Nucleus - Alternative Fuel Concept Motorcycle
May 9th, 2008 by Paul Crowe - "The Kneeslider"
This is what the designer, Branko Lukic, calls the nUCLEUS, an alternative fuel motorbike concept. He thinks motorcycles shouldn’t mimic one another but instead should do things differently. His nUCLEUS (Why do designers write like they hit the caps lock?) is a “square against the air” which looks like a slab from the side but from the front presents only blades to confront the wind.
The bike squats down resting on the body when parked and rises up when ready to ride. Its appearance isn’t what I would call appealing but it certainly is different and as we look into the future, everything is worth at least some consideration, so here it is.
This is in no way a finished idea but only a concept and it’s sure to evoke an emotional response in some viewers, especially if they’re used to what might be called a “normal” motorcycle. Of course, once you get away from the usual internal combustion engine, the shape and configuration of the motorcycle may vary widely from what we’re used to seeing. Fuel cells, batteries, and who knows what else may not be the best looking technology and covering it up might be the way to go, an idea I’ve mentioned before, plus they may have little need for exposure to the air for cooling like your average engine, either way, things may look a bit different in the future.
Designers like Lukic often push the envelope specifically to get people thinking outside their comfort zone, their ideas may have merit, they may be silly, but at least it gets you thinking.
There’s a video at their site showing more angles and how it rises up and parks. More photos and the link below:
Link: nUCLEUS via Business Week
Posted in Alternative thinking, Concept Motorcycles, Motorcycle Design
| Top Of Page
24 Responses to “Nucleus - Alternative Fuel Concept Motorcycle”
Please read before commenting ...
This is a public forum, NO PROFANITY OR PERSONAL ATTACKS WILL BE TOLERATED! STAY ON TOPIC! All comments are filtered, if yours does not appear, do not resubmit, it has been held for review. Comments may be edited or removed by the moderator. Above all, keep the conversation civil! Thanks.
May 9th, 2008 at 8:35 am
i try and stay open minded about motorcycle design, but i just can’t like this.
it is different…
May 9th, 2008 at 9:07 am
Most motorcyclists — me included — seem to prefer good looks over almost anything else. Even setting that aside, however, and saying I hypothetically valued safety, efficiency, and performance above all else, this strikes me as being nearly impossible to handle in a crosswind and unnecessarily draggy due to all the air being packed into that giant scoop around the front wheel.
It also strikes me as what some of those Bonneville streamliners might have looked like before their streamlining got a little more form-fitting, which is a polite way of saying this is ugly as sin.
May 9th, 2008 at 9:40 am
I see potential ground clearance issues, particularly up front. Imagine those corners digging in when you come into a corner a little hot, under braking. That would be one fun highside.
May 9th, 2008 at 9:58 am
it sure would make a cool kitchen table though.
May 9th, 2008 at 10:08 am
besides the emotional reaction and a closed mind not open to future realizations … it’s just a damn cardboard sheet ducttaped on a motorcycle !?
May 9th, 2008 at 10:11 am
Ok philp Starks’ bike was ok, but this isn’t sexxy at all…..
May 9th, 2008 at 10:27 am
This guy is sooooo arrogant.
May 9th, 2008 at 10:39 am
finally…a motorcycle you can put wood panels on. Chicks could wallpaper it with floral designs, or you could put an original mural on it, or put your favorite beer adverisement banner on it.
May 9th, 2008 at 10:41 am
I hate to say it, but I actually like it despite it’s functional flaws. It’s so un-what-we-think-when-we-think-motorcycle that it really appeals to me.
May 9th, 2008 at 10:42 am
Well…it’s interesting…I guess…
I too would be very concerned about crosswinds. I wonder if it would take off like a kite?
May 9th, 2008 at 11:53 am
Looks like somebody waited until the night before the deadline to design a bike.
I just posted a similar response on the article at BW… but I wanted to throw my two cents down here.
I see that one of the guys who worked on the project has some riding experience, but I highly doubt that he has any experience *designing* a bike. The plates DO look heavy, and even if they are made of a lightweight material, I guarantee that at speed the front of the plates will flap around and shudder.
Aesthetics at the cost of safety IS NOT DESIGN. Design is the process of making things better; remember, form follows function. These guys just stand in a circle jerking themselves off because they think they’ve done something original.
Doing something “original” like this is easy; the question is “can you make it work well?”
May 9th, 2008 at 11:58 am
If you could ride inside of it, and where the handle bars are now, if those were gun slots. Now THAT would be cool…
May 9th, 2008 at 11:59 am
Well, he solved the center stand problem quite nicely.
May 9th, 2008 at 1:32 pm
From a design perspective, I will give Lukic credit for attempting to answer questions not many people are asking. To me, his designs take on an almost elementary or child-like approach to a problem. But that’s not a bad thing at all, especially if a majority of the people are not thinking that way. That’s what ART is.
At the very least, the images above may inspire a few designers to ask their own questions, and come up with something that connects with them emotionally. Surely, there’s been better attempts to break the mold in the 2-wheeled world in my opinion.
However, I will say as a response to some of the comments above, it’s not uncommon for somewhat successful industrial designers to feel like they walk on a higher plain. Their language is littered with philosophies and ideals and such, and then they show you a design as a result of all that talk and the majority of “lesser” people don’t “get it”, but they would “get it” if they were as enlightened or had read the books the designer read. Of course, I’m not saying Lukic is like this, I don’t know him, I’m just saying it’s not uncommon in the design industry. But that just makes it much nicer when you do meet some of the few truly humbled designers.
Besides, to me, designs are usually limited, yes limited, by the medium in which they were created, including CAD. Think about it, would the images above evoke the same reaction from people if they were in watercolor?
May 9th, 2008 at 2:52 pm
Although I don’t see the practicality in this design , I do appreciate the artistic view of it . Beautiful sculpture indeed , if I had the means it would make a great display piece or modern furniture. I also understand as a designer or artist pieces like this get allot of attention and propel you to fame. I like this design because it provokes curiosity. But I still think it would be a cool flat screen TV table or something.
May 9th, 2008 at 4:08 pm
Beauty is in the eye of the beholder. Right now I’m trying to beholden down my lunch. Bleargh.
May 9th, 2008 at 4:21 pm
As a designer I understand what the intent was. This bike is not intended to function, come-on, is that a 40″ seat hight? What it does - successfully - is provoke. Not answer, provoke. It allows people to rethink what a motorcycle should or needs to look like considering a change in technology. Even now (starting with the original Gold Wing) bikes still have a “gas tank” in front of the seat even if it’s really located somewhere else.
Let’s give designers credit, (we’re) supposed to think outside the box so that ideas will be fresh 5 years from now when they finally make it to market. Designers need to abandon convention and status quo or companies would fail trying to compete selling the same thing as everyone else. And yes, I do know of a few with their heads in the clouds.
-todd
May 9th, 2008 at 5:28 pm
I agree that this “bike” provokes, but this thing does not inspire me at all.
Reminds me of a cardboard box.
I like to see the true machine behind the bike and fairings, and cardboxes alike, ruin that for me.
Ugly as all get out.
May 9th, 2008 at 6:13 pm
It’s bloody ugly. The answer to a question nobody asked, and provoking thoughts nobody wants to think.
May 9th, 2008 at 8:46 pm
As a designer, I agree quite a bit with Todd. This bike is a blank canvas in some ways. It dispenses with the things we identify with as being part of the concept of motorcycle. It has no visible gas tank, it has no visible engine. It has wheels, a seat, controls, and that’s about it. It could be powered by anything.
I personally like the shape, but more as it would relate to a piece of high modern furniture I’d love to see in my home rather than a bike to swing a leg over. It can’t be much more ugly than most contemporary sport bikes look to me. Most of them are insectile and strange with odd shapes and confusing graphics that serve to mask the afore mentioned shapes.
May 9th, 2008 at 8:57 pm
The FIRST RULE of GOOD design is that FORM follows FUNCTION.
One thing that just galls me is the affectations of so called designers who try to justify a lack of ability by claiming to be doing work for the sake of making people think. This IMO is a prime example of that. As useless as women’s fashions that are unwearable or architecture that can’t or won’t be built.
Motorcycles are ALL about function.
Good form follows efficient and effective function.
This is neither efficient or effective.
Therefore this is a waste of time and Lukic should either do something worthwhile or go work in a fashion house designing crap for artistic interiors or some such.
While it may be true that GREAT designers like Frank Lloyd Wright for example may have pushed the edge of what could be built through innovative design everything they did was based on the concept that form follows function.
Wright would probably have roasted this guy Lukic.
I repeat GOOD design requires that Form Follows Function. Stuff like this is no better than the guys who decorate vehicles to look like appliances or dog houses.
How many ways can I say it …. I am NOT impressed!
May 10th, 2008 at 12:57 am
I see he started the design with a clean sheet of paper, then said, “Okay, I’m done.”
I love it for being so unashamedly impractical. I can’t wait to pick one up at Ikea.
May 10th, 2008 at 10:17 am
Is it me or did he just forgot to remove the bike from the box ?
IMHO it’s fugly
May 10th, 2008 at 12:24 pm
It definitely is something to make you think, and that reminds me I need a new headboard for my bed.
In all reality, clean it up for side wind by taking off all the unneeded extra “fairing areas”, keep the “motor” covered, and what do you end up with? Just another gsxr or ninja with a REALLY ugly headlight and taillight assembly.
The “alternative fuel concept” of this vehicle is lost and overlooked for ugly aesthetics. Also, the fact that the front wheel, rear wheel and seat all “automatically” move and lock into place, it seems that there would be no real room for any power source. I do like the interesting way of securing the bike though, if it cant roll, its harder to steal, if you cant access the front tire, you cant remove it ect. But those of us that are TRUELY interested in alternative vehicles want to see the guts of the bike, or at least know what it is (electric? diesel? e-85?) hp output? approximate run time (in electrics) before recharge or estimated mpg of a fuel source.
Thank god this is something (aka nonproduct) that will never see any part of production, even though given 2 sheets of plywood, some aluminum stock and a steamer, I could technically reproduce the overall look of this bike in a matter of days. Paint of course is strictly optional, and for an extra 1000 I could roll on any color you want, let me go to home depot for the color samples first.