# Bicycles: crank-forward models?



## Rexlion (Aug 23, 2009)

I have a budget mountain bike... or should I say torture rack.  But a couple weeks ago I had an experience that has me shopping for a new bicycle.

While on vacation I drove to Peninsula State Park in Door County, Wisconsin. About to drive into the park for a bit of hiking, I noticed a bike rental place just outside the entrance. I thought, why not? Use the entry fee for bike rental, ride in, and I can travel more of the park's trails riding than walking. So I backed up and went in and rented their lowest priced bike, a 7 speed that looked decidedly sedate. 

It turned out to be a real eye opener! This bicycle, a Trek Pure "comfort bike", had the pedal crank positioned farther forward instead of right below the seat tube. I couldn't get over how easily it pedaled compared to my usual ride. And my tailsection stayed in the seat instead of gradually sliding forward. It really was comfortable and a nice ride. A nice upright position with a more natural and effective pedaling motion. I rode 13 miles, which was quite a bit for me. Although I did have to stop and walk the bike up two really steep hills (on the way to Eagle Bluff; and they don't call it that for nothing, it's quite an elevation gain), I know my mountain bike would have done me in long before I even reached those grades. 

Since returning home I've been researching as many of these bikes as I can find, comparing and learning. They are sometimes called crank-forward, or pedals-forward, or semi-recumbent. And since a fair number of flashaholics are bike owners also (and even used their lights on their bikes), I thought I'd ask if some of you have experience with any of this type of bicycle, and if so, what brand you recommend (& why).

The only negatives I felt about the Pure were the appearance (looks like an "old fogey's bike" to me... although I'm getting to be one of those I'm not willing to advertise the fact) and the steering (somehow it didn't feel as sure and solid as I'd like; but maybe the higher, wider handlebars were throwing me off). Oh, and the $450'ish price tag... I'd like to find something like that for about half that if I could.


----------



## jtr1962 (Aug 23, 2009)

No direct experience with them, just one area of concern looking at several pictures-namely the seat tube (for example, see this one). Probably OK on smooth roads, but honestly I'd be very concerned that a seat tube at that angle would snap right off here in NYC (our roads are so bad here they could be used for testing the next lunar rover). Other than that, they look really comfortable.


----------



## Eric_M (Aug 23, 2009)

I've had a Pure for 2 years now and love it. Great bike.


----------



## Rexlion (Aug 23, 2009)

Eric_M said:


> I've had a Pure for 2 years now and love it. Great bike.


 I couldn't find the Pure's nominal weight on the Trek website. Do you know what it weighs? 

Good to hear from someone who's had one a while and hasn't found some big flaw or disadvantage... thanks for telling me.


----------



## paintballdad (Aug 24, 2009)

I believe Electra popularized that style of bicycle with the Townie. Most folks who ride one rave about it. It looks like a comfortable bike to ride, i've seen quite a few of them around the SoCal beaches.


----------



## Eric_M (Aug 24, 2009)

Hi,

Don't know what it weighs but it is light. A lot lighter than I expected.



Rexlion said:


> I couldn't find the Pure's nominal weight on the Trek website. Do you know what it weighs?
> 
> Good to hear from someone who's had one a while and hasn't found some big flaw or disadvantage... thanks for telling me.


----------



## smokinbasser (Aug 24, 2009)

Our minister had several bikes and he would take a full recumbent on really long trips of 800 miles or more so that style or the semi recumbents must be really easy on the riders bodies. Having spinal cord damage I suspect even I could ride one of the full recumbents with their back support.


----------



## Coop (Aug 24, 2009)

You should really look into a 'real' recumbent. No matter how good a saddle is, no matter how well your bike is set up, nothing will match the comfort of a recumbent.

I have a Challenge Hurricane Sport USS, Challenge really makes top quality bikes: http://www.challenge-recumbents.com/


----------



## Rexlion (Aug 25, 2009)

Coop said:


> You should really look into a 'real' recumbent. No matter how good a saddle is, no matter how well your bike is set up, nothing will match the comfort of a recumbent.
> 
> I have a Challenge Hurricane Sport USS, Challenge really makes top quality bikes: http://www.challenge-recumbents.com/


 Those Challenge bikes appear to have a challenging pricetag.  I read someplace that recumbents don't do well going up hills; is there any truth to that, and if so, why are they that way?


----------



## nisshin (Aug 25, 2009)

Rexlion said:


> Those Challenge bikes appear to have a challenging pricetag.


I realize that you're looking for a sub $400 bike; even so, the Rans crank forward bikes are good as a standard of measure.


Rexlion said:


> I read someplace that recumbents don't do well going up hills; is there any truth to that, and if so, why are they that way?


Some do climb hills well, like the Lightning P-38, mainly due to the relatively closed seating position (so people say, since I've no experience with it--I'm a triker). With regular diamond frame bikes, you can use your weight while standing upright.

Also consider this point from the Rans website:


Ransbikes said:


> With the crank forward more than a conventional bike and the bars placed low, just above the knees, you can pull yourself down into the pedals. Using this technique it is easy to apply more than your weight to the pedals, which is all standing on the pedals will provide."


----------



## Coop (Aug 25, 2009)

Rexlion said:


> Those Challenge bikes appear to have a challenging pricetag.  I read someplace that recumbents don't do well going up hills; is there any truth to that, and if so, why are they that way?



Uhm, yeah, the pricetag is kinda harsh...

The uphill story is BS, ok, we don't have many real hills to go up here in the Netherlands, but I know a few guys who tackled the alps on their 'bents...

I do know where the myth of bad uphill performance comes from. It came to be beacause of regular roadbikers who thought you couldn't go uphill fast, because you can't put your weight on the pedals. What they forgot to think about is that the recumbent rider can brace himself against the back of his seat. Which allows him to generate a much greater force on the pedals than a straight up rider could ever do by standing up on the pedals and pulling on his handlebars.


----------



## Steve K (Aug 25, 2009)

Rexlion said:


> Those Challenge bikes appear to have a challenging pricetag.  I read someplace that recumbents don't do well going up hills; is there any truth to that, and if so, why are they that way?



I've been riding a Bacchetta Giro 26 recumbent for 16 months or so now, mostly for commuting. My commute includes a 14% grade, and the Giro is definitely slower than the regular bike I rode. Both bikes are set up the same: racks, fenders, lights & hub dynamo, big saddlebag.  I've got about 5000 miles on the bike, so it's not like I'm still adapting to the different pedaling position.

I also just bought a Bacchetta Carbon Aero 2.0! It's as light as my lightest regular bike, an early 80's Raleigh. The Carbon Aero is faster on the flats, but it's still slower on the hills (this is compared to doing the same hill on the Raleigh, in a sitting position). There are muscle groups that are hard or impossible to use in the recumbent position. 

Why do I ride a recumbent? It's because of spinal column & disc issues. If my neck were to heal, I'd sell my 'bents.

Steve K.


----------



## springnr (Aug 25, 2009)

Crank Forward Forum

Some brand info

My around town ride is a K2 Big Easy Deuce


----------



## Rexlion (Aug 25, 2009)

springnr said:


> Crank Forward Forum
> 
> Some brand info
> 
> My around town ride is a K2 Big Easy Deuce


 Thanks, that's a nice resource. I should have known there would be a forum for those bikes.


----------



## Rexlion (Aug 27, 2009)

After a fair amount of research, I stumbled across an interesting bike calle the Hyper Insight, being sold online by Walmart of all places. Only $239. I wish they had one at a store to try out, but am tempted to buy one sight unseen at that price. Over on the bike forum there was talk about a guy from Rans who bought one and modded it with some upgrade components. 

But I'm also really interested in trying out a Day 6 at their local dealer, just to see if it would be worth the extra $$ to me. A whole lot more dough, so it makes me curious to see if they really are that much more comfortable or pleasant to ride than the Trek Pure was. The Day 6 might also give me clue as to how the Hyper Insight might handle, hopefully... I'm basing that on the two bikes being similar in form (whereas the Pure is much more upright).


----------



## wild68fury (Aug 27, 2009)

I am not sure which brand of mountain bike you purchased, but in my experience if you go to a LBS (local bike shop) they can fit a bike to you. Discount stores sell one size bike and they usually do not fit the individual. This causes knee, back, wrist and neck pain. It also causes you to slip off the seat. I would recommend the Electra brand. They have several different models to choose from and the shop can order the right size for you. It sounds like you ride trails so I would stay away from any recumbent style bike. I currently own a Bianchi road bike, Trek mountain bike, and a Sun tandem recumbent my wife and I ride. Take a look at REI or the Electra website for lots of pictures and options.


----------



## Patriot (Aug 28, 2009)

Coop said:


> You should really look into a 'real' recumbent. No matter how good a saddle is, no matter how well your bike is set up, nothing will match the comfort of a recumbent.
> 
> I have a Challenge Hurricane Sport USS, Challenge really makes top quality bikes: http://www.challenge-recumbents.com/





As a life long cyclist, I can say that definitely looks like fun!! oo:


----------



## Rexlion (Sep 9, 2009)

Just to tie up the thread's loose ends... after test riding a Day 6, a Giant Suede, an Electra Townie, and a Trek Pure Sport, I decided to spring for the Trek after all. The Day 6 is the heaviest of the group, and while I loved the seat I didn't like the way the bike worked my thigh muscles. The other three were very similar in handling and performance, but the Trek's seat seemed a bit better to me.

I rode ten miles of the Osage Prairie Trail (a converted railroad bed) on Saturday, and it was wonderful. A fellow biker was suffering along on a Huffy mountain bike, and after sharing about my own lousy cheap mtn bike and how much better the Pure was, he sounded about ready to buy something better also. What was I ever thinking, to own a sub-$100 bike all those years? There really is a difference.


----------



## Steve K (Sep 10, 2009)

glad to hear that you found happiness! At the low end of the scale, small amounts of money do buy large amounts of improvement. 

At the other end of the scale... well, there are still improvements to be had, but they ain't cheap! I've been riding my Bacchetta Carbon Aero 2.0 for a few weeks now, and I think the performance is equal or somewhat better than my upright bikes. Hills are definitely the weak spot for 'bents, but this bike seems to move about as fast uphill as my regular bikes.

Steve K.


----------

