The Effect Of Crank Length On Performance
#26
Elitist
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Atlanta, GA
Posts: 15,965
Mentioned: 88 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1386 Post(s)
Liked 92 Times
in
77 Posts
I see now. I did not scroll down far enough: https://rotorbike.com/catalog/default...3d-cranks.html. It lists only 170-175 in the written description, but the chart farther down shows the other lengths.
#28
Junior Member
Ken is also like 5 feet tall.
Leg length is a factor. I'm currently running 170s, and my fitter said normally she would scream about someone running cranks that long, but they work okay for me because I have such long legs. Still thinking about going down to 165s though because the latest science says they are faster. (Per the video I posted earlier.)
Leg length is a factor. I'm currently running 170s, and my fitter said normally she would scream about someone running cranks that long, but they work okay for me because I have such long legs. Still thinking about going down to 165s though because the latest science says they are faster. (Per the video I posted earlier.)
#29
Senior Member
#30
Junior Member
Few quick noticeable differences of these little cranks. I switched from 165 to 155 (Carelton's pic above) few seasons ago:
* Higher peak cadence (20-25rpm net gain).
* Higher saddle height; more aerodynamic position.
* Higher effective gear (old 92" becomes 95-96" roughly).
* The need to reglue chainring bolts every 2-3 months!
It boils down to personal preference after everything is said and done. However, metrics tend not to lie. Hope this helps!
* Higher peak cadence (20-25rpm net gain).
* Higher saddle height; more aerodynamic position.
* Higher effective gear (old 92" becomes 95-96" roughly).
* The need to reglue chainring bolts every 2-3 months!
It boils down to personal preference after everything is said and done. However, metrics tend not to lie. Hope this helps!
#31
Senior Member
#33
Senior Member
#35
Senior Member
His hip angle also decreases by ~ 5°, the opposite of what would happen by moving to shorter cranks if the position had stayed the same. The shoulder angle (bend at the elbow) decreases by ~8° as well, tightening everything up. This doesn't happen from 5mm crank length as the only change.
By dropping his head and rotating his hips he has dropped into a more aerodynamic position. Short cranks can indeed help with that SOMETIMES but too often someone jumps on the internet, reads 30 minutes on Slowtwitch and jumps to drastically shorter cranks... the same way time triallists 10 years ago thought you needed 180+mm cranks to produce more leverage.
Fwiw I think he has a good fit, and it looks aero. I just think the forest is getting lost in the trees a bit.
#36
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2017
Posts: 120
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 63 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time
in
1 Post
OK, not sure if I get it correctly...
Extra 20-25rpm per 10mm shorter crankarm? This is A LOT. That would mean that between 165 and 170mm crankarms length would be about 10-12rpm difference?
This is where I am confused. You increased in cadence AND gear ratio simultaneously? Or that your absolute speed stays the same with lower ratio, shorter crankarms and higher cadence? I believe the second, just want to be sure.
What is a reason for this? Higher cadence makes more vibrations than smashing?
Extra 20-25rpm per 10mm shorter crankarm? This is A LOT. That would mean that between 165 and 170mm crankarms length would be about 10-12rpm difference?
This is where I am confused. You increased in cadence AND gear ratio simultaneously? Or that your absolute speed stays the same with lower ratio, shorter crankarms and higher cadence? I believe the second, just want to be sure.
What is a reason for this? Higher cadence makes more vibrations than smashing?
#37
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Santa Ana
Posts: 279
Bikes: Fuji Elite, 3Rensho track, Trek Madone 6.9, Specialized MTB, GT MTB, Cannondale Cad3 fixie
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 72 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
I did buy the 150 cranks from Rotor, and I have had several comments concerning how much better I look on the bike when I am in an aero position (handlebars are Scattos). I must be more aero, because my speeds are up and my times are down, and nothing else has changed, except for me getting even older, which I am pretty sure is not enhancing my performance any.
Last edited by rensho3; 02-22-19 at 01:04 PM. Reason: fix typo
#38
Junior Member
- Doubt the cadence gain will be linear like that. Perhaps a better conclusion might be: the closer the optimal crank length, the higher peak cadence.
- Shorter cranks, less leverage. That makes the gearing effectively taller.
- Ever serrated chainring bolts won't stay put in the Power2Max spider (a known issue) and they keep spinning. J-B Weld holds the best but needs to be reapplied every few weeks (3-5 ring swaps per week on average).
#39
aka mattio
But when we shorten the cranks, we can raise the saddle, pitch our torsos forward, and start to approach that nice-looking position.
#40
Senior Member
^I'm not at all saying short cranks are wrong, or won't make you more aerodynamic. They can. For the 5'5 woman 170's that came stock on her bike likely are too long. For the right bike/position/person, 155's or shorter may be right. All I'm saying it that people don't understand what is often making them more aerodynamic.
This athlete changed nothing in equipment between these two runs. There is a 15 watt difference between them. That's in the most controlled setting you can have testing differences in aerodynamics.
That's why it's hard to account for "I must be more aerodynamic" because I changed xxx without checking a lot of boxes and making sure you really only changed one thing. In the real world, that means lots of a/b/a/b/a/b testing realistically. (and keeping up with crr drift, temperature, small position changes, etc)
*athlete is me... (~10yr ago)
This athlete changed nothing in equipment between these two runs. There is a 15 watt difference between them. That's in the most controlled setting you can have testing differences in aerodynamics.
That's why it's hard to account for "I must be more aerodynamic" because I changed xxx without checking a lot of boxes and making sure you really only changed one thing. In the real world, that means lots of a/b/a/b/a/b testing realistically. (and keeping up with crr drift, temperature, small position changes, etc)
*athlete is me... (~10yr ago)
#41
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2014
Posts: 631
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 141 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 2 Times
in
2 Posts
https://www.sheldonbrown.com/gain.html
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
dwmckee
Long Distance Competition/Ultracycling, Randonneuring and Endurance Cycling
9
12-02-13 02:38 PM
Dolamite02
Track Cycling: Velodrome Racing and Training Area
13
04-03-13 11:42 AM