Intera, the ideal inter-city and intra-city combination

When I announced the design competition finalists and later the winner, I mentioned that I also planned to post some of the other entries. As I said, I thought many of them were very interesting and, in my opinion, deserve to be shared. I am not really going to be posting them in any particular order, just randomly as I have the opportunity to do so. This is probably the first one that came to my mind today because there has been a lot of discussion on the blog lately about recumbent positioning. Anyway, here is the first of many more to come.

The Intera, by designer Pieter Lasage, converts from a recumbent to an upright. This concept happened to be the one that I listed as my 10th pick. I liked the idea and the execution of the concept, but I wasn’t convinced enough to move it higher up my list of favorites. You can read Pieter’s description of the concept though, and form your own opinion. Like many of the other entries, this concept is a great example of creative thinking. Thanks again to all who took the time to think about the problem and to enter a design in the competition.

Now onto Pieter’s description of his concept:

a recumbent bike and a standard bike in one
A recumbent bike is more efficient and comfortable for long distances while a standard bike is safer and more manoeuvrable in city traffic. ‘intera’ has all these advantages.

fast and easy conversion
The driver can transform the bicycle in both directions in a few simple steps, without disassembling any part or lifting the bike off the ground. It only takes a few seconds.

without compromising ergonomics in both positions
We built the bike around the two ideal positions (sitting and laying down) instead of fitting the person around the bike.

with only standard industry-wide techniques, systems and parts
This way the time to market and the investment cost is kept to a minimum.

target market
commuters; people who live outside the city and go to work inside the city

innovative features
two comfortable bicycles in one
only using industry-wide techniques, systems and parts.

frame: bended and welded aluminium tubes

drive: standard chains and gears

mechanisms: all hinges (seat, steer and pedals) and locks are plain, low tech and implemented in a way that momentum forces are reduced to a minimum.

Design competition follow up

I wanted the design competition to spark a conversation, and it has certainly done that. I had a feeling the winning entry might be slightly controversial, but I didn’t expect some of the really strong reactions that I have seen lately on my blog and elsewhere. I guess that is not all bad though. As I said in a comment to the last post, I would personally rather design an object that elicits strong emotional responses at both ends of the spectrum (love and hate) than an object that is viewed by the majority of people as just OK. There are a lot of mediocre products on the market that very few people really dislike (or like for that matter). The products and brands that have a loyal following are those that people feel strongly about.

I can’t address all the comments that were left in response to the last post, but I will at least try to address a few of the general comment categories that I noticed.

A number of comments came from people who feel that the basic design has been done before and is therefore not valid. I am certainly aware of enclosed velomobile designs going back 100 plus years. I am also aware of similar recumbent designs with open sides and a roof. The 1970’s Schondorf “Easy Muscar” trike, which can be seen in “Bicycling Science” is the first one that comes to mind. Over the years, I have seen other bike designs which feature roofs from time to time (take a look at a few in the Winter 1985 issue of the IHPVA journal if you are interested). Still, I stand by my statement that Torkel Dohmers’ ThisWay concept is the best looking one I have seen. Yes, that statement indicates that I believe the aesthetics of a bicycle, or any other product, are an important part of the design. “Styling” is not a dirty word in the auto industry, so why should it be disregarded when we are talking bikes? Sure industrial design is way more than styling, but let’s face it…aesthetics are important. It is undeniable that people are often drawn to products based on their initial response to the way those products look. The functionality has to be there to keep them interested, but first impressions are pretty important. Torkel’s design may be functionally similar to a 25 year old Easy Racer with a plastic roof bolted on, as one person mentioned, but show both of those options to a group of prospective users and I would bet that most people would have a clear preference. In my opinion, a design like the Cycle Sol, which was mentioned when the finalists were announced, does not at all take anything away from the “ThisWay” concept. Both designs have roots that can be traced way back, but I stand by my opinion that Torkel’s design looks better, and is potentially more marketable, than similar designs I have seen over the years.

Another group of comments (and for some reason several emails) came from people who believe that the standard safety bike is already perfect and can’t be improved on. Some people feel that the perfect commuter bike already exists and the very act of discussing a non-standard bike design amounts to heresy. A few people told me that, since they are already bike commuters, they know exactly what works and what doesn’t. One person was even nice enough to privately clue me into the fact that I know “absolutely nothing about bikes.” Man, all this time I thought I did, what a let down! Seriously though, it doesn’t bother me if someone wants to question my cycling knowledge. Argue that point all you want, but the facts that prompted the design competition are not really debatable. If only 13 million Americans ride bikes on a somewhat regular basis and 160 million NEVER ride at all, it tells me that we are not doing everything we can to share our love of cycling with the masses (more on that here). Don’t get me wrong, standard diamond frame bicycles work great for me, and for many of you, but there are a lot of people out there who they obviously don’t appeal to. I could take the attitude that everyone should ride to work, and that they should do it on a lightweight, fenderless road bike just like I do, but that would be pretty closed-minded and counterproductive. Instead, I would rather continue to ask the question- what more can the bike industry do to reach that “blue ocean” of potential cyclists? I don’t have all the answers, and I will readily acknowledge the fact that many bicycle companies are already trying hard to reach those people, but I still think the question is worth asking and discussing on this blog.

Many people who commented just didn’t like the chosen design or had specific issues with elements from it. That is fine, and I encourage all of you to share your opinions. Commenters like GeekGuyAndy and gsport george, just to name a couple, expressed their concerns and suggestions for improving the design in a thoughtful manor. Those are the types of opposing comments that add to the conversation and foster further discussion, both pro and con. Negative comments with absolutely no thought behind them, on the other hand, do nothing for the conversation. I allow anonymous comments because I want this blog to be an open forum for all. Criticism is fine, but I do ask that you keep it constructive.

Suggestions for improvement are welcome, but it is worth keeping in mind that the winning conceptual design, like all of the entries, is just that- a concept. I certainly didn’t expect completely engineered and developed designs to come out of a 5-week competition, so obviously all of the entries would need to be developed further to become real products. The entries that are closer in form to bikes currently on the market might require less development, but it should be noted that all are at the early stages of the design process.

Lastly, I want to quote from a comment left by jimmythefly:

“There are a few challenges to be addressed, but this was never meant to be THE bike for every situation. I've sold recumbents in a retail situation, and the non-standard saddle and seating position are not obstacles but invitations to potential consumers.”

I think he summed up something that quite a few people seem to be hung up on. There is no magic solution that will work for everyone who doesn’t currently ride. The point of the competition was to encourage creative thinking about ways to reach some of those “potential cyclists”. By its nature, a competition has to have a winner, and I stand by the one we picked (for the record, “ThisWay” was #1 on my personal top ten list). That said, there are a lot of good ideas in the concepts from the other finalists, and in many of the concepts that I have yet to post. I just ask that you view them all with an open mind and, if you chose to comment, please try to contribute to the conversation in a meaningful way. And, of course… thanks to all of you who have done that so far.

Image credit: Shown above is a rendering of “ThisWay” with a cargo module attached. If you are interested, you can see several more renderings of the concept on Torkel’s website.

We have a winner!

It has taken some time, but I can finally announce that Torkel Dohmers' “ThisWay” concept has been chosen as the winning entry in the Bicycle Design “commuter bike for the masses” design competition. Congratulations to Torkel, who will receive a Cannondale Bad Boy 700 for his efforts. Since I already published Torkel’s description of his entry, I won’t post it again, but you can read it in the finalists post if you are interested.

Some of you may be wondering why it took so long to announce the finalists and then to announce the competition winner. Well, it wasn’t an easy decision. As you know, a jury of designers, and one journalist, with varied backgrounds made the selection, so you can probably imagine that we had different opinions about the various entries. Those differences led to some really great discussions as we worked to reach a decision, so I want to share a little bit of that with you.

First, let me back up a bit. In order to decide on the finalists, each juror made a list of their top ten picks in order of preference. From those lists, I assigned points to each pick (10 points for first, down to 1 point for tenth). I compiled the points for each entry that we chose, and the six finalists were decided based on those numbers. As we made those initial lists, we each wrote a short comment about each of our picks. Here are a few of those initial comments about Torkel’s “ThisWay” concept.

“This semi-enclosed design is different and attractive to be a clean, mould-breaking alternative to non-cyclists. The frame is light (and potentially low cost in volume) due to tall frame (high 2nd moment of area), and offers more protection from other road users, weather and can be seen. My only hesitation is the semi-recumbent riding position, which may put off previously infrequent riders.”

“Fresh concept, well executed design, weather + crash protectionmake it appealing to non-cyclists. By far the best proposal in myopinion. I'd move the seat up a bit higher for improved safety in heavytraffic though.”

“This one is my favorite concept by a long shot. I have seen attempts at a bicycle frame with a partial roof before, but they all look clumsy and top heavy. In this case though, the overall form looks integrated and visually works well. The semi-recumbent riding position is not all that different than the position of a driver in a car, so it may appeal to non-cyclists. I think the seat could be a bit higher to allow a ride similar to a Townie or one of the other popular “foot forward” upright bikes that are popular today. The presentation board could have done a better job explaining the modular cargo attachment on the rear of the frame, but overall I think this concept address the car replacement issue best of all.”

“Personally I’ve never tried a recumbent - I’m very comfortable on a regular bike, but a recumbent makes me think I would have to learn to bike all over again, (would love to try one though!). I can imagine that they are fairly stable as your c.o.g. is lower, but since you are sitting low you are not visible in the traffic. I’m imagining a recumbent could be a bigger obstacle for a non-biker to overcome than to get on a regular bike, especially when thinking about different age groups – it’s an issue with familiarity and perception. What I do like though is that it has the playful outline / x-section of a car indicating that it is a step closer to a car than a regular bike. Overall a very nice design. Like that it has a roof – but I guess it never rains sideways where he lives…”

So based on the numbers, “ThisWay” easily made the list of finalists, but that was just step one. We still had to agree on a winner, and that is when the real jury discussion started. As you can see from the comments above, a few of the jurors liked the concept, but had some reservations about the recumbent riding position right off the bat. As we discussed the six finalists, a couple of jurors still had reservations about Torkel’s concept:

“My main concern is that a recumbent would be a bigger obstacle for a non-biker to overcome than to get on a regular bike, especially when thinking about different age groups – it’s an issue with familiarity and perception. I think a regular person would feel that they would have to learn to bike all over again – therefore they would stick to what they are familiar with, their car.

To me this would appeal to a bike-enthusiast for which there are plenty of bikes already on the market - so it is not inclusive. A non-biker is, for example, a mom with a busy schedule and several kids, an high-up executive with status issues and a really expensive car he / she loves to show off, a person with back and neck-problems, an older person afraid of falling, an obese person who considers walking their main form for exercise, etc etc.

A non-biker, who is new to recumbents, would probably not feel safe in heavy traffic as you will sit considerably lower than on a regular bike.”

A few responses to the rider position concerns were:

“To recommend a higher riding position, ie 'foot forward' rather than recumbent, not a sporty position but nearer classic urban Dutchbikes, than it is now.”

“A (slight) foot forward geometry is amazingly comfortable, for most people. It also feels efficient (except for maybe 'racers').”

“I don’t think a feet first semi-recumbent position is necessarily bad, but the seat could move up a bit. Maybe it could fall somewhere between what is shown in the rendering and something like and Electra Townie.”

Another concern about this concept was the potential cost/ commercial viability, to which one juror responded:

“I think with decent production engineering (possibly using frame making techniques from Toy, Boat, or sport equipment makers rather than bike frame makers) .... it could be made to sell under $1000 to start and under $500 if volume took off.”

“From an engineering point of view the 'frame' can potentially be pretty light for its size. This is because the materials are basically in the right places to maximize stiffness, without being a fully enclosed 'eggshell' (it has a large 2nd moment of area). I could imagine this being molded in glass fiber, around hollow tubes, or even blow or roto-molded ! So cost and weight need not be 'show stoppers'.

In addition to questions about rider position, the jury pointed out other issues that could be addressed with future development; shielding from road water spray, transmission routing, the possibility of electric assist, etc. Most of those points are minor details though. Overall, out of all the entries, “ThisWay” was the concept that most of us on the jury felt was “different enough to be a 'paradigm shift' from, and an alternative to, existing bikes.”

I could throw in many, many more quotes from the jury, but this post is already getting long. It is impossible to capture all the different thoughts, but I do hope that the short bits from our discussions help to give you an idea of the thought and back and forth discussion that went into the decision. I will close with one more quote from a jury member:

“I think we can all agree that convincing a non-biker to leave their car behind is a very complex and interesting problem to solve. There are so many levels to this that we probably haven't even thought of, and it would take a lot of research / ethnographies to uncover all the different issues involved and to understand how to address them.”

I couldn’t agree more, so let’s keep the discussion going. After all, that is what this blog is all about.


Finally, before I close out this (long) post, I want to again thank the other jurors for the time and effort that they put into this competition. Thanks to:

Torgny Fjeldskaar- Director of Industrial Design & Advanced Products Division at Cannondale Bicycle Corporation

Mark Sanders- Principal of MAS Design Products Ltd and designer of the Strida and IF Bikes

Agnete Enga- Senior Industrial Designer, Smart Design/ Femme Den, NYC

Carlton Reid- Editor at BikeBiz, Quickrelease.tv, Bikeforall.net, and BiketoWorkBook.com

LightLane

Recently, a couple of readers emailed me to mention the LightLane concept by Alex Tee and Evan Gant. The concept has been posted recently on various design and tech blogs including Core77, DVICE, and Yanko Design to name a few. I always appreciate reader tips, but actually, I had already seen this one. The LightLane concept was one of the 65 entries in the commuter bike competition on this blog. As a whole, we as a jury liked the concept, but felt like it didn’t exactly fit the brief. Also, I had seen a very similar concept, though not as complete, on Dirt Rag and Cyclelicious not all that long ago. Anyway, despite the fact that this entry didn’t make it to the finalists, I think it is a good idea that is worth passing along, so I will join the other sites on the web in doing so.

If you haven’t already read it, here is the designers’ explanation of the idea behind the LightLane:

A close brush with a distracted driver is enough to intimidate the most avid bikers from riding at night. The problem isn't just about visibility, as safety lights are effective at capturing the attention of a driver. However, these lights are typically constrained to the bike frame, which highlights only a fraction of the bike's envelope.

Bike lanes have proven to be an effective method of protecting cyclists on congested roads. One key is that the lane establishes a well-defined boundary beyond the envelope of the bicycle, providing a greater margin of safety between the car and the cyclist. Yet, only a small fraction of streets have dedicated bike lanes, and with an installation cost of $5,000 to $50,000 per mile, we shouldn't expect to find them everywhere anytime soon.

Instead of adapting cycling to established bike lanes, the bike lane should adapt to the cyclists. This is the idea behind the LightLane. Our system projects a crisply defined virtual bike lane onto pavement, using a laser, providing the driver with a familiar boundary to avoid. With a wider margin of safety, bikers will regain their confidence to ride at night, making the bike a more viable commuting alternative.

Bicycle Design on Facebook

I am traveling for work the rest of this week, so it will take a while longer to announce the winner of the design competition. The jury is still discussing the merits of a couple of the finalists’ entries, but we will make a final decision soon. I can’t promise that it will be next week, but it won’t take nearly as long as it took to announce the six finalists. It is a tough decision, but we are working to come to an agreement as fast as we can.

For those of you who are on Facebook, I want to mention the Bicycle Design page that I just set up last night. So far, there is not a lot to it, but I am open to suggestions. For now, if you become a fan you can upload your own images (sketches, renderings, photos, etc), you can start a discussion topic, or you can comment on the Bicycle Design wall. It seems like a good way to help spread the word about the blog, so take a look and become a fan of this site if you are so inclined.

On the subject of Facebook and other social media sites, I want to point out the “Share this” icon at the bottom of each post. If you read something that you want to share, you can click that icon to email the post or share it on Facebook, MySpace, Digg, Delicious, StumbleUpon, or a variety of other networks. If you enjoy reading a post on this blog, I encourage you to use the “Share this” feature to help spread the word.

Finally, I can’t close out this post without mentioning at least one thing related to the subject of bicycle design. Take a look at Mathew Zurlinden’s Legato GT recumbent bicycle concept, which appeared on the Core77 blog not long ago. Despite what I have said about hubless wheels in the past, I think it is a nice rendering and an interesting form. For some reason, it reminds me of some of Scott Robertson’s futuristic bike concepts.

Local boosterism and Taiwanese carbon fiber

It is no secret that I like living and riding in Greenville, South Carolina. Regular readers are probably used to mentions of Greenville on the blog from time to time, especially toward the end of summer when the U.S. Pro Championship races draw near. As soon as I saw a recent Competitive Cyclist newsletter article titled, “We check out Greenville, SC”, I knew that I would probably want to pass it along.

The fact that they praise the riding here is the main reason I wanted to share the article, but not the only one. There is also interesting content about equipment, specifically George Hincapie and Craig Lewis’ Columbia Team issue Scott Addicts. The article points out the various equipment sponsors’ logos on the seat stays of the team bikes. Among the familiar brands, Continental, Elite, Fizik, SRM, etc., is the logo of Ten Tech Composites, a Taiwanese frame manufacturer that produces frames for many high-end brands. “We don't recall ever seeing a pure Taiwanese manufacturing company serve in the role of supporting sponsor like this,” say the guys at Competitive Cyclist. The article on to say:

“The worst-kept secret in the bike industry is that the best composites manufacturing is done in Taiwan. Ten Tech's decal suggests that Taiwan is ready to come out of closet. They want brands to promote Taiwanese manufacturing. It's an elimination of smoke-and-mirrors. It's truth-in-advertising. As far as we're concerned, it 's awesome.”

Awesome indeed. I have touched on this subject on the blog before, and I agree that it is time to dispel the myth that Asian manufactured frames are somehow automatically of inferior quality to those manufactured in the U.S. or Europe. Certainly the quality of carbon fiber frames on the market varies, but country of origin is most certainly NOT the sole factor that determines quality.

Photo credit: Competitive Cyclist

Finalists in the Commuter bike design competition

After compiling the top ten picks from each juror, I am finally able to announce the finalists in the “commuter bike for the masses” design competition. Rather than elaborate on the entries, I am going to post the 6 finalists, in no particular order, along with the descriptions provided by the designers. I may post comments about each entry from the jurors later, but for now, I want to publish these just as we saw them so that you can all leave your comments. The jury will discuss further and we will select the one out of these six that will be awarded the grand prize, a Cannondale Bad Boy bike.

Before I get on with the finalists, I want to say thanks again to all of you who submitted entries to the competition. The choices were difficult to make and there were some really interesting designs that didn’t make it to the final six (out of 65 entries). I still think they are worth sharing though, so I will post many of the other entries after the winner is announced.

Now on to the finalists, each with a description by the designer:

Update 1/12/09: The images in the post are fairly low-res, so I uploaded the full size boards to a Flickr set. You can click on each to view at full size, or watch a slide show here.

Folding Commuter bike by Rick Marland

The bike's designed around its lock, which becomes a handle when the bike's folded. The lock's big enough to go around a lamppost and if the locks broken the bike can't be ridden away because the locks additional purpose is to hold the bike together. (Lock can rotate meaning it can lock to horizontal/vertical rails)

The seat and handle bars are fully adjustable in all directions (adjusts to fit most adults), and use a spring-loaded geared quick-release to easily adjust/Fold bike.

The bike wheels have puncture resistant/solid tyres, with dual suspension on single sided swing-arms, which give a slim folded profile (handlebars also fold in). The swing arms have a locking catch system for the various luggage/rack options, luggage can remain locked on the bike when it's folded and the whole bike can easily be wheeled around with the lock/handle.

The bike's easy to maintain with its low maintenance shaft drive and 8speed hub gearing, it also uses hydraulic discs, all cables are internally routed. The built in lights are auto on/off (with override switch) and the battery can be charged in the bike, or removed.

(Lock & Quick-release mechanisms are drawn on the incorrect side for illustration purposes)



This Way by Torkel Dohmers

A pedal powered comfortable bicycle with weather protection.

I have made an emphasis on automotive qualities in the design, to attract non-previous cyclists used to cars and motorcycles.

Another selling point to attract more people riding a bike (especially here in Europe) is weather protection - the bike has a roof!

Built in composite materials (carbon or flax fibre) and hydro-formed aluminium, this vehicle is very lightweight (approximate 11-12kg). Has built-in LED lights front and rear powered by a rechargeable battery that gets its power from solar cells on roof. The bike has a built-in belt drive. Riding position is lower than a traditional bike to keep a low centre of gravity and for optimal aerodynamics.

In the rear of frame is a "luggage connector", where the user plugs-in his/her e g attaché bag. The design also benefits of flexibility and comfort for riders of different sizes, as the crankset and seat is adjustable in length/height.

Although this design is more expensive to manufacture compared to its traditional rivals, it is still just a fraction of the buying price of cars and zero in running costs...



Untitled entry by Ian Clewett

My design takes the best elements of ‘traditional’ Dutch type commuting bikes - that easy, comfortable upright riding position, storage racks and baskets, balance and simplicity; then mixes in new technology and new thinking. The main frame and wheel covers/mudguards are a monocoque in moulded plastic - replacing the traditional tubular frame with a durable, cleaner structure which integrates greater rider safety, visibility, carrying and storage features. ‘Fold-flat’ handlebars and lockable folding pedals allow for unobtrusive storage in garage, corridors or confined space as well as built-in immobilising security. The cradle-style handlebars and low headset design allow for a ‘modular’ accessory system on easy mounting rails to tailor the bike to various needs, along with better weight distribution when laden.

Aesthetically, I also wanted the bike to make a statement of being something very ‘different and fresh’ but still recognisable as a bike. I feel that bicycles are often a jumble of components, rather than an integrated product. My design looks and works as a complete unit, resulting in cleaner lines and more built-in functionality. A bike that does what it promises and is a joy to use.



Untitled entry by Mark Huang

The design features I found to be relevant were easy/minimal maintenance, intuitive use, clean to use, reliable, utility: needs to have storage, upright seating position, comfortable seat, improved visibility/ safety, and appearance: not making user feel awkward.
With these parameters in mind, my design proposal is for casual cyclists and new bike commuters. The frame is constructed out of large diameter aluminum tubing, in an upright seating position, and without a top tube to allow for getting on and off the bicycle with ease. The saddle features a larger seating surface that is more integrated into the frame. The form is simple, with larger easy to clean smooth surfaces.
The enclosed-belt drive train connects the cranks to an internal rear hub, giving the user more gearing options in a clean and compact package with less required maintenance.
The hollow bottom bracket adds aesthetic appeal and another mount for locking the bike when parking it. The attached pannier rack detaches to become a U-lock, so a lock will always be with the bike.




The MuskOx Concept by Erik Nohlin

BE SEEN TO BE SAFE

Is the theme of this commuter. The more You are seen, the safer You get,
-You simply can´t be seen enough.

All systems are integrated in the frame:

# Trip data in the frame as lcd panel. Distance today, this week, this month and this year. The parameters are fun to compare with colleagues and fellow commuters and gives instant feedback of your achievements. Max, average and current speed is shown as well as light status and time. There must be an instant reward for cyclists who normally don´t commute – the feedback is the reward – You reward Your body and the environment and get it in clear LCD numbers.

# Reflective paint. It glows in the dark and is highly visible in all weather conditions.

# Integrated front and rear led lights. 10 pcs of ledlights front and rear.

# Extra led lights in rear, pointing upwards. For trucks and high vehicles.

# Hubdynamo charged batteries.

# Hubgears or singlespeed.

# Integrated sturdy steering lock.

# Diskbrakes with integrated wires.

# Integrated brakehandles “reversed throttle”.

# Beltdrive.

# Several rack and fender mounting options.

Muskox: Endures tough weather, Respectable, Muscular, Barrelshaped.



P-one by Chris Green

Getting people out of their cars means giving them a car-like bike.

Choices at purchase similar to a car, materials, construction and design techniques similar to a car and above all comfort and ease of use - like a car.

No direct drive allows constant peddle speed and pressure regardless of bike speed (governed max. 15mph) or incline which in turn means getting sweaty and out of breath (modern mankinds worst enemy) is a thing of the past. Solar panels, front hub generator and mains power charge means there will always be power and the ‘engine’ can power your phone/ipod/satnav too (just like a car.). Integrated lighting and one touch brakes = simplicity and ease of use

The monoque is strong, light and reduces welding. The internal capacity contains all the mechanics/ electrics and gives large flat areas for the solar panels. The folding mechanism means you never need leave the bike at home whether traveling some of your journey by Train, Plane, Car or Boat.

Updated 1/26/09: The competition winner has now been announced. Read about it here.

From outer space, huh?

Several people have asked about it, so before I get started with the post I want to let you all know that the finalists from the commuter bike design competition will be posted later this week. It has taken longer than I expected, but in retrospect, a couple of weeks before the holidays was probably not the best time to have ended the competition. Oh well, I am learning as I go along. Check back later in the week to see the entries that the jury ranked highest out of the 65 concepts that were submitted.

Pictured here is a 1980s Raleigh ad that came from a Road Bike Action Tech feature. If you were a cyclist in the 80s, check out the article. I remembered almost all of these ads, so seeing them all together was quite a blast from the past. If you weren’t yet riding in the 80s, I would still recommend checking out the old ads. I mean, you DO want to see the “bike of the future”, right?

I noticed a couple of bike design related links on Core 77 lately. The first is a folding electric bike project that was a student project by Truong Minh Nhat, a student at the Ho Chi Minh City University of Architecture. The second Core post pointed to a Selectism interview with Ben Ferencz and Nathan Freeman of Freeman Transport, a company that I mentioned in a post a couple months ago, which makes fixie frames with S and S couplings. The photography is nice and the interview is pretty interesting, so I encourage you to take a look even if you are not typically interested in these types of bikes.

Since I just brought up a company that makes what could be considered hipster fixies, I will balance things out by mentioning the latest Bike Snob NYC post. He wrote a review of the Scattante Empire State “Courier Series” bike that Performance sent him to try out. Good stuff as always from the Bike Snob.

As long as I am throwing out unrelated links, I want to mention a poster that I saw in a recent newsletter from Ready Made. “Simplicity is the Key to Successful Living” is the message on the poster by Nick Dewar, which features a bicycle. In his description of the work, Nick says, “I can’t think of a single step that would change the nature of our society more than everyone abandoning their automobiles and cycling instead.” I couldn’t agree more. If you are interested, download a free copy of Nick’s poster from Ready Made.

Finally, I will point out the trailer for the film “Objectified”, which you can watch now on Gizmodo. This is not a bike related link, but as an industrial designer, this film is something that I am pretty excited about. I really enjoyed Gary Hustwit’s documentary “Helvetica” about typography and graphic design, so I am really anxious to see his take on my chosen profession. The world premier will be in March, so keep an eye on the website for screenings near you.

Happy New Year

Hard to believe it is already 2009. It seems like 2008 just flew by. I closed out the year yesterday with an early morning ride on my road bike using the My Tach GPS Cyclocomputer/Training device that I am currently trying out. I will talk more about it in a future post, but for now I will just say that it was pretty cool to be able to download the data and see my ride mapped out in Google Earth. After the ride, I had to get back to work on installing wood flooring in my house. That is what I have been doing all week and today will be no exception, so I had better get on with this post. To start out the year, I am going to pass along a few links that I bookmarked over the holidays, so here they are:

Pictured here is a 36 inch wheeled mountain bike from Black Sheep Cycles. There is nothing like a 36er to make a 29er look like a small wheeled bike.

Bike Radar had a good article recently about form vs. function in the world of bicycle design. It features quotes from a “few industry players/designers” in response to the question "Is form becoming more important than function these days?"

Thanks to MasiGuy for pointing out the “weird bike stuff” pages on Charlie Kelly's website. Yikes! I remember many of these designs from the 80s. Make sure that you don't miss page 2.

The Core blog recently posted a reflective backpack for cyclists. Along those same lines, they posted a reader's bike that was wrapped in Retroreflective Vinyl.

Ron posted recently about carbon fiber construction at Time. Take a look; the post is definitely worth a read.

I forgot to mention it, but Urban Velo mentioned this little bike design program a couple of months ago.

I can't read Dutch, but I recently stumbled across this webpage with a quote from me at the top. I will keep watching to see if new content is added.

Finally, I feel compelled to point out this White Industry hub that Eric posted. If you change cogs often on a fixed gear wheel, you will appreciate this design.

OK, it is back to work on the floor for me. Happy New Year to all of you and thanks for reading in 2008.