Is a recumbent bicycle a bicycle

[rydabent]

Does anyone have a straight forward answer why the UCI ruled that a bent was not a bike. My answer is the the bike mfg at the time bought off the members of the UCI, because it would have cost the mfg a lot of money to tool up for bent frames.

So does anyone here have any other reasonable answer as to why the UCI ruled the way they did.

 

[Ian H]

I think you should read the history rather than making your own up.

 

[Alex321]

Of course it is a bicycle.

And the UCI never ruled that it isn't. They banned them from UCI governed races, which is not the same as saying they aren't bicycles.

 

[steveindenmark]

Bents are banned from most races and ultras probably because they are more aerodynamic.

 

[Ming the Merciless]

Yes, read this

https://onlinebicyclemuseum.co.uk/1934-1936-mochet-velo-velocar/

 

[Ming the Merciless]

Bents are banned from most races and ultras probably because they are more aerodynamic.

Not banned at any audaxes, which are the original ultras for cycling.

 

[classic33]

Anyone explain how posting after last seen was possible?

 

[Alex321]

View attachment 791760
Anyone explain how posting after last seen was possible?

Different clocks, with one still on BST?

 

[Ming the Merciless]

View attachment 791760
Anyone explain how posting after last seen was possible?

Maybe they also started this new thread at 13:43, but I was 4 mins before they posted. With last seen only picking up the first time?

 

[blackrat]

Bents are banned from most races and ultras probably because they are more aerodynamic.

Recumbents are allowed in my 24 Hour races in a separate category. Every - almost - RAAM have had bents in them.