Slashdot Mirror


Build Your Own Monowheel

glengineer writes "Just when you thought it was safe to buy a Segway, Popular Sci has an article on the Monster Monowheel, an 1,100 pound single wheel 'scooter'. From the article: '...works on the hamster-in-a-wheel principle: Move a wheel's center of gravity forward and the wheel turns.' It has an 80cc four-stroke Honda scooter engine and 80 pounds of lead for ballast. Scary part: the driver's seat is in the very front, and the seat scrapes the ground when braking really hard." The builder's website is theriotwheel.com.

209 comments

  1. It looks really wide... by adrianbaugh · · Score: 4, Funny

    ... and since the tyre profile looks quite rectangular I guess it's "wheely" hard to steer ;-)

    --
    "'I pass the test,' she said. 'I will diminish, and go into the West, and remain Galadriel.'"
    - JRR Tolkien.
    1. Re:It looks really wide... by wankledot · · Score: 4, Insightful
      What would be cool would be two large wheels in the back, with the ability to power one more than the other. Then they could be rectangular for better traction, plus you could turn on a dime (literally) and spin in place. You could work out a differential system to turn them both in the same direction for top speed, or power one more than the other to turn. Or to do it simply (but inefficiently) upt brakes on them and slow the right one down to turn right, etc.

      You're right though, if it was one large wheel you would need some secondary method for steering, unlike the other one-wheel devices that rely on leaning right/left on a more motorcycle-like rounded tire.

      --
      My sig is blank, I typed this by hand.
    2. Re:It looks really wide... by AmericanInKiev · · Score: 4, Insightful

      As it is - it could be useful for strange locations.

      We talk about humvees being the all terrain vehicle, but in the end - the ability to "port" the vehicle (carry by hand) is what makes a vehicle trully All terrain.

      a mono wheel maximized diameter while minimizing size - it is therefore the optimal design for an all terrain vehicle.

      AIK

    3. Re:It looks really wide... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

      What would be cool would be two large wheels in the back, with the ability to power one more than the other. Then they could be rectangular for better traction, plus you could turn on a dime (literally) and spin in place. You could work out a differential system to turn them both in the same direction for top speed, or power one more than the other to turn. Or to do it simply (but inefficiently) upt brakes on them and slow the right one down to turn right, etc.

      Do you mean, like a...Segway?

    4. Re:It looks really wide... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Dude that's an Awesome name for this guy's invention!!

    5. Re:It looks really wide... by wankledot · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Except that low-speed stability would be very poor, especially on bumpy terrain. Maybe a very large two-wheel single-axle vehicle.

      --
      My sig is blank, I typed this by hand.
    6. Re:It looks really wide... by simcop2387 · · Score: 0

      how about just having a bicycle with pontoons on the side and a secondary propeller on the back, just fill the pontoons with helium and seal it really well and voila you've got an easy to carry (the helium will help to make up for the pontoons weight since they will be somewhat boyant) ATV that can go on rough terrain and in water, albiet not fast moving water unless you peddle really damn fast but thats a tough one to do anyway

    7. Re:It looks really wide... by photon317 · · Score: 1, Funny


      Man invented the ultimate ATV a long, long time ago. It's called the Helicopter.

      --
      11*43+456^2
    8. Re:It looks really wide... by pipingguy · · Score: 2, Interesting


      This is kind of off the subject, but it's a three-wheeler also.

      T-Rex.

      I've seen a few of them here in Montreal, especially during F1 season.

      Apparently it's a road rocket, but given the low seating position and view that the rider/driver (as compared to a bike) has you'd have to be extra super careful when piloting it. Very cool, though, it never fails to attract more attention than the usual Ferraris and Bugattis.

    9. Re:It looks really wide... by MrScience · · Score: 2, Funny

      At 1100 pounds? I'm not exactly fit, but I think my fingers would get tired...

      --

      You quitting proves that the karma kap worked. The most annoying of the whores shut up. --CmdrTaco

    10. Re:It looks really wide... by AmericanInKiev · · Score: 1

      The Advantage is in forested terrain - which is also important for hiding from helicopters etc...

      Someone else mentioned helicopters as an ideal ATV.

      I would suggest the recent "unpleasantness" suggests that helicopters are their own worst enemy.

      This vehicle may be ideal for retrieving heleicopter pilots from enemy territory - they can get through the jungle - they can be ported over fallen trees - a good deal like motorcycles - only somewhat lighter perhaps.

      AIK

    11. Re:It looks really wide... by AmericanInKiev · · Score: 1

      I just bought an electric assisted bicycle, and If i were planning a trip behind enemy lines - i might choose the bicycle and an inflatable raft as you suggest as my vehicles of choice because i could carry them over or through just about anything.

      The Helium however is hyperbole. just filling something with helium doesn't do it - you need a lot of space - you aren't even within a few orders of magnitude on your lighter than air pontoons.

      AIK

    12. Re:It looks really wide... by Cyno01 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I work in shipping, and had a lightbulb today. Why not fill bubble wrap bubbles with helium. On large packages it wouldn't make much difference, but on small things it would probably save a few bucks. Not sure how feasible it is though... Pat. Pending... :-p

      --
      "Sic Semper Tyrannosaurus Rex."
    13. Re:It looks really wide... by deimtee · · Score: 1

      We talk about humvees being the all terrain vehicle, but in the end - the ability to "port" the vehicle (carry by hand) is what makes a vehicle truly All terrain.

      450 pound counterweight, 65 pound gyro, + engine + frame + payload = maybe upto 1000 pounds?

      That's not that easy to port by hand.

      --
      I'm guessing that wasn't on their radar screen...
    14. Re:It looks really wide... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      We talk about humvees being the all terrain vehicle

      Obviously you've never driven one. Nobody who has would call the HMMV an "all-terrain vehicle".

    15. Re:It looks really wide... by myowntrueself · · Score: 2, Interesting

      For a humvee to be truly considered an ATV it would need to carry a supply of high explosive to remove gates, trees, rocks and a digger arm to widen the road where necessary.

      --
      In the free world the media isn't government run; the government is media run.
    16. Re:It looks really wide... by _pruegel_ · · Score: 1

      Except the helicopter is not able to fly at very high altitudes say like in the Himalaya. So it is an AATV.

    17. Re:It looks really wide... by nyseal · · Score: 1

      I agree, however the design group would have a seriously difficult time trying to mount that 50-caliber from the base of the frame. Hmm....scratch...scratch

      --
      [SIG] Remember Mattel handheld games?
    18. Re:It looks really wide... by Uninvited+Guest · · Score: 1

      If someone comes up with a really inexpensive way to extract, ship, and store helium, you're on to something. Otherwise, the cost of the helium exceeds the savings in shipping weight. I'd hold out for hydrogren. If you had some cheap/abundant source of power (high efficiency solar, maybe?), you could extract hydrogen from water to store in the bubbles.

      --
      Sometimes I worry that I'll develop Alzheimer's disease, but no one will notice.
    19. Re:It looks really wide... by AmericanInKiev · · Score: 1

      I like this idea - the problem is storing the bubble wrap - even if it was metalized I think the storage life is pretty short.

      AIK

    20. Re:It looks really wide... by AmericanInKiev · · Score: 1

      I know - These guys have been working this design for a while.

      The counter weight - unless it is honest payload is a weakness.

      The Segway is functionally similar - and also started life as a monowheel which doesn't require a counter weight.

      A version of this for two people might be a portable design.

      AIK

    21. Re:It looks really wide... by Charley's+Angel · · Score: 1

      So if you get negative weight, does UPS pay you?

    22. Re:It looks really wide... by eathan13 · · Score: 1

      At 1,100 pounds, I hope there are "porters" available...

    23. Re:It looks really wide... by Technician · · Score: 1

      You could work out a differential system to turn them both in the same direction for top speed, or power one more than the other to turn

      The first thing that came to mind was the Toyota Prius transmission. It's continusely variable from forward through reverse. The actual gearbox is very tiny and needs no clutches or friction bands/plates of any kind. The mechanical part they just call a power split device in the new car. The variable ratio is all taken care of with a pair of motor/generators on a gearbox configured simular to a car differential. It should run cool with lots of low speed torque for the ultimate in manuverablility.

      However, having read the article, they want to get the mono wheel land speed record. That can't be done with any dual wheel vehicle.

      --
      The truth shall set you free!
    24. Re:It looks really wide... by Crustydub · · Score: 1

      helium is very expensive,

    25. Re:It looks really wide... by Amiasian · · Score: 1

      Sounds a lot like those rebound and ricochet r/c's.
      Only two wheels instead of four.

  2. See also... by fiannaFailMan · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Someone linked to this when we had the article about the Bombardier Embrio, another cool concept employing segway-type gyroscopic action.

    --
    Drill baby drill - on Mars
    1. Re:See also... by Monkelectric · · Score: 4, Funny

      I find Maddox's segway design ideas intriging.

      --

      Religion is a gateway psychosis. -- Dave Foley

  3. What impresses me MOST... by YankeeInExile · · Score: 5, Interesting

    ... is that they have a version that is licensed as a motorvehicle in California.

    --
    How does the Slashdot Effect happen given that no slashdotters ever RTFA?
    1. Re:What impresses me MOST... by GaryOlson · · Score: 1
      I wonder how the RIOT complied with Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards?

      http://www.nhtsa.dot.gov/cars/rules/standards/FMVS S-Regs/pages/TOC.htm

      --
      Every mans' island needs an ocean; choose your ocean carefully.
    2. Re:What impresses me MOST... by Deraj+DeZine · · Score: 5, Funny

      Rear-end impact, 5 MPH: wheel tipped forward, occupant thrown forward onto ground and run over by vehicle. Slightly above-average damage (approx. 7 standard deviations above the mean for CA motor vehicles).

      Front-end impact, 5 MPH: occupant's legs broken off, driver seat torn off and subsequently run over by vehicle. Comparable economic impact to modern SUV damage estimates.

      Side impact, 5 MPH: vehicle tipped on side, occupant's left arm broken off, driver seat broken off due to shear force and subsequently crushed under vehicle. Comparable results to Segway Human Transporter.

      Head-on impact, 120 MPH combined: occupant broken into several pieces, many of which fused to the vehicle and subsequently crushed under weight of vehicle. Comparable to average damage when involved in a collision with an SUV.

      --
      True story.
    3. Re:What impresses me MOST... by Maxwell'sSilverLART · · Score: 4, Funny

      is that they have a version that is licensed as a motorvehicle in California.

      You're impressed that California found a way to tax this thing? I'd be impressed if the builders found a way to avoid it.

      --
      Moderate drunk! It's more fun that way!
    4. Re:What impresses me MOST... by n6mod · · Score: 1

      It's a motorcycle.

      You figure it out.

      --
      You have violated Robot's Rules of Order and will be asked to leave the future immediately.
  4. that heavy? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    1100 pounds? I don't think my car weighs that much.

    1. Re:that heavy? by YankeeInExile · · Score: 1

      What car do you drive? Even a Dodge Atos weighs about 800 kg?

      --
      How does the Slashdot Effect happen given that no slashdotters ever RTFA?
    2. Re:that heavy? by dsheeks · · Score: 0, Redundant

      Who wants to be sitting in front of an 1,100 pound wheel when it hits something (like a wall; even at "only" 25 MPH)? For the 55+ MPH version, I can just imagine hitting the brakes hard and having the wheel roll right over you. Didn't I see that happen to the Coyote once on the Road Runner show?

    3. Re:that heavy? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Seriously man, if you get in an accident with that thing you WILL die.

    4. Re:that heavy? by kjamez · · Score: 0

      nor mine. (austin mini sprite, can't tell the 1' of snow completely covers the tiny beast)

      --
      you can't have everything, where would you put it?
  5. Big Wheel. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Looks like something from Jayce and the Wheeled Warriors.

  6. Ummmm by cybermace5 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I'm not so sure that it's a good idea to ride a vehicle that, if it fails at high speed, will run the driver over. All it takes is for something to seize up a little bit.

    --
    ...
    1. Re:Ummmm by fiannaFailMan · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I think that if something siezes up in the right place, it makes not much difference if you have two wheels or one.

      --
      Drill baby drill - on Mars
    2. Re:Ummmm by cybermace5 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      But a motorcycle's front wheel is free-rolling, and the cycle has a lower center of gravity. The monowheel already scrapes the ground when braking, it's not very stable as far as pitch is concerned. The driver is basically a bump on a 1100-pound wheel, and if something happens, it's all gonna roll.

      --
      ...
    3. Re:Ummmm by Lord+Kano · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I'm not so sure that it's a good idea to ride a vehicle that, if it fails at high speed, will run the driver over. All it takes is for something to seize up a little bit.

      Seriously, did you read the article? The driver is held in place by a counterbalance. Even with no power, the rules of physics do not change.

      LK

      --
      "Hi. This is my friend, Jack Shit, and you don't know him." - Lord Kano
    4. Re:Ummmm by neurojab · · Score: 4, Informative

      >The driver is held in place by a counterbalance. Even with no power, the rules of physics do not change.

      Indeed. If the mechanism that allows the wheel to spin independently of the driver were to sieze up at 60MPH, what do you imagine would happen to that massive wheel's rotational inertia?

      It woudn't be pretty.

    5. Re:Ummmm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      Yep. Wouldn't be too pretty if you ran into anything either.

      1,100lbs of steel and rubber behind you. At least with a motorcycle you might be ejected instead of turned to jelly right away.

    6. Re:Ummmm by cybermace5 · · Score: 1

      Yeah, I read the article. And, what neurojab said.

      --
      ...
    7. Re:Ummmm by cybermace5 · · Score: 4, Funny

      I imagine a very comical-yet-terrifying leap into the air followed by a large amount of spinning and bouncing. Of course, the driver would be dead before the wheel came down for the first bounce.

      --
      ...
    8. Re:Ummmm by KarmaBlackballed · · Score: 4, Funny

      Unless the counterbalance can adjust position without power, an engine seize at high speed will result in the following series of events:

      1. Wheel locks up. (Conservation of momentum requires that the vehicle continue moving forward.)
      2. Because of the seize event, the frame now spins with the wheel.
      3. Look who is spinning with the frame, that flat guy. See him, no look now, see him? No look again, there he is, wait, he will spin back around, see him now?

      --

      --- -- - -
      Give me LIBERTY, or give me a check.
    9. Re:Ummmm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, the driver/counterbalance assembly is completely separate from the wheel assembly and the motor assembly. They each share the one axle, but nothing else. So whatever happens, the driver stays at same height, except for sudden speedup/slow down.

      This thing cannot go uphill because the driver is still down there. But that's a different thing.

    10. Re:Ummmm by ignorant_newbie · · Score: 2, Interesting

      >Because of the seize event, the frame now
      spins with the wheel.

      um... yeah. except that the weel weighs almost nothing (it's a big tire with a gear bolted onto it. the heavy part is suspended in the middle, and consists of several counterweights, etc.

      thus, the inertia of the weel is almost nothing compared to the intertia of the non-rotating bits, and isn't going to flip you over, any more than your car filps over during a front stop.

      moron.

    11. Re:Ummmm by cybercuzco · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Just design it so the wheel cant lock up. Have it powered by a ratchet system (think bycycle) so that when power is not applied the wheel still spins. Thus if the engine locks up all that happens is that you roll to a stop. You could theoretically push it when the engine is off with this system. A better way to lock the wheel up is by braking (going into a skid) so antilock brakes are a must.

      --

    12. Re:Ummmm by Lord+Kano · · Score: 1

      You could theoretically push it when the engine is off with this system. A better way to lock the wheel up is by braking (going into a skid) so antilock brakes are a must.

      It would be a real bitch to work out an ABS system for a one wheeled vehicle. Current ABS brakes work by determining if one wheel has stopped while other wheels remain in motion.

      I guess drum brakes would be a sufficient system because they are far less likely to lock that disc brakes. But they aren't as effective either.

      Instead of all of the complicated mechanisms, why not just attach an emergency wheel below the driver? That would solve two problems at once. It would make the driver a bit safer in the event of a rapid decelleration and it would allow this thing to go up steeper hills.

      LK

      --
      "Hi. This is my friend, Jack Shit, and you don't know him." - Lord Kano
    13. Re:Ummmm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The counterbalance does not require power to operate. Did you ever look at the damn website?

    14. Re:Ummmm by random735 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      wrong. notice how your car tips forward during a hard stop? There may not be much rotational inertia, but there sure as hell is forward momentum and if the wheel suddenly becomes joined to the previously floating central axle, the whole thing will need to roll together. (or maybe skid, if you're lucky...all depends how much traction the wheel has).

      All your forward momentum will be converted into a rotation as soon as the seize event occurs. (again unless the wheel can slide because it's on a frictionless surface)

    15. Re:Ummmm by Zapper · · Score: 1
      Current ABS brakes work by determining if one wheel has stopped while other wheels remain in motion.

      It was my impression that an ABS in general ensures that a wheel does not lock and skid, therefore maintaining the controllability of the vehicle.

      Of course if you're refering to traction control systems, then that's another thing.

      --
      So much to do, so little bandwidth.
      --
      Try Mozilla
    16. Re:Ummmm by Zapper · · Score: 1
      What I meant to say was:

      It was my impression that an ABS in general ensures that a wheel does not lock and skid, therefore maintaining the controllability of the vehicle. I wouldn't think that the state of one wheel has any infulence on any others.

      Of course if you're refering to traction control systems, then that's another thing.

      --
      So much to do, so little bandwidth.
      --
      Try Mozilla
    17. Re:Ummmm by Cecil · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Yes, because I know of so many people who have been maimed because their bicycle or motorcycle wheels seized up for no apparent reason out of the blue. Wait, actually, I don't even know anyone who has ever had any mechanical parts seize up at random while a vehicle is in motion.

      Why do so many people insist on responding to every new idea with "Wow, this could hurt someone" hysteria? Are they like the anti-invention version of Slashdot's grammar police?

    18. Re:Ummmm by Lord+Kano · · Score: 1

      It was my impression that an ABS in general ensures that a wheel does not lock and skid, therefore maintaining the controllability of the vehicle. I wouldn't think that the state of one wheel has any infulence on any others.

      The ABS determines if you're at a complete stop (a situation where you will want all of the wheels to stop) or if you're skidding by comparing the movement of all of the wheels.

      For example, when you're at a complete stop, all four wheels have stopped. When you skid, one wheel stops before the others. In the event that a skid happens, the ABS momentarily reduces the pressure to the brake caliper of the wheel that has stopped.

      ABS increases the distance required to complete a stop, but it allows the driver to retain control of the vehicle.

      LK

      --
      "Hi. This is my friend, Jack Shit, and you don't know him." - Lord Kano
    19. Re:Ummmm by Skyfire · · Score: 1

      ABS increases the distance required to complete a stop, but it allows the driver to retain control of the vehicle.

      Actually, most of the time ABS will decrease the distance required to stop because the coefficient of kinetic friction is always lower than the coefficient of static friction. So making sure that all of the tires are not skidding decreases the stopping the distance. One exception to this is on snow or sand, where the best way to stop fast is to simply build up a wedge in front of the wheel, which skidding will cause.

      --
      Do not go gentle into that good night. Rage, rage against the dying of the light.
    20. Re:Ummmm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's exactly what happens. I haven't RTA but I have seen these things running irl. They are prone to what is known as gerbiling, that's where the rider spins round inside the wheel as you describe.
      Not good if you just had lunch, but not as dangerous as you might think, hardy riders can gerbil it at 50mph + and not have problems except get very dizzy.

    21. Re:Ummmm by anethema · · Score: 1

      This just isnt true, you are describing traction control. Not ABS.

      In non abs systems, all 4 wheels lock at the same time. It's as if the vehicle has stopped as far as the car is concerned.

      With abs, thousands of checks per second are done to see if the car is moving when the tires arent. If so, it releases the tires for a little bit and checks again. Etc..

      Basically you are sort of right...but if you are skidding, none of the wheels are moving.

      --


      It's easier to fight for one's principles than to live up to them.
    22. Re:Ummmm by anno1602 · · Score: 1

      Look at the digrams. The engine and the counterlever holding the seat are suspended independently. If the motor locks up, it will go cartwheeling, but the rider will stay level (more or less).

    23. Re:Ummmm by zemkai · · Score: 1
      But a motorcycle's front wheel is free-rolling, and the cycle has a lower center of gravity.

      True, but a motorcycle has something like 85% of it's braking in the front wheel. Grip the rear brake too hard, you fish a little bit. Grip the front brake too hard, you stand on your nose... It's an ... interesting... experience.

      -ZK

    24. Re:Ummmm by neurojab · · Score: 1

      >Why do so many people insist on responding to every new idea with "Wow, this could hurt someone" hysteria?

      I wasn't suggesting that it would happen, I was just responding to the notion that the laws of physics would prevent the driver from being hurt if if did happen. They wouldn't.

      You're right... wheels do not tend to sieze up for no apparent reason, but gasoline engines easily can... if you get a leak in the oil pan.

      That said, I'm sure the possibility that the engine could crap out was taken into the design here. Hopefully.

  7. Cool, the latest from apple: The iWheel. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny


    Can I get an Envirofriendly Gas Hybrid Model in Candy Apple Red?

    and does it have an iPod hookup?

    1. Re:Cool, the latest from apple: The iWheel. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      notyet, but I hear that iSteve iJobs is iWorking iOn iIt. Hot damn!!

    2. Re:Cool, the latest from apple: The iWheel. by ubugly2 · · Score: 3, Funny

      Just paint it some weird pastels and call it the iDarwin...

  8. ObSimpsons Post by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What's that word again?

    Monowheel!

  9. Nifty! by FrYGuY101 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    When I read the summary, I thought "Oh, like the one on Monster Garage". For those of you who didn't see the one they featured (briefly), there was a monowheel with a Caddilac engine, and the rider rode on the inside... at high speeds it was unstable until the designer added Stabilizing fins...

    But, for those of you who don't RTFA: You ride in FRONT of the wheel. It's *really* fuggin' cool looking.

    --
    "If we let things terrify us, life will not be worth living."

    - Seneca
    1. Re:Nifty! by UniverseIsADoughnut · · Score: 2, Interesting

      My thoughts to, though that kind of thing is not new. They have been around for decades. I remember the bochure for my university for the engineering department had a guy working on one on the cover 5 years ago. They were also done on junkyard wars. Hell, even Gadget on chip and dale rescue rangers made one, with suction cups on the outside no less.

      Really curious how this guy turns with that tire. Someplace there is a copper mine with a dump truck that lost a wheel, and it looks like the joker got away with the wheel and showed up at burning man.

      Silly Hippies

    2. Re:Nifty! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That wheel on Monster Garage looks like it would be a pain int the neck (literally) to drive. He's got to peer around the wheel to see. He needs a camera system or some kind of mirror so he dosen't injure his back.

    3. Re:Nifty! by azav · · Score: 1

      Yes, they have been around for a while but the unique point on this is that the driver is outside the tire.

      --
      - Zav - Imagine a Beowulf cluster of insensitive clods...
    4. Re:Nifty! by theRG · · Score: 1

      Yeah but I kinda think that the Monster Garage one is cooler. Well, at least the guy tries really hard to make it work.
      TechTV article
      Kerry McLean's Monocycles

    5. Re:Nifty! by JoeNotCharles · · Score: 1

      Hell, here's one from 1978, and the URL's enough to tell you that it's hilarious.

    6. Re:Nifty! by Cyno01 · · Score: 1

      The wheel's pretty thin, it cant be that bad.

      --
      "Sic Semper Tyrannosaurus Rex."
    7. Re:Nifty! by gbjbaanb · · Score: 1

      Its not that new - Scrapheap Challenge (the Uk show 'junkyard wars' came from) made 2 to race against each other. In that episode, the driver say inside the wheel - so the thing was more like a single-wheel motorcycle than the one shown in the article.

      This is the bloke who was the judge/expert:
      http://www.americanroadshop.com/The _Monocycle/the_ monocycle.html

      He also holds the world speed record for monocycle driving... and sells them, for you rich geeks who want to ride up to work in something different.

  10. Scary part: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Scary part: the driver's seat is in the very front, and the seat scrapes the ground when braking really hard.

    In other words, Ford owners will feel right at home.

    1. Re:Scary part: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Unlike the hoards of lowerd, under powered honda's :)

    2. Re:Scary part: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Bah... You mean Cheby owners?

    3. Re:Scary part: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Erm. Which ford owners? I never feel like that in my Scorpio. Though I DID feel like that sitting in a Honda Civic (shudder).

      --Coder

  11. Crazy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Check out www.zekewheel.com too, if you want a non-motorized wheel to ride inside of downhill.

    1. Re:Crazy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > Check out www.zekewheel.com too, if you want a non-motorized wheel to ride inside of downhill.

      How about this:

      Check out www.zekewheel.com too, if you want a non-motorized wheel to ride inside of downhill.

  12. The Bikers know how do to it by pvt_medic · · Score: 4, Informative

    Just check this site out where a bunch of harley riding bikers have created their own monowheel thingy.

    Automobile Mag

    --
    30% Troll, 50% Underrated, 10% Interesting
    Score:5, Troll
    1. Re:The Bikers know how do to it by l810c · · Score: 2, Funny

      That thing sure makes harley riders look like wussies.

    2. Re:The Bikers know how do to it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      now _THAT_ is a monowheel..

    3. Re:The Bikers know how do to it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      but how do you control it? http://images.southparkstudios.com/media/images/51 1/image_09.gif

    4. Re:The Bikers know how do to it by Etcetera · · Score: 4, Interesting


      Here's a video link from a link from the article. It's described as what "must be the first operational V8 monowheel."

      Nifty! Though I do like the RIOTWheel too...

  13. I love the diagram on their site... by BitWarrior · · Score: 5, Funny

    Particularly the labeling of the rider as - "Dummy". I may have to agree with that assessment ;-)

    1. Re:I love the diagram on their site... by bergeron76 · · Score: 3, Funny

      If for no other reason than that he's riding this "contraption" without a shirt! I can understand wearing a leather jacket, or hell even a t-shirt - but to go topless on something like that takes serious balls...

      Of course, I could just be jealous because I look like E.T. when I take my shirt off... but I digress.

      --
      Don't think that a small group of dedicated individuals can't change the world. It's the only thing that ever has.
    2. Re:I love the diagram on their site... by coyote_oww · · Score: 1
      If for no other reason than that he's riding this "contraption" without a shirt! I can understand wearing a leather jacket, or hell even a t-shirt - but to go topless on something like that takes serious balls...

      It's Burning Man. He is very conservatively dressed for this venue. I mean, he has *some* clothing on...

  14. nice by stfubye · · Score: 3, Funny

    The local segway owners will be soo jelous.

    1. Re:nice by pyro_peter_911 · · Score: 1

      The local segway owners will be soo jelous.

      Yeah, all zero of them.

      Peter

  15. Steamroller by RotJ · · Score: 5, Funny

    The most obvious use for this vehicle is to run over those snotty people using Segways. Of course, I guess you'd have to back up over them.

    1. Re:Steamroller by pipingguy · · Score: 1

      The most obvious use for this vehicle is to run over those snotty people using Segways

      I was riding the bus the other day and we were stopped at a red light. Being close to the front, I was gazing mindlessly out the front window when I saw a head go whizzing by.

      At the time, I'm thinking, "there's no way a ped could have crossed the street that fast", and, sure enough, I look right and it's some fat (likely a UNIX admin), long-haired guy riding a Ginger.

      Thank God the dork police stopped him and gave him a ticket for running over all those puppies on the sidewalk.

  16. Is it just me? by JazzXP · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Personally I think the whole concept of that is really quite cool, that said, I don't think it's place is on the road with other motorists, maybe only on a race track.

    1. Re:Is it just me? by seanadams.com · · Score: 4, Insightful

      For some people maybe... as far as I'm concerned everyone should be allowed to drive whatever they want as long as:

      a) they can go fast enough, stop fast enough, and maneuver well enough to avoid inconveniencing or endangering other drivers.

      b) in the event of an impact they will not unduly endanger the lives of others. i.e. a car can be strong enough to protect you without being so heavy that it's guaranteed to destroy anything it hits.

      So by my rules there would be no gas guzzling, top heavy, overweight, unmaneuverable SUVs on the road. But monocycles would be just fine by me if you want to ride one.

      Personally I drive a little 2 door that stops faster than 99% of the cars on the road, can swerve around a hazard with ease, and weighs less than 3K lbs so it won't kill you if I run into your bumper. And it's got four airbags and a strong frame in case you run into me. If you want to ride a monocycle go ahead - you're endangering me less than the asshole in his Expedition, and you're doubltess aware of the... er "safety limitations" of your own vehicle and won't be dicking around those guys in their living rooms on wheels.

    2. Re:Is it just me? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The only thing parent poster is "informative" about is his own opinion. Lazy moderation strikes again.

    3. Re:Is it just me? by AaronW · · Score: 1

      Also as long as the state doesn't have to pay for hospital stays, rehabilitation, or long term care for those who injure themselves. Even Jessie Ventura discovered that the seatbelt law in his state was good because it saved the state a lot of money, just like motorcycle helmet laws. The law's not just protecting others, but protecting the taxpayers from having to deal with people's stupidity.

      I guess the alternative would be that if a person wasn't protecting themselves and hurt themselves, then the state would not in any way pay for a person's recovery and insurance companies wouldn't be required either. Then a person who hurts themself would either die (since a hospital wouldn't be required to treat them in the emergency room), fend for themselves, or be a burdon on their family and friends.

      --
      This post is encrypted twice with ROT-13. Documenting or attempting to crack this encryption is illegal.
    4. Re:Is it just me? by KozmoStevnNaut · · Score: 1

      That's exactly the problem!

      You're protecting yourself by driving a big-ass truck/SUV, but at the cost of the safety of the people around you.

      What do you think happens when an SUV hits a regular car? The car (along with its contents) is obliterated, and the SUV is relatively unharmed. This is because the bumpers on just about all SUVs are located way above the bumpers on cars.

      A car on car collision is what cars a designed to handle. They are designed to hit each other bumper to bumper. Not bumper to windshield.

      If people need a truck or an SUV for moving their boat, or driving around big loads, of course they should be allowed to have a bigger and stronger vehicle, but most people don't need them.

      When driving a large (sometimes very large) vehicle around normal-sized cars, you have to be extra careful. Professional truck drivers are taught this, but Susan Soccermom is not, and thereby she will be a danger to others on the road.

      --
      Eat the rich.
    5. Re:Is it just me? by slim-t · · Score: 1
      Also as long as the state doesn't have to pay for hospital stays, rehabilitation, or long term care for those who injure themselves. Even Jessie Ventura discovered that the seatbelt law in his state was good because it saved the state a lot of money, just like motorcycle helmet laws. The law's not just protecting others, but protecting the taxpayers from having to deal with people's stupidity.

      Jesse didn't have anything to do with the seatbelt law in Minnesota, it was in effect long before he became governor. The helmet law in MN only covers minors and riders with learner's permits. Jesse's contribution to transportation was the light rail in Minneapolis - which will hopefully reduce traffic in the long term.

      I guess the alternative would be that if a person wasn't protecting themselves and hurt themselves, then the state would not in any way pay for a person's recovery and insurance companies wouldn't be required either. Then a person who hurts themself would either die (since a hospital wouldn't be required to treat them in the emergency room), fend for themselves, or be a burdon on their family and friends.

      I think the emergency room is required to treat any emergency that shows up. If the state doesn't pay, the insurance company doesn't pay, and the person doesn't pay they'll either make up the loss by raising prices or if it happens enough they'd close the hospital.

    6. Re:Is it just me? by 09za+ · · Score: 0

      I THINK IT IS JUST YOU.
      If it was the 1800's you would be slamming big horses saying everyone should ride a donkey.
      If you don't like SUV's, don't buy one.
      If you don't being on the road with SUV's, don't drive.
      Just quit bashing a type of vehicle because some bad driver was in one once and they scared you.
      They could have been driving anything.
      SUV's don't drive themselves

    7. Re:Is it just me? by 09za+ · · Score: 0

      but most people don't need them.
      Most people don't need a 5000 s/ft home either.
      Do you hate big house too?
      Where does it end with people like you?
      Why is the SUV the problem when it's the smaller car that is unsafe.
      Your solution: everyone should drive the unsafe cars because we don't want anyone to be more safe than anyone else.
      trucks have been on the roads for decades...they have high bumpers too...Do you hate them?

      No troll...funny

    8. Re:Is it just me? by KozmoStevnNaut · · Score: 1

      A 5000s/ft house won't directly harm anyone. An SUV will. The SUVs have made regular cars unsafe, due to the problems in a SUV on car crash.

      Why should everyone drive an SUV when they're big, slow, and less economic?

      I don't have a beef with trucks, since they're primarily work-related vehicles, and because their drivers have recieved extra truck-related driving lessons. Therefore, they know how dangerous the vehicle they're driving can be to other trafficants, and because of that, they are generally more careful around them.

      --
      Eat the rich.
    9. Re:Is it just me? by betelgeuse-4 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Well, I'd rather be in one of these than one of these, yet the former weighs almost a tonne less. Weight isn't the only important factor.

    10. Re:Is it just me? by 09za+ · · Score: 0

      regular cars were always unsafe.
      Drive an SUV because it is SAFER (especially in poor weather)
      A 5000 s/ft house is less economical than a MUD HUT.everyone should live in a mud hut!(sarcastic overtone)
      There is always something wrong isn't there?
      Why don't you just walk

    11. Re:Is it just me? by KozmoStevnNaut · · Score: 1

      Provided that the car is not a crap car (Lada...) and is in good condition, and that the driver is reasonably skilled, a car is not unsafe to drive around in, in neither normal nor poor weather.

      Just because a car is bigger and heavier doesn't mean it's better equipped for handling poor weather conditions. Many SUVs sold now don't even have AWD or 4WD. A 2WD SUV is worse than a 2WD car in poor weather, mostly because of the added weight and momentum.

      It's not my problem if someone uses a metric fuckton of money to buy a huge house, it's theirs. People can do whatever they want with their money. Some things are just dumb, like soccer moms driving around in Ford Excursions (which in itself is a completely ridiculous vehicle).

      --
      Eat the rich.
  17. Whackety - Whack! Don't Talk Back by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

    If this goes south on him/her, it has got to make one of the best "Whackety-splat-whackety-splat" sounds the world has ever heard. 1,100 pounds and stabilized on the horizontal axis by only 65 pounds of gyros? If you have ever seen a gyro fail at high speed, well, uh, can you say mincemeat?

    1. Re:Whackety - Whack! Don't Talk Back by HawkinsD · · Score: 3, Funny

      But there is a SKID in the front. Which makes this machine GROSSLY safer, and more practical, and stop-able, than the last thirty designs for mono-wheel vehicles that we've seen on Slashdot.

      --
      Never attribute to malice that which can be explained by mere idiocy.
  18. Twisted Metal by bigtrick · · Score: 2, Funny

    Doesn't this remind anyone of Axel from Twisted Metal? You have a huge wheel and a shirtless guy riding it. Mmmm, I can imagine the fiery explosions that will ensue.

    1. Re:Twisted Metal by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That was two wheels. More like a Segway, in fact.

  19. No South Park references yet? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Funny

    At least this one doesn't require oral and anal operation!

  20. Amazing by dirtsurfer · · Score: 5, Funny

    Clown technology has really come a long way

    1. Re:Amazing by gardyloo · · Score: 1

      Yes, absolutely. Would love to see 15 clowns fit inside it somehow, popping out at odd times (perhaps in collisions with Segways).

  21. This is new? by Deadstick · · Score: 4, Interesting

    There's a vehicle out there that really IS a monowheel -- it has no axle at all. It's a one-wheeled motorcycle with the driver inside the wheel...I've seen it demonstrated at motorcycle shows. The frame, holding the seat and engine, runs on a circular steel monorail with a tire around the outside of it, about 6 feet in diameter.

    It's also a very retro-looking thing, built sometime around the early Thirties.

    rj

    1. Re:This is new? by some_schmuck · · Score: 2, Informative

      Uh, I don't think you understand the concept of 'monowheel' ... It means 'one wheel', so it doesn't matter if there's an axle or not.

      It's from the Greek, 'mono' meaning 'one wheel', and 'wheel' meaning 'duh' ;-).

    2. Re:This is new? by Deadstick · · Score: 2, Informative

      Umm, yes...and the picture shows what looks like TWO wheels on an axle. You can call it a biwheel or a roller, your choice: either way, gravity constrains it against motion about the longitudinal axis. The monowheel motorcycle contacts the ground at ONE point.

      rj

    3. Re:This is new? by jamesshuang · · Score: 1

      Sure, it's a good idea, until they needed to stop. The term, "gerbiling" was invented to describe the motion.

    4. Re:This is new? by matt_martin · · Score: 1

      Do you mean this?
      Was referenced on the RIOT website...

      --
      Lurking in the desert
    5. Re:This is new? by seanadams.com · · Score: 1
      In the picture it just looks to me like a big chassis enclosing something, and I really can't tell if there's one wheel or two. But if you RTFA, the diagram is pretty clear, and at the end of the specs it says:

      J. 20-inch-wide rimless tire.
    6. Re:This is new? by Deadstick · · Score: 1

      That's the configuration, but the one I saw was earlier...it was around 1975, and the show promoters said it was built in the Thirties.

      rj

    7. Re:This is new? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      look again at the technical drawings: it is *one* wheel...

      Sheesh, mods, pay attention please: twice you modded this guy up for no good reason.

  22. Woah. by Tragek · · Score: 1

    I want one. Looks kinda cool. My question is, what would it take to get that kind of thing street legal ? It's kindof dangerous for the rider if he/she were to contact any... standing objects. Of course, it's probably just as dangerous as a crotch rocket motorcycle

    1. Re:Woah. by 1lus10n · · Score: 1

      crotch rockets are only dangerous if the person riding them doesnt know what they are doing, or is riding outside of their ability.

      --
      "Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the the universe." --Albert Einstein
    2. Re:Woah. by khuber · · Score: 1

      The fatality rate for motorcycle riders is many times higher than that of car drivers per mile travelled.

    3. Re:Woah. by Tragek · · Score: 1

      Ahh, but that happens much to often. Especially with teens who think that they are invincible.

    4. Re:Woah. by Mabonus · · Score: 1

      Well, I believe that is because the margin for error is decreased. See parent post.

    5. Re:Woah. by 1lus10n · · Score: 1

      perhaps thats because an inexperienced driver in a car is far far far more protected than one on a motorcycle.

      That might also point out that a moron driving a car (or an SUV for that matter) is probably a large contributor to motorcycle fatalities.

      An experienced motorcycle rider (5 or more years) compared to an experienced car driver (5 or more years) is much much more safe, however it is the lack of attention paid to driving by the car driver (cell phone, smoking, eating, drinking etc) that leads to a motorcycle being a more dangerous thing to drive.

      That being said, I would be one hell of a lot happier if everyone drove motorcycles instead of SUV's (and less so cars).

      --
      "Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the the universe." --Albert Einstein
    6. Re:Woah. by 1lus10n · · Score: 1

      no arguement here. but just because a morons drives it doesnt make it more dangerous, it makes the moron + it more dangerous.

      of course I think everyone should be required to drive ONLY a motorcycle for at least 4 years, this way the morons will be weeded out. Like to talk on the cell phone ? drive an SUV to feel "above traffic" ? you die on a bike. its that simple. no fucking multi-tasking in the 3000lb wrecking ball.

      --
      "Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the the universe." --Albert Einstein
    7. Re:Woah. by psiphre · · Score: 1

      hear fucking hear.

      i just recently (dangerous as fuck. even so, i'm a huge advocate for motorcycles. just on the merits of my enthusiasm and constant babbling about how awesome motorcycles are, no fewer than five of my close friends are now considering getting one.

      why do motorcycles rule balls over cars?

      -gas. in california, i'm very lucky to find premium unleaded at $2.35/gallon. on a full tank (3gal) + a 1 gallon "just in case" fuel can that i keep in my saddle bag, I get 200 miles. $9.50 for 200 miles -- 50 miles per gallon or just 4.5 cents per mile.
      to contrast, i have a friend who owns a jeep cherokee. HER full tank of gas costs her over fifty dollars, and she gets 400 miles out of it. 12.5 cents per mile -- and she doesn't get premium.

      -fun. sure, i don't get the stereo and loud music, but all that's just a distraction to car drivers. the feeling of riding, however, is absolutely fantastic.

      -style. doesn't this pretty much go without saying? let's move on.

      -something to talk about. in new company? don't know what to say? ask that guy holding a helmet about his bike. he'll be glad to tell you alllll about it.

      -reactions. a lot of people don't know how to deal with a motorcyclist. it's a foreign concept to them, and it puts them very slightly on edge.

      -cost. my motorcycle cost me 1200$. i got it with ~18000 miles on it. i've since put almost 3000 on it and the only thing i've had to replace has been the rear tire (which needed replacing when i got it) and the oil.
      furthermore, there's less things to go wrong. only two cylinders. two spark plugs. no coolant (air cooled!), no serpentine belt, no AC. mine doesn't even have a chain (shaft driven).

      among others, which iwon't enumerate because i'm running out of attention span.

      the disadvantages to riding a motorcycle? i'm not going to put "danger" here, because even though motorcycles DO have a higher fatality rate, i am thoroughly of the opinion that they are largely the motorcyclist's fault for, as you said, riding outisde of the limits of a) the bike, b) the road or c) their skill level.
      that being said, disadvantages:

      -you only get to take one passenger. however, if that passenger is a girl, and you are a guy, that girl is going to think you're the best thing since sliced bread
      -luggage. if you have saddlebags (which if you ride a crotch rocket, you won't), you have at VERY best 3-4 cubic feet of storage room. it's plenty to go to the store for more soda, though.

      i know i'm way off topic, but you ignited my passion to babble about motorcycles.

      i added you as a friend, by the way.

    8. Re:Woah. by 1lus10n · · Score: 1

      You know what the funny thing about this whole discussion is ? The people who always proclaim motorcycles to be dangerous know nothing about them.

      If your riding a crotch rocket (My prefference, like the full fairing style) you can always grab a messanger bag, the larger ones hold about as much as saddle bags on your typical cruiser/hog/touring bike. I recomend timbuk2.

      I live in the land of bad drivers (upstate NY. blame the snow if you must) so I have a very keen idea on what it takes to be a good driver (both car and bike) though generally I am not a very good bike rider (yet!) I consider myself a good car driver, I would much much rather be on the road with bikers and truckers than the average joe/jane.

      I agree 100% with all of the above stated advantages and one other biggie you did miss: Cost of repairs and ease of repairs. Even with a similar failure rate the cost of repairs is far far less than a car, even less if you do it yourself.

      I am still kinda getting used to the missing music thing (I am a full fledged audio nut) working on mounting some small headphones into my helmet and getting a solid state mp3 player (no moving parts) although I wont use it on a daily basis those 12 hour drives can get a bit tedious without tunes.

      I added you back FWIW.

      --
      "Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the the universe." --Albert Einstein
    9. Re:Woah. by psiphre · · Score: 1

      helmet-mounted earbuds would be cool, provided you have a way to turn them on and off whout removing the helmet. being a music appreciator myself, i've been hurting a couple times listening to nothing but road noise. i've tried humming tunes while riding to and from work (an hour ride on the freeway), but i find it makes it too difficult to hear what's going on around me.

      helmets already block out a lot of the noise of the cars around you (at least, if you wear a full face helmet). i believe that on a bike, your hearing is much, much more important than it is when you're in a car. i'd even go so far as to say that hearing is 40% of riding a bike.^W^W^Wstaying alive on a bike.

      one other big thing i forgot to mention: if everybody rode motorcycles, there would be NO traffic on the freeways (you can fit three or four motorcycles in the space that one car takes up). traffic jams would be nonexistant (smaller vehiciles make for quicker moving traffic). parking would never be an issue (four, maybe five if they're all your friends', motorcycles can park in the space one car needs to parallel(sp?) park).

      there really are a hundred different advantages to riding motorcycles. and most of the disadvantages only exist because those less evolved among us insist on driving cars...

    10. Re:Woah. by macshit · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I would much much rather be on the road with bikers and truckers than the average joe/jane.

      Doesn't it just come down to `people suck,' though? If everyone drove a motorcycle, then the average motorcyclist would be completely clueless.

      [Best new auto safety feature: a giant spike in the middle of the steering wheel -- just watch how carefully people drive!]

      --
      We live, as we dream -- alone....
    11. Re:Woah. by vivian · · Score: 1

      If everyone drove a motorcycle, then the average motorcyclist would be completely clueless.
      No, it's a self eliminating problem.

      One guy I used to ride with took 3 written off GXR 1100's in 14 months (yes, his first 14 months) before he figured out that motorcycle riding wasn't for him. Luckily he got out it all with only having to have a little extra steel as an integral part of his skeleton.

    12. Re:Woah. by 09za+ · · Score: 0

      WOW!
      It must be cool to be in California.
      It rains here and snows in the winter.
      Oh yeah... It's hard to fit all my floor sanding tools on a motorcycle so I can go to work.

      Please stop bashing SUV's...Some of us NEED them.

    13. Re:Woah. by 09za+ · · Score: 0

      Doesn't it just come down to `people suck,' though? If everyone drove a motorcycle, then the average motorcyclist would be completely clueless.
      I don't think it could have been said any better!
      There will always be drivers that suck because people have different reaction times and levels of coordination.
      I wish drivers were required to drive at a race course and push the limits of their skill.
      The road would be safer if everyone knew the limits of their vehicles. The fact that most people don't drive their cars at maximum levels leads them to underestimate the cars ability. This then causes them to over react in situations where a more skilled driver who knows the limits of the vehicle is able to handle with ease.
      As a pro level DH mountain bike racer(SEE PLATTEKILL)I have found that to learn what a bike can do... you have to find out what it can't do. This means a few close calls or big crashes but in the end it is the only way to know what you can do on a vehicle.
      My point: people drive bad because they are not forced to drive good.

    14. Re:Woah. by msim · · Score: 1

      Added yourself & psiphre as friends anyone who rides a bike is worthy of friends status. ;-).

      --

      Life is like a box of chocolates, you never know when your gonna get food poisoning.
    15. Re:Woah. by mattyrobinson69 · · Score: 1

      oo oo - add me! add me! i have a pushbike with a flat tire and fucked up peddles. the chains fucked too. the seats a bit shit too.

      scrap metal for sale! scrap metal for sale!

    16. Re:Woah. by 1lus10n · · Score: 1

      yes I agree to an extent, with one additional point: do stupid shit on a bike and you WILL die sooner or later (more likely sooner). No airbags or any other "save the stupids" technology.

      The spike would be nice, add into that some kind of AI system that shocks the shit out of drivers that do stupid things, like cut you off, or fail to signal on lane changes.

      --
      "Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the the universe." --Albert Einstein
    17. Re:Woah. by 1lus10n · · Score: 1

      I agree 99%.

      Really I dont think you (or at least I cant, at least nothing I wouldnt hear through the headphones anyway.) can hear shit anyway once you get up to high enough speeds. I kind of equate it with a car driver going 70+ with the windows down, can't really hear much, besides wind noise.

      I also might venture to point out: I drive at night when I make long trips, less assholes on the road = better time, more fun, less likely to get cut off by a soccer mom in an SUV.

      --
      "Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the the universe." --Albert Einstein
    18. Re:Woah. by 1lus10n · · Score: 1

      added back.

      "anyone who rides a bike is worthy of friends status." -- you mean anyone with a BRAIN that rides a bike is worth friends status right .... I mean we did cover the whole "teen on a crotch rocket" thing already ;-)

      --
      "Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the the universe." --Albert Einstein
    19. Re:Woah. by msim · · Score: 1

      Consider it done!

      Ok, so yeah it's a pushybike, and it's a buncha s(crap), but still it's a bike 'eh?

      I've got an old partly rusted out pushbike from the 80's you can't even get any rims or freaking TYRES for anymore sitting in the corner of my garage. I've not the heart to toss it and buy a new one as my dad gave the POS to me.

      Motorbikes however, it's chop'n'change week over here in Oz. :-).

      --

      Life is like a box of chocolates, you never know when your gonna get food poisoning.
    20. Re:Woah. by msim · · Score: 1

      Ok, so you've got me there. Your right, i can't handle just any idiot on a motorbike, sometimes i just cringe, like when i see a 150km/h mono in nothing but shorts, thongs and a lid *cringe*.

      Aside from the fact they'd leave my bike for the dust, esp on corners, some probs with having a f*kin cruiser... (unless it's a hirebus im up against, in which case i stand a chance-ish) ;-).

      --

      Life is like a box of chocolates, you never know when your gonna get food poisoning.
  23. Obligatory by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny
    Seriously, did you read the article?

    You must be new here...

    1. Re:Obligatory by Deraj+DeZine · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      Obligatory, adj.; oh-BLIG-uh-tory

      1. Overused, 2. Old joke that was not really that funny to begin with. See Off-topic, Troll.

      --
      True story.
    2. Re:Obligatory by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      hahahahh, NOW how has the bad karma!

      SUCKER.

  24. Best Quote from the Article by MikeDawg · · Score: 2, Interesting
    (From the FAQ)
    Why the Top Hat?
    Dignity, always dignity.
    The runner-up to this would most likely be:
    Technical - The Driver
    What Does it Do?
    Controls the wheel using its bodyweight, the joystick, throttle and brake. Looks out for suicidal pedestrians and bicyclists. Aims toward them.
    --

    YOU'RE WINNER !
    Another lame blog

  25. Yeah... by Cyno01 · · Score: 3, Funny

    Thats what i thought at first too, kinda dissapointed. Although the one on monster garage reminded me waaay to much of the "It" on south park... Linky

    --
    "Sic Semper Tyrannosaurus Rex."
  26. Someone needs to rewrite the "monorail" song by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    from the Simpsons to be the "monowheel" song!

  27. Mr. Garrison? by dukeisgod · · Score: 1

    I didn't RTFA, but didn't Mr. Garrison invent one of these once on South Park? If the controls are the same as his, count me out. I'll stick to my old fashioned motorcycle.

  28. Mr. Garrison's invention? by rkmath · · Score: 3, Funny

    This is an improved version of what we saw in South Park. There is no steering lever to be inserted into the rider's mouth. The other lever is still being used I think, as in Mr. Garrison's design.

    1. Re:Mr. Garrison's invention? by dukeisgod · · Score: 1

      Mr. Garrison had 4 levers, one front, one rear, and he was "jerking" one with each hand for control.

  29. I'm just waiting... by vistic · · Score: 1

    ...for someone to post an alteration of The Simpsons' "Monorail" song, but I'm not clever enough to come up with it myself.

    1. Re:I'm just waiting... by Purple_Walrus · · Score: 1

      Monowheel!
      Monowheel!
      Monowheel!
      Mono... D'oh!

      --
      ------
      Sig
  30. Mirror , just in case by mirror_dude · · Score: 0

    Hi their, just in case things go sidewise as it were I have put up a mirror.
    The mirror of http://www.popsci.com/popsci/auto/article/0,12543, 611352,00.html is at http://mirrorit.demonmoo.com/r_4/www.popsci.com/po psci/auto/article/0%2C12543%2C611352%2C00.html
    The mirror of http://theriotwheel.com/ is at http://mirrorit.demonmoo.com/r_4/theriotwheel.com/

    --
    Note to Mods: When I post mirrors, it's a best guess. I don't know for certain whether or not the site will go down!
  31. Monowheel is Derived... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Mono = One
    Wheel = Wheel

  32. You aint seen nothin! by deathguppie · · Score: 1

    I was there last year and if you think this is something ..... well, you just gotta go see for yourself.!

    ps. lotsa cool technostuff too, and some MS guys talking about doing wireless vid-phones through the city, next year, well, we'll see. the whole thing is supposed to be anti corprate, so...mabey some OSS?

    --
    once more into the breach
    1. Re:You aint seen nothin! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      supposed to be anti corprate, so...mabey some OSS?

      Is is also supposed to be anti-literate? so maybe some more school?

    2. Re:You aint seen nothin! by deathguppie · · Score: 1

      Or how bout an interesting story

      --
      once more into the breach
  33. How much would 'they' charge by kurt555gs · · Score: 5, Funny

    In Illinois the Tollway Authority charges 'per axle'

    I wonder if this would be free?

    Cheers

    --
    * Carthago Delenda Est *
  34. More of a Shelbyville idea... by Digitus1337 · · Score: 0, Redundant

    What's that name? Monowheel! Say it again, Monowheel!

  35. Umm... by dupper · · Score: 3, Funny
    Just when you thought it was safe to buy a Segway

    I never thought that. Well, I started to, once, and immediately preemptievly kicked my own ass.

  36. fsck what ya heard! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Funny

    in soviet russia, the monowheel builds YOU!

  37. What a great idea! by Deraj+DeZine · · Score: 5, Funny

    All the safety of a poorly-made, precarious go-cart, but with the weight and fuel economy of a small car.

    --
    True story.
  38. Just in case the site is /.'ed by martinbogo · · Score: 1


    Mirror is here

    (Mirror will be taken down after 5/3/04)

    --
    "Don't worry about the problems you have in mathematics, I assure you mine are much greater." - Einstein c.1919
  39. From the FAQ by Alien54 · · Score: 1
    What is the RIOT Wheel?
    It's an 1100lb motorized single-wheel vehicle, with the driver in front. Why, what does it look like?

    Is it NEW?
    Completely. There's nothing like it. It's the first radical departure in single-wheel designs in over a hundred years.

    Can I BUY one?

    Are you NUTS? Yes? Then of course you can buy one. These are prototypes, and so stupidly dangerous, but if you'd have bought a Wright Flyer in 1904, then contact us NOW. And if you want us to build you something similar, or something entirely different, we can talk about that, too.

    How does it work?
    Check out the Technical section for a complete explanation.

    --
    "It is a greater offense to steal men's labor, than their clothes"
  40. More power than my current setup? by Fiz+Ocelot · · Score: 1
    Right now I'm using a 4 hamster setup in my server, this should provide more power, yes?

    Now to find myself a giant miniature space hamster...

    1. Re:More power than my current setup? by simcop2387 · · Score: 0

      thats a miniture giant space hamster, Boo should kick your ass, you insensitive clod!

  41. Re:Steamroller for one by KarmaBlackballed · · Score: 1

    Steamrolling is what will happen to the driver if the engine seizes while running at top speed. 1100 pounds hasta hurt when you are supporting it via a face kickstand.

    --

    --- -- - -
    Give me LIBERTY, or give me a check.
  42. Good point... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Can someone explain how you'd turn left with this thing?

  43. Re:Steamroller for one by RotJ · · Score: 1
    Hopefully, they'll put in some kind of rollcage for the final version.

    Also, I'd be interested to see if the person who marked the comment informative will get on the news for murdering Segway users.

  44. My Monowheel Experience by Sexual+Ass+Gerbil · · Score: 4, Informative

    I had a chance to test drive a monowheel last summer. The first time I had trouble learning how to steer all over again, Because of the high center of balance (hint: it's just below the line of radial symmetry), you must be very careful while turning to avoid tipping the vehicle over! This is especially tricky because slowing down for a turn results in gerbilling (see below for a definition) where the driver is swung up from the base of the vehicle, further raising the center of gravity at a time when you need it as low as possible. Fortunately, the second time I mastered the trick of bringing the vehicle to a near stop in order to make sharp corner turns. I've (fortunately!) had several opportunities to drive one since then and my skills have improved.

    For those interested, monowheel vehicles have a vocabularity of their own. For example, gerbilling is when a rider rotates around inside a monowheel due to a sudden force (such as when the wheel stops), much like what happens when a rodent stops running in an exercise wheel. Another loss of rotational control is due to the snowball effect. Snowballing is when a monowheel develops a coating of snow while rolling in much the same way you might build up layers on a snowball by rolling it. Be very careful when driving these things during winter! Monowheels are very efficient vehicles and even when driven on nearly flat ground-- even a small gradient can lead to rolling out of control.

    Monowheels will never be practical vehicles. However, as recreation vehicles, they are quite fun. They're a ride, literally. There's nothing quite like steering around in one of them and feeling the unique forces that can only be felt inside of a big moving wheel. I can tell you personally that gerbilling and snowballing are both enjoyable activities assuming you take the right precautions.

    1. Re:My Monowheel Experience by ColaMan · · Score: 3, Funny

      I can tell you personally that gerbilling and snowballing are both enjoyable activities assuming you take the right precautions.

      Lucky someone didn't take that statement out of context, you could be portrayed as someone decidedly unwholesome.

      --

      You are in a twisty maze of processor lines, all alike.
      There is a lot of hype here.
    2. Re:My Monowheel Experience by Feanturi · · Score: 1

      I can tell you personally that gerbilling and snowballing are both enjoyable activities assuming you take the right precautions.

      Should I? No, maybe I won't...

    3. Re:My Monowheel Experience by msim · · Score: 1

      Duct tape to isle three, repeating, that was duct tape to isle three!

      now where did i put my hamster?

      --

      Life is like a box of chocolates, you never know when your gonna get food poisoning.
  45. Oh, crap. by ro_coyote · · Score: 5, Funny

    Scary part: the driver's seat is in the very front, and the seat scrapes the ground when braking really hard.

    Well, it seems two definitions of the term "tire tracks" will finally meet...

    1. Re:Oh, crap. by NeuroManson · · Score: 1

      And you can get two sets of skidmarks for the price of one!

      --
      Just because you can mod me down, doesn't mean you're right. Shoes for industry!
  46. Does it come with a set of Fred Flintstone feet? by blair1q · · Score: 2, Funny

    This thing is the Lawn Dart of tomorrow.

  47. Normally I don't do this but by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    mod parent down please GOD

  48. Why not just.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Funny

    Why not just buy a God damn unicycle for $20?

  49. Another design - sit inside... by Bagheera · · Score: 2, Informative

    I can't remember the specific issue, but there was an article in Car and Driver some time in the last year or two where a guy built a monowheel (actually a series of them) where the driver and motor set -inside- the diameter of the wheel. I seem to remember all of them had the motor ahead of the driver, and the whole thing running on some kind of big bearing structure. He sold them in kit form for about $8000 as I remember.

    The killer was the Monster version that had one of those tiny Buick V8's driving it. From what I remember of the article, he bailed it at something like 50 once...

    There have been a LOT of these things built over the years. Check out:

    http://www.dself.dsl.pipex.com/MUSEUM/TRANSPORT/ mo torwhl/motorwhl.htm

    Now, as for this specific machine . . . I'm not sure I want my ass hanging out in FRONT of the rest of my vehicle like that. A motorcycle is bad enough with only a little overhang between you and the rest of the world. This thing just seems suicidal...

    --
    Never attribute to malice what can as easily be the result of incompetence...
  50. Pics! AKA Karma whoring for profit! by azav · · Score: 1

    Since there aren't a load of videos or pics for this sick creation, I point you here:

    http://www.dself.dsl.pipex.com/MUSEUM/TRANSPORT/ mo torwhl/motorwhl.htm#sw

    --
    - Zav - Imagine a Beowulf cluster of insensitive clods...
  51. Life imitating art. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'm reminded of a South Park episode parodying the segway with a device very similar to this. Question is were is the mouth piece and anal retainer.

  52. MOD PARENT DOWN! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Not all of the people are as sick as parent... troll.

    BTW everyone knows its really you Mr. Gere.

  53. Junkyard Wars (scrapheap challenge) by DunbarTheInept · · Score: 2, Interesting

    One episode of Junkyard Wars (Scrapheap Challenge its original UK title) was to make the teams BUILD a monowheel and race it.

    Their designs were based on the rider being inside the wheel. Picture a round cage with a seat. The seat is off-center so that it is near the bottom of the inside of the wheel. Thus the rider's weight is not in the center of mass (this is deliberate). When you accellerate the wheel, the torque swings the inner cage forward, making the rider's swing to the front, and when you apply the brake, the rider is swung backward. This is nicely stable because this is slightly countered by the tendency of the rider to get "left behind" when the vehicle accellerates, or get "thrown" to the front when it decellerates.

    One effect of this is that the maximum amount of accelleration or decelleration force is mostly a function of the rider's mass. If the vehicle is accellerating, then the rider is perpetually "falling" from the front down to the bottom, and this "falling" force translates into the Newtonian
    equal and opposite reaction" against the engine spinning the wheel. (Without this, the wheel might stay put on the pavement while the inner cage spins around.) So, the fatter the rider, the more push the vehicle can have (but, of course, the more push it *needs*, so I don't know if this is really helpful or not).

    Anyway, it was a cool episode right up to the moment they started actually trying to race the vehicles. Then it was comically SLOW. I think the teams actually made good vehicles, but they didn't have the driver skill to use them, and so they were too frightened to make them go. I suspect it was something akin to trying to use a unicycle.

    The vehicle is steered by the leaning of the driver, and it balances a bit like a unicycle.

    --

    Don't label something "offtopic" unless you know the topic well enough to tell what's on topic.

  54. This monowheel is different than most by gotr00t · · Score: 1
    It seems that the kind of monowheel you're describing is the kind where the rider is within the wheel. However, the kind that this person is building, the RIOTwheel, is of totally different design.

    The mechanics are housed totally within the wheel, and the seat for the rider is in front of the wheel, with a clever crane/counterbalance system to keep the rider suspended in mid-air.

    Considering this, do things like gerballing still apply? When the brakes are applied real hard, the bottom of the rider's seat scrapes the ground, preventing this from happening. Snowballing might also be avoided, as there is a huge cover attached to the top of the wheel, able to scrape off excess foreign material. Moreover, turns might be easier because this thing seems to have a few very heavy gyros attached.

    IMO, the design for this monowheel is probably the best I've seen, considering that since seeing this article, I've went and looked up pictures/videos, and all of them have the rider in the middle.

    1. Re:This monowheel is different than most by heyheyjc · · Score: 1

      Thank-you. The whole point of the RIOT Wheel is to get away from gerbilling. I just didn't like the idea of not being able to slam on the brakes. Jake.

  55. this is unacceptable... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Are you making fun of My People?

    1. Re:this is unacceptable... by Cyno01 · · Score: 1

      Dont you mean m-iPeople?

      --
      "Sic Semper Tyrannosaurus Rex."
  56. Prior art... by mork · · Score: 1

    .. or rather prior idea(?)

    Check out Iain M. Banks book "Against a dark backgound" featuring a monowheel much like the one in the story ( or actually based on much the same principles, but being a sci-fi the mono is far more advanced ;)

    IMO its a good book and reccommended.

    1. Re:Prior art... by heyheyjc · · Score: 1

      I remembered that book when I started building the RIOT wheel, but looking again later, the driver is on top. Still a damn good book, though. Jake

  57. Looks fine but..... by avidday · · Score: 2, Funny

    Where are the front and rear flexigrip handles?

  58. Video of another one. by Oggust · · Score: 1
    Hjulet is a regular attraction at Cortégen, a student parade/carnival type thing in gothenburg, sweden.

    There's some (small but cool) video of it in action on the page.

    /August.

    --
    "An object declared as type _Bool is large enough to store the values 0 and 1." -- 6.1.2.5, C99 standard.
  59. And people popping the bubbles... by hummassa · · Score: 1

    would get a really, really funny voice .... :-)

    --
    It's better to be the foot on the boot than the face on the pavement. ~~ tkx Kadin2048
  60. Topless and with a top hat .. by klang · · Score: 1

    now if that's not cool, I don't know what is! :-)

  61. ABS looks at deceleration slope and other wheels by name_already_taken · · Score: 1
    ABS systems detect lockup by comparing the wheel speeds to each other and by watching the rate of deceleration.

    For example, if all of the wheels go from 20 MPH to 0 MPH, the system treats that as all wheels being locked up and not a normal complete stop.

    So, it would be possible to build an antilock system for a single-wheeled vehicle. The system could also use an alternative speed input such as a radar system or maybe some kind of optical system that watches the ground surface.

    --
    Putting moderation advice in your .sig lowers your karma!
  62. Ohhh Wonder Wheel! by Mondain98 · · Score: 1

    Dont do this to me wonder wheel! We've been through so much.. I love you Wonder Wheel. Noooo!

  63. Scrapheap Challenge by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I think I remember an episode of Scrapheap Challenge where the two teams had to build monowheel vehicles. I can't really imagine them taking over from traditional cars, though ..... that would be too much of a gothic/sci-fi crossover thing .....

    I say think because I'm not certain I didn't imagine the whole thing on some very nice weed.

  64. It would probably just skid on the frame by CreateWindowEx · · Score: 1
    It looks like the vehicle is designed to have the frame rails under the driver contact the ground under hard braking. If the wheel completely seized up, it would just transfer more weight to the rails, which would transfer weight off of the wheel, making it easier for it to skid. Since the tire isn't a racing slick, its coefficient of friction would be far less than 1.0, so the forces involved would probably be something like 800 pounds or so, although if it happened suddenly it could have quite a jolt. It's not exactly a huge engine, so I'm not sure how much braking torque it could exert if seized.

    So as long as the frame was strong enough not to break or fold up under this kind of stress, it might have a good chance of being able to skid to a stop as long as it could keep moving in a straight line. Even if it did break or tip over, I can't see how that would be any worse than being dumped off of a big motorcycle, not that that's a good thing either.

  65. Their site is incorrect on one thing though... by zakkie · · Score: 1

    We all know that electric vehicles (EV's) are slower than internal combustion, right? Well, right now, there's an opportunity to change that. The single-wheel record is beatable, and (as far as we can find out) this will be the first time an EV has held an outright speed record. Not true. Camille Jenatzy's La Jamais Contente held the outright land speed record and was electric powered. Link for those who care Ciao Zak