non-fixie 

I'm in no way against the use of carbon fibre. Some of the nicest products are made of the stuff: made to make you smile

Yet I find CF bikes - at least the contemporary models - very, very unattractive.

So, I welcomed this bit of news in my inbox today:

The strength of steel with the weight of titanium. Could this be a means to get back to building elegant bicycles?

Check out the original article in Nature.

SJX426 

IMHO it depends. Is the new material like steel or can it be used like CF? I suspect the former. One of the values of CF is that with FEM, engineers can design very complex shapes to meet the desired mechanical properties, both static and dynamic.

Some of the best shaped cars came/come out of Italy, yet we don't complain about them not looking like Model A Fords.

bicycles have usually been about functionality with some marketing exceptions for the general public. For many of us, we like bikes which display form following function as typified by race bikes. For us old guys, that is best reflect in bikes from the 60's through maybe the 90's.

I have not ridden a modern CF bike and I am a bit afraid to do so. If there was one I would risk getting it would have to be the Specialized Roubaix as it has received good review by the over 50 crowd. I am sure there are other models that would work but if $'s were no barrier, I would likely get a custom modern steel or Ti bike.

parken

Good news, thanks for pointing out!

gbi

I figure sooner or later someone will make a better mousetrap (frame material).

My first simple thought was something like a steel & carbon hybrid.

Could be very interesting to see what developes in the future.

Thank you non-fixie for posting this info.

Italuminium

Wouldn't it be nice..

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nZBKFoeDKJo

but really, the supersteels are already out there - it's just that putting them together requires skills and tools that are rare and expansive. I think the future is in either in nanostructured, self-generating structures (without molds and jigs and the like). But I've read too much SF.

seedsbelize 

Firm yet supple.

RobbieTunes

When I met her, anyway. So was I.


I saw that article, as well.
Doesn't mean some frame builder won't use graphics like we see on modern bikes.

Hope to heck it's affordable. Wonder how it welds? Brazes? Paints?
Wonder what it means for rims and spokes, and cranksets?
Can it be hydro-formed for aero? Will I be alive when it's not uber-$ ?
How long until it's done in China? Will it be more profitable in weaponry?
Will the government regulate it? or make me buy it for someone else?

Can't wait to see innovation proceed.

non-fixie 

There's that, of course. But that's easier to rectify than a blob-shaped frame.

gbi

Imagine in the future you order a bike and even the frame material is custom made just for you.

The frame material mix would be adjusted for your physique, riding style, and the intended use/purpose of the bike.

Further, this frame (via the material it is made of) would have the ability to change performance characteristics by adjusting, or continuously dialing itself in

in response to new condition demands put upon it.

Basically (at a non-visual level) the frame material would morph.

Can combined advances in computer technology and nanotechnology make this happen?

Could future advances in bicycle building go so far as to create a bike/machine with its very own cycling skills!!!

Now that would be what I would call a lively frame.

Sir_Name 

Read about this elsewhere - they got around some of the ductility issues encountered in previous attempts by others. Would be interesting to find a source for the material properties.

non-fixie 

But would it be pretty?

On a more serious note: I don't want a bike that adapts to me or to my riding style. I'd probably end up with an electric three-wheeler.

I want a bike that makes me a better rider. I've found that really nice bikes (as in C&V high-end racing machines) tend to do just that. They force me to re-evaluate my position on the bike, adopt an anticipating shifting style and more in general, to understand how all the bits actually work. I like that.

gbi

Hello non-fixie,
We already adapt our bikes to fit our various needs and wants, but this is done on a cruder scale compared to what I am suggesting.
The bike could look no different than other c&v bikes you already own, and yes the bike would look beautiful.
You would not even notice any radical differences; all you would notice is that it would be both the best riding and handling bike you own.
For example; think of the frame material, in some instances, acting in some ways like muscle tissue. It tightens up when the frame or a portion of the frame needs to be stiffer. The frame can also relax or loosen up when it needs to be more compliant.
Just think of it as frame material perfected to the n[SUP]th[/SUP] degree.

iab

What's the point?

You don't like sculpted tubes, you like them round. That's fine.

The only purpose for this new material is to be a weight weenie. Is that your objective?

Steve Whitlatch 

If the new steel has a life span of only 10 years before you fear riding it, the manufacturers will jump on it.

Otis

There's plenty of guys building elegant, light, well crafted, beautiful, and great riding bicycles right now out of the butted steel tube sets that exist right now and have for years.

If you are expecting major manufactures to produce frames like this, and at a price point below a custom builder, well that's not going to happen. Why would they ever go back to that when modern manufacturing of molded material bicycles works so well for them.

I think modern road bikes have gotten ridiculously ugly too. And so have cars and motorcycles and just about everything else. But there's no reason you have to buy an ugly CF frame when there's so many fantastic custom builders around that can do just about any style you are after. You can even get a good looking CF frame from some of these guys........

non-fixie 

No, it's not. And it's not about me needing a nice-looking bike either. I think I got that covered.

It's more about aesthetics in general.

One nice thing about lugged steel racing bikes is that you can actually see how the thing is constructed, and why. The function of every item is easily determinable without needing a degree in engineering. Either just by just looking or by poking a finger at it. Everything you see has a function. If something doesn't work properly it's usually easy to figure out why. Just poke and look. The only frivolities are the decals and the makers' names on the bits.

The result is a machine that looks both functional and elegant. Minimalistic, if you will. And when the materials and work are finished nicely it becomes beautiful. A beauty that can't be matched by slabs of carbon with inexplicable curves that hide all the technical wizardry of the modern racing bike. That just my opinion of course.

To illustrate, two examples from another industry. Both are current production models, BTW, from reputable companies.

randyjawa 

In my mind, I find carbon fibre road bicycles approaching art work, art that is both functional and tremendously pleasing to the eye. Yes, I do like my vintage lugged steel steeds, but that does not impact my ability to appreciate the newer technologies of today, and I wait, with bated breath to see what comes next.

non-fixie 

Thanks, Randy, for the art angle. I've always had a love-hate relationship with the work of Luigi Colani, who may well be responsible for this whole "aero-blob design" thing when it comes to bikes.

Love:



Hate:




Still, it doesn't have to be blobby plastic to be art. Check out what Cherubim is doing. Not the shortest way from A to B, but mighty pretty:

shoota 

Which if that's the case then carbon has already won the fight.

Otis

There's never going to be a shortage of ugly designs and people to buy them. Case in point I see these on the road all the time:



But again, if you want something to your taste go to somebody who can make it to that.

dddd

It has always amazed me that objects are heralded as "art" in a positive sense, when what they firstly accomplish is to destroy the functionality of the functional object they are patterned after.

Is the viewer supposed to be so brain-dead as not to notice?
Art, my *ss.

What a colossal waste of time. Even the marketing angle of producing such designs seems like a net loss to me, and it surprises me that anyone even gives them a second glance.

A bike with say, an adjustable headtube angle, might be worth considering doing a concept build of, but a bike concept that starts by eliminating even the saddle's adjustability, molding the saddle architecture, good grief.

The problem, in one sense, might be that these designers are "art" freaks, not cyclists.

I guess though that if we all bought molded bikes that bike thievery might cease, as only the original customer would be able to comfortably ride the solid-molded bike, perhaps adjusting their chamois pad thickness as they age.

iab

Then why the need for this new "wonder" material? Why not just plain steel tubing?

And your functional view of a lugged bike is incorrect. Any cut lug that is beyond a stress release is frivolous/nonfunctional/pure aesthetics. The British obviously first come to mind.

Also, form following function is only a single aesthetic choice, others are as legitimate. Personally I find Bauhaus architecture at a nonhuman scale and incredibly cold, I would never want to live in a place like that. Their furniture, while lovely to look at, is also cold and quite uncomfortable.






I owned the van der Rohe. Horrible to sit on it. I missed out on the Citterio by minutes by some scrawny model-type at Luminaire's annual sale about 20 years ago. Obviously I still hold a wee bit of ill will. But the Citterio obviously is not a purely functional piece, it is much more comfortable and looks good in a home versus an all glass and concrete lobby which suits the van der Rohe.

gioscinelli 

Engineer Creates a Unique 3D Metal Printer for Just $2 — Prints in Gold, Platinum, Iron & More - 3DPrint.com

3d printer on the cheap! Make your own bike

non-fixie 

For me, plain steel tubing would be fine. My hope is for the new "wonder" material to lure some of the larger makers back into making steel frames.

Good point. It's a fine line between a purely functional piece of work that is nicely finished and going OTT.



The original Bauhaus designs were indeed pretty austere. Later interpretations, however, as in 'mid-century modernist' were much better suited for living in.

As for the Barcelona chair, it is as lousy to sit on as it is beautiful. Still, if I had the space and the money I'd get me a pair just to look at.

I much prefer Le Corbusier's furniture, although he must have designed most of his chairs before he invented the modulor, as they're all pretty small. The only one that more or less fits my 6'2" frame is the only one I own:

non-fixie 

Sure, but as long as it's not available at a reasonable price point, I'm still going to be surrounded by ugly stuff, am I not?

BTW, that Juke is not the worst offender. Ever seen a SSangYong Rodius?