Go Back  Bike Forums > Bike Forums > Road Cycling
Reload this Page >

Are you using the right size cranks?

Search
Notices
Road Cycling “It is by riding a bicycle that you learn the contours of a country best, since you have to sweat up the hills and coast down them. Thus you remember them as they actually are, while in a motor car only a high hill impresses you, and you have no such accurate remembrance of country you have driven through as you gain by riding a bicycle.” -- Ernest Hemingway

Are you using the right size cranks?

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 06-10-10, 11:57 AM
  #26  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Bloomington, IN
Posts: 103
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
It's not even arbitrary pseudoscience - it's just wrong. Something like 90% of the pros use 170-175mm cranks and the few others use bigger ones to 180mm.
bloomieracer is offline  
Old 06-10-10, 02:33 PM
  #27  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 719
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 28 Post(s)
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Longer cranks effectively give you higher gearing. If you consider that gearing is limited by the size of your outer cogs, then changing the crank might be something pros to gain a little extra torque (since they have stronger legs).

Or maybe 90% of pros just happen to have leg length that means they need something in the 172 range.

I can't imagine wanting to go much longer than 170 personally, since it decreases your clearance between your pedals and the ground during turns.
baribari is offline  
Old 06-10-10, 02:47 PM
  #28  
AEO
Senior Member
 
AEO's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: A Coffin Called Earth. or Toronto, ON
Posts: 12,257

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
Originally Posted by border reiver
I am about exactly the same body size as the OP. I have 2 bikes that I ride regularly (i.e. each about 2-3 times per week--Bike 1 when it rains, Bike 2 when it doesn't).

Bike 1 has 172.5mm cranks because that's what came with it. Bike 2 was a custom build so I thought, what the hell, I'll give the crank proportional theory a shot and so it has 165mm cranks.

I "think" I prefer the way the 165mm cranks feel, but that bike is newer and fits me better in other ways, so who knows if I'm being completely objective. What is noticeable is my ability to pedal through corners without clipping a pedal so much.

Bottom line is that even a 7.25mm difference is almost imperceptible. FWIW, I'm also a high cadence spinner. Also FWIW, Cavendish rides 170's.
difference of perspective.
take this example then...

If you're a giraffe, you probably wouldn't know the difference in height between tom cruise and johnny depp.
If you're a donkey, you'll notice.
__________________
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
AEO is offline  
Old 06-10-10, 03:41 PM
  #29  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: NorCal
Posts: 2,457

Bikes: Cervelo R3 (Force)

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally Posted by baribari
I can't imagine wanting to go much longer than 170 personally, since it decreases your clearance between your pedals and the ground during turns.
trying to pedal through tight turns is never a good idea. a good number the crit crashes i've seen are due to pedals clipping the ground. those are the crashes get the most broken bones
Val23708 is offline  
Old 06-10-10, 04:30 PM
  #30  
Should Be More Popular
 
datlas's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Malvern, PA (20 miles West of Philly)
Posts: 43,071

Bikes: 1986 Alpine (steel road bike), 2009 Ti Habenero, 2013 Specialized Roubaix

Mentioned: 560 Post(s)
Tagged: 2 Thread(s)
Quoted: 22614 Post(s)
Liked 8,935 Times in 4,164 Posts
I agree with the others who feel that these "rules" are guidelines, they get you into the ballpark but you have to tweak the fitting for your style and preference.

Same thing with KOPS for cleat position.

BTW the formula gives me 180mm but I am very happy with my 175's....and my ss commuter is 170 which is also ok by me.

Doug

Last edited by datlas; 06-10-10 at 04:45 PM.
datlas is offline  
Old 06-10-10, 05:00 PM
  #31  
Senior Member
 
Dubbayoo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Atlanta
Posts: 7,681

Bikes: Pedal Force QS3

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time in 1 Post
I have a 30" pant inseam, 70cm saddle height and I've always used 170's because that's what bikes came with. Two years ago I bought 165 SRAM Reds and it's been okay. I'm now switching back to 170's because the S975 doesn't come in 165.
Dubbayoo is offline  
Old 06-10-10, 05:33 PM
  #32  
Over the hill
 
urbanknight's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 24,386

Bikes: Giant Defy, Giant Revolt

Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1000 Post(s)
Liked 1,213 Times in 696 Posts
Originally Posted by Val23708
trying to pedal through tight turns is never a good idea.
Incorrect.
__________________
It's like riding a bicycle
urbanknight is offline  
Old 06-10-10, 05:37 PM
  #33  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 719
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 28 Post(s)
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Val23708
trying to pedal through tight turns is never a good idea. a good number the crit crashes i've seen are due to pedals clipping the ground. those are the crashes get the most broken bones
If you're good at judging lean angle and maximize your clearance (clipless pedals, short crank, etc), then you can power out of turns faster, which shaves seconds off laps... Obviously you're not going to be doing any Moto GP stuff while you're trying to pedal, but you can get a pretty good lean. The real limiting factor is road conditions and tire grip.
baribari is offline  
Old 06-10-10, 05:50 PM
  #34  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Chicago
Posts: 223
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally Posted by baribari
Longer cranks effectively give you higher gearing.
They give you a bit longer lever to turn the gear, but don't change gearing.
Markj61 is offline  
Old 06-10-10, 06:17 PM
  #35  
Senior Member
 
wens's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Northeast Ohio
Posts: 3,215
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Markj61
They give you a bit longer lever to turn the gear, but don't change gearing.
Thus effectively changing the gearing.
wens is offline  
Old 06-10-10, 06:41 PM
  #36  
AEO
Senior Member
 
AEO's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: A Coffin Called Earth. or Toronto, ON
Posts: 12,257

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
Originally Posted by wens
Thus effectively changing the gearing.
no, no. the gearing remains the same, but the gain ratio changes.
https://sheldonbrown.com/gain.html
__________________
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
AEO is offline  
Old 06-10-10, 07:12 PM
  #37  
Retro-guy
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Danville, CA
Posts: 285

Bikes: 1980 Raleigh Super Record

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
I'm 6'4", and so the usual crank arm calculations always seem to point to some very long length that is made by no one, and would require a custom frame if it were (to avoid ground-clearance issues). So my current bike has 175's on it.

Ironically, my old 1980 Raleigh (25.5" frame) has 165mm crank arms. I don't know if shorter crank arms were just more typical 30 years ago, or what...

I have average length legs for my height, although I kind of think that I have relatively long calves, and somewhat short femurs. (But you should see my lemurs. They're huge!)
rschleicher is offline  
Old 06-10-10, 07:33 PM
  #38  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Tariffville, CT
Posts: 15,405

Bikes: Tsunami road bikes, Dolan DF4 track

Mentioned: 36 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 385 Post(s)
Liked 180 Times in 102 Posts
I just measured really rough. 28", about 71 cm. I'm 5'7" with short legs.

I ride 175s.

I pedal through turns, even relatively tight ones (but not really tight ones).

Although I have a custom frame, I requested no particular BB height - it's about what they all are.

I can ride 170s too - rode them for track, and rode them on the road for part of the late summer, until I crashed in Aug. I used to ride 167.5s, for a long time, maybe 1989-95. I used to be much, much faster. Like 20% faster in the sprints. I used to be lighter (15-20 lbs from now, and I'm 25-30 lbs lighter than last year). I haven't done a max speed test this year, but I've done multiple long (30+ seconds - those are long to me!) efforts at 35-36 mph without standing, i.e. leadout/chase type efforts, not sprints. I just put an 11T on after not having one for most of a year, so maybe I'll go out and do some sprints at some point

I thought 170s gave me speed (back in 2008), so I rode them the year I wasn't working. I trained a lot, rested a lot, BFed a lot, and I did worse in races than normal (at my elevated weight - about 180-200 lbs). I returned to 175s and promptly did better in crits and such, with 1/3-1/2 as much training.

Now, lighter, with 175s on still (I put them on back in the early winter of 2009), I've had a great season so far. I've been holding off on going to 170s, but I may try it to get more speed. If, that is, 170s give me more speed.

I notice 170s vs 175s. I raise/lower my saddle height to accommodate the crank difference (5 mm). I'm most concerned with leg extension. The leg "rise" at the top of the stroke, not so much.

If someone raised or lowered my seat arbitrarily in a 10 mm range (+/- 5 mm) I'd notice it. I think most riders would too. I definitely noticed a 10 mm difference in stem length, and I noticed 5 mm in saddle fore/aft. 5mm in crank length is pretty significant. 2.5 mm, not as much.

I am more aero on 170s. Although my saddle is higher, my torso is more flat and I can hold a low position more naturally. Since my leg extension remains the same, my frontal area is basically the same.

To go to a longer crank effectively takes months, to raise the cadence back up, to learn to use the leverage effectively. I went to 175s because on my 175 mtb (2" knobbies, suspension fork) I was faster than my 170 equipped Giant TCR road bike (campy 9s). I went on to do very well on the 175s, but I was 210-215 when I was on the mtb, dropping to about 190 for the first races on the 175. For me long cranks make up for a lack of fitness and a lack of FTP. Since I lack FTP even when I'm fit, I'm not sure when/if I move to 170s.

But this is all me. Keep an open mind. I refused to try 172.5s back when I was on 167.5s, although I "tried" them for about 3 days. It took me 10 years go try longer cranks, and when I did, it made a huge difference.

cdr
carpediemracing is offline  
Old 06-10-10, 07:37 PM
  #39  
he said member
 
ls01's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: is everything
Posts: 13,802

Bikes: yes please

Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2789 Post(s)
Liked 1,951 Times in 1,207 Posts
I have ridden 170, 175, 180, none of which have made any difference to me other than when getting fit on the bike, cops, seat set, back etc. Currently my Madone and litespeed have 175s and my orbea has 180. Makes no difference to me at all.
I have a 33.5 inseam and I am 6'-1".
ls01 is offline  
Old 06-10-10, 07:58 PM
  #40  
stole your bike
 
roadiejorge's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: North Bergen, NJ
Posts: 6,907

Bikes: Orbea Orca, Ridley Compact

Mentioned: 10 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4201 Post(s)
Liked 27 Times in 18 Posts
Originally Posted by urbanknight
Although you might be correct, I can also believe that someone might be sensitive to such a difference, considering I have a firm preference in trumpet mouthpieces where the differences are far smaller than 1mm.
Indeed. I used 172.5mm cranks for a while (5'8" 31.5 cycling inseam) and once I used 170mm cranks I preferred those right away because I felt spinning was easier on the shorter cranks.
__________________
I like pie
roadiejorge is offline  
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Caliper
Road Cycling
15
08-05-18 11:26 AM
catgita
Fitting Your Bike
27
08-07-17 10:20 PM
ScottRae
Bicycle Mechanics
9
10-05-13 09:20 AM
datlas
Road Cycling
29
01-13-12 08:21 AM
cooleric1234
Clydesdales/Athenas (200+ lb / 91+ kg)
6
07-04-10 04:45 PM

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service -

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.