You keep repeating this and that about touring, your need for 2x, 50/11* & RD ground clearance, about a mythical future tour in Asia where you'll buy a 349 trifold. Have you actually done any in, say, the last three years? What actual experience do you have with "flight light touring"? Sorry, DG, I'll believe it when I see it, part and parcel of the idle chatter here. Don't tell us; show us. But first things first, before acquiring the 349 trifold, have you acquired the portable CPAP machine yet? There's a Walter Mitty aroma to all of this.


* On a recent tour, I hardly ever shifted into 47/11 on 406 wheels, not because I am out of shape or obese, I am not. I didn't simply because these flat bar folding bikes simply don't provide a good tuck position so on that gear you end up fighting a lot of wind resistance, a fool's errand on tour. It's a tour, not a race; you don't blow your load fighting the wind unnecessarily. I very much doubt you, given your acknowledged overweight and physical condition, need 50/11. Sorry. As inspector Callahan famously remarked, "a man has got to know his limitations".

Doing self-contained touring like I used to, TBD, logistics and medical equipment I would need to carry and needed electrical power might be prohibitive. But in future years I will be traveling to relatives, and I hate being without a bike. Taking train a half-day, then shuttle bus, then loading up panniers (about 2/3 load compared to full touring) and riding, that was a breeze with the 20" bifold, would have been zero advantage to have a smaller bike. But flying out, we'll see, I hope it's as easy. If they (if Southwest Airlines, free checked but no free bike oversize) take the bifold without disassembly into two bags, I think not too bad.

I have heavy toured long ago on a recumbent with trailer, way prior to medical issues, and that week trip above with the bifold only a few years ago, so know what that's about. But neither time did I need to fly. And there is no way I could sit through a train ride of more than half a day, plus it's more expensive than flying, WAY more with a sleeping bed. Once I'm on the ground, I got game; I'm not fast but can definitely do distance, any bike repairs, cooking, camping, etc. But I can't generate my own electricity, not the amount needed each night. That's all for domestic touring. For Asia, yeah, I'll do like you're doing and credit card tour, with needed power adapters. This is something that others cannot say, "Oh you're overplanning". There's really important stuff I need to plan carefully for, but no rocket science for CC touring. For self-contained touring needing AC power, if I do it, you can be sure I'll post how, in order to help others do the same.

Oh, even CC touring with power available, when I flew with my cpap on a long flight, the airline would not let me plug in to available AC power, probably for liability, they required that I have a battery with at least 1.5X needed capacity. So I had to stay awake on a 5 hour redeye flight, when I had planned to sleep. That sucked. So even CC touring, if the flight is long, I need to haul a big battery, but still be below lithium battery size limits per FAA regs.

EDIT based on revisions:

I use 50-11, not often but I do. Usually down a gentle grade, not steep enough to coast, but faster than lower gears will do on 406. I have clip-on aeros on my flat bars, not used enough, but will use constantly if I can rig double-clamps to raise them about 70mm, and use the different aeros I have with wider pad spacing. Then I'll be comfy on the aeros and use constantly, because it takes pressure off my hands. I already rigged an interrupter brake lever on them.

A travel CPAP is not covered by insurance, but just as pricey. Recently there have been some at lower cost, but last I checked were out of stock. I wish I had access to a workshop like I used to, as I'm not using the bells and whistles on my full-size cpap; no tube heat, humidifier, or other functions except auto-start/stop, and I can easily do without that by just flipping a switch. The travel CPAPs are also no bells and whistles, yet ridiculously priced because it's a certified medical item. I just need to build a blower strong enough for 18 cm H20 (20 is the max of my machine), I started out lower but needed higher to keep from waking up. Converting... 0.256 PSI? Wow, that's not much pressure. It also needs to be silent like my machine (they used to noisy), my guess is it's a twin-screw Lysholm pump like a GM supercharger, or centrifugal compresser like a Rolls-Royce Nene (copied by the Soviets for the MiG-15). Those both sound heavy and large. Maybe just simple axial fan would work, but it's not positive-displacement like the others so more difficult to regulate pressure.

I'll bet a travel CPAP is cheaper outside the USA...

I have no complaints about Bromptons, I’ve owned 3 of them. They are simple, easy to ride and easy to fold machines, a bit on the heavy side. The M6L has enough gear range for most purposes. One thing I really like about a Brompton is the huge aftermarket of upgrades and accessories. My current example, after a year’s worth of upgrades and tinkering is now down to 9.5 kg, and there’s still downward room to go.

I used an M3L as a daily commuter in Tokyo after the 2011 earthquake. It was comfortable, nimble, and quick enough to get me around efficiently. I carried a bag under the seat into which I could put the bike when I used the train, subway, or bus, and I could fit it under my desk at work.

My current Brompton is for local rides, and taking my dog to the dog park. It’s one of those Swiss-Army knife kind of things which is very useful.

I also have a Birdy and a Moulton. The Brompton and Moulton get ridden a lot, the Birdy is now collecting dust in the corner.

My experience is the opposite: I know many Brompton owners who started with a cheap bi-fold because they didn't want to pay the price of a Brompton and that after a while eventually bought a Brompton because they weren't satisfied with their bi-fold, mainly the position on the bike (too short/small and the way it folds).

For the Curl, the main reason for it absence, is that its almost impossible to see or test one in reality, I never saw it in any bike shop, its was only sold by some online shops and only Curl with IGH, the latest, most attractive, D9 with a 9s derailleur+disc brakes seems pure vaporware, I never saw it anywhere else than on the Dahon websites and Youtube channel.
So, the Curl is not a competitor for the Brompton not because its a bad bike or its price but because for almost all customers, it commercially doesn't exists.

I never understood the commercial strategy of Dahon with the Curl: Dahon invested money in the development of this bike which is totally different from any other Dahon bike and not a clone of the Brompton (quite a lot because there were several versions with major evolution) but doesn't distribute it and for the D9, probably never produced it ???

Yeah I would also bet same, 10 years ago I would not spend $2k on a folding bike, not even half that, but now that I know how versatile they are (it's my 100%-use townie), I'd spend more for better. My bifold fits me fantastically, I would only upgrade for discs or smaller fold. I just spent money on a disc bifold (but still getting issue resolved regarding actual bike versus advertised spec, and not on components, more major).

Yeah, the Curl is a puzzler. They invested in design and development for the i4. The D9 drivetrain is off the shelf, but they invested a bit more in the single-blade fork, I think for a tighter fold (and then brilliantly reversed the disc (to drive side) and caliper (to front of drive-side fork blade) to preclude need for thru-axle). So weird it's not available. The i4 still pictured on Dahon USA's homepage is the electric version with rear hub motor; Maybe they didn't want that competing with the Unio E20 with mid-drive.

The Curl i4 and Ei4 are the latest I know with IGH. Before that, there were the Curl i8 and i7 also with IGH.

The fork and brakes and seatpost changed several times too, some version had a kind of folding parallelogram saddle mount. There was a version with mounting points for a Brompton block.

If I remember well, the Curl appeared in 2015, i.e. 10 years from now!?

And as said, the issue of this bike is not lack of commercial success, its lack of commercial availability.

Why did Dahon invest in the development of a bike that wasn't really commercialized, wasn't helping to sell other Dahon bikes, wasn't a flagship showing the expertise of Dahon (when you read the press releases and reviews of the Curl, most of the time its presented as a Brompton clone and not as what it is: a really innovative competitor to the Brompton)?

(above) I gotta agree with all, Jipe. Thing is, for me, the Curl D9 would have been the best version, as drivetrain repairs well within my capability and facilities.

But 99% of the time, I'm on 20"/406, I'm not at all a frequent folder, so a Curl or Brompton would be an extravagance that I don't need, although for even a single long trip with a lot of folding, it would be nice.

I do not like the single arm fork and the special front hub required to mount the wheel on such forks (the same issue exists for the Helix: its very difficult to find a front hub that fits on the single sided fork of the Helix).

If a failure happens of the front hub (due to the bearing or the hub itself, for instance due to water/moisture) there is a major risk to be unable to find a new hub that fits on this specific fork.

The lack of front carrier is also a major drawback. Like on the Brompton, the rear rack s not good to carry things and doesn't allow to use side pannier (too low, too close to the pedals and heels when pedaling).

Yeah I wondered about the hubs, whether they were a standard hub with simply a headed bolt replacing the axle; Given the additional bending moment, I would guess that needs to be a lot larger diameter than a standard front QR axle. The first folder I ever saw was a Giant Halfway in 2003 I think, that version had single sided hubs on both front and rear. Easy for flat fix in the field I thought, but also required a proprietary rear rack that was cantilevered off the back of the seatpost. I'm glad I didn't buy it. So yeah, I would gladly accept a standard double-blade fork, however I'd still want the reversed brake as they did, I don't know why anyone didn't think of that sooner. Coupled with rear calipers mounted forward inside the rear triangle, that obviates the primary need for thru-axles, axle pullout under hard braking.

I got lucky on a rear rack; Just when I got my Dahon, also with a rack that was too low and too forward for heel clearance, Nashbar had on clearance a Blackburn full-height rack that also put the panniers completely behind the rear axle. That rack had a U-lock holder, but it required removing the trunk bag, and was prone to break there in terms of holding the lock, I think that's why they were for sale at huge discount. But for my purposes it has been fantastic. It just required ultra-long stays to attach to the low seatstay braze-ons on the Dahon.

As yet, I have not desired a front block, otherwise I would have bought a bolt-on adapter. But my (steered) front rack with panniers, quite often I need to pick up a large shipped box, and that will sit on the top deck great, tied down and tied aft to the tall handlepost, which also turns with the fork; A front block rack would not turn, so I'd need a tall enough block rack to hold any parcel, which would be pretty big. I hauled back on the bike, a new bifold frame in box, after the first frame cracked at the seat tube, that's a pretty great feat. That parcel space is a major plus of my bike, just like many cargo bikes with only a small front wheel.

Has Dahon ever actually sold a Curl D9 to a customer anywhere in the world? Anybody ever see one in a bike shop? Bueller? Bueller?

It wouldn't be the first model Dahon developed and advertised but never sold.



Actually, this didn't degrade an owner's ability to keep their Curl on the road over the years. Non-electric Curls have always used special 56mm OLD front hubs, and you're not going to find a replacement for those down at your LBS, either.



Sheesh. It gets tiresome. Of course the Curl can be fitted with a front carrier. Then the rebuttal: 'but that attaches the dunnage weight to the steering axis'. Uh, you mean like the front pannier racks on Birdys and BikeFridays?

Quote:

---

Like on the Brompton, the rear rack is not good to carry things...

---

You pontificate online a good deal, but you don't seem to be cognizant of the way these bikes are used by owners in the real world.

https://cimg4.ibsrv.net/gimg/bikefor...cb0f64564f.png

How cheap do want?

My Brompton experience
 

I ride a 2016 Brompton H6L. It’s not the fastest or lightest bike out there, but it’s perfect for my needs. I’ve added a Brompton bag and a Brooks B67 saddle, and that’s about it for upgrades. I bought it new in 2016 and have been commuting daily on it ever since.

The best thing about my Brompton is how small it folds up. I’ve taken it on buses and taxis, which I doubt many other folding bikes could manage. I take the train daily, and during peak hours, it’s great to be able to fold it up and keep it right in front of me. In fact, my Brompton is folded up under my desk as I type this!

One downside is that my Brompton struggles on hills of any size. I have a 50-meter climb on my ride home, and it really tasks my 57-year-old legs. Despite this, I don’t regret buying my Brompton, even though it was a bit pricey. It serves me well and is surprisingly fun to ride, even if it’s not a sport bike. Your mileage may vary, of course!
https://cimg9.ibsrv.net/gimg/bikefor...5c5f3b985c.jpg
My Brompton commuting.

Yes, I know these solutions but they aren't easy to use need quite a lot of time to be placed on the bike so that they are only usable for people who do not need to often take the bag off the bike.

I use my bikes daily to carry lots of things these bags attached to the bike with straps cannot compete for ease of use against big Vaude and Ortlieb rear pannier that can instantaneously be put on the bike and removed off the bike.
They are also placed much higher than rear pannier, if they are heavily loaded they have a negative effect on the bike stability and overall behavior.

For the front bag, its much better for the bike stability to have it on the frame than on the handlebar.

For the low rider pannier, they are placed much lower than a bag on the handlebar, the effect on the bike steering and stability isn't the same.

You should know, that on a bike, its always better to have the carried weight placed as low as possible.

DANG! A bit less compact fold, but not by much I'll tell ya. I'm gonna look at that more. No immediate need and no space in my rented room, but yeah. That must be new. I had looked for trifold clones on amazon before and came up empty. Thanks!

EDIT: I'm not liking the narrow parallel seatstays and chainstays; It saves zero weight versus typical chainstays which would make for a much stronger rear triangle. That's going to break in fatigue at the lower front weld of the (high mount) chainstays, it's obvious. I've seen big structural errors on bikes recently introduced on amazon, and then not long for pics to show up broken in half. Also, it folds with the drivetrain to the outside, major flaw versus Brompton and clones. Gotta pass.

56mm?! JHC, I thought 74mm was the only b@stard size. I guess I can understand narrower with smaller wheels, but if they can do 406 on 100mm, 349 on 74 should be possible. What OLD does Brompton use for front on 349s? But the Curl also has discs; 56mm including the disc, OLD, not flange to flange? Man that sounds tight.

Racks: Doesn't even need to attach to the steering axis (though could), there are plenty of front blocks that clamp to the head tube, easy solution. I only haven't done to mine because it would block space on the top deck of my steered rack.

The front OLD of the Brompton is 74mm.

For the front block, look at the way the Curl stem folds almost in front of the head tube: it probably prevents the mounting of a Brompton style front block.

https://cimg5.ibsrv.net/gimg/bikefor...3605fa3dc2.jpg

https://cimg8.ibsrv.net/gimg/bikefor...ac747e3a2c.jpg

One more point about carrying a back pack style bag place vertically on the rear rack of a Brompton attached to the rear rack and seatpost: the Brompton has a rear suspension that makes the distance between the rack and seatpost variable. The strap attaching the top of the bag to the seatpost or saddle must be soft to avoid to block the suspension.

Any attachments for the lower hold the lower parts of the panniers on the Birdy?

I would rather blow $3000 on a Birdy, but then I'm a filthy rich American.

Yes, the thick aluminum rear mudguard arch is used as attachment for the bottom hook of the rear pannier.

https://cimg3.ibsrv.net/gimg/bikefor...96979b5c57.jpg
https://cimg8.ibsrv.net/gimg/bikefor...00ed48cc70.jpg
https://cimg9.ibsrv.net/gimg/bikefor...a1a0bf28e8.jpg
https://cimg2.ibsrv.net/gimg/bikefor...c0ee1410f7.jpg

BUT it requires A soft attachment, does it be not?

Indeed the hook should slide over the vertical arch of the rear mudguard.

It works very well with Vaude and Ortlieb pannier hook place horizontally:
https://cimg6.ibsrv.net/gimg/bikefor...319bd5bbf7.jpg
https://cimg7.ibsrv.net/gimg/bikefor...0c14dde731.jpg

https://cimg0.ibsrv.net/gimg/bikefor...6f8091ec89.jpg

Do 16" bi-fold bikes fit Europeans?
 

What is the mean male adult height and standard deviation in Europe?
178cm and 7cm, respectively.

https://cimg8.ibsrv.net/gimg/bikefor...c1f5e7ff7a.jpg
Height is normally distributed, and we know the distribution's mean and standard deviation. Therefore, we can calculate -- using a z-score table or in this case, more easily with the pnorm() function of the R statistical programming language -- the percentage of the adult male population at or below 175cm in height, the approximate maximum height (I am being conservative) for good fitment on a 16" bi-fold bike. That percentage is 33%. In other words, in a normally-distributed population with mean height 178cm and standard deviation 7cm, the percentage of people at or below 175cm in height is 33%. Put another way, one third of Europe's adult male population is no taller than 175cm. This is fundamental statistics & probability based on the established properties of the Normal distribution.

https://cimg0.ibsrv.net/gimg/bikefor...14febf6764.jpg

What does that look like? Here's a histogram of adult male European height, with 33% of the distribution lying at and to the left of the red line representing a height of 175cm.
https://cimg0.ibsrv.net/gimg/bikefor...0e678250c.jpeg

What is the number of adult males in Europe?
361 million
https://cimg8.ibsrv.net/gimg/bikefor...dd4d68ae36.jpg


What is, then, the number of adult males at or under 175cm in stature in Europe who could fit and ride a 16" bi-fold comfortably?
33% of 361 million or about 120 million.

The same figure for European females will be even greater due to the fact that there are more females than males and females are shorter. There is no reason to speculate, theorize and make up short-sighted BS when we can actually estimate. Hopefully, this will put to rest once and for all the self-interested, ignorant view that these bikes don't fit and are inapt for Europeans. Data talks, BS walks.

Yes, there are of course people below 175cm.

But your test is for people up to 170cm, not useless, but its a minority in the EU and US that represent the majority of forum users..

Note also that the younger people are taller than older people, if you suppress the older people, the average height is higher.

For female riders, not only the height is different, but the whole body sizing is different with longer legs and shorter torso. The experience of a male rider is not valid for female riders.

What is the mean height of European females? 165cm with standard deviation of 6.5cm.

What percentage of European females are 175cm in height or lower, thereby potentially fitting comfortably in a small folder? 94%.

https://cimg7.ibsrv.net/gimg/bikefor...db0aa8bcc.jpeg

How many European females 175cm in height or lower are there? About 360 million.

How many European adults -- male and female -- of 175cm stature or lower are there? About 480 million.

Why always consider 175cm while you are 170cm only?