145mm's and hulkish thighs

[jagur]

i just noticed that my thighs are getting really pumped from unicycling.i was born a skinny person with chicken legs but this last year of uni riding has givin me a pair of real leg pistons...

last week-end i rode down the side of a mountain with 145mm long Profile cranks and a 24x2.6 tyre,you better watch out!

[andrew_carter]

jagur,

I too am growing to love my 145mm Profile cranks with a 24" x 3" tyre setup. I've only gone on two muni rides so far but I had a fair bit of success...it was heaps of fun!

Andrew

[ratherbekayaking]

Originally posted by jagur
i just noticed that my thighs are getting really pumped from unicycling.i was born a skinny person with chicken legs but this last year of uni riding has givin me a pair of real leg pistons...

last week-end i rode down the side of a mountain with 145mm long Profile cranks and a 24x2.6 tyre,you better watch out!

Yeah, I've noticed this happening too. It's kinda a pain. I recently bought a bunch of non-cotton wicking boxer/briefs. The problem was they were too tight on the leg. I had to exchange the mediums for large and they are alsol tight on the legs, but almost loose on the waist. Close enough. And my work pants are loose below the knee, but tight above the knee.

Oh the sacrifices we make for our fun.

Now, If I could only find a fun way to build upper body..... Oh wait, kayak season is almost here.

[jagur]

Originally posted by andrew_carter
I too am growing to love my 145mm Profile cranks with a 24" x 3" tyre setup.

ive only got a 2.6 tyre the 3.0 would be even harder to slow down,but i my try it soon.ive been thinking about a brake alot latly for the down hills.the speed on the trail from 145's is to much to give up,i dont think i will ever go longer than 160mm again.

[AccordNSX]

I'm still adjusting to my 160s. They seem a bit long on a 24x3 setup... I can't possibly believe anyone being on a set of 170s. Then again, I'm doing mainly flat riding and trials right now. I'm sure MUni would make a huge difference when talking about crank length.

[jagur]

Originally posted by AccordNSX
I'm sure MUni would make a huge difference when talking about crank length.

170mm cranks do make a huge differance on steep muni stuff,but unless you get your jollies sweating and grunting like a freak doing hill climbs there is no point.

for anything super steep,its more efficient to walk and faster too.170's on the downhills just makes for a slow descent.

[michaeli]

I'm glad to see there are other folks who use sub-170 cranks on their 24" MUnis. I had the choice between 145s and 170s when I got my new MUni (not even a week ago) and went for the 145s as I use it a lot for transportation and wanted the extra speed.

Jagur: I'm not too sure the 2.6 vs. 3.0 would make a big difference. Have you measured your 2.6? Mine is only 1/8" narrower than the Gazz (which is 2.75" across, same as the Fireball).

I haven't been out on the trails so to speak with the 145s (just urban stuff so far), but I haven't felt the cranks have been too short. My plan is to buy some 170s for when I go home (in the summer), but we'll have to see -- maybe I'll be too attached to the 145s.

Later,
Eli.

[jagur]

Originally posted by michaeli
I'm not too sure the 2.6 vs. 3.0 would make a big difference. Have you measured your 2.6? Mine is only 1/8" narrower than the Gazz (which is 2.75" across, same as the Fireball).

i was talking about it being harder to slow down because of the greater diameter of the 3.0 do to the higher side wall.my Kenda 2.6 rolls out to 78 inches,what a Gazz roll out too?anyone?

[johnfoss]

Originally posted by AccordNSX
I'm still adjusting to my 160s. They seem a bit long on a 24x3 setup... I can't possibly believe anyone being on a set of 170s.

unless they ride on mountains? The crank length that works well is definitely in proportion to the steepness of where you like to ride. I was initially unsure about using 170s, in fact I asked for shorter ones on my Wilder. But it accidentally came with 170s and they work just great. Sure you can go faster with shorter cranks, but you can do bursts on the 170s of nearly equal speed. I know this is true from being unable to keep up with either George Peck or Kris holm at times, while I was riding 150s!

So for milder terrain, or if you only like riding downhill, 150 is a good size. I actually used 140s in the 1999 MUni race at the Snoqualmie Pass. I managed to edge by Brett Bymaster, but Kris Holm (on 170s or 175s) stayed too far ahead to see.

From now on, I think I'll stick with the 170s on my Wilder (3" Gazz) and 150s on my carbon and other MUnis. Maybe even shorter on the carbon, as it will probably only be used for "lighter" cruising rides.

[JoeRowing]

I've suffered from hulk syndrome for many years - I have raced dinghys since I was 8 so I have very over-developed quads.

Because of this had big leg problems including hamstring, knee, and lower back pain, never finding a suit that fitts etc.

I doubt that the relatively small forces involved in unicycling would cause anything like the same problems.
I would reccomend that as a precaution you train up the backs of your legs too before you get too much of a muscle imbalance.

Just for the record - I have 150's and 140's that I use on the muni and 150's for my off road 29 - I find that I can climb and decend anything (almost) on this set-up.

If anything in my case I find the 170's to be huge overkill - I loose traction long before I run out of leg power on the 150's.

On Thu, 13 Feb 2003 12:20:28 -0600, jagur
<jagur.isxgb@timelimit.unicyclist.com> wrote:

>170mm cranks do make a huge differance on steep muni stuff,but unless
>you get your jollies sweating and grunting like a freak doing hill
>climbs there is no point.
I use 170's on a 24 x 3 setup. I would describe me getting my jollies
slightly more graceful than above description, but you're basically
right.
>
>for anything super steep,its more efficient to walk and faster too.
Hah! Who's unicycling for efficiency!?

Klaas Bil
--
Armadillos are the only animal besides humans that can get leprosy.

[Mikefule]

My 26 MUni is a true 26 inch, so that's about the same as some 24s with really fat tyres. When choosing cranks, it's the actual wheel diameter which matters, rather than the nominal size.

I recently took it to a local place where there is a BMX/MTB course with steep short climbs, humps and dips. I went two weeks in a row, once with 150mm cranks and once with 170mm cranks.

There was one dip and climb I could JUST manage on the 150s - descend carefully, then gain speed and let the momentum carry me up and over the crest.

With the 170s, I got less speed, less momentum, but more final torque, and getting over that crest wasn't noticeably easier or harder. Conclusion: for that sort of riding, on short steep up and down stuff with a good hard surface, the 150s and 170s worked differently, but equally well.

But riding along the trails, in deep slimy mud, nasty ruts and general obstacularity, the 170s were noticeably easier. I know that on steep downhills the 170s are a lot easier. On long shallow uphills they are easier. On short very steep sections, I'm not persuaded.

Conclusion: it all depends and only goes to show. :0)

[jagur]

m still waiting for a roll out of a Gazz 24x3 in inches.could someone measure this for me?my 24x2.6 rolls out to 78 inches,i need to see how much larger a 3.0 Gazz is.

[ratherbekayaking]

80 and 1/4 inches

Originally posted by jagur
m still waiting for a roll out of a Gazz 24x3 in inches.could someone measure this for me?my 24x2.6 rolls out to 78 inches,i need to see how much larger a 3.0 Gazz is.

[jagur]

thanx, ratherbekayaking

2 plus more inches eh... i bet its 200 more grams too.