A poll---What is your height/inseam/crank length?
06-27-09, 10:26 PM
#1
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 103
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
A poll---What is your height/inseam/crank length?
A poll---What is your height/inseam/crank length ???? (mention how you ride as well)
I've been reading and all advice on the topic of crank length seems to be voodoo/black magic....
I'm 6"1 inseam 33 on ultegra 175's and recently won a Dura ace crank on Ebay at 172.5.....(would have preferred the DA at 175, but the deal was too good to let go) 2.5 mm looks so small on a ruler !!!! Is there really that big of a difference?
I've been reading and all advice on the topic of crank length seems to be voodoo/black magic....
I'm 6"1 inseam 33 on ultegra 175's and recently won a Dura ace crank on Ebay at 172.5.....(would have preferred the DA at 175, but the deal was too good to let go) 2.5 mm looks so small on a ruler !!!! Is there really that big of a difference?
06-27-09, 10:50 PM
#3
CPM M4
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: The West Side (Of Rochester, NY).
Posts: 4,930
Bikes: Light.
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
5'10 1/2''. 31.5''. 175mm. Mash.
__________________
Ten tenths.
Ten tenths.
06-27-09, 11:20 PM
#5
Senior Member
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: A Coffin Called Earth. or Toronto, ON
Posts: 12,258
Bikes: Bianchi, Miyata, Dahon, Rossin
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 5 Times
in
5 Posts
H:170cm, I: 77cm, C: 165mm and 170mm
spin
spin
__________________
Food for thought: if you aren't dead by 2050, you and your entire family will be within a few years from starvation. Now that is a cruel gift to leave for your offspring. ;)
https://sanfrancisco.ibtimes.com/arti...ger-photos.htm
Food for thought: if you aren't dead by 2050, you and your entire family will be within a few years from starvation. Now that is a cruel gift to leave for your offspring. ;)
https://sanfrancisco.ibtimes.com/arti...ger-photos.htm
06-28-09, 01:29 AM
#6
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Queanbeyan, Australia.
Posts: 4,135
Mentioned: 85 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3450 Post(s)
Liked 418 Times
in
288 Posts
A 33" inseam for a height of 6'1" seems rather short legged. Is 33" your pant inseam or your actual inseam?
Based on an actual inseam of 33" I think the 172.5mm cranks would be better for you than the 175mm cranks.
Anthony
Based on an actual inseam of 33" I think the 172.5mm cranks would be better for you than the 175mm cranks.
Anthony
06-28-09, 02:48 AM
#7
Senior Member
My actual inseam is 33" as well, 5' 11'' tall, 172.5 cranks.
I also don't think that you"ll notice 2.5 mm.
06-28-09, 07:33 AM
#8
ka maté ka maté ka ora
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: wessex
Posts: 4,423
Bikes: breezer venturi - red novo bosberg - red, pedal force cg1 - red, neuvation f-100 - da, devinci phantom - xt, miele piste - miche/campy, bianchi reparto corse sbx, concorde squadra tsx - da, miele team issue sl - ultegra
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 25 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 3 Times
in
3 Posts
height 177cm. inseam 84cm. cranks 175mm. mostly i spin
06-28-09, 07:53 AM
#9
Senior Member
If that 33 inch (84cm) inseam is a cycling inseam, then 172.5mm crankarms should be fine. I prefer 172.5mm crankarms for my 83cm inseam. If you posted a pants inseam, stop that, and use centimeters.
For the record, height 169cm, 83cm inseam, 73 cm saddle height, 172.5mm crankarms.
For the record, height 169cm, 83cm inseam, 73 cm saddle height, 172.5mm crankarms.
06-28-09, 08:30 AM
#10
Member
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Santa Clarita, CA
Posts: 35
Bikes: 2009 Felt F2 SL Dura-Ace 9000, 2007 Fuji Track, 2003 Fuji Team SL Ultegra 6500
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
Height 183cm
Inseam 84cm
Cranks 172.5mm
Frame 58cm
I thought about 175mm cranks, but I am comfortable on my 172.5's...
Inseam 84cm
Cranks 172.5mm
Frame 58cm
I thought about 175mm cranks, but I am comfortable on my 172.5's...
06-28-09, 08:55 AM
#13
Senior Member
6"
35.5 inseam
172.5 cranks
Frame = 59cm
35.5 inseam
172.5 cranks
Frame = 59cm
06-28-09, 08:57 AM
#14
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Fort Lauderdale, FL
Posts: 70
Bikes: 2008 Cannondale Six13
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
Does the size of your feet have any effect on desired crank length? After all, the interface with the pedals is near the end of your foot, not at the end of your leg.
06-28-09, 09:02 AM
#15
Living Notoriously Well
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Florida
Posts: 886
Bikes: 06 Felt F80
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
Height 5' 9.5"
Inseam (cycling) 32.25"
Crank 172.5mm
Spin (90/105 rpm)
I don't think that your feet would make a difference in desired crank length... more saddle position.
you also have to remember that an increase of 2.5mm in crank length is actually a 5 mm increase in the overall assembly. Raise or lower your saddle 5 mm and tell me you don't notice a difference.
Inseam (cycling) 32.25"
Crank 172.5mm
Spin (90/105 rpm)
I don't think that your feet would make a difference in desired crank length... more saddle position.
you also have to remember that an increase of 2.5mm in crank length is actually a 5 mm increase in the overall assembly. Raise or lower your saddle 5 mm and tell me you don't notice a difference.
Last edited by mr handy; 06-28-09 at 09:06 AM.
06-28-09, 09:05 AM
#16
Aluminium Crusader :-)
Height: 182cm (just under 6ft)
Long-ish legs: 35" inseam (89cm)
Favourite crank length: 172.5
I'm a grinder/masher, who can't out-sprint a fast dog.
Don't worry, regulars, I'm not gunna crap on and bore y'all as much as usual.
I went 'big' on the crank length thing a few years back. I rode 170s for years, then 175s for ages; back to 170s after a knee injury scare; then I tried 180s (for whole freakin year -- I sold them); 177.5s for a while (I still have them somewhere), but ended up back on 172.5s. I probably would've been happy with 170s, but my local shop had a great deal on some used Dura-Ace 172.5s when I wanted to new shanks, so i settled for that length.
I've become so used to 172.5s that 175s feel a little awkward for extended grinding.
I prefer shorter cranks over the longer coz I'm relatively higher over the pedals through most of the downstroke. This makes pounding the pedals easier due to less knee and hip flexion; kinda like how a half squat is easier than a deeper squat, although it's apparently a little more complicated than that.
Long-ish legs: 35" inseam (89cm)
Favourite crank length: 172.5
I'm a grinder/masher, who can't out-sprint a fast dog.
Don't worry, regulars, I'm not gunna crap on and bore y'all as much as usual.
I went 'big' on the crank length thing a few years back. I rode 170s for years, then 175s for ages; back to 170s after a knee injury scare; then I tried 180s (for whole freakin year -- I sold them); 177.5s for a while (I still have them somewhere), but ended up back on 172.5s. I probably would've been happy with 170s, but my local shop had a great deal on some used Dura-Ace 172.5s when I wanted to new shanks, so i settled for that length.
I've become so used to 172.5s that 175s feel a little awkward for extended grinding.
I prefer shorter cranks over the longer coz I'm relatively higher over the pedals through most of the downstroke. This makes pounding the pedals easier due to less knee and hip flexion; kinda like how a half squat is easier than a deeper squat, although it's apparently a little more complicated than that.
06-28-09, 04:40 PM
#20
Roadie
5'10"
33" inseam
172.5
I went from 172.5 to 175 to 172.5 and can feel the difference between difference lengths, I like the shorter cranks much better, I can spin quite a bit faster
33" inseam
172.5
I went from 172.5 to 175 to 172.5 and can feel the difference between difference lengths, I like the shorter cranks much better, I can spin quite a bit faster
06-28-09, 05:06 PM
#22
Elite Fred
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Edge City
Posts: 10,928
Bikes: 2009 Spooky (cracked frame), 2006 Curtlo, 2002 Lemond (current race bike) Zurich, 1987 Serotta Colorado, 1986 Cannondale for commuting, a 1984 Cannondale on loan to my son
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 56 Post(s)
Liked 38 Times
in
16 Posts
Yes.
But only if you are used to one and switch to the other.
The range of motion during the pedaling stroke is slightly different. When you go from smaller to larger you need to get power from your muscles in situations that they are not used to. Trust me, you will feel it. Especially at the top of the stroke.
When going the other way, you feel like your stroke should be a little longer than what is required. Instead of letting off you "push" just a little too long on every stroke. It feels like you are constantly fighting your bike.
But only if you are used to one and switch to the other.
The range of motion during the pedaling stroke is slightly different. When you go from smaller to larger you need to get power from your muscles in situations that they are not used to. Trust me, you will feel it. Especially at the top of the stroke.
When going the other way, you feel like your stroke should be a little longer than what is required. Instead of letting off you "push" just a little too long on every stroke. It feels like you are constantly fighting your bike.
06-28-09, 05:36 PM
#24
Young and unconcerned
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Merry Land
Posts: 4,123
Bikes: Yeah, I got a few.
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
6'0"
34"
172.5
Though who knows if that's technically what I should have... But it works for me so I keep on getting them when I build up bikes.
34"
172.5
Though who knows if that's technically what I should have... But it works for me so I keep on getting them when I build up bikes.
