See The Invention That Just Changed Biking Forever



What is the solution to a greener, more physically-fit planet?  Biking!  Even though forward-thinking cities already use bikes for their transportation, the US has been lagging behind.  Even though biking is fun and practical, there are some drawbacks that may keep people from taking it up.  The most common reason why people don’t bike is the amount of energy needed to do it.

Meet the invention that’s going to change all of that.  Developed by researchers at MIT, this device snaps onto your bike and helps you conserve energy.  And it does it in an ingenuous, remarkable way.

It’s called the Copenhagen Wheel, and it stores the energy that you already use, and saves it for when you need it most.  Hills become flat, and you no longer have to expel loads of energy to get around.  Curious?  Watch the video for more information.  It’s a device so simple, you’ll be amazed at what it accomplishes.  It just might change the cycling world (and our planet) forever.

This amazing story was brought to you by our partners at PosiChange, which provide tools for a greener earth.

  • laura

    what happens when your smart phone dies?

    • craig

      the wheel explodes

    • Barry

      You can get a hub that will charge a cell phone and power a front and rear light.

    • dasdsad

      No vedio instagrm for you

  • johnTnash

    All for the low, low price of …

    • bucshee

      just shy of 700$ (699$ to be exact) 😀

      • bucshee

        and it gets better..shipping to my country (Romania) is 79$

        • Cindy

          Like all technology, I’m sure that price will come down.

  • pierpp

    Why? The whole point of exercising is to give your heart a workout and burn calories…Only in America do they devise a way of “cheating” exercise….unreal….

    • guest

      its supposed to make riding your bike more comfortable so you will use more often for driving to school, university, work or shopping without being exhausted when getting there. And besides that it burns a few calories.

    • Coen

      Are you serious right now? “at MIT together with the city of Copenhagen” Where do you think Copenhagen is? Sure as hell not America. We’re trying to make more people ride bikes so it saves energy and gas. Dont be an idiot.

      • Lcon

        No need to call names. Especially since it doesn’t say anything about Copenhagen except for the name. It was developed at MIT. Which sure as hell in America.

        • richgilberto

          No, it says MIT teamed up with the city of Copenhagen…

          • Roo6

            It seems to that some people are commenting without watching the explanatory video.

          • Heather_Habilatory

            Are you surprised? “I have no idea what this thing is, but let me tell you all the ways it’s terrible!!!”

        • Mark J

          Do a bit of research before scolding people.

          Who are you? the hall monitor? (and I didn’t appreciate your use of the word “hell”… how rude)

          Fucking grow up.

          • Dr Repper

            ‘Hell’ rude, but ‘fucking’ entirely appropriate for a public forum viewed by children. Hmmm… Agreed though; rather silly to comment on videos that one clearly hasn’t watched.

    • Matt

      This invention isn’t for exercise, it’s explicitly for transportation with the added benefit of exercise.

    • much sarcasm

      you’re absolutely right pierpp

    • Pam

      I disagree, it makes it a no excuse alternative to sitting your butt in a car and driving

      • Baz

        Dude your still riding a bike your still pedaling and burning your precious calories, it just makes actual traveling & going up hills a bit easier. goodness you seem to think this makes biking 100% automated when its clearly not.

        • D

          Bottom line, is if it gets people interested in cycling then it’s worth the dollars spent and put someone on the “road” to eventually enjoying what they’re doing and possibly taking the next step in buying on the premise of working out. This idea simply burns clean energy, promotes a healthy alternative and drives interest.

    • martaz

      no, it is NOT the only reason. It is ALSO to stop using fossil fuels. Nobody is forcing you to use it.

    • Considering the video said it was invented and used mostly in Copenhagen DENMARK…… Are you really THAT clueless??

    • Sean Long

      I am surrounded by hills that, at my current weight and level of physical fitness, I absolutely CANNOT ascend on my recumbent trike. Literally, it’s physically impossible …. and if I tried anyway, the way a ‘bent works, I’d almost certainly blow out both of my knees, require surgery to fix them, and then be unable to ride (or even WALK comfortably) for months afterwards.

      An e-assist motor would enable me to get up those hills, to where I could resume providing most or all of the motive power. IOW, it would enable me to ride MORE – further, longer, to more places.

      Pretty much the OPPOSITE of “cheating” exercise, or being “lazy”.

  • Nice idea, don’t see the use case.

    • christopherparker

      I’m the use case. I live 16 miles from town with some very significant hills and a big elevation change. I am not strong enough to make this trip now. I would be if I had one of these.

      • Let me reframe that: I live in a country were almost everybody cycles from the age of 4, and the only people I see who use assistance – petrol or electric – are the old and infirm. I see the use case for this group, and I don’t see the use case for broader adoption outside this group.

        • christopherparker

          I live in a country (USA) where the old (the so-called “baby boomers”) are now becoming a large demographic group (the largest? I’m not sure). And, truth be told, in a country that is mostly overweight and doesn’t exercise, the majority might be considered “infirm” as well. I am in neither of these categories, but I suffer from a third American problem, that of having everything built so far apart from everything else. Most Americans live in the suburbs and this is true; I live in the countryside and it is even more so.

          • I realize that this look like a 1 + 1 = 2 proposal, however as Leon Kok points out above he would gladly put it on his existing bike. For this to really sell you already need a to own bike, I think that the likelihood of you already cycling increases dramatically if you own a bike. I believe that the average American would need to buy a bike to be able to use this wheel, as I doubt that these Americans have bikes in the first place, although I don’t have the figures to back that up.

            Adding the cost of a bike, even a second hand bike, that is comfortable to use for traveling the 16 miles — approx 1-2 hours of cycling — as you propose to do, has a big impact.

            I’m sure I could be wrong, and I hope for the company’s sake there is a flaw in my reasoning, and I don’t think this will take off.

          • Mark J

            Not everybody lives in such a tiny, flat, city (Amsterdam). And most American households have bicycles.I have a fused knee and still ride a footbike. Actually, that wheel on the front of my bike would make it more convenient when I feel like riding the 4-5 mi to work.

          • So I went to look up some numbers, ~33% of Americans own a bicycle, ~10% used a bike 6 or more times in a year, and about 20 million bikes are sold every year. I’m quite pleasantly surprised at these numbers, what didn’t surprise me was that over the age of 15 bikes are used for only 0.6% of all trips. The mean trip being ~3.9 miles. To be clear I’m basing my figures on Pucher and Renne, 2003 as this was the most current data I found.

            I do think there will be an impact from the introduction of this wheel, and it’s sexy, however I still don’t think that it will be broadly adopted without certain criteria being met.

            As for Amsterdam being tiny it’s 136.3 sq miles, compare it to New York’s 321 sq miles it’s about 42% of the size. Or roughly 1.6 times the size of Seattle. And as you say it is flat. 😉

          • Sean Long

            What you have to ralise is that here in the U.S. … most people view bicycles as being for children and young teenagers. As soon as you’re old enough to drive, you’re expected to work towards “upgrading” to a car or a truck. Which accounts for the sudden drop for riders over the age of fifteen (common driving age here is 16).

            Also, outside of urbanised areas, things really do spread out. I live in semi-rural Thompson, Connecticut – literally, the north-eastern corner of Connecticut. Even as out of shape as I am, I could reach that corner in 20-30 minutes on my trike. Well, I could …. except for the foot of snow we’ve gotten this past week. My trike isn’t equipped for snow and ice, not this year.

            So, anyway … the nearest grocery store is in Webster, Massachusetts – about 6km away. The nearest post office is the same distance away – but about 2km away from the grocery store. That’s EACH way, mind. A round trip to both places would be a total of ~14.5km. And would take me an hour of riding, maybe more, just for travelling. Much more time than a car would need, and that too factors in to how infrequently adults use bicycles (etc) to get around.

          • I understand that bikes are viewed for the under 16s in the US, and that at 16 and over you have a car, although I read that that’s been changing recently.

            My believe is that people who cycle will continue to cycle. And people who don’t, won’t. Naturally there is a grey area of people who would like to cycle. And actually doing something is very different than saying or wanting to do something. A solution needs to reduce the pain, and make something easier. From a cycler’s perspective this makes cycling easier, from a driver’s perspective this changes very little as with or without this cycling will still make you tired from exertion, sweaty in the summer, wet in the spring and autumn, and cold in the winter.

            In most of the world that I’ve seen and read about where the population is know for cycling as a means of transportation – especially China, India and Vietnam – most upgrade to a motorized vehicle as soon as they can afford it. They haven’t been going for the cheaper electric, such as the ones made since the 1930s by Gazelle and Phillips, or petrol assisted bicycles that have been around for at least 80 years.

            I have been swayed somewhat by the arguments made here, although I have yet to see something that convinces me that this will take off in ways that I didn’t expect. This could be the next NEST Thermostat, although I doubt it.

        • Leonardo Farage Freitas

          I think this won’t sell well in your country (betting on Netherlands or Belgium). But other countries don’t have the culture of using bike as a mean of transportation, so this invention might help people get off their lazy asses and begin to bike around.

          And also, lessen the amount of sweat before going to work 😛

          • Leon Kok

            I think you see that wrong Leonardo, i live in the Netherlands and you see the so called E-Bike taking it’s place on the streets. I think that if they can make the price acceptable this could sell a lot in Holland. You don’t need to buy a new E-bike for starting at € 1200,00. You only have to replace the wheel in the bike you already have so it becomes an E-bike. I would be very interested to put it in my mountain bike.

          • Leonardo Farage Freitas

            What I tried to say to Daniel is that perhaps in his country (which I guessed was Netherlands or Belgium) it wouldn’t sell well based on what he said. But I agree with you, the most interesting part of this invention is being able to use whatever bike you already have.

          • How many of these lazy people already own a bike?

          • Leonardo Farage Freitas

            Well, perhaps they don’t own one because they know they wouldn’t use it. But with this, perhaps some of these lazy people will give it a try. I guess this is better than they not even trying.

        • richgilberto

          Your city probably has showers and the like at its offices for people who bike to work because it’s much more common there. In the US we just have to hope we don’t smell all day.

    • James Bao

      Use case here: live in San Francisco. Would love to have the power to go over a hill instead of having to ride around it on a commute (when you want to get home as fast as possible). Same case with Seattle.

      • Tanner

        I agree – as a Seattle resident, where commutes can range from a very pleasant coasting down to water level one way and a nightmare of climbing back up that hill the other to riding a route not dissimilar to a sine wave in both directions, this device would be very welcome. Seattle does remarkably well as a bikeable city in regards to infrastructure, but it’s significantly less so in regards to the dramatic changes in elevation.

      • King_Kaufman

        Yeah, I live about five miles from work in the southern part of San Francisco. Going downtown, it’s a pleasant, relatively short ride, slightly downhill most of the way. In the afternoon, heading back home, it’s slightly uphill most of the way AND there’s a stiff headwind. It’s about 45 minutes of slow, miserable, freezing torture, not what I want or need at the end of a long work day. If I had this device, that whole equation would change. I want one—if the price comes down a lot.

    • Sean Long

      Use case: I am a 42 year old, obese man with piss-poor physical fitness.

      Nonetheless, seeking to change my life, I bought a thousand-dollar recumbent tricycle. It’s great, even just a little riding has improved my fitness appreciably.

      However, one big problem: HILLS.

      There’s 20%-grade hills all around the very small valley I live in the middle of. I am not physically capable of ascending those hills in my present condition. Also, unlike an upright cycle, on a ‘bent you can actually blow your knees out (requiring surgery to fix them!) if you underestimate a hill, and end up having to mash the pedals too hard, to keep going.

      An assist motor for ascending hills would be _glorious_ in my situation; it would enable me to ride longer, further, and to more destinations than are currently possible right now.

      • Do you use your gears?

        • Sean Long

          All three of them, yes. And I know those aren’t much, but then, my trike only comes with 8 or less gears. My current gear range is 24-43 (with a 3-speed Sturmey-Archer internal hub); the best this model gets is 24-80 (with the 8-speed version of the same hub), or 20-62 (with the Nexus 8-speed internal).

          I’d _love_ to get that Nexus 8-speed, but it’s a three hundred dollar item, plus paying a local cycle shop to install it (I’m not up to that level of maintenance/repair, yet).

          And really? The plain truth is … I’m honestly just that out of shape. That will improve, yes (I’m even looking at snow tires and other winter-riding gear). But in the meantime, I’d’ve loved to have a few more options for routes and destinations and so forth.

          This device would help immensely with that … well, aside from neeing a full blown license to ride an HPV with an assist motor of ANY kind, either here in Connecticut, or in neighboring Massachusetts. 🙁

  • jbryce

    cool, but it doesn’t really show you how it works. i mean that there’s a bunch of superimposed images but it doesnt explicitly show someone struggling to go up a hill and then the thing kicking in to speed them up.

    • HikaruYami

      That’s because that’s not how useful technologies work. It doesn’t
      “suddenly kick in”. As long as you’re pedalling at a constantish rate,
      it knows to not change its rotational velocity appreciably, which means that it’d already be working as soon as you *started* going up the hill. Showing what you’re asking for would be lying in a way that makes the product look worse than it is.

  • meowmix

    Just wait guys, I bet in a few years they will make a bike that runs fully on a motor so no peddling is even required! Oh wait, that’s a motorcycle…. Laziness prevails!

    • cmiN

      Yeah, but such devices don’t produce CO2 nor consume fuel. Simply they are smart and pluginable.

      • Kevin Combs

        You forgot about the coal plant that in a hundred miles away from you tucking in some little corner burning fuel to produce the electricity need or the nuclear power plant that is leaking radiation into the earth and will cause problems in the future. that is the biggest problem with anything electrical, with these devices, just because you do not see the emissions getting emitted right in front of you dose not mean it is not coming from somewhere else. I do believe they say that when you are not pedaling, your forward momentum is generating the power for the motor which is the best part about this wheel though they should some how make another part for your front wheel to generate the electrical power with minimal drag on your forward motion.

        • bamcintyre

          Oh give it a break… most of the battery power for this device comes from the rider, not the the electrical socket. It’s my energy, so I should just waste it?

          • Eric

            Most of the power assist comes from plugging it in. The recapturing of braking energy could improve the efficiency of an electric bike, but not by a lot.

            Energy is lost in the form of heat whenever it is transformed, stored or transported. That means that when energy is captured from braking, some of it is lost due to friction in the motor/generator, some is lost by the battery where it is transformed into stored energy, and from stored energy back to electrical current, and some is lost as it moves through the wires of the system & motor.

            Besides that, cyclists just don’t brake that much when biking. I adjust my speed and route when I’m biking so that I brake as little as possible.

        • wtfdontshowmyname

          It is charged by riding it, so you don’t need to plug it in. You can if you need it for the begining of your ride though

      • SavaShip

        Humans produce CO2, and consume fuel… just pointing that out.

        • And trees use CO2 and give us O2. Your point?

          • SavaShip

            What do trees have to do with this? I was pointing out that the device needs human power in order to work, and humans produce CO2 and consume fuel, so if the goal is to be carbon neutral, it failed. I’m not saying it’s not an awesome idea, I’m just saying in order for the device to work, CO2 is produced.

          • Because w/o trees, you can’t breathe AT ALL buster. I was being nice, you can go screw you want to get snotty. “Carbon footprint” my tookus. You liberals, that’s all you think about even when it comes to HUMANS breathing, for God’s sake! Really? REALLY? God, no wonder I love trees more than humans, most humans suck. Should have known better than to find commonsense on a site like this. Why don’t we kill off ALL animal life – they fart, nasty CO2 and all that, ya know; all vegetation that shows ANY propensity to decay, releasing it’s carbon; and then clear out every human on the face of this earth BECAUSE WE BREATHE. Oh my God… *shaking my head at your kind’s stupid obsessions* Pathetic…

          • SavaShip

            I think you just completely overreacted to what I typed. Nobody asked me what I thought about CO2, I simply pointed out that CO2 is produced in order for the device to work. In short, you found common sense on this site, then you proceeded to make a whole lot of assumptions based on an innocuous comment. Also… are you an alien? I gathered that you might not be human due to the “your kind’s” comment. Also, did you call me a liberal without even finding out my political viewpoint? I am not taking any political sides in my comment, I simply made a true and basic statement, which is: In order for a Copenhagen Wheel to work, CO2 must be produced in the form of breathing, and energy must be consumed in order for the biological being powering the bicycle to make motion.

          • Sally Strange

            What do trees have to do with this?

            They, not fossil fuels, are the source of the carbon we exhale.

          • SavaShip

            Trees get their carbon from the air. The air gets its carbon from the earth. Volcanoes throw huge amounts of carbon into the air. The more Carbon Dioxide in the air, the better the plants thrive. Sounds like you should support the burning of fuels.

          • Sally Strange

            The more Carbon Dioxide in the air, the better the plants thrive.

            Only up to a certain point. Like Nitrogen, CO2 is an essential plant food, but excessive amounts can inhibit plant growth or even kill them.

        • Sally Strange

          The CO2 humans produce is from the carbon in plant bodies, not fossil fuels, therefore the CO2 we exhale does not constitute a net increase in CO2 in the atmospheric carbon cycle.

          • SavaShip

            So… only fuel CO2 is bad in whatever world you were raised? Exhaled CO2 doesn’t really count in the atmosphere now? I personally don’t even think CO2 affects climate, however I can’t wait to be entertained with nonsense and psuedo-science as you explain your rationale in coming to the conclusion that exhaled CO2 doesn’t count.

          • Sally Strange

            So… only fuel CO2 is bad in whatever world you were raised? Exhaled CO2 doesn’t really count in the atmosphere now?

            First of all, CO2 isn’t inherently bad. It’s only bad if you’re concerned about maintaining the ecosystems that allow us to grow wheat and rice and cattle and whatnot, and have a nice ocean with lots of yummy fish in it.

            Second, the main problem with fossil fuels is the fossil part. The carbon that went into making the oil and gas and coal that we’re burning has not been in the atmosphere for 200 million years. If it hadn’t been locked up underground, climate change wouldn’t be an issue, but then we also wouldn’t have oil and gas and coal to burn.

            I personally don’t even think CO2 affects climate,

            I personally don’t think you exist, but my opinion is irrelevant when it’s contradicted by facts.

            however I can’t wait to be entertained with nonsense and psuedo-science as you explain your rationale in coming to the conclusion that exhaled CO2 doesn’t count.

            Depends on what you’re counting. If you’re counting net gain in atmospheric carbon since the Permian geological era, exhaled CO2 does not count.

          • SavaShip

            See, I knew this was going to be fun. It sounds like you are the leader of your own environmental religion that has been bestowed with absolute knowledge on subjects that our scientists are still debating and researching. You seem to know exactly what the balance of CO2 is supposed to be, and where it all comes from. Volcanoes free millions of tons of carbon that was locked up underground, and we humans take lots of carbon, and remove it from the surface system not putting it back. All our lumber that is used in houses, the carbon we add to steel and metals; These are carbon resources we don’t readily give back to the ecosystem. So you are blessed with the knowledge of knowing exactly what net gains and losses we’ve made in a dynamic system with billions of variables, your faith is strong but misplaced. Your religion has also told you where gasoline comes from, and that it takes hundreds of millions of years to make, even though scientists are discovering that “fossil” fuels are anything but ancient animal matter, and take significantly less time to make than previously thought, changing their estimates from hundreds of millions of years, to just tens of thousands, and they learning more about it all the time. I have unfortunately just shattered your religious views, and now you’ll likely lash out at me again… you were dead on right about one thing, your opinion is completely irrelevant when it’s contradicted by facts.

          • Sally Strange

            See, I knew this was going to be fun.

            I agree. Science is fun. Facing down the prospect of an altered climate, though, not so much.

            It sounds like you are the leader of your own environmental religion that has been bestowed with absolute knowledge on subjects that our scientists are still debating and researching.

            At least we agree that religion is a bad thing. As for me, I’m not a leader. I work in energy efficiency and my degree is in environmental science. This is kind of my thing. I’m reporting to you want the scientists are saying.

            You seem to know exactly what the balance of CO2 is supposed to be, and where it all comes from.

            I have a rough idea, yes. The balance of CO2 should be no more than 350 parts per million. The carbon all comes from the same place, ultimately: exploding stars. But some of the carbon on Earth has been sequestered beneath the ground for 200 million years, which is approximately 198 million years longer than humans have been around. So we evolved adaptations to a low-carbon atmosphere and ecosystem, not a high-carbon one.

            Volcanoes free millions of tons of carbon that was locked up underground,

            That’s true.

            and we humans take lots of carbon, and remove it from the surface system not putting it back.

            I’m not sure what you mean by surface system. If you mean the carbon cycle, that’s inaccurate. We’re only adding carbon to the carbon cycle. We are making attempts to subtract carbon from the carbon cycle, but so far those attempts are negligible in volume compared to the tons of fossil fuels we’re combusting.

            All our lumber that is used in houses, the carbon we add to steel and metals; These are carbon resources we don’t readily give back to the ecosystem.

            They’re still in the ecosystem. You’re in the ecosystem. We’re all in the ecosystem. Okay, except the folks on the international space station.

            So you are blessed with the knowledge of knowing exactly what net gains and losses we’ve made in a dynamic system with billions of variables, your faith is strong but misplaced.

            It’s not a blessing, and faith has nothing to do with it. But I do appreciate your commitment to making religion look bad by using religious terms as insults.

            Your religion has also told you where gasoline comes from, and that it takes hundreds of millions of years to make, even though scientists are discovering that “fossil” fuels are anything but ancient animal matter, and take significantly less time to make than previously thought, changing their estimates from hundreds of millions of years, to just tens of thousands, and they learning more about it all the time.

            See, if this were anything but a cynical lie, whoever told it to you would have presented you with the research and told you to look for him or her at next year’s Nobel ceremonies. And, if it were anything but a cynical lie, they would have told you by what mechanism it’s possible to compress hydrocarbons in tens of thousands instead of tens of millions of years. I’m sorry that someone has been taking advantage of your ignorance like that.

            I have unfortunately just shattered your religious views,

            Religious views are for gullible fools, it’s true!

            and now you’ll likely lash out at me again… you were dead on right about one thing, your opinion is completely irrelevant when it’s contradicted by facts.

            Yup. Let me know when you find some facts.

          • SavaShip

            So wait, hundreds of simultaneous studies at once, and I have to pick one guy to win a nobel prize, even though those hacks only give nobel prizes to people like Al Gore. Al Gore the charlatan who rides around on his Gulfstream IV jets that burns 700 gallons of Kerosene an hour, to get paid $30,000 per speaking engagement so he can tell the lower-middle class not to drive their pickup trucks because they put too much carbon in the atmosphere?

            If you really have facts, you can answer these questions easily… however, if you answer them honestly and correctly, it will call out your previous replies as nothing more than psuedo-science trolling.

            Why isn’t oceanic pressure enough to compress hydrocarbons?

            Why is the carbon amount that you chose from a constantly varying cycle the “correct” amount?

            When we take lumber and preserve it with pressure treatment making it resistant to carbon breakdown by fungus, how does that not constitute at least the temporary removal of air carbon?

          • Sally Strange

            So wait, hundreds of simultaneous studies at once, and I have to pick one guy to win a nobel prize, even though those hacks only give nobel prizes to people like Al Gore. Al Gore the charlatan who rides around on his Gulfstream IV jets that burns 700 gallons of Kerosene an hour, to get paid $30,000 per speaking engagement so he can tell the lower-middle class not to drive their pickup trucks because they put too much carbon in the atmosphere?

            OK, you don’t like the Nobels. That’s cool. I happen to agree that the Nobel Peace prizes are a bunch of BS, but I don’t think the same is true about the scientific prizes, which is what I was referring to. Either way, the point stands: a discovery that geologists have been dramatically wrong about the length of time it takes to create oil, gas, etc., would be spectacularly awesome in the scientific community. Journals would be pushing each other aside to publish this author’s findings, they’d be getting all kinds of awards (not just a Nobel), there’d be news articles galore, etc. I note that you haven’t yet linked to anything regarding this alleged bit of astoundingly groundbreaking science you claim knowledge of. I for one would love to see the research. If it’s true, it really would be a remarkable discovery.

            (Incidentally, Al Gore’s personal integrity or lack thereof has zero bearing on whether the scientific findings he attempted to communicate are true.)

            If you really have facts, you can answer these questions easily… however, if you answer them honestly and correctly, it will call out your previous replies as nothing more than psuedo-science trolling.

            If you say so. I do commend you on your love of science, though. I also detest pseudo-science.

            Why isn’t oceanic pressure enough to compress hydrocarbons?

            I didn’t say it wasn’t.

            Why is the carbon amount that you chose from a constantly varying cycle the “correct” amount?

            Because humans evolved in an environment where atmospheric carbon levels varied within a certain range. Getting outside that range means putting pressure on our ability to grow and harvest food, simply put. The further outside that range, the harder it will be to maintain the biological foundation of our civilization.

            When we take lumber and preserve it with pressure treatment making it resistant to carbon breakdown by fungus, how does that not constitute at least the temporary removal of air carbon?

            Because living trees remove carbon from the atmosphere and convert it to O2. Dead trees do not. Pressure treating it merely delays the release of the carbon in the tree body into the atmosphere. Cutting it down means that there’s less carbon being removed in the first place.

            Any more questions?

          • SavaShip

            Yes, why did you cop out on your answers? You are not being honest. The circle of life for a tree is thus: The tree lives, taking in carbon… the tree dies, where fungus consume the solid carbon and exhale gaseous carbon. Pressure treating lumber, removes the latter portion, or significantly delays it. Dead trees, because of fungus, emit CO2 back to the atmosphere, whereas lumber, does not. Deceptively using rhetoric by stating the carbon is still there is not an honest answer.

            Humans developed in a certain CO2 level, so you concluded that those levels are what earth is supposed to be? That is not sound scientific reasoning… not at all.

            Again, you claimed someone discovering how oil was created would constitute a nobel prize, but you claim to know where it comes from, even though you claim that knowledge would win a nobel prize, even though there is no nobel prize that would cover that discovery. Current geologists mostly agree that crude oil is made from dead algae and plankton, and takes significantly less time to create than previously thought. Even though some deposits are ancient, many are not very old relatively. However no petroleum geologists have won any nobel prizes for any of their work, mainly because nobel has physics, and chemistry but no geology prize, the only geology related prize was given in Chemistry, to a physicist named Willard Frank Libby… so you seem incorrect in your assumption that a prize would be issued for the discovery of the origins of petroleum… just ask your local petroleum geologist, they’ll tell you how it is.

          • Sally Strange

            Yes, why did you cop out on your answers? You are not being honest.

            I didn’t cop out, and I am being honest. Why are you lying?

            The circle of life for a tree is thus: The tree lives, taking in carbon… the tree dies, where fungus consume the solid carbon and exhale gaseous carbon. Pressure treating lumber, removes the latter portion, or significantly delays it. Dead trees, because of fungus, emit CO2 back to the atmosphere, whereas lumber, does not. Deceptively using rhetoric by stating the carbon is still there is not an honest answer.

            That’s pretty much what I said. Living trees fix carbon, dead trees do not. Decaying trees release carbon, pressure treating delays the release of the carbon. This was in answer to your question about why pressure treating lumber isn’t considered “temporary removal of air carbon”. You’ve stopped a tree removing carbon from the atmosphere, and delayed its release of carbon into the atmosphere. That doesn’t fit the bill, unless you meant something very different than what I understood from the phrase “temporary removal of air carbon.”

            Humans developed in a certain CO2 level, so you concluded that those levels are what earth is supposed to be? That is not sound scientific reasoning… not at all.

            It is perfectly sound scientific reasoning. If it really were not sound scientific reasoning, you would be able to explain why it isn’t sound, rather than simply asserting that without evidence.

            Here’s why my reasoning is sound and yours fails: you’re asking the wrong question. The question is not “What greenhouse gas (GHG) levels are ideal for the earth?” The question is, “What GHG levels are ideal for maintaining human civilization with its abundant food production, hot running water, and internets?” Human civilization, not the earth, requires a certain amount of arable land and fresh potable water. Human civilization, not the earth, requires that ocean acidity levels not drop below a certain level so that the hundreds of millions of people who depend on fishing for survival don’t starve. With all our technology, it’s easy to forget that we are biological beings who are completely dependent on the ecology and the species with which we’ve co-evolved (rice, wheat, domesticated animals) for our survival. I don’t think it’s likely that climate change would cause human extinction, but I do think it’s a distinct possibility that we lose our ability to sustain so many people, that we lose a lot of our technology, that more wars, famine, and disease will come about because of the pressure a changing climate will put on our ability to meet our basic needs.

            Again, you claimed someone discovering how oil was created would constitute a nobel prize, but you claim to know where it comes from, even though you claim that knowledge would win a nobel prize, even though there is no nobel prize that would cover that discovery.

            What? I think you totally misunderstood me. I claimed that your version of how oil is formed contradicts the accepted understanding that if it were true, it would constitute a discovery that would revolutionize science. The sort of discovery that is normally recognized by the awarding of a Nobel Prize–or, if you’re going to be nit-picky about it, since there is no Nobel set aside for discoveries related to Earth Science, a Wollaston Medal. Scientists already have discovered how oil is created, and you claimed that you know better than them. You still haven’t linked to your source that says that it takes tens of thousands rather than tens of millions of years to compress hydrocarbons into fossil fuels, by the way. Why are you holding out?

            Current geologists mostly agree that crude oil is made from dead algae and plankton, and takes significantly less time to create than previously thought.

            I don’t believe you. I would like a link to whatever source of information led you to think this is true.

            Even though some deposits are ancient, many are not very old relatively.

            Relative to what? The Cambrian?

            However no petroleum geologists have won any nobel prizes for any of their work, mainly because nobel has physics, and chemistry but no geology prize, the only geology related prize was given in Chemistry, to a physicist named Willard Frank Libby… so you seem incorrect in your assumption that a prize would be issued for the discovery of the origins of petroleum… just ask your local petroleum geologist, they’ll tell you how it is.

            Thanks for the info about the Nobel Prize. My remark about the Nobel was a rhetorical flourish meant to underscore how groundbreaking it would be if your claim about the length of time it takes to transform decaying organic matter into fossil fuels were true, not a literal prediction that the mysterious person who made this discovery (whom you still have not named or linked to their research) would definitely win a Nobel.

            It’s not really relevant to the discussion though. By accepting that scientists are an okay authority to go to on such questions, you’ve doomed yourself to accepting that climate change is real and dangerous to our civilization’s survival (NOT, as I noted, the survival of the earth itself, or life on earth). Even if it does only take, say, 50,000 years instead of 500,000 or 50,000,000, that doesn’t change the chemical properties of CO2 or CH4, the two main greenhouse gases that are altering the chemical balance of the atmosphere right now.

    • mauims

      Check out RUBBEE– itʻs happening to bikes.

    • Bokkie Gerber

      Fully agree!

  • When will the Carbon version be available?

    • dsdsds

      carbon on bike..urgh!…you can buy a

    • Stark060

      It’s an electric motor, which means its components must be made of conductive material (copper).

  • Lembu

    wait and see..china made coming soon as they release this product ><..haha

  • Matt

    This would be extremely great for college campuses. Even though I’m not in college anymore, I could see many more people adopting bikes.

  • Rebamjr

    Oh goody, another feature to keep us from doing as much as possible to stay in shape.

    • Leonardo Farage Freitas

      For some people it would be this, or no bicycle at all. And, you don’t need to use it, you can keep your bike as is

    • richgilberto

      I feel like the people who make comments like yours don’t live in a major city. If I ride my bike to work in the morning in a suit and tie, do I want to be sweating my ass off? Do I want to go up and down the hills for 12 miles each way AND deal with a full day’s work? That’s why I take the bus.

      • Heather_Habilatory

        I don’t live in a major city, and biking here is still terrible. So many hills. Not the kind you can ride up either. Like two-miles-long-crazy grades-with-no-bike-lanes-hills. No. Thank. You.

    • darkNiGHTS

      Yeah, I just love showing up to a business meeting at a coffee shop all sweaty.

    • Sally Strange

      God, you pretentious fuckers are annoying. Is it really that hard to understand that sometimes, people aren’t riding their bikes primarily for exercise, but for transportation–that is, getting from point A to point B? And that when you’re using your bicycle for transportation, not having to work as hard to get from there to here is actually a definitely plus, especially if you don’t have access to showers or locker rooms at your destination? Seriously, what is WRONG with you people?

    • Sean Long

      On the contrary. The biggest challenge I have been facing, upon returning to cycling as a 40-something obese couch potato hoping to change his life?


      I’m up to handling (somewhat brief) 3% inclines with effort but not discomfort. Anythign steeper, or anything over fifty or a hundred feet, and I’m in trouble. The kind of trouble that reduces me to mashing the pedals … which, on a recumbent like my TerraTrike Rover, puts me in real danger of blowing my knees out.

      Which would mean surgery, and _months_ of not riding. Doesn’t sound like a winning proposition to me.

      Whereas, an assist motor? Something that can kick in when the pedalling starts getting too hard? Means I could STAY out there, riding further, riding LONGER. In other words, it would ENABLE me to seek greater and greater degrees of fitness.

      This _particular_ assist motor would not be something I could use, mind. But a device _like_ it, would be absolutely lovely.

  • Sar

    this is from Weeds

    • Andrew England

      Exactly.. I was hoping someone else caught that.

    • JenniferJuniper

      I WAS THINKING THAT TOO!! hahaha

  • Julian Shapiro

    $700 + 13 lbs. = heavier bike and lighter wallet. Have fun fixing a flat.

    • nilobee

      Right. As opposed to spending $1,200 on a carbon fiber wheelset that saves you 850 grams in weight.

    • Sean Long

      My TerraTrike Rover cost $900 base (plus accessories like head/tail lights, etc). IT also weighs 45 pounds.

      Not everyone is obsessed with ultra-cheap.

      Not everyone is obsesses with ultra-light.

  • gimmetoys

    How odd that people see the negative in this invention. It’s just a more balanced way of using your energy, so you can cover longer distances and more challenging terrain, that may otherwise make a bicycle journey unfeasible. Surely this would encourage people to use a bicycle!..

    • Tom

      It’s because it’s taking the work out of cycling. For the average commuter who isn’t a serious cyclist, this is a great invention, but most of the people who are following cycling innovations are people who are serious about cycling, and with that commitment to the sport comes some biases. If I was on a ride with some of my buddies and one of them showed up with this we’d laugh at him the whole way because he isn’t working for it. There’s something absolutely amazing about earning your hills, and this kind of cheats that.

      • Not Dumb

        This isn’t for cycling, it’s for commuting.

        • diana

          Thank you not dumb. I was going to say the same thing. This Tom guy takes himself all to serious.

          • Mark

            And also forgets that its whoevers choice to put one of these devices on. “Laugh at him the whole way because hes not working for it”, I suppose you still use your IBM computer and wait forever for pages to load on your dial-up connection ??

        • breischl

          Not Dumb maybe, but clearly not smart enough to read all the way to the second sentence of Tom’s reply: “For the average commuter who isn’t a serious cyclist, this is a great invention”

        • Lena Haber

          Exactly!! If I’m biking to work, the least sweaty and tired I am when I get there, the better. Cycling for exercise, strength, and endurance is, I’m afraid, more of a weekend thing for most of us.

          • Z-Ro

            And thus, the complexity of human nature. Never ceases to amaze me how people are constantly close minded in the observation and denotation of someone else being on a “single plain”. Kind of like “hipsters” ruling something out because it’s,”trendy”. “I can’t stand that band, they’re so trendy!” Correct me if I’m wrong, isn’t, “not being trendy” a “trend” as well? Takes all kinds. I do however understand, from a motivational stand point why some feel it’s necessary to discount. I find myself doing it all the time to stay motivated. The only reason I would even pay another attention is because there is usually a bit of myself seen in the reflection. I would be at home on the couch if I didn’t like the results of working out. Does that make gathering the gumption any easier? Nope. I may see someone who obviously could have benefited from exercise and say to myself a snide remark in order to reassure. Funny though, some things blow up and everyone wants to try it. The market explodes and leads to innovation and great advances in whatever it may be. The purists knock all the new comers and if not for them, whatever it is they love may never have seen integral evolution that can only be brought on by the attention of the masses. I’m guilty too, funny how we can be so complex, yet simple minded.

        • alf

          didnt Tom just say that?

      • Stark060

        Man you really missed the entire point of this invention/article…

      • martaz

        then don’t use it. Nobody is forcing you too. it’s for those who want it.

        • Paul Kennedy

          I didn’t see a single Lycra clad, meat and two spuds toting, cafe poser amongst the riders. It’s not for fitness (although it promotes it). To suggest that is akin to using a forklift to spot you while bench pressing. LOL. Gonna buy me one 😉

      • The_PainfulTruth

        But what’s a ‘serious cyclist’? I think you are referring to a sports cyclist, which I’ll remind you account for a small minority of cyclists worldwide. Most cyclists are like me and ride a bicycle to get around on and we really don’t care about much else other that will our bicycle work and get me from point a to point b.

      • Confused

        So does the gears, or even the wheel make it to easy for pro cyclists?

      • Gus

        Tom, I run, I run a lot. I look at all of you and your pedalling friends and think, if they had real fitness they would be on their feet. That does not make your desire to ride invalid or worth laughing at. You wanna earn a hill, Run up it. Then we can talk about who has earned it. See its a stupid point of view. You wanna ride, and your probably not a great runner so you don’t do it.

        That is why people use the electric wheel, for the same reasons

        • Shawerma

          Gus, I craw, I craw a lot. I look at all of you and your running friends and think, If they had real fitness they would be on their hands and knees. That does not make your desire to run invalid or worth laughing at. You wanna earn a hill, CRAW up it. Then we can talk about who has earned it. have a stupid point of view as well. You wanna run, then you probably are not a great crawler. That is why I use a skateboard.

          • Shawerma

            I spelled “crawl” without an L…because I don’t even have a tongue…L’s are hard to pronounce without a tongue…but I’m not complaining.

          • shimboy

            Tom, Gus, Shawerma……I shimmy on ma lil’ tummy. If you don’ shimmy up tha hill , bleeding oll ova da road then you’all are pussies.

            Great bike innovation. Getting one.

          • Vegansdon’t Needviagra

            Best response to any subject ever posted to the internet EVER!

            Gus, biased asshole much? a fitness person knocking another fitness person.. You are just fucking bizarre Gus.. Can’t see that forest huh?

          • Bawler

            Shawerma, I slither, I slither a lot. I look at all of you and your crawling friends and think, If they had real fitness they would be on their goddamn bellies trying to use their SPINES to get moving. That does not make your desire to crawl invalid or worth laughing at. You wanna earn a hill, slither up it. Then we can talk about who has earned it. have a stupid point of view as well. You wanna crawl, then you probably are not a great slitherer.

          • sunny


        • Dezmond

          I run and cycle. A lot. And I would rather run up a hill than pedal up one any day of the week.

        • Dean

          I had to give up running when my knee stopped functioning properly; you’re only badass when you wear out your own knee – until then – your just running.

      • rahul

        if you can’t see why this thing was invented — well, you need to pull your head out of your ass.

        • Josephine Harkay

          Gentlemen, please watch your language!

          • handsomened

            Josephine, sadly, there is no such thing as courtesy on the internet. It is virtually impossible to have a reasoned, lively discussion without someone crashing it with their anger, aggression, ridicule and sarcasm

      • Sally Strange

        If I was on a ride with some of my buddies and one of them showed up with this we’d laugh at him the whole way because he isn’t working for it.

        So basically you and your friends are a bunch of assholes and you’re somewhat surprised that not everybody is as big a jerk as you are. Got it.

        • I ride my bike for exercise. This defeats the concept. If I rode a bike as a low cost open air, environmentally benign product, this looks like it would be OK.
          In terms of putting all things into the hub, I feel this would limit the range of the bike for longer distance riders. In addition, the range is small, I often ride more than 30 miles on weekends(often over 100) – but then if I pedal, does that extend the range?
          Then it also seems to be cheaper to have a battery added to a bike with a motor and controller could cost less than $700 – I see add-on kits for a lot less.

          • Sally Strange

            Exactly. And if you were not a gigantic asshole, you would easily process the concept that not everybody rides their bike for the exact same reasons you do.

          • handsomened

            Wow, you are nasty. You must be a riot at parties.

          • Sally Strange

            Wow, you are nasty. You must be a riot at parties.

            Especially when there’s a gigantic douchebag who needs to have his ego pricked, yeah. People find that quite entertaining.

          • handsomened

            As much as I am tempted to join you in your cesspool of name calling, I will resist. But you obviously need help. Go work on yourself.

          • Sally Strange

            As much as I am tempted to join you in your cesspool of name calling, I will resist. But you obviously need help. Go work on yourself.

            I think it’s obvious that I’m quite competent at intellectually eviscerating mental midgets like yourself. Thanks but no thanks for your fake concern. Next time, try the name calling. It’s more fun.

          • handsomened

            Right. I’ve looked at your history of “intellectual evisceration” on this site. Everyone on this forum is a douchebag, asshole, prick, immoral liar, gullible fool, pretentious fucker, idiot, etc. You may be smart but with this much bile in your heart and contempt for anyone who has a different opinion than you, your intellect is obviously more of a burden than an asset. Your need to be right and insult anyone with a different opinion than you renders your opinions worthless as it is pretty much impossible to take you seriously.


          • Sally Strange

            I have contempt for you and your tone trolling. And I have contempt for climate change deniers. And I have contempt for exercise snobs who sneer at people who aren’t as fit as them.

            You’ve failed to demonstrate what the problem with this is. Other than it makes you unhappy, and who are you again? The internet’s self-appointed social policeman or something? I’m crushed, crushed I tell you, that such a pusillanimous pompous windbag doesn’t take me seriously.

          • Jules Evan

            Sally Strange, the problem with this is that you perpetuate the douche-baggery. rather than contribute something solid to the article, nor do you help the values of the person you’re insulting. I’m not saying you’re right or wrong, I’m just giving MY opinion haha the same way you give yours :p

            With intellect like yours, you obviously have the capacity to better the world. Not that it’s yours or anyone’s responsibility, or that you should care to. I’m sure you enjoy having an onslaught of idiots and pompous assholes to combat (notice how I didn’t use quotes) but the internet/world might do better with less. But hey I’m just an optimist!

            ~Cheers 🙂

          • Vegansdon’t Needviagra

            Yeah Jules.. well said 🙂

          • Drue_H

            Sorry, I love Sally, and if I were a lesbian, I’d ask for her number also. It is so tiring to read comments that one knows only comes from ego, as she stated. Those comments add nothing to the discussion. It’s simple one upmanship. At least Sally makes me laugh like hell.

          • big willy

            Its a bike people…feel free to build a bridge and get over it

          • bellaroo

            THANK YOU

          • Arlo

            I would sincerely like to know what you do not have contempt for so that maybe we could share in some form of pleasant togetherness as human beings. Contempt is a lonely feeling.

          • Berto

            I’m not sure why Handsomened is trying to sound like your parent when you are clearly NOT his child. He also fails to see that even though he feels you’re insulting, he’s doing the same thing with just different words.

            Tom was being a total Jerk simply by saying “If I was on a ride with some of my buddies and one of them showed up with this we’d laugh at him the whole way”. You would think with all of Handsomened’s so call wisdom, he would’ve seen that.

            I dig your style Sally Strange, way to be.

          • Bill Short

            Dear Sally, What you see in others, you have in yourself, and the degree it disgusts, or angers you is the degree you exhibit these same traits. However, it becomes like trying to see the forest when so many trees are in the way, and much easier to castigate someone else than to reflect on yourself. At the same time, if you see positives things in others, say you have deep respect for someone like the Dali Lama, Mother Theresa, or does something exceedingly kind, or generous, you would not even be able to recognize those attributes if you didn’t possess them, and the degree you see those positive traits is also the degree of which you emulate them.

          • mike

            truly smart people don’t behave the way you do. i know a lot of incredibly smart people. they use their intelligence wisely, and don’t waste it on the desert air, or speak ill when they know it’s only a fool’s errand. if they don’t have something constructive or nice to say, they don’t say anything. with that; they would have precious little to say to you.

          • emjaysea

            Calling people names hardly counts as “eviscerating”, in fact, it’s cheap and all too easy. I was told when I was a kid that the cheapest way to put yourself up is to put someone else down. I just showed up here and read down from the top, and I don’t see any reason to call not one but two separate guys gigantic assholes and mental midgets. The amount of vitriol you’re spewing goes well beyond the pale.

          • Vegansdon’t Needviagra

            Actually Sally, YOU are the douchebag here. Numerous negative posts with name calling thrown in.. that time of the month?

          • ChrisLoos

            Psst…this invention is not for you.

          • hestia2013

            Exactly Bill. You are not the intended demographic, so you don’t need to buy this and, unless you’re a big hypocrite, you won’t buy it.

          • Sean Long

            I ride for exercise, too.

            But I’m old enough, with bad enough knees, and also FAT enough (together with the much greater weight of my ‘bent trike, compared to a typical d-frame), that I’m pushing as much as twice as much weight around, with less strenggth and endurance.

            So I literally CANNOT even ATTEMPT the hills that surround me. My options for where to go, and how to get there, are SEVERELY limited.

            An e-assist motor would change that (if CT would allow it without getting a full drivers’ license).

            Not everyone has the sameneeds, EVEN if they share the same goal. Keep that in mind.

          • mr_orange

            without knowing exactly where you live (_and maybe you’re on a mountain face_), but if you’re not even attempting now I doubt a fancy gizmo will change that very much. YOU CAN ATTEMPT and you will go slower and you will be a effing champ when you do. Drop the excuses bro, get on da bike!

          • Sean Long

            First off, mr_orange … I HAVE a cycle. Mine is a recumbent tricycle, with a BASE price of $900, and I’ve invested at least that much more into equipment, accessories, and assorted gear (shoes, helmet, etc).

            What you don’t realise, clearly, is that if I were to attempt an incline I’m not physically ready for? I face a very real, significant risk of injuring my knees, requiring surgery and being laid up, unable to walk or ride AT ALL, for weeks, maybe months.

            You see, on a typical upright cycle, the force you can apply to your knees (when pedalling) is limited by gravity and your own weight – a level of force they face with every step you take, and so, that yoru knees can guaranteed take for a long, long time. That’s because you’re not pushing against anything, just applying your feet to the pedal.

            Recumbents, however, work differently. In a recumbent, every time you work the cranks, you push forward on the pedal with your foot … and backward against your seat, with your back and shoulder. Thus, you can _easily_ exceed the level of force your knees (and the connective tissues that hold them together) can handle. You can blow your knees out with EASE, attempting an incline you’re not ready for.

            And I actually HAVE injured my knees, on a 5% or 6% grade. I had trouble walking due to pain for three days, and was too sore to ride at all for another two days. Then played it safe for the rest of that week, just to be sure.

            FWIW, though? There are 20% grades in almost every direction away from where I live. That’s not a trivial climb, even on an upright. And THOSE are the very inclines I’d like to use an assist motor on. Especially THIS kind of motor – the kind that doesn’t entirely take over, just HELPS …. I’d still have to pedal, and WORK, to get up those slopes.

            Just … I wouldn’t have to risk _serious injury_ to do it.

            EDIT: and I guarantee you, between my trike and my own fat ass? I’m probably hauling around TWICE as much weight as you do. My trike weighs 45 pounds “naked”. Add gear, water / gatorade / whatever for hydration, and so on; then add my own 280 pound bulk, plus my clothes and helmet and things.

            So, the grades I’ve mentioned? DOUBLE them, to see what you’d be facing to have the same level of effort expected of you.

          • Jim

            A recumbent trike would have several gears to help with any hill. You can even go slower than a regular bike because you don’t have to worry about staying upright, it’s much easier for you.

          • Sean Long

            Jim … try riding a trike.

            For one, they’re heavier. Even the top-of-the-line, almost RACING model trike sold by TerraTrike – the Sportster SL – which starts at $3999 “stripped”, weighs thirty pounds. Three to six times as much as a comparable d-frame upright.

            For two, gearing solutions on a tadpole recumbent are somewhat more limited. A front derailleur is far, far less practical due to the difficulty of laying proper control runs for shifting. TT’s SL setup can give a gear range of 22″ to 122″, but gain, that’s a four thousand dollar trike.

            MINE is a Rover 3-speed; it weighs between 45 and 50 pounds. It gives me a gear inch range of 24 to 43, with three speeds to choose from. I could, conceivably, upgrade to a Shimano Nexus 8-speed internal hub, giving me a range of 20-62. But that would cost me …. well, the MSRP is $250. Plus whatever a bike shop would charge me for installation (rebuilding the wheel is beyond my abilities, just for starters). Call it a $400 job, maybe $500. To get a low gear only 4 inches different from what I have already. (Mind you, I _want_ one, but there are other priorities ahead of that in line. Snow/ice tires, for example. Big Apple tires from Schwalbe for spring/summer riding on the barely-paved Airline Trail North, for another.)

            And it’s really not about the speed. It’s about the FORCE exerted on the rider’s knees, and how easy it is for an unwary rider to exceed their knees’ tolerance and do themselves potentially-serious injury.

          • Vegansdon’t Needviagra

            Your excessive weight does not increase the strength of your legs, so recumbent or upright. You need to drop all those excuses, start eating plants and get on that bike

          • Sean Long

            Well, the reply that included links to actual articles discussing the very real differences between pedalling an upright and a recumbent didn’t get approced by the moderator.

            Nonetheless … it’s not about the strength in anyone’s legs. ANYone, even a child, of ANY weight … on a recumbent cycle, because the rider’s back is braced against the seat, it is very possible to injure your knees, even quite seriously by applying more force to the connective tissues than they can handle. Not in a single push, mind you, but over the course of several revolutions of the crankset.

            I find it insulting, by the by, that you assume I’m not riding at all – your “get on that bike” comment. I _do_ ride (or rather, I did, before the snow and ice of winter arrived). I certainly did not spend two thousand dollars on a cycle, only to not ride it, ever.

            My complaint is that my choices of WHERE to ride, are very restricted. By hills. That would injure my knees, if I tried ascending them just yet.

          • Vegansdon’t Needviagra

            Forks over Knives is your answer my friend. Those hills will be nothing to you in the future if you just watch that movie

          • Matt

            Wow, just wow. I dont know where to begin with your comments. Without really knowing the person you are responding to, you assume they’re some fat person who doesnt do any exercise. You are ignoring multiple factors here; age of the person, physical condition, weight, caloric intake, body type, metabolism. I guess eating vegetarian means that you instantly lose weight, I guess I’ll go drink 6 liters of sugar based soda per day because technically that would fall within the vegetarian category and means I should just lose weight right?

            What you failed to realize is that many people like to ride bicycles and do long journeys but are not physically fit enough to handle it, and some will never be able because of medical conditions that arent “weight” or “diet” related.

          • Vegansdon’t Needviagra

            It doesn’t defeat the concept. You think that riding suddenly requires no energy? it REDUCES the effort. If you want the same level of exercise, ride faster or ride farther.. seems pretty simple. Maybe you could re read the post and see if you can pick up on the core concepts. If not, you can always have someone who is more intelligent explain it for you

          • Rafa

            Estoy de acuerdo.Los costos mandan.Otro punto interesante será saber que tan seguro es su uso.En los países en desarrollo tener un celular que controle los movimientos de tu bicicleta es peligroso por el transito y ademas por los robos y arrebatamientos.E incluso en países desarrollados tener una aplicación que decida la velocidad y aceleración de un vehículo que conducís me parece muy poco ecológico, y ademas peligroso sin reglamentaciones de tránsito, se favorecen accidentes aún conduciendo con manos libres al atender llamadas.Me imagino que tener el celular conectado a la rueda es una tentación para chatear mientras se maneja con una mano, y más si tomamos en cuenta que la mayoría utiliza el reproductor de música y vídeos de su celular. Cambiando de tema , quisiera será saber porqué los segway no representan competencia para la bicicleta…costos?diversión?ecología?simpleza de la bici? No lo se responder, pero intuyo que la bicicleta llegó para quedarse tal cual.

        • handsomened

          Sally you are harsh and there is no need for your abuse. Tom was making a point. Re read his post and see if your aggression is warranted.

          • Sally Strange

            Sally you are harsh and there is no need for your abuse. Tom was making a point. Re read his post and see if your aggression is warranted.

            I’m feeling pretty aggressive towards you and your paternalistic tone trolling right now.

        • Pop-Up

          Sally, I want a date. Leave your phone #!

          • Sally Strange

            It’s December 18, 2013. I don’t understand why you would need my phone number for that.

          • Pop-Up

            I can’t make it today. How about Friday night?

          • Vegansdon’t Needviagra

            It’s december 18th still……….. and he was joking

          • Teresa Stacy

            so clever, you made me giggle!!

        • Tonyfromteeoh

          This one is nothing but name calling. What was your point again?

        • Redwood

          Sorry but you’ve missed the point completely there – the point was its cheating so you wouldn’t turn up on an organised bike ride with one – because you go on organised bike rides to get fit and beat challenges like going up hills without using a motor… seems like you are very sensitive, have missed the point and overreacted. Perhaps you are an asshole? joking ^^

      • Pat R

        cycling as a sport would want the physical stamina to power the bike, but in this case it would get people who don’t normally bike to do so for getting around. Great for the environment!!

      • Linda Johnson Carraway

        I assume that its use is optional?!

      • L.A.Rmstong

        Besides … don’t real serious cyclist just do drugs to improve their performance????

      • tga999

        I disagree, I doubt it even helps that much on a serious road ride: it’s very unusual on that kind of ride that you’re losing much energy to braking compared to wind and rolling resistance.

      • ron

        my friends and i ride fixies. we sometimes see guys riding bikes with gears. If I was on a ride with some of my buddies and one of them showed up with gears we’d laugh at him the whole way because he isn’t working for it. There’s something absolutely amazing about earning your hills, and gears kind of cheat that.

      • GuyFawkesLives

        That’s incredibly rude for those of us who have issues…..i.e. knees with issues,……this would allow us to get on the bike again.

      • Falkvinge

        Kind of like rifle scopes were looked down on in the beginning by those who had grown up with iron sights, learning to aim the hard way.

        There are always people looking down on people who have found an easier way to do something, and mocking them because they don’t have it as tough. And yet, without such lazy people who insisted on getting the same output for less effort, we’d still be plowing the fields by hand.

      • TinaFea

        “we’d laugh at him the whole way because he isn’t working for it.”

        that must make you feel like a really big and important person. Good for you!

      • GodBox

        So don’t buy one dummy

      • Alfsito

        Like all the people told you this is not meant to be used at the tour, but anyways not at this point of development, but for sure with very efficient motor, batterys and charging system earning hills would be much improved, and it would be still no cheat, as all the power comes from your legs yet. ¿or are gears cheating?

      • Sandra Chung

        No, it isn’t taking the work out of cycling. Did you miss the part about custom settings?

        I had a spinal injury and subsequent surgery which has left my left leg permanently weak. I can’t ride a regular push bike, because I physically CAN’T push down on the left pedal enough to keep bike going up any sort of incline above 5 degrees. So, there is no ‘earning hills’ for me.

        And your comment about it being a cheat: do you drive a car? Ride a bus? Take a train? Get on a plane? Ride in a boat? Wouldn’t that make YOU a cheat, by your own logic. Get a grip, ok? This is for commuting. And how so nice of you and your friends laughing at your other friend. You underwhelm me with your camaraderie.

      • Just Sayin’

        I see where you are coming from, Tom. Looking on the bright side, this can be turned on and turned off. I really wish I was in as good shape as I used to be. I am not. I admire your zest for great cycling. My cousin and her husband devote good, quality time to cycling. I know this takes away from the full benefit of real cycling. Looking on the bright side again, it would hopefully get more people outside cycling instead of driving the car. That would be better for the environment. Just looking on both sides of the coin.

      • casprd

        As a “serious cyclist” who has been riding and racing for 20+ years, I love this invention. You’ve lost the sheer joy of riding. It isn’t about who climbed the hill fastest or put out the most watts or anything like that. It’s about being on the open road with the wind in your hair and the sun on your face. Not every person who is serious about cycling wants to race or ride ultra endurance events. The old guy who likes spinning around the lake on his clunker is just as serious about his love of cycling as you are. Sad to say but you’re much less the “serious cyclist” as you are the cycling snob.

        • Vegansdon’t Needviagra

          Beautifully said,…..

      • kim walker

        riding a bicycle is not a sport.

        • Really???

          Google Redbull Rampage and tell me it is not a sport.

          Granted, Redbull rampage is not the kind of cycling that would use a Copenhagen wheel

      • Neil

        The only serious cyclists are those riding fixed wheel “bone-shakers” … none of your sissy gears, brakes, or safety features. And those Victorian charioteers laughed at such silly inventions as chain-driven gears, equal-sized wheels, rubber tires, and brakes as “frivolous.” Still, I suspect that the definition of “serious cycling” has developed along with the technology.

      • Peter Ped Helcmanovsky

        I’m afraid that while I get and support your point, you are doing it completely wrong. If I was on a run with some of my buddies, and one of them showed up with a bike, we’d laugh at him whole way because he isn’t working for it. There’s something absolutely amazing about earning your hills, especially if you manage to run whole way and not to walk just for a little bit, and these bikes kind of cheats that.

      • Really???

        Nothing about this device stops you from pedaling as hard as you like. When you go out with your buddies, do you where spandex to cut down wind resistance? Use Carbon fiber to make your bike lighter? Have clipless pedals to make yourself more efficient?

        And do you ride less hard just because you’ve given yourself these advantages?

        I agree, I would draw the line at racing… this is not for competition. But if you want to go faster and see more, why not?

        • Really???

          wear*… whoops.

      • Mike M.

        Just how does that cheat? It’s not like you are putting a motor on it. You are the one pedaling, transferring the power no matter what. It’s not like you harvest the power from the sun or anything. It just evens things out. If you can explain how you are “cheating”, let me know, I’ll contact Newton and tell him he’s wrong.

      • dbucks

        I’m a touch confused by this argument. I see “bike for exercise” folks spending thousands of dollars on more efficient bikes. If they just cared about the exercise, wouldn’t the walmart cheapie do just fine?… I mean, it’s heavy and inefficient and all that – definitely providing plenty of opportunity for exercise! Is this some extra cheat in a separate category from carbon fiber and toe clips?

      • Ash

        No, Tom, that’s not right. The cycling scene won’t suffer at all, they can either not use it (which would be kinda dumb) or adapt by doing newer routes, longer, harder routes that will basically take out everything out of the cyclist.

        This stores energy produced by yourself, it’s not like riding an electric bike at all, it will only chance cyclism as we know it, but that’s not inherently bad, all sports change from time to time, we must be open minded.

      • Just Rayne

        okaaaay soooo… dont buy one then??? Not everyone who rides a bike is an extreme cyclist. if its not your thing, then its as simple as you not buying one. but for people who live/commute downtown and would rather save gas and the hassle of parking downtown and driving, this could be a good thing for them. and just because its not as beneficial to a workout as pedaling without one, if more people are getting on bikes because of it than normal, they will still see some benefit, and the planet will as well. i dont see this as a bad thing in any way. its not being forced onto every bike in existence. its an option for people who may want it.

    • patrickv

      I find it fantastic. For example, not everyone wants to be all sweaty after going through some crazy hills like San Francisco, but would like to commute to work without using a heavy vehicle.
      And isn’t that a double standard anyway? I’m sure that these same people who claim to be these fantastic purists also like carbon fiber bikes… And don’t they take some of the effort off compared to heavier bikes?

    • Kwijibo

      I am just a commuter type rider and prefer to get full synthetic drugs from Armstrong Inc. and blood transfusions each morning before my commute to work. I don’t think this is going to help me.

  • 186272sec .

    A computer controlled flywheel. Nothing new. Re imagining of the perpetual motion machine.

    • richgilberto

      But it’s a hub motor…

    • Except where it’s not… as the explanatory video points out – it has a motor.

    • rahul

      somehow i doubt your best efforts could even approach something this functional.

  • TP

    Can the wheel be plugged to fuel up? If not, all the energy it stores is energy you’ve put in it, by pushing extra hard to move a heavy wheel instead of a light one. While the extra kick might be appreciated for hills, it does mean that you are working more all the rest of the time… so it’s more like you’re now in a slight uphill,instead of flat, with some hils. Some might prefer it, but at the end of the day, I suspect you work more dragging that weight around than you would have with a lighter bike.

    • James Bao

      My guess it the extra energy comes from storing the wasted energy from braking, much like the Prius’s Hybrid tech. Essentially, every time you go down hill or brake at a stop, you store energy that can later power assist you up a hill.

  • noel

    I use similar bike for two years and with hills it help’s in a way nothing else does. bike becomes my first choice transpotation in the city because of electricity which help’s me when needed. It’s one of most helpful thing’s I ever buy. I recomand it not for recreational purpose but for everyday use. World is flat for me 🙂 …everything seems closer and “in reachable sight” in terms of distance AND time needed.

    • Mazhar Syed

      hi noel what is the brand name and model of the white bike shown in the video with the upright handle bar? Pls advice. Thanks, Mazhar

  • Leon kok

    Only 25kmh topspeed, only 50km distance,No disc brakes. Hmmm a lot of less good thingies. Good is that you just replace the back wheel in your owne bike,

    • You don’t want friction brakes when you’re using a regenerative system like this – it detracts from any energy capture that it can do. I see the demo bike still has friction brakes on the rim. I *suspect* that’s for emergencies or final stopping and holding power.

  • Polina Grinbaum

    The negative claims about “laziness” are really missing the point here. I live in San Francisco and I bike for two very distinct reasons commuting and recreation. Recreation is where I want to earn those damn hills. I have a light carbon bike and I LOVE TO talk about gear. I regularly do rides of 50 plus miles in the season. But the issues of recreational riders have largely been solved. Commuting has a whole different set of issues.

    We have a semi-reliable transit system but still if you don’t live super closely to major arteries – and many of us don’t – it can be 30 minutes between buses. A bike is a perfect way to get around those issues. i live on top of a steep hill, there are hills between me and most places. We are talking about a 7%-14% grade for 1/2 a mile to 2 miles. Also, wind is major issue in some parts of san francisco – 15-30 miles hour winds are common. This isn’t laziness. This is practicality. This basically means that i have to bring a change of clothes and/or wear workout clothes so i don’t get to the top of a hill and then freeze because my clothes are sweaty. Also this makes it difficult to cart stuff with me. And lets face it, getting to work 10 minutes early so you can towel off and change, or take a shower isnt’ always practical. So stop with the laziness comments.

    biking is practical, it has a much lower barrier to entry than a motorcycle. which requires a license and classes and a lot more money and gear. Plus it’s just plain scarier for a lot of people.

    In SF we are trying to make our city in the top of bike friendly cities. There are many barriers we have to overcome to reach that goal. a lot of those include road infrastructure which is being addressed very actively right now. But two barriers are wind and hills for a lot of people. it’s very easy to ride from the mission to downtown we got that licked! It’s getting to and from neighborhoods like mine- eureka valley that can be problematic.

    • Kitten_Pile

      I’m still skeptical this will work on Hyde Street.

    • Bob Wickberg

      I think they’re REALLY missing the point. This is simple physics. If the only energy that powers the wheel is energy that the rider puts into it, the rider isn’t doing less work using the wheel than if s/he wasn’t using it. There’s no free lunch here. You’re getting just as much of a workout with it as without it.

      • mdoodle

        It is true that the only energy powering the wheel is the rider’s pedaling, but that doesn’t mean that the the rider is using the same amount of energy as if they weren’t using it- that is the whole point of the wheel! Normally when you break, you lose all of the momentum you have built up through pedaling. In order to get moving again, you must use more energy to get back to the same speed as before. The back wheel is designed to minimize the amount of energy you will need when you start back up by essentially holding on to the energy you normally lose by breaking. So infact, while you will still have to put in energy to ride the bike, it will be less so if using the back wheel attachment.

        • Energyman

          So what you’re saying is that the device _creates_ energy that wouldn’t otherwise be there? If this is the case, why not installing one to _both_ wheels and start selling the excess power to the network? Hell, I’d by their stock shares anytime!

          • Jade

            No, that’s not what they’re saying.

            When you break the forward momentum of the bike is siphoned away via friction by the road and the breaks.

            The motor, essentially, stores energy gathered from your pedaling before you break.

            That way when you stop the bike completely there is still energy (electricity I assume) stored in the motor. When you start to pedal again that energy is released and helps to turn the wheel so that you are not using as much energy to get the bike up to speed. I assume it then begins to store up energy from the pedaling again for the next time you break/start again.

            Accelerating is much more difficult than keeping a steady velocity, and when you go from stopping to starting up again that is acceleration. That’s why it can sometimes be harder to start pedaling a bike than to keep going.

      • Josephine Harkay

        You hit the nail on the head! I remember my high-school physics: energy cannot be gained nor can it be lost; it can be transformed or will go somewhere else. The ad should rather say: slightly stronger pedaling on a flat surface will “store up” energy, not “conserve” it, which then can be released when you go uphill.

        • Tim

          Not quite. The device harvests and stores energy which is
          normally transferred elsewhere. When you slow down, energy is
          recovered. When you go down hills, energy is recovered. The rider
          isn’t the *only* energy input on the bike, gravity does its bit too.

          • Josephine Harkay

            Correct. The biker makes use of gravity which is a free source of energy; I haven’t thought of that. – Now if they only could make use of the huge source of free energy created by the seas’ ebb and tide.

      • breischl

        When you brake some of the energy you put into pedaling is dissipated as heat. The wheel instead recaptures some of that energy – that’s the “regenerative braking” they mention. So it’s using some energy that the rider would’ve otherwise lost. It’s not a free lunch in the thermodynamic sense, but compared to using regular brakes it is a free lunch.

        Battery powered cars and hybrids use the exact same method to extend their battery life.

    • Jackie Lannin

      Polina- I lived in SF for many years- had kids on the back of my bike- sometimes the hills were just brutal to go up.

    • JG

      Thank you

  • ganjibus

    Bikes are already very efficient machines at it is, especially those with multiple gears.
    I’m sure some will find this a godsend, I think it’s for dweeds.

  • Name

    expending energy is fine…but i don’t like to get wet from the deluge of rain we have where i live. perhaps they can invent a bike with a top, or would that be a smart car?

    • Sean Long

      Google “velomobile” … 🙂

  • piapiapia

    So, you need to own an iPhone for this? And NO to “carrying your kids” in that fashion on a bike pls!

    • No, no you don’t. Their FAQ clearly says “The Wheel will work without a smartphone”

  • teat

    the copenhagen wheel? like the one from the show Weeds?

  • danielfoo

    everyone’s a fucking critic. that’s my criticism for today! playing my part~

  • DarioFe

    The weal itself can be a really useful device, but the smartest thing is the app. Facebook addicted will buy it for sure, even if there are no hills on their way.

  • Vivek

    Stored energy in wheel will give me unnecessary push and trouble more in few situations when I really would like to slow down. Some more energy will also be consumed in pulling that battery load. And see, The battery pack should pay me actually for pulling it.

    • richgilberto

      It senses when you stop pedaling so it wouldn’t push you. If it sees you’re trying to pedal and are getting resistance, it lessens the resistance.

  • brunostrange

    Very cool creation.

    One quick note. The article reads: …”The most common reason why people don’t bike is the amount of energy needed to do it.”

    In the US, the most common reason people don’t bike is that most cities don’t have the infrastructure for it. Along with innovations such as this wheel, concerted efforts for bike infrastructure would make the US a much bike friendlier place.

  • Thom Sullivan

    Why aren’t any people in this video wearing helmets?

    • erik smit

      Because commuters never wear helmets?

    • Sally Strange

      Because in Denmark, Holland, and other countries, traffic patterns make it safer for cyclists, to the point where helmets are unnecessary. Bicycle/automobile crash rates there are much lower than in the USA, because of different urban planning strategies used in the USA as compared to Europe.

      • mike

        only a naive fool would ever suggest that a helmet is unnecessary when biking, regardless of how the situation is engineered. significant velocity is not a requirement for increased risk of traumatic brain injury or death. what a sophomoric comment.

      • Soren Lester

        Sally, a lot of people in Denmark, including myself, wear helmets.

    • the futurenow

      They could also be wearing the “invisible helmet”…the one that looks like a scarf

  • PnP Light

    Is anybody knows what the battery is made of?
    and if it is recyclable in a very clean and safe way for the planet?

  • purist

    Gears, pneumatic tires, lightweight frames were all innovations that nobody thinks are bad ideas. Why not create a single seat unicycle that rolls on an iron clad Wagon wheel with no brakes. Now, that would be one for the purists. I think I will invent that….

  • madmatt

    How does it work when its raining or when it gets cold out!

  • Hannah Mac

    Such a cool invention! Bring them to NZ! More people should commute by bike.

  • Harley Davidson


  • hawkchev

    I am not worried about “saving” the planet as fossil fuels are not harming the planet, but this is a cool invention. I am a new biker and like it for the exercise….but for commuters, they can save money and get exercise at the same time. I am amazed at what people think of to invent and market. I hope they market it properly. I love the fact that it’s a product that could be useful for many and create jobs for our poor Obama economy. Good Luck Copenhagen Wheel.

    • rahul

      lol’ing at this.

    • Sally Strange

      fossil fuels are not harming the planet

      Technically, I suppose that’s true. Technically, fossil fuels are just altering the chemical balance of the atmosphere. It’s the altered chemical balance of the atmosphere that is doing damage to the ecosystems that provide humans with our basic necessities.

      • hawkchev

        Sally…can you provide me with the evidence that shows that fossil fuels are “altering the chemical balance” of the atmosphere? And if so, also provide the evidence that it is actually doing damage to the ecosystem. I would consider changing my position with evidence. The IPCC through the University of East Anglia already showed they had to doctor the climate data for the UN to make the temps look warmer. Global warming alarmists lost all their credibility that day.

        • Sally Strange

          1. The carbon in the fossil fuels we’re currently burning has not been in the atmosphere for about 200 million year.

          2. Now it’s in the atmosphere. Tons and tons and tons and tons of it.

          If you were sincere about changing your mind based on evidence you’d have already done it.

          • hawkchev

            Thanks for the reply, Sally.
            1. God created the world only around 6000+ years ago…he created the fossil fuels for our use.
            2. If in fact there is “tons and tons” of it in the atmosphere, show me the proof that it’s harming or warming the planet. With the earth being abut 6000 years old, we have verifiable climate data for about 150 years. There is no way you can extend that data with any accuracy at all.
            I am not afraid of scientific, provable evidence that shows “yep, this fossil fuel use is shortening the life of this planet”. I am afraid there is no “proof”. There is plenty of scientific “consensus”, but consensus is not science. Plus, there are many scientist that believe other than you. Until someone can find documented proof that it’s harmful, we need to proceed with caution on spending at the level that the alarmists want to spend.
            My point about emails from East Anglia was that alarmists had to lie to promote their agenda…which makes their agenda MORE suspect.
            Also, neither of us can prove scientifically when or how the earth was created. However, the Genesis account of creation makes the most sense as you look at fossil evidence all over the world.

          • Sally Strange

            1. God created the world only around 6000+ years ago…he created the fossil fuels for our use.

            Ah. I see. You are either a hideously immoral liar, or a gullible fool.


  • cycleclone

    Can I put it on my stationary bike and take a nap? LOL

  • Hime62

    Love it! but at that price I don’t think so. When the price of attachments exceed the cost of most bikes then it’s just pure luxury. I think if they could find a way to manufacture it at a more affordable cost it would be everywhere.

  • Murray Smith

    The device is actually capturing and storing energy that would otherwise be wasted, and redistributing it when needed. It’s a net energy gain. The same technology may have application to motor vehicles and industry.

  • Douglas Nolan

    A great step forward, nobody said you have to have it but if it encourages. People to get outside and explore or take the bike to the corner store rather than the car all the better, think how beneficial it would be for kids to keep up with their parents. Well done.

  • alex

    Why do they keep referring to biking? It’s called cycling. Why is it connected to a phone, that’s pointless and restrictive. Why is it not regenative as that’s where current technology is. And why is it red? It says in the video it’s contained in RED casing. Why red? I really want one as it’s cased in red even though it’s stupidly connected to my phone.

    • Read the FAQ – it doesn’t need a phone. Research your other questions

  • Rachael Elizabeth Burrows Brow

    I live in a very hilly place so will be magical to go further and faster on my own steam. I think lazy people will want to try and might get them out and about

  • Jac.

    Wow! they’ve re- invented the wheel, I want one,be great for the old Knees. It’s fucking Snowing in Cairo on the Pryamids, but don’t tell Aust.current P.M.Abbott,cause that ‘s yet another Extreme Weather event, and He just ” can’t handle the Truth!”

  • Cameron

    This would be better if It charged my smart phone

  • Mike

    Interesting. But I think the biggest drawback to getting people on bikes in the U.S. is the fear that someone is going to run them over (distracted driving, indifference to safety, etc.). The second is the distances we cover here in the central U.S…. we are just so spread out. However, this could help make commuting in some areas more palatable.

    • Sean Long

      Not an unreasonable fear. I’ve actually been run off the road once, just this year.

  • optomisty

    one other reason folks don’t bike more is because the roads are too dangerous for bikers!

  • optomisty

    Since this is run by your cell ph, it will be used by the feds to keep track of where you go. another thing>>> what happens if the motor kick in and won’t let you break and stop when you need to?

    • If you read the FAQ and do some basic research you’ll find that it can operate without a smartphone or phone of any kind.

  • Yago

    This idea would it be amazing for Wheelchair Users. BIG HELP better that the rechargeable ones that are very expensive and heavy.

  • Lehmann108

    I would never ride with this weight on my bike! Come to a hill, stand on those cranks!

    • Sean Long

      Recumbent rider, instead? “Mash the pedals and blow out your knees. What the hell, it’s only painful surgery!”

  • Edw

    I thin it’s great to hep climbing hills. I don’t get the interactive smartphone part though.

    • W Dawes

      Drone tracking

  • Kxevin

    As a racing cyclist of more than 30 years who still competes, this thing is brilliant. It isn’t FOR the fitness cyclist, or cycling snob. It’s for human beings who want to ride bikes, and make riding those bikes a practical part of their daily lives. I have learned over the years that not everyone wants to huff, puff and sweat to earn their pace. And that includes me. Racing at 40 mph is one thing, but sometimes you just want to ride your bike somewhere. And on those days, or if someone is a civilian, folks just want a nice, easy pedal.

    If you are a casual rider, commuter, utility rider or any other cyclist that cares not a whit for lycra, power meters or anything carbon, this is a bit of brilliance, that expands the reach of bicycles. That is something that all cyclists can get behind.

    • thegreyfox

      well said

    • shayneo

      Word. I’ve been using an electrical bike for ages now, because its useful and practical when I’m not feeling energetic and just want to get to work. I’ve had a number of cyclists give me grief for it, “Why ride a bike if your going to turn on a motor when going up a hill?” sort of stuff. Well…. because I dont always have the energy to spend a half hour going up a steep hill. I dont always have the time to do it. I want assisted transport that won’t stink up the air with CO2, so many reasons. And if it doesn’t meet the approval of ultra-competitive jocks, thats OK, I tend not to enjoy their company anyway.

    • Sean Long

      It’s also for fat old guys trying to get BACK into shape (or some semblance of it), who need help getting over the steeper hills mid-ride. Like me; I can handle 2% and 3% slopes, but at 4% I start to have problems, and at 5% or more I’m in danger of blowing out my knees.

      An e-assist would be beautiful for me (if there weren’t that pesky licensing requirement here in CT); it would open up so many more possibilities for destinations, routes, and so forth.

  • akcatlyn

    Oh my.–It’s a great invention–does there always have to be a pissing contest!

  • Eyeshield

    Reminds me of the rickshaws in Bangladesh. It doesn’t have a fancy German name, tho. Plus, these days you can attach wireless connectivity to any idea. The bloatware doesn’t impress me. That said, if they have a much cheaper version with just the battery and generator, I’ll definitely consider one. That’s very convenient.

  • Keith McNab

    Seems perfect for hilly Hong Kong. But does it work without the smartphone; I don’t have one.

  • Jean Boyd

    What will be next??????

  • Teitia

    So how much are they and where can you purchase a Copenhagen Wheel?

  • niico100

    Totally pointless. Like e-bikes, it’s just for fat lazy people who don’t like a little exercise.

    The problem with the bicycle is it’s virtually perfect.

    • rahul

      you’ve completely missed the point.

      • niico100

        Oh enlighten me. I have NEVER thought ‘oh I’m so tired, I wish I could go 20% further’. Is that the point? Interesting tech, but a problem looking for a solution – it is literally pointless.

        • Sally Strange

          I have NEVER thought ‘oh I’m so tired, I wish I could go 20% further’. Is that the point?

          Obviously, the point is that nobody ever thinks things that you don’t think. Everyone is exactly like you. Everyone has the exact same goals and interests as you. And if they don’t, it’s because there’s something wrong with them.

          • niico100

            No, it’s just a stupid idea with zero application. All that expense and complexity for what? Getting 20% less exercise.

            Solution looking for a problem.

          • Sally Strange

            No, it’s just a stupid idea with zero application. All that expense and complexity for what? Getting 20% less exercise.


            Not everybody’s primary goal in bike riding is to get exercise. That was the point, which you are apparently too effing stupid to process. I ride my bike for exercise, sometimes. Other times, I ride it to get from point A to point B. Sometimes, point B is a business meeting or the theater. In that case, 20% less energy used to get there is a definite bonus for me.

            Clear now, idiot?

          • niico100

            Your anger proves you know I’m correct, really you should learn how to argue without ad-hominum attacks and let your argument do the talking. This is what I do.

            The difference this makes will be totally negligible. Not only will you barely notice it, it is yet another thing to go wrong on your bike, costs you money, will be a target for thieves, adds weight and complexity to a bike – which is a wonderfully simple thing, complicates maintenance – it is just a total non starter.

            It sounds like you’d be better off with an e-bike or scooter for getting from point A-B if you’re not fit enough to cycle. If you are, this just isn’t worth it for the many points I have listed.

            However if you want to waste your money, go ahead.

          • Sally Strange

            Just a quick note to say that [Argument + insult] =/= ad hominem.

            Otherwise, you’ve pretty much admitted I was right: your main problem was in lacking the imagination necessary to envision a world full of people whose goals, needs, and preferences are not identical to yours.

            P.S. This is an insult. In addition to the factual argument above. See how that works? I’m not saying you’re wrong BECAUSE you’re an asshole. I’m saying you’re wrong. AND, also, you’re an asshole.

          • niico100

            Clearly you don’t understand my simple arguments or what ad hominem means.

            Indeed you have attacked me ad hominem again – therefore showing the lack of any cogent argument.

            Advice – try and see the bigger picture, try and control your emotions.

            An expensive device, that is a target for thieves, that makes maintenance much harder, that adds weight and costs you money to buy – all for a tiny reduction in energy used has no place anywhere.

            Devices that would make sense – a 100% electric bike (e-bike) or scooter. This is the worst of all worlds, you still sweat but have the complexity.

            This will sell to a few curious people only.

            You have refuted none of my clear points, which are all valid.

            See how I have risen above your petty insults. Some people just continue to fail throughout life.

            I am signing off now as I have to get back to the beach I’m sitting working at. I will not respond to any more of your silly arguments, mainly because you have none of any interest to a thinking person.

            Good luck.

          • niico100

            Your anger proves you know I’m correct, really you should learn how to argue without ad-hominum attacks and let your argument do the talking. This is what I do.

            The difference this makes will be totally negligible. Not only will you barely notice it, it is yet another thing to go wrong on your bike, costs you money, will be a target for thieves, adds complexity to a bike – which is wonderfully simple, complicates maintenance – it is just a total non starter.

            It sounds like you’d be better off with an e-bike or scooter for getting from point A-B if you’re not fit enough to cycle. If you are, this just isn’t worth it for the many points I have listed.

            However if you want to waste your money, go ahead.

    • Sally Strange

      Like e-bikes, it’s just for fat lazy people who don’t like a little exercise.

      You are a bad person and you should feel bad about yourself.

    • lifevicarious

      Yeah, because thin fit people like showing up for their suit and tie jobs sweaty.

      • niico100

        If you don’t like turning up to your job sweaty, perhaps you should cycle slower – or get an e-bike or scooter or walk.

        The difference this makes will be totally negligible. Not only will you barely notice it, it is yet another thing to go wrong on your bike, costs you money, will be a target for thieves, adds weight and complexity to a bike – which is wonderfully simple, complicates maintenance – it is just a total non starter.

        • lifevicarious

          Cycling slower takes more time obviously, something people either don’t have or aren’t willing to give up. Maybe people don’t want an e-bike, maybe they want to use the bike they already have. And maybe they live too far to reasonably walk.

          20% is far from negligible. 20% is huge on a bike. Drafting reportedly saves you 30% when in the right position. And if you’ve ever drafted, you realize how huge of a difference that is. People train for years and years and spend thousands of dollars to get far smaller gains then 20%.

          Yes, it is something that could go wrong on your bike. But it’s not like it makes your bike inoperable if it doesn’t work. You just would have a little added weight and no 20% power gain. Everything that has a monetary cost is a target for thieves. As are the existing multi thousand dollar sets of wheels many have now.

          It may be a non starter to you but your continual arguments against this are asinine at best. You clearly have some axe to grind. If you don’t like a product, don’t buy it. Rallying against something no one is making you buy is childish and makes you look like a total arse.

    • Sean Long

      <— 280 pounds. Has a recumbent tricycle, bought SPECIFICALLY for exercise and weight loss. USED to be 350 pounds.

      So yes, I'm fat. But lazy? HELL NO. Tell you what … your d-frame is probably, oh, ten pounds? Likely less, but we'll go with 10# for bike-and-equipment. And you, you're probably no more than 180# yourself, yes? So, you, bike, and fudge factor … 200#.

      My recumbent trike starts at 45#, "naked". Equipment and gear pushes that up by quite a bit (hardshell topcase on the cargo rack, for example). Then, _I_ weigh 280#. So while you're hauling 200# of you-and-bike around, I've got around 340#, maybe 350# to move. Nearly TWICE as much as you do.

      Second point, since my ride is a three-wheeler, I've got 50% more rolling resistance to account for than you do.

      Next, my trike is only three-speed; I didn't have the money to afford the 8-speed version. Recumbent Trikes don't play well with front derailleur setups either, so the gearing ratio is strictly limited. Which means …? I am far less able than you are to shift down to a lower gear, in order to handle a slope.

      So, yeah. I'm working somewhere close to THREE TIMES as hard as you do, to go up the same hill. And you think someone like me would want an e-assist motor, because we're LAZY?

      Buddy, we're LESS lazy than you, because even without the damned motor, we're out there TRYING to climb those hills.

      (I'd also like to point out: on your d-frame, your ability to apply pressure to your knees is limited by gravity. On my recumbent, my ability is NOT limited. Blowing out your own knees by mashing the pedals too hard is a very _real_ danger for us 'bent riders. Which only makes an assist motor even MORE attractive.)

      • niico100

        by the way dude – best way to lose weight it via diet, not via exercise. You need a lot of exercise to burn off a very small amount of food.

        • Sally Strange

          Fuck off, douchebag. Are you his doctor? No? Then STFU.

        • Sean Long

          Actually, the truly best way to lose weight is BOTH. Which I am doing – but I will not diet so harshly as to DEPRIVE myself. I’ve tried that in the past, and have always failed, and broken that diet.

          So now, if I’m hungry? I eat. If I have a craving for something sweet? I have something sweet. On the other hand, I try to keep portion sizes down – If I’m having a steak, I’ll go for a 7oz or 9oz portion, instead of the 14oz+ that I’d’ve done in the past. I’ll have three to five small chocolates (like Hershey’s kisses), where I might have had twenty before. I’ve cut my soda/pop intake drastically (it was at 2L per day – now I mostly drink water)

          Moderation in all things, INCLUDING moderation itself.

          • niico100

            As long as weight continues to go down fine.

          • Sean Long

            I’d like to lose more, yes.

            But I won’t cry, if I can’t. If I get better cardiovascular health, but stay this weight … I’ll still have profited from getting back into cycling. 🙂

        • mike

          this is one of the dumber things i’ve heard today. thanks!

  • Angry Heathen

    wait, some ass monkey stuck a flywheel on a bike and this is supposed to be revolutionary? get out of the house, go to one of the countries that’s scoring better in education, and this is really old news. oh wait, let me guess, the americans put batteries in it.. it’s called an E-BIKE and they’ve been around since 1897 !

    • rahul

      your jealousy is showing.

  • SauronHimself

    Truing that wheel is going to be a pain. Some legitimate concerns that haven’t been addressed are the warranty (not listed on Super Pedestrian’s website) and if there is a crash replacement policy. In order to be taken seriously and be able to successfully sell a product, a warranty has to be included. Most wheel manufacturers offer two to five years depending on the technology, and almost all wheel manufacturers offer a crash replacement policy that lets the consumer buy a replacement wheel at typically 50% off MSRP.

  • Jackie Lannin

    I agree with Polina- sometimes the hills are too much. I am a “real bicyclist” – am going to be 60 in a few weeks. In warmer weather- I am in the upper midwest and it is brutal here right now- I bicycle all the time for my transportation. There are times when I am not up to the last mile/hill/upper incline or have more weight with groceries and this would be a great thing. Does anyone know how much this costs and how long the battery life is in the “wheel” invention.

  • Dave Rawe

    This is a good idea. However, the use of a smart phone as the controller is a concern to me because yes we must have yet another Bluetooth system . Why not use a STAMP controller. Seriously this is not really for the common person ( worldwide) that does not have the accessibility to technology. For many years people have done fine without this gizmo. Let’s come up with a system that is not so tech based and lower cost first. Adding 13 pounds to a bike is a great amount for a bicycle. OK…what about the battery life cycle and how do you propose to dispose of it when it dies ( and it will). What about reliability of the motor and associated braking system? These are not negatives but are things that need to be addressed for sustaionabe system.

  • moveebuff

    I want this wheel!…..Brilliant!

  • Tommi

    I have never seen the so called “Copenhagen wheel” in Copenhagen….

  • Yachtrod

    I hope this technology is adapted to cars.

    • Sally Strange

      It has been; it’s the same concept behind gasoline/electric hybrids.

  • Anne Carlton

    This is great. To get the masses commuting, I think we need to re-think tricycles, outfitted to provide some protection. The main concerns for bikers around urban areas are falling and collisions. Once they get going, they don’t want to stop. This nifty invention could help make it easier to use a heavier, sturdier vehicle and make starting and stopping less taxing.

    • Sean Long

      More protection would mean more weight, which would in turn make for a more-strenuous ride.

      Trust me, I _ride_ a trike: a TerraTrike Rover, a tadpole-configured recumbent trike. It’s a wonderful ride, Ilove it topieces. But it’s also forty-five pounds, a good five times as much as many traditional, upright “diamond frame” two-wheel cycles. Adding some sort of cage around the rider, especially one able to protect during a collision with a car or truck, would take a couple HUNDRED pounds of metal. Just not practical, sadly.

      • Anne Carlton

        I see a a trike design with titanium and one motor on the rear axle, with a better, automatic gear system. Two wishbone style support/side bars would go outside two rear wheels arching to meet behind the seat with struts to triangulate. The handle bars and front fork could also have some lightweight bars added without much weight. I’m thinking smaller rear wheels to have a lower center of gravity and more stable vehicle. I do think it could be done under 50 lb.

        • Sean Long

          …. and your design would cost twenty or thirty thousand dollars. Maybe more.

          The TT Rover (what I ride), made of high-tensile steel and weighing in at 40 pounds (plus rear wheel gearing, if any), already costs $699 … in single-speed, with no accessories at all (like, say, a headlight and tail light, or a water bottle cage, etc).

          A TT Sportster SL (frame: “6061 T6 Heat Treated Aluminium”), weighing 30 pounds, costs $3,999 …. plus accessories.

          Recumbent trikes are sufficiently low-demand, that they’re quite expensive as-is. Going to titanium, and putting enough of a cage around someone that they can survive an impact with a vehicle (including, if their trike rolls over) … yeah. At LEAST twenty thousand dollars. 🙁

          • Anne Carlton

            You have choices in how you want to think. If you are daydreaming about something better, cost really isn’t a factor. Prototypes are always expensive. When there is a solution to real need, there will be a trend, a demand and a market and mass production will follow. I spend about 2500 per year to commute and another 800 on the Gym. If I could reduce those costs, I imagine I could spend 4-5K on a tri-vehicle – “Trivie”. I think that there could be various prototypes of this kind of vehicle as there are with cars and motorcycles. The point is that a tri-wheel vehicle fits the semi-motorized solution better than the two wheeled one. A motor that stores the energy of stopping and helps return momentum will make it easier to travel. As all bike riders know, when you stop you have to partially dismount to balance. This is awkward and makes bikers more prone to running lights and other risky behavior. Bikers failing to slow, yield or stop at intersections is a major factor in urban bike collisions. Trivers, triving to work would be safer than bikers – just saying.

          • Sean Long

            Anne, I think you misunderstand the prices I cited. Those aren’t prototype costs. Those are actual, retail MSRP prices. From one of the less-expensive trike makers out there, in fact.

            Let’s say you wanted to buy that TerraTrike Sportster SL. There’s $4K right away. Shipping will be another $300, unless you’re fortunate enough to have a dealer very close to you. Accessories and up-rated parts for the trike itself (better shifting, cargo rack and pannier bags to carry things in, etc) are going to run you another, let’s say, $400-ish. Accessories for yourself are going to run $300-ish (chiefly a helmet and cycling shoes – a must-have for triking).

            At that point, for a standard, not-crash-cage-equipped trike, you’re looking at $5K. And it already is going to weigh 35-40 pounds,plus yourself, and any cargo (e.g.: regular shoes to change into at your destination).

            And I will re-state: the kind of crash cage you are talking about – one strong and substantial enough to be worth the effort of even designing it – is going to weigh FAR too much to be practical. You’re going to end up with a cycle that has a base weight of significantly over 200 pounds, BEFORE the rider and cargo are calculated in.

            My own trike is forty-some pounds, and believe me, I do actually feel that weight, when ascending any sort of slope.

            Your idea is a nice one … but it’s just not practical.

            Oh, and by the way:

            [[ As all bike riders know, when you stop you
            [[ have to partially dismount to balance.

            Not on a trike, you don’t. 🙂

            Pet peeve alert! The following is almost certainly going to develop into a rant against inconsiderate, arrogant motorists …!

            [[ Bikers failing to slow, yield or stop at
            [[ intersections is a major factor in urban
            [[ bike collisions.

            _A_ factor, yes. But not a _major_ factor, nor anywhere near a primary factor.

            Most bike-car collisions are caused by motorists, either through carelessness, lack of observational awareness, or even downright arrogance and hostility toward cyclists.

            I’ve actually been run off the road, on my highly-visible trike, in broad daylight … because the driver behind me (a) chose to operate their vehicle in a reckless manner endangering everyone else on the road at that time, (b) chose to violate at least three laws at the time, and (c) simply didn’t give half a fart about me or my safety.

            Specifically, he overtook me in a no-passsing zone (even when it’s a cyclist, that’s illegal here in CT); he overtook me with less than 3 feet between his vehicle and myself (again, illegal in CT); he overtook me while ascending a low hill with a curve at the top (reckless) despite having to move into the oncoming traffic lane (dangerous); he then nearly had a head-on collision with an oncoming vehicle, and had to move back to his right very quickly and suddenly … NEARLY RUNNING ME OVER. If I hadn’t reacted swiftly enough by steering to the right, off the road, I’d’ve ended up gettign sideswiped and possibly dragged under his rear wheels. As it is, my (thousand dollar) trike was nearly damaged by a precipitous turn onto a soft shoulder (yanking the trike into a fishtail turn). Oh, and there’s the little bit about me being nearly killed. And/or, the people in that oncoming car. Wee minor details like that.

            And you know what’s the best part of this? That wasn’t unusual. It’s TYPICAL behavior here!

  • argenta

    will it have a tracking device so if stolen one can find their back wheel again?

  • PLL

    I disagree with the main reason the author says we don’t bike enough. I would not bicycle on the roads and streets in many cities or towns because of the crazy drivers. Also, many cities and towns do not accommodate bicyclists with bike lanes or paths. Many roads are way too narrow for bikers. Also, the geographical area factors into whether people will use their bicycles. Excessive heat like the San Joaquin Valley or the mountains of western Montana do not make you want to bicycle; forget it!

  • Tony

    I commute to work on a bicycle because I live in area with such horrible traffic that I find myself drifting into a catatonic state with every passing minute because stuck in stop and go traffic. Slowly watching my brain cells die with each red light. Stress levels increasing and life span decreasing with each a$$hole that feels it necessary to play real life frogger on the innerstate constantly changing lanes to try and advance 1 car length.

    My main goal is to get to work fast and not get killed by cars on my bike. Thats it.

    If dressing up as a clown made me more aero and farting provided additional thrust, then I would dress up like Bozo and eat a pound of brocerli every ride. My point is, if it gets me to work faster on my bike, I’m all about it. This Copenhagen Wheel invention is awesome! I could care less what the spandex mafia bike snobs think.


  • Lucid_American

    If you are going to ask people to give up their cars and other carbon emission activities, then you better have something that is easily adaptable, low cost, and makes their lives easier. Give them a bike where they can get around San Francisco or the Suburbs of Illinois (boring and wide) and they can easily see themselves pocketing their fuel savings and catching some fresh air at the same time. I think this is a great step in the right direction…a black casing would be far more attractive and less “geeky” looking…but that is minor to say the least. Kudos to MIT!

    • Sean Long

      Casing in a wide variety of colors would go over well, I should think.

  • GuyFawkesLives

    Where can you buy this? It doesn’t look like it’s being sold yet. I would love this. I live in a majorly hilly city. I would definitely use this wheel.

  • Annette Maj-Britt Ottesen

    smart – are there any special speed limits for bikes or are they allowed to follow the car limits?

    • Sean Long

      Depends. Generally, an e-bike is restricted to a top speed of 19mph or less. That’s very specifically the case here in Connecticut and in Massachusetts.

  • Ross Peeler

    The amount of smugness in this article is exactly why so many people dislike cyclists. That and the whole ‘running red lights’ thing.

    • lifevicarious

      The amount of cyclists drivers kill while sharing roads they have every legal right to ride on is why cyclists dislike drivers. But I agree with you on the running red lights.

    • Sean Long

      The amount of arrogant disdain for cyclists that motorists display – expecially ON THE ROADS – is disgusting beyond all belief.

      I’ve actually been run off the road by a motorist. And twice, impatient motorists looking to pass me – around a curve, with a blind hill-crest at the top, in a marked AND signposted “Do Not Pass” zone – have nearly had head-on collisions with oncoming vehicles because they couldn’t wait twenty goddamned seconds for it to be SAFE to overtake me.

      Nine out of ten motorists who overtake me, in fact – in a rural area, no less – do so illegally. If I could report them, they’d each be in for hundreds of dollars of tickets. And I’m working on a proper video-camera setup so I can start doing exactly that.

      Before you protest it: I do in fact deplore cyclists who don’t obey the proper rules and laws. I personally like the idea of a Cyclist Licensing scheme, even including registration plates on bikes and similar.

      But let’s be honest: in any accident involving a bicyclist and a motorist, the bicyclist is in much greater danger of severe injury and even death, than the motorist is even in danger of a single tiny bruise.

      If I and my fifty-pound cycle hit your car at my top speed of around 10mph, you’ll need to have the paint retouched, maybe have a couple dents hammered out.

      OTOH, if you and your multi-ton car hit me at city-street speeds of 30mph to 40mph, I am probably DEAD.

      That comparison puts things rather into a different perspective, now, doesn’t it?

  • disqus_CGonmBcI1B

    When you figure out how someone can ride a bike 20 miles to work in 7 degree weather when the snow is 8″ deep get back to me. Otherwise this is only a fad.

  • disqus_CGonmBcI1B

    When you figure out a way that you can ride a bicycle 20 miles to work when it is 7 degrees and the snow is 8″ deep get back to me. Otherwise this is a fad.

    • lifevicarious

      Move or get a new job.

    • Sean Long

      For the cold: electric socks / gloves / longjohns.

      For the snow: Schwalbe makes two grades of snow/ice tires.

      For the 20 miles: get in better shape.


  • disqus_CGonmBcI1B

    I guess this publication can’t handle any comments that disagree with it’s position.How friggin communistic!

  • disqus_CGonmBcI1B

    Darn your fast!

  • Michael Foley

    Is this the same Copenhagen wheel that was featured in Weeds on Showtime?

  • dave_o

    Hey, this is AWESOME! But you have to have a fancyphone to use it??? 🙁 Not cool. I do not want a smartphone, due to the cost of the phone, and the costs of data plans, and the privacy issues they present.

  • keith8404

    Unless you have sworn off all modern technology and developments in your cycling, and only ride a single speed steel frame bicycle with platform pedals in an effort to make sure you “earn all your hills,” I’d avoid being critical of anyone else’s choice to use a device like this.

  • Guest

    I’m not sure if this amounts to anything more than a weight attached to the wheel that makes the wheel a more effective flywheel; in which case you would have to work harder each time you stop and start or accelerate. Get ready for disappointment if your commute hits stops often.

    It seems like there are obvious practical advantages for many people. It is always interesting to hear the ‘purists’ debate aesthetics.

  • Danno

    Do they not wear helmets in Copenhagen? Best tech invention to save your life.

  • laxbuff519

    wasnt this on weeds?

  • Elias Friedman

    So it’s an e-bike. Other than it being a more convenient retrofit, I should think that having all the extra weight of an e-bike also being rotating weight would be a distinct disadvantage to handling, braking, and acceleration. I imagine the wheel’s load capacity is even less than that of a conventional wheel- a distinct disadvantage to a commuter.

    Also, as a year-round, all-weather bicycle commuter, I have to wonder how well this thing handles sub-freezing temperatures, snow, road salt, torrential rains, heat, humidity, radical temperature changes from indoors to out, and abuse from potholes and the occasional crash. Is it user serviceable, or would I be stuck with it someplace halfway to work?

    Lastly, e-bikes are de-facto illegal here in the state of New York. They’re considered to be motor vehicles (essentially electric mopeds) and would require registration, but the DMV will not register them. You could try, but I doubt you’d be able to get the policy changed, because New York City residents have a long-standing gripe about the reckless food delivery men on their illegal e-bikes (the NYPD is too busy ticketing cyclists running red lights in Central Park to enforce the e-bike law, if many officers even know about it)

    • Sean Long

      Connecticut and Massachusetts don’t require registration for e-bikes, but they do require a drivers’ license (standard, or motorcycle).

    • Elias Friedman

      I am vastly amused that nobody has addressed the issues I’ve brought up that would seem to make this a poor example of an e-bike (or electric moped, as I prefer to call them). Having all that weight spinning in the wheel can’t help but have serious impacts on handling, braking, and acceleration. that in addition to all the other items I mentioned in my first post, make this a very niche vehicle – I’m afraid I don’t see it succeeding any more than any other e-bike previously, nor like the mopeds before them.

      • Sean Long

        Depends on what sort of bike you put it on. On a tadpole-configured tricycle, the impact would be negligible – even the weight. My TT Rover is already 45 pounds “naked”, so a 13-pound addition is going to have only a small effect overall.

        Trikes don’t lean into any corners, so there’s be no steering effects at all.

        And the weight, at the back, would possibly HELP with braking (brake too hard on a tadpole trike, and your rear wheel lifts off the ground; adding another dozen pounds back there would HELP, not hurt).

        The only problem, really, is that for my particular trike (internally-geared hub only), it’d have to be reduced to a single-speed device. 🙁

        • Elias Friedman

          The problem isn’t the weight per se, but rather that it’s rotating with the wheel. You’ll note that even cars, trucks, and trains try to minimize the amount of mass that is involved in rotation of their wheels. Google up “Moment of Inertia” and “Gyroscope” for more information about what I’m getting at.

          • Sean Long

            Note my mention of trikes not leaning into corners. Honestly, if your trike leans at all, you’ve done something very wrong and are probably about to get intimate with the pavement. So gyroscopic effects aren’t really relevant for those. 🙂

  • dk

    I looooove it! can’t wait to learn more, I can carry my kids!! Use my bike as means of transportation, always? excellent! and take care of the environment.

  • Kevin

    As an older person who had to quit riding because of some health/physical reasons this would work great for me. All you bike nazi purists will hopefully stay young forever and never have a knee or a hip go bad so you won’t ever need something like this to make something you love possible again. If this gets me biking again, then all I have to say is, “Thanks.”

  • Baptiste Nicolosi

    you can also buy a motorcycle…

  • susanlou

    People who cycle for exercise should not be so critical, if they want only exercise and want it the hard way, why don’t they ride the bikes with one speed? Why do they like the lighter weight bikes? Come on guys, some of us are not in the best shape but would still like to ride long distances, some people would like it for commuting.

    • Sean Long

      I agree wholeheartedly.

      This summer, I got back into cycling – for exercise and weight loss. I decided on a tadpole recumbent tricycle (that’s two wheels in front, one in back), due to my age (over 40), physical fitness level (“I envy couch potatoes”), and weight (~280#). The trike’s unloaded weight is 45#, and I’ve probably got another 10# of gear and accessories on it, so all told, with me and everything else, we’re talking about close to 350# of weight to move.

      I’m fine on flat roads, or even slopes up to 2%, or briefly 3%. 4% for more than twice the length of my trike is murder on my knees and legs still.

      And I live in a very hilly area; there’s some roads around here that hit 20% grade. An assist motor would help me get past those slopes and give me more places to ride under my own power – instead of the exact same four-and-a-quarter mile loop, over and over and over and over and over ….

  • dan

    I think it would encourage people like me who can’t cycle very far to do more cycling if you can cycle a further distance it opens up new horizons and so what if the bike is helping you ….if its helping you to get to your nearest shops or to visit a friend all tithe good !!!!

    • Sean Long

      Yes. It also opens up destinations and routes that might be on the other side of a hill the rider just can’t handle (yet). Definitely, that’s the case for ME! 🙂

  • not a fan

    it needs batteries….. why doesn’t it power it self? not worth the price!

  • bobinnyc

    I’m not sure what all the negative comments are all about either. It’s not all just about YOU! It’s about a better, healthier, cleaner world. Finally a move forward with little to no kick back. Open your minds!

  • Ed

    I don’t understand the issue – if you don’t like it, don’t use it. It’s that simple.

    And for those who are going to laugh at commuters using something that allows others (who may be less fit, or just less into cycling) to leave their cars at home… you are the ones that need to take a good look at yourselves, and pull your head in.

  • Ibby

    Except most people in North America don’t bike because the roads just aren’t designed for it. Shitty drivers + lack of bike lanes means you have a death wish if you try to bike everywhere. Having a good system of bike lanes and a culture of bike commuters like certain European countries will do a lot more to encourage people to bike everywhere than a cool gadget. I would like this for my bike though…

  • oneworld

    i just want to ride my bicycle

  • Ryan

    My reasons for not riding a bike more often are not about the physical effort that it requires, it’s a combination of the time it would take to get where I’m going (compared to driving), the lack of passenger/cargo space (compared to a car), and the weather (cold, rainy, etc.). I enjoy riding when it’s sunny and I just want to be out and about. It’s better than walking. But I still mostly drive and having this invention wouldn’t change that very much.

    • Sean Long

      Time, and Weather, there’s really no solutions for. Cargo space, though – you can get a trailer that will have as much space as a small car’s trunk. 🙂

  • mike

    author: ingenuous and ingenious are not the same

  • visitorzero

    Looking over the comments… sad to see how some folk will use anything as an excuse to pick a fight.

  • Maruice

    This is great! Big problem with biking to work is that you can get pretty sweaty, pit stains and BO are not so good for the office!

  • Iris

    The biggest barrier to biking is the lack of safe routes to travel!

  • Genius

    My absolute favorite part of this product is that you don’t HAVE to buy it. It is not mandatory to purchase something you don’t have a need for. It’s that simple. It really is. Amazing right?!?

  • RJp8454

    A scooter is always an option if you don’t want to ride a bicycle. There is really no in between and never will be.

  • EeebeeE

    I am 55 years old. Likelihood of my winning the Tour de France are somewhat less than a snowstorm taking place in a certain warm place. But my commute to work is about 3 miles. Unfortunately, it involves riding down into a valley, then back up out of it. This has been the biggest obstacle to my riding to work, because I do not want to come into my office smelling like a petunia. If I get zero exercise now from riding to work, then buy this wheel, I WILL get exercise. And at the same time I will reduce transportation costs and be more environmentally friendly.
    All you serious bicyclists, if you think this is a cop-out, don’t get one. I personally could benefit from this and I do not give a rodent’s posterior what you think anyway.

    • Sean Long

      Plus, once you’re accustomed to riding to and from work, OTHER trips, of steadily growing distance, will start to seem like good opportunities for a nice, relaxing ride in the fresh air. 🙂

  • Julio Fudgefullnames

    You have to have your smartphone out in order for this to work? How the fuck is that supposed to be practical for people living in high crime areas?

    • lentower

      It works without a smartphone.

      But with the default factory settings.

  • Jim

    Please please please do not make this require a smartphone to be attached at all times for it to work. For configuration, that’s fine. But if I have to plug in my phone every time to use it, forget it.

  • ktbau

    Wow, so bizarre how uptight people are getting about this. I endurance cycle and will continue to do so because I love it. I may or may not put this thing on my bike for commuting, but I realise I have the choice. If I ever move back to a city, I’d love to see these on bikes and people of all shapes and sizes giving bike commuting a go and getting the cars and congestion off the road, while getting some exercise at the same time. What a great idea!

  • Bri

    Wonderful, but correction: “The most common reason why people don’t bike is…” Death by Velocidiot.

    The most common reason why people don’t bike is
    The most common reason why people don’t bike is
    The most common reason why people don’t bike is

  • Josephine Harkay

    I thought every Website/Facebook had a moderator. Then may I ask the My Disqus moderator to either delete comments containing abusive or gutter language, or else, just delete those words. Eventually people will get it. How about a kinder, gentler nation? Besides, how can anyone get so upset about a bicycle gadget?

  • Cathy Cee

    In my opinion, using physical energy is NOT the most common reason people don’t use their bicycles for commuting, it’s all the other little things: You arrive to work sweaty or it’s simply too cold or rainy. No place to put all the things you may need to take to work or to carry stuff you may get on errands on the way home. Just not safe to ride in some areas. Some people’s jobs are simply out of range of a ride, while some city’s public transport may include bike racks, people who must drive in unincorporated areas do not have that perk. I would love to be in a situation where I could ride my bike to work, but it’s just not practical to do. I love my quiet, secluded home more than the desire to bike to work.

  • a rider for safety

    I would have thought the people in the video should be wearing helmets.Ride a bike for any length of time and a mishap is bound to occur,,,

    • kylejack

      Maybe people in cars should all wear helmets too. A study has shown it would dramatically reduce head injuries.

  • Bobby Dixon

    more than one 2 or 3 ways to use a bike…. all are bikes so enjoy your ride and dont worry about another persons reason for riding.

  • Noah Draney

    You all do realize that this is a joke. The Copenhagen Wheel is an invention that was created by a character in a tv show called weeds. It was a failure and made very little money for the character who invented it. I believe this article is a joke and if it is not, i see a lawsuit in the future.

  • Roelf Arthur Gavino

    i hope it’s not that too expensive. This invention have lots of possibilities. 🙂

  • Debo Rah

    if you commute this is an amazing bike. If you use the bike for exercise and you think this takes away the fun and exercise, then don’t buy this bike. The world is free for you to do what you want. But people that stay here dissing and discussing how this invention is crap…do no good to themselves and others. Simply choose that this is not for you 🙂

  • Simone

    Brilliant .. what a wonderful invention for those who would like to get more use out of their bikes. It would certainly encourage and aid those who are not as physically fit – they could travel further therefore use their bike more and their car less. Love it!

  • trilolutretorio

    this is not good in countries in which you cannot listen music while you are on a bike

  • Bob Cole

    damn, lance could haved used this BWAAA HAAA HAAA.

  • David Escalante


  • David Escalante

    “See The Invention That Just Changed Biking Forever” I don’t see anyone yet using it, “changed” or “may change”?

  • Jackie Marshall

    In a hilly city, this would be a godsend after a long tiring day at work with the “hill” looming on the slog home. Now if they could just come up with a way to keep the drivers of cars from swooshing by missing us by millimeters and blowing their horns we’d be all set.

  • John Link

    Where are they being sold?

  • kbs

    i would love to pass this along if there weren’t porn at the bottom of the page

  • sallysewup

    If you are using this to commute, you can attach the wheel, and conserve energy. I don’t see why if you are riding for exercise, or sport you just couldn’t take the wheel off. That would solve some peoples concern of if they are being challenged enough physically. Right?

  • Hanna P

    This is great, but only one thing is missing: the cover that keeps you, and you smartphone, dry- particularly during
    the Copenhagen and Amsterdam fall and winter.

  • Simmer Down

    What a great invention. Some of the negative comments on this device seem to be a bit snobbish. If you want exercise don’t use it. If you think it makes bicycling too easy then give up your 10 or 15 gear bike and get yourself a one speed beach cruiser or one of those three wheel bikes with the giant front wheel.

  • JG

    On a positive note, I ride for exercise. I also like to go on cycle training rides with my husband but I can’t keep up, this may help us spend more time together without him having to slow down for me. I like it.

  • JJ

    How long does the battery last? Hopefully it does not require replacement very often.

  • gregthepainter

    I’ve never seen so many a**holes on one thread-anywhere. Endlessly entertaining, Thanks so much everyone, put the peddle to the meddle.

  • eric

    Just for clarification, what does a smart phone or an “ap” have to do with this wheel?

  • What a great idea!

  • JasperBurns

    What a missed opportunity to say they “reinvented the wheel.” Shame for missing that easy one

  • Teresa Stacy

    fabulous idea, interesting the way a great idea sparks threads of conversation that turn into personal battle of name calling. people who get out into the world realize that there are fascinating places in this world where the inhabitants actually use bicycles for their main source of transportation. I live in Las Vegas, where granted, the weather is not always conducive to cycling, but virtually no one bikes for anything other than exercise. After traveling abroad, I came home and put together a nice little bike for running errands and LOVE doing it. I could go further and do more with this handy lil’ invention, save gas AND wear and tear on the vehicle I love and use to travel to and from work and to LA and SLC. (not to mention diminishing my carbon footprint!) I can see people in some of the places I visit actually going from town to town with this, you’d be amazed what they are able to carry with them! So, look past your egos and see the big picture, the global picture, this is a very really need being filled, and a wonderful idea, no matter what you find your personal needs to be.

  • Cesar Arango

    This great for both commuter and biker. Why? The commuter is obvious. But the avid biker would be able to cover more distances and yet burn off the same amount of calories if he or she were to bike a shorter distance with more intensity. Cheating? Hardly. Tell me some of you avid bikers. Do you really think you can cover the same amount of distance as without one? I highly doubt it. You get back what you put in.

  • electronymph

    I own an electric bike (Bionx system) and have used it to commute for nearly four years. It’s changed the way I do things for the best. I no longer own a car, and just use my electric bike, car sharing or public transit. When I want a work out/recreational ride, I take my trail bike into the forest and get sweaty.

    Having an electric bike just means you’re taking a different approach to cycling and using it for more than a work out. I enjoy cycling for exercise, and I enjoy being able ride my 90% up-hill route to work without getting overly sweaty (no showers at work). I still get exercise, because the system allows me to choose varying degrees of assistance, starting from zero. I ride nearly every day, and I’m physically fit – not some weakling lazy bum that some of the ‘serious cyclists’ in this thread of comments would believe I might be. Your type can mind your own businesses and keeping flashing around in your sponsored spandex and fancy road bikes – I won’t judge.

  • Alberto Jr. Purugganan

    Putting the hybrid in bike tech—but the bottom line of riding bikes is to ride without gizmos and use thigh and arm muscles! ( the pure benefits of EXERCISE!). It’ll be a BOOST—but THAT’s IT—-it ain’t nuke so I’ll not be cynical about this—-

  • Cool, but I’m not surprised to find that costs $799

  • Raven

    I see a lot of people saying ‘I ride my bike for exercise’ then putting this down so I wanted to say a few things.
    1. A lot of people would benefit by getting more exercise than they are now, and one of the ways of doing that would be to bicycle more often. So you try to start by cycling to work. You just started, so it is hard on your body to do uphill cycling at all. There are a number of steep hills to travel to and from work. You decide bussing and walking part of the way is more ‘doable’. – For people who feel this way it gets you more motivated to actually exercise more then over time you get better and can either oopt to remove it or simply cycle longer distances for the pleasure of it. You’re much healthier than you used to be, and more like the people who cycle up those hills withot the extra aid. Maybe you won’t need the extra boost someday, and maybe it will, but now you are healthier and have more options.
    2. You had to start somewhere. For some people this will be a start. Applaaud them, and support them, and before you know it maybe they’ll be 2cycling the same way that you do, on the same 30 mile daily treks.
    3. Some people are not capable of cycling to the extent you are. Spinal injuries, knee/leg/foot injuries, recovering from debilitating sicknesses; there are many reasons for it. Something like this could provide a means to to recover that is not as taxing or debilitating as going into top form bycycling. I know personally a number of people that this could help that range from injured people to people who had minor strokes that were environmentally induced.

    That said, I have my own complaint. I personally work at a place that involves steep hills both ways, and often find it easy to cycle only part way and pop my bike onto a bus front the restof the way. I would find something like this great to have. Unfortunately, I have to lock up my bicycle in a midtown area for the day because the underground parking at work is only permitted for use with cars, and locking this up on the streets would just be a temptation to people who have cable cutters.

  • LarryBundyJr

    I like the fact it’s a big red circle to notify muggers that you have a iPhone attached to your handlebars, so they can knock you off and steal it, instead of all that awful guess work on if you’re carrying anything valuable or not!

  • bbbobby

    Unless this thing has found away of creating energy, then on any ride you will use just as much energy, you just get to ‘save up’ for the hills when you are on the flats… Great idea!

  • Chris Livingston

    What if you could choose not to use that energy for the motor but could charge batteries to power appliances, charge phones, etc?

  • Rideguygary

    WOW, I am an avid rider of bikes. I race cyclocross, train, ride for fun & fitness and commute when I can. I love to talk about cycling and where it is going and what we can do to get more people on bikes. But given the vitriolic and harsh comments, often phrased as “intellect” I think I am going to pass on this one. Like I need to be called an asshole on this very merry time of year. I think I will go ride a bike instead. Happy Holidays.

  • Samuel

    Can someone explain what it is, the article nor the advert did. Typical misuse of statistics.

  • Samuel

    Why is no one discussing the fact that, as of yet, the invention makes no sense. As for the comments, the implied violation of the conservation of energy is about as hilarious as people protesting againsts it

  • Edu

    Weeds? No one?

  • daveycotter

    This whole thing just bemuses me. How do people in Compenhangen think that painting your wheel red makes you go faster? When I was a kid we put playing cards in the spokes with clothes pegs, now THAT makes you go faster! Thing about it…And what’s this thing about homosexuals??? Tom, less of the anti gay vitriol.

  • CPH guy

    This is from the TV show Weeds. It´s Andy Botwins weel 🙂

  • whateva

    Why add mass and complexity to an already excellent design? Oh yeah we need to buy more things we don’t need

  • JBR

    I love the internet. An article about a device invented to ease the ride for commuting cyclists turns into an all out slugfest perpetrated by an initial fitness snobbing, followed by a barrage of insults and a slew of defensive posts. This is an invention which will NOT be forced onto every bicycle, so, contrary to what you may believe, you will still be permitted to cycle without one and get all of the exercise that your heart desires. However, as stated by a few people, this device will hopefully encourage those who don’t want to arrive at work dripping with sweat and smelling as if they just rolled in garbage, to bike to work once in a while. Why are people so quick to pick fights and crap all over things that they fail to fully understand or disagree with? Can’t we just have civil discussions or are those reserved only for those times when we are face to face and forced to be accountable for the language we use and the tone that we take with a bunch of perfect strangers. Did I mention that I love the internet?

  • mike_f

    SO COOL!~

  • Kenny Ray Martin

    gotta be a 5 Thousand dollar bike

  • Nosferatu

    If people will embrace it and more will choose biking is all that matters. It is not only about fitness but also about being a much less expensive and a lot more ecological mean of moving around. As the time goes by the things that affect the environment in a harmful way less and less will become more and more important.

  • AmIJustAPessimistOrWhat?

    cool. It will remove the energy conservation incentive part of the reason for cyclists to blast through red lights and stop signs.

  • Juan

    THis is an amazing invention for people who use bikes for commuting. Of course, if you are exersising, then just don’t use it. All in all this is an amazing piece of hardware

  • spyce

    It’s simply way too expensive to ever make any significant difference in commuting patterns. The wheel costs more than many entry level bikes, including e-bikes. It will amount to hipster bike-jewelry. And, the barriers to choosing cycling have much more to do with safety and perceived safety than to the perceived sweatiness.

  • Nestor Madeo
  • maeli

    but i don’t neeeeeeeeeed a smartphoooone, hell oooooo!

  • rafa

    Me parece novedoso, me gustaría saber más sobre las especificaciones tecnicas.Si bien tener un smartphone para andar en bicicleta no me seduce para nada, quizá ayude a personas mayores con artrosis, o a obesos remolones come rosquillas a bajar un poco su colesterol por unos cuantos dolares.Como leía hay alternativas con motores eléctricos e incluso a combustible fósil más útiles, baratas,y con menos dependencia de las reparaciones por la empresa líder.Lo novedoso es la vuelta a la renovación y aprovechamiento de energía como ya viene sucediendo con los buses híbridos de algunos países de Europa que aprovechan la inercia del frenado para acumular energía que se utiliza en motores eléctricos.

  • karne

    i rue the day people just shut up and click next.

  • city puzzle

    great idea !

  • betty jaimes

    Lmaoo makes me laugh, you people like to complain about everything, you dont like the invention dont buy it simple as that. Negative comments are just crazy lol

  • besharam pappu

    But what about the cost? Is it going to be available to masses??

  • Get Real

    This is exactly why we have a problem with the environment, we all need more and more gadgets.

  • Elisabet Martín

    I’m from Spain and I would like to Know
    Where can I buy one of this wheel? Thank you

  • Mirko3viso

    where can I buy ? How much does it cost ? Can you send in Italy ? How many time to delivery ?

  • asdafarian

    Nice.. hipsters changing the world one unfeasible concept at a time. It seems developers spend 99% of their effort on fancy videos praising their inventions and nothing ever sees the light of day. Next time I’d like to see a link to an actual product!

  • Calvin Chu

    Super cool but I think people would totally steal that Copenhagen wheel when I park my bike for several hours on the street. I would take the back wheel off when I go in for work but then that is a hustle and make your hands dirty when you handle the chains connected to the rear wheel (unless you have those bike that can get the wheel off easily in a few seconds). And how much does that thing cost? Super cool design would love to have it but there is the crime problem. I think this would totally work in Denmark or Japan where people just don’t steal bike, but not for many cities like LA, large part of Australia, college towns and China.

  • bob Thomas

    Also makes it safer to ride with no helmet,

  • Jorge W. Moreno-Bernal

    Now the question is: How do I order one?

  • Jorge W. Moreno-Bernal

    Now the question is, How do I get one?

  • Art Farquad

    I like the bike part, but I hate “smartphones”!

  • Bruce Dean

    The author needs to do some research before writing an advertorial such as this. The author clearly just drank the purple kool-aid that the company’s press release provided.

    A quick search of the internet would reveal that this is just existing technology in a red package. You pay more for less performance than the Chinese have be offering for years.

    I hope the company paid the author well for this advertorial and the misrepresentation of the field of electric bicycles. Next time try presenting it as researched news.

    If people want to get into electric bikes, go to the Chinese products as they are tried and tested technology.

  • I love the idea! My only suggestion… I do not like the red color at all…. I think a grey would be much better visually.

    Best! & feel free to contact me.