[Closi]

I don't think its crazy - both my mum and sister are intimidated by gears and tend to go for a fixie every time we go on holiday and you need a bike (e.g. Centre Parcs) but struggle to keep up on the hills. Maintainability is not a big concern for them - someone else does it (The last tire change the local bike shop did it for us for £5 + parts).

They would completely be in the target market for this. If they were buying a bike, this is a system they would want. In fact, it's a system I would want them to have, because I'm sick of watching them struggle with a single gear and they really do not feel comfortable with multiple gears!

I've tried to explain the benefits of multiple gears and how it's actually simple, but they won't have it. They aren't that comfortable with riding a bike anyway, and they don't want something extra to think about on top of all the other things. I also don't think they are completely atypical.

I can also see this being a great rental option, and great for kids who want a step-up bike as they learn.

Your argument seems to be "advanced users don't want this" - but that's not the target market. Automatic gears on cars don't go into racing cars, and manual gearboxes can be easier to maintain and provide more control. Automatic gears on cars are actually really there to reduce complexity for the average driver, which is what this is for bikes.

[ogre_codes]

> I don't think its crazy - both my mum and sister are intimidated by gears and tend to go for a fixie every time we go on holiday and you need a bike (e.g. Centre Parcs) but struggle to keep up on the hills.

Aside from mechanical issues, shifting gears when you don't expect it is about one of the worst experiences you can have on a bike. Being in a lower gear than you expect and spinning out or being in a higher gear and having no traction is terrible. The Nexus is super easy to shift (and can shift when you are stopped) has a bigger gear range, and is predictable.

Also, when bikes were launched, these didn't exist. Now it's likely you can get an all around easier ebike for about the cost of one of these so it's a no-brainer.

> Your argument seems to be "advanced users don't want this"

No. My argument is nobody wants this you might think automatic shifting on a bike is a good idea, but every time it's been done people hate it. It doesn't work like an automatic in a car.

The fact that it's far more difficult to change a tire means users are even less likely to learn basic maintenance. It's nice to say "They'll take it to the shop!", but that doesn't help when they are on the bike trail 4 miles from their car. With a somewhat normal drive-train another rider can give them an assist. With this, it's unlikely anyone has the tools with them to help out.

[Closi]

> My argument is nobody wants this

I'm saying I know at least two people in my immediate family who would want this, so I don't think nobody wants it.

It might not be any good, and informed purchasers might not want it after trying it, but I think people want the concept.

[ogre_codes]

These languished on bike shop inventories for 10 years largely unsold. Other automatic bike shifting has been around for even longer than that and they haven't sold well either.

Shifting gears isn't what keeps people off bikes, the average 10 year old figures out shifting gears in about 20 minutes. What keeps people off bikes is the fact that most places in the US are unsafe for cycling.

More or less everywhere it's safe to ride bikes, bike ownership and use increases dramatically using existing shifting technologies.

[Closi]

> What keeps people off bikes is the fact that most places in the US are unsafe for cycling.

This may shock you, but most people don't live in the US, and different people have different motivations for either cycling or not.

Although clearly you represent the everyman and can be the one-person-focus-group for the bike market!

[ogre_codes]

> Although clearly you represent the everyman and can be the one-person-focus-group for the bike market!

The bike market represents the bike market. As I said, these have been around for 10+ years and nobody buys them. It's not my opinion that these are undesirable, we know they are undesirable based on sales numbers.

Bikes with Automatic drive trains aren't popular in the US. ... or Europe. ... or Asia. ... or anywhere.

They are more expensive, heavier, and harder to work on than traditional bikes. Half-assed automatic shifting doesn't make up for those issues.

Maybe I'm off base and people just didn't like them because they are ugly. Who knows, but since it's been 10+ years now I think it's clear they aren't the fix-all for getting people on bikes Shimano designers thought they were. Maybe, just maybe, your mom and your sister aren't the perfect bellwethers of the needs of skittish would-be-bike-riders in the world.

[Closi]

> Maybe, just maybe, your mom and your sister aren't the perfect bellwethers of the needs of skittish would-be-bike-riders in the world

Your claim is that nobody wants them. I know at least two, which is more than 0.

They aren't popular yet, but I'm willing to bet that they will be with further development. Let's not forget that the first automatic gearbox for cars, the 1904 Sturtevant "horseless carriage gearbox", wasn't exactly a market hit - it took until the late 1940's for it to take off as a polished product and longer still to overtake manual transmissions (due to similar cited concerns about maintainability and the level of control).

In fact, I actually drive a manual transmission in my car because of those factors (and manual is still more popular in the UK), but clearly the majority of the market has moved on.