New Slant on Bicycles (Jan, 1936)

New Slant on Bicycles

EVERY man his own streamline is the idea of Fred Strecker, English rider, in the bicycle design at right.

9 comments
  1. Stephen says: December 17, 20097:06 am

    As a cyclist, I would think one disadvantage of this is that you can’t use your weight on the pedals. Another is that you would get a horribly stiff neck from trying to look forward in that position. Another is that you can’t easily see behind you – c.f. the discussions on “prone piloting” a while ago.

  2. jayessell says: December 17, 200912:27 pm

    I can’t believe the cover illustration is from 1936.
    It looks like it should be from 20 years earlier.
    What’s that quote about war planners trying to fight the previous war?

    By the way….

    H.G. Wells wrote “The Land Ironclads” in 1903.
    In his “War and the Future” (1917) he patted himself on the back
    for predicting (and perhaps influencing the creation of) military tanks.
    But, for the next war, he predicted battleship sized tanks.
    (I think I’ve seen that illustration also.)
    There’s probably ‘math’ or something that puts an upper limit
    on the size of tanks, although the tanks in Iraq are pretty big.
    (The same physical law that makes giant ants impossible?)

  3. Nomen Nescio says: December 17, 20092:00 pm

    looking behind you shouldn’t be that hard, just cock your elbow outwards and nod your head down and to the side a little. it’s seeing what’s coming up ahead that’ll give you a headache.

    also, trying to regain some sort of balance if you should start to fall over or need to stop in a hurry might be trickier than if you were seated more upright. how do you shift your center of gravity quickly and with good control when you’re flat on your face?

    …for that matter, is that guy’s whole body weight resting on his crotch?

  4. Tracy B says: December 17, 20092:33 pm

    I wonder about that too– that bicycle would turn him into a soprano. I wonder when they finally came out with the recumbent arrangement. Recumbent would not work with a short wheelbase bike like that.

  5. John says: December 17, 20093:28 pm

    Obviously there are many reasons that explain that this design did not succeed. Which was the expected advantage of that ride position?

  6. Don says: December 17, 20093:31 pm

    >Which was the expected advantage of that ride position?

    Aerodynamics. See: http://en.wikipedia.org…

  7. Repack Rider says: December 17, 200910:16 pm

    I wonder what the saddle looks like.

    I see that the design allows him to shorten the wheelbase by a foot or more, quicker handling, less stability.

    Everyone wants to reinvent the [bicycle] wheel. If you click my link, my friends and I actually did. In 1979 I opened an unusual bike shop in a rented garage along with my best friend and former roommate, a fellow named Gary Fisher. We called our little business MountainBikes and our only product was expensive handmade balloon tire bikes for cross country riding. Bicycling hasn’t been the same since.

  8. dj_nme says: December 18, 20096:10 am

    If it worked half as well as Mr Mochet’s recumbent design (1933), then it would have won a few races spectacularly and then been banned for being “non regulation” (ie: too much better than other bicycles).
    As it stands, I doubt it went much further than a few posed photos.

  9. gary says: December 20, 20099:59 pm

    All I can say is…..OUCH!!!!

Submit comment

You must be logged in to post a comment.