Moulton - rim size

[simonineaston]

I must say, looking back, that I started to get a bit fed up with the whacky world of Moultons when the value of the rarer models started to move. That coincided with i) my active membership in the club and ii) the popularity of ebay. The BoA meets were a treat in the early days, when you could meet and chat with BoA staff, including The Doc. himself, Michael Wolfe (Moulton Preservation) Tony (there's not much about Sturmey Archer he doesn't know...) Hadland and a whole gaggle of Moultoneers, who knew a ton of stuff about all aspects of their favourite bikes, from building wheels, to converting one into a tandem etc.etc.. But steadily throughout the noughties, there was more and more interest taken in the bikes from collectors, hell-bent on grabbing and showing off their latest aquisition from ebay. A lot of these bikes disappeared off to the far-east, which is fair enough in itself, but prompted a new type of buyer over here. Prices crept up - some better described as rocketing! - and the slightly fusty, old-school feel of the club changed, and not for the better - but Hey! That's just my opinion. I'm just glad I had the opportunity to enjoy it all while it lasted and especially to meet and talk to Alex Moulton himself. I did a project on him as part of my degree (Boy, I bet he was sick of people "doing projects on him", but he never ever let it show).
The bike itself, in all its guises, is a delight to ride (once you've made it your own, as Mick points out), which after-all, is the whole point.

[Mick F]

The bike itself, in all its guises, is a delight to ride (once you've made it your own, as Mick points out), which after-all, is the whole point.

Yep.
A delight to ride ............ until you come to a hill of course.
They are heavy, they bob under load, and in cross-winds and head-winds they are like a sail/parachute.

......... but they are a delight to ride .......... or at least mine is!

[speedsixdave]

Marketing-wise, poor old Moulton seem to have wandered off the plot a bit recently... I'm finding it difficult (as must be obvious from recent posts!) to work out what model is what and how it differs from others. Dealer's websites aren't much help as they simply copy / paste the info off Moulton's website.
I wonder if Shaun's still there. He was pretty sharp, so I'm wondering if he left, after his uncle passed away. Reading between the lines, Dan F seems to have moved from a development role at Pashley, to a more hands-on job at BoA.
Thanks for the warning re waiting times.

Hopefully the waiting times are reasonable for the Stratford-built bikes, i.e. the TSR, SST and Cone.

Shaun is long gone and his name is infrequently mentioned at MBC events now. I was never quite convinced he was interested in bikes, but who knows? Dan Farrell is now at least Technical Director of the Moulton Bicycle Company, and I think the majority of the engineering decisions now are his. But he is one part of a company where 90+% of the sales are to the Far East, and this will clearly have a huge impact on how the company develops. I may have opined before on this forum that I worry that the revolutionary days of Moultons are all in the past, and all we will get now is refinements and rehashes of existing ideas. I hope I'm wrong.

When you read about the development work in the 1960s and early 1980s - bump rigs, dynamometer tests, tyre development with Dunlop and Wolber, the work on fairings, John Woodburn et al.banging up and down roads for months on end - and see the obsessional iterative prototype design in the old museum, it is clear that there was a serious engineering drive to create a better bicycle, and a lot of time and money was put behind these efforts. Dan is a proper engineer and I don't for a moment doubt that he is keen to improve the bike. But if you can sell as many as you can make of a beautiful but slightly impractical bike for £19000 (the Double Pylon), the desire to risk it all on new designs that may or may not be successful is going to be hard to sell to your board.

[speedsixdave]

Very true what you say methinks.

For my own part ....... and I've said it lots on various parts of this forum about a few bikes ........... is that you buy a bike and it's not what you want. You want the bike, but not as it is off the shelf. This is why I bought a FRAME from Mercian and fitted what I wanted to it, and changed it as my circumstances and routes to work changed.

...

Given my time again, I'd source a TSR bare frame, and I would suggest anyone who wants a TSR to do the same. Yes, get them to build up the bike to your specifications if you want ................ but the offerings they have as a complete off the shelf machine don't suit everyone at all.

Same here. Already I've changed bars, front wheel (hub dynamo), back wheel (hub brake), chainset (105 too ugly and dirty) and pedals. Front brake may go next. I liked the saddle though!

I think companies that produce unusual products like Moulton are often reluctant to sell bare frames as the worry is if you buy one and fit it out incompetently such that it works poorly or dangerously, that can reflect extremely badly on the frame manufacturer. At least a fully-built bike ought to leave the dealer in a fit state to ride.

[AM7]

I may have opined before on this forum that I worry that the revolutionary days of Moultons are all in the past, and all we will get now is refinements and rehashes of existing ideas. I hope I'm wrong.

I fear you are right. There hasn’t really been anything new or revolutionary from Moulton in the last 10 years or so, since the Double Pylon or maybe the M-Dev prototype. Without Alex’s idiosyncratic vision, anything new and exciting seems even less likely.

[garygkn]

The original Jubilee is very different to the new Jubilee. They are not the same bikes although they may look the same. The classic 1987 original is a different design and it wasn't produced for very long. The contemporary version does not uses 406 rims and it does have a unified rear triangle.

I think I was over tired at the time. The contemporary Jubilee does indeed have 406 rims. Looking at The Century they look like 406 as well. The original Jubilee has 369.

[Brucey]

century model uses 369 wheels, it says here

http://www.moultonbicycles.co.uk/models/NSCENTURY.html

cheers

[Brucey]

Current models use wheels as follows

Moulton
Speed 406
Jubilee 406
XTB 406 (20 x 1.95" tyres)
SST 406
TSR 406

Moulton NS
NS double pylon 406
NS Speed 406
NS Marathon 406

AM series
AM GT 369
AM 22 369
AM speed 369

Cone 406 (Duranos)
NS Century 369

So far as innovation goes, they have to tread carefully; if they innovate away from whatever AM designed/trialled already, they run the very real risk of making something that will be criticised "because it isn't a proper moulton". So don't expect anything that deviates too far from the AM playbook. It'll be interesting to see how far the raking over the coals goes; IIRC one of the early Moulton prototypes was a monocoque. This design was rejected for good reasons, but that presumably won't -should it be deemed prudent- stop it from being made as a 'limited edition'.... ker-chingggg….!

cheers

[gazza_d]

The whole buying bike then slowly swapping every component is something that a lot of cycling enthusiasts, especially if we do a fair few miles. I did with my British Eagle 531 tourer I bought in the 80s. 4 years down the line and almost everything was swapped or upgraded. That's not unique to Moulton, but it can be symptomatic of the kind of person who buys a Moulton in the first place.

I'd love another F frame, but they always seem to be relatively silly money or the far end of the country. I'd also love another spaceframe which I could build into a (relatively) light bike. Both my existing spaceframes are fully rigged for commuting/transport with guards, dynamo lighting and racks. A "naked" Moulton would be a joy to have.

[AM7]

The whole buying bike then slowly swapping every component is something that a lot of cycling enthusiasts, especially if we do a fair few miles.

Indeed. I’ve noticed that a lot of Moulton bashing that happens on this forum quote the modifications that Mick has made to his TSR as a reason the bikes are in some way deficient. But they don’t take into consideration that swapping out components to better suit the owner is something a lot of us do anyway and also that Mick’s example is a fairly extreme one (sorry, Mick!). However, I’ve no doubt that many Moulton owners, like the owners of other bike brands, keep their bikes with the stock components and only replace bits when they wear out.

For myself, I currently have six Moultons - four spaceframes and two f-frames - and I’ve changed out virtually every part on them. In some cases, I’ve changed the same component several times! But that’s also the case with every other non-Moulton bike I own, so it’s says more more about the owner than the bikes

[simonineaston]

A "naked" Moulton would be a joy to have.

That's my current plan. I'm enjoying my TSR a lot but the sort of riding I do now (recreational day rides, without any camping gear) is crying out for a stripped down AM-type...
The Moulton-bashing you refer to is an interesting phenomenon. Often carried out repeatedly by a small number of vocal individuals, their logic appears to extend no further than, "I'm going to criticise you for buying a Moulton" and fails to persue any line, other than "I don't like them!". They appear to be unable to accept the simple fact that some folk are different to others! Fortunate perhaps that the target of the criticism is often too polite or practical to want to engage in a pointless and tedious slanging match. I'm soooo used to it all, as a serial owner of Apple devices and Citroen cars. Why can't some people just let me get on with my life?

[Mick F]

........ that Mick’s example is a fairly extreme one (sorry, Mick!). However, I’ve no doubt that many Moulton owners, like the owners of other bike brands, keep their bikes with the stock components and only replace bits when they wear out.

Two points here, and no need for apologies!

Mine "grew like Topsy" in that the bottom gear of 34/25 the bike came with wasn't low enough, so I swapped out the cassette for an 11-28.
I wanted a higher gear too, so the biggest chainwheel I could buy at a reasonable cost was a 61t, and sold the stock 58t. There was no way on God's earth that I would have even considered a silly cassette with a 10t cog, so 61/11 was what I stuck at.

I detested the Tiagra STIs as the hoods were far too big even for my big hands. Having used Campag Ergo for many years, Tiagra STI was horrible, so fitted indexed DT shifters and sold the Tiagra STIs and fitted standard brake levers.
The seatpost was a carbon one, and try as I might, it would slip down, so sold that and bought an alu one .......... a whole 9g heavier.
The Tektro brake callipers were cheap and nasty, so fitted Shimano 105.

The idea of extending the gearing by fitting a Sturmey Archer 3sp turned the bike from a limited gear bike to one with as many ratios from very low to very high that I (or anyone else) could want. If you live somewhere flat-ish, the bike as it was would be ok, but when I ride I have HILLS, and they come thick and fast, and I need GEARS.

Absolutely brilliant system, and I heartily recommend it for a small-wheeled bike used with hills.

[hercule]

The only original parts of my 1990 AM14 are the frame and the seat post. Even the paint isn’t original! It’s now perfect.

[simonineaston]

Absolutely brilliant system, and I heartily recommend it for a small-wheeled bike used with hills.

I had the Sachs Duo-Drive on my first TSR, and it was FAB - can't quite remember why I got rid of it now!!

[Sid Aluminium]

There hasn’t really been anything new or revolutionary from Moulton in the last 10 years or so, since the Double Pylon or maybe the M-Dev prototype. Without Alex’s...

rubber fortune to underwrite years of methodical R&D to create a (sometimes) commercially profitable new machine

... anything new and exciting seems even less likely.

Shrug. There's always 1890s diamond frame bikes done in the engineering material du jour.