsit before i spend $$$$ on a new seat!
Kencumbent
New Member
Indeed!
Good luck
Please post about how this all goes.
Good luck
Please post about how this all goes.
ak-tux
Zen MBB Master
Unlike diamond frame road bikes through the UCI, there is no uniform design standard that cuts across the board for recumbent bicycles for the purposes of equipment manufacture and racing that levels the playing field and reduces the total cost of ownership. There are far too many completely different and incompatible designs with corresponding die-hard followers, that it would be very hard to narrow down to a standard.
You just need to read through BROL forums to get the idea.
I mean, without even considering bikes vs trikes , there are
- LWB vs SWB,
- highracers vs low races,
- FWD vs RWD ,
- twisted chain FWD vs MBB FWD,
- different front/rare wheel sizes,
- faired vs unfaired
- e.t.c.
- Open road racing standard
- Indoor or open velodrome standard
- Faired recumbent racing standards
- Must be unfaired
- Must be Short wheel base (SWB)
- Must have a suitable Chain-ring guard at the front.
- Must be High racers (the lowest part of the seat should not be below xx mm from the ground e.g. 50cm)
- Seat recline should not be lower than X degrees (e.g. 35 deg)
- The Bottom Bracket should not be higher than top of the headtube
- Both Wheels must be equal in size, all be 700c ( or 650B for women and shorter riders ) and rapidly interchangeable.
- The frames must show some minimal level of adjustability of fit to different riders.
- Minimum allowed bicycle weight for structural safety should be X e.g. 7.5Kg
Last edited:
Kencumbent
New Member
If the idea is to get the UCI to accept recumbents in a separate class to DF bikes,
then why restrict the design, except to impose a minimum weight as for DF? The racing itself will soon enough cause the designs to converge on that which proves most efficient.
then why restrict the design, except to impose a minimum weight as for DF? The racing itself will soon enough cause the designs to converge on that which proves most efficient.
ak-tux
Zen MBB Master
In a race on open public roads, where group drafting and teams are in play, safety and relative uniformity is important and can become an issue.
Imagine for a moment a "peleton" of recumbent bicycles with chainrings sticking out in front (SWB)for some, while others are so low down (aka low racers) while others are a foot or more higher (aka high racers). Suppose a crash occurs at speed and those behind collide into those in front.... those chainrings will cut.
The visibility of low racers will be obstructed by the high racers, while they cannot quite draft each other. In addition, deploying a neutral service car in such a race will be very difficult because there is such a vast array of recumbent types that are not very compatible.
.. just my opinion. It's all just hypothetical but it shows how difficult it will be to agree on a standard.
Last edited:
McWheels
Off the long run
The forward-most spiky-thing guard is something the British Human Power Club insist on. Beyond that, though, there are sevreal races every year where different sizes, heights and concepts, including DFs, all race each other, drafting allowed. www.bhpc.org.uk There are classes based on how much fairing, full, partial or non, and the same for multi-track vehicles.
However the sample size and prestige of the annual championship isn't enough to inspire major manufacturer effort, with several home-brew machines also doing well.
But back to the central concept, is there such a thing as a Recumbent Manufacturer's Trade Body? Should we try to start one? US only or whole world? What would be the aims?
However the sample size and prestige of the annual championship isn't enough to inspire major manufacturer effort, with several home-brew machines also doing well.
But back to the central concept, is there such a thing as a Recumbent Manufacturer's Trade Body? Should we try to start one? US only or whole world? What would be the aims?
- To get recumbents as separate classes into as many bike races as can be persuaded
- Target list? Again, US only?
- To have the UCI ratify Faure's hour record from 1932? Good press to be had with that one and the rest of the world loves a legal battle in the Court of Arbitration for Sport (expensive though it is).
- Recommend a series of standards (as above) with as much flex in them as possible (see Mouton's exclusion in the 60s)
- Coordinate the campaigning from different countries' clubs and manufacturers
- To put coordinated pressure on the UCI reps from each corner of the globe
- Finally, with my most Machiavellian hat on, to generate human interest stories of how unfair the recumbent ban is on talented and deserving individuals, whether they be disabled or not, and to sell that story to
- Cycling press
- Insurance companies associated with cycling
- Legislative assemblies (members of parliament, congressmen...)
- Who else can we think of?
trapdoor2
Zen MBB Master
I think this discussion of racing ought to be moved to the racing forum. I think you'll get more commentary there.
We're still in the early stages of the evolution of recumbent racing. At this point, I think we're still going to have to race in various categories to comply with safety issues. At some point, a 'racing standard' will emerge (
). Once that is accepted as "the fastest basic design" then we can think about standardization. Personally, I cringe at that.
We're still in the early stages of the evolution of recumbent racing. At this point, I think we're still going to have to race in various categories to comply with safety issues. At some point, a 'racing standard' will emerge (
). Once that is accepted as "the fastest basic design" then we can think about standardization. Personally, I cringe at that.
Last edited:
dtseng
Well-Known Member
99.999999....% who buy bicycles are not competition racers. It's important to promote recumbent bikes among the general public for the purposes of human powered transportation, leisure, and exercises for health, etc.
There is too much space between the main frame of S40 and the wheels. I think S40 can be improved by making the main frame lower, moving the seat forward, and shorten the chain stay. Use modern high strength steel or titanium to reduce the weight. 36 degree back inclination would be better. I think 40 degree is a bit too much, and it was the reason that I mentioned T50. The steering system is very strange to me. Use push/pull action on the handlebar to sway the far-away BB. I would think the torque should be applied to the steerer tube. I'll wait till September 18 to see what changes have been made in V20, perhaps purchase a V20 instead.
There is too much space between the main frame of S40 and the wheels. I think S40 can be improved by making the main frame lower, moving the seat forward, and shorten the chain stay. Use modern high strength steel or titanium to reduce the weight. 36 degree back inclination would be better. I think 40 degree is a bit too much, and it was the reason that I mentioned T50. The steering system is very strange to me. Use push/pull action on the handlebar to sway the far-away BB. I would think the torque should be applied to the steerer tube. I'll wait till September 18 to see what changes have been made in V20, perhaps purchase a V20 instead.
Attachments
Last edited:
Jeremy S
Dude
FYI, the chainstay supposedly comes in two lengths with your picture showing the longer one. I don't know what you're basing your assessment on, though.
