Joe Justus makes me feel like I’m five years old again.
He clutches the back of my bike seat, assuring me that I can do it. He asks if I’m ready; I tell him yes and slowly begin to pedal around the track outside United Cycle.
I pick up momentum. Joe warns he’s letting go. I wobble. I tumble.
But after about two minutes of practice and only a few crashes into the nearby fence, like most newbies, I’ve mastered my balance.
Justus, the resident bike expert from United Cycle, isn’t giving me remedial riding lessons. He’s showing me how to pilot a recumbent bike, the best bike that almost no one rides.
Ever fantasized about being able to zip around town while stretched out on your favourite recliner? Recumbent bikes move the chain to the front wheel, allowing you to stretch your legs out in front: you sit reclined and lower to the ground, a more aerodynamic position than any hunched-over-the-handlebars model offers.
But does it make that much of a difference? Well, it was good enough for Francis Faure, who in 1933 used a recumbent bike to travel a record-breaking 45.055 km in one hour. The International Cycling Union considers the aerodynamic shape an unfair advantage: since 1934, recumbents have been prohibited from competing against uprights. All current speed records, climbing up over 80 km/h, are held by recumbents, vastly outpacing their more common cousins.
Recumbent bikes are also incredibly comfortable: Padded seats! Back rests! Legs extended! It’s more like riding a La-Z-Boy on wheels. Even after a two-hour journey, Justus never complains of a sore neck, hands, or bum. And he’s 70!
So if recumbent bicycles are faster and more comfortable than uprights, why aren’t they more popular?
Many believe they’re more difficult to balance. In fact, just as with any bike, the trick is practice. In rare cases where balance remains an issue, Justus explains, outrigger wheels can be placed on either side.
Another apprehension is that recumbent bikes are dangerous. Because they’re lower to the ground than uprights, there is a fear that recumbent bikes are less visible to drivers. Hogwash, says Justus. As long as riders stick to the shoulder, he says, they aren’t any more difficult to see. Nor is he worried about getting sucked under the transport trucks that pass him. In fact, he’s been blown away—but not off his bike—by the courtesy of truckers and drivers in general. (For the record, Claire Ellick from the City of Edmonton’s Transportation Department confirms that there’s no need to create additional safety rules for recumbent bicycles, although she says adding a flag would be a good idea.)
Justus speculates one reason we don’t see more recumbents is that they’re not great for off-road use, as riders can’t stand up to absorb shocks with their legs. (Mountain bike models are available, though more difficult to come by.)
But the main reason so few recumbents whiz through our streets may be their price, which typically sits somewhere between $1,300 and $4,500. The bikes are expensive because they’re handmade, usually in North America. Justus maintains they’re well worth the cost, and, he notes, upright bikes were once much more expensive too. “As more people ride them,” he says, “more are manufactured and prices will decrease.”
One thing’s for certain: riding a recumbent bike is sure to garner you lots of attention. My 20-minute spin elicited many chuckles from onlookers. Justus feels the novelty of the recumbent bike is part of the attraction. Just the other day, some junior high kids shouted, “Hey! Cool bike, man!” as he rode by.
This year, Justus says, he’s had more customers express an interest in recumbent bikes than ever before. And in his own experience, a brief ride is all it takes to convert a skeptic.
“I’ll be riding my recumbent bicycle forever,” he says.
