Moulton SST -- reasons (not) to buy?

For discussions about bikes and equipment.
pwa
Posts: 9858
Joined: 2 Oct 2011, 8:55pm

Re: Moulton SST -- reasons (not) to buy?

Postby pwa » 2 Mar 2019, 4:47pm

Very much on a side issue, a neighbour of mine has a fairly recent MX5 and the only downside versus his previous, older model MX5 is that he can't get his folded Brompton in. But that won't affect most of us.

User avatar
fossala
Posts: 1195
Joined: 21 May 2013, 8:29am

Re: Moulton SST -- reasons (not) to buy?

Postby fossala » 2 Mar 2019, 4:58pm

Sidlaws wrote:
Mick F wrote:
Sidlaws wrote:Anyone care to quantify the speed disadvantage as compared to a traditional diamond framed tourer etc?
I have stats coming out of my ears.

I lose one minute per mile riding Moulton vs riding 531c Mercian.
Same route, same bloke, same kit.

30mile ride will take half an hour longer.
Fact.

I actually don't care. Moulton is a delight to ride, so taking longer isn't an issue. :D


Crikey, that sounds rather a lot, and that I'm very likely slower on a bike than are you, your minute per mile would be even greater for me! Mmm. Could it be that the same bloke on the same route with the same kit has a different attitude (work ethic) when riding the Moulton?

I found that I was just as fast on my AM-18 than I was on a good "audax" bike. An AM-18 should be faster than a TSR/SST as it's quite a bit lighter.

roubaixtuesday
Posts: 1944
Joined: 18 Aug 2015, 7:05pm

Re: Moulton SST -- reasons (not) to buy?

Postby roubaixtuesday » 2 Mar 2019, 5:10pm

Mick F wrote:Better friction in a more efficient way does not overheat 406 Moulton rims.

Believe me, it's true.


This interesting theory breaks the first law of thermodynamics, the law of conservation of energy.

Forumites can take their choice, but I'd go with thermodynamics myself.

roubaixtuesday
Posts: 1944
Joined: 18 Aug 2015, 7:05pm

Re: Moulton SST -- reasons (not) to buy?

Postby roubaixtuesday » 2 Mar 2019, 5:12pm

Mick F wrote:I lose one minute per mile riding Moulton vs riding 531c Mercian.
Same route, same bloke, same kit.


This is more than the difference I see commuting on an audax style bike vs a mountain bike with ice spike tyres.

It's a *huge* speed reduction!

pwa
Posts: 9858
Joined: 2 Oct 2011, 8:55pm

Re: Moulton SST -- reasons (not) to buy?

Postby pwa » 2 Mar 2019, 5:31pm

roubaixtuesday wrote:
Mick F wrote:Better friction in a more efficient way does not overheat 406 Moulton rims.

Believe me, it's true.


This interesting theory breaks the first law of thermodynamics, the law of conservation of energy.

Forumites can take their choice, but I'd go with thermodynamics myself.

Perhaps explained by trusting better brakes more, thereby being able to leave the braking late and spending more time not braking at all?

hercule
Posts: 945
Joined: 5 Feb 2011, 5:18pm

Re: Moulton SST -- reasons (not) to buy?

Postby hercule » 2 Mar 2019, 7:18pm

My MX-5 was a Mk 2.5, the Brompton only went in the boot if you put it in exactly the right place (else the lid wouldn’t shut). For Moulton carrying duties it was back half in the boot (remember I have 17” wheels) and front half strapped in with the seat belt in the footwell/passenger seat. Of course with the roof open you could probably carry a tandem, just not very elegantly :lol:

Sidlaws
Posts: 8
Joined: 27 Feb 2019, 8:46pm

Re: Moulton SST -- reasons (not) to buy?

Postby Sidlaws » 2 Mar 2019, 9:27pm

hercule wrote:My MX-5 was a Mk 2.5, the Brompton only went in the boot if you put it in exactly the right place (else the lid wouldn’t shut). For Moulton carrying duties it was back half in the boot (remember I have 17” wheels) and front half strapped in with the seat belt in the footwell/passenger seat. Of course with the roof open you could probably carry a tandem, just not very elegantly :lol:


Yep, I had a Mk 2.5 with LSD and 6-speed box. Loved it,... but that was before I had the Brompton. Currently I'm sans car as a continuation of what was initially a 6 months experimental car-free period. But if I that were to change, another '5' would be a distinct possibility. So rear triangle in the boot, front half in the footwell and the wheels behind the 'passenger' seat... should work.

iandusud
Posts: 197
Joined: 26 Mar 2018, 1:35pm

Re: Moulton SST -- reasons (not) to buy?

Postby iandusud » 3 Mar 2019, 8:47am

reohn2 wrote:
iandusud wrote:

Going back to the original post. I can't comment from personal experience on recent Moultons but I have had my AM Jubilee for 30 years. I ride it regularly as well as my 700c wheeled bikes. There was a previous comment that the small wheels give a harsh ride compared to a 700c wheeled bike. This is utter nonsense. My AM is my most comfortable bike by far and allows me to not worry about avoiding dropped drain cover and general bumps in the road that I have to avoid on my 700c wheeled bikes. It is also a great load carrier. I have toured carrying camping gear on a 700c bike and on the AM. The AM is much more stable with a load that a large wheeled bike. I believe that Chris Juden, when he road tested an AM7, said that it was best loaded touring bike he'd ever ridden.


I stand corrected,but what tyres are you riding on your 700C bikes?


My 700c bikes are on 25mm tyres which I run at around 70psi (I weigh around 71kg). But I regularly ride bikes with wider tyres including my tandem with 40mm tyres, but they don't compare to the AM for comfort, particularly at the front. As someone else pointed out the rear suspension is even better when carrying a decent load on the rear carrier (like when touring). In fact I got to ride a prototype of the Moulton Speed at the Bradford on Avon factory back in the day and one of the things that I particularly liked was the softer rear suspension. When I mentioned this to Alex Moulton he nearly bit my head off and said that he'd made no change whatsoever to the rear suspension cone. I later mentioned this to Tim Bigwood who ran the workshop he confirmed that they had indeed changed the composition of the rubber to soften the rear suspension. Alex was a funny like that though. He didn't like to admit to any changed because I think he felt that it might suggest that he got something wrong in the first place. It certainly wasn't common knowledge that the rear tubes on the front fork were beefed up.

Some people don't like the feel of the suspension when pedalling hard but if you pedal with a fluid efficient style there's no problem, and in fact it encourages good pedalling IMO. To counter this I've seen some people when they first get a Moulton run the front suspension with a lot of preload, but the suspension actually works when run relatively soft, with appropriate damping.

Brucey
Posts: 34821
Joined: 4 Jan 2012, 6:25pm

Re: Moulton SST -- reasons (not) to buy?

Postby Brucey » 3 Mar 2019, 9:22am

when riding on a suspension bike, a different pedalling style is almost mandatory. Out of interest have you measured the speed difference between riding a Moulton and a more conventional bike?

FWIW I have often felt more comfy on a suspension equipped bike but I have very rarely felt faster per se.

cheers
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Brucey~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

User avatar
Mick F
Spambuster
Posts: 45804
Joined: 7 Jan 2007, 11:24am
Location: Tamar Valley, Cornwall

Re: Moulton SST -- reasons (not) to buy?

Postby Mick F » 3 Mar 2019, 9:35am

Sidlaws wrote:
Mick F wrote:
Sidlaws wrote:Anyone care to quantify the speed disadvantage as compared to a traditional diamond framed tourer etc?
I have stats coming out of my ears.

I lose one minute per mile riding Moulton vs riding 531c Mercian.
Same route, same bloke, same kit.

30mile ride will take half an hour longer.
Fact.

I actually don't care. Moulton is a delight to ride, so taking longer isn't an issue. :D


Crikey, that sounds rather a lot, and that I'm very likely slower on a bike than are you, your minute per mile would be even greater for me! Mmm. Could it be that the same bloke on the same route with the same kit has a different attitude (work ethic) when riding the Moulton?
Possibly, but it can't always be true.
It's fast enough on the flat, though accelleration isn't as good. Downhills it's fine though at speed, crosswinds are an issue.
It's up the hills - and there are lots of them here - that the bike is slower. The suspension absorbs the power and the bike is a few Kg heavier too.

I suppose if I compared the two bikes on a flat route, there would be little - if any - difference.
Mick F. Cornwall

User avatar
Mick F
Spambuster
Posts: 45804
Joined: 7 Jan 2007, 11:24am
Location: Tamar Valley, Cornwall

Re: Moulton SST -- reasons (not) to buy?

Postby Mick F » 3 Mar 2019, 9:42am

roubaixtuesday wrote:
Mick F wrote:Better friction in a more efficient way does not overheat 406 Moulton rims.

Believe me, it's true.


This interesting theory breaks the first law of thermodynamics, the law of conservation of energy.

Forumites can take their choice, but I'd go with thermodynamics myself.
Read the thread.
Not saying that 406 rims don't get warm, they do.

I blew out twice with the Tektro brakes due to having to squeeze constantly rather than "pulse braking" as the braking wasn't powerful enough. I put the blow-outs down to black rims, but I was corrected by the more knowledgeable on here. I fitted good solid Shimano 105 brakes, and even though I can go down the same hills as before, the tyres stay inflated. I've often stopped and felt the rims, and they are only warm.

When I blew out the front tyre, it took a few minutes for the rim to cool enough for me to even touch it, let alone change the tube. :shock:
Mick F. Cornwall

roubaixtuesday
Posts: 1944
Joined: 18 Aug 2015, 7:05pm

Re: Moulton SST -- reasons (not) to buy?

Postby roubaixtuesday » 3 Mar 2019, 9:52am

Read the thread


I have read it.

I'm going with the laws of physics. Brake blocks cannot create or destroy energy.

You're very welcome to have different opinions, I've no objection.

reohn2
Posts: 35256
Joined: 26 Jun 2009, 8:21pm

Re: Moulton SST -- reasons (not) to buy?

Postby reohn2 » 3 Mar 2019, 9:52am

Yebbut which 25mm tyres?
There are tyres and tyres.I've been riding 40mm(37mm actual size)Vittoria Voyager Hyper tyres for a number of years and find them very fast,but the real plus is comfort when run at the correct pressures for load,whether that be on UK crapmac or gravel upto 20mm sized stone,the only thing they don't like,being a slick,is slimey surfaces such as mud and wet grass which is to be expected.

I'm convinced a Moulton couldn't live with the kind of varied terrain I ride on these tyres on my Salsa Vaya,though that kind of terrain may not apply to Moulton owners as the small wheels are at a distinct disadvantage on rough terrain suspension or not.
That's not a criticism of Moulton but of small wheels.
MickF's observations of how much slower his Moulton is compared to his Mercian on the hilly terrain he rides indicates wasted energy.
I found the same thing on two 700C wheeled bikes one a 10.5kg Thorn Audax fitted with 28mm tyres compared to the Vaya @12.5kg fitted with 40mm Hypers but the difference was much less stark than Mick's.
My difference was within 1mph over a 70mile flatish course with one significant climb in it.But the huge difference was comfort,and that difference is huge.
That's a lotta talk about tyres but a test ride on Moulton was enough to convince me that it wasn't a bike I could live with,obviously they have a following but it's niche and IMO Moultons do have their considerable problems.
-----------------------------------------------------------
I cycle therefore I am.

User avatar
Mick F
Spambuster
Posts: 45804
Joined: 7 Jan 2007, 11:24am
Location: Tamar Valley, Cornwall

Re: Moulton SST -- reasons (not) to buy?

Postby Mick F » 3 Mar 2019, 9:59am

roubaixtuesday wrote:
Read the thread

I have read it.
I'm going with the laws of physics. Brake blocks cannot create or destroy energy.
You're very welcome to have different opinions, I've no objection.
If you've read it, you understand ........ but you seem not to.

The bendy Tektro brakes needed to be squeezed almost constantly down the steep hill. The front rim overheated and the tyre blew out.
With good brakes, the brakes are more efficient and therefore when you squeeze the brakes, the bike slows down more, and therefore you don't have to brake so much.

Hence cooler rims.

Nothing to do with thermodynamics, more to do with time and space.
Mick F. Cornwall

reohn2
Posts: 35256
Joined: 26 Jun 2009, 8:21pm

Re: Moulton SST -- reasons (not) to buy?

Postby reohn2 » 3 Mar 2019, 10:06am

Mick F wrote:
roubaixtuesday wrote:
Read the thread

I have read it.
I'm going with the laws of physics. Brake blocks cannot create or destroy energy.
You're very welcome to have different opinions, I've no objection.
If you've read it, you understand ........ but you seem not to.

The bendy Tektro brakes needed to be squeezed almost constantly down the steep hill. The front rim overheated and the tyre blew out.
With good brakes, the brakes are more efficient and therefore when you squeeze the brakes, the bike slows down more, and therefore you don't have to brake so much.

Hence cooler rims.

Nothing to do with thermodynamics, more to do with time and space.

It's a 'spike' of energy reduction mesured in heat followed by a 'time and space' of allowance for that heat to dissipate,then the cycle is repeated as and when needed.
Whereas dragging a poor brake or a steeper hill that won't allow for pulsing to get the speed under control,allows for a continual build up of heat to a point where the transference of that heat to the tyre expands the air in the tube to an extent where it can't be contained and the tyre blows.


EDIT:- All that said 700C wheels and bigger tyres at lower pressures allow for a lot more heat build up than 406's would,how much is anyone's guess but there'll be a formula for it.
-----------------------------------------------------------
I cycle therefore I am.