Just stumbled across this post from the Triton Overlord on a mtbr forum:
“We are building a unicycle frame that will have internal disc brake system (just like on the bi&es), 125mm bearing spacing (classic one is 100mm that’s why disc brake does not fit inside the legs). This is a very new standard introduced by Nimbus. And we are the second manufacturer after Nimbus itself to provide unicycles under this standard. Trying to keep up to date, thanks to our demanding customers!” - http://tinyurl.com/uniframe
I wonder if this frame was a once off, or if there will be a batch of 125mm spaced Tritons specifically designed to take the Nimbus Impulse hub and disc brake set up hitting the market soon…Who knows, between Mountain uni and Nimbus (and hopefully KH???), soon we may have more disc brake options than we can poke a stick at…
I wouldn’t count on it. It only addresses half of the issue (really way less than half). Where are you going to mount the caliper? I don’t see the vision of redesigning the frame for a wider hub without addressing a caliper mount. Amidst the challenge of selling high end Triton Frames with a limited market for the “stick pokers”, Triton has already innovated their frames with a tab mount, and solves the aftermarket disc brake retrofit issue. Not to say innovation isn’t going to always happen or be welcomed, but R&D cost is high, margins are slim, and sellable market for a wide hub Ti is miniscule…
75mm flange to flange plus 20mm for the disc would work in the existing frames. I though UDC was planning on releasing something like that…
There’s nothing inherently wrong with 125mm spacing, but it is wider than a 100mm spaced hub, so you feel like you’re riding a wider uni. Not so much of a problem for bigger folks, might even make it more comfortable in terms of seat-thigh rub as well as foot positioning, but some smaller folks are gonna hate it.
I really enjoy riding my KH 29er with 100mm spacing, not sure whether 125mm spacing would improve or worsen the ride. I do know that the Oregon rides wide, partly due to the big wheel, but also due to the wide frame. I would not choose to ride a 29 x 2.4 wheel/tire in an Oregon.
I suppose it’s possible that the 125mm hub could become a new standard, it would certainly improve some designs, such as providing additional space for a disc hubbed Schlumpf or even a some differential drive systems
I really like the standard spacing/external disk for most of my stuff but I run into problems when the wide tires are mixed in.
When the legs of the frame are angled outward (like the Triton Triple) things get real tight with an external disk. On a standard hub I can get it to work with less than 1mm of clearance on the inside of the disk and about 1mm between calliper and crank. I am going to have to do some mods to make it work with a Schlumpf.
I think that having less then 2mm of clearance total is a bit too tight and there are two things you can do to rectify it.
1- make s-shapped legs a la conundrum
2- switch to internal disk and have legs go strait up
Option number 2 is more economical as long as you aren’t planning on running a Schlumpf, and also makes it easier to get a über wide tire/rim combo into the frame.
I think that the internal disk on wide hub is here to stay (for fat unicycles and 36ers) and external disks are also the future (for everything else, including schlumpfable 36ers)
I think what I don’t like about the Oregon is how wide it is at the crown, ie where my knees hit the frame. In a sense, an external disc makes sense since it doesn’t require the frame to be wider at the hub.
Oh my goodness, I just had an epipheny, what if the disc mount was part of a crank spacer on the Isis spline between bearing and crank? Then it wouldn’t need a specific crank, just clearance at the bearing holder. It might be tight on some frames…
Where do I claim my prize?
Seriously, I am all about disc brakes, esp since I am finding Maguras to have insufficient stopping power, but what holds me back from the MountanUni system is the cranks. I honestly do not like the Sinz cranks. If there were other cranks choices or if the disc adaptor worked on BMX styled cranks (thread on or bolt on), then I’d be on board.
I’m not counting on it, in fact i’m seriously considering investing in the mountainuni system and another normally spaced triton designed to take a disc. I just thought the discussion it prompted would be interesting, and so far it has been
Also, mountainuni1, can you define “stick poker?” I’m not familiar with this term…
I’d prefer an internally placed disc, but I don’t like how it would increase the q factor. You’d have to narrow the hub which would weaken the wheel if it was internal.
So I think the Mt Uni system is a good compromise…I’m getting one!
soon we may have more disc brake options than we can poke a stick at…
Stick Poking referenced.
The SINZ crank hesitance would have “some” relevant conversation if was based on something more than a look, or general visual comparison. Or still better yet, buy a pair and use them. Then, I be happy to accept any constructive criticism as to why one would consider their style, design, strength, sturdiness, Q Factor or otherwise inferior. Not many in that camp, and many more who’ve bought and enjoy them. You’ll see another happy Schlumpf/ Mountainuni customer in the forums shortly.
i really love the mountainuni system and trust it! and i don’t need the disc inside, i usally ride the 26" setup with the 3.0er tyre.
but: the SINZ cranks are not very strong, ok it’s enough for normal muni, but when you start doing bigger drops they bend very easy (happend to me 3 times: with the 155er and 135er…) and here in europe they are hard to get and als the coice of length is small.
it would be great if we could combine the mountainuni system with any isis cranks…
it is a one off and there will be no series of this - except you order some
a customised frame will need arround 6month+ at the moment
contact me for interest http://ridetriton.com/products/en/home/
personal I am not a friend of the wide hub solution cause of the Q factor.
just at the time when Mountainuni started I plan to produce anasymmetric hub with inner disk 100mm. then I tested the Mountainuni system and for me it works so perfect with the out disc that i didn´t find any need of an asymmetric inner hub with all problems connected - weekening the wheel, no schlumpf, high costs…and stopped Flo´s (kaiser4racing, designer) and my project.
why inner disk
the most discussed “problem” with the outer disc was the exposed disk will be vulneralbe to damage - at all there was not serious damage till now, there is no problem.
for extreme riders the cranks could be stronger , thats right - so when you ride like turtle - or plan to ride like him you may bent some cranks (before he bent the sinz cranks his problem were the the breaking pedals - so I think if you do not destroy you pedals you mostly will not bent the sinz cranks)
anyway riders like him like to have problems with all kind of stuff / munis
on the other hand the since cranks are lovely light (and may be comparably with the also very amazing venture cranks)
a lot things in life are a question of bucks - so if you have enough we are lucky to build titanium cranks (for mountainuni system) or an inner disk hub for you:D…but even so i spend realy a lot of cash for unicycling I wont do this for myself
I am about to receive my replacement Oregon frame as we speak. The first one didn’t last me very long unfortunately. And I am pretty much expecting this new frame to fail as well but we’ll see, maybe not.
So if it turns out they all break, then unless Nimbus improve that frame design this Triton frame would be my only alternative so far for using the Oregon wheel set.
I really don’t have that kind of money anywhere, though, so :o
But there might be a market there if all the Oregon owners break their frames (which I really don’t hope for Nimbus).
The idea with a disc mounted to a Schlumpf sounds very good to me, I wonder if Florian is experimenting in that direction at all.
The “Sinz” problem is due to the one crank choice, the choice is not as high quality as current non disc compatible cranks, ie weaker and more prone to bendage/breakage, and there is only on Q style.
I am familiar with Sinz cranks, thanks for asking.
So, I don’t have a problem with in-bound or out-bound disc location, I think risk of damage is not different that what Magura calipers are exposed to now, but I do have a problem investing in something that has an unknown future based on a limited production crank and apparently obsolete BMX/MTB standard.
ISIS, for those who pay attention, is no longer common in the biking world.
So, to make me a consumer, I need a standard that will live on, so show me something like a thread on adaptor that work on BMX ISIS cranks or find another crank choice, then I’ll buy. In the meantime, the hub mounted disc is more utilitarian as all cranks are usable and frames are more easilly re-designed.
I’m not sure I understand this point. It’s true that there aren’t many choices for brakes that fit the Maggy four bolt mount, but that’s really a different issue. Unlike brakes, cranks are a necessary thing for a unicycle. To have your crank choice limited by your choice of brake is the problem. It would be like saying that to run maggies you could only use united steel cranks. If that was the case I don’t think many people would use them.
It would be cool to have a rotor that attached to a mount on a trials crank. The only problem there is that trials cranks are generally available in a couple of standard sizes, and they are long.
The good part about the 110 BCD and ISIS standards are that they are open standards free for anyone to manufacture. SINZ might be the only readily available crank in the smaller sizes but nobody is stopping you from shortening beefier cranks, getting a spider for profile cranks, or coming up with your own idea to get the disk on a suitable crank.
wait, weren’t we talking about a 125mm spaced inboard disk Triton frame?
Nice new uni in the making 
