what will the bike of the future look like?

[scooter01]

Is this it?
http://www.likecool.com/Bradford_Waugh_Bike--Design--Gear.html

I came across this picture on the web and it had me thinking what the future of bikes will be. The handle bars on this one seem to be left out of the rest of the concept.

I often wonder when a bike will give up a chain, and have a different drive idea

[Elefantino]

http://www.likecool.com/Gear/Design/Bradford%20Waugh%20Bike/Bradford-Waugh-Bike.jpg

That is really cool.

On the other hand, I believe in the distant future we will be riding bikes made entirely of transparent aluminum.

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3405/3198953564_80c7c03991.jpg

I believe they will be marketed under the "Darkstar" name by Justin Spinelli IV.

[scooter01]

Good one!

[Chance]

The image mainly highlights differences between real everyday working prototypes and those meant to inspire mostly the imagination. It has its purpose. Just don't expect to ride it soon.

[gdw]

.

[rugbysecondrow]

.


This is the DUI version.

[toaster]

That futuristic looking one is really interesting, but I'll bet you're giving up some real racing qualities that are present in today's bikes.

[67-59]

I'm gonna go out on a limb and predict they'll look something like this (www.kirkframeworks.com/owners%20gallery%20photos/Mills2_400.jpg).

[Rueda Tropical]

The bike of the future in the 20's, 30's, 40's, 50's .... , etc. all looked very similar. I expect 30 years from now the diamond frame and fork will still be the shape of the "bike of the future".

[palincss]

Maybe the manufacturer's logos will get smaller? It's for sure they can't get any larger, there isn't room.

[rice rocket]

Maybe the manufacturer's logos will get smaller? It's for sure they can't get any larger, there isn't room.

You're assuming tubes won't get bigger (which they will :hello: ).

[ciclisto]

a COLNAGO

[roguedog]

that's actually pretty cool looking. thought this was another link to that circle bike.

thanks for the link.

[dhoff]

bikes are only going to change so much as long as the designs that are acceptable for racing are regulated.

Innovation is limited by the ability to use a new idea in racing. Open that up and we will see many new designs like the one shown here, which as it stands could not make it to the big show.

We will never know what works best as long as we can only try what we already know. And the rules say, that is about all we can do, change the material and maybe the shape a little bit, but no, don't change anything more than that, we might have ANARCHY

The industry is stunted by Racing regulations.

-d

[Nelson99]

bikes are only going to change so much as long as the designs that are acceptable for racing are regulated.

Innovation is limited by the ability to use a new idea in racing. Open that up and we will see many new designs like the one shown here, which as it stands could not make it to the big show.

We will never know what works best as long as we can only try what we already know.
-d

Indeed. Mountain bikes and tri bikes suggest that while the current UCI reg design is near optimal, it could evolve given the chance. However, w/o that chance, we will never know...

[victoryfactory]

How about a CVT style shifting rear hub that senses RPM's
and changes gears accordingly linked to a flexible shaft drive made light with
carbon and Ti?
add electronic servo driven braking and you have a cable free bike of the future.
Huh?

[palincss]

The problem with shaft drive isn't what the shaft is made of. As for the rest, I'd rather have cables than all that electronic gear. What's so wrong with cables that you'd want to discard the fundamentally self-powered, mechanical nature of the bicycle as we know it in order to be rid of them?

[Dave B]

Regardless of how it works, think of those wheels w/o spokes like in the picture. How heavy would a rim have to be to be able to support weight of a rider w/o spokes?

That couldn't ride well at all.

[Aaron O]

I'll take the yellow.

[PBWrench]

It really hasn't, and really won't, change in basic design or form.

I suspect that new fangled wizardry will bring us something like this:

[dd74]

Future? Probably within the next three years, Campagnolo and SRAM will have full electronic groupsets, and as they become more popular, they'll push out cable-driven groups, just as many car manufacturers have done with manual transmissions.

CF wheelsets will become more popular.

But as far as what makes a bike - pedals, cranks, chain, handlebars, frame, seat, wheels and tires - not that much has changed since the advent of the safety bike. In a lot of ways, race bikes from the early part of last century look and operate the same as bikes today.

IMO, the bicycle was perfect from the get go. I'm not sure it needs or ever needed that much modernization.

[steampunk]

i'd venture to say the basic shape and major parts will still look very similar to bikes today or even what has come before. what we see are enhancements like system integration or electronic or wireless control. even a Di2 bike or that Factor001 bike still basically resembles anything since the "safety" bicycle.

design "The Next Bicycle" seems to be a mandatory assignment for industrial designers or design school. thus the many fanciful design concepts out there.

as long as you need a bicycle with two wheels, presumably one to steer with and the other to drive it, and a humanoid form with two hands (to steer), two feet (to provide the motive force) and a butt (to support the human) - there are only so many ways to connect the dots together.

[Mark McM]

The purpose of a bicycle is to use a human being's power to transport the payload of said human being. Since the size, shape, configuration and power output of today's human being isn't likely to change much in the future, the bicycle of the future isn't likely to be much different from today's bicycle, either.

[dd74]

That's right. If humans change, bikes will change. Even if we as a species fall back to walking on all fours (sometimes it seems we're heading that direction), bicycles still wouldn't need to be much different from what they are now.

[Chance]

bikes are only going to change so much as long as the designs that are acceptable for racing are regulated.

Innovation is limited by the ability to use a new idea in racing. Open that up and we will see many new designs like the one shown here, which as it stands could not make it to the big show.

We will never know what works best as long as we can only try what we already know. And the rules say, that is about all we can do, change the material and maybe the shape a little bit, but no, don't change anything more than that, we might have ANARCHY

The industry is stunted by Racing regulations.

-d
Based on recent conversation you seem to echo RPS’ point of view exactly. Regulations do seem to stifle some innovation by making entry hurdle more difficult to overcome. And probably more so for guys without deep pockets and established resources.

Video clips of various RPS bikes being ridden and abused show the design has a lot of potential yet he won’t pursue manufacture for lack of UCI approval or resources to overcome it. He’s adamant (right or wrong) that without access to some form of racing any new frame design is DOA.

His design appears to be a minor departure from normal bikes yet highlights that regulations can affect what actions investors are willing to take when money is on the line. And in his case it’s hard to see why UCI would deem the design unacceptable. It’s almost the same.

[palincss]

Doesn't seem to have had the slightest affect on designers of recumbent, semi-recumbent, folding and travel bikes, though.

[Chance]

Doesn't seem to have had the slightest affect on designers of recumbent, semi-recumbent, folding and travel bikes, though.
They are completely different markets. Bikes like recumbents compete against other recumbents and not against racing bikes so cost disparity or disadvantage due to lower volume doesn’t mean the same.

A new “racing” frame design that is not approved for “racing” will likely have lower volume which adds to investment risks (whatever that risk is). Regulation may not prevent its introduction but will serve as additional head wind into what is already a tough challenge of breaking into the market place.

Let’s just say it's hard to see how regulation helps new products.

[Mark McM]

bikes are only going to change so much as long as the designs that are acceptable for racing are regulated.

Innovation is limited by the ability to use a new idea in racing. Open that up and we will see many new designs like the one shown here, which as it stands could not make it to the big show.

We will never know what works best as long as we can only try what we already know. And the rules say, that is about all we can do, change the material and maybe the shape a little bit, but no, don't change anything more than that, we might have ANARCHY

The industry is stunted by Racing regulations.

-d

While this may be true, it seems to me that the this is the bicycle industry's own fault. The overwhelmingly vast majority of cyclists never enter an organized race, so why should they care if their bike follows racing rules? Most of the cyclists I've met are only vaguely aware of bike racing to begin with, and have no idea about racing regulations, so why does the bicycle industry restrict themselves to designs that affect only a small portion of their potential customer base?

As I understand it, the US is the biggest single market for bicycles in the world. Most bicyclists in the US have never and will never enter a race; but even those that do race, most participate in non-UCI events which are much more liberal on equipment regulations. There should be a very large market in the US for bikes that don't necessarily meet UCI regulations.

(Yes, I do race in the US, and most of my bikes are not completely UCI compliant)

[johnnymossville]

Slightly lighter and slightly better shifting (Electronic or Mechanical) than today. People who don't ride wouldn't see any difference.

[Chance]

While this may be true, it seems to me that the this is the bicycle industry's own fault. The overwhelmingly vast majority of cyclists never enter an organized race, so why should they care if their bike follows racing rules? Most of the cyclists I've met are only vaguely aware of bike racing to begin with, and have no idea about racing regulations, so why does the bicycle industry restrict themselves to designs that affect only a small portion of their potential customer base?

As I understand it, the US is the biggest single market for bicycles in the world. Most bicyclists in the US have never and will never enter a race; but even those that do race, most participate in non-UCI events which are much more liberal on equipment regulations. There should be a very large market in the US for bikes that don't necessarily meet UCI regulations.

(Yes, I do race in the US, and most of my bikes are not completely UCI compliant)
What kind of races and what kind of liberal equipment regulations? And do your non-compliant bikes get overlooked by UCI or are you not entering UCI races?

[bicycletricycle]

http://i975.photobucket.com/albums/ae236/bicycletricycle/PongBike.jpg

[Mark McM]

What kind of races and what kind of liberal equipment regulations? And do your non-compliant bikes get overlooked by UCI or are you not entering UCI races?

Most of the races I do are sanctioned by USCF/USAC (US Cycling Federation/USA Cycling), which covers almost all road racing in New England, as well as a large portion of races in the rest of the US (the last I heard, there were somewhere between 30,000 and 40,000 licensed USAC racers in the US). I also do a few hill climbs in the B.U.M.P.S. series (such as the Mt. Washington Hill Climb), which generally aren't run under the umbrella of a national organization.

Below is the entirety of the section of the USAC rulebook on bicycle regulations (see http://www.usacycling.org/news/user/story.php?id=4220 for the full rule set). Differences from UCI regulations include: There are no rules regarding rider position (for example, the saddle may be as far forward or back as the rider prefers); frame tubes may be any profile (no 3:1 profile rule); there is no minimum weight restriction; wheels design isn't restricted, and non-standard wheels don't have to be submitted for certification (and you can use solid disk wheels in road races). UCI bicycle regulations do apply in some cases, but only for national championships or races that select for international competition - which means that UCI rules only apply to a few hundred people, out of the tens of thousands of USAC licensed racers.

1M. Bicycles
1M1. Bicycles used in competition must be propelled solely by the rider's legs and shall have the following characteristics:
(a) Dimensions. Bicycles may be no more than 2 meters long and 75 cm wide, except that tandems may be up to 3 meters long
(b) There may be no protective shield, fairing, or other device on any part of the bicycle, which has the effect of reducing air resistance except that spoke covers may be used
(c) Wheels may be made with spokes or solid construction. No wheel may contain special mechanisms to store and release energy
(d) The handlebar ends shall be solidly plugged and attachments thereto shall be fashioned in such a way as to minimize danger without impairing steering. Handlebars used for steering with ends, features, or attachments that extend forward or upward or that provide support for other than the rider's hands are permitted only in time trial and pursuit events (not in Team Sprint); however, attachments that point upward on the brakehoods of road bicycles are allowed if the distance between them is greater than 25 cm (9.8 inches). [disqualification]
(e) Bicycles must meet current UCI technical regulations at events that select 17-18, U23 and elite riders for international competition or national teams. All bicycles used in National Championships (for age 17 and older riders) and NRC races must comply with the current UCI regulations
(f) Bicycles commonly known as recumbent may not be raced in USA Cycling races unless there is a separate race for
52
this category of bicycle, and then may be used only in that category.
(g) A mass start bicycle is a road or track bicycle that is legal in all events within the road or track discipline, rather than a bicycle that is restricted to particular events. As an example, a bicycle with handlebars offering forearm support is not a mass start bicycle.
(h) Time trial events may restrict the competitors to mass-start bicycles in one or more classes, provided that the restriction is stated in the race announcement and technical guide. This includes time trials in stage races.
(i) A Single Speed is any type of bicycle possessing only one rear cog and only one front chainring and with no means of altering the gear ratio in any way for the duration of the race.
1M2. Riders are responsible for their selection of competition equipment and for taking reasonable precautions to insure that its condition is adequate and safe for use in competition.
(a) To maintain compliance with these regulations, the equipment and uniform of one or more riders may be examined at any time to discover the use of items which are not allowed or which are obviously improperly adjusted, insecurely fastened, or which may present a danger to the rider(s). The Chief Referee shall prohibit the use of any such items discovered during the examination. Such examinations are conducted at the discretion of the Chief Referee. An examination of every rider's equipment is not required.
(b) USA Cycling and any race organizer or sponsor, and their respective agents, officials, employees and volunteers, shall not be liable for any damages or injuries arising from or connected in any way with the condition or adequacy of any rider's competition equipment or uniform, regardless of whether or not such competition equipment or uniform was examined or was not determined to be in violation of the rules.
53
1M3. Bicycle Types
(a) For track races, only a bicycle with a single cog fixed wheel and without derailleurs, brakes or quick releases may be used; However, in pursuit and time trial events that are not championships or selection events, brakes, freewheels, quick releases, and derailleurs may be installed on the bicycle so long as only one gear is functional.
(b) For road, cyclocross and MTB races, only a bicycle with a freewheel and one working brake on each wheel shall be used, except as allowed elsewhere in these rules.
1M4. In roller races, either road or track bicycles may be used. All classes are restricted to a development of 7.69 meters (25 feet 3 inches) and cranks must be at least 165 mm. long.
1M5. A handcycle is a 3-wheeled cycle with standard bicycle drivetrain and standard bicycle crankarms. The cycle must be operated by pedaling and shifting using only the upper body to perform said functions. The maximum wheelbase for a handcycle is 72 inches. Handcycles must have a chainring guard to protect the rider from the drivetrain. As of January 1, 2000, all handcycles must have 2 separate working brake calipers (or discs) and a fully-functional lever for each.
1M6. Junior Gears. The maximum chaingear ratio for Junior riders is based on age and discipline. Blocked gears will be allowed, except in National Championships. All tests for compliance shall be done using the "roll-out method.” There is no restriction for cyclocross or MTB races. For road and track the limits are:
Road
17-18: 7.93 meters (26’)(52x14)
15-16: “
13-14: “
10-12: “
54
Track
17-18: Unrestricted
15-16: 6.78 meters (22'3")(48x15)
13-14: 6.36 meters (20'10.5")(48x16)
10-12: 6.00 meters (19’8”)(48x17)
The gear limit for a rider is determined by the age of the rider and the discipline, and applies in all events in that discipline subject to the notes shown below:
(1) For Juniors 16 and under who are competing in Championship team sprint, team pursuit, keirin, or Madison the 17-18 (unrestricted) gear limit applies.
Note that the gear combinations listed are merely suggestions – the distance rolled out is the governing standard.

[spacemen3]

The future is 1996!

http://bicycledesign.net/wp-content/uploads/2011/07/pre-lugano-charter-bikes.jpg

[bicycletricycle]

no softride love?

[jgspin]

That Bradford bike must have some kind of roller or bearings on the frame for those tires to push or rest on. Doesn't that create more drag?

[Stan Lee]

Unfortunately I believe it looks like this...

http://www.foxnews.com/leisure/2011/09/22/ford-builds-bicycle/

[sg8357]

With an estimated useable life span of 75 years, the Golden Sunbeam
is the bike of the future.

[FlashUNC]

no softride love?


And no Trek Y-Foil....

http://lmitchelldesigns.com/Cleanquiet_htm_files/4.png