It makes you think...

If a partnership between one of the world's most experienced titanium builders (with the benefit of economies of scale) and a small direct-to-consumer bike brand yields a titanium folder for a minimum of 5500 USD (7000 CAD), where does Helix get inspired to offer one at 1500 CAD?

Are we really to believe that Burke is keeping an ultra-plush 75% margin? Brands want margin, but they also want growth and scale. You don't get growth or scale with a prohibitive price-tag.

I reckon their minimum cost is 3500 USD... and, they're dealing with less mechanical complexity than Helix (Lefty fork, unproven hinge designs etc).

https://seattle-cycles.squarespace.com/shop

I bet that Helix is offering an initial low price to raise capital to get off the ground. And with a new company's associated risks & delays, a lower price is necessary. Once up & running though, I predict the Helix will cost more. But with their greater use of automation, their production costs could be lower than Burke's.

I did not know it could get any more weird. The thread and forum keeps on giving...

:popcorn

I fully agree with this statement: the Burke exists, has been used and is build by a very experienced titanium frame builder. Its price is high but it is the normal price of titanium frame bikes.

Remember that building a titanium frame is difficult, many manufacturers failed and had lots of broken frames. A folder frame is much more difficult and expensive to build with much more parts to make and solder than a road race bike that has only 8 tubes to solder.

Peter is no expert in automation. If anyone would have the expertise to automate, it would be the Lynskey family (creators of Litespeed, Lynskey, and other category-defining titanium bikes. Also creators of the Burke). They have the capital, production expertise, supplier relationships, and distribution relationships to make something like that work. But, their cheapest price for a titanium folder is 7,000 CAD.

Also, businesses don't 'raise capital' by committing to a product that loses ~2,000 CAD / Unit. If I wanted to raise capital for a titanium folding bike brand, I'd take a bank loan with a 5% interest rate.

Let's say it takes 4 million dollars of parts and labour to fulfill the first 2 million dollars of sales for the Helix (actual cost 3,000 CAD, sale price 1,500 CAD). Then, where does that leave you after selling 1,300 bikes?

a) 2 million dollars in debt
b) Sitting on top of a spoiled market. Consumer price expectations are pegged to the 1,500 CAD price, so when you increase the bike to 4,000 CAD (with a slim 25% margin) you have anemic consumer demand.

In the slim chance that Peter fulfils the original Kickstarter orders, how long does it take to recoup his debt?

Over the past three years, Peter has presold 1,300 - 2,000 Helix bikes. That's with a jaw-dropping, loss-leading discount.

Let's estimate that he can make a 4,000 CAD / bike. Unless he has some distribution magic (and he won't without a proper margin) it will take triple the time to sell 2,000 bikes at the 4,000 CAD price. That's nine years to sell 2,000 bikes, with a margin of ~1,000 CAD per bike.

Even then, he's only covered the initial 2 million CAD debt from the Kickstarter.

So! It takes a total of twelve years to produce ~3,300 bikes, with no sliver of profit in sight!

I'm all for the success of the Helix project, but running a napkin business projection, I can't begin to guess at his long-term strategy.

Am I missing something?

Just a hint: Lynskey like Nevi is making high quality titanium bike frames using high quality expensive titanium material and a high quality expensive manufacturing process.

But there is also much cheaper titanium materiel available and it is possible to make savings in the manufacturing process.

This is the approach taken by Van Nicholas for instance.

But Van Nicholas manufacturing happens in China with low labor costs, not in Canada.

And even Van Nicholas doesn't reach the Helix price + the Van Nicholas bikes are classic road bikes frames much easier/cheaper to manufacture than a complex folder frame like the Helix frame.

Going too far in the simplification / cost cutting for the frame manufacturing lead to bad quality, not reliable frames.

So, I doubt that it is possible to make a good quality, reliable titanium frame bike for the price proposed by Peter.

Not that I enjoy drama but am I the only one worrying that valuable contributors such as Jur or JoeRemi who so far have contributed to this (admittedly at this point) opinion piece of a thread were censored?
Unless i am mistaken they have seldom resorted to depraved language or ad-hominem attacks and, although some of their opinions were voiced strongly (and as well they might, it's Helix after all!) I cannot see a justification for such a treatment?

You, myself, jur or anybody else can take ourselves out at any time we want, slamming the door or not. No, the world will not stop itself in its tracks. At the same time, when wishing to impose one's own rules, there is no problem starting one's own forum and inviting friends. The usual problem is of critical mass to move the project forward. A large conglomerate with variety of topics has its strengths in the amount of expertise and manner in which the topics flow, but then to make it run the rules need to be somewhat rigid and atmosphere at times not familial.

I wasn't censored, the moderators have always been fair with me, I'm just over it. This folding bike forum seems kinda pointless without Thor involved, and I suspect Yan and Pinigis are gone, too. I have other forums and Twitter (@josephremib) to yak at, so away I go.

Gentlemen, we understand how these events may come as a surprise to many of you, but please take note of the solicitation section of the Forum Rules, below.

Solicitation
Please refrain from using Bike Forums to promote your "crowdfunding campaign" (kickstarter/indiegogo), commercial services or website, or to advertise items for sale. If you are a Premium Member (Titanium or Red Star), you may attach a short link to your own blog or personal site within your profile or signature to your market items in our marketplace forums here (private sales only, no ebay auctions or online storefronts), or to a noncommercial website that you specifically own. Free members are not allowed sig links for their sites.

So our actions are hardly “arbitrary and capricious”. The guidelines are clear, you cannot conduct commercial marketing activities or promote your commercial products on these forums. We are sorry this has been allowed to go on for so long, leading many members to believe these types of operations are acceptable. They are not.

Alternatively, commercial operators have the option of signing up as a paid advertiser on these forums as scores of others do. That’s how this site exists, through paid advertising. Look around you at how few of you users bother with a paid, premium membership . . . we surely cannot run a forum on that! So to allow some businesses free access to our membership while others have to pay is just not reasonable.

Thanks for your concern and understanding in this matter.

Is there any actual evidence of the fenders or bags? Other than a declaration on their website I saw no image of the bike with fenders nor saw an option to purchase those fenders anywhere.

Usually I take people's word for it when it is posted on a legitimate website. If they didn't have it, why post it? Plus if you want evidence I suggest you call +1 (206) 434-2359 and ask.

This is getting too far away from the Helix thread and should be posted in the Burke thread. So I am finished talking about Burke. I come to this thread everyday just to get the latest on Helix because it is like watching a train wreck. I hope for everyone's sake I will be eating my words six months from now.

Helix is a new company, & has a lot to learn. But looking at their manufacturing methods, it appears they have an automation advantage over Lynsky, particularly in welding.
https://lynskeyperformance.com/upgrade-shop/

Nope, Lynskey are the contracted manufacturers/ fabricators. Not the "creators" of Burke.

Interesting video about the Lynskey factory:

I must say that I was more impressed by the Nevi factory video/frame building process:

What both video show is that the welding is just one step of the frame building and that there are a lot of steps needed to build a quality titanium frame, a welding robot only helps for one step, all the other remains. Together, all those steps take a lot of effort and explain the high manufacturing costs of a titanium frame, savings during the welding step won't dramatically reduce the manufacturing costs.

I'll wager that a $5500 Burke bike also has far spendier components than the Helix, which has taken a very cost effective route. But even though the Helix should cost less to produce than the Burke, it should command a higher than current price.

Great video!
One step (albeit a small one) which the Helix won't need is weld polishing.

Robot
 

What the video shows is that they weld the frame by hand, that's a step that Helix eliminates, saving time and $$$ (if the cost of the robot is ignored) - anyone want to concede that by eliminating expensive labor with the robot that's why they can make the whole operation pencil out. Much of everything else I can wager can be done with south of the US workers.

All I know it’s Friday and I’m hoping for a public newsletter from helix :) happy Friday all!!

I too am itching for an update.
But now I'd like a test ride on the Nevi titanium incumbent bike.
It makes USS look cool.

(I know it's "recumbent", but I like the joke.)

Yes, robot welding will probably save labor costs. But what the video show is that there are a lot of steps needed to build the frame and that welding, even done by hand, is only a small part of the effort needed to build the frame.

The manpower saved by the robot won't provide a massive cost saving (remember also that a human is still needed to install the jig in the robot and to remove the welded frame out of the robot).

Actually, I think that the biggest saving of the robot is to avoid the need of people to weld the frame, which is a very specialized/skilled/difficult to find person.

You are a week early. Next scheduled Helix update is Friday the 16th.

People here act like the Burke is out there in reasonable supply. Is anyone here a Burke owner? Seems expensive for what it appears to be, so I expect Burke has not sold very many yet. Maybe I missed some posts, but I haven't seen anyone here post an "I just bought a Burke 20" or anything similar.

My Ti Swift may not have the smallest fold, but it rides great and really does exist. A quick look today shows the framesets for sale at $1200 USD which is a bit less than the Burke. I think Helix may not profit on the bikes they produce this year, but I don't think they will cost Helix anything close to $4000 to build.

I have been waiting for availability of the Helix folding bike since first reading about it in 2015. When the Kickstarter funding campaign was announced I considered participation. My personal experience with funding failures and actual scams on Kickstarter and Indiegogo led me to decide to wait for retail availability of the Helix. My interest in this bike brought me to this website and this thread.

The Helix is a brilliant design. It is very compact when folded, with the frame inside the footprint of the wheels, and due to its normally sized wheels the bike should ride like a normal bike. When folded, both wheels are in parallel and locked together hub-to-hub, making rolling it around in the folded position easy, no trolley wheels needed. Using modern components, disc brakes and standard bicycle parts makes customizing the bike an easy process. There are, however, a few engineering concerns.

The front hinge fork lock hopefully uses a spring to maintain constant clockwise rotational pressure to keep the lock from vibrating loose, or vibrating to the open position.

The rear swing arm will be loose and rattling with the current design. The rear latch does not pull the swing arm tight against the frame. It only prevents it from swinging open. Because of this design, the play in the rear helical hinge and the play in the retaining latch will create a shaky and rattling bike. With mild engineering revisions this can be resolved.

The contractor who fabricated the bicycle seen on the Helix website has pictures of the parts they built: htps://www.protolabs.com/resources/case-studies/helix-bikes/ <--Link broken: I am a new poster. Add a 't' to https

As has been discussed by others, the numbers don’t work. This bike cannot be manufactured and sold at a profit for anywhere close to the pricing originally offered. This bike utilizes complex hinge parts that cannot be manufactured at a low price if made out of titanium. It was a poor choice to go with titanium, also addressed by others in this thread. With no products being sold by Helix, the developer is out of money or on his way to being out of money. With no money and no products being sold, this is a non-sustainable venture.

I don’t see this funding campaign as a KickScam. It is a KickFail due to unrealistic price projections, obvious manufacturing challenges and inept project management. The Helix folding bike is a great design backed by good intensions from a person who is way out of his skill set. The developer is aware of this thread. This is good, as this means he will eventually read this post. It is my hope that he soon pulls the plug and walks away from this failure with lessons learned and partners with an overseas manufacturer to construct a revised design using more appropriate materials.

I very much want to purchase a Helix, and I am prepared to spend $3,000 retail. Waiting three years for a bicycle has forced me to look elsewhere. There is nothing else on the market like the Helix, so I am back to looking at non-folding bikes.

Interesting link, thanks.

It is also what I think of the Helix project.

Hopefully, it doesn't become a KickFail, if it does, it would be one of the biggest (in term of number of backers and amount of money lost) !

I haven't found anything on the web which matches your description.
Do you have a link to images?
As I understand the front fork lock, it uses a long inner sliding tube which moves from the pivoting lower fork into the upper non-pivoting portion of the fork, thereby locking them together. The helical spring applies an axial upward force under this sliding tube to ensure engagement.
Rotational force on the lower leg is handled by a mechanical interlock between the upper & lower fork sections, with help from the hinge. This looks more vibration resistant than any other other folding fork design I've seen.

It seems weird to call it a "fork" when it has only one leg.
Oh, well...bike terminology is odd to us outsiders.
If the geometry of the latch engagement surfaces is right, it would have no slop.
Do you have access to more detailed design info than I can find?
The pix in this link show only prototype parts.
I'd expect the production designs to differ.
As production begins, many of us will be paying the balance due. This will be a big cash infusion.
So short run sustainability looks achievable. A higher retail price will make the long term profitable for a bike which should have tremendous appeal worldwide.
You hope for abandonment?
Criminy, aren't you a ray of sunshine for us!

As I promised another poster, I offer my personal guarantee to all.
If Helix fails, I'll post an image of a refund.

Do we know how many bikes were pre-ordered and have an idea how much money will arrive from the pre-ordered bikes ?