A recumbent bike for climbing

[Blondie]

For me a good climbing recumbent has

1. Fairly lightweight frameset.
2. Does not hinder your ability to generate power.
3. stiff frame so that most of your power goes into driving the bike forward.

Ultimately how fast you go up a hill is dependant upon how much power you can deliver to the driven wheel, and the overall system weight (you plus bike plus accessories).

If you think the BB on the P-38 is high then don’t try high racers which would be a shock to you.

I also ride a P-38 but with the standard bars and stem the usual way round. I find it a good climber and after 4 years riding it am faster uphill on it than my road bike.

The steepest sustained hills I’ve climb on it are 25% and there was no need to weave.

I’m one of the fastest climbers in my cycling uk group regardless of bike type. Often what we assume is caused by the bike type, is more often a difference in fitness levels, or simply a question of system weight, if you’re of similar fitness

Also as above, if you want your overall average speed to be higher, then putting an greater effort in uphill matters. Provided you can sustain it over the number of hills and duration of your ride.

[a.twiddler]

Pretty much what you described. Still, for many, stumbling across a recumbent that's local and sort of fits is the best we can hope for.

Low weight is not often what comes to mind when comparing a diamond frame with a recumbent, but it obviously helps if it's there.

I'm not sure what is meant by not hindering your ability to generate power, but I could imagine that some riders would cope better with more extreme angles of recline and bottom bracket height than others, and having too upright a seat could restrict your breathing, so getting a set up that works for the individual is probably more critical with a recumbent than with a diamond frame layout.

If your frame doesn't flop around like a wet noodle it helps, too. I didn't think that the frame of my Linear was particularly flexy, at least with my power output, but after I got a frame brace welded on last year the difference was noticeable. It didn't stop me getting up hills, before that, even so.

Now that I'm getting more accustomed to the Spirit I'm not finding problems getting up hills on that, either. I would have thought that the suspension might absorb some power but I can't detect any loss.

Of course it's all relative. I'm not worried about speed. As long as I can get up hills, the downhills can look after themselves. I was always a great freewheeler, maybe less so on a recumbent as there is more benefit from pedalling downhill to gain speed for getting up the other side, to compensate to some extent for not being able to stand on the pedals as per upright bike. It's swings and roundabouts, and mostly the benefits outweigh the drawbacks.

I can't help thinking that the effect of hills on recumbent bikes is overstated. If you're a fierce competitive rider on an upright bike you'll be the same on a recumbent, and will do your utmost to be better than the rest, as you'll hate being passed by anybody.

As for me, I'm happy to ride alone, grow a beard, wear sandals with socks, chill out, twirl up those hills at my own pace, wave cheerily at those who go by covered in sweat and snot, take the day as it comes. I just wish I'd discovered recumbents years before, when I was younger and stronger.

[pjclinch]

...so getting a set up that works for the individual is probably more critical with a recumbent than with a diamond frame layout.

I suspect it's pretty much the same.
For example, despite years of experience with fairly stretched out positions and drop bars and being happy with them I now really don't care much for either and avoid them.

...wear sandals with socks,

Socks optional, but if you're not already familiar check out Shimani SD5 SPD compatible sandals. My feet are too wide for Shimano shoes and boots, but with the sandals it's not a problem. Highly recommended!

Pete.

[Audax67]

Scheissgerät steigt nicht! Shouted complaint of recumbent German gentleman as I passed him on my conventional bike, halfway up a l-o-o-o-o-ng climb out of Pont-à-Mousson on a 600 in 2011. A never-to-be-forgotten moment.

[[XAP]Bob]

What do they say about a workman and his tools?

[Lodge]

My Bacchetta Giro 24" wasn't too bad at climbing, as per the screenshot of my Garmin data from back in 2016. 70 miles with 4666 feet of ascent at an average of 10.3 mph. I did a similar trip on my touring bike (Patria Terra) back in 2012 at a similar speed. Both bikes had Rohloff hubs geared for climbing and were similar weights. The Bacchetta, with its straight frame tube and no suspension, transmitted the power well with no discernable flex.

[Blondie]

I can't help thinking that the effect of hills on recumbent bikes is overstated.

Agree. It’s mostly anecdote from someone on an upright catching up someone on a recumbent up a hill. Usually they don’t know the rider, have no idea how hard each of them was working, or relative fitness levels, or how much fatigue the other rider is carrying. They just see they are on a different bike design and assume that’s the reason they were able to catch them. When I catch and pass uprights uphill, I don’t go, ah uprights are rubbish uphill.

This is why the anecdotes from riders who ride both upright and recumbent are of more interest. They are in a position to compare performances when they go all out uphill on both upright and recumbent. The engine is the same, now let’s see what they can do on the same hill.

[Stradageek]

It's complicated and I think the answer appeared somewhere on this forum some years ago when I asked if anyone had readings for power output at the cranks and rear hub for a recumbent climbing a hill at a given speed compared to a DF bike.

But there's another factor. A fairly recent GCN challenge pitted a velomobile against a TT bike. The girl in the velomobile commented that she was winning whilst putting out only 250 Watts but was at maximum heart rate. She didn't expand on the obvious conclusion that she had no 'recumbent legs'. Witness also Chris Hoy, in his prime, having a try out at Battle Mountain and failing miserably. This, of course, begs the further question of whether the human body can generate the same amount of power in the recumbent position as in the DF upright mode. Again, I think there are comments but no firm conclusion elsewhere on this forum.

I think the late, great, Mike Burrows did a semi-scientific hill climb experiment using his own bikes and legs and concluded there is little difference.

But there is a difference in the bikes; weight and a direct chain-line plus a very slightly more upright seating position and rigid frame are what (I believe) make my Bacchetta Strada a great climber and my Speedmachine a poor/slower climber. In particular, I once reduced my seat angle on the Strada to get more aero and soon reverted when I couldn't climb hills

Apologies for the 'unlinked' references to previous forum discussions, I'm trying to recover from a beast of a cold and running out of energy fast - back to the sofa methinks...

[UpWrong]

I know from the gears I use when climbing that I produce more torque on an upright which tends to result in more power. Using a higher cadence on the bent can compensate a bit but the uprights still result in quicker times.

[Blondie]

Where as I am now faster uphill on my bent than my upright. At least on the hills I’ve done comparisons on.

[Tigerbiten]

My understanding is ......

The more open the knee-hip-shoulder angle is, the less you engage your glutes to pull the thigh back.
This shifts the power generation more onto your quads.
Hence needing the odd thousand mile to get the quads to a new level of fitness and to build up your "bent" legs.
Plus your quads are a smaller muscle group therefore they fatigue quicker.
This means you have a lower max sustained power output.
It may not be much but it's there.

At flat land speeds, 8-16 mph, you tend not to push hard and there no real difference between bent and upwrong, bar comfort.
Above flatland speeds your racing and the aero advantage is much bigger than the slight max power loss on a bent.
It's below flatland speeds when hill climbing that the any power loss shows up.
You cannot push quite as hard as your quads fatigue quicker and you cannot get out of the seat to use your muscles in slightly different ways, hence bents are slower uphill.
And the steeper the hill, the worse it gets.

Just my 2p worth .....

[a.twiddler]

I've been doing it wrong! Apart from tinkering with gear ratios, poring over gear tables and perhaps trying out different crank lengths I've not done much else apart from making sure the bike(s) fit me. No stressing about various angles, giving greater or lesser amounts of power generation.

I would think that none of the muscle groups in my ageing Betty Spaghetti legs are particularly large but they manage to let me trundle across the landscape OK. I was surprised how even before I did some work to liberate some more of the available gears how the Linear could manage to get up hills, as I believed what I'd read about recumbents not being able to climb. After all, it isn't some super lightweight sporty machine. Perhaps it's just a matter of attitude. I know that I will reach the top of whatever appears ...eventually. For me, at least, as long as everything fits, it's mostly about having low enough gears.

The HPV Spirit seems promising so far, is certainly very comfortable and a bit handier than the lengthy Linear despite its long wheelbase.

Maybe I'm missing something, haven't owned enough recumbents yet, not come across the one that fits, is faster on flat or undulating terrain for the same effort than what I've known to date, without having a penalty in harder climbing or comfort. This seems to be the trade off from what i've read over the last 3-4 years. The eternal search for The One that does it all.

[Stradageek]

Couldn't be caught by a younger paceline of 3 on a long flat, gained 300m freewheeling down a mile long gentle descent against an £8000 carbon racer, but puffed a bit chatting to the same guy on the following ascent. I put it down to a heavy steel highracer and 67yrs of age

But could I really justify a Bacchetta Carbon Aero

[KM2]

Hey, you’re retired . It’s playtime….

[a.twiddler]

Hey, you’re retired . It’s playtime….

Something similar crossed my mind. What's a paceline anyway? A brand of chamois cream? No need for that on a recumbent.

My last recumbent ride involved some bridleway, a bit of towpath bashing and amazingly for me, actually gaining on an older DF rider in some sort of club colours on a long uphill.

He was with a younger companion. I have to keep reminding myself when I see "old fellers" that actually they're younger than me, until I catch a glimpse of myself in the bike mirror.

They stopped for a breather and as I went slowly past he asked if that thing was electric. Once I'd confirmed that it wasn't, he must have been remotivated by the knowledge that I wasn't going to turn up the assistance and see him off as a little later they both went past, very slowly. Admittedly, the whole episode was like a slow motion replay but it was quite gratifying nevertheless. I don't often pass other riders anywhere.

Carbon fibre? None on my bike. One can dream, but I wonder if it's suitable for the sort of rides I do. Lycra? Maybe some in my socks.