[XAP]Bob wrote:I'm not convinced that I could spot any exact changeover points (except the step change as you get to "Non-UCI"), but I think that there is a progression which is worthy of an intermediate label...
I think there's a progression, too. My view is that, when set up correctly for leg length from saddle to pedal, an upright is too tall to get both feet flat on the ground when stationery. This is fine for most, but not necessarily for commuters or people who would need more stability when stopping.
There's a "foot forward" configuration where the bottom bracket is moved a few inches forward of the seat tube (eg the Electra Townie......... http://www.electrabike.com/bikes/townie
). In this arrangement, for the same saddle to pedal length, the saddle is nearer to the ground, allowing two flat feet when stopped. I've had a go on one in America and it's true.
Then there's a configuration with the B/B more forward again (eg the Rans.....http://www.ransbikes.com/bicycles/bicyc ... rward.html
). This is still referred to as foot forward (or crank forward) and with the seat even lower. But still the saddle looks more or less conventional, even if a bit bucket shaped.
Then there are swb and lwb recumbents (eg Bachettas....... http://www.bacchettabikes.com/recumbent-bikes/
) with feet so far forward that some sort of back support is needed.
The change from f/f to semi recumbent lies between the configurations of the Rans and the lwb Bachetta. My own feeling isnt that the definitiion lies directly with the forward distance of the B/B but with what happens when you stop. If you stop and you're still essentially sat on a saddle, with your feet down but without the need for a backrest, then your on an upright, crank forward or F/F bike. If you're stopped, feet down but are still being supported by a back rest, then you're on a semi-recumbent (or if feet are level with hips or above) a recumbent.