View Single Post
Old 06-14-20, 09:45 AM
  #5  
phughes
Senior Member
 
phughes's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 1,959
Mentioned: 7 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 535 Post(s)
Liked 413 Times in 248 Posts
Originally Posted by Wilmingtech View Post
Ive got a Gravel / Endurance bike that's 53.5cm. Short wheelbase with a little toe overlap and I have 172.5's on that one. It weighs in right at 9kg and is a solid fit. And while I can spin on that bike I dont get the power out of it like I do on the Ridley. The Ridley is built for climbing and that it does. I also can accelerate and put the power down with the longer cranks and of course it helps that it weighs in at 7.4kg.

I'll have to try the 172.5s on the Ridley later this summer and see if I can spin a little more with the shorter cranks on the climbs (too late to swap them for tomorrows ride). My thinking is that with the shorter cranks I might get a slight increase in cadence and save my legs for the longer climbs vs putting out slightly more power at a lower cadence with the longer cranks.

My endurance bike came with 170's and that felt weird. Like riding a walmart or a kids bike. It's crazy how much difference 2.5mm makes.

-Sean
I will say that the shorter cranks worked out very well for me. My knees thanked me. When I installed them, I was commuting in the Ozarks, with plenty of big hills. I preferred the shorter cranks, and still do now that I am back in Western, PA.
phughes is offline