|
Bicycle Quarterly is testing a Moulton
1 Attachment(s)
http://www.vintagebicyclepress.com/currentissue.html
We test a Moulton "New Series" Stainless: Small wheels and full suspension promise a very different ride from a conventional bicycle. With a list price of almost $ 16,000, does it deliver? http://bikeforums.net/attachment.php...hmentid=169005 |
Just skimmed this issue last night -- I am not at all a folder expert but I would say if you are a Moulton owner/rider this issue is a must (BQ sells single copies of their magazine via their website).
They have a huge test on the Moulton, a big review of the bio of Alex Moulton, comments from the Moulton company, and a long story on the history of "unconventional" bike models. They also had the rider who loaned them the test Moulton as a "guest reviewer" of a conventional rando bike, also featured in the issue. BTW, BQ didn't like the Moulton much. I don't have the review in front of me, but the bottom line was something like, "We were hoping that this bike would be a revelation, and it wasn't." |
wawrning ... spoiler alert!
Originally Posted by BengeBoy
(Post 11462577)
BTW, BQ didn't like the Moulton much. I don't have the review in front of me, but the bottom line was something like, "We were hoping that this bike would be a revelation, and it wasn't."
(1) Despite claims, they felt that the bike was slower. (2) That the racks were wimpy. (3) The suspension was excellent at smoothing large jolts but could not handle high frequency vibrations/bumps nearly as efficiently as supple wide tires. (4) The rear suspension bobbed under heavy pedaling Jan did have a few positive things to discuss -- for instance the handling of the bike -- but what was really disappointing to me was the response by Shaun Moulton. I really hate it when people claim to have all of this evidence but fail to show any of it. EDIT: I really wish I spelled "warning" correctly. Sorry. |
Darn! Guess I need to put my three Moultons up on Craigslist before the bottom drops out of the market. :eek: :twitchy:
:) |
Reading about Moulton's reasons for developing his bike reminded me of every wacky new development you see in bikes where a non-cycling industrial designer decides they can do it better, despite knowing almost nothing about riding... Not to say that he didn't come up with a brilliantly unorthodox solution, but so many times when you try and fix one problem (high top tubes) you create new ones (complexity).
Also thought he had an interesting point about the suspension- Suspension design for bikes has really improved over the last 50 years, and maybe it's left the simple elastomer/single pivot behind... That said, I still want one. |
Originally Posted by SesameCrunch
(Post 11513169)
Darn! Guess I need to put my three Moultons up on Craigslist before the bottom drops out of the market. :eek: :twitchy:
There are people that complain about Jan's reviews. I'm trying to remember a particular forum with a bunch of frame builders (famous ones) talking about his Pegoretti review. Although Jan is willing to defend his remarks and explain how he comes to his conclusions. Personally, broadly speaking, I think that some statements/conclusions he makes are too strong based on the evidence. But it is clear that he is trying to be objective and honest. Just to elaborate, the Moulton owner was faster on an alternative randonneur bike than on the Moulton. That, among other observations, led them to the conclusion that it was slower. Moreover, the owner corroborated the comment regarding the rack .... from memory, the big rack instead of the day rack. I'm surprised that he didn't weight the smoothing of the big jolts more. Particularly for randonneurs that often ride in the dark. There are Moultons that can fit relatively wide tires -- 1.6" if my memory is correct -- so there are good reasons to believe that it would be more comfortable and safe for longer distances. |
Originally Posted by buck-50
(Post 11513388)
Also thought he had an interesting point about the suspension- Suspension design for bikes has really improved over the last 50 years, and maybe it's left the simple elastomer/single pivot behind...
That said, I still want one. |
Suspension bob... riding behind Connie last weekend I noticed she was bobbing a bit. So I tried to see what was doing the bobbing and it turned out to be the Brooks saddle rails and to lesser degree the seatpost. I couldn't see the rubber suspension moving. I had a similar issue with the Mini - even after I replaced the rear suspension with a hard piece of plastic, it still bobbed at a certain cadence - saddle and seatpost again.
|
Originally Posted by invisiblehand
(Post 11513854)
Borrowing a comment from the Moulton's owner, I wonder how long it would have take Jan to adjust his spin for the suspension. Jan has a very high cadence and is particularly fast. I imagine that it is pretty efficient. How different is the pedaling technique for a suspended bike?
|
The fact Jan doesn't like a bike doesn't mean you won't like it. I'm not sure I have a single bike Jan would approve of!...:twitchy::o
|
I would like to read the BQ. Since I haven't read it (yet?), I can't speak from a position of sure knowledge; but I know for sure, the mind is a funny thing. Prejudice and firm conviction is something extremely hard to turn around. So if the BQ tester had a previous prejudice/firm conviction about "funny" bikes, PLUS it is blazingly obvious that the randonneur is #1 in BQ, then it doesn't take a math genius to spot the obvious conclusion. Comments like "I really wanted to like the bike" is actually a bit of a give-away to the opposite - read "I didn't like the bike and this test proves it".
The same sort of prejudice is there in AtoB magazine - The brommie is king and nothing else will do. I know - I suffer from the opposite form of prejudice/firm conviction/strong preference for small-wheelers. I do get on large wheelers from time to time but I just can't force myself to like them. :P |
Originally Posted by invisiblehand
(Post 11513854)
Borrowing a comment from the Moulton's owner, I wonder how long it would have take Jan to adjust his spin for the suspension. Jan has a very high cadence and is particularly fast. I imagine that it is pretty efficient. How different is the pedaling technique for a suspended bike?
OTOH, the Bridgestone Moulton, with the older rear triangle design, bobs a bit when I spin at a higher cadence. I can't imagine the New Series would have the suspension bob issue as the design should have only gotten better over time. |
Originally Posted by SesameCrunch
(Post 11514502)
I have not experienced rear suspension bob on my TSR, and I've ridden that a lot of miles under different circumstances.
OTOH, the Bridgestone Moulton, with the older rear triangle design, bobs a bit when I spin at a higher cadence. I can't imagine the New Series would have the suspension bob issue as the design should have only gotten better over time. |
Originally Posted by BruceMetras
(Post 11514640)
There's information over on the Moulton forum from the owner of the NS ... it puts some of the comments in perspective..
|
|
|
It's in the public so I suppose it isn't a problem:
I have been avoiding opening my copy, but I guess I have to get to it. As to the quote, it is not accurate. The time difference that was cited in the article (at least in the draft I reviewed) was for a 3/4- mile 6-8% hill climb. The time difference is seconds, not minutes. I was faster on the MAP by about 15 seconds. That was for a single run up the hill on the MAP, compared to my typical time on my NS. I kept the MAP for a couple of weeks and made a point of timing myself up that hill on every bike I rode (the hill is on the approach I almost always take to my house). My times on the MAP varied from 3:35 to 3:55, on the NS the range was 3:47-4:30. The 3:47 time was exceptional, typically I am at or over four minutes. The two bikes weigh about the same. On my ATB one day, weighing 46 lbs with the cargo I was hauling, my time was 3:48. Corrected for weight this would be 3:32 if the ATB weighed the same as the MAP. Riding my Bacchetta Ti Aero I have times in the 3:45-4:15 range; corrected for weight this is similar to the MAP times. To my knowledge none of this more detailed information made it into the review. Nevertheless, it is hard not to conclude *my* NS is slow. My bike's flexitors and hydrolastic are at Moulton now for testing, at their request. My bike is a 2004 frame, with softer flexitors than what is currently supplied. As you know from my posts here, I've had some trouble with the hydrolastic so I won't be surprised if it does not perform as it should. The most upsetting thing for me in all this is that Jan would not hold the article while Moulton tests the suspension parts. Bill Gobie |
Interesting. I'm pretty sure that my copy read 15 seconds. And it isn't surprising that if Jan worked on the article for the Fall issue that there is a real deadline. Anyway, if something is found to be amiss, Jan has published updates in the past.
And yes ... I don't think that I would change my spin for a bike either. |
15 seconds difference on a time of 225 seconds [3:45 avg MAP time] is ~7% which is not a huge difference - especially if the testing was not particularly well controlled for other factors.
If the test bike had some known issues with the suspension it seems kind of pointless [beyond filling a few pages] to test it in the first place until those problems were resolved. Although Jan would certainly print any additional material in subsequent issues the fact is many people who read that first article will not see the correction/addendum. |
Originally Posted by buck-50
(Post 11513937)
I get that, but then again, Jan (like most of us) is looking for a bike he doesn't have to re-learn ho to ride- If I've spent 20+ years riding one way, and then some guy who swears he's got a better bike as long as I ride it his way, I'm not gonna get that bike.
"Insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result ...or maybe you don't expect a different result and you want to keep it that way so you can keep riding just as you always have? That's putting the cart before the horse if you ask me.
Originally Posted by jur
(Post 11515239)
It's in the public so I suppose it isn't a problem:
|
Thanks to a very helpful forumite, I was able read the article. It did seem to be a reasonably balanced approach. Perhaps it suffers from a slight lack of objectiveness but that's very hard to avoid if you're already riding what you think to be the world's best bike. So you tend to compare items which are valuable to you (Grand Bois tyres which are the most desirable item to have I understand). It also seems Jan has a very bouncy pedaling style which old-fashioned bikes with fat tyres are very forgiving with). Either that or he pedals at a rate where the suspension bobs. I have never detected any bobbing in my Moulton, except maybe if I pedal very fast down a slight incline which does not require hard leg work - then it's very hard not to bounce but that happened on my non-suspended singlespeed as well.
It is true at least to some extent that the Moulton was designed by a non-cyclist - Alex Moulton designed exactly what HE wanted. It is a credit to his engineering skills that it turned out so well. Anyway, what I suspected to be the case turned out to be so - the randonneur bicycle with Grand Bois tyres which is unassailable in its pole position at BQ, was compared against a funny bicycle with hard narrow tyres and outdated suspension. There was no mention of ensuring the tyres were inflated to give 15% sag. So perhaps all the testing was done with too-hard tyres? |
Originally Posted by jur
(Post 11520927)
It is true at least to some extent that the Moulton was designed by a non-cyclist - Alex Moulton designed exactly what HE wanted. It is a credit to his engineering skills that it turned out so well.
The history of these bikes is in the books The Moulton Story and The Spaceframe Moultons. tcs |
Originally Posted by chucky
(Post 11520258)
Why not? If you're not willing to learn anything new then aren't you automatically precluding yourself from ever experiencing something better?
"Insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result ...or maybe you don't expect a different result and you want to keep it that way so you can keep riding just as you always have? That's putting the cart before the horse if you ask me. Interesting. According to those comments the Moulton was faster on average...looks like BQ just decided to cherry pick the outliers to fit their desired conclusion. BQ has a pretty narrow focus- insanely narrow. Expecting Jan to suddenly decide that his beloved randonneurs are not the perfect bike is silly. He's got his preferences. He started a magazine so he could have a place to talk about them. He tested it, he didn't care for it, he went back to what he knows and loves. |
| All times are GMT -6. The time now is 11:31 AM. |
Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.