Originally Posted by
Sharpshin
Good point, but longer cranks don't have to be stood on to benefit from the greater leverage/torque they afford. For the last 18 months this has been my daily ride, a worked-over '95 Hard Rock, with the 175mm cranks....
I have several bikes with 175mm cranks and one with 170mm cranks. The 170mm bike I think I run slighly higher cadence on it due to the shorter stroke.
It's great urban commuter bike, but just doesn't seem to roll as easily as my Voyageur, which is a high mileage-eating machine, maybe the wide-rim wheels I had built along with those stout 2" Marathon Plus Tour tires are too heavy.
When I got back on the Voyageur after a year and a half, the short cranks just felt confining and inefficient.
Off topic, but if that was my Brooks, I would tighten up the adjuster a bit and apply some Proofide to increase water resistance.
That is a nice looking bike, but the Marathon Plus tires have a reputation for being slow. Not because they are heavy, they just have a lot of rolling resistance. I have toured on Marathon Extreme 57mm wide tires (now discontinued) and they rolled better than I expected, they had a supple sidewall and did not consume a lot of energy when rolling. For a tire designed for rough roads and gravel, I was surprised how well they rolled on smooth pavement.
The bike in the photo has the 57mm wide Marathon Extremes. A third of my trip was on rough gravel (or rock), thus my choice of tire, but two thirds of my trip was on good quality pavement, thus I wanted a tire without a lot of rolling resistance.
