Joe Remi

Linberl, I tend to come from the perspective of how does the bike fit in the market it's aimed at, which is how I get caught up in "weight for a ti bike" and "folding compared to Brompton." I understand that's not your interest, but I wouldn't be able to explore it in a thread not devoted to Helix. So here I am! 🙂

2_i 

I recently put 50/32/20 rings on Brompton, in place of the 50 ring, without a change in chain. The primitive Brompton derailleur absorbed the extra 30T in slack without problems. The bike folds and unfolds fine. When working on increasing the number of rear gears I tried a proper derailleur solution. Long-cage Shimano XT absorbed the extra slack fine for an unfolded bike or when I stayed in 50T when folding. However, if I folded the bike in any of the smaller rings, the extra slack from folding tangled the chain so that the bike could not be unfolded again. I built in several versions of a chain catcher such as for Birdy. Still in the smallest ring the proper solution derailleur would not be able to cope with the situation while the primitive did. The chain would get repeatedly tangled and had to be untangled by hand. I could build up the proper derailleur to work but why if the primitive solution from Brompton works. Beyond anything, I do not want to have a derailleur cage riding by the ground. My bikes are for real use when they are banged, flip over, get covered by mud and need to be bombproof and are not there to hang from a hook of the scale. Cables?!

Brompton components are made cheaply so they can be affordable. Anybody who put out something to the market knows how difficult it is to make a profit within products treated as a commodity. Yes, overall Brompton is expensive compared to other bikes but this is because its components are highly customized to achieve the fold. The product has to balance at a point where many people can still buy it. If someone claims that it can be done better, they should go ahead and provide the market with their own proposition. While common sense dictates that Helix must fail, they are due praise for trying.

I add photos ro show that I am not talking on empty.



Bike in tests


Absorbing slack.


Going for tangled mess.


Normal operation with primitive Brompton derailleur

Jipe

I understand your concern, but there are two main reasons for all these comparisons:

• First, maybe the most important, the goal of the project is not to make a single batch of bikes but to start an Helix business, Comparison with competitors bikes is needed to guess if the Helix business can be successful. The success of the Helix business is also important for backers because it is the only way to guarantee the availability of the promised accessories and spare parts..
• Second, the KS campaign was very aggressive claiming "Helix™ - The World's Best Folding Bike", and Helix to be SMALLER (not true, and Helix is even bigger than promised) LIGHTER (not true, and Helix is almost 2kg heavier than promised, 11.38kg vs. 9.57kg), SAFER (not true because many other folders are safe, safety of Helix must still be proven), EASIER TO USE(still to be proven, but folded Helix doesn't roll on its two wheels as promised, the video showing the folding isn't really convincing, all utility equipment/accessories - front block, rack, mudguards - aren't available yet). So, it is normal that now that some Helix have been delivered to backers people compare Helix to its competitors to check if all these very strong and aggressive claims are true or just fake..

BromptonINrio

chill out guys!
lets face this new bike!
i never think the can deliver a suspension bike with 9.7kg.

linberl

I guess I just think before everyone starts judging whether the bike has potential to take over the business world, we might want to wait for some detailed ride reports, lol, As to KS claims....c'mon, if you've backed projects (as I have) then you know that marketing is part of it. And projects evolve during development and production. Heck, I'm waiting (longer than Helix) on a project that is radically different from how it started out. As the dev proceeded, he learned things and encountered obstacles and had to make adjustments. It's the nature of KS/IGG and why these projects weren't just put out at full retail for purchase from the beginning with venture capital backing....because they are "half-baked" and KS gives the designers the time, $, and freedom to finish baking them into some form of reality. All you have to do read the T&C (if you haven't personally experienced projects) to see that there is no guarantee of an item, or that an item will even be anything like what was initially offered. Crowdfunding is project development and development includes change. As to all the detailed Brompton stuff, I'll just have to get better at skimming past it since it doesn't interest me, even as a source of comparison; I personally cannot see a 24" and 16" bike ever being comparable, but that's maybe just me.

Joe Remi

Linberl, where I think the Brompton comparisons come from is Peter's highly silly declaration that he was building The Best Folder In The World. That - and the original price points - automatically put it in competition with the almost universally accepted Best Fold For Commuting And Travel, which I think was a mistake. My brain would probably have always focused on best folding 24” wheel bike if he had introduced it that way. It's pretty clearly already that.

unclejemima

linberl

Yeah, I get that. But it is marketing, right? And it kind of depends on how you interpret "best folder". Does that mean best fold or best riding bike that also folds? Or both? Or does it mean best fitting folder or lightest? The Brommie is not the best riding folder but it does have the most compact fold. It's also not lightweight (stock). As we all know, there isn't a perfect folder that is perfect for every use and person. If someone tried to interest you in a car and said it was the "best car in the world" I know you would be pretty skeptical. Because we are all used to hype and marketing b.s. with cars as pretty much the way they advertise.
I backed a device that advertised itself as the "easiest and fastest" - and when folks finally received their stuff, it was neither. Did the developer hope to deliver on his promises, who knows, perhaps only the dev deep in his heart. Was it just hyperbole to try to raise money? Probably. There's very little oversight in crowdfunding.
I guess Peter is guilty of getting people's hopes up and maybe not meeting those expectations but what matters now is did he deliver a good bike. I don't think any KS devs understand that generating business works best if you underpromise and overdeliver.

Jipe

Linberl, , I agree with you that there is marketing in every KS project, its part of the game. There is also marketing in any new product launch.

But for Helix, marketing was really very aggressive with claims that the new bike would be better in any aspects,size, weight, safety, ease of use, price compared to all its competitors.

Yes, you need to make promises to attract customers but creating unrealistic expectations is not good.

There was something similar with the Vellobike+ project where the creator promised a self charging ultra lightweight, very compact electric assist folding bike. Now that the bikes were delivered (not all of them and with also a big delay) and are available in bike shops, it appear that the bike is heavier and bigger than promised and that the electric assist is either very weak or works only on a very short distance (as anybody with experience in regeneration and technical knowledge knew from the beginning).

Revoltingest

About being the "best folder"....
https://smallbusiness.chron.com/puff...ing-24357.html
It's like advertising that Coors beer is the "most refreshing".
Has anyone here felt betrayed upon discovering that Coors
isn't really more refreshing than other beers?

werewolf

Many years ago Coors, "made from mountain spring water", was not sold in the east and it had a semi-mythical statuts. Guys would bring some home with them on the plane when they traveled to the west. Since then it has been bought out, most recently by the Annheuser Bush mob, and now it just tasties like Budweiser swill.

linberl

Most of the KS stuff I've funded had pretty aggressive marketing. Most of it turned out to be b.s. I'm still waiting on my biggest investment and hoping it will be close to what has been promised. Based on my personal funding experience, I'd say the best projects meet about 80% of their marketing statements. I'm just surprised that anyone would actually expect a KS project to deliver 100% in every way and be surprised or disappointed when it didn't. But I get that happens...you can see it in comments on less than stellar projects, folks who actually think KS is like a regular retail store and demand refunds or adjustments because the project is not exactly like the project page stated. And then they are surprised to find there are no consumer regulations and the T&C leaves them with no recourse.

Joe Remi

All true about KS, but (REPETITION ALERT) I'm still surprised by the weight. It just didn't make sense to me as the rider of a ti bike: If my ti road bike is lighter than my steel road bikes with similar components, then my brain thinks the ti folder should be in the range Peter predicted. But after watching the video WOW there's a lotta tubes and gizmos on that thing. I can see where the weight came from.

Schwinnsta

It's great that it can be rolled on the back wheel, but if need to add fenders will it still roll? If you could add a rack then you could add easy wheels. Oh, where would mount the rack? I guess to the chain stays.

I acknowledge that it is easy to criticize. And I think important to do so. I also acknowledge that they have persevered, so far, in a Herculean task, to bring an inexpensive fresh designed titanium folder to market.

linberl

It's not exactly a simple design, lol. Just the mechanism for the rear latch looks like a lot more material than most folders. But - maybe future iterations (if there are any) can be lighter and still durable once he gets some real life usage data that he can look at to trim. I know with steel tubing you can do all kinds of things like butting and using different grades - could he do something like that with the Ti later on?

Jipe

I completely agree with you,Helix uses a lightweight material but its design specificity makes it heavy: bigger heavier wheels, heavy folding fork, heavy helical hinge, heavy rear frame lock...

Really lightweight bike are bikes where every part has been studied from the beginning to be lightweight. Not bikes designed without taking weight into consideration on which weight savings measure have been applied later on.

Gibsonsean

The designs for the Helix fenders and rack work seemlessly with the fold without impact to rolling or folded size. That is the designs. We'll see how they are when realised.

Gibsonsean

True for a 7kg bike but I doubt they will striugle to shave a kilo or two off the Helix.

Gibsonsean

Is it just me or is this thread turning a bit dull

Joe Remi

I can mention the weight again and piss the Brompton guy off if you want! 🤣

Schwinnsta

The fact that it weighs like a steel bike, but is priced like a steel bike, is still a plus. It will resist rust and be springier.

linberl

roflmao!!!

Kabuto

Does anyone know what model/make the pedals are? From 3:28.

borjita

Wellgo C241

Jipe

2kg saving is a lot and would bring Helix at 9.38kg, still almost 1.5kg more than a Burke and a titanium Brompton. (I do not take into account weight weenies single speed Brompton that weight less than 7kg with the original frame but aren't really usable).

There is not a lot to win on the components: its a "naked bike" with few components, the transmission isn't high end but not heavy, same for the brakes, there are no other tires and no lightweight wheels in ETRTO 507. The only big weight savings on the components would require to use very expensive exotic components for the crank and brakes (something like the THM Clavicula SE crank, the Trickstuff Direttissima brake...).

The frame material is already lightweight, only possible saving is by using high end carbon manufacturing for some parts (seatpost, rear arm, fork tube, stem, handlebar, saddle...) but this would also increase a lot the price (look at the prices of Schmolke, AX-lightness, THM...).

More weight savings can only happen with a major frame redesign..