Ive done many 5 ft drops on my Profile’s and they are doing great. Bottom line, I still think profile has been tested harder than Qu-ax. Qu-Ax is cheaper, so I guess go with that.
Someone wrote: “Muni shouldn’t break cranks anyway.”
Huh? Why not? What kind of Muni are you riding? Our little club has a garage full of busted Profile cranks and bent rims et al.
JL
The cranks were KH 2005 cranks and not Profile:
Im about 70kg and 1.80 meters tall I havn’t had problems with any other unicycles even cotterless ones haha… I think the Qu-Ax cranks are hollow, but they’re not tubular like the KH 2005 and Profile’s.
I’m definitely not saying Profile’s or any other brand is bad by the way, and maybe other cranks have been tested more but the Qu-Ax cranks are proven with years of abuse by some extreme riders from Europe. Qu-Ax is just one of the strongest cranksets out there for a very reasonable price.
a lot of you are saying “this brand has held up to this high of drops and this brand broke at this height”
that doesn’t work that way because once you figure in different weights, different styles, different landing zones, how many previous drops it has been taken off of, if the bolts are tightened enough,etc they don’t compare that acurately. the only way to really know which brand is the best would be to make a machine that screwed into the cranks where the pedals go, and have it slam the wheel into the ground repeatedly increasing the force each time. (with the same tire and the same preassure in each)
til that machine is made we can only assume which brand is the best based on what we like and what few we have seen break.
If you guys want testing, with the same height, same style of dropping and landing, same weight, then look at Joe Hodges. Look at all the cranks he has broke, now look at the one he couldn’t break. Qu-Ax. 
This is seriously how I go about in Crank/hub strength.
Qu-Ax
KH/Profiles
K1
DX
I didnt put the Onza Tensiles up there because I only know of one person who is riding, but from what I have heard, they are supposed to be right around Moment strength.
I think a lot of us riders dont ride Qu-Ax is because they think it is a cheap brand of a unicycle, and usually put it side by side, then say to go with the most expensive KH or K1 because those are the best. But when you look at it, years of riding KH, Profiles, and K1 have resulted in bent cranks, squeaking clicking noise, snapping, replacements, and design flaw. At the same times, there are just as many, if not more riders on Qu-Ax, riding them for years, putting them through the same abuse, the same huge gaps and drops, the same muni trails, and they haven’t had any problem.
were the drops exactly the same. same angle, same height, same force?
What exactly are you trying to prove here?
Same height, yes, what you jump off usually doesn’t grow unless everything became magical and had a life of its own. Same angle, possibly, I dont expect Joe to land perfectly on an exact angle, but im pretty sure he does land in a general area that is always the same. I do. Same force, most likely, unless one day he decides to wear a 50 pound weight and then go do his trials line.
Seriously though, whats the big deal here? Is it such a problem that no one has bent or snapped Qu-Ax cranks? Or does that fact just scare people because how could something cheap be better than the expensive top name brands!? 
Oh geez! What a conundrum! lol
The full quote being:
“the general thought from what I’ve read is KH if the strongest and builds up the strongest wheel (due to flanges) and is trailed by profile then DX/Quax. Although I’ve never seen any evidence to show that profiles stronger than the other hub/cranks”
Which means that most people say that profiles are stronger, but I haven’t seen any evidence for it.
I didn’t know you could buy the hub/cranks separately, thanks for the heads up. My biggest problem with the Qu-ax is that I like to build my own wheels and don’t like the 48-spoke rims out there that I’ve seen. For that reason I’d pick KH over quax any day. Although currently I’d need a profile setup to fit my muni frame due to my 40mm bearing holders.
On crank-bending machine(originally posted in another thread for some reason): No good. First of all, it would be extremely pricey. Apart from the costs of making and operating the machine, you’d need to break quite a lot of unis, at least five of each model to eliminate a possibility of a defected crankset skewing the results. A big waste.
Second, the test is simply stupid. No trials rider repeatedly slams his uni against the ground at the exactly same angle with a constantly increasing force. The test doesn’t model a real-life situation and therefore the results are irrelevant to what you’re supposed to be testing(general strength).
So, stop whinging and accept that qu-ax rules.
Not to wade into this debate, but I rode Profiles for about 5 years. In that time I wore out around 9 hub/cranksets in total, either by axle creaking or bent crank arms. I ride agressively but I’m not really that hard on equipment. Profiles are great cranks and credit is due to them for being the first mainstream bike manufacturer to produce a good setup. But the Profile design hasn’t changed in many, many years, whereas others have been working pretty hard on upgrading crank and hub design. In my opinion, the new Moment cranks are a lot stronger than Profiles, both the cranks and also the hub. And they won’t creak over time or break at the welds because ISIS splines are tapered and the Moment’s don’t have any welds. Ryan went through the Profiles like butter, and that hasn’t happened so far with his use of the Moment’s.
Kris
From what Ive read the KH/Onza 2005 CRANKS aren’t that strong and the new moments are much stronger, but stronger than Profile, or Qu-Ax? Time will tell.
I also have read people saying they’ve never heard of anyone breaking Qu-Ax cranks, and there are definately a lot of people in Europe beating on them. The fact that they are rectangular instead of round makes them stronger. I’ts just been a problem w/ them being available in the US. There have been frequently none available at UDC (the only US company to carry anything by them) and sometimes they had the cranks in 170 mm. This is the first time in about a year that I saw anything in a smaller size. It would be nice if UDC could get more consistent availability of these cranks and in 127 mm also.
That drop of the KH 24 that bent its craks would have been worse on a trials. The longer spokes, larger wheel, and tire all absorb more of the force of the impact and transmit less of this to the cranks than a trials.
It would not be that hard to set up a machine desined to test for points of failure of cranks. All you would need is the cranks though. The hub assembly, tire, wheel, and spokes would all increase the variables. A large majority of the force is streaght down on most landings and I think a sufficient way of testing, although they could repeat the testing in multiple angles. The hub end of the crank would be bolted to something solid and secure and an object screwed into the pedal end and do like Jerik said.
Both sheer strength and durability should be tested. Crank A may be able to withsand the equivalent impact of a 180 pound rider off a 10 foot drop, but not last ten eight ft. drops. Whereas Crank B could take the ten eight ft. drops but not the single 10 ft. drops. The only ones likely to have such tests done is one of these companies with the intention on advertising the results, assuming they favored this company. These tests could probably be done for under a retail value of $1,000.
A different test would need to be made for the hup/axle assembly.
Hey,
Has anyone reading this actually bent a pair of Moment cranks or directly seen someone bend them (ie not “heard” some story about it but actually seen or done it)?
No matter how much they get tested before-hand, it is stressful coming out with a new crank design because I know exactly what people will do to them. So far, I have not heard from anyone who has bent a pair of Moments, which I’m a bit surprised about because there are a lot of them on the market now and usually there is someone out there who can break pretty much anything.
Kris
I havn’t actually seen Moment cranks bend before yet, but heard via via:
Click here for the original post. So far that has been the only report I’ve heard, I have a pair of the KH cranks myself and I must admit that I really like the design, strong and light and up to ISIS specs unlike some cranks…
i ride with kh hub and quax cranks
and iam really surprised because iam fat and i do big things and my cranks/hub are in perfect shape
To be fair, I know 2 people who have bend there qu-ax cranks. One of them is a big guy the other has done crazy drops like 3m to flat. My own Quax hub, on my 24 inch MUni, isnt in perfect shape either (after a 3.2m drop a few years ago in bend down slightly).
so, what, we have 2-5 broken quax hubs
and at least 10 known profile hubs, and the warranty didn’t cover several of those.
go w/ qu-ax
and DX hubs… 2-3 broken …ever… one of which is mine, but it only has an extremely loose keyway
I haven’t read all the posts because theres far to much repetition of pointless arguments but i will add to the old lack of testing debate by saying that Joe Hodges rode them hard and could not bend or break them and he is a machine in breaking things.
Also Torker is a direct copy of Qu Ax cranks, direct!
Kris, i don’t think anyones doubting the strength of the new moment they seem awesome and i think the debate should stay between torker and qu ax
The “big deal” is the fact that there hasn’t been an objective test (that I know of) performed on a selection of unicycle hubs. All we have in this thread is first- and second-hand accounts of isolated incidents and a whole lot of pontification / postulation… no scientific testing, no statistical analysis, nothing that would give anyone any right to make a definitive statement… including yourself.
Stop spreading rumors and just admit it: You really don’t know which is stronger.
Think of it this way. If you had to choose one of these cranksets to prevent a 10 ton vault from crushing you to death, you really wouldn’t know which one to choose, as there hasn’t been a “breaking strength” established for each set… so until there is, your guess is as good as anyone else’s.
I know we dont have any positive proof of which one is stronger, at least not yet. It would be nice to get some equipment and testing done to see exactly how much each hub can take.
And because no one, including myself, knows which one is stronger, that is why I am not saying that one is stronger than other. I stated what I believe the order of crank strength is, but I did not go out and say that I am right and know for sure which one is stronger.
Hmm, who exactly would we go to if we were able to get proper testing done?