We were discussing the other day about the strange effects of changing from one uni to another… you know, you wobble all over for 5 minutes then wonder what the problem was.
I took the Coker out for the first time in a few weeks this evening. Last time I rode it any significant distance was on 150 mm cranks, original plastic pedals and the Viscount seat. Now it’s on 125 mm cranks, studded platform pedals (DDG) and a Velo seat.
But most of my recent riding has been buzzing about on a 24 with microcranks. :0)
Last time I rode the Coker, I was freemounting 100%, either foot, and idling confidently for around 10 - 15 pedal strokes, as well as reversing short distances.
Imagine then my horror when I failed to mount about 6 times in a row, and when I did, I couldn’t idle the bloomin’ thing to save my life. (Later, I got the mounting up to 100% on flat tarmac, and was able to idle for 5 or 6 very tentative pedal strokes.) Of course, reducing from 150s to 125s is a reduction in leverage of 17% which is a big drop. The bigger wheel and increased height make the idling movements bigger, so momentum becomes more of a problem.
So, just out of interest, what size cranks do most Cokernuts use for general riding? That’s occasional hills, occasional rough ground, sometimes in traffic.
I believe all Cokers come standard with 6" cranks, even the Deluxes. If I had to guess, most prefer 5" cranks. We put 5"ers on Ben’s Coker and he loves them. He’s even still doing the tricks with the 5" jobbies.
I experience some hip and leg muscle soreness during and after riding that I attribute to not being in shape (even though Mary says that I have lots of shape). But I tend to think sometimes that with the reduction in stroke length in using fives over sixes, some of the muscle issues would be lessened. Someday, I’ll kick out my 6"ers and try the fives.
125mm is a whole different world from 152mm as you found out. For flatish
rides, most people would probably prefer 125mm or even shorter once they are
used to the Coker. Although ease of idling and your raw torque are reduced
proportionally. For modest but real hills, I prefer 140mm and for real hills
152mm and for REAL SERIOUS hills 165mm or 175mm. And one the most serious
hill I ever did, I was wishing for 180+mm.
It’s all a matter of personal preference and depends on terrain and the
rider’s skill and experience.
Now that you’ve tried both 152 and 125, you might be very interested to try
175 (or 165). At that length idling is trivial and you have absolute and
total control over the Coker. It feels like a normal unicycle with the
benefit that you go faster. You just can’t go really fast or far in comfort.
I know of one person who always rides with 175mm on his Coker (and he really
rides it too!) And there are others who generally don’t go longer than 125
(or even 110 - Roger?!) Well maybe he goes longer for Red Bull at night?
—Nathan
“Mikefule” <Mikefule.cmvgz@timelimit.unicyclist.com> wrote in message news:Mikefule.cmvgz@timelimit.unicyclist.com…
>
> We were discussing the other day about the strange effects of changing
> from one uni to another… you know, you wobble all over for 5 minutes
> then wonder what the problem was.
>
> I took the Coker out for the first time in a few weeks this evening.
> Last time I rode it any significant distance was on 150 mm cranks,
> original plastic pedals and the Viscount seat. Now it’s on 125 mm
> cranks, studded platform pedals (DDG) and a Velo seat.
>
> But most of my recent riding has been buzzing about on a 24 with
> microcranks. :0)
>
> Last time I rode the Coker, I was freemounting 100%, either foot, and
> idling confidently for around 10 - 15 pedal strokes, as well as
> reversing short distances.
>
> Imagine then my horror when I failed to mount about 6 times in a row,
> and when I did, I couldn’t idle the bloomin’ thing to save my life.
> (Later, I got the mounting up to 100% on flat tarmac, and was able to
> idle for 5 or 6 very tentative pedal strokes.) Of course, reducing from
> 150s to 125s is a reduction in leverage of 17% which is a big drop. The
> bigger wheel and increased height make the idling movements bigger, so
> momentum becomes more of a problem.
>
> So, just out of interest, what size cranks do most Cokernuts use for
> general riding? That’s occasional hills, occasional rough ground,
> sometimes in traffic.
>
>
> –
> Mikefule - Roland Hope School of Unicycling
>
> ‘I left it next to your bumper book of original quips. I hope you don’t
> mind.’
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Mikefule’s Profile: http://www.unicyclist.com/profile/879
> View this thread: http://www.unicyclist.com/thread/21063
>
A few weeks ago I experimented with 125s on the Coker for a few days. I hit amazing speeds then did an spectacular high speed UPD. On another day, I did 53 miles, which included some surprisingly steep inclines and declines. Then I put the 150s back on because I just sort of preferred them.
Since then, I’ve been playing with shorter cranks on my other unis, and have got down to 102 mm on my 24 - a 1:3 ratio, the same as the Coker with 150s.
I can fairly easily idle (including one foot) the 24 on 110s, and can more or less idle the Coker on 150s. Thus boosted in confidence, I tried the 125s again, but the gain in speed and smoothness does not seem to justify the loss of fine control at low speeds, on mud, or when tired. As for 170s, I have a pair which I took off my 26 because the felt so ungainly.
I’ll keep experimenting, but it’s always nice to know what is or is not a reasonable goal, based on others’ experiences.
Mikefule.cnn0o@timelimit.unicyclist.com writes:
>
>A few weeks ago I experimented with 125s on the Coker for a few days. I
>hit amazing speeds then did an spectacular high speed UPD. On another
>day, I did 53 miles, which included some surprisingly steep inclines and
>declines. Then I put the 150s back on because I just sort of preferred
>them.
>
>Since then, I’ve been playing with shorter cranks on my other unis, and
>have got down to 102 mm on my 24 - a 1:3 ratio, the same as the Coker
>with 150s.
>
>I can fairly easily idle (including one foot) the 24 on 110s, and can
>more or less idle the Coker on 150s. Thus boosted in confidence, I
>tried the 125s again, but the gain in speed and smoothness does not seem
>to justify the loss of fine control at low speeds, on mud, or when
>tired. As for 170s, I have a pair which I took off my 26 because the
>felt so ungainly.
>
>I’ll keep experimenting, but it’s always nice to know what is or is not
>a reasonable goal, based on others’ experiences.
I always tell people that it takes a long time to adjust to new Coker
cranks. I’d give it another 450 miles or so on the shorter cranks. Then
you might really know. It took me over a month to get used to mine when I
went from 6" to 5" cranks. The switch down to 4.3" cranks took about the
same amount of time. I regularly ride 60 miles a week on these 110s
without any UPDs, even low-level UPDs. And I always hit 20mph on the
downhill near my house. I typically keep up a 15mph pace with no problems
on the bike paths, and I weave in traffic pretty well despite the tiny
cranks. What I found interesting is that I had to develop not muscles but
technique in order to use them effectively. That’s why they take a long
time to get used to.
David
Co-founder, Unatics of NY
1st Sunday / 3rd Saturday
@ Central Park Bandshell
1:30 start time after 11/1/01
450 miles, you say. That’s a lot of riding. This year I have been out on a uni several nights a week, most nights, and my only uni with a computer is showing under 300 miles. I’d guess I’ve done similar distances on 2 of my others, maybe a bit less.
I know 125 are feasible on the Coker - I’ve done a fair bit of riding on them - but… I suppose it’s a matter of preference and opportunity.
>A few weeks ago I experimented with 125s on the Coker for a few days. I
>hit amazing speeds then did an spectacular high speed UPD. On another
>day, I did 53 miles, which included some surprisingly steep inclines and
>declines. Then I put the 150s back on because I just sort of preferred
>them.
For how long did you try the 125mm cranks? One may need to ride several
weeks with a new crank size to become fully acclimated. It is also best
to have a course with a good mix of level surface, hills, and riding
surfaces (gravel, dirt, pavement).
It took me several weeks to get used to the change from 150mm to 125mm
cranks. Hills are a special challenge. There is a very steep hill I go
up which I could barely get up using 150mm cranks with virtually no
chance of falling assuming adequate concentration. At first, with the
125mm cranks I could still make it up, but nearly fell at the top on my
first few attempts. I never did fall going up that hill and after a
about 10-15 climbs, it seems about as hard now with 125mm cranks as it
was with the original 150mm cranks.
I think one just needs time to get acclimated to a new crank size.
