if they would just make bikes more eco friendly, more people would ride them. No?

Pretty cool design though, esp. all black like that.

…people who are neither engineers nor cyclists. They’re cool to look at, but their suitability as real world bikes are questionable.

As far as the eco question, a real steel frame could last decades. I don’t see this bike lasting decades. Longer lasting bike = greater eco benefits.

And their over-engineered comment is bull too. Sure, some top end bikes are over-engineered. My Surly Steamroller is not.

Are they cast or forged? What makes them green?

How long until this “green” marketing movement goes away and we get real products that are really environmentally friendly?

it reminds me that I still don’t understand why “boy” bikes have a high middle bar, when “girl” bikes have a lower middle bar.

Anatomically speaking: makes no sense.

How eco-friendly (or un-friendly) is the process of creating carbon-fibre frames? I am asking cause I just don’t know.

When I was much younger, I experimented with laying up fiberglass skateboard decks, and that involved some really icky chemicals.

MBT

. . . appears in the top picture to be welded in place.
If that is the case, then the total cycle time for the construction of the frame would be virtually no different then a standard frame.
In keeping with his theme, he should have only had fender struts on the drive side as well.

With regards to ‘Green’, I can only assume that the idea is to use less material to create the frame and in doing so is it conserving resources.
The savings in materials is nominal, at best.

I’m philosophically with Triki on this one.
If you want to go ‘Green’ with your bike, then just go buy a used bike.
Used bike = Almost ZERO Carbon Footprint.
Now, that’s ‘Green’!

but have nothing to do with reality. as someone already brought up, they’re done by design students, not cyclists or engineers, to address some non-existent or non-important issue. once in a blue moon, one of them will have some aspect that will one day be integrated into a real bike, but for the most part, it’s just computer design masturbation.

take this design. what problem does is solve? bikes use too much metal and too many welds. i know, let’s design a bike that still uses metal and welds, but just slightly less. sure, it will require bike makers to buy some new and expensive tube bending machines and jigs, will remove some of the adjustability of traditional frames, make brakes and gears a thing of the past, as well as carrying a water bottle. and sure, all those things could be addressed, but then you’d be left with a near copy of a traditional frame.

it looks cool, and by cool i mean somewhat interesting, but that’s about it.

the materials saving might be negligible, but there might be some aerodynamic advantages to eliminating 4 cross-sections – the UCI would flip-out, though (actually, I’m pretty sure the lack of a seat-tube is already a problem)