Coker crank length

Unicycles and Equipment
1

Hi all,

Sometime ago I think there was a discussion about the optimal crankarm length
for Cokers. I missed the details and would like to know what the conclusions of
this were.

Yesterday, I changed my crankarms from the original 6" to 5.5", and I feel that
on the whole it is easier to handle and is especially comfortable for long
distances on smooth roads.

The disadvantage, if I can call it that, is that it is more difficult to climb
hills and do such maneuvers as one-foot idling, which I more or less mastered
using 6" cranks.

Any comments are welcome.

Regards, Jack Halpern CJK Dictionary Publishing Society, http://www.kanji.org
Voice: +81-48-481-3103 Fax: +81-48-479-1323

2

Re: Coker crank length

Jack, 110 mm cranks on a Coker are very do-able. I hated the 6" cranks that came
on the Coker and went to 5" almost immediately. After about 8 months I went to
110 mm. I never miss the 5" cranks. The 110 mm make the miles fly by! The
shorter stroke seems to reduce wobble as well. -Mark

Free e-Mail and Webspace - http://Unicyclist.com

3

Re: Coker crank length

Jack wrote:

> Sometime ago I think there was a discussion about the optimal crankarm length
> for Cokers. I missed the details and would like to know what the conclusions
> of this were.
>
> Yesterday, I changed my crankarms from the original 6" to 5.5", and I feel
> that on the whole it is easier to handle and is especially comfortable for
> long distances on smooth roads.

Definately smoother on shorter cranks, I have not found it harder on hills with
shorter cranks though. I must say my favourate is 110 cranks on my Coker. It is
soooooo smooooooth :slight_smile:

> The disadvantage, if I can call it that, is that it is more difficult to climb
> hills and do such maneuvers as one-foot idling, which I more or less mastered
> using 6" cranks.

I agree shorter cranks do reduce manoeverabolity, I don’t know if it does
reduces ones ability to one foot idlinging because I cannot do it on a Coker! I
have problems idling it, I think it is that I am light weight and end up just
being lifted out of the seat when I idle, then thown off! I tend to track stand
when I wait for lights etc.

Roger

4

Re: Coker crank length

Greetings

In message “Re: Coker crank length”, Mark Stephens wrote…
>
>
>Jack, 110 mm cranks on a Coker are very do-able. I hated the 6" cranks that
>came on the
Coker and went to 5" almost immediately. After about 8 months I went to 110 mm.
I never miss the 5" cranks. The 110 mm make the miles fly by! The shorter stroke
seems to reduce wobble as well.

I am amazed to hear this. How about things like idling, spinning, quick stops,
and the like? Isn’t it real hard work?

>-Mark
>
>_____________________________________________________________
>Free e-Mail and Webspace - http://Unicyclist.com
>
>

Regards, Jack Halpern CJK Dictionary Publishing Society, http://www.kanji.org
Voice: +81-48-481-3103 Fax: +81-48-479-1323

5

Re: Coker crank length

I’ve not been brave enough to try shorter cranks on my Coker up to this point,
but I’ve had the privilege of riding with Mark Stephens through our neighborhood
after he installed the 4-1/4-inch cranks. We went up some steep grades and down
some very steep grades on a 9-mile ride. Since he lives in Oklahoma, he wasn’t
used to our terrain, but he rode it like a champ.

Mark is huge (6’4", 200+ pounds), so I assumed that his size and God-given
strength made the difference. Then Roger Davies told me he also uses short
cranks, and he’s not huge. So I guess it’s just strength. I’ve just removed the
5-inch cranks from my 26-inch Semcycle, and installed 4-inch cranks. Riding it
is easy, so easy that I’m ready to scale down to 5.5-inch cranks on the Coker.

If CNN reports that a “big wheel was just clocked at 25 mph and climbing, and
some guy was holding onto the seat for dear life,” you’ll know that the
attempt was made!

-John

----- Original Message ----- From: Jack Halpern <jack@hictsvr.hinocatv.ne.jp>
To: Mark Stephens <Cokerhead@unicyclist.com>
Cc: unicycleSourceUK <Roger@unicycle.uk.com>; Unicycling mailing list
<unicycling@winternet.com> Sent: Monday, July 17, 2000 11:26 AM Subject: Re:
Coker crank length

> Greetings
>
> In message “Re: Coker crank length”, Mark Stephens wrote…
> >
> >
> >Jack, 110 mm cranks on a Coker are very do-able. I hated the 6" cranks that
came on the
> Coker and went to 5" almost immediately. After about 8 months I went to
110 mm. I
> never miss the 5" cranks. The 110 mm make the miles fly by! The shorter
stroke seems
> to reduce wobble as well.
>
> I am amazed to hear this. How about things like idling, spinning, quick
stops,
> and the like? Isn’t it real hard work?
>
> >-Mark
> >
> >_____________________________________________________________
> >Free e-Mail and Webspace - http://Unicyclist.com
> >
> >
>
>
> Regards, Jack Halpern CJK Dictionary Publishing Society, http://www.kanji.org
> Voice: +81-48-481-3103 Fax: +81-48-479-1323
>

6

Re: Coker crank length

Jack Halpern <jack@mail.hinocatv.ne.jp> wrote:
: I am amazed to hear this. How about things like idling, spinning, quick stops,
: and the like? Isn’t it real hard work?

Yes.

sarah who picks her crank length to suit what shes planning on doing. ie 5s for
long flat rides, 6s for commuting, off roading, hilly rides etc.

7

Re: Coker crank length

Greetings

In message “Re: Coker crank length”, unicycleSourceUK wrote…
>Jack wrote:
>
>> Sometime ago I think there was a discussion about the optimal crankarm
>> length for Cokers. I missed the details and would like to know what the
>> conclusions of this were.
>>
>> Yesterday, I changed my crankarms from the original 6" to 5.5", and I feel
>> that on the whole it is easier to handle and is especially comfortable for
>> long distances on smooth roads.
>
>Definately smoother on shorter cranks, I have not found it harder on hills
>with shorter cranks though. I must say my favourate is 110 cranks on my Coker.
>It is soooooo smooooooth :slight_smile:

Are you sure about that number? My God, that’s only 4.3"!! You must either be a
lunatic (you are a member of the Loonies, right?) or a genious beyond your
times! :slight_smile: (just joking, as I need not tell you).

How the frick can you start, stop, turn, and idle? Please, share these secrets
with us ordinary mortals so that we can achieve greatness too.

>> The disadvantage, if I can call it that, is that it is more difficult to
>> climb hills and do such maneuvers as one-foot idling, which I more or less
>> mastered using 6" cranks.
>
>I agree shorter cranks do reduce manoeverabolity, I don’t know if it does
>reduces ones ability to one foot idlinging because I cannot do it on a Coker!

But of course, because you use cranks way too short. It’s the chicken and
egg problem.

>I have problems idling it, I think it is that I am light weight and

No! It’s because your cranks are too short and you don’t have enough levrage.

>end up just being lifted out of the seat when I idle, then thown off! I tend
>to track stand when I wait for lights etc.

All this talk convinced that maybe I should take one more step towards The
Lunatic Way and try 5" cranks. Sarah tells me she uses them. I can imagine what
a breeze it would be to ride at high speed on a smooth road, but God forgive me
if I have tackle a steep hill or off-road trails.

>Roger
>
>
>

Regards, Jack Halpern CJK Dictionary Publishing Society, http://www.kanji.org
Voice: +81-48-481-3103 Fax: +81-48-479-1323

8

Re: Coker crank length

I first put the short cranks on while the MN ride, it did make a difference. I
took them off while my wrist was healing from it’s injury. It was so nice to get
them on again though, I did swap for 150’s for the Redbull though, it seamed
that I might need them on an event like that.

I will have a set with me in China so we can have a play Jack to see what
you think.

Mark… I have just noticed your email address! love it.

Roger

 The UK's Unicycle Source <a href="http://www.unicycle.uk.com/">http://www.unicycle.uk.com/</a>

----- Original Message ----- From: “Mark Stephens” <Cokerhead@unicyclist.com>
To: “Jack Halpern” <jack@mail.hinocatv.ne.jp>; “Mark Stephens”
<Cokerhead@unicyclist.com>
Cc: “unicycleSourceUK” <Roger@unicycle.uk.com> Sent: Monday, July 17, 2000 4:50
PM Subject: Re: Coker crank length

> Jack, I don’t idle,spin,or stop quick-sorry. I do know that hills are easier
than I thought they would be.
> -Mark
>
> — Jack Halpern <jack@mail.hinocatv.ne.jp>
> > wrote:
> > Greetings
> >
> >In message “Re: Coker crank length”, Mark Stephens wrote…
> > >
> > >
> > >Jack, 110 mm cranks on a Coker are very do-able. I hated the 6" cranks that
came on the
> >Coker and went to 5" almost immediately. After about 8 months I went to
110 mm. I
> >never miss the 5" cranks. The 110 mm make the miles fly by! The shorter
stroke seems
> >to reduce wobble as well.
> >
> >I am amazed to hear this. How about things like idling, spinning, quick
stops,
> >and the like? Isn’t it real hard work?
> >
> > >-Mark
> > >
> > >_____________________________________________________________
> > >Free e-Mail and Webspace - http://Unicyclist.com
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >Regards, Jack Halpern CJK Dictionary Publishing Society, http://www.kanji.org
> >Voice: +81-48-481-3103 Fax: +81-48-479-1323
>
> _____________________________________________________________
> Free e-Mail and Webspace - http://Unicyclist.com

9

Re: Coker crank length

Greetings

In message “Re: Coker crank length”, John Drummond wrote…
>28 mph?! That isn’t just fast, it’s scary!

No, no, no! That’s 28 kph (KILOMETERS per hour), or around 17 mph!

>The highest speed I’d heard of was 24.5 mph by Gilby.

That’s almost 40 kph! Gilby, what size cranks do you use?

>With 6-inch cranks I top out around 15 mph, and that’s fast enough for me.
>
>-John
>
>----- Original Message ----- From: Jack Halpern <jack@hictsvr.hinocatv.ne.jp>
>To: John Drummond <unicycle@bellsouth.net> Sent: Tuesday, July 18, 2000 3:04 AM
>Subject: Re: Coker crank length
>
>
>> Greetings
>>
>> In message “Re: Coker crank length”, John Drummond wrote…
>> >I’ve not been brave enough to try shorter cranks on my Coker up to this
>> >point, but I’ve had the privilege of riding with Mark Stephens through
>our
>> >neighborhood after he installed the 4-1/4-inch cranks. We went up some
>> >steep grades and down some very steep grades on a 9-mile ride. Since he
>> >lives in Oklahoma, he wasn’t used to our terrain, but he rode it like a
>> >champ.
>> >
>> >Mark is huge (6’4", 200+ pounds), so I assumed that his size and
>God-given
>> >strength made the difference. Then Roger Davies told me he also uses
>short
>>
>> I guess physical strength is an importsnt factor.
>>
>> >cranks, and he’s not huge. So I guess it’s just strength. I’ve just removed
>> >the 5-inch cranks from my 26-inch Semcycle, and installed 4-inch cranks.
>> >Riding it is easy, so easy that I’m ready to scale down to
>5.5-inch
>> >cranks on the Coker.
>>
>> I am now using 5.5" and I am quite happy. I got used to idling, but I do find
>> it difficult to idle one-foot. I guess I need more practice. I can imagine
>> that 5" cranks will give me smoother ride once I hit the road, but I ma
>> guessing that 5.5" may be the best size if I want to have my cake and eat it
>> too: that is, have pretty good speed and good maneuverability too.
>>
>>
>> >If CNN reports that a "big wheel was just clocked at 25 mph and
>climbing,
>> >and some guy was holding onto the seat for dear life," you’ll know that
>the
>> >attempt was made!
>>
>> I clocked my speed with 5.5". I was scared to go at full speed, so I held
>> back. I got about 28 kph. Is that pretty fast for a Coker? I guess Riger with
>> his 4.25 cranks can easily exceed 30 kph.
>>
>>
>> >-John
>> >
>> >----- Original Message ----- From: Jack Halpern
>> ><jack@hictsvr.hinocatv.ne.jp> To: Mark Stephens <Cokerhead@unicyclist.com>
>> >Cc: unicycleSourceUK <Roger@unicycle.uk.com>; Unicycling mailing list
>> > <unicycling@winternet.com> Sent: Monday, July 17, 2000 11:26 AM
>> > Subject: Re: Coker crank length
>> >
>> >
>> >> Greetings
>> >>
>> >> In message “Re: Coker crank length”, Mark Stephens wrote…
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >Jack, 110 mm cranks on a Coker are very do-able. I hated the 6" cranks
>that
>> >came on the
>> >> Coker and went to 5" almost immediately. After about 8 months I went
>to
>> >110 mm. I
>> >> never miss the 5" cranks. The 110 mm make the miles fly by! The
>shorter
>> >stroke seems
>> >> to reduce wobble as well.
>> >>
>> >> I am amazed to hear this. How about things like idling, spinning,
>quick
>> >stops,
>> >> and the like? Isn’t it real hard work?
>> >>
>> >> >-Mark
>> >> >
>> >> >_____________________________________________________________
>> >> >Free e-Mail and Webspace - http://Unicyclist.com
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> Regards, Jack Halpern CJK Dictionary Publishing Society,
>> >> http://www.kanji.org Voice: +81-48-481-3103 Fax: +81-48-479-1323
>> >>
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>> >
>>
>>
>> Regards, Jack Halpern CJK Dictionary Publishing Society, http://www.kanji.org
>> Voice: +81-48-481-3103 Fax: +81-48-479-1323
>>
>>
>
>
>

Regards, Jack Halpern CJK Dictionary Publishing Society, http://www.kanji.org
Voice: +81-48-481-3103 Fax: +81-48-479-1323

10

Re: Coker crank length

Hi,

I know this is rather an old thread but I just noticed that you were amazed at
Gilby doing 24mph. I generally am sceptical of the top speed on cycle computers,
but on the MN ride I had the experience of Gilby going flying past me on 150
cranks while I was flat out on 110 cranks at close to 20mph. I do believe he
could make 24mph.

Roger

 The UK's Unicycle Source <a href="http://www.unicycle.uk.com/">http://www.unicycle.uk.com/</a>

----- Original Message ----- From: “Jack Halpern” <jack@hictsvr.hinocatv.ne.jp>
To: “John Drummond” <unicycle@bellsouth.net>
Cc: “Unicycling mailing list” <unicycling@winternet.com> Sent: Tuesday, July 18,
2000 4:20 PM Subject: Re: Coker crank length

> Greetings
>
> In message “Re: Coker crank length”, John Drummond wrote…
> >28 mph?! That isn’t just fast, it’s scary!
>
> No, no, no! That’s 28 kph (KILOMETERS per hour), or around 17 mph!
>
>
> >The highest speed I’d heard of
> >was 24.5 mph by Gilby.
>
> That’s almost 40 kph! Gilby, what size cranks do you use?
>
>
> >With 6-inch cranks I top out around 15 mph, and
> >that’s fast enough for me.
> >
> >-John
> >
> >----- Original Message ----- From: Jack Halpern
> ><jack@hictsvr.hinocatv.ne.jp> To: John Drummond <unicycle@bellsouth.net>
> >Sent: Tuesday, July 18, 2000 3:04 AM Subject: Re: Coker crank length
> >
> >
> >> Greetings
> >>
> >> In message “Re: Coker crank length”, John Drummond wrote…
> >> >I’ve not been brave enough to try shorter cranks on my Coker up to
this
> >> >point, but I’ve had the privilege of riding with Mark Stephens
through
> >our
> >> >neighborhood after he installed the 4-1/4-inch cranks. We went up
some
> >> >steep grades and down some very steep grades on a 9-mile ride.
Since he
> >> >lives in Oklahoma, he wasn’t used to our terrain, but he rode it
like a
> >> >champ.
> >> >
> >> >Mark is huge (6’4", 200+ pounds), so I assumed that his size and
> >God-given
> >> >strength made the difference. Then Roger Davies told me he also
uses
> >short
> >>
> >> I guess physical strength is an importsnt factor.
> >>
> >> >cranks, and he’s not huge. So I guess it’s just strength. I’ve
just
> >> >removed the 5-inch cranks from my 26-inch Semcycle, and installed
4-inch
> >> >cranks. Riding it is easy, so easy that I’m ready to scale down to
> >5.5-inch
> >> >cranks on the Coker.
> >>
> >> I am now using 5.5" and I am quite happy. I got used to idling, but I do
> >> find it difficult to idle one-foot. I guess I need more
practice.
> >> I can imagine that 5" cranks will give me smoother ride once I hit the
> >> road, but I ma guessing that 5.5" may be the best size if I want to have
> >> my cake and eat it too: that is, have pretty good speed and good
> >> maneuverability too.
> >>
> >>
> >> >If CNN reports that a "big wheel was just clocked at 25 mph and
> >climbing,
> >> >and some guy was holding onto the seat for dear life," you’ll know
that
> >the
> >> >attempt was made!
> >>
> >> I clocked my speed with 5.5". I was scared to go at full speed, so I
held
> >> back. I got about 28 kph. Is that pretty fast for a Coker? I guess
Riger
> >> with his 4.25 cranks can easily exceed 30 kph.
> >>
> >>
> >> >-John
> >> >
> >> >----- Original Message ----- From: Jack Halpern
> >> ><jack@hictsvr.hinocatv.ne.jp> To: Mark Stephens
> >> ><Cokerhead@unicyclist.com>
> >> >Cc: unicycleSourceUK <Roger@unicycle.uk.com>; Unicycling mailing
list
> >> ><unicycling@winternet.com> Sent: Monday, July 17, 2000 11:26 AM Subject:
> >> >Re: Coker crank length
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >> Greetings
> >> >>
> >> >> In message “Re: Coker crank length”, Mark Stephens wrote…
> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >> >Jack, 110 mm cranks on a Coker are very do-able. I hated the 6"
cranks
> >that
> >> >came on the
> >> >> Coker and went to 5" almost immediately. After about 8 months I
went
> >to
> >> >110 mm. I
> >> >> never miss the 5" cranks. The 110 mm make the miles fly by! The
> >shorter
> >> >stroke seems
> >> >> to reduce wobble as well.
> >> >>
> >> >> I am amazed to hear this. How about things like idling, spinning,
> >quick
> >> >stops,
> >> >> and the like? Isn’t it real hard work?
> >> >>
> >> >> >-Mark
> >> >> >
> >> >> >_____________________________________________________________
> >> >> >Free e-Mail and Webspace - http://Unicyclist.com
> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> Regards, Jack Halpern CJK Dictionary Publishing Society,
> >> >> http://www.kanji.org Voice: +81-48-481-3103 Fax: +81-48-479-1323
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >>
> >>
> >> Regards, Jack Halpern CJK Dictionary Publishing Society,
> >> http://www.kanji.org Voice: +81-48-481-3103 Fax: +81-48-479-1323
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> >
>
>
> Regards, Jack Halpern CJK Dictionary Publishing Society, http://www.kanji.org
> Voice: +81-48-481-3103 Fax: +81-48-479-1323
>

11

I’m not an experienced Coker rider. I have 6.5" cranks on my 45" Unicycle
Factory big wheel. But I enjoyed very much riding a Coker with 5" cranks
in the marathon at NUC. I think 5" works well for cruising, but would be a
little short for lots of hills or riding in crowded places.

My suggestion is to try the 5" first, and see what you think. If you want
to go even shorter, get the 4". This will at least give you a chance to
get used to the shorter crank ride.

Enjoy, John Foss, the Uni-Cyclone jfoss@unicycling.com www.unicycling.com

No matter what happens in life, somebody will find a way to take it
too seriously

12

I’m not an experienced Coker rider. I have 6.5" cranks on my 45" Unicycle
Factory big wheel. But I enjoyed very much riding a Coker with 5" cranks
in the marathon at NUC. I think 5" works well for cruising, but would be a
little short for lots of hills or riding in crowded places.

My suggestion is to try the 5" first, and see what you think. If you want
to go even shorter, get the 4". This will at least give you a chance to
get used to the shorter crank ride.

Enjoy, John Foss, the Uni-Cyclone jfoss@unicycling.com www.unicycling.com

No matter what happens in life, somebody will find a way to take it
too seriously

13

I’m not an experienced Coker rider. I have 6.5" cranks on my 45" Unicycle
Factory big wheel. But I enjoyed very much riding a Coker with 5" cranks
in the marathon at NUC. I think 5" works well for cruising, but would be a
little short for lots of hills or riding in crowded places.

My suggestion is to try the 5" first, and see what you think. If you want
to go even shorter, get the 4". This will at least give you a chance to
get used to the shorter crank ride.

Enjoy, John Foss, the Uni-Cyclone jfoss@unicycling.com www.unicycling.com

No matter what happens in life, somebody will find a way to take it
too seriously

14

I’m not an experienced Coker rider. I have 6.5" cranks on my 45" Unicycle
Factory big wheel. But I enjoyed very much riding a Coker with 5" cranks
in the marathon at NUC. I think 5" works well for cruising, but would be a
little short for lots of hills or riding in crowded places.

My suggestion is to try the 5" first, and see what you think. If you want
to go even shorter, get the 4". This will at least give you a chance to
get used to the shorter crank ride.

Enjoy, John Foss, the Uni-Cyclone jfoss@unicycling.com www.unicycling.com

No matter what happens in life, somebody will find a way to take it
too seriously