Folding Bicycles for Dummy Commuters

fold-up bicycle

Remember those essays your English teachers used to assign, the ones called "compare and contrast"? The whole idea of doing that exercise was to get you to tell how two things are similar and how they are different. Today's freelance DotD picked an assignment sort of like that at eHow.com (Leaf Group has moved it from LiveStrong.com to SportsRec.com for some reason), but Michelle Wishhart had a problem when it came to describing the "Disadvantages of a Fold-up Bicycle"¹: she had no idea what she was talking about...

Wishhart's assignment was, in reality, half of a "compare and contrast" – or, in this case, "advantages and disadvantages." The advantages of a fold-up bicycle are clear: it fits into a smaller space than a conventional bike, which lets you carry it with you as luggage. Michelle thought so, too – sort of:

"For commuters and regular travelers, folding bikes may seem like a godsend. They can be stored safely off the streets, which reduces their theft risk. They're low to the ground, which makes them easy to mount and dismount. Of course, there are also disadvantages to folding bikes, from the difficulty of getting parts and accessories to their somewhat unorthodox appearance."

The cycling types here at the Antisocial Network looked at that and laughed: with the possible exception of the "difficulty of getting parts" stuff, the rest of that is utter bull. The disadvantage of a folding bike, from the perception of an actual cyclist, is simple: it folds. While that's super nice for someone trying to take a bicycle on a commuter train² or tuck a bicycle in the trunk of a Corvette, it causes problems for people riding the "foldsmobile." To heck with the "unorthodox appearance," there are real disadvantages:

• Weight: the additional hardware needed to strengthen fold points increases weight. Any actual cyclist (as opposed to a nursery clerk) knows that weight is the enemy
• Wheel size: as a general rule, the larger the wheels the more efficient the drivetrain. Only a few folding bikes have wheels in the same size range as a typical road or mountain bike.
• Cost: The extra hardware and nonstandard parts mean that a foldable is more expensive than a conventional bike of comparable quality.

The chief difference, obviously – at least to a cyclist – is purpose. If all you want is a bike to take you two or three miles between public transportation stations and your home, shopping, and office; a foldable is a great idea. If you want to go for a ten-mile off-road jaunt or hit the highways for a fifty-mile cruise, a fold-up bicycle is an unlikely choice.

Wishhart never mentioned those aspects of a folding bike, except perhaps her offhand comment that "most folding bikes [are] difficult to ride on an off-roading trail" – not realizing that "off-roading" is a term for jeeps, not MTBs. Nope, once more we have a freelancer attempting to convey expertise in a field for which she's not an expert, just a Dumbass of the Day.

¹ The original has been deleted by Leaf Group, but can still be accessed using the Wayback machine at archive.org. Its URL was   livestrong.com/article/1006966-disadvantages-foldup-bicycle/
² FYI, Michelle, many commuter trains and buses now have racks and/or compartments for full-size bicycles.

copyright © 2018-2022 scmrak

DD - BICYCLES