-5

I’m a college student and cyclist at USC. I’ve had three bikes stolen while at USC and it really annoyed me so now I’m doing something about it.

I’ve created a lock that specifically secures the wheels of a bike. It works by replacing the hex nuts or quick release skewers holding a bike in place. It’s designed so none of the common theft tools (i.e. wrenches, vice grips, bolt cutters) can get through it or get any leverage on it.

The nut can only be tightened / loosened with the specific wrench that comes in each package. There are multiple variations of these nut:wrench combinations.

I’d love to get some feedback on the product, whether or not you’d use it, and any advice you have (from business/marketing ideas to product improvements).

Móż
  • 23,532
  • 3
  • 71
  • 120
Bickeylikey
  • 19
  • 1
  • 5
    Do you mean something like the ones here? I guess you're bit late for that invention. – Benedikt Bauer Jun 24 '14 at 16:57
  • You have had three bikes stolen. How are they stealing the bikes? Would your invention have stopped the thefts? http://bicycles.stackexchange.com/questions/937/locking-your-bike-in-public-areas – paparazzo Jun 24 '14 at 17:09
  • @BenediktBauer we have a "close" button for dup questions, but what about dup inventions? – PeteH Jun 24 '14 at 17:16
  • 1
    @PeteH I guess the closing institution for this is called "patent office" ;-) – Benedikt Bauer Jun 24 '14 at 17:19
  • 1
    Yeah, I'm afraid (speaking as an engineer/programmer with my name on 13 patents) that your invention does not, based on the above description, appear to be "novel" enough to be patentable. – Daniel R Hicks Jun 24 '14 at 19:26
  • @DanielRHicks Actually, unless I'm mistaken, public disclosure of an invention before it's patented (or applied for patent) is actually grounds for not having a patent granted. But the OP never said anything about wanting to patent the invention. It's also possible that he came up with the idea on his own without being aware of already existing products. Current locks have limited number of combinations due to manufacturing constraints. I wonder if 3D printing could be used to make each set of bolts truly unique. – Kibbee Jun 24 '14 at 20:40
  • @Kibbee - You have a certain amount of time after public disclosure to file a patent (though the rules are quite murky on this). And, say, the adoption of a scheme for automobile "mag wheel" locking lug bolts to bicycle hub nuts would not be considered a new invention, nor would simply increasing the number of possible combinations be a new invention. And finally, a scheme for simply locking the wheels onto the bike does very little to prevent bike theft. – Daniel R Hicks Jun 24 '14 at 20:47
  • @BenediktBauer There are similar products that are out there. However, what differentiates us from them are our multiple variations of the product (so one wrench doesn't open all), unique design to prevent tools from opening the lock, high-end stainless steel, and cheaper cost than the competition. Additionally, we are currently patent-pending! – Bickeylikey Jun 24 '14 at 21:13
  • 2
    Voting to close because insofar as the question is clear it's off-topic. There's no right answer so at the very least it should be community wiki. – Móż Jun 24 '14 at 22:16
  • @Daniel R Hicks: Software patents are regularly issued with far less innovation than you have described above (I am the 'inventor' of one such patent). It seem a shame that the rest of the world has to miss out on all the fun..... – mattnz Jun 25 '14 at 00:51
  • 1
    @mattnz - I agree that I've seen patents issued for really stupid things, but generally if there's something similar the PO will sniff it out (to a fault). In the OP's case the device sounds pretty much identical to the anti-theft lug nuts sold for mag wheels. The fact that this is for a bike rather than a mag wheel will have little bearing on the matter, especially since any patent on the mag wheel lug nuts will no doubt have been made broad enough to cover bike wheels. – Daniel R Hicks Jun 25 '14 at 01:02
  • @mattnz -- BTW, the PO doesn't give a rat's patoot about "innovation" -- it's "novelty" that's important. – Daniel R Hicks Jun 25 '14 at 01:05
  • In any event, you ask our opinion about your invention, but you've not described it in any way sufficient to allow evaluation. Voting to close. – Daniel R Hicks Jun 25 '14 at 01:28

1 Answers1

2

With any invention need to determine if it is new. If it is new then patent it prior to sharing the idea.
This is not new. Search Amazon for "locking skewers" or "security skewers".

A product like this is going to reduce theft of components but does not stop theft of the bike. If the bike is not properly secured they will just steal the whole bike. The devices are not going to stop the thief from removing the devices relatively easily in the privacy of a garage.

Two bikes not properly secured and one has device locks and the other not. If the bike with device locks is worth twice as much then that will most likely be the first bike stolen.

I see the value in these device but they don't replace securing the frame to a fixed object. And securing wheels and seat with a lock.

paparazzo
  • 15,718
  • 2
  • 28
  • 60
  • We are currently patent pending. And yes, there are other products similar to ours. However, our cause is to gather up the discrepancies these other products have and create a solution in one product! Flaws include having one variation, low-end material, high price, and safety issues (easy to open with other materials). Additionally, our product is a supplement to the U-Lock and other types of locks. – Bickeylikey Jun 24 '14 at 21:27
  • 2
    If your cause is to "gather up the discrepancies" you misrepresent. If your cause is to supplement other types of locks you misrepresent. I hope your question is shut down. -1 – paparazzo Jun 25 '14 at 00:26
  • 1
    @Bickeylikey - You can walk into any auto parts store in the nation and buy security lug nuts that have a reasonably wide variation of keys. Your scheme does not sound to be particularly different. – Daniel R Hicks Jun 25 '14 at 01:07