Bicycle design

Design Discussions general design discussion
21

Ah Yes the airfoil ---- Are you going to clap your hands together and applaud the design or did the design really make a difference?

Short history. The KM40 is one of the most beautiful carbon fiber frames made however, it had 650c wheels and only would fit guys that were 5’-11" to 6’ tall and had a 33" inseam measured floor to crotch while barefoot. Everyone on the planet is not the same size therefore Kestrel needed a new model to replade the KM40 and fit more riders.

The discussion of 650c vs 700c wheels is only pertinant until you reach the performance level of a top time-trialist / triathlete.

The awards were not given to Kestrel for the best design in carbon that did a better job in performance. I have no problems with the airfoil as another new model in the marketplace, but the frame had a boring paint job and was not any faster than other frames in its category. Kestrel should have been given an award for sourcing a frame offshore and keeping american workers employed. Kestrel is a great small company and the trend is to offshore the manufacture of products for the US market. While I hate to give credit to offshoring manufacturing, Kestrel did not go out of business and has remained here in the Unite States. It has been too cutthroat to make good products here in the US.

Kestrel had a product (the KM40 ) that was out of date because of the wheel size. To stay in business the company has decided to take advantage of cheap manufacturing through the entire model line. While I personally wish that every Kestrel was still made in California, I empathize with the owners of their small company.

As Independent Designers, I would hope that design leaders in the education community would direct young designers/engineers to concentrate on products that are for viable markets.

we all spend too much money on our education to waste it on “Fresh ideas for a new bicycle frame” Our instructors and companies should push design toward marketplaces with potential rather than products that refill the shelves.

22

Those old bikes designed By Mike Burrows were great. The Giant MCR2 was, in my opinion, one of the best looking production bikes made. Leave it to the UCI to ban those designs from racing. Still, we see the effects of Burrow’s work. Before that time even compact geometry was considered odd.

I still don’t understand the “designers should stay away from bikes” crowd. I wouldn’t trade my current light, stiff DA equiped road bike for an old lugged steel frame with 12 speed friction shifting downtube shifters. Racing bikes are better designed now than ever. Sure, I still have a few old road and track bikes from the 80’s, but you won’t catch me taking them out on long fast rides.

23

Those old bikes designed By Mike Burrows were great. The Giant MCR2 was, in my opinion, one of the best looking production bikes made. Leave it to the UCI to ban those designs from racing. Still, we see the effects of Burrow’s work. Before that time even compact geometry was considered odd.

I still don’t understand the “designers should stay away from bikes” crowd. I wouldn’t trade my current light, stiff DA equiped road bike for an old lugged steel frame with 12 speed friction shifting downtube shifters. Racing bikes are better designed now than ever. Sure, I still have a few old road and track bikes from the 80’s, but you won’t catch me taking them out on long fast rides.

24

I think it should be noted that the UCI only constrains the road racing bikes. I figure over 95% of all bikes sold do not fit into this category. The UCI has nothing to say about mountain bikes, hybrids, BMX, cyclo-cross, sidewalk cruisers and certainly not human-powered vehicles.

Also, the Lotus bike was designed by the same Mike Burrows who also designed the Windcheetah. I don’t remember which bike came first, but the single side fork was not really that innovative, just easier to get past the UCI censors. If you want to compare, Burrows’ Windcheetah had a single sided drive hub!

It’s unfortunate that some people generalize with statements like “designer should stay away from bikes.” I design for a living. I’m also a “former” recumbent bike builder (really no such thing as I’m working on another machine).

The big problem is that the two major constraints for a bike seem to be mutually exclusive. To be efficient, a bike must be lightweight. To be marketable, it must be beautiful. Decoration does not make things light and ultra-functional objects are generally ugly. There’s the rub.

:)ensen.

25

The Windcheetah and other monoblade recumbents came well before any of Burrow’s upright carbon bikes. No doubt there is a lot of innovation happing in the development of recumbents and enclosed velomobiles.

I am glad to see some interest in this discussion on the forum. Like it or not, our profession has influenced all types of bicycles quite a bit in the last ten years. It is interesting and timely that an article about bike design appeared on the Core77 website today. Check it out if you haven’t already seen it:

http://www.core77.com/reactor/01.06_reinventing.asp

26

Does anyone have nice bike renderings or sketches to show off?

27

Generally, I agree that bicycle design, except on the very high end of the market, hasn’t seen any change in decades. The bigger companies seem to treat the smallest advancements as radical innovation. Still, there are some interesting things going on that aren’t purely decorative.

Biomega bikes (www.biomega.dk) have a couple of amazing things. The “Boston” bike they did for Puma is an ingenious folding bike that uses a detachable cable instead of a bottom tube that doubles as a lock. If the cable is snipped by a theif, the bike rendered useless.

My favorite bike of theirs (and the one I now own) is the “Copenhagen,” which was purpose built as an urban commuter bike. First, it uses a drive shaft instead of a chain (so you can wear pants and not worry about greasing them) which is integrated into the frame itself. Also, the cables are all routed inside the frame, and the frame itself is painted a glow-in-the-dark yellow that is subtle and beautiful.

I also just saw photos of the new “Citystorm” by Giant Bicycles, another purpose-built commuter, which incorporates some incredible features that go well beyond styling. (designartnews.com is for sale | HugeDomains)
They’re not pretty, but the Breezer bikes seem genuinely innovative, too.

In general it seems that the commuter bike is finally becoming something that is getting real design attention instead of being merely a marketing angle for an existing design with a couple of component tweaks. Trek Bikes made a huge deal about their Soho “Urban Bike” but beyond some minor nods (rubberized bits on the frame, curved handlebars and, I’m serious, a thermal coffee mug holder instead of a water bottle) the bike ain’t that much different than 10 others they offer. Same goes for the “urban bikes” by Cannondale and Specialized, which are mostly just the same road/mountain bike hybrid with thin tires and black paint.

Ask anyone who bikes regularly and they’ll tell you that no one bike can do it all–there are many different kinds of bikes because they each fill a need that often is at odds with other common needs (fast road bikes are too delicate for mountain biking trails, riding positions differ wildly based on speed vs. duration, etc.). Bike design is at its best when companies get specific in addressing these things.

Last thought: I think that a major factor in the sameness of bike designs is that the industry is tied to a small group of component manufacturers (Shimano, SRAM, etc) who supply brakes, cranksets, etc. that require standardization across brands and are instrumental in determining key points and dimensions. Ironically, this is actually pushing design in one category–bikes for non-bikers. Shimano has developed a new automatic transmission for bicycles and in order to push it, has partnered with Trek, Raliegh and Giant to develop a new line of “Coasting” bikes. Each company took the concept in different directions from retro to modern. (www.coasting.com)

28

this is a great discussion.
I agree, many designers should stay away from bicycle design, and the many designers I am talking about are the designers that don’t regard the history or culture of use. The rest of the designers that understand the market and end users…well they are welcome. The bicycle is ripe with opportunities for design. It is a more mature market than cars or electronics. It has great opportunities and requires multifunctional teams to work together in collaboration. If there were no collaboration between ID and engineers and marketing and warranty and supply chain and on and on then you would have a pile of crap product that everyone would see through.

the point that I think is lost in much of the discussions is there are many many different user groups, cultures and product categories within the bicycle industry. Folding bikes are for a certain group of people. Carbon race bikes are for a certain group of people. One of the greatest bicycle designs of all time, the seventies Schwinn Suburban is for a certain group of people. And these people are quite different with different expectations. If you don’t like highly styled bikes then you will like more traditional bicycles because that is your expectation. And btw, some of the most simple designs are designed! Geez!

Working in the industry on frames and components and soft goods and the like I can say that design is more important to the bicycle industry than ever. Specialized, Giant, Acell (dutch) and Trek are arguably the biggest players in the industry and ID is key to their business…the same way that engineering, marketing, supply chain, accounting, pro teams, dealers and on and on are key.

The really cool thing about the bike design blog is it gives an avenue to question ideas and look at new ways of thinking. I applaud the effort and if I weren’t under NDA I would submit some designs to the blog myself.

Design and user centered design research is more important than ever…whether you are designing a high style electra or a high performance straight tube carbon bike (which by the way straight tubes aren’t necessarily better).

If you don’t agree go look at the evolution of the humble hammer! Design can fit in everywhere if the designer recognizes the end user and if the design realizes that there are many different types, cultures and styles of use.

and last but not least: It is all about multi functional teams ya’ll!!!

29

30

I just bought an Orbea Orca.
Without the awesome design, how could I justify paying such an obscene amount?

31

How do you like the SRAM components? Force right? I’m anxious to try something other than Shimano or Campy.

32

…Sorry to say I put Shimano Dura-Ace on mine… But here’s an article on how SRAM stands up (quite well). Sram definitely positively innovated the human interface:

http://www.glorycycles.com/srforogrre.html

33

Interesting to see road cycling is popular with ID designers. Do you reckon this is because it is very kit (product) focused, i.e. an excuse to buy lots of beautiful components!

BTW…I’m also a big cycle racing fan with De Rosa, Viner and Scott road bikes.

34

Maybe because we can’t afford to own comporable design quality in other things, like luxury or sport automobiles… For $5,000 you can buy a bike that has equivalent quality surpassing a $50,000 automobile.

Also maybe because as Industrial Designers, we tend to believe that life can be improved via augmenting our own human capabilities through products (which to me, defines the difference between jogging and cycling.)

Oh yeah, and it gives us a whole new category of stuff to buy and covet…

35

IDEO + Shimano = Coasting, a strategy for making bikes “for the suburbs”.

36

But also as designers, many of us believe less is more. That’s why a lot of designers I know ride fixed gear bikes-- strip away all the bullshit (derailleurs, cables, brakes) for a pure and direct bicycling experience.

37

If that had been done five years ago I might have been more impressed.
But I do like the approach–all boats rise with the tide.

38

For some stunning examples of metalworking art in motion, check out these photos from the Handbuilt Bicycle Show last month in San Jose CA:

http://www.cyclingnews.com/tech/2007/shows/nahmbs07/?id=results/nahmbs071

There was a large emphasis on ‘townie’ bikes this year…most of them way too nice to consider locking up outside. But they have neat solutions for storage and comfort too - designed and built by the people who use them.

I think that’s part of the bicycle’s appeal to designers: that the distance between idea and implementation can be so short, and the possibilities for customization so great. Plus whether it’s a track bike or a downhill bike, bikes are relatively stripped-down and functional, vs. cars where so much is purely brand-driven aesthetics.

The current track-bike fixation baffles me, especially in towns like Seattle and SF. I mean, it’s HILLY here, and if you aren’t some skinny gnarly courier, you are never getting up these hills with one big gear. I see girls in nice shoes and no helmet spinning their way downhill on Pike riding messenger-style bikes and think “that’s hot, but soooo stupid”. Not to mention engendering knee blowouts later on. I’m not hating - I have a track bike myself, but it’s for riding on weekends, not commuting. It’s currently a hipster trend though - very difficult to find a nice steel 1980’s road frame used anymore… and these aren’t the bikes that will get the car-dependent populace jazzed up.

39

Sorry to say I put Shimano Dura-Ace on mine…

Du-rache (spoken with Italian accent to appease campy riders) is a solid choice , too.

Had a look at on of those Orcas the other day at a local bicycling expo, excellent lines. I hear they’re pretty quick…

40

With DA10 I think shimano have really come on a long way in terms of ID. The chainset and shifters are beautiful yet remain very functional.