Comment by jacquesm
4 years ago
Yes, that's what I thought. I had fallen many times with recumbents and never the slightest problem, because you're so close to the ground.
And then my foot hit the ground, ever so briefly. And that's a failure mode I never really considered but what happened next went pretty quick and irreversible once it starts: your foot hits the ground, the bike moves a little bit forward, this puts more pressure on your foot, so it becomes harder to lift. Within a fraction of a second all of your weight will be on that foot, there is no way to lift it up because you are still seated behind your foot. By the time your foot is under you you will have a couple of broken bones and a twisted ankle. If you're lucky.
So no, they are not the safest bikes, they are safe most of the time, except for that one nasty little corner case.
I live a theoretical argument as much as the next guy but in this particular case my practical experience should count for something. Don't ride a low racer, not if you like your legs.
That's a well known issue and why people are generally advised to only ever ride recumbents with cleats (or heel slings or similar). And in any case it doesn't affect velomobiles for obvious reasons.
The very first thing I did on getting my recumbent tricycle was to swap my cleat pedals in (rather than the ones it came with, with a plastic foot cage), and I shudder to imagine the result of feet falling to the road at 30km/h.
Of velomobiles, remember that they normally have foot wells; if uncovered, the harm of feet falling will still be reduced, but not absent.
I think it's called "leg suck". I wonder if there are taller city-oriented recumbents where your legs are far enough from the road.