# The most stylish Brompton yet?



## srw (8 Apr 2016)

http://www.brompton.com/News/Posts/2015/Collaborations-Brooks

You cannot begin to imagine how tempted I am.


----------



## dan_bo (8 Apr 2016)

Just the thing to be seen outside borough market on.


----------



## Milkfloat (8 Apr 2016)

The most stylish could also be described as the least ugly. I associate Brompton with functional, not stylish.


----------



## srw (8 Apr 2016)

When it comes to engineeing, functionality enhances beauty for me. The sort of bikes most people drool over - all cut-down handlebars which make steering difficult, shiny chrome which will last a couple of weeks in the rain and designed for an arse-in-the-air position - look horrible to me.


----------



## gavintc (8 Apr 2016)

Wow stylish and brompton in the same sentence. They may 'do the job' but they are fugly.


----------



## Fab Foodie (8 Apr 2016)

Nnnice!


----------



## Fab Foodie (8 Apr 2016)

Fab Foodie said:


> Nnnice!


If only it was a 2 speed ....


----------



## benb (8 Apr 2016)

Want


----------



## Profpointy (8 Apr 2016)

well other than being green, what is special about it?

I like the clear lacquer one where you can see the bronze of the brazing - but would also like it with an Affline, or as we're window shopping, a Rohloff conversion.

Recently bought an older more ordinary model - and I must say the componentry is on the cheap side


----------



## jefmcg (8 Apr 2016)

Profpointy said:


> I like the clear lacquer one where you can see the bronze of the brazing


But that's fake, it's bronze paint.


----------



## bikegang (8 Apr 2016)

srw said:


> http://www.brompton.com/News/Posts/2015/Collaborations-Brooks
> 
> You cannot begin to imagine how tempted I am.



In real life..

.


----------



## John the Monkey (8 Apr 2016)

Who knew that a day would come upon which the companies Brooks and Brompton would suffer the word "colourway" to be used in describing their products.

O tempora, O mores.


----------



## srw (8 Apr 2016)

Sadly not. Although there is some rather lovely rainwear, a pair of handlebar grips which Brompton really should have used, and my personal favourite - a stylish and practical briefcase.

Now. About this Brooks Brompton. Fantastic photos, @bikegang, but I can't get close enough to see the price tag. I also notice with disappointment that there is no front luggage block (+£15), no Marathon pluses (+£30) and no Easy wheels.


----------



## Flying Dodo (8 Apr 2016)

The bike's a nice colour. Shame about the saddle, so I'll pass on that.


----------



## annedonnelly (8 Apr 2016)

I like the shiny bell  I'm not a fan of that colour so I'll be leaving those limited edition ones for others to buy. Might treat myself to a Brompton buff though. I can layer it with my Cyclechat one.


----------



## Pale Rider (9 Apr 2016)

This could be the most stylish Brompton yet, but it indicates a growing problem with the brand.

Bromptons are excellent bikes, they have plenty of substance, but the company seems increasingly concerned with style.

Fine if you can do both, but rather than concentrating on boutiques and ludicrously priced designer luggage, I would like to see Brompton concentrating a bit more on product development.

There are one or two areas in which the bike could be improved, the gear change mechanism is cheap and nasty.

Removing/refitting the rear wheel on geared versions is over complicated.

The supplied pump is next to useless.

I would prefer to see Brompton work a bit harder on improving the substance of the product, rather than the style of its presentation.


----------



## Hugh Manatee (9 Apr 2016)

John the Monkey said:


> Who knew that a day would come upon which the companies Brooks and Brompton would suffer the word "colourway" to be used in describing their products.
> 
> O tempora, O mores.



I have just unsubscribed from the newsletter stating this as the reason.


----------



## shouldbeinbed (9 Apr 2016)

Pale Rider said:


> This could be the most stylish Brompton yet, but it indicates a growing problem with the brand.
> 
> Bromptons are excellent bikes, they have plenty of substance, but the company seems increasingly concerned with style.
> 
> ...


Stands and applauds.


----------



## John the Monkey (9 Apr 2016)

[QUOTE 4229118, member: 259"]it's a Jspanese Crane one, so much cheaper elsewhere.

They are dead nice though.[/QUOTE]
It'd be nice if they did an after market brass dome & ringer for the current bell - compared to the Crane I use on my Surly, the stock Brompton bell is insufficiently sonorous and delightful.


----------



## John the Monkey (9 Apr 2016)

Hugh Manatee said:


> I have just unsubscribed from the newsletter stating this as the reason.


I say! Steady on old thing!


----------



## srw (9 Apr 2016)

Hugh Manatee said:


> I have just unsubscribed from the newsletter stating this as the reason.


Who cares, as long as they continue to deliver great bikes and saddles?


----------



## srw (9 Apr 2016)

Pale Rider said:


> There are one or two areas in which the bike could be improved, the gear change mechanism is cheap and nasty.


This is a Sturmey Archer problem, unless you're talking about the derailleur.


> Removing/refitting the rear wheel on geared versions is over complicated.


On the hub gear version it's straightforward. Unless you're talking about the derailleur.




> I would prefer to see Brompton work a bit harder on improving the substance of the product, rather than the style of its presentation.



If you steer clear of the derailleur there's little to improve. I'd love them to do a stock 5-speed version, but that depends on someone making a decent 5-speed hub. I'd love them to do an all titanium bike, but that's not exactly a large market.

The fact is that their sweet customer spot is affluent commuters. Who, as long as the product performs, like a bit of style. I suspect the boutiques more than pay their way. And the designer luggage subsidises the product development.


----------



## Flying Dodo (9 Apr 2016)

"Innovate or die" springs to mind. Currently Brompton are on a wave due to demand from space concious commuters and trendy types. However it's still the same product as 20 years ago with a heavy, over engineered steel gas pipe as its main frame. Yes, it looks lovely and folds very nicely, but there's a new range of competitors waiting in the wings doing the same or even slightly better. As an example, Apple aren't still selling the Apple Macintosh. If they hadn't brought out new products, they wouldn't still be in existence. Doing special editions like this tie-up with Brooks, or the forthcoming light up frame are merely tinkering at the edges.

Eventually the tide will turn for Brompton unless they bring out a better product. It won't be this year or next year, but 5-10 years down the line.


----------



## StuAff (9 Apr 2016)

Flying Dodo said:


> As an example, Apple aren't still selling the Apple Macintosh. If they hadn't brought out new products, they wouldn't still be in existence.



Ahem. The Mac is alive and well. Just not with a 9" black and white CRT, 68000 processor, 128kb of RAM…but pedantry aside, good point. There is a titanium frame Brompton, with Rohloff or 27 speed derailleur options, but they didn't build it. I don't know how many actually got made, web information is old and sporadic. The standard bike has never had much appeal for me But this, oh......





Will Butler-Adams (who knows of Len Rubin and his little beauty) should just have said 'we'll do that', and, er, do it. Brompton's policy of slow, slow, steady improvement & making sure everything retrofits isn't necessarily bad, but that insistence has stifled them. You shouldn't have to go to third parties doing their own engineering for something like a wider gear range than the six speed, for example. I certainly don't want them to do what Dahon did (too many changes year on year, part issues well documented by me let alone anyone else!), but there should be some innovation.


----------



## Pale Rider (9 Apr 2016)

srw said:


> This is a Sturmey Archer problem, unless you're talking about the derailleur.
> 
> On the hub gear version it's straightforward. Unless you're talking about the derailleur.
> 
> ...



A simple hub gear needing only axle bolts to remove the wheel ought to be possible, but I suspect chain tension and the fold would be a problem.

That would give a twist shifter, surely ideal on a Brommie - nothing to snap when folding or carrying.

The brakes were rubbish, partly cured by improving the levers a few years ago.

But whatever type of callipers they are still look over complicated to me - what's wrong with V brakes?

My local dealer changed a non-locking suspension block to a locking one recently.

The kit contained a dozen or so bits and the dreaded Brompton exploded diagram.

Brompton boast about there being 1,000 - or whatever it is - parts needed to make a complete bike.

Actually, they should be ashamed of that number and looking to reduce it significantly.

I liked mine, sold because it was surplus to my requirements.

It's also the only bike I've ever got decent money for secondhand.

I may buy another in future, but not until I see some genuine improvements.


----------



## srw (9 Apr 2016)

StuAff said:


> But this, oh......


----------



## srw (9 Apr 2016)

Flying Dodo said:


> Eventually the tide will turn for Brompton unless they bring out a better product. It won't be this year or next year, but 5-10 years down the line.



The main constraints they're working under are:

UK manufacture
Backwards compatibility
Foldability
My best guess (and it is only a guess) is that the "style" developments are going hand in hand with "technology" developments. If you think of the subtle technological developments they've made over the last few years - multiple handlebar styles, 2-speed derailleur, lockable fold, brake upgrade, titanium extremeties as an option - I think your pessimism is misplaced. That's just about the whole bike which has been upgraded as a core or as an option. I _hope_ that they continue to be an independent British manufacturer with one core product which they keep gradually upgrading. I _fear_ that the current owners will cash out to a VC firm or a bigger manufacturer.


----------



## StuAff (9 Apr 2016)

srw said:


>


What don't you like about it?


----------



## srw (9 Apr 2016)

> But whatever type of callipers they are still look over complicated to me - what's wrong with V brakes?


They're pretty standard road bike calipers...


> My local dealer changed a non-locking suspension block to a locking one recently.
> 
> The kit contained a dozen or so bits and the dreaded Brompton exploded diagram.


Which is about as many bits as you need to change a cassette on a normal bike.


> Brompton boast about there being 1,000 - or whatever it is - parts needed to make a complete bike.
> 
> Actually, they should be ashamed of that number and looking to reduce it significantly.


You remember this photo?





If there are many fewer than 1,000 parts there I'll be very surprised.


----------



## srw (9 Apr 2016)

StuAff said:


> What don't you like about it?


I quite like the wheels that prop it up when it's folded (though easy-wheels would have been sensible) and the front carrier block. Everything else just looks horrible - either too shiny for the sake of it or else oversized for the bike. 

I freely admit that that is partly unfamiliarity - I'm very used to the standard Brompton - but a lot of it just seems like upgrades for the sake of upgrades.


----------



## StuAff (9 Apr 2016)

srw said:


> I quite like the wheels that prop it up when it's folded (though easy-wheels would have been sensible) and the front carrier block. Everything else just looks horrible - either too shiny for the sake of it or else oversized for the bike.
> 
> I freely admit that that is partly unfamiliarity - I'm very used to the standard Brompton - but a lot of it just seems like upgrades for the sake of upgrades.


It should be shiny- it's titanium. Agreed, a lot of Brompton owners would be perfectly happy with everything else as they can buy now- and no reason (if you could buy one) that you couldn't just have single speed-six speed options as now. But, some people might want more than that, and do (else you wouldn't be able to buy Alfine/Rohloff/derailleur conversions). And the UFB is much lighter, even with all those upgrades. 8kg for the 27 speed.......


----------



## srw (9 Apr 2016)

StuAff said:


> It should be shiny- it's titanium. Agreed, a lot of Brompton owners would be perfectly happy with everything else as they can buy now- and no reason (if you could buy one) that you couldn't just have single speed-six speed options as now. But, some people might want more than that, and do (else you wouldn't be able to buy Alfine/Rohloff/derailleur conversions). And the UFB is much lighter, even with all those upgrades.


For any commercial proposition there's a compromise between development and build cost and market size. As you might (not) know I'm looking at an 8-speed conversion. But for the size of that market it's just not worth Brompton doing the development work. 

As I said upthread, their core market is affluent commuters. On my affluent commuter train typically only 3 or 4 out of about 500 passengers tote a Brompton. That's a 300% or 400% increase on a few years ago, but it's still a _tiny_ proportion of the potential market. It will always be more commercially viable for them to focus on what commuters want than on what long-distance riders want.


----------



## srw (9 Apr 2016)

User said:


> Lighter would be nice, as would be quicker fasteners for the hinges. An ovalised section seat-pin would constrain the saddle to point the right way.


Yes, all desirable. The quicker fasteners are now available as after-market options, and will probably make their way onto the core design in due course. Without a frame triangle to give stability lighter will always be a challenge. The ovalised seat-pin is a nice idea but (as you definitely _wouldn't_ know) a heavier rider will very slightly deform the seatpin and so rely on being able to twist the thing to get it lifted.

I have a long enough online Brompton memory to remember calls for better brakes, saddle height limiters, fold lockers and easy wheeling as everything that stood between the Brompton and perfection. Guess what technological improvements have come out in the last 10 years or so?


----------



## srw (9 Apr 2016)

User said:


> I would reckon more than that. Last Tuesday at around 07:40, was on the concourse at Marylebone and watched about a dozen come off one train.


I sit at the back of the train, so might not see them all! And with the 3 or 4 Bromptoneers I see there are the same again of Dahonners and others, all looking rather embarrassed at the general crapness of their bikes.

Even so, a dozen out of 500 is still only 2%. A good 10% or more of those people could easily commute by bike.


----------



## StuAff (9 Apr 2016)

srw said:


> For any commercial proposition there's a compromise between development and build cost and market size. As you might (not) know I'm looking at an 8-speed conversion. But for the size of that market it's just not worth Brompton doing the development work.
> 
> As I said upthread, their core market is affluent commuters. On my affluent commuter train typically only 3 or 4 out of about 500 passengers tote a Brompton. That's a 300% or 400% increase on a few years ago, but it's still a _tiny_ proportion of the potential market. It will always be more commercially viable for them to focus on what commuters want than on what long-distance riders want.


Indeed so, Will B-A made the point some years back about large-scale manufacturing being very, very different to the Len Rubin (if he's still working on it)/Steve Parry/others doing mods scale. On the one hand, it is indeed much better for them to focus on their core market- they're planning to double production now they've moved, and I imagine there will still be a keen demand for more- but on the other, they are missing out on sales of higher-margin product. And other people have done much of the R&D for them (though scaling it up and quality control would obviously be a different matter). Titanium frames, they could build- or get some blokes in Tennessee or West Sussex to do it for them (very well). Rohloff, derailleurs, they could fit.


----------



## srw (9 Apr 2016)

StuAff said:


> Indeed so, Will B-A made the point some years back about large-scale manufacturing being very, very different to the Len Rubin (if he's still working on it)/Steve Parry/others doing mods scale. On the one hand, it is indeed much better for them to focus on their core market- they're planning to double production now they've moved, and I imagine there will still be a keen demand for more- but on the other, they are missing out on sales of higher-margin product. And other people have done much of the R&D for them (though scaling it up and quality control would obviously be a different matter). Titanium frames, they could build- or get some blokes in Tennessee or West Sussex to do it for them (very well). Rohloff, derailleurs, they could fit.


My sneaking suspicion (and it is only a suspicion) is that part of the move to a new factory is motivated by doing exactly what you suggest. I don't think they'll go down the derailleur route, because they've realised for a long time that derailleurs close to the ground get very mucky and need more maintenance. I wouldn't be surprised to see an official Ti Brommie (although even the East - not West - Sussex manufacturer uses the far East for a lot of its building). I don't think they'll go Rohloff, because that demands a wider triangle, but I do think they'll work up an 8-speed hub geared model based around the standard width SA 8 speed that Kinetics use. And I hope they'll work with SA on an 11-speed or similar model.


----------



## StuAff (9 Apr 2016)

srw said:


> My sneaking suspicion (and it is only a suspicion) is that part of the move to a new factory is motivated by doing exactly what you suggest. I don't think they'll go down the derailleur route, because they've realised for a long time that derailleurs close to the ground get very mucky and need more maintenance. I wouldn't be surprised to see an official Ti Brommie (although even the East - not West - Sussex manufacturer uses the far East for a lot of its building). I don't think they'll go Rohloff, because that demands a wider triangle, but I do think they'll work up an 8-speed hub geared model based around the standard width SA 8 speed that Kinetics use. And I hope they'll work with SA on an 11-speed or similar model.


Enigma are in Hailsham- forgot that! Yes, compared to even a 20" wheel, a derailleur on 16" is noticeably lower, and they've been dismissive of derailleurs in the past anyway. Never had a problem with it on my Dahons in terms of muck or maintenance, but those extra inches make a lot of difference. The wider triangle thing I don't get- it would only increase the folded size a little- 15mm!!!-but broaden (literally) their options considerably. 
You might well be right about them doing Ti themselves, eventually- the likes of the Black Edition seem more about trying to increase their margins than improvements, and I can't blame them for that. Perhaps they're testing the waters for flogging Ti bikes for considerably more money.


----------



## ianrauk (9 Apr 2016)

gavintc said:


> Wow stylish and brompton in the same sentence. They may 'do the job' but they are fugly.


Have to agree......


----------



## srw (9 Apr 2016)

StuAff said:


> The wider triangle thing I don't get- it would only increase the folded size a little- 15mm!!!-but broaden (literally) their options considerably.


A broader triangle means a different chainline, which means a wider BB. And screws up the backwards compatibility.


----------



## Flying Dodo (9 Apr 2016)

Why does there have to be backwards comparability? They can continue a classic version, and also produce an updated version with a slimmer, lighter frame. Such as that lovely Ti version @StuAff posted earlier.


----------



## StuAff (9 Apr 2016)

And, as now, there's no reason why older bikes can't be modded for a wider triangle.


----------



## srw (10 Apr 2016)

Flying Dodo said:


> Why does there have to be backwards comparability?


One of those self-imposed constraints - "buy a Brompton and parts will always fit". It also makes the supply chain and production line simpler.

For that matter, why should they only build in London? Why shouldn't they introduce a non-folding model? Or sponsor a race team?


----------



## Flying Dodo (10 Apr 2016)

srw said:


> One of those self-imposed constraints - "buy a Brompton and parts will always fit". It also makes the supply chain and production line simpler.
> 
> For that matter, why should they only build in London? Why shouldn't they introduce a non-folding model? Or sponsor a race team?



Fair enough, and being built in London is also part of their heritage, so I don't have any issue with that, and it makes good marketing sense. Even if they don't go down the route of a new model and continuing the "classic" version", they could still bring out a new, computer designed main beam and rear triangle which is significantly lighter, can still take a 100kg rider but is still the same shape. 12kg for a typically spec Brompton is not really the way to encourage customers. A lot of people do seem to buy them regardless, due to them being a fashion icon. 

Although I'd be quite happy to have a Brompton, I'm even happier having something which is over 2kg lighter, 8 speed and not a Brompton.


----------



## GrumpyGregry (10 Apr 2016)

Flying Dodo said:


> "Innovate or die" springs to mind. Currently Brompton are on a wave due to demand from space concious commuters and trendy types. However it's still the same product as 20 years ago with a heavy, over engineered steel gas pipe as its main frame. Yes, it looks lovely and folds very nicely, but there's a new range of competitors waiting in the wings doing the same or even slightly better. As an example, Apple aren't still selling the Apple Macintosh. If they hadn't brought out new products, they wouldn't still be in existence. Doing special editions like this tie-up with Brooks, or the forthcoming light up frame are merely tinkering at the edges.
> 
> Eventually the tide will turn for Brompton unless they bring out a better product. It won't be this year or next year, but 5-10 years down the line.


Countless niche quality products sell perfectly well over considerable periods of time without their manufacturers getting on-board the built-in obsolence bandwagon.


----------



## srw (10 Apr 2016)

Flying Dodo said:


> A lot of people do seem to buy them regardless, due to them being a fashion icon.


Perhaps if your commute involved a busy train journey you'd have a different view about why people buy them!

It's also worth observing that they've currently got a lead time on bespoke bikes of 4 - 8 weeks at least, so they're not exactly short of work at the moment. And that's despite Bromptons being a product which just keeps on going.


----------



## bikegang (10 Apr 2016)

srw said:


>


 How do you like this one then? The whole bike with rack and fenders still under 8Kg (Stock fork and rear triangle).
But the owner think front part too flexible during ride, he (~70kg) would prefer to have thicker heavier but stronger stem and frame.


----------



## srw (10 Apr 2016)

That's more like it, although it looks more like an angle-grinder than a chainwheel.


----------



## Flying Dodo (10 Apr 2016)

srw said:


> Perhaps if your commute involved a busy train journey you'd have a different view about why people buy them!
> 
> It's also worth observing that they've currently got a lead time on bespoke bikes of 4 - 8 weeks at least, so they're not exactly short of work at the moment. And that's despite Bromptons being a product which just keeps on going.



I'll have you know I'm not a country bumpkin! I go into London quite often, so do see a fair number of Bromptons, but also a number of Dahons and others, probably a 2.5 to 1 ratio. As there's not a lot of difference between the fold, weight and size (although there are some which are lighter than Bromptons), the herd instinct comes to mind, and the development of this Brooks 150 limited edition is indicative of the "designer" element. 

Of course Brompton would be even busier if they brought out a modern, lighter model. As I said, 12kg for a standard model is not a good way to encourage new customers. @velovoice ditched the 8 speed as it was just too heavy.


----------



## Flying Dodo (10 Apr 2016)

srw said:


> That's more like it, although it looks more like an angle-grinder than a chainwheel.


Yeah - I'd drill some holes in that!


----------



## StuAff (10 Apr 2016)

bikegang said:


> How do you like this one then? The whole bike with rack and fenders still under 8Kg (Stock fork and rear triangle).
> But the owner think front part too flexible during ride, he (~70kg) would prefer to have thicker heavier but stronger stem and frame.
> 
> View attachment 124401
> ...


That's pretty awesome. First time I've seen paired-spoke wheels in 16".


----------



## Flying Dodo (10 Apr 2016)

StuAff said:


> That's pretty awesome. First time I've seen paired-spoke wheels in 16".


Not so sure how long they'd last on some of London's roads..............


----------



## StuAff (10 Apr 2016)

Flying Dodo said:


> Not so sure how long they'd last on some of London's roads..............


Not that old chestnut! They're tough. And even tougher in smaller diameters.


----------



## Flying Dodo (10 Apr 2016)

So why aren't all wheels built that way?...............


----------



## windmiller (10 Apr 2016)

Beige was considered stylish in the 70's but you got the full monty not just the extremities. Does anyone know the price? Hope it's not, "well if you have to ask".


----------



## StuAff (10 Apr 2016)

Flying Dodo said:


> So why aren't all wheels built that way?...............


Well, for a start, Rolf Prima hold a load of patents on them, for another people think they're fragile.....


----------



## CharlieB (11 Apr 2016)

srw said:


> http://www.brompton.com/News/Posts/2015/Collaborations-Brooks
> 
> You cannot begin to imagine how tempted I am.


Go on @srw, you know you want to…

…I would, only I'm not allowed a fifth bike, let alone a third Brompton.


----------



## CharlieB (11 Apr 2016)

User said:


> 50% Brompton is an odd ratio.


Are you saying I should up it to 67%, as above, then, @User ?


----------



## John the Monkey (12 Apr 2016)

Flying Dodo said:


> ...A lot of people do seem to buy them regardless, due to them being a fashion icon.


I bought mine largely on the strength of a test ride - I was attracted by the compact fold (in 2009, nothing else was even close) but had decided to compromise a little and get a Mezzo. But the B rode so nicely that I changed my mind again - the backwards compatibility (and reasonably cheap parts) is a big plus for me too, as I can't see buying another being in my immediate future.

I have no illusions about my fashionability on one - colleagues, and even my own daughter see me with it and say "Oh, on the clown bike again then?"


----------



## Kell (12 Apr 2016)

I must admit, there aren't many people (I've met) that don't own a Brompton that then see one and don't think it's pretty neat.

The only people that tend to put them down tend to be those that have bought another bike and put down Bromptons as a way of justifying their own purchase.

I owned three folding bikes before getting a Brompton so it's not like I wanted one above all else. In fact, the first three I chose were deliberately done just because they weren't Bromptons. I genuinely don't care what other people ride, though I am interested in their reasons for choosing their bike, but to make a blanket statement about all Brompton owners is insulting at best.

And I'd hardly say any small-wheeled folder is a fashion icon. They are all, to a point, function over form.


----------



## Flying Dodo (12 Apr 2016)

Fair comment, and they're brilliant at what they do, and I do genuinely like Bromptons. A Brompton was the last bike I put away in my garage last night and I lovingly locked it up alongside all the other varied bikes in there, so I'm not size-ist! 

They could be much better though. However increasingly they are marketing a concept as they know they're in a dead-end. So recently there's the Black edition, now this Brooks model. As I keep on saying, 12kg for steel gas pipe construction is not giving consumers a good deal. Their web site boasts that they are at the cutting edge of bicycle innovation. And yet the product is almost identical to 25 years ago. How is that cutting edge?

There's the Hummingbird - 6.5kg or Helix 9.5 kg coming along - they're cutting edge.


----------



## John the Monkey (12 Apr 2016)

Flying Dodo said:


> There's the Hummingbird - 6.5kg or Helix 9.5 kg coming along - they're cutting edge.


Depends, innit.

The folded package isn't as good - those are bikes for people who need a fold because they don't have a shed or garage, not because they need a bike they can fit in the luggage racks of Pendolinos.


----------



## Kell (12 Apr 2016)

I'm certainly not saying they can't be improved.

The gear shifters and gearing in general is antiquated at best. The weight is another contentious issue.

But for me, there was no better combination of foldability and price.


----------



## Flying Dodo (12 Apr 2016)

John the Monkey said:


> Depends, innit.
> 
> The folded package isn't as good - those are bikes for people who need a fold because they don't have a shed or garage, not because they need a bike they can fit in the luggage racks of Pendolinos.



The Helix actually folds up smaller than the Brompton.


----------



## John the Monkey (12 Apr 2016)

Flying Dodo said:


> The Helix actually folds up smaller than the Brompton.


With 24" wheels, that is impressive!


----------



## Origamist (12 Apr 2016)

John the Monkey said:


> With 24" wheels, that is impressive!



If it were true! The Helix is not as small as a Brommie when folded (volume wise) but it is surprisingly close. The Helix does fold smaller than most 20" wheel folders though.

The only reason I have not bought a Brompton this year is due to the 'imminent' release of the Helix. However, it appears to have run into manufacturing delays and I'm toying with a raw finish S2L with a 58t chainring.


----------



## srw (12 Apr 2016)

Flying Dodo said:


> The Helix actually folds up smaller than the Brompton.


If Helix actually manages to deliver a 10-speed derailleur titanium bike made in Canada for $1600 I shall be gobsmacked. It will be the best value bike in the world.


----------



## Origamist (12 Apr 2016)

The estimated cost of the Helix 10 speed is/was 1600 USD. I can't believe that the price will not go up though.


----------



## benb (13 Apr 2016)

The Helix looks fantastic. Too good to be true?


----------



## John the Monkey (13 Apr 2016)

benb said:


> The Helix looks fantastic. Too good to be true?


Again, I think it depends on what the purchaser is after - There's no parking fold, no ability to trolley the bike around on its rear castors, no integrated luggage solution...

OTOH, lighter, probably fewer manufacturer only parts, easier to tune for a perfect fit to you, probably more forgiving of poor surfaces, &c &c.


----------



## Kell (13 Apr 2016)

John the Monkey said:


> With 24" wheels, that is impressive!



I've seen the videos of the Helix before, but if it's going to be $1600US then you know it's going to be at least the same in £. So for people that think Bromptons are expensive, it's hardly going to tempt them away.

And the Hummingbird won't end up at 6.5kg by the time you add a back brake, mudguards and gears...

But the point is well made, other people are coming up with other ideas. If the Helix had been available when I bought my Brompton and was close to the same price, then I would certainly have test ridden it. The Hummingbird, not so much.


----------



## Kell (13 Apr 2016)

John the Monkey said:


> Again, I think it depends on what the purchaser is after - There's no parking fold, no ability to trolley the bike around on its rear castors, no integrated luggage solution...
> 
> OTOH, lighter, probably fewer manufacturer only parts, easier to tune for a perfect fit to you, probably more forgiving of poor surfaces, &c &c.



It doesn't push along on the easy wheels because you wheel it about on the actual wheels. That's one thing I think Brompton could look into - see if there's a way to alter the fold so the front wheel can be used to push it along.


----------



## shouldbeinbed (13 Apr 2016)

Kell said:


> It doesn't push along on the easy wheels because you wheel it about on the actual wheels. That's one thing I think Brompton could look into - see if there's a way to alter the fold so the front wheel can be used to push it along.


That would compromise one of their main selling points though, the compact fold would have to be less so to de-overlap the front wheel from the rear assembly. Personally I don't have an issue with it as is, if I need to I can leave the bars up and tip it back just a tad to roll it on its castors/easy wheels.


----------



## Kell (13 Apr 2016)

That's fine if you don't have to move it very far or the surface is perfectly flat. But the weight of the bike is all wrong so it's pretty unstable even on a smooth train platform, and next to useless on a pavement (for example).

I've heard of people fitting skateboard wheels instead of the easy wheels to make this bit easier, but my heels only clear my easy wheels by mm anyway, so anything wider wouldn't work.

As I say, I was looking at mine folded the other day and wondering if there would be a way so that the front wheel is tucked in while folded as it is now, but if you pulled up the seat post and leant it back, it would hit the ground and you'd be able to roll it along.

It was just a thought as one of the great things about the full-size folders I used to have was that you'd could push them along really easily while folded (although it took less than a second to unfold). This was useful for me as I normally get on the back of the train to ensure there's space, which means I'm furthest away from the ticket barriers. In turn, with a Brompton, because of the weight, it's uncomfortable to carry for that length of time so I have to stop and unfold it to push it along, which means by the time I get to the barriers, I have to queue for ages.

It may be that it's only me that thinks it's a good idea though...


----------



## StuartG (13 Apr 2016)

Yes - it would be great to have more Brompton competition and we can only wish these two entrants well.

However one recurring criticism of the Brompton in this thread is of the 'gas pipe' frame. Over engineered? Maybe, but it does work - the Brompton doesn't normally break. The issue facing any folder is the design of the frame has to be compromised for the fold. That means parts of it will have to endure much higher stresses than those of a normal road bike frame. There is no alternative to beefing it up. The skill is doing 'just enough' to keep the weight down.

Arguably Brompton did a bit more, Dahon a little bit less. Dahon are where they are because people prefer a folder that doesn't break to one that has a bit of reputation for doing so even if it has other advantages.

No one, including the designers, will know if these new bikes will survive ten years (or even five) of real abuse until they have done it. This does make it difficult for new entrants once the euphoria of the launch passes and teething problems become apparent. Are they teething or fundamental? Are they implicit in the design or introduced in production?

Hand built prototypes don't test everything. It usually takes Microsoft to 'version 3' to produce a usable product. They have more resources than these cycle designers. I shall keep my wallet tight until they are proven in the field. Chicken and egg I know, but I'm not into the scrambled variant.

Personally for me - my major reservation is the gearing. I'd be very happy with a wider range 5 speed hub. That's it. Otherwise don't mess with what isn't broken. Which is a good description of my ten year old M3L.


----------



## shouldbeinbed (14 Apr 2016)

Birdy & the somewhat cloney of it Mezzo have avoided the hinged frame and still produce an acceptably small fold/decent ride combo.

My Birdy Blue is 14 and the frame is still in top nick. The sram dualdrive died a few years back and it's on a 5 speed SA hub now, doesn't feel as solid and reliable as the Brommy 3 speed SA variant but works well enough & plenty enough range for hilly Oldham and surrounds.


----------



## John the Monkey (15 Apr 2016)

Interestingly, perhaps, whilst looking for something on another topic, I found threads from 2009 and 2012 on YACF arguing that Brompton were pricing themselves out of the market.


----------



## GrumpyGregry (15 Apr 2016)

Origamist said:


> The estimated cost of the Helix 10 speed is/was 1600 USD. I can't believe that the price will not go up though.


And by the magic of Treasure Island that price will translate to a minimum of 1600 GBP.


----------



## srw (22 Apr 2016)

I'm wondering if this, if I replaced the stock grips with something from Brooks, would be a decently stylish substitute. The black, incidentally, is Starburst. I like the Nickel plated edition, but the derailleur is just wrong.


----------

