We're going for full The Mummy mode tonight:









If one looks at a Moulton from the standpoint of ride harshness in comparison to a Twenty, then yes - the Moulton's suspension is absolutely superior in that respect. From the standpoint of putting power down to the rear wheel, I think the Twenty does it better.

I think it all boils down to what one personally prefers in a bike, not any actual level of "better" or "worse." Case in point, while I can tolerate the parasitic drag of an internally geared hub without complaints, I have virtually zero tolerance for most sprung rear triangles. Any sort of bounce that works against my cadence or continued motion is an irritant that reminds me of Wal-Mart dual-suspension abominations. While the Moulton is by no means that bad, it doesn't really feel much different than many 2000's elastomer suspensions. In fact, it reminds me a lot of the Birdy BD-1.

Also, if I'm on an upright bar bike, I want to be upright. I can't stand the "MTB position," and the Moulton's combination of effective top tube length, long reach stem (relatively speaking) and flat handlebars all go against my short-stem-and-North Road-handlebar sensibilities.

Consider my posture on Blasptwenty, then realize that the Moulton's effective top tube is 4.5cm longer than the Twenty (57.5cm for the Moulton Mk.1, 53cm for the Twenty) and has a flat handlebar. I go from being comfortably upright on the Twenty to leaning forward on bars that are nearly flat, with a wrist position that is no where near as comfortable as a drop bar.

For the record Blasptwenty's Velo-Orange Cigne stem is 70mm and the Moulton is 76.2mm, so the difference there is minimal. It's arguably moot once one mounts a North Road, depending on width, bend, and extension.



So, just from the standpoint of what I like and dislike in bikes, the Moulton has two strikes against it that the Twenty doesn't. I've also ridden Twenties with three different factory bar combinations, so I'm also likely biased to the fact that I've had opportunities to experience them in my ideal configurations.

Don't get me wrong though. For all its issues, I'm absolutely in love with this BMC-built beast of fine British bodgery. Helps me forget that yet another Rover P6 has slipped through my fingers. It's like a bicycle equivalent to that car. Quirky, strangely constructed, not without its faults, but so charismatic that you can't help but adore the damned thing far more than you should.

I don't want to go too A&S here because I inspired you out of a Twitter thread, but I don't have the good sense to shut up, so here we go:

Any bike lane that doesn't serve riders down to the most fearful (i.e., painted and not protected) is fairly useless in my book. Confident riders will claim the lane or a wide shoulder in vehicular cycling tradition, so there's no point in making an unprotected bike lane in a door zone.

Granted, a good parking protected bike lane takes a lot of pieces to fall into place to work: It takes road space, a commitment to not just put paint down but make significant curb modifications, a willingness to deal with members of the public who are anti-cyclist (in their mind, every cyclist is a peloton in their way, all while missing the point that a PBL gets riders out of their hair in the first place), and the truly maddening issue of semi-pro/pro riders who fight protected bike lanes with no regard for the 51-56% of people who would ride if protected bike lanes were there.

This latter camp of machismo peloton/training dies really gets to me - after all, if one doesn't like the protected bike lane, go vehicular cycle in the travel lane. These riders have pflucked things up so much locally that it's warranting flyers like this one. This is one of the latest I had a hand in creating for work. (Early draft, so the QR code is not active - just in case you decide to try it. This is also the reason I get no work done on The Headbadge).


(P.S.: Where's Waldo?)

Cycling is very good for commuting and the economy when you make the infrastructure safe enough. On-street parking is vastly overrated, while a community where one can can dust off their bicycle get to work or the store with minimal stress can get a lot more people in front of storefronts (note: I'm speaking of urban and suburban areas here; rural is a different story). While not everyone will use a bicycle, a connected network will encourage a higher mode share, reducing the need for on-street parking (overrated and a poor use of space) and putting more eyes on the sidewalk directly in front of smaller businesses. Reliable and frequent public transit is also equally as important to encourage this mode shift.

What's more, the scuttlebutt is that upcoming standards documents will also allow state cycling lobbyists a good argument to get any mandatory bike lane laws off state books, so any legal objection is soon to be moot too.

To leave this topic on a positive note: We have a limited (very) network of protected lanes in Downtown Miami. They may not be the best design ever, but the folks behind it in the district and at public works moved mountains to make them happen. More importantly, these lanes are doing the work they should - encouraging folks of all ages and abilities to use them. This is my favorite video of it:

Twitter

But I digress. In fact, I digressed enough that this might as well be your LeGrand thread.

Speaking of which, your influence on the Moulton has not gone un-noticed.



-Kurt