Ducati Monster Forum

Local Clubs => Ducati MOB => Topic started by: enzo on February 06, 2009, 09:09:30 AM



Title: A D16, or...
Post by: enzo on February 06, 2009, 09:09:30 AM
your $70k alternative:

http://www.ridemission.com/index.shtml (http://www.ridemission.com/index.shtml)


Title: Re: A D16, or...
Post by: Spidey on February 06, 2009, 09:18:53 AM
That thing better have *wicked* traction control.  There's pretty much no way to keep your tires on the road with immediate power of an electric engine.  What happens when you crack the throttle mid-turn?  Yikes.


Title: Re: A D16, or...
Post by: mostrobelle on February 06, 2009, 09:35:14 AM
Is it so ugly that they can't show a photo of the whole bike at once? 


Title: Re: A D16, or...
Post by: Cynic on February 06, 2009, 09:40:58 AM
Is it so ugly that they can't show a photo of the whole bike at once? 
[laugh] [laugh] seriously.... that thing... is not pretty. My new bike looks twice as good and it's a BMW  [roll]


Title: Re: A D16, or...
Post by: enzo on February 06, 2009, 09:47:47 AM
That thing better have *wicked* traction control.  There's pretty much no way to keep your tires on the road with immediate power of an electric engine.  What happens when you crack the throttle mid-turn?  Yikes.

"max torque at zero RPM"  Now that's the bike I want at the Richmond Bridge toll booth!

...and I think it looks good.  Unique, yes, but simple and very clean lines, well crafted.  A nice departure from the busy, inflated, boastful looks of today's sportbikes.


Title: Re: A D16, or...
Post by: Desmostro on February 06, 2009, 10:53:15 AM
I just want to say, I told you so!   [cheeky]


My prof designed it. Yves Behar @ fuse project

(http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RsBtgxfBVt0&eurl=http://www.ridemission.com/community/&feature=player_embedded)

(http://www.designboom.com/cms/images/fuksas/444.jpg)

(http://www.designboom.com/cms/images/fuksas/445.jpg)

This is a full scale concept model. As in, it may be a little fru-fru still until they work out the details costing, market, manufacturing, all that. So don;t gett your panties in a bunch about ... No, go ahead, get your panties in a bunch. It's fun to hear what peeps think.

There's a little bit of weirdness that I can't quite... It needs a little practical real-world layer on it. The omnidirectional grid of the vents - hu? A little Victorian. A little hard to clean. I dig the headlights / tail lights though.


Title: Re: A D16, or...
Post by: Vindingo on February 06, 2009, 11:35:20 AM
The headlights and tail lights are pretty cool, but I'm not feeling the side view.  I agree that the "vents" are odd and they just dont look right.  The "tank" also looks very tall.  I wonder if the interanls actually dictated that shape, or if it was strictly aesthetic.

(http://www.ridemission.com/images/model_page/glimpse/Mission_One_Side.jpg)


Title: Re: A D16, or...
Post by: enzo on February 06, 2009, 12:59:50 PM
The vents make sense to me.  Not only are the perforations well integrated with the paneling of the bodywork design, the triangular shape of the openings inherently adapt to the complex shape of the tank while projecting a sense of strength and efficiency.  Clean and functional.


Title: Re: A D16, or...
Post by: Desmostro on February 06, 2009, 01:06:58 PM
like a wall vent in a queen ann.      doe!   -it slipped out.  :-X




It is different though, and I'm all about different.  [thumbsup]


Title: Re: A D16, or...
Post by: enzo on February 06, 2009, 01:57:59 PM
Maybe, but the triangle is integrated, rational and functional as it is applied here, and therefore modern. :P 

Back to the bike, it looks like all the heat from the motor, which I'm guessing is considerable even with an electric motor, is directed to the rider...

also:
http://blog.wired.com/cars/2009/02/mission-motors.html (http://blog.wired.com/cars/2009/02/mission-motors.html)


Title: Re: A D16, or...
Post by: Popeye the Sailor on February 06, 2009, 07:45:40 PM
It's a perfect example of form following function.



I just never knew before that "ugly" was a function.




Title: Re: A D16, or...
Post by: johnc on February 06, 2009, 09:09:44 PM
i'm not slamming the design ... just pointing out that the tail light reminds me of a smiling max, the blue meany in yellow submarine ...

(http://www.freewebs.com/chtfreak64/Blue%20Meanie%20Leader.jpg)


Title: Re: A D16, or...
Post by: johnc on February 06, 2009, 09:34:02 PM
and in keeping with the electronics theme ...

on the positive side, this would make an awesome track bike ... especially for laguna.  no worries about pissing off the sound nazis with this puppy.

on the negative side, i just don't think tee shirts printed with the slogan "loud piezoelectric ceramic elements saves lives" will have the same visceral effect as tee shirts with " loud clutches saves lives".




Title: Re: A D16, or...
Post by: Vindingo on February 07, 2009, 06:28:28 AM
The vents make sense to me.  Not only are the perforations well integrated with the paneling of the bodywork design, the triangular shape of the openings inherently adapt to the complex shape of the tank while projecting a sense of strength and efficiency.  Clean and functional.

I agree that triangulations do inherently adapt to complex geometries and organic shapes, hence their use generative design ad nauseum.  Where I think the use of a this regular geometry (the triangle) is lacking is on the side panels that are neither concave or convex.  The surfaces do not call for the use of triangulation in order to adapt to a complex shape.  The use of the regular pattern on a flat surface gives the impression that it is an aplique - like a wall vent.     
 
[bang]  Thinking like this only reminds me of school and makes my head hurt.  Maybe the designer just "liked" how it looked  [moto]


Title: Re: A D16, or...
Post by: EEL on February 15, 2009, 05:01:01 AM
Anyone else notice the huge sprocket on the back? I bet a sprocket change could get 180ish top speed with very usable torque left over.


Title: Re: A D16, or...
Post by: Reddymon on February 15, 2009, 11:12:02 AM
The headlights and tail lights are pretty cool, but I'm not feeling the side view.  I agree that the "vents" are odd and they just dont look right.  The "tank" also looks very tall.  I wonder if the interanls actually dictated that shape, or if it was strictly aesthetic.

(http://www.ridemission.com/images/model_page/glimpse/Mission_One_Side.jpg)
I think I agree with just about all your observations.  To me the whole tail section looks a little thin and weak.  Though I usually prefer simple fairing shapes I feel this is so plain it is a little dull.  I like the rear view mirror integration and the windscreen shape.  The headlight rocks.  There must be some way to cut down that really high "tank".  The vents suck.

So you are out on uber bike a hundred miles from home and out of juice.  Assuming some is available, how long does it take to charge this thing?  About the only thing I can think of this might be practical for is as a commuter bike.  That can't be the target.  Who would buy this?


Title: Re: A D16, or...
Post by: EEL on February 15, 2009, 11:58:19 AM
Who would buy this?

Like everything else in that price range, the ultra trendy uber elite-I'm sure brad pitt,tom cruise and jay leno already have their order in.


Title: Re: A D16, or...
Post by: Drunken Monkey on February 15, 2009, 07:26:11 PM
I think the design would be greatly improved if the bike wasn't as thick as it is.

As it stands, it's a bit too "Shamuu the Killer whale, as represented in a really low polygon count 3D model" for my tastes.

Then again, everyone's a critic. It's definitely iconic and I'm sure they'll sell one to Jay Leno, Tom Cruise and Brad Pitt. [roll]

But I'd LOVE to have one as a track bike. Although I have to wonder... If singles give the best "feel" for cornering, followed by twins, then inline fours. What's a motor that so smooth it's effectively an infinite number of cylinders going to feel like?

Then again, I bet you can tweak the inverter powering the motor to be behave like any number of virtual cylinders... Me likey  [thumbsup]


Title: Re: A D16, or...
Post by: mostrobelle on February 15, 2009, 10:29:22 PM
But I'd LOVE to have one as a track bike. Although I have to wonder... If singles give the best "feel" for cornering, followed by twins, then inline fours.


Why is that?  I've never heard this... I'm curious to know more.


Title: Re: A D16, or...
Post by: Spidey on February 15, 2009, 11:11:18 PM
But I'd LOVE to have one as a track bike. Although I have to wonder... If singles give the best "feel" for cornering, followed by twins, then inline fours. What's a motor that so smooth it's effectively an infinite number of cylinders going to feel like?

No con-rod driven crankshaft or counter-balancing weights?  Can you imagine how easily that thing would change direction?  OTOH, that lack of inertia would make that thing a total mess for handling.  Mebbe it just has a million ton flywheel?


Title: Re: A D16, or...
Post by: Drunken Monkey on February 15, 2009, 11:35:23 PM
Why is that?  I've never heard this... I'm curious to know more.

With fewer cylinders come fewer pulses of power to the rear wheel.

The theory goes that with a single if you get on the gas in a corner when the cylinder fires it breaks the rear wheel free but then you have a whole two revolutions before the engine fires again. This gives the rear wheel time to recover and regain traction.

On a twin this happens less and on a four the pulses come so fast that the rear breaks free and continues to do so.

Supposedly on twins and singles it's easier to feel the edge of traction and adjust accordingly.

This is why many of the GP bikes have moved to a "big bang" style crank layout, where all 4 cylinders fire very close to one another to imitate the output of a twin or single.

There's a better explanation here: http://www.motorcycledaily.com/08april05_bigbang.htm

Now imagine an electric motor. When you overpower the rear coming out of a corner the power is never going to let off (no pulses at all) so when it breaks free, it doesn't recover.

Of course, being electric, you could easily modulate the power any way you like and make it imitate a single. Or even make it act like an inline four when it's upright and then have the power output act more like a single when it's leaned over.

And traction control is a lot easier if you're just controlling the volts & amps going to the rear wheel motor.


Title: Re: A D16, or...
Post by: mostrobelle on February 16, 2009, 11:33:52 AM
Wow...I must have stumbled upon some previously unknown IQ, because that totally made sense.  Will read the link, too.  Interesting...  [thumbsup]


Title: Re: A D16, or...
Post by: Desmostro on February 16, 2009, 11:36:08 PM
The motor will be another flywheel in its self adding a lot of gyroscopic inertia.
There are so many ways to play with the power and weigh distribution - imagine. There's not much dead weight like a transmission except the battery. But there are some experiments going on using uber-capacitors or flywheels that are much lighter than batteries. I think Formula1 is using regenerative braking (KERS - kinetic energy recovery systems (http://www.racecar-engineering.com/articles/technology/281974/f1-kers-bosch-goes-modular.html)) this coming year and storing the electricity in many different way such as this. The power is then going from electricity to kinetic back to electricity. So freaking cool as a concept. Extra power is then available in huge bursts from the capacitors. They're still writing regulations on it for F1 I think. That type of thing can be placed in many different places on the bike in small parts or big lumps.

All that is awesome. The thing that bugs me most about the design is that it's a bit cold. I like a minimalist line like everyone, but, it doesn't look like it can cradle a pilot "inside" the cockpit. It looks like you could slip off the side if you tipped too far over. I mean, flat planes? So weird. If your knees don't fit exactly in that little nook it looks like it would be uncomfortable. It's just a bit over designed IMHO and I'm still pissed I didn't get to work on it  [cheeky]

It remains to be tested though. My friend Noah did some of the shaping. I'm going to harangue him about it.


Title: Re: A D16, or...
Post by: ROBsS4R on February 17, 2009, 12:14:07 AM
I appreciate the Vision of who ever designed this but I personally like it better when I removed the triangles from the rear of the frame.

It makes it flow better with the solid front Fairing. I think with a different color combo this bike can look stunning.

(http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3214/3287432074_d37bcf8f1b_o.jpg)


Title: Re: A D16, or...
Post by: Holden on February 17, 2009, 02:09:51 AM
I like it. Bicycle controls. ;D

"Tank" looks high, but might actually be comfortable to lean on...

& someone should copy that headlight design pronto.


Title: Re: A D16, or...
Post by: Drunken Monkey on February 18, 2009, 09:22:38 AM
... But there are some experiments going on using uber-capacitors or flywheels that are much lighter than batteries. I think Formula1 is using regenerative braking (KERS - kinetic energy recovery systems (http://www.racecar-engineering.com/articles/technology/281974/f1-kers-bosch-goes-modular.html)) this coming year and storing the electricity in many different way such as this.

I have seen the future and it is ultracapacitors. Not only should they be able to charge quickly, they should also be able to discharge quickly. So as long as your electric motor doesn't short / melt you can get huge amounts of HP out of them.

The downside: Until they figure out electric front wheel drive for bikes, they can't build a motorcycle with decent regenerative breaking. Unless you want all your braking at the rear wheel, anyway.  [puke]


Title: Re: A D16, or...
Post by: Desmostro on February 21, 2009, 03:52:37 PM
and there's another one:

Vectrix Electric Superbike (http://www.autobloggreen.com/photos/vectrix-superbike/1206002/) from ROBRADY

Another one that looks like it was designed by those who don't ride.  >:(
It just looks like it's trying too hard.  Too much going on, not enough ride-ability.

(http://www.autobloggreen.com/photos/vectrix-superbike/1205999/)

(http://www.blogcdn.com/www.autobloggreen.com/media/2008/12/moto_sportive_vectrix_superbike_3.jpg)


Title: Re: A D16, or...
Post by: Holden on February 21, 2009, 04:10:08 PM
and there's another one

That thing looks like it's gonna snap in half if you sit on it...

Here's the real thing:
(http://www.electricmotorcycleforum.com/images/Vectrix-Superbike.jpg)

Never imagined a brake rotor that would give you ground clearance issues...


SimplePortal 2.1.1