Slashdot Mirror
New Human-Powered World Hour Record
jesterpilot writes "Last weekend, the limit of human propulsion was pushed another kilometer. At the 2006 Dempsey-MacCready One Hour Record Attempts on the Nissan track in Arizona, Fred Markham set a new World Hour Record by cranking 85,4 km in a fully faired recumbent bicycle. This is about 1 km more than Sam Whittinghams 2004 record.
Noting Fred's age of fifty years, it seems the boundaries of human propulsion are not even close yet.
Read a report of the decisive runs on Rob English' diary."
New World Hour Record - Now With 61 minutes!
"Total destruction the only solution" - Bob Marley
Being a computer bound, lazy geek, this scares the crap out of me!
-- I have a private email server in my basement.
I know fast freddy, or at least I've met the guy. I met him at Calfee in Santa Cruz, Calfee makes "the best" carbon fiber diamond-frames. He was getting ready to move over to Easy Racers, whose bikes have set numerous human-powered land speed records. They even sell one of those designs, the Gold Rush, to consumers. It's way sexy for a bicycle. Another friend of mine works for them, designing and prototyping bicycles, and doing side work on electric bicycles. Very cool stuff.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
As I point out to my wife, unless you live more than 12 miles from work or are in tremendously horrible shape... cycling smokes all other forms of transpo...
12 miles seems to be the magic traffic versus bike # from my casual watching...
but when they finally get the aero recombant marketable... maybe that will change to 20.
Cars are wierd... not usre why people use them so much...they make you fat...
For those of us that are used to the english system: 85.4 kph = 53.0650998 mph
I don't think I average that on my drive to work.
Can all fish swim?
The guys powering these things aren't couch potatoes either.
Recumbent bikes are cool and faster than regular bikes because the legs are set up near the chest if you look at it horizontally (the long way) and cut down on wind resistance dramatically even without wind flairs and all that.
And they have been setting records for years but unfortunately they have been banned by the UIC (they define the standard bike as a bike). It is said a mediocre (professional) cyclist could beat someone like Armstrong in a normal one day race due to the inherent advantages of the recumbent.
According to the wiki:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Recumbent_bicycle
I wanted a recumbent for years (long wheel base) but because of their low production, they tend to be more expensive, are also heavier, and most look funny.
There are some damn fine looking ones but they cost $$$$, like the Calfee Stiletto, which incidently was codesigned by Calfee and the guy in the article Freddy Markham before the two had a falling out:
http://www.rbr.info/calfee.html
BTW, Markham is known as the Armstrong of recumbents. Getting a record at his age is a surprise, but will add to his legend.
The English use SI, as far as I know.
I have freaks! I did something right...
World Hour Record. That's how far he went in one hour. Divide the distance by the time and you get the rate (85.4km/h).
And if that's not the answer to your question, could you provide more information next time?
I have nothing to say.
Allowing recumbents in road racing would entirely change the nature of the sport. When riding an "upright" bicycle, riding behind close behind another competitor requires about 1/3 less effort. (Sheltering.)
However, nobody is stupid enough just to let everyone else sit on their wheel for a 200Km race. Instead echelons are formed where riders take turn in front, doing their share of the work. Eventually break groups form, and hopefully the smaller group can organize better and gain an advantage.
Of course, if you're in a break group with all your own teammates, organizing isn't a problem. But most of the time you're with competitors. So you have to work *with* your opponents, yet still beat them. This leads to all sorts of interesting tactics.
If road racing turned to recumbents, such tactics would virtually disappear due to the shelter advantage being reduced to minimal. It would, in essence, become a mass start time trial instead of a road race as we know it today.
This is why the UCI does not allow recumbents: It'd be a different sport.
...I got pulled over for *speeding* in a 45 (IIRC, zogheimerz now) zone on my ten speed, an old varsity I had worked on. Radar gun had me at 70(that I remember), downhill of course. The cop and me were both laffin like crazy, he's like "boy, you know how fast you wuz goin?" I'm like "nope, but it sure was fun passin them cars!". No ticket, I got a "warning"...
Glad to see a boomer break another record! yaaaa US!1!!1leben
I am a bent (short for recumbent) rider. I ride a longbikes Slipstream. (IMHO the most comfortable long-distance touring bikes on the planet) I would like to clear up some possible misunderstandings that might exist.
Not all Bents are fast, just as all uprights are not fast. The speed you can get on a bent is largely dependant on your engine.
After riding 100+km (62+miles) on a bent nothing hurts. Compare that to an upright.
If you suffer from wrist, neck, bum, or genital pain after spending ANY amount of time on an upright, I strongly suggest you investigate recumbents.
I strongly recommend browsing http://bentrideronline.com/ It is a goldmine of information.
Bring the joy back to cycling, get bent.
"The price good men pay for indifference to public affairs is to be ruled by evil men." ~Plato (427-347 BC)
it's the usual phrasing for that certain kind of bicycle speed record.
i wonder if this one is standing start or flying start.
[i have an opinion and i am not afraid to use it]
I don't know how handy you are, but you could consider making a 'bent.
Take a look at Atomic Zombie's webpages: everything from reasonable recumbents to front-wheel-drive pure-racing designs, all made from scrap bikes and electrical conduit, welded with a cheap arcwelder. If you're willing to invest more time and energy you can build some superb designs. With my projects, I buy reasonable low-end bikes (shimano exage-level components) from local thrift stores, usually for under $40 for a complete bike, and use those partskits to outfit frames. (You do have to buy lots and lots of bike chain, usually new, since splicing used chain rarely works very well.)
Anyway, Atomic Zombie also has a book in which he goes into considerable detail about the design/construction of thirty or so different bikes. I have friends that have built most of them, and several of the people had never welded before building their first strange bikes. You can get a cheap AC welder from the likes of Harbor Freight & Salvage for way under $100.
Nostalgia's not what it used to be.
The pieces are fairings. ...in a fully fairinged recumbent bicycle. (verbing) ...in a fully fair recumbent bicycle. ...in a fully faired recumbent bicycle. (original)
The adjective fair means unincumbered.
The verb fair, from ship building, is to make smooth and flowing.
Were that I say, pancakes?
I wanted a recumbent for years (long wheel base) but because of their low production, they tend to be more expensive, are also heavier, and most look funny.
Why not a short wheel based? They are lighter, faster and especially the dutch ones like Challenge or Optima don't particulary look funny.
Trust me, I work for the government.
"The world's fastest bicycles, known as "Speedbikes" will converge at the Nissan Technical Center North America outside Casa Grande, Arizona June 30 and July 1-2, 2006 to compete for the $25,000 Dempsey-MacCready Prize, for the first Speedbike to travel 56 miles (90 K) in one hour from a standing start." from http://www.recumbents.com/wisil/racing2006/dempse
Uttering logically derived and empirically supported truths to the disciples of the orthodox establishment.
You don't see F1 cars racing in the NASCAR (or CART or LeMans or SCCA or German Touring Car Championships) circuits. Similarly, UCI's races are limited to upright bicycles.
What's the problem?
Why yes, I AM a rocket scientist!
That's not true. Recumbents are faster on flat road and more aero-dynamic but try climbing hills with them. With a normal bike you can stand up and push if you really need to. A recumbent doesn't have room for that extra push. A recumbent won't have much of an advantage, if not a disadvantage, in something with mountains like the Tour de France.
EvilCON - Made Famous by
The recent record was set at a track (in Arizona) that was different from the previous record holder's ride (in Germany). In fact, aren't there bound to be many differences? Like time of day, weather, and especially wind speed and direction? Is a different of ~1-1.5% within a margin of error or a bona-fide new record? Sure it is technically a longer distance, but it seems like it would be impossible to fully normalize against the different conditions. I guess one would have to atleast do it one the same track, with approximately equivalent weather conditions. Considering that these speed bikes are so precision tuned to add seconds here and there to a time trial, such margins of error should be at least be acknowledged.
When riding an "upright" bicycle, riding behind close behind another competitor requires about 1/3 less effort. (Sheltering.)
It's called "Drafting" and is known to every racing fan and bicycle enthusiast I have ever met.
As for the recumbents not drafting, that's not true. While the bonus may be reduced slightly, there would still be an incentive to draft. Drafting works no matter what kind of vehicle you are in.
What the UCI could do is set up a different league for recumbent racing. Keep the two seperate, such as NASCAR with trucks and cars.
Fly me to the moon Let me sing among those stars Let me see what spring is like On jupiter and mars
I was passing cars *fast*, riding down the center line betwen the two lanes. t-totally completely bonkers nuts. Was going to work, it was around 7 long twisty miles downhill to work (you know, more or less descending), then in the afternoon an terrible 7 mile climb back home when I was already tired from working in an orchard all day. I was laid down over the bars, tucked in for that run, I did it every day but usually I braked some and stayed in my lane, that day I just went for it,you know how you just get feeling *good* ands things are flowing smooth? In the groove? whatever the saying is now. I just went for it zooooom! big fun! It was the cops radar gun, you'd have to question him, he said 70, but I think it was the second fastest I have ridden on a bike. I hit another LONG hill once with little traffic and built up a dang good clip, again, passing cars in the middle. I was a biking fiend back then, and shortly after the radar incident I moved and opened a bicycle shop, were I also built one of the first prototype "mountain bikes", although it wasn't called that then and there weren't any for sale anyplace..
Anyay, it's my story from my youth and I am sticking to it! Got a few more stupid human tricks I fortunately lived through,. another time perhaps...
Also note that it's far, far more difficult to go uphill on a recumbent (perhaps due to different muscles being actuated or the inability to get out of the saddle to produce the surge of watts that might be necessary). Recumbent riders ALWAYS get dropped on any climb.
-- n
Unlikely, even if you had a clone of Armstrong riding the recumbent. Road races take place on rolling terrain, and involve acceleration tactics. Recumbants lose their efficiency uphill because you can't change position on the bike to exploit different muscle groups. Tactics involve a lot of short burst acceleration followed by recovery. The recumbant advantage is due to sustained power, not sprinting.
If road racing turned to recumbents, such tactics would virtually disappear due to the shelter advantage being reduced to minimal. It would, in essence, become a mass start time trial instead of a road race as we know it today.
There is not a grain of truth in any of this.
1. The UCI has a strong sense of tradition that lead it to quickly ban things that don't look like a bike Lemond, Merckx (sp) Gimondi (keep going back...) rode. Recall that the time trial bars in Lemond's era were a controversy and are strictly limited to time trial efforts. National organizations usually follow the UCI at the national level with regional events offering greater flexibility.
2. Like all competitive events, racing equipment is designed to a specification first. Innovation has a tough time making it through any way. Pick your sport, F1, Nascar, Bicycle racing. They all have detailed equipment specs.
3. Wind resistance is the still there if you are sitting in a canopy or not. It will still be the same style of racing. Relatively flat events usually end in a mass sprint. Hilly events usually end up with a tiny lead group and the rest come straggling in for 1+ hours afterwards. Recumbents would make everything faster on average, but that's about it.
OT
What's sad is a competitive amateur (Cycling USA ranked racer) can't go near recumbents for fear of being shunned from the amateur/pro sport. Then you'd see some amazing times. I'm not sure how people would take to racing recumbents as an organized sport, but if Nascar can attract viewers maybe recumbents can if they can simplify some of the race formats.
http://www.maxineudall.com/2010/02/should-economists-be-sued-for-malpractice.html
You can ride what you want of course--but there's a couple of points I'd make:
Firstly--recumbents don't cost that much now. Yes there are some $3K and $4K+ ones, but there are upright bikes that cost that much too and everyone who rides doesn't own one. The cheaper 'bents start at around $500-$600. At that price point a bent is not particularly fast or good for long-distance touring, but it will still be way more comfortable to ride than any upright, at any price. If you can cough up $1200-$1500, there's quite a few choices. -Which is not very expensive, when you consider that 'bents are actually comfortable to ride, and that you might ride them a lot more than you would an "uncomfortable" bike.
How many upright bikes sit gathering dust in people's garages, their tires going flat from dry rot?
People buy these bikes because they "cost less", or because they "look normal".
But of course the bikes make one's butt, neck and hands hurt--so then they never ride them.
What kind of bargain is that?
If you already know that upright bikes are uncomfortable for you to ride, then don't throw your money away on yet another one.
Secondly--when upright bike riders say "it's comfortable", they really mean that "it's not so bad that I can't stand to ride it". With recumbents, normally your butt and neck never hurt, and your hands never go numb. The comfort difference between uprights and recumbents is difficult to overstate.
With recumbents, you don't wear "padded" shorts or padded gloves, because you never need them.
And the thing is--if you have never tried riding a recumbent 50 or 100 or 200 miles, you don't really know the difference. Upright defenders tend to forget that people who spend money on recumbents nearly-always used to spend money on nice upright bikes; we know what it feels like to ride uprights.
I spent $1500-$2000+ each on a series of bikes for twenty years, telling myself "it wasn't that bad".
Then I borrowed a BikeE for an afternoon, and realized--it was that bad. And it had always been "that bad".
Every upright bike I had ever owned had been uncomfortable, in the exact same ways.
It doesn't matter if you spend $200 or $2000 on an upright, they're gonna hurt just the same.
Soon after I bought my first recumbent, I got rid all but one my upright bikes--because I wasn't riding them at all anymore anyway. The last one I kept just in case I wanted to ride it ever.
Two years later I hadn't taken it out even once, so I got rid of it too.
~
There is a lot of development work going on amongst the riders of "Crank Forward" bikes such as this one. One applies greater force to the pedals by pulling on the handlebars, it's possible to tuck (albeit in a jacknife position), and some models also allow standing. The main attractions, though, are the comfort and convenience. Many owners also report feeling substantially younger :-)
Sweat:
You will sweat if you leave for work with a ride that takes at least 40 minutes and give yourself 40 minutes to arrive at your destination. If you time your ride such that you don't have to hammer up hills and race between traffic lights and stop signs you can ride in most weather without sweating.
Trunk Space:
Most road bicycles (there's no good reason to ride mountain bike sized wheels and knobby tires on pavement) can be equipped with rear and front racks. With a pannier on each side of the rack, you can add more weight than you'd be willing to carry walking. Add a backpack and you're a big rig. If you don't want to put your 30 inch CRT on the rear rack, you could always pick up a gaming laptop with the money you've saved over a year or two in fuel and car maintenance.
Girlfriend:
Are you sure you're a geek? Diamonds are a girl's best friend, but second best is buying your woman a nice bicycle she can ride next to you. If you're the old-fashioned, dominant type you can get a tandem bicycle and make her ride behind you, serving merely as a means to get more power. If she's the new-fashioned, dominant type you can get a tandem bicycle and let her steer while forcing you to ride stoker.
A/C and Sun:
If you're going to work in the morning, the angle of the Sun in the sky is probably low enough that a little sunscreen will keep you from burning. If you ride outdoors frequently you'll become better accustomed to the heat and humidity and not find the lack of air conditioning to be so awful.
Rain:
It is not easy to bicycle with an umbrella, however the same full-body rainsuits that can be rolled into tiny little bags for backpacking work when cycling. If you can keep your work clothes at work, who is going to care if you arrive a little wet with time to dry and dress?
I'll be your candy shop of infinite deliciousity if you'll be my discotheque of endless rump-shaking.
There are a lot of good sites on the web about making bikes of all types. The Internation Human Powered Vehicle Association has a library of links for DIY sites, some of them of exquisite sophistication, like Damon Runyard's carbon fiber bikes and some of the pedal-powered hovercraft.
The reason I tend to recommend atomic zombie is that rather than buying a bunch of 4130 and jigging up a gorgeous replica Greenspeed, complete with machining and tapping details for wheel mounts, the Zombie takes a BMX, welds a new bottom bracket shell onto a stick of tubing onto the front of the BMX, bolts on a couple pieces of plywood -- and, dude, recumbent! Half a dozen non-precision weldjoints and an hour with a tablesaw and you're done! It's much more encouraging to beginners, who might not have lathes and mills.
I like the website you pointed out, don't get me wrong. I'd love to build something like that. But if we want to get this critical mass of recumbent-builders going, start out with rickety dogbikes to give people a taste, then start building the superb designs.
Nostalgia's not what it used to be.
I don't think you have done many recumbent races. I ride many races a year on my Challenge lowracer. Stayering and coöperation with competitors are fundamental as well. The only difference is you have smaller groups due to the greater differences in speed. A rowing bike is much slower than a velomobile, so it's two groups of rowing bikes, five groups of lowracers, three groups of tail-faired lowracers and four groups of velomobiles, for instance. But you have to use tactics or you lose. I blew many of my races this way when i just started.
A tactical very interesting part of recumbent racing is the go-kart circuit: in every corner it's a hard fight to get through first, but if you try to block your competitor too hard, you lose speed or may even crash. Fast acceleration, hefty but controlled braking is essential. With 14 corners every 38 seconds (my last race on a go-kart circuit), that's quite exciting.
Trust me, I work for the government.
The present-day record for car pacing is held by Fred Rompelberg of Holland, who reached 268.831 km/h (167.043 mph) on a bicycle following a car at the Bonneville Salt Flats, Utah, on October 3, 1995.
Interestingly, he set the record 27 days shy of his 50th birthday, so there does seem to be a trend here....
2 weeks ago at Hellyer velodrome Freddy was "getting too old for this" and now he sets a new record. This is a 1 hour record. Hitting mid 50's on a diamond frame bike takes a good hill. The drafting bicycle speed record is somewhere around 150mph. The non-drafting, pedal up to speed record no tailwind, no hills is at 82mph in a similar bike that Freddy used. Recumbents.com , Battel Mountain have info on the top speed runs. Freddy did something like 76mph last year. These bikes are more HPV's as they are fully faired. Aerodynamics and power are a cool combination.
For the street, one of the best performing recumbents are the Bacchetta's. Bacchetta has been giving a good showing around the country for the past few years. They did the Hotter-N-Hell century as a team (drafting) in 3:56 passing the bicycle race that was part of the event. John Schlitter won the Race Across Florida on a Bacchetta this year, and Bacchetta took 1,3-5 overall. They were used for a 3rd place finish last year in the Race Across America 4 man team. They also had a rider up to third this year before he dnf'd. Cycling News Results with Jim Kern in 3rd on a Bacchetta . Later this month, there will be quite a few recumbent and HPV teams competing in the Race Across Oregon including a 4 man team, and 2 man team from Bacchetta.
Of course, to give credit where credit is due. One of the slickest bikes out there is the Velokraft NoCom low racer bike. This bike is more track/pure race oriented, and is quite fast.
If you want to increase your cycling speed by a few mph. Check out a recumbent. For more info, there's the wildly popular recumbent site Bentrider Online which has a very informative forum section.