Strida 5.0

[Rob Morley]

In article <[email protected]>, Noel
[email protected] says...
> On Tue, 22 Jan 2008 01:31:08 +0000, Rob Morley wrote:

> As MarkT has pointed out, the pre-2.5 versions were not nearly as
> stable. If you won't try one again then your loss.

I can live with 'excitable' handling, but I didn't like the teetering
toppling feeling that the layout inspired - as the basic design is still
the same I doubt that's changed.

> > I have a piece of paper that folds much smaller. I wouldn't want to
> > ride it though.
>
> Eh?
>
The worth of a folding bike can't be judged only on its folding ability.

 

[M-gineering]

Noel wrote:
> On Mon, 21 Jan 2008 20:35:33 +0000, Mark T wrote:
>
>> I've seen a couple being ridden about but unfortunately never had a go
>> on one.
>
> http://strida.co.uk/testride/
>
> the best way to evaluate any bike is to test ride it. we invite you to
> take the strida onto the subway, store it in the trunk of your car, fold
> and unfold the bike, bash it about, and ride it every day. if the strida
> doesn't meet your expectations, we'll buy it back, no questions asked.
>
> the large fine print
> to prevent abuse of this system, the customer is responsible for return
> shipping charges.
>

Going by the description, here is an ex owner who wasn't to pleased with
a Strida 3 He still got some great mileage out of it though
:
http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=120170405931

--
/Marten

info(apestaartje)m-gineering(punt)nl

 

[Noel]

On Wed, 23 Jan 2008 08:41:49 +0100, M-gineering wrote:


> Going by the description, here is an ex owner who wasn't to pleased with
> a Strida 3 He still got some great mileage out of it though :
> http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=120170405931

And the buyer's comment:

"Very efficient transaction - goods much better than described!"

 

[Noel]

On Wed, 23 Jan 2008 08:41:49 +0100, M-gineering wrote:


> Going by the description, here is an ex owner who wasn't to pleased with
> a Strida 3 He still got some great mileage out of it though :
> http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=120170405931

The seller later posted the following to the Strida forum:

"Strida supplied standard Brompton Tyre as a replacement for their
standard tyre. The Brompton tyres sze is 16 x 1 3/8. This fits on the
narrow rim of the Strida. I assume that the rationale for being sent this
tyre when I complained about pinch flats was to supply a wider tyre.

Unfortunately - or rather fortunately given the other problems that I had
with the bike and my now happy ownership of a Brompton (three months and
not so much a hint of major mechanical or tyre failure) - this did not
prevent pinch flats.

Regards

William (ex-Strida 3 owner) (Sold on Ebay )"


The final comment in the thread is from a person who apparently owns a
Strida and a Brompton:

"Glad you are still 'in the fold' - I've got several folders including a
brompton and a strida, and each has their own 'sweat spot' .. Brompton's
is its great build and amazingly small cubic fold ... its the one I take
if I need to stow in a locker. All here know Strida's benefits (light,
quick fold, wheelability, simplicity and about 1/2 price)... but the one
thing I guarentee you'll miss is when you get a rear flat on the
brompton ... its an absolute pig to fix, but with no forks, about as easy
as you can get on a Strida..... I guess with a string of punctures you
already know that"

http://www.stridaforum.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=121&highlight=product
+recall

Cheers
Noel

 

[Noel]

On Wed, 23 Jan 2008 05:44:01 +0000, Rob Morley wrote:

> I can live with 'excitable' handling, but I didn't like the teetering
> toppling feeling that the layout inspired - as the basic design is still
> the same I doubt that's changed.

I have never experienced anything like this "teetering toppling feeling"
during hard braking or hill climbs or kerb mounts. We would therefore
have to conclude that it has changed from your trial model?

>> > I have a piece of paper that folds much smaller. I wouldn't want to
>> > ride it though.
>>
>> Eh?
>>
> The worth of a folding bike can't be judged only on its folding ability.

No but folding ability is a criteria and in this newsgroup 'folder' means
'folding bike'. Discussing ones ability to ride folded pieces of paper
is irrelevant.

Cheers
Noel

 

[Mark T]

Noel writtificated

> Unfortunately - or rather fortunately given the other problems that I had
> with the bike and my now happy ownership of a Brompton (three months and
> not so much a hint of major mechanical or tyre failure) - this did not
> prevent pinch flats.

Ah well, if he's too stupid to put enough air in them.

 

[Noel]

On Wed, 23 Jan 2008 08:41:49 +0100, M-gineering wrote:

> Going by the description, here is an ex owner who wasn't to pleased with
> a Strida 3 He still got some great mileage out of it though :
> http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=120170405931

I asked Strida about the product recall that this guy mentions and here
is their response:

--------------------

hi noel,

the review was written by somebody who felt it was unfair that he could
not return his bike after 6-months without a restocking fee.

we did send out steering pin bolt replacement kits to customer who bought
bikes in 2006 and and early 2007. but your bike is not affected. there is
no issue with the ball-joint moulding. yours is safe.

let us know if you have any other questions, and we'd be happy to
respond.

best,

strida customer service

--------------------

Cheers
Noel

 

[Rob Morley]

In article <[email protected]>, Noel
[email protected] says...
> On Wed, 23 Jan 2008 05:44:01 +0000, Rob Morley wrote:
>
> > I can live with 'excitable' handling, but I didn't like the teetering
> > toppling feeling that the layout inspired - as the basic design is still
> > the same I doubt that's changed.
>
> I have never experienced anything like this "teetering toppling feeling"
> during hard braking or hill climbs or kerb mounts. We would therefore
> have to conclude that it has changed from your trial model?
>
Or that we have different expectations of how a bike should feel. The
basic layout is still the same, I doubt that any changes made would
significantly affect my opinion.

> >> > I have a piece of paper that folds much smaller. I wouldn't want to
> >> > ride it though.
> >>
> >> Eh?
> >>
> > The worth of a folding bike can't be judged only on its folding ability.
>
> No but folding ability is a criteria

'criterion' - 'criteria' is plural

> and in this newsgroup 'folder' means
> 'folding bike'. Discussing ones ability to ride folded pieces of paper
> is irrelevant.
>
Discussing the foldability of something that's claimed by some to be a
bike but found by others not to meet certain criteria, e.g. fun, useful
transport, might be considered equally irrelevant.

 

[Noel]

On Thu, 24 Jan 2008 03:52:05 +0000, Rob Morley wrote:

> Or that we have different expectations of how a bike should feel. The
> basic layout is still the same, I doubt that any changes made would
> significantly affect my opinion.

I ride mountain bikes and racing bikes more than the Strida but you
clearly know far more about cycling than I ever will so I can well
understand that you find my opinion worthless.

> 'criterion' - 'criteria' is plural

Thanks.

> Discussing the foldability of something that's claimed by some to be a
> bike but found by others not to meet certain criteria, e.g. fun, useful
> transport, might be considered equally irrelevant.

Are you saying that you do not consider the Strida to be a bike?!

Rob, I (used to) read your posts with interests but you are trolling and
not actually contributing anything useful.

Cheers
Noel

 

[Mark T]

Noel writtificated

>> Discussing the foldability of something that's claimed by some to be a
>> bike but found by others not to meet certain criteria, e.g. fun, useful
>> transport, might be considered equally irrelevant.
>
> Are you saying that you do not consider the Strida to be a bike?!
>
> Rob, I (used to) read your posts with interests but you are trolling and
> not actually contributing anything useful.

Not terribly useful, but fairly funny. C'mon - folders exist for two
reasons: folding, and being laughed at

 

[Rob Morley]

In article <Gq%[email protected]>, Noel
[email protected] says...
> On Thu, 24 Jan 2008 03:52:05 +0000, Rob Morley wrote:
>
> > Or that we have different expectations of how a bike should feel. The
> > basic layout is still the same, I doubt that any changes made would
> > significantly affect my opinion.
>
> I ride mountain bikes and racing bikes more than the Strida but you
> clearly know far more about cycling than I ever will so I can well
> understand that you find my opinion worthless.

Now you're getting silly.
>
> > 'criterion' - 'criteria' is plural
>
> Thanks.
>
> > Discussing the foldability of something that's claimed by some to be a
> > bike but found by others not to meet certain criteria, e.g. fun, useful
> > transport, might be considered equally irrelevant.
>
> Are you saying that you do not consider the Strida to be a bike?!

I'm saying that I don't consider it to be a bike I'd ever have any use
for.
>
> Rob, I (used to) read your posts with interests but you are trolling and
> not actually contributing anything useful.
>
I'm just stating my opinion - is that not allowed?

 

[Esra Sdrawkcab]

Noel wrote:
> On Thu, 24 Jan 2008 03:52:05 +0000, Rob Morley wrote:
>
>> Or that we have different expectations of how a bike should feel. The
>> basic layout is still the same, I doubt that any changes made would
>> significantly affect my opinion.
>
> I ride mountain bikes and racing bikes more than the Strida but you
> clearly know far more about cycling than I ever will so I can well
> understand that you find my opinion worthless.
>
>> 'criterion' - 'criteria' is plural
>
> Thanks.
>
>> Discussing the foldability of something that's claimed by some to be a
>> bike but found by others not to meet certain criteria, e.g. fun, useful
>> transport, might be considered equally irrelevant.
>
> Are you saying that you do not consider the Strida to be a bike?!
>
> Rob, I (used to) read your posts with interests but you are trolling and
> not actually contributing anything useful.
>
I think it's the lack of gears that makes the Strida a novelty item, and
not a serious option. I bought a single speed cheapy folder (not strida)
and it's a lump to carry, but the real nuisance is the frantic peddling
at top speed of 2*walking.

 

[Noel]

On Fri, 25 Jan 2008 09:17:42 +0000, Esra Sdrawkcab wrote:

> I think it's the lack of gears that makes the Strida a novelty item, and
> not a serious option. I bought a single speed cheapy folder (not strida)
> and it's a lump to carry, but the real nuisance is the frantic peddling
> at top speed of 2*walking.

The Strida comfortably does 12mph-14mph which is quite novel in London.
With every bike there are compromises. A Brompton can have gears but is
more of a dirty, expensive and heavier lump to carry. Your cheapy folder
is too slow. I have to take the train so the Strida *is* a serious
option for me - as it should be for anyone with an open-mind.

Cheers
Noel

 

[David Damerell]

Quoting Esra Sdrawkcab <[email protected]>:
>I think it's the lack of gears that makes the Strida a novelty item, and
>not a serious option.

Tell _that_ to Steve Abraham (or, hell, to Brompton, who offer a
singlespeed option).

>I bought a single speed cheapy folder (not strida)
>and it's a lump to carry, but the real nuisance is the frantic peddling
>at top speed of 2*walking.

The Strida's a 56", so it obviously won't top out at twice walking pace.
It seems quite a sensible gear choice for urban traffic, really.
--
David Damerell <[email protected]> Kill the tomato!
Today is Leicesterday, January.

 

[Roger Merriman]

David Damerell <[email protected]> wrote:

> Quoting Esra Sdrawkcab <[email protected]>:
> >I think it's the lack of gears that makes the Strida a novelty item, and
> >not a serious option.
>
> Tell _that_ to Steve Abraham (or, hell, to Brompton, who offer a
> singlespeed option).

singlespeed seems to be quite popular, see a few about.
>
> >I bought a single speed cheapy folder (not strida)
> >and it's a lump to carry, but the real nuisance is the frantic peddling
> >at top speed of 2*walking.
>
> The Strida's a 56", so it obviously won't top out at twice walking pace.
> It seems quite a sensible gear choice for urban traffic, really.

yup it's the gear i quite often use when i'm biking though town.

roger
--
www.rogermerriman.com

 

[Erik Sandblom]

Den 2008-01-24 04:52:05 skrev Rob Morley <[email protected]>:

> In article <[email protected]>, Noel
> [email protected] says...
>> On Wed, 23 Jan 2008 05:44:01 +0000, Rob Morley wrote:
>>
>> > I can live with 'excitable' handling, but I didn't like the teetering
>> > toppling feeling that the layout inspired - as the basic design is
>> still
>> > the same I doubt that's changed.
>>
>> I have never experienced anything like this "teetering toppling feeling"
>> during hard braking or hill climbs or kerb mounts. We would therefore
>> have to conclude that it has changed from your trial model?
>>
> Or that we have different expectations of how a bike should feel.


Why should the bike behave as you expect? It's a completely different kind
of bike, so I don't think you're well served having any kind of
expectation at all the first time you try it. The Strida is obviously
meant for multi-modal travel where the bike part of the journey is not
meant to be longer than 20 minutes or so. If it works for that purpose,
why complain?

I love my Brompton, and I've tried the Strida and the A-bike. I thought
the Strida was strange but perfectly okay, and the single speed was not a
problem. The A-bike however would not coast, because there was too much
friction from the tiny wheels and whatever else. Theoretically you can
just keep pedalling, but, well, I didn't like it.


> The
> basic layout is still the same, I doubt that any changes made would
> significantly affect my opinion.


I can make my Brompton very uncomfortable by changing the the saddle
height two centimetres, or by adjusting the saddle angle by five degrees.
You can't tell what a bike will feel like by looking at it.

Erik Sandblom

--
Oil is for sissies

 

[Rob Morley]

In article <[email protected]>, Erik
Sandblom
[email protected] says...

> Why should the bike behave as you expect?

It's under no obligation to fulfill my expectations, just as I'm under
no obligation to buy/ride it.

> > The
> > basic layout is still the same, I doubt that any changes made would
> > significantly affect my opinion.
>
>
> I can make my Brompton very uncomfortable by changing the the saddle
> height two centimetres, or by adjusting the saddle angle by five degrees.
> You can't tell what a bike will feel like by looking at it.
>
Unless they've built in some sort of invisible top tube adjustment I'll
not be booking a test ride.

 

[David Damerell]

Quoting Rob Morley <[email protected]>:
>Or that we have different expectations of how a bike should feel. The
>basic layout is still the same, I doubt that any changes made would
>significantly affect my opinion.

As a result of this discussion, I had a bish on a friend's Strida 3 last
night. It does feel extremely peculiar because of the way that raising the
saddle pushes you closer to the handlebars. I'm of average height for a
man (5'10") and I felt uncomfortably cramped.

More to the point, however, was the difficulty of mounting and
dismounting. Like most regular cyclists, I have saddles adjusted for
riding, not for touching the ground without getting out of the saddle.
When I mount or dismount, I keep one foot on a pedal and lower my crotch
over the top tube in front of the saddle. The Strida's frame makes this...
tricky. It's not clear to me how one can have the saddle at the right
height for comfortable riding.
--
David Damerell <[email protected]> Distortion Field!
Today is First Friday, February.

 

[Rob Morley]

In article <c0*[email protected]>, David Damerell
[email protected] says...

> More to the point, however, was the difficulty of mounting and
> dismounting. Like most regular cyclists, I have saddles adjusted for
> riding, not for touching the ground without getting out of the saddle.
> When I mount or dismount, I keep one foot on a pedal and lower my crotch
> over the top tube in front of the saddle. The Strida's frame makes this...
> tricky. It's not clear to me how one can have the saddle at the right
> height for comfortable riding.
>
You have to do a rolling mount - one foot on a pedal, scoot, swing the
other leg over. It must be a pain stopping at lights etc. because you
either have to teeter or dismount, where on a proper bike you can just
step forward out of the saddle. Maybe Strida riders are gutter huggers
and use the kerb.

 

[David Damerell]

Quoting Rob Morley <[email protected]>:
>[email protected] says...
>>When I mount or dismount, I keep one foot on a pedal and lower my crotch
>>over the top tube in front of the saddle. The Strida's frame makes this...
>>tricky. It's not clear to me how one can have the saddle at the right
>>height for comfortable riding.
>You have to do a rolling mount - one foot on a pedal, scoot, swing the
>other leg over.

I never learned that one. I suppose if I had a Strida I'd have to.

>It must be a pain stopping at lights etc. because you
>either have to teeter or dismount,

I don't much fancy the dismount, either, given the potential for endless
comedy as you whack your nads on the back of the saddle.
--
David Damerell <[email protected]> Distortion Field!
Today is First Saturday, February - a weekend.