You could try the Mountain Uni UCM. It rotates the calliper up compared to the D’brake giving the unicycle a tidier look and prevents the hose from sticking out so far. But you have to remove the calliper from the mount every time you remove the bearing holder.
I have an early disk tab triton frame. mine has a non-standard spacing and uses a 160mm front adaptor for a 180mm disk. I don’t know if they have changed.
I did see they were more upright but I am not sure how easy they are to come by now that braking project has sadly come to an end.
It must have been you I was thinking of, that is totally the other way around to the normal front/back adapter set up 
MountainUni is still around, selling disc brake kits, adapters, etc. I just bought one of their kits after deciding against going with a hub mounted disc setup.
MountainUni is still selling disc brake kits, adapters, etc. I just bought one of their kits after deciding against going with a hub mounted disc setup. Kb1jki posted that they are not moving forward at this time with their new design for custom cranks due to costs. That hardly means the company is done. I’m expecting the new KH disc cranks will work with the caliper mount as well.
MountainUni is still selling disc brake kits, adapters, etc. I bought one of their kits after seeing the Oracle and deciding against going with a hub mounted disc setup. Kb1jki posted that they are not moving forward at this time with their new design for custom cranks due to costs. That hardly means the company is done. I’m expecting the new KH disc cranks will work with the caliper mount as well.
That doesn’t make sense, if you remove the bearing cap brake mount, you are also removing the wheel, so why couldn’t you remove them together and having enough hose you shuodl be able to uncouple them without removing the caliper from the mount.
A frame mount would be nicer and “tidier”, but it’s not a big deal, I have yet to hit my foot on the caliper or mount, and the reinstall of a D’Brake doesn’t require break adjustment so it’s a no brainer for the most part
The UCM positions the caliper more at the top of the disc so are you not able to move the bearing cap down until the caliper has been removed or at least loosened quite a bit.
The UCM positions the caliper more at the top of the disc so are you not able to move the bearing cap down until the caliper has been removed or at least loosened quite a bit.
If you are not changing wheels often, having the caliper and hose closer to the frame and less vulnerable seem worth the inconvenience. If you are changing wheels often the D’brake is probably preferable.
Hmm, I didn’t realize it was quite that tight, seems like that may be a downsize of that design. Honestly, I have been using a D’ Brake adaptor on the Oregon for a while and now I’m using them on my 26 and 29, I really can’t see any reason to worry about the the caliper being removed with the bearing cap.
I remove my wheels for cleaning (rare), flats, (very rare), and tire changes (not so rare 
), the brake always aligns just fine, there is no obvious flexing that I have noticed, even under hard breaking and me being a big guy. If anything were to flex, it would be the spindle/bearings in the bearing holder or the spokes/rim, and that would affect any brake.
On my first Oregon frame I had direct mount, now I have the D Brake, I found no noticeable difference in performance, nor did I have any increase in caliper impacts from objects or my foot. This is a non issue. The only reason to have a direct mount is for weight and aesthtics, possibly some convenience. Maybe the KH frames will work for both inboard and outboard?
What I do notice about the disc brake vs rim brake is that as I am riding down a rough trail and braking, the brake is far, far, far (did I say far?) smoother, which probably has a lot to do with the brake surface being free from the effects of rim flex.
Yesterday I got stuck in a huge downpoor, a perfectly dry trail turned in a miasma of muck, clay, organics, puddles, and through it all the disc brake just kept on working, then when I hit dry ground it cleaned up and no rubbing. Let’s see a rim brake touch that!!
Why IS mount? For unicycles it gives the greater options for adjustment and swapping discs. Having the adaptor in place allows greater ability to change settings. It also works best on the Oregon and for bearing housing mounting.
Why not post mount on frame? It was an option and considered. On our first Oregon we did mount on the frame as it was CrMO, but with the Oracle being in the pipeline it moved back to the d’brake concept. The manufacturing of forks/frames and getting them “square” through the welding and final hardening is just not easy. Bike companies go through lots of work (and cost) to guarantee position. The d’brake works every time, it aligns on the bearing that is a reference point for the disc and works with almost any unicycle frame - simple. I bet the bike guys wish they had such a fool proof method.
Why position the calliper so low? We tried higher on the first prototypes but this position seams the obvious one. It allows the wheel can be removed without changing any of the setting on the calliper. Also in testing it was show to not be a problem for catching either the calliper or the hose. (you can move the hose position so that it points in to the frame not out, that is what I have done)
Roger
From what I’ve seen everybody using the d’brake is mounting the IS to PM adapter straight to it without any additional spacers - which means there isn’t a need for additional adjustment beyond what PM gives you. If you want to swap disc sizes with PM, then you simply swap adapters in exactly the same way as with IS - the adapters to run larger discs with PM are just as readily available, and even easier to use. There is no advantage at all to using IS in this application - but PM has the advantage that those wanting to run a 160mm disc can do so without the need for another adapter.
Am I missing some other reason why IS is preferable, or do you not understand why PM works just as well as IS for the scenarios you mention?
If PM works it works. But IS is more tollerant of missalightment when using a 160mm disc and is easier to integrate on to unicycle designs, particularally bearing mount.
From experience, I think that in time 180 will become the favoured disc size on unicycles.
Roger
>200mm ftw!
Just got my hub and d’brake ordered along with some spiffy new spokes. My 203mm MT2 is patiently waiting in its box still - can’t wait to get it built up into my KH29 next weekend!
Pics coming when it’s done.
203 on a 36" looks great. 
I thought that was a 205
might be… what is 2mm on a disc that size anyway!
Yes, I.S. allows for more adjustment, esp with the D Brake.
I have quite a few muni rides on my Oracle hub/D Brake adapter, other than some fine truing after the first few rides, it is bomber!
Note, unless you are a seasoned wheel builder and you know how to build dished wheels, use a spoke tensioner, etc… I suggest having the wheel built for you; and have them use spoke lock (penetrating thread lock for spokes).
The Oracle hub has narrow flange spacing, kinda freaky when you first see it, but it works fine.
I heart disc brakes 
Umm, 1mm each side?
New Nimbus 36" Alu frame ?
2 or 4 pistons ?
It is a prototype frame on another development programme. The way of things to come? I am not saying yet, but we have 2 new 36" designs being worked on for next year, both are exciting for different reasons.
The brake is a Hope, I am not certain but I think it is the 4 pot version.
More description of the unicycle here:
http://www.unicycle.uk.com/blog/staff-unicycles-part15′/
Roger