Want to build something comfortable, but issues with local bike path 'style'

marka-ee

100 W
Joined
Mar 24, 2020
Messages
170
I have been on a fully suspended 'stump jumper' ( rear hub motor ) for 3 years now, but would like something more comfortable. Searching for recumbent information brings up trikes 9 time out of 10. While I love the idea, the local bike paths are too narrow to allow safe passage with a trike. Also there are several rail crossings with a zig zag steel pipe system to slow down traffic, and there is no way for that on a trike.The 2 wheel recumbents with a shorter wheel base might get past with some juggling, but I have never ridden one and fear that even with suspension on both wheels there is an issue with recumbents because you can not do a unweighting move with your legs to get over some road problems. The paths here are not very maintained. So maybe I should stick with a MTB , maybe with a slight long tail mod? I am also looking for some forks that have near zero stiction. May a link design. The Cannondale easy rider looks nice and has a low stiction front shock. I don't do 'big air.' 25mm travel is fine. Sometimes it would bottom, but 99.9% of the time : plush ride. The Cannondale is a rare item though. Funny how nobody tests forks for friction, other than some opinions here and there. Just looking for ideas, thanks!
 
I agree a trike likely won't work there.

But "greater comfort" and the ability to pick up and lift the bike over such obstacles

is not mutually exclusive.

Personally the Dutch style utility frame is a lot better for general use

than the NA-mainstream near universal use of sport designs for all types of riding
 
You can build comfortable on a bike frame. It doesn’t have to be a trike or a bent. Check for chopper or bobber style, that many had built. Yet, none of them are readily available with suspension. That would require serious mods because comfort does not rely only on geometry. Suspension is also an important factor, for speed at least.

Not being comfortable on a Stumpjumper, I can understand. But this bike is not very complicated to build for comfort. Smaller wheel on the rear, big saddle, slacker steer angle... not so much work.
 
marka-ee said:
The 2 wheel recumbents with a shorter wheel base might get past with some juggling, but I have never ridden one and fear that even with suspension on both wheels there is an issue with recumbents because you can not do a unweighting move with your legs to get over some road problems. The paths here are not very maintained.

It's true - on a recumbent, you either roll over it, or you don't.

The Cannondale Easy Rider is by most accounts a good ride. If you could make it over the obstacles with that, I'm pretty sure you could do it with a Burley Limbo like mine - no front suspension there, but 20" wheel, and really there isn't much weight up there so the suspension in the back does most of the work. (My front wheel is in the front position, making it a "Compact Long Wheelbase" design like the Cannondale, though not actually quite as compact.) Both of them have a high rider position, which is a good thing as far as I'm concerned. There are a couple European brands with Short Wheelbase full suspension models, current production stuff that's very nice but expensive. There's a current production Maxarya series that's similar to the Cannondale minus the front suspension with 20" wheels front and back, moderately expensive, and ... to my surprise, they have a Ray 2E electric motor model! with the battery on the handlebar mast (not where I'd put it if there were any alternative.)

I have to admit almost completely unable to make tight turns on mine. I was never really hot at it, but the motor is a serious encumbrance as well here. So I have to kind of paddle through most slow-down zig-zags.
 
Swept back handlebars with generous rise and a Cloud 9 seat, along with an upright seating position changed my ride experience from painful to no pain and wow, look at all that scenery. My next ebike is full suspension with those things, it'll be even more comfortable than the rigid bike it replaces. The recumbents and tadpoles I see on bike paths look higher risk than regular bikes.

A Stumpjumper FS with upright seating position and C9 seat should be excellent.
 
i like my compact long wheelbase semi recumbent, but i have to say that tight maneuvers at slow speeds are a pain in the butt on some trails.

However i still pick it over an upright any day, even in instances where it doesn't shine. Because a suspended lawnchair is so comforting to ride, and she's fast 💪 :lol:
 
MikeSSS said:
The recumbents and tadpoles I see on bike paths look higher risk than regular bikes.

Recumbent (2 wheel) bicycles are lower risk than regular bikes.
 
Watching recumbents thread their way, at very low speeds, between the walkers and bikes passing each other in different directions, at tricky bends in the bike path, reveals recumbents to be significantly higher risk than normal bikes. They are less stable in this part of the ride, a part that happens many times in a 20 to 30 mile ride.

Because of Covid-19 there are lots more first time bike path walkers and bike riders, who don't know or practice stay in your own lane unless passing etiquette. The first few times new people are on the path they wander back and forth across the path, walk three abreast, have their dogs on one side while they are on the opposite side with the leash stretched tightly across the path, have their toddlers and dogs running back and forth across the path and their dogs aggressively threatening attack against other walkers and bikers. Recumbents are high risk in these situations, especially when the bent riders are new to path riding.

Nobody rides open road anymore here because it's not open road anymore and because large pickup drivers and cement truck drivers habitually buzz close to bikes.
 
donn said:
MikeSSS said:
The recumbents and tadpoles I see on bike paths look higher risk than regular bikes.

Recumbent (2 wheel) bicycles are lower risk than regular bikes.

IMHO the short wheelbase type 2 wheel recumbents are what's awefully skittish and weird at lower speeds. the mid-long wheelbase semi recumbents are only unstable at 0-5mph, where a fall would hurt you the least. Both of these types of bikes get more stable when you are going faster and faster because of the lower center of gravity though.

One big safety factor with recumbents is that you don't fall as far when you do. So the impact of hitting the ground is cut in half or less. And you are more likely to crash at lower speeds.

I did have a car once try to merge into my lane and had to make a sudden sharp emergency maneuver on my semi recumbent at about 20mph. The bike wobbled hard but magically regained it's balance. I would have absolutely gone over the bars on an upright. At that point, i was totally sold.

Visibility to drivers on a semi recumbent is also surprisingly good. but i imagine it's not so great on a full recumbent.

I would absolutely not ride a 2 wheel full recumbent on a trail with walkers, bends, etc. They just don't maneuver well below say 10-15mph, and you spend a decent amount of time at those speeds while on trails.
 
MikeSSS said:
Nobody rides open road anymore here because it's not open road anymore and because large pickup drivers and cement truck drivers habitually buzz close to bikes.

It's the opposite here. If you have any inclination to practice the social distance thing, you may as well leave the multi-use trails to those who don't really.

But this is also assuming that the intended use is to get somewhere, for some purpose. Just to go out for a ride on a multi-use trail, a motor doesn't really make so much sense to me.
 
I've had and built recumbent bikes. You are right. You cannot stand up for bumps. I also have a old fsr with rear hub. I have a 20 in. X2.3 in .for the hub and 24 in on front. Mini apehangers .
Some will scoff but it is comfy for me. I still want to get a better seat.
I say have some larger rims laced and go with bigger tires. You can run less pressure.
 
I always employ a "comfort strategy" to my ebikes (I'm 70). Stating with a FS mountain bike;
1) If the handlebars are low, I add adjustable "stem-extenders".
2) I use this seat;
https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B07J6RBQ1B/ref=ppx_yo_dt_b_search_asin_title?ie=UTF8&psc=1
Very firm and supportive for a "cheap seat", it breaks in to conform nicely to the posterior.
More like it just worked out this way, all my bikes have been equipped w/ a Fox Float rear shock which is air adjustable. I'm a big guy and use Fox's air shock tuning kit which allows 3 custom raising rates.
And also incidental, I lace up wider rims and run 2.4" Crazy Bobs. These tires have a solid side-wall and I can safely run less than 30 PSI, which helps comfort.
I have always use geared motors which weigh less than 5 Kg for less un-sprung weight.
These days, I only ride low speed "assist bike", so I run a 2 Kg. mini on the frt.
I'm lucky in that I don't have any lower back problems so a mild "monkey f**king a football" riding position is not bothersome.
 
john61ct said:
Personally the Dutch style utility frame is a lot better for general use

than the NA-mainstream near universal use of sport designs for all types of riding

You're right about that. But there are many places in a non-flat country where just getting around by pedal power implies riding more vigorously than a Dutch bike is set up for. That makes it a great candidate for electric assist, though.

One of the puzzling things about US market bikes is the "comfort bike", which is intended for a similar purpose to that of a Dutch bike, but set up badly for it, with a handlebar height and seat tube angle that are at odds with each other. It's as if they were designed by and for people who don't actually ride them (which is probably true).

7bbbdeee12a754b2c6e3e262b00f4b8f_large.jpg


versus

Azor-Carolina-Womens-R-High-Gloss-Black.jpg
 
Electra Townie cruiser bicycle, 29D, 3x9 speeds, has 27.5 wheels, not good for a hub motor
There is also a 21D model, 3x7 speeds, has 26" wheels .

Both would be a good option for a cruiser style while still keeping the regular bicycle riding position and having a 22 crank for the hills if you want more of a pedal assist.

The 7D is a 1x7 model, if you dont use pedal assist and prefer more throttle action then using whatever a chain does.

A cruiser fat bike, most are rigid that arent expensive a.f.
Would give you more cushioning with 4" or 5" fat tires. Add a suspension seat post and a quality seat, then add a suspension fork.
EVO 604's are nice
Random find - https://www.bikesxpress.com/products/micargi-slugo-seven-speed-fat-tire-beach-cruiser-_924-2


You can also buy a lean back (lay back) seat post to get your position to where you want it.
 
Balmorhea said:
One of the puzzling things about US market bikes is the "comfort bike", which is intended for a similar purpose to that of a Dutch bike, but set up badly for it, with a handlebar height and seat tube angle that are at odds with each other.
I rode a Netherlands-made/style bicycle around the parking lot once. I don't know how they do it. Maybe one develops the ability to use different muscles, but I think if you look at pictures of people cycling to work &c., in the Netherlands or anywhere, natural selection has led to a moderate forward posture. Not bolt upright.
 
donn said:
Balmorhea said:
One of the puzzling things about US market bikes is the "comfort bike", which is intended for a similar purpose to that of a Dutch bike, but set up badly for it, with a handlebar height and seat tube angle that are at odds with each other.
I rode a Netherlands-made/style bicycle around the parking lot once. I don't know how they do it. Maybe one develops the ability to use different muscles, but I think if you look at pictures of people cycling to work &c., in the Netherlands or anywhere, natural selection has led to a moderate forward posture. Not bolt upright.

If you live in a flat place, with short distances, and don't want to go fast, it works fine to sit up as straight as you please. You get better visibility and situational awareness that way, too. That's how they do it in most of the cycle commuting world. Traditional Chinese bikes, Indian bikes, African bikes, Indonesian bikes all look pretty Dutch.

I don't live in a place like that, so I like my bars set a few inches higher than my seat, but with a long forward reach.
 
Several years ago I bought one of these Momentum IWant Park bikes like the ones below. Mine was orange, and I believe that the different colours reflect different frame sizes. I thought it looked a little funny until going for a test ride. As soon as I got back to the bike shop I bought it. Truly the most comfortable bike I have ever been on. Just a well thought out design due to the crank forward layout. I paid somewhere between $300 and $400 for it, can't remember. Should never have sold it. I always set my bikes up for a more upright riding position because it gets the weight off your wrists, and is just more comfortable to ride. These bikes are already set up for an upright position.

This would be my recommendation. Any bike is going to be a compromise, but if you want comfort, then this is it. There's another manufacturer that makes something called a Townie that is pretty close to one of these. You might want to pop into a shop and take one for a test drive like I did. The dropouts in the rear are on the narrow side, but there's probably room to shoe horn a hub motor in there, or put it on the front, or go w/ a mid drive. I was concerned about the problems of putting a suspension fork on the front due to the bike's long stem, but they found a nice one in a catalog for me, so that's not an issue.

oU5HIuf.jpg

XNrDZGf.jpg
 
torker said:
I've had and built recumbent bikes. You are right. You cannot stand up for bumps. I also have a old fsr with rear hub. I have a 20 in. X2.3 in .for the hub and 24 in on front. Mini apehangers .
Some will scoff but it is comfy for me. I still want to get a better seat.
I say have some larger rims laced and go with bigger tires. You can run less pressure.

Both of my semi recumbents have rear suspension. One has front suspension as well.
The bike with dual suspension is more comfortable than a BMW when it goes through a pothole. The one that just has rear suspension, i'm confident to bomb down a mountain trail with. I've never once thought that i need to stand up.

There's a decent amount of recumbent and semi recumbent bikes out there that at least have rear suspension. I'm surprised that people still buy unsuspended ones! maybe they don't see them as serious vehicles or something..
 
Here are some comfortable feet forward semi-recumbent and recumbent comfort cruisers to salivate over including some narrow leaning trikes.

Semi recumbent 3 Kamils electric Velokraft.JPG
Bram Smit leaning Delta 2.JPG
Compact tandem pilot is recumbent by Fitek.JPG
 
Balmorhea said:
One of the puzzling things about US market bikes is the "comfort bike", which is intended for a similar purpose to that of a Dutch bike, but set up badly for it, with a handlebar height and seat tube angle that are at odds with each other.
7bbbdeee12a754b2c6e3e262b00f4b8f_large.jpg


versus

Azor-Carolina-Womens-R-High-Gloss-Black.jpg
Would you mind explaining more for noobs like me?

Explicitly which factors in which direction, even which bike is which, which is better, what elements makes it easier to grind up a steep hill etc

I've no idea, so ELI5



 
John in CR said:
a few more:
Semi recumbent 6 Giant Revive comfort Ebike.JPG
We had one exactly like this here, Giant Revive. I did ride it once. It does have rear suspension and adjustable steering angle and height. Easy to build since it has horizontal dropouts. Not a bad idea from the start, but the riding feel is absolute crap. It is like a mobility vehicle, made for 5 mph granny shopping. No wonder why Giant had lost money with this bike.
 
john61ct said:
Balmorhea said:
One of the puzzling things about US market bikes is the "comfort bike", which is intended for a similar purpose to that of a Dutch bike, but set up badly for it, with a handlebar height and seat tube angle that are at odds with each other.
7bbbdeee12a754b2c6e3e262b00f4b8f_large.jpg


versus

Azor-Carolina-Womens-R-High-Gloss-Black.jpg
Would you mind explaining more for noobs like me?

Explicitly which factors in which direction, even which bike is which, which is better, what elements makes it easier to grind up a steep hill etc

There is a useful and proven range of hip angle for effective pedaling. Too narrow, and it impedes breathing and doesn't let your glutes work effectively. Too wide, and it also prevents your largest hip extensors from doing their job.

Both the bikes I showed have very upright sitting positions, so you can't push against the weight of your torso when pedaling. But the Dutch bike has a slack seat angle, which allows you to push back into the seat to some degree, and helps offset the amount that the riding position opens up the hip angle.

The American comfort bike has a very steep seat angle, like a sporting road bike. The hip angle is too wide, and there's no way to push against the saddle when pedaling. It's really ineffectual and awkward.

Fortunately after almost 30 years of this kind of incompetently designed bike, many manufacturers seem to be getting wise to the ways they undermine attempts to ride them. So now more than ever in the USA, you see comfort-oriented bikes with slacker seat angles:
156154-800-auto


These things are relevant to us as e-bikers because we don't ever have to pedal very hard, and our ergonomics thus correspond to weak, feckless, effort-averse pedal cyclists.
 
"These things are relevant to us as e-bikers because we don't ever have to pedal or pedal very hard"

I like that black bike picture, 3x8 is good to have because I like the ability to use the 22 or 24 crank gear for climbing, but also have the 44 for cruising at speed.
 
Back
Top