Probably a combination of several things create individuals' perception of optimal crank length. I'm not going to say anyone should do this or that based on my spec or choices. Pro cyclists are so narrow of a group that other industries would select as the model for equipment selection. They are so homogenous in physiological specs and genetic expression as to be highly discriminating when compared to the potential public customer looking to buy a bike.
I am 6' 1", 187#, have a 70" tip to tip arm span (19" outside/outside shoulder width), have a 94cm PBH and size 11 feet. I ran middle distance and did long triple jump in high school. My ortho injuries requiring reconstruction are right knee ACL reconstruction (Andrews autograft + Macintosh band support), left shoulder reconstruction of damage from wear. Non surgical healed ortho damages include left shoulder 3° separation (prior to and distinct from the surgical repairs) and left high ankle sprain with fibula fracture. I prefer riding clipped since recovering from the knee thing and always pull up and back with the rising foot, even commuting. My climbing style is to remain seated, sliding as far back to advance my timing (car folk get it) until utterly out of gears. Transitioning to standing uses more energy for me than shorter folks and the output while taking the power production off the largest muscles, tapping smaller ones with less glycogen stores and stamina in sustained output, all proportionally less compared to riders more closely resembling the pro phenotype. Ever since the knee thing (all my adult riding) I have stayed on 175mm cranks. I move less on the saddle through phases of level, uphill and downhill pedaling while retaining my preferred sliding back on the saddle for extended outputs rather than gearing down and standing up. As for how I compare to the current pro peloton template I am so abhorrent I should take up another pastime. I have long seen the small set of pro racers as the deviants whose publicity ruins the cycling for me and other normals who enjoy riding without having what they do or use forced upon us. When I built my custom Coast around my needs and wants, we optimized my riding position and unique challenges/preferences. This time I was faced with cranks a tad shorter or longer than my habitual 175mm in the RH item and I picked (correctly by the last four years' riding) the 177mm. It works for me, glad it was a choice. Andy Cheatham Pittsburgh On Friday, February 28, 2025 at 9:37:42 PM UTC-5 Eamon Nordquist wrote: > I wonder if there is any correlation between the crank length that works > best for people and the cadence they prefer to ride? I have a suspicion > that some people with longer legs who favor a slower cadence might do > better with long cranks. So much of the talk about crank length centers on > racing performance and higher cadences. As for myself, I have tried 165, > 170, and 175 cranks. I have years (decades) of experience with the 170 and > 175 cranks, but closer to a month on the 165's. I have always adjusted > saddle height based on the crank. I like both 170's and 175's, but always > felt the 165's only worked when I was using a faster cadence (regardless of > gearing). Otherwise I started to get the sensation of riding a clown bike. > I am unable to maintain higher cadences because of lung issues, but can > otherwise ride all day on a bike. I've certainly had my best performances > ever (long rides and touring) on the 175's, and have no plan to change. For > reference, I am just under 6 feet tall and have a pbh of 89cm. I also never > really ride with very much if any saddle to bar drop and have long arms. > > Eamon > Seattle > > On Wednesday, February 26, 2025 at 5:33:18 AM UTC-8 Garth wrote: > >> I suspect many people would like the feel of short cranks regardless of >> the bodily measurements. I'm talking about say 140-155mm. Small 5-10mm >> changes are often not even noticed. Aerodymamics comes into play from short >> cranks in that it's less stressful to effectively ride in a low position >> while pedalling. Many racers are now going really low even on the their >> road bike. Regardless of one's abilities, anyone riding into the wind or >> downhill can tell that lowering the torso into the wind is more efficient >> than sitting up with the upper torso catching the wind. As for >> performance/speed gains from the shorter crank alone, that depends on the >> rider and how effectively they can put power down to the pedals more >> efficently. That's what I experience using 150's. I figured eventually some >> successful riders would find them beneficial, then and only then will we >> see the likes of "big bike" start selling them. SRAM has been selling 155's >> for mtb use for a number of years. Maybe now it's the road's turn to go >> down to at least 150mm. If you really think about it a very imited >> selection of cranks for such a vast range of heights and leg lengths. One >> can buy a stem from 0 to 170mm but the majority of cranks are only made >> from 165 to 175. . >> >> Even @6'2" I found the 185mm length didn't live up to crank length >> theoretical claims. It was just the opposite. More length didn't equate to >> output efficiency, greater ease in climbing, or anything for that matter. >> Going to 175 or 170 didn't make any notable difference either. That didn't >> happen until I tried some stock retail 152 Sugino XD's. Those ended up >> being break-happy so I went with some Andel and Origin8's in 150. I also >> have a custom cut SRAM triple mtb crank in 150 that I haven't used yet. I >> also pedal more towards the mid-foot than ball. I feel very "planted" to >> the bike. The ability to ride low easier came about after I was riding them >> for a few years and was tiring of riding more upright, I craved going lower >> and back to drop bars. I could never figure how in my 20's and dabbling in >> racing, how anyone could ride without strain and pain in a lower TT >> position. It felt all wrong to me, too much strain in the hips and knees. >> When I started moving my saddle forward with the short cranks I started to >> have "ah-hah!" feelings. I've now moved my saddle forward over 25mm. Now I >> get it, moving closer to the BB, plus shorter cranks it's just less >> straining to pedal. Less strain on the hip and knees, and on a day to day >> basis I feel fresher even after doing many hills the previous day. >> >> Please note, this setup works for ME. What works for anyone else is up >> for them to experiment with. Short cranks have been around for a long time >> but they take a little strategic and patient searching. It wouldn't take >> much for Riv to offer them as their manufacturer Andel is already >> manufacturing some cranks down to 150mm. But I get it, cycling traditions >> and myths die hard. I read many comments of riders who mock short cranks >> without ever using them. As a kid I used to mock anyone I saw pedalling >> their bike mid-foot ...... now I get it. Humble pie, mmmm good ! >> Aahahahahaha ! >> >> I've read this : https://biketestreviews.com/cranklength/ >> It makes sense why long crank lever were not effective for me. Much of it >> is rather techie even, but the benefits of riding short cranks is clearly >> stated throughout. >> >> I've been riding the rollers all winter with a few random outdoor days >> when it's been in the 50's. Even being in winter/sucking wind kinda shape, >> I'm amazed how efficient pedalling is uphill, the ease of spinning the >> circle, it's very zippy ! >> On Tuesday, February 25, 2025 at 2:11:24 AM UTC-5 Steven Sweedler wrote: >> >>> I switched from 180 to 165 crank arms on my touring bike because of a >>> very low bottom bracket.A bit embarassed to say I can’t feel a difference, >>> and don’t feel like I a fiding any faster, though thats rarely a goal. >>> >>> Steven Sweedler >>> Plymouth, New Hampshire >>> >>> On Mon, Feb 24, 2025 at 9:14 PM Nick Payne <njh...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>>> On Tuesday, 25 February 2025 at 2:37:16 am UTC+11 Steven Sweedler wrote: >>>> >>>> Several pro riders are moving to much narrower bars for the aero >>>> benefits. >>>> >>>> >>>> There is a UCI-imposed limit on how narrow handlebars are allowed to be >>>> for road events (350mm, I think). The other change that some riders are >>>> making / have made is going to shorter cranks. Apart from any >>>> biomechanical >>>> advantages, shorter cranks allow a more aero position because the rider's >>>> knees are not coming up as far at the top of the pedal stroke, so the >>>> torso >>>> can be lower without reducing the hip angle to the point where power >>>> production suffers. Tadej Pogačar started his racing career on 172.5mm >>>> cranks. A couple of year ago he moved to 170mm, and last year to 165mm, >>>> and >>>> his results after the change speak for themselves - last year he entered >>>> 27 >>>> races and won 24 of them, including two monuments, the Giro, the TdF, and >>>> the world road championship. Pogačar is 5'8", not particularly tall, >>>> but even Wout Van Aert, who is 6'3", is now using 165mm cranks on his >>>> road, >>>> cyclocross, and TT bikes. >>>> >>>> Nick Payne >>>> >>>> -- >>>> >>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >>>> Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group. >>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send >>>> an email to rbw-owners-bun...@googlegroups.com. >>>> >>> To view this discussion visit >>>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/rbw-owners-bunch/08efa1b5-d00c-43f7-beb5-fec4e84fcc1dn%40googlegroups.com >>>> >>>> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/rbw-owners-bunch/08efa1b5-d00c-43f7-beb5-fec4e84fcc1dn%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> >>>> . >>>> >>> -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/rbw-owners-bunch/816a7f6c-f21f-4548-b07b-696c1abea612n%40googlegroups.com.
