KentS

I just want to point out that if someone had right clicked on the picture of the BMW girl and selected "Search Google for image" they would have known right away that it was from a BMW ad. Try it. Post number 108.

Joe Remi

Who could possibly give a damn?

Raxel

Automated frame welding is not new. Taiwanese companies (Merida for example) have been using robotic tig welder for like two decades, manly to build frames in a massive scale (>200,000 units a year!)
And their ALUMINIUM frames are not that cheaper than Chinese titanium frames in general.

So there is absolutely zero chance Peter can build titanium frame in his factory that cheap. If he can do such a magic somehow, he can be an instant millionaire by mass producing road and mtb frames at a fraction of the current cost.
If you can see the future, you don't need to tell others' fortune for small money - you can go buy some lottery tickets instead.

So he thought he could make money selling the bike at that low price. Now I wonder whether he ever had a bike at all.

Gibsonsean

You can only know how funny this is if you've seen the backer updates.

Gibsonsean

You can by a Merida bike with alu frame for less than £500.

tcs

So Helix is fitting the latest, improved SG-7001-11?

FolderBeholder

downtube

I believe Apple started the concept of secrecy. Several companies have followed that model.

It's a personal preference issue.

Thanks
Yan

berlinonaut

I would not call this best practice. There are surely more products in the making that you have never heard about and the creators do not share information about than the other way round. I've i.e. never seen Johnny Ive discuss the Apple products that are not released yet in a public forum not any car makers nor basically any other serious business man - still there always are wild speculations about those products. It seems not affect their revenue to the negative.

Staying focussed is a very important thing for a creator and I can totally understand Peter, the more with the tone and culture in this thread towards him. I can understand the interest that people have in the Helix and the eagerness for information and the disappointment for the lack thereof. Still this is just a random internetforum - it's not the real world, it does not pay Peter's bills and it is pretty irrelevant from a global, holistic perspective. Some people here seem to overrate their own relevance by far. I cannot understand where they derivate their entitlement for information from Peter from.

FolderBeholder

FolderBeholder

Jipe

Nobody tested this bike, nobody even saw it in real, so this statement seems to me a little bit optimistic !

A more realistic statement is to say that there are now bigger chance that you will receive a titanium folding bike maybe in July, maybe later.

How good will it be, nobody knows yet.

Why would Peter not communicate now that the can produce the Helix ? And also why not restart the pre-orders to collect some more cash ?

I see two reasons for that:

• the bike is a very first version, there is a lack of field test of it. Backers aren't real customers if something goes wrong, no warranty or anything, they can easily be used as first field testers to identify problems that will be fixed on the first commercial bikes.
• There are lots of history of kickstarter projects/products copied by Chinese companies before the KS project was finished. This could a reason to keep Helix as secret as possible even if this isn't good to launch a new product.

Gibsonsean

Even if the first bikes shipping to backers soon, it will be months before all KS and pre orders are fulfilled. Focus is no doubt on getting the final product ready to ship and the business ready for market. They had a fairly strong marketing campaign for the KS funding so not a new concept for them and there is time enough for that later. I expect that, subject to good reviews from early backers and perhaps select industry publications, the existing pent up interest and word of mouth will provide sufficient demand to keep them at capacity for the rest of this year.

downtube

Him being hands off has created this super large thread. I expect he will get more press, whenever he wants.... because nothing is in the public domain.

His success with Kickstarter was not luck! He has a plan for everything. That doesn't mean things will work out as planned.

FYI he doesn't need/want press now. So it is best to put it off.

Thanks
Yan

Revoltingest

Of course I'm optimistic. But this is reasonable, based upon the massive
amount of info Helix has made available, eg, geometry, components,
design, troubleshooting, manufacturing methods, materials.
Also, I'm a recovering design engineer (mechanical, medical, aerospace),
so I couldn't resist direct communication about some thoughts.
I like his approach to design, ie, obsession over making the best product.
We've endured delays, but the reward will be a better bike.

Jipe

If you are an experienced design engineer, you know like me that the probability of being first time right when you make a completely new product from scratch is very low, there are always problems that only appear when the product is released and used by many real users in real conditions.

All big companies with a lot of knowledge aim at being first time right with their products, very few succeed.

In the Helix case, the probability is even lower because Peter never designed and manufactured any bike before Helix. Nothing replaces experience !

Revoltingest

Then I assume you agree that the extra time he took to develop the bike was worth it.
It also helps that he's using standard components where possible.

RedTrek

Why did you choose the internal hub model?

Gibsonsean

i didn't. 10 speed for me. More functional, cheaper, lighter and the advantages of the Alfine are not key to me.

Jipe

Sure, it will help but nothing replaces experience and real users.

All bakes use many standard components, the folders are a type of bike that need several specific components (like the Helix folding fork) or non standard components (like the ETRTO 507 wheels and tires).

For me the biggest risks are the riding experience, comfort+position on the bike for big people and reliability.

Riding experience is always a challenge for folding bikes because there is a conflict between riding experience and folding + folding size.

Comfort+position on the bike for big people is a problem because there is always a conflict between folding size and frame length in case of folding with a single piece frame.

Reliability because there is a conflict between reliability and weight and because titanium manufacturing is difficult.

Look at what happened with the Brompton : from the beginning it was an excellent concept but the first models had many problems and weaknesses, several iterations were needed to come to a mature model.

berlinonaut

How would ETRO 507 wheels be not standard components? ETRO 507 IS a standard... Just because you probably do not get them in the supermarket around the corner? Then there is a problem: If you consider everything that is not identical to all the other bikes around to be "non standard" (and thus a downside) but on the other hand want a bike that massively differs from all the other bikes around in terms that it should i.e. be lighter and have bigger wheels and still fold very compact but at the same time is identical to all the other bikes around you end up in a catch 22...

While I agree with the argument in principle there is are huge differences between the two cases: When the Brompton was initially created in the 70ies there were basically just three types of folders around: The Bickerton (which gave the inspiration to the Brompton), the Moulton (which wasn't a "real" folder) and the armada of cheap folding bikes that set on the Moulton hype of the 60ies as knockoffs but totally lacked build quality and ergonomics. Totally different story today - there are hundreds of folders around and far more knowledge about the topic. Andrew Richie had a total lack of money when he built the first Bromptons and that continued up into the 90ies. This led to some compromises which Peter with the massive funding does not suffer from. I.e. the Brompton MK1 used existing castings from a french manufacturer and had to build the bike around them (and had to stop building frames when the manufacturer stopped offering these hinges). Peter invested in CNC and built what he thinks he needs. Today we have computers, simulations, automated welding and high quality components - all of which was either not available or not used in the earlier days of the Brompton.
If you look at the issues that the earlier Brompons had you'll end up with things like:
- breaking frames on the MK1 that had to be rewelded
- non mature custom components on the early bikes like the chain tensioner that got enhanced over time
- lower end components on earlier bikes like the brakes or the lights that got replaced with better components as they became availiable
- breaking main frames on the MK2 bikes that were either caused by inconstistent quality of the manual brazing or a single series of tubes below the specified quality (which was only discovered as suddenly some frames started to break on the hinge) - depending on whome you ask
- rear frames rusting through, mainly caused by a small hole that was necessary for temperature regulation during the brazing/welding
- braking handle bars, caused by the miserable idea to get them delivered from Neobike, the Asian licence taker of Brompton that took shortcuts all along the way (and led to the Brompton clones that we see in Asia today).

That was pretty much it. When looking at the Helix we see that these kind of issues probably can be avoided today by using modern technoligy, automated welding, CAD and computer simulations, building the stuff in house instead of outsourcing and higher quality components on the market. All of which Peter does, making use of the massive funding he got and the technology available today. The basic concept of the Brompton stands for more than 40 years now and the basic model for more than 30 years (starting with the MK2 in 1987).

So I'd assume it can be possible that the Helix could be a bike w/o major issues or quality flaws right from the start, especially with someone as quality fanatic as Peter seems to be. Clearly this is not guaranteed and bad surprises may be happening. But chances are way better today than they were when the Brompton was invented.

On the other hand it seems natural and to be expected that there will be some maturing over the following years, based on real world experiences, real world usage, user feedback and technology moving forward. But in the same way that many Bromptons of the late 80ies still are in full service today this could easily be possible with the Helix, too.

Raxel

Every engineering student and his dog now have access to CAD, FEA and CNC machines. Automatic welding machines have been around for 20 years. I don't understand why people thinks only Peter (and nobody else) has some magic pixie dust that can lower the production cost tremendously. If he can do something right now, other would have done it years ago.

berlinonaut

Oh really? Obviously you missed out that we were compairing the early days of the Brompton between 1976 and the early 1990ies with the situation today. To make it explicit for you: This was more than 20 years ago - and that was exactly why I ways outlining that fact: It was a totally different situation back then when the Brompton was invented.



Suprisingly I do not know any dog of an engineering student that successfully built a big-wheeled compact ti-folder with automated welding during the last 20 years. Or any other person for that matter. Do you know any? If not it seems either to be not that easy or a bad idea or nobody else had the idea (or the trust in the idea or the balls to it).

And btw.: If anything anybody is doing for the first time in history cannot be done because if it could be done it already would have been done earlier by someone else (who then quickly would have faced the very same argument and thus couldn't do it) we possibly would still all be living on trees.

Revoltingest

Of course, I know that if I waited 5 or 10 years, Helix would have improvements.
I'm not an early adopter precisely because I see what happens with novel products.
But in this case, I decided that the design was mature enuf to be worth getting
now, rather than waiting until I'm closer to the end of my bike riding days.

berlinonaut

Your statement sounds rather like you are in group 1. But if the Helix proves to be really made of proper titanium (which I have no doubt it is/will be) I'd assume Peter would not deny it if you offered him to pay the 4000-5000$ you assume fair for the bike, of course plus a premium as it is made in Canada which results in higher cost for the workers involved. Why should he?