I've spent a long time with folding bikes over the years. My advice: bite the bullet and buy a Brompton[1].
Yes, Bromptons are expensive. But they ride like a bicycle, have gears, a stiff enough frame, luggage racks etc. There's very little compromise. The fastest I've done on mine is 45 kph and I've ridden 70km in a day. I carry it on and off buses and trains multiple times a day without issue.
In the past I had an A-bike[2]. It's a fun and cute little design but the wheels are absolutely tiny and has no gears. You feel like you're riding a folding contraption rather than a bicycle. The build quality was rather plasticky too. I like the idea of an A-shape with telescoping tubes. It's quite an ingenious fold.
I've also ridden (but not owned) a Pacific CarryMe[3]. The ride experience again suffers for the short wheels and no gears, but it could be useful for some. The fold still leaves you with quite a long package.
I'd love to try the Kwiggle bike. I don't think the strange seat will cause as many problems as people think, but I suspect the overall ride experience to be a bit bouncy and flexy. Maybe it's worth it for the small fold.
For a more out-there design I think the Halbrad/Half-Bike[4] could be quite nice but it never really got past the prototype stage. Under-seat steering is a bit of an adjustment too.
A discussion about folding bikes would not be complete without mentioning Helix. Helix folds almost as small as a Brompton but has 24” wheels and standard bicycle components such as disc brakes, Shimano/SRAM drivetrain etc.
Also the fold is the most compact possible, even more compact than Brompton in terms of maximizing the use of space. It also fits in a standard airline luggage without any disassembly which few other folding bikes can claim.
The frame is full titanium including the locking mechanisms. It’s made in Canada and is the lowest cost complete titanium bike on the market, folding or not.
We were on track to complete Kickstarter deliveries by end of 2020. Still very late by all measures but the challenges of staring a manufacturing company from scratch cannot be understated. It's very hard. Even so, our backers for the most part supported us and anyone that didn't want to wait was offered refund. The pandemic threw a huge wrench into our plans and the last two years have been an incredible balancing act of managing run-away lead times, rising costs and other critical details. As an example, if you place an order for saddles right now, you're getting them late 2023/early 2024 and it's 30-50% deposit up front. Titanium costs just went up 20% and lead times increased by another 30 days due to recent world events.
As another post here mentions, it would be good for me to write about the lessons of our journey as it is unique and becoming more relevant as hardware startups seem to be on the rise. I will do that soon.
What is the production rate of helix? I have never seen one on a street. Compared to Bromptons, Dahons,.. produced in thousands a year. I guess, I have to wait to see a Helix in real, right? How many are there around nowadays?
One of the first thing I do when I want to buy a product from a newish startup is check if they've had a kickstarter and see the comments. If there are a lot of negative comments left unanswered like in this campaign, it's a massive red flag
A good rule of thumb I use for Kickstarter and startups in general is: is the world a better place with or without this product? If it is, expect that the process of getting an idea to market is very difficult and can get messy. I try to keep that in perspective. Platforms like Kickstarter help ideas come to life and having it as an option is a net positive for innovation.
Oh, I am very forgiving of campaigns running into issues and do expect a percentage of campaigns I back to fail. I don't treat kickstarter as a preorder. In the past when some campaigns failed and I could see from the update that they made a clear effort, I didn't ask for a refund even if they offered one.
I'm not so forgiving of campaigns running into issues and not replying to comments. In this case, I see that this campaign had a last update in 2017 and people complaining in the comments with no response I can see in the last 4 years.
And this kind of lack of communication that's shown in Kickstarter is not a good sign of the integrity of the company (and doesn't look good for prospective buyers).
Logistic problem are understandable, rising costs make sense but in that case, publicize it. I've seen some kickstarter campaigns that had such issues, had a lot of delays and had to sell retail in order to have enough money to deliver their backers reward but they were transparent, published the updates in kickstarter and even made it visible to everyone.
We do our updates on our own customer portal. Last update was about 3 months ago. Our portal has much better ui/ux, has a forum, access to the customers purchase history, one login vs two and some other benefits. Overall it's a far better experience for the customer.
You should comment then on the kickstarter page for any customers commenting there (who might not have realized that) and for people who are not connected to it who would be looking at your campaign...
And yes agreed, kickstarter's UI is really not great..
I think it is great you have managed to ship this but as another poster pointed out there were quite significant delays and frustrations with your backers. Some years backI looked it up again and saw forum discussion with further frustration.
If you have not already done so: you should transparently write up the lessons that you have learned and how you are going to address this for your electric launch to build up confidence. I remember your kickstarter and in retrospect continue to agree with my decision to not participate (I'm the happy owner of a Brompton that I can check in airline luggage instead).
Overall that looks really nice, so thanks for sharing.
A bit of unsolicited feedback; listing the seat post options based on rider height (regular for shorter than 6’3”, and extra long for taller than 6’3”) is wrong.
Seat post height is based on how long your legs are, not how tall you are. If anything, you should list that by inseam.
As it is, I would have no idea which option is the most appropriate.
> is the lowest cost complete titanium bike on the market, folding or not.
Do you have sources to back that up?
In the UK, the price on your website lists it as £2,025 (or £3,003 for the higher-end model). I can get a PlanetX titanium gravel bike for £1,799 - granted it's not folding, but you specified "folding or not"!
Definitely not spending any time on the internet soliciting business, you can check. Either the product speaks for itself or it doesn't, that's up to you - I have zero desire to market any wares. I read hn from time to time and saw a folding bike posts at #2 and thought I could enrich the discussion as there was no mention of Helix. If you're into folding bikes or cycling, why not find out about what else is available?
Also not avoiding any questions or intentionally lying. At the time I checked I missed the lower cost bike from PlanetX. Aliexpress would be cheaper as well, so I concede.
Your very presence in this thread exists to solicit business. I'm beginning to see a trend here when it comes to you and your company's representations of reality.
Can we do better than this? It is not welcome here, per the HN guidelines, and poisons everyone who sees it. It's also an accusation without evidence, and therefore meaningless in regard to the accused.
I truly think it's the most clinically sterile word to describe what he (and his company... this isn't just a HN issue) are doing and continue to do. In his own response he didn't even challenge the statement that he is lying, but doubled down and says he's not soliciting new business even though he dropped in on a different bike thread to hawk his bike (er.... "down payment for theoretical hypothetical bike in the future") to anyone who was interested in the completely legitimate, in-production one that OP posted.
The comment in question, and others provided that evidence: statements from customers that they were still waiting on their bikes, several years after ordering.
If you want more than that, the ball is in your court to follow up on it.
> If you want more than that, the ball is in your court to follow up on it.
We don't have time to dig up evidence for other people's comments, and that claim, even if true, would not be evidence that they lied (delayed shipping are not lies), and not be evidence that they lied here.
In my experience (and maybe you'll correlate), all materials involve compromise; there doesn't tend to be a case where a material is outstandingly better in all categories.
Comparing titanium vs. the best steels, it's half the weight but also half the modulus of elasticity and half the tensile yield strength. I wouldn't expect there to be much weight advantage when comparing two tubes with roughly equal properties but maybe this is a case of "every little bit helps"?
If I remember rightly, titanium is harder to process also.
There were many reasons to choose Ti over steel, aluminum or carbon fiber. Steel would have significantly thinner wall thickness and would be less durable. Folding bikes get handled a lot, they get banged up, fall over, experience crushing forces etc. Carbon fiber is also less durable for this use case and aluminum would have been heavier for our design. Ti leaves no compromises other than cost of manufacturing but that is a great challenge to work on and there are many ways to optimize it which we are working on.
Would you be open to an entry level version in steel with single speed targeting 12kg or so? This would solve many of the manufacturing and part shortage issues.
Hell, I'd probably buy one without any parts which were standardized and likely to be customized anyway (saddle, brakes, bb and cranks, levers, chain, freewheel) and just move them over from a current bike.
That’s awesome! You are living the dream creating that.
Along the lines of my other comment, have you had any problems with Brompton around your pivoting rear wheel? Your design looks very different from the Brompton but I believe it’s that pivoting rear wheel they are quite aggressive about legally (where they can be).
That single sided front fork is genius!
I really hope you have incredible success, next time I’m looking for a folding bike I will certainly check yours out.
Thank you! The pivoting real wheel was actually invented by Mario Raimondi in 1963, 16 years before Brompton. The patent has long expired and in our case we are pivoting and translating, so it's a new take on this function.
Been a fan for a long time, in fact, my dream bike is a helix with a belt drive (and possibly a mid-drive motor). I do understand a belt drive might require a tensioner, but a man can dream! My current folder has a belt and it's a joy to ride on.
Additionally, I saw there are some electric options coming up in Q3, would you spare a moment to share your thoughts about possible future developments (i.e. if you see belt/ebike options expand in the future)?
Wow, a fan here on hn! Belt drive is possible but it makes for a heavier bike as it usually is paired with an internal geared hub. Also all of the innovation in cycling where maximum drivetrain efficiency is the goal is still firmly footed in chain drive (shimano/sram/campagnolo and a growing group of others). Also right now it’s not a priority as we have a lot of open projects: accessories, electric, scaling manufacturing.
Mid drive on the other hand would be a more challenging project because of the space and packaging constraints of our design. But, rear hub motors, which is what we’re using, have improved a lot recently; they are lighter, 2 speed, quieter and are considered to be comparable now. You also have a far more flexible upgrade path when technology improves as it’s not tied to the frame.
Electric Helix is going to be pretty ground breaking because up until now, the only other compact option was Brompton which is front wheel drive.
So maybe the dream bike is still possible, just a bit different.
Front wheel drive is nice in the winter - I hadn't thought of that until I watched a friend going up a steep snowy road with no problems, while 2wd cars were stuck. The electric motor on the front wheel, his own pedalling on the back wheel: Both wheels are powered. He had traction like a 4wd car.
Definitely understand where you're coming from. I'm excited to see how well can Helix make the pedal assist with rear wheel motor work. What I like in particular is that the setup will be more upgradeable than most mid-drive builds.
With respect to the belt drive, glad to hear that's still a possibility (albeit not a priority, which is fine). This is just a single data point, but if there was a Alfine 11 option with a belt, I'd pull the trigger and buy one right now. Well, perhaps I'd wait for the rear rack and the luggage case that I understand are in the works, those are killer accessories.
For me personally, the weight is less of a concern, at least in the vicinity of the low numbers where current helix builds are. To illustrate, my current 20 inch folder is about 15kg (belt+alfine 11) and I find that quite manageable.
In any case, keep rocking on, I hope you guys succeed - it's exciting to see such novel bike engineering happening here in Canada :)
Another +1 on the belt drive. I owned a Cube with a belt drive for a number of years and absolutely loved it. True "zero maintenance", and none of the other problem a chain brings (oil, dirty right-pants-leg, oily hands after putting the chain back on). Switched to an electric a few years back and couldn't find one with a belt drive under 5k.
Belt drive would need a bunch of frame changes though (mostly rear fork). Actually, looking at the design a bit more, it might work without modification.
I feel alfine (mushy, inefficient, wears out in not much longer than a chain drivetrain) as the only igh option (and explicitly making choices that prevent a rohloff being used) and no belt drive is a deal breaker for anyone with the kind of money to blow that is seeking something as convenient and premium as possible.
A bike that is always clean, never needs you to mess around finding a secure lockup and almost never needs service is the dream, and stopping 90% of the way there for want of 3kg seems so strange.
Thanks for posting that. A while ago I've been looking at Bromptons for my third bike (first is my long distance / gravel Kona, second is my cheapo 30y old city bike that I leave on the streets). I love Brompton's folding ingenuity (AFAIK they do fit a carry on as well on most airlines), but one thing I couldn't get past is their use of custom components. To me this thing is what Apple would do if they were making bikes. Beautiful, practical, hip, but man you'll rue the day when something breaks. All seems to be custom made by them / for them.
Major kudos for using off-the-shelf standard components. I can't over-stress this enough.
I'm not saying I'm pulling the trigger and ordering straight away (I've had this idea in my head for well over a year, so far just waiting for a good excuse / trip idea), but it's definitely made it close to the top of my list now. Even though it's pricy at around 3k Eur, given the titanium frame it's probably still well cheaper than equivalent Brompton (Chapter 3 or such).
I beleve what he is saying is that if they had used 16” wheels like the Brompton their fold would be smaller. But they have gone with larger 24” wheels for better durability and ride.
Going by those dimensions, Brompton takes 89l of space, whereas Helix takes 85l, so I guess they meant the overal volume when rounded up to a containing box.
I do have some questions: why don’t your bicycles have a spoiler above the wheels to prevent water and/or slush from spattering all over the rider? Are there attachments that can be separately added? Or are these meant to be used only in dry and clean(er) conditions?
I noticed on your site that a carrying case won't be available until Fall 2022 but I'm wondering whether you're imagining a case along the lines of a suitcase or something more like a backpack. My primary vehicle is a motorcycle and since moving to my current ___location, biking has entirely fallen off my daily schedule because I have no easy way to transport a bicycle and there are no good paths near me. Something I could strap to my back would be a solution better than I could've hoped for to my dilemma. It'd be an instant buy for me.
While twice as expensive the Helix looks much more like a decent bike at roughly the same weight. Like many folding bikes and scooters the Kwiggle looks like you could get seriously injured if you hit something (small). Before your face hits the pavement you would try stick your leg forwards but it has these scary looking spikes there.
Thank you. Designing it was a labour of love. It’s function over form in every detail. No gimmicks, cheap materials or manufacturing short cuts like using castings for example. The welded frame components are all cnc machined from titanium blocks and the frame is robotically TIG welded in an argon chamber in our Toronto factory. We literally spare no expense in making them.
A well made titanium bike will easily outlast your Mazda and have better resale value. You’re getting outside and active. Lower carbon footprint. Never pay for parking. There’s so much more.
A bicycle is not a car, in the same way that a tablet is not a PC. If you want the former, the comparative price of the latter isn't relevant.
If you want to talk about why they're expensive compared to cars, IDK... cars are mass produced by robots in Japan and the bikes are small-scale assembled in Canada by people.
This bike has a steeper head tube, reducing trail. But reducing rake (even if it goes negative), increases the trail again.
Stability is more complicated than just that, though... iirc bicycles have a bunch of nodes, including 1? 2? that are unstable but slow enough that riders don't notice they're compensating.
We have a 10 year warranty on the frame. Replacement parts can be shipped worldwide in 3-10 days. The components such as brakes, drivetrain, wheels are industry standard and can be serviced by any bicycle shop.
If you are not too picky about the exact model of replacement component, you can get most components at bicycle shops on the other side of the world. They are quite standardized.
My understanding is that Brompton have a patent on their particular fold configuration and so no one can copy it. I’m very much of the opinion that that fold is the most compact while keeping your cycling position close to that of a normal bike. Every other compact folding bike is fighting for a design against that patent, and it can’t be done. This looks to me like one of those designs, if the designers had been able to independently develop a fold without infringing Brompton they would have come up with something very similar to them, not this strange contraption.
You can see the Brompton influence, one pivoting wheel and folding cross bar with a 45deg hinge. But they have had to compromise in order to not infringe the design resulting in a very odd seat design.
I have spent many many hours trying to design a fold as good as Bromptons and haven’t managed too, it’s just too perfect.
Hmm, will have to dig into it and do some research as, if it is expired, why has no one copied the design?
Edit:
It seems to have been proven in court that they have copyright (rather than the old patent) of the design. A bit like the coke bottle design I suppose.
Filing for a design patent should invalidate any claim to copyright on the features of the design that are claimed in the patent. Pick your IP protection lane, you can't have your cake and eat it too.
> Filing for a design patent should invalidate any claim to copyright on the features of the design that are claimed in the patent. Pick your IP protection lane, you can't have your cake and eat it too.
Oh, I so wish that were true.
Software is the poster child for multiple IP regimes applying to the same thing, with copyrights applying twice over (source code and object code/binary executable) as well as patents. Patents can in theory also be applicable to the compilation of source code into object code, but as far as I'm aware no one has pursued a case on that basis, and in any case open source compilers are now standard.
But it gets even crazier when you start adding trademark and trade dress (ie. "look and feel" etc.) into the mix.
Just about the only form of IP that in practice is invalidated by the other forms is trade secret, as the others all involve some form of disclosure or publication.
In the U.S., copyrighting a design merely means you can't reproduce the design documents. It has no effect on the design of an actual product (which would be covered by a design patent, which has a lifetime of 15 years).
(Brompton is a UK company, so this wouldn't apply to UK-based competitors, but it would protect US-based competitors.)
EDIT: it looks like the EU actually has similar rules. Brompton is very likely going to lose this case, and is probably just counting on the court proceedings to delay this competitor's entry into the market. Expect a flood of Brompton-likes when the lawsuit settles.
I did and I didn't regret it for a second, it sees tons of use and is pretty much indestructible. The design is timeless and the second hand market for Bromptons is pretty good, they hold their value better than any car I've ever owned. The first five minutes require some care but after that it's super stable and very low on maintenance given the complexity of the folding. It's small enough that it fits the cargo space in my car where it normally lives so that I always have a bike with me wherever I go.
If there is a downside that would be that even though the wheels are quite a bit bigger than the ones of the bike showcased here that the tires are very high pressure and need frequent topping up.
I'm not parent but since this is framed as if it's a 'gotcha' question ..
a) yes, when it's used anti-competitively; which it almost exclusively is. I haven't been sold on the idea that idea exclusivity funds creative and public works and value-stores. I tend to believe that capitol does that -- and I think capitol can be generated regardless of copyright state.
b) Yes, I have a cc0 1.0 license on anything I release outside of the contracts i'm beholden to from other entities. My thingiverse profile, for one, is filled with general purpose models and assets that are all licensed cc0 1.0 -- these took real person-hours to produce and have actual value for some folks.
other than the occassional irritation with persnickety users here and there I enjoy the work and view it as a social good -- I hope others find the work valuable and use it themselves; surely others exist with the same motivations.
The concern is obviously not that copyright is inherently immoral, or whatever you're insinuating, even though there are valid objections against the current status quo of multi-century copyrights.
The concern is that they're double-dipping. They had a patent. Patents expire after 20 years, but give you exclusive right to use an invention in the meantime. After a patent expires, what's supposed to happen is that anyone can make use of it.
After the patent expired, they started abusing copyright to kill competition.
It's incredibly unethical to try and have it both ways. They had their patent. Their patents is gone. Competitors should be allowed to use the technology in that patent, without worrying about a random court for some forsaken reason allowing them to abuse copyright to stop competitors from being able to compete.
For a small island with a very British habit of regular, unnecessary self-crippling, there's quite a lot of innovation going on here. Just not a lot of self-congratulatory "disruptive" internet BS innovation.
e.g. ARM, Dyson, the RepRap project, the Raspberry Pi, the Oxford/AZ vaccine, Rolls-Royce jet engines. Graphene. The micro-satellite. Vantablack. The genuinely trailblazing .gov.uk project. Quorn. Cloning!
And most importantly, the tikka massala, the balti, and the Henry vaccum cleaner.
(And, someone told me the other day, bungee jumping. Sorry about that)
I have no idea if our IP regime is worse or better than anywhere else's; we do not have a tradition of crazy software patents, though, so my guess is better, not worse.
I think the dismay is about trying to use copyright to slither around the expiration of a patent, if that is what is going on.
I like the Brompton and tried one in a shop, but decided I couldn't see springing $1400+ for one unless I was sure I would use it a lot, so I would possibly start with a lower cost folding bike and see how I liked it. That was pre-pandemic so I put the whole thing aside.
I'm not concerned about travelling with the bike. The attraction of a folder to me is just an easier time getting it in and out of an apartment for commuting purposes.
I would not recommend starting with a lower cost folding bike. When I was shopping for a folding bike 8ish years ago I tried out a bunch of different bikes. Most folding bikes feel pretty squirrely and harder to ride than a typical bicycle. Larger wheels help but then the extra size cuts down on the benefits of having a folding bike. Bromptons were the only folding bikes I tried that felt good to ride as soon as I tried them. If you start with a cheaper bike, you might get used to it but you might hate how it handles and avoid using it as a result.
That confirms my point, the “knock off” makers are unable to optimise the design significantly further than a “real” Brompton. They have decided that the overall design as is perfect as you can get (other than component/manufacturing improvements).
Due to copyright regulations and court orders in the UK and EU the knock off can not be imported and sold.
Yeah, I'm going to second this. Even the 16" wheels on a Brompton are pretty miserable on bumpy roads (Boston); the Kwiggle has even smaller wheels.
The fold on a Brompton is just about perfect. It takes no time at all. I'm a little annoyed to find that they're using copyright to keep a monopoly on it, but certainly not so much that I'm going to give it up.
I tried out a Tern, a Dahon, and some random ancient thing. I've never regretted spending the extra coin on the Brompton. The fact that all the greasy bits are in the middle when it's folded means you throw it in your trunk without thinking about it. It means you put it between your legs on the subway without thinking about it. The fact that it folds in seconds means you don't miss your train fumbling with it at the fare gate.
The only downside I can see is like half the parts on the thing are bespoke. Replacing a derailleur, for instance is not something your average shop can do. Ditto the shifters.
It's the Apple of bikes: the tight integration of the components gets you an absolutely magnificent package (at a premium price), but you get some lock-in as a result.
Dunno. It looks like you get fenders and a bunch of little upgrades like the folding pedal and a nicer saddle. Oh and a light and the luggage block some standard. The folding pedal is a nice touch, not gonna lie. I've got it on mine. Essential? Probably not, but it's one less thing to clip your shins on as you're running for the train. The package, nice as it is, is still a little awkward.
They've reorganized their product lines since I got mine. I've got a two speed with flat bars and fenders, all steel (i.e. no titanium). I'd say that three speeds is probably a worthy upgrade unless you live somewhere dead flat (and the two speeds are spaced too far apart for my liking, I'd add). Even the flat bars are pretty upright if you're used to a road bike.
Of other note, if you have a long inseam, you'll be getting a bigger seat post. I'm a 34" inseam, and I had to get the extendable seat post to get the seat high enough.
Get the one with the folding peddle. Seems like a minor thing. I’ve left mine unfolded because I was being lazy. Once. It makes that much difference in my experience.
The Brompton is bigger and heavier than this though. The Brompton A line is 25.3" x 23" x 10.6" and 25.6 lbs (64x59x27cm and 11.6 kg.) This is 21.6" x 15.8" x 9.8" and 20.9 lbs (554025 cm and 9.5kg.) Nearly five pounds lighter, 7.2" shorter and 3.7" shorter - that's a big difference for some of these use cases.
For example, lugging it around on public transport, or bringing it on a plane, or just dragging it around a city for the day - this thing easily wins, there’s just no comparison. I haven’t rode one of these so of course I can’t say, but the fact that they rode it all around the entire IJsselmeer (one of the largest lakes in the world) - which is a serious bike ride even on a normal bike - is a pretty good sign that this bike isn’t terrible to ride on, even if it may not quite be a Brompton. So the comparison becomes “decent portability and excellent biking” vs “excellent portability and decent biking”. I think that’s a fair tradeoff. If anything, I wish it would go further - give me half the size and a mediocre biking experience and I’d buy one in a heartbeat.
Did you ever look at the Strida? It was designed in response to the Brompton, with a simpler fold and the ability to wheel it around on its actual wheels while folded, rather than little casters. It doesn't fold quite as small as a Brompton (it's more golf-bag like), but the footprint is similar if there's something to lean it against.
I'm very happy with mine, and it has most of the advantages you list - luggage rack, real bike feel (my longest day is apparently 64km and top speed 64kph). The sensitive steering takes a bit of getting used to the first time but you adapt quite quickly. For me the simple fold (and, sure, lower price) feels like a big advantage compared to the Brompton, which is what several of my friends have.
it's either brompton or strida. other bikes are just dumb. tern. dumb. moulton dumb. pacific cycles dumb. dahon dumb. birdie dumb. bike friday , kinda dumb. old raleigh folding tanks ....the list goes on. any bike with under 16"" wheels is also totally stupid . retardedly so, unless it's for some niche clown world where bumps don't exist and you don't ride the thing farther than a mile.
What do you have against bd-1/birdies ?
Outside of the lock clip that could be improved, it has very few compromises and can be maintained/upgraded without proprietary parts.
It was a difficult decision for me to spend 1.300 EUR in a Brompton, but I don't regret it a little bit. I have to admit I didn't use any alternative as a long term foldable bicycle, but after 3 years with the Brompton I don't have a single complain. Great quality, minimum weight, nice riding, fast un/folding. Everything you would expect from a portable bike.
Regarding the cost, I'm quite sure I could sell mine for more than 800 EUR while any other alternative would lose at least 50% of the value and probably require more maintenance.
Ah, another Beixo driver. I really liked the idea of the shaft drive, but I couldn't get used to the elastic feeling in the drive train. I still somewhere hope I rode an old model and everything is better now, but my guess is it's an integral part of the concept of a shaft drive on a bicycle.
Had one for a bit, very small wheels, was kindof fun but in London its just easier to have a normal bike and arrange your commute so that you use it, rather than carry a small bike around.
I also had a Strida, really nice design and a good balance between usefulness and foldyness
i owned an A bike for like a week. they are unrideable. entirely and totally unrideable on real roads of any kind unless you want to damage your prostate.
I'm sure Bromptons are great, but the prices are just ridiculous, and their marketing grates. I really don't need my bike to be handmade in London.
I have a Decathlon foldable. It doesn't fold quite as small as a Brompton, so I wouldn't want to be regularly taking it on public transport. But it's light and solid, folds easily and rides well at about one third the price.
£850 / 1090€[1] sure it's a bit expensive, but ridiculous really? I find it really funny to find such a comment on a forum where a big chunk of users are fine paying more than twice the price for a laptop.
Ha, interesting. I'm used to road-bike prices, and I also know what cargo bikes can cost, so when I read "ridiculously expensive", I imagined they cost like a cheap used car, not less than €1k... All depends on context.
Yes .. for me, it sounds expensive. A macbook is a rocket ship in terms of complexity vs. a bicycle. If copyright/patents went away, how cheap do you think you can produce a macbook? a folding bike?
This line of thinking is why everything was stupid expensive in the bay area (mattresses, bicycles, etc.) In Canada, I never paid more than 300 for a bicycle or more than 500 for a mattress. As OP said, I don't care if it is made in London, the price needs to be accessible to the masses for these things to solve our transport crisis.
Perhaps you're right that £850 is slightly below the ridiculous threshold (my recollection was that they were all £1000+). Though it seems that price omits arguably necessary features like mudguards.
Any bike that costs as little as yours does is probably in reality a pretty poorly designed and built bicycle. Bromptons are actually pretty cheap as far as bicycles go.
I've done lots of touring, including one 1600km trip in China, with a Dahon Speed P8, which has 20-inch wheels, which are likely a bit more pleasant than the 16-inch wheels of the Brompton. It's also a good option if you're looking for something lower priced. If you take the wheels and pedals off and pack it correctly it's possible to fit inside a Samsonite Oyster 29 suitcase which fits regulation dimensions to be accepted as normal check-in baggage on most airlines.
That said the bike in TFA looks interesting for multi-modal commuter use in e.g. Singapore or other such cities where a Brompton likely would not be accepted on the subway.
There's also the JZ88 (https://jz88.com/shop.html) which is claimed to be Singapore MRT-acceptable but I haven't used it.
I have a Dahon Briza, with 24in wheels. The main thing was that a couple of them can be easily loaded in my car. Otherwise I just ride near my home.
I am not totally satisfied, but it is OK. I'll probably change the crank gear to be larger, the very lowest gears aren't useful right now because they are so slow.
I also can't ride it without having at least one hand on the handlebars.
I use mine in two ways:
1) Multi-modal commute. I ride my Brompton to and from the train station on both ends of my commute, about 2 miles per segment.
2) Weekend/vacation cruising, if I'm going somewhere on a car or ferry, it's easy to take the Brompton along.
I use my Brompton as an alternative to walking. It is good enough to be my only bike and practical enough that I have no inclination toward a special wardrobe.
I have a dahon mariner bike. I like it even though I lack the boat it’s supposed to pair with (I put it in my car). It doesn’t fold as small as the bromton, but I think the wheels are bigger.. it’s useful to have the bike when traveling, dropping car at shop. I think I like the Danone better than my brothers bromton e-bike (which he won in a raffle.. lucky). Ebikes are great though.
Since you have experience with folding bikes (but anyone's help will be welcome). Do you know if folding bikes are viable at all for a tall person? (about 197 cm / 6 ft 5.56 in)
It would be convenient for me to have one due to lack of space in my apartment, but from an external observer perspective they all look like too small and like I would need to ride hunched and uncomfortable, so I haven't really looked into them. But maybe it's just prejudice.
I'm 6 ft and ride a regular Brompton. They also make a telescopic seat post for taller riders, and the H bars are designed for a more upright riding position. They're surprisingly flexible in setup but I would definitely try and get a test ride.
The easy answer is go to a bike shop and do a test ride. I guess it will depend more on your build - how much height is in your legs vs body for example.
I guess Al-Khwarizmi comes from the near East and from 9th century or thereabouts, so there are no local stores for them to try out, but online shopping works perfect since they deliver to all places and to all times.
Being similarly tall with longish legs (especially my thigh bone, important for eg. legroom in cars, airplanes...), I'd be extremely weary of jumping on a bike that's not suitably sized, no matter what claims people make how a smaller bike can fit you.
But what matters just the same is your arm length, body length and such: basically, how far down and in the front you can reach when properly seated above the pedals? I've only got "average" arms (my wingspan matches my height), so smaller frames mean hard to reach handlebars.
When you can't easily try a bike out, if it's not rated for at least 2-3" (5-8cm) taller riders than you are, I wouldn't get it because your balance and posture will suffer.
I'd like to add a type of bike which is tiny but not foldable: a Minivelo.
I recently ordered a frame on AliExpress [0] equipped with internal cable routing and disc brake mounts, 2.25'' tire clearance. My build looks like a gravel bike. A gravel bike on 20'' with an 11 speed cassette, a drop bar and SRAM derailleur. Of course, not to miss a great carbon sear post. Including pedals and tires, the bike accounts for 10kg.
In order to take it on flights, I did sew myself a backpack to fit the bike. Taking the bike apart takes me 10 minutes. It is a tiny bit too large for hand luggage but ideal for being checked in.
For me the frame is a great compromise between size, stiffness and maintainability.
Velo orange [1] does offer a lovely frameset, too. It's just hard to get by in Europe (at a reasonable price point).
Sure Brompton has the most experience with these kind of bikes, but a steel frame on a bike that is supposed to be carried around?
If I would spend that amount of money I would probably go for https://www.r-m.de/de/bikes/birdy/ with additional benefit that it is a German manufacturer ;-)
I'll second that. My dad had a different English folding bike in the 1980s, got rid of it and got a Brompton that he kept for 30 years. I had a Dahon that was ok I guess but the Brompton was way better. The Dahon had lots of frame flex and the folding headset, folding pedal, and flimsy seat post never worked right.
The thing is the Kwiggle is not just small but offers a new way of cycling which is much better for your body and uses more muscle groups than normal cycling.
You have to ride one to understand :-)
Oh, I didn't realize you could even buy them direct now. I was looking at >~£1200 in shops or ~£1400 for the models in stock where I got mine. (The cheapest used to be single speed, and 3-speed is stretching it for non-trivial hills like the scarp round here.)
Back in the mid 2000s I used to ride a 2 miles, 45 minute train, then 7 miles to work, and back, 5 times a week on a Bromptom. No problems, it was ideal.
I then moved and I lived at one end of the Central line in Essex, about a 1 minute walk, and worked a similar distance in West London.
Took about 55 minutes for the train to go, always got a seat in both directions.
However during summer I would ride on my Bromptom one way in the morning two or three times a week - took about 24 miles, or 2 hours, I'd then fold it up and take it home on the train.
My next move was too far to ride (45 miles each way), and less than a mile from the station at each end so didn't do much commuting riding then, and I moved to be a home worker in 2011, but I still ride my Bromptom around the country lanes. Occasionally think I should upgrade to something with more than 3 gears (it's relatively hilly where I live).
The bike itself I think cost £520 back in 2005, a new one of the same model is over £1k now, not sure what the second hand value is
I do a regular 25 mile commute one way across London, train back myself.
One of my routes includes Hampstead and Highgate, a decent amount of climb. I tried the 3 speed hire Bromptons, but went for the 6 speed when I purchased one. The upgrade was well worth the money, I doubt I'd be able to get up those hills on the 3 speed.
I would wholeheartedly agree with this. I've tried Dahon, Tern, and one other frame I can't recall after pining for a Brompton for years but eventually bit the bullet and purchased one for myself. No comparison. It's my favourite bike for non-snow/slush conditions. Bike Friday was also on the short list but I didn't have the opportunity to try.
Good on you for doing 70km! That's about the limit of my comfortable endurance on it too. My record is~100km plus two ferry rides touring on the west coast but I admittedly walked it up the last two hills in the dark and I started to wish I was done around 85km.
What do you use for checked airline travel? I have the B&W hard case but haven't tried anything else. I think it is a linear inch or two over regulation if measured but nobody has ever stopped me or charged overage.
Your B&W case is about 4" over regulation, I believe, but I've read that last year many airlines began waiving the oversize fee for bikes (the weight limit still applies, but a Brompton plus the case should easily meet it). So tell the check-in agent there's a bike in the case if they ever decide to measure it.
I'm in the process of building aluminum cases for two Zizzo folders my gf and I just bought. I'm keeping them under the size limit to be safe, but because they also convert into trailers (to haul carry-on) and are relatively beefy, I'm bumping up against the 50 lb weight limit for economy seats. Right now I'm scratching my head as to how to incorporate casters and center stands with only 1 lb left to play with. :|
I have a folding portage cart with light weight removable wheels that attach via pushpin axles into metal receivers. Buy two extra receivers, drill holes in the side of the case, bolt on the receivers, and attach the wheels at the destination.
I haven't used it for this yet but plan was I would just take the wheels in my carry on. I also have not work out how to attach the cart to the bike yet.
Wike sells the individual wheels, pins, receivers (2) and even a diy box trailer kit(1) using these parts with instructions if looking to visualize this.
Just my comment to "but I suspect the overall ride experience to be a bit bouncy and flexy".
Kwiggle is a new movement for a flexy human being. Humans have been accustomed to putting their natural flexibility into a rigid posture on a bicycle for 200 years.
If you are thinking the bicycle from the anatomically view, you should invent a bicycle, that could be ridden upright with your flexible natural movement similar to the walking.
This was the first idea of the Kwiggle. And this is an opportunity to get back to your natural flexibility. After a little get used to, Kwiggle will adapt to your movement and not the other way round.
My biggest question is the combination of an extremely short wheelbase, small wheel diameter and, perhaps more importantly, the negative fork offset and the steep head tube angle. It seems it would be extremely easy to get thrown over the handlebars when hitting an obstacle... What's your reasoning behind this geo? Is it only space saving?
First of all: The fork offset is needed to obtain the same trail as with a normal bike. Large wheels need to bend the fork forward in order to reduce the natural trail for easier steering. Small wheels need to bend the fork backwards in order to get the same effect, because the natural trail of small wheels is to small. Just look on a shopping cart. The fork of the steering wheels is bent backwards too.
On Kwiggle you ride upright with a small wheelbase. So you have to adjust a little bit and you should pay a little bit more attention to the road. We have so many customers who have mastered that with bravour, so we stopped worrying about it.
Only with this small wheelbase it is possible to get a bicycle folded to handluggage size.
When I lived in Amsterdam, I rode a regular (non-folding) bike. It didn't have gears - but I didn't need them. If you do in-city riding, and your town is planar, gears are not necessary. And you won't be going 45 kph anyway.
On the other hand, if you ride 70 Km a day - why would you even need a _folding_ bike? That means you do serious cross-country riding. Use a regular bike.
I've had an A-bike in the past as well, and while I like the idea in principle, it's essentially a scam, due to the extremely low-quality materials - some components in the transmission are made of plastic, and they're bound to break rather quickly (I think it took me just a few months, even with around 20 km/week).
Bromptons are fantastic but there are many folding bikes with gears for much much less money. Decathlon Oxylane 120 retails for €289, with taxes, for example. It's not a Brompton, but for 1/4 of the price it doesn't need to be.
Build quality and longevity. After five years of daily use you will be able to resell your Brompton for 80% of its initial price, while I would guess you would be lucky to get more than $100 for your old Decathlon.
The most you can lose out on the Decathlon is those €289, whereas 20% of the quoted Brompton price of $3800 is double that :)
Resale value is important in the sense that you know you are risking at most X, which with Brompton sounds to be €600 — in case you dislike it or don't have a need for it anymore, or are in a need of cash, so the risk you are willing to take is still larger.
Ultimately, as with anything, if Bromptons are really of such a high quality, the best purchase is a used Brompton which you might be able to resell for the same price you got it at. If you really end up using it to the max, you can resell it early and get a new one specced to your liking.
For something you'll end up using daily, the most important thing is quality, and then you should look for the best price next.
For shorter rides the saddle thing can be no biggie, but on long distances your butt will curse at that thing. Saddles are more important than people would acknowledge.
The Brompton is a much better folded bike (it's a lot smaller, it actually stays folded, it doesn't have exposed greasy parts when folded, you can use it as a shopping cart, etc).
High end Terns (Verge) are more like a normal bike with good components but they are nowhere near as compact when folded (likelihood of walking it into a shop and not getting yelled at is nil, unlike with the Brompton), they don't have as good commuter accessories as the Bromptons and they ride much stiffer (which is good or bad depending on what you are doing with the bike).
I own a Tern Verge myself. Got already > 1'200 km tracked, although not using it that often. Beside some ... issues (a pedal broke, the brakes need some adjustments from time to time and one tire (that I changed myself, I have to add) loses some air over time) I really love it. Especially being able to push it and not having to carry it when it is folded is a big plus for me.
Yes, Bromptons are expensive. But they ride like a bicycle, have gears, a stiff enough frame, luggage racks etc. There's very little compromise. The fastest I've done on mine is 45 kph and I've ridden 70km in a day. I carry it on and off buses and trains multiple times a day without issue.
In the past I had an A-bike[2]. It's a fun and cute little design but the wheels are absolutely tiny and has no gears. You feel like you're riding a folding contraption rather than a bicycle. The build quality was rather plasticky too. I like the idea of an A-shape with telescoping tubes. It's quite an ingenious fold.
I've also ridden (but not owned) a Pacific CarryMe[3]. The ride experience again suffers for the short wheels and no gears, but it could be useful for some. The fold still leaves you with quite a long package.
I'd love to try the Kwiggle bike. I don't think the strange seat will cause as many problems as people think, but I suspect the overall ride experience to be a bit bouncy and flexy. Maybe it's worth it for the small fold.
For a more out-there design I think the Halbrad/Half-Bike[4] could be quite nice but it never really got past the prototype stage. Under-seat steering is a bit of an adjustment too.
[1] https://www.brompton.com/
[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A-bike
[3] https://pacificcarryme.com/
[4] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TQIC138vmlE