Crank Arms 165mm vs 170mm
02-12-18, 02:54 PM
#26
Newbie
Join Date: Oct 2016
Posts: 3
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
i know this is like a decade ago, but still... best awnser
5mm isn't much, but a 165mm crank has 3cm less travel per revolution than a 170mm, and that is a noticable amount.
Also, a bike with 70mm of BB drop, and reasonably long platform pedals (shoe to shoe outer measurement of around 378mm) will strike at 25.6 degrees with 175mm cranks, 26.8 degrees with 170mm cranks and 28 degrees with 165mm cranks.
velocity = sqrt(9.8 * radius * tan (lean angle)), in meters, seconds and degrees.
That puts your max turn speed around a 12m radius at 16.75, 17.24 and 17.69 mph for 175, 170 and 165 mm cranks, respectively. Sure, 5mm isn't much, but that is a meaningful change in max turn speed, nearly 1mph between 175 and 165, all else being equal. You'd have to lower your Q by 20mm to equal the change achieved by lowering crank length by 5mm. Both methods will have the same effect, but crank length or BB drop gets you more turning speed per mm of change than Q.
*puts away his engineering calculator*
peace,
sam
Also, a bike with 70mm of BB drop, and reasonably long platform pedals (shoe to shoe outer measurement of around 378mm) will strike at 25.6 degrees with 175mm cranks, 26.8 degrees with 170mm cranks and 28 degrees with 165mm cranks.
velocity = sqrt(9.8 * radius * tan (lean angle)), in meters, seconds and degrees.
That puts your max turn speed around a 12m radius at 16.75, 17.24 and 17.69 mph for 175, 170 and 165 mm cranks, respectively. Sure, 5mm isn't much, but that is a meaningful change in max turn speed, nearly 1mph between 175 and 165, all else being equal. You'd have to lower your Q by 20mm to equal the change achieved by lowering crank length by 5mm. Both methods will have the same effect, but crank length or BB drop gets you more turning speed per mm of change than Q.
*puts away his engineering calculator*
peace,
sam
02-12-18, 03:38 PM
#27
Fish Out of Water
Join Date: Jan 2018
Location: Milwaukee, U.S.A.
Posts: 44
Bikes: 1992 Cannondale 2.8, 1993 Trek 930, 2012 Trek Marlin, 2018 Raleigh Back Alley
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 23 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
I was told there would be no math in this thread.
02-13-18, 11:03 AM
#29
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: Traveling through time, will return last week.
Posts: 730
Bikes: Bare Rum Sword Knuckle Runner
Mentioned: 7 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 278 Post(s)
Liked 122 Times
in
64 Posts
This thread is all about the math. It was started on 07-12-05....so 7 x 12 x 5 = 420....(might need to get high for this next part)....then the date it was necro'd was 02-12-18....so (420/2) - 12 - 18 =180.....now subtract how many years old this thread is...180-13 = 167
Adjusted for internet error and we have 167.5 cranks as the answer
Adjusted for internet error and we have 167.5 cranks as the answer
02-13-18, 11:11 AM
#30
Banned
Velodromes have banked corners, ( & straights) higher on the right side.. going counterclockwise..
02-13-18, 02:17 PM
#31
Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: PHL
Posts: 9,948
Bikes: Litespeed Catalyst, IRO Rob Roy, All City Big Block
Mentioned: 19 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1332 Post(s)
Liked 398 Times
in
194 Posts
That's why track riders always use a shorter crank arm on the right side.
02-13-18, 09:00 PM
#32
Senior Member
ROM (range of motion) is an issue, such as for triathletes who want a smoother transition from bike to run; and, for those who've had knee replacement surgery, for example, joining the 120° ROM club (active not just passive ROM) is pretty much the requisite minimum level for getting into 165s, not that going to 145s is not okay if that's what is required to enjoy the sport.
