Nimbus 36" frame weight



oddsends wrote:
> Where do you people come up with this garbage. You can order the new
> Big One with brakes/mounts (HELLO). I just measured (with calipers)
> the seat post of my coker to be 25.4mm, Surprise a size that you can
> buy a Thompson seat-post for and coincidently the same size as the
> nimbus frame ('wrong again'
> (http://www.lhthomson.com/elite_sizes.asp)). How do you know it's
> stiffer did you actually test them or have you seen actual test
> results? UDC claims it to be stiffer but I haven't seen anything that
> backs up their claim with empirical evidence. Not to mention I was
> rather amused when Terry(Muni Addict, I have also seen others also post
> the same) couldn't feel an appreciable difference between the Radial
> frame and the Nimbus frame. And what's the reason why the schlumph hub
> won't fit? Bearing size, Bearing spacing, Bearing holder lip
> interference, or the fact you would have to drill and tap a hole for
> the torque arm yourself?
>
> Am I completely off my rocker or what?



Well said, I couldn't have said it better myself. I just don't
understand why people in this forum seem to speak as if they have owned
and tested each and every unicycle frame. I think if you have evidence
of such a claim, then that's fine. Otherwise, you sound like the New
York Times. :D

Shannon


--
ShannonG
------------------------------------------------------------------------
ShannonG's Profile: http://www.unicyclist.com/profile/16593
View this thread: http://www.unicyclist.com/thread/67828


Posted Via Usenet.com Premium Usenet Newsgroup Services
----------------------------------------------------------
** SPEED ** RETENTION ** COMPLETION ** ANONYMITY **
----------------------------------------------------------
http://www.usenet.com
 
i think there's some confusion over which coker frame people are
referring to. the original steel coker frame fit a 22.2mm post and had
no brake mounts. it was light, but the quality was low.


--
boo radley

User CP - Edit Options - Uncheck: Show Signatures - Save Changes
------------------------------------------------------------------------
boo radley's Profile: http://www.unicyclist.com/profile/10484
View this thread: http://www.unicyclist.com/thread/67828


Posted Via Usenet.com Premium Usenet Newsgroup Services
----------------------------------------------------------
** SPEED ** RETENTION ** COMPLETION ** ANONYMITY **
----------------------------------------------------------
http://www.usenet.com
 
"Why the V2 frame? My guess is that it's all about the look."

I was shopping for unicycles back before Christmas, and Target had a
20" unicycle on their website with the 4-post design. Hard to imagine
that it was just coincidence. I don't see it there now, though.


--
StephenH
------------------------------------------------------------------------
StephenH's Profile: http://www.unicyclist.com/profile/16659
View this thread: http://www.unicyclist.com/thread/67828


Posted Via Usenet.com Premium Usenet Newsgroup Services
----------------------------------------------------------
** SPEED ** RETENTION ** COMPLETION ** ANONYMITY **
----------------------------------------------------------
http://www.usenet.com
 
unicyclification wrote:
> Couldn't the same question now be asked about the Nimbus 36"? What is
> the advantage, now, of the Nimbus 36" over the Coker Big One, which
> weighs 480 grams less?



Because no one has ridden both frames yet as far as I know, no one
knows the answer to this. No one knows if it's stiffer (although
personally I've never had any hassles with stiffness on my old stock
coker frame). The only known advantage is that the coker is way
lighter.

The other known advantage of the nimbus at the moment is that you can
buy the frame alone, whereas the coker frames aren't available
separately, so you don't have a choice to use the new nightrider rim /
tyre / hubs without first buying the coker wheel. The coker does look
like a pretty good bargain though, and the difference in price is a
fair bit.

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/67828


Posted Via Usenet.com Premium Usenet Newsgroup Services
----------------------------------------------------------
** SPEED ** RETENTION ** COMPLETION ** ANONYMITY **
----------------------------------------------------------
http://www.usenet.com
 
johnfoss wrote:
> Why the V2 frame? My guess is that it's all about the look. The frame
> itself must be really stiff, but that's not a huge thing because it
> still connects to the wheel through the same two little bearings.

Correction. Though the interface at the wheel is basically the same for
all 36" frames (in terms of stiffness), there's still a lot of flex
that can happen in a frame. I should have remembered this lesson from
my old carbon MUni frame. That's too long and unrelated to repeat here,
but suffice it to say we put tremendous twisting forces into unicycle
frames as we pedal, especially uphill. Way more than you might imagine.
Add a long handle to the front of your seat or frame, and you increase
the torque that can be applied in this twisting.

Therefore, stiffness may be much more a factor than I tossed off the
other day, though I've yet to do much serious comparing. I have mostly
only ridden my own Coker (1st-generation, deluxe) a lot, and other
peoples' 36ers very little.

Based on what I've seen and can extrapolate, the V2 frame should be the
stiffest by far. This means there should be less flex between the front
of your seat or handle and the bearings. This is side-to-side flex
we're talking about. The next-stiffest frame should be the Nimbus (or
Hunters), which also have more structure to brace against flexing.
After that there are the various steel frames that have been made,
which are probably fairly similar and finally the new "alloy" frame on
the Big One, which is still an unknown. Surely it is less stiff than
the V2 and other multi-leg designs, but beyond that we'll have to get
it out in the field and see for ourselves. It all depends on how beefy
the tubing is.

Coker also claims that their new unicycles are quite a bit lighter than
the originals. Definitely the new rim will have a lot to do with this,
plus general lightness in most of the other parts, I guess. For the
moment, I think the tires are the same, but they are developing new
ones.


kington99 wrote:
> it's stiffer, it has a narrower profile, it has brake mounts...

My *guess* is that the Nimbus frame must be stiffer, but nobody knows
this yet. How do you know about the narrower profile? How much
narrower? They both look fairly narrow. And both are available with
brake mounts.


ShannonG wrote:
> Otherwise, you sound like the New York Times.

OUCH! Consider yourself burned. :D


StephenH wrote:
> I was shopping for unicycles back before Christmas, and Target had a 20"
> unicycle on their website with the 4-post design. Hard to imagine that
> it was just coincidence.

Interesting. Did it look like the same exact frame? Apparently Coker is
making the V2 frames in-house (in Tennessee), so I'm sure that one was
unrelated. It's possible they "scouted" the job of fabricating the
frames in Asia first, which put the idea out there for some
high-volume, low-price company to make some knock-offs.

I hope to get my hands on a new Coker soon, and will offer what
feedback I can...


--
johnfoss

John Foss
Email: "jfoss" at "unicycling.com" -- www.unicycling.com
-----------------------------------------------

Man with broken collar bone say: "Have you checked your shoelaces
lately?"
------------------------------------------------------------------------
johnfoss's Profile: http://www.unicyclist.com/profile/832
View this thread: http://www.unicyclist.com/thread/67828


Posted Via Usenet.com Premium Usenet Newsgroup Services
----------------------------------------------------------
** SPEED ** RETENTION ** COMPLETION ** ANONYMITY **
----------------------------------------------------------
http://www.usenet.com
 
johnfoss wrote:
>
> Interesting. Did it look like the same exact frame? Apparently Coker is
> making the V2 frames in-house (in Tennessee), so I'm sure that one was
> unrelated. It's possible they "scouted" the job of fabricating the
> frames in Asia first, which put the idea out there for some
> high-volume, low-price company to make some knock-offs.



I assume he was talking about the 'Mongoose Squid'
(http://tinyurl.com/2upw86)

It looks ideal if you think that most trials unis are too light and if
you prefer your knees with that battered and bleeding look :D

STM


--
semach.the.monkey
------------------------------------------------------------------------
semach.the.monkey's Profile: http://www.unicyclist.com/profile/12078
View this thread: http://www.unicyclist.com/thread/67828


Posted Via Usenet.com Premium Usenet Newsgroup Services
----------------------------------------------------------
** SPEED ** RETENTION ** COMPLETION ** ANONYMITY **
----------------------------------------------------------
http://www.usenet.com
 
Thanks for clearing that up, johnfoss. After reading your previous
post, I was starting to wonder if the frame design was important at
all. Your clarification makes it a little easier to ask the question I
was getting at earlier, which is basically this...

If the Nimbus frame provides enough extra stability or stiffness over
the aluminum Big One frame to be worth the extra 480 grams of weight,
then is it possible that the Coker V2 also provides enough more
stiffness over the Nimbus to be worth the additional 600 grams of
weight? And at what point does the "balance" between frame weight and
frame stiffness shift in favor of one over the other? Is it determined
entirely by the type of riding being done?

In other words, at what point do you conclude that the extra stability
is not worth the extra weight, or that the "light-weight" frame has
sacrificed too much in structure to warrant the weight savings?


--
unicyclification
------------------------------------------------------------------------
unicyclification's Profile: http://www.unicyclist.com/profile/16337
View this thread: http://www.unicyclist.com/thread/67828


Posted Via Usenet.com Premium Usenet Newsgroup Services
----------------------------------------------------------
** SPEED ** RETENTION ** COMPLETION ** ANONYMITY **
----------------------------------------------------------
http://www.usenet.com
 
semach.the.monkey wrote:
> I assume he was talking about the 'Mongoose Squid'
> (http://tinyurl.com/2upw86)
>
> It looks ideal if you think that most trials unis are too light and if
> you prefer your knees with that battered and bleeding look :D
>
> STM




Whoa! Cool, man. If only they made it in 36"!!!

Comes with a 3" tire and from a Google search, looks like it can be had
for $75 and free s/h....


--
unicyclification
------------------------------------------------------------------------
unicyclification's Profile: http://www.unicyclist.com/profile/16337
View this thread: http://www.unicyclist.com/thread/67828


Posted Via Usenet.com Premium Usenet Newsgroup Services
----------------------------------------------------------
** SPEED ** RETENTION ** COMPLETION ** ANONYMITY **
----------------------------------------------------------
http://www.usenet.com
 
unicyclification wrote:
> For those interested in the comparison, UDC has now posted the weights
> for the Nimbus 36" and Titan 36" frames as follows:
>
> Nimbus 36" - 2.82 lbs (1279g)
> Titan 36" - 2.55 lbs (1157g)
>
> The weight of the Nimbus 36" differs slightly from the one given before
> because this includes the bearing caps and bolts. Below is the new
> weight line-up of the various 36" frames.
>
> Thanks UDC! More info allows a more informed purchase decision and a
> happier customer....
>
> Alloy Coker: 799 grams
> Schlumph v1: 850 grams
> Coker: 864 grams (?)
> Ken's coker: 1100 grams
> Nimbus: 1279 grams
> Titan: 1157 grams
> V2: 1872 grams



The titan is the same as the old 25.4mm coker frame, therefore I'm
going to make an educated guess and say that Ken's rounded weight is
infact the same as the Titan.

making the new list.

Alloy Coker: 799 grams
Schlumph v1: 850 grams
Coker 22.2: 864 grams
Titan: 1157 grams
Nimbus: 1279 grams
V2: 1872 grams


In terms of production frames, the alloy coker frame is the lightest,
followed by the Titan, Nimbus, and V2.


--
ntappin

'how to build a strong comfy saddle from junk.'
(http://tinyurl.com/hxcb3)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
ntappin's Profile: http://www.unicyclist.com/profile/10800
View this thread: http://www.unicyclist.com/thread/67828


Posted Via Usenet.com Premium Usenet Newsgroup Services
----------------------------------------------------------
** SPEED ** RETENTION ** COMPLETION ** ANONYMITY **
----------------------------------------------------------
http://www.usenet.com
 
Anyone know what the Qu-Ax 36er frame weight is? the total weight is
8.2kg.


--
unicyclist.ca

http://www.Unicyclist.ca
------------------------------------------------------------------------
unicyclist.ca's Profile: http://www.unicyclist.com/profile/16025
View this thread: http://www.unicyclist.com/thread/67828


Posted Via Usenet.com Premium Usenet Newsgroup Services
----------------------------------------------------------
** SPEED ** RETENTION ** COMPLETION ** ANONYMITY **
----------------------------------------------------------
http://www.usenet.com
 
unicyclification wrote:
> If the Nimbus frame provides enough extra stability or stiffness over
> the aluminum Big One frame to be worth the extra 480 grams of weight,
> then is it possible that the Coker V2 also provides enough more
> stiffness over the Nimbus to be worth the additional 600 grams of
> weight?

Define "worth." :)

In other words, the answer to that question is going to be very
subjective. Some people like stiffness, some people may like flexiness,
and even more people probably can't be bothered to notice the
difference. For myself, I don't have an answer because I have to ride
more different unicycles and see what I like. I've ridden one of the
new Nimbuses with the T7 and all the extras, and I thought it was
awesome. But I don't have enough riding on any of them to have an
opinion on stiffness.


unicyclification wrote:
> Comes with a 3" tire and from a Google search, looks like it can be had
> for $75 and free s/h....

You may have found a link to a site that still has those things, but
according to the Amazon link it is not in stock and may never be
available again. That's a unicycle I would hang on the wall, or
otherwise look at, but I don't think I'd want to subject my knees to
those pointy corners, no matter what my leg length!


--
johnfoss

John Foss
Email: "jfoss" at "unicycling.com" -- www.unicycling.com
-----------------------------------------------

Man with broken collar bone say: "Have you checked your shoelaces
lately?"
------------------------------------------------------------------------
johnfoss's Profile: http://www.unicyclist.com/profile/832
View this thread: http://www.unicyclist.com/thread/67828


Posted Via Usenet.com Premium Usenet Newsgroup Services
----------------------------------------------------------
** SPEED ** RETENTION ** COMPLETION ** ANONYMITY **
----------------------------------------------------------
http://www.usenet.com
 
unijuul had an interesting comment 'here' (http://tinyurl.com/2at7j4)
related to the weight of a unicycle. Seems like he is saying more or
less that he thinks the most important parts of the uni, in terms of
weight, are the moving parts...and more specifically, the moving parts
that are farthest from the hub are going to make the most difference
with less significance as you move toward the hub (tire, then the tube,
followed by the rim and then the spokes least of all). This makes a
lot of sense to me in relation to the limited amount I understand about
the laws of physics.

Any opposing opinions on that?

Somebody who is better with physics than myself...would the weight of
the frame itself, not being a moving part, make any more difference
than the weight of the rider? For example, would there be any
significant difference between a 178 lb. rider on a Coker Big One and a
175 lb. rider on a V2, assuming the standard wheel/tire setup? Total
weight for both rider and uni would be 194 for both. Obviously if the
rider is doing "unigeezer" style jumps and drops, weight makes a
difference...but I'm talking about general street riding where the
wheel doesn't leave the ground.


--
unicyclification
------------------------------------------------------------------------
unicyclification's Profile: http://www.unicyclist.com/profile/16337
View this thread: http://www.unicyclist.com/thread/67828


Posted Via Usenet.com Premium Usenet Newsgroup Services
----------------------------------------------------------
** SPEED ** RETENTION ** COMPLETION ** ANONYMITY **
----------------------------------------------------------
http://www.usenet.com
 
I've been pondering the question about which frame is "the best" as far
as stiffness, and weight and where it begins to make a difference which
of those you want to compromise, but I've yet to find the answer. I've
only ever ridden the nimbus frame so I can't really have an opinion,
but I think it would be interesting to figure out what type of program
bike builders use to test bike frames before they even leave the
drawing board. If we could input the dimensions, tubing diameter and
thickness, and the materials used to make a frame into a program and
run it through a virtual stress test to really see what would happen if
an extremely aggressive rider rode each frame for a long time. Then we
could have tangible evidence to use when recommending frames to
people.

It's just a thought and not seeming to be a very plausible way of
figuring it all out for me at the moment but I figured why not just get
high tech and go all the way instead of going off what the manufacturer
says. If anyone has the ability to do the tests I would be interested
in seeing some actual results instead of just opinion based
recommendations all over the place.


--
Ducttape

'-*buy my shirts*-'
(www.zazzle.com/ducttapesunicycle*)
'*watch my videos*'
(http://www.youtube.com/profile?user=ducttapesunicycle)
'*uniman comics*'
(http://www.unicyclist.com/forums/showthread.php?t=53444)
'*original thread for uniman*'
(http://www.unicyclist.com/forums/showthread.php?t=49862)
*'sigged quotes' (http://tinyurl.com/29b744)*
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ducttape's Profile: http://www.unicyclist.com/profile/12006
View this thread: http://www.unicyclist.com/thread/67828


Posted Via Usenet.com Premium Usenet Newsgroup Services
----------------------------------------------------------
http://www.usenet.com
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom Back