I finally have 160mm Profile cranks!

Gary of unicycles.com.au put these on back order for me a while back and they finally arrived. Hooray! They’re beautiful.

Just letting you know that Profile still do them in this size.


you will love them, im on 170’s now ( no brake) so that continues the 10mm ive had on you for the last year :smiley:

I still can’t believe you went all the way to 170’s. :slight_smile:

I gave up on removing the old ones tonight…didn’t feel like attempting to pry off the right crank for now (without a crank puller). Not sure how I’m going to go about doing it because it’s on there pretty tight.


you’ll be thankful you held off, those 170’s are a wee too long, methinks

When my cranks were tight, I would take a flathead screwdriver and gently tap it between the inside of the crank and the spacer. Once it moves away from the spacer a bit, twist the screw driver and it will open up another 1/4 inch. From there stop using tools. :slight_smile: I would hold the end of the crank and shake the wheel (with the wheel towards the floor) The wheel will fall off from there.

Do all of this gently and it there will be no damage.

If you think 170’s are long, you should try 175’s… I used to ride 175mm profile DH cranks and did I ever feel the difference when I switched to 170’s.

I’ve tested the short cranks and was greatly disappointed. Not to start that whole flame war again. Ultimately, the difference in length, speed, torque really doesn’t matter when one considers the facts. Still, I like to be able to stop quicker, spin up faster (control the wheel) and ride sans brake.

You think you guys have it bad…I am riding a kh24 wheelset (splined) with Torker bmx cranks that are 180mm!!! :astonished:

I am not joking, I have John C. and Unibrier to vouch for that. Ive sort of adapted to them, they suck for downhills, and i dont really care for them on uphills. I am not that weak of a rider, but i would rather have 165’s (yes, i have ridden them before) hell, I will take 170’s. I think I will be needing some new cranks in the future. Oh yeah, they are already bending, and if i’m not mistaking, longer cranks bend easier then shorter cranks?


Yeah Sabin, longer cranks are weaker, but the manufacturer is generally supposed to take this into account when designing them. Profile does this (I think), since they have the warranty and hence benefit from making a good prodfuct. YOur haro’s, once they hav eamde the sale, are out of Haro’s hands.

In contrast to Sabin and Andrew, I recently tried 145mm cranks on my muni, in place of the 170s (I had the 145s laying around waiting for a hub [hint, hint, see my sig], I wouldn’t waste my money on them just for muni). I find there are some times when I can’t fully stop, and I need an extra 1/2 rev to stop when speeding, but otherwise I like them. Strangely enough, I made it up 2 extremely difficult hill climbs on the 145s, when I had failed them repeatedly on the 170s.One of them was a rather long one, too, so I know it wasn’t due to momentum. I am still puzzling over why I did better with them than the 170s. My current theory is that I’m already a strong enough rider to torque up any hill, so there’s really no difference I notice. Unicycles have low enough gearings that the loss of 1" of length makes me work a bit harder, but I still have enough power for most things.

Yeah Bevan,

The shorter cranks do give you a lot of momentum, which obvioulsy helped with those hills nice work. Your right about the issue with stopping, which can be vital on rocky/rooty downhill sections. But then again, thats partly what the brake is for.


Actually Bevan, I agree with a lot of that. I do still prefer 145mm over 170mm, but I think with the steeper and more technical riding I want to get into 160’s will be ideal. Tomorrow morning I’m trying them out on the mountain.


Sabin, I am definitely sure that one of the hilols was too long to have momentum make any difference. One was around 100-200’ long.

I find the issue of stopping is bigger on steep stuff where you don’t want to be spinning full power until the very end. Also, Sabin, brakes aren’t replacements for torque, rather they are supplements. A brake won’t solve all problems on steep sections.

Andrew, I still prefer 170s, since if I were in any rush to get anywhere, i’d be on a bike. Also, the extra control of the 170s (I’d be on 165s if I had it my way) is a good trade for a small loss in speed.

Ride Report…

They’re perfect! I can picture myself being almost as happy with 155’s and I now know for sure that 170’s are far too long for my liking.

Steeper technical stuff - They are ideal for this…I didn’t hit my pedals on the ground/logs and rocks and am really impressed by the extra torque compared ot my old 145’s. There was one line in particular where I was rolling over this pile of logs down a hill and towards the end of it I hit a big one. My weight was quite a fair way forward and I’m pretty sure that with my 145’s I would have come off, but with the new 160’s I was able to power over it cleanly.

Log riding - I thought that maybe the longer cranks would result in my wheel twisting all over the place and having a generally less smooth log ride but this wasn’t the case. I had good success with logs this morning and in fact, the longer cranks allowed me to pedal up steep sections of logs that I normally could not.

Plain speed - To be honest I did notice a slight drop in the speed I could go comfortably but it wasn’t something that bothered me. I could still get good speed in shorter bursts to launch off logs and get up steep hills.

Hill climbing - I’m still not sure which I like better for this. I could really feel the extra torque up the steep hills. Generally I think I like them both about equal for hill climbing, except or really steep bits…the new 160’s performed very well on those.

Drops - I think I will need to spend a little bit of time getting used to the extra torque on landing. A few times I had the wheel slip from underneath me. This may have been partly because it was slippery out there today but I think the main reason was that with the old 145’s I had to apply more braking pressure than I now need to. I think this extra braking torque will be very very beneficial once I get used to it.

Trialsy lines - I loved them for these too. On the stack of logs I mentioned before I also tried some different lines hopping (and on other piles of logs). That extra torque was beautiful. It especially felt nice when I was hopping perpendicularly onto round logs. Often with the old 145’s the wheel would roll out from under me in those situations.

Two thumbs up!


ha i have 175’s on my 24" and i love it for street


p.s. i just broke them haha

Re: I finally have 160mm Profile cranks!

On Fri, 18 Mar 2005 20:02:17 -0600, “unibrow” wrote:

>ha i have 175’s on my 24" and i love it for street

What is the effective diameter of your wheel? I’d think that with a
real 24" wheel your pedals would be touching flat ground if you lean
even moderately. Of course it also depends on how wide your pedals

Klaas Bil - Newsgroup Addict

people who unicycle are shyly exhibitionistic - GILD

yeah it was mainly cause the muniac hub comes with the 170 kooka’s already pressed on. they are longer than i like but without a brake i need the extra torque.

Re: Ride Report…

Riding with longer cranks requires some different technique, especially when climbing.

The difficulty with longer cranks is keeping the pedal stroke circular and consistent. It’s very easy to start pedaling in squares which will affect your riding style.

With longer cranks it is more difficult to keep a smooth circular pedaling motion, especially when climbing while standing up out of the saddle. With longer cranks you need to learn how to dance on the pedals and keep that circular motion going even when standing out of the saddle. It takes practice.

When I’m climbing I try to stay light on the pedals. I also try to point my toes down at the bottom of the pedal stroke and pull back and up on the backside of the pedal stroke. It’s the same things you should be doing with shorter cranks, but it’s more critical with longer cranks. If you loose the dance you start pedaling in squares and at that point the technique and riding style changes. If you’re trying to power your way up a short steep climb you don’t want to loose the dance because that kills the momentum and the climb becomes a grunt from that point on. That’s when longer cranks on a climb can be a liability.

Riding a Coker or other street uni with long cranks (170’s or so) will teach you how to spin with the long cranks. That’ll transfer over to the muni.

I have a second wheel for my muni. Right now it has 160’s on it. I’ve tried it for muni and didn’t like the shorter cranks. It takes noticeably more leg work to climb with the shorter cranks. I could feel it in my legs during the ride compared with the 170’s. I didn’t like it. It was like riding around on the mountain bike one gear too high. If I was on the bike I’d of shifted down a gear.

Long cranks aren’t going to work as well for everyone. People with shorter legs may find long cranks more awkward than people with long legs. Some people have different body mechanics that may favor shorter or longer cranks. Everyone’s not the same. It’s good to find what length works for you.

yuo are destructive kid

I did the exact same ride today on my 170s. Much different. Stopping is super easy, as is accelerating. I had taken those things for granted until I got used to the 145s. I’m kinda annoyed by the slowness of the 170s, now, but they are still excellent for most of what I ride. I also did both difficult hill climbs today that I did on the 145s, in a similar number of tries.

The thing I notice about the 170s is that the bottom of the pedal stroke is far more distinct on the 170s then the 145s, making some transitions a bit weird. But in the end, I still like the extra torque, although I can definitely think of a few trails where 145s would be better (can anyone say Tahoe rim from CMW 04?). Lloyd’s trail would also be fun on 145s, although northstar would be suicide.

so glad i had 160’s for that, i still lost that fire trail race to scott on 170’s but he cheated by pedaling faster. :slight_smile:

northstar is just like Falls City in its steepness ,just alot longer and i can say not suicide with 145’s but alot of dismount,walk, mount, dismount repeat etc.