'This is the bike for Chicago'

The worst winter in decades inspired a design firm and frame builder to fashion a bike tough enough for this town.

http://www.chicagoreader.com/chicago/minimal-method-bicycle-concept...

Views: 3278

▶ Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Far'arned Retrogrumpalunkus #63 on July 30, 2014 at 8:55am

Because the rules about speeding, selling & buying drugs, stealing, and so on have been such a big help so far in eliminating those things.

Jonathan Quist said:

Yeah. Gee. Sort of like the rules that the US should have about "fog lights", "driving lights", etc., etc.


Permalink Reply by Jonathan Quist on July 30, 2014 at 9:10am


Uh, yeah. What you said.

Actually, if an approaching vehicle has obnoxiously bright lights, retroreflective material is probably more effective than an opposing set of obnoxiously bright lights. Of course, that's just my opinion pulled out of thin air - I have no data to support the hypothesis.

Obligatory reference to the original topic: If one has to pull over and change the nav destination or send a text message, won't the lack of a top bar on these bikes (making them more difficult to hold up while standing on the ground straddling the bike with hands occupied) be another annoying design feature? (he said, smoothly changing the topic away from his earlier short-sighted comment...)


James BlackHeron said:

Because the rules about speeding, selling & buying drugs, stealing, and so on have been such a big help so far in eliminating those things.

Jonathan Quist said:

Yeah. Gee. Sort of like the rules that the US should have about "fog lights", "driving lights", etc., etc.


Permalink Reply by S on July 31, 2014 at 5:59am

I think it'd be closer to the laws/regulations regarding cars having seat belts, airbags, and such.  They seem to have gone in pretty much universally.  

James BlackHeron said:

Because the rules about speeding, selling & buying drugs, stealing, and so on have been such a big help so far in eliminating those things.

Jonathan Quist said:

Yeah. Gee. Sort of like the rules that the US should have about "fog lights", "driving lights", etc., etc.


Permalink Reply by April on July 31, 2014 at 10:29am

+1  Hilarious and right to the point.  Exactly what I was thinking. I voted for SF the only bike that even considered carrying children utilitarian. 

Lisa Curcio 6.6mi said:

Permalink Reply by Chitown_Mike on July 31, 2014 at 11:01am

Bike snob is hilarious, but I really liked the Chicago one.  Not just because they are from here but because the other designs just don't do it for me.  Especially the one where everything shoots out of the tubes, that seems weird and useless to me.

Permalink Reply by Anne Alt on August 1, 2014 at 4:30am

I liked the fact that the SF modular cargo concept included a wide variety of carrying accessories. Nice that they didn't dismiss folks who ride with kids. 

April said:

+1  Hilarious and right to the point.  Exactly what I was thinking. I voted for SF the only bike that even considered carrying children utilitarian. 

Lisa Curcio 6.6mi said:

Permalink Reply by Thunder Snow on August 4, 2014 at 8:05am
Permalink Reply by Kevin C Dormant on August 4, 2014 at 8:52am

Effectively challenging the old N+1 formula.

Thunder Snow said:

Permalink Reply by Far'arned Retrogrumpalunkus #63 on August 5, 2014 at 2:09am

Electronic shifting, once dialed in, does not ever go out of adjustment unless the derailleurs are knocked. The same can not be said about cables. 

Permalink Reply by Gene Tenner on August 5, 2014 at 2:33am

Integrated accessories were part of the requirements that the designers had to adhere to.

Jennifer on the lake said:

I am genuinely curious as to why design people are so opposed to accessories that attach separately. Are we all failing to grasp some basic principle of design philosophy?

Permalink Reply by Anne Alt on August 5, 2014 at 3:52am

A lot of old low-tech stuff holds up very well for an amazingly long time - true for bikes, cars and many other things.

Jeff Schneider said:

I think I'd be unlikely to choose Denny over Divvy.

This one, even more than the others, makes me wonder which of its integrated features will fail first, and how much it will cost to fix, if that's even possible.

At this moment I have a 33 year old touring bike sitting in front of me.  I have been able to maintain it all these years without much difficulty.  Will the same be true of the electronic shifting, electrical assist, or even the integrated handlebar lock of the Denny?  Two years after it goes on sale, I'll bet the integrated lights will no longer be available...

Permalink Reply by Jonathan Quist on August 5, 2014 at 4:22am

Integrated accessories do make sense for some riders - as a percentage probably a much smaller number in any online cycling community than in the general population.

I like the clean look, but probably as much due to the novelty as anything else. I also like the look of a traditional road bike with quality accessories bolted on... on the other hand a folding bike with fully integrated and functional accessories would be quite attractive. How about a George Jetson bike that folds into a pocket-sized case at the touch of a button?

The real issue here is in the notion that any team can design "the" bike for Chicago or any other locale without first defining the target rider. Or more correctly "target riders".

Gene Tenner said:

Integrated accessories were part of the requirements that the designers had to adhere to.

Jennifer on the lake said:

I am genuinely curious as to why design people are so opposed to accessories that attach separately. Are we all failing to grasp some basic principle of design philosophy?

RSS

Groups

© 2008-2016   The Chainlink Community, L.L.C.   Powered by

Disclaimer  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service