Re: Innovative?

[Just zis Guy, you know?]

On Fri, 3 Jun 2005 21:11:17 +0100, "Sean Kerslake"
> wrote in message
>:

>I was just wondering what people thought of it and if they had seen
>[specific] similiar designs which I could cite.

It looks to me to be trying to replicate the flat storage of the
Burrows 2D, but without the decades of bike design experience.

http://www.halffg.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/foldsoc/IMG_0412a.jpg

and this is Mike:

http://www.halffg.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/foldsoc/IMG_0410a.jpg

(from http://www.halffg.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/foldsoc/cf2004.html)

Hey! I was there!

Incidentally, Richard Ballantine owns a 2D.

But none of these are half as good as a Brompton :-)

Guy
--
May contain traces of irony. Contents liable to settle after posting.
http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk

85% of helmet statistics are made up, 69% of them at CHS, Puget Sound

[Rich]

Sean Kerslake wrote:

> Its looks are 'wowwing' my colleagues into giving it a very good mark and
> I'm being the spoil sport because having seen alot of bike designs from the
> last 100 plus years, I don't think it is that 'wow'.

It's ugly.

[Rich]

Sean Kerslake wrote:

> I was just wondering what people thought of it and if they had seen
> [specific] similiar designs which I could cite.

It reminded me of this http://www.montagueco.com/productpara.html when I
saw it (I couldn't find the link until now), except not as refined.

[ookook]

>Hi guys,
>
>Have a look at the pictures at:
>http://www-staff.lboro.ac.uk/~cdspk/index.html
>
>This is one of my students projects which we are currently marking and
>having heavy debates about.
>
>Its looks are 'wowwing' my colleagues into giving it a very good mark and
>I'm being the spoil sport because having seen alot of bike designs from the
>last 100 plus years, I don't think it is that 'wow'.

I would say that an "urban" bike should have some means of carrying
some minimal amount of cargo, and should break down for easy storage.
It should also incorporate some effective antitheft measures. I
don't find the frame design particularly appealing, and no cover over
the chain means it's going to mess up clothing. I like the fenders.
Not enough bikes have them these days.

>I think the student made the mistake of pushing the frame aesthetics and not
>the flat pack delivery, self assembly part of his brief.

I don't understand the benefit of one-time self assembly. Most people
aren't very good with even simple mechanical tasks. If it can be
broken down for storage in a small space and reassembled quickly and
easily, it's good. The frame isn't particularly appealing.

>I was just wondering what people thought of it and if they had seen
>[specific] similiar designs which I could cite.

I like the lucabike, but it's expensive as all get-out.
www.lucabike.com

[Bruce & Lois Nelson]

I agree with the opinion "ugly".
In north america, particularly in the US, letting the consumer assemble the
bike is asking for lawsuits.
This front fender, like most does not go forward far enough. In order to
keep water from the tire from blowing up in the cyclists face, it needs to
carry at least 25° farther forward.
Bruce

"Sean Kerslake" > wrote in message
...
> Hi guys,
>
> Have a look at the pictures at:
> http://www-staff.lboro.ac.uk/~cdspk/index.html
>
> This is one of my students projects which we are currently marking and
> having heavy debates about.
>
> Its looks are 'wowwing' my colleagues into giving it a very good mark and
> I'm being the spoil sport because having seen alot of bike designs from
the
> last 100 plus years, I don't think it is that 'wow'.
>
> I think the student made the mistake of pushing the frame aesthetics and
not
> the flat pack delivery, self assembly part of his brief.
>
> I was just wondering what people thought of it and if they had seen
> [specific] similiar designs which I could cite.
>
> Cheers for any feedback, Sean
>
> PS. Please go to the UK New Designers Exhibition web site and vote for
the
> Moulton as a more significant iconic design than the iPod -
> http://www.newdesigners.com/
>
> Sean Kerslake
> Design and Tech
> Loughborough Uni
> UK
>
>

[John_Kane]

Sean Kerslake wrote:
> Hi guys,
>
> Have a look at the pictures at:
> http://www-staff.lboro.ac.uk/~cdspk/index.html
>
> This is one of my students projects which we are currently marking and
> having heavy debates about.
>
> Its looks are 'wowwing' my colleagues into giving it a very good mark and
> I'm being the spoil sport because having seen alot of bike designs from t=
he
> last 100 plus years, I don't think it is that 'wow'.

It looks to me to have all the elegance of a pile of welded plate steel
even if it is a polymer frame. I cannot see any functional let alone
esthetic reason for that ugly boxy frame and the forks are no better.
>From a functional point of view it looks like it would add weight to
the bike with no added structural strength. The chain wheel seems
awfully small. I certainly would not give it house room.

I have seen a square or box type frame a few times. I know there is a
low cost recumbent with one available now but don't know the make.

If you can have a look at some of the old New Cyclist magazines from
the early 1990s, IIRC Mike Burroughs did a design with a single fork
and stays only on the left side of the bike with a similar but much
more elegant frame for them.

The bike had the added advantage that one could remove or replace a
chain without having to break the old one (The stays were only on the
left side of the bike). I do believe that that may be one functional
redeeming features of this bike.

The caption on the photo also says" Compact living, stored in the
'hallway'". Unless those pedals are hinged and the handlebars can be
move 90 degrees easily, the bike does not look any more 'compact'
than any other 'normal' bike.

Without the design specs it is difficult to comment but was the bike
supposed to be a practical useable everyday bike If is was, it
certainly does not seem to meet any reasonable standards for a modern
bike. ? A few points: the rear fender look totally inadequate: The
first ride in the rain and one would have a streak up the back and
probably a bit of gravel in the hair. Also it looks to me as if there
is no easy way to put a carrier rack on the bike and that, for
something that is clearly not designed for 'sports' riding, is
really not acceptable. By the way does that thing have any brakes? It
does not appear to have any gears so I assume it must have a coaster
brake? From the photo given what appears to be a one speed bike the
chain wheel looks very small, probably too small to make it a practical
bike for riding in traffic.

> I think the student made the mistake of pushing the frame aesthetics and =
not
> the flat pack delivery, self assembly part of his brief.

Yes and unfortunately the student seems to have pushed backwards on the
aesthetics :)
It is hard to see how that frame etc is much of an improvement over a
regular frame that one can buy at the local bike shop. The wheels,
headset, pedals, all appear standard so I see no advantage for a flat
pack delivery here. I may be missing something the self-assembly but
it seems to me that any good bike manufacturer could ship a bikes with
the forks (complete headset ?) assembled and let the buyer stick on the
fenders, stick on the chain, bolt on the wheels, attach pedals and
voil=E0 you have something quite similar. I'm assuming that one still
needs a pedal wrench and a hex wrench and headset (?) wrench for the
headset.

> I was just wondering what people thought of it and if they had seen
> [specific] similar designs which I could cite.

I am not impressed. Looks ugly and does not seem to show any real
innovation. If your colleagues are wowed by the looks they may need new
glasses.
See Mike Burroughs in New Cyclist as mentioned above. I have no
reference as I donated my copies to a cycling reporter years ago.

Now if you want them to be "wowwed" I'd suggest letting them have
a look at a Pederson. http://www.dursley-pedersen.net/ Now that is an
innovative bike design! It is 110 years old but still... Mind you I
don't know if it meets your design specs.=20

John Kane
Kingston ON

[Bob]

Sean Kerslake wrote:
> Hi guys,
>
> Have a look at the pictures at:
> http://www-staff.lboro.ac.uk/~cdspk/index.html
>
> This is one of my students projects which we are currently marking and
> having heavy debates about.
>
> Its looks are 'wowwing' my colleagues into giving it a very good mark and
> I'm being the spoil sport because having seen alot of bike designs from the
> last 100 plus years, I don't think it is that 'wow'.
>
> I think the student made the mistake of pushing the frame aesthetics and not
> the flat pack delivery, self assembly part of his brief.
>
> I was just wondering what people thought of it and if they had seen
> [specific] similiar designs which I could cite.
>
> Cheers for any feedback, Sean

It's ugly, it looks heavy, and it doesn't appear to offer any advantage
over a single speed child's bike with coaster brakes. Outside of that
it's okay.

Regards,
Bob Hunt