# recumbent once more



## velocidad (17 Jun 2009)

got myself a challenge furai. i think you will agree a fine looking machine


----------



## Arch (17 Jun 2009)

Nice indeed.

Very stealthy looking.


----------



## HelenD123 (17 Jun 2009)

Wow! That looks smart.


----------



## dataretriever (18 Jun 2009)

Mmmmmm, I'm drooling. Does the stealth finish confuse Plod speed traps??


----------



## LeeW (18 Jun 2009)

You have the 'bent, now you just need your 'bent legs


----------



## arallsopp (18 Jun 2009)

Say, that's a nice bike. 
Am quite envious of your chain tubes.

Few questions, in order of ascending geekiness:

You planning to put clipless pedals on there?
Is that a laidback sticker on the frame?
Do you find top gear high enough? (Might just be the photo angle. Is that a T53?)
How come you ended up with a manufacturer's sticker on the rear rather than the model number?

Beautiful piece of kit mate.


----------



## velocidad (18 Jun 2009)

arallsopp said:


> Say, that's a nice bike.
> Am quite envious of your chain tubes.
> 
> Few questions, in order of ascending geekiness:
> ...



chain tube envy? you not have any on yours then?

clipless no, but some of those power grip thingies probably.

laidback sticker yes, originally from them.

top gear high enough?, huh, i wish i had the umf to find out, not even been been on outer ring yet 

not sure about the lack of model name sticker, i wondered that myself.

cheers,

velocidad.


----------



## Andy in Sig (18 Jun 2009)

Do they do USS versions of that and what does it weigh?


----------



## velocidad (18 Jun 2009)

yep uss is an option. as for weight, i'm not sure. maybe 15kg as it is. you can specify a light weight model with carbon boom etc etc which i believe gets it down to about 12kg, but don't quote me on those weights.

cheers,

velocidad


----------



## velocidad (18 Jun 2009)

yep my bathroom scales say 15kg for mine as it is.


----------



## arallsopp (19 Jun 2009)

velocidad said:


> chain tube envy? you not have any on yours then?


Nope. Mine is the SLII variant, with no rear stickers at all



Andy in Sig said:


> Do they do USS versions of that and what does it weigh?



USS adds 0.2kg, but as velocidad says, you can still keep it around 12 if you're careful with options. Mine is a touch over at the moment, but its rigged for touring with a big tailbag at the back, a SON hub dynamo, GPS, and lighting front and rear.

Shipped like this:





Now looks like this:


----------



## Andy in Sig (19 Jun 2009)

That's interesting. I've got a Street Machine which I wouldn't part with under any circumstances but have been thinking about getting something lighter which would never be loaded with anything more than the equivalent of a top bag (a bit like in your picture) simply for going faster on one day rides. I really like the Street Machine design and have been trying to identify a lightweight model which (relatively) closely resembles it. The only thing which seems to be missing on yours is that the back wheel is not 26".


----------



## NickM (23 Jun 2009)

Please be sure to keep your front quick release done up TIGHT.

A friend's Furai lost its front wheel under hard braking, wrecking both wheel and fork (he was lucky, and landed on his feet).


----------



## NickM (23 Jun 2009)

Andy in Sig said:


> That's interesting. I've got a Street Machine which I wouldn't part with under any circumstances but have been thinking about getting something lighter which would never be loaded with anything more than the equivalent of a top bag (a bit like in your picture) simply for going faster on one day rides. I really like the Street Machine design and have been trying to identify a lightweight model which (relatively) closely resembles it. The only thing which seems to be missing on yours is that the back wheel is not 26".


Burrows Ratcatcher seems to fit the bill, if your back fits its seat - not USS, but I don't know of a current 559/406 bike which is both USS and likely to be much lighter than your Street Machine.


----------



## Andy in Sig (24 Jun 2009)

Thanks Nick, that looks nearer the mark. The lack of USS puts me right off though. It is a purely personal preference but I think OSS somehow goes against the point of a recumbent.


----------



## NickM (24 Jun 2009)

I've only ever had OSS bikes, although I have tried USS machines and can see their appeal. I find that for a "fastish day out" bike ASS somehow seems more appropriate. I think it's something to do with elbows being tucked in for speed - the Spitfire Pilot Effect 

And it's perfectly comfortable, assuming that the bars have enough adjustability to put them in the ideal position for you. I ride my Kingcycle for hours and hours without ever thinking "My arms are getting tired".

USS does seem to be associated with relatively sedate cycling. Having said that, most current Challenge bikes are available with USS, including the higher models in their tasty SL range; but they do not offer a lightweight 559/406 wheeled bike at the moment. I dare say one will be along in due course...

<edit> Hold the press! There is a fleeting mention of a "lightweight version" (at 12.5kg) of the normally rather portly Ventus here


----------



## Andy in Sig (24 Jun 2009)

That looks interesting too. I wonder why HPV can't just realise my dreams and make an 8 kg version of the Street Machine?


----------



## arallsopp (24 Jun 2009)

They do. The key is to be careful in the options you choose/omit.
I can't imagine you'd be much over that if you asked them not to add:

Mudguards
Racks
Lights
Mirrors
Headrest
Seatpad
Seat
Front forks
Wheels
Drivetrain
Tyres
Valve caps
Paint
etc...

The SMGTe is a great bike. Love it for what it is. 

...and then buy another


----------



## Andy in Sig (24 Jun 2009)

I've got no argument with that and I couldn't imagine touring on anything else.

I wonder if carbon would work as a recumbent frame material ...


----------



## Chonker (24 Jun 2009)

of course

http://www.m5-ligfietsen.nl/site/EN/Models/Carbon_Low_Racer

http://www.velokraft.com/

the nocom is seriously sexy, one day...


----------



## arallsopp (24 Jun 2009)

Andy in Sig said:


> I wonder if carbon would work as a recumbent frame material ...



To be honest, I'm not entirely sure carbon would work as any frame material, regardless of rider position. All my bikes take far too many knocks, and I'd be worried about the integrity of the frame, delamination, standard horror stories, etc.

Here's how I resolved it:

Chances that I would ride more if my bike was lighter? 1/10 
Chances that I would ride further if my bike was lighter? 2/10
Chances that I would enjoy riding more if my bike was lighter? 2/10
Chances that I would ride less if I was terrified of damaging it? 8/10

+1 for Aluminium with replaceable carbon bits then. Hence, Furai


----------



## Andy in Sig (24 Jun 2009)

All good, sensible points.


----------

