175mm cranks....a c...
 

  You don't need to be an 'investor' to invest in Singletrack: 6 days left: 95% of target - Find out more

[Closed] 175mm cranks....a case of psychosomatic?

24 Posts
18 Users
0 Reactions
75 Views
Posts: 126
Free Member
Topic starter
 

I have 170's on both my race bike and my CX bike, but I've ended up with 175mm cranks on my training bike.
At 5'8" 170mm' seem the norm. Whilst I'm not suffering at all with the 175mm's I feel a little sluggish climbing whilst seated and strong climbing out of the saddle. Is this in my head or is that the difference between the two sizes coming into play?

Thinking of selling on and fitting 170's


 
Posted : 04/04/2015 7:49 pm
Posts: 21461
Full Member
 

Some people are more sensitive to the difference than others. Since going from 175 to 170, I can't ride 175 any more.


 
Posted : 04/04/2015 7:52 pm
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

at 172cm tall Graham Obree reckons you should be on 165's...

(9.5% of your height, as a rule of thumb)


 
Posted : 04/04/2015 7:54 pm
Posts: 15261
Free Member
 

I am 5'10" and found 170mm cranks make an appreciable difference for me on both road and MTB some time ago.

Seated your using your leg muscles more, stood you're using more of your body weight to lever the cranks, hence the different sensation between stood and seated climbing, length of the levers will always affect how efficiently your body can Use the, longer won't work better for everyone.

Use what you find most comfortable...


 
Posted : 04/04/2015 8:00 pm
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

I definitely notice the difference I went from 175 to 170 back to 175.


 
Posted : 04/04/2015 8:01 pm
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

Surly it's to do with inseam length... I'm 5.11 and a bit (182cm) but I have a 34 inch inseam which is on the rather long side.


 
Posted : 04/04/2015 8:02 pm
Posts: 11269
Full Member
 

I'm 5ft 6, 32" inside leg and run 165mm middleburns on the Tripster, I think I have 170mm middleburns on the hummer.


 
Posted : 04/04/2015 8:09 pm
 DanW
Posts: 1062
Free Member
 

Surly it's to do with inseam length

I'd guess it is femur length more than anything but that is getting a bit specific

I certainly notice a difference between 170's and 175's and would sell the 175's in an instant


 
Posted : 04/04/2015 8:13 pm
Posts: 17187
Full Member
 

5ft 10 here with 30.5 IL, cranks range from 165 on track bike, 172.5 on road and 175 mtb. The track ones took their toll on my hypermobile knees initially but all good now and can't really tell them apart.


 
Posted : 04/04/2015 8:17 pm
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

I'm 6ft (34" inseam) and got a bike built to my measurements, and it was specced with 172.5mm cranks, which I now use on all bikes except the MTBs which are running 175s for extra leverage.


 
Posted : 04/04/2015 8:24 pm
Posts: 0
Free Member
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

Great link macavity!


 
Posted : 05/04/2015 8:57 am
Posts: 21461
Full Member
 

Good info there. The reason I went for shorter cranks was because my knees hurt on 175 but not on 170 after advice from a physio.

From what the sky chap is saying, sounds like I've made the change for exactly the right reasons.


 
Posted : 05/04/2015 9:26 am
Posts: 41395
Free Member
 

I'm guessing there may be more than 5mm in the cranks that's different between the training bike and the other road bike?

Also...

Onzadog - Member

Some people are more sensitive to the [s]difference[/s] [u]hype/nosnense[/u] than others


 
Posted : 05/04/2015 9:29 am
Posts: 21461
Full Member
 

Al, read my post above your last few ne before dismissing someone else's opinion so glibly.


 
Posted : 05/04/2015 9:32 am
Posts: 41395
Free Member
 

Which one?

What about sky guy's opinion?:

There is no “correct” crank length, as there is no appreciable difference in power output between 150 – 180mm cranks


 
Posted : 05/04/2015 9:38 am
Posts: 21461
Full Member
 

More the points about knees being the biggest cause of issue, small changes upsetting knees and all knees having their own biomechanics.


 
Posted : 05/04/2015 9:46 am
Posts: 41395
Free Member
 

Ah fair enough.


 
Posted : 05/04/2015 9:51 am
Posts: 17209
Full Member
 

Has your average cadence changed? I recommend the new Garmin cadence pod because it is so easy to swap between bikes.

I ride 165 to 175 and my cadence doesn't really change (from high) - 105 in yesterday's race is normal).

I suspect it's psychosomatic to be honest.


 
Posted : 05/04/2015 10:01 am
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

all knees having their own biomechanics.

agreed, especially when knees come attached to legs that range from <28" to >38". The belief that 175-165mm cranks is enough choice for everyone is a little daft.

(sorry for mixing units, it's the curse of my generation)

the difference from 175 to 165 is only 6%, i'm not surprised many people can't really tell, it's like the difference between a 58cm frame and a 56.


 
Posted : 05/04/2015 10:05 am
Posts: 43345
Full Member
 

A friend was visiting a couple of weeks ago and wanted to try out my fatbike and 29er. We took both for a ride and swapped half-way round. She immediately sussed that the 29er had longer cranks (175 vs 170). I can't say I was really aware of it and had to check the cranks to find out what length they were).


 
Posted : 05/04/2015 10:33 am
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

I'm 5'11" with a 32" inseam and run 175's on the hardtail and 170's on the full suss. Can't tell the difference personally, only reason the susser has shorter cranks is to help with ground clearance.


 
Posted : 05/04/2015 2:50 pm
 Sam
Posts: 5
Free Member
 

Did you adjust saddle height when switching to the longer cranks? A bit of extra extension would be very noticeable. Drop your saddle 5mm compared to that with 170s.


 
Posted : 05/04/2015 5:09 pm
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

I've currently got 170mm on the left and 175mm on the right. Both feel the same to me.


 
Posted : 05/04/2015 6:18 pm
Posts: 0
Free Member

6 DAYS LEFT
We are currently at 95% of our target!