Hacker News Reader

Comment by jstanley | Hacker News Reader

A 2012 review in Wired says it rides pretty much like a normal bike: https://www.wired.com/2012/02/stringbike/

Other than that I can't readily find any more reviews from anyone who claims to have ridden one. I wonder why, given that they apparently have been making them for 10 years?

View on HN

Almost always the downside to a non chain drive is a loss of efficiency. A chain and cog setup is really really good, like 99% efficient with a clean lubed chain. Internal hub gears, drive shafts, strings, almost all of them have losses a bit worse than that, which sucks when you are a 0.5hp motor.

Interesting - I was just having a discussion with my son the other day about the term "horsepower". Quick research showed that the average human can generate 1.2 HP in a burst, or 0.1 HP sustained. Is 0.5 HP the accepted measure for sustained output while riding a bike?

Depends on how long to sustain - 0.5 HP is 373 watts, which is more than male pros sustain over a whole race stage but less than some can do for ~10 minute sections.

[1](https://cyclingtips.com/2017/06/just-how-good-are-male-pro-r...)

I have never really looked up the details. But I watch MotoGP and figure if something was better they'd be using it. So chain it is.

This only really matters for sport. Hub gears and dynamos are less efficient but much more convenient for commuting.

Unless you're commuting in a salty environment destroying your chain (and bike arguably), I fail to see how a conventional chain drive is anything resembling inconvenient for commuting.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com