Java Neo 2 vs Dahon MuEX

How does the Java Neo 2 folding bike compare to other folding bikes? After introducing the main features and specifications of the bike in Part 1 and Part 2, let us now compare it with another bike. In this case, it is fair to compare it with a Dahon folding bike as both bikes are using 20" 406 wheelsets.

For comparison, I used the Dahon MuEX as that is the only 20" folding bike that I have currently. For those who know, the Dahon MuEX is a high end Dahon folding bike, with many top level and lightweight components. However, for this comparison, I will not be comparing the bike weight or components specifications, as components can be changed easily. Furthermore, it is not fair to compare the stock components of the Java Neo 2 to the upgraded components of the Dahon MuEX.

What I will compare is generally the bike geometry and size, plus other features such as ease of folding. The Dahon MuEX geometry will be representative of most other 20" Dahon folding bikes. First, let's look at the wheelbase and overall length of these two bikes.

Same as for other bike geometry comparisons, I used the centre of the bottom bracket as the datum for aligning the bikes.

Chain stay length of the Dahon MuEX is slightly longer than the Java Neo 2, by about 10mm.

Distance from front hub to bottom bracket is also longer on the Dahon MuEX, by about 25mm.

Bottom bracket on the Java Neo 2 is higher than the Dahon MuEX, which is quite unusual. This might be due to the folding rear triangle design which requires this.

What this means is that the wheelbase of the Java Neo 2 is shorter than the Dahon MuEX, while the bottom bracket is higher. This means less stability on the Java Neo 2 as the wheelbase is shorter, while the centre of gravity is higher due to the higher bottom bracket.

Java Neo 2
Chainstay length: 390mm
Wheelbase: 985mm
BB height: 310mm

Dahon MuEX
Chainstay length: 400mm
Wheelbase: 1020mm
BB height: 284mm

Height of top tube (or main frame) is about the same at the head tube area. However, the Dahon MuEX frame curves downwards near the seat tube. This means that step over height is about the same.

How about the folded size? This is a very important factor as a folding bike needs to fold easily and compactly, in order to justify the higher weight and cost compared to a non-folding bike of the same specifications.

When folded, the Java Neo 2 is about the same length, but is quite a bit taller, due to the long seat post and the high seat tube. This is a big issue for me as I cannot fit the Java Neo 2 upright into the back of the car, unlike the Dahon MuEX.

For folded width, both bikes are about the same, even though the Dahon MuEX handlepost folds inwards while the Java Neo 2 handlepost folds outwards.

Up till now, we can see that the Java Neo 2's folded size is taller than the Dahon MuEX, even though it has an innovative new folding design. In my opinion, if a new folding design does not result in a more compact fold or easier fold, what is the point? It may be cool or interesting to have a new folding method, but it has to be at least equal in size to the market standard, which is the Dahon fold.

If a new folding method results in a smaller folded size, it may be acceptable to have a more complicated fold. Or, if the folded size is larger, but is easier to fold, it may also be acceptable. Some other folding bikes also have a larger folded size plus a more complicated fold, but they have other features. For example, the Birdy fold is larger and more complicated than a Dahon, but it has full suspension. A Tyrell FX also folds larger and is more complicated than a Dahon, but it rides very well due to the rigid frame.

However, in this case, the Java Neo 2 has a larger folded size, plus a more difficult fold (refer to Part 2), with no other feature that makes it better than a Dahon.

Let's check out the weight of some stock components. From what I see, the handlepost can be easily upgraded to a more lightweight type (non-adjustable), while the handlebar components (shifters, brake levers, grips) are more or less standard with similar weight no matter what you upgrade to.

The stock crankset is a square taper type, which is quite heavy. Upgrading to a Hollowtech II type of crankset and bottom bracket will save quite a bit of weight. The exact weight is not known as I will not be disassembling those parts.

However, other components that are easily removed will be weighed, such as those shown below.

Weight of super long seat post (650mm) plus stock saddle is 761 grams. In comparison, a Litepro seatpost (320g) plus a mid range saddle (230g) will weigh just 550 grams.

Weight of high profile front wheel (wheel + tire + tube + rotor + QR axle) is 1639 grams. In comparison, a Wheelsport Smart front wheel (584g) + Kojak (230g) + tube (100g) + rotor (125g) + QR axle (50g) will be just 1089 grams. Much room to save weight here.

Weight of high profile rear wheel (wheel + tire + tube + rotor + QR axle + cassette) is 2083 grams. In comparison, a Wheelsport Smart rear wheel (793g) + Kojak (230g) + tube (100g) + rotor (125g) + QR axle (65g) + cassette (300g) will be just 1613 grams.

From this, we can see that the stock high profile wheelset is quite heavy. Changing to a mid range Wheelsport Smart 1.0 wheelset plus better Kojak tires would save you 1 kg, while keeping the other parts the same. If you spend more for high end parts (lightweight wheelset and tires, titanium QR axles, etc), you can save another 300 grams or so from just the wheelset.

With these weight estimates of the various bike components, plus the weight of the overall bike, I was able to make a rough estimate of the frame weight (main frame + rear triangle only). This is just an estimate as I do not have the exact weight of many other components, but it should be around this range.

Full bike weight is 12.3 kg without pedals in stock condition. After deducting the weight of all the components, the estimated frame weight is 3.6 kg. This does not include the front fork. For comparison, the other bike frame weights are shown below. Some of these weights include the rear derailleur hanger or seat post clamp, or the headset weight, so the comparison is not exactly accurate, but the general trend is there.

Frame only weight estimates (excluding fork)

Java Neo 2: 3600 grams

Dahon MuEX/MuSP: 2400 grams

Crius AEV20: 2440 grams

Wheelsport Fantasy: 1760 grams

Java Freccia: 1060 grams

Merida Scultura 5000: 1000 grams

Canyon Endurace: 807 grams

Fabike C3: 1296 grams

Note that the Java Freccia, Merida Scultura 5000, Canyon Endurace, and Fabike C3 are carbon frames, while the others are aluminium frames.

From this frame weight comparison, we can see that the weight of the Java Neo 2 is not competitive at all, being much heavier than the aluminium Dahon frame. The carbon frame version of the Java Neo will weigh less, but it will also cost a lot more.

Disadvantages of Java Neo 2 compared to Dahon
1) Taller folded size.
2) Long seat post is necessary for folding, cannot change to shorter and lighter seatpost.
3) Frame is heavier than Dahon.
4) Folding and unfolding steps is awkward.
5) Some lateral flex (between seat tube and rear triangle) at rubber stopper area.
6) Not possible to change to 451 wheels as it will affect the folding.

Advantages of Java Neo 2 compared to Dahon
1) Drivetrain is tucked inside when folded.
2) Can lay the frame down on the side easily, ideal for putting into car boot lying down.
3) Frame folding lever is nicely integrated into the frame.

My initial intention of getting the Java Neo 2 folding bike was to see if it is good enough to replace the Dahon MuEX. If it was, I planned to transfer all the compatible components from the Dahon MuEX to the Java Neo 2. However, after comparison, the Java Neo 2 loses out to the Dahon MuEX in almost every aspect. Note that I did not compare the components specifications, just mainly the frame weight, the folded size, and ease of folding.

The conclusion for me is that the Java Neo 2 is not good enough to replace the Dahon MuEX. On its own, the Java Neo 2 is a decent folding bike. With its unique folding design and sharp appearance, it looks quite good. However, in my case, it is not better than a Dahon in terms of weight, folded size or ease of folding.

Tyrell IVE - Overall Ride Quality

4th and final part of the Tyrell IVE review, and the most important part: How well does it ride? There is no point having a nice looking bicycle if it doesn't ride well, as it is meant to be ridden and not a wall decoration.

Previously we looked at the various components of the Tyrell IVE, the folding mechanism, and then the folded size comparison with the Dahon and Brompton. Now, after testing it for a longer distance, I can give a more balanced and comprehensive review.

For this comparison, it will mainly be done against the Dahon and Brompton, which are the typical 20 inch folding bike and the 16 inch folding bike. For some of the attributes that I chose to highlight, it will be compared against each of these bikes to see where it stands.

Do take note that there are many attributes that will collectively define a bicycle as good or not, so we cannot just judge it based on one or two items. Of course, if those attributes are very critical to you (such as folded size or price), they will naturally carry more weight when you are selecting the ideal bike for your needs.

The final test ride was done during the OCBC Cycle 2018, which is a good chance to fully evaluate the Tyrell IVE. It consists of fast rolling flats, some longer upslopes (Sheares Avenue), and also fast downhills. Most importantly, I have done a similar route on the Dahon MuEX and the Brompton M6R on previous years as well, so it is a relatively fair comparison.

Starting off with the transportation of the bikes to the OCBC Cycle start point, let's compare the Tyrell IVE with the other bikes and finally the overall ride quality.

Transporting two folding bikes is easy. Just put both of them in the car boot and you are good to go! No need to fold down the car seats or remove the bicycle wheels.

Practically, in terms of transportation size when putting the folded bike into the car, the Tyrell IVE fits in a similar space as the Brompton, even though it is larger in terms of folded size. Unless your Brompton already fits tightly without any extra space around it, the Tyrell IVE should also fit quite easily in the same space.


Saddle
Even though I was wearing padded cycling shorts, the stock saddle started to feel uncomfortable for me after just 10km. I have used saddles with even less padding (such as the Selle Italia SLR Kit Carbonio Flow), without much discomfort, even after longer distances, so I can say that my butt is rather seasoned in terms of bike riding.

Although the stock saddle seems wide and cushy, it does not seem to have enough support in the correct areas. It might fit well for some people, but not for me. That made the ride a little tougher that what I expected, due to the unexpected saddle discomfort.

Stock saddle is not so nice for me, although it might work well for others.

If I owned the bike, I would have changed out the saddle to my preferred brand or shape. Another reason that contributed to the butt discomfort was the more upright riding position.


Riding Posture
Being a flat handlebar bike, the riding posture is naturally more upright compared to a drop bar bike, which I am so used to. My two main bikes, the Canyon Endurace and the Avanti Inc 3 (three bikes if you count the recently-disassembled Java Freccia mini velo) all use drop bars, which I prefer due to the better ergonomics and also faster ride.

Having a more upright riding posture means that more weight is on the butt, compared to a drop bar bike where more weight is on the hands. Therefore, riding in an upright posture will make it more likely to cause butt discomfort.

This brings me to the next point, which is that the distance between the saddle and the handlebar is rather short. Once again, for people of average height or more, the posture might be too upright. This would be ideal for shorter riders, but taller riders might want to extend the reach for a more sporty riding posture.

The upright posture is similar to that on the Dahon and Brompton, so I cannot fault the Tyrell IVE on this. It is a result of using flat handlebars, which is usually used for folding bikes for a more compact fold and more casual riding.

Tyrell IVE and Dahon MuEX on top of the bridge along Sheares Avenue!

If you want to know the benefits of using a drop bar or bullhorn bar, check out this old post here!


Handlepost Stiffness
What I really liked about the handlepost is that it feels super stiff! It feels just as stiff and unyielding as the first time I tried the Tern Verge P18 a few years ago. With a stiff handlepost, you can pull on the handlebar confidently to put down the power, or pedal while standing up. This is something that the Dahon or Brompton cannot match, as their handleposts will still have some flex.

Massive handlepost design of the Tern Verge series, I was so impressed by the stiffness when I first tried the bikes.

Riding Speed and Stability
The most important attribute of a bike, in my opinion, is how well it rides. "Well" doesn't necessarily mean fast, although it is always nice to go fast with less effort. In my definition, a bike that rides well is a bike that you will want to ride again, simple as that. Be in fun, or fast, or comfortable, a bike that you like to ride is a bike that you will ride often. I have come across bikes that are not nice to ride, such as a cruiser that I tried in Long Beach, or most of the shared bikes around. OK for short distances only (less than 3km), where the alternative is a long walk.

One thing I liked is that the Tyrell IVE rides faster than the Brompton. Even though the wheelsize is similar, the Tyrell IVE just feels more stiff and lively than the Brompton. On the Brompton, even with the stiff suspension, you can still feel the bike bobbing up and down slightly when pedaling hard. There is no such phenomenon on the Tyrell IVE which feels more efficient.

Of course, the 20 inch Dahon still goes faster, as it has larger wheels, smoother tires, and is also more lightweight by almost 3 kg!

The Tyrell IVE is also very stable when rolling down the slope at 50km/h, partly due to its long wheelbase and also stable geometry. It feels even more stable than the Brompton or Dahon, which is also helped by the stiff handlepost. With a properly spaced cockpit, it will be even better.

The Tyrell IVE has a really long wheelbase!

Shifting and Braking
The stock shifters, rear derailleur and cassette that comes on the Tyrell IVE is Shimano Sora 9 speed, which is a road groupset. With proper shifters that have easy-to-operate levers, shifting operation is much easier and more intuitive compared to the Brompton 6 speed.

On the Brompton, I had to create my own DIY gear indicator, so that I know how to shift up the gears. On the Tyrell IVE, shifting is easy with no fuss.

Other than gear shifting, the brake lever position on the Tyrell is more ergonomic, as it points downwards at about 60 degrees, instead of being almost straight down as on the Brompton. With a better lever shape and better ergonomics, it is easier and more comfortable to use the brakes.

Brake lever on the Tyrell IVE has a nice lever shape and is angled downwards at a comfortable angle.

That said, most bikes have the brake levers angled correctly, it is just the Brompton that needs the straight-down angle for compact folding.

Actual shifting performance on the Tyrell IVE is also better, as it uses a normal chain and cassette, so I can shift under load even while pedaling, or even make multiple gear changes at a time. That is not possible on the Brompton, due to the nature of the Sturmey-Archer 3 speed hub that does not allow gear changing while under load. This is a big difference as I do not need to think about pedaling lightly while changing gears  on the Tyrell IVE.

Using chain and cassette allows quick gear changing that is possible even while under load.

Another benefit of having 9 speeds is much better cadence control, as the steps between the gears are smaller. With that, it is easier to find a suitable gear for pedaling efficiently, which is another factor that contributes to the Tyrell IVE having a faster ride than the Brompton.


Others
The stock Tyrell IVE comes with a 53T chainring, which is too low for a regular cyclist. With a 53T/11T combination, and 16 inch wheels (although it says 18 inch, the actual size is almost same as 16 inch), the top gear is only about 80 gear inches. This means that I ran out of gears far too easily, even when cruising along on the flat. When going downhill, pedaling does not have much effect as the bike is already rolling so fast.

On the other end of the gear range, the low gear is too low, as I didn't need the lowest 2 gears even when going up Sheares avenue. It is easy to upgrade the stock chainring to 56t or even 58T, to get a gear range that is more suitable.

Stock chainguard is already 58T compatible, so you can use a larger chainring without needing to change the chainguard.

Finally, the Tyrell IVE uses mainly standard drivetrain and brake components, so it is easy to upgrade or replace components, unlike the Brompton which uses many special parts. If you want to go 10 speed, easy, just upgrade the drivetrain. Want better brake levers or calipers? Just upgrade it with standard components. The crankset can also be upgraded easily if you feel a need to do so. If you want to reduce the bike's weight, you can do all those above, plus change to a lighter wheelset.

Servicing the bike or changing the inner tube is also easy, as the Tyrell IVE uses normal wheels with quick release axles, no need to bring out a wrench to loosen the axle nuts.


Conclusion
The Tyrell IVE is a folding bike that rides surprisingly well, given its small wheel size. With a stiff frame and handlepost, putting down power is efficient and it translates into a fast ride. The stock 9 speed components are decent enough that there is no need to upgrade it, although you can do so easily if you want to.

With a stock weight of 11.5 kg (without pedals), I think it is quite feasible to reduce the weight to 10kg if you want. Just changing to a lighter wheelset and tires will yield a significant amount of weight savings. Using lighter drivetrain components will save even more weight. That is not even counting the easy ones, which is a more lightweight seatpost and saddle.

Although the folded size is not as compact as the Brompton, the ride is good, while it offers excellent flexibility and potential in terms of component upgrades and weight loss.

If you ask me to choose between the Tyrell IVE and the Brompton, it will be a difficult choice. If I absolutely need a compact folded size and don't plan to upgrade the components, the Brompton will be ideal. However, if I want to upgrade the components easily, and want better shifting performance, while only needing to fold it occasionally, the Tyrell IVE will be more suitable. Ultimately it depends on what is your need.

While I was writing these posts on the Tyrell IVE, I found that Tyrell came up with a new version, the Tyrell IVE Sports that addresses some of these issues, as seen below. It seems that Tyrell already know of these issues and have already worked to improve it.

New 2018 Tyrell IVE Sports

As with all bikes, it is best to test ride the bike, preferable over a longer ride, to know the pros and cons of each bike. There is no perfect do-it-all bike, only the best bike that best fits your needs. If you have multiple requirements, it might be best to have multiple bikes...

Tyrell IVE - Geometry and Folding Comparison with Brompton and Dahon

In the first part of this Tyrell IVE review, the overall bike features were shown, followed by the second part which studied the folding mechanism in detail.

For this third part of the review, the geometry and folded size of the Tyrell IVE will be compared to my two other folding bikes, the Dahon MuEX and the Brompton M6R. This will give us a good idea of where the Tyrell IVE stands when compared to a typical 20 inch folding bike and the super compact Brompton.

In my case, I did not resort to more precise measurements such as using a measuring tape to check the actual dimensions. It is more of a rough gauge by eye, to see if there are discernible differences. If I cannot find a difference by looking at it, then it is probably not different enough to be felt.

Starting with the 20 inch Dahon MuEX, which is equipped with 406 sized wheels, let's compare the bike geometry and the folded size with the Tyrell IVE.

Putting the bikes side by side first...

As always, I align the centreline of the bottom bracket to each other as this is the datum for the whole bike.

Rear end of the bike (at tire circumference) is almost the same, despite the difference in wheel size. 

As the Tyrell IVE has a longer chainstay, the rear hub axle is further back from the bottom bracket compared to the Dahon, which results in the rear length being similar even though the wheel is smaller in diameter.

As for the front end, the Tyrell IVE front hub is also slightly further in front compared to the Dahon. Overall, this means that the Tyrell IVE has a longer wheelbase (about +30mm) compared to the Dahon.

When folded, the Dahon is longer, as the 20 inch wheel sticks out more. The other end of the folded package is aligned for a fair comparison.

The Tyrell IVE has a wider folded package, as the handlepost folds outwards instead of inwards like on the Dahon.

Overall height of the Dahon is taller, mainly caused by the saddle sticking out on top.

Moving on to the Brompton, let's do the same thing and compare the geometry and folded size. At the end of this post, I will summarize everything and draw a conclusion.

Putting the Brompton and Tyrell IVE side by side. Tyrell IVE has a higher top tube and also has a down tube, compared to the Brompton which only has one large top tube.

Once again, align the centreline of the bottom bracket before doing any more comparison.

Tyrell IVE has a longer chainstay length compared to the Brompton, with an additional 20mm (estimated).

Can't really see it clearly here, but the front hub is at about the same position.

With the front hub in the same position, and the wheel sizes being similar (349 for Brompton vs 355 for Tyrell IVE), the front edge of the tire is at the same distance from the bottom bracket.

Comparing the folded appearance, the Brompton obviously looks neater, with no slanted angles like on the Tyrell IVE.

Folded length of the Tyrell IVE is longer, as the bottom bracket of the Tyrell IVE is behind the seat tube, as compared to the Brompton which has a bottom bracket in front of the seat tube.

For folded width, the Tyrell IVE is much wider, as both the handlebar and front wheel sticks out quite a bit.

Another view of the folded width comparison

As for the folded height, the Brompton and Tyrell IVE have the same height, with the saddle being the highest point.

Overall Length (front tire to rear tire)
Dahon (406 wheel) > Tyrell IVE (355 wheel) > Brompton (349 wheel)

Wheelbase
Tyrell IVE > Brompton > Dahon

Folded Length
Dahon > Tyrell IVE > Brompton

Folded Width
Tyrell IVE > Dahon > Brompton

Folded Height
Dahon > Brompton = Tyrell IVE

In summary, the Tyrell IVE has a surprisingly long wheelbase, which corresponds to the stability that I feel when riding it at higher speeds.

As for the folded size, the Tyrell IVE is shorter and lower than the Dahon, but wider due to its more clumsy fold. The Brompton comes out the champion again for having the most compact fold.

If you absolutely need the most compact fold, the Brompton is the choice to get. However, if you don't need the most compact fold, the Tyrell IVE is a good choice as it is cheaper than the Brompton, given the same spec (9 speeds vs 6 speeds on Brompton), is slightly more lightweight (11.5kg vs 12.3kg), but folds slightly larger. There are also other pros and cons, such as shifting, braking, which will be elaborated on in the next post.

From this comparison, you will be able to find the folding bike that best suits your needs, in terms of folded size.

For the final part of the review, I will share my opinion on the ride quality and other aspects of the Tyrell IVE.

Dahon MuEX: 1x11 Drivetrain - Installation

Finally, after preparing the 11-32T 11 speed cassette, the short cage Ultegra Di2 rear derailleur, and the front single Ultegra 6800 crankset with Wolf Tooth 48T chainring, it is time to assemble all these new components to the Dahon MuEX!

It was already set up with a 2x10 speed Ultegra/XTR Di2 system, so there is no need to start from scratch. The advantage of having a Di2 setup is that it is modular. So if you just need to upgrade the rear derailleur, just unplug and replace the rear derailleur, and you are done! No need to change the shifters or the Di2 wires.

In this case, since I am going from a front double to front single drivetrain, the front derailleur can be removed, along with the left side shifter. The new Di2 wiring layout is shown below.

New 1x11 speed Di2 wiring layout. No more front derailleur or left side shifter.

Once everything is connected, the Di2 setup box SM-PCE1 can be connected to the system to update all the Di2 components. This ensures that the latest firmware is used and all the components are compatible with one another.

Previously, when the Ultegra Di2 front derailleur was installed, a 2.5mm spacer had to be placed under the right side bottom bracket cup to prevent the crankarm from touching the front derailleur. Now, without the front derailleur, there is no need for this spacer.

Red 2.5mm spacer under the right side bottom bracket cup can be removed.

Ultegra 6800 crankset with Wolf Tooth 48T chainring installed! Looks really good with the red chainring bolts.

Close up look of the interface between the chainring and the crankarm.

Front derailleur removed!

Ultegra 6800 11-32T 11 speed cassette installed!

Special short cage edition Ultegra Di2 RD-6870 rear derailleur for 11-32T cassette. Very ample tire and ground clearance.

Chain path when in the rear low gear. Rear derailleur cage is not over stretched even though it is a short cage, because there is only one front chainring.

Good clearance between cage/chain with tire

Another view of the clearance.

Setting the chain to the rear top gear puts the chain in the smallest sprocket, closest to the frame. Still ample clearance between chain and frame.

Chain path when in the rear top gear. Rear derailleur cage is slightly extended to maintain some chain tension to minimize chain slap.

Another view of the Di2 rear derailleur on the cassette.

Handlebar gets tidied up a bit, without the left side shifter and the Di2 wire between the left side shifter and the display.

Now it is 11 speed as shown on the display! I love the digital gear display, like how I first tried it on the Dahon Boardwalk Di2.

The bell can be mounted at the left side handlebar area, inverted for a neater look. Activate the bell by pulling the bell lever with the index finger, similar to how a shifter is operated.

No interference between the bell and other parts when the handlebar is folded down

Sufficient clearance for the bell when the bike is folded

View of the folded Dahon MuEX 1x11 speed

View from the drive side 

View from the non-drive side

For practical reasons, a kickstand is added to the bike despite the additional weight. Kickstand weighs about 157 grams.

Revised bike specifications, with the new 1x11 speed Di2 setup. Weight without pedals is reduced from 8.7 kg to 8.4 kg.

This setup has already been tested at the recent OCBC Cycle 2017, and there is no problem! The gear range is sufficient for climbing and also a bit of downslope pedaling. Of course, if you wish to pedal fast down the Sheares bridge slope, the gearing is not high enough. On all other days, this gearing is sufficient 99% of the time.

Gear shifting has been simplified, as there is just one shifter to shift across the 11 speeds on the rear cassette. The overall bike weight has also been reduced, due to the removal of the left shifter, front derailleur and second chainring. Even though the wide range cassette is slightly heavier, overall weight loss is still about 300 grams. Lastly, I get to utilize the components that were removed from the Canyon Endurace, using it to convert this Dahon bike to 11 speeds.