# Moulton bikes



## JackE (16 Jul 2010)

Just wondering if there are any Moulton fans on this forum. Because of my type of work, I get quite a lot of lower back pain and was wondering if the suspension system on the TSR range would ease the problem. I'm a lightweight tourer and usually do around 60-70 miles per day. I have a "big birthday" coming up in a few years time and I'm thinking of treating myself to a nice bike.
Questions....1) Are they as "comfortable" as people make out. 2) Are they really as fast as a 700c wheel bike. 3) Will I become an obsessive Moulton "anorak" within a few weeks!!!!!


----------



## Alan Whicker (17 Jul 2010)

Dunno if this helps, but Jack Thurston who does the excellent Resonance FM bike show rode Montreal to New York on a Moulton (I think it was a Moulton anyway - it's been a while since I heard this!)







http://thebikeshow.n...by-bicycle-one/


----------



## Danny (17 Jul 2010)

Uncle Phil is the man to speak to about Moultons, and I am sure will be along shortly to extol their virtues.

If you have lower back problems I would strongly recommend going to an LBS that can do a proper bike fitting exercise. I went to Paul Hewitt for this reason and he changed my riding position quite significantly. I now get much less back pain than I used, though I can't say the problem has been cured altogether.

I would also suggest you look at his Cheviot touring bike. Not nearly as fun as a Moulton but certainly the most comfortable touring bike I have ever had.


----------



## Amanda P (20 Jul 2010)

... and as if by magic...

I have a restored AM18 and I love it.

It's very comfortable - particularly for me, as I like a short top tube (virtual top tube in this case) and a fairly upright position. A Moulton gives you this if you want it. I also find the suspension means I can spend much longer in the saddle before sore shoulders and a sore arse drive me to take a rest. But that's me.

As fast as a 700c wheeled bike? That depends on the engine. There's no reason it shouldn't be. Moulton spent months doing roll-down tests in a hangar in the 1960s working out the optimum compromise between wheel size and weight and rolling resistance. On high pressure tyres, he concluded around 16 - 17 inches was the best - the wheel is much smaller, lighter and stronger than a 700c wheel, and with a high pressure tyre and suspension, rolling resistance is about the same.

MIT recently did the same testing, but with dynamometers and all that jazz - but came to the same conclusion. The newer Moultons and Pashley-built TSRs use 20" wheels, largely because of tyre availability.

Incidentally, the small wheels make the bike very nimble and quick to accelerate. Riders can also draft each other closer. Moultons did well in track racing back in the day - until the UCI decided they were not bicycles and banned them from competition (a sure sign of a superior technology).

Will you become an anorak? Not necessarily. But look - you're posting on a cycling forum. I think it's already too late for you...

It's well worth calling the Moulton factory and arranging a test ride. They have a little test track around the grounds there, and you can try all the models on that. Give them a bit more notice and you can take a bike out for a day's ride and see how you get on with it. Or make friends with a nearby Moulton owner, or join the club. There's also a lively forum.


----------



## ASC1951 (21 Jul 2010)

Uncle Phil said:


> Incidentally, the small wheels make the bike very nimble and quick to accelerate.



The corollary of that is that small wheels are more easily deflected i.e. handle a lot worse on rough surfaces.

It's a bit like getting a fixed wheel - great fun to ride, but I'm glad it isn't my only bike.


----------



## Amanda P (21 Jul 2010)

ASC1951 said:


> The corollary of that is that small wheels are more easily deflected i.e. handle a lot worse on rough surfaces.
> 
> It's a bit like getting a fixed wheel - great fun to ride, but I'm glad it isn't my only bike.



That's true - but that's why there's suspension. A Moulton isn't great off tarmac, it's true. But as a road bike I don't think a spaceframe Moulton is in any way inferior to a large-wheeled bike. Just different.


----------



## JackE (21 Jul 2010)

Phil,
Thanks for your input. I am going to join the Moulton Club and perhaps go along for part of their Bradford weekend in Sept. The idea of being loaned a bike for a day's test ride is almost unbelievable and must be worth trying out. What you say about the "pain in the ass" problem being less on the Moulton is interesting. As I get older, this problem seems to be getting worse (even on my ti tourer with 28 Marathons). 
Thanks again.
Jack


----------



## ASC1951 (21 Jul 2010)

Uncle Phil said:


> That's true - but that's why there's suspension. A Moulton isn't great off tarmac, it's true.



The easier deflection intrinsic in small wheels increases side-to-side movement i.e. makes the handling worse. Suspension will help with up-and-down movement, but not with deflection. Moultons never caught on because - despite the 'space age design' hyperbole at the time - their all-round performance is inferior to standard bikes.

Still fun to have one, of course.


----------



## Beardie (22 Jul 2010)

Lower back pain? Try a recumbent with a decent backrest.


----------



## xpc316e (22 Jul 2010)

Beardie said:


> Lower back pain? Try a recumbent with a decent backrest.



+1

I also wanted a Moulton, but for reasons of price and a desire to have the bike fold easily to fit in the car, I bought a Dahon Jetstream P8. I know that it is not the same animal as a Moulton, but it is a 20" wheel with suspension at both ends. It is a little bit more twitchy than a 700c wheeled bike, but I can confirm that it accelerates very well and is what I'd call 'lively'. It is quite comfortable on the road and quite passable for short off-road bits where the tyres (and rider) are the biggest limitation. I hope one day to be able to buy a Moulton, but in the meantime the Dahon is a useful substitute.


----------



## kit-small-wheels (30 Aug 2010)

JackE said:


> Just wondering if there are any Moulton fans on this forum.
> 
> <big snip>
> 
> Questions....1) Are they as "comfortable" as people make out. 2) Are they really as fast as a 700c wheel bike. 3) Will I become an obsessive Moulton "anorak" within a few weeks!!!!!



You bet there are!  

I've got five of the little things at the moment, down from seven at the start of the year. As to your questions :-

1) I think so, but then I'm wholly biased not having ridden a 'big wheeler' since 1963, when I got my first Moulton. They certainly ride potholes a lot more comfortably and after last winter that's a big plus point.

2) Pass, I'm not a racer anyway, but the rolling resistance of a 16"-17" wheel is considerably less than that of a 700C wheel. Having said that, only the more expensive AM or New Series range would be lighter than a similar spec 'big wheeler'. The current TSRs tend to be slightly heavier than their conventional counterparts, the older APBs and even older F frames are quite a lot heavier, in standard form anyway.

3) Depends. There are two types of Moulton rider, those who ride them because they are a bit different and who have a few other types in their sheds, and those, like me, who are totally 100% besotted with all things small wheeled.  Only you'll know which type you are once you've ridden one.


----------



## sgw (2 Sep 2010)

kit-small-wheels said:


> and those, like me, who are totally 100% besotted with all things small wheeled.



I am with you on Moultons,

but "all things small wheeled" ...?


----------



## JackE (3 Sep 2010)

Thank you for all your replies. I do apologise for my flippant comment about the Moulton anoraks. I'm getting more intrigued by Moulton's all the time and have just applied to join the MBC. I hope to get down to Bradford in the Autumn for a test ride of the TSR 27/30.

This German guy's take: http://www.flickr.com/photos/36579973@N02/show/ on using a front (platform) carrier looks interesting. Does anyone use this system or is the front rack with small panniers more popular?


----------



## Amanda P (6 Sep 2010)

Mrs Uncle Phil uses a front platform carrier, with the dedicated bag, on her AM. Also the rear platform and bag.

That's largely because her bike (bought second-hand and significantly updated and upgraded) came with those items.

I haven't been able to get the special bags, so I use a specially-built rear rack, styled in the Moulton fashion, but with straight sides, which takes regular rear panniers, and another specially-built gadget that attaches to the front rack mounting points and allows use of a Brompton bag on the front end.

This combination works well for fully-loaded camping touring.

The bikes will be around at Bradford-on-Avon this weekend. I'm willing to build more of these racks and Brompton-bag thingies if anyone's interested.


----------



## willem (6 Sep 2010)

If, like me, you have lower back problems and if that is an issue with cycling, a recumbent is probably the best way to go. If, like me, you like climbing and off road touring a lot, then it is probably not such a good idea, however. However, do not forget that you can have a lot more comfort on a traditional bike as well. Of course, it all starts with proper fit, as others have already remarked. Second, in my experience a drop bar at saddle height or even a bit higher than that is preferable to a straight bar. Sitting upright is quite a strain on the back. Third, fitting wide tyres like 50 mm makes a vast difference, particularly with the higher frequency vibrations. There is a vast range of wide tyres for 26 inch wheels, from fast Schwalbe Kojaks to rugged Marathon Extremes, and much in between. Fourth, a good suspension seatpost like the Cane Creek Thudbuster makes a real difference, even on tarmac. Fifth, for off road touring you could also consider a suspension fork. A bike like the Thorn Sterling even leaves you a choice, depending on conditions.
Alternatively, if you are interested in a really fast machine, you might consider a 650B audax bike with clearance for the 42 mm Grandbois Hetre tyre.
Willem


----------



## JackE (6 Sep 2010)

Phil,
Thanks for your very interesting replies to my questions. Sadly, I will not make it to Bradford this weekend, will try again....... next year. Very interested in your load carrying solutions, especially the Brompton fitting. Next month I'm meeting up with a couple from the CTC forum who have a TSR 27 and 30. That will be my first view of these bikes "in the flesh" and I'm looking forward to it. 
I'm quietly determined to follow my gut feeling about Moulton bikes and see what happens.
Jack


----------



## willem (6 Sep 2010)

Well, I did ride one, and might one day get one as a nimble city bike. I like rough road touring, however, and for that I think the Moulton is less than ideal. All I wanted to do is show you the range of possibilities with a recumbent and with a more classic bike. You did mention your back problems at the start, after all, and no suspension is faster responding than a fat tyre.
Willem


----------



## Amanda P (7 Sep 2010)

As the owner and rider of a Moulton, a recumbent and a fat-tyred bike (albeit 26", not 650B), I think all three have their place. 

If I'm touring on the road,it's hilly or there's traffic, and I want to cover the ground briskly, the Moulton's the best tool for the job.

If I might encounter rough, muddy, loose or lumpy surfaces, something with fat tyres, or at least capable of taking a tyre with tread, is the tool to use (only slick tyres are available to suit 369-wheeled Moultons) - so a 26"-wheeled tourer or mountain bike.

If it's on the road and flat or only gently rolling, and any companions will also be on 'bents, I'll choose the recumbent.


----------



## Monika (17 Apr 2013)

Hi I'm not sure if I have posted this in the right bit but here goes. A friend of mine is selling a Vintage 1951 Moulton bike on eBay. It is due tomorrow afternoon. It is in very good condition and has a lot of history with it. I think she should have done a little research before putting t on eBay as it was valued at a Antiques Roadshow in the 1970 at £600. She has proof of this in form of a letter. 
This is the history! 
Own by Earnest Mapels, Minister of Transport. There is a typed letter and also a original hand written letter of history, it gives a little more information,plus the valuation given at the antique road show. 
It is selling at the moment at £155. Could someone please tell me if she is making a mistake selling it and is it worth a lot more then £155.
Thank you


----------



## Amanda P (18 Apr 2013)

Monika, the right place to get expert advice is the Moultoneers' Yahoo group. This is allied to the Moulton Bicycle Club, but you don't have to be a member to join and post on the forum. You'll get all the advice you could want if you post there, and you may get offers to buy too. The MBC also has channels for selling Moultons, although to be honest they're trading among friends and prices tend to be a bit lower than on the open market.

Depending on the exact model of the bike, its condition and how well documented its provenance is, £155 sounds a bit low to me, but they often go for that sort of money, particularly if they're 'collection only'. Be willing to ship (including to the far east - that's where a lot of Moultons are going these days) and it could go for a lot more than that.


----------



## Amanda P (18 Apr 2013)

Oh, and to the best of my knowledge, the first Moulton bikes were sold in 1962, so is it possible you have dates wrong? If your provenance documents say 1951, or you've said that they do, then bidders are probably ignoring the history as fictional - there may have been prototypes around in 1951, but no production bikes.

I've found the listing now, and it's a nice bike. Collection only will seriously limit the price, as the keen buyers of bikes like this are in the far east.


----------



## Monika (18 Apr 2013)

Thanks for your reply!


----------

