You are reading a single comment by @polybikeuser and its replies.
Click here to read the full conversation.
London Fixed Gear and Single-Speed is a community of predominantly fixed gear and single-speed cyclists in and around London, UK.
This site is supported almost exclusively by donations. Please consider donating a small amount regularly.
@polybikeuser
"Designer" seems to cover a multitude of activities/disciplines these days, from the aesthetics of clothes and interior design, through to the (semi)science of ergonomics and interface design, with all sorts in between, for example typography.
I know enough to know that over the years a number of product design courses have repositioned themselves as product engineering courses to distinguish themselves as being concerned with producing things that functioned better, rather than just looked nice.
I'm not anti-design, far from it, but there are too many designers who play around with objects and make them pretty, claim they've improved them but have too little understanding of the underlying function/physical properties of the object they claim to be improving. For example what proportion of designers use Finite Element Analysis?
The Royce chainset may well be no better than a Sugino 75, it may be a mistake to have the ring on the inside of the spider rather than the outside if you want to make regular ring changes, in which case it won't establish itself in the market. On the other hand it may prove to be engineered to be stiffer than the competition and with a narrower Q factor, which may appeal to some, in which case it may find itself a niche. I happen to like the way it looks, but at the end of the day, that's not really the greatest priority is it? My concern is that some, and I emphasise SOME designers would think it was.