Odd Bicycles from the Archives, or Ways to Cheat in Cycling Besides Doping

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

This article was published in Scientific American’s former blog network and reflects the views of the author, not necessarily those of Scientific American


This past Monday, the first doping scandal of the 2011 Tour de France was announced. Russian rider Alexandr Kolobnev tested positive for the diuretic hydrochlorothiazide (used to mask other doping agents) and has since voluntarily left the race while his urine is tested for further substances. Professional cyclists have been using performance-enhancing drugs for decades. Some medical professionals have begun to argue for the legalization of these substances so they can be safely monitored since cyclists and other athletes can't seem to stay away. However, I think if you’re going to try and cheat your competition in a cycling race, why not try and reinvent the bike rather than the rider and have some fun while you're at it?

An article titled “Grotesque Forms of Cycles” ran in the December 30, 1899, issue of Scientific American, and featured cycles built for a “Great Cycle Meeting” that took place at Holburn Viaduct, England.  While they were made for advertisement purposes, there is no doubt that some of these cycles could be used to get ahead in a road race.


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


A gigantic bicycle was on display whose wheels measured 19 ½ feet in diameter and pneumatic tires 8 inches in thickness. It was created by Messrs. H.A. Lozier & Company, the manufacturers of the Cleveland bicycle. Surely a bicycle that large would be capable of covering a great deal of ground, giving its rider a sure advantage in a race.

Perhaps you would be more interested in giving your whole team a leg up. This tricycle, boasted as being the largest in the world, was able to carry 8 cyclists and had two driving wheels and a steering wheel that measured 13 feet and 7 ½ feet respectively. It was constructed for the Wowenhoe & Rubler Company of Boston and weighed 2,236 pounds (not including the 8 riders).

The meeting also featured advantages for the heavier-than-average cyclist wanting to compete, particularly the heaviest cyclist in the world in 1899, referred to only as “Grimes.” Grimes weighed in at 567 pounds, measured 6 feet tall 62 inches around the chest. The bicycle he is pictured with was specially built for him.

Lastly, for those who preferred to cycle for leisure rather than competition, “The Sociable” offered the chance to ride side by side with a companion. Its driving wheel measured about 6 feet in diameter and covered over 19 feet with each revolution. Herr Karl Jatho, the inventor, is pictured on the cycle with his sister.

While performance-enhancing drugs may do more for a cyclist’s race standings than any one of these imaginative contraptions, we are at least reminded of the innocence and whimsy that can accompany a bike ride. Besides, isn't it always safer to soup up your wheels instead of your body?

In 1845 Scientific American magazine made its debut on newsstands and has continued to be published ever since. Now, Nature Publishing Group and Scientific American are working to digitize all past issues of the magazine. Mary Karmelek is in charge of checking over each issue, and in the process she uncovers fascinating, captivating and humorous material buried in the yellowed pages of our past. In this blog she shares the highlights of her discoveries. Additional archival material appears every month in our 50, 100 and 150 Years Ago column.

More by Mary Karmelek

Subscribe to Support Independent Journalism

Great science journalism requires human expertise, time, effort and creativity. And it costs money. That’s why I and the journalists here at Scientific American hope you’ll join our community.

When you subscribe, you are supporting staff and freelance journalists who are passionate about telling science stories that are true, important and compelling. Our editors and reporters are often experts in their fields, which means they understand the nuances of big discoveries and can untangle the breakthroughs from the hype. With a subscription, you are also supporting rigorous fact-checking to ensure the words we publish are precise and accurate. And you’re supporting original illustrations, graphics and photos that bring you closer to an advanced laboratory, an ice sheet in Antarctica or a space mission in orbit. You’re helping us craft other types of high-quality journalism as well: Our newsletters are carefully written, edited and curated by staffers you have or will come to know and love. Our Science Quickly podcast is based on original reporting, collaboration with editors and scientists and exacting production.

Subscriptions keep this engine running so we can continue to deliver thoughtful, rigorous and independent science journalism to you. In an era of viral misinformation, this work is crucial. If you value what we do, I hope you’ll consider joining us as a subscriber

Thank you,

Jeanna Bryner, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe