More interesting is the fact that it's a 2-speed automatic. I've seen previous attempts at adding automatic transmissions to bikes but much of the reviews out there seem to mostly complain about the shift points and inability to control them. E.g. they shift at a fixed speed and there's no way to "kickdown" unlike an automotive automatic, which also takes into account engine speed and throttle position. I suppose the analogous indication for a bike would be the force being applied to the pedals.

I believe it is this one (or an OEM variant): https://www.sram.com/sram/urban/products/automatix

I think its gimmicky.

If you're going to bother with internal hub gearing, you might as well make it manual-- its even easier than shifting a derailleur and you don't need to be moving. Its not like automatic 2-speed shifting is solving a real problem.

Well it is pretty handy to have the uphill gear and standard gear on a town bike.

I’ve got a Norco (CityGlide) with the SRAM 2-sped automatic on it. It’s pretty good. The shift is more based on the torque applied than the speed you’re going at; coasting and then using light torque will shift back to first gear pretty quickly.

Aside from the belt drive, this looks pretty close to the CityGlide that I have, and at a similar price (on sale). (The CityGlide lists around CA$799, and I got mine at a bike show for CA$450; I’ve spent more since then, including getting fenders.) If I didn’t already have a two-speed automatic, I’d probably look at this seriously.

I also have a Dahon (Speed P8) that I use in the winter, although I might be using the Norco a bit this winter. When I replace the Dahon, I’m strongly considering a Montague full-sized folding bike.

It's an old Fichtel & Sachs design, from 70s or earlier. I think it came back to production few years back, now by Sram that bought Sachs while back.

I think there also is an old Shimano design, but that was 3 or 4 speed.

The 2-speed internal gear hub seems to be the same SRAM Automatix that you have probably heard of, it's been around for a while (since 2011?) and used in quite a few bikes on the market.

http://www.sheldonbrown.com/automatix.html

Belt driven bikes have actually been around for quite a while. They aren't nearly as common as chained bikes but are generally less greasy/dirty. They are also usually good for people who don't do a ton of bike maintenance because (unlike a chain) a belt will never rust.

I remember us using the hardware for a belt driven bike in a solar car race, I recall it offered higher efficiency than chain drives that were available.

Edit: Actually I think the main draw was the continuous gear ratios you got, somewhat comparable to a CVT

This is true. There tends to be a lot of power loss due to friction from rotation of the links around the pins in a chain.

Chain drives are about as efficient as you can get, actually. Can be more efficient then meshed gears.. But only if the chain is properly maintained.

Belts may not have pins, but it still needs to simultaneously stretch and compress to go around pullies. The deformation and friction losses add up.

With the solar-powered EV the fact that belts lend themselves to a simple and reliable CVT (constant velocity transmission) probably made up for drive train losses. They could run the motor at the optimal RPM regardless of speed, which can make a huge difference.

With bicycling 'race bike image' and fashion plays a huge role in what people are willing to buy.

People tend to want to spend the money on aping 'Tour De France' bicycles. So high seats and low bars for a 'racing position'. Clipless peddles, high dollar light-weight components... Especially going from 32 spoke wheels to as few as 8 or even 4 spokes are all symptoms of this trend.

And that's just road bikes. Mountain bikes have their on trends with the heavy suspension components used for downhill that soak up all the energy from the rider, etc.

It's the bicycle equivalent of trying to use a Nascar or Class B Rally car for getting groceries. You end up with a really expensive, fragile, high-maintenance, really uncomfortable bike totally inappropriate for touring/commuting/trail riding.

Belt drives don't have a place in racing, so they usually don't have a place in most people's bicycles. The reality is that belts drives are a trade off between maintenance and efficiency.

This Ikea bicycle uses a 2-speed automatic geared hub with belt drive. It features built-in lights and a very upright riding position. It has front disk brake and rear coaster brake (you have to peddle backwards). It looks fairly heavy and ruggedly built.

The advantage of this is that it offers very simple controls and should be extremely low maintenance. It should accept abuse and neglect and run for a long time.

So things like... A family bicycle for running to the local store. Going on flat, level trails. It would be very nice for a 'campus bike' for universities or corporate areas were you spend time going from one building to another. Rental bikes.

It should lend itself to any situation were you are dealing with fairly flat ground, leisurely pace, and multiple people sharing the bicycle.

It won't ruin clothing, it won't spray water and dirt everywhere. You pants are not going to get caught in the gearing. You are not going to have rusted chains or dragging brakes. If it falls over you don't need to un-bend things or re-adjust derailleurs, etc.

The things to worry about this is the same for most Ikea products: Non-standard components, sizing and shockingly cheap components that sabotage the rest of the product. if it uses rugged and standard sizing/components for everything then it will probably be awesome... if not then it could be a turd.

Bear in mind that Ikea is a Swedish company, where the 'race bike image' is much less common, and is pretty irrelevant to their target market for this bicycle. The bicycle looks like 90% of the ones you'd find in Scandinavia, and is intended for daily use commuting, shopping, socialising and so on.

They give the weight as 16kg, which I think is fairly light for a bicycle of this type. Most people would add the basket and rear rack though.

My bicycle has a stainless steel self lubricating chain but I know where you're coming from. lots of people are put off by the idea of maintenance of their not very often ridden bicycle.

They will still be disappointed when they get this one out of the garage next summer to find the tyres are flat and splitting.

Why would a bike in storage deteriorate that much more quickly than one in use? You do need to store the tires inflated, but I use one set of tires for years, and I keep the bike outdoors in all weather and use it daily.

I do get the impression bike tires have gotten better over the years, because I don't remember tires being that robust in my childhood (but, well, memory and all...).

Tyres may be left in a garage or shed, where they're susceptible to direct sunlight and/or ozone.

Ozone? Could you please elaborate? What's with storage that increases ozone exposure?

Electric motors in a garage or storage room (e.g. for a heating system) might be a source of ozone, or sunlight on oils and solvents. The storage itself isn't the problem, it's the higher-than-average level of ozone in typical places rarely used bicycles might be stored.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ozone_cracking

Do tires exist that don't have these problems? Perhaps something made of a hard foam that doesn't deteriorate while stored?

Yes they do, for example: http://www.tannus.com

The trade off is that they're somewhat heavier and have more rolling resistance than a good air-filled tire.

I've found that keeping tires out of the sun makes the biggest difference. If kept out of the sun, bike tires can last a long time. One time I bought a bunch at the same time, and over the years I've regularly gotten one or two out of storage and found them satisfactory.

They had hard foam tire bikes when I was a kid but they didn't last long. And solid rubber tires are heavy. Decreasing rotating mass on a bicycle is always a good thing.

This is more like the belt drives we have had available in motorcycles for a long time just a smaller/lightweight version of it (due to much less power involved)

I have a pair of friends that are serious tandem riders and they now run their premium touring tandem with Gates Carbon Drive. They switched from chain because, if you didn't know, tandem bikes with strong riders have a reputation for eating chains. (Premature stretch, leading to cog/ring wear, and eventually breakage because of the torque involved.) Belts are stronger than chains in some regards and I think high-torque applications is one of them. Witness Harley-Davidson switching to belts decades ago, away from chains. Also, on a bicycle, a belt system can shed almost a pound versus an equivalent chain-cog-ring-derailleurs setup. While being very quiet and very clean.

Downsides ... unlike an easy chain repair, you can't repair a belt in the very rare case it breaks. So you carry a spare on a tour. There are suggestions that frictional losses are higher with belt versus chain, though. And belts are apparently weaker when twisted or laterally flexed than chains, so storage and initial setup is more critical.

Good belts are less elastic than chain. Really good belts are less elastic than gears.

Gates belts are dramatically stronger than chains. The bigger downside is the frame needs to built to accommodate the belt. The chain/belt passes through the rear triangle and you have to have a way to open it for a belt.

The transmission efficiency is probably nothing compared to the IGH and it's weight.

I was a little upset when honda dropped timing gears from the vfr engine. Chains are less reliable ... belts even less so. But issues of stretch and timing are irrelevant on a bicycle drive.

Fyi, the accepted horsepower-to-belt ratio for motorcycles is around 100hp for every inch of belt width. Beyond that, stretch and slipping become an issue no matter the material. Thats why sportbikes have stuck with chains.

Belts on cars have gone through rounds of engineering improvement and are now better than chains. Perhaps the same has happened to bicycles.

By "chainless" I was first thinking something like this:

http://glendalecycles.com/bike-technology/chainless-shaft-dr...

Neat, can you change gears?