Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Solowheel

solowheel.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 54 posts

Re: Solowheel

#31

Post by apendleton »

Dewie wrote: post #26
davidw wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I think I'd rather spend the $1,800 on a really good bike. For city transportation purposes, a solid, but crappy bike is much better: it's far less likely to be stolen, and a lot less stressful.

This seems like I can lug around inside buildings and whatnot, unlike a bike. I don't trust biking to a lot of places, because cretins will take whatever they can: the wheels, the steering wheel, anything that isn't bolted on, really.

You could get a decent folding bike (a Dahon or Brompton) for way less money than that, and folded, they're not much bigger than this thing. Plus they're street-legal in most places, likely unlike this thing, and you get the exercise benefits of riding.

Re: Solowheel

#32

Post by apendleton »

jere wrote: post #8

It seems a little bit ridiculous that they're selling this as a "greener" and healthier alternative than a bicycle. I suppose the advantage is the size?

Absolutely agreed. Even just considering the energy it takes to keep its battery charged, I'd be deeply skeptical that this device would hold the lead for more than a few months, even if the manufacturing energy for a bicycle is higher -- and if you care about keeping the manufacturing energy of your bike to a minimum, you can buy a bamboo bike, or (even better) buy one used, something for which there is no equivalent with this device both because it's new and because I can't imagine it could hope to last 20 years the way a good bike can. And on yet another level, I'd also have to be convinced that this thing can facilitate car-free living the way bike ownership in an urban area can, which is a huge source of energy savings that bikes can bring to the table.

Re: Solowheel

#33

Post by nwh »

freehunter wrote: post #12
ars wrote: post #4

The segway was also supposed to change the world - and then it was too expensive. I'm disappointed to see that this too is far far too expensive. It needs to be under $250 to even have a chance, but they are asking for $1,795!!

Under $250?! I'd say around $500. I don't know if I'd trust it if it were under $250, not with the manufacturing technology I know of today.

It's a microcontroller, a hub driven motor and a lead acid battery. You could probably churn these out quite cheaply if you so desires.

Re: Solowheel

#34

Post by Lewisham »

TylerE wrote: post #22
tirant wrote: post #14

Why are people wearing a helmet? It only gets up to 16km/h (10mph), and it just adds like 10cm to your height. Humans can run up to 44 km/h and Ive never seen them wearing a helmet. It really makes the product look dangerous.

I bet it's classified as an electric bike....and lots of places require helmets for bike riders.

...or you need to use it on the road, in which case a helmet will protect you if you get buzzed by a car (or worse).

Re: Solowheel

#35

Post by mike_esspe »

jgrahamc wrote: post #5

According to the documentation it balances front-to-back and not side-to-side and the rider is responsible for maintaining that balance. I wonder how easy that is (especially with any load like a backpack). I think I'd rather spend the $1,800 on a really good bike. But I bet this is fun to mess around on.

BTW, for short-length city transportation (5-10km) folding kick scooter is better, than bike. You can always fold it and bring it inside. And you are still 2-3 times faster, than pedestrian.

I think kick scooter was my best purchase this year :)

Re: Solowheel

#36

Post by herge »

mike_esspe wrote: post #35
jgrahamc wrote: post #5

According to the documentation it balances front-to-back and not side-to-side and the rider is responsible for maintaining that balance. I wonder how easy that is (especially with any load like a backpack). I think I'd rather spend the $1,800 on a really good bike. But I bet this is fun to mess around on.

BTW, for short-length city transportation (5-10km) folding kick scooter is better, than bike. You can always fold it and bring it inside. And you are still 2-3 times faster, than pedestrian. I think kick scooter was my best purchase this year :)

5km is quite a long time to be on a kick scooter.

Re: Solowheel

#37

Post by rfnslyr »

davidw wrote: post #15
jgrahamc wrote: post #5

According to the documentation it balances front-to-back and not side-to-side and the rider is responsible for maintaining that balance. I wonder how easy that is (especially with any load like a backpack). I think I'd rather spend the $1,800 on a really good bike. But I bet this is fun to mess around on.

> I think I'd rather spend the $1,800 on a really good bike. For city transportation purposes, a solid, but crappy bike is much better: it's far less likely to be stolen, and a lot less stressful.

Not even. Get proper locks and it will be fine.

A proper bike >>>> something shitty. No comparison.

Re: Solowheel

#38

Post by g8oz »

nwh wrote: post #33
freehunter wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Under $250?! I'd say around $500. I don't know if I'd trust it if it were under $250, not with the manufacturing technology I know of today.

It's a microcontroller, a hub driven motor and a lead acid battery. You could probably churn these out quite cheaply if you so desires.

LiFePO4 (lithium iron phosphate), not lead acid

Re: Solowheel

#39

Post by jweir »

Ah! I saw one yesterday near Prospect Park, Brooklyn. I was driving and couldn't stop to ask about it. Now I know.

Looks like a trip.

Re: Solowheel

#40

Post by corin_ »

benvd wrote: post #19
ars wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can put your foot down with a bike because you are holding the handlebars, and your weight is on the seat. How would you do that here? You are standing on it - if you took one foot off you'd fall. You'd have to hop off every time you stop. If you are athletic with good balance you could probably stand on one foot, but I doubt most people could.

Most people couldn't stand on one foot? Really? Am I that out of touch with reality? Not even being snarky.

It's not that people can't stand on one foot, it's that if you stand on this wheel with only one foot, then you'll fall sideways before your other foot has a chance to hit the ground. Well, that's my assumption, anyway. Get on a (normal) bike, ride along, then stand up on it so your weight is on the pedals through your feet. Come to a stop, then try and get off it, from standing, without supporting yourself with handlebars or seat.
Post reply on HN