e
Symmetry Is Overrated: Paolo de Giusti's XXXVI DG Bicycle Concept
Based on the description of his latest project, it's safe to assume that Paolo de Giusti is sick of all of the newfangled concept bikes that seem to be all the rage these days. Whether they're design competition entries or simply eye-catching renderings, the Italian art director simply isn't impressed. But beyond hoarding vintage Campy components like your average retrogrouch (not that there's anything wrong with that), he proposes yet another variation of the concept bike:It is not a folding bike, nor is it an electric- or battery-powered bike. It is not iOS-ready. You can't plug your music/phone/camera into it. This is the XXXVI DG—quite simply, this is a bicycle. Two wheels. Two pedals. One Seat. Inspired by bicycles for bicycle lovers, combining traditional elements and components in an unconventional yet innovative way. The frame takes its shape from a simple desire for asymmetric aesthetics, while at the same time providing a stable cave-like covering for the wheels and preserving the bicycle's ergonomic features.
Its name, of course, refers to the diameter of its wheels: "The 36” wheels are, themselves, blasts from the past, having been commonplace many years ago for their uniquely smooth, relaxed and sturdy rolling, perfect for the everyday cruiser."
Of course, a particularly jaded cycling enthusiast might cite Cannondale's "Lefty" single-bladed fork and similarly experimental asymmetric frames as precedents to de Giusti's XXXVI DG. But in fairness to the designer, the highly unorthodox bicycle merits consideration beyond its overlapping frame and fork: from the undersized chainring—presumably to compensate for the placement of the single chainstay—to the angled line of the top tube, the XXXVI DG would likely make for an unconventional ride... to say nothing of actually building the thing.
See additional zoomable views over on the Coroflot project page for XXXVI DG.
-
oFavorite This
-
Q12Comment
Directory Company Profiles
Core77
Industrial Design
Resources
Industrial Design
Resources
-
Core77 Directory
Find the Best Industrial Design CompaniesGo -
TactileTactile is a product and UX design firm founded in 2004. Blending physical and digital design, we cr...
-
Logitech
-
Tandem Product Design
With a stellar record of design and engineering successful products with World Class brands since 20...
-
Pq Design Group
PQ Design Group is the preferred partner for ambitious startups and global brands, offering a pragma...
-
Spatial Dynamics
Spatial Dynamics is a hardware product design and development agency located in Cambridge, Massachus...
-
James Owen Design
We've been creating brands, designing and developing new products, and destroying mediocrity for ove...
-
Jackson Hedden Inc
We design unique products for startups, companies, and everything in between. We believe good design...
K
{Welcome
Create a Core77 Account
Already have an account? Sign In
By creating a Core77 account you confirm that you accept the Terms of Use
K
Reset Password
Please enter your email and we will send an email to reset your password.
Comments
the rear wheel looks like it's too far under the saddle because the rear wheel is so big. im sure the distance from the cranks to the rear axle is a good bit longer than the average bike. same with the crank height. the fork IS raked, but it is essentially raked at the top instead of using curved blades. geometry is preserved.
belts are known to be less efficient. and they wear cogs much, much faster. both are due to the high tension required to keep the belt from skipping.
shorter cranks never damaged anyone's knees, as long as the gearing was appropriate.
as pointed out at the first comment, it's clear this designer is more than a little familiar with bicycles, i can see how this would actually ride very nicely. i would only add a planetary gear hub or nuvinci cvt to increase its usefulness.
Hi Nym, don't worry, the biometric is save
http://www.muee.eu/XXXVI%20Paolo%20De%20Giusti%20Bike%20Concept%2036/XXXVI%20DG%20SIZE%20COMPARISON.jpg
about the solution of the mono arm , of course is not for a weight reduction..as is not the best solution for motorcycles..but it's beautiful. A race bike is made to be lighter and faster, a downhill bike is heavy and indestructible...the XXXVI is a cruiser, so...relax ;)
I mean I like this idea for going pathes no one ever before has pursued, but it's a bit too far.
First of all:
Symmetry is good, as it reduces bending moments by splitting the forces symmetrically. Those moments have to be compensated by much more material and structure. (Just take a look at this massive single armed rear wheel swing:
http://motorplush.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/10/Midalu-FGR-2500-V6-Revolutionary-Naked-Bike-rear-wheel-and-swing-arm-10.jpg)
It makes sense in the race world, where you might have to quickly exchange the wheel in the world of motorcycles.
In the world of bicycles it merely makes sense for the sake of weight reduction.
Pretty famous is Canondale with their "Lefty":
http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_-9e8x_G6k4A/TEfWHqYrrII/AAAAAAAAAXA/0G-hixbhhJ8/s1600/horquillas-suspension-lefty-cannondale.jpg
But yet it doesn't cut the weight in half...not even close.
You need a more solid shaft and a bending resistent heavier hub and axle.
It makes kind of sense for suspension forks, especially if they are not mainly air-powered.
Nevertheless...saving weight can't be the main goal here. I assume steel tubing is used?
And because of it's asymmetrical design a lot more cross-bracing is needed.
I like to see bigger wheel sizes. But it's overall wheel base seems to be to narrow. I can almost feel my shoes touching the front wheel in curves.
And as someone else pointed out the bottom-bracket seems to be oddly low. Pedals touching the ground in curves is a serious danger.
If the argument there is to just user shorter cranks, I highly have to disapprove. 170-175mm is the range for normal sized folks...going lower can cause knee injuries.
The overall geometry looks pretty unsettled to ride. The rear wheel is too far underneath the saddle. This paired with the short wheelbase, the quite flat steering angle without any forerun seems to be a bit too extreme.
Anyways...good that someone thinks a bit outof the box.
I'd also like to see how this works as far as stability at speed...
technically, a belt is a closed ring, and has to be installed on frames where is possible to open the rear triangle ( yes, you can open this frame, but it's not easy)
But
I don't like belt system, I like metal, because you can clean, repair, repaint, cut, weld ...and at the end recycle. time for plastic toys finally is at the end.
but there is a chain instead of a belt only for one reason: because you HAVE to take care of your bike eheh
it Is not a limit, no pain no gain, the user will respect the product, because he is an essential part of it,in this way the product life will be longer. ;) ciao Paolo
It seems a shame to miss out on having a belt drive on the side missing a chainstay though. I mean, why have a chain that you need a chain tool and lubricant for when you can have a nice silent running belt? I'm guessing it's to do with torque flex etc...?
I'd like to try riding a bike like that, anything that makes potholed city streets smoother.
Also, the smaller chainring is due to the bigger wheels; 1 wheel rotation covers more ground than smaller wheels, therefore, different ratios are required. Its the same reason small wheeled folding bikes often have huge chainrings. (Sorry, as a designer and former cycle mechanic, I couldn't help myself)