SLC say good-bye to UNI5

General
1

I just completed 41.2 miles on UNI5. Total time–3 hours 47 minutes. Average speed about 10.87MPH. The first 28.1 miles were straight into a head wind. The last 13.1 miles were exactly the
opposite direction, therefor a tailwind. Relatively no side winds, as the wind was right in my face one direction, and at my back the other. Incidentally, the wind was strong enough to make a big american flag like you see at government building stand straight out. Any less wind, the flag would have sagged. So however many MPH wind speed that is.

My average speed in the head wind was 10.87 MPH. My average speed in the tail wind was 10.92. As you can see, not any significant difference in speed. Well guess what, I have ridden a Coker enough to know that in the same conditions I would have shown a greater difference in average speeds when comparing the 2 directions. Whether or not the speed on my Coker would have been faster or slower in whatever direction for the sake of this discussion is irreverent. The fact is that you are more exposed to wind on a coker than on a 24.

With that behind us lets talk about what is important. The above speeds are of little difference when compared to the same course ridden on my Coker under the same conditions. I have recorded some faster times on the same course with my Coker, however I was doing a bunch more ridding and was in much better shape

I have been a participant in endurance cycling for 10 years. Both road racing and recreational rides. I have completed eleven 200 mile rides. Of those rides, most were road races where a slight advantage over 9 or 10 hours made a significant difference in over all time. I discovered that the biggest contributor to effective endurance riding is energy conservation.

Lets take a look at endurance unicycling and energy conservation. By endurance unicycling I mean miles that are 75 or greater in 1 stage or 1 day. Any corrections or adjustments via poor road conditions, uncomfortable saddle, wind, or whatever that cause one to have to speed
up or slow down to stay balanced are the biggest contributor towards taking away from energy reserves . These corrections( even slight) over time significantly take away from your total endurance. The idea behind effective endurance unicylcing , other than your fitness level is allowing the wheel to roll at your desired speed ( depending on your vehicle and fitness level) without interruptions. You must develop the ability to enable the wheel to roll down the road in a smooth uninterrupted manner. Obviously though out your ride you will have to make some corrections for various reasons, but the whole idea is to minimize them.

The good news is that with practice it is possible to propel UNI5 down the road with no more ( or very little) effort towards corrections that the Coker. Particularly on smooth roads. What does this mean in the world of speed and endurance unicylcing? EVERYTHING! We can talk about differences in wind speeds at elevations, leverage, wheel size, or whatever, but the simple fact is that you CAN propel UNI5 over long distances, at very close to the same speeds as the Coker!

With this discovery ( or invention) future distance rides will be much faster! Most unicyclers that are in shape are able to travel
at faster speeds but are simply limited by whatever cadence is possible on their Coker. Some even go to shorter 4.5 or 5 inch cranks to effectively increase cadence. The most important thing we all must realize about cadences
is this.-- At a given wattage or effort-- an increased cadence is directly proportional to an increased heart rate. In other words, more energy is expended giving the same amount of effort (always measured with pressure or
watts at the pedal) with cadences above 95. 95 is the line at which benefits are lossed with faster caddences. This variable is
so well documented in the world of cycling that training rides at higher cadences (110+) are designed to target the heart and save from having to tap into other energy reserves.

By combining a 700C wheel with the same hub that is on UNI5, you are effectively reducing overall cadence by forcing pedal speed into an acceptable range, adding inches of travel per revolution rather than increasing
cadence. Needless to say, there are many Coker heads that are experienced and fit enough to travel at faster speeds but are limited to how fast they can pedal. Now we have a solution to the problem.

This hub is key to providing the unicycle world with a vehicle who’s speed is only limited by the riders level of fitness and fear factor. That is what we have needed since the sports inception. I see it as revolutionary.

Most importantly is that UNI5 is just as enjoyable as a Coker. It’s easy! People will look forward to using it. That’s big! Have fun and put this thing to the test!

 Dan
2

A well considered/writen review, Dan, identifiying and addressing what I think are the primary concerns of most of us for this contraption. Sounds like your work is paying off, Greg.

Christopher

3

curious

who’s payin for all this shipping and it sure would be neat if at the end of the “tour Uni5 2002” there were total shipping costs, i would like to see site to site price differances for shipping the same unicycle. :roll_eyes:

4

Re: SLC say good-bye to UNI5

In article <dan.2rqio@timelimit.unicyclist.com>,
dan <dan.2rqio@timelimit.unicyclist.com> wrote:
)
)This hub is key to providing the unicycle world with a vehicle who’s
)speed is only limited by the riders level of fitness and fear factor.
)That is what we have needed since the sports inception. I see it as
)revolutionary.

Not to say anything negative about UNI5, which sounds great, but at
some point you run into the problem that your gear is larger than
you can easily push up a hill. A 700c wheel with a 1.5 multiplier
is approximately equivalent to a 42x25 bicycle gear in terms of
distance covered per pedal revolution. (If my calculations are correct).
Even if you leave aside the fact that unicycling takes more energy
than bicycling, I think most riders would have difficulty pushing
a 42x25 up a hill greater than 5 or 6%. On a bike, non-hammerheads
can compensate by riding really slowly and reducing pedal torque, but
riding big geared uni slowly is a challenge of its own.

So now we just need to engineer a shifting mechanism
-Tom

5

Re: Re: SLC say good-bye to UNI5

Negative comments about the Uni.5 are welcome and ENCOURAGED. These are product reviews and, when necessary, should be scathing.

6

I can’t believe I missed it! The UNI5 was in SLC, and I knew nothing of it… rats! I probably would have drive up from Provo to check it out (well, I don’t know… it just gives Greg an ego trip :slight_smile: I’m guessing that in the next few years the hub will be available to buy (at least I hope).

To the SLC uni’ists:
When and where do you guys meet up? Maybe I’ll make a chance to come up and ride with you.

7

Re: SLC say good-bye to UNI5

“Tom Holub” <doosh@inl.org> wrote in message
news:Og9s8.3980$Yb1.21426@sea-read.news.verio.net…
> Not to say anything negative about UNI5, which sounds great, but at
> some point you run into the problem that your gear is larger than
> you can easily push up a hill. A 700c wheel with a 1.5 multiplier
> is approximately equivalent to a 42x25 bicycle gear in terms of
> distance covered per pedal revolution. (If my calculations are correct).
> Even if you leave aside the fact that unicycling takes more energy
> than bicycling, I think most riders would have difficulty pushing
> a 42x25 up a hill greater than 5 or 6%. On a bike, non-hammerheads
> can compensate by riding really slowly and reducing pedal torque, but
> riding big geared uni slowly is a challenge of its own.

700c * 1.5 = something like a 40" gear, most singlespeed mountain bikers
ride 52" gearing and can get up pretty much anything with them, road bikers
often ride 60" fixed or more and again are quite nifty at the getting up
hills lark, so I don’t think this is a major problem yet as our gears are
probably pretty equivalent once you’ve taken into account crank length
differences.

I reckon going downhill is more of a problem though a brake could sort this
out.

Joe

8

I can’t believe I missed it! The UNI5 was in SLC, and I knew nothing of it… rats! I probably would have drive up from Provo to check it out (well, I don’t know… it just gives Greg an ego trip I’m guessing that in the next few years the hub will be available to buy (at least I hope).

To the SLC uni’ists:
When and where do you guys meet up? Maybe I’ll make a chance to come up and ride with you.

Now that the weather is warming up, I hope to get a group together at least once a month. We have never met in the same place twice. Check unicycleutah.tripod.com for times and places of meetings.

My son and I rode the Uni5 with Michael Grant and Dan on Saturday. I was very impressed! It was a little difficult to mount at first, but easy enough to learn in a few tries. It was a blast to ride the Uni5 along side one of the other guys on the Coker. The Uni5 feels a lot like the Coker at moderate and fast speeds, but it turns much sharper because it has less momentum. I agree with Dan that this has the potential to revolutionize the sport. On the negative side, it has some backlash when you try to slow down suddenly. I tried idling on it, but could only idle two or three times before it threw me. Its a great cycle and I’m hoping that it won’t be too long before it goes into production, although I imagine the cost will probably be beyond my budget.

Tom Copeland

9

Re: Uni5

John Foss <john_foss@asinet.com> wrote:

>Part of that previous information is probably from me, from experience
>riding geared giraffes and a 20" geared to 40" many years ago. But the
>difference is in the ratio. At only 1.5:1, this cycle is a much easier ride
>than the 3:1 giraffe I rode at UNICON VIII, the 20" geared to 40" I rode in
>1982, or the almost 2:1 Schwinn Giraffe I set up in 1980. It’s still extra
>work to stay above the wheel, but the gear ratio is the controlling factor
>of that.

The bigger gear ratio may be a significant factor. However, on a
giraffe, the center of wheel and pedal rotation is not the same as it is
with the Uni5. On a standard unicycle or Uni5, one’s feet (when on the
pedals) are almost always centered over the axle without much effort.
On a giraffe, the center of pedal rotation can move forward and backward
relative to the center of wheel rotation and complicates the balance,
requiring extra effort beyond that of a standard or Uni5 unicycle.

Also, the chain of the giraffe certainly has a much larger backlash than
the Uni5 and especially the standard (which has no backlash)

In the future, we should specify wheel size, gear ratio and gear inch,
even though with any two the third could be computed.

>> Overall it takes more effort to propel UNI5
>> when compared to a Coker–But, not much.

>I agree. But 20% more “effort” at the most, and this based on minimal riding
>experience. The percentage would surely go down with practice, but I think,
>always remain above zero.

I would guess that the backlash, since it is probably trivially small
compared to a chain drive, would require minimal additional effort.
Overcoming the friction of the epicyclic hub itself might actually be
more additional effort. The percentage of additional effort might be at
least a few percent, simply due to overcoming the additional friction
of the epicyclic hub itself.

>> Most importantly, with the 700C, less effort will be
>> lost due to corrections. Again, I feel this is 95% of
>> the reason UNI5 is a little harder to propel.
>> Inherently a 700C is less susceptible to road
>> imperfections than a 24 inch thereby lessening corrections

>I don’t think it’s the wheel size so much as the gear ratio. But this means
>the effort on a 700c wheel would still be similar to on the 24". As the
>wheel gets heavier, though, I would expect an increase in “work”. But a 700c
>“road” wheel should be lighter and more responsive than a typical 24" wheel.

The 700c wheel will certainly roll over small bumps with greater ease
than a 24". A larger wheel will also have greater momentum to overcome
the small bumps with less corrective effort.

>> Even if 45 inch pneumatic tires were available Im
>> not so sure it would be the way to go compared to this.

>It’s still about the same; the big wheel will always be the more effortless
>and steady ride. But it will always be heavier, more susceptible to wind,
>and harder to fit into the cupboard. The smaller, geared wheel will be
>lighter, better for going uphill, and much better for storage.

There are pros and cons for both big wheels and epicyclic hubs.
For now, the epicyclic hub will be rare and very expensive and this is a
big con for it. Even ignoring this factor, the big wheel has the clear
advantages of no backlach, both big and heavier wheel for easier control
over small bumps, and greater tire surface contacting the ground that
reduces the twisting effects of wind gusts. Uni5 has smaller dimensions
for easier storage and is significantly lighter which may aid in
climbing hills as John has suggested. However, could the epicyclic hub
fail in very steep climbs due to the extreme (sine wave) forces required
to climb? Almost all my regular big wheel hubs that have failed, failed
in a steep climb.

>> They’re heavy, and you are much
>> more exposed to the elements.

>I don’t see how you are more or less exposed to the elements on a different
>sized wheel. You are presenting exactly the same profile to the wind, and
>sitting in the same position. The difference is you don’t have all that
>wheel causing wind drag.

Wheel size will not be a significant factor in wind resistance at speeds
up to about 20 mph (32 kph), unless riding into or perpendicular to a 10+
mph (16+ kph) natural wind.

Sincerely,

Ken Fuchs <kfuchs@winternet.com>

10

Re: Re: Uni5

How would you describe the failure, Ken? Did the axle break, did the flange weld break loose, did the spokes break or tear out, or something else?

11

Re: Uni5

On Thu, 11 Apr 2002 02:13:33 -0500, Ken Fuchs <kfuchs@winternet.com>
wrote:

>the big wheel has <snip> greater tire surface contacting the ground that
>reduces the twisting effects of wind gusts.
While this may be true, I argue that the bigger wheel will be more
prone to the twisting effects of wind gusts.

The big wheel has more surface to catch side wind; moreover, on
average that surface is farther away from the twisting axis, which
increases the momentum. Assuming that the wheel rolls forward at
appreciable speed, the friction of the tyre that resists twisting will
not be very large (it would be significant if the rider did a
standstill).

Does anyone of the test riders of uni.5 so far have comparative
observations to make on this point?

Klaas Bil

“To trigger/fool/saturate/overload Echelon, the following has been picked automagically from a database:”
“Security Consulting, Ramsi Bin Al-Shib, MYK”

12

If you are experiencing a high torque situation, wherby maintaining a fast cadence is not possible (like with a Coker typically found in a head wind or hills) then you will get the twisting effect. I found that it’s very hard to avoid in these situations. On a bicycle you simply shift down a few gears in order to get the cadence back up to where it is smooth, reducing the need to enhance the push- down motion associated with high torque, low cadence situations.

As for comparing UNI5 with the Coker with regard to twisting, I found them no different. In high torque situations you will get a twisting effect with both. However, almost all twisting under normal conditions (flat to rolling hills with no severe headwind) can be virtually eliminated with practice. Most twisting is due to inefficient pedaling practices such as excessive bouncing or unnecessary shifting your weight back and forth. The idea is to pedal efficiently, whereby no twisting takes place.

People think that you simply just pedal. Even cyclists have to practice efficient pedaling. It not easy and takes practice. On a unicycle it’s even harder. Nice round even brisk strokes as apposed to pumping or bouncing strokes. After a while it becomes intuitive.

When experiencing high torque situations I would presume that if there is less twisting that takes place with a big wheel when compared to uni5 then its probably because the wheel itself (long spokes big rim and big tire) are absorbing most of it.

Dan

13

Would you not take exception with radicaly steap climbs, where the rider must pitch weight onto the top pedal to effect any forward movement? Or with proper technique, do you think this can be ‘twist free’- I can’t image it, but that don’t meen it ain’t so.

Perhaps Scot Cooper could give us some expert insight…

Christopher

14

RE: SLC say good-bye to UNI5

> > People think that you simply just pedal. Even cyclists have to
> > practice efficient pedaling. *

In this thread, I think the use of “twisting” is the same as what we in the
unicycling world have traditional referred to as “wobbling”. This is where
the unicycle makes a slight “S” pattern as you ride. If you go through a
puddle your wheel will make a snake-like line, rather than a perfectly
straight one (this is one of the ways to spot unicycle tracks on the trail,
vs. bike tracks). Some people wobble, in their normal riding, more than
others.

> Would you not take exception with radicaly steap climbs,
> where the rider must pitch weight onto the top pedal to
> effect any forward movement?

The slower you are going, the less of a problem wobbling (or twisting)
should be. When riding up real steep stuff, your speed is probably equal to
or lower than walking speed.

> Or with proper technique, do you think this can be ‘twist
> free’- I can’t image it, but that don’t meen it ain’t so.

The steeper the trail (up or down, without brakes), the more you will tend
to wobble. Though wobble can be minimized, the steeper the trail or the
stronger the headwind, the more wobble you will have to cope with.

When I ride up long hills, I swing my arm in rhythm with the pedals, to
counteract some of this wobble. Since I usually hold the seat with my left
hand, the right hand does most of the swinging. As my right foot presses
down, my arm swings to the rear. As the left foot presses down, my arm
swings to the front. Naturally, the slower you are going and the harder you
are working, the more “waste” is caused by any twisting or wobble. My arm
swinging helps me make a straighter line, which gets me up the hill with
(presumably) less expenditure of energy. And in the shape I’m in, I need all
the help I can get.

Note: this arm swinging of course is only useful when you’re going real
slow. If your arms are moving like a cartoon character’s, you know you’re
going too fast for it to be useful.

> [image: http://www.outtech.com/Unicycle/EUT/Bio/BioCooperScot.jpg]
> Perhaps Scot Cooper could give us some expert insight…

Scot is one tough hombre, not afraid to ride his MUni giraffe nearly
anywhere. He even rode it on some of the wooden bridges at the Sea Otter
Classic in March (my pictures not up yet).

But here’s some steep unicycling pictures:


Brett Bymaster rode up steeper slopes than I’ve ever seen anybody do
continuously (not on momentum gained from run-up).

Enjoy,
John Foss, the Uni-Cyclone
jfoss@unicycling.com

“We were discussing Big Mac Meals. I think that has little if anything to do
with cow parts. There are probably more UNICYCLE parts in a Big Mac than cow
parts.” - Greg Harper on cuisine

15

I want the yellow Telford that guy is holding up in picture #94. Do you know how I can get my hands on one. I think it will work well with Harpers new hub coupled with a 700C tire.

Dan

16

RE: SLC say good-bye to UNI5

> I want the yellow Telford that guy is holding up in picture
> #94. Do you
> know how I can get my hands on one. I think it will work well with
> Harpers new hub coupled with a 700C tire.

There is an unkown length of waiting period for the sought-after Telfords. I
don’t think it costs you anything to be added to the list! You have to
contact Geoff Faraghan. Best way to get a response from Geoff is by phone.
According to your unicyclist.com profile, you don’t live anywhere, so I
don’t know if this would be long distance or international. I can give you
his number if you like, but will not post it here on the public formum.

Geoff has ridden Harper’s unicycle and likes it. I took pictures of him on
it with the Laguna Seca Raceway scenery in the background, at Sea Otter.
I’ll notify the group when I get them posted…

Stay on top,
John Foss, the Uni-Cyclone
jfoss@unicycling.com

“We were discussing Big Mac Meals. I think that has little if anything to do
with cow parts. There are probably more UNICYCLE parts in a Big Mac than cow
parts.” - Greg Harper on cuisine

17

Re: SLC say good-bye to UNI5

Thanks Dan for this exposition. You focus on twisting caused by
left-right alternation of pedal force applied. My remarks (and request
for comparison between uni.5 and Coker) were written as a response to
Ken Fuchs’s statement about twisting caused by wind gusts which I
understood as side wind gusts pushing the rider (and wheel etc) out of
a straight line. Maybe I understood that incorrectly, I now realise
that windgusts from the front (and also from the rear) invoke
reactions in pedal force that can cause twisting as well.

Klaas Bil

On Fri, 12 Apr 2002 11:14:04 -0500, dan
<dan.308zy@timelimit.unicyclist.com> wrote:

>
>If you are experiencing a high torque situation, wherby maintaining a
>fast cadence is not possible (like with a Coker typically found in a
>head wind or hills) then you will get the twisting effect. I found that
>it’s very hard to avoid in these situations. On a bicycle you simply
>shift down a few gears in order to get the cadence back up to where it
>is smooth, reducing the need to enhance the push- down motion associated
>with high torque, low cadence situations.
>
>As for comparing UNI5 with the Coker with regard to twisting, I found
>them no different. In high torque situations you will get a twisting
>effect with both. However, almost all twisting under normal conditions
>(flat to rolling hills with no severe headwind) can be virtually
>eliminated with practice. Most twisting is due to inefficient pedaling
>practices such as excessive bouncing or unnecessary shifting your weight
>back and forth. The idea is to pedal efficiently, whereby no twisting
>takes place.
>
>People think that you simply just pedal. Even cyclists have to practice
>efficient pedaling. It not easy and takes practice. On a unicycle it’s
>even harder. Nice round even brisk strokes as apposed to pumping or
>bouncing strokes. After a while it becomes intuitive.
>
>When experiencing high torque situations I would presume that if there
>is less twisting that takes place with a big wheel when compared to uni5
>then its probably because the wheel itself (long spokes big rim and big
>tire) are absorbing most of it.
>
>Dan
>
>
>–
>dan
>------------------------------------------------------------------------
>dan’s Profile: http://www.unicyclist.com/profile/78
>View this thread: http://www.unicyclist.com/thread/17331
>

–
“To trigger/fool/saturate/overload Echelon, the following has been picked automagically from a database:”
“BRLO, http, Weekly World News”

18

Re: SLC say good-bye to UNI5

On Fri, 12 Apr 2002 13:37:15 -0700, John Foss <john_foss@asinet.com>
wrote:

>If you go through a
>puddle your wheel will make a snake-like line, rather than a perfectly
>straight one (this is one of the ways to spot unicycle tracks on the trail,
>vs. bike tracks).
The other difference is that a bicycle leaves a double track (go
figure!) which is especially noticeable in curves or, indeed, in
wobbly riding. This spring, I have competed with my daughter (both on
unis) who could leave the straightest track after a puddle. We were on
a par.

>My arm
>swinging helps me make a straighter line, which gets me up the hill with
>(presumably) less expenditure of energy.
If I go up a steep paved road, it seems to help me if I wobble a lot.
With a lot I mean

/

/
or maybe even //. (Hey, two pictures of 4 bytes each, that’s small!)
I then do slow, “single” pedal pushes. Riding along this trajectory is
a bit less steep. But maybe I’m fooling myself.

Klaas Bil

“To trigger/fool/saturate/overload Echelon, the following has been picked automagically from a database:”
“BRLO, http, Weekly World News”

19

Re: SLC say good-bye to UNI5

>Ken Fuchs wrote:
>> * Almost all my regular big wheel hubs that have failed, failed in a
>> steep climb.

harper <harper.2ydmz@timelimit.unicyclist.com> wrote:

>How would you describe the failure, Ken? Did the axle break, did the
>flange weld break loose, did the spokes break or tear out, or something
>else?

In all cases, the end of the axle cracked and broke off either at the
outside edge of one flange or inside edge of the cotter pin slot.
(All the hubs I had built were cottered.) The axles were all cold
rolled steel. I think the stress of occasional sideways falls may have
been a factor in the failures. The hubs were not heat treated and
usually lasted about a year of heavy daily use (except for winter).

Correction: I did have one hub fail while riding my 50" wheel on a
level street. All other big wheel failures were on my 40" going up
a steep hill.

Till now I’ve been silently following the epicyclic hub from design,
through implementation and now testing. I’m really impressed by the
quick progress and creative testing procedure! However, what can anyone
say about the long term reliability of the hub? How long might it last
under various conditions such as:

  1. level roads

  2. hilly roads

  3. hilly trails

  4. mountain trails

Can the hub’s internal components take daily stress without wearing out
and/or breaking prematurely?

How could a successful hub be defined: X miles of failure free riding
without significant degradation of the ride quality (backlash, etc.).

Greg, I hope you do have continued success with your epicyclic hubs!

Sincerely,

Ken Fuchs <kfuchs@winternet.com>