Tom Sherman wrote:
>
> I would choose a re***bent trike if I really want to see things. The
> riding position does not naturally have the rider looking down. Road
> hazards that could cause the single-track [1] vehicle rider to lose
> balance can easily be ignored, if the trike has properly wide and
> durable tires.
>
> [1] Reference to the vehicle, not narrow "technical" off-road trails.
>
I've been casting long glances at the upcoming Sun delta trikes, in
particular the $1700 X-3 AX:
http://www.bentrideronline.com/index.php?op=ViewArticle&articleId=388&blogId=1
However I'll have to see it in person first, or at least see one of the
others that uses the same frame.
....Also I am curious about the width, or lack of it. I noticed with the
current models that the rear wheels are considerably narrower than the
front wheels of tadpole trikes. Of course tadpoles need room for their
front wheels to turn, and on a higher-seat delta you are free to lean
your upper body a bit in turns--but I'm wondering now--why all deltas
seem to be built with relatively high seating and all tadpoles are built
with relatively low seating.
.....
So it seems that delta trikes have the advantage of being narrower, but
the disadvantage of not turning under power equally well both ways--as
on most delta trikes, only one rear wheel is driven, and when turning
hard the inside rear wheel tends to lift....
--------
The only "high" tadpole I can recall is the Cycle Genius Phoenix:
http://www.cyclegenius.com/trx.html
Which has been discounted 20% lately, and is a model that I don't see
much talk about so it may not be selling very well. It doesn't look very
agile, it'd probably get you more questions about being disabled than
any other trike around I think.
Does anyone make a lower-seat delta at all?.... Certainly running a
chain under a low-set seat cannot be an impossible task; most of the
tadpole trikes do it....
~
|
