# The Perils of Buying without a Test Ride



## a.twiddler (10 Jul 2021)

*The perils of buying without a test ride.*

I'm even shorter than I thought!
I recently acquired a Dawes Low Rider with a view to trying out a SWB recumbent which is reputedly easy to learn to ride. I’d had some thoughts about maybe buying a recumbent that could be taken on a train as easily (or uneasily) as a “normal” DF.

The seat is nice and low with an easy step over and the seller in all good faith stated that it should fit someone with a 29” inside leg. It is a mesh seat with a triangular cushion similar to the Linear. Following my good experience with the Linear I bought it sight unseen as it is very hard to find any sort of recumbent within travelling distance, and I had to courier it. I assumed that a low seat height gave a good chance of a boom which would adjust down well.

The bike is in very nice original condition, the bronze green paintwork is very good apart from some minor scrapes. It doesn’t look as if it’s been ridden much. Even the plastic pedals and front chainguard look new. The nexus 7 hub gears work fine on the stand. It even has the original dynamo lights but the dynamo seems stuck in the off position -lack of use? So I haven’t been able to try it. The roller brakes work OK. Both have slight fore and aft play, which I assume is normal. The cranks are 170mm. A neat touch is a built in rear wheel lock with 2 keys and traditional pump pegs under the frame tube. It has mudguards which are in good condition.

A big however! follows. The boom was adjusted to within 2cm of the shortest setting to suit the previous owner. Nevertheless I can just reach the pedal at its furthest point with my toe while seated normally, with no chance of reaching it with my heel. I measured my Linear and came up with a pedal to seat back dimension of 37 inches. I measured the Dawes and came up with a dimension of 43 inches. Even if I were to move the boom back to its minimum I would only gain 2cm or about ¾ inch. I pondered about this for a long time. Even with 160mm cranks I would only gain 1cm, gaining 3cm in total. If I were to take a hacksaw to the boom (which I don’t want to do -the frame is too nice) there is only one cm between the end of the frame and the clamping bolt. This would make the reach a total of 4 cm shorter, less than 2 inches.

Plan B. Make up a seat rail to bring the seat forward. I found some perforated angle strip and a suitable exhaust clamp which with some old inner tube protected the frame. I experimented with several versions and lengths to get some idea but came to the following conclusions.

Moving the seat forward would work so far as pedal reach was concerned. However it has the following undesirable effects.

1. As the seat moves forward it increases in height, due to the frame sloping upwards to the front, losing the benefit of its main attraction, ie low seat height.

2. The gap between the seat nose and the steerer is reduced, making it awkward to get a foot over to mount and dismount.

3. The original seat position is well balanced between the wheels. With the seat forward more weight is on the front wheel possibly upsetting the handling, making the rear wheel more prone to skidding and probably more likelihood of inadvertent stoppies.

4. It just doesn’t feel right. The steerer is too close.


It’s in too nice a condition to maul about.
It looks as though I will have to return it to standard and sell it. It’s a shame as it’s a well thought out package. Someone of more average height would get the benefit of it, while I will have to do more research, though I’ve been finding it hard to find information on max and min dimensions for recumbents. It would seem that used smaller SWB recumbents are rare, with models having adjustability of both boom and seat likely to be beyond my budget.
Any suggestions welcome!

I’ve been spoilt by the adaptability of the Linear!


----------



## cyberknight (10 Jul 2021)

can you shorten the boom ?
aka hacksaw /pipe cutter


----------



## a.twiddler (10 Jul 2021)

Not if I want to keep the welded on fittings for the clamping bolts. I need to find about six inches of reach. If I cut that off the frame and the inner boom I will also have some pretty serious heel interference with the front wheel. Also, most likely, an unsellable bike after that.


----------



## a.twiddler (10 Jul 2021)

I was actually hoping for posters' experiences with SWB recumbents that would suit the vertically challenged. Low seat (within reason) and short reach from seat to pedal. As I posted originally, it's in too nice a condition to maul about.


----------



## midlife (10 Jul 2021)

BITD we used to screw blocks of wood to the pedals. Is there a more modern equivalent?


----------



## a.twiddler (10 Jul 2021)

It would take some pretty hefty blocks of wood in my case!


----------



## Spiderweb (10 Jul 2021)

Could try Children’s crank arms?


----------



## flake99please (10 Jul 2021)

Shorter cranks?

EDIT. as above comment


----------



## a.twiddler (10 Jul 2021)

cyberknight said:


> can you shorten the boom ?
> aka hacksaw /pipe cutter


I went out and measured up the boom, wheel and crank arm area after replying to this post and there is quite a bit of potential heel interference with the current near-shortest setting so logically, this being where the steering movement is greatest, moving the crank further back nearer the steering axis might tend to reduce this effect despite the wheel being higher nearer the fork crown. I have no experience of how this works in practice, but possibly shorter cranks could mitigate this. I used to use 165 cranks on my tourer in the 80s with no issues, I have seen recumbentists discuss using 160 or even 155 cranks but it is matching them with a suitable chainset that could be a problem. The frame tube bends downwards behind the boom area so limits the amount the frame can be cut back while still having enough safe length to retain the cut down boom. What is the likely safe minimum needed for the frame and boom? I can see that cutting a longitudinal slot under the frame in the boom area with a hole drilled at the end as per original wouldn't be a huge problem but what is the best solution for clamping the frame round the boom that a) works and b) doesn't look naff? Bearing in mind that this counts as major surgery to me, but if it works, it would be worth it.


----------



## oldwheels (11 Jul 2021)

a.twiddler said:


> I went out and measured up the boom, wheel and crank arm area after replying to this post and there is quite a bit of potential heel interference with the current near-shortest setting so logically, this being where the steering movement is greatest, moving the crank further back nearer the steering axis might tend to reduce this effect despite the wheel being higher nearer the fork crown. I have no experience of how this works in practice, but possibly shorter cranks could mitigate this. I used to use 165 cranks on my tourer in the 80s with no issues, I have seen recumbentists discuss using 160 or even 155 cranks but it is matching them with a suitable chainset that could be a problem. The frame tube bends downwards behind the boom area so limits the amount the frame can be cut back while still having enough safe length to retain the cut down boom. What is the likely safe minimum needed for the frame and boom? I can see that cutting a longitudinal slot under the frame in the boom area with a hole drilled at the end as per original wouldn't be a huge problem but what is the best solution for clamping the frame round the boom that a) works and b) doesn't look naff? Bearing in mind that this counts as major surgery to me, but if it works, it would be worth it.


My Adventure HD has 152 cranks so shorter ones are available. I did not specify them as they came with the trike which was preowned but little used.


----------



## Ming the Merciless (11 Jul 2021)

How tall are you?


----------



## oldwheels (11 Jul 2021)

Ming the Merciless said:


> How tall are you?


I think I am now just over 5ft 9ins with inside leg of 29inches. Used to be 5ft 101/2 but shrinking with age.


----------



## a.twiddler (11 Jul 2021)

Ming the Merciless said:


> How tall are you?



For myself, I am a towering 5' 5 1/2" in socks. Used to be 5'6". Trousers 29" inside leg, though 28" is better. It would be nice to be able to buy trousers without having to shorten them. Or recumbents without having to modify them. Or even upright bikes, where even the smallest adult sizes are so variable so that I have to try them to be sure I can actually get on. And as for motorcycles, which I have always had one of since 1968... Yet anyone can just jump in a car no matter how immense or micro it is and in a matter of minutes get it adjusted to suit.

The Linear took more than a few minutes to get it to fit but there is plenty of adjustment left in it either way, which is one of the endearing things about it.

I don't think I am unusually short in the general scale of things, though obviously not average height, until I get reminded when buying a consumer durable how hard it is to get one that actually fits me. I see people going about their normal lives who are shorter than me. Tallness or shortness is probably more a matter of perception. People who are shorter than me are short. People who are taller than me are tall. Most people probably have a similar viewpoint.

Crank length is probably a bit of a red herring. I rode with 165s for years without thinking about it because it was what my chainset came with. When I bought a mountain bike it had 175s despite being a small frame and I noticed the difference (but that might have been due to the high bottom bracket) and soon got used to it. With recumbents it could be an advantage to have shorter cranks for wheel interference reasons and also because it might make spinning easier. My Linear has 175 cranks and I find them fine too. Mostly, you probably just ride wot you got unless it causes discomfort.


----------



## a.twiddler (12 Jul 2021)

All the above has rather taken the gloss off the joy of getting a new bike. Got a good deal, rather diminished by the cost of a courier on top. Had hoped to just be able to ride and evaluate it without much further outlay but there are some options to minimise the amount of hacking the boom and frame about that might be needed. (Which I am still not keen to do due to the uncertainty of getting the desired result).

For example, a suitable seat back cushion to bring myself forward. Pros -cheap and simple. Cons-may not be comfortable, being forced to sit on a narrower part of the seat.

SJS do chainsets with shorter cranks and a range of chainrings. Pros-I had considered changing to a double or triple in the future to widen the gear range once I had time to evaluate what I've got. Cons-I wasn't planning to spend the money just yet. Would probably involve changing the perfectly good bottom bracket as well. Could cope with manually changing the chain over for now but while the bottom bracket unit is out, I could drill and tap the shell to take a bolt to hold a length of seat pin to act as a derailleur post. The seat pin idea has worked quite well on the Linear. Then cough up for a front changer. The chain tensioner rollers on the bike are currently fixed, not sprung. Would need to sort that out too. Getting complicated!

Pedal spacers are available fairly cheaply to take the heels further out to help with potential heel strike. Whether that might lead to knee issues due to a wider "Q" factor is unknown.

With hindsight, booking an appointment with Kevin at D-Tek for a test ride session would have been a wise thing to do, to give me more idea what I could actually ride without modifications, despite the cross country trek needed to get there.


----------



## PaulM (12 Jul 2021)

I think a practical minimum length for cranks is 140mm, but you might need lower gears to cope with less leverage. TBH, the Dawes is known to be a heavy lump and has limited gearing options with no FD post.

For SWBs that suit short riders, the Nazca Fiero XS and Azub Origami are good. I have the latter and am thinking of selling, but probably looking for more than you'd like to spend.


----------



## a.twiddler (12 Jul 2021)

Low seat height is one thing, but manufacturers' tech specs don't seem to include minimum distance from seat back to pedal with the boom right in. You need a bit to spare really, for minor adjustments once you have been riding a bit. The Nazca Fiero XS suggests "riders from 150cm" though as you suggest with the Origami, maybe outside my budget range. I have read several reviews of the Origami, and it does seem a well thought out design. Not come across the Nazca Fiero before. There could be others too.

I am beginning to think that the whole SWB thing may be beyond me either through cost of a suitable newer one, or due to physical limitations of the affordable, older ones. I had considered something like a Pashley PDQ but none have been near enough for me to have a look. Of the pedal to seat back measurements I have no idea but reviews tend to suggest that the seat height might be a problem, particularly as the seat has a square base rather than being tapered like this Dawes or the Linear. It's a jungle out there! What I need is someone with a metaphorical machete who can let some light in so I can see what might be suitable yet affordable. The worst thing is that up till now anyone selling anything promising seems to be at the far end of the country from me.

As in my original post, my options are either to sell this as it is, as it is in surprisingly good condition, or bite the bullet and take a saw to it. My normal inclination would be not to do anything to it that isn't reversible but if by doing the minimum to it that makes it usable by me, it may be worthwhile. I'm not going to rush into it, as further information may be forthcoming on here.

Meanwhile I will continue enjoying my Linear which was a very good buy and has given me (and many passers by) a lot of pleasure..


----------



## PaulM (12 Jul 2021)

Bents with 305m front wheels might be an option: Bike E, Cannondale, HPV Spirit, M5 CMPCT. They can be had for £500 or less on the used market.


----------



## Milkfloat (12 Jul 2021)

Is there any specialists you can contact that may have some ideas - you cannot be the only person that has ever had this problem.


----------



## 404 Not Found Anywhere (12 Jul 2021)

The PDQ isn’t a particularly good ride for those of us with shorter legs: not only is the seat height itself relatively high the hammock design means that you‘ve really only got the distance between knee and foot to reach the ground. I fitted a hard shell seat to mine and being able to get that extra hip extension helped a lot, but the PDQ’s ultra short wheelbase meant that the handling was messed up.

My Fuego works well for me, though, and it’s one of the few machines to be sold in small and medium/large models. I find its handling is very reassuring. Mine is a small (I’m about 5’ 7” with a 30” inside leg). I think the Challenge Hurricane is a bit lower. Both sadly are out of production, as is the Nazca Fiero.


----------



## 404 Not Found Anywhere (12 Jul 2021)

Short cranks: I have them on all my bents, I reduced the gearing by the same proportion as I reduced the crank length plus an extra 10% or so. Sheldon’s Gain Ratios were very helpful in working out what the gearing should look like. I was surprised how much I had to push the boom out to get the right length (my cranks are between 145 and 152 mm)


----------



## Yakboy (14 Jul 2021)

On my wife's Dawes Lowrider (which I am in the process of selling) we had exactly the same problem. I shortened the BB tube and I think I recontoured the boom a little (I can't remember exactly) and I had some professionally shortened 140mm Shimano Cranks which had previously been on one my Girls full suspension mountain bike, and all was good. My wife is 5ft 4 and probably has 27-28" inside leg, so it can be done.


----------



## a.twiddler (14 Jul 2021)

Thank you. That's just the sort of information I was hoping for! Maybe if my timing had been better, I could have bought yours ready modified.
I am curious about the boom, though. How much length did you have to remove to get it far enough back? Mine is stubbornly stuck at the moment, about 2-3 cm between the back of the bottom bracket and the front of the tube which is part of the frame (mine is green too). I am giving it some time and Plus Gas so I can get it out and look at it. I had a feeling that it wouldn't go any further back without taking it out and shortening it. 
It has probably been set at that length for the previous owner for a long time.

I was hoping to get away without shortening the green tube as the clamps are quite near the end, so you have given me hope. 140mm cranks might be a step too far, but I wouldn't know without trying some. 

As a matter of interest, how did your wife get on with the bars? Mine look like conventional town bike bars but the stem is very long. They feel like ape hangers after being used to underseat steering.

Any further info would be welcome. As @Milkfloat said above, I cannot be the only one with this problem.


----------



## Yakboy (14 Jul 2021)

a.twiddler said:


> Thank you. That's just the sort of information I was hoping for! Maybe if my timing had been better, I could have bought yours ready modified.
> I am curious about the boom, though. How much length did you have to remove to get it far enough back? Mine is stubbornly stuck at the moment, about 2-3 cm between the back of the bottom bracket and the front of the tube which is part of the frame (mine is green too). I am giving it some time and Plus Gas so I can get it out and look at it. I had a feeling that it wouldn't go any further back without taking it out and shortening it.
> It has probably been set at that length for the previous owner for a long time.
> 
> ...


I seem to remember it being a bit of a struggle to get the black boom out, I think I just soaked it in penetrating oil for a day or so. I made semi-circular adjustments to the green boom so the pinch bolts were still intact and the bottom bracket slotted into circular cuts, I can't remember how much I cut off the black piece but I don't think it was very much. My wife doesn't seem to have any problems with the ape-hanger bars. I'll take some photo's of the bike tonight and post so you can see the differences


----------



## Yakboy (14 Jul 2021)

I would be happy to sell the 140mm cranks and 32 tooth chainring (or even lend them if you pay postage) but you do have to modify the plastic crank guard internally. I was happy to do it on ours because the plastic wasn't pristine and I managed to do it neatly . I have now put the original 170mm Nexus cranks back on and you can't really tell I have modified it.


----------



## a.twiddler (14 Jul 2021)

Yakboy said:


> I seem to remember it being a bit of a struggle to get the black boom out, I think I just soaked it in penetrating oil for a day or so. I made semi-circular adjustments to the green boom so the pinch bolts were still intact and the bottom bracket slotted into circular cuts, I can't remember how much I cut off the black piece but I don't think it was very much. My wife doesn't seem to have any problems with the ape-hanger bars. I'll take some photo's of the bike tonight and post so you can see the differences


Curiously, while waiting for the boom to loosen up I have been thinking of ways to move the boom back by making a curved recess in the front of the tube to take the bottom bracket shape with the same intention of preserving the pinch bolts.


----------



## ExBrit (14 Jul 2021)

This is an option. It can add up to 6" to your leg length. I hear it's painful and expensive but it won't damage your bike.
https://medlineplus.gov/ency/article/002965.htm


----------



## a.twiddler (14 Jul 2021)

Yakboy said:


> I would be happy to sell the 140mm cranks and 32 tooth chainring (or even lend them if you pay postage) but you do have to modify the plastic crank guard internally. I was happy to do it on ours because the plastic wasn't pristine and I managed to do it neatly . I have now put the original 170mm Nexus cranks back on and you can't really tell I have modified it.


You have a pm


----------

