170s
10-04-13, 07:59 PM
#1
Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: middle of California
Posts: 34
Bikes: Trek mountain bike, Centurion road bike, Trek single speed
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
170s
Just noticed that the crank arms on my road bike are 170s. Other road bikes I have looked at have 175s. Why do some bikes have one and others longer ones? Is there a performance advantage to having 175s? I would think so. Thanks for any info.
10-04-13, 08:07 PM
#2
Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: NJ
Posts: 3,084
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 5 Times
in
4 Posts
It's a size/proportion thing. Typically, taller ppl want bigger frames and, to go with that, they'll also want longer stems and longer cranks and wider bars to match their proportions. Lennard Zinn, a tall guy who sells cycling equipment aimed at other tall riders, offers some very long cranks. Conversely, kids' bikes tend to have short crank arms, and some companies offer to modify high-end cranks in shorter lengths for serious riders of short stature.
The unintended consequence of playing with different crankarm lengths is that it will have an effect on the gear ratio, albeit it's not typically a dramatic difference. Longer cranks make for shorter gearing, and vice-versa.
hth
rob (fwiw, I tend to prefer longer cranks than would typically be recommended for my height/frame size...)
The unintended consequence of playing with different crankarm lengths is that it will have an effect on the gear ratio, albeit it's not typically a dramatic difference. Longer cranks make for shorter gearing, and vice-versa.
hth
rob (fwiw, I tend to prefer longer cranks than would typically be recommended for my height/frame size...)
10-04-13, 08:07 PM
#3
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Pittsburgh, PA
Posts: 33,656
Bikes: '96 Litespeed Catalyst, '05 Litespeed Firenze, '06 Litespeed Tuscany, '20 Surly Midnight Special, All are 3x10. It is hilly around here!
Mentioned: 39 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2025 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 1,085 Times
in
733 Posts
Crank length is often related to rider size with taller riders preferring (or assumed to prefer) longer cranks. So, based on that, larger frames are usually fitted with longer cranks. Longer cranks give more leverage but tend to inhibit cadence so they are a trade off.
There are a lot of formulas used to determine "optimum" crank length based on rider height or leg length but several studies have shown little relationship between crank length and developed power so you pays your money and takes your choice. Some riders are indifferent to crank length while others have a strong preference.
There are a lot of formulas used to determine "optimum" crank length based on rider height or leg length but several studies have shown little relationship between crank length and developed power so you pays your money and takes your choice. Some riders are indifferent to crank length while others have a strong preference.
10-04-13, 08:10 PM
#4
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: New Rochelle, NY
Posts: 37,688
Bikes: too many bikes from 1967 10s (5x2)Frejus to a Sumitomo Ti/Chorus aluminum 10s (10x2), plus one non-susp mtn bike I use as my commuter
Mentioned: 134 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5259 Post(s)
Liked 1,572 Times
in
901 Posts
Crank length is as much a matter of fashion as mechanics. If you think about it we're talking a small 5mm difference.
170mm is the long term standard for road bikes, but mtn bikes tend to use 175mm. Some 20 or so years ago the road standard moved to172.5mm.
Proponents of long cranks talk about better leverage, but I discount that, since bikes a re a geared system and you can make the mechanical advantage whatever you want. Folks who spin tend to prefer shorter cranks, but it's not a hard rule.
IME, there's no great issue with shorter cranks, but shorter people can suffer with longer cranks because the difference in height top and bottom becomes a problem.
I'm sure that others will chime in, some claiming the size is important, but to me it's a tempest in a teapot.
BTW- all my bikes still use the same 170mm crank length that I started with 45 years ago.
170mm is the long term standard for road bikes, but mtn bikes tend to use 175mm. Some 20 or so years ago the road standard moved to172.5mm.
Proponents of long cranks talk about better leverage, but I discount that, since bikes a re a geared system and you can make the mechanical advantage whatever you want. Folks who spin tend to prefer shorter cranks, but it's not a hard rule.
IME, there's no great issue with shorter cranks, but shorter people can suffer with longer cranks because the difference in height top and bottom becomes a problem.
I'm sure that others will chime in, some claiming the size is important, but to me it's a tempest in a teapot.
BTW- all my bikes still use the same 170mm crank length that I started with 45 years ago.
__________________
FB
Chain-L site
An ounce of diagnosis is worth a pound of cure.
“Never argue with an idiot. He will only bring you down to his level and beat you with experience.”, George Carlin
“One accurate measurement is worth a thousand expert opinions” - Adm Grace Murray Hopper - USN
WARNING, I'm from New York. Thin skinned people should maintain safe distance.
FB
Chain-L site
An ounce of diagnosis is worth a pound of cure.
“Never argue with an idiot. He will only bring you down to his level and beat you with experience.”, George Carlin
“One accurate measurement is worth a thousand expert opinions” - Adm Grace Murray Hopper - USN
WARNING, I'm from New York. Thin skinned people should maintain safe distance.
10-04-13, 09:46 PM
#5
Randomhead
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Happy Valley, Pennsylvania
Posts: 23,874
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Liked 3,261 Times
in
2,248 Posts
I went to 172.5 for a while in the early '80s, didn't really see a difference and moved back to 170s. I feel that my leg speed is marginally slower with the longer cranks.
10-04-13, 09:49 PM
#6
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Middle Earth (aka IA)
Posts: 20,440
Bikes: A bunch of old bikes and a few new ones
Mentioned: 178 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5852 Post(s)
Liked 3,363 Times
in
2,015 Posts
Crank length is as much a matter of fashion as mechanics. If you think about it we're talking a small 5mm difference.
170mm is the long term standard for road bikes, but mtn bikes tend to use 175mm. Some 20 or so years ago the road standard moved to172.5mm.
Proponents of long cranks talk about better leverage, but I discount that, since bikes a re a geared system and you can make the mechanical advantage whatever you want. Folks who spin tend to prefer shorter cranks, but it's not a hard rule.
IME, there's no great issue with shorter cranks, but shorter people can suffer with longer cranks because the difference in height top and bottom becomes a problem.
I'm sure that others will chime in, some claiming the size is important, but to me it's a tempest in a teapot.
BTW- all my bikes still use the same 170mm crank length that I started with 45 years ago.
170mm is the long term standard for road bikes, but mtn bikes tend to use 175mm. Some 20 or so years ago the road standard moved to172.5mm.
Proponents of long cranks talk about better leverage, but I discount that, since bikes a re a geared system and you can make the mechanical advantage whatever you want. Folks who spin tend to prefer shorter cranks, but it's not a hard rule.
IME, there's no great issue with shorter cranks, but shorter people can suffer with longer cranks because the difference in height top and bottom becomes a problem.
I'm sure that others will chime in, some claiming the size is important, but to me it's a tempest in a teapot.
BTW- all my bikes still use the same 170mm crank length that I started with 45 years ago.
10-05-13, 02:24 AM
#7
Senior Member
ScottRae, Technically one can produce more output torque using with the longer crank arm than the shorter crank arm for a given input force. (Crank arms are to me are a first-class lever which have a crank arm as the fulcrum between the effort force and the resistance.) That said, there's very little, if any, seat of the pants performance difference. One difference that is noticeable is that my cadence is a tiny bit slower on my bike with 175 mm crank arms. If I immediately switch between different length crank arms I do feel the difference for just a few moments and then I adapt and it's a non issue.
If you're curious, try the longer crank arms.
Brad
If you're curious, try the longer crank arms.
Brad
10-05-13, 03:03 AM
#8
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: Vermont
Posts: 1,200
Bikes: Pinarello Montello, Merckx MX Leader, Merckx Corsa Extra, Pinarello Prologo, Tredici Magia Nera, Tredici Cross
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 4 Times
in
3 Posts
There is certainly a "feel" difference between the sizes. My leg length matches a 175 crank, best. I'm more of a strength rider than a spinner so, 175 makes more sense. The 172.5 cranks I had a chance to ride, seemed to up my cadence(as noted above).
10-05-13, 07:08 AM
#9
Really Old Senior Member
I use 165mm cranks because I have a limited range of motion in my R. knee.
175mm gives me chronic knee pain to the point that I really won't ride except as necessary to get groceries etc. (no car)
170 and I have some pain at times.
165mm and I rode my Hybrid 70 miles in a day.
175mm gives me chronic knee pain to the point that I really won't ride except as necessary to get groceries etc. (no car)
170 and I have some pain at times.
165mm and I rode my Hybrid 70 miles in a day.
10-05-13, 09:20 AM
#10
Senior Member
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: St Peters, Missouri
Posts: 30,225
Bikes: Catrike 559 I own some others but they don't get ridden very much.
Mentioned: 16 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1572 Post(s)
Liked 640 Times
in
361 Posts
I'm 5'10" which is right on the mean for American men.
For years I used 172.5mm cranks on my road bikes. When I decided to convert my Klein to a compact double, 175mm was immediately but 172.5mm wasn't I worried endlessly over that 2.5mm change and eventually bought the longer crank. Lance Armstrong says he can sense a 1mm difference, but I certainly couldn't.
After breaking my hip, I decided to have a stock crankset shortened by Bikesmith in Minneapolis. I worried about the difference between 148mm and 152mm. The owner told me he doubted I'd be able to tell the difference. His son and another racer overhauled two bikes with similar cranksets over the winter. Inadvertently they installed one 172.5mm and one 175mm crankarm on each bike. He said they didn't discover the mistake for six months.
My conclusion is that if you are unusually tall or unusually short or have some other physical issue, like recovering from a broken hip, it might make a difference. Most riders, however, can and will easily adjust to slightly different crank lengths.
For years I used 172.5mm cranks on my road bikes. When I decided to convert my Klein to a compact double, 175mm was immediately but 172.5mm wasn't I worried endlessly over that 2.5mm change and eventually bought the longer crank. Lance Armstrong says he can sense a 1mm difference, but I certainly couldn't.
After breaking my hip, I decided to have a stock crankset shortened by Bikesmith in Minneapolis. I worried about the difference between 148mm and 152mm. The owner told me he doubted I'd be able to tell the difference. His son and another racer overhauled two bikes with similar cranksets over the winter. Inadvertently they installed one 172.5mm and one 175mm crankarm on each bike. He said they didn't discover the mistake for six months.
My conclusion is that if you are unusually tall or unusually short or have some other physical issue, like recovering from a broken hip, it might make a difference. Most riders, however, can and will easily adjust to slightly different crank lengths.
