Just curious… how high up the banking were you able to get at the velodrome?
Also… what top speed have you hit on that machine?
To the best of my information, according to Guinness, official hour records have to be done on either a closed course, or an out & back course. A velodrome is not necessary. But the logistics of using an out & back course are alot more difficult to prove & document to the decimal distance.
On the track, I had the officials measure the inside edge of the apron surface 3 times, and take the average. It was not possible for me to have even ridden this line, as it was defined by a grass-to-pavement edge. So yes, I was quite a bit outside that measured line on the turns, being in the center of the apron width. To use the banking on that track, you’d have to go at least 20.
While other designs obviously inspired you… your design seems quite unique and ingenious… and most importantly, you have gone about designing and building the 21st implementation of this type of technology on the latest, greatest unicycle (for speed)… and have tested and proven the design!
Hey, Pete… this is your second reference to this technology being manufactured 
… a change of heart or some new developments, perhaps? Either way… that’s GREAT NEWS for unicyclists worldwide! I can’t wait to hear more…
Your doing an amazing job - keep up the good work! You are a major asset to the unicycling community!
and judging by the three pages of discussion so far, this part of your ride was quite a success as well
well done
One question i have for Pete and Ken relates to the effect that their closed-course path length has on their performance, e.g. does the relatively tight radius of curvature at the velodrome or cricket field make their riding more difficult? Does the relatively narrow pavement increase the difficulty of your ride? Does the repetitive nature of orbiting such a short course cause you to become mesmerized?
thanks,
.max
I would add elegant to that list.
I put the rest of my pics up on page 2 of Tom B’s Gallery.
If you haven’t had a chance look at the vid too for a look at the track and cadence.
I can’t speak for Pete- but I find velodromes very difficult to ride on. But it looks like Pete used a big velodrome with a relatively shallow banking (?400m). I’ve ridden on a 333.3m velodrome and it is definitely not worth the effort.
My 24hr record was done on a closed 465m circuit. That is just big enough to make it interesting. The curve is wide enough that you do not notice it too much. It was quite bumpy and potholed in places, which slowed me down a bit, but also kept it interesting when you are riding around the course hundreds of times.
Point to point rides are definitely easier psychologically- but not accurate enough for Guinness. They must have changed to rules since Lars did his point to point 24hr record in 2002- I was told that unless I had super accurate satellite/GPS mapping that they would not accept it.
Ken
Pete rode on the inside apron of the velodrome where it is flat (no banking in the turns). Each lap on the apron was measured to be 1263 feet (a bit less than a 1/4 mile per lap). As velodromes go it’s a big velodrome, but it’s still a tight lap for a unicycle. Something with a longer lap and wider turns would be better. Pete lives close to the velodrome so it was convenient and he was also able to get the track closed for the hour while he tried for the record.
Something interesting about the measuring method used for the 1 hour style time trials. When it comes to the end of the hour you finish the final lap then they do some math to figure out how far you were into that lap when the hour ended. I didn’t know that was the way that they did it.
Andrew, I used the flat apron surface, not the banking. You have to be going about 20 to not have to lean waaaayy right on the banking. The apron surface width is about 8 feet, so I was riding 3 to 4 feet from the inside measured line. That added some distance, so my recorded pace of 15.1 up to the crash was probably an actual 15.2?
I have hit about 21 so far on the wide-open trail, that’s as fast as I mentally cared to go. My best practice lap at the track was 46 seconds, right at 20mph, but there’s no way I could maintain that.
Max, my track was 385 meters, and I believe Ken’s was 465. The relatively tight turns didn’t bother me much. The biggest problem was a sideslope on the straightaways. The entire track is banked, even on the staights. I had to lean to the right on every straightaway. Other than that, I didn’t mind riding an 8 foot wide section. And no, I didn’t get mesmerized, only fatigued!
Those latest pics, especially the focus/endurance one, are so professional-looking it is scary.
One can’t help but think that unicycling has passed a milestone of maturity in some subtle way.
I know what you mean about having to lean to counter uneven pavement (such as the banking at the velodrome) from riding my Coker and my geared giraffe in the City (on the streets and the bike path). When I rode my geared giraffe on the bike path along the Hudson River even the slightest amount of unevenness required me to lean in the opposite direction and was extremely annoying (especially in windy conditions which compounded the problem)… whereas I would hardly notice that same small amount of unevenness on my Coker! I think the higher seat height (plus being on top of a pole essentially) and the smaller wheel size of my geared giraffe (no noticeable flywheel effect) made the smallest amount of compensation lean feel like a lot!
So 20MPH is the magic number… very interesting! I assume that would probably only get you maybe about 1/4 - 1/3 the way up the banking?
I watched the video footage of your lap… absolutely phenomenal stuff!
A 20MPH lap… Wow! That’s quite an impressive achievement on a unicycle! You are an inspiration, Pete!
Many thanks for developing the technology to further the sport and for generating increased awareness and exposure for this (incredibly exciting) discipline… and to Harper and Florian Schlumpf, as well, for the technologies they developed… which are also [B]extremely exciting![/B]
Crank length does seem a bit weird.
But allowing geared unicycles to set records seems pretty silly, given the massive speed advantage they have over normal unicycles. Would you allow freewheeling geared unicycles to do the record, which might make a big difference on an up then downhill out and back course, with the higher maximum speed on the downhill and the large range of possible gears.
Maybe there’s really scope for two categories, similar to the difference between ‘cycling’ and ‘human powered vehicle’ records on two wheels, where cycling is a bike that looks like a normal bike and can be pedalled off from a standing start etc, whereas human powered vehicles are just anything that can be pedalled. Even if access to geared wheels is less limited, it’s still putting an extra price premium on specialized equipment for anyone who wants to challenge it, whereas currently you could just buy a stock coker and challenge pretty much any of the records by training up, so they’re truly records of athleticism and skill, rather than of technology purchasing ability.
Having said that, it is really great that you’ve made a unicycle that a relatively inexperienced rider can ride almost as fast as some of the top high speed riders and it’ll be cool to see what happens with it.
Joe
surely u can’t make such a sweeping statement without estasblishing what the ‘allowed’ equipment should be?
it’s been mentioned on this thread that one of the current records (that i haven’t seen anybody contest) was set on a 42" wheel
surely if u take issue with a geared uni, u should establish a wheelsize limit?
why not rather allow any and all riders on one human powered wheel (we can discuss fixed hubs later) to have a go at the record and if a group of ‘purists’ would prefer to keep a seperate ‘36"only’ record, they will be free to do so
to prescribe what can or can’t be used in record-attempts is a slippery slope that can easily lead to innovators and innovations (such as geared unis, that most everyone on this board seem to believe is ‘a good thing’ for the sport) be strangled in their creative endeavours
if u can’t test your new equipment at the top end of the sport (i.e. record attempts), where can u test it?
surely u can’t make such a sweeping statement without estasblishing what the ‘allowed’ equipment should be?
it’s been mentioned on this thread that one of the current records (which i haven’t seen anybody contest) was set on a 42" wheel
surely if u take issue with a geared uni, u should establish a wheelsize limit?
why not rather allow any and all riders on one human-powered wheel (we can discuss fixed hubs later) to have a go at the record and if a group of ‘purists’ would prefer to keep a seperate ‘36"only’ record, they will be free to do so?
to prescribe what can or can’t be used in record-attempts is a slippery slope that can easily lead to innovators and innovations (such as geared unis, that most everyone on this board seem to believe is ‘a good thing’ for the sport) be strangled in their creative endeavours
if u can’t test your new equipment at the top end of the sport (i.e. record attempts), where can u test it?
(ps. my mention of ‘purists’ in the post above suddenly struck me, on second read, as seemingly disparaging
it was not intended in this way and i hope the ''s will remove this impression)
“why not rather allow any and all riders on one human-powered wheel (we can discuss fixed hubs later) to have a go at the record and if a group of ‘purists’ would prefer to keep a seperate ‘36"only’ record, they will be free to do so?”
Surely this “unlimited” class must be an option. For starters, it will provide the most innovation, since folks will all be trying to come up with the next best thing, and the sport will eventually benefit from all the experimentation.
Relative to other sports, a speed record recorded on a non-geared 24 inch uni is pretty “cave,” even thouugh it’s an impressive accomplishment. The geared option brings the whole shebang to a much higher level, and soon expect crazy speeds to be achieved and maintained over 60 minute periods, as well as top speed trials.
Enjoy these developments, because it’s one of those rare times when an adventure sport is just coming of age. In 50 years folks will look back on the nascent geared speed work and present-day Muniing as the “Golden Age.” In other words, if you’re interested in speed and Muni, it’s a very good time to be alive bacause standards are being set as we read!
JL
By definition, the event is limited in scope, by the requirement that you only have one wheel. Also it seems for the IUF records, they outlaw geared giraffes. My opinion is that for the purposes of standard records, a unicycle should be defined as a one wheeled direct drive vehicle where the cranks are attached to a wheel axle which directly drives the wheel and the pedals are directly attached to the cranks.
Philosophically, I think geared unis are cool as pieces of engineering and I’m sure are cool toys, but it seems to me that geared unicycles lose one of the fundamentally cool things about unicycles, which is the simplicity. Effectively a chain geared unicycle is a fixed wheel bike with the front wheel taken off. The only unicycle like . Even with the schlumpf gears you just can’t see the complexity inside the hub. Pragmatically it’s great that you can go faster, but it just isn’t the same thing.
If you don’t outlaw them in record attempts, you end up with a situation where someone relatively unfit can get a record, which other riders without access to the technology can’t, like the bicycle ‘human powered vehicle’ records, where only people with expensive custom designs can compete and it’s arguably much more about the technology than skill. I think until most riders have geared unis and they don’t cost a fortune, this argument is somewhat about whether you think the record is about athletic achievement or a combination of athletic achievement and the ability to make or purchase very expensive unicycles.
In bicycling, recumbent bikes still get built despite not being allowed to attempt the standard world records. Unicycles still get built, despite not being allowed to attempt UCI records. Tri-bars etc. still get made.
Joe
Notably this is a complicated topic…
A split of two classifications of unicycles is going to be the best way to go. With a geared and non geared standard, those who have geared access can continue to push the technology further. Perhaps there are only a small number of events that are recognized, or even achieved: furthest distance and fastest time in one hour or in 24 hours.
Guinness Records will be most interested in what sells; that’s their point, to sell books and show amusing humans on TV. For them it is in their best interest to have faster unicycles, geared or not.
World records come with one other price tag: Determination. Funding, ability and practicality all become details to a passionate person who has a dream to push the boundary of human achievement further.
I have absolutely no problem with a geared unicycle being used for the records. It is still very much a unicycle and certainly isn’t like a giraffe just because of the chain.
As long as the geared unicycle has the cranks in line with the center of the wheel (like a standard unicycle) then it’s a standard unicycle whether it’s geared or not. The other limitation I would make is that the unicycle is fixed geared.
No need to divide things up into geared and non-geared classes.
If you’re worried about unfair advantages then you might as well define a universal standard unicycle that will be used for record attempts and not allow anyone to use anything different. Just lock it in to that design for ever and ever.