Re: Why Do People Fall Down?

Roger Zoul wrote:
> <frkrygow@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote
> 
>> On Oct 27, 5:17 pm, Tom Sherman <sunsetss0...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>>> Prisoner at War wrote:
>>>> There was a guy with a hand-cranked trike...I was happy to see him.
>>>> But I don't know what the big deal with trikes is...'bent bikes are
>>>> already safe enough.  Why a trike, exactly?  What real advantage does
>>>> it offer?  So you needn't worry as much about balance (except on
>>>> turns, I guess!)...so what?
> 
> Significant fun factor and very different riding experience.  Going up
steep 
> hills has some advantages too. Pain factor is an issue on long rides 
> compared to other types of bikes (perhaps I should say the lack of
pain).

I remember at the end of a long, hot, tiring ride being happy to sit 
still on my trike, and not get up. Hard to do that on anything else.

>>> Ride a well designed tadpole trike for an extended distance. You will
>>> either get it, or you are a lost cause. ;)
>> Perhaps the one hanging in my garage isn't well designed... but the
>> original owner rode it on only a few occasions before giving it up for
>> his normal bike.
>>
>> The next owner took only a couple test rides and stored it in his
>> basement.
>>
> 
> I'd venture a guess that neither of these people really gave it a 
> chance....either feeling too isolated since most riders are on uprights 
> (lots of people just feel uncomfortable being "the only one")...or
really 
> not so much into riding to begin with. It seems strange to me that
someone 
> would really drop dime on an expensive trike and then not ride it. That 
> seems like someone not committed to exercise or cycling to me. 
Afterall, 
> how often does that happen with regular bikes?

Relatively unused upright bicycles do turn up from time to time for sale.

>> The guy he gave it to passed it on to me.
> 
> Perhaps you'll pass it on to me, since you're obviously not a fan. I'd
love 
> to have a free trike! :)

Probably a few hundred dollars to ****p, unless you want to drive to Ohio 
to pick it up. (Been there, done that.)

>> My wife, a couple friends, and I each took our turns at test rides.
>> For all of us, it failed the test.
>>
> 
> These other people cycle a lot I take it?

Experienced upright cyclists often have so ingrained habits they do not 
want to change to anything different.

>> The low-racer configuration seems good only for "toy" use.  The
>> turning circle is inconveniently large (you can't do a U-turn on a 20'
>> road)
> 
> Toy use?  I've ridden several centuries and I never needed to do a
U-turn. 
> And if I did, I could just stop and turn the bike around 180degs.  On my

> 'bent I can just put my foot down quickly to easily get turned around.
Those 
> who ride "low-racers" mainly use them for riding fast and don't focus on

> distance, from my observation (the two-wheel lowracer isn't my style, 
> though). But, I have to ask you -- what's wrong with that?

On a long-wheelbase, over-seat steering like Roger Zoul's RANS Stratus, 
one can use the back of ones knees in combination with the handlebars to 
pick the bicycle up and rotate in place.

>> and getting in and out of the trike is an extreme yoga
>> exercise.
> 
> That's curious.  I was at my local bike shop on Saturday and saw two
total 
> noob riders get in and out of a trike with no difficulty whatsoever. 
The 
> guy was very slender so that didn't surprise me too much.  The lady was 
> shorter, not fat by many means but not very slender either.  I was
impressed 
> at how effortless it was for her to get up.  She did have to think about
it, 
> though. But that's true on most road bikes too since the pedals/saddle 
> height prevents the both feet from touching the ground at the same time.
> 
>> The need for three tracks through the potholes, plus it's
>> low visibility, seems risky for the roads, and the extra width makes
>> it inconvenient on MUPs.
> 
> the extra width isn't that much extra and the low visibility is really
just 
> your opinion from not really riding one, I think.
> IMO, cycling of any kind is inconvenient on MUPs. Trikes would have an 
> advantage there as they can stop on a dime which is problematic at best
on 
> two wheels of any type.  The trikes I have ridden do u-turns on a dime,
too, 
> much better than any other bike I've tried.

Rear suspension helps greatly with the potholes, since it is relatively 
easy to steer the front wheel around them.

>>  And of course, you'd better have a pickup
>> truck to take it anywhere.
>>
> 
> Hmm...some trikes fold into the trunk, and there are racks for them. I
have 
> a rack for my upright and my bent and wouldn't consider trans****t any
other 
> way.
> 
>> It's interesting as a design exercise.  But that's its only virtue,
>> from what I can tell.
> 
> Your view is very limited, Frank. I'm rather disappointed in you.  Bike 
> prejudice  is what you're displaying here. It's kinda sad, if you ask
me.  I 
> have an upright, a long-wheel base bent and probably will have a trike
soon. 
> I enjoy all of them for the different experiences they offer. Each one
has 
> it's own set of pros/cons. I know one fellow (not personally, from afar)
who 
> commutes to work on this trike. No flags either. I think this is
especially 
> interesting as he does his in a college town on a college campus, with
lots 
> of students flying around in cars.
> 
>> So I suppose the whole crew of us are lost causes!
>>
> 
> I would tend to agree, yes. It's not hard to understand, though, as we
as 
> humans all seem to have our own biases built up from pre-conceived
notions. 
> These notions can be very very hard for us to overcome.  For some
reason, 
> though, I expect more from you! :)  

Agreed. Frank Krygowski aka frkrygow@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 is correct on other 
issues such as bicycle foam hats. However, he does need (along with 
several others) to fix his user name.

-- 
Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia
When did ignorance of biology become a "family value"?