FRIEZE NEW YORK 2013
INTERNATIONAL HOME + HOUSEWARES SHOW 2013
TOKYO DESIGN WEEK 2012
BEIJING DESIGN WEEK 2012
Back in March, we caught a tantalizing glimpse of "FLIZ," an unconventional (to say the least) concept bicycle that was on view at the first annual Munich Creative Business Week. With nary a project page (their current site remains scant on details) to follow up with the design team, we were pleasantly surprised to see that they published the project earlier this month, as an entry for the James Dyson Award:
FLIZ comes from the German "flitzen" and means speeding... with your feet... Based on the very first bike—the "Laufrad"—it is a velocipede concept of healthy, ecological mobility in overcrowded urban space. Its laminated, innovative frame with 5 point belt system does not only mark the outstanding appearance, but first of all it provides a comfortable, ergonomic ride between running and biking. The frame integrates the rider and due to its construction it works like a suspension whereas the belt replaces the saddle and adjusts your position. These aspects reduce pressure in the crotch and distribute the body weight while running, which is a unique feature. On the bottom of the rear stays special treads are located to place and relax the feet.
That takes care of what; as for why:
After analysing the original running machine constructed by Karl Freiherr von Drais, the inventor of the velocipede that was basic to the bicycle, we liked to revive that principle. So we put some questions: "Does the running machine make any sense for adults nowadays? If yes, how and where could it be useful?" "How can we offer a certain amount of mobility to people, who are by any reason not able to ride a bike (or drive a car)?"
Childrens' balance bicycles are perhaps the last vestige of the draisine of lore: the pedal-powered drivetrain was the major innovation of the modern bicycle—this so-called 'safety bicycle' evolved from the penny farthing, itself a successor to the draisine—and the bicycle design hasn't changed much (Moulton, Obree, Y-Foil, etc. notwithstanding) for over a century.
If the term 'safety bicycle' conjures a specialized assistive device, so too does the FLIZ look like an elaborate physical therapy apparatus. Where the inspiration was atavistic, the execution is futuristic: the bumblebee-yellow glass and carbon fiber frame has a slick, high-performance aesthetic. Thus, it comes off as a confused hybrid of the Batpod and the Flintstones car, biomechanical and armor-like yet almost too low-tech, forgoing mechanical advantage for bipedal locomotion.
After testing a replica of the running machine of Drais we pointed out some negative aspects, e.g. the unsafe steering or the wide seat stay. Our idea then was "freedom for the running legs." Beside sketching we built a ridable prototype made of wood and tension belts, of which we realized the potential of the concept. Sketches and mock-ups were followed by the handmade prototype FLIZ. There is a 1:4 scale model as well.
The main plaint against the FLIZ, as others have pointed out, is that it just looks awkward, something like what racewalking is to running. In other words, I'm not sure who the FLIZ is for: those "who are by any reason not able to ride a bike," yet who are capable of walking and balancing whlie suspended from a harness? Is the FLIZ a solution looking for a problem, or are we missing something?
Helmet-tip to BikeGotham
Comments
Does anybody really want their head between those bars when a wreck happens? Look at all that leverage the front and rear "forks" will have on someones neck.
The location of the rear strap needs some work...
So they learned a thing or two about prototyping... I'd still expect ID students to be able to justify a project by citing more than "cool factor" or "no one tried it before".
The main thing I'm worried about is how it hinders the rider's breathing...
"less pressure on crotch"...really?!?!
The thing that really scares me about this is the harness and its use in an urban environment.
I've tried finding statistics on how the actual bicycle fares during a fatal or serious bicycle-traffic accident however understandably, I can't find any.
But if a car were to hit you whilst you were riding a bicycle, would you not stand more chance walking away unscathed or even alive if you were thrown (or could throw yourself, or could even adjust your position when landing) from the bicycle? Surely being strapped in (to what must only become an unstable anchor) puts you more at risk?
In the UK, the Royal Society for the Prevention of Accidents (ROSPA) released a set of figures in July of this year on cycling accidents, which said 75% of serious or fatal cyclist accidents occured in urban areas (75% of 107 killed, 3,085 seriously injured).
It's probably fair to say that a substantial amount of those severe cycling accidents were due to the rider being injured after being flung from the bike (for instance in a head on collision), but even in those circumstances, what the hell happened to the bike?
In my mind, introducing these onto the roads would make for a few, if not a lot, of the 16,023 'Slightly injured' to be bumped up a category or two.
(Also from a functional point of view; going up an gradient would be adding the weight of 2 wheels to your walking pace, plus the user would take a good ten seconds to strap themselves in, compared to the 2 seconds it takes to mount a bicycle, which doesn't seem to suit the urban-travel ethos.)
With no fairing to protect the rider from the rear wheel I feel like it's incredibly likely that the rider will put his foot into the spokes
Am I the only one thinking "it" from South Park?
As a former bike messenger and current ID student, I'm going to say that I'll be damned good and happy when the industrial design community finally collectively find the next hot thing and quit trying to re-think the bicycle.
Product archetypes are product archetypes for a reason. I know it's a thrilling thing to try and come up with something that hasn't been done before, but that's not a good enough reason. You really have to have something more compelling than this. This, or a spokeless wheel.
I know I'm oversimplifying and generalizing here, but I mean, really? The rest of the world already has enough ammo to question the wisdom of our contributions. Why give them another thing to point at and say "What the hell are they thinking?"
This is so ridiculous... It has to be a joke.
Ok as a victim of a few bike "accidents" I have to say this thing scares me. first off due to my past history when I do ride im constantly sitting up looking over my shoulders to be proactive this "concept prevents that ability. also on a proactive level if i see an accident coming im throwing myself in another direction or directing my fall after impact. not to mention neck fatigue. yeah you can stand up but how often would i want to stop and stand up and manage the bike at the same time. I think the only issue addressed is crotch pressure but I dont think this solves it. concept yes. solutions ehhh im not convinced yet.
Is this a joke?
I love it!
I think most here just don't get it and bicker about functional things and forget the creative process that supposedly drives their industry. It has been explored and probably is a functional failure. So what?! Enjoy it for what it is.
This seems to take everything that's working properly about a bicycle and throwing it out the window. Then, add in some groin straps, stick your head in a closed loop of metal, put your feet directly next to the spinning spokes on your back wheel, and force you to constantly hunch forward.
I mean, how would you even stand up if this tipped over while you were riding it?
Besides safety issues noted above, this looks tough on the back. You can never stand up when stopped at a light or at any other time. Ow. Skateboard or scooter are still better versions of foot powered vehicle.
+10 points for exploring the concept through to the end, but -1,000,000 for all of the safety/practicality points noted by others. Also, I get the feeling you'd end up bashing your ears against the frame rather frequently.
Why?
No, really, why?
So useless, and a waste of time, resources and so much more. It's so ridiculous, i can't even imagine this people are serious. Please tell me it is a joke. Please.
Call it "art", and I'll happily follow the artful exploration into new mobility.
Call it "design", and I'll call it:
- Dynamic Mobile Wedgie
- Anti-Ergonomic Amalgamation
- Carbon Composite Contraception
this type of thing is why people generally assume that all designers use drugs.
Yes take the concept of the bike and strip away everything besides the wheels that make it efficient...
It's a nice looking death trap.
Seriously? This is so stupid; what's the point of making a bicycle concept that is exponentially less practical, safe, comfortable and efficient than the absolute worst bicycle you could ever buy.
At least they are trying something new and unique with their ideas. I would never have imagined such a thing and while it may not be practical it is a lot better than some of the ideas I see fellow ID students come up with. People are too focused on if it works and hoping its a joke but these people are actually taking a risk unlike many others.
From this someone could draw inspiration and create something better. So to anyone who is complaining just chill out.
Great comments. I do wish there was more recognition on the part of design/engineering instructors of how much effort has gone into the bicycle in the last 175 years and how optimized the thing is. There's an arrogance about this that reminds me of the (remarkably) large number of inventors who approach my engineering student project lab colleagues with their perpetual motion machines and complain their novel solution for overturning Newton is misunderstood. At least these FLIZ guys have done a well executed prototype, which is an important process to go through as one becomes a designer/engineer
Nice prototyping. Too bad it did not went into something usefull.
Well, saying at least they tried isn't the right thing to say. You need to be able to judge if an idea is either good or bad, clearly in this case, from the beginning, this is a bad idea for so many reasons... Developing it so far is puzzling...
If this is the future of our profession, it is pretty sad.
I don't think of it as a bike because it is not propelled by pedals. Therefore I see it as assisted running and that means you could have quite a bit of control with your feet, like a Flintstones car. Looks like a lot of fun.
How sad that so many are so quick to condemn without trying it first. If all inventions were "tossed" so quickly we'd still be back 100 years. Try. Fail. Try again. It's a proven technique.
If you want to be condemning... then you'd best be offering up improvements. Otherwise, let your mind open up a bit, think about the possibilities and quit yer bitchin.
So quick to pass judgement! I agree taking the concept to this level is somewhat confusing, and I hope no monetary gain was expected, but if you are passionate about something and have a vision pursue it, and don't stop until others can see your vision and the project takes off, or more importantly you learn a valuable lesson and apply what you experienced to the next project. After all, don't love any 1 product too much...
I'd like to try this 'thing'....
This bike definitely has some safety issues that need to be corrected before it can be used by the general public. The first thing I notice is that the bike only has front brakes. If the rider is going fast and has to stop short the bike is going to flip very easily. It is simple enough to run a brake cable down the frame and attach a much safer rear brake instead. I also think that if there were pegs on the back tire it would be a lot more comfortable when going down hill. You would be able to secure your legs rather than let them dangle and risk running them over or getting your foot caught in the spokes.
Other than those issues I think that the concept is very cool and would be fun to ride. The fact that you have to run in order to go fast make riding it a very good workout. People are always looking for new ways to exercise so this product will attract a lot of people.
Hello all! ID student and first timer here. It's good to see some creativity around. I think it's a fun concept, but some questions were raised while looking at this design. I think a bit more thought should've been put into safety.
As someone already mentioned, the spokes really could be of much concern. It'd be hard to adapt to when used to today's bicycles. Also, I think it'd be hard for the user to fully look around. Even if this was placed in a pedestrian situation (skateboard and roller skates category), I could imagine moderate accidents waiting to happen.
Imo, they should place the concept into further development, should they want to produce it. Some FMEA, common sense, Murphy's Law and extensive testing should do the trick (so to say).
This really offers nothing useful, it makes a risky activity riskier, and removes the advantage of having a bicycle: the increased efficiency of a pedal operated drive chain. Try again gentlemen.
For people uncomfortable on a "normal" diamond frame bike there are already plenty of alternatives, primarily recumbent bikes and trikes. The recumbent bike has been around since the 1890's and should have replaced the "regular" bike frame design, as it was faster and safer (lower to the ground so smaller impact from falling, virtually impossible to go over the handlebars in a smash sue to lower centre of gravity and weight distribution over longer wheelbase etc. It's also indisputably faster as the rider is nearer to the ground and presents a lower profile to the air which is the most significant impediment to speed above a certain level. Recumbent bikes own every human powered vehicle record there is. The only reason they are not more popular is due to a decision made by the traditional cycling fraternity to ban recumbents from racing after Francis Faure kicked the butt of everyone else in a cycling race in 1933, setting a new record.
933 Francis Faure, a Frenchman, rode a recumbent 28 miles (45 km) in an hour, a new record. The UCI (Union Cyclist International) has a lot to answer for.