Tuuk OneUp Chassis or Tri-Di Chassis

[wordman8]

Hey, It looks like Tuuk is at it again.

They have the rocker and now the OneUp Chassis.

This is a Stable chassis that has wheels of 72mm 72mm 80mm and the back one is 78mm.

It is just like a "Locked Rocker" chassis and they state that the back wheel is just a little bit off the surface so you can rock back and forth for Acceleration (Leaning Forward) or Turning (Leaning Back).

Most people I have found don't believe in this.

I think it works great. It is all personal preference.

Nike HiHO skates have this OneUP chassis.

The thing that sucks is with 3 different size wheels you can't just buy a normal set of wheels.

Several companies have this new setup... I think CCM calls it something else, but it is the same thing really (see below).

TRI-DI? Extruded 6000 Aluminum frameprovides strength and performance
Tri-Di? frame uses 72mm(1), 76mm(2) and 80mm(1) wheels

CCM Vector PF6 has this chassis and probably all the vectors.

[Wally]

Hi everyone :-)

Just seen one of these new oneup chassis in the shops. My understanding until I saw it in the shops was that it had a normal rockered setup, ie: front and back wheels raised off the ground, but that you could change the back wheel to an 80 mm one so that the three back wheels are flat and only the front one would be raised.
However...having seen the Nike Ignite LX Oneup's, they seem to have the front three wheels on the floor at the same time and the back wheel is the only one raised up. That seems completely stupid to me! Is there any advantage to having the back wheel raised up? Or is it simply to get 'round patent issues with the HiLo setup - despite the fact that the chassis itself is identical (from what I can see) to the HiLo setup.

[Quote]Several companies have this new setup... I think CCM calls it something else, but it is the same thing really [Quote/]

Are you sure CCM uses this same setup or do they have a normal rockered setup (front and rear wheels raised).

Also, does anybody have any experience with these two-piece TUUK chassis? The Ignite LX's had them and it looked kinda crappy having three extra bolts just to hold the chassis together, are there any performance disadvantages in this? Or does it not make much difference?

Wally,

[Ven98]

From what i have heard around the rink, the One Up was just a way to get around the patent issues. From what i have felt, using the One Up, it has pretty much the same feel as the HiLo.

[MDE3]

I have even heard that some manufacturers using this arrangement have gone as far as to supply an 80 mm wheel in the skate shipping box to replace the 78mm wheel should the customer so desire....There is NO doubt(in my mind) that this has been done in an attempt to technically circumvent the "split level" patent...One of the requirements in the language of the patent (I believe it refers to a "split level" rather than a HiLo) is that for wheels to be assembled on the chassis with axle centers at different heights above the floor, and meet the intent of the design, all the wheels must be in contact with the floor simultaneously.

By supplying an arrangement that does NOT have all wheels in contact with the floor, technically the manufacturer is not in "breach" of the patent rules. If at some point a court were to rule on the "intent" of this arrangement, indicating that the intent of the supplier was to offer their customer's the same advantage as the HiLo, but without actually supplying it in this arrangement, a court might still find the manufacturers in breach of the patent protected arrangement.

None of this will be worthwhile until enough of these arrangements have been sold(maybe 2 -3 years), and then the holder of the patent(Mission), might be able to claim serious financial damages, and thus seek serious compensation...... It would not be financially worthwhile to pursue a court ruling on this just yet.