RoadBikeReview.com's Forum Archives - General


Archive Home >> General(1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 )


180mm cranks vs. 175 mm. Anyone test the difference?(10 posts)

180mm cranks vs. 175 mm. Anyone test the difference?BIG RING
Dec 16, 2003 1:49 PM
I have always used 175's and am curious to see if the extra leverage is very useful. Inseam is 35" and I tend to use bigger gears rather than spin.

Thanks
It's not, ...Dwayne Barry
Dec 16, 2003 2:21 PM
this has been studied. There is no difference in either max power or efficiency at submaximal power across the range of normally available crank lengths.
Unless...xrmattaz
Dec 16, 2003 2:57 PM
you will be running said 180's on a singlespeed.

My SS mountain bike works much better wit 180's vs. 175's.
My roadbike has 175's.
Just wondering, why would single speed matter xrmattaz?BIG RING
Dec 16, 2003 3:07 PM
I dunno.xrmattaz
Dec 16, 2003 3:48 PM
I have 175's on my original SS.

Had a nice titanium SS built up, and the 180's just seem to provide more torque, I guess. I'm thinking a good old strong masher (offroad) like myself can benefit from longer crankarms. They seem to work well...better than the 175's on the old bike, IMO.
In a recent Velonews article Zinn swears that there is benefit…Bruno S
Dec 16, 2003 3:33 PM
for tall riders. I have a 36.5 inseam and use 180mm. Have no problem spinning or knee pain. Everybody talks about fit, fit, fit but when it comes to cranks it is: crank length doesn't really matter. If you have long legs, use longer cranks so your muscles flex as everybody else. Isn't it logical?
In a recent Velonews article Zinn swears that there is benefit…russw19
Dec 16, 2003 3:42 PM
I wouldn't ever argue against getting cranks that fit, but what I would say is that if you have gotten used to riding 175's, 180's aren't going to make you a faster rider. The leverage advantage is just too small to make any difference.

Now if you asked if you could tell the difference between 165's and 180's, that may be noticable as we are talking 15 miliimeters, which is a little over half an inch, but 5 millimeters is 1/8th of an inch. It's not like we are talking about frame fit where there are inches different or stem fit where the increments are 10 mm each step... we are talking 5 millimeters.... its the width of a nickle.

Russ
there should be a wider range of cranks but it would be...Bruno S
Dec 16, 2003 4:39 PM
a nightmare for manufacturers. Frames range from 48 cm to 62 cm that is about 30% (Even more if you consider the seatpost adjustment). Cranks, on the other hand, range from 165 to 180 only 9% (and 180 is only available in D/A or Record).
And now you see why most say it's a non-factor for fit... nm.russw19
Dec 16, 2003 4:49 PM
I went from 175's to 177.5's last spring...russw19
Dec 16, 2003 3:36 PM
I didn't notice any difference what so ever. More so, I have an older Eddy Merckx that has 170mm Campy Super Record cranks on it, and I can't tell any difference riding that bike. The whole bike feels different so I can't isolate the cranks as having any different feel.

But when I went to order my FSA Carbon cranks last spring, they were out of 175's in the ISIS Campy 10 that I needed, so I just went up to the 177.5's and they feel exactly the same as my old 175 Dura-Ace cranks.

If you can tell a difference, it will only be for one or two rides, then you will adapt.

Russ