Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

This Is the Gyro-Stabilized, Two-Wheeled Future of Transportation

wired.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 164 posts

Re: This Is the Gyro-Stabilized, Two-Wheeled Future of Transportation

#121

Post by jff »

jack-r-abbit wrote: post #109
jff wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A good motorcyclist would not allow you to pull up along side them in their lane. When riding normally, we take up an entire lane by riding in the middle, to prevent people from thinking "Oh, that motorcyclist is at the edge of the lane, that means I can try and use the rest of the lane to pass". Lane splitting is an exception, and a pretty hair-raising one at times because people are constantly jockeying to get into…

So I guess we can agree that lane splitting is a double standard where the motorcycles get favor. Besides the air-cooled aspect (which may or may not be as relevant today), what are some other reasons why motorcycles should be allowed to pass in such a way that cars are not? Maybe around the SF Bay Area we are the exception to the lane splitting exception because I see countless motorcycles lane split at all speeds o…

I figure that if a motorcyclist is splitting lanes, he's not taking up a spot in the jam of cars ahead of you. That means one less person in there slowing things down. I can definitely see where it would feel unfair, but really it's more like the self-checkout at a grocery store, or when a post office sets up a separate line for people who just need to pick up a package. The motorcycles are capable of getting out of the way, so they do, which reduces the number of vehicles sitting in the congested area.

I've only ever lane-split when traffic is essentially stopped; at that speed, having somebody suddenly change lanes in front of me would suck, but I wouldn't expect to die from it because I'm moving slowly. It's a lot different when an SUV swerves into you as you're both going 75 on the freeway.

Re: This Is the Gyro-Stabilized, Two-Wheeled Future of Transportation

#122

Post by jack-r-abbit »

UnFleshedOne wrote: post #118
jack-r-abbit wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So I guess we can agree that lane splitting is a double standard where the motorcycles get favor. Besides the air-cooled aspect (which may or may not be as relevant today), what are some other reasons why motorcycles should be allowed to pass in such a way that cars are not? Maybe around the SF Bay Area we are the exception to the lane splitting exception because I see countless motorcycles lane split at all speeds o…

Aside from safety reasons (on which I can't comment) there is no reason not to let bikes go faster in between the lines -- car drivers aren't losing anything. Maybe there are some hurt feelings because it feels unfair and perception that they should stand in line like everybody else, but that is unjustified as they don't slow down your kind of traffic (well, maybe marginally). So double standard here is perfectly jus…

well... "no reason not to" is not quite the same as "perfectly justified" but I kind of see your point. By that same logic though, there really isn't any reason not to let other vehicles lane split if it can be done safely.

Re: This Is the Gyro-Stabilized, Two-Wheeled Future of Transportation

#123

Post by arethuza »

jack-r-abbit wrote: post #120
arethuza wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are models with no doors or half doors - apparently some legislation somewhere would require a heated front screen if it had full doors: http://www.expertreviews.co.uk/car-tech/1284439/renault-twiz...

ah... I thought the "half door" was that bar across the opening. It seems that is a third model which would still get me wet. It seem the half door is the lower half (of course.. it wouldn't make sense to be the top half). SO driving that would be like driving with the windows down the whole time. It still makes we wonder how people make use of these when it rains. Maybe the shape of things deflects the water out eno…

Actually, the idea of having a vehicle with a windscreen/windshield in a damp climate without some means of keeping it free of condensation is pretty scary - so that legislation kind of make sense (at least for Northern Europe).

Re: This Is the Gyro-Stabilized, Two-Wheeled Future of Transportation

#124

Post by TylerE »

WiseWeasel wrote: post #117
excuse-me wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not quite so clear cut for a small car. A small common rail diesel engine in a car gets close to 40%, a coal power plant runs at about 45%. Add in transmission losses and charging/battery/electric motor and the diesel g CO2/km is probably better.

Coal is significantly cheaper than diesel, and coal power plants have filtration systems to reduce their emissions; diesel engines not so much.

You should really check out modern diesels. A VW TDI engine has cleaner exhaust than a typical modern gasser. You could hold up a white handkerchief to the tailpipe and it'd stay clean.

Re: This Is the Gyro-Stabilized, Two-Wheeled Future of Transportation

#125

Post by elithrar »

InclinedPlane wrote: post #83

This is a non-starter. This fills the same niche as an electric moped at 6% or less of the cost. And people can drive electric mopeds on city streets legally today . For less than half the price someone could buy a used, low-mileage sedan (such as a Civic, Corolla, or Accent), with a trunk, seating for 5, seatbelts and airbags. And then use the other $8k to pay for gas at $5 a gallon for the next 48,000 miles. Or, th…

These very much remind of a two-wheeled Can-Am[1], which are "trikes" in the vein of a motorcycle. They're also much larger and would never be able to lane-split (legal or not).

[1] http://www.can-am.brp.com/

Re: This Is the Gyro-Stabilized, Two-Wheeled Future of Transportation

#126

Post by jack-r-abbit »

arethuza wrote: post #123
jack-r-abbit wrote: post #120

Earlier quoted context omitted.

ah... I thought the "half door" was that bar across the opening. It seems that is a third model which would still get me wet. It seem the half door is the lower half (of course.. it wouldn't make sense to be the top half). SO driving that would be like driving with the windows down the whole time. It still makes we wonder how people make use of these when it rains. Maybe the shape of things deflects the water out eno…

Actually, the idea of having a vehicle with a windscreen/windshield in a damp climate without some means of keeping it free of condensation is pretty scary - so that legislation kind of make sense (at least for Northern Europe).

oh... don't get me wrong. I understand the usefulness of having a good heater when it is raining. Likewise I understand the horror of having an inefficient heater when it is raining. It was just interesting that there is legislation mandating it. I'll assume that the US has this as well then.

Re: This Is the Gyro-Stabilized, Two-Wheeled Future of Transportation

#127

Post by [deleted] »

Haiperlink wrote: post #16
vannevar wrote: post #4

If they added two more wheels instead of the gyros, they'd get passive stabilization and lower cost. They'd also get more room for a larger battery and cargo or passengers. And since roads and parking lots are already designed for 4-wheel vehicles, the extra width wouldn't be much of a disadvantage.

There is a better solution for that. My neighboor created the Monotracer, also available as electro vehicle. http://www.monotracer.com/ The electronic version also got the XPrice for the most efficient motorvehicle. http://www.progressiveautoxprize.org/teams/xtracer?carId=138

[deleted]

Re: This Is the Gyro-Stabilized, Two-Wheeled Future of Transportation

#128

Post by CognitiveLens »

jakejake wrote: post #33
slavak wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This was what I thought they were talking about when I saw the headline. I assumed this was an amused look back on the good ol' days. I never did understand why anyone ever thought the Segway would revolutionize anything. I don't see the big advantage, and - frankly - you look downright ridiculous riding it. And yes - I did get to ride it. It's kind of cool for the novelty factor, but I fail to see any incredible adv…

One place I've seen them where I thought they really made sense were in large parks where security guards ride around on them, able to cover a lot of ground using the walking paths.

Covering more ground in a way that was more effective at stopping ne'er-do-wells than riding a bicycle? Electric-assisted bicycle if it is hilly?

Segways are not off-road vehicles, nor are they fast or maneuverable enough to be an effective security vehicle.

Re: This Is the Gyro-Stabilized, Two-Wheeled Future of Transportation

#129

Post by ken »

Yxven wrote: post #98
cjensen wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm just as skeptical as you, but... Electric mopeds cannot go on freeways. An electric motorcycle is better for nontrivial distances. On the other hand, an electric moped which cannot travel faster than 20mph also has an advantage: in California it is treated as a bicycle and can travel on bike paths on major bridges. My main complaint: if neither electric motorcycles nor self-balancing motorcycles are currently pop…

Personally, I've always wanted a vehicle with the speed and fuel efficiency approaching a motorcycle and a 5-star crash safety rating. Motorcycles are a death trap, and I refuse to ride one despite their many advantages.

Unfortunately, I think you're imagining a fantasy vehicle: your requirements are pretty much in direct conflict with each other.

The smaller the vehicle, the less it can rely on passive safety (crashing better), and the more it has to rely on its advantages at active safety (avoiding crashing). You can't cheat physics: a tiny personal vehicle is never going to have passive safety as good as a midsize car. Even relatively safe compact cars like the Toyota Yaris don't have 5-star crash ratings, so I don't see how a 2-wheeler ever will.

Motorcycles are dangerous primarily because (a) small fast vehicles tend to attract more than their share of irresponsible people (which, not uncommonly, includes alcohol), and (b) car drivers have trouble seeing tiny vehicles. I don't see how this vehicle proposes to change either of these factors.

Post reply on HN