The essence of a country is found not in its tourist attractions but in its small, hidden details, details that go easily unnoticed by tourists traveling quickly through a place. How the air of a place feels blowing across your skin. How people in the countryside smile with a curiosity and interest that is sometimes absent in the eyes of city dwellers. To experience these details of a place, you need time to travel slowly. We chose to travel by bicycle because it forces us to slow down. For 20 months, we will travel and learn about different parts of the world, different cultures and, last but not least, ourselves.
“Isn’t it difficult to go uphill with these bikes?” So many times we had to answer this question – THE big question when it comes to recumbent bikes.
First of all, a direct comparison between normal bicycles and recumbents does not make a lot of sense. Unlike normal bikes, recumbents cover a wide spectrum of bike models; different wheel sizes, frame geometries, and seat
heights equate to near-endless variation in recumbent design. Within this range there has also been a lot of change within the last years. Recumbents are not strange and heavy experimental vehicles anymore. We chose the Challenge
Seiran because we wanted a bike with two 26” wheels. It is a lot easier to find spare parts for such wheels in remote areas, and bigger wheels roll better on rough roads, as well. Among the 26” recumbents we tested, the Seiran
seemed to have the most sophisticated and reliable construction, thanks to a combination of its low weight and sportive geometry.
Climbing a hill on a recumbent is not harder or easier than climbing with a normal bike, it’s just different. During the many days we cycled together with other bikers on normal bikes, we found out that we cycled more on a
constant force level than our cycling partners. They increased their pedal power on climbs, especially on short ones. We, however, always pedaled on a high frequency and with less force. They were faster on short hills, but
during the longer climbs, our speeds leveled out.
One thing you can not do on a recumbent is get out of the saddle to stand and pedal. The many “toureros” on normal bikes we met didn't go out of their saddles often though and also prefered to pedal on a more constant force
level. The advantage of pedaling out-of-the-saddle on a normal bike is the load being distributed over more muscles. On a recumbent it’s always the same muscles you have to use and they therefore get tired faster. This can
be a problem for untrained recumbent bike riders. On a long bike trip though the muscles get trained sufficiently so you can ride all day long.
At a certain point during steep climbs, the climb gradient becomes too great to continue pedaling with a low force. When this happens, bikers on normal bikes keep riding (standing or pushing very hard while sitting), but recumbent
riders need to dismount and push their bikes. A clear disadvantage? Not necessarily. Climbs that steep are very rare. Main roads usually are built on a 7-8% incline. There are those persons who would never push their bikes
for one single meter and love the road the steeper and crazier it is. For them a recumbent is not the right bike. Pushing a recumbent uphill is a lot easier compared to pushing a normal bike (holding the handlebar) which becomes
exhausting after a few minutes due to the asymmetrical load on the body. Pushing a recumbent can be done by pushing it from behind, grabbing the rear panniers. Steering is astonishingly easy by balancing the bike to the right
and left. Even on bad roads we did not have problems steering our bikes like that. The longer we were travelling, the earlier we started pushing the bikes – even on hills where we could have been riding. Using different muscles
and not having to focus on steering the bike on low speeds became a welcome change during long and hard cycling days.
There are many other advantages and disadvantages of riding recumbent bikes: