Taming the Fuego

DIscuss anything relating to non-standard cycles and their equipment.
Post Reply
hercule
Posts: 1156
Joined: 5 Feb 2011, 5:18pm

Taming the Fuego

Post by hercule »

I though it might be worth noting this for anyone who is struggling with their recumbent.

I've been riding recumbents for over 10 years now, first and mostly trikes, though I have had a fascination with the two wheeled variety. I've struggled to get on with the two wheelers, though - my LWB Tour Easy clone is not the most manageable of beasts, BikeEs are a bit slow (and give me terrible recumbutt after a while). I really enjoyed my Pashley PDQ, it was quick, stable, and responsive, but a bit twitchy at speed and a inch or so too high for me to be wholly confident I could get a foot down when needed.

I bought a Nazca Fuego second hand 4 years ago and whilst I have mostly enjoyed riding it, I've have struggled with its slow speed handling, hills and road junctions made me feel very anxious. Sometimes it's felt like riding it has been a challenge rather than a pleasure, and I've reached the point at times where I have seriously thought of trading it in for another trike, but before doing that had resolved to see if I could improve the handling issue. I considered the positive features of my PDQ, which were a relatively upright seat and virtually tiller free steering and tried to see if I could replicate them on my Fuego.

The first was easy to do: simply raise the seat up. Second proved challenging: as I got it, the Fuego had a fairly long tiller and with the standard cranks I had very little latitude to move it without banging my knees against the bars. I fitted a 152mm Lasco chainset, which pushed the bottom bracket a bit further forward and significantly reduced knee bend. Suddenly I had acres of room between the bars and my knees. Unfortunately the stem wasn't going to slide in by hand any further even though it seemed that there was plenty of room left; cue block of wood and gentle taps with a hammer. I managed to move the bars in 2 inches or so and still have plenty of leg clearance. Finally, I raised the bars; previously I'd ridden with them in their lowest position, practically in my lap. The bars are now in a line with the bottom bracket and my eyes as I sit on the bike. The combined effect has meant that my elbows are bent at about 100 degrees , rather than the much more acute angle that was the case before.

I have been startled by the result. The bike is much more manageable at slow speed, I can roll up to junctions and sit forward without thinking that I'm about to land on the tarmac in a heap. I'm not wobbling all over the place climbing hills (though sadly they are no easier!) There seems to be little effect on high speed handling, I reached 36mph today with no change in the bike's usual confident manner.

I suspect I have been seduced by the "low, sleek, fast" image of low racers and have unconsciously replicated that. Sitting up a bit and minimising the tiller effect has made a big difference, even if I'm less aero. Whilst moving the bars and the seat are the obvious mods, I wasn't expecting that changing the crank length could impact bike set up in the manner it has done. Happy rider :)
PDQ Mobile
Posts: 4659
Joined: 2 Aug 2015, 4:40pm

Re: Taming the Fuego

Post by PDQ Mobile »

Interesting little report.
More upright is seemingly the answer to feeling secure at rest I think.
I had a PDQ, and I rated it highly as a stable ride. I even took it around one of the mountain bike trails at Gwydyr Forest once, though my neck was stiff for days afterwards from the bouncing around. I don't think the frame (or neck)would stand that treatment long term.
It was sort of foldable too.
Took it to Majorca and the roadies (who had passed me laughing going up) couldn't touch it on a twisting downhill descent, such fun!!
Though at high speeds uneven surfaces could be interesting, but on smooth tarmac, uncatchable.

I bought a SMGT as a replacement. I prefer underseat steering now. The comfort and ergonomics are brilliant. It's heavy though.
It has adjustable seat angle of course and I manage it ok in all conditions even up very steep (1:5) sub 3mph hills.
Enjoy your upright Fuego!
UpWrong
Posts: 2409
Joined: 31 May 2009, 12:16pm
Location: Portsmouth, Hampshire

Re: Taming the Fuego

Post by UpWrong »

How did you raise the seat? Normal seat adjustment or did you need to raise the frame by changing the rear shock position?

Interesting observation about being able to raise and shorten the tiller bar once you had your knees rising less with the short cranks. My own experience with tiller is the there's almost a tipping point between manageable and nerve-racking. On my Stratus XP I changed over from the laid-back sling mesh seat to the more upright standard seat in order to reduce tiller.
hercule
Posts: 1156
Joined: 5 Feb 2011, 5:18pm

Re: Taming the Fuego

Post by hercule »

The seat is at the top of its normal range (previously I was in the middle); you might know you can also change the rear shock mounting though as that has an effect on the head tube angle it can affect the steering a bit (I find the steeper the head tube, the more twitchy it handles).

One of the issues with my LWB is the huge amount of tiller, I think originally it must have been built for someone with much longer arms and proportionately shorter legs than me.
recumbentpanda
Posts: 286
Joined: 6 Apr 2009, 12:13pm

Re: Taming the Fuego

Post by recumbentpanda »

Strikes me this is really a post about 'bike fit'. One of the nice things about the fuego is its adjustability, so provided you have the right frame size ( they come in small medium and large I believe) you should be able to tune it to suit your particular build.

Un-used to tiller steering, I also found mine tricky at low speeds at first, but like any skill I also find I am improving with practice. Having the bars too low both exaggerates the tiller effect and means 'belly interference' becomes a problem :D. I have to negotiate quite a few slow tight corners on my usual rides, and for those I just push the handlebars forward and up. It startles onlookers, but immediately improves slow speed handling.

The usefulness of short cranks in improving clearances for oss bikes is certainly worth thinking about - I am, but my current fuego has some rather nice 175s on which I am reluctant to replace just yet.

Overall I love the fuego, it's one of the nicest bikes of any description I have owned.
swscotland bentrider
Posts: 299
Joined: 3 Aug 2008, 4:38pm

Re: Taming the Fuego

Post by swscotland bentrider »

I've always run the Fuego's I have owned in a fairly upright riding position. (Middle shock setting , seat near the top of its range) I use 170 mm cranks. It is by far and away the best sorted 'mid' racer I have ridden. I'm currently riding a Furai 24 and good though it is am seriously thinking about going back to the Fuego.

One aspect I particularly like is the ease with which it can be launched. The only recumbent I've owned where it became an unconscious action as on a DF. Because I was able to keep one foot planted on the ground while beginning to roll forward on the power stroke made it the best recumbent bike for loaded touring I have ridden. :D
hercule
Posts: 1156
Joined: 5 Feb 2011, 5:18pm

Re: Taming the Fuego

Post by hercule »

Yes indeed, my point was that a bit of fiddling with position can make a big difference; on recumbents, fit seems to be not just about the comfort factor but riding dynamics as well (true on a DF too, but not to such an extent).

The Fuego is available in two sizes, M and L; mine is a M as I'm 5'8" on a good day, I think I'd get even more heel strike with a L. One of the paradoxical things is that the larger frame size has a lower seat height, those of us with short legs are further from the ground! I'd agree it's a lovely bike, I'd be upset to have to part with it.
User avatar
pjclinch
Posts: 5470
Joined: 29 Oct 2007, 2:32pm
Location: Dundee, Scotland
Contact:

Re: Taming the Fuego

Post by pjclinch »

I just don't get on that well with tillers. Otherwise identical bikes I've ridden with tillers and aeros I've found the tiller a bit skittery and the aeros rock solid. It doesn't surprise me given my fairly limited experience of tillers that repositioning them a bit could make a useful difference.

Pete.
Often seen riding a bike around Dundee...
BrownBear
Posts: 29
Joined: 16 Apr 2016, 5:24pm

Re: Taming the Fuego

Post by BrownBear »

Short cranks were key to your success, and indeed most seem to find they suit HRs well. Even 175->165 has eliminated occasional heel strike for me. Many current developments are a potentially good for bents; discs, wider profile tubeless tyres, Wi-fi gears... yes please. Hopefully, the increased focus on female specific bikes (eg Canyon's new range) might be the trigger for wider availability of shorter crank lengths. It's often been pointed out that if 6fter's are best served by 175mm, then proportionality suggests someone of 5ft 2 would benefit from around 150, yet groupset restrictions mean small frame sizes aren't able to make that standard issue. A 155 SRAM Red 1*12 etap would be part of my dream 2020 graphene HR build :-)

I agree USS is the ergonomic choice, in applications where that trumps aerodynamics. But I'd put a shout in for superman bars. My point is that there's no need to compromise seat angle for slow speed handling, since it's so easy to sit up at slow speed. Can't deny the severe gradient issue with extreme laydown though. I have lent forward and used the handle bar cross bar climbing in the peaks occasionally; it works well but then it's virtually impossible to change gear. On the fly seat adjustment and/or remote gear adjuster buttons on the bars would be another part of my dream build.
hercule
Posts: 1156
Joined: 5 Feb 2011, 5:18pm

Re: Taming the Fuego

Post by hercule »

In fact my recent tinkering was the last step before trying superman bars (aerosteer in Nazca-speak) on my Fuego. My only concern was the possibility of leg interference in sharp turns and the consequent reduction in turning circle.

BTW when I look at the geometry of women's specific frames they look more and more like what I need to ride an upright comfortably: short reach, bars generally level with the saddle... maybe they should be called "women and aging inflexible men" fit instead!
BrownBear
Posts: 29
Joined: 16 Apr 2016, 5:24pm

Re: Taming the Fuego

Post by BrownBear »

Yep leg interference can be a big issue with s/m bars. (Don't like the term aerosteer much, since hamster bars - in the right setup - are undoubtedly more aero). It depends on the bars and the rider (long legs and short arms being the least suitable). I found that bar end gear triggers made (painful) contact, but with excellent X0 twist grips, I have no issues. So, unfortunately, that requires experimentation - though many of us seem to enjoy the process of tweaking setups :-)

I agree gender is a pretty broad brush way of defining geometry. There's a rather good video on 'proportional geometry' at http://fairlightcycles.com/why-fairligh ... cba1185463 (and IMO a Faran would make an excellent stable mate to a HR).
Post Reply