Are there fewer bent and trike riders in Europe

[classic33]

To weld up a bike you have to have expensive fixtures to hold the tube in place while brazed or welded. Back in the 30s mfg didnt want to buy a whole new line of fixtures, so they bought off the UCI!!!

Recumbents predate the UCI. As do Penny Farthings.
And, if you take the time to check, you'll find that it wasn't the UCI that wanted recumbents banning. Nor did manufacturers buy "off the UCI!!!". Ill informed pieces, like this piece I'm replying to, do nothing to improve the perception of recumbents among cyclists.

The bicycle I pictured is a commercially produced and available. Although I'm uncertain if it's still available new.

 

[grldtnr]

Recumbent rider on this side of the pond.
View attachment 787525
And he's wearing a helmet!

Pendantically, that isn't a recumbent, the rider is lying prone, if the rider was recumbent ,they would be the other way round.
But I agree that it is a HPV, and many do wear helmets , in this case more ford aerodynamics ,rather as a sop to safety.

Rydabent, I believe there is a very strong 'recumbent' scene on the continent , the Danes, Germans, Dutch,Czechs and even Finland have a very strong cycling scene, especially in recumbents, and I cannot support your view it's small scene over here, yes thee are far fewer recumbents of whatever persuasion then there are 'Upwrongs' but that's because most believe the Upwrong to be superior in terms of safety, which is a fallacy, they are however much more comfortable than a conventional diamond frame

 

[classic33]

Pendantically, that isn't a recumbent, the rider is lying prone, if the rider was recumbent ,they would be the other way round.
But I agree that it is a HPV, and many do wear helmets , in this case more ford aerodynamics ,rather as a sop to safety.

Rydabent, I believe there is a very strong 'recumbent' scene on the continent , the Danes, Germans, Dutch,Czechs and even Finland have a very strong cycling scene, especially in recumbents, and I cannot support your view it's small scene over here, yes thee are far fewer recumbents of whatever persuasion then there are 'Upwrongs' but that's because most believe the Upwrong to be superior in terms of safety, which is a fallacy, they are however much more comfortable than a conventional diamond frame

A recumbent position refers to any horizontal, lying-down posture, including variations like lying on one's back (supine), stomach (prone), or side (lateral), or a position where one is leaning back and almost lying down.
The term comes from the Latin word recumbere, meaning "to lie down".

 

[a.twiddler]

I came across this list of two wheel recumbent manufacturers on an American forum recently. Perhaps a couple of years old, but might give an idea of interest levels. Some of them no doubt build trikes too.

"I do think there are still plenty of 2-wheeled options, thank goodness!!
Available in USA:

• Azub
• Bacchetta (Bent Up)
• Carver
• Cruzbike
• HPV
• Lightning
• Linear
• Longbikes
• Maxarya
• Metabike
• Performer
• Recycled Recumbents
• Schlitter
• Sun Seeker

Not available in US? Or may be harder to get...

• Challenge
• Flevo
• Flux
• M5
• Pelso
• Rinzler
• Slyway
• Solyom
• Toxy
• Traix
• Wolf & Wolf"

Just thought I'd chuck that into the mix.

 

[rydabent]

Recumbents predate the UCI. As do Penny Farthings.
And, if you take the time to check, you'll find that it wasn't the UCI that wanted recumbents banning. Nor did manufacturers buy "off the UCI!!!". Ill informed pieces, like this piece I'm replying to, do nothing to improve the perception of recumbents among cyclists.

The bicycle I pictured is a commercially produced and available. Although I'm uncertain if it's still available new.

If the UCI wasnt bought off, why did they declare recumbents were not bicycles. What other reason can you give?

 

[classic33]

If the UCI wasnt bought off, why did they declare recumbents were not bicycles. What other reason can you give?

If you can be bothered to check, the UCI banned them from racing in '34, specifically UCI competitions.

 

[a.twiddler]

If the UCI wasnt bought off, why did they declare recumbents were not bicycles. What other reason can you give?

Um, stuck in the groove of what they knew? Resistant to "new" ideas? Hemmed in by the fortress of rules and regulations that they'd already built? What was the average age of those on the various committees? Back then, most likely much older males from a certain stratum of society."It's the way we've always done it" even if the safety bicycle had only been around for 30 years or so back then. I don't know. Maybe good old self interest and backhanders were there on the list too. They might have started out young and altruistic, but organisations tend to develop in such a way that perpetuating themselves becomes a powerful force too.

 

[classic33]

To weld up a bike you have to have expensive fixtures to hold the tube in place while brazed or welded. Back in the 30s mfg didnt want to buy a whole new line of fixtures, so they bought off the UCI!!!

Still awaiting the answer to which companies the UCI supplied by the way.
Perhaps you'd care to answer this one before asking any further questions.

 

[404 Not Found Anywhere]

Not that I have any interest in the UCI etc but I think the main reason for the original UCI ban was to make it a competition between athletes, not engineers or inventors. Same way other sporting organisations have gone in dictating standards: golf, tennis, archery, even athletics. The IHPVA however has gone a different route with it being about technological advancement and physical abilities - but even then they have restrictions (no electric assistance, for example). None of these approaches are “better” than another, just different. The UCI aren’t stopping anyone riding recumbents if they want to, just in UCI sanctioned competition.