Comments on: A Bike http://www.psfk.com/2006/06/a_bike.html Ideas & Trends Mon, 23 Nov 2009 02:38:31 -0800 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4 hourly 1 By: KC George http://www.psfk.com/2006/06/a_bike.html/comment-page-1#comment-6907 KC George Tue, 21 Aug 2007 07:40:23 +0000 #comment-6907 Belli has come as close to perfection as possible. Maybe, if his bike had a kind of 'nano' suspension, it would have been more perfect. As Dr Moulton says suspension is crucial in any bike. Belli has come as close to perfection as possible.

Maybe, if his bike had a kind of ‘nano’ suspension, it would have been more perfect.

As Dr Moulton says suspension is crucial in any bike.

]]> By: Alessandro Belli http://www.psfk.com/2006/06/a_bike.html/comment-page-1#comment-1876 Alessandro Belli Tue, 30 Nov 1999 00:00:00 +0000 #comment-1876 <p>Our solution to the same problem.</p> <p>I think that Sir Clive's work is trying to address one of the most puzzling problems of modern engineering: why is the bicycle one of the few products that's remained failry unchanged through at least three technology revolutions? And why in the world shouldn't, in the age of miniaturization and "personal"-ization, the bicycle be grafted upon the public/private transportation means as a tool for "fine distribution" intermediate between the car or the bus or the tube and mere walking?</p> <p>I am a product designer, and as many others (including design superstar Richard Sapper) I have tried to contribute a solution. The first concern of our study group was, true, to make sure that our project "didn't invent anything" in terms of ergonomics. That is we have tried to stay as close as possible near the standard biking parameters, in order to avoid the "circus monkey" image that some were mentioning.</p> <p>Our work was supported by the European Commission's program "LIFE" and by engineering polymer concern Ticona-Celanese: http://www.ticona.com/index/news/newsletters/ticona_highlights_0105_lightweightbicycle.htm</p> <p>It may be interesting to compare our project with Sir Clive's:</p> <p>- HALF the volume and more compact when folded: 48x36x12 cm vs. 70x30x20 (as declared by the Sinclair website).</p> <p>- Twice larger wheels with Pirelli tubeless tyres.</p> <p>- Super-stiff pre-tensioned space-frame frame, as stiff as a "normal" bike (or more).</p> <p>- Larger size, 100% regular ergonomics and handling (relationship between seat, handlebars, pedals and wheelbase) for people up to 1,92 cm (US male 99th percentile).</p> <p>- Totally automated, pushbotton, "landing-gear style", folding/unfolding</p> <p>- Belt traction (no chains), normal gearing, 3 speeds, normal 170-mm cranks.</p> <p>- Much lighter than the A-Bike, all plastics, engineered by Ticona-Celanese: 4.0 kg.</p> <p>- Electric kit that brings the total to a mere 6.0 kg.</p> <p>I believe that our solution is a more advanced one, more realistic and industrially sound. But my respect to the fact is that Sir. Clive had the ability to bring his to the market while we still are not there.</p> <p>Best regards,<br /> Alessandro Belli</p> Our solution to the same problem.

I think that Sir Clive’s work is trying to address one of the most puzzling problems of modern engineering: why is the bicycle one of the few products that’s remained failry unchanged through at least three technology revolutions? And why in the world shouldn’t, in the age of miniaturization and “personal”-ization, the bicycle be grafted upon the public/private transportation means as a tool for “fine distribution” intermediate between the car or the bus or the tube and mere walking?

I am a product designer, and as many others (including design superstar Richard Sapper) I have tried to contribute a solution. The first concern of our study group was, true, to make sure that our project “didn’t invent anything” in terms of ergonomics. That is we have tried to stay as close as possible near the standard biking parameters, in order to avoid the “circus monkey” image that some were mentioning.

Our work was supported by the European Commission’s program “LIFE” and by engineering polymer concern Ticona-Celanese: http://www.ticona.com/index/news/newsletters/ticona_highlights_0105_lightweightbicycle.htm

It may be interesting to compare our project with Sir Clive’s:

- HALF the volume and more compact when folded: 48×36x12 cm vs. 70×30x20 (as declared by the Sinclair website).

- Twice larger wheels with Pirelli tubeless tyres.

- Super-stiff pre-tensioned space-frame frame, as stiff as a “normal” bike (or more).

- Larger size, 100% regular ergonomics and handling (relationship between seat, handlebars, pedals and wheelbase) for people up to 1,92 cm (US male 99th percentile).

- Totally automated, pushbotton, “landing-gear style”, folding/unfolding

- Belt traction (no chains), normal gearing, 3 speeds, normal 170-mm cranks.

- Much lighter than the A-Bike, all plastics, engineered by Ticona-Celanese: 4.0 kg.

- Electric kit that brings the total to a mere 6.0 kg.

I believe that our solution is a more advanced one, more realistic and industrially sound. But my respect to the fact is that Sir. Clive had the ability to bring his to the market while we still are not there.

Best regards,
Alessandro Belli

]]>