The Roundtail: ringing the changes in frame design?

Surely it's missing ring forks?

KOOK-a-palooza!

Well said and I for one quite like it ... although I'd
have to also agree with bigdummy on the front triangle
"jarring"

First of all, Velo-Alex, let me say I'm flattered that you seem to think I work only with great products, not novelties.

Secondly, let me say that I was involved with the beginnings of BMX, Mountain Biking, SPD shoes and pedal systems, HyperGlide cogs, underbar shifting, Mountain Bike Suspension, and the introduction of Ergon grips to the US Market.

ALL OF THESE PRODUCTS WERE LAUGHED AT OR DESPISED BY THE BIKE INDUSTRY.

The bicycle industry thought that BMX was a joke (now it's in the Olympics.) They thought Mountain Biking was the second coming of BMX (which had taken a dip in the 80's.) They thought you would die on mountain bike rides, because you would fall off a cliff 'cause you were clipped in, with HyperGlide cogs, you WOULDN'T BE ABLE TO CREATE CUSTOM COG COMBINATIONS (oh the humanity!)

I had to work for over a year to get the master himself - Ned Overend - out of toe-clips and into SPD. People said "No Way those forks will ever be used for anything but downhill! Top-mount shifters were more reliable (so underbar shifting evolved to be better) and NO ONE could get enough of their hand around an ergonomic grip until a teenie Russian with XS hands named Irina Kalentieva kicked their ass on gnarly XC courses)

There is no problem when using the inner chainring (at least on this double...) and there is less for a chain to get stuck on than a standard chainstay.

As far as the Boardman comment - A straight line is the shortest point between two lines, has the lightest weight potential, and works extremely well ON A SMOOTH WOODEN TRACK where there is no road "noise."

Straight tubes push what hits them DIRECTLY from one end to another. Curved tubes send shock in multiple directions and get dissipated quickly.

The shock absorption of rings is proven. That's why 29'er's ride better than 26'ers offroad on hardtails. Rings take the shock and internalize them to a much bigger percentage than straight tubes.

At this point we are not remotely concerned about UCI Certification (maybe next year we will be!)

We have no swag to give to the editors, and they've all had positive, open minded comments about the bike. They've been around long enough to know there is more than one way to skin a cat.

So anyhow, a lot of people are loving the design. Open your mind and take a chill pill. There's room for "different..." And it just may be better for most situations.

peace - SB

I like Chris Boardman's philosophy when designing his bikes that the shortest distance between two points is a straight line.

Don't Cannondale Synapses already have curved seatstays, and look a lot better to boot?

I'm quite excited by this. I take the point about the softride comparison, but I think this actually looks a good deal better than that. I'd like to try one.

Aethestically, if the top and down tubes and the fork were curved the way a Pinarello's are the contrast between the front end and the back would be rather less pronounced and less jarring. Or perhaps a double top-tube like a Jones.

and what is a 'Big Finite Element Analysis Machine'? Can you not run FEA on a design programme on a reasonable PC anymore?

That looks aweful! Just cos you put Campag Boras and SR on it, doesn't make it look cool.

And surely if people want vertical compliance, they could get a FS MTB? Are we all getting too soft?

They all laughed etc. Maybe if they were elipses instead of circles, it would achieve the same effect but be less of a radical eyesore. On the UCI question, it. Would never get sanctioned .....BI cycle means two wheels,not four. I wouldn't be. Seen dead on it and I am known as a champion of all things weird

Few observations:
1. Its a prototype. Perhaps with some refinement, for example slim down the part of the circle that would be the rear stays on a 'normal' bike, might make it more aesthetically pleasing.
2. The trouble with cyclists is they tend to be traditionalists. Even the ones who think they're not scoff when someone comes up with something different.
3. The guy might actually be right - think Obree; how many timetrialists don't ride with tri bars?
4. If he builds it out of carbon fibre and claims it weighs half a miligram less than average all the weight-obsessed monkeys will want one.

Nothing really wrong with this, just we're not used to seeing things look like this.

I'll tell you something else that's wrong with it:

You drop the chain onto that little ring and you're going to have some serious issues with the chain wearing through what would be the chainstay on a normal bike.

I scoffed when I saw this being promoted by Boehmke and thought perhaps it was all a delayed April fools joke. Sadly, it's not.

The Allsop Softride failed because people didn't want to be seen riding a bike that fugly, the price tag didn't help. This is every bit as ugly as the Softride and will no doubt be just as expensive (if not more) for an 'advantage' that can just as easily be achieved within the design of a standard frame or with the addition of accessories.

I've got £20 that says it never gets much beyond the NAHBS / SDBS circuit. And of course tests in Road Bike Action, Wired and Bicycling magazine who will test anything for Schwag.

have a feeling that won't be getting uci approval any time soon....