40
I have few thoughts about bikepacking on recumbent bike. (thelemmy.club)
submitted 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) by to c/bicycle_touring@lemmy.world
29 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

I have few thoughts about bikepacking on recumbent bike.

Because of the weight distribution I don't see any difference in the ridability and handling. The issue with flexing bike when loaded with bags isn't noticeable when riding only when you need to push it.

But the hills are killing me it isn't ideal without the bags but with them it is brutal.

#bikepacking #biketouring #bikeTooter #regel17 @bicycle_touring

My sleeping spot
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 8 points 6 months ago (16 children)

On a recumbent you cannot use your arms during climbs. On a regular bike, when you pull your handlebars, that force adds up to that of your legs. On a recumbent it doesn't.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 16 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (3 children)

    I've found it easier to pedal hard on a recumbent, against the seat back. One of my knees hurts now. It's a bummer that the upper body doesn't get exercise.

    On an upright bike, hard pedalling is a whole body exercise, with the swaying side-to-side.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] [S] 1 point 6 months ago (1 child)

    @Tehdastehdas @DivingPinguin

    I would like to exchange pedaling hard for more cadence because it is quite hard with long cranks on my knees. With short cranks it is easier and I want to change them. Also lot of other stuff because it is quite old and it shows (mostly regular stuff like bearings, pedals, cables...) so I will be taking it apart after the season and doing all of that.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 1 point 6 months ago (11 children)

    Think on that just a little bit more...

    On the standard bike, your normal maximum force on the pedals is your body weight, being pulled down by gravity. You can increase that slightly by pulling your body down with your arms, but your arms aren't nearly as powerful as your legs.

    On the recumbent, you aren't reliant on gravity at all. You're pushing your hips backwards against a backrest. You can put several times more force on the pedals with a recumbent than you can with a standard, upright bike.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 11 child comments
    •
  • [–] 3 points 6 months ago (3 children)

    One of the best things you can do for long distance trekking is merely lifting your opposing leg.

    You have a point. Sure. You can dig in. But you're going to get exhausted really quick.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] 3 points 6 months ago (2 children)

    They are talking specifically about climbs, where they are trying to get more force on the pedal through the use of their arms.

    If we're talking about distance trekking, you shouldn't be coming off the seat at all. Your pedal force should be much less than your body weight, even during climbs. Downshift to maintain sustainable cadence and effort, even if that means slowing to a walking pace.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 6 months ago (1 child)

    I typically have my seat so high there's not much difference between standing and seated. Maybe a couple inches. Gotta get that near full extension.

    Superfluous movement is just wasting energy. Like swaying back and forth.

    I'm kind of doubtful how much your arms would aid you beyond stabilization. Minimally, I would imagine lifting your other leg would be much more effective at increasing power transfer. Especially if you're clipped in....

    Indeed, pedal the bike, cadence is key. And I just don't really see you arms really helping at cadence speed. Maybe if you're like gruelingly pushing at a very low cadence?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 3 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago)

    I agree with you fully. The parent comment's focus on the use of arms during a climb seems rather silly.

    Downshift, focus on maintaining consistent, sustainable pedal pressure and cadence. Ignore road speed entirely. If you're doing it right, even the steepest hill is just a long stretch of flat road.

    Focusing on the role of the arms in applying force to the pedals only makes sense if we are talking about single speed bikes, fixed gear bikes, or racing. It does not make sense when we are talking about trekking.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 6 months ago

    During a climb your blood pressure in your legs is massively reduced like when working with your hands overhead the extremities tire much quicker. That's why your legs are killing you in a climb.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 6 months ago (5 children)

    On the recumbent, you aren't reliant on assisted by gravity at all

    Fixed it for you.

    Your maximum force on a standard bike is the weight of your legs plus the force you are able to exert via muscle power and cadence.

    You can put several times more force on the pedals with a recumbent than you can with a standard, upright bike.

    That's simply not true, quite the opposite. There's several reasons why professional cyclists don't use recumbent bikes for races, one of which is that it's possible to transfer MANY times more force through the pedals to the wheels on an upright bike where you're assisted by gravity and have much greater range of motion and are engaging more different muscles.

    Here's a scientific paper about it

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 6 months ago (4 children)

    Your cited study concerns itself with power; your comment discusses force. The two are not the same. What your study is talking about is the equivalent of "horsepower". What we have been discussing is the equivalent of "torque".

    Your maximum force power on a standard bike is the weight of your legs plus the force you are able to exert via muscle power and cadence.

    FTFY. As soon as you consider a time component ("cadence", or strokes-per-minute), you aren't talking about force. You are talking about power.

    A recumbent bike puts the rider in much the same position as the user of a leg press machine. An upright bike puts the rider in much the same position as the user of a scale.

    You can only put force equal to your body weight on a scale. I'm betting that you can put force equal to several times your body weight on a leg press. Gravity does not assist the upright rider here: gravity limits the amount of force the upright rider can apply: any additional force doesn't go into the pedal; it goes into lifting the rider off the seat. There is no question that the rider of the recumbent bike has the advantage on "force".

    one of which is that it’s possible to transfer MANY times more force power through the pedals

    Again, FTFY. Recumbents allow much greater force on the pedals, so your comment was patently false. De-conflating "force" from "power", your comment starts to reflect the conclusions in your cited study. (Although the "MANY times" claim is still wildly misleading)

    Upright bikes may be slightly more efficient at converting power, but the parent comment isn't discussing power. They are discussing force.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 6 months ago (3 children)

    An upright bike puts the rider in much the same position as the user of a scale.

    You can only put force equal to your body weight on a scale

    You HAVE to be fucking trolling 😄

    By your definition, the most/only effective method of riding a normal bicycle would be to simply jump up and down until you eventually reach your destination 😄

    gravity limits the amount of force the upright rider can apply: any additional force doesn't go into the pedal; it goes into lifting the rider off the seat

    ..do you have any idea how a bicycle chain or equivalent works? Have you ever SEEN someone operate a bicycle?

    I don't know if you're joking, under the influence of powerful hallucinogenic substances, or a secret fourth thing, but you're DEFINITELY not making sense regardless 😄

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 6 months ago (2 children)

    The reason I am "not making sense" is because you are continuing to not understand the distinction between "force" and "power".

    "Torque" is a measure of force. "Horsepower" is a measure of power. Do you understand the difference between the two? Until you understand that distinction, you will not be able to understand the discussion you have joined.

    …do you have any idea how a bicycle chain or equivalent works? Have you ever SEEN someone operate a bicycle?

    Yep! I've actually even ridden bicycles before! My hips have never been secured to an upright bike. Every time I've tried to press harder on the pedals than my body weight, my hips have come off the seat. The force my legs have applied to the pedals has lifted my body into the air, against the force of gravity. I've been able to introduce a little more force on the pedals, with my arms pulling my body downward toward the handlebars, but not by much.

    On the recumbent bike, gravity and my arms aren't what is providing the counter force to allow me to push against the pedals. The backrest of the bike is what I am pushing against. I can push far more than my body weight against the backrest. Much more than I can pull with my arms.

    You've entered a discussion on "force", but you are still failing to understand that you are talking about "power". When you understand the difference between "force" and "power", you'll be able to understand the discussion. Until then, my commentary will not make any sense to you.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 6 months ago (1 child)

    Yep! I've actually even ridden bicycles before! My hips have never been secured to an upright bike. Every time I've tried to press harder on the pedals than my body weight, my hips have come off the seat. The force my legs have applied to the pedals has lifted my body into the air, against the force of gravity. I've been able to introduce a little more force on the pedals, with my arms pulling my body downward toward the handlebars, but not by much.

    You're completely forgetting the fact that you're also pulling up with your "rear" foot as you're pedalling. Moreover, pedalling is not "push down repeat on other leg", but it's a circular motion where you're able to transfer power all through the cycle.

    The maximum force you're able to put to pedals is irrelevant, because so much of the power you output depends on the cadence. If you're pushing your maximum force on the pedals, it already means you've lost the momentum and your power output is shit. The force has a small effect on sprints though.

    Anyways, if the force was a major factor to prioritize, you'd see a lot more pro cyclists being swedish giants, but in reality most are on the shorter side. The benefits from lower weight and less drag from big body are far more important factors

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 2 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago)

    See, I knew you could get there.

    Now, I'm gonna have you go up to where the parent commentator discussed the importance of "force" and the use of arms on an upright bike, and reply your "power" comment to them, not me. I was directly rebutting their "force" arguments; I made no claims regarding "power" for you to rebut. Your criticism is wasted here. But, your insight would be valuable in the context of their argument.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent