It's been done a long time ago with just higher gearing ratios. A bike designed for a velodrome has extremely high gearing ratios, and it's not uncommon for racers to get over 50MPH with people even being killed during events. The high gearing ratio is very hard on your knees. I used to bike a lot when I was younger, when I got into my mid 20's, biking in the lowest gear all the time started to effect my knees. Trust me, you don't want to ride something like this once you start to loose your cartilage.
@@vanshbhavsar9024 You probably don't bike a lot, but if you have a bike, try to bike in the top gear at all times. This WILL grind your knees. What is demoed here is 10 times worse. I used to bike a lot, and I was always in top gear unless I was climbing. This is an interesting example of gearing ratios, but there is a reason we don't have them at this level. Believe me, you will age and get old, and this bike destroys knees. I know 30 years is hard to imagine, but if you don't do anything incredibly stupid, you'll be here in time and be astonished you are. Live well, and live long.
Scientifically, no matter how much u increase speed by gears, it will take the same amount of effort from you to reach point B from point A. That's because the more gears you increase the more difficult it would be for you to pedal and you will reach point B faster at the cost of getting exhausted sooner. On the other hand if u use lesser gear you will reach point B slower but this time u'll get exhausted slower as well. In both cases your exhaustion after reaching point B will be the *SAME* , that's my point...... Still if u have doubts here's some physics for you: Let's consider the total force that you have applied on the pedal throughout the whole path be "F". Now let "T" be the total time taken to reach point "B" from point "A". Suppose you are moving with a constant speed. Also let us suppose that your gear combo is able to make you go *"n"* times faster/slower. But time, now *"T"* is *inversely proportional* to "n" but "n" is directly proportional to the Force, *"F"* you are applying on the pedal, because you are *increasing speed at the cost of losing mechanical leverage of the pedal.* So, *n varies F ---(1)* & *n varies 1/T ---(2)* From (1) & (2) we get, n varies F/T Or, n = k × (F/T) Or, *k = (n × T)/F ---(3)* [Where, "k" is proportionality constant] Case 1: When your gear combo increases your speed. Therefore "n" increases to "n1", "T" decreases to "T1" so, *k = (n1 × T1)/F1 ---(4)* [Let us assume the force be F1] Case 2: When your gear combo decreases your speed. Therefore "n" decreases to "n2", "T" increases to "T2" so, *k = (n2 × T2)/F2 ---(5)* [Let us assume the force be F2] From (4) & (5) we get: *(n2 × T2)/F2 = (n1 × T1)/F1* But *n2 × T2* = *n1 × T1* = *a constant* _[since, from (2),_ _n varies 1/T_ _or, n = constant/T_ _so, _*_n × T = constant_*_ ]_ So, *constant/F2* = *constant/F1* Or, *F1 = F2* *↑ This proves that the total force that you applied on the pedal throughout the journey from point A to point B is same no matter what your gear combo is.* Additional fact (for those who still gonna point out biology stuff hoping that it can prove me wrong): it's true that our legs are designed in such a way that it cannot change the amount of effort taken linearly with change in rpm. But still I am saying that cycle, friction with the road, gears, and all other factors will make our leg muscles lose same amount of chemical energy at the end of the journey. Because at the end the work done by you is the same as the distance is same. The only thing you can increase or decrease is the force u apply on the pedal which can make u go faster by decreasing the time it will take or vice versa. Your cycle will take away same amount of energy from you after u reach point B. But well to make your point legit we have to consider the energy radiating out from our muscles in form of *heat* and getting wasted, to counter that heat our body produces "sweat" to keep ourselves from overheating, now yes that is something that I haven't considered because I was talking about cycling in daily life, not Olympic cycling races where they cycle for a long time at extreme speeds. So what I'm trynna say, is that to reach a destination with the help of anything be it a vehicle, be it your own body, or be it an another living being carrying you, the work done to do the displacement is always constant no matter how fast or slow u reach that point. The result never feels the same because we waste a lot of energy due to friction, and all other stuffs. Even in a car, the energy needed for the work to be done is always a constant, if the result is not a constant then that means energy got wasted in form of heat, sound or in some cases light. So at lower gears a lot of energy gets wasted in form of heat. But even so if u minus this wasted energy from the one which was needed to reach you to your destination it will be nearly the same ("nearly" because friction causes energy loss at higher gears). U can go and ask "Veritasium" himself if u doubt my brain. I'd love to get roasted by him if I'm wrong. I hope this ends the debate.
Actually scientifically it takes a different amount of effort because the human legs are not perfect theoretical energy sources. Human legs are most efficient in a narrow range of cadence, around 70-100 rpm. It uses less energy to do 50kph at 85rpm than it does to do 50kph at 40rpm or 140rpm. At 40rpm the force required is too high and it overloads the muscle, and at 140rpm the nerve channels become fatigued quickly and also the leg mass becomes increasingly a factor. Towards each side of the extremes of gearing, the nerves and muscles fatigue quicker, but for different reasons.
You guys are free to believe what u want. (Also, keep scrolling down a bit to see where I have replied to a legend named @B C ) Edit: For God sake.. it takes so much to make ppl understand a simple concept.. even after that they keep fighting for proving their own opinions which is false.. -_- I edited my comment above, HOPE it clears the doubts now. *Think rationally my pals...*
@@igxniisan6996 I think you might be confusing the amount of work (W=FD) done (which is the same no matter the gear) and the human effort which does have an optimal range to maximize performance.
Clever , would be great with a tail wind or downhill :) , a bit hard on the old knees though , if you could make the pedal crank arms variable length while on the go to suit the extra torque required , that might be interesting to try .
It's been about 7yrs since I've worked around machinery as in machine repair department. At first didn't see the difference was then started to think once again. Thanks to you, no blaspheme intended, I see the light once more! Very ingenious!
If you knew anything about practical science and applied physics you would realize that the middle sprocket makes absolutely no difference to the final ratio between the front and rear sprockets.
@@MsMara287 I'm your first like. I'm just a simple machine repair guy, nothing more. Plain and simple, like a Amish or Minnonites simple.... Thanks for that invite of applied science, I love science, history and mathematic stuff.....
@@MsMara287 Actually, it does something: It adds friction, making this "very ingenious" design less efficient than having the same gear ratio between merely two gears. But yeah, anyone with a basic understanding of "applied physics" as you called it ("Technical Mechanics" would be the appopriate course in engineering studies) would see within 2 seconds, what is really going on here
It would be interesting to do some calculations to see what would fail first on a stiff hill: 1) rider's legs, 2) gear teeth, 3) chain, 4) gear connection point, 5) pedal crankshaft, 6) pedals, 7) something else. I would also be interested to see a top speed without the modification using GPS and a top speed after.
He should refine it. Maybe add intermediate gears or a tiny electric motor in the wheel to ease the torque. A lighter bike would help too. Cool idea anyway ☺
Не стоит забывать риск зацепиться обувью или одеждой за дополнительную звездочку. Лично мне кажется, первее придет конец раме. Она не рассчитана на такие нагрузки, к тому же металл испорчен при сварке.
The principle is good, but there are lots of problems here too. Firstly the rear freewheel he removes is probably a 16 tooth. It would be far easier to replace the rear wheel with a freehub design which would allow an 11 tooth sprocket. Similarly it's also easier to increase the chainring size at the same time. Secondly the stresses going through the chainstay will be enormous....far more than the tubing was designed for. However I like the concept though. To have a secondary gear would allow for incredibly high gear ratios (or low ratio too). Interesting for record attempts etc, or recumbent bike that achieve high cruising speeds.
Подходит для ровных дорог, а вот уклоны тяжело будет преодолевать на таком. Потому и придумали системы переключения передач типа Shimano. Если нужно выжать весь скоростной потенциал, достаточно просто поставить 7- или 8-ступечатую кассету с минимальным числом зубьев на звезде 11, а ведущую звезду поставить 52. Тогда на 1 оборот педали будет приходится 4.72 оборота колеса, что вполне оптимально, в зависимости от диаметра обода.
Да не будет это работать и на ровных дорогах. Проблема разгона велосипеда далеко не в передаточных соотношениях. Ничто не помешало бы установить переднюю звезду хоть на 100 зубьев и разгоняться до сотки. Куда вы денете сопротивление воздуха и трение качения? А именно они и тормозят велосипедиста, причем их сопротивление растет тем быстрее, чем больше скорость. Так, например, при скорости 20-25 км/ч сопротивление воздуха не особо ощущается, едешь расслабленно. 30-35км/ уже тяжелее, 40 и выше- приходится "продавливать" воздух, это понятно уже по трепыхающейся одежде и жуткому ветру в ушах. Воздух на больших скоростях уже похож на жидкость в некоторой степени.
не обязательно. он сделал с одной дополнительной звездой, мы 17 лет назад делали с 3мя дополнительными звездами. и главная звезда была большая 84 зубца размер шатунов 145... для разгона до 25км было тяжело из-за размера шатунов и натяжения цепей... но потом все это компенсируется... был предназначен для высоких скоростей. на свободной езде развивал 88км. максимум разгоняли до 133. поставили мотор колесо в добавок ездили 155
It's really hard to pedal though, reverse the gears ⚙️ so we can have torque but not speed we can't get both isn't it Haha... Well made man really awesome 👍
Dos detalles. 1.-. El primer plato es de 48 dientes , el segundo de 39 y vos piñones de 16. Según el ensamblado por cada vuelta de pedal, se obtiene 7.3 vueltas de rueda. Eso se puede superar con un plato de 60 dientes para bicicleta plegable junto con un piñon de 8 dientes para BMX. Es decir no Hera necesario, por otra parte hay quienes han instalado platos descomunales para tener desarrollos mucho más largos. 2.- se requiere de mucha fuerza para mover esa trasmisión. Incluso los profesionales utilizan desarrollos mucho más cortos. Ejemplo Contrarreloj 58-11 (5.27 vueltas de rueda por cada vuelta de pedal) Ruta 53-11 (4.8 vueltas de rueda por cada vuelta de pedal) Xco 38-10. (3.8 vueltas de rueda por cada vuelta de pedal) Bmx (entre 2.4 y 3 vueltas de rueda por cada vuelta de pedal)
Yo al tipo no lo veo haciendo tremenda fuerza para pedalear y agarrar esa velocidad al menos en el vídeo se ve relajado y no puedes poner era con h Bro 😐
@@rodripx2186 si realmente fuese eficiente se usaría en las bicicletas de competición... De hecho si sabes de física sabes q no sirve el esquema planteado
In essence you've constructed a heavier, odd-looking overdrive gearing, very much like what internal bike hubs have. Of course the overdrive ratio is 2.43 : 1 , unlike an internal 3 gear hub which gives you 1,33 : 1 on the "normal" chainring/sprocket ratio
У многоскоростного на высокой передаче крутить трудно и чувствуется сопротивление ветра. На более повышенной просто сил не хватит. Хуею с таких видео ради проммотров
the manafacturers make a 6 to 12 speed sprocket for better purpose for clim flat and down portion of riding, but u make a gear for only flat and downhill,
You have to be strong as a beast to power that top speed. Higher gears have higher top end but it divides your torque to overcome the tendency to remain still.
you should show the amount of force needed to ride the bike before and after or set it on a stationary bike frame and test the resistance and show yourself stopping since you removed the coaster brake
I like it. You might be able to add a stack of shifting gears atop the orange gear that you could use to shift to a better ratio on hills. I don't see anywhere else conventional bike parts would work. (Edit nevermind look at the clearance, I think this one stays 1 speed)
You could just use a shifter with some sensible ratios. 3 gears in the rear is enough to drive up a hill and drive faster on flat ground than you will ever want to on a bike like that.
Projeto incrível, adoraria experimentar. Tem que ter muita perna pra explorar o máximo desse sistema. Deve ser incrível passar de 40km/h e ainda ter relação pra ir muito mais além. Parabéns.
Como curiosidade, vale. Se você mora em lugar plano, e se tem perna pra embalar, pode até ter algum uso (mas haja perna). Agora, se pegar vento contra, subida ou se tiver muito semáforo no caminho... 🤣
@@jeffersonallan4903 olha, depois de muitos anos de encarar subidas brutas, meus joelhos já não querem mais saber disso não. A métrica agora não é watts, é sorrisos por km 😁
53/39 na frente e um cassete 11/25ou mais ,faz isso usava essa relação em bike com aro 26 com rodas leves e pneu 1.0 ainda vou repetir esse projeto novamente recomendo pois já tive
A chance desse pneu estourar é enorme haver um acidente fatal. Esses freios V-Brake aquecem o aro e levam ao estouro do pneu, e certamente após atingir acime de 60km/h ele começará a vibrar. Além do fato do esforço enorme durante circuitos planos e subidas.
A idéia é boa para lugares planos, se usar uma bicicleta nessa configuração em uma cidade que tenha muitas subidas, acredito que vai ter que empurrar ladeira acima.
Um outro detalhe são os pneus. Se vc não tiver um pneu apropriado para velocidades acima de 50km/h, certamente ele irá estourar, e a chance de um acidente fatal é enorme.
@ peneu so estora se tiver muito cheio mais peneu de bike goenta muita carreira e peso muito difícil explodir so se tiver usando cama de ar velha ou aro ruim ou muito remendo na cama de ar. Mais nao tem risco nenhum
Two details. one.-. The first chainring has 48 teeth, the second has 39 and your sprockets have 16. According to the assembly, for each revolution of the pedal, 7.3 revolutions of the wheel are obtained. That can be overcome with a 60 tooth folding bike chainring paired with an 8 tooth BMX sprocket. That is to say, Hera is not necessary, on the other hand there are those who have installed huge turntables to have much longer developments. 2.- A lot of force is required to move that transmission. Even professionals use much shorter developments. Example Time trial 58-11 (5.27 wheel revolutions per pedal revolution) Route 53-11 (4.8 wheel revolutions per pedal revolution) Xco 38-10. (3.8 wheel revolutions per pedal revolution) Bmx (between 2.4 and 3 revolutions of the wheel for each revolution of the pedal
Si vas a usar google translate por favor arregla primero los errores del original... porque la esposa de Zeus no tiene nada que ver XD jajaja y "force" está mal en el contexto. Y me reí con "Turntables" jajaja
get into aero position , invest a skin suit , -14 degree stem with dropbar , mold carbon fiber like lotus sport 110 :))))))) nice stuff man also this remind me of the "183 mph Land Speed Record Bike" . break the world record bruh, love the ideas
Con buen juego de engranes se puede incrementar las rpm de la rueda trasera. La limitante es que en realidad, mientras mas rpm se obtengan en la rueda trasera por vuelta de pedales, mas esfuerzo tendra que hacer el ciclista, asi que tendria que considerar este aspecto.
@@joseluissolanohuayascachi1811 si, queda tan pesada que no podrás subir nada, te costará hasta arrancar en un lugar parejo, si es para jugar puede ser, pero no tiene utilidad en la realidad, además de que se puede lograr lo mismo en una bici con cambios
@@luisalbertomendezsilveira6607 Dale genio, si sabias que existe algo llamado ''entrenamiento'' con el puedes aumentar tus capacidades y lograr mover ese cambio ''tan pesado'' facilmente, no hay que ser un genio para eso, si te sale muy pesado y dificil subir cuestas, solo hazlo muchas veces hasta que obtengas la fuerza necesaria y luego puedas hacerlo como si nada. Que llorones que son carajo.
You could increase the efficiency of this entire design by getting an even larger gear at the front and leaving out the second gear, while maintaining the same effective gear ratio
Make a hybrid boke by dding a geared electrical motor to help you with the needed start torque, especially in hills. You may even turn off the motor once you reached the high speed and the motor becomes a dc generator that charges the vattery
hope that there will be a part 2.. for you to continue working on the modyfi and additional gear..ofcoz for the hilly and uphill road.. . you are the one who works on it..I bet you can do it sir..👍🙂
The next part will be about modifying the legs, so they can manage to provide the torque through such a high ratio. Anyone who's ridden a multi-gear bike understands that.
@@masterbaiter338 uh, not so much. there comes a point where it's harder on the knees than it's worth. And to answer Crusader's question? about 3x harder to push than the ratio it started with. and that was already about a 3-1 ratio. You'd probably end up going slower because the strain on your legs is so high.
