Which is Stronger: Profile Hub/Cranks OR Splined Qu-Ax Hub/Cranks?

[noibs]

Just curious...does anyone have an opinion about the relative strength
(for big drops) of the Profile hub & cranks (145mm) as compared to the
splined Qu-Ax hub & cranks (145mm).

There's obviously a huge price differential between these two hub/crank
assemblies and many seem to think that the splined Qu-Ax hub & cranks
are pretty strong. Disregard the fact that the Qu-Ax is 48 hole and
the Profile is 36 hole.

Thanks.


--
noibs
------------------------------------------------------------------------
noibs's Profile: http://www.unicyclist.com/profile/14274
View this thread: http://www.unicyclist.com/thread/58517

[genesis4]

i have heard of them.


--
genesis4

unicycle WITH Christ (the clouds are soft):D
------------------------------------------------------------------------
genesis4's Profile: http://www.unicyclist.com/profile/13976
View this thread: http://www.unicyclist.com/thread/58517

[musketman]

I dont know. Are you sure Quax cranks havn't been snapped? Not many
people ride Quax setups, so I dont think they have been tested that
good. Many Many people ride profile cranks, and still say they are very
strong. they have had a fair trial. Kris Holm, Dan Heaton, and many
many others have done some crazy stuff on them for years. Yes a few
have broke, but they were dropping some crazy stuff.

I have heard qu-ax cranks are very strong, but I dont think they have
been tested touph enouph to say they are any stronger than profile
cranks. Another good thing with profile is that if you did break them,
you get another cranks free. Overtime is you ride hard they pay for
themself.

My profile cranks are easy to get on and off, and arn't lose at all.
They dont sqeek/creak at all either. I think the bottom line is the
qu-ax cranks need to be tested and given some abuse before we can say
anything about them.


--
musketman

MUSKETMAN
www.unicycle.com

For Sale: Parachute, only used once, never opened, small stain
------------------------------------------------------------------------
musketman's Profile: http://www.unicyclist.com/profile/9214
View this thread: http://www.unicyclist.com/thread/58517

[genesis4]

I think the bottom line is the qu-ax cranks need to be tested and given
some abuse before we can say anything about them.



does this mean we get to blow something up!!?


--
genesis4

unicycle WITH Christ (the clouds are soft):D
------------------------------------------------------------------------
genesis4's Profile: http://www.unicyclist.com/profile/13976
View this thread: http://www.unicyclist.com/thread/58517

[musketman]

genesis4 wrote:
> I think the bottom line is the qu-ax cranks need to be tested and given
> some abuse before we can say anything about them.



does this mean we get to blow something up!!?




Ah, heck, why not!


--
musketman

MUSKETMAN
www.unicycle.com

For Sale: Parachute, only used once, never opened, small stain
------------------------------------------------------------------------
musketman's Profile: http://www.unicyclist.com/profile/9214
View this thread: http://www.unicyclist.com/thread/58517

[genesis4]

musketman wrote:
> Ah, heck, why not!



i love it when fourth of july comes early!:D


--
genesis4

unicycle WITH Christ (the clouds are soft):D
------------------------------------------------------------------------
genesis4's Profile: http://www.unicyclist.com/profile/13976
View this thread: http://www.unicyclist.com/thread/58517

[DustinSchaap]

More than 50% of the riders in Europe ride Qu-Ax lol, I think they've
been tested enough... Qu-Ax isn't a very popular brand in America and
Australia because they arn't easily available there... german trial
champion Lutz Eichholz uses these cranks, Rocco Schulz (1.00m+ rolling
hops) uses them, I know plenty of people who have tested them, myself I
have taken them above 2.10m drops and 9sets and the only thing that was
damaged was my ankle. Frank Vroemen has taken them above 2.40m drops
and his are still perfect too.


--
DustinSchaap

FOUNDER OF EENWIEL.NL (\"HTTP://WWW.EENWIEL.NL\")
*Sponsored by 'MUNICYCLE.COM' (http://www.municycle.com) , 'QU-AX'
(http://www.qu-ax.com) and 'SEMCYCLE' (http://www.semcycle.com)*
------------------------------------------------------------------------
DustinSchaap's Profile: http://www.unicyclist.com/profile/12614
View this thread: http://www.unicyclist.com/thread/58517

[musketman]

Not good enouph. I havn't even heard of these people. If they even did
do that It doesn't matter, because the Profiles have done that and then
some. So still Youd have to test them for years..and hard. I know they
are strong, but I just dont know if you can just come to the conclusion
that they are stronger than profile. They are probably close to the
same, and either one would be a great setup.


--
musketman

MUSKETMAN
www.unicycle.com

For Sale: Parachute, only used once, never opened, small stain
------------------------------------------------------------------------
musketman's Profile: http://www.unicyclist.com/profile/9214
View this thread: http://www.unicyclist.com/thread/58517

[olarf]

For sure Dustin is absolutely right that the QU-AX set is well approved
for some years by many riders and really strong!
There must be a reason that Pro trial Riders do a lot of work to move a
48 spokes QU-AX Hub into a 36 spokes Hub to build a wheel with a 36
spoke rim :D
If you don't know Rocco and Lutz and some other popular European riders
you should maybe visit utv to become familiar with them, they have some
video stuff online. You will find a lot of QU-AX Hub Sets in all
European Videos and also in some from other Continents.
At least only on a test bench it would be possible to get a neutral
result which set is stronger, drops say nothing about cause it totally
depends on the technique you use who hard they stress the Hub Set.
So for now I think both Sets are really strong ones but the QU-AX one
is much cheaper.


--
olarf

visit 'unicycle.tv' (http://www.unicycle.tv)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
olarf's Profile: http://www.unicyclist.com/profile/10588
View this thread: http://www.unicyclist.com/thread/58517

[musketman]

olarf wrote:
>
> So for now I think both Sets are really strong ones but the QU-AX one
> is much cheaper.



yes, that's where Im at.


--
musketman

MUSKETMAN
www.unicycle.com

For Sale: Parachute, only used once, never opened, small stain
------------------------------------------------------------------------
musketman's Profile: http://www.unicyclist.com/profile/9214
View this thread: http://www.unicyclist.com/thread/58517

[brendan]

i think looking at the price, even if the qu-ax were to be weaker, you
coudl still buy nearly 3 hubs and cranks for the price of one profile
set.

SO really its not worth getting profiles anymore....


--
brendan
------------------------------------------------------------------------
brendan's Profile: http://www.unicyclist.com/profile/13680
View this thread: http://www.unicyclist.com/thread/58517

[Seager]

Alot of you people are saying things that aren't backed up with any
evidence.

Firstly, it's **** easy to get QUAX in the states. You just go to
unicyclist.com and order one. Here is how I generally see things
broken down nowadays:

People who who want to build their own unicycles up from the ground use
profiles or KH hub/cranks 'cause people, in general, don't want to deal
with a 48 spoke setup.

People who buy ready made unicycles buy Torker DX's or Quax if they are
on a budget and by KH if they can afford it. Generally people get the
DX over the Quax because the DX is about $100 bucks cheaper. A few
years ago the Quax was THE cheap good unicycle to get, but it's not
anymore because the DX is finally of a good enough quality to replace
the Quax.

Therefor, there is no reason to buy Quax. It's a pain to lace up to
any of the standard rims if you are making your own unicycle (if you
can even buy Quax cranks stand-alone.) They are no longer the best buy
on a budget because the DX is just as good and $100 bucks cheaper.
People who want a better unicycle than the DX buy a KH or build their
own using a KH or profile hub.

Things were different 2 years ago though.

As far as comparable stength goes, 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 - but good luck buying DX or Quax cranks seperately. Oh
yea, and K-1 fits in there somewhere around the same level as profiles
- 'cept they're too straight for my tastes.


--
Seager

'Team RoadShow' (http://www.teamroadshow.com) | 'Unexpected Failure
Productions' (http://www.unexpectedfailure.com) | 'Moab'
(http://tinyurl.com/9fxuv)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Seager's Profile: http://www.unicyclist.com/profile/8840
View this thread: http://www.unicyclist.com/thread/58517

[Jerrick]

I would go with Qu-Ax.


--
Jerrick

~*~!I ride for Christ, Fun, Challenges, and a lot
more!~*~
'!Gallery!' (http://tinyurl.com/gf2g9)
'!MRIS!' (http://tinyurl.com/jjjnz)
'Easy Tire Removal Guide.' (http://tinyurl.com/rd9ru)
My sponsor '~!SIXSIXONE!~' (http://sixsixone.com/)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Jerrick's Profile: http://www.unicyclist.com/profile/11632
View this thread: http://www.unicyclist.com/thread/58517

[DustinSchaap]

It used to be harder to get Qu-Ax in the states, also Unicyclist.com is
not a store and Unicycle.com is ;) I checked Unicycle.com and indeed
the Qu-Ax is on there now for a very good price, however the new Torker
DX is not so I can't really comment on your claims regarding the
Torker, does it have a new frame yet?

I love it how you say that 'alot of people' are saying things that
aren't backed up with any evidence, and you do exactly the same and
worse...

You claim that people who buy Qu-Ax don't have the budget for a Kris
Holm unicycle, I do, I actually bought a Kris Holm 24" last year, the
first pair of cranks was bent in 2 weeks the second pair in 2 days. I
am sure the new Moment cranks are an improvement, I'm actually quite
sure they are because I've tested them, however they havn't been out
very long and already someone bent them... Profile's have been snapped
and I've heard of more problems with Profile cranks than most other
cranks, use the search function if you want some -evidence-. A mate of
mine bent the Koxx cranks in less than three months so I wouldn't say
they are uber strong either. The Qu-Ax cranks have been tested for
years and I havn't seen pictures or heard someone complain about bent
or broken cranks, neither has Egon so I think that pretty much proves
that the Qu-Ax design is better than most existing cranks. I havn't
seen anything on the new Torker yet, if it's the same design as first
then the Qu-Ax' are better, if it's a new design I would like to hear
some reports and see them and maybe I will change my opinion then.

I'm getting a little tired of typing haha and I want to have some lunch
now, however I am interested on how you back up -your- claims.


--
DustinSchaap

FOUNDER OF EENWIEL.NL (\"HTTP://WWW.EENWIEL.NL\")
*Sponsored by 'MUNICYCLE.COM' (http://www.municycle.com) , 'QU-AX'
(http://www.qu-ax.com) and 'SEMCYCLE' (http://www.semcycle.com)*
------------------------------------------------------------------------
DustinSchaap's Profile: http://www.unicyclist.com/profile/12614
View this thread: http://www.unicyclist.com/thread/58517

[ivan]

Jerrick wrote:
> I would go with Qu-Ax.


+1

In fact, I did and I'm very happy about it.


--
ivan

Read me! thank you.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
ivan's Profile: http://www.unicyclist.com/profile/12759
View this thread: http://www.unicyclist.com/thread/58517

[Seager]

DustinSchaap wrote:
> It used to be harder to get Qu-Ax in the states, also Unicyclist.com is
> not a store and Unicycle.com is ;) I checked Unicycle.com and indeed
> the Qu-Ax is on there now for a very good price, however the new Torker
> DX is not so I can't really comment on your claims regarding the
> Torker, does it have a new frame yet?
>
> I love it how you say that 'alot of people' are saying things that
> aren't backed up with any evidence, and you do exactly the same and
> worse...
>
> You claim that people who buy Qu-Ax don't have the budget for a Kris
> Holm unicycle, I do, I actually bought a Kris Holm 24" last year, the
> first pair of cranks was bent in 2 weeks the second pair in 2 days. I
> am sure the new Moment cranks are an improvement, I'm actually quite
> sure they are because I've tested them, however they havn't been out
> very long and already someone bent them... Profile's have been snapped
> and I've heard of more problems with Profile cranks than most other
> cranks, use the search function if you want some -evidence-. A mate of
> mine bent the Koxx cranks in less than three months so I wouldn't say
> they are uber strong either. The Qu-Ax cranks have been tested for
> years and I havn't seen pictures or heard someone complain about bent
> or broken cranks, neither has Egon so I think that pretty much proves
> that the Qu-Ax design is better than most existing cranks. I havn't
> seen anything on the new Torker yet, if it's the same design as first
> then the Qu-Ax' are better, if it's a new design I would like to hear
> some reports and see them and maybe I will change my opinion then.
>
> I'm getting a little tired of typing haha and I want to have some lunch
> now, however I am interested on how you back up -your- claims.




I can't respond at lenght 'cause I'll be late for work, so quickly -

Lack of evidence of quax braking is no proof that they are stronger
since fewer of the top riders ride quax. The top riders over here in
the states are riding profile and KH and occasionaly breaking them.
But they aren't riding quax from what I've seen.

Also, the new DX does have a new frame and was on unicycle.com last I
checked for 100 bucks less. Also, I never said that profile was
stronger - I said I haven't seen any real evidence either way. What I
did say was the quax was a waste of time if you are building your own
unicycle since you can't get the hub/cranks separate and since 48 spoke
wheels are a pain in the ass.

As for lack of evidence, your most recent post was the first evidence
I've seen, so my early comment was correct. As for you breaking KH
equipment so easily - I'm skeptical. Are you doing trials on your 24?
Muni shouldn't break cranks anyway. What are you doing to break KH so
easily?


--
Seager

'Team RoadShow' (http://www.teamroadshow.com) | 'Unexpected Failure
Productions' (http://www.unexpectedfailure.com) | 'Moab'
(http://tinyurl.com/9fxuv)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Seager's Profile: http://www.unicyclist.com/profile/8840
View this thread: http://www.unicyclist.com/thread/58517

[DustinSchaap]

This is turning into a real argument haha, let's avoid that, just some
facts untill I will stop trying to convince you.


Seager wrote:
> Also, I never said that profile was stronger


Ehm, from an earlier post:

Seager wrote:
> KH if the strongest and builds up the strongest wheel (due to flanges)
> and is trailed by profile then DX/Quax.


KH is the strongest, trailed by profile and *THEN* Qu-Ax, you do say
Profile's are stronger...

First my point in argument was that Qu-Ax isn't easily available in the
states, you correct me and then you say this:

Seager wrote:
> since you can't get the hub/cranks separate


That is what I was aiming at in my first post and then you corrected me
and yes, to my surprise Qu-Ax is finally properly on the market in the
US. Here is a link to the 'cranks'
(http://www.unicycle.com/Shopping/shopexd.asp?id=841), the 'hub'
(http://www.unicycle.com/Shopping/shopexd.asp?id=844), or the 'cranks
and the hub' (http://www.unicycle.com/Shopping/shopexd.asp?id=798). I
don't really see your problem with Qu-Ax, they have been proven in
Europe, there arn't many "-top riders-" in the US that ride them
because they wern't available in the US in the old days. Forrest Rowell
is a good rider, he rides Qu-Ax. A lot of the top riders in Europe ride
the Qu-Ax and have done similar stuff as US top riders have on their
unicycles.

As to what I did with my 24" isn't really interesting in a topic about
Profile's and Qu-Ax, but I have used it a few times for some hops (max
70cm) and small drops (smaller than 5ft) and when I finished my MUni
ride and was putting my uni in the car I noticed something weird about
my cranks so I checked them and they were pretty bent...


--
DustinSchaap

FOUNDER OF EENWIEL.NL (\"HTTP://WWW.EENWIEL.NL\")
*Sponsored by 'MUNICYCLE.COM' (http://www.municycle.com) , 'QU-AX'
(http://www.qu-ax.com) and 'SEMCYCLE' (http://www.semcycle.com)*
------------------------------------------------------------------------
DustinSchaap's Profile: http://www.unicyclist.com/profile/12614
View this thread: http://www.unicyclist.com/thread/58517

[Uniman_3]

How tall are you and how much do you weigh to be bending all of these
cranks off of 5 foot drops?
my lil bro (he only weighs like 80lbs and is only about 4'10'') has
done plenty of 5footers and his profile cranks have done great, he has
the Nimbus 20'' trials with the profile cranks.....
my friend did a 7footer on dirt (it was from the flat piece on top of
the hill to a landing on the bottom) on my lil bros uni and it held up
fine..he then proceded to do it on his 2007 KH trials and it held up
fine...he is about 5'5'' and weighs only about 130lbs...
Also are the Quax solid tubed or hollow tubed like the profile and KH
cranks?


--
Uniman_3

Words are made to strike the minds of the unsuspecting.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Uniman_3's Profile: http://www.unicyclist.com/profile/14387
View this thread: http://www.unicyclist.com/thread/58517

[musketman]

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.


--
musketman

MUSKETMAN
www.unicycle.com

For Sale: Parachute, only used once, never opened, small stain
------------------------------------------------------------------------
musketman's Profile: http://www.unicyclist.com/profile/9214
View this thread: http://www.unicyclist.com/thread/58517

[vivalargo]

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


--
vivalargo
------------------------------------------------------------------------
vivalargo's Profile: http://www.unicyclist.com/profile/5625
View this thread: http://www.unicyclist.com/thread/58517

[DustinSchaap]

The cranks were KH 2005 cranks and not Profile:

DustinSchaap wrote:
> I actually bought a Kris Holm 24" last year, the first pair of cranks
> was bent in 2 weeks the second pair in 2 days.


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.


--
DustinSchaap

FOUNDER OF EENWIEL.NL (\"HTTP://WWW.EENWIEL.NL\")
*Sponsored by 'MUNICYCLE.COM' (http://www.municycle.com) , 'QU-AX'
(http://www.qu-ax.com) and 'SEMCYCLE' (http://www.semcycle.com)*
------------------------------------------------------------------------
DustinSchaap's Profile: http://www.unicyclist.com/profile/12614
View this thread: http://www.unicyclist.com/thread/58517

[torkerdx]

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.


--
torkerdx

gordito8me wrote:
> it's like running across the highway at rush hour. Dangerous, stupid,
> but not really that fun.




Unicaw89 wrote:
> Koxx rapes Torker hard!




unifreak7 wrote:
> Where they should be - Holding your unicycle, ready to quit kissing and
> get out and practice.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
torkerdx's Profile: http://www.unicyclist.com/profile/12543
View this thread: http://www.unicyclist.com/thread/58517

[Jerrick]

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. :p

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.


--
Jerrick

~*~!I ride for Christ, Fun, Challenges, and a lot
more!~*~
'!Gallery!' (http://tinyurl.com/gf2g9)
'!MRIS!' (http://tinyurl.com/jjjnz)
'Easy Tire Removal Guide.' (http://tinyurl.com/rd9ru)
My sponsor '~!SIXSIXONE!~' (http://sixsixone.com/)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Jerrick's Profile: http://www.unicyclist.com/profile/11632
View this thread: http://www.unicyclist.com/thread/58517

[torkerdx]

were the drops exactly the same. same angle, same height, same force?


--
torkerdx

gordito8me wrote:
> it's like running across the highway at rush hour. Dangerous, stupid,
> but not really that fun.




Unicaw89 wrote:
> Koxx rapes Torker hard!




unifreak7 wrote:
> Where they should be - Holding your unicycle, ready to quit kissing and
> get out and practice.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
torkerdx's Profile: http://www.unicyclist.com/profile/12543
View this thread: http://www.unicyclist.com/thread/58517

[Jerrick]

torkerdx wrote:
> 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!? :eek:

Oh geez! What a conundrum! lol


--
Jerrick

~*~!I ride for Christ, Fun, Challenges, and a lot
more!~*~
'!Gallery!' (http://tinyurl.com/gf2g9)
'!MRIS!' (http://tinyurl.com/jjjnz)
'Easy Tire Removal Guide.' (http://tinyurl.com/rd9ru)
My sponsor '~!SIXSIXONE!~' (http://sixsixone.com/)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Jerrick's Profile: http://www.unicyclist.com/profile/11632
View this thread: http://www.unicyclist.com/thread/58517

[Seager]

DustinSchaap wrote:
>
> Ehm, from an earlier post:
>
> KH is the strongest, trailed by profile and *THEN* Qu-Ax, you do say
> Profile's are stronger...



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.



>
> First my point in argument was that Qu-Ax isn't easily available in the
> states, you correct me and then you say this:
>
> That is what I was aiming at in my first post and then you corrected me
> and yes, to my surprise Qu-Ax is finally properly on the market in the
> US. Here is a link to the 'cranks'
> (http://www.unicycle.com/Shopping/shopexd.asp?id=841), the 'hub'
> (http://www.unicycle.com/Shopping/shopexd.asp?id=844), or the 'cranks
> and the hub' (http://www.unicycle.com/Shopping/shopexd.asp?id=798). I
> don't really see your problem with Qu-Ax, they have been proven in
> Europe, there arn't many "-top riders-" in the US that ride them
> because they wern't available in the US in the old days. Forrest Rowell
> is a good rider, he rides Qu-Ax. A lot of the top riders in Europe ride
> the Qu-Ax and have done similar stuff as US top riders have on their
> unicycles.
>
> As to what I did with my 24" isn't really interesting in a topic about
> Profile's and Qu-Ax, but I have used it a few times for some hops (max
> 70cm) and small drops (smaller than 5ft) and when I finished my MUni
> ride and was putting my uni in the car I noticed something weird about
> my cranks so I checked them and they were pretty bent...



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.


--
Seager

'Team RoadShow' (http://www.teamroadshow.com) | 'Unexpected Failure
Productions' (http://www.unexpectedfailure.com) | 'Moab'
(http://tinyurl.com/9fxuv)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Seager's Profile: http://www.unicyclist.com/profile/8840
View this thread: http://www.unicyclist.com/thread/58517

[ivan]

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.


--
ivan

Read me! thank you.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
ivan's Profile: http://www.unicyclist.com/profile/12759
View this thread: http://www.unicyclist.com/thread/58517

[danger_uni]

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


--
danger_uni
------------------------------------------------------------------------
danger_uni's Profile: http://www.unicyclist.com/profile/21
View this thread: http://www.unicyclist.com/thread/58517

[skilewis74]

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.


--
skilewis74
------------------------------------------------------------------------
skilewis74's Profile: http://www.unicyclist.com/profile/12404
View this thread: http://www.unicyclist.com/thread/58517

[danger_uni]

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


--
danger_uni
------------------------------------------------------------------------
danger_uni's Profile: http://www.unicyclist.com/profile/21
View this thread: http://www.unicyclist.com/thread/58517

[DustinSchaap]

I havn't actually seen Moment cranks bend before yet, but heard via
via:


pete66 wrote:
>
> DustinSchaap wrote:
> > the new KH cranks are about 10x as strong as the 2005 version
>
>
> Not 10x (at all) but definitely slightly stronger. My 05 cranks
> survived some big 9-10sets unscathed. I've seen 07 cranks bend after
> multiple 360s down about a 5-6foot drop.



Click 'here' (http://tinyurl.com/yurtc5) 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...


--
DustinSchaap

FOUNDER OF EENWIEL.NL (\"HTTP://WWW.EENWIEL.NL\")
*Sponsored by 'MUNICYCLE.COM' (http://www.municycle.com) , 'QU-AX'
(http://www.qu-ax.com) and 'SEMCYCLE' (http://www.semcycle.com)*
------------------------------------------------------------------------
DustinSchaap's Profile: http://www.unicyclist.com/profile/12614
View this thread: http://www.unicyclist.com/thread/58517

[picado]

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


--
picado

From HELL SP mono CLUBE!

###unicycle for JAH RASTAFARI###
One wheel in brazil
------------------------------------------------------------------------
picado's Profile: http://www.unicyclist.com/profile/11964
View this thread: http://www.unicyclist.com/thread/58517

[Lutz]

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).


--
Lutz

'POINT RACING' (http://www.pointbike.de) | 'AJATA'
(http://www.ajata.de) |

'www.einradshows.de' (http://www.einradshows.de)
'www.extremeunicycling.de' (http://www.extremeunicycling.de)

'Video' (http://www.ajata.de/2m/lutz/lutz.wmv) |
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Lutz's Profile: http://www.unicyclist.com/profile/1752
View this thread: http://www.unicyclist.com/thread/58517

[skrobo]

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


--
skrobo

><> Unicycle For Christ <><

____________________________________________
-last edited by \"elvisunifreak\" at 8:35 pm -
------------------------------------------------------------------------
skrobo's Profile: http://www.unicyclist.com/profile/12272
View this thread: http://www.unicyclist.com/thread/58517

[Lucas1wheel]

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


--
Lucas1wheel

Lucas1Wheel -I am really up for S.L.U.T.S
MrBoogieJuice -Keep it to yourself thankyou very much.

I LOVE YOU MIKE!!!! You kick ass.
I smell....of peaches
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Lucas1wheel's Profile: http://www.unicyclist.com/profile/11476
View this thread: http://www.unicyclist.com/thread/58517

[maestro8]

Jerrick wrote:
> Seriously though, whats the big deal here?


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.


--
maestro8

Those are my principles. If you don't like those, I have others. --
Groucho Marx

The only way to comprehend what mathematicians mean by Infinity is to
contemplate the extent of human stupidity. -- François-Marie Arouet de
Voltaire
------------------------------------------------------------------------
maestro8's Profile: http://www.unicyclist.com/profile/7871
View this thread: http://www.unicyclist.com/thread/58517

[Jerrick]

maestro8 wrote:
> 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?


--
Jerrick

~*~!I ride for Christ, Fun, Challenges, and a lot
more!~*~
'!Gallery!' (http://tinyurl.com/gf2g9)
'!MRIS!' (http://tinyurl.com/jjjnz)
'Easy Tire Removal Guide.' (http://tinyurl.com/rd9ru)
My sponsor '~!SIXSIXONE!~' (http://sixsixone.com/)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Jerrick's Profile: http://www.unicyclist.com/profile/11632
View this thread: http://www.unicyclist.com/thread/58517