Jipe

Your comment show that you do not know the rear triangle of recent Moulton (not the older AM series).

On these Moulton, the bottom bracket is suspended and part of the moving rear triangle.

The chain traction has no effect on the compression of the rear suspension because the link between the bottom bracket/chainring and rear wheel axle/cassette is rigid (and of course the distance between the bottom bracket axle and rear wheel axle is fixed, it doesn't change with the rear suspension compression).

So pedaling has no effect on the rear suspension, only the body mass movement has an effect like on any MTB including the most recent ones.

Darth Lefty 

I saw them. URT's were abandoned on mountain bikes about twenty years ago.

I'm not suggesting that Moulton do anything. They are clearly (per post 32 above) in business making Moultons, they don't have to innovate all the time. But someone could.

tcs

Dr. Moulton's last bike design, the MDev-90: adjustable hydroelastic rear suspension, adjustable Flexitor front suspension with progressive on-the-fly lockout, space frame construction of carbon fiber tubes in compression over stainless steel wire in tension:



Sadly, he ran out of gas before he could get this in production.

Jipe

The need of a mountain bike aren't the same as the need of a road bike.

MTB suspension just do not fit the needs of road bikes. No road bike need 150 or 170mm suspension travel !

Moreover, MTB became so specialized that only few people really need those bikes.

This resulted in the creation and huge success of gravel bikes.

pinholecam

MTB suspensions are over engineered for road riding for sure. Unfortunately, the shorter travel options (eg. 30mm) are as expensive as the longer 100mm options and weight about the same.
So for 26, 650b, 700c bikes, wider tires at reasonable pressures for the road condition + Red shift stem + flexy/suspension seatpost is the way to not overkill and keep the weight reasonable.
There are also a couple of novel approaches used on the GT grade, Specialized Roubaix, Trek (Isospeed)

The TSR is not a cheap bike and one can have that same 'vision' with a cheaper modern bike (that also looks good ).
To assign it to 'cheap tubes' kinda blames the user from being too poor to buy the one with 'real tubes'
Conversely, the cost of a Moulton speed would get a super road bike and then some. (a Ritchey Breakaway with appropriate stem/seatpost comes to mind; or a non folding Specialized Roubaix, etc )


,
I really liked my TSR for cruising rides. It handled the odd road irregularity well and had a very smooth ride quality to it.
The reason why I eventually sold it was that it was clunky to dismantle, and did not ride as competitively (which I do every Sunday vs road bikes)

Jipe

I am not blaming anybody to buy a TSR because it cost less.

The problem is that first such a space frame requires much more manpower to be built than a classic diamond frame and second that its built in the UK where manpower costs are much higher than in China and Taiwan where most bike frames are built.

This is the reason for the high price of the TSR.

The higher end models are hand built by Moulton in their very small factory, the way the tubes are assembled reduces the weight but is more complex and they use more expensive tubes that also reduce the weight.

For the Moulton speed and other stainless steel frame Moulton, the tubes are really very expensive (these special stainless steel alloy have exceptional mechanical properties that allow to make a really lightweight frame that competes against titanium frames for weight and performances but cost a lot of money), the silver brazing is different and more expensive and the whole frame made of a lot of small tubes is hand polished what takes a lot of time.
Last point, the Moulton Speed uses high end component like a complete Campagnolo Super Record groupset which is lightweight but very expensive (much lower weight but much more expensive than the components mounted on the TSR).

If you look at the price of other high end hand made in Europe frames like for instance Passoni (that built mainly titanium frames but also stainless steel frames and also often mount high end Campagnolo groupset), even if they are diamond frames simpler to build than Moulton, they are as expensive.

For me, the price of such high end bikes really hand made in UK or EU bikes is much more understandable than the even higher price of high end carbon race bikes from for instance Trek, Specialized... made in big automated factories in China and just assembled elsewhere..

davidhunternyc

Hello, I'm trying to figure out the differences between the NS Speed and the NS Double Pylon? How are they similar? How are they different? Is there qualitatively a better bicycle between these two models? Thank you.

Duragrouch

I'm new to this Argument Room.

I've never ridden a Moulton of any kind. I'd love to own one as functional art.

Just a couple notes:
- IIRC, from decades ago, I thought a Moulton space frame, with bubble fairing over the handlebars and further down, was faster than large wheel bikes, I think mostly because of that fairing. But I could be wrong. I think I recall someone riding one in RAAM, not certain.
- The debate about suspension, the points about frequency make sense; With any suspension and especially rear, there is more moving (unsprung) mass, versus a cushy tire, the latter being able to better respond to higher frequencies.
- You don't need a space frame for a torsionally stiff diamond frame. The 1989 Cannondale criterium 3.0 frame with a 2" downtube and also large top tube, was immensely stiff in torsion, you could absolutely hammer on the pedals with no flex, instant go. But dang it rides stiff, too stiff in longitudinal bending. 28mm tires helped, just barely able to fit.
- My monobeam frame Dahon Speed is surprisingly stiff in torsion, even with a folding joint in the middle, that ovalized main tube has a lot of torsional section modulous, plus steel has 3X the elastic stiffness as aluminum. I climb with it without flex issues. (I also have the earlier non-telescoping steel handlebar riser.)

50PlusCycling

I have a lowly Moulton APB with a separable frame. This bike I own in addition to a Birdy, a Brompton, a Dahon, and a Peugeot, all of course are folders. One thing I love about the Moulton and the Birdy are their ability to take modern upgrades, and both my Birdy and Moulton run Dura Ace-XTR Di2 drivelines.

Of my small-wheel bikes, the Moulton has by far the best ride. Its long wheelbase, and well thought out geometry make it a remarkably steady and stable. I find my Birdy much more “twitchy” in its handling, the Brompton and other bikes are less well-handling than the Birdy. The Moulton’s suspension, while looking rudimentary, works remarkably well. Running 120 psi in 20x1” tires doesn’t result in a harsh ride. I have an upgraded suspension on my Birdy, and the front end is probably smoother than the Moulton, but though the rear suspension on the Birdy is not as good as the Moulton.

One of the things which attracted me first to the Brompton, then to the Birdy were their design and compact foldability. However, when it comes to actually riding them, though they are perfectly good, they are not as good as my Moulton. I do wish the Moulton were easier to take down and pack for travel, but it’s not especially difficult, and I was able to score a custom Ostrich travel bag for my bike which has compartments for the wheels and frame components, and which allows it to be packed and arranged into a small space. A pocket tool is all that is necessary taking down or reassembling the bike. The bag is designed to roll up tightly, and be carried behind the seat tube.

I wouldn’t say Moultons are over-engineered, but I wish they weren’t so over-priced.

tcs

Jipe

The NS Speed has normally a one piece frame (but there were special editions with a separable frame) its more sport oriented and weight less than the Double Pylon which is more a touring bike.

The head tube of the Double Pylon is not a tube but a Pylon (therefore the name Double Pylon, the NS Sport was also called Single Pylon), honestly I do not know what is the benefit of this front Pylon compared to a head tube?

The lightest and most sport oriented Moulton is the Speed with some lightweight components its possible to come close to 8kg which is not possible with the NS Speed.

Schwinnsta

In my opinion, Moulton bikes are not faster than ordinary bikes. During hard pedaling the up and down motion, mainly from the front shock, causes a response from the shocks that is out of synch with the pedaling motion, slowing the bike down.

I would urge anybody to read Bicycle Quarterly's review of the NS speed before buying a Moulton.

tds101 

My preference is an Origami Swift with the right gearing - and the right rider (not myself of course) ... The Moulton is still a beautiful piece of kit, nonetheless.

Duragrouch

Thanks. Funny, the small bubble fairing I vaguely recall is not present in either photo. Maybe I'm thinking of seeing it on a different bike, probably. Now, the full-faired one, I was not aware that Doug Milliken was part of that. Could be a different person, but my guess is that is the son of William Milliken (not the governor of Michigan), who together co-authored Race Car Vehicle Dynamics, an outstanding introduction to automotive vehicle dynamics, everything also applies to normal passenger cars as well.

A year after that Moulton, Fast Freddy Markham did 65 mph on the Gold Rush Racer by Gardner Martin (recumbent).

By the way, can't recall where I read it, but the original (non-space frame) Moulton "shopper", had a simple rear rubber suspension; When the design was later produced by a major maker, they eliminated that for cost and perhaps weight, but didn't grasp how much that reduced shock (peak) loads into the frame, and they started busting frames in the field left and right. Even a small amount of wheel travel to spread load energy over longer time, makes a huge difference in fatigue loads and durability.