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

Dahon's new brompton lookalike?

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.

Dahon's new brompton lookalike?

Old 06-21-08, 11:28 PM
  #26  
mjw
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 130
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally Posted by jur View Post
Thirdly, the new Dahon is a patented design, so it has been accepted by the patent office that it is different significantly enough to a Brompton to warrant a separate patent. These people have therefore pored over the details and compared it to the Brompton, unlike you who seem to have made a snap judgment based on one photo and some prejudice. There a very limited number of ways a bike can be folded, the frame fold is one, the back wheels swivelling forward is another, both ideas are used by a large number of different manufacturers. Now Dahon decides to implement it, and they are imitating? Why not the others, such as Bike Friday or Birdy?
The design has not in fact been patented. It is a published application and has not been picked up by an examiner yet.

They have claimed the following as their invention but again, it is not yet patented and is subject to change. Most claim sets are rejected at first.

What is claimed is:

1. A folding bicycle comprises a frame, a front wheel, a rear wheel and a rear fork; wherein the frame includes a beam and a central axle; and wherein a folding joint is installed on the beam, and the rear fork is hinged with the frame via a hinge axle, on the rear fork is installed a support bar which rests against the frame; characterized in that, the beam is S-shaped, and the hinge axle is tilted by an acute angle with respect to the central axle of the frame.

2. The folding bicycle according to claim 1, characterized in that, the angle between the hinge axle and the central axle is between 1° to 5.

3. The folding bicycle according to claim 1, characterized in that, the top of the support bar has a ball protrusion, correspondingly a sleeve with a hole is provided at the frame, such that the ball protrusion can be inserted into the hole of the sleeve, and wherein the sleeve is made of elastic materials.

4. The folding bicycle according to claim 1, characterized in that, a reinforcing rib is provided at the frame, which is welded to connect the beam, a seat tube and a hinge seat into a whole, and wherein the hinge axle is mounted within the hinge seat.
mjw is offline  
Old 06-22-08, 12:04 AM
  #27  
jur
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Albany, WA
Posts: 7,392
Mentioned: 16 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 321 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 7 Times in 6 Posts
To me it looks like the patent has been granted, US patent #20070210556.
jur is offline  
Old 06-22-08, 12:21 AM
  #28  
mjw
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 130
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
In the US, Patents are currently 7 digits (numbered from patent #1). Patent application numbers start with the year and are followed by 7 digits.

If you go to the bib data about the application, it says publication number- nowhere does it say a patent number.
mjw is offline  
Old 06-22-08, 12:30 AM
  #29  
jur
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Albany, WA
Posts: 7,392
Mentioned: 16 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 321 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 7 Times in 6 Posts
Ah. Thanks for the clarification.

But it remains a proper application, and would not have been submitted unless the patent attorneys were convinced it is novel and non-obvious in some ways, and/or poses an improvement on an existing design, or something like that. The point was not whether it is actually a granted patent (it's pending), but whether it is a novel development over something like the Brompton or Birdy, and not an imitation. The point of the invention is a smaller fold.
jur is offline  
Old 06-22-08, 12:37 AM
  #30  
mjw
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 130
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Yes they're probably pretty confident given that they've most likely spent tens of thousands of dollars on this application- for example attorney's fees in various countries, application fees in those countries, and translations (one of the reasons the application is so short- easier translation). Also Mr. Hon has been in the game a long time and knows all the competition.

Lots of interesting bikes in US class/subclass 280/278 (land vehicles with folding frame)

On a related note, I was sitting on the train with my Vitesse and I got to thinking that a second fold would sure make it smaller- looks like someone's figured it out.

Last edited by mjw; 06-22-08 at 12:49 AM.
mjw is offline  
Old 06-22-08, 01:12 AM
  #31  
mjw
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 130
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Also, take a look at figures 2 and 3. The background says this is from "a UK patent" and it looks like the brompton. The background section goes on to state why the brompton is not an optimum design and how they go about making it better.
mjw is offline  
Old 06-22-08, 03:05 AM
  #32  
somnatash
eight spokes
 
somnatash's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Ruhr district, Germany
Posts: 478

Bikes: merc, brompton, roadster, cheap every day bike

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time in 1 Post
Hi mjw,
can you please explain what you mean by "figure 2 and 3" or explain "why the brompton is not an optimum design and how they go about making it better"
Thanks
somnatash is offline  
Old 06-22-08, 03:33 AM
  #33  
mulleady
The Metropolis, UK
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 2,353
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 2 Times in 2 Posts
Originally Posted by jur View Post
Not sure what you are trying to put accross here... it seems you are saying if bikes are made from anything other than "genuine steel", they are imitations...?

I certainly don't wish to ignite a rather pointless "one material is better than another" debate, but you seem very prejudiced with no apparant good reason.

Firstly, modern materials including steel have moved far beyond "genuine steel." My personal favourite is stainless steel. But not because a frame made from it would superiour in its fundamental bike-related qualities. No, just because I like the idea.

Secondly, bikes made from steel can be terrible, far worse than aluminium. Quality doesn't depend on the material from which they are made. But a bad steel bike is usually worse than a bad aluminium bike.

Thirdly, the new Dahon is a patented design, so it has been accepted by the patent office that it is different significantly enough to a Brompton to warrant a separate patent. These people have therefore pored over the details and compared it to the Brompton, unlike you who seem to have made a snap judgment based on one photo and some prejudice. There a very limited number of ways a bike can be folded, the frame fold is one, the back wheels swivelling forward is another, both ideas are used by a large number of different manufacturers. Now Dahon decides to implement it, and they are imitating? Why not the others, such as Bike Friday or Birdy?
Did you fall out the wrong side of the bed this weekend Jur?
mulleady is offline  
Old 06-22-08, 03:37 AM
  #34  
mulleady
The Metropolis, UK
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 2,353
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 2 Times in 2 Posts
Originally Posted by Raxel View Post
I've just heard this very interesting info that dahon is going to release a new ultracompact folder.


-It will be named 'Curl'
-It will have 18" wheel
-It will fold like brompton. (Rear swingarm folds downwards, not sideways like current dahons)
-It will have aluminium frame that look like current Curve model.


And I guess it will have V-brakes, internal gear hub (3 speed/8 speed), Klickfix mount as such.
At last, modernized brompton from dahon... I can't wait to get one.


[pic]https://img2.dcinside.com/viewimage.p...84e2419f2e2df9[/pic]
I don't think the Brompton is old fashioned at all. I've had one 2 months and it looks great and performs flawlessly. That is a subjective view. Bromptons are built for durability and although I would agree Andrew Ritchie is conservative, there have been incremental improvements. It is part of the Brompton brand to have a classic look and sure it's not for everybody.

I'd be surprised this Dahon comes in at the budget point of the Curve SL. However a $1000-1100 would be very interesting. The name Curl is simply brilliant branding wise, very simple but clever.
mulleady is offline  
Old 06-22-08, 03:39 AM
  #35  
mulleady
The Metropolis, UK
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 2,353
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 2 Times in 2 Posts
Originally Posted by mjw View Post
Also, take a look at figures 2 and 3. The background says this is from "a UK patent" and it looks like the brompton. The background section goes on to state why the brompton is not an optimum design and how they go about making it better.
That's a mistake to compare like that by them in the document. What is 'optimal' as Somnetash says? My Brompton folds and unfolds in seconds! Only criticism is trying to roll it more efficiently when folded.
mulleady is offline  
Old 06-22-08, 05:09 AM
  #36  
jur
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Albany, WA
Posts: 7,392
Mentioned: 16 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 321 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 7 Times in 6 Posts
Originally Posted by mulleady View Post
Did you fall out the wrong side of the bed this weekend Jur?
Not far wrong there mate.

It came accross as *****y, then? * sigh * I do have foot in mouth disease.

FF, don't take this as personal pls. It's just clumsy ol me making a mess of it again.
jur is offline  
Old 06-22-08, 05:14 AM
  #37  
Dahon.Steve
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: New Jersey
Posts: 7,143
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 261 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 10 Times in 9 Posts
Originally Posted by Raxel View Post


Just found a pic. I can see V brakes, hub gears, 355 marathon racer tires, integrated rear carrier, a new folding pedal, curious linkage at the seatpost etc..
I wonder how you're supposed to carry the bike? LOL. The fold is so small, how do you pick the bike up?

It looks like the frame has a huge intendation in the middle so that's how they made the fold so small. Let's hope they manage to keep the bike below $600.00 USD and use the Nexus 8 speed. I just might end up selling my two Dahon folders for this one. These are interesting times indeed!

OH... Please Dahon, use a better color. I want fire engine RED!

Last edited by Dahon.Steve; 06-22-08 at 05:18 AM.
Dahon.Steve is offline  
Old 06-22-08, 05:35 AM
  #38  
jur
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Albany, WA
Posts: 7,392
Mentioned: 16 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 321 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 7 Times in 6 Posts
The Mu XL is over $900 with similar sort of specs. If this was priced the same as the Mu XL the Mu XL sales might suffer, so I doubt this one would see under a $1k. I would expect introductory pricing in the range of $1200.
jur is offline  
Old 06-22-08, 06:49 AM
  #39  
mulleady
The Metropolis, UK
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 2,353
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 2 Times in 2 Posts
Originally Posted by jur View Post
Not far wrong there mate.

It came accross as *****y, then? * sigh * I do have foot in mouth disease.

FF, don't take this as personal pls. It's just clumsy ol me making a mess of it again.
You aren't normally grouchy in fairness except to one user but there was a reason for that lol
mulleady is offline  
Old 06-22-08, 06:50 AM
  #40  
mulleady
The Metropolis, UK
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 2,353
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 2 Times in 2 Posts
Originally Posted by jur View Post
The Mu XL is over $900 with similar sort of specs. If this was priced the same as the Mu XL the Mu XL sales might suffer, so I doubt this one would see under a $1k. I would expect introductory pricing in the range of $1200.
Still would be a good price. A modded Brompton with Nexus 8 speed would cost a lot more. Will be depend a lot how well and quick it folds and durability of parts.
mulleady is offline  
Old 06-22-08, 07:07 AM
  #41  
Raxel
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 339
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 104 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 36 Times in 20 Posts
Originally Posted by mulleady View Post
Still would be a good price. A modded Brompton with Nexus 8 speed would cost a lot more. Will be depend a lot how well and quick it folds and durability of parts.
A modded Brompton with Nexus 8 speed would weigh at least 4~5 lbs more too.
Raxel is offline  
Old 06-22-08, 08:49 AM
  #42  
mjw
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 130
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally Posted by somnatash View Post
Hi mjw,
can you please explain what you mean by "figure 2 and 3" or explain "why the brompton is not an optimum design and how they go about making it better"
Thanks
From the application:

As shown in FIG. 2, in a folding bicycle disclosed by a UK patent, a folding joint is installed on its beam and the rear fork is hinged with the frame, so that the front part of the bicycle can be folded laterally via the folding joint and the rear fork can be,folded forward around the hinge axle 6 a . As shown in FIG. 3, since this bicycle can be folded at two points, after the bicycle is folded, the frame is positioned between two wheels instead of sticking out, and the folded bicycle is smaller in volume. However, since the hinge axle 6 a is parallel to the central axle 7 a , after the bicycle is folded, the rear wheel 8 a is positioned below the beam 3 a . As a result, the beam is slightly higher than the wheel. Meanwhile, the beam must be humped up in order to have the rear wheel placed under it, which looks not natural and orderly, and which affects the strength and rigidity of the folded bicycle. Furthermore, since the hinge axle is parallel to the central axle, the rear part of the bicycle can not be folded sufficiently close to the beam and the bicycle still has a large width after being folded.

See drawings here.

I don't speak German but here's the one from the German Patent Application:
Wie in Fig. 2 dargestellt ist, ist bei einem Klapprad, welches durch ein UK-Patent offenbart wird, in seine Stange ein Klappgelenk eingebaut, und die hintere Gabel ist mit dem Rahmen gelenkig verbunden, so dass der vordere Teil des Fahrrads mit Hilfe des Klappgelenks seitwärts geklappt werden kann und die Hintergabel um die Scharnierachse 6a nach vorn geklappt werden kann. Da dieses Fahrrad an zwei Stellen geklappt werden kann, befindet sich der Rahmen, nachdem das Fahrrad zusammengeklappt worden ist, zwischen den beiden Rädern, wie das in Fig. 3 dargestellt ist, und steht nicht mehr ab, so dass das zusammengeklappte Fahrrad in seinem Volumen kleiner ist. Da die Scharnierachse 6a parallel zur Mittelachse 7a liegt, nachdem das Fahrrad zusammengeklappt worden ist, befindet sich das Hinterrad 8a jedoch unter der Stange 3a. Das Ergebnis ist, dass die Stange etwas höher liegt als das Rad. Das bedeutet, dass die Stange etwas angehoben werden muss, damit das Hinterrad unter sie gebracht wird, was nicht natürlich und nicht ordentlich aussieht und auch die Festigkeit und die Starrheit des zusammengeklappten Fahrrads beeinträchtigt. Da die Scharnierachse parallel zur Mittelachse ist, kommt hinzu, dass der hintere Teil des Fahrrads nicht hinreichend dicht an die Stange geklappt werden kann und durch das Fahrrad noch immer eine zu grosse Breite aufweist, nachdem es zusammengeklappt worden ist.


Originally Posted by mulleady View Post
That's a mistake to compare like that by them in the document. What is 'optimal' as Somnetash says?
Of course it's the opinion of Mr. Hon. I didn't mean to say that the Brompton was worse-Only that Mr. Hon identified what he calls a problem with the Brompton and tried to fix it. It's good he gives this background because look at everyone who said "oh this is a Brompton clone". He's telling you exactly why it's different.
mjw is offline  
Old 06-22-08, 09:12 AM
  #43  
mulleady
The Metropolis, UK
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 2,353
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 2 Times in 2 Posts
Of course didn't mean you Raxel!
mulleady is offline  
Old 06-22-08, 10:05 AM
  #44  
Weakling
Weakling
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Sweden, Europe
Posts: 247

Bikes: Microbike, but I want to own a Carryme

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
As in Fig. 2, is built with a folding wheel, which is revealed by a UK-patent,
into its bar a folding joint is represented, and the rear fork is articulated
connected with the framework, so that the front part of the bicycle can be
folded with the help of the folding joint sideways and be folded forward the
Hintergabel (rear fork?) around the hinge axis 6a can.

Since this bicycle can be folded in two places , the framework,
after the bicycle was folded up, between the two wheels is, as in Fig. 3
is represented, and is not away, so that the folded up bicycle is smaller
in its volume. Since the hinge axis 6a lies parallel to the axle center 7a,
after the bicycle was folded up, the rear wheel 8a is however under the bar 3a.

The result is that the bar lies somewhat more highly than the wheel.
That means the fact that the bar must be raised somewhat, so that
the rear wheel is brought under it, which naturally and not does not
look tidy and also the firmness and the stiffness of the folded up bicycle impairs.

Since the hinge axis is parallel to the axle center, it is added that the rear part
of the bicycle can be folded not sufficiently closely to the bar and by the bicycle
still too large width exhibits, after it was folded up.
I guess those who knows english better that german prefer the englsih original?

I know almost nil german.

Doesn't Dahon have any picture of it not folded? Too new? 1200USD would be too much for me.

The good thing about something that small folded is that one could put it in a sac and that sac
in the "Cart" at the mall so one can take it inside and not get it stolen.

Naive as I am I tried to use my Microbike as a kind of trolley but they got angry me used in inside.
So to have an ultra small package like that is maybe a good thing. And it rides better than A-bike
most likely.

How much bigger is a Downtube Mini compared to this one and how much does a DT Mini cost.

Not 1200 I guess? Would the DT mini be so much of a downgrade to use? Very small that one too?
Weakling is offline  
Old 06-22-08, 12:00 PM
  #45  
Clownbike
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 361
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 9 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time in 1 Post
Originally Posted by Raxel View Post
I have seen numerous crack cases of bike fridays and a couple of cases of bromptons.
In fact bromptons have the same weight restriction (105kg AFIAK) as dahons. So if you think steel is inherently more durable/strong than aluminium, it is not true.

And I don't think bromptons and tikits are luxurious either. They use very cheap components, and their high costs are mainly due to how and where they are manufactured. If they are mass produced in asia their price can go down as low as low-end dahon models.

BTW there are some stainless steel bikes around... some moultons and some reynold 953 bikes. Unfortunately they are more expensive than titanium ones :]
In the early 70's I had a Peugeot 10speed frame break in the middle of a cross country trip. Yes, they did honor the lifetime frame warranty, but the ChroMo frame did break and I had to have the frame brazed in Kansas to make it back to California and I was responsible for rebuilding the bike on the new frame.

Unfortunately, as the Strida has shown, Asian mass production does not guarantee a lower price out the door. Morgans are still hand made in England, but I wouldn't want to pay that kind of money for sliding post front suspension.

The original Dahon Mariner also had a stainless frame.
Clownbike is offline  
Old 06-23-08, 12:10 AM
  #46  
Raxel
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 339
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 104 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 36 Times in 20 Posts
Originally Posted by mulleady View Post
I don't think the Brompton is old fashioned at all. I've had one 2 months and it looks great and performs flawlessly. That is a subjective view. Bromptons are built for durability and although I would agree Andrew Ritchie is conservative, there have been incremental improvements. It is part of the Brompton brand to have a classic look and sure it's not for everybody.
Bromptons look great and perform OK, but so do english 3-speed bikes.
They are ignoring some obvious design faults and sticking to legacy design/parts.
And for the incremental improvements...

I just cannot understand why they are using expensive titanium parts to save little weight, and still using cheap and heavy components of old design. They are selling titanium seatpost at $200, which is a legacy design and requires penta-clip to use with modern saddles. Combined with pentaclip, it weighs more than cheap dahon or birdy stock seatposts. And for pedals- they are selling titanium spindled version of the same brick-like pedal at extra $$$. It is almost a joke...

In my opinion, with minor design change and using better components for rims/cranks/bottom brackets/seatposts etc they can easily shave more than 1kg without much expense.

Last edited by Raxel; 06-23-08 at 12:18 AM.
Raxel is offline  
Old 06-23-08, 02:38 AM
  #47  
mulleady
The Metropolis, UK
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 2,353
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 2 Times in 2 Posts
Originally Posted by Raxel View Post
Bromptons look great and perform OK, but so do english 3-speed bikes.
They are ignoring some obvious design faults and sticking to legacy design/parts.
And for the incremental improvements...

I just cannot understand why they are using expensive titanium parts to save little weight, and still using cheap and heavy components of old design. They are selling titanium seatpost at $200, which is a legacy design and requires penta-clip to use with modern saddles. Combined with pentaclip, it weighs more than cheap dahon or birdy stock seatposts. And for pedals- they are selling titanium spindled version of the same brick-like pedal at extra $$$. It is almost a joke...

In my opinion, with minor design change and using better components for rims/cranks/bottom brackets/seatposts etc they can easily shave more than 1kg without much expense.
I agree with almost everything except the OK performance. My 6 speed performs and rides really well for a commute and go bike. A little bit harsh on the Brompton give its compact nature. As for 'old' design. most of the components are designed for durability. The Brompton is undoubtedly durable and very reliable.

On th expensive weight savign options your arguments are irrefutable. I went for the standard steel frame in raw lacquer with 6 speed, why waste the money? Of course Brompton should test the market a little more developing a better lightweight version.
mulleady is offline  
Old 06-23-08, 02:43 AM
  #48  
somnatash
eight spokes
 
somnatash's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Ruhr district, Germany
Posts: 478

Bikes: merc, brompton, roadster, cheap every day bike

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time in 1 Post
Originally Posted by Raxel View Post
...I just cannot understand why they are using...components of old design. ... titanium seatpost ... requires penta-clip
Yes, a microadjust seatpost top would be fine. Luckily one can exchange the top of the telescopic seatpost with such.

... titanium seatpost... Combined with pentaclip, it weighs more than cheap dahon or birdy stock seatposts.
Is that so? If you have exact weights of the posts and also their seizes I would be interested. From websites weights it seems different (no guaranty):

Pentaclip:98g
brompton ti-seatpost: 268g (so +Pentaclip 98g=366g!)
long (+6cm) brompton ti: 298g
telescopic brompton ti (bottom, top and quick release): 495g
telescopic bottom only: 264g

Birdy Alloy: 452g
New Birdy Alloy 552g
Birdy Ti: 385g

Dahon regular seatpost: 524g
Dahon telescopic top: 260g+Dahon telescopic lower unit: 430g =690g
Dahon special light SDG i-Beam Pro seatpost: 396g

...In my opinion, with minor design change and using better components for rims/cranks/bottom brackets/seatposts etc they can easily shave more than 1kg without much expense.
I am really interested in examples
Raxel, please share them if you have. As I try to waste my money on lighter components for a brompton, I realized it possible but not so easy:

Rims: (ETRO349)
Sun M14A 227.5g (Anybody have a dealer to buy these?)
Velocity AeroHead: 235g says website but my kitchen scale tells: 250-255g
Velocity AeroHeat: 272g
brompton rims: 287g
Sun L20: 300g
Sun CR18:305g

Birdy (AlexDV16=355x16): 310g
Birdy (AlexDV15=355x15): 290g

cranks and bb incl. chainwheel:~809g:
brompton cranks (170mm)+50Teeth set, including chain-disc: ~ 539g
bb:~269g
To lighten: swap the bb for TA-Axis ti: Brompton-set + TA-Axix: 690g
Anybody ideas for a lighter set that fits the fold, maybe some carbon or magnesium cranks?

Last edited by somnatash; 07-26-08 at 04:37 PM.
somnatash is offline  
Old 06-23-08, 03:18 AM
  #49  
bangkok
late member
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 202
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
I wish they would sell a normal seatpost with integrated railclamps.

I've seen this 600mm seatpost advertised as a B part at a German site, but don't know the weight as they won't answer email (in web-German) ... but even so it'll be a heavy for EUR25:

https://www.fahrrad-schnaeppchen.de/M...egory_Code=061

A one-of custom made Ti seatpost in 600mm ("extended" length) x 31.8 with rail clams was quoted at 350g inclusive of screws. So the weight saving potential is 50g for an extended post, while cost savings is big!
bangkok is offline  
Old 06-23-08, 03:50 AM
  #50  
mulleady
The Metropolis, UK
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 2,353
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 2 Times in 2 Posts
Hi Som, any luck with your B and if so how is it?
mulleady is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

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

Copyright © 2023 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.