View Full Version : Why the angle on the rear fork legs?

01-14-2011, 12:52 PM
Why are the rear fork legs angled? It seems to add complexity but I don't see the benefit.

Wouldn't two parallel arms work as well? Weight change would be minimal and appearance seems similar.


Radical Brad
01-14-2011, 01:01 PM
Do you mean parallel to the ground so that they connect with the seat back tube a few inches lower?
If so, yes that would work, but now you add more unnecessary tubing length and the resulting frame will not look as nice.


01-14-2011, 02:24 PM
I meant parallel to each other so that they are not angled from the axle to where they attach the frame.


01-14-2011, 02:25 PM
Would that make the whole recumbent longer?

I personally think the current design looks sleek because the frame follows the seat shape ( or vice-versa )

Odd Man Out
01-14-2011, 03:45 PM
My vote is to go with your gut -- beauty is in the eye of the beholder -- if you think it will look better then by all means do it -- structurally it will make no difference so by all means do it and show us your results.

John Lewis
01-15-2011, 01:00 AM
On my Bentech builds the stays are parallel.

From the point of view of strength and appearance they are fine.

One I built with disk brakes. The other had V brakes and that is where the problem starts because the fork of the stay is too wide near the rim to fit the brake. I got round it by welding in a short spacer tube at that location.

My take would be that the angled stay makes brake fitting easier. other tan that it is probably aeshetics.


Radical Brad
01-15-2011, 01:21 AM
Ok, I see what you mean. Yes, you could do that.