Anyone who has ever ridden a bicycle, and is in the least creative, has come up with some theory of how a bicycle could be made faster, cheaper, lighter, or better in some other way. There is something audacious about a bicycle that seem to appeal to inventors. The thing is so simple, all its innards are on display, you can actually see how it works before your eyes. Its efficiency is beyond doubt in a counter intuitive way. How can it make sense, that on a given journey, you can burn only a third of the calories, while dragging along a lump of metal with you?
People who have never seen a bicycle ridden before are gobsmacked. Russian soldiers invading Berlin in 1945, had never seen bikes before, and before long, they were shooting people just to take their bicycles. Not long afterwards, they were shooting each other for the same reason. In the year 1899, half of all the patents applied for in the USA, were for accessories and improvements to bicycles.
The thing is, that once the "safety bicycle" was invented about 1890, the design was about right. Apart from variable gear ratios, the bicycle was pretty much as we know it today. Yes, there have been improvements. Today, we have better gears, better brakes, better lights, and lighter bikes. But the basic concept remains the same after a century and a quarter.
Development, as with motor cars, is often lead by what is happening in road racing. There is a trend away from simple tubular frame members, in favour of pear drop cross section, to give a more aerodynamic shape. There can be no doubt that a simple tube gives the strongest result for a given weight of material. My thought was to keep the simple tube, and glue on an aerodynamic shape at the back, made from polystyrene foam. The whole thing could then be covered with a stick on plastic film. The result would be lighter stronger and cheaper.
I then realised that the rules of racing forbid any component that has no purpose other than reducing air drag, so the polystyrene bit would be a rule breaker. The other thing I have often pondered is bike bearings, for wheels and bottom brackets. Why not use the sealed-for-life ball race bearings of the type use in electric motors, car alternators and so on. OK, they would be slightly heavier, but for commuter type bikes, they would have advantages. They would have a long life, require no maintenance, and be easy and quick to replace. Bought in bulk by the manufacturer, they would be quite chap. Every body wins.
People who have never seen a bicycle ridden before are gobsmacked. Russian soldiers invading Berlin in 1945, had never seen bikes before, and before long, they were shooting people just to take their bicycles. Not long afterwards, they were shooting each other for the same reason. In the year 1899, half of all the patents applied for in the USA, were for accessories and improvements to bicycles.
The thing is, that once the "safety bicycle" was invented about 1890, the design was about right. Apart from variable gear ratios, the bicycle was pretty much as we know it today. Yes, there have been improvements. Today, we have better gears, better brakes, better lights, and lighter bikes. But the basic concept remains the same after a century and a quarter.
Development, as with motor cars, is often lead by what is happening in road racing. There is a trend away from simple tubular frame members, in favour of pear drop cross section, to give a more aerodynamic shape. There can be no doubt that a simple tube gives the strongest result for a given weight of material. My thought was to keep the simple tube, and glue on an aerodynamic shape at the back, made from polystyrene foam. The whole thing could then be covered with a stick on plastic film. The result would be lighter stronger and cheaper.
I then realised that the rules of racing forbid any component that has no purpose other than reducing air drag, so the polystyrene bit would be a rule breaker. The other thing I have often pondered is bike bearings, for wheels and bottom brackets. Why not use the sealed-for-life ball race bearings of the type use in electric motors, car alternators and so on. OK, they would be slightly heavier, but for commuter type bikes, they would have advantages. They would have a long life, require no maintenance, and be easy and quick to replace. Bought in bulk by the manufacturer, they would be quite chap. Every body wins.
