Categories

For real? A racer with no gears, and what on earth is preventing the front wheel from wobbling all over the place (a single point of contact)? Neat lines and spiffy renders, though, but do we really need another spokeless construction that doesn’t really solve any problem (but adding a bunch of new and shiny ones)?
Sorry, I just couldn’t help myself from balking over this…

Een voordeel is dat je niet met je tas of voet tussen de spaken kan komen.

I would buy that

Wonderful! another lettuce drier. The design is nice looking, at least to my eyes of course, but it's something that would not work on earth. It's a concept of an engine-less spaceship. I would buy a spaceship too, if it served me when tossed into space.

i don't know what you mean by 'lettuce drier,' Yuri, but it looks like it's simple and would work to me.
I'd pay a few hundred USD for one of these

nice looking, but will be tough making it ridable (because of bike geometry no-go's … fx. the steering angle and trail of the front wheel)

Could you tell me where center of gravity of rider is? And isn't it just too close to back axis? And if it is too close, what will happen when you're going uphill? (I like the looks, but I am concerned about functionality of this).

For real? A racer with no gears, and what on earth is preventing the front wheel from wobbling all over the place (a single point of contact)? Neat lines and spiffy renders, though, but do we really need another spokeless construction that doesn’t really solve any problem (but adding a bunch of new and shiny ones)?
Sorry, I just couldn’t help myself from balking over this…

Coolest bicycle design ever! Looks like a bicycle version of the Tron Lightcycle. Would absolutely buy this (if it was possible to build). However, I do agree that the spokeless design might not work and the fact that the user is too close to the back-wheel and that the front-wheel is too close to the legs when turning. Id's say keep the design, move the front-wheel more forward and use 3 strong big spokes in every wheel, then you might pull this one off.

The bike would provide two discussions if built as shown above:
1) wow! What an interesting bike. I wonder if it is fun to ride?
2) wow! Is that the rider of the bike crumpled on the ground in pain?

Stupidest thing I have ever seen. The bicycle is a perfect machine, they can be purpose built, some can preform better than others at different tasks, but on the whole “The Bicycle” can not be improved upon. And when do you see “folding” and “race bike” in the same right up? It's a daunting task to try to be the one guy since Davinci to find a fresh take on it, so I give these guys credit, but there are a lot of silly misses in the construction that a frame builder, or even dedicated recreational cyclist, could have helped them avoid.

Een voordeel is dat je niet met je tas of voet tussen de spaken kan komen.

Regarding the front wheels on turning, no its not too close at all, the dimensions of the bike regarding the position of the wheels are base on a real racer bike, so it would function just fine. As to the back-wheel, it was really design that way to have it portable as possible while not sacrificing its function

We are exploring ways of inventing and designing new bikes for the future, And we can not attain that if we didn't try. If you seen racer bikes being transported one place to another, it is usually carried on top on the roof of the car, if not disassembled. Point is that high performance bike are not mobile enough. The objective of the concept is to make bikes portable for less hassle and burden of space specially in the growth of population here and beyond. On the engineering aspect, suggestions on how to improve the designs function is open. Thank you.

This is not real

Everything can be improved upon. Awareness and sensitivity to problems is key in design.

Looks nice but you wont be going anywhere fast. You have a single, unchangeable gear that would be a very low gear. Might be good for climbing hills, but with the riders weight so far back, you will be doing a wheelie when your not falling over backwards.

Allen, it's a beautiful design! My first instinct was, where do I buy this?

Please don't waste your time justifying your nice efforts to someone that says, quote: “The Bicycle” can not be improved upon. ” or “Stupidest thing….” Instead, gives more cool stuff!

Everything can be improved upon, but why does every “cutting edge” bike designer thing that hub-less wheels are a great idea? Have you ever heard the phrase, “Don't reinvent the wheel?” And, having ridden a few actual bikes, I'll agree with the posts above that there are some serious geometry issues with this design. In short, it looks very cool, but it would never work in presence of gravity.

A structural hopeless hubless wheel design, is analysis no longer a part of the design process?

But I like the fact that you are awaiting constructive criticism, Allen, so here is a point how to improve your design:
Ask yourself what kind of forces act on the bicycle while riding and cornering and especially on the wheels of the bicycle, draw them, or you know what, just cut your design at scale out of a piece of cardboard and ride it around on your desk. You will come to realise that the top of the wheel is the worst place to 'hold' the wheel. The rim would have to be so strong that you'd almost have to make it out of a train rails section. And then still: the long 'arm' of the wheel diameter would crumble your tiny frame tubes.
Instead look at the more logic places to divert the forces from the ground, yes, near the ground. The only advantage that these useless hubless wheel designs could ever hold over conventional wheels is that you can get a more direct road feel by letting the bicycle frame take up the forces directly near the tire contact point with the ground.
This design here is nothing more than a rendering practice. So please if you really have the intention to change the world with your designs, put your time and energy in some small scale models, mockups, proto's instead and feel your design. And do some research!! Wrong: http://tinyurl.com/y8kdj53 wrong: http://tinyurl.com/4azsfx9 OK-ish: http://tinyurl.com/4qaklr8

So kind of like the iF Mode by Mark Sanders, except this one is not useful & will never pass the concept stage

plr – Your poor use of the English language can be 'improved upon'.

This is not real

I hate student work like this. It shows that they did absolutely NO research on bicycle geometry or strength of materials, or even how gear ratios work. Ugh. waste of time!

1) Most single speed bikes made for street riding have around a 3 to 1 gear ratio. That bike looks like it has a 1 to 4 gear ratio. It would move forward maybe 6 inches for each revolution of the pedals. This shows a total failure of understanding of the basics of how bicycles work.

2) The rake and trail of the fork shows a total lack of understanding of how bicycle steering works.

3) If someone was on the bike as it appears in the rendering with the rider (aside from the seat post needing to be a foot longer) it would fall over backwards.

Three strikes and you're out. You've created many more problems than you've solved. Bicycles, like any tool, must FUNCTION first and look pretty second. You've designed something that would be impossible to use for its intended purpose.

Looks like everyone has done a pretty good job at pointing out that not enough time was spent in the research phase of design.

To add – circular tubes on a racing bike? If this were the 80's that would be state of the art.

Hubless wheels on a racing bike… Even if feasible, you're going to have some aero penalties. Disk, tri-spoke, deep vee, etc. wheels are good places to start research as to why the current designs are the way they are.

Folding? You're going to need to choose a demographic. Serious racers are not going to care about the bike's ability to fold. They also won't care about fenders (although I understand you were thinking of somehow supporting a hubless wheel.

Aerobars…

Rider position… You've shown a rider position that looks like a person is on a mountain bike. Not aerodynamically efficient for a racer.

Rake, Trail, Radius of Gyration

You need to do more time researching. You can't hope to innovate on the future if you don't understand the current state of the art. You also need to research customers – if it doesn't sell, it's not a product. Understand their needs.

If you don't understand the system, you can't hope to change the system.

Without that research – this isn't design, it's just art.

I think it's an interesting concept. I doubt if it wil lead to a functional bike though.
I hope the designer isn't put off by the negative remarks.

There is a lot of truth in some about the shortcomings in this design as far as bike geometry and wishes of bike riders.
I for example noticed that the front fender looks like it's too far to the front. The rain and mud will sling up in the riders face with the fender positioned like this.

I think its probibly a good idea when a designer without 'understanding the system'' takes a look at the bicycle. Cause in knowing the system, lies the danger of not being able to think outside of it. To come to completely new concepts it might be good to have a fresh look on things.

hey man… your design looks good huh…also the rendering, the lens flares… but if a person rides this bike he would fall off the ground through the back part of your bike because the seat is above the half of your back wheel. some adjustments on the seat would work…
i think you don't need a lot of research. just a few knowledge about physics and a common sense would help you in creating your concepts.

I agree with the majority of the comments above, but there is an entire fixed gear culture and set of races. I don't personally find it appealing — the bike I did a single 4000Km trip on had 63 speeds — but I know that it's there and appreciate the geeky appeal. That said, fixed gear bikes are relentlessly traditional. People that ride fixed gear bikes are aiming for a Platonic ideal (whether they know what that is or not). The intersection of that Platonic ideal of BICYCLE and your folding, spokeless design is exceedingly small so economical delivery is unlikely (however, you did find one buyer above if you could get the price down to his level… also unlikely).
http://www.wired.com/culture/lifestyle/news/2005/... http://www.oldskooltrack.com/files/fg.manifesto.f... http://www.laurenceking.com/product/Fixed%3A+Glob...

Keep designing,
Mike

So cool, I like

Having a small cog on the pedals and that massive one around the rim of the back wheel would make it the worst racing bike ever.

And if you did manage to get a decent amount of torque, wouldn’t you pop a wheelie straight off the back due to the position of rider being right over the top or even slightly aft of the center of the back wheel?

Having a small cog on the pedals and that massive one around the rim of the back wheel would make it the worst racing bike ever.

And if you did manage to get a decent amount of torque, wouldn’t you pop a wheelie straight off the back due to the position of rider being right over the top or even slightly aft of the center of the back wheel?

All these hubless designs are expensive exercises of taking a brilliant and proven design and then regressing it to what is basically a dream of taking the mechanism of lettuce driers and incorporating that into all-things-wheels for aesthetic reasons. There's nothing wrong with that, but in the process it seems all designers involved are subject to forgetting the physical problems that the original design solves, or maybe it doesn't matter as much when you have a cool rendition. I'm happy for your financial situation.

Is it just me or does some one else also see's that his would be he slowest cycle ever.

Allen,

While a lot of these comments are very good engineering and right on. The founder of Google said something along the lines of it's easier to be wildly successful when you are creating what everyone thinks is impossible. My advice – think outside of the box, recreate the wheel, and challenge the norm.

For the record – I'm avid biker and I'd buy one of these (for big bucks) if I could stick it in my luggage and take it with me. Even if it only had one speed it would be a blast to ride this around cities as long as it would hold together and give a reasonable ride.

~Jeff

I think this is more of a designs student project of “what if you could break all the rules of the norm. ” Personally I think it looks awesome and was designed to promote creativity and not be an actual product.

I think this is more of a designs student project of “what if you could break all the rules of the norm. ” Personally I think it looks awesome and was designed to promote creativity and not be an actual product.

I think this is more of a designs student project of “what if you could break all the rules of the norm. ” Personally I think it looks awesome and was designed to promote creativity and not be an actual product.

I think this is more of a designs student project of “what if you could break all the rules of the norm. ” Personally I think it looks awesome and was designed to promote creativity and not be an actual product.

Early bikes, the Penny Farthings, had fixed gears that depended on the diameter of the wheel. You can change the gear ratio by changing the size of your chainring or the size of your wheel, or both. You can introduce variable gears by modifying your crank mechanism. If you move the rear wheel back to get a workable center of gravity, the pedals will move back also. Thus the constraints of this concept will probably force you to adopt a more prone rider position than we are accustomed to. The saddled position and shape will change.

Another option might be to go recumbant, with the pedals on the front wheel, thought this introduces complications in steering. Could you steer the rear wheel? Turn the rider around on this design, lengthen the frame, reduce the size of the rear wheel, and put the handlebar under the rider. Some people are scoffing at the hubless wheels, but I think that is the most exciting part of this design. Improvements in materials may make a hubless wheel practical in our lifetimes, when it was not before.

I suggest talking to open-minded frame-builders and also call Michelin R&D folks in Greenville, SC, as they are probably experimenting with hubless wheels and would be fascinated with your project and willing to help a creative guy like you without being scoffers.

Looks way too hard to steer. Centre of gravity would be behind the back wheel if the rider sits up and the bike would topple backwards unless some weight was put on the front wheel which is pointless when you can just move the seat forward.

With the gearing the way it is, pedaling forward would make the bike move backwards. Also, the gear ratio is reversed from a normal bike so you would never be able to move more than a few inches…backwards. Think about it, for every complete turn of the pedals the wheel would only move about 3 inches.

It looks fancy and I like it, but it simply wouldn't work. The rider's center of gravity is WAY too far back; The saddle shouldn't be directly over the center of the rear wheel. Also, the handle bars, oh the handle bars… If this is meant to be a race bike, which it claims to be, the spacing between each of the brake hoods needs to be quite a bit larger. Also, how exactly do you adjust the angle of the bars on this bike? It looks like it's built right into the steer tube of the fork… These are just the things that strike me off the bat.

Don't get me wrong, I like the concept, but this bike puts “form” way before “function.”

the seat is too close to the rear wheel……the user will follow back easily~ it is very dangerous~!!!

how much weight it can support??

WOW! nice it must be one for me !

awesome…china will produce it..

It's a pitty that many designers don't inform themselves adequately before they start spending time (and/or budget) on designing and rendering. I'm sorry but this is just a waste of energy and it appears clumsy to those who know a bit about bicycles…

The bike looks awesome. I love the spokeless design, but as said before the gear would be way too low to be efficient. And also the center of gravity for the rider is too far back so it would be awkward riding it. If possible place the wheels farther apart, especially try and move the back wheel farther back, that would help a lot. and i would also recommend making the contact points and the rail on the front tire larger so that it would be more stable and smooth. and also, maybe not market it as a racing bike, but just as a touring bike or city bike, cuz thats what it really is. As i biker, i look forward to seeing what else you come out with in the future. thanks for showing, good work

Not plausible for the every day rider. Looks like something out of tron, and id honestly ask who couldnt design this.

Sorry.

HONESTY is what im about

What do they teach you design students? That you can reinvent something just by making some swishy lines, taking away all practical features of something and therefore making it physically impossible? Oh I forgot if you don't mention how your reinventions are "green" then its worthless. When you throw around words like "thermoplastics" and suggest materials like titanium you are just embarrassing yourself and your profession. Do you know the physical properties of these materials or their manufacturing limits? In the future don't try and explain how you think your fantasy contraptions are actually possible, call them what they are which is just a way to show off your decent computer rendering skills.

What do they teach you design students? That you can reinvent something just by making some swishy lines, taking away all practical features of something and therefore making it physically impossible? Oh I forgot if you don't mention how your reinventions are “green” then its worthless. When you throw around words like “thermoplastics” and suggest materials like titanium you are just embarrassing yourself and your profession. Do you know the physical properties of these materials or their manufacturing limits? In the future don't try and explain how you think your fantasy contraptions are actually possible, call them what they are which is just a way to show off your decent computer rendering skills.

This bike has a lot of problems.

This bike has a lot of problems.

I think this is the stupidest reply iv ever seen… dont you think that this is just a concept for you to say that this is the stupidest thing you ever seen? O_o??? and by the way, all design’s are not perfect, going to the “folding” its purpose is to lessen hassle or save space specially when going outdoors duh?? common sense O_o??

Any designer worth their weight in salt knows to never say never

I totally agree. And what happens when you stop pedaling and the rear wheel keeps turning the gear?

Have you ever tried real street bikes and compared them to other bikes? Because honestly your bike geomerty does not seem to fit for a racing bike.

You do understand that you can not take isulated parts of bike geometry and join them with complete different bike geometries on other parts and espect them to function just like before?

While I love the look, your bike seem to be one of the most inefficients designs I have ever seen. Look over function seems not a reasoable way to design … but go head build a prototype. And buy yourself a few bikes to compare, I am suggesting you try some current racer, some old classic from the 80s and a current titan frame one to notice the differences. Oh, and make sure to to use a geometry compatible to your body size and shape. Makes all the difference on longer tours.

Really?! How many languages do you speak fluently? None, because you wouldn’t have said something like this if you did. Your comment is petty and arrogant.

I agree with the placement of the seat and pedals.

Try putting the seat at the point of the fold.

My apologies to BaoTu. I was not paying close enough attention to whom you were referring.

Also the point of fold might be better if it is off-set from the frame to allow space for the wheels to fold together flush.

Right now the fold being in-line with the frame causes the inside of the tires to prevent the bike from completely folding.

Since I’m talking about the folding, you might also consider the seat being in a location that it does not interfere with the handle bars.

(Thinking about the way a bicycle moves when ridden) Consider having a competitive cyclist critique the design. They usually have the best knowledge of what the bikes need and how they are used.

When can it be purchased? Do you live near Taichung?

I have a few suggestions that might make this a bit more practical…

In response to the complaints about hub-less wheels, there’s an easy solution: drop the forks so it contact the wheels at the ground, or points just forward and backward of that point. Remember those things from Star Wars: Episode III?

Gearing complaints? Planetary gears are your friends. Fix the center ‘sun’ gear, and pedal-power the ‘planets’, and that brings up your drive gear’s speed quite a bit. If you bring the drive gear down to the ground contact point as well, you get much less strain on the wheel. This means that you’ll have to do some torque routing (i.e. chain), but it also permits you to move the back wheel a bit, opening out the wheelbase and creating more stability (not that there was much to worry about in the first place).

Granted, this makes the appearance less minimalistic, but it makes this a viable concept.

As far as the stance of the bike, it should be proportioned so that the rider’s leg is at a little less than full extension when they are sitting on the seat, not above it as in the graphic. It doesn’t need much, just to scale up the bike so that it fits in that respect. If you do that, the aerobars will also be far enough forward to allow for a more streamlined profile. If you allow for front-to-back adjustment of the bars, it will allow for more customization and comfort when riding.

All in all, not great initial design, but it could be made practical without drastically changing the aesthetic.

this bike rendering was intended to draw all the ME’s away from their FEA analysis and say,,, com’on IDman!!!
beautiful lines, beautiful photorealistic rendering tool, but no way with current manufacturing…
but what the hey,, they say sci-fa follows sci fi and this is definitely sci-fi
,,,,i get paid for sci-fa

Embarrassing.

This looks stupid. There would be no advantage to this design and would actually face much more significant rolling resistance making it useless as a racing bike and more of a neato display piece

This was my first thought too, surely it would ride up and probably topple over backwards?

Now, people, if you look closely, you can see that A) there are gears embedded in the back wheel itself, B) the front wheel is actually hooked into the “single point contact” and C) the wheel wells keep the bike wheels balanced. Any questions?

That is one of the coolest bikes I have ever seen. It is the bike the Jetsons would ride if they actually had roads.

Well, a) the gear ratio is appalling, b) we already knew that, but that’s not even close to the problem, and c) balanced? What are you even talking about?

I liked your design, the use of plastics is ok, but they are structurally weaker than metals, so a plastic bike is bulkier but lighter than a chromemolly bike, the same way an aluminium bike is from said heavy bike.

another poster has adressed the gearing issue quite well a possible solution is that of the lunartic bike, the pedals move a gearing that revs up the wheel.

Einstein said that crazines is to do the same thing and expect different results, and Edison said “I haven’t failed, I discovered 10000 ways it won’t work”, so you are up in a good path. forget about standard forks, gear ratios and the like and play with what is left, you will find ten thousand ways it won’t work, but when you find the one that does it…

There’s no reason it would *have* to be single-speed. The value of the necessary “cleverness” would depend on the market—if there is one. Most of the design could probably be made to work, if the priority is aesthetics more than robust, simple function.

Yes, I only have one question: are you another artist without education in the physical sciences?

Sorry, the threading has broken down. My reply is to Jimmy C asking “Any questions?”.

Awesome simple green design but don’t be a problem to urself tring to reinvent physics.
The rail/magnetic design would never work under 10^x$ | x > 4, not to speak about the time it would take to make it reliable. Take one step at a time so you won’t fall from the start.

I did not get a chance to read all of the comments, but a possible solution to some of the common concerns I’ve seen (seat to close to back wheel/not really a racing bike with one gear) first to solve the center of gravity issue, perhaps a design which has the seat slide up the frame, then locking into place could be a decent compromise. It is positioned so someone leaning forward (as in a racing design) can have their center of mass in an ideal location, so this would be more for a user’s preference. The functionality is still there, and you considerations, Allen, are very thought through. As for the gearing issue, perhaps including a gearing design strictly on the pedals? I’ve just now heard of this design, so I haven’t drawn anything up, but It seems you could adjust the gearing directly from the pedals, and perhaps in this way achieve the effect some of those concerned with gears would wish to see.

I have to say, my grammatical skills are not the best, but if you would like any input at all on this bike, I would be happy to work on this.

The point of contact on the front wheel is most likely my biggest concern though, but for what you are trying to accomplish, I think this is a good start. It has a ways to go before it could be considered a “racing bike”, but a portable bike that doesn’t go slow is still something people would want, and the looks are a plus as well.

Beautiful design. I would love to see this as a high-wheeler concept. The minimalist, elegant aesthetic would look stunning as an ultra-futurist penny-farthing design. A major engineering challenge would be designing the gearing inside the pedal assembly to give a proper mechanical advantage.

let me add upon this

no dampening of motion might make your crotch, legs, hips and spine to get some of the most horrible pain ever experienced by mankind.

then, even if therer are a lot of rails with moving balls on the top of the frame it will wobble. and get teared to pieces really quick, it can get dirt in there getting slowing and sudden stop leading your head towards the earth,

so much more going on, better simulate it on a less than perfectly clean and even testing ground.

Concept bike where the concept fails. The mechanical disadvantages created at the wheel connection/gear points render these connections incredible in the true sense of the word – as in not credible.

Cool , Love to have it

It’s obvious this “designer” (stretch of the word) has no real understanding of the physics of a bicycle with a rider on it. I’d like to see how easy it would be to keep that front wheel on the ground when your butt is behind the center point of the rear wheel. Not to mention how squirrely a bike with such a ridiculously short wheel base would handle.

As an architect, furniture designer and national caliber bicycle racer, I’m appalled that students design crap like this that looks “cool” but has zero relationship to the reality of the human form and the physics involved in designing such a machine that we need to be able to ride. I’m all for “thinking outside of the box” and love minimal and modern design but get your head out of the clouds and get grounded with basic physics and rider position before you post something this insane on the internet and make a fool of yourself in the design AND cycling community

It’s just not about making a “thing”. Where was your research? Did you interview ONE experienced frame builder? Did you analyze current bike geometry and rider positioning? Did you find any gaps in those currently used that your freaky position corrects? Do you have idea of how that trail is going to make the bike steer? Do you even know what trail is? Did you position one humanoid on your model to see if it would tip backwards? Did you overlay the current relationship of rider and his contact point of saddle, pedals and handlebars to a known current stable, power-efficient bike geometry and do something BETTER in that regard? You’re the epitome of the “disconnected” designer who does it in a vacuum and thinks they did something “cool”. And like a vacuum, this sucks as a bike.

Hrm. This post didn’t reply “inline” with PLR’s post that begins with
“Stupidest thing I have ever seen. The bicycle is a perfect machine….”
Apologies for the errant reply!

1st,I’m shocked by this bike design，cool and fantanstic!
2nd,I want to buy a bike like this though I don’t konw whether this design is safe enough? I’d like to own it!