Comments on: A couple of folding bike concepts

By: kfg

kfg — Thu, 02 Feb 2012 16:35:32 +0000

Where women comprise half or more of the riding population you find that most of them ride the same sort of bike; the standard step through safety that’s been constantly popular for over 100 years. Many “non-riding” men have gravitated to the same bike for urban utility use. http://oldbike.wordpress.com/1898-cooper-no-4-roadster/

It’s what works.

Most of those who do not ride such a bike ride a small wheel backbone bike, which are already in plentiful supply from a variety of makers.

It would appear that industrial design is not where the answer is to be found.

The basic idea of the Crewe bike has been around for, what for it, wait for it . . . at least 100 years. The last I’m aware of off the top of my head who offered production models was Montague, but they have since gone to a backbone design, as virtually all people serious about making folders eventually do.

It’s what works.

By: art

art — Wed, 01 Feb 2012 19:05:04 +0000

I like the folding bike, but from a structural perspective, the double hinge should be on the down tube (tension member) instead of the top tube (compression member). The current design is going to be prone to buckling, particularly as the hinges wear and develop some play.

By: James Thomas

James Thomas — Wed, 01 Feb 2012 14:21:17 +0000

Good thought, Nick. Maybe so…

By: Nick F

Nick F — Tue, 31 Jan 2012 22:51:49 +0000

Couldn’t agree more.

…maybe the next Bicycle Design competition ought to have a bicycle advocacy/infrastructure focus?

By: James Thomas

James Thomas — Tue, 31 Jan 2012 22:46:30 +0000

Steve, I agree with you. I have mentioned in past posts that the design of a bicycle can only be a small part of the solution. The big picture is what we all need to really focus on, and it starts at the local level. I am heavily involved in local bicycle advocacy issues, and that is the focus of my other blog. I encourage EVERYONE who rides a bike to get involved with advocacy efforts in their local community and work to make a difference. Of course, the obstacles are not all local. Today, ALL cyclists need to contact their Representatives to voice opposition to the "The American Energy and Infrastructure Jobs Act" (proposed in the House today) . It would be a shame to lose federal funding for Transportation Enhancements and Safe Routes to School, but it just goes to show that we can never let our guard down if we want to see real change in the US.

By: Nick F

Nick F — Tue, 31 Jan 2012 00:37:15 +0000

S+S Couplers go for around $450 installed for a pair on a pre-existing frame, by a custom builder. A single, OEM unit, installed during fabrication, would cost a tiny fraction of that. Furthermore, the mindset that "only poor people ride the bus" is the fundamental reason we have a garbage transportation system in America.

By: Nick F

Nick F — Tue, 31 Jan 2012 00:25:03 +0000

This would work with a rear brake… each join bends less than 90°, which a cable and housing could absolutely handle.

Now a shifter cable would be a little bit more complex, but there is no reason (apart from convention) that it couldn’t be run along the top tube as well.

By: steve

steve — Mon, 30 Jan 2012 23:05:02 +0000

I love to see new designs, but I’m afraid the problem is much larger than more appealing bikes. People, particularly women, have to have a sense they are safe, you heed to have places to securely leave your bikes (sorry – foldable doesn’t work when you are doing errands) and so on. Northern Europe has made great strides – sadly I see little progress being made here outside of a few cities and even there it is trivial compared to the European effort.

But that shouldn’t stop anyone working on interesting bikes as they are a piece of the puzzle too – but we shouldn’t fool ourselves into thinking they are a major piece.

By: Matt

Matt — Mon, 30 Jan 2012 20:16:28 +0000

I actually like both of those – unusual, since I’m normally fairly critical of “new” bike designs. I’m really impressed with how much detailed work went into Raymon’s design – would love to see a full-scale prototype. It actually bears a lot of resemblance to many bikeshare bikes (but obviously most bikeshare bikes don’t fold!).

Philip’s design with the couplers seems really simple and elegant. The only problem is it seems it could only be applied to fixies because of the rear brake run – I know there are couplers for brake lines too but that does interfere with the simplicity. That’s not an issue if you’re a fixie rider… but I’m not.

By: Andy

Andy — Mon, 30 Jan 2012 20:10:41 +0000

I like Philip’s design. It would require giving up some handling characteristics by beefing up the tubes and having the joints, but that’s the quickest and easiest folding system I’ve seen for a full sized bike. Steel frames are great for certain applications, but for a folding bike this would probably be fairly heavy, especially if you wanted gear options. You would also be limited if you wanted to have typical flat bars that would be a bit wider than what’s in the video, since there’s no quick fix to rotate the bars on this. S&S couplers go for about $400 on their own though, so we’re looking at a bike that would cost upwards of $1000 as a single speed though – not quite what the bus riding crowd would be likely to purchase. Just make sure you don’t lock it using only the main triangle!