Thank you all for the support and constructive feedback! I'd like to note that as many of you pointed out, I made a few errors in the math at 0:32 . At 45 degrees, the torque should be closer to 71% not 50%. I also made some oversimplifications with the mechanics of pedaling, where the forces applied by your foot are more dynamic than the single downward force of gravity like is shown in the animation. I'm looking to improve my video quality and my math in the future so I do appreciate the corrections!

All that work for 10 seconds of demonstration 😢 it deserves more love, maybe a part 2?

As a design and manufacturing engineer, I have immense respect for your ability to conceptualize in 3D space! That is NOT a simple skill to master. I also envy your animation ability

Excellent video, but it seems like it ended too soon. You kind of left us hanging. You didn't tell us how the ride was. Was it hard to pedal, how fast, gearing, efficiency, improvements. It seemed as if you were successful, but it also seemed as if you weren't very happy with it. I have a design and it's similar to yours only in how the power from the legs is delivered, with the straight up and down force, the rest is different. It's not electric and it's all in my head. You've got a totally original proof of concept. Get excited!

A shout to the Dad who's obviously spent a lifetime assembling a wicked workshop and then teaching his son 💪🏻

Well done, but a bit disappointed that there was no review of the user experience after the build.

I wish you explored the final product more or did a comparison and test to see if your hypothesis of “is this design more efficient” was true. You should definitely make a part 2 for this, there is a lot more content you can get out of this bike

Incredible concept. Buuut... There are two overlapping torque curves, one for each leg, flattening out the total resulting torque curve. (Try pedaling with one leg and see how the analysis of a single crank doesn't work). The natural motion of a leg is not vertical or linear and doesn't result in a constant power output. The chain drive is > 95% efficient, and this is probably < 80%. Just listen to how loud this system is compared to a near silent chain drive. A chain drive is also very light and very robust.

This channel joins Stuff Made Here in the "came out of nowhere with fully formed, highly entertaining engineering videos" category.

Thing is we don't always just apply the force downwards in reference to the moment arm when we're biking, we adjust our ankle to get a better angle in order to produce the most torque which might be a point to consider.

Not sure if I’m more impressed by the concise high quality video or the engineering skills. Well done.

Fantastic mechanical engineering project! Shimano got the same result with much less expense and work, by making crank sprockets that varied in radius as a function of crank angle. The beauty of this was that you could get whatever advantage this offers, by changing only one component in your drive system. I remember this from the 1990s, so the fact that they're not used everywhere today implies that these didn't provide any significant improvement in overall efficiency. The consequence of having a circular sprocket, and its sinusoidal torque curve, means that the leg muscles are used in a cyclic way, where their maximum output is used only for short periods, and we learn to apply maximum force only when the crank is close to horizontal. Lengthening these periods may just result in quicker fatigue, since the muscles don't have time to relax between bursts of force. So this is more of a bioengineering problem than a simple mechanical one - keep in mind that in walking or running, which we are optimized for, our muscle output is also cyclic.

Probably one of the most impressive and underrated parts of this video is the fact that you manually machined all these parts. Getting the precision, required for builds like this, manually is crazy

As a bike mechanic... look, I respect your enthusiasm and drive to execute what is genuinely a neat foray by an outsider into the world of cycling physics, but in the end it's just that, a foray by an outsider. You might get a longer peak torque from this design, but the big flaw with it (and with every other attempt by a non-cyclist to create a vertical pedaling system) is that, with proper saddle height, your feet never stop moving with a traditional crank setup. This maximizes the length of your power stroke, which in turn accomplishes two things: it minimizes muscle strain, and it ensures that you don't lose momentum, which is what would happen with a) overextended legs on the downstroke and b) pedaling vertically. This is all due to the fact that, the moment your feet stop moving, your power stroke ends and you lose all your acceleration, meaning it takes more energy to resume the stroke with your upper foot. I realize that this has been a nasty wall of text, and for that I apologize, but ultimately this is just an attempt, albeit a well-meaning one, to fix a problem that simply doesn't exist.

Being an avid cyclist and mechanical engineering student, this video is just super fun to watch! I'd love to hear more about the mechanical principles and thoughts behind your idea in another video. Great content man!

My god, finally one of these weird and cool machines that's not made entirely of cheap 3D printed plastic. I love seeing something well made like this.

This channel is gonna be one of the best engineering channels on KZfaq

Partner with Q rings by Rotor. They make bike chainrings designed according to your legs’ torque curve so they take an oval shape roughly. When your foot is at the 90* position the rings ovalize so they get bigger so it more efficiently uses your power and when your legs are in the 180* position they flatten out so they get smaller so you can quickly pedal out of the dead zone

I’d be so proud if i had a son as studious and productive as you are. Great work brother

Very cool project! Can’t wait to see more! Ironically, the bike you are working with has a shimano biopace crankset installed which you can see has non-circular rings. These rings already do essentially what your contraption does (to a more or lesser extent I’m not sure). I would recommend simply installing some circular rings and see if you notice a difference. Also you seem to have a bit of a misconception about torque and efficiency. They are not really related in the way you suggest. Simply increasing your torque does not make you more efficient. If that were true, your contraption is unnecessary because you could otherwise just switch to a lower gear. The small inefficiency that a bicycle drivetrain does have is still present in your design because your power is still transmitted through all the original bicycle components, plus all the components in your contraption. It is impossible that you have improved the mechanical efficiency.

One thing missing: the comparison between both design with the practical/sound experiment

Technological progress has been amazing to watch for me from the early 70’s to present day. Maker KZfaq is full of 1 person doing what often took companies with many dozens employees years to accomplish. I find a new creator, what seems like every day, building amazing new projects.

That's a very cool project wrapped in a cool format. However I feel like this video lacks a proper conclusion. Where is the graph comparison? I was hoping that the final cam track would be made of metal. You didn't even mention how the bike feels after the modifications. There is close to zero footage of the bike actually working after the mods :/ I'd also like to see a different person trying to ride the bike. Take a friend, put him in front of a camera, let him ride the bike and record his reactions and thoughts about the mod. I know that it's not about the destination, but about the journey, but man, it kinda feels like the video ended extremely abruptly. You can milk this project a lot more and I feel like it deserves a second video.

we need a follow up comparing your heartrate while maintaining 15 mph on a traditional bike vs this bike.

Just a little constructive criticism here. At the point 9:04, I noticed that some of the master links were facing the wrong way. Basically you want the side that clips on, to face the opposite way of travel, if not you risk the link catching on one of the gears, and unclipping. It's also probably better to only use one master link, there for reducing the chance of failure. Overall great work, can't wait to see the next project!!

The alternator is a great idea to compare the speed of the wheel but replace the light bulb with a multimeter and read the current change to get a really accurate picture!

This is an outstanding video! We really need a part 2 about what it's like to ride, how fast you can go, how tiring compared to a regular bicycle etc.

This is an awesome example of putting engineering skills into action. I'd love to see this compared to a set of pedals on an elliptical gear.

I love how this is the same but different from the last video. The production value is super high. It’s all done so perfectly. Cannot wait to see what’s next. This is the best part of all my fav engineering channels like Colin Furze, Tom Stanton, Stuff Made Here etc etc. So so glad you exist!!

The editing is amazing and the project itself seemed very intuitive! Amazing video, great idea, and I can tell this channel is going to blow up soon! Great work!

That shop is to die for. Your so lucky to have such amazing opportunities for creativity.

im glad that this level of expertise is available for free on youtube. this is a masters class in engineering, great 3d cg

Although I don’t see much real world use since it would be hard to isolate the cam from the environment, it’s still an insanely cool concept, keep up the awesome work!

I applaud your tenacity and dedication to experimentation! Please do a follow up video. I have my suspicions that this system may introduce a lot of extra friction that will ultimately lead to a slower bike, but there is only one way to prove my hypothesis true or false. Excellent job making the components!

"The garage" scene was so wonderfully edited, the music, the cuts, it wall made it feel so epic and cool, like the part of the movie where the protagonist finally belives in themselves and starts preparing to face the villain. That was a really enjoyable video, it definetly deserves the button clicks, cant wait for more content.

Like others have mentioned, this was exactly the issue of evening out, as much as possible, the torque curve that the biopace chain ring was meant to address. Sheldon Brown has a write-up on the biopace design and why it never caught on.

Here are some thoughts from a cyclist in the real world. • There’s so much good here!Original thinking, clever graphics, beautiful workshop and fine craftsmanship. Applause! • Biomechanics are super complicated. Consider that conventional bikes can be successfully ridden by humans aged 3 to 123 with all their biomechanical diversity. • Biochemistry is even more complicated and none of us are continuous sources of power. Our various components need cyclic rest (as others have mentioned) • This looks like it would add some weight which is a factor on uphills. For many it’s a critical factor. • Even at scale this would surely add considerable cost. Additionally the materials and energy to manufacture raise the carbon footprint which ideally we would keep as low as possible. • There are many more sources of friction (not least all the sliding) which are also very noisy. Noise is something many (most?) cyclists abhor. • The added fiction would increase spectacularly once this gets dirty which is both inevitable and almost immediate. That leads to two further undesirable outcomes: cleaning and maintenance. • While there are many different genres of cycling and cyclists a very large proportion of journeys are for low cost, low speed, low maintenance and low effort city “commuting” (I use the word loosely). Simplicity is the guiding principle. In slight contradiction to some of the above I have for my bike paid a hefty price for something that adds weight and (slightly) reduces efficiency: a Rohloff internal hub. Now this really is a fine piece of engineering for a specific purpose: it eliminates faffing around with derailleur gears on long distance bike touring. And it’s a utter joy to use. But it’s not a solution to any of the problems facing city cycling which are largely behavioural, social and political. I look forward to your next beautiful out of box thinking project. Keep it up.

that machining was impressive, although I would have liked to see more of the finished product. I'd guess that with more torque you'll also need to change the gear ratio to make the bike use all that power

I hope cam-drive bikes become a thing. I had a similar idea while I was going through a thought exercise for a "100km/h bicycle". My main motivation was to get more reciprocating action rather than circular and getting to use the quadriceps longer for each stroke. A cam drive not too dissimilar to this one came up. I'm glad I found someone who actually built one and test it.

You are one hell of an engineer, keep it up. Thanks.

Amazing videography and (more importantly) engineering. I can appreciate the creativity and experience it takes to create this project. Although, as some comments have pointed out, this bike is actually less efficient than (most) standard bicycles for two reasons inherent to the design. This is considering the true definition of mechanical efficiency, defined by the power output / power input. 1. The primary, obvious reason is due to the abundance of sliding friction. The bearings are a good touch, but considering that all of the parts downstream of the CAM are original, any added friction in your system will reduce the efficiency. You can hear the bearings rolling pretty well, which shows the amount of energy being lost to sliding friction either within the bearing itself or against the track as it rolls. 2. The second, much more important loss of energy that contributes to this devices lower efficiency is in the CAM design itself. Not all of the energy that is transmitted by a vertical step is converted into torque, and this is due to the physical nature of a wedge, or an incline. Work is a change in energy, and Power is the rate of Work over time (change in energy over time). Work can be calculated by multiplying a force by its parallel displacement of an object. For example, if you push against a stationary wall, you have done no work (and therefore transmitted no power) because the displacement is 0 despite the application of a force. If you were to instead push up on a box and lift it into the air, you have done work on the box because you applied a vertical force and it experienced a (parallel) vertical displacement. In the same way, by pushing down on a pedal in a downstroke (starting from a 12 o'clock position and ending in a 6 o'clock position) power is transmitted because the downward force is parallel to the pedals displacement, since the pedal has displaced vertically and not horizontally. The energy is transferred through the torque that the force creates on the pedal, and although the torque does follow the sin shape your graph showed, this does not make it inefficient. All of the energy supplied by the leg (ignoring friction) is transmitted into velocity of the bike. Unfortunately, as beautiful as your design is (especially the JB weld😉), it does not have 100% efficiency (ignoring friction) like a standard bike pedal. To explain why, consider pushing a cart up on an inclined surface, or a ramp. Although it is difficult to fight gravity, you reach the top and you have two things: a cart with more potential energy because it is elevated, and a cart with kinetic energy from its horizontal velocity (congrats!). The potential energy comes from the work done by the vertical component of your force, and the kinetic energy is from the work done by the horizontal component. Because you are in a world where friction doesn't exist, you have been 100% efficient. Now go up the ramp again, but imagine now once the cart reaches the top, it runs into a wall and stops completely. The potential energy is the same, since that is only based off of the height of the cart, meaning that all of the energy transmitted through the vertical component of you pushing the cart is conserved (100% efficient). However, the car has no velocity anymore because it hit the wall and lost its kinetic energy through some process of plastic deformation or transferring the energy into the wall itself. So, whatever energy was spent pushing the cart horizontally is now gone, indicating a drop in efficiency. Remember, in a fully efficient system, the total energy of the cart-earth system after the action is done should equal the total energy before, but as we just showed, it is lower because the cart has no kinetic energy. If the ramp were at a 45 degree angle, the displacement in the horizontal and vertical direction would be equal, and the force applied in the horizontal and vertical directions would be equal, and so it is known that the Kinetic Energy (KE) = Potential Energy (PE) at the top of the ramp. So, when the KE is lost from the cart stopping, this results in a system with only 50% efficiency! Now, how does this relate to your CAM? Let's look at one bearing and examine the forces. Well, when the pedal is pushed down, the bearing transmits a horizontal and vertical force on the CAM track. The horizontal force in this case is what is converted into Torque and therefore rotates the CAM and in consequence the wheel. This is analogous to the vertical force in the ramp example (confusing I know) because as long as you keep rotating in the same direction, or keep pushing the box uphill, the work done will be positive and will not be lost. *However*, if you look at the vertical force that the bearing applies to the CAM track, what do we see as the CAM undergoes 1/2 of a rotation? It starts stationary, then the bearing moves vertically (which can also be considered an opposite vertical motion of the CAM itself) as the pedal is pushed down, until a half rotation occurs, and then the bearing no longer has a vertical velocity! Work had to be applied to the bearing in the vertical direction at some point in the process, otherwise it would have no change in vertical velocity, but as we can see, the beginning and end state of this half rotation results in the same vertical velocity of the bearing. This is the same as in the case with the cart, where the beginning and ending horizontal velocity are 0 because energy was lost during the cart's collision with the wall. Even though the force and displacement are always in the same direction for this half rotation, indicating positive work should be done on the bearings vertical velocity, the bearing ends up with no change in its vertical velocity, and so we can conclude that this energy was lost. And, ladies and gentlemen, what does it mean when energy is lost from a system? It's efficiency goes down! What this means is that if your track were at a 45 degree angle, for example, it would be the same 50% efficiency as seen in the ramp scenario. Of course, yours is much steeper, but the efficiency could still be calculated to be tan(angle). TL;DR, the vertical component of the force applied to the CAM does work to the bearing-CAM system, but this energy is promptly lost, indicating a loss of energy from the system and therefore a loss of efficiency. In comparison, a bicycle's transmission system has 100% efficiency (all of this is ignoring friction effects). Great video and project! Hope to see more soon.

So glad the algorithm brought me here. I use my engineering skills every day for a company and have honestly never thought about using this for myself which is extremely strange. By valuing your own skills and presenting it here, you're teaching me as well as others to value our skills as well. Very inspirational.

OK, looks like a brilliant idea. I do see a lot of design challenges in dealing with friction losses between the sine curve track & pedals, and in the two extra drive train components though 🥴

That's a cool project. Another way I work around the nonlinear torque characteristic is to add an entire phase of propulsion to the pedals... at 90°, by using my quads and hamstrings and tilting my feet so that I can push 𝘢𝘯𝘥 pull, fore and aft as well as down, instead of just down. More rounded exercise for the legs too.

It may be more efficient, but it's top speed has to be way lower. Also I think that you loose a lot of efficiency through the gears and chains used, another thing is that if you short pedal it, I imagine things would break very easily. Cool concept, really is, but I don't think it's practical.

I am still amazed with the unique ideas and the quality of the videos. It feels like this channel is destined for greatness! PS. I was here when this channel had only 23.7k subs. Just for the record when I am going to be surprised how much this channel grew in the furture.

Second video! Excited to see this channel's future. I know it'll grow even more soon enough. The animations are very good and the editing is also great.

The music choice in this video is really nice. Nobody else seemed to mention it lol

0:32 cos(45°) is not half, its .707 so youre making 71% of the total torque. Half would be at 60°, 30° on your display in the video, you can even see this in the projection you do of the length. Probably just an oversight but might be worth fixing. Good video, always love to see new concepts.

You can tell an engineer is proud of their work when they end the video immediately after finishing the project without showing a single comparisons

The loud sound it makes indicates, that it is not very efficient in total. But a great idea! Thanks for presenting and realizing it.

I'm so impressed with all this talent. Bravo , bro.

Some very interesting ideas here, thinking outside the box. Maybe instead of a fragile protruding cam and rollers it could be a grooved drum with one roller? If the drum rotates around the frame stem the driven shaft could be the original crank shaft, doing away with the extra chain drive. Would love to see this subject investigated further 🙂👏

Amazing ingenuity and proof of concept. I had an idea that I thought would revolutionize power production. I wish I had a friend like you who could bring it to reality to see if it had any merit. Nice job!

I've never seen a channel with such elaborate and beautiful projects (yes, I'll take two as a valid sample size for now), so I really hope you get the attention you deserve.

Interesting . This has been addressed before in the form of a wire drive system consisting of an L shaped crank and a wire wrapped around a hub. The pedals move almost vertically up and down and the wire transfers the motion into rotational movement at the wheel. A velomobile is suited to a linear pedal movement using a similar wire system to convert to rotational motion.

As a mechanical engineer, my all respect to your Dad and my best wishes to you.

Really enjoyed the video. About what you are engineering: there have been a lot of attempts to optimize efficiency. There are some examples in "bicycling science" by David Borden Wilson. There is a point where the muscles get too little rest while cycling and acid is building up. If you are looking for that the project will be an real life usable improvement would suggest to include human factors in this project.

I think it might be made better with the pedals themselves on horizontal bearings, so your legs can make a more natural motion that way

There was a bicycle transmission (Stringdrive) that used treadles pivoting on shafts placed where a conventional bike has its crankshaft. The treadles pulled cables that operated ratchet mechanisms in the rear hub. Mechanical advantage ratio was altered by moving the cable attachments along the treadle levers. It was a very light arrangement.

this is a really interesting idea, i wonder how it works out with actual pedaling tho since it seems like you might not be able to engage as many muscle groups which could hurt efficiency on the human side, offsetting the improved mechanical efficiency

Oval front sets do basically the same thing, but I still love this design! Looks like it should be steam assisted 😁

Since 1996 been on various road Recumbents bicycle commuting: short-wheelbase, long-wheelbase, high above the seat bottom bracket and low below the seat bottom bracket. Found that the best torque and aerodynamic is on Cruzbike Vendetta V20C with BB high above the seat: thigh power + leg power against the back seat makes more torque than on regular road bike with thigh and leg alone even while standing on pedal. Laidback bicycles mimics standing on pedals against the back seat. As you get old thighs and legs lose strength a bit compares to teenage years but not true on road Recumbents' riding without pain.

Its truly inspiring to see such a new channel with this quality. Keep up the great work!

Neat little physics experiment, but more weight and more moving parts probably hurts your efficiency more than helps it. Still a very interesting contraption, however. Thanks for sharing your ideas with us.

I love that you have a biopace eliptical chainting on this bike which is designed to reduce torque in the powerstroke

This would be very interesting to do in a recumbent. You could do longer pedals, too.

I absolutely love this. As a man that devotes himself to preventative maintenance, I have to say that having sealed lubricant ion system on a drive train like this would be very hard to make and it made even be impossible but if you did make one like this, then it might just be the most reliable bicycle ever designed.

Got wonder struck by seeing the ability to visualise, conceptualise and put into practice in such precise manner that even a big automobile company should envy. Hats off to your talent and skill. You will come up with something extraordinary!

Wow!! I was impressed by your CAD work at first, but at 3:10 I really had to pause and admire the model - awesome. Super engaging and a fun idea. I built an electric pedal assist bike a few years ago and it's been so fun to ride but this is way more creative XD

This feels like only half a video. I really hope you just released early to have a quick followup after the staggering success of your first video and create either complete videos or videos clearly recognizable as series. I really love to see another engineering channel that does interesting stuff on youtube!

You bike has bio pace oval chainrings, I don’t know if you already knew this, but I figured I would point it out. Super cool idea and the whole system is really impressive :)

This concept is amazing. Love the work you did! You didn’t just want to make a thing, but explain and understand why it did what it did

Great project! It looks like the bike has an oval chainring (Shimano Biopace). It would be interesting to see whether/how that affects the torque curve of the new system, compared to a normal round chainring.

أقترح عليك أن تعدل اتجاه حركة القدمين عن طريق إمالة المحور قليلاً مع التجربة للوصول لزاوية الميل المناسبة الأكثر راحة لحركة الأرجل. ايضاً أقترح تحويل المسار البلاستيكي البارز إلى حفر غاطس في اسطوانة معدنية. عمل جيد 👏👍

Incredible work again! your projects are so unique and cool.

Im not well versed in this stuff, but i thought that more parts meant more lost energy. I would have liked to see more testing and more numbers, but i guess the objective was completed already. The design does in fact work and thats really cool.

Nice job on not only designing and building this, but also your cinematography work. Ty for posting.

The concept here is amazing! If the loss of the cam and moving parts is less than the gains from the system this could honestly be something amazing

You could've just made the pedal sprocket slightly elliptical to improve torque when the pedals are above each other. Your legs can push forward and back, not just up and down. The elliptical sprocket may require new chain guides since it will tend to shake the chain at high speed.

We used a regular crank set up to pedal a 27,500LB. GVW dump truck, and got it to go up to 40MPH back in 2012. Since then, our knowledge on human power has increased dramatically. We're doing a Volvo tractor trailer, and already have most of it ready to go! If you're ever in New Jersey, come see the physical proof. 🍷🍷😎

It was exciting to watch your design come together, and I can't wait to see what you build next. We definitely need a comparison video of this design and a traditional crank design! Awesome work!!

I don´t wana talk down your cool engineering venture, but! There is already a way easyer solution for that not realy occurring problem, it´s elliptical chainrings! 😏 The other thing is that our lags don´t work that way, they don´t just push staight up and down, they are made to be moved in a arc, and will have a broader torque curve then you described. Also the energy delivered by our muscles is not linear proportional to the force the exert. Yes they use energy just for a static holding force, but way less then if they also move under the same force. It´s easy to assume that our muscels just use up the same amount of chemical energy, regardless if the are exerting a force static or while moving, but it,s not! Otherwise a pretty cool contraption! 😎

An incredible idea, i would love to see optimized and refined into a production ready prototype. It's got the potential to complete in a class all its own. Engineers would have a feild day with this.

This really seems like it could go far, this channel and its videos are greatly produced, the explanations are impecably done, and on top of that easy to folow. Great job, this deserves more than a couple thousand views, im a fan

Bro if ever you decide to create a teachable classroom for your fans. I will be the first one to join. Cheers to your efforts.

i could see this working super well on those custom chopper bicycles

There’s a substantial problem in your bicycle crank model. Any cyclist will spot it immediately: nobody peddals by applying force strictly in downward direction. Especially when you use clips/SPD etc., you can apply torque efficiently basically through the wole rotation on both sides simultaneously. Moreover, you engage basically all the muscle groups in your legs, not just thighs.

Wow - your editing and storytelling flow so well. My favourite part is from 1:45 - 2:45. Wow, great job here.

2:15 yooo that's basically Peter designing his Spider-Man costume's montage in Raimi's first Spider-Man I love it! 😂

Cool video! Obviously not very practical but rethinking basic systems like this is neat. Hope to see more soon.

That's quite a marvel of engineering you've designed there. And when you machined those mountings about 6:55, they looked so professionally done, that they remind me of suspension fork mounts for a motorbike. Fair play. I can understand why this likely wouldn't be something mainstream though because of how complex it is. So many intricately machined parts. Brilliant nonetheless, and you proved the title 👍 P.s. that bike's gonna be one harsh ride. Suspension is a wonderful thing 😉😜

All the friction losses in the additional gears and chains… damn. In the end you have to put in the same (or more thanks to added friction) amount of work to get from A to B. So what does it accomplish? I applaud your craftsmanship and creativity! Great video!

Looks like a great design for a recumbent bike. With a regular bike, your pros can produce torque at all angles with cleats.

It was very interesting,but i think that by using clip-in pedals you solve the original problem

What's also interesting is the plot mapping for the angle to pounds chart for the bike has a highest plot point of 20.4, where the cam graph goes up to around 22 and stays there for the duration of it's peak

The playing card used to measure torque through frequency is the coolest little idea ever

I wish we got a little more of the test at the end. How was it? Is it as comfortable as a normal bike? It looked kinda slower

This is a phenomenal video. Idea, storytelling, style, to execution. Brilliant.

Amazing concept! Can you get bunch of people try this bicycle and possibly do a timed race?