Oh, what "true motive" is that? Your version? I "don't feel a need to strong arm fair competition with ridiculous laws just to get ahead" and I don't plan on living the rest of my life "on just one moment of eureka without ever lifting a finger again." I succeed by my own ingenuity, not by copying someone else without lifting a finger. I wouldn't have any clients otherwise.

You don't know me or my motives, nor do I ever expect you to. I do suspect from your nihilistic posts here that you could care less about anyone period. You're one scary dude.

+1

From pictures I have seen in some forum, Ming cycle seem to be concentrating on strida 5 during the recent bike show. Is it true they have stop producing the strida 3. Can anyone shed some light on this.

Metal rims on the Strida 5 allow higher air pressure and thus lower resistance when riding although it feels more in hands cause every small gravel makes the bike vibrate?

Bad fakes can go either way. Some will like the concept and buy the real thing and others without testing the real thing get disappointed using the faked one and think the real one only marginally better.

Where I live the real Strida 3.2 failed to click the wheels together so it failed to roll easily in front of me cause the wheels wanted to go ways on their own. It was impossible to click them together. I put much effort into forcing them together but had to give up. So despite being original something didn't fit. Maybe the persons behind the scene in the bike shop was new to it cause the bike is not a regular bike and they maybe didn't follow instructions that well.

To me it is a moral issue too. Ideally one should not fall for buying fakes. Apart from injury due to the fake breaks down. We have had several Mountain bikes that breaks at the welded seams and that is very dangerous at high speed. So the warning to not buy fakes is true.

But if something is 6 times cheaper that could mean the original is priced too high.

Brompton here is very costly. So had Flamingo been easily avalable so I could test ride it and look at quality me maybe would have bought one.

The SmartBike me bought had a three times higher price here compared to if I had lived in England.
I could be wrong but to me it looks like a HandyBike rip off. HandyBike being the original and SmartBike the fake. There is so little that is different so I fail to see SmartBike as an original construct. To me it is a fake and a very bad one at that. Bandbrake extremely bad at breaking.

Min order: 20' container of 220pcs @ US$108/pc, FOBChina. Figure another $15/pc as a conservative est. for shipping and customs. No idea about duty on importing bikes. Door to door shipping would be about 6 weeks. I bet they show up here within two months at about $200-250 on ebay.

Group buy, anyone?

I wouldn't group buy some cheap rip off that will fall apart in weeks if not months. You get what you pay for....

Say...

How come a Chinese Strida knockoff takes all kinds of heat here, but everyone's super psyched about this new Brompton ripoff:

https://www.bikeforums.net/folding-bikes/406181-new-flamingo-ultimate-folding-bike.html

Doesn't look quite like a brompton? Maybe a cheap knockoff place actually *gasp* developed something past just the copy and manufacture stage?

You should compare the Brompton to the Merc ...

What you see in the Flamingo is the result of a copyright infringement lawsuit.

Didn't know the lawsuit history. Still, lots of people wanting the new Flamingo, no protest about a Brompton ripoff. Because it's Taiwan rather than China maybe? Because even though the are still totally ripping off the concept it is changed enoug to conform to IP law?

All I know is what you told me. You said you're passionately endorse IP restrictions because you're an architect. If that isn't being motivated by self interest then what is?

I get it, you support strong IP restrictions because it's better for your wallet. Fair enough. Please understand, however, that some of us are more concerned with the underlying moral issues.

Most of the heat seems to be coming from an overly vocal minority. Why they've decided to latch onto this particular case is a mystery to me.

There were similar complaints about Merc since it was, for all intents and purposes, a precise copy of an older Brompton model.

EDIT: I should point out that Merc and Flamingo are somewhat distinct in their appearance. Merc and the old Brompton model are very difficult to visually distinguish.

The older model of Flamingo (under another name maybe?) was much more similar to a classic Brompton than this newer design. Apparently, based on your comment, there was a lawsuit which forced the change?

If you look around the Flamingo site, you'll also find another folder that looks an awful lot like Dahons from just a couple years ago. Could also be that Flamingo (Grace Gallant Ent. Co. Ltd.) is stealing Pacific Cycles's business plan as well...

Just speculation on my part. I do know that Brompton won its copyright case in Europe and that it did not immediately apply to Britain.

You don't seem to read very well but you do like to extract your own distorted conclusions from what you read and project them as fact. So be it, you are the champ there - go forth and copy the ideas of others verbatim without a guilty conscience if you feel that is progress. I almost choked when I read you feel concerned with moral issues....

I suspect the knock offs are produced by the actual manufacturers.

Substituting cheap parts (wheels saddle), not inspecting, requiring the buyer to tune up the bike after sale, accepting small defects, and not have any support or warrenty could knock the price of the bike down by more than half.

I see Strida 8 on ebay for $700 from Korea.

If Strida wants to maintain it's market position they should design an 8 speed hub for it. I doubt any other hub for a 'half' fork will every be made so they will have their monopoly back. If they wanted to be wacky they could put the IG hub in the BB.

Strida is a brand name. The manufacturer is Ming Cycles of Taiwan. The knock-offs are from mainland China from unknown manufacturer(s). Ming Cycles does continue to improve the Strida - many of the changes from 3.2 to 5.0 originated in-house there. They may currently be working on a hub design to accommodate a Schlumpf Speed-Drive for a future Strida model. This kind of innovation is driven by customer feedback, not the knock-off competition. I don't see anything new being developed by the knock-offs. The letter below is an example of Schlumpf and Ming Cycles collaboration:

Subject: Re: Can speed-drive be installed on Strida?
Date: Sun, 06 Jan 2008 23:10:03 +0100
From: schlumpf innovations <info>
To: Amuro Lee <amurolee>

Dear Amuro,

we sent a speed-drive to Strida and are waiting for their results. They told
me a few weeks ago, that they are working on a solution.

Best regards

Florian

Hello everyone
My friends are all here !! Good to see you, Amuro and Weakling. How do you do? :-)

This topic seems hot. My opinion is simple about this matter.
---
There are two kinds of skillful manufacturers on this planet;
1. worry about feeling guilty
2. worry about feeling shame
---

It's interesting to see what strong reactions this topic raises. To me it's fairly simple:

There are laws on trademarks, patents, copyright, and design rights. Any or all of these rightsmay be broken by "copy" bicycles. The legal issues are usually complex so that only those directly involved will be sure of the facts. Just because a bicycle looks like something familiar doesn't necessarily make it illegal. If it is then it's up to those affected to take action. It is up to us to calmly report it for their attention.

My biggest concern is that cheap copies may be unsafe. Genuine bikes will have passed tests and achieved certification by the EU or whichever national body applies in your location. Criminals who don't care about IP rights, usually equally don't care about their customer's safety.

Finally, I really wish that those incredible talented and dilligent people in China (mostly) who make the copies would apply their talents a bit more creatively, as it would push forward the market for everyone. I know that China is gradually moving in the direction of better enforcement, but in the meantime we have to do the best we can in dealing with the counterfeits. It's very simple to report illegal auctions to Ebay for example, and if more people did so, they might take more action.

To see the amazing results of true creativity, just see what the inventor of Strida has made now!
https://www.foldingforum.com/forum/viewforum.php?f=15

Totally agree with Gary here. Very wise words.

In fact what you say applied to the Merc which is a high quality clone of the Brompton in both design and fold. An injunction was granted in the Netherlands but not in the UK. I believe this was down to the identical nature of the Merc and therefore the injunction was intendede to prevent distribution was based on copyright protection. The Merc is more unusual in that it is not inferior, no matter what Bromptonites say. It's simply a question of legal argument. Yes one can of course have views on the unashamed lack of originality in design but not in execution of quality and safety.

Interestingly the Brompton fold mechanism it out of patent and would seem difficult to defend on copyright look alone across various jurisdictions. In fact Grace Gallant Enterprises of Taiwan is applying the Brompton style folding mechanism across their range of new folders. Aside from the folding technique the new bikes from GG look different and have different components.

The Strida itself may also be out of patent but it is the intention of the Chinese manufacturers to confuse the brands, use Strida's very own photos and marketing material and finally to produce low quality copies which also intend to deceive authorities.

The Taiwanese have improved as a manufacturing hub in electromics and bikes which shows the Greater China region is well capable of introducing top-class products that work off the fusion with Western innovations and contribute to the final user market. No better example than Pacific Bikes of Taiwan and even Grace Gallant are challenging Brompton on new hub featured 16" folders. At the end of the day brand equity and good service can still protect a well established brands like Brompton or Strida from clones anyway. Competition is good as long as its fair. A lot of the low grade companies should be rendered unviable by both more exacting quality standards and the final market. However, intellectual property protection still plays an important role in preserving the income flow of a firm's R&D invstment. The question is how long and far protection goes. The music industry is an example of consumer exploitation using IP and DRM protection, E.g. Sony BMG. I do not think Brompton are like this at all, although some question its legal pursuit of Mec in Europe. This is a very contentious issue. On the whole, Brompton feel this is room for competitors in the folding bike market and even provide a link to their rivals on their website, encouraging prospective customers to make an informed decision. I guess they just don't like identical clones regardles of quality.

LOL - ya know that's a bit prim there mulleady. It's called globalisation. The Chinese can produce things at a fraction of our western costs. Granted they can do it VERY badly, but they can also do it VERY WELL too. This bike might be crap, or it might be excellent. It depends on the motives of the manufacturer. I read the same kinds of nonsense (poor quality, nasty constrcution etc) about the Merc. It has been one of the most pleasure giving posessions I ever had and the AtoB review that almost stopped me buying it is a filthy pack of lies, propagated by an irked Brompton hanger on.

All this holier than though stuff about rip-offs, seems to miss the point that even in the case of very innovative bikes, we are talking about minor re-designs of a hundred year old technology. You make a frame that holds two wheels apart and you drive one of them by cranks and pedals.

There is virtually nothing about any modern bicycle that wasn't thought up by 1910, except maybe the use of fancy new materials like carbon fibre. The bike is a very basic mechanical device and we should stop thinking and talking about them like the idea of them had just been brought to us by Martians. Every bike manufacturer relies on a hundred years of mechanical ideas and already proven technologies. What about the strida has not been done before?

The bike below has more than a passing similarity to the Strida, don't you think? New - I don't think so.

Sorry EvilV .. But, I dont see much similarity at all !!!!

Look at the seat, the relationship to the bars, and the small back wheel. I'd claim the original safety penny farthing has features that are in the strida.

Seriously though, my point is that while modern cycle designers bring their own brain power to the table, they are mostly endlessly re-cycling earlier concepts and ideas in cosmetic ways. Ritchie and his ilk have a bloody cheek in claiming they have the right to copyright their products as he did in that Dutch court judgement. His whole product depends on the work of hundreds of bike designers and engineers, who long ago worked out how to make ALL the core technologies. Ritchie claimes that his single curved main tube is unique. Is it? I don't think so. The penny farthing above has a single curved main tube, even if it does have a rather larger front wheel.

My diatribe is really against the idea that it is such a big sin to copy a design. Leaving aside the minor arrangements of parts and particular shapes and proportions, everything important about the bicycle was invented before any of our parents were born, and most of us, before our grandparents could walk.

Except when you pay far too much to a smug London based manufacturer who has a following of sycophantic masochists.

Ouch ... why dont you tell us how you really feel about brompton

ZIIIIIIIIINGGGGG!!

evilv hit it on the head. considering how much they charge for these things, its hard to justify overpaying for something that could just as fall apart in 'weeks', as their 'knock-offs'.

Who here is to say that brands lesser known than coveted brompton, or ralliegh, are going to 'fall apart in weeks'?

so is every bike that suddenly uses an A-frame design a knock-off strida? I agree that ripping off the marketing materials and not generating any of their own graphics etc etc makes for a really sour impression.

just look at the other ebay strda thread and look at my pics, that is a copy that i hope doesn't make it to north america since that one is really flimsy..