billyk
Guru
- Having gotten past that embarrassing "I can't control my bike!!!" stage, especially embarrassing since I've been riding recumbents for 15 years, I'm able to enjoy it and appreciate the ingenuity of the design. It's a fun bike to ride, and feels like it would be very comfortable for long distances. I'm still not quite sure of myself, though the involuntary swoops are getting less frequent. (The worst is when someone yells "cool bike!", and I wave, and then wobble awkwardly). I'm not yet comfortable in close traffic.
But ....
- The shifting is smooth. The internal hub is a joy. On the other hand, the drive train is noisy, full of little creaks and clicks, almost continuously. I cannot identify the source. Possibly I just hear more than usual since the drive train is right in front of me? Whatever, it breaks the lovely gliding feeling of a well-tuned bike.
- My biggest problem is steep hills. I don't mean the 4-5% grades that Seattle is full of. No problem there. But I unavoidably must climb 1 block of more than 15% grade on my way home from work. I make it about half the time, and the others are an undignified stop, get off, and push. The problem is that when tilted uphill, there is less weight on the front wheel and it slips. I have good grippy slicks - 1.5-inchers - down around 75psi. Plenty of rubber on the road. And I am pulling hard on the handlebars, lifting my butt out of the seat. But inherently, being tilted back means less weight on the front wheel. It seems pretty fundamental to the design. And this is a hill that I have climbed every single working day for more than 20 years, on upright bikes and several kinds of RWD recumbents. It's steep, but a very climbable hill on most bikes.
There was some discussion here about putting a 451 wheel on the front and 559 in the back (see the end of the Quest thread "559 front, 451 rear - thoughts?"). That would put more weight on the front wheel, but I chickened out and got the standard 559s, partly because of being afraid that reducing the trail so much would make the bike less stable; also I ran out of money.
- The above problem is worsened because I think the lowest gear is still too high for efficient climbing. I'm a firm believer in high-cadence riding, especially uphill, since mashing the pedals on a recumbent is not good for the knees. When going uphill (especially that 15% grade) I'm pedalling so slowly that each push is too hard, which exacerbates the slipping. In a lower gear and higher cadence, the motion would be more even and the slipping presumably less. So I'm tempted to give up that elegant elliptical chainring for something smaller. Not happy about that but I don't have another good idea, and I hate having to push the bike uphill.
Suggestions would be welcome!
But ....
- The shifting is smooth. The internal hub is a joy. On the other hand, the drive train is noisy, full of little creaks and clicks, almost continuously. I cannot identify the source. Possibly I just hear more than usual since the drive train is right in front of me? Whatever, it breaks the lovely gliding feeling of a well-tuned bike.
- My biggest problem is steep hills. I don't mean the 4-5% grades that Seattle is full of. No problem there. But I unavoidably must climb 1 block of more than 15% grade on my way home from work. I make it about half the time, and the others are an undignified stop, get off, and push. The problem is that when tilted uphill, there is less weight on the front wheel and it slips. I have good grippy slicks - 1.5-inchers - down around 75psi. Plenty of rubber on the road. And I am pulling hard on the handlebars, lifting my butt out of the seat. But inherently, being tilted back means less weight on the front wheel. It seems pretty fundamental to the design. And this is a hill that I have climbed every single working day for more than 20 years, on upright bikes and several kinds of RWD recumbents. It's steep, but a very climbable hill on most bikes.
There was some discussion here about putting a 451 wheel on the front and 559 in the back (see the end of the Quest thread "559 front, 451 rear - thoughts?"). That would put more weight on the front wheel, but I chickened out and got the standard 559s, partly because of being afraid that reducing the trail so much would make the bike less stable; also I ran out of money.
- The above problem is worsened because I think the lowest gear is still too high for efficient climbing. I'm a firm believer in high-cadence riding, especially uphill, since mashing the pedals on a recumbent is not good for the knees. When going uphill (especially that 15% grade) I'm pedalling so slowly that each push is too hard, which exacerbates the slipping. In a lower gear and higher cadence, the motion would be more even and the slipping presumably less. So I'm tempted to give up that elegant elliptical chainring for something smaller. Not happy about that but I don't have another good idea, and I hate having to push the bike uphill.
Suggestions would be welcome!
