May 21, 2001 10:26 AM
|I just bought a new crankset for my old 50 cm Trek 420. It was on closeout and came, to my surprise with 175 crankarms. I am only 5'8" with a 29 inch inseam. I took my 1st ride with it on Sunday. Climbing seemed a bit easier and everything appeared to be the same except that at the top of the pedal stroke, my leg felt a little higher. Should I return them and get 170's or should I stick with these 175's?|
|Well, I think that climbing with the 175's would be a bit||bill|
May 21, 2001 3:41 PM
|easier, but you may experience the difference at the top of the pedal stroke, where your leg may feel a bit higher. |
Every time I've asked the same question, I am told to look at a ruler, and what you see is what you get. 5 mm is just not that big a deal. There was a study done recently, for which others on this board may have the link, which, although not TERRIBLY scientific, basically concluded that shorter meant faster spinning meant more power, but whether you like the feel is really personal. Unlike some other aspects of fit (if my saddle is just that much rotated, everything can feel different), I think that different crank lengths can result in a slightly different feel without a tremendously different fit or a tremendously different result (and very little objective difference).
That said, according to conventional wisdom, you should be in a 170 or maybe a 172.5 (look at THAT difference on a ruler). In other words, your crank is long. But don't you like the sound of that?
|Tall riders: anyone ride 180's?||Mick|
May 22, 2001 1:38 AM
|I'm really tempted to try running 180 cranks,
holding off so far because they are expensive and hard to find.
I'm almost 6'3", really long legs, size 12 shoes. The conventional wisdom says longer crank arms = slower spin, but I'm curious if anyone tall has found the opposite to be true -- easier to turn your long bones through a slightly larger diameter circle?
|Tall riders: anyone ride 180's?||Brit Racer|
May 22, 2001 2:23 AM
|I ride 180s.
I'm 6'5" with 34 / 35 inch inside leg. I've used them for 3 years now and would never go back to 175s or 170s. Immediately I swapped to the longer cranks, I found myself going 1mph faster over a 35 mile 'standard' course than I ever had before. Since I got them, I have been consistently quicker and have found no drawbacks and have found no problem in spinning them. My advice would definitely be to give it a go.
|I'm going to take the plunge next week...||Bruno S|
May 22, 2001 12:10 PM
|I,m 6'4", size 13 with long legs. From what I have read so far plus comments from tall people longer cranks will give me better endurance and climbing speed. They are supposed to make spinning and sprinting slower but I don't consider this a problem. If I can gain speed in the climbs its worth it. |
I have been thinking about it for a while now because they are expensive. They are only offered in Dura-ace or Record. But for the money I think that this will be the upgrade that will give me the most speed increase.
May 22, 2001 1:27 PM
|It is my understanding that they are coming out with a road crankset. Seeing as how they make most of their mountain cranks with a 180mm option, they may produce their road crank with the same option. Shoot em an email and let us know if they'll have that option.|| |