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?
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).<p>I think I'd rather spend the $1,800 on a really good bike. But I bet this is fun to mess around on.
The segway was also supposed to change the world - and then it was too expensive.<p>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!!
This is interesting but then again the price point doesn't seem to help break the do-I-look-like-a-dork image[1]. Also without the handle wouldn't it feel that you're not in control of the machine? To me it would. At least the Segway has a handle.<p>Then again, I'd rather see this product through the lens of tomorrow. When we'd have more Teslas and Segways out there these unicycles too will find more acceptance. Fossilization of fossil fuel ones should kind of pave way for this type of hardware. Good luck to the guys building it!<p>[1] <a href="http://www.paulgraham.com/segway.html" rel="nofollow">http://www.paulgraham.com/segway.html</a>
This thing was on Shark Tank. They got $300,000 for 33% of the company from Robert and Kevin. I'd link to the video, but I can't find it. It was on episode 7 of season 4.<p><a href="http://sharktankblog.com/business/self-balancing-unicycle/" rel="nofollow">http://sharktankblog.com/business/self-balancing-unicycle/</a>
Interesting section on illegal Chinese copies.<p><a href="http://solowheel.com/about-illegal-solowheel-copies/" rel="nofollow">http://solowheel.com/about-illegal-solowheel-copies/</a>
Their 'illegal Chinese copies' page has a Youtube video that demonstrates the failure mode at speed: <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wOOXBFvKAQM" rel="nofollow">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wOOXBFvKAQM</a><p>I wouldn't want to get anywhere near this - even a small obstacle in the road and you'll see that same failure mode, every time. Good luck jumping off, their trained rider who's expecting it barely manages.
I like the 10 mile range, but the 24lb weight makes it difficult to lug around.<p>Boosted Boards, by comparison, weighs 12-15 lbs and has a 6 mile range.
I'd much rather spend that much money on an electric bike where all the tubes are slightly oversized and have li-ion batteries inside them and a fairly well hidden/disguised electric motor somewhere. Nobody thinks twice about being seen on a bike. Plus there's the "I can pedal a very small amount and double the range" factor.
It's very compact. It's more compact than a folding bike. It also has a much faster transition time. I wonder how the cost benefit compares with a folding scooter? Hill climbing would be an advantage over a folding scooter. How much of a benefit would that be in a city?
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.<p>It really makes the product look dangerous.
This seems to have come out over 2 years ago so the price may be far too high.<p>I do wonder whether it would have been far more successful if they'd created a snazzy Kickstarter video and required people to pre-pay for it.
"She may not look like much, but she's got it where it counts, kid. I've made a lot of special modifications myself." - disappointed it wasn't this Solo; but still: seems much better than an electric scooter (for moving around in the city, at least).