It says that it has "fewer moving parts", but it doesn say what it is that they're comparing it with.What could possibly go wrong?
You don't, and that's why all the alternatives over time have failed.Trouble is, how do you compete with the 99% efficiency and low cost of a properly set up chain?
that was the Mando.That's disappeared without trace and I can't even remember the make now.
Thanks Woosh, that's reminded me of the full name, Mando Footloose.that was the Mando.
Spencer Kelly @ BBC Click did a quick demo on it.
I think he may have inadvertently killed it.
These ideas seem logical on paper until someone tries to make real devices.
I much prefer the incremental approach.
If comparing to a chain drive where each side plate, roller, pin and any dirt seals are added into the parts count, then saying "fewer moving parts" is easily justified.It says that it has "fewer moving parts", but it doesn say what it is that they're comparing it with.
and they always make them look weird, so nobody wants to buy them, anyway.You don't, and that's why all the alternatives over time have failed.
This hydraulic one is a variant on the all electric one with dynamo at the crank driving a rear hub motor. That's disappeared without trace and I can't even remember the make now.
.
it does not say how many moving parts the front and rear hydraulic pump motors have though.If comparing to a chain drive where each side plate, roller, pin and any dirt seals are added into the parts count, then saying "fewer moving parts" is easily justified.
Just wonder why recourse to a hydrostatic variable speed drive was considered, where the innate properties of a brushless electric motor drive and associated controller could do away with "gear" ratios, and still live in a large hub unit.
That's exactly why some people do want to buy them. But obviously not enough such suckers.and they always make them look weird, so nobody wants to buy them, anyway.
I have often wondered about this.and they always make them look weird, so nobody wants to buy them, anyway.
This is what happens when you let art students loose on bike anatomy...this one will make your eyes tie themselves in knots trying to make sense of it!I have often wondered about this.
It seems to me that possibly there is one engineer/inventor who knows his stuff and unfortunately he employs Art College graduates, advertising people, and spin doctors rather than more engineers, electricians, electronic engineers.
The result is an oddity that will only appeal to a small number of people, wrapped up in hype and oversell.
Once production starts and complaints come in, there is no-one able to offer proper support and further development.
Meanwhile, the original inventor has moved on to his next cunning idea.
So many organisations employ "stylist" rather than designers, the stylist having highjack the term designer, in some companies completely.I have often wondered about this.
It seems to me that possibly there is one engineer/inventor who knows his stuff and unfortunately he employs Art College graduates, advertising people, and spin doctors rather than more engineers, electricians, electronic engineers.
nobody. You 'gift' the company. The money helps the company develop the product. If it's successful, the company sends you what it promised.Who audits the accounts?
It's gambling with style.I do wonder whether crowdfunding is scam.