Recumbent muscles

[Auntie Helen]

We were just locking our trikes up outside the Co-op in Manningtree when a passer-by struck up a conversation with us about them (this happens a lot).

He was clearly a fairly knowledgeable cyclist and we had a good discussion about the merits/disadvantages of trikes and DF bikes. He asked whether bike riders found it difficult to convert to trikes and I trotted out the line about it being different muscles and you have to build them up. He then asked me which ones were different, and I didn't know. On me my backside has clearly seen the benefit of cycling but I can't be sure that's trike muscles, rather than general cycling muscles, as I didn't cycle before getting the trike. The chappie thought it would be the quads that were larger on the recumbent but I'm not sure about that, it seems that the muscles that are working are at the side of my hips.

Can anyone enlighten me as to the correct answer when I'm asked this question again (as I'm sure I will be!)

 

[Riding in Circles]

You tend to use your quads more so your whole leg is exercised rather than concentrating on the calf muscles.

 

[Fiona N]

I tend to disagree with Catrike on this - sure you can use your quads more to make up for the lost of back muscle use but that's not the main reason it takes a while to 'convert' to 'bents from uprights.
The issue can be reduced to the fact that your legs basically 'hang' down from the saddle on an upright, so gravity isn't a big factor in leg alignment (although it's obviously better for your knees if you can manage correct alighment in the plane that the legs move it - which is vertical) and your hips flexors aren't greatly important either as the up and down of the leg takes place pretty much below the hips.
In comparison, the near 'horizontal' extension of your legs on a 'bent means that during the pedal stroke you have to maintain correct alignment of the knees while gravity doesn't help you at all, so the stabilising muscles around the knees tend to get a much better work-out on a 'bent (one of the reasons I think that 'bent riding and running make better partners for X-training than upright road biking and running - mountain biking is another thing entirely). Add in the need to raise your extended leg against gravity each pedal stroke, which uses the hip flexors intensively, and you've clearly got to train up muscles for 'bent riding which aren't particularly exercised by riding an upright.

So over all, I reckon 'bent riding is better for your knees if you take the time to develop the stabilising muscles fully, even if the potential to mash the pedals while braced against the seat does mean that you can over do it. As ever, it comes down to developing a good pedalling technique and cadence.

 

[ufkacbln]

Avoid the question!

I tend to simply point out that you can brace against the seat and hence use all your muscles including those in the thigh to push, hence getting more power to the pedals.

Let them work out which ones.

I do know that after a few sessions on the recumbents my jeans are tighter round the thighs!

 

[ufkacbln]

Not if sensible. Most riding on a recumbent is about sensible use of gears. For instance steep climbing tends (especially on trikes) to be more "winching" in a lower gear than on an upright.

Mashing high gears is not a god idea in either recumbents or uprights