Sincitycycler

It's weird having 170's on my old commuter and 180s on my racing bike. The short cranks on my Peugeot are kind of cool for acceleration and spinning on the flats, but as soon as a climb comes ...ugggh! Where's my 180s?

I wonder what 165's feel like? Anybody use them?

biker7

I have ridden them alot in years past. For guys our size, I would say not what you want. They work ok...but as you said...you will miss your long cranks on the long mild or steep grades into the wind or just steady state high speed cruising on the flats. They are good for quick acceleration however but most riding is about steady state and not sprinting.
George

AnthonyG

Hey. 165 mm is LONG! What are you talking about. Well they're long for me anyway!

Well I used to ride around on 110 mm cranks on a kids bike. I kid you not! and they were OK actually. I used to get up some BIG hills with then no trouble. The trick is you use a lower gear than you normally would but it's easy to spin at a higher cadence. One issue to consider is that with the shorter cranks you probably aren't set up properly and an educated guess would be that your too far infront of KOPS with the shorter cranks to feel right. One big advantage or realy short cranks is that you can pedal out of the saddle forever and feel OK.

Regards, Anthony

Ineedhelp

My bike is a very small, wsd, and originally came with 650c wheels and 165 cranks--but I swapped them out for 170s when I bought the bike.

There's considerable toe overhang with the 170s, so when I decided to get a compact crank for hill climbing, I went back to the 165, but even with the compact crank, they don't seem to work as well as the 170s with 53/39 chains--not even for climbing; the same leverage just doesn't seem to be there, and even with 165s, there's still a certain amount of overhang.

So I'm sticking with the 170s. If I run into any really bad hills, maybe I'll get a triple, but so far hasn't been necessary.

Sincitycycler

[IMG] toe overhang [/IMG] Explain please? Hope it's curable with medication!

caligurl

i ride with a 167.5.... it's on a wsd bike (specialized dolce elite)

i don't have any toe-overlap!

tlupfer

my track bike has 165s. i can spin a higher cadence than with the 175's on my road bikes; however, i rarely find the need to spin 140+rpm on my road bike.

Ineedhelp

I have a 45cm women's specific design bike, and the frame is much shorter, so if the wheel is turned sharply enough, my foot will hit the wheel on the downstroke, and I will fall.

Fortunately this only occurs at very low speeds. At higher speeds, you do not have to turn the wheel as sharply, and tend to turn more by leaning into the turn. I've only hit the wheel once due to toe overhang, so I just have to keep it in mind when riding slow.

There is almost no way around this issue on smaller frames, which is why they usually come with the smaller 650 wheels to minimize this problem. On some of the smaller Terry wsd bikes, they eliminate this problem completely by putting even smaller wheels on the front, and a standard 700c wheel on the rear.

Ineedhelp

Your bike is probably a little bigger than mine, which is only 45cm. The toe overhang (ok, toe-overlap) only occurs on the smallest sizes.

I couldn't go with a larger frame because of the "standover" height. Although, I think the dolce is one of the models where the top tube is slanted, meaning that it is lower in the back, offering greater clearance to enable buy a larger frame and still get sufficient "standover" clearance--it's a different geometry which didn't feel right to me, and I just wanted a titanium frame...

Of course, you're also talking to someone who has to wear a youth helmet with dancing bears on it, so what do you expect?

late

Hi,
I use 165 cranks, and I like them. But I have very short legs.
It's like they say, if the shoe fits, crank it...

caligurl

mine's a 51!

ggg300

I have a set in a box. I used them to help me change from mash to spin for about a year. I liked them a lot, but on a long hill they were a bit hard. I'm back to 170's and can now spin better. I will put them on a fixed gear bike when I get around to.

pgoat

I have 165s on my old 80s trek road bike. I like them - I only feel they hurt climbing when I sit and spin. For standing and banging up a hill they are fine, maybe even smoother than the 170s on my other bikes.

As you'd expect they are nice and smooth sitting and spinning in an easy gear over flat ground.

I recently used an old three speed with 140mm cranks for commuting - they felt weird at first but I got used to them quickly. They did suck rather badly for my one daily seated climb (Queensboro Bridge, LI side), but other wise they were fine.....one funny thing; after a few weeks of commuting on the 140s my 170s on my other bikes (used on the weekends) felt monstrously long and uncomfortable to the point of mild pain!

Of course now that I ditched the three speed and use only 165-170s I am fine with them. 5mm will make a difference but unless you are a competitive racer I doubt a few mm will hurt you too much either way. (30mm is another story!! )

puddin' legs

on my track bike. They're great there, but wouldn't want anything shorter than 172.5 for the road (currently using 175's)

ed073

Track only.