So my question is, why is the market full of bigger bikes instead of more compact ones (not necessarily foldable)? Is it purely a market/fashion/ease-of-production thing or are smaller wheels more problematic than larger ones? And in fact the Brompton is truly successful and loved by its users. But for city commute/errands I wouldn't imagine something the size of a Brompton making much difference. Which got me thinking, why are most bikes so "big"? Why the 26/29" wheel ratio? I understand the benefit of such wheels and frames for performance - obviously a larger wheel is better for mountain biking and road racing by taking more impact off of you and onto the wheel. I can easily bring it up the stairs even without folding it or really quickly lift it from the frame to get across complicated obstacles on the road (say up a curb or past construction work areas). However the best part of the bike for me is not the folding but the fact that it's small with its 16" wheels and light/compact frame. I love the Brompton with its obvious folding capabilities.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |