M
P
Paul - xxx
Guest
Marz <[email protected]> typed:
> http://www.treehugger.com/files/2007/01/hyperbike_hype.php
>
>
>
> I can't think of anything to add.....
Good grief.
--
Paul - ***
UPS for auction 140076629312
> http://www.treehugger.com/files/2007/01/hyperbike_hype.php
>
>
>
> I can't think of anything to add.....
Good grief.
--
Paul - ***
UPS for auction 140076629312
P
Paul Boyd
Guest
On 21/01/2007 00:35, Marz said,
> http://www.treehugger.com/files/2007/01/hyperbike_hype.php
> I can't think of anything to add.....
A bit of a bugger to buy new tyres for, or to fix a puncture. Might
also be a tad tricky to get through the barriers on cycle-paths
--
Paul Boyd
http://www.paul-boyd.co.uk/
> http://www.treehugger.com/files/2007/01/hyperbike_hype.php
> I can't think of anything to add.....
A bit of a bugger to buy new tyres for, or to fix a puncture. Might
also be a tad tricky to get through the barriers on cycle-paths
--
Paul Boyd
http://www.paul-boyd.co.uk/
M
Mark McNeill
Guest
Response to Paul Boyd:
> > I can't think of anything to add.....
>
> A bit of a bugger to buy new tyres for, or to fix a puncture. Might
> also be a tad tricky to get through the barriers on cycle-paths
"The prototype weighs in at about 200 pounds..."
I can think of a few hills which would be either rather a challenge or
altogether too exciting, depending on direction.
--
Mark, UK
"We make irrevocable decisions in a state of mind that is not going to
last."
> > I can't think of anything to add.....
>
> A bit of a bugger to buy new tyres for, or to fix a puncture. Might
> also be a tad tricky to get through the barriers on cycle-paths
"The prototype weighs in at about 200 pounds..."
I can think of a few hills which would be either rather a challenge or
altogether too exciting, depending on direction.
--
Mark, UK
"We make irrevocable decisions in a state of mind that is not going to
last."
I
Ian Smith
Guest
On Sun, 21 Jan, Mark McNeill <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> "The prototype weighs in at about 200 pounds..."
>
> I can think of a few hills which would be either rather a challenge or
> altogether too exciting, depending on direction.
I think both directions will be quite exciting - the rider seems to be
centred pretty close to the axles. Steep uphill, front wheel starts
to lift....
I noted the reference to 200 pounds, coming so quick after it did
about the reference to conventional bikes carrying so much dead weight
(the upper torso, you see, is useless dead weight when you ride a real
bike).
regards, Ian SMith
--
|\ /| no .sig
|o o|
|/ \|
>
> "The prototype weighs in at about 200 pounds..."
>
> I can think of a few hills which would be either rather a challenge or
> altogether too exciting, depending on direction.
I think both directions will be quite exciting - the rider seems to be
centred pretty close to the axles. Steep uphill, front wheel starts
to lift....
I noted the reference to 200 pounds, coming so quick after it did
about the reference to conventional bikes carrying so much dead weight
(the upper torso, you see, is useless dead weight when you ride a real
bike).
regards, Ian SMith
--
|\ /| no .sig
|o o|
|/ \|
D
Danny Colyer
Guest
Marz wrote:
> http://www.treehugger.com/files/2007/01/hyperbike_hype.php
>
> I can't think of anything to add.....
I want one!
Can't think where I'd use it, though.
--
Danny Colyer <URL:http://www.colyer.plus.com/danny/>
Reply address is valid, but that on my website is checked more often
"He who dares not offend cannot be honest." - Thomas Paine
> http://www.treehugger.com/files/2007/01/hyperbike_hype.php
>
> I can't think of anything to add.....
I want one!
Can't think where I'd use it, though.
--
Danny Colyer <URL:http://www.colyer.plus.com/danny/>
Reply address is valid, but that on my website is checked more often
"He who dares not offend cannot be honest." - Thomas Paine
M
Mark Thompson
Guest
> I noted the reference to 200 pounds, coming so quick after it did
> about the reference to conventional bikes carrying so much dead weight
> (the upper torso, you see, is useless dead weight when you ride a real
> bike).
It did imply that they were going to use lighter materials to reduce the
weight. Not sure about the 50mph mentioned - doesn't seem very aero, and I
can't imagine my arms providing much power (not compared to thighs anyway).
Does look fun thobut.
> about the reference to conventional bikes carrying so much dead weight
> (the upper torso, you see, is useless dead weight when you ride a real
> bike).
It did imply that they were going to use lighter materials to reduce the
weight. Not sure about the 50mph mentioned - doesn't seem very aero, and I
can't imagine my arms providing much power (not compared to thighs anyway).
Does look fun thobut.
M
Mark McNeill
Guest
Response to Ian Smith:
> > I can think of a few hills which would be either rather a challenge or
> > altogether too exciting, depending on direction.
>
> I think both directions will be quite exciting - the rider seems to be
> centred pretty close to the axles. Steep uphill, front wheel starts
> to lift....
Hadn't thought of that; but I went to the Hyperbike website, where
there's a link to an interview with the designer ["as any cyclist will
tell you, the worst thing about cycling is the seat..." ;-)], including
a few shots of him riding it round a carpark. It seems that lifting the
front wheel is a design feature: which goes some way to removing my
first objection, which was it ought to have been called the Hypertrike.
--
Mark, UK
"How many things which served us yesterday as articles of faith, are
fables for us today."
> > I can think of a few hills which would be either rather a challenge or
> > altogether too exciting, depending on direction.
>
> I think both directions will be quite exciting - the rider seems to be
> centred pretty close to the axles. Steep uphill, front wheel starts
> to lift....
Hadn't thought of that; but I went to the Hyperbike website, where
there's a link to an interview with the designer ["as any cyclist will
tell you, the worst thing about cycling is the seat..." ;-)], including
a few shots of him riding it round a carpark. It seems that lifting the
front wheel is a design feature: which goes some way to removing my
first objection, which was it ought to have been called the Hypertrike.
--
Mark, UK
"How many things which served us yesterday as articles of faith, are
fables for us today."
S
Simon Brooke
Guest
in message <[email protected]>, Marz
('[email protected]') wrote:
> http://www.treehugger.com/files/2007/01/hyperbike_hype.php
>
> I can't think of anything to add.....
Certainly a lot of hype. 'Crawling at 50mph', eh? Has this thing actually
been clocked at 50mph? It has a lot of windage, and I'd be surprised if it
could be made to achieve half that in still air on the flat. Mind you, I
have been known to be wrong.
--
[email protected] (Simon Brooke) http://www.jasmine.org.uk/~simon/
;; If you're doing this for fun, do what seems fun. If you're
;; doing it for money, stop now.
;; Rainer Deyke
('[email protected]') wrote:
> http://www.treehugger.com/files/2007/01/hyperbike_hype.php
>
> I can't think of anything to add.....
Certainly a lot of hype. 'Crawling at 50mph', eh? Has this thing actually
been clocked at 50mph? It has a lot of windage, and I'd be surprised if it
could be made to achieve half that in still air on the flat. Mind you, I
have been known to be wrong.
--
[email protected] (Simon Brooke) http://www.jasmine.org.uk/~simon/
;; If you're doing this for fun, do what seems fun. If you're
;; doing it for money, stop now.
;; Rainer Deyke
S
Steph Peters
Guest
Danny Colyer <[email protected]> of Home in Bristol, UK wrote:
>Marz wrote:
>> http://www.treehugger.com/files/2007/01/hyperbike_hype.php
>>
>> I can't think of anything to add.....
>
>I want one!
>
>Can't think where I'd use it, though.
And where would you keep such a monster?
--
Steph Peters
Chorlton Wanderers Cycling Group
Monthly slow and easy rides from South Manchester
http://www.sandbenders.demon.co.uk/cycling/chwan.htm
>Marz wrote:
>> http://www.treehugger.com/files/2007/01/hyperbike_hype.php
>>
>> I can't think of anything to add.....
>
>I want one!
>
>Can't think where I'd use it, though.
And where would you keep such a monster?
--
Steph Peters
Chorlton Wanderers Cycling Group
Monthly slow and easy rides from South Manchester
http://www.sandbenders.demon.co.uk/cycling/chwan.htm
C
Clive George
Guest
"Mark Thompson"
<pleasegivegenerously@warmmail*_turn_up_the_heat_to_reply*.com> wrote in
message news:[email protected]...
> It did imply that they were going to use lighter materials to reduce the
> weight. Not sure about the 50mph mentioned - doesn't seem very aero, and
> I
> can't imagine my arms providing much power (not compared to thighs
> anyway).
Isn't the thing about using arms as well as legs that the limiting factor
isn't the leg muscles, it's the cardiovascular system? Ie adding arm power
gets you nothing extra.
cheers,
clive
<pleasegivegenerously@warmmail*_turn_up_the_heat_to_reply*.com> wrote in
message news:[email protected]...
> It did imply that they were going to use lighter materials to reduce the
> weight. Not sure about the 50mph mentioned - doesn't seem very aero, and
> I
> can't imagine my arms providing much power (not compared to thighs
> anyway).
Isn't the thing about using arms as well as legs that the limiting factor
isn't the leg muscles, it's the cardiovascular system? Ie adding arm power
gets you nothing extra.
cheers,
clive
D
Danny Colyer
Guest
I wrote:
>>I want one!
>>
>>Can't think where I'd use it, though.
Steph Peters wrote:
> And where would you keep such a monster?
I have a big garden and a good sized patio. I feel that storage would
involve a tarpaulin.
I'd also need to widen the garden gateway...
--
Danny Colyer <URL:http://www.colyer.plus.com/danny/>
Reply address is valid, but that on my website is checked more often
"He who dares not offend cannot be honest." - Thomas Paine
>>I want one!
>>
>>Can't think where I'd use it, though.
Steph Peters wrote:
> And where would you keep such a monster?
I have a big garden and a good sized patio. I feel that storage would
involve a tarpaulin.
I'd also need to widen the garden gateway...
--
Danny Colyer <URL:http://www.colyer.plus.com/danny/>
Reply address is valid, but that on my website is checked more often
"He who dares not offend cannot be honest." - Thomas Paine
M
Marz
Guest
Danny Colyer wrote:
> I wrote:
> >>I want one!
> >>
> >>Can't think where I'd use it, though.
>
> Steph Peters wrote:
> > And where would you keep such a monster?
>
> I have a big garden and a good sized patio. I feel that storage would
> involve a tarpaulin.
>
> I'd also need to widen the garden gateway...
>
> --
> Danny Colyer <URL:http://www.colyer.plus.com/danny/>
> Reply address is valid, but that on my website is checked more often
> "He who dares not offend cannot be honest." - Thomas Paine
Oh drivers will just love to see you on that thing on the road. If it
can do the 50mph claimed by the inventor then motorists will have few
reasons to overtake (though they'll try).
> I wrote:
> >>I want one!
> >>
> >>Can't think where I'd use it, though.
>
> Steph Peters wrote:
> > And where would you keep such a monster?
>
> I have a big garden and a good sized patio. I feel that storage would
> involve a tarpaulin.
>
> I'd also need to widen the garden gateway...
>
> --
> Danny Colyer <URL:http://www.colyer.plus.com/danny/>
> Reply address is valid, but that on my website is checked more often
> "He who dares not offend cannot be honest." - Thomas Paine
Oh drivers will just love to see you on that thing on the road. If it
can do the 50mph claimed by the inventor then motorists will have few
reasons to overtake (though they'll try).
M
Mike Causer
Guest
On Sun, 21 Jan 2007 11:57:25 -0800, Marz wrote:
> Oh drivers will just love to see you on that thing on the road. If it
> can do the 50mph claimed by the inventor then motorists will have few
> reasons to overtake (though they'll try).
50mph? Hmmmm.
Let's plug some numbers into http://www.kreuzotter.de/english/espeed.htm
Bike style? let's call it a roadster, the body position is about the same
even if the Hyped-bike has many more aerodynamically draggy tubes in its
frame.
Weight? take the standard rider weight and remember 200lb for the "bike"
Speed? 50mph
-> Power required = 4898W
An absolutely top-class rider can produce 1000W for a handful of seconds
with the legs only, therefore the arms are adding 3898W to the Hyped-bike!
To cruise at 50mph, as the inventor says, the leg power might be 450W for
an hour for a TdF winner, so the arms are now providing 4348W.
Now let's try the power output that /I/ call "cruising", 100W (your
wattage may be higher, and in Mr Holme's case definitely will...) and my
weight is a touch more than standard, but with legs alone I could cruise it
at 10.2mph on a level road with no wind.
[Video clip] Flexes biceps [/video]
Hmmmm, 20W perhaps? But not for long because the muscles are not used to
it. 11.2mph. Wow, really flying along now!
Well it really should go downhill with all that weight? Nope, without
pedaling on a 5% slope it reaches 30.2mph. My recumbent does better than
that -- 40.2mph.
Unless that inventor has hidden a 5kW engine somewhere in that frame is a
total bust.
Mike
> Oh drivers will just love to see you on that thing on the road. If it
> can do the 50mph claimed by the inventor then motorists will have few
> reasons to overtake (though they'll try).
50mph? Hmmmm.
Let's plug some numbers into http://www.kreuzotter.de/english/espeed.htm
Bike style? let's call it a roadster, the body position is about the same
even if the Hyped-bike has many more aerodynamically draggy tubes in its
frame.
Weight? take the standard rider weight and remember 200lb for the "bike"
Speed? 50mph
-> Power required = 4898W
An absolutely top-class rider can produce 1000W for a handful of seconds
with the legs only, therefore the arms are adding 3898W to the Hyped-bike!
To cruise at 50mph, as the inventor says, the leg power might be 450W for
an hour for a TdF winner, so the arms are now providing 4348W.
Now let's try the power output that /I/ call "cruising", 100W (your
wattage may be higher, and in Mr Holme's case definitely will...) and my
weight is a touch more than standard, but with legs alone I could cruise it
at 10.2mph on a level road with no wind.
[Video clip] Flexes biceps [/video]
Hmmmm, 20W perhaps? But not for long because the muscles are not used to
it. 11.2mph. Wow, really flying along now!
Well it really should go downhill with all that weight? Nope, without
pedaling on a 5% slope it reaches 30.2mph. My recumbent does better than
that -- 40.2mph.
Unless that inventor has hidden a 5kW engine somewhere in that frame is a
total bust.
Mike
D
DavidR
Guest
"Marz" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> http://www.treehugger.com/files/2007/01/hyperbike_hype.php
The inventor obviously doesn't realise that stability is entirely to do
with the footprint and nothing whatsoever to do with axle height.
In fact, those enormous wheels contribute to an unnecessarily high cog, so
smaller wheels spaced to the same footprint would improve stability.
> http://www.treehugger.com/files/2007/01/hyperbike_hype.php
The inventor obviously doesn't realise that stability is entirely to do
with the footprint and nothing whatsoever to do with axle height.
In fact, those enormous wheels contribute to an unnecessarily high cog, so
smaller wheels spaced to the same footprint would improve stability.
I
Ian Smith
Guest
On Mon, 22 Jan 2007, DavidR <[email protected]> wrote:
> "Marz" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>
> > http://www.treehugger.com/files/2007/01/hyperbike_hype.php
>
> The inventor obviously doesn't realise that stability is entirely to do
> with the footprint
and CoG height.
However, I think that's just one of a great number of things the
inventor doesn't realise.
regards, Ian SMith
--
|\ /| no .sig
|o o|
|/ \|
> "Marz" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>
> > http://www.treehugger.com/files/2007/01/hyperbike_hype.php
>
> The inventor obviously doesn't realise that stability is entirely to do
> with the footprint
and CoG height.
However, I think that's just one of a great number of things the
inventor doesn't realise.
regards, Ian SMith
--
|\ /| no .sig
|o o|
|/ \|
M
Mark McNeill
Guest
Response to Mike Causer:
> Speed? 50mph
>
> -> Power required = 4898W
>
> An absolutely top-class rider can produce 1000W for a handful of seconds
> with the legs only, therefore the arms are adding 3898W to the Hyped-bike!
>
> To cruise at 50mph, as the inventor says, the leg power might be 450W for
> an hour for a TdF winner, so the arms are now providing 4348W.
It reminds me a little of Angela Lee's version of h****t physics: after
all, if a cyclist's legs can propel a bike at 25mph, shouldn't doubling
the number of limbs providing power result in doubling the speed? ;-)
--
Mark, UK
"There is no prejudice so strong as that which arises from a fancied
exemption from all prejudice."
> Speed? 50mph
>
> -> Power required = 4898W
>
> An absolutely top-class rider can produce 1000W for a handful of seconds
> with the legs only, therefore the arms are adding 3898W to the Hyped-bike!
>
> To cruise at 50mph, as the inventor says, the leg power might be 450W for
> an hour for a TdF winner, so the arms are now providing 4348W.
It reminds me a little of Angela Lee's version of h****t physics: after
all, if a cyclist's legs can propel a bike at 25mph, shouldn't doubling
the number of limbs providing power result in doubling the speed? ;-)
--
Mark, UK
"There is no prejudice so strong as that which arises from a fancied
exemption from all prejudice."
P
POHB
Guest
Mike Causer wrote:
> On Sun, 21 Jan 2007 11:57:25 -0800, Marz wrote:
>
> Unless that inventor has hidden a 5kW engine somewhere in that frame is a
> total bust.
Those flywheels and turbines must be very special
> On Sun, 21 Jan 2007 11:57:25 -0800, Marz wrote:
>
> Unless that inventor has hidden a 5kW engine somewhere in that frame is a
> total bust.
Those flywheels and turbines must be very special
D
dkahn400
Guest
POHB wrote:
> Mike Causer wrote:
> > On Sun, 21 Jan 2007 11:57:25 -0800, Marz wrote:
> >
> > Unless that inventor has hidden a 5kW engine somewhere in that frame is a
> > total bust.
>
> Those flywheels and turbines must be very special
The flywheels and turbines are to make up for the weight lost by
replacing the gas pipe construction with carbon fibre. This is yet
another machine from an inventor who thinks he sees where the
"inefficiency" is in conventional cycling. The blind alleys of cycling
history are littered with prototypes of 50 mph bicycles built by people
who completely misunderstood the problem. The only significant gains
left to be made are in aerodynamics, and this contraption seems to do
rather badly on that score.
--
Dave...
> Mike Causer wrote:
> > On Sun, 21 Jan 2007 11:57:25 -0800, Marz wrote:
> >
> > Unless that inventor has hidden a 5kW engine somewhere in that frame is a
> > total bust.
>
> Those flywheels and turbines must be very special
The flywheels and turbines are to make up for the weight lost by
replacing the gas pipe construction with carbon fibre. This is yet
another machine from an inventor who thinks he sees where the
"inefficiency" is in conventional cycling. The blind alleys of cycling
history are littered with prototypes of 50 mph bicycles built by people
who completely misunderstood the problem. The only significant gains
left to be made are in aerodynamics, and this contraption seems to do
rather badly on that score.
--
Dave...
D
dkahn400
Guest
Mark McNeill wrote:
> Response to Ian Smith:
> > > I can think of a few hills which would be either rather a challenge or
> > > altogether too exciting, depending on direction.
> >
> > I think both directions will be quite exciting - the rider seems to be
> > centred pretty close to the axles. Steep uphill, front wheel starts
> > to lift....
>
> Hadn't thought of that; but I went to the Hyperbike website, where
> there's a link to an interview with the designer ["as any cyclist will
> tell you, the worst thing about cycling is the seat..." ;-)], including
> a few shots of him riding it round a carpark. It seems that lifting the
> front wheel is a design feature: which goes some way to removing my
> first objection, which was it ought to have been called the Hypertrike.
On the website it claims that removal of the front wheel is one of the
development goals. That should make the braking interesting.
It also explains where the project 50 mph comes from. The 8' diameter
wheels are going to rotate 4 times for each pedal cycle. That's a 394"
gear. This will be achievable because the rider will use the whole of
his upper body, and will not be "obstructed" by a seat. This simply
confirms that the designer does not understand cycling.
--
Dave...
> Response to Ian Smith:
> > > I can think of a few hills which would be either rather a challenge or
> > > altogether too exciting, depending on direction.
> >
> > I think both directions will be quite exciting - the rider seems to be
> > centred pretty close to the axles. Steep uphill, front wheel starts
> > to lift....
>
> Hadn't thought of that; but I went to the Hyperbike website, where
> there's a link to an interview with the designer ["as any cyclist will
> tell you, the worst thing about cycling is the seat..." ;-)], including
> a few shots of him riding it round a carpark. It seems that lifting the
> front wheel is a design feature: which goes some way to removing my
> first objection, which was it ought to have been called the Hypertrike.
On the website it claims that removal of the front wheel is one of the
development goals. That should make the braking interesting.
It also explains where the project 50 mph comes from. The 8' diameter
wheels are going to rotate 4 times for each pedal cycle. That's a 394"
gear. This will be achievable because the rider will use the whole of
his upper body, and will not be "obstructed" by a seat. This simply
confirms that the designer does not understand cycling.
--
Dave...
Similar threads
