Thanks guys, i didn’t quite notice that there were some new replies to this thread.
I know what you mean.
A recent design that perfectly reflects my view on the actual goal of, or let’s just what I think transpoartation design in general should be doing, is Jean-Marie Massaud’s MeWe Concept for toyota. as well as the entrepreneural spirit and brave intentions behind bmw’s i models. Or just think of older examples like the Audi A2 or the Honda Element.
So the 4W market has, at some point, recognized that i has to change its’ strategies to survive, the 2w sector on the other hand, didn’t, as i pointed out in the description of this project. The brief for this project was to provide concepts for a 2w product that can attract a younger targetgroup to the ever-aging customerpool of motorcyclebuyers.
With my design i wanted to adress some aspects of the current transportation design sector, that i found were problematic and especially visible in the 2w sector. for example the possibilities that come with plastic parts and the still evolving production techniques for the fanciest of surfaces that ultimately led to the current status in transportation design where pure styling has replaced at least function-related designsolutions. 125cc bikes that want to look like their moto-gp idols, crossovers that look like dakarbikes, but are not even fit for gravelroads, etc.
This dishonesty in 2w-design (and in transportation in general) was my driving motivation behind offering a new kind of architecture, taking a step back in terms of the visually implied aspirations and therefore ultimately ending up with a result that looks different from the current 2w-status quo. Because apparently this status quo does not appeal to young people. So a bike for them should not look try to be like the ones that you can already buy. I think that worked out.
I totally agree with you that i do not offer groundbreaking improvements or innovations for a 2w product. I just wanted to communicate to Honda, that i think what they are doing right now and have been doing since the Honda Cub, is contradicting their theorethical heart-warming philosophy (check the letters from the old man). Which ultimately makes their products no longer relevant in terms of function, spirit and consequently appearance to todays group of possible customers.
That in the end i went full berzerk in 3D and ended up with an overloaded, unbalanced totally badass-wannabe bike that does not entirely reflect my philosophy and what i wanted to say with the result, is true, and i know it. I mean, it doesnt even have a “start/stop engine” button or any other kind of interface that makes it move.
(but doing it was a crazy amount of fun, i can tell you 
)
Anyway, i am currently with Honda R&D Europe in Rome for 6 months and work on translating my mindset into products in a better way, so i’ll just tell you to lean back, i will post more refined and thought-through concepts on transportation stuff next year
all the best,
max
PS: Regarding the smartphone integration: basically 80 percent of our project team were having “smarphone as a speedometer”, “race with your buddies and compare tracktimes’n’stuff online”, etc. in their concepts.
i didnt like the idea of adding stuff a certain group of people likes and uses to something that we want to sell them. i understand, that it can make sense to get their attention, but i thought the fundamental problem why bikes dont sell to young lads was because of - well, more fundamental aspects than just “trying to be cool and young and fresh and web 2.0 and twitter” - so i tried to stick to the conventional parameters in 2w features and design.