5 ms·

These search results do not appear to describe a flaw in the product. I watched a bit from one of the crash compilations and would describe every crash I saw as

by Zak 4y ago

These search results do not appear to describe a flaw in the product. I watched a bit from one of the crash compilations and would describe every crash I saw as rider error. Many of them were attempting stunts, holding cameras while riding, or both. It may be easy to make such errors, but the same could be said of a unicycle, skateboard, BMX bike, or any of many other vehicles generally seen as safe enough for sale to the public.

Supermancho 4y ago
Not even 4 deaths a year, I have to say this is still a magnitude safer than swimming or skiing. It's dangerous to some degree, but enough for a recall seems over the top. Just the statement itself seems unusually targeted. First they came for the magnets, now the uniboards?
- fn-mote 4y ago
  > Not even 4 deaths a year, I have to say this is still a magnitude safer than swimming or skiing. The only meaningful comparison would be a _rate_, not total number of injuries. Google says there are 40 skiing deaths per year in the US. It would be very easy to believe there are 100x more people skiing than uniboarding. This passes my back of the envelope test for "dangerous". If you've got better numbers, I'll listen.
  - Zak 4y ago
    My take on it is that if it's no more dangerous than the term "20+ MPH electrically-driven skateboard/unicycle hybrid" sounds, then it's perfectly fine to market it to adults. That sounds kind of dangerous to me. If I was going to ride one, I'd be sure I was wearing a helmet, knee pads, and elbow pads. I'd ride it in a very controlled space free of obstacles, uneven surfaces, and unpredictable road users until I mastered controlling it. I'd step up that safety gear a notch if I was attempting stunts. Some people aren't that careful, but as long as they're injuring themselves rather than others, it does not strike me as grounds for a recall. Edit: the wheel locking randomly or unpredictably certainly would be grounds for a recall, but the linked Youtube search doesn't show that, at least not without watching a couple hours of video.
    - latchkey 4y ago
      It is too easy to nosedive on these things at speed and go superman. Either a balance mistake or hardware failure. There are tons of videos of people nosediving. There are now third party companies making little wheels that sit on the end edge that are supposed to help protect you. IMHO, that is one advancement that the company should be making as part of the core product and not just outsourcing.
      - Zak 4y ago
        Safety wheels do seem like a good feature that should be standard on these. There's a speed over which they can no longer accelerate fast enough to self-balance, and braking to override the user's questionable decision to go faster would cause a nosedive. What I'm seeing from a quick search is that there's an audible warning upon exceeding the speed that's safe for self-balancing. Ignoring that is rider error.
        latchkey 4y ago
        .... beep ... superman!!!
  - sleepybrett 4y ago
    Yeah future motion cites bicycle deaths vs onewheel deaths. As if bicycles are not used to cover many many orders of magnitudes more miles traveled. Even with that we should be talking about bicycle deaths caused by a bicycle hardware fail, not being hit by a non-attentive driver.
- latchkey 4y ago
  I think at least part of the difference is that this is a single company that is building, selling and supporting this product. They go out of their way to hold their dominance and not allow for competition and thus improvement of products. The CEO says as much so in his video and in a lot of ways is using safety and control as an excuse for this. Since that is the case, they should own it and provide a product that doesn't randomly lock up as well as have a whole bunch of well documented electrical / construction / design problems. Imagine that there was only one company that made skis.

by Zak 4y ago

Supermancho 4y ago

Not even 4 deaths a year, I have to say this is still a magnitude safer than swimming or skiing. It's dangerous to some degree, but enough for a recall seems over the top. Just the statement itself seems unusually targeted. First they came for the magnets, now the uniboards?

fn-mote 4y ago
> Not even 4 deaths a year, I have to say this is still a magnitude safer than swimming or skiing. The only meaningful comparison would be a _rate_, not total number of injuries. Google says there are 40 skiing deaths per year in the US. It would be very easy to believe there are 100x more people skiing than uniboarding. This passes my back of the envelope test for "dangerous". If you've got better numbers, I'll listen.
- Zak 4y ago
  My take on it is that if it's no more dangerous than the term "20+ MPH electrically-driven skateboard/unicycle hybrid" sounds, then it's perfectly fine to market it to adults. That sounds kind of dangerous to me. If I was going to ride one, I'd be sure I was wearing a helmet, knee pads, and elbow pads. I'd ride it in a very controlled space free of obstacles, uneven surfaces, and unpredictable road users until I mastered controlling it. I'd step up that safety gear a notch if I was attempting stunts. Some people aren't that careful, but as long as they're injuring themselves rather than others, it does not strike me as grounds for a recall. Edit: the wheel locking randomly or unpredictably certainly would be grounds for a recall, but the linked Youtube search doesn't show that, at least not without watching a couple hours of video.
  - latchkey 4y ago
    It is too easy to nosedive on these things at speed and go superman. Either a balance mistake or hardware failure. There are tons of videos of people nosediving. There are now third party companies making little wheels that sit on the end edge that are supposed to help protect you. IMHO, that is one advancement that the company should be making as part of the core product and not just outsourcing.
    - Zak 4y ago
      Safety wheels do seem like a good feature that should be standard on these. There's a speed over which they can no longer accelerate fast enough to self-balance, and braking to override the user's questionable decision to go faster would cause a nosedive. What I'm seeing from a quick search is that there's an audible warning upon exceeding the speed that's safe for self-balancing. Ignoring that is rider error.
      - latchkey 4y ago
        .... beep ... superman!!!
- sleepybrett 4y ago
  Yeah future motion cites bicycle deaths vs onewheel deaths. As if bicycles are not used to cover many many orders of magnitudes more miles traveled. Even with that we should be talking about bicycle deaths caused by a bicycle hardware fail, not being hit by a non-attentive driver.
latchkey 4y ago
I think at least part of the difference is that this is a single company that is building, selling and supporting this product. They go out of their way to hold their dominance and not allow for competition and thus improvement of products. The CEO says as much so in his video and in a lot of ways is using safety and control as an excuse for this. Since that is the case, they should own it and provide a product that doesn't randomly lock up as well as have a whole bunch of well documented electrical / construction / design problems. Imagine that there was only one company that made skis.