Input for redesigned Coker

Oops, make "wider hub".

No wonder I don't write very often............

--
Doug

Ride like you stole it!
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Doug's Profile: http://www.unicyclist.com/profile/673
View this thread: http://www.unicyclist.com/thread/46390

Oops, make "wider hub".

No wonder I don't write very often............

--
Doug

Ride like you stole it!
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Doug's Profile: http://www.unicyclist.com/profile/673
View this thread: http://www.unicyclist.com/thread/46390

Loosemoose said:

A disc brake, although it is cool, is a very binary braking system, it
has very little modulation. Its on hard, or its off. Very good hold,
and very rapid on-to-off-to-on response which is good for bikes, bike
trials and MTBing, but bad for unicycles IMHO.

I'd say completely the opposite, in my (limited) experience of
borrowing people's bikes modulation is one of the main advantages of
disc brakes over rim brakes. I think this is because you've only got a
tiny bit of travel between pad and disc, so it can be spread out over a
relatively large distance of lever pull. Obviously there are other
advantages, like not being screwed up by mud / wet, but modulation is
the reason many people say they put them on bikes. All brake types on
bikes have enough power to stop the wheel, how variably they work is
the major difference no?

There is a hassle with disc brakes though, that they might require
better wheel building and place more stress on the wheel, as I guess
you're putting the braking force through the whole wheel, rather than
just through the rim + tyre? I seem to remember this being part of why
trials bikers were slow to take up disc brakes, that you need a really
well built wheel to survive all the locking up of the back wheel and
the forces of hopping on the back wheel with the brake on.

Joe

--
joemarshall

my pics http://gallery.unicyclist.com/albuq44
------------------------------------------------------------------------
joemarshall's Profile: http://www.unicyclist.com/profile/1545
View this thread: http://www.unicyclist.com/thread/46390

That makes sense Joe, i'm no bike expert, it was just something I'd
heard, or assumed at some point. I agree with the extra stress issue,
stopping the hub moving will put huge rotational stress through the
spokes as the rim/tyre keeps rotating. At least with a rim brake you're
directly stopping the part touching the road, and the stress is in the
frame which needs a lower manufacturing tolerance than the rather
technical wheelbuild.

Loose.

--
Loosemoose

Dave: "I had a particularly bad UPD & found I'd lost a shoe"
Officially a  & ~ expert.

_no1_quote_of_crawley_2005:_
Leigh: "Where's Trevor"
Baz: "I think he's upstairs, balancing The Bishop"
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Loosemoose's Profile: http://www.unicyclist.com/profile/6326
View this thread: http://www.unicyclist.com/thread/46390

I hope this isn't too far off-topic because it's mostly fantasy and not
a real suggestion for coker design. But I wonder if some of the
brilliant minds on this forum could develop something like this.......a
mass-adjusting braking system. Wouldn't it be great if there was a
practical way of combining traditional braking with something that
kicked the center of gravity simultaneously backward (or maybe a little
sooner than simultaneously) to take some of the unforgiving face-plant
tendencies of braking out of play? I know that the body through
leaning is the organic way to do this, but I have yet to use a brake
for any purpose other than a very slight reliever for my legs on long
descents (and I've had some scary moments letting the brake off, too).
It seems like if there was a counter-weight mechanically connected to
the brake handle that moved back when you applied the brake, and came
back forward when you released it, that you could have a better chance
of staying on the unicycle when using the brake (especially in a
situation that requires a spontaneous adjustment in speed).

I'm sure that besides the weight issue, there must be other problems
with this, but I'm too short on brain cells to figure that out. What
do you think?

--
unidaddy

'My Gallery' (http://tinyurl.com/cx3jh)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
unidaddy's Profile: http://www.unicyclist.com/profile/7879
View this thread: http://www.unicyclist.com/thread/46390

New Coker, sounds like your fairly early in the process, but do you have
any goals regarding time to market yet? Just trying to get a sense of
whether there might be new offerings in 6 months, or are "you" a couple
years away?
Axe

--
Axe
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Axe's Profile: http://www.unicyclist.com/profile/11158
View this thread: http://www.unicyclist.com/thread/46390

To answer questions on time frame for the new Big One. I will be trying
very hard to at least have a prototype to show at the show in Memphis.

The reason I suggested a rounder profile was because John @ UDC showed
me worn Coker tires and the wear marks go onto the sidewall of the tire
because the square profile of the tire causes you to be on the side
wall when turning and not on the tread.

The weight of the new unicycle will be lighter. It will probably be
around 4 to pounds lighter.

--
new_coker
------------------------------------------------------------------------
new_coker's Profile: http://www.unicyclist.com/profile/11562
View this thread: http://www.unicyclist.com/thread/46390

One thought for bigger wheels, even if you make a clever frame, is that
it limits any accessories. My coker currently has lights, a mudguard
and a cycle computer on the seat tube and seat post. With a bigger
wheel and hence less seatpost, that lot wouldn't all fit.

As for disk brakes loading wheels, I wouldn't have thought that would
be too much of an issue. There are extra loads, but all in the
rotational direction that the wheel is designed for, rather than the
sideways loads that break things. I thought the problem with trials
biking was the rotors breaking, not the wheels, but I could be wrong.
It's not all marvellous though, because the disk brake takes up space
so the hub is effectively narrower, hence weaker wheel, and more faff
building because it has to be dished.

John

--
johnhimsworth

Never argue with an idiot; they drag you down to their level and then
beat you with experience.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
johnhimsworth's Profile: http://www.unicyclist.com/profile/1788
View this thread: http://www.unicyclist.com/thread/46390

I think that we have all agreed that we need lots of things that we
cannot agree on.

If a Coker doesn't fit into a car for instance, what is the problem?
Not the Coker but the car. Lets be honest. We like Cokers because they
are big, so what is the problem with bigger. BIG,BIG,BIG!

Don't get carried away with other things, they will come after the NEW
BIG ONE LIKE THE 48".

Short legs, that's your problem not mine!

--
onebyone

Bill Blogs is an alien!
www.municycle.com.au
------------------------------------------------------------------------
onebyone's Profile: http://www.unicyclist.com/profile/10014
View this thread: http://www.unicyclist.com/thread/46390

onebyone said:

Short legs, that's your problem not mine!

If you are intending to retail them, then it is your problem as well.
:-)

With careful design you can expand the market for any unicycle to more
people. More people, more sales, cheaper products.

Roger

--
rogeratunicycledotcom

++++++++++++++++++
Unicycle.com in the UK
The UK's Unicycle Source
www.unicycle.uk.com
+++++++++++++++++++
------------------------------------------------------------------------
rogeratunicycledotcom's Profile: http://www.unicyclist.com/profile/4116
View this thread: http://www.unicyclist.com/thread/46390