In an earlier thread, Loch said
The more I think about it, the more I think this makes sense for many people.Originally Posted by Loch
Example - Urban bike
For an urban bike, aside from cost and maybe a pound of weight, is there any reason to choose a stiffy over a folder? Remember, we can get folders with 26" wheels... In an urban environment, I'd sooner have the folding ability than one less pound.
Now for extreme lightness, speed, or riding-over-boulders ruggedness, I think the stiffy has the advantage.
For super-rugged off-road biking, a good moutain bike can't really be replaced by a folder.
For super-competitive or ast road biking, a dedicated, lightweight road bike is desirable.
But what about for us mere mortals, who don't need to look at lap times or win races, what is the point of this ultra-focused approach?
For everything other than the above, why not just have folders?
1) Road folder, such as the Swift for road riding. Has a slightly higher rolling resistance due to the smaller wheels than a proper road bike, but who cares?
2) Mountain bike, such as a Montague or Dahon Jack folder for light mountain or hybrid biking. (26" wheels and all) For super rugged stuff, that joint may not hold up, but I'd think by that point, you'd be more worried about your own personal injuries than the bike, no?
3) Choice of small-wheeled folders for multi-mode commuting
Is there something I'm missing, or do many people just feel like they need to have race-caliber bikes even if they don't race?
Not having to worry about a bike rack is so liberating, from fuel costs, to the cost of the rack...
This is the Folders forum, I understand, so I may get biased answers, but I think a lot of your are also into stiffies too. I'm afraid to ask in a stiffies forum, for fear that the answers may be a bit militant.