Folding tyres are easier to mount and store. They are also a gram lighter.
Why are non-folding tyres still manufactured?
Why folding and non-folding tyres of the same model differ in price more than a few cents, which I think the price difference between 2 meters of kevlar cord and 2 meters of steel wire would be?
The reason non-folding tires are manufactured is that people still buy non-folding tires. Companies will make what sells.
In the original post there is a comparison between two tires of the same model, one is folding and one is not. According to the post:
folding and non-folding tyres of the same model differ in price more than a few cents.
The question asked in the original post is really:
Why would someone choose a non-folding tire over a folding tire if the two tires are the same model and virtually the same price?
Someone would choose a non-folding tire over a folding tire of the same model and price is if they didn't need the ability to fold the tire and they felt that a non-folding tire is easier to install.
Another factor is that tires of the same model name often come in many variations. For most manufacturers, the model name simply refers to the tread pattern or even just the general style of the tire (e.g. Panaracer’s Gravel King lineup). Model names are therefore almost always followed by an indecipherable combination of letters, numbers, and Egyptian hieroglyphs that denote the specifics of the tire’s construction, and by extension the “tier” of that specific tire. Here's an example of a product page for the Schwalbe Nobby Nic:
As you can see, there are three different tiers and several variations in casing, rubber compound, and size within each. This is all for one model name!
My point is that the wire bead versions of a tire often come with a cheaper casing and cheaper rubber too, which explains their lower price. The high-end rubber and casing options aren't available for wire bead tires at all. As you can see from the image, the wire bead Nobby Nics are $28, while the mid-range is around $55, and the top-of-the-line $89. (To be fair, most of Schwalbe's products are notoriously well-performing but also unusually expensive.)
Also, manufacturers often associate fancy marketing with the "holy moly this tire FOLDS!!!" aspect, which further increases the price delta.
Lastly, steel is really, really cheap. Kevlar is less so.
Tangent: This is also why you have to be careful when buying tires, especially used ones. When you are buying a “Nobby Nic” for example, are you getting the $89 model or the $55 one? You can easily be paying too much/little because of the specifics, even without factoring in the bead material.
Cost The cheapest wire-bead BSO tyre I can buy is $14 NZ, and is a MTB format in all the common diameters. example
The cheapest folding tyre would have to come from a bike shop, and starts at around $50 NZ. For a direct comparison, their cheapest wire bead MTB tyre is $21-$29.
At the low end, wire bead tyres are cheaper.
Sturdiness From browsing, it seems there are a lot of mid-range MTB tyres from brand names, that are wire bead. For example, Maxxis detonator, ardent, crossmark etc. These appear to be knobby variations where weight is not the main issue.
Tubeless I can't really speak personally on this, but wire beads are supposed to be more resistant to popping off the rim, or burping under low pressure, because there's a physical wire holding the bead in a line instead of just air pressure.
Personally I prefer a folding tyre, unless its a really cheap bike that I don't want to sink money into.
Some quick numbers:
https://www.alibaba.com/showroom/wire-rod.html
A cheap road tyre is 365g in steel, 280g in aramid bead
https://www.schwalbetires.com/bike_tires/racing_tires/lugano-2
MTB tyres seem to have a similar weight difference, though there are rubber differences also there.
https://www.schwalbetires.com/bike_tires/off-road_tires/racing_ray_489
I estimate therefore around 100g of steel reinforcement in the bike tyre, costing 5-8 cents. The aramid weighs around 1/6, of this so maybe 15g. At $25/kilo this comes to around 38 cents.
So the price difference should be 30 cents. I guess when you markup the price for sale you'd expect to multiply that by about 5, so maybe $1.50
If you consider the kind of garbage fitted to a cheap bike, then 'cheapest everything' and 30 cents off the price is 100% something they want. So we can immediately rule out ending steel wired tyre, because they are cheaper to make, they work fine, and many bikes are built on hundreds of such penny-pinching distinctions.
Well then why do they sell them at retail?
Because they want to get as much money out of you as they can. If someone is willing to pay $1000 (and they are) for a set of handlebars, why sell it for $100.
It's price discrimination, and it's there to get you too spend more. They make very little profit on the cheapest tyre, and more on each tyre as the price increases.
When Shimano sell the same brake lever with a screw blanked out as 'SLX' as Deore XT, that's not because it's cheaper to make, it's because if you want the nicer product then they will make you pay for it.
Given that getting a name as a bike tyre manufacturer is expensive in terms of large amounts of marketing, distribution, etc., there's literally no reason for them to sell 'nice' folding tyres for less money. I live in Indonesia, there's a local brand called Swallow, and there's also Schwalbe. Does it make sense for Swallow to add to their cost basis by using aramid? No. Because anyone who wants a nice tyre is buying Schwalbe or Continental. Is there any reason for Schwalbe or Continental to sell you a folding tyre for the price of a wired one? No, because people are willing to pay $50+ for a bicycle tyre, so they have no reason to engage in destructive business practices and eat into their profits.
