Originally Posted by
stellawhite
2. Wheel size -
The next criterion to tick against is the wheel size. It determines how portable your bike will be as well as the ride comfort. 26", 24", 22", 20" 16" and 14" are the different available wheel diameters. Folding bikes in 14" and 16" are among the smallest wheels, designed for leisure rides. Smaller wheel sizes are not as stable when cornering. Folding bike 26" wheels on the other hand are typically fitted to mountain bikes as they offer the highest level of stability..
This is not true.
What defines the stability of the bike is not the wheel size, its the bike frame geometry.
The mostly used commuter folding bikes have small wheels in ETRTO 349, ETRTO 355 or ETRTO 406. So these wheel sizes aren't meant for leisure only.
Globally, big ETRTO 559 wheels aren't better than smaller ETRTO 349, ETRTO 355 or ETRTO 406 wheels.
BTW., inch sizes are meaningless, there are at least 2 different 16" (ETRTO 305, ETRTO 349 and 18" = ETRTO 355 is almost the same size as 16" ETRTO 349, the difference is only 6mm), at least two 20" (ETRTO 406 and ETRTO 451), at least 3 different 24" (ETRTO 507, ETRTO 520, ETRTO 540) and at least two 26" (ETRTO 559 and ETRTO 571).
Originally Posted by
stellawhite
3. Frame design and material -
The idea of including a folding mechanism is to add functionality to the bike. The frame and build material have a say in it. Aluminum, steel, carbon fiber and titanium are the commonly used build materials for folding bikes. Titanium and carbon fiber are lightweight, but very expensive. Aluminum and steel are extremely durable, but heavier with steel being the heaviest..
This is also not true.
Aluminum isn't heavier than titanium.
And there are so many alloy of steel that writing steel is meaningless. High end steel is as lightweight as titanium.
High end steel frames are more expensive than most carbon frames.
Besides the weight, the mechanical properties of the material and its durability are more important than weight.