Photography by Matt Wikstrom

How can the road bike be improved?

by Matt Wikstrom - February 25, 2014

Compared to the earliest bikes, today’s road bikes represent a quantum leap in both design and engineering. As road cyclists we've certainly got a lot to be grateful for, but how much room is there for improvement? CTech editor Matt Wikstrom investigates.

In the beginning

The modern bicycle was born more than 120 years ago with the invention of the “safety bicycle”. The new design was distinguished by a chain drive for the rear wheel, allowing the steering to be divorced from the transmission, and smaller wheels could be used.

Two other inventions enhanced the design: first the introduction of pneumatic tyres in 1888, followed by variable gear systems around the turn of the 20th century. The latter eventually gave rise to cable-operated derailleurs from the late 1930s.

The safety bike was both safer and faster than its predecessors (such as the penny-farthing) but a competing design emerged around 1930. Stemming from work on pedal-driven cars, the recumbent bike offered a new position for the rider that promised improved aerodynamics and greater speed.

Indeed, a recumbent was used to set a new hour record in 1933 however the design was outlawed by the UCI when it introduced strict guidelines for bicycle design in 1934.

A need for speed

Racing has played a crucial role in the evolution of bike design as riders and their sponsors have searched for any advantage over their rivals. The quick-release skewer was invented by Tulio Campagnolo in 1927 after he was frustrated by a slow wheel change during a race, while cable-operated derailleurs moved forward once the Tour de France permitted their use in 1937.

Greg Lemond ushered in a new era of appreciation for aerodynamics when he won the 1989 edition of Le Tour with clip-on bars and Graeme Obree challenged the UCI with new riding positions as he pursued the hour record on the track.

After a century of refinement, the safety bike is now lighter, faster and more reliable. At the same time, a variety of specialised designs have emerged to serve a multitude of disciplines. There is a lot to appreciate about the evolution of the bike design but is there any room left for improvement?

Improving upon perfection?

The success of a bike’s design can be measured in many ways. Ultimately, it must meet the needs of the rider, but it can also be judged on the basis of its aesthetics and reliability. The design must also satisfy a minimum set of criteria to be considered a bicycle, as set out by the UCI.

Every sport needs a clear set of rules. The UCI’s regulations have been criticised as being outdated and arbitrary, even restrictive, but they provide a clear definition for the industry, sponsors and competitors. At the same time, they also protect the tradition of bicycle design and the heritage of the sport.

Aesthetics

The UCI’s regulations may dictate wheel size, handlebar positioning and placement of the bottom bracket, however there is still plenty of scope to experiment with the appearance of the bike. The diameter of tubing has grown larger over the years and morphed into new shapes.

Purists will argue that perfection was attained decades ago, but that is just a matter of taste. The art of bike design fuels the beauty and romance of cycling as much it serves the tastes of the individual. There is no need for improvement in this realm, but ongoing experimentation is crucial because our passion for the sport depends upon beautiful bikes.

Function trumps all

Bicycle design is very much grounded in its utility though. Function trumps form every time and there is an insatiable demand for better performing equipment by riders at all levels of the sport. More than 100 hundred years may have passed but the industry remains devoted to improving the performance of the bicycle.

Indeed, some engineers are now working towards an algorithm to define the perfect ride. This is a lofty ideal but it highlights the new sophistication that is being brought to bike design. Lighter, stronger, and more efficient; the coming breakthroughs promise to make us faster, but we will continue to work just as hard on the bike, because that is one of the sport’s greatest appeals.

The wheels of progress turn slowly

In some regards, the future is already here — the industry is awash with plenty of technologies that have yet to be adopted and/or exploited to their full potential. Electronic gear systems, tubeless tyres, and hydraulic disk brakes all feature in predictions for the future of road cycling yet the technology is already familiar, even proven in some instances.

Let’s take a close look at this road bike of the future: is there anything that can be improved upon? Hydraulic disk brakes and tubeless tyres have proven track records. All there is to complain about is the weight of each, which I’m sure will be addressed if they are adopted by the pros for competition use.

Similarly, electronic gear systems have also proven to be more reliable than their mechanical predecessors, so the future is looking bright.

Is the chain drive outdated?

The chain and cassette will still deteriorate relatively quickly, undermining the performance of the transmission. In addition, the chain suffers from a very short service interval and continues to be highly susceptible to wet weather. Then there is the disposable rear derailleur hanger, which has become indispensable in the carbon bike era.

It may break away to save the rest of the frame during a crash but it hobbles the performance of rear derailleur because it is too flexible and prone to bending. And once it bends, the only solution is to force it back into place with the help of a specialised tool or replace it altogether.

Switching from a derailleur to an internally geared hub (technology that actually preceded the derailleur) would improve the reliability of the transmission immediately. Add in electronic shifting with a belt drive or a chainless system, and the transmission would be smoother and quieter with a much longer service interval, hence their appeal and early adoption by commuters.

For road cyclists, the switch would entail a significant weight penalty along with a reduction in the number of gear ratios, though both could be refined. A far greater obstacle is the damage the new transmission would do to the aesthetics and tradition of road bike design.

Hang on?!

If derailleurs are to persist, then road bikes could return to using a one-piece dropout and hanger manufactured from more robust materials (such as titanium) to address the shortcomings of disposable hangers. Alternatively, a new linkage such as Shimano’s direct mount system may improve the performance of the disposable rear hanger.

Stop the creaking!

Another shortcoming that deserves to be addressed is the inevitable creak/click of the bottom bracket. At present, the industry is awash with new bottom bracket standards, but a robust design that can accommodate variety in crank design without suffering from clicking or creaking has yet to emerge.

Part of the problem is an obvious mismatch of materials coupled with inadequate weatherproofing. Alloy crank axles are mated with steel cartridge bearings that will start to creak once wet, thanks to the potential for oxidation at the interface.

The same problem afflicts the headset and hubs too, making for a cacophony of maddening noises. Any improvement in weatherproofing also needs to extend to the seatpost, stem and handlebars too.

Compatibility issues

At present, there is limited interchangeability among many groups of components (for example, there are far too many bottom bracket standards), yet there seems to be some consensus on fork steerer and handlebar diameters.

Further simplification of the various competing standards would improve the serviceability of the bike, though this is probably unlikely given the industry’s inclination towards competition and experimentation.

Artificial intelligence

It’s perhaps inevitable that computer control systems will be utilised to further improve gear shifting and braking. For shifting, the system could respond to cadence and pedal pressure, modulating the speed and force of shifting to suit the cadence and load on the pedals.

There is also the possibility of introducing automatic shifting to suit “city riding” to cope with frequent stopping. For braking, a computer system can intervene to prevent wheel skid in the same manner as ABS by regulating the force of braking between the front and rear brakes.

Personalisation

I’d like to see road bikes with adjustable geometry that could be operated while riding the bike. Such a system would allow the owner to personalise the geometry and/or alter it to suit different situations. Heading out to a criterium, the steering could be quickened to suit a technical course then relaxed for the ride home or a bit of gravel riding the following weekend.

Airbags?

Finally, at the risk of venturing into the realm of concept bikes, I’d like to see a tyre system that allowed the air pressure to be adjusted while riding the bike. Such a system would also serve recovery from a puncture but the biggest benefit would be in allowing the rider to respond to changing conditions, such as wet roads after a sudden shower.

Final thoughts

Road cyclists currently enjoy an enormous range of highly engineered bikes that are light, strong, and fast. Future refinements will continue to improve on performance and reliability, but will this come at the expense of the bike’s serviceability?

The Oryx time trial bike, designed in 2007 by Harald Cramer.

Not so long ago, bikes were simple to repair and novice mechanics could attend to basic jobs. Now a suite of specialised tools and a measure of training and experience are required for the same work. There may come a point where sophisticated designs threaten the essence of the bicycle by blurring its distinction from other vehicles on the road.

Having said that, the fact that the modern road bike still resembles the original safety bike despite more than 100 years of refinement argues that such a threat is a weak one at best.

For the future then, will a new building material rise to challenge carbon fibre? How much automation will be introduced (or tolerated)? Will the transmission be overhauled completely? And will hubs and spokes be eliminated to yield the fastest wheels ever? I’m looking forward to watching the future unfold.

What changes would you like to see in road bike design in the years to come?

Tags: future, tech

Nat

and internal, wireless, electronic, 22 speed transmission based in the rear hub. Belt drive (no lube needed, quiet) non-creaking BB and a fully weatherproofed frameset. Tubeless tyres, disc brakes and carbon rims that no longer need a braking surface. Power meters integrated into the soles of shoes or cleats?
Hugh Jaas

The UCI unwittingly controls innovation in bikes. Manufacturers are going to research and develop technology that will be popular and make the most money. If something isn’t being raced or used to its full potential, it wont be researched and developed. Because no one will use it on the weekend. They simply wont buy it. Hence no sales. Pro racing influences everything in cycling, road mtb track cx, it all filters down from the top. Cars for example innovate because there isn’t one body governing how the highest levels of use are governed. Its a free market essentially. Cycling is the opposite. Daily rides don’t need to evolve. Because money wont be spent. Racing bikes (all forms) will only evolve based on what’s happening professionally.
- Dave
  
  Daily rides DO need to evolve, to allow cycling to become a more competitive form of transport for the 99% of Australians who never use a bike for transport.
  
  Efficient and convenient e-bikes for commuter usage are not going to evolve out of competition.
  - Hugh Jaas
    
    Daily commuters wont evolve from a tour bike, but they will evolve from RnD. Id contend that if rnd is being done for something new, we wont know about it until racing bikes change. No manufacturer wants the public to think their commuter is more technologically advanced than a $7000 carbon racing bike. Racing bikes need to be the pinnacle of design because that’s where the money is. $7000 commuters will not sell.
- 900Aero
  
  Motorsport has the FIA which regulates specs for pretty much every level of the sport. Certainly the high-end ones where mfrs are investing in new tech. In fact, I’d argue that the FIA is more prescriptive than the UCI.
  - Dave
    
    Depends which arm of the sport you’re talking about.
    
    Formula 1, the World Endurance Championship and the FIA GT3 class raced in the Australian GT Championship still have plenty of capacity for differing designs across the field. I would argue there’s more variety in just the nosecones of the 2014 F1 cars than there is in frame design across the WorldTour team bikes.
  - Hugh Jaas
    
    I agree the fia is more prescriptive. The difference is that the fia change their rules constantly. They allow different aerodynamics to be used, this year they have turbocharged engines, different materials to be used in braking, KERS, DRS, they are all new innovations. Using thinner this and that and wider this and that is in the rules. As long as the UCI keeps their rules on bike design stagnant, which they have been, we wont see anything new and bold.
dcaspira

Massive article! no doubt the trend is pointing to Data.

The big opportunity, and I think Specialized are moving in this direction with Mclaren, is to attain data from the frame to better understands rider / route characteristics & offer far more precise ride / feedback characteristics. I’m hoping one day, frame builders will have access to our frame “feeds” enabling us to build relationships that provide pure customisation, just like surfboard shapers have with their surfers.
Joel

Paint the Colnago orange, and give it a 5-arm crank
- singlespeedscott
  
  You do know that it is the bike of 1982 Road World Champion, Giuseppe Saronni?
RayG

As the owner of a Rohloff, I’d say the noticable additional drag (drive train inefficiency) is what would put most racing cyclists off. They’re no quieter than derailleurs, either.

I thought the problem with creaking bottom brackets was that manufacturers didn’t make bikes and parts to strict enough tolerances. At least, that’s what you said back on February 3rd (http://cyclingtips.com.au/2014/02/bottom-brackets-wrestling-with-the-new-standards/)

And hangers are disposable because derailleurs are too expensive to be replaced, which is what the alternative would be. That’s why replaceable hangers were developed (insert comment about people who forget history being destined to repeat it).
- RayG
  
  And as for that Oryx. Tri-spoke wheels and a Softride suspension beam….Are you sure the caption’s correct? Because I think it was designed in 1987, not 2007.
  - RayG
    
    On a more positive note, I’d like to say that the basic bicycle design is one of the most efficient machines we’ve ever invented. Plus they’re fun and beautiful.
    
    All these other ‘advances’ are just tinkering around the edges.
John

Legalising internal crank shaft motors! Surely this could have widespread appeal to non-Spartacus commuters and enthusiasts alike.
- Robert Merkel
  
  If you’re not racing they’re legal now.
  - Dave
    
    Up to 250W - beyond that you’re off the public road and riding on your own turf.
- Dave
  
  Derny races where it’s just the derny riders racing each other.
Rossco

Go back to custom steel would be a good start . Bikes that fit riders . Not trying to fit riders to generic bikes
- Sean
  
  Good luck selling that to the average punter.
  - Sean Doyle
    
    That comes back to marketing. The bike companies are lazy because using pro cycling is an easy way of promoting gimmicks. If the average punter had marketing that did not include pro racing they’d think differently. Problem is the traditional road racing bike is about as efficient as it gets for obvious teasons.
Robert Merkel

For what it’s worth I like some of the ideas on a more reliable bike (though not at the cost of performance - unless they can cut down the drivetrain drag Gates belts and hub gears are nonstarters for racing).

I’m doubtful that fully automatic gears will ever fly on racing bikes, unless something like the NuVinci CVT improves to the point where it’s practical for a racing bike and then could be electronically controlled. ABS brakes? Maybe, but geez the modulation would have to be really, really good.

There’s also the question of whether the rules should be relaxed a little (or a lot) to allow more innovation in racing bicycles, which in practice means lighter weight and better aerodynamics (and possibly less tyre rolling resistance).

The basic form of the bicycle is restricted by the need to be able to race in a pack, which also sets the broad parameters of the riding position. However, within that there’s no particular reason why the double diamond frame needs to be retained.

The concern with freeing up the regulations is that at present the playing field for equipment is reasonably level. Opening up the regulations might lead to a situation where somebody rocks up at the TDF with a major equipment advantage; similarly, you could have amateur racing seriously disrupted by an equipment arms race.

Cookson seems to be leaning towards a cautious freeing-up of the rules, on some of his early interviews, but there’s not been anything concrete on this yet.
- Geoff
  
  It’s a delicate balance between stimulating innovation and preventing an equipment arms race where the team with the deepest pockets has the greatest advantage.
  There are however still some instances where innovation moves on, in spite of UCI regulations - as with disc brake systems, where Shimano and SRAM are driving the innovation forward, and the UCI will probably need to go along with the change sometime in the future - probably after Campy has a product. In this case, however, both Shimano and SRAM seem to think that there is a market for a product outside of UCI-controlled racing.
  - Dave
    
    In the case of disc brakes, it does help that the product is already mature and is simply being ported over to road racing bikes.
    
    An arms race could be headed off by instituting a “claiming rule” allowing teams/manufacturers to innovate, but also putting some tough enforcement on making sure it’s available to everyone. Bikes which were raced would be put on display after each stage for full inspection and photographs by any other teams interested. Should there be some innovation another team (or the manufacturer they work with) decide they want, they would then have the right to demand a purchase of the whole bike or just the component set in question, with all the specific tools or consumables required included.
    The UCI would cap prices for whole bikes and certain component sets (e.g. a whole wheelset, a whole brake set, whole drivetrains etc) at a level set low enough to discourage an F1-style unlimited arms race, and delivery would be required within seven days or further use of the component/s by the first team being immediately banned until after delivery has taken place.
    - Geoff
      
      Part of how you guarantee a level playing field might be to require that all components used in racing be available in general retail, and should be mass produced. - i.e. to be able to use it to race, you have to be able to go into a bike shop and buy it. This does however cause problems with manufacturers testing prototypes (like SRAM’s electronic shifting).
      - Sean Doyle
        
        That is actually a UCI rule now.
- Greenalias
  
  An interesting article. Very sad that the article completely
  overlooked the most obvious area where improvements could be made – namely, handlebars.
  
  Surely with all the modern knowledge of ergonomics, biomechanics & wind tunnel testing, the scientists could come up with a better design for 100 year old handlebars.
  
  What do you think?
inopinatus

“I wish the manufacturers would come up with a new bottom bracket design”, said no-one, ever.
- runrider
  
  Mavic had a sealed bottom bracket unit in the 1980′s that was just brilliant. It was locked in place with an adjustable ring & had cassette bearings, so required no maintenance. I used one for 5 years of 20,000km yearly riding without touching it once. Still have it in an old steel frame & after 15 years of non use, the cranks still spin freely.
  Headsets are still the most annoying element on a bike, always going out of adjustment because of the fight to keep a bike straight & then developing the hollow spot on the bearings.
  Replacement rear hangers, easily solved. Steel frames! When you crashed on one of these frames in most cases you could bend the hanger back using pliers and keep using the bike.
Tim Rowe

What surprises me most is that noone’s played around with completely changing the dimensions and size of chains, the teeth etc. They’re all half inch pitch and that’s it. You would think by now we’d have seen all kinds of different innovations, yet every drivetrain release we end up with maybe slightly narrower chains (eg, we’ve gone from 8mm to 6.9mm 6.1mm to to 5.9mm or whatever), but we haven’t seen the length between pins and engagement points change - perhaps even some kind of dual engagement system.
- ed - sydney
  
  dont forget a chain has to be able to bend around an 11 tooth cog so if the links are too long it wont properly mesh
  - Tim Rowe
    
    Who said anything about 11 tooth? If you have a clean slate who knows, it could end up be 30 teeth… hell, they might not even be teeth as we know them. It might drive from two rows instead of one. Think outside what we’ve all known and got used to.
    - Robert Merkel
      
      I’m no mechanical engineer but I’m presuming a chain with more links in it would a) increase drivetrain loss on balance, and b) be more costly to manufacture.
      
      Shimano has presumably thought of this and tried different pitches at some point.
      - ed - sydney
        
        i am a mechanical engineer and im trying to think back to second year design when we did chains and gears - think i need to go and look at my shigley textbook
- Billy
  
  Nup can’t be done, I need an 11 cog for sprinting and a bigger chain will slip. Do you even ride?
  - RayG
    
    Just a bit:
    
    http://cyclingtips.com.au/2011/06/a-ride-with-tim-roe/
    - RayG
      
      Doh! Wrong Ro(w)e
  - SouthernHoax
    
    You are assuming you need the 11 to sprint. What if you had a 56 front chain ring, i would suggest you wont need an 11 anymore. Tim’s point is extremely valid when you dont try to make small changes to the existing design.
- Sean Doyle
  
  Bigger distance between pins means for the same number of teeth a sproket gets bigger. say you went to a 20mm pitch you have an 11 tooth sprocket that would be about as big as a 1/2 ” pitch 17 or 18 sprocket. ie bigger all over and more weight. The technology in modern drivetrains is right at the forefront of chain driven drive systems. Very difficult to improve on its function now. Same can be said for the rest of the bike. The makers will go on about big advancements but its all moustache twirling now.
- Alan
  
  Shimano 10 mm pitch chain flopped like a lead balloon thirty years ago.
Arfy

A bicycle wiring loom. We have all these electronic gadgets using wireless protocols, all with their own batteries that need replacement or charging, while at the same time there’s shifters and derailleurs using proprietary wired protocols with a large battery. Surely it’s time that someone (yes Shimano, you’re in a position to do this!!) came up with a wired protocol with a centralized battery that allowed these other gadgets to use the battery power and communicate over the wire. This would have several benefits including that the gadgets could use a smaller, sealed form factor, and use much less power. There would be many parallels to what exists already today in our cars, trucks, and motorbikes.
- Tim Rowe
  
  Even better would be a standard interface where these wires connect to the frame. The actual wiring could be embedded in the frame, under the resin coating. In fact, on road they could actually use the brake cable as a wire for data, and have a connector that goes in at the brake mount.
  It baffles me that even by now this hasn’t been done.
  - Rosco
    
    Integrating lights.
    Im amazed at how many accessories fit on with nothing more than a zip tie or a bit of velcro.
    It would be easy to make a stem that also contains a battery and decent light in the face plate.
    Or mount computers more neatly, or bring flight deck buttons on the shifters back that can work with any ANT+ computer.
    - echidna_sg
      
      di2 junction boxes are a blight on design. At least english cycles (among others) have had a go at integration into the stem.
    - Arfy
      
      You could add rear-facing tail-lights in the bar-ends, connected to your front-facing light. You turn one on and they all turn on!
      - Dave
        
        Use the bar end lights for indicators maybe. Not hugely useful for racing, but could be good for the other 99% of cycling.
        
        GT
        
        And then, to complete the picture, a generator in the bottom bracket.
  - Arfy
    
    There’s a technical reason why you wouldn’t want it embedded into the frame, that’s because if there’s a problem like a broken wire then you can’t replace it. The brake cable probably wouldn’t be used as you don’t know if an owner changes to a non-conductive cable, and you’d want a cable that’s immune to interference from mobile phones, other bikes, and cars. In cars we use a mix of standard protocols depending on how much data and how many modules are connected to the wire (up to 100 modules in high-end vehicles). I don’t think bikes need the complexity of a car, and could get away with a relatively cheap version.
- echidna_sg
  
  shimaNO did it YEARS ago and nobody bought it….
  
  flightdeck, look it up.
Mountain Biker

it already exists. it is called a mountain bike.
Jerome

I was quite surprised that an article looking into the future did so much looking into the past
Abdu

This is a great topic. If bikes haven’t advanced much, cars are positively stagnant. The computer (nothing to do with car manufacturers) are the only change to what is still a big hunk on 4 tyres.

Why stop at bikes? Why can’t we have advances in clothing? Light but crash/graze resistant nicks (Draggin jeans for motorbikes?), smart clothing with built in HR sensors, power meters in shoes, you can have those ideas for free…

The fact that we don’t have disc brakes in the pro peloton shows how much the UCI block progress. The paper pushers should open up cycling to technology, because it will rapidly help the sport in so many ways.
- velocite
  
  Don’t totally agree with you in relation to cars Abdu. If we just look at the changes post war the big ticket items in my opinion have been unitary construction and disc brakes. You may not have driven a car with four wheel drums, don’t know what vintage you are, but they were woeful. And come to think of it, having brakes on all four wheels and hydraulically rather than mechanically actuated was rather significant. And then there’s fuel injection and combustion chamber design..
  
  I do agree with you about the role of the UCI though: not allowing discs is wrong headed I think.
  
  Having recently changed from spd pedals to Look Keo - on account of they’re Garmin Vectors - pedals that didn’t take half the intersection to get into would be good!
  - Steel
    
    electronic stability control
    autonomous braking
    front, side and curtain airbags
    structures that can survive a frontal crash at up to 70 km/h
    power up from around 20 kW/litre to 100 kW/litre
    harmful emissions down from grams per kilometre to micrograms per kilometre
    Noise vibration and harshness levels in a $10,000 car that exceed what a Rolls Royce could produce in 1970.
    Lights that actually allow you to see the road ahead instead of a couple of candles
    Tyres that almost never puncture.
    
    Yeah, not many changes.
    - velocite
      
      Ha! Nice list. But isn’t it interesting to reflect on perspectives? In the postwar era all cars have whisked you around at potentially dangerous speeds while seating you in a comfortable chair in a waterproof environment. Pre war mostly they were contraptions by comparison, and of course before that was horses. Huge changes with enormous social impacts.
      
      At that level has there been any change that deserves listing with the arrival of the safety bicycle?
    - Abdu
      
      ..Meh.. ABS developed by aeronautical industry. Fuel injection used in WWII German planes before cars. Need I go on?
      
      A quick look at the state of the industry shows it’s a dinosaur.The car ads now hardly bother and show what you can do when you’re not driving.. It may be shiny but it’s still a trd.Here in Australia we have the Holden Commodore and Ford Falcon as proof, actually the most popular car by most sales is a pickup truck the Hilux.
      
      Nice apples.
shoot goal

Actually stop, analyse and determine what is the ideal wheel diameter for a road bike. - Seems we arrived at a size due to a mix of trial and error and the limitations that were likely imposed by the available manufacturing techniques at a point in time.
- Chris
  
  What limitations do you see associated with the 700c size?
  - Dave
    
    It does dictate frame design to a certain extent. If it were freed up then we might see advances not directly related to the wheel size.
Steel

Some thoughts:

I think there is going to be huge innovation in electric bikes for commuting. This is going to open cycling to a much broader demographic as hills and distances are far less of a problem. I’ve often wondered if there isn’t scope for a hybrid procycling/e-bike competition to help drive innovation in the industry - maybe Cancellara’s BB motor will become a reality.

Increasingly in automotive it is the passenger car industry that lead out the sport on technology. This is a reversal of what has happened over the preceding decades. Chassis electronics have seen massive growth. Hybrid drive systems featured in passenger cars first. We will see vehicles becoming increasingly autonomous in the coming years. However, these things don’t mash well with sports that are supposed to be about the athlete, rather than the car. Relating that to bikes, I suspect the industry will be driven at the consumer level, rather than competition.

Materials will continue to evolve and make stiffer, lighter and robust - choose all three an increasing reality. Have a look at Graphene as an example.

Better design of the cockpit. Controls, data, lights etc… This seems an obvious area for someone to partner with a Google or Microsoft to better intergrate
- Dave
  
  An e-bike race of some kind would make for an interesting track event as part of a six day race.
jules

regenerative, electromagnetic brakes replacing friction versions.
- shoot goal
  
  would weigh more…
  - jules
    
    rule 1 of brainstorming… :)
  - Sean Doyle
    
    That only matters to the racing crowd.
- Dave
  
  KERS on a bike! I wonder what would be the bike version of DRS though…
  - Efe Ball?
    
    Phantom aerobars.
    UCI will ban its use for more than 10 sec.
shoot goal

the oryx time trial bike is on the right track (pun intended) stronger and stiffer material could mean the triangle based frame may no longer be needed - thats a lot of potential material saving
Simon

I thought the whole point of a replaceable hanger was that it could be made of a malleable / relatively delicate material so that it broke or bent, rather than a chainstay or other non-replaceable bit of the frame. Sacrificial derailleur anode, kind of thing.

As to where I think bicycle design should go? It doesn’t involve electronic shifting - I know they’re better now, lighter and more exact, etc - but I’m loathe to give software engineers the problems of the bike rather than removing the challenge from the next generation of mechanical engineers - who know what they will come up with? I’m still in awe at the functional beauty of the latest and best mechanical gruppos - it’d be a very great shame to stymie their development for the relatively easy answers of today’s di2, etc.
- Sean Doyle
  
  Still takes a mechanical engineer to design the components. The software guys are off to the side.
jules

on the airbag thing, trucks already have those if that isn’t where you got the inspiration from in the first place. but i think that would be genuinely worthwhile.
Anton Rodman

DESIGN? LEST GET PAST THE HURDLE OF SHAMEFUL PRICING FIRST. MAKE THE FRAMESETS AND GROUP SETS CHEAPER. THAT’S A GOOD START!
- James
  
  Do you know how small profit margins and mark ups are in the cycling industry? You should be grateful products aren’t more expensive
  - Anton Rodman
    
    I am grateful I paid 10K for my BMC Teammachine SLR01 with Sram Red 22. It’s the only frame geometry that fits my riding style and body type.
    I am grateful to my parents too for the genetic hand me downs.
    I wasn’t talking about the retailer (LBS) where his life blood relies on accessories, labor and repairs. Inefficient industry in pricing and your aware. Shall I go on?
Dave

1. Hydrophobic nanotech coatings and sealants for genuine wet weather protection and next-generation dry lubrication. Make it so completely non-sticky that a blast of compressed air is all that’s needed to clean it!

2. Better drivetrains - let’s skip past belts which are just one increment along from a chain, maybe to a shaft system.

3. A gearbox at the bottom bracket end of the drivetrain (i.e. “between” the crank axle and the chain ring) instead of hub gears or a derailleur.

4. Lightweight tube sealant solutions - not for racing when there’s always a service vehicle not too far away but for the other 99%.
- Tom
  
  Gearboxes in the BB already exist in downhill bikes…in their current form they are way too heavy to consider using on anything else though.
Alex

Missed one Cranks should be adjustable infinatly for length.
- Alex
  
  Broken spokes should never ever happen.
  - Alex
    
    Rim brake surface should never wear. Stellite it.
    - Alex
      
      25yr design life for allcomponents. Service should be checking bolt torgues, seals and grease.
      - Alex
        
        Use of high grade bearings and steel alloys (exotics).
        
        Alex
        
        Specify epoxy standards in for safety of workers / environment and users.
        
        Alex
        
        Forkes should have some safety redundancy as carbon cracks… Maybe some dye released after carbon cracks etc with some sort of structure that allows a few rides after it cracks.
        
        Alex
        
        Probably wheels are too big nowadays..
- Sean
  
  I to like to use alternate length cranks. If it’s a crit with only left turns, like you, i’ll bolt on a 150mm left crank and leave the 175mm right crank on. I’d have competed more over summer if it weren’t for my knee and hip injury.
  - Chris
    
    longer chainstays for larger frames would make them handle better. gone are the days of needing to save weight by shortening the stays. Anyone ever riden a bike with longer chain stays? less oppourtunity for rear wheel wash outs when cornering.
  - Alex
    
    I meant ‘missed one’ - cranks… Ie both arms should have adjustable recess at axial…
Paolo

I always love the use of ” Quantum leap” as it is actually the smallest leap you can make and it doesn;t usually involve a change in quality. But hey, who cares about the true scientific meaning as long everyone is using it…in the complete opposite way.
- Sean Doyle
  
  Well that probably accurately describes most ‘advancements’ that we are spoon fed. No much has changed in the 25 years I’ve ridden. Generally the bikes have gotten lighter but not really faster.
  - Dave
    
    That’s because the riders are getting cleaner.
    - Sean Doyle
      
      lol. thats funny.
      - Dave
        
        Not saying that they’ve stopped, just the the obvious ones like EPO are now easily detected and they have to resort to looking for marginal gains instead.
      - Dave
        
        It’s true. The big gains to be made from the likes of EPO are too easily detected now, the best pharmaceutical assistance they can get now are just marginal gains.
simonnix

Pick a diameter (re: everything).

Some kind of braking rear light activation would be handy - the more cues we can give motorists the better. Hell, it’d probably be handy in a race situation, too.

If there were a way to capture power from the wheel when under brakes (as in a hybrid car) that’d be neat, also. I imagine you’d achieve that with a dyno, which brings me to the next item…

Self-sufficiency is an important part of cycling. For those who aren’t racing, charging and running electronic doodads with a dyno is less archaic than it sounds - we’ve come a long way since bottle dynamos. A Schmidt hub really took the heartache out of lighting on my tourer - flick a switch, pedal. It’s fantastic.

Electronic rigging throughout the frame to connect the aforementioned doodads without relying on ANT+ would be nice (central power source for the system, no signal issues), but the only way I could see it working would be with something really simple and highly durable (say, a sealed CAT5E or even mini or micro USB) running from the front of the bike (where your routing of power and data takes place - maybe inside the hollow of the stem) to the bottom bracket, the dropouts, etc.

On the subject of IGHs - I’m not sure they’re a great idea across the board. Changing a flat becomes more involved, and (unless you buy a Rohloff), they really, REALLY don’t like shifting under load. Great for a wet weather stop-start commute on the flat, but they introduce a bunch of other problems, most of which become a ‘black box’ for the average punter - you can’t see the mechanism, you just know that pedalling goes in and movement comes out. That, again, goes against the notion of self-sufficiency.
- Arfy
  
  The rear brake light could be done, you just need a micro switch that’s activated by the rear caliper or the cable-pull. The issue would be how to discern the brake light from a flashing rear light? I’m sure it could be done, just a matter of working out the detail.
  You got me thinking on Ethernet or USB3. If you have high-speed data cabling then you could easily hook up a rear camera to a display on the bars/stem to act as rear-vision. Especially useful when you’re passing parked cars and need to keep an eye out in front and behind. You could then go one step further and use the camera data for crash-avoidance, such as an automatic horn to warn drivers who are too close, or an ABS-like system to help stop the bike safely, or even an airbag system in the event of an unavoidable crash (I don’t think an automatic missile system is allowed on bikes, even though it could have its uses … )
  - Pete
    
    If it could be done, shimano would have done it already and they haven’t. Plus it has no application in racing. Also USB3 isn’t fast enough these days.
    - Arfy
      
      If you’re racing you’re not allowed to have a camera. UCI rules. But there’s still plenty of cameras out there. And just quietly, Shimano hasn’t done everything.
      
      As for USB3, you only need 400MB/sec for HD video without compression. USB3 can run at over 5GB/sec, so I’m not sure why you think it’s not fast enough? Anyway I’d use one of the new Automotive Ethernet standards, they only need two wires and are being used for multiple camera applications such as Advanced Driver Assistance Systems.
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BroadR-Reach_Ethernet_standard
jooo

A much better derailleur hanger already exists (to go with a great axle system) but it’s unfortunately underused…

http://www.bike24.com/i/p/8/9/26098_00_d.jpg
Kim

Here is my wish list

Firstly Matt has done a great job with this article

Improving rolling resistance in tyres would be useful

Having real puncture proof tyres would be useful
Rider position adjustment during the event would be useful. Change gears by use of electronic mechanisms is possible why not a saddle adjustment during a ride, down and back or up and forward combined with crank length adjustment oe some other combination. We change gears to maximise performance why not position.
Electronic Braking
Quieter riding, yes no squeaks no ticks not clicks. just smooth riding
Longer wearing parts would be cost effective and useful.
Rider feedback contacting to effort levels would be useful based on past performance…
Safety needs to be improved. In the event of a fall well you are on you own.
Some better cooling arrangement for the human body while cycling other than drinking, looking for a sprinkler to ride under or a nice fresh breeze.
http://www.iendure.com iEndure

I generally like the break-away rear derailleur hanger idea for saving the frame and derailleur in falls. What I don’t like is how hard it can be to find a replacement. There must be 1000s of hanger variations. I wonder if standardizing the hanger shape can make things easier?