Old 01-15-16, 05:13 PM
  #5  
agmetal
Senior Member
 
agmetal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Boston, MA
Posts: 1,541

Bikes: Bianchi Volpe, ANT 3-speed roadster, New Albion Privateer singlespeed, Raleigh One Way singlespeed, Raleigh Professional "retro roadie" rebuild, 198? Fuji(?) franken-5-speed, 1937 Raleigh Tourist, 1952 Raleigh Sports, 1966 Raleigh Sports step-through

Mentioned: 21 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 248 Post(s)
Liked 27 Times in 18 Posts
Originally Posted by AnthonyG
What is your inseam without shoes?

If your legs are long enough then you could use either crankset without noticing that much difference, particularly since your not racing. If however 170mm ranks are at your absolute limit then 2.5mm will make a difference. I'm of the view that most people are on bikes with cranks that are too long for them which makes bike riding more uncomfortable than it should be. Then again, how far do you ride?

Anthony
Why does "without shoes" matter, if I'm not riding barefoot? I have no issue with the 170s, and I do remember feeling that the crankset on my old Raleigh Sports felt short, and that was closer to 165.

I do at least 12-13 miles a day, at least 5 days a week. Most single-day mileage is 80ish, but I've done over 160 in a weekend before.
agmetal is offline