# Higher Order Cube Difficulty Poll



## AlGoreRhythm (Sep 28, 2014)

I am taking this poll for my science fair project. Wasn't sure which section to put it in, so I put it here.


----------



## GrandSlam (Sep 28, 2014)

I think a lot of people will agree that they get a bit redundant to solve.


----------



## TDM (Sep 28, 2014)

They're no more difficult to solve, but they're more difficult to solve _quickly_. At least for me. I suck at bigcubes.


----------



## PJKCuber (Sep 28, 2014)

I suck at bigcubes and I suck at 2x2. The only events I think I'll ever be fast at are 3x3, Pyra,Skewb, Mega(Bcz it is similar to 3x3) and BLD events.


----------



## Dene (Sep 28, 2014)

Difficult in what way?


----------



## IRNjuggle28 (Sep 28, 2014)

Yes, they're more difficult. There are no skills you use for 3x3 that you don't need for big cubes (all reduction methods), but there are skills you use for 7x7 that you don't need for 3x3. In that sense, they are more difficult: they require a broader skillset. 

Could you elaborate on what you mean by "difficult?" What I just said is way too self evident to be worthy of a science fair project, so I bet I'm misinterpreting you.


----------



## AlGoreRhythm (Sep 28, 2014)

I mean compared to the 5x5, are they, in your opinion, more difficult to learn?


----------



## Randomno (Sep 28, 2014)

I can't solve 5x5+, but no, they aren't really much harder. Just center to put together, and more edges to match.


----------



## AlGoreRhythm (Sep 28, 2014)

> 9 Hours Ago *PJKCuber*
> I suck at bigcubes and I suck at 2x2. The only events I think I'll ever be fast at are 3x3, Pyra,Skewb, Mega(Bcz it is similar to 3x3) and BLD events.



Lol, I love big cubes, but as a puzzle solver, not a speed cuber. Doubt I will ever compete in 6x6, 7x7.


----------



## Dene (Sep 28, 2014)

To learn? Only a teensy bit.


----------



## stoic (Sep 29, 2014)

7x7 was the first cube I was able to solve without some sort of guide or help (6x6 last 2 centres I struggled). Above that it's really just more of the same.


----------



## IRNjuggle28 (Sep 29, 2014)

AlGoreRhythm said:


> I mean compared to the 5x5, are they, in your opinion, more difficult to learn?


The only thing that's really more difficult is using commutators to solve the obliques in the last two centers. So yes, a little bit more difficult.


----------



## ryanj92 (Sep 29, 2014)

After 6x6 there's nothing new you need to learn, and all I had to learn for 6x6 was l2c comms...
In terms of speed solving, I think they get a little harder each time (more intricate mechanisms and smaller pieces mean your turning has to become increasingly accurate)


----------



## CiaranBeahan (Sep 29, 2014)

Like a lot of other people are saying, the last two center comms were the only thing I found difficult. Besides that the rest of the cube was easy to solve, I also improved really quickly. I remember doing my first few solve, I got a 17 minute solve the 16 the 15, 14, 13, 12 and it stopped at 11 minutes until I actually had to practice to improve. Going down 6 minutes in 6 solves a minute each time can't be seen as difficult.


----------



## XTowncuber (Sep 29, 2014)

everything 5+ is slightly more difficult than 5x5, but not really harder than each other.


----------



## Carrot (Sep 29, 2014)

I can't solve 6x6x6 and 7x7x7 is just a disaster to solve, I can however solve 4x4x4 and 5x5x5 no problem.


----------



## Please Dont Ask (Sep 29, 2014)

Carrot said:


> I can't solve 6x6x6 and 7x7x7 is just a disaster to solve, I can however solve 4x4x4 and 5x5x5 no problem.



If you can solve the 4x4 and the 5x5 you should be able to solve 5x5+


----------



## TMOY (Sep 29, 2014)

6^3 and higher never caused me any problem.


----------



## TheGrayCuber (Sep 29, 2014)

As the cubes get bigger, they don't get harder, they just become more time consuming. Its all the same as you add more layers, just with more pieces.


----------



## AlGoreRhythm (Oct 17, 2014)

Yeah. got my 7x7 today, and it was pretty easy. Like a 6x6, but if anything, easier. Needed no help and solved in about half an hour.


----------



## Daryl (Oct 20, 2014)

5x5+ they don't get difficult, it just consume more time, more edges to pair..
It just difficult to solve it quickly (at least for myself)


----------



## JasonDL13 (Oct 20, 2014)

There's a difference between time consuming and hard. A 4x4 is easier then a 5x5 because of parity. There for, a 7x7 is easier then a 4x4. No parity, just more pieces to solve, so it takes more time.


----------



## qqwref (Oct 20, 2014)

No parity? Have you ever solved a 7x7x7? There's parity in each of the two wing orbits, just like the 5x5x5 but twice as much. The fact that you have to do it during edge pairing (if you use reduction) doesn't change that.

Besides parity, though, I'd say that 7x7x7 is quite a bit harder than 4x4x4 because of centers. They're pretty much trivial on the 4x4x4, but on the 7x7x7 you have to deal with building separate rows and combining them, fixed centers, and obliques (and in addition you can't always build the last two centers just by doing row by row).

I think the dividing line is after 7x7x7 - by that point you've seen every piece type together, so there's really nothing new to throw at you.


----------



## IRNjuggle28 (Oct 20, 2014)

I think the line is before 7x7. A lot of people seem to think the line is 5x5, and I don't know where they're coming from either. The last new things are parities and obliques, and both of those happen at 6x6. What new piece type is there on 7x7? It's a 6x6 that has middle edges and plus centers, both of which 5x5 prepares you for. 6x6 is the line.


----------



## qqwref (Oct 20, 2014)

7x7x7 has no new pieces, but it's the first time that you have obliques and fixed centers together. You could argue it doesn't matter, but at least it's a new situation.


----------



## JasonDL13 (Oct 20, 2014)

qqwref said:


> No parity? Have you ever solved a 7x7x7?



Oops! I mean no permutation parity


----------



## AlGoreRhythm (Oct 23, 2014)

If we could get 100 replies, that would be awesome! SO far the poll is leaning towards, "Yes, but not significantly"


----------



## teboecubes (Sep 21, 2017)

In my opinion 6x6 is more difficult than 7x7, but from there, it just gets more time consuming, not really hard


----------



## I_<3_SCS (Sep 21, 2017)

Juss saeing, this is a tewible way to conduct wesearch. The adience may be wight, but you have no idea who we are exept that we like cbing. Then, what if I just put a wandom answer to your poll to scwew with your wesults? Additioally, I don't even see how this could be a science fair projekt??? Lastly, you're leading us on... like you put lading answers that skew reslts like a like a dat won dat saes dis: 
No, They were easy after 5x5.

cum on now, this is compleely unscientfic. u shud do a prper exeriment, damet.


----------



## One Wheel (Sep 21, 2017)

I_<3_SCS said:


> Juss saeing, this is a tewible way to conduct wesearch. The adience may be wight, but you have no idea who we are exept that we like cbing. Then, what if I just put a wandom answer to your poll to scwew with your wesults? Additioally, I don't even see how this could be a science fair projekt??? Lastly, you're leading us on... like you put lading answers that skew reslts like a like a dat won dat saes dis:
> No, They were easy after 5x5.
> 
> cum on now, this is compleely unscientfic. u shud do a prper exeriment, damet.



This thread was just bumped 3 years, so the original question is irrelevant. More importantly, if you ever want anybody to take you seriously then spell properly, and if you want to make a joke then wait until you think of something witty.


----------



## Ordway Persyn (Sep 21, 2017)

I_<3_SCS said:


> Juss saeing, this is a tewible way to conduct wesearch. The adience may be wight, but you have no idea who we are exept that we like cbing. Then, what if I just put a wandom answer to your poll to scwew with your wesults? Additioally, I don't even see how this could be a science fair projekt??? Lastly, you're leading us on... like you put lading answers that skew reslts like a like a dat won dat saes dis:
> No, They were easy after 5x5.
> 
> cum on now, this is compleely unscientfic. u shud do a prper exeriment, damet.


Is this Elmer Fudd? This is the kind of comment you would find on a popular youtube video, not on a moderated forum.


----------

