What do you think of this?

[liberty]

The idea Is a work in progress and has been gathering dust for a while, and with gas prices where they are, it may be time to dust it off and present it. The idea is simple: electric bikes are a practical, low-cost way to commute, at least in the summer in most places, and almost year-round down here. The problem is that electric bikes are still two-wheel vehicles, and that alone turns a lot of people off; I don’t like relying on just two wheels myself.

My solution is to take two electric bikes and connect them with a lightweight frame, replace the individual saddles with a bench seat, and link the two front wheels so that when one turns, the other turns with it. Instead of handlebars, use a simple steering stick for maneuvering.

Some people might say this can’t be done, but it can; I’ve done a version of it before. I took two regular bicycles, welded them together, and linked their handlebars so that turning one would turn the other; that allowed me to take my son for rides. I called it a “dual bike.”

I don’t see why the same concept couldn’t work with electric motors added, a bench seat, and a steering stick. For rainy weather, you could add a removable front shield made of light plastic, and a top made of the same material, supported by a lightweight roll over bar. It would use bicycle tires, have a motor equivalent to two electric bikes, and a battery to power the motor. The whole thing would be light enough that an average man could lift it, and it would be able to travel around 45 miles an hour, fast enough to travel on secondary roads, and cost only a couple $1000 or so, roughly equivalent to two electric bicycles.

[Joe Guy]

Somebody already came up with your idea and improved on it back around 1932. Along with using no gasoline, it has the added advantage of holding golf clubs, groceries, and your dog. You could even pack yer shootin' iron in there...

[MajGenl.Meade]

I don't think anyone's had that idea before. You're onto something.

[liberty]

Somebody already came up with your idea and improved on it back around 1932. Along with using no gasoline, it has the added advantage of holding golf clubs, groceries, and your dog. You could even pack yer shootin' iron in there...

Sorry, no prize for you. Fifteen miles an hour and a total range of about forty miles isn’t good enough. Just look at the thing: all that wasted energy, oversized tires, and unnecessary weight. Golf carts weren’t built for either speed or range. They were designed to be safe and to do minimal damage to a golf course, which is not my interest.

My interest is in building something that can travel fast enough to use on secondary roads, be cheap enough that most people can afford it as a second vehicle, and be genuinely energy‑efficient.

[liberty]

I don't think anyone's had that idea before. You're onto something.

Did I say this was an original idea? I don’t think so. You need to read it again. I was simply proposing that a very old idea be reconsidered. It goes back to the horseless carriages of the 1880s.

As for your example, it’s close, but not good enough. It’s not street‑legal. There are no fenders, no headlights, and only one seat. I want a vehicle that can carry two people, and I don’t see any way to attach a windscreen or a top.

[Bicycle Bill]

I remember seeing ads for plans to build something like what you're describing in the back pages of Popular Mechanics back in the 1960s.

Or you could maybe find an old one of these — a PPV ('People Powered Vehicle') from the mid-1970s



and convert it using bicycle wheels with hub-mounted electric motors for assholes like yourself who are too lazy to pedal... although I'd recommend leaving the pedal system intact so you can still get home when the batteries run down.

-"BB"-

[Joe Guy]

The whole thing would be light enough that an average man could lift it, and it would be able to travel around 45 miles an hour, fast enough to travel on secondary roads, and cost only a couple $1000 or so, roughly equivalent to two electric bicycles.

How much do you think the battery would weigh that could go 45 mph and travel a long distance?

[liberty]

The whole thing would be light enough that an average man could lift it, and it would be able to travel around 45 miles an hour, fast enough to travel on secondary roads, and cost only a couple $1000 or so, roughly equivalent to two electric bicycles.

How much do you think the battery would weigh that could go 45 mph and travel a long distance?

The battery would weigh about 20 pounds, and an individual could purchase an additional one and carry it along for extended range. Technically, it is a feasible idea, and I believe it could work. The reason I insist on using bicycle tires is that the vehicle would need to be classified as something other than an automobile. Once you enter the realm of cars, government regulations drive the price up significantly. There are already plenty of expensive cars on the market, and even the ones considered inexpensive are still too costly for many people. A lot of people in this country need reliable, low-cost transportation, especially in areas without public transit; if the price cannot be kept low, the concept will never succeed.

Before someone brings it up, I admit that it would not be a particularly safe vehicle. Its light construction would make it difficult to meet higher safety standards; however, it would not necessarily be much more dangerous than a motorcycle. As a historical example, remember the Corvair, which was once promoted as an affordable transportation option, though it later became the subject of major safety debates. It is a reminder that when regulations and public concerns intersect, even promising ideas can be derailed.

My broader point is that discussions about safety often focus on the vehicle itself when a significant part of the danger comes from unsafe driving behavior. I feel that current efforts to address dangerous drivers are not adequate; stronger enforcement could reduce risks more effectively than adding layers of regulation to every type of vehicle. To put it simply, instead of trying to put everyone in a tank, we should focus on getting truly dangerous and unreliable drivers off the road.

[MajGenl.Meade]

I'm not sure how we've gone from this "The idea is simple: electric bikes are a practical, low-cost way to commute, at least in the summer in most places, and almost year-round down here", to this:

To put it simply, instead of trying to put everyone in a tank, we should focus on getting truly dangerous and unreliable drivers off the road. . . My solution is to take two electric bikes and connect them with a lightweight frame

Are you proposing that truly dangerous and unreliable drivers should be forced to ride in a 2-person electric vehicle that you've designed - and will only be allowed on minor roads, get killed or seriously injured, and thus leave the good roads available for nice people like you and me? I'm not against it per se, though it seems a bit harsh.

I thought you were proposing an early 1920's renaissance of electric, tiller-steered, phaetons (banned on freeways) for people to commute to work but only on secondary roads. Heaven knows how they'd get into the big city to do all their clerical work.

Seems to be a bit of mission drift going on

[ex-khobar Andy]

At some point in the not-too-distant future, roads everywhere will have to be reconfigured for reality. Fossil fuel based energy will become enormously expensive as the stuff becomes harder and harder to extract from the ground, and this Libmobile or something like it, will become the norm. Not the total answer unless we develop a system of free or cheap electricity from renewable sources.

Lib's larger point is that many (most??) accidents are due to some sort of driver error. I think that my generation (I'm 76) might be the last who learned road safety on our bicycles when there was less traffic on the roads and our parents were not bothered when we set off on long rides. 'Just be back before dark.' We learned how drivers behaved and how to share the road. And we took that learning to our own driving. Any car driver less than about 50 probably had the sort of protective parents (I'm not knocking it - I'm one) who would not allow them out to learn road sense at an early age; and they mostly behave accordingly.

[MajGenl.Meade]

Lib's larger point is that many (most??) accidents are due to some sort of driver error.

[liberty]

I'm not sure how we've gone from this "The idea is simple: electric bikes are a practical, low-cost way to commute, at least in the summer in most places, and almost year-round down here", to this:

To put it simply, instead of trying to put everyone in a tank, we should focus on getting truly dangerous and unreliable drivers off the road. . . My solution is to take two electric bikes and connect them with a lightweight frame

Are you proposing that truly dangerous and unreliable drivers should be forced to ride in a 2-person electric vehicle that you've designed - and will only be allowed on minor roads, get killed or seriously injured, and thus leave the good roads available for nice people like you and me? I'm not against it per se, though it seems a bit harsh.

I thought you were proposing an early 1920's renaissance of electric, tiller-steered, phaetons (banned on freeways) for people to commute to work but only on secondary roads. Heaven knows how they'd get into the big city to do all their clerical work.

Seems to be a bit of mission drift going on

I didn’t actually consider that; it might be worth trying. It can’t hurt; if a person is unable to handle a big, powerful vehicle, maybe they need something a lot smaller. It’s very few people who cause almost all the trouble; people who are not able to control themselves, road rage for example.