Folding bike?

CM said:

My question is: how much do I need to spend on a folding bike to get
decent performance as a beginner, and does anyone have any
recommendations?

The biggest player for folders are Dahon, with models starting at a
couple of hundred and AFAICT you really can't go wrong with them.
However, the fold is a simple halfway hinge, which on the one hand
is enough to get it in the under-stairs cupboard but on the other
may make you remarkably unpopular on a crowded bus or train.
Something like a Brompton folds much more compactly, but they start
at quite a bit more, and there's often a waiting list if you can't
find one in stock (but then you have far less control over the
specification).

More upmarket Dahons are very nice bits of kit and can be used for
sports or touring riding, but of course "more upmarket" means more
£££s.

Something like a Birdy has a "normal bike" quality of ride and
versatility on the road /and/ a very compact fold, but the "cheap
and nasty" version comes in at about £800 and they go up from there.

As usual, you do get what you pay for, though I imagine if you
start reasonably close to the bottom of the ladder (I'd personally
draw the line at ~£200 to avoid cheese) it shouldn't be too hard to
sell it on in London these days if you decide on either something
nicer or walking everywhere...

Pete.
--
Peter Clinch Medical Physics IT Officer
Tel 44 1382 660111 ext. 33637 Univ. of Dundee, Ninewells Hospital
Fax 44 1382 640177 Dundee DD1 9SY Scotland UK
net [email hidden] http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/

CM said:

Hi,

I live in central London, and I'm considering getting into cycling as
a way to getting fit without spending hours in the gym. It seems to
me that the opportunities for hassle-free cycling in London are a bit
limited, so I was planning on using the tube/train to get out of
London at weekends to find off-road routes in Epping Forest and road
routes further afield.

ps. You don't need a folding bike to go on the Tube.
You can take any Tube line, except the very deep ones, outwith the rush
hour. I have done this - took a road bike on the East London Line two
weeks ago.
So you can take the Metropolitan Line out to the Chilterns, or the
Central Line out to Essex no problem.

http://www.lcc.org.uk/index.asp?PageID=65

So just go to your local bike shop, or go down to Decathlon at Canada
Water and buy any bike you fancy,
Take it out of a weekend on the Tube to the countryside.
Take the bike to any station without deep escalators (eg. Baker Street)
and wheel the bike onto the train.

And look at the LCC pages for rides in your area:
http://www.lcc.org.uk/index.asp?PageID=28

Other tip for Central London:
the Mall is closed on the weekends. So (London marathon Sunday
excelted!) You can go from Admirality Arch along the Mall, up
Constitution Hill and across Hyde Park Corner (bike crossings) to Hyde Park.

"CM" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Hi,

I live in central London, and I'm considering getting into cycling as
a way to getting fit without spending hours in the gym. It seems to
me that the opportunities for hassle-free cycling in London are a bit
limited, so I was planning on using the tube/train to get out of
London at weekends to find off-road routes in Epping Forest and road
routes further afield.

I'm very tempted to get a folding bike to reduce the hassle of
transporting the bike on trains and tubes. As I'm just starting out,
I don't want to spend hundreds, but I'm concerned that the cheapest
folding bikes will be pretty horrible to ride. I'm hoping to build up
to doing things like the London/Cambridge ride in the summer.

My question is: how much do I need to spend on a folding bike to get
decent performance as a beginner, and does anyone have any
recommendations?

Thanks

If you do want a folder,

have a look at:
atob.org.ukBuyers' Guide.htmlOpen ↗

200 quid is a reasonable starting point - more if you can afford it!
don't go much less (except possibly below).
Dahon (as mentioned elsewhere) are good value.

There are lots of Ikea folders (unwanted Xmas bonuses for staff...) on ebay
for under £100.
not sure what they're like though (comments anyone).

Rgds
Peter

On Sat, 21 Apr 2007 20:19:15 GMT, "peter-potato" <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

"CM" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Hi,

I live in central London, and I'm considering getting into cycling as
a way to getting fit without spending hours in the gym. It seems to
me that the opportunities for hassle-free cycling in London are a bit
limited, so I was planning on using the tube/train to get out of
London at weekends to find off-road routes in Epping Forest and road
routes further afield.

I'm very tempted to get a folding bike to reduce the hassle of
transporting the bike on trains and tubes. As I'm just starting out,
I don't want to spend hundreds, but I'm concerned that the cheapest
folding bikes will be pretty horrible to ride. I'm hoping to build up
to doing things like the London/Cambridge ride in the summer.

My question is: how much do I need to spend on a folding bike to get
decent performance as a beginner, and does anyone have any
recommendations?

Thanks

If you do want a folder,

have a look at:
atob.org.ukBuyers' Guide.htmlOpen ↗

200 quid is a reasonable starting point - more if you can afford it!
don't go much less (except possibly below).
Dahon (as mentioned elsewhere) are good value.

There are lots of Ikea folders (unwanted Xmas bonuses for staff...) on ebay
for under £100.
not sure what they're like though (comments anyone).

Rgds
Peter

Thanks for all the helpful responses.

Does the wheel size make a significant difference - would it be
realistic to do 50 miles on one for example? This is what I'm aiming
for this summer.

Thanks

CM wrote on 21/04/2007 22:00 +0100:

Quoted message said:

Thanks for all the helpful responses.

Does the wheel size make a significant difference - would it be
realistic to do 50 miles on one for example? This is what I'm aiming
for this summer.

No but the bike does. For that sort of distance you would be better
getting a normal bike - you will get something much better than a folder
for the same money. As others have said you can take them on the
Tube/trains to outside London or there are plenty of good rides in
London. Central London cycling on the roads is pretty good these days
too with the CC zone.

--
Tony

"The most savage controversies are those about matters as to which there
is no good evidence either way."
- Bertrand Russell

CM said:

On Sat, 21 Apr 2007 20:19:15 GMT, "peter-potato" <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

"CM" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Hi,

I live in central London, and I'm considering getting into cycling as
a way to getting fit without spending hours in the gym. It seems to
me that the opportunities for hassle-free cycling in London are a bit
limited, so I was planning on using the tube/train to get out of
London at weekends to find off-road routes in Epping Forest and road
routes further afield.

I'm very tempted to get a folding bike to reduce the hassle of
transporting the bike on trains and tubes. As I'm just starting out,
I don't want to spend hundreds, but I'm concerned that the cheapest
folding bikes will be pretty horrible to ride. I'm hoping to build up
to doing things like the London/Cambridge ride in the summer.

My question is: how much do I need to spend on a folding bike to get
decent performance as a beginner, and does anyone have any
recommendations?

Thanks

If you do want a folder,

have a look at:
atob.org.ukBuyers' Guide.htmlOpen ↗

200 quid is a reasonable starting point - more if you can afford it!
don't go much less (except possibly below).
Dahon (as mentioned elsewhere) are good value.

There are lots of Ikea folders (unwanted Xmas bonuses for staff...) on ebay
for under £100.
not sure what they're like though (comments anyone).

Rgds
Peter

Thanks for all the helpful responses.

Does the wheel size make a significant difference - would it be
realistic to do 50 miles on one for example? This is what I'm aiming
for this summer.

Thanks

One of my rides has 305 wheels and I would have no toruble doing 50 (or
more).

peter-potato said:

There are lots of Ikea folders (unwanted Xmas bonuses for staff...) on ebay
for under £100.
not sure what they're like though (comments anyone).

They're low geared (6-speed rear derailleur only) and need a longer
seatpost (I'm 5'8 with long legs soe YMMV). Other than that (and twitchy
handling) they're OK but without an extended seatpost & higher gears I'd
not want to go more than a couple of miles.

--
Stephen Patterson :: [email hidden] :: http://patter.mine.nu/
GPG: B416F0DE :: Jabber: [email hidden]
"Don't be silly, Minnie. Who'd be walking round these cliffs with a gas
oven?"

John Hearns said:

CM said:

I live in central London, and I'm considering getting into cycling as
a way to getting fit without spending hours in the gym. It seems to
me that the opportunities for hassle-free cycling in London are a bit
limited, so I was planning on using the tube/train to get out of
London at weekends to find off-road routes in Epping Forest and road
routes further afield.

ps. You don't need a folding bike to go on the Tube.
You can take any Tube line, except the very deep ones, outwith the rush
hour. I have done this - took a road bike on the East London Line two
weeks ago.
So you can take the Metropolitan Line out to the Chilterns, or the
Central Line out to Essex no problem.

http://www.lcc.org.uk/index.asp?PageID=65

So just go to your local bike shop, or go down to Decathlon at Canada
Water and buy any bike you fancy,
Take it out of a weekend on the Tube to the countryside.
Take the bike to any station without deep escalators (eg. Baker Street)
and wheel the bike onto the train.

The Underground is split by train design into deep tube lines and
sub-surface cut and cover lines. The sub-surface lines are the
District, Metropolitan, Circle, East London and Hammersmith and City
lines. Off peak you can take a bicycle on any part of a sub-surface
line and also on non-tunnel sections of tube lines.

See http://www.tfl.gov.uk/roadusers/cycling/974.aspx

On that page is a link to a page with details of the Overground
(national rail) rules for bikes http://www.atob.org.uk/bike_rail.html
--
Phil Cook looking north over the park to the "Westminster Gasworks"

CM said:

Quoted message said:

Thanks for all the helpful responses.

Does the wheel size make a significant difference - would it be
realistic to do 50 miles on one for example? This is what I'm aiming
for this summer.

Go for a folder if that's what you are aiming at.
There are storage problems in London flats also, and you might not want
to lug a bike up stairs.

If you go for a non-folding bike, go to your local bike shop and look at
hybrids.
You could do worse than go over to Decathlon at Canada Water and have a
look at their range too. Good value.

If you do store a bike on a balcony, or in a garage area downstairs get
yourself a big, tough chain and padlock and leave it there permanently.
You can get a big chain from any decent bike shop, or ask in a
motorcycle shop. Do not skimp on locks if the bike is being left
overnight. Thieves carry big bolt cutters - there is a scattering of
snipped cable and D-locks in my car park area.
On Your Bike at London Bridge have a good selection of Abus locks.
I don't mean to put you off - but if you buy a cheap cable lock don't
expect to have any bike with you for a long time in London.

CM said:

Does the wheel size make a significant difference - would it be
realistic to do 50 miles on one for example? This is what I'm aiming
for this summer.

On smooth roads, wheel size becomes less and less significant. On rough
tracks and potholed streets, bigger wheels become more comfortable.

It seems that comfort is proportional to folded size.

A couple of recommendations from my personal experience with regards to
folders:

Dahon Speed TR: 20" wheels and seatpost suspension. Not suitable for
repeatedly jumping on and off public transport since it takes a few
minutes to fold (requires hex keys), doesn't fold terribly small, has
the dirty chain and vulnerable derailleur on the outside when folded,
will not stand up when folded, and is not convenient to carry with one
hand. However, for day-rides with perhaps just one off-peak train
journey each end of the day, I find it VERY comfortable. It has 21 gears
and feels/responds like a touring bike. The riding psition can be
customised very well, e.g. stem height, handlebar reach, brake lever
position. For mile-eating with the convenience of storage, ability to
throw in a car boot and the ability to be the third bike on a
two-bike-train with a jobsworth conductor, I cannot recommend this bike
highly enough. I repeat,however, that (although I don't have experience
of peaktime tube travel) this is not a suitable commuter friendly one.

Brompton: I have owned this for only a couple of weeks, however first
thoughts are: Very suitable for jumping on and off public transport
(birmingham buses and 'tram' are my experience). It has 16" wheels which
are less pothole friendly than the Dahon. I haven't tried this for long
distances, but don't imagine it being comfortable for your intended
50miles. It has a maximum of 6 gears, and for maximum efficiency you
need to think carefully about the range of gears you'll need for your
intended terrain. Compare this with the Dahon where the 21 gears cover
all possibilities. The geometry is not alterable i.e. the handlebar
height can not be changed. On the plus side, it was designed with
commuting in mind, and it folds in less than 20 seconds, into a package
which encloses the chain on the inside, is well balanced when picked up
with one hand, models with rear rack stand upright when folded.

There are loads of other options out there but I hope these two give you
some food for thought.

Richard Bates wrote on 22/04/2007 09:57 +0100:

Quoted message said:

Dahon Speed TR: 20" wheels and seatpost suspension. Not suitable for
repeatedly jumping on and off public transport since it takes a few
minutes to fold (requires hex keys), doesn't fold terribly small, has
the dirty chain and vulnerable derailleur on the outside when folded,
will not stand up when folded, and is not convenient to carry with one
hand. However, for day-rides with perhaps just one off-peak train
journey each end of the day, I find it VERY comfortable. It has 21 gears
and feels/responds like a touring bike. The riding psition can be
customised very well, e.g. stem height, handlebar reach, brake lever
position. For mile-eating with the convenience of storage, ability to
throw in a car boot and the ability to be the third bike on a
two-bike-train with a jobsworth conductor, I cannot recommend this bike
highly enough. I repeat,however, that (although I don't have experience
of peaktime tube travel) this is not a suitable commuter friendly one.

Brompton: I have owned this for only a couple of weeks, however first
thoughts are: Very suitable for jumping on and off public transport
(birmingham buses and 'tram' are my experience). It has 16" wheels which
are less pothole friendly than the Dahon. I haven't tried this for long
distances, but don't imagine it being comfortable for your intended
50miles. It has a maximum of 6 gears, and for maximum efficiency you
need to think carefully about the range of gears you'll need for your
intended terrain. Compare this with the Dahon where the 21 gears cover
all possibilities. The geometry is not alterable i.e. the handlebar
height can not be changed. On the plus side, it was designed with
commuting in mind, and it folds in less than 20 seconds, into a package
which encloses the chain on the inside, is well balanced when picked up
with one hand, models with rear rack stand upright when folded.

There are loads of other options out there but I hope these two give you
some food for thought.

I would guess there are three classes. Bikes like the Dahon Speed TR,
Bike Friday, Airnimal which can be folded if you need to but its an
event to fold them. Bikes like the Brompton which fold quickly but,
although people do do 50 and even more miles on them they are not really
what people would generally call suitable for distance riding. But
there is an interim which does not fold quite as small and fast as the
Brompton but is suitable for long distances and that is the Birdy and
Mezzo and possibly (have not ridden one yet but have heard reports) the
Bike Friday Tikit.

--
Tony

"The most savage controversies are those about matters as to which there
is no good evidence either way."
- Bertrand Russell

Richard Bates said:

It seems that comfort is proportional to folded size.

Up to a point... but not any further than that. Also, define
"comfort"... for example, for short hops through town my Brompton
is vastly more comfortable to me than the stretched out position of
my MTB with knobbly tyres (which doesn't fold at all), but OTOH for
a 20 mile along estate tracks in the 'Gorms I'd /much/ rather be on
the MTB, and I wouldn't want to do 50 miles on the road on either
so in a general case which one is "more comfortable"?

Also, one can throw money/technology at things to some extent. The
rather good suspension on a Birdy renders a lot of the advantages
of bigger wheels immaterial, and in return allows advantages of
smaller wheels like their being stronger and giving you a
potentially more compact fold.

Pete.
--
Peter Clinch Medical Physics IT Officer
Tel 44 1382 660111 ext. 33637 Univ. of Dundee, Ninewells Hospital
Fax 44 1382 640177 Dundee DD1 9SY Scotland UK
net [email hidden] http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/

In article said:

CM wrote on 21/04/2007 22:00 +0100:

Quoted message said:

Does the wheel size make a significant difference - would it be
realistic to do 50 miles on one for example? This is what I'm aiming
for this summer.

No but the bike does. For that sort of distance you would be better
getting a normal bike - you will get something much better than a folder
for the same money.

On the other hand if he is regularly going to take it on trains and
tubes within London, spending the money on a decent folder might be
better than buying both a cheap folder and a cheap non-folder.

Another option might be a Moulton, which doesn't fold, but does come
apart[1] for compactness if necessary, and with it's small wheels is a
bit more compact than a normal bike, but has suspension designed to
give an equivalent or better ride. But a new one would cost more than
a not-too-bad folder and a not-too-bad normal bike.

I was about to suggest looking at the autofaq wiki page, but it
seems to have gone away.
java.util.MissingResourceException: Can't find bundle for base name ApplicationResources, locale en_GB

[1] At least on some models, the early F-frames mostly weren't Stowaways.

Patter said:

peter-potato said:

There are lots of Ikea folders (unwanted Xmas bonuses for staff...) on ebay
for under £100.
not sure what they're like though (comments anyone).

They're low geared (6-speed rear derailleur only) and need a longer
seatpost (I'm 5'8 with long legs soe YMMV). Other than that (and twitchy
handling) they're OK but without an extended seatpost & higher gears I'd
not want to go more than a couple of miles.

To the OP - regarding wheel sizes.

Assuming equivalent gearing is arranged.

For on-road and path use smaller wheels are most
likely better then larger wheels for all purposes
except ride quality. The addition of suspension to
a small wheeled bike allows the ride quality to
surpass that of a large wheeled bike. I am not a
particularly experienced cyclist however the
Birdy Blue that I have had some experience of
has a more confortable ride that any non suspension
bike I have riddden and was at the time the fastest
bike I had ever riden too.

I have heard that one reason that
smaller wheels are not more popular is that
they are specifically disallowed from racing
and have been for decades/centuries?
The "lycra louts" :-)) therefore won't touch
them with a barge pole.

I would be astonished to find that if this artificial
restriction was removed that the size of wheels
used on road racing bikes was not to reduce
substantially since it seems to me that
the aerodynamic drag would be much smaller.

On the other hand for jumping over tree trunks
larger wheels would seem to be handy.

<[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

To the OP - regarding wheel sizes.

Assuming equivalent gearing is arranged.

For on-road and path use smaller wheels are most
likely better then larger wheels for all purposes
except ride quality. The addition of suspension to
a small wheeled bike allows the ride quality to
surpass that of a large wheeled bike. I am not a
particularly experienced cyclist however the
Birdy Blue that I have had some experience of
has a more confortable ride that any non suspension
bike I have riddden and was at the time the fastest
bike I had ever riden too.

I also have a Birdy. I have found that I am limited to a speed of about
35mph above which it seems that any additional extra power applied to the
pedals does not result in a speed increase. The bike also seems to get less
stable when it reaches these speeds. Other riders on conventional road bikes
in the club I belong too can manage 40mph easily if they want to.

One thing I have noticed is that the Birdy seems less effort to ride than my
mountain bike with road tyres, hence the mountain bike is now only used as a
spare bike.

Quoted message said:

I have heard that one reason that
smaller wheels are not more popular is that
they are specifically disallowed from racing
and have been for decades/centuries?
The "lycra louts" :-)) therefore won't touch
them with a barge pole.

I would be astonished to find that if this artificial
restriction was removed that the size of wheels
used on road racing bikes was not to reduce
substantially since it seems to me that
the aerodynamic drag would be much smaller.

I asked at my LBS about how to get more speed out of my Birdy and was told
it was impossible because of the small wheels, they don't work, they can
only spin so fast and if I want to go fast I should get a racing bike. The
cycling club seem to think that I would be faster on a proper road bike as
well. How truthful this is I don't really know but I guess there is
something in it if so many people with a lot more experience than I have are
saying it.

Quoted message said:

On the other hand for jumping over tree trunks
larger wheels would seem to be handy.

Adam Lea said:

I asked at my LBS about how to get more speed out of my Birdy and was told
it was impossible because of the small wheels, they don't work, they can
only spin so fast and if I want to go fast I should get a racing bike.

This guy managed ok with small wheels:

http://www.canosoarus.com/08LSRbicycle/LSR%20Bike01.htm

Perhaps you just need a more aerodynamic body position?

Anthony

Anthony Jones said:

Adam Lea said:

I asked at my LBS about how to get more speed out of my Birdy and was told
it was impossible because of the small wheels, they don't work, they can
only spin so fast and if I want to go fast I should get a racing bike.

You might want to consider another bikeshop, with a few more braincells
intact!

Quoted message said:

This guy managed ok with small wheels:

http://www.canosoarus.com/08LSRbicycle/LSR%20Bike01.htm

Didn't he fell of first because the Schraedervalves without valvecaps
opened at speed?

--
---
Marten Gerritsen

INFOapestaartjeM-GINEERINGpuntNL
www.m-gineering.nl

Adam Lea said:

I also have a Birdy. I have found that I am limited to a speed of about
35mph above which it seems that any additional extra power applied to the
pedals does not result in a speed increase. The bike also seems to get less
stable when it reaches these speeds. Other riders on conventional road bikes
in the club I belong too can manage 40mph easily if they want to.

There are various different Birdies... what sort is yours, which bars
does it have, and what tyres is it running at what pressure, do you have
mudguards? There's a lot more to speed than wheel size.

Quoted message said:

I asked at my LBS about how to get more speed out of my Birdy and was told
it was impossible because of the small wheels, they don't work, they can
only spin so fast and if I want to go fast I should get a racing bike.

Tossers. A faired Moulton holds a world speed record for an upright
bike, which it clearly couldn't do if it was "impossible because of the
small wheels", and Moultons have been used to get creditable results in
the RAAM. The reason small wheels never show up in UCI races is because
the UCI have banned them: they usually tend to ban things that help, not
things that hinder...

Quoted message said:

cycling club seem to think that I would be faster on a proper road bike as
well. How truthful this is I don't really know but I guess there is
something in it if so many people with a lot more experience than I have are
saying it.

Again, what is the setup of your Birdy? If it's, say, the tour
(formerly "Blue"😉 model with mudguards, DualDrive and 38mm tyres then
of course you'd go quicker on a full-on road bike, but if you put a
heavier, less efficient gear system, air-catching mudguards and tough,
comfy but relatively high rolling resistance tyres on one of their bikes
then that would slow them down too.
To get something faster than a Birdy Tour, get a Birdy Speed with no
'guards and Stelvios and you'll probably find you can go faster (that's
why it's called the "Speed" (formerly "Black"😉).

Big wheels do better than /unsuspended/ small over rougher roads, but
the suspension on the Birdy is probably good enough to iron that out,
and may even make it /more/ efficient on really dodgy tarmac.

Pete.
--
Peter Clinch Medical Physics IT Officer
Tel 44 1382 660111 ext. 33637 Univ. of Dundee, Ninewells Hospital
Fax 44 1382 640177 Dundee DD1 9SY Scotland UK
net [email hidden] http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/

Anthony Jones wrote on 23/04/2007 00:27 +0100:

Quoted message said:

Adam Lea said:

I asked at my LBS about how to get more speed out of my Birdy and was told
it was impossible because of the small wheels, they don't work, they can
only spin so fast and if I want to go fast I should get a racing bike.

This guy managed ok with small wheels:

http://www.canosoarus.com/08LSRbicycle/LSR%20Bike01.htm

Perhaps you just need a more aerodynamic body position?

The BromptonTalk group has its own version of Alan Holmes:

Quoted message said:

Racing Brompton I always found fun, I timetrialed Brompton several
times in the past (1990-1993) , the results were not that bad: 37km
in 45º17,22' in the hilly Schwarzwald. That is an average speed of
±49kmh.

Not bad for three gears!

--
Tony

"The most savage controversies are those about matters as to which there
is no good evidence either way."
- Bertrand Russell