For the Cyclists out there...

[Richardrichard9]

Tandem Bikes???

I am thinking about getting one for next summer, for me and my sister to ride.

Anyone have any comments or suggestions?

I have no clue what size to get either.

[tofu]

--

[Donn]

If there's a chance that you could rent, look into that. At worst, a few hours on a rental could give you a better idea of what to buy. At best, it could be better bicycling - tandems are too long to easily transport, but there may be rentals at some attractive locations.

I've ridden tandem only once, and that was enough for me, but I see people doing it with apparent enjoyment. On the bright side, it's more aerodynamically efficient than two separater riders.

[Rick Denney]

The problem i have with tandems is that the stoker always has the same view. And since the captain is usually the guy (who in my experience is the one with more handling experience--and that is important with a tandem), that means the the female stoker has a view she doesn't want, while the male captain does not have the view he prefers. The formula just is not right.

But it takes a well-matched pair to ride two singles such that both enjoy the ride. I had a girlfriend for a short time when I lived in Dallas who rode about equally to me, but it's really rare.

There are tandems that have freewheeling stoker cranks, and a cassette built into the stoker's gears. These are made by Da Vinci, and they allow the stoker to pedal and shift independently from the captain, and that would be a real advantage.

http://www.davincitandems.com/dv2.html" target="_blank

Another good place to start:

http://www.sheldonbrown.com/tandem.html" target="_blank

Rick "who never got into tandems" Denney

[Todd S. Malicoate]

they allow the stoker to pedal and shift independently from the captain, and that would be a real advantage.

I see where they can pedal independently, but how does the stoker shift? I don't see any shifters in the back in your link...is there another bike you're talking about?

Both riders being able to shift independently would be really cool, but wouldn't they have to be in the same gear on the rear cassette?

[Dean]

This is a guess, and let's see if I am right


I am betting that there are two separate gear sets--one on each set of the wheel?

[tofu]

--

[Donn]

When I bought my Alex Moulton from Angle Lake Cyclery (now exclusively recumbent dealers) out in Seattle they had a tandem that the rear was like a conventional bike and the front was like a recumbent so both had clear sight lines. They claimed it was popular.

Probably Opus Counterpoint. Now revived in PA as the Viewpoint I still see a Counterpoint once in a while, and it does look like a good way to go. Controls belong to the rear rider, apparently, and the front rider probably should be the lighter of the two.

[Todd S. Malicoate]

This is a guess, and let's see if I am right


I am betting that there are two separate gear sets--one on each set of the wheel?

That makes no sense to me...the rear wheel can only spin at one rate. There's only one hub there.

I'm not trying to provoke an argument, just trying to understand (for example) how the captain can be going along in 10th gear while the stoker is in 1st gear. It would be cool, but I can't get my mind around it.

[Rick Denney]

I see where they can pedal independently, but how does the stoker shift? I don't see any shifters in the back in your link...is there another bike you're talking about?

The one I saw was probably custom-made. It had a cassette on the rear crank. I don't remember if the cassette was used for the synchronizer chain, which would cascade the gearing for the captain (not the best idea, I wouldn't think), or how they did it. In fact, I can't even remember who owned it--it was probably a dozen years ago when I saw it. I do recall specifically that Da Vinci made it, and that I was impressed with the engineering of it.

Of course, you have to have some scratch to be considering a good-quality tandem of any sort, and if your budget extends to considering a custom bike, then just give them a call and discuss your needs.

Rick "suffering from CRS on this one" Denney

[Rick Denney]

I'm not trying to provoke an argument, just trying to understand (for example) how the captain can be going along in 10th gear while the stoker is in 1st gear. It would be cool, but I can't get my mind around it.

It would be possible to have a rear wheel with two cassettes, though I've never seen a left-handed rear derailleur, nor have I seen a cassette with the pawls running the wrong way. Given enough money, though, anything is possible.

But my memory is more in the direction of there having been a cassette mounted on the stoker's bottom bracket. If that's the case, then it would be possible to mount the cassette such that the small cog faced inwards, and that would only require the right bracketry to support the outer bearing and derailleur. That backwards cassette rings a bell. Thus, the rear crank could freewheel on the bottom bracket at whatever speed the bottom bracket was going, which could be adjusted with respect to the captain's crank by adjusting the two derailleurs on the stoker's crank. I suspect it would be useful for the rare adjustment of the relative spin rates between the captain and stoker, but probably not for routine shifting.

I'm not sure I'd want to get out of the saddle as a tandem team with non-synchronized cranks, though. The captain would be trying to zig while the stoker wanted to zag, and it could get interesting. These tandems with freewheeling stoker cranks seem to be intended for teams usually comprising a strong rider paired with a weaker rider, and only the stronger rider would likely get out of the saddle.

My other fear for a freewheeling stoker is that (s)he would decide (or be forced to) to stop working halfway up a steep hill, with the result that I as captain would be suddenly pulling the entire load, and with limited ability to shift. Given that I have enough trouble pulling my own fat posterior up many hills, that could result in an immediate assumption of a laterally horizontal attitude. That attitude usually begets other attitudes that are inconsistent with continued enjoyment. It is amazingly difficult for a tandem team to extricate themselves from the bike when they go down--neither rider can unclip until the other one does, and arms aren't strong enough to lift the bike up enough to allow the trapped leg to gain any purchase. I was friends with Jim Hoyt, owner of Richardson Bike Mart (of Lance Armstrong early sponsorship fame), and he and his wife were (and I assume are) avid tandem riders. They started a tandem club in Dallas, and I watched that club start a group ride a couple of times. If someone went down on the start (and someone always went down), it usually took ten minutes to extricate them and regroup.

On singles, everybody gets up the hill any way they can, regrouping at the top if necessary.

I was in Dallas, with few hills of consequence, when I observed that Da Vinci. Here in hilly Virginia--no way.

Rick "thinking a recumbent tandem would be that much more unmanageable in hills, but at least one would not have as far to fall" Denney

[Donn]

thinking a recumbent tandem would be that much more unmanageable in hills, but at least one would not have as far to fall

I haven't tried it, but just to be contrary, I'll say the recumbent could be more manageable.

The tandem I've seen is a Longbikes built like my Ryan/Longbikes Vanguard - low bottom bracket, long wheelbase (very long wheelbase.) At rest, you're really at rest, in what feels a lot like a lawn chair, with either foot or both flat on the ground. To start off, put one foot on a pedal at say 11 oclock, and just start pedaling. The key point is, you don't have to climb up onto the seat, as you would in a normally configured upright bicycle, so there's less going on during the launch, in terms of maneuvers that could be confusing when done by two people at the same time on the same bicycle.

The long wheelbase could make slow speeds a little tricky, but the tandem could have an advantage here over my 1-man, where the weight is close to the rear wheel. And fitting various size people is probably easier than with an upright.

[Richardrichard9]

Thanks for all your input!!!

We have talked about the issue of who is in front and back and such, and decided (together) that I will be. And we get along great so I don't think that will be a problem.

Lately we have been biking and trying to pedal together to practice.

But despite all of this, I am planning to buy a nice used one off of craigslist, for $300, and if we like it, we might buy one of the higher end ones.

[Todd S. Malicoate]

We have talked about the issue of who is in front and back and such, and decided (together) that I will be.

Will be which?

[Rick Denney]

I haven't tried it, but just to be contrary, I'll say the recumbent could be more manageable.

I appreciate the advantages that you point out. But there is a key disadvantage, especially in these parts: On a recumbent, the cyclist cannot bring his weight to bear on the pedals. There are times when getting out of the saddle makes the difference between getting to the top of the hill and having to walk up it. I foresee recumbent tandem teams, especially when one of the riders is weak, walking up a lot of steep hills that they might have pedaled up were they able to stand on the pedals.

Rick "not a fan of recumbents" Denney

[Richardrichard9]

We have talked about the issue of who is in front and back and such, and decided (together) that I will be.

Will be which?

I will be in the front... she will be in back...