Moulton Bikes

Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.

Drzdave58

Über Member
I’ve owned a dozen bikes the last several years. Just recently acquired a moulton tsr and I’ll never look back. I love the twenty inch wheels and the suspension works great. ive put about one thousand kms on it so far . Its an exceptional riding bike. Try one and you will see.
 
OP
OP
wafter

wafter

I like steel bikes and I cannot lie..
Location
Oxford
I'm surprised it's only 3%, but I'll take your word for it. They feel fast on take off and even as a kid on my RSW 16, mates where in awe of my speed:tongue:, must be my awesome thighs!
Actually, I've just gone throught it a bit more rigerously and for a given mass and road speed the reduction in total kinetic energy of the bike and rider by switching in isolation to wheels that are around 2/3ds the diameter (and 2/3ds the mass) comes in at less than 2% compared to 700c wheels (using ballpark values).

Something that was previously lost on me until I looked at the spreadsheet a bit more is that while smaller wheels weigh less, have a smaller radius of gyration and as such have a much lower polar moment of inertia (for the example above it falls by around 70%, so to accelerate the smaller wheel at a given angular rate would only take 30% of the energy), for a given road speed of course the smaller wheels needs to rotate at a higher speed; which largely offsets its reduction in inertia.

All the above is for masses typically encountered on an adult bike. If we cut the bike mass by a third and rider mass by a half to simulate your younger self the difference in total system energy between the two wheel sizes rises to a bit over 3%.

Interesting stuff, arguably :laugh:

I’ve owned a dozen bikes the last several years. Just recently acquired a moulton tsr and I’ll never look back. I love the twenty inch wheels and the suspension works great. ive put about one thousand kms on it so far . Its an exceptional riding bike. Try one and you will see.
I'd certainly be interested to give one a go.. although I'm not sure I've even seen one in the flesh before tbh, so the chances are probably pretty minimal!
 
Last edited:
My father had a Mouton (Minx i think it was) in the early 80's ish. It was in his garage until quite recently, i'll have to look if it's still there although i fear it's been "garage cleared":ohmy: It was blue and i thought it folded ?

I remember him being very proud of the Moulton brand and always claimed that a Moulton held a certain record that could never be broken again as a road had changed or bridge removed ??? anyway he loved the thing and was quite disappointed when i recently told him i'd bought a 2nd hand Brompton:laugh: he said it's was a poor mans Moulton
 

Drzdave58

Über Member
Actually, I've just gone throught it a bit more rigerously and for a given mass and road speed the reduction in total kinetic energy of the bike and rider by switching in isolation to wheels that are around 2/3ds the diameter (and 2/3ds the mass) comes in at less than 2% compared to 700c wheels (using ballpark values).

Something that was previously lost on me until I looked at the spreadsheet a bit more is that while smaller wheels weigh less, have a smaller radius of gyration and as such have a much lower polar moment of inertia (for the example above it falls by around 70%, so to accelerate the smaller wheel at a given angular rate would only take 30% of the energy), for a given road speed of course the smaller wheels needs to rotate at a higher speed; which largely offsets its reduction in inertia.

All the above is for masses typically encountered on an adult bike. If we cut the bike mass by a third and rider mass by a half to simulate your younger self the difference in total system energy between the two wheel sizes rises to a bit over 3%.

Interesting stuff, arguably :laugh:


I'd certainly be interested to give one a go.. although I'm not sure I've even seen one in the flesh before tbh, so the chances are probably pretty minimal!
I’d never seen one in person or ridden one either until i travelled to the bike shop, bought it and brought it home. My initial impression upon first laying eyes on it was , WOW!!
 

rogerzilla

Legendary Member
It's all about the suspension, although a bike that breaks into two halves in 10 seconds is occasionally useful, e.g. for fitting in a car along with holiday luggage.

They beat you up less than a normal bike but the trade-off is that they are a bit slower (or require more effort for a given speed).

The weight can be a little depressing -more like a touring bike than a racing bike - and they pogo on climbs if you try to wrestle them along.
 

Drzdave58

Über Member
It's all about the suspension, although a bike that breaks into two halves in 10 seconds is occasionally useful, e.g. for fitting in a car along with holiday luggage.

They beat you up less than a normal bike but the trade-off is that they are a bit slower (or require more effort for a given speed).

The weight can be a little depressing -more like a touring bike than a racing bike - and they pogo on climbs if you try to wrestle them along.
You make some valid points for sure. For me, where I live the roads and bike paths are very bumpy. The aluminum framed bikes I had been riding for years were knocking the hell out of me with the constant jolts. The Moulton front suspension , paired with the steel space frame, take the sting right out of them, smooths them out nicely, making for a more enjoyable ride.
 

Schwinnsta

Senior Member
Some of our bombed out roads are bad enough that a Moulton will be the fastest bike, but in general, where I live it is not enough of a benefit to justify the tendency to bob, which dissipates energy. On the other hand, the rear suspension on the Brompton is worth its negatives but rear suspension that transmits horizontally may be better than vertical motion.
 

berlinonaut

Veteran
Location
Berlin Germany
Some of our bombed out roads are bad enough that a Moulton will be the fastest bike, but in general, where I live it is not enough of a benefit to justify the tendency to bob, which dissipates energy.
I am wondering: Did you ever ride one? Because both of your claims seem somewhat dubious to me. A Moulton will today barely ever be "the fastest bike" - it will however be a fast or even very fast bike and maybe the most comfortable one at that speed.

Regarding the bob: It affects almost exclusively the front suspension and only when going uphill out of the saddle. Furthermore the front suspension differs massively between Moulton's models (which means the amount of bob is different between models due to different suspension principles) and it can be adjusted. An easy but unusual task that many workshops do not know how to perform properly. On my TSR the difference between a correctly and an incorrectly adjusted suspension is massive plus there are springs of different strengths available (which one has to know). When adjusted correctly my TSR does not bob recognizably to me and what's left can be easily avoided by pedaling smoothly and round instead of mashing. When going uphill stay in the saddle instead of standing up and you are done. Of course this needs a good amount of gearspread - I modified mine with a Rohloff hub and it is utterly brilliant. As I said: Moultons need a somewhat different riding style. There are a lot of prejudices around them, positive ones as well as negative ones - most from people who did never ride one and just repeat second hand opinion, often enough not even well understood. Thus I am curious where your opinion comes from.
 
@wafter, as you have crushed my lifelong belief that small wheels accelerate faster than big ones with your scientificness and mental gymnastics, I have had to give the subject considerable thought to reconcile myself with this new reality. The only conclusion that I can come up with is that riding a bike with diminutive wheels must evoke some ancient, primal insecurity, little man syndrome if you like, therefore giving one a significant competitive advantage:okay:
 

Fab Foodie

hanging-on in quiet desperation ...
Location
Kirton, Devon.
Actually, I've just gone throught it a bit more rigerously and for a given mass and road speed the reduction in total kinetic energy of the bike and rider by switching in isolation to wheels that are around 2/3ds the diameter (and 2/3ds the mass) comes in at less than 2% compared to 700c wheels (using ballpark values).

Something that was previously lost on me until I looked at the spreadsheet a bit more is that while smaller wheels weigh less, have a smaller radius of gyration and as such have a much lower polar moment of inertia (for the example above it falls by around 70%, so to accelerate the smaller wheel at a given angular rate would only take 30% of the energy), for a given road speed of course the smaller wheels needs to rotate at a higher speed; which largely offsets its reduction in inertia.

All the above is for masses typically encountered on an adult bike. If we cut the bike mass by a third and rider mass by a half to simulate your younger self the difference in total system energy between the two wheel sizes rises to a bit over 3%.

Interesting stuff, arguably :laugh:


I'd certainly be interested to give one a go.. although I'm not sure I've even seen one in the flesh before tbh, so the chances are probably pretty minimal!
IIRC, you’re in Oxford area? If so, Warlands in the Botley road stock them....

Friends of mine have one each, they’re lovely to ride....the bikes that is....
 
Personally, ”quirky” appeals to me. Add in heritage, unique design, craftsmanship, AND performance which punches above its weight class and thats what draws me to any number of vehicles. That and the fact that they aren’t for everybody.

I don’t own a Moulton, but I’d sure like to. But based on the qualities I’ve highlighted which I appreciate, those have led me to own my Brompton, several Vespas, a Piaggio Mp3, 2 Minis (there’s Moulton DNA there) and numerous other not mainstream stuff in my life.

Yeah...I’d LOVE a Moulton...a TSR to be specific. Has all that and then some.
 
Top Bottom