Schlumpf 2014

Does anyone know what changes, if any, are being made to the next batch of schlumpf hubs. :thinking:

shorter ratio was under analyze but I don’t know if finally it was decided or not to develop it
longer axis was expected in order to facilitate the crank fitting (strangely current Schlumpf axis is shorter than KH hub and needs to file the frame)
real anti-rotation system was expected (KH frame is compatible since disc tab is added)
recently I heard of a longer axis (125mm instead of 100mm) to receive the disc brake on the hub but I don’t know if this is realistic or not as all KH gear is using 100mm only !

Damn, shorter ratio and disc compatible? If it happens (when pigs fly) sign me up!

Is there an expected releases date?

Thanks BB, the shorter ratio would be an interesting option. I suppose we’ll just have to wait and see what comes out of Florian’s workshop.

As far as I know, the 2014 model is supposed to work with spacers (which are forbidden for the current model) and thus will provide compatibility to Kris’ EDB standard (external disc brake). The latest thing I heared about a release date was fourth quarter of 2014.

Many people asked Florian about this new generation and I have heared many things about it, but do not know what is truth and what is wish or fiction. Some say, there will be two versions. Others tell Florian said the hub will be narrower and have a seat for a disc brake rotor. Another change could probably be about torque support (or anti rotation system as you call it).

One guy wrote to Florian and got an answer which I will quote here:


Until now, I have not heared anything about the price.

Sounds like a good update to fit into existing situation, but no new ‘extras’.

Bring on the ratio change, my bank account is willing :slight_smile:

Ah, but for a downshifting hub to run on my 36er, it would be the ultimate gravel road killer.

I never rode with a Schlumpf hub but I read somewhere that there is some play in the hub making it feel like you’re riding with a lose crank. Is this true? and if so is it just when you’re beginning your ride or is it like that throughout the ride.

Maybe that’s something that will be sorted in the next model.

I think the current gear ratio is fine for the medium sized wheels 24, 26, 29, but on 36er a 1:1.33 ratio might be preferable. I wonder has Florian done any market research on peoples preferred gear ratio.

It would be interesting to see what ratio would be most popular with riders on this forum.

I’m asking all these questions because I’m considering buying a Schlumpf hub when the next batch comes on the market

My wallet is holding out the white flag as I speak lol!

There’s definitely some slop, but it’s hardly noticeable, and only while mounting that I could feel.

If there’s a smaller ratio and disc compatibility, I’ll seriously be thinking about it…

The issue of gear lash comes up from time to time on the general Schlumpf discussion thread (which begins here: Schlumpf hubs: general discussion. )
There will always be some, or you wouldn’t be able to shift the gears. But in my experience, it isn’t that much, and you get used to it fairly quickly. You don’t notice it at all when you are pedaling steadlily forward.

Thanks guys, I’ll go for it. I intend putting it on my KH 24" first and when I’ve mastered it then I’ll transfer it onto my KH 36er. I’m gonna wait 'til this new model comes out. Hopefully it will be available this year…

Thank you Eric, sounds clear now ! It will solve frame clearance, hub slipping, disc brake compatibility and Oracle frame compatibility issues

Florian said nothing about shorter ratio as Kris told me one year ago, may be not decided finally

Yes, thanks Eric for all the info. The translation of Florian’s letter is very helpful.

Perhaps Kris could chime in here… :roll_eyes: I’m dying to know.

One day we might get a 1.33 but i dont see it being too viable for Florian to manufacture them anywhere in the near future unless we get heaps more riders, and a s*#t load of more unicyclists to investing in a geared hub.

I love the idea of a 1.33 ratio but i see i would only be happy with it for the Muni. More i ride my 26G on road at maximum around 70% cadence, i dont think less than 1.5 will be very good…

I have another hub for my next guni. Kh36er, i think it will be scary crazy fast near tapped out speed at 1.5 and hell climbing small hills geared up so maybe 1.33 could be more suited to 36in…

If they get made put my name on the pre order list too. i will find a uni which will making riding that little more enjoyable and faster going with less effort.

honestly now after riding 1.5 for a while. 1.33 is not the holy grail, one and only.

1.5 has its well deserved place. 1.33 might be too much of a novelty. or a beginners geared hub…

The current models can be setup well with a bit of care and being particular. i dont think i have had a slip using carbon paste/ grease in my bearing cups. Just make sure it doesnt go near seals because its like sand paper on moving surfaces.

Hello M.T. I suppose using longer cranks would reduce the ratio somewhat… so that’s an option.

I’ve heard mention of the hub “slipping”. Would you please explain that to me and is it dangerous ? I’m thinking that on shifting gear the hub bearings are slipping in the bearing cups causing the rider to lose purchase as s/he pedals, causing a freewheel effect. Is that correct? :thinking:

I’m not M.T., but crank length doesn’t affect ratio. Leverage and wobble, sure, but the ratio remains unaffected by crank length.

Yeah, pretty much. The geared hub has to anchor against something. The current scheme involves a knurled surface which fits into the bearing holder like a bearing would. If that slips, you’re suddenly nearly freewheeling until it decides otherwise. Such a time is generally going to be when it is quite important to not be doing that, and an Unexpected Precarious Dismount[1] becomes likely as a result. So it would be as dangerous as any other UPD. Usually not, except when it is.

I read that old Schlumpfs had an arm which connected with the frame, but that was before my time. One assumes that that scheme had some shortcoming which resulted in the use of the current one.

[1] or… Unexpected Possible Danger… Uh-oh; Pedal Desperately… Unceremonious Padding Deployment… Unimportant Private Disaster… Unannounced Pedal Detachment…

I wish I could say that I was in the market for a geared hub, but it’s not in the cards at the moment.

One thing that always puzzled me about the torque arm arrangement on the Schlumpf hub is that unicycles have two mounting holes on the frame made to order for attaching the transmission. I figure there must be a reason why the current knurled bearing wasn’t made with a couple of lugs that the bolts could go through to replace the lower bearing housing; otherwise, it seems so obvious to me. Another idea I had a while back was that the same knurled piece could have an “ear” on it that would be sandwiched between the lower cap and the frame. In this setup you would need an alternate lower cap to accommodate the thickness of the ear, but that wouldn’t be to much trouble.

Thanks for the insights and rational approach. The 1.33 does seem to have a market, but even the 1.5 market isn’t that large. 1.33 would be smaller.

As far as climbing in 1.5 (on a G36) goes, it is a bit of a beast. That’s why shifting is nice. That’s where picking a crank size to manage both gears becomes interesting. Those who gravitate towards the 137ish (or shorter) side of things do it sometimes for the smoother spin. Sometimes it’s to reach the shift buttons easier too. I totally see both those points.

I’m running 150s so I can leave it in high gear a bit longer. I also like the 1:1 with 150s for going up pretty much any hill I can find. I like them for gravel roads and a bit of off roading too. I do lose a bit on the spin, but it’s the compromise I prefer. With size 12(US) shoes I don’t need to worry about reaching the shift buttons. I’ve thought about 137s, but I don’t feel the need to go a whole lot faster than I can on 150s.

I’ve had no problem with slip, but have known of others have problems with freewheeling. These issues were traced to loose cranks and cranks that didn’t sit far enough on the spindle and rubbed the frame.

No matter what the ratio, check your bolts for safety’s sake.