The great thing about trikes

[rydabent]

The great thing about trikes, and especially e-trikes is you can remain active years longer. When you get older, if you set in front of the TV, you will quickly rust out and die.

OTOH with how much fun trikes are to ride, they are great fun for anyone, no matter how old you are.

[rydabent]

The "real cyclist" turn their noses up at bents and trikes--------now. But some day, they too will get old and if they want to get out and cycle, a trike may be their only choice. And with an electric trike, they can almost ride up to the day of their funereal.

[GirishH]

@rydabent, I will not turn my nose at bents or trikes or e-bikes. I was feeling proud about riding my fatbike across the mountains Himalayas until I rode into a cyclist riding a single-speed bike in the same region and he's planning to climb the same mountains that I am struggling in my 10-gear bicycle..:-(

That was a humbling moment for me..

By the way, I saw this "carriage" along the hillside yesterday. Your comment about funeral made me connect the "dots"..

(03-30-2025, 09:32 AM)rydabent Wrote:  The "real cyclist" turn their noses up at bents and trikes--------now. But some day, they too will get old and if they want to get out and cycle, a trike may be their only choice. And with an electric trike, they can almost ride up to the day of their funereal.

[momoviribus]

The great thing about a trike is the stability! Newbies can just get on it and start riding, whether you will before or not, it's stable enough not to roll over (on a smooth road!) Another great thing is that you can carry a lot of stuff, although two-wheelers also have baskets, tricycles can carry several times their capacity!

[rydabent]

(04-23-2025, 03:47 AM)momoviribus Wrote:  The great thing about a trike is the stability! Newbies can just get on it and start riding, whether you will before or not, it's stable enough not to roll over (on a smooth road!) Another great thing is that you can carry a lot of stuff, although two-wheelers also have baskets, tricycles can carry several times their capacity!

Yes what you say is true. Anyone even if they have never learned how to ride a bike, can get on a trike and ride off with confidence.

[rydabent]

Trikes have 3 great things going for them, comfort, view, and ease of use.

[Jesper]

(04-23-2025, 03:47 AM)momoviribus Wrote:  The great thing about a trike is the stability! Newbies can just get on it and start riding, whether you will before or not, it's stable enough not to roll over (on a smooth road!) Another great thing is that you can carry a lot of stuff, although two-wheelers also have baskets, tricycles can carry several times their capacity!

Note: you can carry a large capacity on an upright trike, but not as much on a recumbent trike; and a 2 wheel bike can have more capacity than a recumbent because of visibility and the significant difference at the height where the average rider's head would be (~3'). There is no way that the packs I have seen on many stock touring bikes that would fit on a standard recumbent trike without modifying the riders position to achieve adequate visibility front or back (no mirrors!) around your gear. On upright riding machines with two or more wheels you can pretty much pack from the lowest pedal position up to neck height and still have 360° visibility plus being able to wear a backpack for more capacity; plus you can stand up for better visibility on a standard bike or trike. That same amount of gear would not be feasible on a recumbent unless you have a very long neck even if you could mount it and control it while riding at high speeds and maneuvering (have not seen any recumbent, 2 or 3 wheels, outhandle a 2 wheel bike even without packs mounted).

I like recumbents (though I would never ride one due to their limitations and what I can do on a road bike), but let us be honest about the reality between uprights and recumbents that cannot be overlooked.

Another thing about head height is all the crud getting in your face when riding bike where your head is considerably lower than when riding upright bikes (and you get to breath in more or that crap too!!). Debris flying up from your own tires, the wind, trucks/cars (got to love the small pebbles shooting at your legs on an upright but at your eyes on a recumbent), etc. is much more prevalent below the saddle of an upright bike; and right where your head is on a recumbent. If I had to clean the as much grit and dirt off of my face as I do my legs after a 2 to 3 hr ride I would just stop riding. If riding off-road on my road bike I am getting my legs and hands hit by surrounding flora; on a recumbent you are slapped in the face (if you could even go where I go on a recumbent which of course is another limitation: restricted riding adventure).

---

(05-11-2025, 08:55 AM)rydabent Wrote:  Trikes have 3 great things going for them, comfort, view, and ease of use.

Better view on an upright unless you can see over a 5 foot wall while sitting in your bike's chair. I could not when I sat on one which is the big limitation unless you are particularly tall or like to look at walls and not over them. Immediately I knew without turning a pedal that what I would normally see while riding an upright would be greatly hindered by riding on a recumbent; aside from handling limitations. You also have farther visibility on an upright just due to curvature of the Earth and by the fact that having your eyes in a higher position than is possible on a recumbent vehicle puts you at an advantage.

Still recumbents are great if you are fine with losing the advantages of riding an upright bike/trike over gaining the advantages of riding a recumbent bike/trike.

---

Another fun note about trikes in general is that they are 1.5 times as likely to get a flat as opposed to a 2 wheeler regardless of upright or recumbent trike design and that cannot be refuted by anyone who understands mathematics.
It is also more difficult to avoid road hazards with 3 wheels, and with recumbent trikes with single rear wheel you cannot see it easily to maneuver clear in a tight bind. On an upright I can hop, skip, and maneuver at a higher speed around and above debris with either front or rear wheel thus avoiding flats (any of you recumbent folks ever do a rear wheel lift or side shift?). I doubt that "bent" riders going over 15 mph (or at any speed really) could avoid debris any easier as I can on an upright even though claiming to be able to see road debris easier. Not sure where that comes from since I can clearly see and avoid tiny debris, glass, metal bits, etc. while cruising at 17-20 mph. It is about seeing it early and with my head being at a higher level I will see debris and obstacles earlier the other side of a rise before a recumbent rider unless they are using a periscope. Is my logic wrong, or are recumbent chairs mounted as high as upright bike/trike saddles?

[rydabent]

Why worry about a five foot wall, when a great percentage of the time DF riders are staring down at their front wheel.

[Criminal]

(05-12-2025, 10:15 AM)rydabent Wrote:  Why worry about a five foot wall, when a great percentage of the time DF riders are staring down at their front wheel.

Hello cyclists,
The quoted statement is blatantly false. Obviously common sense and how people actually ride their bikes shows the remark as folly regardless of attempts at rationalizing it.

This is how lies and disinformation gets spread. I am glad someone exposed it. Why say something that is just ludricous when you put any thought into the statement

I have ridden a 2 wheel recumbent. I WAS looking at the my top of front wheel, as it was just below my chin level; but what do I know? Not even a close contest to whether I looked at my tire on an upright compared to the recumbent (which front wheel kicks crap up in your face while you are looking at it; not fun!).

[rydabent]

(05-20-2025, 01:28 PM)Criminal Wrote:  

(05-12-2025, 10:15 AM)rydabent Wrote:  Why worry about a five foot wall, when a great percentage of the time DF riders are staring down at their front wheel.

Hello cyclists,
The quoted statement is blatantly false. Obviously common sense and how people actually ride their bikes shows the remark as folly regardless of attempts at rationalizing it.

This is how lies and disinformation gets spread. I am glad someone exposed it. Why say something that is just ludricous when you put any thought into the statement

I have ridden a 2 wheel recumbent. I WAS looking at the my top of front wheel, as it was just below my chin; but what do I know? Not even a close contest to whether I looked at my tire on an upright compared to the recumbent (which front wheel kicks crap up in your face while you are looking at it; not fun!).

The 20 inch front wheel on my RANS Stratus is far below my line of sight. The front wheel on my Trident trike are at the side of my line of sight. Having ridden DF bikes for 60 years before going bent, I all to well know DF riders spend a lot of time staring down at their front wheel. On a long ride, after a while it hurt to hold you head up much to get a good view. At least twice I have been run off the bike path by DF rider looking down at their front wheel.

[Criminal]

@rydabent Just because you looked at yout front wheel while riding your upright bike does not mean the VAST MAJORITY of riders do the same thing. You mention a couple times in 60 years of riders NOT PAYING ATTENTION to their riding (does not matter where they were looking except for the fact that they were not cycling in a safe manmer). You would think, if based on your statements, that you would have to avoid at least every other rider or more because, per your ludicrous statement, the majority of upright riders are looking down. How did you survive when you were looking down.

It is clear that regardless of any empirical proof you are stuck on some mental groove that does not allow you to alter your faulty impression of upright cycle riders. You made another comment about vision; well guess what, studies have clearly showed how having your eyes at a lower level reduces the range of your vision. Of course with your twisted logic you clearly think that someone siiting in a chair can see more than someone standing up. I know it is not "old man" logic since I myself am quite old so it must be irrational thought which of course we all know you cannot debate. Never debate with the demented, senile, insane, drunk, or immature. You will not win because the insane will always think their thoughts are rational no matter how much logic is used.

I'll see all you upright riders out there on the trail; no wait, I will not see you, nor you me, as we will all be looking down.

Cheers; I am done with nut case, but I'd be happy to hear from those who agree 100% with the OP, as so far there is no one who does!

[rydabent]

(05-20-2025, 01:28 PM)Criminal Wrote:  

(05-12-2025, 10:15 AM)rydabent Wrote:  Why worry about a five foot wall, when a great percentage of the time DF riders are staring down at their front wheel.

Hello cyclists,
The quoted statement is blatantly false. Obviously common sense and how people actually ride their bikes shows the remark as folly regardless of attempts at rationalizing it.

This is how lies and disinformation gets spread. I am glad someone exposed it. Why say something that is just ludricous when you put any thought into the statement

I have ridden a 2 wheel recumbent. I WAS looking at the my top of front wheel, as it was just below my chin level; but what do I know? Not even a close contest to whether I looked at my tire on an upright compared to the recumbent (which front wheel kicks crap up in your face while you are looking at it; not fun!).

Aw come on now, I know how DF riders ride. After all I rode DF bikes for 60 years before going to bents. On century rides the sorest part of my body was the back of my neck and shoulders, from trying to hold my head up to see where I was going. That just doesnt happen on recumbents. In fact after a century on a bent, while you may be tired, nothing hurts.

[Criminal]

One great thing about recumbent trikes is that it apparently makes you lose sight of reality and you think you now have the best thing ever even though: 1) on average you suck in more concentrated exhaust emmissions, dust/extra fine grit/pollen, etc. (heavier than air, fumes/dust stay low to the ground) than when on a Generally Upright Riding Posture Frame (GURPF) bike whether "DF" or not; 2) on average you have more debris thrown into your face (lower head level) than when on a GURPF bike; 3) you have factually increased danger due to reduced visibility (lower eye level; simple geometry easily proves this, studies have been done), except for seeing the ground directly beneath your butt (too late!; you already ran over that glass with your front wheel(s) [that rydabent was not looking at]) than when on a GURPF bike; 4) storing your recumbent trike is more of an issue than it is for a GURPF bike; 5) transporting is more of an issue (I can put 2 GURPF bikes in a Mini Cooper while still seating 4; try that with 1 recumbent trike!) than it is for a GURPF bike; 6) shipping is more expensive (common sense: larger & heavier = more $) than it is for a GURPF bike; 7) recumbent trikes are harder to portage (manually carry due to weight, length, and width) over/around obstacles, fit into lifts, carry up/down stairs, enter/egress some trails, etc. than it is for a GURPF bike; 8) recumbent trikes on average cost more than a similar level GURPF bike; 9) climbing with your recumbent trike is slower on average than it is for a GURPF bike; 10) recumbent trikes handle far worse than a GURPF bike; 11) recumbent trikes require higher cost and more time to maintain (common sense: 3 hubs) than it is for a GURPF bike 12) recumbent trikes require more onboard repair supplies (3 wheels= more inner tubes, possibly also needing more than one size of tube) than for a GURPF bike; 13) can carry less cargo than on a GURPF bike; 14) allow for less body movement (you cannot lean back, stand up than when on a GURPF bike

Myth: recumbents are more comfortable than GURPFs. Fact: It is a personal preference, and has to do with each rider's body type and preferred riding style. Consider that a rider doing a century ride who is sore after the ride from not being in the proper condition or whose body cannot handle such event compared to another cyclist who can ride 200 and not be sore. The century rider was uncomfortable because their body and physical condition was not appropriate for efficient cycling of a GURPF and so a eecumbenr might be more comfortable; whereas a GURPF riding can be perfectly comfortablr after riding for 12 hrs or more without soreness (I did it; I and never thought while riding that I wished I was on a "bent trike").

Recumbents ARE inherently: 1) more stable than a GURPF bike; 2) faster than GURPFs on flats and descents (if no too technical; where bikes excell over trikes) due to aerodynamics (depends on seat angle, as you can have an equal more aerodynamic profile on a GURPF if riding in such a manner.

So yes, trikes are great if the differences between a "bent trike" and GURPF bike are of no concern to you. If your body's physiology and condition; and personal preferences are best fit for that type of design then by all means buy one. It is not a negative reflection for choosing that type of vehicle; but it is also not reason to state baseless claims without assessing all factors in an unbiased manner; especially if just trying to make diaphanous rationalizations to support one's opinions because you disagree with the facts.