Crank Length?

[-Adam-]

Whats the word on this subject?

I have long (ish in relation to my body) legs, I use 175mm cranks currently.

Whats the opinion on having different crank lengths on different bikes, for example, say I have 172.5mm cranks on my new 'training' bike. Is it bad to ride both?

Discuss!

Please

[Kasper]

[Sylv]

I did do that for a few months marco on my singlespeed, with a 175 and a 170, when I bought that single titanium crank arm!

Couldn't tell the difference but surely not a good idea.

[huw williams]

see if you stopped wasting your money on booze and birds and bought a powertap like I TOLD YOU you could do a series of controlled tests with different crank lengths to determin what's best for you - bloody students

[Andrew G]

How long are your legs? How tall are you? What do you prefer?
It's a minefield Adam.
If you google it then there are all kinds of calculations you can do and whether any of them are any good, who knows? They'd probably tell you to get 173.8 cranks .

If you are average height (5'10" ish) then I think you'd normally use 172.5 cranks. That doesn't take in to account your leg length though as you may have the body of someone 5'5" and the legs of someone 6'2"!

After you get round that it then can depend on whether you are a spinner or a grinder, shorter cranks for a spinner. Ullrich always rode big gears and despite not being that tall used long cranks, very long for TTs.

As it's off season, and the race bike will be tucked up for winter, you could try the 172.5s on your training bike and see how you find it. Is there a chance it could help souplesse (sp?) with more spinning? Bike set up could become a nightmare though as you won't just be able to transfer the measurements from one to the other.

Being short has it's advantages, you just stick 170s on anything .

Money on birds and booze is never wasted money Huw.

[quote="Andrew G"]Money on birds and booze is never wasted money Huw.

[huw williams]

I spent a fortune on two birds once - Zebra Finches from New Zealand - they were rubbish - waste of money

[mrP(Boonen)VT]

Going back to Adam's Q...

I have experimented with different cranks from 165 - 175. After much huffing and puffing concluded that I was most comfortable on 172.5.

I used 175 for TT bike but never felt I was getting any benefit from extra leverage and went slower compared to 172.5.

However, curiously adapted very quickly to 165 on the track and when using them for fixed TT.

I think therefore that your legs can cope with cranks up to a comfortable maximum and experimentation will prove the best for you.

Die Kaiser once used 190's for a TT

[-Adam-]

[quote="marco"]in my twenties i spent most of my money on women, drink and drugs. the rest i just wasted...

[huw williams]

Hutch once spent about 2 months on a power meter averaging out his test results on different crank lengths in order to determin which ones he was most efficient on

WARNING! DON'T EVEN GO THERE! Hutch is insane (as well as a mullti-time national champion) and had nothinng else to talk about for months

[-Adam-]

LOL, fair enough.