Collapsible wheel

[Dan Burkhart]

I'm sure we've all had one collapse when it wasn't supposed to, but this
one is designed to do it.
http://www.duncfitz.co.uk/wheel.html
Dan


--
Dan Burkhart

[carlfogel@comcast.net]

On Thu, 6 Mar 2008 11:41:54 +1100, Dan Burkhart
<Dan.Burkhart.35tsqz@no-mx.forums.cyclingforums.com> wrote:

>
>I'm sure we've all had one collapse when it wasn't supposed to, but this
>one is designed to do it.
>http://www.duncfitz.co.uk/wheel.html
>Dan

Dear Dan,

Grout's 1878 folding highwheeler:
http://i31.tinypic.com/2a0doie.jpg

Cheers,

Carl Fogel

[Ryan Cousineau]

In article <Dan.Burkhart.35tsqz@no-mx.forums.cyclingforums.com>,
Dan Burkhart <Dan.Burkhart.35tsqz@no-mx.forums.cyclingforums.com>
wrote:

> I'm sure we've all had one collapse when it wasn't supposed to, but this
> one is designed to do it.
> http://www.duncfitz.co.uk/wheel.html
> Dan

Very clever, but I fear that except for the special case of wheelchairs,
they are overestimating the downside to small wheels.

--
Ryan Cousineau rcousine@gmail.com http://www.wiredcola.com/
"In other newsgroups, they killfile trolls."
"In rec.bicycles.racing, we coach them."

[Werehatrack]

On Thu, 6 Mar 2008 11:41:54 +1100, Dan Burkhart
<Dan.Burkhart.35tsqz@no-mx.forums.cyclingforums.com> may have said:

>
>I'm sure we've all had one collapse when it wasn't supposed to, but this
>one is designed to do it.
>http://www.duncfitz.co.uk/wheel.html

Looks like they've got a tubular tire on there in a flanged rim with
no glue. I have to wonder about the weight, rigidity and durability
of the wheel; that many joints would seem to provide too many
opportunities for things to get sloppy.


--
My email address is antispammed; pull WEEDS if replying via e-mail.
Typoes are not a bug, they're a feature.
Words processed in a facility that contains nuts.

[Brian Huntley]

On Mar 5, 8:36 pm, carlfo...@comcast.net wrote:
>
> Grout's 1878 folding highwheeler:
> http://i31.tinypic.com/2a0doie.jpg

Is than an S&S coupling low on the spine?

[carlfogel@comcast.net]

On Wed, 5 Mar 2008 18:00:04 -0800 (PST), Brian Huntley
<brian_huntley@hotmail.com> wrote:

>On Mar 5, 8:36 pm, carlfo...@comcast.net wrote:
>>
>> Grout's 1878 folding highwheeler:
>> http://i31.tinypic.com/2a0doie.jpg
>
>Is than an S&S coupling low on the spine?

Dear Brian,

Well, it's the 1878 version of an S&S coupling.

"Think of a new idea in bicycle design and someone will have already
invented it, probably in the nineteenth century."
--John Pinkerton

According to Henry Sturmey, quoted in the "It's in the Bag!" history
of folding and portable bikes by Tony Hadland:

"The backbone is provided with a joint (a) about two-thirds of the way
down, and can be taken in two by removal of a bolt. This is the only
joint in the frame-work, the chief difficulty being of course the
wheel, and this is constructed in four parts, the rim-pieces being
connected by simple bolts (B), and the spokes screwing into the four
parts of a light ring, which are secured to the periphery of the hub
by neat catch-bolts."

Grout's folding highwheeler supposedly took about ten minutes to knock
down or reassemble and cost two to three times as much as a typical
highwheeler.

The idea was that you could carry it onto the railway car without any
back-talk from insolent railway porters, who wanted to charge extra
for bicycles, leading to fierce lobbying wars for free bicycle
transport in the UK and the US before 1900. (You'll be pleased to know
that we usually won, but the railways kept trying to pull sneaky
tricks.)

Cheers,

Carl Fogel

[Werehatrack]

On Thu, 06 Mar 2008 05:46:53 GMT, Ryan Cousineau <rcousine@gmail.com>
may have said:

>In article <Dan.Burkhart.35tsqz@no-mx.forums.cyclingforums.com>,
> Dan Burkhart <Dan.Burkhart.35tsqz@no-mx.forums.cyclingforums.com>
> wrote:
>
>> I'm sure we've all had one collapse when it wasn't supposed to, but this
>> one is designed to do it.
>> http://www.duncfitz.co.uk/wheel.html
>> Dan
>
>Very clever, but I fear that except for the special case of wheelchairs,
>they are overestimating the downside to small wheels.

Much depends on the requirements; I find that a 20" folder leaves
something to be desired if more than a few miles of riding at a time
will be needed, or if it must carry my 195-lb carcass across unpaved
or poorly maintained surfaces.

--
My email address is antispammed; pull WEEDS if replying via e-mail.
Typoes are not a bug, they're a feature.
Words processed in a facility that contains nuts.

[Tom Sherman]

Ryan Cousineau wrote:
> In article <Dan.Burkhart.35tsqz@no-mx.forums.cyclingforums.com>,
> Dan Burkhart <Dan.Burkhart.35tsqz@no-mx.forums.cyclingforums.com>
> wrote:
>
>> I'm sure we've all had one collapse when it wasn't supposed to, but this
>> one is designed to do it.
>> http://www.duncfitz.co.uk/wheel.html
>> Dan
>
> Very clever, but I fear that except for the special case of wheelchairs,
> they are overestimating the downside to small wheels.
>
Why would someone want large wheels for riding on the road?

--
Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia
The weather is here, wish you were beautiful

[SMS]

Werehatrack wrote:
> On Thu, 06 Mar 2008 05:46:53 GMT, Ryan Cousineau <rcousine@gmail.com>
> may have said:
>
>> In article <Dan.Burkhart.35tsqz@no-mx.forums.cyclingforums.com>,
>> Dan Burkhart <Dan.Burkhart.35tsqz@no-mx.forums.cyclingforums.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> I'm sure we've all had one collapse when it wasn't supposed to, but this
>>> one is designed to do it.
>>> http://www.duncfitz.co.uk/wheel.html
>>> Dan
>> Very clever, but I fear that except for the special case of wheelchairs,
>> they are overestimating the downside to small wheels.
>
> Much depends on the requirements; I find that a 20" folder leaves
> something to be desired if more than a few miles of riding at a time
> will be needed, or if it must carry my 195-lb carcass across unpaved
> or poorly maintained surfaces.

It's a rough ride on the small wheeled bicycles unless they have suspension.

[RicodJour]

On Mar 8, 11:30 am, Tom Sherman <sunsetss0...@REMOVETHISyahoo.com>
wrote:
> Ryan Cousineau wrote:
> > In article <Dan.Burkhart.35t...@no-mx.forums.cyclingforums.com>,
> > Dan Burkhart <Dan.Burkhart.35t...@no-mx.forums.cyclingforums.com>
> > wrote:
>
> >> I'm sure we've all had one collapse when it wasn't supposed to, but this
> >> one is designed to do it.
> >>http://www.duncfitz.co.uk/wheel.html
>
> > Very clever, but I fear that except for the special case of wheelchairs,
> > they are overestimating the downside to small wheels.
>
> Why would someone want large wheels for riding on the road?

The gyroscopic effect keeps you upright in case you have narcolepsy
and doze off.

R

[Tom Sherman]

SMS aka Steven M. Scharf wrote:
> Werehatrack wrote:
>> On Thu, 06 Mar 2008 05:46:53 GMT, Ryan Cousineau <rcousine@gmail.com>
>> may have said:
>>
>>> In article <Dan.Burkhart.35tsqz@no-mx.forums.cyclingforums.com>,
>>> Dan Burkhart <Dan.Burkhart.35tsqz@no-mx.forums.cyclingforums.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> I'm sure we've all had one collapse when it wasn't supposed to, but
>>>> this
>>>> one is designed to do it.
>>>> http://www.duncfitz.co.uk/wheel.html
>>>> Dan
>>> Very clever, but I fear that except for the special case of
>>> wheelchairs, they are overestimating the downside to small wheels.
>>
>> Much depends on the requirements; I find that a 20" folder leaves
>> something to be desired if more than a few miles of riding at a time
>> will be needed, or if it must carry my 195-lb carcass across unpaved
>> or poorly maintained surfaces.
>
> It's a rough ride on the small wheeled bicycles unless they have
> suspension.

The ride with small wheels is perfectly tolerable with some vertical
frame compliance and additional compliance in the seat mesh and foam pad.

--
Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia
The weather is here, wish you were beautiful