Is a recumbent bicycle a bicycle
- Thread starter rydabent
- Start date
Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.
a.twiddler
Veteran
I have an azub 6 and a lightning p-38.
I consider them to be more as types of craft than mere bikes!
Yes, mercifully getting away from the endless disagreements and splitting of a hairs about UCI definitions, etc.
For some, maybe some form of regulated racing is their life, or some sort of trickle down effect into their sporty activities. Well, fair enough.
Having no interest in that sort of stuff in the many decades that I rode conventional bikes before I tried my first recumbent I couldn't give more than one or less than three hoots about the UCI or whatever gang you have to be accepted by to pursue your two wheeled activities.
I have to agree with @RANDOR that the right recumbent for you may just be a bike, but if it has the right combination of virtues, it's somehow more than just a bike. Even my old less than speedy Linear somehow combined the sensation of low flying with stately ship like progress and an ability to keep trundling along comfortably all day, up hill and down dale. It took me some years and several different recumbents to incrementally improve on it and find a worthy successor for my needs, and a couple of them along the way didn't work for me at all.
So a recumbent may be a bike in that it has two wheels, but just as all bikes may not be created equal, neither are recumbents. And most recumbents nowadays are more likely to be trikes!
Browser
Guru
- Location
- Crowland, Lincolnshire, UK.
As I understand it the UCI didn't ban recumbents, merely introduced a set of regulations which made it impossible for a 'bent to comply with. It has the same effect but doesn't see them being accused of outlawing a particular type of bike from competition. Same as with Graeme Obree's hour record bike, the UCI declared that the riders chest couldn't rest on the handlebars, which his bike sort of relied on.
Answering the original question, a quick Google turned this up;
Bicycle
/ˈbʌɪsɪkl/
Noun
A vehicle consisting of two wheels held in a frame one behind the other, propelled by pedals and steered with handlebars attached to the front wheel.
So a two-wheel 'bent can be defined thus.
Answering the original question, a quick Google turned this up;
Bicycle
/ˈbʌɪsɪkl/
Noun
A vehicle consisting of two wheels held in a frame one behind the other, propelled by pedals and steered with handlebars attached to the front wheel.
So a two-wheel 'bent can be defined thus.
kingrollo
Legendary Member
Of course they are bikes.
The OP has posted a variation on the same question many times now.
I think his grievance is that DF bikes are dominant and he thinks recumbents should be and he blames the UCI for this .
Total nonsense of course. In fine weather on a flat road riding a recumbent is something everyone should try - it's serious fun.
Riding in traffic, going up hill and general manouvrablity are imo what stops them being more popular. Not saying there aren't people who master those techniques on a bent are riding bent and loving it.
But UCI ban is imo a very tiny part of why recumbents are very niche.
The OP has posted a variation on the same question many times now.
I think his grievance is that DF bikes are dominant and he thinks recumbents should be and he blames the UCI for this .
Total nonsense of course. In fine weather on a flat road riding a recumbent is something everyone should try - it's serious fun.
Riding in traffic, going up hill and general manouvrablity are imo what stops them being more popular. Not saying there aren't people who master those techniques on a bent are riding bent and loving it.
But UCI ban is imo a very tiny part of why recumbents are very niche.
Regulating them out of competition is the same as banning them.
How about letting riders pick any kind of bike they want for the terrain being raced on that day?
classic33
Leg End Member
Including electric assisted trike by any chance?
