philosophical(ish) ...
 

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

[Closed] philosophical(ish) crank conundrum

9 Posts
7 Users
0 Reactions
109 Views
Posts: 0
Free Member
Topic starter
 

Is it worth spending much money on cranks? From what I can find on weights, it seems like until you spend top end there isn't a massive weight saving, I only weight nine stone so I doubt i'd notice stiffness differences, and I rub my heels something crazy so blingyness wont last and doesnt bother me anyway. However, its not like cranks wear out quickly so the added cost is spread out over a long time and as I race xc (badly) I'm developing a gram shedding complex.

About to 0% credit card a new groupset, was planning on the new xt cranks with an xtr or one-up 36t ring but the devil on my shopping shoulder is saying spend more. Is the pound per gram saving on cranks generally better or worse than other components?


 
Posted : 28/08/2015 1:17 pm
Posts: 10333
Full Member
 

Deore cranks are great. IMO.


 
Posted : 28/08/2015 1:42 pm
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

as a rough guide, if you're 5'10 (or less), you may well appreciate 165mm cranks, this option is only readily available on XT.

just a thought.


 
Posted : 28/08/2015 1:45 pm
Posts: 0
Free Member
Topic starter
 

ads678 - Member

Deore cranks are great. IMO.

thanks, not really after which ones to buy, more wondering whether, if you are going to spend more on something, its worth spending it on cranks or not, seems like you get less difference for your money but then they last a long time.

ahwiles - Member

as a rough guide, if you're 5'10 (or less), you may well appreciate 165mm cranks, this option is only readily available on XT.

just a thought.

interesting, and biomechanically makes sense, but i'd be wary of buying without trying for a while - which clearly isn't possible.


 
Posted : 28/08/2015 2:01 pm
Posts: 2642
Free Member
 

as a rough guide, if you're 5'10 (or less), you may well appreciate 165mm cranks, this option is only readily available on XT.

Interesting... I'm curious to know what is behind that statement.

I'm 5'6 and I definitely appreciate 165mm cranks. Made my eyes water paying almost £100 for a set of XTs, but it was worth it (to me).


 
Posted : 28/08/2015 10:56 pm
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

I would spend more on wheels tyres and suspension before cranks, those have benefits you can feel.
I believe in the arguments for 20% crank to leg sizing for optimum pedal efficiency, but dont forget you get more saddle clearance with longer cranks which might be a reason not to switch down 165.


 
Posted : 29/08/2015 8:00 am
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

tillydog - Member

Interesting... I'm curious to know what is behind that statement.

I'm 5'6 and I definitely appreciate 165mm cranks. Made my eyes water paying almost £100 for a set of XTs, but it was worth it (to me).

165 is only 5% less than 175, it's not a big difference. If 175 is 'long', then 165 is probably more 'medium' than 'small'.

Mostly, it was more suggestion than statement, something Mr Ferrals might consider.

(Fwiw , my 5'1" wife uses 140mm cranks, 165 was MILES too long for her)


 
Posted : 29/08/2015 9:11 am
Posts: 13771
Free Member
 

ahwiles - Member

165 is only 5% less than 175,

5'6" is only 5% less than 6'


 
Posted : 29/08/2015 9:18 am
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

I'm not sure what your point is, but it's more like 8%.

(Can someone check my mental arithmetic please?!)

It can be almost impossible to find cranks less than 165, which seems odd to me.


 
Posted : 29/08/2015 9:52 am
Posts: 17
Free Member
 

If I was spending big money on cranks shimano don't get a look in. Race Face or sram carbon with direct mount for me.


 
Posted : 29/08/2015 10:01 am

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