The Folding Society - Buyers Guide
The Folding Society
Evaluating and comparing different folders
This page offers some very general suggestions on how to go about
deciding whether you need a folding or separable cycle, and if so, which
one. Some of the more popular, commonly available, models are
summarised. The contents of this page are currently in rather a rough
form, which I hope readers will excuse. When time and energy permit, I
will try to tidy things up, but at present I'd rather be out riding my
I am listing here some of the factors which I consider significant when
comparing different folders. In some cases, where I think it is
particularly important to do so, I’ve given examples, though
otherwise I haven’t commented on the relative strengths and
weaknesses of different makes and models.
Please note that the importance of the different factors listed below
will be different for different users. For anyone using the folder
principally in conjunction with daily train travel for commuting, covering
only a few miles a day on the bike, ride quality probably won’t be as
important as ease and speed of folding. I often r as
I dispensed with a car for some years (I have one again now, but it did less than 10 000 miles in 3.5 years as I don't use it if I have a practical alternative), I use trains a lot, but the local commuter
services have no restrictions or charges on cycle carriage, so I don’t
have to fold the bike daily. Hence for me ride quality is
important, though reasonable folding ability still counts.
Ease of folding
It is necessary to put some bikes (derailleur geared ones) in top gear
before folding, which is tiresome. How easy is it to avoid getting dirty
when folding, carrying and unfolding the bike? In this country most people
probably use the folding with trains rather than aircraft, but air travel
might be relevant in some cases. The Bike Friday, because it is American,
recognises this to a greater extent than some others - see the note on bags below.
From an unfolding point of view, does the saddle height and/or handlebar
position need to be altered each time the bike is unfolded?
Speed of folding
Some very artificial times are sometimes quoted. Realistically, times
quoted should include the putting it in the bag (and include time to
unpack the bag). But the Brompton, for example, does not usually need to
be bagged as it is such a neat package, and this needs to be recognised.
See the note on luggage as well, as being able to quickly fit and remove
luggage can make a big difference to the real folding and unfolding times.
Some covers are intended for concealing the bike, while other
manufacturers supply a fully enclosed carry bag with some form of handles.
Actually the former are more useful (at least for commuting), as they tend to be smaller and
lighter to carry, and it may be easier to lift and carry the package by a
fixed part of the bike than have it swinging on a strap. Bags also usually
involve zips or other fasteners, which take time to do up and undo.
Personally I much prefer the very compact and light Pertex covers which A
to B magazine produce for the Brompton, Birdy and Bike Friday to the
manufacturers offerings – they were also cheaper, but
regrettably are no longer available! The ability to put a
Bike Friday in a case (or carry-on airline luggage) may sometimes be
useful for overseas tours, but it is a slow process, and the comparison of
folding time for the Friday should be based on the carry bag rather than the case time. 'Sophisticated' folding may well be more difficult to carry out than a simple mid-frame fold (for example, the relatively simple fold of most Dahons may not produce the most compact folded bike, but it is very easy and quick to perform).
Size when folded
Not just volume, or dimensions, but whether it can be fitted into
particular spaces, such as luggage space at the end of railway carriages. Some 'folders' actually involve separating parts of the bike (eg removing a wheel or handlebars) - not only is there more risk of getting dirty doing this, but it is usually more difficult to carry the bike if it is in more than one piece, or additional straps have to be used to hold the parts together. Some folders lock into place when folded, while others are inclined to try to unfold themselves when being carried.
Ease of carrying when folded
Does it latch together in some way so that it stays in one piece when
carried, or is bagging essential? Is the chain on the inside, to avoid
getting oil on the user, or on other things? Is there something convenient
to pick it up by, and is it then well balanced, or does it keep banging
against your leg? Can it be easily carried by short people – not just
a question of strength, and stairs can be particularly awkward with some
machines if you are short. weight distribution and shape can make a folder more diffiult to carry than a full-size conventional bike, though if it can be folded quickly and easily the answer to this may be to ensure that it is not folded until the very last moment. Folders which can be wheeled along on their own main wheels (or possibly small jockey wheels, though these usually only work well on VERY smooth surfaces) are MUCH easier to move around when folded - The Strida and Airframe (and probably other 'stick' folders) are particularly good in this respect.
A heavy bike is harder work to pedal, particularly up hill, and in the
case of folders the weight is also important as you will lift and carry
the bike. But remember that some bikes are so easy and quick to fold that
they will be wheeled as far as possible and folded at the last minute –
the Brompton scores here. Others which are difficult to fold and unfold,
and need to be bagged, may need to be carried further (eg at the last
minute it is announced that the train is arriving at a different
platform!). It is important to recognise that extras can alter the
relative weights quite easily – adding a carrier, prop stand and
mudguards to a Birdy makes the weight almost the same as a standard
3-speed L model Brompton, on which the folding method makes a prop stand
unnecessary, mudguards are standard, and the front luggage bracket is
extremely light (though an extra). Some folders can be pushed or pulled
along when folded using the road wheels, or small jockey wheels - quite an
advantage if you do need to move the machine any distance when folded.
Ride quality
This could be subdivided into several issues.
Comfort can be related to any suspension, the
seating position (ability to get the bars the right height and distance
from the rider, and position of the bottom bracket relative to the saddle
– fore an aft as much as vertically). I think something like the
saddle should not be over stressed, as it is extremely easy to change the
saddle if you don’t like it – Bike Friday actually list most of
their bikes without a saddle or pedals, so that the owner can choose the
most suitable one. When buying a bike I usually ask for the saddle to be
changed to one of my choice.
Free-running capability. This is very important if you don’t want
to waste effort, and tests have shown big differences here. Using suitable
tyres is probably the most significant point, so although a coasting test
is useful, it is important to make sure that the bikes are fitted with
comparable tyres – see note on tyres below.
Off-road – probably deserves some mention, but not usually a major
factor for most buyers. See my report and also notes on tyres below. If you want to do serious off-road riding, (not just reasonably good towpaths and cycle tracks), then a 26 inch wheel really can be an advantage - but it is really only necessary in quite difficult conditions. Folders with 26 inch wheels are available - Dahon produce a number of models, for example, but they are much less portable than the smaller wheeled folders, and are more likely to attract unwelcome attention if you try to take them on a train!
A very crude generalisation is that larger wheels tend to
handle seriously muddy, sandy and other difficult conditions better than smaller ones,
and also are less quick to respond to small movements of the handlebars (ie
they initially feel more stable, though this is partly a question of
familiarity).
The important thing to recognise here is that most of the bikes have the
ability to use different types of tyre, and this can make a considerable
difference to how well they perform under different conditions. A Birdy
(or Land Rover APB) on knobbly tyres will be hard work on the road, but
excellent off road. The same bikes fitted with good road tyres will run
freely on the road but won’t be very good off road. To judge the
whole bike based on the particular tyre fitted on a test bike would be
misleading to say the least. But it’s worth noting that the choice of
tyres is better with some sizes than others (though there is a very
reasonable choice in all the common sizes nowadays) – those with 20 inch
wheels have the best choice for small wheelers. A very crude
generalisation is that larger wheels tend to handle seriously muddy, sandy
and other conditions better than smaller ones, and also are less quick to
respond to small movements of the handlebars (ie they initially feel more
stable, though this is partly a question of familiarity). See also the comments above.
Gears – range and spacing are far more important than number. Ease
of changing gear. Recognise that on many bikes it is relatively easy to
raise or lower the whole gear range by using a different chainwheel. The
Brompton for example is listed with a low gear options – the
experience of most riders incidentally is that with the Brompton it is
better to go for one of the lower options than the standard. On the Birdy,
however, it would not be easy to change to a smaller chainwheel, as
special chain retention devices are fitted to the chainwheel, and are not
available personally I find the gearing of all the Birdy models is too high overall, so the difficulty of lowering it is a real drawback for me. The ability to modify the gearing to suit your individual prefernces may be an issue for enthusiasts - very difficult with the Brompton, for example, due to the unusually narrow forks, and also difficult with the Birdy, as described earlier.
Brakes – not usually one of the best features of small-wheeled folders, and
although better brake shoes may help to some degree, other changes are not
always easy to carry out.
Accessories are in some respects less important – pumps etc are
easily available in all sorts of forms, and are quite cheap. However, it’s
worth commenting that with some folders it’s difficult to find
anywhere to carry them. The Birdy, for example, has no obvious points for
mounting a pump or a bottle cage, and personally I’m not keen on the
pump mounted in the seat tube, where it gets dirty, and also rattles. The
Brompton has no mounting points, but the small pockets in the front bag
are ideal for bottles, tools, pump etc, or these items can be put in the
small saddle bag which holds the cover. I really wish that more folder manufacturers would provide bottle/pump mounting bosses - Bike Friday are generally the best in this respect, and I was very pleased to see that the modestly priced Downtube that was tested in late 2006 was also fitted with bosses.
Reliability
This can be difficult to assess meaningfully based on one example, but
it is an important consideration. In very general terms, Bromptons have a
very good track record for reliability, availability of spares, and
quality of service. Bike Friday use very few special components, and
generally seem extremely reliable. Birdys use more special parts, and the
experience of some owners seems to be that spares can be difficult to
obtain. My own impression of the Birdy is that it is slightly less robust
than, for example, the Friday or Brompton, but as yet I’ve had no
problems. These comments are based on what I have heard from a reasonable
number of owners, although in the case of the Birdy I don’t think the
sample is large enough to be conclusive. Early Stridas were not very robust, and
used lots of special parts - although they still use many special parts, reliability now seems much improved, and to their credit they are still supplying parts for very early machines. While improvements to models on a regular basis are generally to be welcomed, if this means that specialised spare parts become difficult to obtain, this is not good news.
It’s useful to be able to carry things easily on the bike –
whether it is a briefcase, sandwiches and a water bottle, shopping, or
touring equipment, plus of course the essential pump, puncture repair
outfit and tools! Actually in some circumstances you might dispense with
these tools on a folder, since you could easily hop on a bus or summon a
taxi in the event of a puncture or breakdown. The Brompton front bag is
exceptionally versatile, and though it and the associated mounting block
are quite expensive, they are a tremendous asset. Rapid and secure loading
and unloading are important on a folder. Bikes like the Micro
are much more limited. If you want to tour with a folder, then the luggage options need to be examined carefully before buying, and this might also be important for shopping. Ease and speed of fitting and removing the luggage is also important when travelling regularly by train. The Carradice SQR system provides a reasonable solution for many folders when the amount to be carried is not very great, though the way that it fits does usually mean that the saddle cannot be lowered fully when folded.
Making the purchase
Do you really need a folder?
There are a number of distinctly different reasons why a folding bicycle
may be useful, including:
Storage in a restricted space in a house, flat or office.
Transport in the boot of a car (safer, less risk of damage to the car
or bike, and less risk of theft, than using a rack).
Commuting with train assistance for the middle part of the journey.
Touring, using the ability to fold to allow easier travel by public
transport – train, plane or boat.
Riding to a destination and returning by car or public transport (or
General cycling, including shopping and day rides, without folding.
There may of course be other factors which make you interested in a
folder, and it may be that several of the reasons listed are relevant. Do
remember, though, that folders are generally more expensive than
non-folding bicycles, and, depending on the model, when compared with the
nearest equivalent non-folder they may be heavier and may not give such a
good ride. Cheap folders, typically ‘Klapprads’ with a simple
hinge in the middle, made of steel (though sometimes aluminium), might prove so unsatisfactory in terms
of ride quality and folding that they don’t get used and put the
owner off cycling for life. However cheap these may be, they cannot be
considered good value, and they don’t come within the scope of the
comparisons made here, in that they are neither suited for uses such as
train-assisted commuting nor longer rides for pleasure.
If the intended use of the folder is for train-assisted commuting only,
it is worth checking on what regulations apply on the trains you will be
using. In some enlightened areas there are in fact no restrictions at all
on carrying cycles (folders or non-folders) at any time of day, and no charges (eg local trains in
the Centro area). Also bear in mind that if you want to go on an extended
cycle tour, with a lot of luggage, it may be much less trouble to book and
pay for the bicycle to travel in the luggage van than to have to remove
all the luggage and carry it and the folded bike on a train just at the
start and end of a tour lasting perhaps several days. Off-road the smaller
wheels used by most folders put them at some disadvantage compared with
conventional mountain bikes, but in all but the most extreme conditions
these small wheelers, if fitted with appropriate tyres, can cope without
serious problems, although some models are better in this respect than
But there are lots of situations in which folders are far more useful
than a conventional bicycle, and where they will give improved mobility,
easier carriage of luggage or shopping, they can reduce journey times, and
improve the health of the rider and the environment. And many people find
real pleasure in cycling as an activity in its own right, combining
exercise and travel in the countryside or elsewhere.
There are many different folders available, but although some are direct
competitors, in many cases the different priorities which influence the
designers mean that some are more suited to some types of use than others.
So in choosing a folder, first identify how you would use a folder, and
then decide the priorities of the features to match this use.
Size and riding comfortably
When buying a conventional, non-folding bicycle, the frame size is one
of the things you have to decide. Nearly all folders lack a high
cross-bar, and have a very extensive range of saddle height adjustment, so
that they are unisex and unisize (some models of Bike Friday are custom
made to exactly suit the rider, though they still offer a wide range of
saddle adjustment). Although you may not need to specify the frame size
when buying the bike, it is still important to adjust the saddle height
etc to suit you – the wrong riding position is not only
uncomfortable, but it is inefficient and wastes energy. In particular, a
lot of people ride with the saddle much too low. If you have returned to
cycling after a long break, you may well feel more confident if the saddle
is low enough for you to reach the ground with your feet while still
seated, but in terms of efficiency it is actually better if the rider’s
leg is almost fully extended straight when the pedal is at the bottom of
its travel. With the saddle at this height, you will still be able to
reach the kerb while seated, but in practice it is usual to get off the
saddle anyway when dismounting, so the saddle height, particularly in the
absence of a cross bar, does not present any problems in stopping safely.
A slightly lower saddle position may be preferred for extensive off-road
riding. Taller riders may need to specify extra long seat post options on
some models.
The other crucial features in comfortable and efficient riding are
handlebar height and reach (distance along the bike from saddle to
handlebars). Unfortunately adjustment of the height of the bars is quite
limited or non-existent on many of these folders, or you may need to
specify the required height (and reach) at the time of purchasing. Some
limited adjustment of reach can usually be achieved by fore and aft
movement of the saddle, but this may not be enough on its own to achieve
the ideal riding position.
When buying, make sure that you are comfortable on the bike, and discuss
with the supplier whether there are any options of different handlebar
heights and reach. If you are comfortable and able to ride efficiently,
cycling is a pleasure, but riding an unsuitable, heavy bike with an
uncomfortable riding position and the saddle too low will be a misery, and
will probably put you off using your cycle.
Where to buy
Most cycle shops – even the specialists – do not stock any
folders at all, or possibly just one make. Any advice you get form these
shops is likely to be of limited value, and may be biased by what they
sell or can get hold of. Caveat emptor.
There are a few dealers around the country who stock and can supply a
number of different makes and models, though none of them stock all the
machines available. If you want the opportunity to see and try a number of
different makes, and get informed and reasonably unbiased advice, then it
is worth seeking out these specialists, or reading A to B magazine and its
web pages, and dare I suggest also The Folding Society and its web pages!
Perusal of A to B magazine and our web pages will indicate some of the
dealers who specialise in folders.
ADDITIONAL COMMENTS ON SOME OF THE POPULAR MODELS
The range of folders available is changing all the time, and therefore
this section represents only a general view of some of the more popular
makes and models. These comments are intended to be read in conjunction with the test
reports on this web site.
The A-Bike is certainly the smallest and lightest folder generally
available at the time of writing, and as Sir Clive Sinclair was involved in
the design it has attracted a lot of publicity. While the size and weight of
the folded package are very appealing, and the price is not excessive,
unfortunately the tiny wheels and 'unusual' saddle mean that most people
find it unpleasant to ride. For very short riding distances on
very good surfaces it may be worth considering, but it is unlikely to suit
most people. There is also no provision for carrying any form of luggage on
I used a current Airframe for a few months in 2005.
A rather unusual design of folder, which folds via frame joints in a way
reminiscent of an umbrella. Not especially compact when folded, though the
stick format means it can easily be pushed along on the wheels when folded.
The complex design and folding frame joints mean that it is fairly
expensive, and the frame is rather flexible when riding, which some people
do not like. The Airframe first appeared in the 1980's, but was not in
production for long, reappearing only recently. Although the current models
look very similar to the original ones, improved manufacturing means they
are greatly superior to the originals. Rather expensive, and not to
everyone's taste, so rather rare.
Comments based on experience with two Chameleons.
Airnimal are one of the newer entries on the Folder scene, although by
now (2007) they have actually been around for several years. The Chameleon
was their first model, and is still in production. It is a fast road bike
par excellence, usually being fitted with narrow high-pressure tyres, which
at 24 inches are larger than most folders. Although probably most at home on
roads and with relatively light loads, a standard rear pannier can be
fitted, and with slightly beefier tyres it can be used for touring as well.
It would not be well-suited to daily train-assisted commuting, as the folded
machine is quite large, the front wheel has to be removed, and a strap is
needed to hold the bike together. Various carry bag and case options are
available, and for transport by car or by air it is quite a good choice. The
later Joey is a more modestly priced machine of rather similar design, but
lacking the rear suspension, and also available with a slightly different
wheel size which offers more choice of heavy duty tyres. Though still not a
compact folder, the Joey is rather more portable than the Chameleon, and the
time taken to fit it into a hard case for air travel is particularly
impressive. The final Airnimal model (at the time of writing) is the Rhino -
one of the few serious off-road folders. It has long-travel front and rear
suspension, and the use of 20 inch (406) wheels means a good choice of
tyres, though some might argue that these relatively small diameter wheels
will not be ideal in the most severe off-road conditions (serious mud, sand
etc). Probably the closest competitors are in the Bike Friday range. A
recent addition to the range is an electric version of the Joey.
This is not a very common machine, at least here in the UK. It has been
around for a number of years now (2007), but though I have seen one I have
not ridden it, nor do I know any owners. The report in A to B was
reasonably favourable. My initial impression looking at the bike, the
specification and the price was that it has less to offer than, for
example, the Birdy,
but without proper experience of it I am not in a position to make a
judgement.
I owned a Bickerton for a few years in the late 1980's.
The Bickerton was the first modern folder, and for many years was the
only one readily available. Its novel aluminium construction produced a very
light frame, but one which was very flexible, which most people found very
undesirable. The Bickerton is long out of production, but due to the large
number that were sold, quite a lot still survive. Probably not a good choice
for anyone nowadays, unless you are interested in a piece of cycling
history. If you do have one, support is available via , and Mark Bickerton, the son of the designer Harry Bickerton, is
still actively involved in the cycle industry (Cyclemotion, who are
associated with Dahon amongst others), and has made a start on .
Bike Friday
Comments based on personal experience of a Bike Friday since 1996
and a number of friends and acquaintances who own them.
For: A high performance bike that folds. The sales pitch is that
it rides as well as your best bike (aiming it by implication at the
existing cycling enthusiast who feels a need for a folder), and this is
quite a fair description. Very enjoyable to ride on the road – the
Pocket Rocket in particular is very exhilarating to ride. Good luggage
carrying capacity using standard panniers and the (optional) rack (the
rack is a standard design, but comes with special mounting brackets). The
folding system ensures that the saddle height and handlebar position are
not altered during folding and unfolding. As a result of the use of 20
inch wheels there is a very good range of tyres available to suit
different types of use (Note that the models with ‘451’ in the
model name, the Pocket Rocket and the AirFriday, actually use a different
version of the nominally 20 inch wheel, which has a more limited range of
tyres than the common ‘406’ version used by the other models).
The AirFriday and AirGlide are unique in that they are designed in a way
that allows them to be taken as carry-on luggage on aircraft, though this
means they separate rather than folding, and makes them less train
compatible. The custom models (ie all except the Metro) are available in a
wide range of colours, if that sort of thing interests you. Bike Friday
are almost unique in offering a folding recumbent bicycle - the SatRDay.
Bike Friday are unusual in offering some off-road models (eg Gnu).
Against: Folding is not as easy as some of the others, and it is
rather bulky when folded (as opposed to the much longer disassembly for
fitting in the carry case or, in the case of the Air… models, the
carry-on bags). The mudguards look rather odd but are reasonably
effective, and can very quickly be removed and fitted, so that you can
ride the bike stripped down on dry days to save weight. The custom built
models (ie those other than the Metro) are quite expensive in the UK. The
lack of suspension with small wheels results in a rather hard ride on the
road, and off-road it can be very uncomfortable. The optional suspension
seat post and Softride stem may improve matters, but they add weight, and
technically are not very elegant – I have no personal experience of
their effectiveness. The models using a suspension beam (AirFriday and
AirGlide) are very expensive, and though they may provide some suspension
to the rider, personally I don’t think they are a very elegant
engineering solution.
Suggestions and comments: The A to B cover (no longer
available) was better than the
official carry bag if you just want to hide the fact that this is a
bicycle – it is much smaller and lighter to carry folded,
it is easier to carry the bike by holding the frame through the bag than
carrying it via the handles on the official Friday bag, and it is quicker
to drop this cover over than fiddle around with the Friday bag in which it
is a tightish fit, and needs to be zipped, chough of course such a
drop-over cover does not provide any protection to the bike. The standard sized and
specified Metro is relatively cheap, but the other (custom built to size)
models are now looking rather expensive in the UK. The Sachs 3x7 gears&
(or later 3x8 and other similar systems), which combine a rear derailleur
and a hub gear,& fitted on most models are very effective and give a good range of closely
spaced gears, and easy gear changing, but are a bit heavy. The Pocket
Rocket models with pure derailleur gears and their light weight are
particularly exhilarating to ride on the road. Bike Friday now have a
folding recumbent model, though this is unlikely to be of interest to most
readers. Probably the closest competitors are in the Airnimal range.
Comments based on personal experience of a Birdy since June 1998 and
a number of friends and acquaintances who own them.
For: Quite light due to use of aluminium frame, which will not
rust (though personally I do not like aluminium as a material for bike
frames!). Very effective front and rear suspension, with easy
replacement of rear suspension elastomer to suit different weights of
rider a the suspension is maintenance free. Good off-road
handling in light use - eg towpaths, bridleways etc. Folds
reasonably easily and quickly. Some earlier limitations have now been
overcome - latest (2006) frames are devoid of rattles and offer reasonable
luggage carrying capacity, and there is now quite a good choice of tyres for
the unusual 18 inch (359) wheels.
Against: Some
people report problems obtaining spares, and emails I have sent to Riese &
Muller in Germany have been unanswered, though the number of reports is
too small to make a valid judgement about these factors. Adding mudguards, rack
etc brings the
weight close to that of some other folders which might on paper appear
Suggestions and comments: Some people prefer the riding position
with the alternative handlebar assembly, which is slightly more upright
and has a shorter reach than the standard one. Fitting 16& wheels is
relatively simple and gives access to the excellent Primo tyre available
in that size. However, tyre choice is limited in this size too, and the
standard high pressure version of the Birdy 18& tyre does perform
quite well off-road even if it is not particularly good on-road, and an 18&
knobbly full off-road tyre is available (though it is reportedly hard work
on the road). The carry bag (actually a cover) fitting into a small bum
bag is ingenious, but almost impossible to fold away after use. Once again
I would opt for an A to B cover – lighter, more compact, and easy to
fold and store - except that it is no longer available!. Conceptually well
positioned in the market with quite good
folding properties and some advantages over the Brompton in ride, but
unfortunately also with a number of serious drawbacks which cancel out the
theoretical benefits.
Comments based on personal experience of a Brompton since 1990 and a
large number of friends and acquaintances who own them.
For: You can take a Brompton (almost) anywhere! It is the only
folder that owners fold whether they need to or not, and that proves its
folding qualities better than any testing method. It is fairly easy to carry, but
folding is so quick and easy that you rarely need to carry it far –
you can leave folding it until the last minute. The folded package is so
neat that you rarely need to cover it. The front luggage carrier is
expensive but highly effective, and some people carry much larger bags
than the standard Brompton one with no ill effects. Very well built and
reliable. Though it would not be my personal choice for a long ride, it is
quite capable of such a task. My longest ride in a day on one is over 60
miles, and on the longest day of 1998 I rode (on my Bike Friday) 100 miles
in the company of 2 Brompton riders who were on L3s. Where folding is a
higher priority, it is usually my first choice. Optional titanium parts
are now available, significantly reducing the weight, though of course
increasing the price.
Against: Difficult to find much to complain about in the latest
form, apart from the limited range of gears. The latest models have a choice
of handlebar design to suit different riders, and also a slightly longer
frame than earlier ones, which suits most people better. Some people comment
that the brakes are
not very impressive, though the latest versions are better than earlier
models. The brake levers are rather nasty.
Suggestions and comments: The standard gearing is rather too
high for most people, and I would generally recommend specifying the low gearing options –
some find an even lower gear range is preferable.& Because the
front carrier is so effective, the rear carrier is not really necessary
(and luggage carried there would have to be removed before the first
parking movement of folding), so I would opt for the cheaper and
significantly lighter models without the rear carrier. The front
bag is so effective that it should be considered an essential, but it is
not very aerodynamic, and the bike is certainly more responsive without
it, so don’t fall into the trap of carrying it even when it isn’t
needed! The Bromptons still sets the standard by which other folders are
judged - which is not necessarily to say that it is the best solution for
Comments based on owning several Dahons since 2003.
Dahon is the largest, and one of the oldest, folder manufacturers. In the
early days their machines were fairly basic, but in recent years the range
has increased enormously, and design and quality has improved markedly.
Although they do not offer a folding recumbent (yet?!), they cater for just
about every other sector of the folder market. The model range changes
almost every year, so that it is difficult to comment on individual models.
Folding is via a central frame hinge on most models, and is easy and quick,
and reasonably compact when folded (though not in the Brompton league in
this respect). While the 20-inch wheeled (406) models are the best known,
there are also models with 16 inch wheels, and several models which have 26
inch wheels. The latter are inevitably rather bulky when folded (a real
concern for train travel), but the bigger wheels can be an advantage for
more serious off-road riding. Some, though not all, models are weak in terms
of mudguards and luggage carrying. While I favour continuous improvement,
the major annual model changes go rather beyond this, and might have
implications in terms of availability of spares, at least in the longer
term. Dahon models are generally reasonably priced for what they offer, and
are always worth looking at when considering a folder. Dahon manufacture
some folders which are sold under other names, and have also designed
folders for other companies.
I have never ridden a Fold-It, though I do know a couple of people
who own them.
Manufactured by Pashley and sold under their Brilliant Bicycles
previously made by Cresswell Engineering. The Fold-It has now been
discontinued.
For: Sturdy. Fairly simple to fold. Reasonably cheap. 20&
wheels means a good choice of tyres.
Against: Bulky when folded. Fairly heavy.
Suggestions and comments: Some people may like the rather
upright riding position which can be achieved, though it can be adjusted
to suit those who prefer the bars lower and further forward. Rather
utilitarian, with rather limited folding facilities which are not well
suited to daily rail-assisted commuting where folding/bagging is needed.
The Fold-It has now been discontinued.
A new design which has been seen as offering some competition to
Brompton. Rather more complex and not quite as easy to fold as the Brompton,
and not as compact when folded. Luggage carrying is not as effective as on
the Brompton, though the new quick-release system should suit many people.
The gearing options are more versatile than on the Brompton, but some
reviewers have commented on what seems to them an odd choice - namely rather
closely spaced gears on the derailleur model, and quite low gearing overall.
Already a number of minor changes have been made from the very first
production models, and these represent worthwhile improvements. Worth
looking at if you are considering a Brompton or one of the Dahons or others
in this market sector.
Comments based on owning a Micro for a number of years.
Manufactured by Pashley and sold under their Brilliant Bicycles
previously made by Cresswell E not to be confused with
the MicroBike produced in ?Sweden?, which is now obsolete. The Micro has
now been discontinued.
For: Light, quite quick and easy to fold in that it is all very
obvious. Reasonably cheap. Fun to ride over short distances. The 16&
wheels mean that high-performance tyres can be fitted (as for the Brompton) to give a
good on-road ride, though these are not standard.
Against: Short wheelbase and small size mean that larger riders
will probably not find this bike very comfortable. The short wheelbase
could also cause problems with the front wheel leaving the ground
(wheelies) if ridden too exuberantly. Handlebar stem flexes more than is
desirable. Limited luggage capacity.
Suggestions and comments: Quite suitable for train assisted
commuting unless the rider is large and/or needs to carry luggage. Not
really suitable for larger riders or for longer distances. The Micro has
now been discontinued.
Comments based on personal experience of a Moulton AM since 1984,
and APB since 1992, and a large number of friends and acquaintances who
There are four main ranges currently – the AM, APB (now the TSR
range), New Series and Bridgestone Moulton. Most points
apply to all.
For: A very high performance bicycle with full front& and rear
suspension, with the ability to be separated into two main parts.
Suspension requires no maintenance. Very comfortable over long distances.
Very versatile luggage carrying options, and carriers can easily be
removed. AM and New Series machines are quite light.
Against: Do not fold. When separated, the main parts are
still bulky, and would require bagging on many rail services. This
requires some further dismantling and will take 5-10 minutes – so
unsuitable for a daily rail-assisted commute unless the local train
service will carry bicycles unfolded without restrictions. New Series and AM
are expensive, though APB/TSR range is more modestly priced. APB models are
heavy - the later TSR versions are lighter than the APB, though still not
especially light.
Suggestions and comments: Moultons do not fold – most (though
not all) separate (quite easily) into two parts. This works well for easy storage
at home or carriage in a car boot (an APB will fit in the back of a Metro
with the rear seat still in place, but the parcel shelf removed), but is
not suitable for a daily commute which involves having to separate and bag
the bike. Separation can be achieved without much trouble in under 1
minute, but full bagging will take between 5 and 10 minutes. The
separation facility is just a part of the overall Moulton concept, and the
bikes are not designed specifically with folding and separation in mind.
The latest New Series machines can be split into more and smaller parts
(it will fit in the boot of a Mini), but this is fairly time consuming,
and the bikes are hugely expensive. If the limited degree of portability
of the Moulton is sufficient for the needs of someone looking for a ‘folding’
bike, then it can be a very good choice, but this limited portability
would rule it out for many applications.
http://www.alexmoulton.co.uk
The Strida was resurrected in 1998 after being out of production for
some years. I have now owned one of the latest (2006) models for a while.
For: Looks great hung on a wall as a piece of art! Fairly simple
and quick to fold, and can easily be wheeled along in ‘stick’
form when folded, which can be very convenient. Quite light. Belt drive
avoids oil and grease (but this
advantage cancelled in practice by disadvantages of belt drive).
Against: Awkward riding position. Raising the saddle brings the
rider closer to the bars – the opposite of what is needed. Feels
rather unstable – understeer changing rapidly to oversteer (latest
versions are better, though the comment still applies). Tyres are fairly
high rolling resistance, and their small diameter results in a harsh ride.
Limited luggage carrying capacity. Quite bulky
when folded and may not easily fit into some storage spaces, though the
shape suits other spaces very well, and it is quite easy to stand in a
packed train with the folded machine vertical. Single gear
with belt drive. Almost
everything non-standard, so may be difficult to get spares except from the
reliability of the original model was not good. In fairness,
latest models seem much more reliable, and the support offered by the
company for even the oldest models is excellent.
Suggestions and comments: Really best suited to quite short, flat
rides associated with commuting with train, bus etc support. Riding position
may not suit all. The 'stick' folding method is not all that compact
overall, but is very convenient in some situations, and the ability to roll
the folded bike along easily on its wheels is a big plus point. If you can
accept the limitations, it is quite effective at what it does.
Tactic Panache
The Panache was perceived when it was introduced as a potential
competitor for the Brompton. For various reasons, it never managed to live
up to expectations, and is rarely encountered. Other folders are available
which are generally better for most people.