Strida 5.0

Noel said:

New version of the Strida has been released:

http://bikesthatfold.com/content/view/33/

The page states:
"no brake pads to replace, no chain to stretch, no gear teeth to wear
out, no rims to retrue"

How does that work? There are brakes, there's a "chain" (well,
toothed belt), and there are wheels. All are susceptible to wear and
tear, thus making the statements untrue, as far as I can tell.

PhilD

--
<><

PhilD <[email hidden]> wrote in news:c371f502-3f78-4b5e-a509-
[email hidden]:

Quoted message said:

Noel said:

New version of the Strida has been released:

http://bikesthatfold.com/content/view/33/

The page states:
"no brake pads to replace, no chain to stretch, no gear teeth to wear
out, no rims to retrue"

How does that work? There are brakes, there's a "chain" (well,
toothed belt), and there are wheels. All are susceptible to wear and
tear, thus making the statements untrue, as far as I can tell.

I was going to say drum brakes, but the pic looks like discs - so no,
not *strictly* true

Quoted message said:

--
<><

Mike the unimaginative writtificated

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

How does that work? There are brakes, there's a "chain" (well,
toothed belt), and there are wheels. All are susceptible to wear and
tear, thus making the statements untrue, as far as I can tell.

I was going to say drum brakes, but the pic looks like discs - so no,
not *strictly* true

I think the statement refers to the Strida 3, which had drum brakes and
nifty plasticky wheels.

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

Noel said:

New version of the Strida has been released:

http://bikesthatfold.com/content/view/33/

The page states:
"no brake pads to replace, no chain to stretch, no gear teeth to wear
out, no rims to retrue"

How does that work? There are brakes, there's a "chain" (well,
toothed belt), and there are wheels. All are susceptible to wear and
tear, thus making the statements untrue, as far as I can tell.

I used to have one. The brakes were drum brakes and the toothed belt was
kevlar based and had been tested to 500 000 miles of use and still didn't
need replacing. The plastic wheels were one piece.

--
Simon Mason
http://www.simonmason.karoo.net/

On 19 Jan, 09:54, "Simon Mason" <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

I used to have one. The brakes were drum brakes and the toothed belt was
kevlar based and had been tested to 500 000 miles of use and still didn't
need replacing. The plastic wheels were one piece.
--
Simon Masonhttp://www.simonmason.karoo.net/

Did it meet up with the low maintenance claims ?
How far would you be comfortable to ride one ?

In article <[email hidden]>, Noel
[email hidden] says...

Quoted message said:

New version of the Strida has been released:

http://bikesthatfold.com/content/view/33/

Main changes seem to be with the brakes and the wheels and this one is a
couple of lbs lighter.

"There is no gear-system to fail, no brake pads to replace, no chain to
stretch, no gear teeth to wear out, no rims to retrue, no head-set to
loosen, no wheel hub cones to wear-out, no derailleurs to bend / break
and virtually no parts susceptible to rust."
And no way you'd catch me riding one (unless I was offered a substantial
payment) - they're horrid nasty things. Apparently the designers, and
those who thought it worthy of receiving awards, have no idea what makes
a bike rideable.

Quoted message said:

And no way you'd catch me riding one (unless I was offered a
substantial payment) - they're horrid nasty things. Apparently the
designers, and those who thought it worthy of receiving awards, have
no idea what makes a bike rideable.

That may have been true with the earlier ones, but the later models are
said to be better:

<www.strida.co.uk/media/uploads/faqs/strida_faq_197_Strida_Tips_V2
_Mark.pdf>

Myth 3. Strida has poor ergonomics.
For racing, and where riding at 9/10th or more is normal, then getting
the best aerodynamics and power stroke is important to extract the last
1/10 seconds. The snag is the same setup advice is passed down (as
hearsay eg on cycling forums etc.) as ‘the norm’ for all bicycle use –
which is total rubbish ! In town, good visibility from a close handle bar
upright riding position is more important than lying flat (with bended
back and straining neck) for aerodynamics. Hence the classic ‘sit up and
beg’ dutch bikes. Many folding bikes aim to please the ‘racing
cyclist/enthusiast’ some are even designed by racers – but is this
appropriate for urban use ?
I felt not, and during the stringent masters degree program from which
Strida was evolved, I met up with a top UK ergonomist. He helped me to do
tests (with a fully adjustable test rig) and understand the riding habits
of potential users: mainly urban, multi-model commuters in the 5 to 95%
ile range, from this work the upright riding position for favoured, and
the bent arms that taller riders (like me) get from being close to the
bars does not matter, as arms are bent when riding.

Myth 4. Strida has poor handling.
Originally the ergonomic test rigs were also used to adjust the steering
axis, trail etc. that goes into giving a bike its handling
characteristics. Also a lot of cycling books and handling theories were
studied. For the 1st Stridas (eg Strida 1’s), I followed the traditional
‘handling theories’, about what makes a bike handle well – and the
handling was OK, but NOT perfect, so the myth was partially true back
then. At the time I put this mismatch between the traditional wisdom of
bike steering geometry and the actual ‘feel’ of the early bikes down to
the short wheel base.
When Steedman bought the company he was keen to perfect the Strida. And
he wanted to improve its handling, so he consulted all the ‘experts’ in
the industry and they all came up with various theories about what would
improve the handling – most suggested various angles and tweaks based on
traditional theories, and most were wrong !! – We had a special fully
adjustable test rig, and so could try out the theories and other
settings. This was harder than expected because of the lack of ‘Strida
virgins’ … ie the human soon learns to adapt, and so familiarity with the
bikes handling soon spoiled objectivity. In the end we changed 2 key
factors: 1. we added ball bearings to the main loadbearing (lower) joint,
2. We used the geometry settings from the rig most preferred by ‘strida
virgins’. The steering geometry of a Strida (from Strida 2.5) is now
quite different from the theories, but it works ! For a bike with such a
short wheelbase the handling is now really good, a well balanced rider
can ride hands off (don’t try this at home folks !).

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

Quoted message said:

On 19 Jan, 09:54, "Simon Mason" <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

I used to have one. The brakes were drum brakes and the toothed belt was
kevlar based and had been tested to 500 000 miles of use and still didn't
need replacing. The plastic wheels were one piece.
--
Simon Masonhttp://www.simonmason.karoo.net/

Did it meet up with the low maintenance claims ?
How far would you be comfortable to ride one ?

I won it in a competition and rode it once. I found its wobbly handling and
lack of gears serious drawbacks. I would prefer to walk instead like the
other chap said.

--
Simon Mason
http://www.simonmason.karoo.net/

Noel said:

New version of the Strida has been released:

Funny old world. We went to Edinburgh museum today and in one section
(design) was a number of machines hanging from the roof. They started
off with a hobby horse, onto an ordinary, then a safety and so on ...
finally culminating in a Strida. I wonder if the curator is aware of
other modern machines.

There was also a rather nice looking trike on display with a single
large driven wheel on the left of the seat and 2 smaller steerable
wheels on the right, one in front of the rider and the other behind. The
only brake appeared to be a bit of metal that came into contact with the
hub of the large wheel. It was probably fixed though. so fully legal.

--
Don Whybrow

Sequi Bonum Non Time

"I've noticed that the press tends to be quite accurate, except
when they're writing on a subject I know something about."
(Keith F. Lynch)

Don Whybrow said:

Noel said:

New version of the Strida has been released:

Funny old world. We went to Edinburgh museum today and in one section
(design) was a number of machines hanging from the roof. They started
off with a hobby horse, onto an ordinary, then a safety and so on ...
finally culminating in a Strida. I wonder if the curator is aware of
other modern machines.

Yes, but Strida's are given away for free 😉

--
/Marten

info(apestaartje)m-gineering(punt)nl

On Sat, 19 Jan 2008 14:29:41 +0000, Rob Morley wrote:

they're horrid

Quoted message said:

nasty things. Apparently the designers, and those who thought it worthy
of receiving awards, have no idea what makes a bike rideable.

Have you ever ridden one? Speaking from experience (I have had a Strida
3 for three years now) they are extremely rideable. Being so light they
are very nippy and, after the 10mins it takes to get used to the
handling, they are very manoeuvrable even at speeds slower than walking
pace. Great fun too and with an upright position which lets you see over
most non-4x4s.

Strida's are not great on very steep hills but in London there are not
too many of those. As a folder it is second to none.

My next folder will probably be a Brompton as I would like to do some
touring but I would never dismiss a Strida. It is an excellent commuter
option for journeys <10m.

Cheers
Noel

Noel said:

I would never dismiss a Strida. It is an excellent commuter
option for journeys <10m.

being metric, I couldn't agree more 😉

(but I cherish the manual which recommends tall persons to lower the
saddle!)
--
/Marten

info(apestaartje)m-gineering(punt)nl

M-gineering writtificated

Quoted message said:

(but I cherish the manual which recommends tall persons to lower the
saddle!)

IIRC the designer is 6'3" and rides one (well, several). With a simple
modification it becomes suitable for tall people. Quite why he didn't make
it to fit himself in the first place I'm not quite sure :-/

Quoted message said:

IIRC the designer is 6'3" and rides one (well, several). With a simple
modification it becomes suitable for tall people. Quite why he didn't make
it to fit himself in the first place I'm not quite sure :-/

I borrowed one of the first series ten years ago. I am 6ft2 +1/2.
My 10yr old son thought it was fun and rode it around the cul de sac
for a few weeks.
I thought it was impossible to achieve a reasonable cycling
position.Also the seat fixing was delicate and broke under my weight.
The ride was weird and 'hot'.Hands-off ?definitely not.
If I was given one and had a half mile to go from the train every
morning I might consider it, since it would be quicker than walking
and it is a very quick fold/unfold.
I can't imagine how it could be made substantially better for a big
person, though it would be a lot more acceptable for an average sizer
if they have made it stronger and stiffer.
TerryJ

TerryJ writtificated

Quoted message said:

I borrowed one of the first series ten years ago. I am 6ft2 +1/2.
My 10yr old son thought it was fun and rode it around the cul de sac
for a few weeks.
I thought it was impossible to achieve a reasonable cycling
position.Also the seat fixing was delicate and broke under my weight.
The ride was weird and 'hot'.Hands-off ?definitely not.
If I was given one and had a half mile to go from the train every
morning I might consider it, since it would be quicker than walking
and it is a very quick fold/unfold.
I can't imagine how it could be made substantially better for a big
person, though it would be a lot more acceptable for an average sizer
if they have made it stronger and stiffer.

Reading between the lines, the first marks (up 'til 2.5) had awful
handling. Somewhere in this thread I posted a link that explained a little
about how they'd improved the handling and how to make it more suitable for
tall people.

I've seen a couple being ridden about but unfortunately never had a go on
one.

Mark T said:

I've seen a couple being ridden about but unfortunately never had a go
on one.

http://strida.co.uk/testride/

the best way to evaluate any bike is to test ride it. we invite you to
take the strida onto the subway, store it in the trunk of your car, fold
and unfold the bike, bash it about, and ride it every day. if the strida
doesn't meet your expectations, we'll buy it back, no questions asked.

the large fine print
to prevent abuse of this system, the customer is responsible for return
shipping charges.

In article <[email hidden]>, Noel
[email hidden] says...

Quoted message said:

Rob Morley said:

they're horrid
nasty things. Apparently the designers, and those who thought it worthy
of receiving awards, have no idea what makes a bike rideable.

Have you ever ridden one?

When they first came out. It was fine riding up and down the hall at
Cyclex, but I wouldn't want to ride one in traffic or on an uneven
surface. I had the feeling that I'd fall off the back if I accelerated
hard, and you can't really shift your weight forwards to prevent that,
so I'd be very dubious of its ability to pull away sharpish when the
lights change. Lack of gears isn't good either.

Quoted message said:

Speaking from experience (I have had a Strida
3 for three years now) they are extremely rideable. Being so light they
are very nippy and, after the 10mins it takes to get used to the
handling, they are very manoeuvrable even at speeds slower than walking
pace. Great fun too and with an upright position which lets you see over
most non-4x4s.

Strida's are not great on very steep hills but in London there are not
too many of those.

The ergonomics of diamond-frame bikes and recumbents make sense to me.
I don't think I could never adjust to the upright position and short
reach.

Quoted message said:

As a folder it is second to none.

I have a piece of paper that folds much smaller. I wouldn't want to
ride it though.

Quoted message said:

My next folder will probably be a Brompton as I would like to do some
touring but I would never dismiss a Strida. It is an excellent commuter
option for journeys <10m.

10 metres?

Rob Morley said:

When they first came out. It was fine riding up and down the hall at

As MarkT has pointed out, the pre-2.5 versions were not nearly as
stable. If you won't try one again then your loss.

Quoted message said:

I have a piece of paper that folds much smaller. I wouldn't want to
ride it though.

Eh?

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

commuter option for journeys <10m.

10 metres?

Very droll.

I regularly ride a 6mile route through from Clapham Junction to
Hammersmith/Chiswick and it is not in the least bit uncomfortable. It
takes me around 25mins and that is via a combination of main roads,
backstreets, towpaths, parks and cyclepaths. A 12mph+ average is
respectable through London.

When I arrive at the station I hardly break stride to fold the bike and
as it is wheeled there is no problem negotiating the barriers or running
with it. On the train, if it is packed to the gunnels the bike simply
stands in front of me taking up almost no room at all.

Cheers
Noel

Quoting TerryJ <[email hidden]>:
[Strida]

Quoted message said:

The ride was weird and 'hot'.Hands-off ?definitely not.

How long did you ride it for? When I first got a Brompton, the handling
seemed extremely perverse; however I soon got used to it, and have been
quite contented with moderately fast descents on it.
--
David Damerell <[email hidden]> flcl?
Today is Saturday, January - a weekend.