# It has taken a long time.



## xpc316e (13 Apr 2009)

Last year I bought a used Radius C4 LWB USS 'bent and ever since then I have been fettling it in an attempt to get it to fit me and feel right. I have had to cut and shut the handlebars in quite a few ways, but yesterday I welded up an extension to the seat mount. It means that I sit about an inch higher and it has changed the whole feel of the bike. It used to be comfy, but now it just feels _right._ I cannot wait to get out on it now that the lighter evenings are here. I am so glad that I persevered with all my hacksawing and welding.

Have you had to make many changes to your machine to make it right for you?


----------



## arallsopp (14 Apr 2009)

I'm still battling with my new one. For me, fettling with the bike after the first few months is analogous to sitting in my car and moving the electronic lumbar support. Suddenly, I'm aware that something that once was, is not. And then I spend forever after shunting it back and forth only to discover I will always be aware of it, and that its position is perhaps not quite right.

There are so many parameters available in bents. Once the bars are about right, the boom technically correct, and the cleats fairly intuitive, I tend to let muscle memory learn the rest.

Is probably very bad technique. But everything else just leads me to spend entire rides thinking 'should that be 3mm further / nearer / higher / wider / taller / longer / deeper, etc...'


----------



## Andy in Sig (14 Apr 2009)

There's a bike firm in Germany called Patria which makes uprights. The clever thing is that their dealers have a sort of jig on which you sit and things are adjusted until everything feels just right and then the measurements are read off and the frame ordered. (I'm sure somebody in the UK must do that to.) I wonder if anybody does it for recumbents.


----------



## Amanda P (14 Apr 2009)

My Bentech needed a fair bit of fettling.

The seat was far too wide, so I cut that down.

It's taken me a while to get the boom just right - the "heel on the pedal, leg straight" thing doesn't seem quite right on a 'bent.

My handlebars have also been through several incarnations, and I still have improvements in mind.

When you build the bike yourself, though, you have to expect never to be satisified!


----------



## Auntie Helen (14 Apr 2009)

My husband's had his trike for six months and he's still adjusting the boom length to try to stop his knees aching. It just doesn't seem to work for him, partly I think because one of his legs is longer than the other. I got my boom right within a week and it's been brilliant ever since.


----------



## byegad (15 Apr 2009)

Helen, if his legs are very different then Highpath engineering, based in Wales, I think, could be the answer with one crank shortened by the appropriate amount.


----------



## Auntie Helen (15 Apr 2009)

His legs are only slightly different. I think, actually, it's perhaps a little more to do with not doing enough cycling to build up strength. He seems to be OK on his mountain bike (although doesn't go far on that one either).


----------



## xpc316e (15 Apr 2009)

arallsopp said:


> everything else just leads me to spend entire rides thinking 'should that be 3mm further / nearer / higher / wider / taller / longer / deeper, etc...'




I am glad that I am not the only perfectionist in the world - sometimes it's a heavy cross to bear.


----------



## Andy in Sig (16 Apr 2009)

Uncle Phil said:


> My Bentech needed a fair bit of fettling.
> 
> The seat was far too wide, so I cut that down.
> 
> ...



When I got my Street Machine the dealer (also a SM rider) told me that for bents the leg has to be a little bit more bent (too many bents in this sentence) when the leg is fully extended than is the case with uprights. I've found that to be very good advice, at least for me.


----------



## byegad (16 Apr 2009)

I agree with Andy, my booms, after a lot of trial and error, are a bit shorter than 'heel on the pedal and leg straight'.


----------



## PaulM (16 Apr 2009)

*I Disagree*



byegad said:


> I agree with Andy, my booms, after a lot of trial and error, are a bit shorter than 'heel on the pedal and leg straight'.



I disagree, I've read the opposite, and found the opposite to be true. On recumbents you can have the pedals a bit further away, afterall there isn't the same problem of reaching the ground from the saddle.


----------



## bicyclos (16 Apr 2009)

In my case I built my bent around my build. My build is 6' with long legs and shortish body. To tell you the truth its the most comfortable bike I have ever owned. There is some fantastic recumbents / bikes available today, I would love to have the cash available to purchase something exotic and engineered, but then again I have gone bespoke. The leg length I set on my bike is just off straight without stretching which works for me.


----------



## byegad (16 Apr 2009)

As both my booms are attached to trikes I don't need to reach the ground. I found I ended up with my Azub-4 boom on the short side too. This had no effect on my ability to reach the ground, it was just more comfortable.
For me a good way of setting up a 'bent is to set the boom using the heel and straight leg method then move the boom in by a centimetre or two. As a first fit this is a good starting point for me. I've just moved my Kettwiesel boom in an extra centimetre after 1300miles and am noticing an improvement. So that's a full inch and more shorter than heel and straight knee would indicate.

Others may differ but it's true for me that I prefer (and am faster with) a more bent leg than I would ride on a DF, where the heel and straight knee method is almost spot on for me, my last four DFs were set this way and only one required a minor tweak after initial set up.


----------



## Andy in Sig (17 Apr 2009)

You can afford the straight leg with an upright because if you need a bit of extra force on the pedal (difficult to add _extra_ force with the leg fully extended) all you have to do is rise off the saddle but there is virtually no way you can provide extra force to a fully extended leg on a recumbent. You do however have that option if your leg is slightly bent. The distance to the ground is IMO simply not a factor when determining leg length on a recumbent.


----------



## byegad (17 Apr 2009)

You may well have put your finger on it Andy. I certainly climb better with a slightly shorter boom.


----------



## Amanda P (17 Apr 2009)

I've just (well, a month ago) moved my boom out about an inch. 

Getting off the bent and onto one of my ordinary bikes, it seemed to me that the 'bent felt shorter. And it was giving me a pain just above the kneecaps after a long ride or a stiff climb.

It's a bit early to say whether this is going in the right direction, but it just feels more right at this stage.


----------



## Andy in Sig (17 Apr 2009)

Uncle Phil said:


> *I've just (well, a month ago) moved my boom out about an inch. *
> 
> Getting off the bent and onto one of my ordinary bikes, it seemed to me that the 'bent felt shorter. And it was giving me a pain just above the kneecaps after a long ride or a stiff climb.
> 
> It's a bit early to say whether this is going in the right direction, but it just feels more right at this stage.



There's always one, isn't there?


----------



## Amanda P (17 Apr 2009)

PaulM said:


> I disagree, I've read the opposite, and found the opposite to be true. On recumbents you can have the pedals a bit further away



Two, actually.


----------



## Andy in Sig (18 Apr 2009)

You could get one of those tandems then that's recumbent at the front and upright at the back.


----------



## Auntie Helen (18 Apr 2009)

Andy in Sig said:


> You could get one of those tandems then that's recumbent at the front and upright at the back.


Like this one?







I believe it's a Hase Pino. The chap on the back was working pretty hard most of the time but was clearly a very effective stoker as they overtook me going up some of the hills. (Spot the more traditional tandem in the background trundling up the hill).


----------



## Andy in Sig (18 Apr 2009)

That's the one. I've seen a few of them zipping up and down in Germany. They need a snappy ad slogan for it like: "Tandem riding wives and girlfriends of the world unite in buying one of these! You have nothing to lose but a permanent view of your husband's/boyfriends neck!"


----------



## Auntie Helen (18 Apr 2009)

The interesting thing about that tandem was that apparently the person at the front could freewheel whilst the stoker pedalled. So it's an ideal tandem for lazy front-seat passengers. They have to be quite brave, though, as they can't steer and are going to hit any obstacle first!

Here it is again with a different front-seat passenger:





Spot how red in the face the stoker is!


----------



## xpc316e (18 Apr 2009)

The guy on the back is the captain surely - he has control of all gears, brakes, & steering. I know he sits in what would normally be the stoker's position, but the stoker must be the person in front.


----------



## Fiona N (18 Apr 2009)

The bent/upright bikes I've seen in CH and Germany have mainly been occupied by (largish) kiddie on the front and dad on the back. Certainly gives the youngster a better view than the usual child seats and whatnot. Yesterday I saw a poor child in a child seat being assaulted by her father's rucksac which constantly clobbered her in the face unless she bent her body backwards in a pretty uncomfortable fashion. Don't these parents use their brains?

On the leg extension on recumbents, the Windcheetah as ever has solutions for all possibilities  The 'continuous curve' seat means you can adjust yourself backwards and forwards over an inch or two according to how you're riding. For me this means that for high cadence powering along, I'll be slightly further back with less bend in the knee - about equivalent to an upright. For slogging up long grinds in bottom gear, I'll generally move forwards so get a more bent knee. I don't consciously think about this, it's just the pattern I've got into and certainly, compared to the very fixed position of the Speedmachine, I find it's both more efficient and powerful. Also, I've not had the knee niggles that I have with the Speedmachine and which were one reason I use much shorter cranks on the Speedmachine.

I certainly wouldn't want to go for a straighter knee on a recumbent with a hard seat as there's far too much potential for hyperextension under serious loading which is a real no-no, ergonomically


----------



## Amanda P (20 Apr 2009)

Funny you should mention those, Andy. 






We borrowed this one from JD Cycles. The boom wouldn't go short enough for Mrs Uncle Phil, so they had to fit tiny short cranks to get it to fit her - but it did. We wrote lots more stuff about our day with it here.


----------



## Andy in Sig (20 Apr 2009)

That's a good review and I'm surprised after reading it that you didn't order one on the spot. Incidentally, I once saw somebody on one using it as a normal bike (i.e. without stoker) to do some shopping and it looked a lot niftier and handier than normal trikes do in those circumstances.


----------



## Amanda P (20 Apr 2009)

We were sorely tempted. 

The large number in red in the centre of this page is the clue as to why we didn't.


----------

