Dear Dom, 

I took the Long-Easy for a 20 mile ride on the W & O trail last weekend - nothing fell off - so I guess the bike is finished. I am very pleased with all aspects of the bike except for my paint job, which I intend to rectify this winter. I will ship off the frame to a professional and have it done right. 

I have been riding bicycles all my life, but my experience with recumbents just dates from last September. When I was a student at MIT in the early Eighties I think I saw Professor David Gordon Wilson commuting several times up Massachusetts Avenue with his Avatar. That was the first time I saw a recumbent bicycle, but I never forgot it. It took a long time to convince my wife to buy one because of the cost. We finally settled on the BikeE because it would fit both of us. Unfortunately, she always wanted to ride the "fun" bike, which left me on the wedgy, and that is when I sent you the order for the Long-Easy plans. 

I built the Long-Easy because I wanted a lwb recumbent with great drectional stability, and USS. The Long-Easy is directionally very stable, more so than the BikeE. However, this is what you would expect. The BikeE is more maneuverable than the Long-Easy, and this is also what you would expect. The seat is slightly lower relative to the crank position on the Long-Easy, and I actually find this more comfortable than the BikeE seat. I made the seat just as you described in the plans and it turned out well. I do not see any need for foam padding. 

Another feature that really surprised me about the bike is how well the drive train works. I transferred everything from an ATB I bought at Price Club three years ago and it works better on the Long-Easy than it did on the ATB. I thought having three times as much chain as the ATB would give me a noisy, clunky drive train, but that is not the case. I get less noise from the Long-Easy than from the BikeE. However, the BikeE has a Sachs internal hub, which I like, and it contributes to the noise as well as the plastic chain guard. For some reason the polypropylene tubing you recommended makes less noise. 

The rider sits well forward of the rear wheel on the Long-Easy as compared to the BikeE and I think this makes for a softer ride. The BikeE is very stiff, with smaller wheels, and the bumps get transmitted to the rider with a lot less attenuation. Last night I was coming down a hill at high speed, maybe 30 mph, and I failed to avoid a large bump. For a second I experienced a springing sensation, which may have been a combination of the larger wheels, tires, and even the frame. This would have been quite different on the BikeE. Whatever resonance I hit, it disappeared fast and I do not consider it a problem. 

Samuel F. Burkeen 
June 13, 1998

Date: 12/16/99 9:29:04 PM Eastern Standard Time
From: Samuel Burkeen
To: DomErie@aol.com

Needless to say, I am very proud of these bikes. I now own the two
Bentechs plus a Rans Tailwind. I figure I have covered the recumbent
spectrum, more or less - ASS, USS, LWB, SWB, and CLWB. I enjoy riding
all of them, but they are all quite different in handling qualities.
<BR>
Before I compare the bikes I will describe the SWB. It came in at 29
lbs, which is two pounds less than the LongEasy. I used a 135 mm
dropout spacing and installed a new 24-speed mountain bike drive train.
The low gears are more important to me and this setup takes me below 20
gear-inches. I hit the bike store sales last fall and bought new, more
expensive components for the SWB, compared to the LongEasy. I plan on
upgrading the LongEasy this winter.

Originally I installed the same fork on the SWB as on the LongEasy.
This fork came from HPV supply with a 43 mm rake. When I first rode the
SWB I found it a bit sensitive for my tastes. This is subjective and
other riders may react differently. However, I used Bill Patterson's
model to make an estimate of how much the sensitivity would decrease if
I increased the trail by reducing the rake. Bill Cook also rode the
bike, and said he would cut the rake in half based on his experience. I
had a fork custom made with a 22 mm rake. This increased the trail
another inch, and I arrived at total handling perfection. I don't won't
to brag, but I am really pleased with how the bike handles.
<BR>
I moved the seat mounting bolt back one inch, but I do not recommend
doing this if you are trying to compensate for rider height. I
initially found that the bottom of my right leg occasionally contacted
the top idler. I lowered the idler by about 1/2 inch and reduced its
diameter, and it fixed the problem. Other than this small change the
bike is identical to your plans. I made the rear rack and handlebars
out of 6061 aluminum. I also used 6061 aluminum for the steering tube. I
do not think that steel is necessary as long as you select the aluminum
tube with enough wall thickness, and it saves weight.

As I said above, the bikes are all quite different in the way they
handle. The SWB is more responsive, has a very low low-speed (maybe I
can learn to do a track stand), and climbs hills like a goat. I am not
sure what to attribute it to, but my perception is that I ride the SWB
faster on the average than either the Tailwind or the LongEasy. I think
there is something to the claim that ASS is more aerodynamic. The
ergonomics of the SWB may be more optimum for me also. However, these
differences are small. If I had to rate all three bikes in terms of
overall handling qualities I would put the SWB in the best category, the
LongEasy second, and the Tailwind last. This is not because the
Tailwind has bad handling or does not work, but as compared to either
the LongEasy or SWB, I think it needs a bit more trail. In fact, I am
not sure why Rans uses such a weird, highly raked fork. I think they
over did it, but the bike still works, and it has the best seat.
<BR>
The LongEasy is still a pleasure to ride, and there is something about
USS. It is not as aero, and I occasionally have to worry about the
increased width that the handlebars present, but the view and relaxed
position is definitely superior to either of the other bikes. The SWB
is more practical in terms of transporting it, and not having to worry
about clearance problems on narrow bike trails. I get uneasy when
another cyclist passes me too closely and I am riding the LongEasy.
There is no problem on the SWB or the Tailwind. If you have to push the
bike across the street the LongEasy is a bit awkward to handle, and
usually I flip it around, grab onto the rear rack and pull it behind
me.

Both the SWB and LongEasy are great designs. I am very pleased with the
way they turned out. You get a bit apprehensive, considering all of the
work involved with building a bike, but I tell people that if they stick
to your plans they end up with a very good recumbent.

Merry Christmas

Frank Burkeen

Reston, VA

Marion Wike's Long-Easy

Hello again Dom,

I'm enclosing a photo of last year's project, the Long-Easy, along with my plans order for your SWB w/USS. I had so much fun (despite my errors) building your Long-Easy that I've decided to try the SWB.

The Long-Easy was the first project with this degree of difficulty that I have ever attempted and I am very pleased with the results. This 'bent generated so much interest in my neighborhood that for the first few months after completion I was unable to complete a ride without being stopped at least once with questions. Especially interested was our neighborhood police bike patrol. I gave them your web site address and who knows, you may be hearing from them.

Despite several errors in construction, the bike rides great, albeit with some directional instability. And I am having trouble getting used to the incredibly sensitive steering. Never-the -less I am very pleased with the results and am looking forward to the next project.

Don't you agree, that the decal is the icing on the cake!

Oh, lest I forget, I used a roller skate wheel instead of a skate board wheel, cut the groove on the drill press and painted it to match the frame. It's worked well.

Sincerely,

Marion Wike
N. Fort Myers FL
1/18/99