You are currently browsing the tag archive for the 'history' tag.
Entire frame, without any attachment, F, fourth line, F clef; handle-bar Bflat under first ledger line, G clef; a piece of tubing C; brake handle, D; front fork, Eflat; right crank with a portion of attachment to sprocket wheel, Esharp; left crank only, F; handle-bar post, G; saddle post, A; brake-rod with brake, Bflat; sprocket wheel, C; front hub, D; spokes, E on the first line and its octave above; step F; front axle, G.
“The Music of the Bicycle”,
Musical Standard, November 1897
r:B
Whilst perusing some fascinating 19th century material on chainless bicycle solutions, I happened across this drawing of the Hildick Chainless Bicycle Gear.
The Hildick Chainless Bicycle Gear (1898)
Given the main reason for replacing the bicycle chain is to obviate a messy, potentially dangerous and fragile drive system, the decision to opt for a large, open gear and all the greasy, moving parts that entails seems somewhat eccentric. In case you haven’t worked it out, the inner ring of the mechanism is fixed and the outer ring runs on bearings, something like a giant freewheel. In its favour, it looks as though it could have been retro-fitted to any standard, chain-driven bicycle.
It made me reflect on something I’d once read Dean Kamen, inventor of the Segway, say about the South Pointing Chariot invented by the ancient Chinese – a cart which, through an assembly of differentials, pinions and annular gears, would always point an indicator stick South, no matter in which direction it was driven. The odd thing is that the Chinese had already discovered the magnetic properties of lodestones and thus had a ready method of detecting North even when unable to use astronomical navigation. They had essentially reinvented the problem! Now, if only someone had pointed Mr Kamen towards the bicycle he might have saved himself a lot of bother.
To me, the most elegant solution for a chainless bicycle offered in the late 1890s was the bevel-geared shaft-drive system by Sterling and others in the USA, possibly because it looks so much like the hand-operated food mixer I remember mentally disassembling as a child. Unfortunately, it would probably have limited serviceable life due to gear wear – the bevelled teeth providing such a small point of contact that they would be unable to take the full leverage of the crank over a prolonged period – but it does offer some inspiration.
The Sterling bevel-geared Chainless Crank Bracket (1898)
What if the crank axle were a fixed worm gear so that there was more metal in constant contact with the drive shaft and hence a more evenly spread load? This after all is the chief benefit of a chain – the spread load of numerous teeth being driven at once. Would the gear ratio be too low to be practical? It would certainly take up less space in the bottom bracket…
If we revert to a chainwheel and chain, with the appropriate constraining rollers, there is no reason at all we could not have a chaindriven system which was completely enclosed in the chainstay!
Any thoughts?
UPDATE: Appears that UK company Zero Bikes have already resuscitated the shaft-driven chainless bicycle. I really should keep up to date!
UPDATE 2: OK! There’s also Dynamic Bicycles in the USA. Jings! I’m so out of touch!
UPDATE 3: Yes…and also from Beixo in the Netherlands. This post is now closed!
r:B
I recently stumbled across a video clip which prompted recollection of a curious bicycle uility-cum-security handlebar that was marketed in the late 19th and early part of the twentieth century.
The device was invented by one J. F. Sargeant of Bracknell and comprised a two-part handlebar containing inside it a selection of tools including a bicycle pump, oil-can, cleaning brush, and spanner.
It seems the handlebar was easily detached and solidly reattached with a single rotation of the left half. The removable half was also retained as proof of ownership when checking the bicycle aboard a train, both halves sharing a unique identifying number.
The patented design could be retrospectively fitted to most varieties of bicycle and a service was offered which would convert the customer’s existing handlebars including full nickel re-plating.
It was felt the bicycle was less likely to be stolen when left parked with incomplete or “dismembered” handlebars. If further security was felt necessary, Mr Sargeant had also developed a version which contained a Colt revolver, apparently tested successfully at the Military Tournament. An umbrella might have been more useful…!
From what I can determine, the handlebar was originally manufactured under license by Longhurst and Hitcham of Ascot but a trade advertisement from 1897 suggests a manufactory in Wokingham, nearby but on the opposite (west) side of Bracknell from Ascot…
Now, we both know that the natural laws of the universe would normally ordain that the “patent improved” handlebar part at the most inopportune moment, most likely while negotiating a potholed road under heavy traffic.
However, the video clip below would tend to suggest this is not an entirely unmanageable situation and this contraption of Sargeant’s may not have been the acme of theft deterrence the inventor would have led us to believe…
r:B
“It is a strange fact that the Dutch, among the most bicycle-conscious of Europeans, have the most dangerous bicycles. Equipped only with back-pedal brakes, they leave both hands free to fend off pedestrians and point out landmarks. The Germans share their preference for back-pedal brakes, but they suplement them with an emergency hand brake on the front wheel. This is of the ‘plunger’ type, and stops the bicycle more effectively than the rider; but it is at least a gesture to safety. The Dutch, one assumes, are keen to demonstrate their courage or geography or both.”
– The Times, Monday, July 18, 1955
R:B
“A bicycle made almost entirely of hemp and resin has been constructed at Alesandria, Piedmont Province, Italy. The bicycle weights about 30lbs and can carry a weight up to 240 lbs. It is hoped to use hemp and resin in the manufacture of other mechanical equipment.”
Reuters, Friday, 23rd February 1940
<cough><cough>
<giggle>
<snurk>
R:B
That expression on his face speaks volumes…
“Gerald didn’t know who to tell…but the cashmere cape just wasn’t cutting it!”
R:B
The bicycle was defined as a “carriage” in an English court-room in 1879 – an attitude subsequently fossilised in a parliamentary Act of 1888 – at a time when the only competition for the road were pedestrians, horses and horse-drawn traffic; the bicycle was quite literally the fastest thing on wheels. This rationale would have seen the term extend also to prams and wheelchairs.
Indeed, until the change in local government legislation (1994?), I can attest that a local bylaw in Dundee made it illegal to “push a perambulator” or “move on roller skates” across the City Square – although I believe you could drive a herd of sheep down the main thoroughfare opposite the square on market days! Current UK legislation does, however, identify the potential for classifying push-along scooters, skateboards and roller-skates as vehicles despite acknowledging the obvious practical problems of enforcement.
As I’ve touched on briefly in an earlier post, any time the opportunity arose in the first half of the twentieth century to create a codified bicycling policy which would have made provision for cycle paths similar to those now envied in north-western continental Europe, it was rejected by cycling organisations representing the narrow interests of the (un)sporting minority. Thanks to these elitists, we now have the privilege of conveying our bicycles – and potentially skateboards and roller-skates – through the dirt and madness of today’s traffic as the alleged equals of cars, trucks and buses. This is clearly nuts!
In the past I’ve ridden – with no real concern – in traffic conditions that would simply terrify me today and I honestly find it increasingly difficult to advocate anyone take up vehicular city cycling. Some people may enjoy pretending to be a “vehicle”, not me…I just want to ride my bicycle.
Messrs Obree, Beaumont and Hoy aside, Scotland has another, lesser-known, bicycle-riding hero. Now, I’m not suggesting this is how to ride around the streets of Edinburgh, but Danny Macaskill is an excellent – if eccentric – example of why the notion of the vehicular bicycle is a nonsense. Let’s see you do this in a “carriage”…
R:B
“Some regulations of bicycle traffic seem to be most urgently needed. Cyclists are rapidly becoming a grave danger to both foot passengers and vehicles.
“…every cycle should have a tinkling bell continuously sounding. This might be musical, like the sleigh bells. The present spring bell is most alarming when sounded behind a foot passenger. One is just as apt to go right in front of the wheels as to move out of the way. “
from a letter from J. B. to The Scotsman,
Monday 24th September, 1894
The extract above presents an interesting approach to the bicycle bell. I’ve never seen a bicycle with sleigh bells although the idea does have its own peculiar charm, particularly at this time of year.
I recall something that I saw some years ago in Germany which almost fits the bill, a rotary-operated bell which fits to the front fork in the same manner as a bottle dynamo and is switched into contact with the tyre by a trigger mounted on the handlebars.
It is a relatively safe assumption, however, that any bicycle accessory has been around the block at least once before and this is no exception. The following advertisement from an early 20th century Sears Roebuck catalogue offers much the same performance but at a price I imagine would be multiplied at least twentyfold today.
R:B
