Re: The AI specified bicycle features of the future

On 5/26/2024 5:34 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:

On Sun, 26 May 2024 16:25:43 -0500, AMuzi <am@yellowjersey.org> wrote:
 

On 5/26/2024 12:29 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:

On Sat, 25 May 2024 14:09:39 -0500, AMuzi <am@yellowjersey.org> wrote:

Typical example:
https://luxlow.com/bicycles/vintageroadtrackbikes/1898-antique-davis-dayton-model-22-special-road-racer-bike-2950/

 

We're in general agreement. Still, well over a hundred years
on, people do still ride simple (if not simplistic)
bicycles.  There is a gulf as usual between 'adequate' and
'desirable'.

 True.  However, products don't remain simple for very long.  The
problem is that if every manufactory produces nearly identical minimal
bicycles, there would be no way that they could differentiate their
product from those of a competitor.  This is called "product
differentiation".  The only think left with which they could compete
is price.  The result is usually a race to the bottom where nobody is
making a profit.  So, the various manufacturers add features,
functions, options, decorations, distinctive (or disgusting) colors,
ad infinitum to provide a way for them to claim that their products
are superior, when under all the gingerbread, they're basically the
same.
 [Q]  What's the difference between simplistic and crude?
[A]  Simplistic costs more than crude, even if they are the same.
 

One quibble; Late 1890s mid to premium bicycles are on
tubular tires not 'solid rubber' or even semipneumatics.
>
'no visible valve stem' may be either a photo edit or a
'just for looks' tire rather than a $$$ period correct tire.

 That's possible.  But, I don't think so.  I looked at all the photos
on both pages and did not see a tire valve stem.  I also didn't see
anything that might work with sew up tires.  What was obvious was the
wood rim was likely an original antique, while the rubber tire was new
and didn't show any sign of rubber aging (crumbling, splitting,
cracking, flaking, chipping, etc).  My guess(tm) is that the tires
were 3D printed, cast, or molded and have a foam rubber core.
Something like these:
"3D print your own bike tires!"
<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6WIOQ3Jf5a4>
"I Tried Solid Bike Tires | Here's What I Found"
<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SXAkzNTL2tc>
 Dunlop started producing pneumatic tires in 1988, 10 years before the
Dayton Model 22 bicycle.  That's sufficient time for the Dayton Model
22 to have been equipped with pneumatic tires, but it's still possible
that the bicycle used the older solid tires.
 Sigh.  I just took another look at the photos.  In photo #10 at 10
o'clock and #19 at 11 o'clock, the rear rim shows something that might
be a tire stem.  Same with #20 at 9 o'clock on the front rim and 5
o'clock on the rear tire.  It looks much too short to be a tire valve.
So, now I'm not so sure.
 Drivel:  I just finished rebuilding a Coleman 533 white gas stove.
Time to test my latest "improvement".  Instead of using two Viton
(FKM) rubber o-rings for the fuel valve seal, I substituted Teflon
valve packing rope.  Hopefully, it won't cause a deflagration.
 

They are "just for looks" then.  That pattern 'single' (translation = tubular tires 1-5/8" wide), popular and nearly standard from the 1980s through the 1920s, are very dear and by their nature do not age well. Coker was making them until a few years ago at $300 each, which is a lot for display on museum pieces.
No bicycle in the 1890s would have been saleable with 1870s style solid tires.
--
Andrew Muzi
am@yellowjersey.org
Open every day since 1 April, 1971