Go Back  Bike Forums > Bike Forums > Folding Bikes
Reload this Page >

New 3sixty bikes (Affordable Brompton Clone)

Notices
Folding Bikes Discuss the unique features and issues of folding bikes. Also a great place to learn what folding bike will work best for your needs.

New 3sixty bikes (Affordable Brompton Clone)

Old 03-23-19, 09:07 AM
  #1  
Raxel
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 333
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 97 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 22 Times in 15 Posts
New 3sixty bikes (Affordable Brompton Clone)

I heard that the 3Sixty bikes will add more lineup this year,

-Small frame with M-bar (last year's model, based on TW brompton, 1 inch headset, no pusher mount nut)
-Small frame with S-bar (same frame as last year's version, new bent stem for S-type handlebar)
-Large frame (new model, roughly the same dimension as UK brompton, 1 1/8" headset, pusher mount nut for external shifting)
-Full titanium version (~15lbs)

So basically the new large frame version will be almost the same as the UK Brompton.
I don't know the price but I am pretty sure it will be less than 1/2 of UK brompton


New S-type model (with short frame, 1 inch headset)


New full titanium model
Raxel is offline  
Likes For Raxel:
Old 03-23-19, 09:10 AM
  #2  
Raxel
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 333
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 97 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 22 Times in 15 Posts
And here's my build with custom 3d printed tensioner (with integrated pusher mount)
It weighs 8.3kg now with heavy aluminium seatpost, riser handlebar and stock brakes.

Raxel is offline  
Likes For Raxel:
Old 03-23-19, 12:57 PM
  #3  
ttakata73
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Bangkok: hottest average temperature :(
Posts: 627

Bikes: *1998 GT Forte Ti 700c, Totem KDS-D 26" fatbike, BirdyGT 18", Brompton M2LX 16"

Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 87 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Nice, hope they sell well. Too bad all these clones don't use the opportunity to make the bike better. An integrated headset and a regular derailleur hanger would have been easy changes. I will keep my old Brompton since this is no improvement in design.
ttakata73 is offline  
Old 03-23-19, 01:17 PM
  #4  
Raxel
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 333
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 97 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 22 Times in 15 Posts
Originally Posted by ttakata73 View Post
Nice, hope they sell well. Too bad all these clones don't use the opportunity to make the bike better. An integrated headset and a regular derailleur hanger would have been easy changes. I will keep my old Brompton since this is no improvement in design.
One of the clones (GROO M3T) uses aluminium frame, rear hinge with sealed bearing, integrated headset, height adjustable handlepost with quick release (a la Dahon). I think it costs around $400 with 3 speed IGH.
The handlepost folds the other way though (exposing the chain)
Raxel is offline  
Likes For Raxel:
Old 03-23-19, 03:49 PM
  #5  
FolderBeholder
Senior Member
 
FolderBeholder's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2017
Location: Inland Southern California
Posts: 298

Bikes: 1963 Schwinn, EuroMini Urbano, Magnum Premium 48, Brompton S6L, Tokyo Bike Mini-Velo

Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 123 Post(s)
Liked 39 Times in 23 Posts
Does “clone” really mean “knock-off”?

Or is this a legitimately produced (with Bromptons blessing/licensed I mean) unit?

FolderBeholder is offline  
Old 03-23-19, 05:41 PM
  #6  
Lalato
Senior Member
 
Lalato's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Bay Area and Sacramento
Posts: 1,244

Bikes: Dahon Curl i8

Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 37 Post(s)
Liked 4 Times in 1 Post
Originally Posted by FolderBeholder View Post
Does “clone” really mean “knock-off”?
Or is this a legitimately produced (with Bromptons blessing/licensed I mean) unit?
I don't believe these are licensed. They may not be improvements over the existing Brompton design, but that doesn't mean they aren't legitimately produced.. They're just not at all affiliated with Brompton in the UK.

It would be cool to see if they start improving the design (apart from materials usage e.g Titanium and Aluminum). For now, though, it's just clones.
Lalato is offline  
Old 03-23-19, 06:02 PM
  #7  
ImplodingVoice
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2019
Location: New Jersey
Posts: 22
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 15 Post(s)
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Great post. How many years has this bike model been on the market / on the road?
ImplodingVoice is offline  
Old 03-23-19, 08:57 PM
  #8  
Raxel
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 333
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 97 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 22 Times in 15 Posts
Originally Posted by Lalato View Post
I don't believe these are licensed. They may not be improvements over the existing Brompton design, but that doesn't mean they aren't legitimately produced.. They're just not at all affiliated with Brompton in the UK.

It would be cool to see if they start improving the design (apart from materials usage e.g Titanium and Aluminum). For now, though, it's just clones.
Brompton patent expired more than 10 years ago. They are all legitimately produced and marketed bikes with full warranty.
Raxel is offline  
Old 03-23-19, 09:03 PM
  #9  
FolderBeholder
Senior Member
 
FolderBeholder's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2017
Location: Inland Southern California
Posts: 298

Bikes: 1963 Schwinn, EuroMini Urbano, Magnum Premium 48, Brompton S6L, Tokyo Bike Mini-Velo

Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 123 Post(s)
Liked 39 Times in 23 Posts
Originally Posted by Lalato View Post
I don't believe these are licensed. They may not be improvements over the existing Brompton design, but that doesn't mean they aren't legitimately produced.. They're just not at all affiliated with Brompton in the UK.

It would be cool to see if they start improving the design (apart from materials usage e.g Titanium and Aluminum). For now, though, it's just clones.
Well it sounds like it could be considered theft of IP if it’s simply a non-auth copy to which the original designers receive no benefit (Brompton).

At the very least, its plausible to consider that an unitiated buyer could purchase a copy/knock-off/clone whatever one chooses to call it, THINKING theyre getting the genuine article. This is often the goal in design plagarism...Im just saying.

Not everyone is attracted to that business model, me being one. To each their own however...
FolderBeholder is offline  
Old 03-23-19, 09:08 PM
  #10  
FolderBeholder
Senior Member
 
FolderBeholder's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2017
Location: Inland Southern California
Posts: 298

Bikes: 1963 Schwinn, EuroMini Urbano, Magnum Premium 48, Brompton S6L, Tokyo Bike Mini-Velo

Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 123 Post(s)
Liked 39 Times in 23 Posts
Originally Posted by Raxel View Post
Brompton patent expired more than 10 years ago. They are all legitimately produced and marketed bikes with full warranty.
warranteed by Brompton?
FolderBeholder is offline  
Old 03-23-19, 10:17 PM
  #11  
tcs
Palmer
 
tcs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Parts Unknown
Posts: 6,223

Bikes: 1980 Mike Melton, 1982 Stumpjumper, 1982 Santana, 1984 Alex Moulton AM, 2008 BikeFriday tikit T-11, 2010 Dawes Briercliffe, 2017 Dahon Curl i5, 2019 Surly ½DT14

Mentioned: 24 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 696 Post(s)
Liked 183 Times in 126 Posts
Originally Posted by raxel View Post
brompton patent expired more than
20

years ago.
tcs is offline  
Old 03-23-19, 10:25 PM
  #12  
tcs
Palmer
 
tcs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Parts Unknown
Posts: 6,223

Bikes: 1980 Mike Melton, 1982 Stumpjumper, 1982 Santana, 1984 Alex Moulton AM, 2008 BikeFriday tikit T-11, 2010 Dawes Briercliffe, 2017 Dahon Curl i5, 2019 Surly ½DT14

Mentioned: 24 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 696 Post(s)
Liked 183 Times in 126 Posts
Originally Posted by FolderBeholder View Post
Well it sounds like it could be considered theft of IP if it’s simply a non-auth copy to which the original designers receive no benefit (Brompton).
Not at all familiar with patent law, I take it?

BTW, don't hold your breath waiting for Brompton to pay royalties on the use of the 45º folding handlepost during the active period of Dahon's patent on that design.
tcs is offline  
Old 03-24-19, 06:07 AM
  #13  
berlinonaut
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Posts: 656
Mentioned: 13 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 313 Post(s)
Liked 10 Times in 8 Posts
Originally Posted by tcs View Post
Not at all familiar with patent law, I take it?
IP is more than just patents. Brompton tried to sue Dahon when they introduced their Curl Brompton clone in Europe based on IP (and not patents) and lost the case, as far as I know because the court came to the conclusion that the Curl was different enough from the original. As none of the other Asian clones are offered outside Asia there might be reasons for that. One being that those plagiatory bikes do not fulfill western safety standards and have not been successfully or at all tested to the norms mandatory for selling in western countries. Second may be that in the early 2000s companies like Merc that did try to distribute their Brompton clones in Europe got sued by courts due to violation of IP (and obviously not because of patents as those were already gone by then). The bikes had to be destroyed and they were explicitely banned from distributing those bikes in Europe.

Even in China, where IP infringement of western brands is notorious and seemed impossible to stop things may be about to change: Land Rover just won a case against Landwind, selling a clone of one of their car designs: https://www.dailymail.co.uk/money/ca...er-Evoque.html

With that happening climate may be changing for copycats in China. Brompton is trying to be more present and sell more in Asian markets and thus they may sooner or later have to address the issue locally - which they did not do until know, possibly because of risk, limited ressources and only a small chance of winning the case due to the general attitude in China towards such things and even less of being able to enforce a possible outcome towards the ever changing amount of clone producers. Instead they focussed on developing their bike further to beat the competition qualitywise. The future may however show a different approach.

Just because there are no patents involved or Brompton did not go to court does not mean that what the plagiators do would be legal.
berlinonaut is offline  
Old 03-24-19, 06:53 AM
  #14  
tds101 
Wake up!!!
 
tds101's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Mastic Beach, NY
Posts: 3,227

Bikes: 9+,...

Mentioned: 11 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 708 Post(s)
Liked 194 Times in 113 Posts
You know, people have complained in other threads about topics constantly being rehashed and beaten to death like a dead horse, and here we are discussing the same patent crap about Brompton OVER and OVER AGAIN. Who cares if this isn't a Brompton approved clone? Enjoy it for what it is, decide if it interests you, and if not,...move on.

Brompton patent discussion =
__________________
If it wasn't for you meddling kids,...
tds101 is offline  
Old 03-24-19, 07:04 AM
  #15  
Bonzo Banana
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Location: Merry Old England
Posts: 738

Bikes: Muddyfox Evolve 200, Bicycles4u Paris Explorer, Raleigh Twenty Stowaway, Bickerton California, Saracen Xile, Kona Hoss Deluxe, Vertigo Carnaby, Exodus Havoc, Kona Lanai, Revolution Cuillin Sport, Dawes Kingpin, Bickerton, NSU & Elswick Cosmopolitan

Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 282 Post(s)
Liked 13 Times in 11 Posts
Bromptons are expensive hence why I don't have one but they are fully certified and tested for a long life with decent components. These don't look strong or built to last, the basic crimped dropouts on the forks and other parts look pretty poor. It's no bargain to pay half as much for a bike that lasts only a couple of years and puts your safety at risk.

I thought the whole point of that frame design was the need for steel or possibly titanium so the flexing of that downtube doesn't cause premature fatigue. To just keep the same frame design but move to aluminium unless overly compensated for with a much thicker possibly non-butted tube seems less than ideal. As you change materials the frame design should change quite a lot. While I was at a recycling centre sometime ago I saw a basic generic folding bike where the chainstays had sheared off and twisted and a huge number of deep scratches to the underside of the frame downtube. I didn't know how old it was but it looked like a pretty horrific failure possibly injury causing. The bike was folded but I think that was purely to make it easy to dispose of as the hinge itself looked fine. It was clearly aluminium too due to lack of corrosion on the frame itself even though other parts were corroded. It wasn't a brand I recognised and the wheels weren't attached and some other components had been removed. What was obvious about it was the complete lack of strengthening in its design and it looked exactly like the sort of frame that would fail. I don't know the date of the bike as that was made difficult by the lack of components but if I was guessing somewhere between 2006-2012. The stem was still attached and was a basic quill stem, non-folding.

Bicycle certification has improved over the years and frame tests have become much better and stricter. There is better indication now of weight limits and more requirements for manuals to give detailed information regarding of normal use and expected lifespan. Even in China many Chinese avoid Chinese branded goods due to safety concerns and prefer western brands even if the products themselves are manufactured in China because they believe they will meet proper safety standards and won't have dangerous cost-cutting. Even in Taiwan which is the source of probably the best bike components in the world nowadays there is a large low end sector where they assemble mainland Chinese parts to put a 'made in Taiwan' sticker on them or small factories that produce low end product that sells on Taiwan's great quality reputation despite being poor quality. The risk is pretty much eliminated by buying properly certified products that have been legally imported commercially into Europe or US and not a personal import.

Bonzo Banana is offline  
Old 03-24-19, 07:23 AM
  #16  
FolderBeholder
Senior Member
 
FolderBeholder's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2017
Location: Inland Southern California
Posts: 298

Bikes: 1963 Schwinn, EuroMini Urbano, Magnum Premium 48, Brompton S6L, Tokyo Bike Mini-Velo

Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 123 Post(s)
Liked 39 Times in 23 Posts
Originally Posted by berlinonaut View Post
IP is more than just patents. Brompton tried to sue Dahon when they introduced their Curl Brompton clone in Europe based on IP (and not patents) and lost the case, as far as I know because the court came to the conclusion that the Curl was different enough from the original. As none of the other Asian clones are offered outside Asia there might be reasons for that. One being that those plagiatory bikes do not fulfill western safety standards and have not been successfully or at all tested to the norms mandatory for selling in western countries. Second may be that in the early 2000s companies like Merc that did try to distribute their Brompton clones in Europe got sued by courts due to violation of IP (and obviously not because of patents as those were already gone by then). The bikes had to be destroyed and they were explicitely banned from distributing those bikes in Europe.

Even in China, where IP infringement of western brands is notorious and seemed impossible to stop things may be about to change: Land Rover just won a case against Landwind, selling a clone of one of their car designs: https://www.dailymail.co.uk/money/ca...er-Evoque.html

With that happening climate may be changing for copycats in China. Brompton is trying to be more present and sell more in Asian markets and thus they may sooner or later have to address the issue locally - which they did not do until know, possibly because of risk, limited ressources and only a small chance of winning the case due to the general attitude in China towards such things and even less of being able to enforce a possible outcome towards the ever changing amount of clone producers. Instead they focussed on developing their bike further to beat the competition qualitywise. The future may however show a different approach.

Just because there are no patents involved or Brompton did not go to court does not mean that what the plagiators do would be legal.
^^^^THIS^^^^
(and some of you might have a different opinion were it YOUR IP that was being.....copied)
FolderBeholder is offline  
Old 03-24-19, 07:25 AM
  #17  
FolderBeholder
Senior Member
 
FolderBeholder's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2017
Location: Inland Southern California
Posts: 298

Bikes: 1963 Schwinn, EuroMini Urbano, Magnum Premium 48, Brompton S6L, Tokyo Bike Mini-Velo

Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 123 Post(s)
Liked 39 Times in 23 Posts
Originally Posted by Bonzo Banana View Post
Bromptons are expensive hence why I don't have one but they are fully certified and tested for a long life with decent components. These don't look strong or built to last, the basic crimped dropouts on the forks and other parts look pretty poor. It's no bargain to pay half as much for a bike that lasts only a couple of years and puts your safety at risk.

I thought the whole point of that frame design was the need for steel or possibly titanium so the flexing of that downtube doesn't cause premature fatigue. To just keep the same frame design but move to aluminium unless overly compensated for with a much thicker possibly non-butted tube seems less than ideal. As you change materials the frame design should change quite a lot. While I was at a recycling centre sometime ago I saw a basic generic folding bike where the chainstays had sheared off and twisted and a huge number of deep scratches to the underside of the frame downtube. I didn't know how old it was but it looked like a pretty horrific failure possibly injury causing. The bike was folded but I think that was purely to make it easy to dispose of as the hinge itself looked fine. It was clearly aluminium too due to lack of corrosion on the frame itself even though other parts were corroded. It wasn't a brand I recognised and the wheels weren't attached and some other components had been removed. What was obvious about it was the complete lack of strengthening in its design and it looked exactly like the sort of frame that would fail. I don't know the date of the bike as that was made difficult by the lack of components but if I was guessing somewhere between 2006-2012. The stem was still attached and was a basic quill stem, non-folding.

Bicycle certification has improved over the years and frame tests have become much better and stricter. There is better indication now of weight limits and more requirements for manuals to give detailed information regarding of normal use and expected lifespan. Even in China many Chinese avoid Chinese branded goods due to safety concerns and prefer western brands even if the products themselves are manufactured in China because they believe they will meet proper safety standards and won't have dangerous cost-cutting. Even in Taiwan which is the source of probably the best bike components in the world nowadays there is a large low end sector where they assemble mainland Chinese parts to put a 'made in Taiwan' sticker on them or small factories that produce low end product that sells on Taiwan's great quality reputation despite being poor quality. The risk is pretty much eliminated by buying properly certified products that have been legally imported commercially into Europe or US and not a personal import.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eYOwZwJrsqE
^^^^this^^^^
FolderBeholder is offline  
Old 03-24-19, 07:29 AM
  #18  
berlinonaut
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Posts: 656
Mentioned: 13 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 313 Post(s)
Liked 10 Times in 8 Posts
Originally Posted by tds101 View Post
You know, people have complained in other threads about topics constantly being rehashed and beaten to death like a dead horse, and here we are discussing the same patent crap about Brompton OVER and OVER AGAIN. Who cares if this isn't a Brompton approved clone? Enjoy it for what it is, decide if it interests you, and if not,...move on.

Brompton patent discussion =
Well - possibly the connection of those two topics is caused because they are connected. It is a question of personal attitude abd morale if you mind IP or not. But - as Bonzo said earlier - those clones may also be of different (and possibly lower) quality (as threads in this very forum with experiences with clone Bromptons show). So as long as people claim: It looks a like Brompton and this proves it is as good as Brompton but it only costs a fraction - so this British suckers are ripping you off, neglecting the fact that copying is cheaper than inventing, avoiding quality standards is cheaper and similar looks do not automatically mean similar quality these topics will pop up again and again. Indepedently of patents or not.
berlinonaut is offline  
Old 03-24-19, 08:37 AM
  #19  
Raxel
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 333
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 97 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 22 Times in 15 Posts
Originally Posted by berlinonaut View Post
Well - possibly the connection of those two topics is caused because they are connected. It is a question of personal attitude abd morale if you mind IP or not. But - as Bonzo said earlier - those clones may also be of different (and possibly lower) quality (as threads in this very forum with experiences with clone Bromptons show). So as long as people claim: It looks a like Brompton and this proves it is as good as Brompton but it only costs a fraction - so this British suckers are ripping you off, neglecting the fact that copying is cheaper than inventing, avoiding quality standards is cheaper and similar looks do not automatically mean similar quality these topics will pop up again and again. Indepedently of patents or not.
Being more expensive do not automatically mean having better quality. They are all from FACTORY ASSEMBLED 2018 UK bromptons.





Raxel is offline  
Old 03-24-19, 08:42 AM
  #20  
tcs
Palmer
 
tcs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Parts Unknown
Posts: 6,223

Bikes: 1980 Mike Melton, 1982 Stumpjumper, 1982 Santana, 1984 Alex Moulton AM, 2008 BikeFriday tikit T-11, 2010 Dawes Briercliffe, 2017 Dahon Curl i5, 2019 Surly ½DT14

Mentioned: 24 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 696 Post(s)
Liked 183 Times in 126 Posts
Originally Posted by berlinonaut View Post
Brompton tried to sue Dahon when they introduced their Curl Brompton clone in Europe based on IP (and not patents) and lost the case, as far as I know because the court came to the conclusion that the Curl was different enough from the original.
They didn't lose the case - it was thrown out at first hearing for being meritless. Brompton was ordered to pay Dahon's legal fees - ouch!

Just because...Brompton did not go to court does not mean that what the plagiators do would be legal.
So you've called on Brompton to get legal and pay Dahon for the IP theft of the patented 45º folding handlepost?
tcs is offline  
Old 03-24-19, 08:51 AM
  #21  
tcs
Palmer
 
tcs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Parts Unknown
Posts: 6,223

Bikes: 1980 Mike Melton, 1982 Stumpjumper, 1982 Santana, 1984 Alex Moulton AM, 2008 BikeFriday tikit T-11, 2010 Dawes Briercliffe, 2017 Dahon Curl i5, 2019 Surly ½DT14

Mentioned: 24 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 696 Post(s)
Liked 183 Times in 126 Posts
Originally Posted by FolderBeholder View Post
At the very least, its plausible to consider that an unitiated buyer could purchase a copy/knock-off/clone whatever one chooses to call it, THINKING theyre getting the genuine article.
Fascinating. What exactly about a bike with a big 3SIXTY decal, 3SIXTY hangtags, 3SIXTY owners manual and 3SIXTY warranty purchased from a 3SIXTY dealer would make an uninitiated buyer think they were buying a Brompton?
tcs is offline  
Old 03-24-19, 08:59 AM
  #22  
berlinonaut
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Posts: 656
Mentioned: 13 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 313 Post(s)
Liked 10 Times in 8 Posts
Originally Posted by tcs View Post
So you've called on Brompton to get legal and pay Dahon for the IP theft of the patented 45º folding handlepost?
I'm not in Brompton's shoes and do neither know much about the handlepost topic you are mentioning. As far as I know (which may be wrong) this was no intentional theft but a parallel development of something David Hon had patented either shortly before or maybe even shortly later (if you look at the timeline when which bike was invented publically) and he tolerated it for the sake of making folding bikes more popular and common (afaik the official statement by Mr Hon) but maybe also because he was not totally sure his patent would survive a court call or if the matter was crystal clear (just speculation).
berlinonaut is offline  
Old 03-24-19, 09:06 AM
  #23  
tcs
Palmer
 
tcs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Parts Unknown
Posts: 6,223

Bikes: 1980 Mike Melton, 1982 Stumpjumper, 1982 Santana, 1984 Alex Moulton AM, 2008 BikeFriday tikit T-11, 2010 Dawes Briercliffe, 2017 Dahon Curl i5, 2019 Surly ½DT14

Mentioned: 24 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 696 Post(s)
Liked 183 Times in 126 Posts
Originally Posted by berlinonaut View Post
As far as I know (which may be wrong) this was no intentional theft but a parallel development of something David Hon had patented either shortly before or maybe even shortly later...
Patent IP theft doesn't depend on intent. If Dr. Hon's work was later, as you further speculate, then Mr. Ritchie could present notarized, witnessed evidence his work came prior - which, in ~30 years, he has been unable to do.
tcs is offline  
Old 03-24-19, 09:10 AM
  #24  
berlinonaut
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Posts: 656
Mentioned: 13 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 313 Post(s)
Liked 10 Times in 8 Posts
Originally Posted by Raxel View Post
Being more expensive do not automatically mean having better quality.
In the very same way that a cheaper price or a similar look does not mean equal quality. There is a connection between price and quality if you go below a certain price level but there is not necessarily one on higher price levels. Still there are a number of factors apart from build quality that explain a higher price of a British made Brompton.

Originally Posted by Raxel View Post
They are all from FACTORY ASSEMBLED 2018 UK bromptons.





Black Ti fork from 2018 looks like CHPT3. The issue shown in the picture looks like the root cause would have been an overtightened stem nut. The question would be who overtightened it. Brompton is not free from failures but if they occur they usually handle them very generously (like the bottom bracket one lately). And if I remember correctly something was changed regarding the ti-forks not too long ago. So my questions would be:

1. was the stem nut overtightened by the factory or did someone fiddle around with it later?
2. did you place a warranty claim with Brompton and what was their reaction and handling of the issue?

One of the reasons why Bromptons are more expensive is that they actually have warranty, spare parts and customer support...
berlinonaut is offline  
Old 03-24-19, 09:16 AM
  #25  
berlinonaut
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Posts: 656
Mentioned: 13 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 313 Post(s)
Liked 10 Times in 8 Posts
Originally Posted by tcs View Post
Patent IP theft doesn't depend on intent. If Dr. Hon's work was later, as you further speculate, then Mr. Ritchie could present notarized, witnessed evidence his work came prior - which, in ~30 years, he has been unable to do.
He did not do so - which is not the same as if he was unable to do so. Mr Hon did not care so why would Andrew Richie? Both were interested in making folders more popular. At the time the issue occured (early to mid 80ies) they did not really compete with each other. If Mr Hon had filed a claim (which would have been the first step if he considered that Brompton was violatin his patent) Andrew Richie would probably have defended himself (or changed the design) and both of us do not know what would have been the outcome of a possible trial.
berlinonaut is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information -

Copyright © 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.