The basic concept behind the Hunter/Telford/Vortex frames is the same
for all three. Instead of using fat, low-end "cheap bike" tubing, on
unicycles being built wider than all previous unicycles (wider tires at
the dawn of manufactured MUni), use two pieces of high-quality bicycle
tubing (as for a bike's rear triangle).
As I remember it, the Hunter design came first, but Geoff Faraghan
designed his Telford frame before today's version of the Hunter frame
was made (there was at least one slightly different prototype). The
intent of the Telford frame was to imitate the seat post angle of a
bike, so bike seat posts could be used, specifically suspension ones.
Otherwise it was designed to look cool, which it did.
The Hunter frame seems to be a good, rigid design. It may look a little
funny, but it does the job well. As much should be expected from an
experienced bike frame maker like Rick Hunter.
The DM Vortex frame may have been thought as a logical extension of the
thin tubing design into a more symmetrical shape. I also came up with
that design, on paper, before I ever saw one.
So you have high-quality, thin tubing. This enables you to expand your
"framework" fore and aft, while at the same time keeping your frame's
width to a minimum. This is especially useful for shorter riders. Now,
not sure if this needs to be added or not, but if you added a hinge
mechanism to any of these frames it would risk compromising their
rigidity and would certainly undo any of the weight savings.
--
johnfoss
John Foss
"jfoss" at "unicycling.com" -- www.unicycling.com
-----------------------------------------------
"Idiot America—where fact is merely that which enough people believe,
and truth is measured only by how fervently they believe it." --
Charles Pierce, in Esquire Magazine
------------------------------------------------------------------------
johnfoss's Profile: http://www.unicyclist.com/profile/832
View this thread: http://www.unicyclist.com/thread/46919
