Style Enough for the Big Time?
by John Riley
Resting in my garage through a harsh Toronto Winter is a four-year-old, long wheelbase Vision VR40 with underseat steering. It shows the signs of many enjoyable miles. I am unfaithful to my bikes and tend to get a new one every few years, but so far I have not found one that I am sure I would like better. The ride is smooth and relaxed and the seat is comfortable.
The bike is completely modular. With the appropriate additional pieces, it could be built with a short wheelbase, or the steering could be converted to above-the-seat. The simple monotube frame does its job and keeps the cost of the bike reasonable, given its modularity and performance. But would I say that my trusty steed was pretty or stylish or sleek? Afraid not. Not even close.
Many people who buy recumbents are engineers or technical people. Many of them probably feel that if it works right, it looks right. Form follows function, and that is good enough for them. But lately there has been some talk that, for a variety of reasons, recumbents may finally be poised to reach a much wider market. Recent comments in RCN have raised the issue of supply as limiting factor in the growth of recumbent sales. Supply has been constrained in recent years, and that will need to be resolved.
Beyond that, there is a question in my mind as to whether they have a look that would allow them to ever be really popular. Is their look stylish enough for the fashion conscious? When people buy products, especially expensive ones, they do not just think about function. Consciously or unconsciously they consider what the product says about them, how they will look using the product, and what others will think about them when they use the product. It seems unlikely that any design that strikes the casual observer as funny looking or weird will ever be widely accepted, and unfortunately that seems to be how at least some recumbents are perceived by adults at the present time.
Leaving aside perceptions of the product created by marketing and just considering the form of the product itself, style is usually conveyed by the characteristics of a surface; its form, color, and texture. But bicycles have very little surface. Mostly they consist of a few tubes enclosing a lot of air. But the shape made by the tubes and the finish of the tubes and components do offer some opportunities.
At the risk of seeming frivolous to the engineers, on the one hand, or suggesting that someones baby may be less than absolutely beautiful, on the other, I would like to offer some opinions about the look of some of the more popular recumbents. I do not mean to suggest that the builders necessarily had any of these style issues in mind when they designed their bikes, but I believe that shapes convey feelings, whether intended or not.
In fairness to the look of the Vision, I think the new models in the
hardtail, short wheelbase, above seat steering format are much more attractive than my somewhat ungainly ride. With the 20 inch front wheel
and the longer wheelbase, the proportions are much improved. The bike looks clean and purposeful. The above seat steering is definitely cleaner than the ungraceful underseat bars.
I have told one of the people at BikeE that I thought their bike was the VW Beetle of the recumbent world. BikeEs have been raced successfully. But the bikes reputation is that it may be the most user friendly, though it may not be the fastest or most comfortable. But it is a bike that anyone can hop on and ride. Many people who move up to what they consider a more performance-oriented bike keep their BikeE as a runabout or as a bike that anyone in the family can ride for fun. With the anodized aluminum beam frame, and either riveted-on rectangular stays or air shock suspension, the bike has a technical look. It is very angular, but all the angles, the slope of the handlebars, the beam, and the rear stays are all in the right direction: sloping forward, suggesting speed.
If the angular, technical look of the bike belies its cheerful nature, the proportions do not. The wheels are small and the bike is fairly short. One larger local rider commented to me that he thought the sight of his large person on this rather small bike looked a bit clownish. I think that is harsh. I think more in terms of it being a friendly, non-aggressive look.
The Rans bikes all use small round tubes that are entirely consistent with traditional road bike aesthetics. No one changing over from a traditional road bike would have a problem with these tube sizes. Compare this with the look of the three inch monotube on the Trek recumbent. The Trek is appealing to riders coming over from a mountain bikeas anything goes with mountain bike frame design.
The tube sizes on the Rans bikes are similar to those of road bikes, but the proportions are completely different. Road bikes have almost equilateral proportions in their two triangles. The Rans bikes have triangles too, but they are squashed into narrow wedges. In their favor, these wedges all point forward, again suggesting speed. The V-Rex is probably the best expression of this. Its narrow, pointy wedge frame is angled up slightly, as if ready for flight. The Tailwind also has a simple wedge frame, but the V-Rex is still a stronger shape. The position of its front wheel suggests nose wheel; the Tailwinds front wheel does not.
The Tour Easy has a look that says, Get your motor RUN-nin, head out on the HIGH-way.... If the Rans frames have forward pointing wedges like a fighter plane, the Tour Easy frames have a reverse wedge, like a Harley-Davidson motorcycle. The top line of the frame rises as it runs straight from the rear dropouts to the top of the head tube. The bottom line of the frame is nearly parallel to the ground, running from the rear dropouts to the low bottom bracket. This results in there being a lot of height at the front of the frame. This height keeps the handlebars shorter, and thus stiffer, than on some other long wheelbase above seat steering bikes. From a style standpoint, it all reinforces the Harley image. The style of the bars themselves is also consistent with this look.
Rather than the front end of the frame being designed around a 20 inch fork to go with the 20 inch front wheel, the frame uses an oversized fork. This extended fork look is also a hallmark of the Harley chopper style. Some recumbents may not have enough style for the mainstream; the Tour Easy runs the risk of having too much. It may be over the top for some.
Interestingly, no recumbent designs make use of one popular bicycle style idiom, that of the cruiser. This style has its roots in the balloon-tired bikes of the 30s. It became the mainstay in childrens bikes in the post war years. It continues in various forms today. Regular readers will recall that I was quite taken with the GT Cruiser display at the bike show last fall. I was struck by how this look seemed to appeal equally to older people nostalgic about the bikes of their youth and to younger people who were not yet born when these bikes were the only thing going.
Thinking about these bikes triggered a memory of a bike I had seen in Toronto that had some of this style, but was much closer to being a recumbent. With some effort, I tracked it down. I knew this bike was cool when I had to go to a tattoo parlor to photograph it. The frame comprises two small, gently curved, parallel tubes. The maker, Matt Hurn, describes it as a teardrop shape. The bike is almost recumbent, and could be modified to be one. Unfortunately, the maker is not really interested in pursuing this.
In general seat mounting would be more problematic with the curved
frame. This might be dealt with by incorporating the seat mounting idea
used on the Hurn bike and on the Roadster pictured in ads from Human
Powered Machines in RCN. In both cases the bottom seat mount is attached to a tube that telescopes into a diagonal frame member.
Frames with curved tubes are harder to produce, especially in the low volumes that are typical of recumbents at the present time. But my
premise was to think about what style of recumbent might have broad appeal. Given sufficient volume, I do not think this sort of design would
be a problem.
There is another style element that was common on balloon-tired bikes in that past and is also used on some of the GT designs: the tank. These often had some limited functionality, providing for a horn or light. But their main purpose seems to have been to provide an opportunity to make a style statement that linked the bike to the style of the day, particularly as expressed by automobiles. This idea might be resurrected and executed in some modern light weight material. It might have real functionality by providing for a high quality lighting system and maybe a bit of storage space. The upper trailing edge might suggest a dashboard with an integrated computer mount and switches for the lights. The exterior could be shaped, textured and colored to express any desired style motif.
Would these designs be successful? Hard to say. But given the acceptance of the cruiser style over time with different age groups, it might be worth considering if one were looking for a recumbent that might have appeal beyond the current market. And if not this look, then some other. Weird and funny looking are traits that are not likely to carry recumbents into the mainstream.
Why should anyone care? The more choices there are in the bicycle world, the more likely it is that people are going to find a bike that meets their needs, including those complex emotional needs that are such a big part of any purchase today. More bicycles is a good thing.
Editors Note: With the mainstream manufacturers coming on board, we are likely to see a design renaissance. The topic that John writes about has been discussed before. Why cant recumbent manufacturers use swoopy curved tubes like those found on $200 cruisers? The reason has always been that its much easier to bend and curve 100,000 cruiser frames in Taiwan than it has been for recumbent manufacturers to build a few hundred in the USA. Bending CroMo tubes is expensive; that is why you dont see much of it. I was hanging out with John at the GT cruiser display and it was the character that could be recumbentand probably the only thing that will ever make recumbents cool.
As for current designs, the big boys are taking a hard look at what is going on in recumbency. Our beloved BikeE has been criticized for its easy-to-build design premise and the Vision has been described to me as an engineers grab bag. Nearly everyone sees the Harley style in the Easy Racer (though if there was ever a bike that needs swoopy curved tubes...). Rans and Lightning designs are the only recumbents designed to road bike standardswith their triangulation and stiff frames. Lightning even has some cast lugs, a real fork crown and a brazed frame.
