oobject » Zero Bike

(votes: +96)

We have included the zero bike alongside the Selandia bike since in many ways it is opposite but equal. If you are going to stretch the limits of technology for a design, such as the classic bicycle, that doesn’t necessarily need to be changed that much, then this is how to do it.

View the entire chart: non Apple minimalist gadgets

7 Responses to “Zero Bike”

Leonard Low Says:
October 11th, 2007 at 5:01 pm
This design isn’t currently possible to make, nor will be in the foreseeable future. (1) while it’s possible to use superconductors to achieve magnetic repulsion, all superconductors operate at temperatures well below normal atmospheric ranges. While advances have been made in this area of supercoductor research over the last couple of decades, a “room-temperature” superconductor is not even remotely on the horizon… (2) The magnetic repulsion effect generated by superconductors is not of unlimited strength. The design presented here would require the two sets of superconductors to not only hold up the weight of the cyclist, using a tiny surface area allocated to each wheel, but would also need to counteract the additional forces imposed by braking, cornering, and variations in road surface. The effect of these forces would be magnified by the arrangement of the components, which constitutes a Class 3 lever, with the load being the cyclist atop the bicycle and the fulcrum being the point of contact between the wheel and the ground. In a Class 3 lever, the amount of input effort required is *greater* than the load - hence the forces on the “superconductor” arrangement would be magnified.
Adam Rice Says:
October 12th, 2007 at 3:57 pm
In addition to being technologically unfeasible, this design would also be practically unrideable. Tucking the rear wheel so far forward would give the bike a very biased weight distribution, and the short wheelbase would be super-squirrelly.

But it sure looks cool.
Eric Says:
October 14th, 2007 at 2:34 am
yea……….what they said
Leo Says:
November 29th, 2007 at 9:05 am
The comments may or may not be true… So? Is it good minimalist design, or not? That was the question, not if it is feasible to make or use.

Good minimalist design does not mean simple to make. It means simple to use. For instance, a Mac is just as complicated a machine to make as a Windows PC, but it is a lot simpler and more consistent in actual use…

So, regardless of how complicated to make, or whether the tech even exists (yet?), or whether I personally like it (I don’t actually), it’s nonetheless clearly good minimalist design, so yes, it’s wins a vote… At least from me.
danny Says:
January 18th, 2008 at 5:50 am
@ adam rice: Really? cause the frame geometry doesnt look much different than most persuit bikes (which I assume this is). That being said, even as someone who prefers to ride in an aggressive position this bike looks a little uncomfy.
Markus Says:
April 23rd, 2008 at 4:11 pm
It’s awfully bad design. Design is not just about looks, it’s about shaping a technical solution in an ergonomically, aesthetically and functionally optimal way. Therefore, if a design relies on physically implausible and for the foreseeable future impossible technical solutions, it fails.

Assuming the availability of arbitrary technological advances, a ‘minimalistic designer bike’ could look any way you want - including a 2 inch cube, if you want.

The problem with such ‘design studies’ is that modern 3D renderings look so convincing that people tend to ignore the fact that they would never work in the real world.

The success of Apple and the likes is that they made stunning designs of objects that were actually possible to build - and not just technically, but under a viable business model.
Brian Says:
August 12th, 2009 at 1:08 pm
That riding position would crush my nuts and make my hands go numb by compressing my wrists.

Have you an opinion, used or been to this object or place? Tell us what you like don't like about it, or post any specs/info about it:

More lists...