Mick F wrote:The mudguards on my Moulton TSR are very close to the tyres, front and rear. It's where the bridges are that's the problem. I'm on record on here describing how the front mudguard cracked and how I repaired it with a new bridge and new stays. The mudguard now has two sets of stays instead of the usual one. You can see the crack in the attached photograph at the second set of stays.
It could have been possible that when mine snapped, it could have jammed up under the forks. Doing that at speed ............ and I'm no slouch descending hills ........... could have resulted in a header.
IMG_0287.jpg
It could still do it without quick release safety clips,especially with small clearances such as you have
EDIT,posted before I saw Bruce's or Aniesboy's posts above
-----------------------------------------------------------
"All we are not stares back at what we are"
W H Auden
I have looked at fitting the release clips - I have some spares - but I don't think they would fit due to the restricted area due to the suspension linkages needing to move up and down. As it is, the stays have to be bent and angled to avoid the suspension. Front mudguards on a Moulton aren't the easiest things to design.
I'll revisit this later maybe. I'll dig out the spares and see how they fit or not, but it could be that they'll be a waste of time.
The Moultons across the range all come without mudguards as far as I know, and you have to specify them as an added extra.
the TSR fork (and others like the APB fork) requires that the stays fit in a small space like Mick says. I wonder if it might be possible to fit a secu-clip by using an angled/staggered bracket to bring it behind the plane of the suspension linkages?
Thinking about it, it would surely be possible to bring the secu-clip downwards and out of the way; for non-release stays this mounting position would be problematic, but for stays that will release it should be OK?
Of course the chap in Oxford's fork had no such obstruction, and his machine could easily have been fitted with a secu clip or similar.
There are also stay releases that operate on the other end of the stays, although they are rarely such a neat design, better that than nothing, surely?
One is to fit "P" clips to the front fork stays (moving fork) higher up (hard to see from pictures on net) and maybe a spacer to clear rear fixed fork (this could be plastic). You could even mount the stays to "P" clips inboard of fixed rear fork, this would mean no spacer and all gubbins is hidden from view as I know Mick does not favour clutter. Stainless "P" clips. Stainless nuts (nyloc) washers and bolts. Secure stay clips. No brackets to make. Job done!
Higher mount means less likely to jam anyway.
NA Thinks Just End 2 End Return + Bivvy - Some day Soon I hope You'll Still Find Me At The Top Of A Hill Please forgive the poor Grammar I blame it on my mobile and phat thinkers.
The mudguard top is secured with the front brake of course, so the bottom of that fork is the wheel securing QRs at the dropout. Trouble is, that pair of forks are at the front and are thinner than the suspended forks. I doubt you could arrange the stays to go round the suspended forks to the fixed ones. The only sensible place are the dropouts. It's a matter of finding the right clips to fit.
There are two types. Big thick plastic ones, and thinner neater ones. I'll try and get a photo.
If you zoom in on the bike in the incident it has no secu-clips fitted,the stay is clearly visible vertically still connected to the mudguard which is folded up under the fork bridge
Mick You could use some longer stays(from 26inch or point the 700c) point the secu-clips at a downward angle then with a sharp bend in the stays clearing the fixed fork legs long to them in the right direction toward the mudguard brackets. In the event of a obstruction between the guard and tyre they'd release
-----------------------------------------------------------
"All we are not stares back at what we are"
W H Auden
For some reason Moulton design the original New Series bike (which this one is) with mudguards and short drop sidepull brakes, leading to extremely narrow clearances. It was one of several “idiosyncratic” design choices that seemed frankly bizarre to me.
I had that very problem of mudguard jamming under the fork stirrup with my Moulton AM 14 last year. Fortunately I was only going at walking pace and no damage was sustained (to me or the bike). The replacement Moulton mudguards are now light alloy or stainless with single but robust stays. There is plenty clearance at least on my 17” wheel bike. I think they look quite nice.
I'm a trendy consumer. Just look at my wobbly bog brush using hovercraft full of eels
hercule wrote:For some reason Moulton design the original New Series bike (which this one is) with mudguards and short drop sidepull brakes, leading to extremely narrow clearances. It was one of several “idiosyncratic” design choices that seemed frankly bizarre to me.
My early TSR 8 is similarly afflicted. The mudguards leave clearances for pretty chunky tyres, but with the DP brakes there's nothing bigger than a 32 going to fit (so there's loads of clearance around my mudguards...). Current TSR 8s have Vs which makes more sense. I might get Ben "Kinetics" Cooper to put discs on mine, he'd done a nice job on another TSR he had in the shop last year, and then I can use slightly more sensible tyres than Duranos for hack-bike use.
hercule wrote:For some reason Moulton design the original New Series bike (which this one is) with mudguards and short drop sidepull brakes, leading to extremely narrow clearances. It was one of several “idiosyncratic” design choices that seemed frankly bizarre to me. ....
perhaps this was to allow an 'all campag' build option?
NA Thinks Just End 2 End Return + Bivvy - Some day Soon I hope You'll Still Find Me At The Top Of A Hill Please forgive the poor Grammar I blame it on my mobile and phat thinkers.
If what happened to the poor unfortunate chap (and his bike) was due to the front mudguard jamming up under the brake bridge ......................... what caused it, and how fast must he have been going to severely bend the front end like that?
If what happened to the poor unfortunate chap (and his bike) was due to the front mudguard jamming up under the brake bridge ......................... what caused it, and how fast must he have been going to severely bend the front end like that?
The fact that a bike was so badly equipped was able to cause such a catastophe is far more important than what caused it to happen. If secu-clips were fitted that chap may well have been alive today.
-----------------------------------------------------------
"All we are not stares back at what we are"
W H Auden
