The jackshaft one? 19.5lbs, and it is a 36er with lots of extra frame, bars etc. Kind of hard to work out just how much the gearing adds, but it can’t be a huge amount - then again a Schlumpf is only 800g extra.
In regards to having a fixed up or down geared hub, I have found that my off road big wheel skills have grown to the point that I don’t want anything other than a downshifting hub.
In other words, I prefer a fixed hub for my 36er for all around use over a fixed gear reduction.
Anything that is worth doing is going to need to be a shift on the fly, esp since we have a viable alternative already (Schlumpf).
What frustrates me most, as a person who works on their own gear, is that with a Schlumpf I can’t choose my gearing and I can’t fix a broken part.
The “fix” for me would be a downshifting hub that has both 1:1 and 0.75:1 AND an upshifting hub that has 1:1 and 1:1.25
With ratios that I choose, the other costs (weight, complexity, durability, cost) would be far less significant.
Flat out, a 50% step is too much, we all know it, some riders are just more willing and capable at working around it.
I would own two hubs if I could get the gearing I desire.
During last Unicons, I had the opportunity to meet Florian Schlumpf and to discuss with him about my 3 gears hub project (0.727:1 / 1:1 / 1.375:1 with twist shifter).
Florian confirmed that my drawing is fine and should work, but he is not interested to develop and produce it. I need to find an other solution. Let’s see …
Thought I would add my two cents here about what I am looking for.
I ride my uni instead of owning a second car or taking public transit. While a bike is probably still cheaper, it makes me feel far less bad about dropping a lot of cash on something like a hub. A schlumpf is in around $1200, which is half what insurance for a year on a vehicle would be here, let alone gas, maintenance etc. It’s also about the price of a year’s worth of transit passes. I’d rather ride! So cost for a well-made reliable hub is not an issue for me.
In terms of new developments, I’m definitely wishing I had more gears. I am very happy with my schlumpf/36 setup at the moment, and I’m sure that tires and rims will continue to get lighter and more functional. I would love to see a 1:1 / 1.35 / 1.7 triple-geared hub on a uni.
I also think that I would be totally fine riding something like the huni-rex or a jackshaft type unicycle to adjust a triple-geared hub to the ratios that I would like. If the hub was .7/1/1.3 as Didier suggests above, and I could bump everything up a bit it’d work fine for me, especially if the solution was readily available.
I hope to see three geared or greater in the next few years, the Schlumpf is a huge step forward but there’s always an improvement to be made!
I’m sorry if people feel as though they are being flamed for not being schlumpf fan boys (like myself). However, at times i feel as though i have to defend the equipment from a small group of people who do not like it, which may paint a deceptively negative view of it to other people who look to this forum for advice. There are more than 500 schlumpf muni hubs out there in the world with happy users, most of those people don’t post on these forums.
Back to the question at hand- A 3 speed remote shifting hub with the ratio’s that Dave mentioned would be a really great leap in gearing technology. I think down gearing would have an extremely small market (sorry Ben) as so much is achievable on a regular sized wheel in 1:1.
I think it will be a good while before anything else comes close to matching the price, quality and usability of the schlumpf.
Mark
It depends on what you are comparing. A down gear as an interest with a bigger wheel size. A 3 gears with Dave ratios on a 24" or 26" wheel is very close to my concept of 3 gears hub (with down gear) on a 29 wheel with short cranks but will be easier to ride in high gear thank to 29" wheel inertia compared to 24" and 26".
Let’s see …
\
That’ what a forum is for- to exchange ideas.
It would be equally deceptive to paint an overly optimistic view of something that people have various issues with. I think it’s a gross generalisation to conclude that 500 Schlumpf users view it the same way you do.
I was one of the first to own a Schlumpf, I have set a world record and placed 2nd and 3rd in the Unicon marathon on Schlumpfs. I think it’s a great technological advancement for unicycling. They have their place, I’m happy to have several Schlumpfs in my collection.
I hope they get better (and they have with each reincarnation), but at present, I only use them for racing, because the reasons I stated earlier.
John Foss (a far more talented rider than I) can mount his 36er in high gear but I can not imagine being able to do that. When I first got my geared 36er (before i learned to shift with my feet) I tried a downhill assisted mount (leaning on my mailbox) in high gear just to see what 2nd gear felt like. It was tough just to get up on the darned thing in high gear but it did make me comfortable enough to not fear the gear when I did learn to shift. I became fairly proficient with shifting 150mm cranks but now that I have shorter (137mm) cranks I don’t feel like I have to ride on my toes as much. Plus 137mm cranks spin like a dream in 1:1.
MUni is challanging enough and I’m rarely in a hurry on a mountain bike trail. I think the Schlumpf is at home in a 36er where it almost feels natural on day one as it was amazingly easy to learn. i love mine because Cokering pavement in 1:1 gearing is boring. I guess that is why I think every time I read a Schlumpf pros/cons thread, “that are not talking about me” and the geared 36er owners know what I’m talking about.
So my vote is its perfect as is!
This is in the works. Schlumpf is planning to sell this as a retrofit item, maybe by the end of … 2013.
That would be a very good addition.
Mark, I think you underestimate the desire for gearing down big wheels to climb and descend steeps. Many of us ride 29ers, and while the 1:1 is good for 80% of all trail riding, there are still places where a geared down 29er would be very practical, i.e the other 20% of the trails. Then there are the 36er touring crowd who would kill for a downgeared hub when climbing and descending long grades. A downgeared 36er would be a game changer, truly versatile for distance tours, mixed use, and commuting.
Think about from a biker perspective, what would they say about geared down vs gearing up? Can you imagine someone touring a 24" wheel and gearing up? Not likely, what you will find is a single speed biker riding a big wheel (29") and gearing it down to climb; that was me before I rode unis.
110% agreed
You used a gear ratio of less than 1:1 on a single speed? Strange - round here most seem to run about 2:1 on a 26" wheel and just a tad less on a 29er. That’s why biking analogies aren’t all that useful.
The other thing you need to consider when talking about gearing down is the losses in the drivetrain. With a current Schlumpf hub, low gear is direct drive, so virtually lossless (there is a tiny amount of power wasted spinning the planet cogs, but as there is no load on them it’s pretty minimal). In high gear there are gearing losses, but that’s more than made up for by the efficiency improvement of having the human body work slower. If you had a geared low gear you would waste a significant amount of power in the gears - noting that the torque through the gears would also be higher than with a current Schlumpf and power wasted increases with increasing torque. Unfortunately you’re doing this at a point where you don’t have power to spare and there aren’t actually huge physiological advantages to gearing down.
all of that depends on the wheel size and crank lengh, as said by Ben
Presumably, if a rider gears down it’s cos they’re climbing a hill they can’t do in 1:1?
If so, then even with efficiency losses, they’ll still find getting up the hill considerably easier, so the lower gear will be very useful.
for sure, gear down should be used only for climbing
the efficiency of an automotive tranverse manuel transmission is 95%, so I guess Schlumpf hub is not very different from this figure …
Seriously, you can’t get the gist of my comment without help 
I rode 29er SS rigid, 32 x 20-22 depending on terrain, 2.3-2.4" tires, low pressure, a lot like what I ride for muni. I got the big wheel for terrain gobbling and maintaining momentum because I lacked the low gear for cranking through tech stuff, the big tire was for absorbing the terrain, the low gearing for climbing steep stuff, coasting was my downhill “high gear”.
What I look for in a muni is all of the above. What is lacking is the low gear for climbing. Unlike Mark, I am totally uninterested in riding a small wheel as they suck for terrain bridging. Don’t believe me, then ask a biker why they ride a 29" vs a 26", don’t be surprised if their answer is strangely similar to mine.
Imagine the 36er touring/commuter crowd getting a geared hub that allowed them to “gear down” to 24", they would be able to spin up steeps without straining their legs and stay in the saddle. There is something to be said for having a higher spin rate to reduce leg stress, or so they say.
There is absolutely no way that a significant portion of the 36er touring/commuter crowd would lug around an extra 2.5 pounds of rotating weight so they could ride it like a 24". Gearing up a smaller, lighter wheel makes sense; gearing down a bigger, heavier wheel makes absolutely no sense for a road unicycle (and precious little for an off-road unicycle).
I absolutely would ride a geared-down 29" for off-road; I’ve already moved to 165 cranks, and long uphills are still too hard. I don’t want to be standing up and powerclimbing anything but short steeps.
It’s not really rotating weight, in any meaningful way, since the distance from the axis is so small. I doubt I would notice it at all on the road, and off-road only when I was doing something technical that involved really moving the unicycle around.
I’m talking about the rotating weight of a 36" wheel, not the hub. Gearing down a 29er is just silly; gearing down a 36" is insane.
Let’s say there is a geared down hub. Same
Weight same strengths and weaknesses. Just does the opposite
I personally can see a physical 24" wheel with virtual 36 geared up. And I see the advantages of this
A physical 36. And a geared down virtual 24… Maybe I’m missing something but there seem many disadvantages weight, bulk, height or ride. But I see few pluses
Maybe not this ratio or not this wheelsize. And I may be missing something but I think the utility of a down only shift is small. Now
A hub that shifts down to 0.7 and up to 1.5
Mmmm … Shut up and take my money