Long Distance Competition/Ultracycling, Randonneuring and Endurance Cycling - Folders for brevets

Is there any reason why a 20" folding bike could not be used successfully for riding brevets?
Any opinions on which folder would be best?

Small-wheeled bikes aren't as efficient. Try a Ritchey breakaway instead.

20" wheel bents are used by some brevet riders, not many but it happens.
If your speed/power/endurance are such that an extra 6-10# is not likely
to slow you to below brevet completion speeds and the bike can be rigged
to carry your supplies and necessities then go ahead. They do travel
conveniently, but for a 'bit' more money you can get an S&S coupler equipped
bike that travels at least as easily (prolly $400-800 premium, depending on
frame type), a slightly less elegant variant on Ritchey's approach.)

Is there any reason why a 20" folding bike could not be used successfully for riding brevets?
Any opinions on which folder would be best?

folks have done pbp and other long rides on folders, kick bikes, tandems, 3 spds, fixed gears, ancient euro city bikes, etc.

the bike doesn't seem to have much relevance other than if it fits the rider and the rider is comfortable using said tool. you'll pay a 'penalty' in weight or whatever if that bothers you and your fitness is such that you roll in with seconds to spare before control closings. i'm sure there are 'proper' road bike rigs that weigh more than a smartly setup folder for brevets...

Small-wheeled bikes aren't as efficient. Try a Ritchey breakaway instead.

Not quite right.

I rode a Frezoni S&S 700C Audax bike in the 1999 PBP (1200 km), 2005 Edinburgh-London (1400 km) and 2008 Great Southern Randonnee (1200 km), a 1965 Moulton Stowaway 16" with Duomatic hub in the 2003 PBP and a Pashley TSR30 20" in the 2007 PBP. Very little difference in rolling resistance between them, apart from the viscous drag of the coaster brake.

Tal Katzir rode his 16" Brompton at 2007 PBP and this year's 1600 km Mille Miglia.

Several Bike Friday riders have completed PBP. They are probably the best fitting 20" folders.

Bike Friday makes a nice folder + shipping box that converts to a trailer so you
don't have to wonder where the luggage goes or your shipping box is stored.

Wouldn't do it myself, but somebody successfully finished the RM1200 this year on a fixed gear folder - and Airnimal, I think. And at 89+ hours, he "got his money's worth".

SP

i rode with a guy on a 600k this summer (in OR) who rode a folder, and finished at least.

i think it was a bike friday "tikit"

Another vote for the Ritchey Breakaway. People can tell you all they want that smaller wheels areen't less efficient, but there is a reason that a lot of Tri guys are moving from 650's to 700's and Mountain Bike racers are moving from 26" to 29". Big wheels just roll faster.

Don't beleive me? Go out and ride a 10mi TT on your 20" Then hop on a 700c and do the same TT. Even tired you will beat your time on the 20" If I am wrong, go ahead and ignore me and ride brevets on a 20"

Another vote for the Ritchey Breakaway. People can tell you all they want that smaller wheels areen't less efficient, but there is a reason that a lot of Tri guys are moving from 650's to 700's and Mountain Bike racers are moving from 26" to 29". Big wheels just roll faster.

Don't beleive me? Go out and ride a 10mi TT on your 20" Then hop on a 700c and do the same TT. Even tired you will beat your time on the 20" If I am wrong, go ahead and ignore me and ride brevets on a 20"

Larger diameter wheels roll easier over obstacles, but on a flat surface like a roadway is there really much of an advantage?
I thought that was the reason for MTB racers going to 29er's, and the technical trails were the reason behind the 69er design (big wheel up front to roll obstacles easy, small wheel in back for better drive.)

I asked a very-experienced rando friend (who has a Bike Friday that he's ridden on a 600K) what bike I should buy for a travel bike for PBP. He advised me to get an S&S-coupled regular bike, rather than a BF. The reason is that the smaller wheels on the Friday are stiffer and transmit more road shock, thus causing fatigue.

The Ritchey Breakaway looks like a great alternative to S&S, but while the latter has stood the test of time, I don't know that the Breakaway has been around long enough to know its long-term durability.

Anyway ... while my S&S coupled bike is great to ride, it is definitely not a "no-brainer" whether to take it on a trip. It is quite a bit of work to disassemble, pack, unpack, reassemble (and then repeat at the end of the trip). I'm pretty fast, but it is probably still at least an hour at each end. The Ritchey looks like it'd be about the same. A Bike Friday would be faster and closer to a no-brainer to take with you.

Wouldn't do it myself, but somebody successfully finished the RM1200 this year on a fixed gear folder - and Airnimal, I think. And at 89+ hours, he "got his money's worth".

SP

I believe you are referring to Pat Hurt, who did indeed finish under the wire.

Not only did he ride an Airnimal, he rode a fixed Airnimal to a finish of 89:02.

When I made the photo below, "for the family back home," he commented wryly: "They already know I'm mad!" Crazy or not, he conquered survived the Rockies!

There are a number of other randos who have completed ultras, incl. PBP on folders of all sorts; perhaps most "famously" Jacques Bilinski (http://www.randonneurs.bc.ca/galleries/gal_2007/ pbp_jacques.html), who was featured on the 2007 PBP poster. Scroll down Jacques' photo page for a shot of that poster and pics of his bike. They deserve our utmost respect; not because they used machines some wouldn't consider, but because they had what it takes to finish such difficult challenges.

Having done a century and countless 60+ mile rides on a folding bike: The main issue with a 20" folder, IMO, is long-term comfort. The smaller wheels transmit more road buzz and bumps, and I suspect the more responsive handling adds to arm fatigue. In my case, comfort issues became slightly problematic after around 70 miles or so. A few tweaks might have lengthened that, but possibly with some performance penalties (e.g. using wider tires).

The second issue is gearing. Many folders have single front chainrings, so that will limit your gearing somewhat. Not a problem for flat rides, but may be problematic on the hills.

Allegations of performance disadvantages to folders are slightly exaggerated. The smaller wheels do have higher rolling resistance, but are aerodynamically superior. My best guess is that it's mostly a wash, other than the impact of less comfort.

As to "which folder," it depends a bit on why you want a folding bike. If you're planning to travel with the bike, keep in mind that the ability to fold or separate the bike comes at quite a premium sometimes -- e.g. S&S couplers will add close to $1000 to the cost of a bike. It only becomes cost-effective if you frequently fly with the bike.

If you're looking to save space in your home, or double as a commuter that you can bring indoors, or don't want to fuss with bike racks, the aforementioned Bike Friday is probably the best way to go.

Small-wheeled bikes aren't as efficient. Try a Ritchey breakaway instead.

It isn't quite so simple. In theory, for a tire of identical construction/width and identical tire pressure there is more deflection in the direction of travel with a small wheel. But in practice, the story is much more complicated.

In my experience, where you get hurt with small wheels is the gearing. The typical solution today is to use the Capreo cassette/hub that has a 9-tooth sprocket. This allows one to use a normal crankset and achieve high enough gears for typical road riding. However, the Capreo cassette is a very wide 9-speed cassette typical of many touring setups. Consequently, you loose a lot of granularity with respect to a typical road bike.

Limiting the discussion to uprights -- my experience with recumbents is almost nil -- most people would describe the steering as a little twichy but one gets used to it quickly. Long story short, it isn't the small wheel per se that creates the effect but instead it is the relatively low amount of trail. So if you are accustomed to low-trail bikes then the adjustment will be very fast in my experience. As an aside, low-trail bikes generally do well with loads in the front such as a handlebar bag since it slows down the steering.

I have a Bike Friday NWT -- triple chainring with Capreo cassette -- and recommend it. The model has a more relaxed geometry and uses the more popular 20" wheel (ERTO 406) which has a much bigger selection of tires. I also suggest that you have the rims drilled for Schraeder and use presta adaptors since finding BMX tubes -- often Schraeder -- during travel is relatively easy.

At least with respect to the Bike Friday, some of the advantages are

(1) Packs/unpacks faster than S&S or Ritchey travel bikes. This is the consensus from experiences and discussions among the local cycling groups. Personally, I can pack/unpack both my wife's and my bike in the amount of time it takes a typical person to set up their full-size travel bike (~ 40-45 minutes from what others typically report). I am not a bike mechanic ... I don't possess any special skills that I am aware.

(2) Quick fold allows car travel without a rack. This both improves mileage and gives more options. It also gives a nice bailout option if you need to take a cab from the middle of nowhere. I can fit my wife's and my bike in the trunk of our Toyota Echo if I remove one of the front wheels.

(3) Bike Friday has a reputation for excellent customer service and will Fed Ex parts to you while traveling (24-hour phone line for emergencies).

(4) They do customize the bike such that it matches the reach and leg extension dimensions of your favorite bike.

I test rode the Airnimal. Nice ride but a strange tire size (24" ERTO 520).

I should note that my long distance riding is limited to centuries and double metric centuries. I have done many on the NWT.

My wife and I are going to do some brevets in the near future on our dual 20" recumbents. I've ridden both 26" recumbents and the 20" recently (also had an old 20"rear/16"front one) and the main difference I notice is you have to be alot more careful where you point those tiny little wheels and what you try and roll over. Railroad tracks, expansion joints, road/driveway ramps with gaps, potholes, cobblestone in poor condition and lots of other stuff you just can't roll over without putting some thought and planning into it like you can with the bigger wheels. Alot more careful then when switching from 700x50 or 700x32 to 700x23. Of course the problem would be less if you could bunny hop or lift your front wheel easily but on a long ride you may become careless or too tired to do so and stuck where I am on my recumbent and just have to eat it.

Gearing has to be cared for and isn't as easily fixed if there is a problem as would a 700c or 26" bike but there are options. My 20" bike has a 60/42(?) up front and a 12?-25 in back. At about 28mph or so I have to start spinning over my cruising RPM if I want to go faster and well that doesn't happen to me alot. I am limited by the double but I do have a bigger gear range on the low end then I have on my road bike with a double.

I could add a dual drive to the rear wheel or maybe use a schlumph crankset to expand my ratios but I can't ride slower then 3mph or so and stay upright so lower gearing may be wasted on me.

Big wheels just roll faster.

Don't beleive me? Go out and ride a 10mi TT on your 20" Then hop on a 700c and do the same TT. Even tired you will beat your time on the 20" If I am wrong, go ahead and ignore me and ride brevets on a 20"

I don't ride too many 10 m TTs any more but my average time to complete 200 and 300 km brevets is statistically the same using 700 x 23C and 16 x 1 3/8" tyres.

Choosing a small-wheeled bike with suspension avoids the road shock/ additional rolling resistance that small wheelers are prone to. My 700C bikes are rougher than my Moultons. Bike Friday should look at that aspect a little more as the Air Friday or Thudbuster suspension posts aren't great solutions IMHO.

What you have with some of these posts are those who have a bias against "small wheeled" cycles. People in that camp will not change their minds and more than likely have never riden one.

As an owner of a " smalled wheeled" folder which is a Bike Friday Air Glide with drop bars, Ultegra Groupo and set up for long Distances, I see no reason why you could not do a Brevet on it or a simular "High End" folder.

I can't believe this thread. At least there was one person who mentioned the Alex Moulton. The Alex Moulton bikes are not "foldables" in the sense that you can fold them and take them on a bus, but they do break apart into a large suitcase. The small 17 or 20 inch wheels have no more rolling resistance than regular sized wheels which has been PROVEN. The tire diameter does not start to effect rolling resistance on smooth surfaces until you get to skateboard wheel diameters. The ride is spectacular because of the suspension system. The suspension is also what allows the bikes to roll over bumps efficiently. I am surprised that I don't see more of these bikes on the road. Typically, I am the only one who shows up at the big centuries (2000+ riders) with one.

The Alex Moulton bikes have several disadvantges listed in my order of importance:

1. Suspension system makes pedaling while standing up highly inefficient, a big factor in group riding
2. Very expensive
3. Some models do not fit taller riders - there are models that will definitely fit
4. Quirky problems fitting bicycle parts due to strange dimensions
5. Quality can be poor despite the price
6. 17 inch models don't like deep gravel roads, 20 inch wide tire models do great
7. Bikes are never unstable but difficult to ride hands free
8. Very few dealers
9. At their prices, you probably won't want the factory parts kit, and "frame only" kits are only avialble in England through Avon Cyclery.


Some of the advantages are:

1. Wow, what a great ride!
2. Most models have a very nice luggage system avialble. Better than regular bikes.
3. Bikes are very rugged and strong, much more than a regular bike
4. Bikes can be packed with fenders in place
5. Excellent rolling resistance, my 17 " wheels at 90 psi roll BETTER than my thin Conti 25's at 100 psi. I can't hammer this point home enough, once you put a suspension on a bike, small wheels roll every bit as good as large ones! That was the whole idea behind the Moulton concept.
6. The bikes are rockets on fast decents
7. Handle potholes and pave better than regular high pressure tire bikes - yes this is counter intuitive. I think it has to do with my observation that the small wheels handle edge traps very well. Parallel pavement seams don't seem as difficult to traverse as regular narrow tire bikes. Potholes just don't bother it.
8. Excellent factory parts support, but they run on British time. I have a 1989 model AM 14 and as far as I know, I can get every Moulton specific part. The rest of the parts are normal bike parts available everywhere.
9. Standover clearance for everbody! The bikes fit small riders very well. The bikes are also more adjustable for size than regular bikes, but they are not infinitley adjustable. Taller riders need to consult a Moulton expert to figure which models are acceptable.

Yeah Crock,

I understand what you mean. However, you have to remember that most of the bias against small wheeled bikes are from those who have never ridden a quality folder like a Moulton or high end Bike Friday. Also they typically swallow the Kool Aid fed to them by their LBS and the major manufacturers.:lol:

I see little difference in speed while using my 20" folder, however on a longer ride I feel comfort may play a role, slowing one down eventually. With smaller wheels I believe the ride is a little more harsh unless tire pressure is reduced but reducing pressure would likely slow one down a bit. We have a S&S coupled bike as well, but for traveling ,my folder is the preferred choice as it is so much easier to get it from suit case to road ready.

....but reducing pressure would likely slow one down a bit....

not entirely true... as has been discussed here, in BQ, and on the randon list...

I rode a Moulton 20" once 30 years ago. I was impressed by how fast it was.

Another vote for the Ritchey Breakaway. People can tell you all they want that smaller wheels areen't less efficient, but there is a reason that a lot of Tri guys are moving from 650's to 700's and Mountain Bike racers are moving from 26" to 29". Big wheels just roll faster.

Don't beleive me? Go out and ride a 10mi TT on your 20" Then hop on a 700c and do the same TT. Even tired you will beat your time on the 20" If I am wrong, go ahead and ignore me and ride brevets on a 20"

I agree. No different for an automobile. Larger wheels make less revolutions than smaller wheels and therefore less vibration, all things being equal of course.