A Cycling & bikes forum. CycleBanter.com

Go Back   Home » CycleBanter.com forum » rec.bicycles » Techniques
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

[crank lenght] Better leverage ??



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old August 13th 05, 09:20 PM
le-sheq
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default [crank lenght] Better leverage ??

After reading alot about cranks, I still have doubts which lenght is best
for me. I'm around almost 6' tall and my inseam is 86 cm (33.88 inches). Now
I have crank 172,5 mm long. Ocassionally I participate in amateur road races
where the terrain is very hilly, with steep (+10%) climbs. I thought of
swithing to 175 mm crank, which, according to this
http://www.airborne.net/eready/janet...zing_step3.asp is right for
me. As a rider, I like low cadences and I'm build more like a sprinter (80
kg) than an up-hiller. I've read that longer crank is useful on uphills but
is the leverage benefit big enough to justify extra money spent on the
longer (175) crankset?

All the best,

Lechu


Ads
  #2  
Old August 13th 05, 11:13 PM
Leo Lichtman
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default [crank lenght] Better leverage ??


"le-sheq" (clip) is the leverage benefit big enough to justify extra money
spent on the longer (175) crankset?
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
175/172.5= 1.4% I hardly think you would notice it. It would be equivalent
to half a tooth change on a 34 tooth rear cog. (Please don't tell me you
can't change less than one tooth. ;-)


  #3  
Old August 13th 05, 11:24 PM
Ron Ruff
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Better leverage ??

le-sheq wrote:
is the leverage benefit big enough to justify extra money spent on the
longer (175) crankset?


Save your money. That 2.5mm difference is extremely tiny, and the
"benefit" even with something much longer (or shorter)might be zero.

Studies on the effect of crank length on performance have not been able
to find any meaningful correlations. Practically all riders can perform
optimally with the standard lengths, unless they are very short.

BTW, this has been discussed many times on this newsgroup... and
recently, too. Do a search if you'd like some light reading...

  #4  
Old August 14th 05, 02:06 PM
Qui si parla Campagnolo
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Better leverage ??


le-sheq wrote:
After reading alot about cranks, I still have doubts which lenght is best
for me. I'm around almost 6' tall and my inseam is 86 cm (33.88 inches). Now
I have crank 172,5 mm long. Ocassionally I participate in amateur road races
where the terrain is very hilly, with steep (+10%) climbs. I thought of
swithing to 175 mm crank, which, according to this
http://www.airborne.net/eready/janet...zing_step3.asp is right for
me.


I suspect that Airborne has more 175 cranks to sell, so they say that.
Put 4 people in a room and ask about crank length, get 5 opinions. I
use 172.5 for anybody in your height range. 175s won't make any
appreciable difference. Climbing 10%+ grades is hard for everybody. A
crank 2.5mm longer won't make it any easier, "may" make your knees
complain.

  #5  
Old August 14th 05, 07:07 PM
Sheldon Brown
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default [crank lenght] Better leverage ??

le-sheq wrote:

After reading alot about cranks, I still have doubts which lenght is best
for me. I'm around almost 6' tall and my inseam is 86 cm (33.88 inches). Now
I have crank 172,5 mm long. Ocassionally I participate in amateur road races
where the terrain is very hilly, with steep (+10%) climbs. I thought of
swithing to 175 mm crank, which, according to this
http://www.airborne.net/eready/janet...zing_step3.asp is right for
me. As a rider, I like low cadences and I'm build more like a sprinter (80
kg) than an up-hiller. I've read that longer crank is useful on uphills


That's widely repeated nonsense.

but is the leverage benefit big enough to justify extra money spent on the
longer (175) crankset?


Absolutely not. If you want more "leverage" use a smaller chainring in
front or a larger sprocket in back.

Crank length does affect leverage, but that's not a reason to select a
crank length. Select a crank length for biomechanical reasons.
Especially, if you get sore knees, shorter cranks can sometimes
alleviate the problem.

There would be zero performance advangage from swapping out your crank
to one an eensy bit longer. You would be throwing money away for nothing.

See: http://sheldonbrown.com/cranks for more details on this.

I'm about your height and generally use 165 or 170. Tried 180s but they
made my knees hurt. Tried 150s but I had to set my saddle too high, but
otherwise they were OK.

Sheldon "Cranks" Brown
+--------------------------------------------------+
| What's not worth doing is not worth doing well. |
| --Don Hebb |
+--------------------------------------------------+
Harris Cyclery, West Newton, Massachusetts
Phone 617-244-9772 FAX 617-244-1041
http://harriscyclery.com
Hard-to-find parts shipped Worldwide
http://captainbike.com http://sheldonbrown.com

 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

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

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 03:33 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 CycleBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.