Comments on: Ecomobile by David Jushpe

By: Julian Gould

Julian Gould — Wed, 14 Dec 2011 18:06:10 +0000

I love the shape which is suitable for a practical fully man powered bike and would comment as follows:
In this congested world, a recumbant bike has to put the rider high enough in the saddle to see and be seen, but still give good leverage on the pedals for maximum performance .
If it can be made light enough, then the wheels can be thin rimmed for minimum resistance.
I guess that the connection of the pedal bottom bracket and steering head to alightweight structure will be a problem.

By: Mike

Mike — Thu, 10 Nov 2011 18:52:48 +0000

Ho man, I can’t resist one more on this. Check out Bike snob NYC today for the 130 year old version of this design, complete with “Inflatable side cushions to prevent lateral falls and running off narrow bridges. These being filled with hydrogen gas will overcome the entire weight of the machine and rider, leaving just enough bearing on the ground to supply the necessary running friction. With these attachments the rider is expected to outstrip the wind, and even ride to Naples via Canandaigua Lake.”

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-ibrziarkxro/TrvWXqv4mHI/AAAAAAAAXOQ/6NR6SSDYUy0/s1600/bygoshispeed.jpg

By: David

David — Sat, 05 Nov 2011 06:48:00 +0000

You have your personnel vision of what can be build and what can’t be, it is limited by your own knowledge and skills. Don’t take it as universal.
Personally i’m here to meet peoples who believe in the concept which I believe is original. As I said at the beginning; it’s technically very challenging. I’m not here to compare my skills with yours. I’m not here to waisting my time. I want to discuss concepts and technical solutions.
I know it can be build you know it can’t be so the discussion is closed.

By: Ross Nicholson

Ross Nicholson — Sat, 05 Nov 2011 05:46:29 +0000

Mike is right. The people who don’t get enough credit is the guys who put things together in the real world.
Clearly people who make renderings can do so in many arts. But while the nuts and bolts crowd can be under-appreciated, it can also be overcompensated. I know for a fact that George Lucas did not write The Star War on which his famous series is based. (It was a 1963 novella, now as lost as Lucas and his agents can make it.) Lucas was a nuts and bolts guy with the contacts to get the job done.
This design, like everything with two wheels, is derivative. And like most of the designs presented here, it might be a tad unlikely. It has served its purpose among us, though. It got us talking, eh?

By: Mike

Mike — Fri, 04 Nov 2011 19:30:25 +0000

I say this over and over here, but when someone posts an elaborate rendering of something they clearly haven’t though about the construction and use of, it tells me that the part of the design process that the person enjoys is drawing neat looking things. That kind of person is never going to find the real work of design fun and rewarding; there simply aren’t jobs in the world of functional object design where you get to just draw something cool and hand off the prototyping, revisions given cost and materials limitations, and technical drawing to others. The right job for that kind of person is in aesthetic design — clothing, home goods, and other nonmechanical objects where form comes first and the number of steps in the process between design and production is very small. I think people think I’m mocking designers when I tell them to switch to doing this type of work, but I’m dead serious and I genuinely think they will find it more rewarding and spend much less of their life frustrated, unemployed, or both. In this case we’re actually talking about someone who is involved in aesthetic work now, and so what I’m saying is keep your day job. If your interest was really in designing the type of object you have drawn here you wouldn’t have drawn an elaborate rendering, you would have made some rough sketches and then started building prototypes.

Please don’t insult all of us by saying that we’re only critical of you because we’re not forward-thinking and you are. People on here have decades of design experience, and many of us have brought stranger (albeit more practical) things than your ecomobile to market.

You say I would have laughed at a smart phone design 10 years ago. Hate to tell you, but 10 years ago there were touch screen smart phones with wireless internet, voice recognition, and IR peripheral connectivity that was the precursor to bluetooth. Google the Ericsson R380 if you don’t believe me. They didn’t have GPS until 2004, but this was because GPS wasn’t really opened to civillian use until the late 90′s. The smart phone wasn’t some lighting bolt from the sky invention by Steve Jobs or anyone else, it’s the product of a chain of handheld computing designs that goes back at least three decades. They’re only ubiquitous now because the carriers have expanded their networks enough that they can sell the data service as a product to a large number of people and use those fees to subsidize the handset cost. 10 years ago the best smartphones cost around $600 at retail. Today if you want to buy an iphone 4s out of contract you will pay around $700.

By: David

David — Fri, 04 Nov 2011 01:03:23 +0000

you would said the same thing if you saw the design of an actually smart phone as little as 10years ago. Following your messages (Andy, Mike) there is no need innovation, no need designs and no need designers… product should be in the shop before it would be created you should spend some time to think about the meaning of “Designer” Most of people are here to echange new ideas… if you want to see new bicyle you should browse online catalogues, here nothing for you guys.
About price. There is no direct relation between cost and retail price, already explained above. Ecomobile may cost 1000 or 10000 it’s not important to define it right now

By: Andy

Andy — Mon, 31 Oct 2011 14:42:49 +0000

This is the difference between CAD “desiners” and people who actually make prototypes and real then real products. Just because there’s a picture of it online, doesn’t mean it could be functional, or feasible, or that anyone will be able to afford it. I like seeing neat ideas, but I don’t think for a second that there would ever be demand for a multi-thousand $$$ bike that can be set up to float.

By: David

David — Mon, 31 Oct 2011 14:35:13 +0000

“and the best artist are the ones who already died”

By: Mike

Mike — Mon, 31 Oct 2011 14:22:19 +0000

“I’m a complicator I don’t want easy solutions”
This is why you should not try to design functional things. I would strongly suggest shifting your professional interest to purely aesthetic design, like clothing or consumer furnishings. You will have a happier and more successful design career.

This is never going to get built and doesn’t propose any viable ideas. Next, please.

By: Andy

Andy — Sat, 29 Oct 2011 13:17:44 +0000

The premise is nearly impossible because inflated tubes aren’t going to hold such a craft upright. I’m not doubting the buoyancy, but I’m doubting that a thin cloth material can possibility hold pressures high enough to stay rigid enough to hold 250+lb upright.