offset cranks
Thanks for the input with straight vs offset cranks. Only a couple months on this and there is a learning curve. The other challenge I’m having is using the brake. Wonderful to freemount with. and Wonderful to UPD with if used incorrectly. thanks to all
So all crank lengths can be found with various Q-factors? Saddle comfort does seem to go down a tad ( rubbing ) with straights. I ride to/from work and I wear Levi’s. Avg. 20 miles a week.
True this is why I got 170mm cranks for my 29er initially as I rode 175mm on my bikes for 20 years + as well, but on a bike you have gears so your cadence is slower and you don’t have the same rocking twisting impact as you do on a uni as you try and spin those long cranks.
I still think leg length has a part to play and is of tern over looked I am reasonably short at 5’8-9" with my legs being particularly short so my Femur is probably more than 30mm shorter than someone who is 6’2" which would see a 165mm being better for them and 137mm better for me. Unfortunately unlike bikes crank length changes the whole Uni ride characteristics so there will always be a trade off.
Also on a bike you would (should) set up your saddle lay with a plumb-bob so your front knee is inline with the pedal spindle, which on a unicycle is not possible. People who have never ridden bikes properly and Unicycled all their lives will probably not know this type of information so just look at crank length from a torque / spin perspective
I used to do this to mount at first but it is a bad habit, practice free mounting properly as it is a good skill to have (especially static mounts for trials and MUni)
Dragging the brake on the downhills to compensate for gravity and therefor control your speed means you can lean forward and pedal smoothly / faster like you would on the flat, people think you are mad when you say the brake is to make you go faster downhill 
If you are getting thrown off by using the brake you maybe using it incorrectly or in the wrong situations, I would recommend searching on these forums or getting Kris Holms unicycling book as it has a fantastic wealth of information and also lots of great pictures and stories.
Most people think of longer cranks as having more leverage, therefore they must be better to climb steep hills. What they forget is that your legs are part of the system, and the force that they can produce changes with the length of the crank. It took me a while to recognize this, as I went from 170mm->165mm->150mm->137mm on my 24" (but stopped at 150mm on by KH36 for control reasons).
Eg, would you rather climb 100 1’ steps or 50 2’ steps?
Would you rather run five miles or walk five miles?
Efficiency is a funny thing when it comes to unicyling because unicycles are not efficient, they often require more effort to cover the same amount of ground than if you were walking/hiking/running.
I rode in a twenty mile mtb race last Fall, it took me just over six hours to complete, and upon completion my quads cramped up and I could barely walk.
I used to run ultras and have run that same course and courses much harder, but it would take me 3-4hrs to cover the same ground and I would not have been as tired, certainly not to the point of having leg cramps.
Two years ago I rode an eight hour trail race with a buddy, the laps were ~ ten miles, mostly single track. My buddy tends to walk the big hills, while I tend to ride them, we both finished at the same time, but I was much more tired and suffered from quad cramps (again). In retrospect, he was more efficient than me by simply choosing to walk hills that I rode, so as a result he did less work because he was more efficient.
I like long cranks because I want to climb those hard hills, which experience has shown me I cannot do with a shorter crank because it does not provide enough leverage. I’ve tested this theory more than a few times, the results are always the same, so I choose to be less efficient on my overall spin so that I can have more power and control on the steeps.
Even my 36er is equipped with long cranks because I use it for steep climbs, but if I were doing a long stretch of road then I’d probably swap to the 137mm pedal position; I haven’t done this yet because I keep going on big climb rides.
This always seems to come down to personal preference, but my reason for using shorter cranks for climbing (140’s on my 29er) stems from my lack of balance or perhaps just lack of general climbing skills. I find I can maintain my momentum longer on gradual climbs and once I get down to the “short” strokes I seem to be able balance better at the momentary pause for each 180.
Maybe I just need to practice more and then I would be able to take advantage of the additional leverage from longer cranks, but there is so little time and so many sports and activities to enjoy I do not foresee extensive climbing practice in my immediate future.
I know what you mean, I can still stand between strokes and stand up far more easily on the short cranks as I am closer to the axle so feel better balanced.
On the limited times I hit a hill that beats me I walk up fast for a few seconds then jump back on and ride some more which over time sees me riding things I could never get up before.
However I agree walking up a hill quickly is the virtually the same speed as slogging up standing up I do like the work out though and my legs have developed massively with the smaller cranks which I am loving.
Like you say Ben Unicycles are massively in efficient but they are fun and I love the challenge of the shorter cranks like you love a 36er to make trials that are easy on your 29er a challenge again. Hell the reason I took up MUni was because switching to a single speed MTB just wasn’t challenging enough 
I wasn’t talking about efficiency, but leverage. I guess I should ask “would you rather step up two 1’ steps or one 2’ step?”. The important point about leverage is that it isn’t just the length of the crank; your leg geometry is involved. It is counter-intuitive, but most people can climb steeper hills with cranks shorter than 170/165mm.
Efficiency is much more complex. Danny Too published a number of research papers on the subject in 1999 and 2000 (studying recumbent bicycles). To summarize his findings:
“Optimal crank length depends on individual proportions and probably are functions of the hip- and knee- joint angles that optimize muscle lengths. Shorter cranks (145mm) gave higher powers at the start of a thirty-second test, for instance, whereas longer cranks (230mm) allowed the riders to produce the highest power levels of all cranks lengths at the end of the period, when they were tiring.”
Shorter cranks lengths are better for a quick burst of power while longer cranks lengths are better for endurance power. I suspect this has to with short crank lengths optimizing the leg geometry, but longer lengths engaging more of the muscle (and hence accessing more stored energy). There is also a theory that anaerobically engaging muscle fibers not normally used will produce lactic acid which can migrate to other muscle fibers where the energy can later become available for aerobic production of ATP, but that hasn’t been well studied. If this turns out to be the case, then occasional use of infrequently used muscle fibers during a long ride will make 90% of their stored energy available to the other muscles.
What’s easier, this:
Or this?
Do you really think that you proved anything with this message other than your total mis-understanding of everything Ken just said?
Looking at just the leverage angle is a bit simplistic as you have bio mechanical interface of the riders limb as well and overall speed of a ride.
My 170mm cranks made hills ridiculously easy on my first ride with a 29er but my overall average was 1mph slower than my 26er with 145mm cranks. Yes it was easier on the hills and at the end of the ride I wasn’t very tired at all but it felt slow and unchallenged opposed to my 137mm which are fast hard work on the hills but rewarding and challenge me.
My experience seems to reflect other peoples experiences but it would be interesting to know peoples total leg and or Femur length and their preferred crank length as I bet there will be a direct correlation between the two
Excellent point! 
standard measuring
Sounds good…What should be the standard?
Bottom of foot to top of bent knee?
Front of bent knee to crotch?
I’ll start…
35" inseam = 150’s
32" inseam
137mm cranks
Nice to mix metric and imperial units 
Wow didn’t even notice the mixed measuring.
I was thinking “1 wheel-1 world” yeah, that’s it. 
My inseam is 32", femur measuring from center of knee cap to illiac crest (hip bone) is 21". I dom’t have very long legs, but I loke very long cranks 
Last weekend I did a brief pedal poistin swap from 165 to 137, this was on the trail, ridih some flowy singel track. I found the cranks to be a tad short, lost enogh control that transitons and obstacles became much more difficult and steep ups became steel walks, so I swapped back shortly.
So yesterda I swapped cranks on my 36er from 165’s to 150’s and rode a moderate single track loop that I’ve done often on 29er and 36er. It was akward at first, requiring a finer balance point than the big cranks, I couldn’t count on pedal pressure to slow down or power up, momentum was key but too much momentum with short cranks is not as controllable, spinning smoothly and thinking ahead were the name of the game.
By the end of the ride, fours later, I was pretty comfortable riding the shorter cranks, I even considered keeping them on for a while longer, that was until I hit some tough uphills and some even tougher downhills. Uphills that I normally think nothing of ridring were walks and the downhills on steep rocky terrain were supper duper sketchy; think out of control spin riding across rock ledges.
I could see running 137 to 150 for flatter terrain, more double track, gravel roads, that sort of thing, but for single track it’s just not reasonable to try and climb/descend technical single track on short cranks. I’d even go as far as to say it was dangerous doing so, had to force myself to walk things I normally ride :o
So i went home and swapped cranks, but instead of going back to 165’s, I went straight to 170’s
Tomorrow it’s back to the single track on the36er, go big or go home!
Hi Ben,
All this crank swapping… 
How about a Schlumpf?
You have much more experience than a few years ago, when you had your first Schlumpf.
You will be fine in high gear on the easy trails, they will be fun again.
Just been out on my 36 which always reverts to 150s whatever else I try. About 22 miles including a single longish steepish incline and a more gradual descent with some steep sections. Always felt under control and I made it up the hill in one. I also ride the 36 comfortably on easy cross country including short but steep descents on 150s.
Swapping cranks is a simple 5 - 10 minute job if your tools aren’t hidden in several different parts of the garage.
I’ve always played around with cranks, it helps that I have lots of choices and a nice place to work.
I last rode a guni a year ago, my skills haven’t changed much, but then it really wasn’t a skill thing turned me off on the guni, it was the 50% gearing step. I’d like a 25-30% step, also some 165/150 cranks, but of course neither of those dreams are coming anytime soon…
I’m thinking about building a 29guni, but it would be more for double track and dirt/gravel road, extended rides, overnighters, that sort of thing. A guni really isn’t viable for the trails I ride, it’s just to variable, I’d be in and out of gear too often. When I rode bikes I was on a 29er single speed, which is a very popular mtb styler here, for the same reasons I ride a single speed uni.
I rode the 36er last night with the QuAx chromoly steel 170’s, but the Q factor was just a little too much for my already super wide hub (125mm), the power was better but the width threw me off.
@ Feisty: I think the Q factor may have been what made your uni ride weird when you ride the wider cranks. I’m on an Oregon, so I’m used to having a wide set up, but the addition of 12-15mm width made the ride wonky. Have you tried a K1 crank?
So I didn’t totally dislike the 150’s, though they were a tad short for climbing, so tonight I’m swapping out to some K1 160’s which have a Q factor in between the Ventures and Moments. If these are a nice balance of power and spin, then I’m going to order a new set of the K1 lights.
Last night was my first night ride of the season, single track, leaves, roots and rocks, so much fun :o