Originally Posted by
Ygduf
why would you not go shorter cranks for a climbing bike?
shorter cranks allow for the leg to stay more extended at the top of the stroke, opening the hip angle. you lose short-term torque for a better endurance position. see TT riding and short cranks. I'd also build it with a single chainring. Save weight on the front derailleur and front brifter and just get a decent range in the back. like a 42 / 11/32 setup. something like that.
And I wouldn't skimp on tires. you're unlikely to lose a race by a handful of seconds, and you seem to have terrible luck with flats.
The crank length is good input. I guess because hill climbing and longer cranks at a lower RPM are a tradition. I have some 170s in the box. We may try on Palomar.
Good input - thanks. FWIW my last when I was fit bike was single ring. I do not like high chain tension, meaning I'd rather a 50X25 over a 34X17 - it is worth the weight. But single ring and cutting the FD is a good idea.
Tires - general philosophy is in stage races you must survive to race another day. In a single day, go big or go home. But a 22mm 170g Veloflex Record over 220g 25mm silk FMB is a tough one. I lean toward the FMB. I don't "skimp" on tires. That Knights Ferry flat was NorCal crap that flatted a Tinkoff team tubular. Sometimes wheels being pulled out of faulty frame design gets confused with tires flatting. I also had 1 month delayed delivery in 2015 so had to use bad choices and we had bad luck. Yes - I am sensitive (So the kid is in college instead of Dohar).
Anyway there were no flats this year, nothing since July 2015. None in training, none in racing - that I can remember anyway.