Cycling Equipment · Public discussion

? 175 vs. 172.5 crank arm length

Started by Mmcs · · Last activity · 12 posts · 1,887 views

This thread is locked and is currently read-only.

Thread navigation

Jump through the discussion

Go to the original post, the replies on this page, or the latest preserved contribution.

Thread details

What we know about this thread

Original section
Cycling Equipment
Published
11 March 2003
Last activity
13 March 2003
Original author
Mmcs
Posts
12
Discussion status
Public discussion
Total views
1,887
Views / 30 days
0

The navigation and discussion metadata provide context. Posts remain in their original chronological order.

Showing posts 1–12 of 12
Posts remain in their original chronological order.

Text size
  1. What is the significance to my training/general riding of pedaling two different bikes one with 175
    and the other with 172.5 length crank arms?

  2. A shy person askked:

    Quoted message said:

    What is the significance to my training/general riding of pedaling two different bikes one with
    175 and the other with 172.5 length crank arms?

    Precious little. The bike with longer cranks will provide a 1.4% lower gain ratio in a given
    sprocket combination, so for the same gear it would climb a wee bit better, but not top out as fast.
    Since you presumably have the option of changing gears, this difference, small as it is, becomes
    utterly insignificant in practice.

    The longer cranks will require you to bend your knee a bit farther for each stroke, possibly leading
    to knee problems that a shorter crank might not cause, but, again, this difference is so small it
    really doesn't matter.

    Sheldon "Long Legs, Short Cranks" Brown +---------------------------------------------------------+
    | We can be knowledgeable with other men's knowledge, | but we cannot be wise with other men's
    | wisdom. | -- Michel de Montaigne |
    +---------------------------------------------------------+ Harris Cyclery, West Newton,
    Massachusetts Phone 617-244-9772 FAX 617-244-1041 harriscyclery.comharriscyclery.com Hard-to-find parts
    shipped Worldwide captainbike.comcaptainbike.com sheldonbrown.comsheldonbrown.com

  3. Quoted message said:

    What is the significance to my training/general riding of pedaling two different bikes one with
    175 and the other with 172.5 length crank arms?

    None at all.

    But you will get other opinions. Ignore them, for I am right.

    --
    Ted Bennett Portland OR

  4. "MMCS" <[email hidden]> wrote in message "]news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:

    What is the significance to my training/general riding of pedaling two different bikes one with
    175 and the other with 172.5 length crank arms?

    Lost in the noise. There will most likely be many more noticeable differences between any two given
    bikes than the 2.5mm crank length.

    --
    Andrew Muzi yellowjersey.orgyellowjersey.org Open every day since 1 April 1971

  5. MMCS said:

    What is the significance to my training/general riding of pedaling two different bikes one with
    175 and the other with 172.5 length crank arms?

    No difference, provided your knees bend equally well.

    Then, here is my own story about crank lengths. I have always used 170mm cranks and I was very upset
    to find out that the, still beautiful, used Record pair I had picked up at a shop were 170 and
    172.5, respectively. After going back to the shop the seller acknowledged the mismatch and quite
    honestly said: 'That's not right. I'll do my best to try to find a good mating pair for you'
    (not been able, thus far). Let me add that he is the MOST experienced mechanic, racer himself
    upon a time, you can imagine.

    Recently I had considered getting those cranks back and install them, differring lengths
    notwithstanding. After all, my left knee is much better that the other one and I know it can bend
    more and better. I consulted a good friend of mine, an experienced cyclist too, and he said: 'I
    wholeheartedly advice you not to'.

    Funny how different people would behave differently and suggest so different approches!

    Who has got two 170mm cranks for me, anyhow? I would be satisfied with just the spiders, of course.

    Sergio Pisa

  6. "Sheldon Brown" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    "]news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:

    A shy person askked:

    Quoted message said:

    What is the significance to my training/general riding of pedaling


    two

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    different bikes one with 175 and the other with 172.5 length crank


    arms?

    Quoted message said:


    Precious little. The bike with longer cranks will provide a 1.4%


    lower

    Quoted message said:

    gain ratio in a given sprocket combination, so for the same gear it would climb a wee bit
    better, but not top out as fast. Since you presumably have the option of changing gears, this
    difference, small


    as

    Quoted message said:

    it is, becomes utterly insignificant in practice.

    Quoted message said:

    The longer cranks will require you to bend your knee a bit farther for each stroke, possibly
    leading to knee problems that a shorter crank might not cause, but, again, this difference is so
    small it really doesn't matter.

    I know we always trade the same links (with the same equivocal studies) when this issue comes up,
    but is there really no good science on crank length? It would seem to me that the range-of-motion
    problem you raise would at least get some attention if it really does have the potential for causing
    injury. -- Jay Beattie.

  7. In article <[email hidden]>,

    Jay Beattie said:

    "Sheldon Brown" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    "]news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:

    A shy person askked:

    Quoted message said:

    What is the significance to my training/general riding of pedaling two different bikes one
    with 175 and the other with
    172.5 length crank arms?

    Precious little. The bike with longer cranks will provide a 1.4% lower gain ratio in a given
    sprocket combination, so for the same gear it would climb a wee bit better, but not top out as
    fast. Since you presumably have the option of changing gears, this difference, small as it is,
    becomes utterly insignificant in practice.

    Quoted message said:

    The longer cranks will require you to bend your knee a bit farther for each stroke, possibly
    leading to knee problems that a shorter crank might not cause, but, again, this difference is so
    small it really doesn't matter.

    I know we always trade the same links (with the same equivocal studies) when this issue comes up,
    but is there really no good science on crank length? It would seem to me that the range-of-motion
    problem you raise would at least get some attention if it really does have the potential for
    causing injury. -- Jay Beattie.

    IIRC the length cranks need to be before causing such an acute bend as to risk knee problems (in an
    otherwise healthy knee) is really big. Where did I read that... maybe in the Hinault book? The size
    mentioned- wherever I read it- was like 210 mm; and I would imagine that this would be proportional
    to the leg length. With my 91 cm inseam, I should be able to ride 180s with no problem. I have a set
    in the basement that I need to mount on a bike and see how they are.

  8. "Jay Beattie" <[email hidden]> wrote in message "]news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:

    I know we always trade the same links (with the same equivocal studies) when this issue comes up,
    but is there really no good science on crank length?

    I don't know of anything equivocal about the studies of Martin et al. - and those are essentially
    the only true scientific studies of the topic that I am aware of (in part because I never got my
    senior honor's thesis published).

    Andy Coggan

  9. "Andy Coggan" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    "]news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:

    "Jay Beattie" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    "]news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:

    I know we always trade the same links (with the same equivocal


    studies)

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    when this issue comes up, but is there really no good science on


    crank

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    length?

    I don't know of anything equivocal about the studies of Martin et


    al. - and

    Quoted message said:

    those are essentially the only true scientific studies of the topic


    that I

    Quoted message said:

    am aware of (in part because I never got my senior honor's thesis published).

    Do you have a link (if there is one). -- Jay Beattie.

  10. "Jay Beattie" <[email hidden]> wrote in message "]news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:


    "Andy Coggan" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    "]news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:

    "Jay Beattie" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    "]news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:

    I know we always trade the same links (with the same equivocal


    studies)

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    when this issue comes up, but is there really no good science on


    crank

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    length?

    I don't know of anything equivocal about the studies of Martin et


    al. - and

    Quoted message said:

    those are essentially the only true scientific studies of the topic


    that I

    Quoted message said:

    am aware of (in part because I never got my senior honor's thesis published).

    Do you have a link (if there is one). -- Jay Beattie.

    ncbi.nlm.nih.govquery.fcgi
    ds=12183473&dopt=Abstract

    ncbi.nlm.nih.govquery.fcgi
    ds=11990729&dopt=Abstract

    ncbi.nlm.nih.govquery.fcgi
    ds=11417428&dopt=Abstract

    ncbi.nlm.nih.govquery.fcgi
    ds=10828327&dopt=Abstract

    Bottom line: alterations in crank length within (and even beyond) the normal range used by
    cyclists has no significant effect on either maximal power or submaximal efficiency. Factors other
    than performance (e.g., ground clearance, comfort) should therefore take precedence when selecting
    crank length.

    Andy Coggan

  11. MMCS <[email hidden]> wrote"

    Quoted message said:

    What is the significance to my training/general riding of pedaling two different bikes one with
    175 and the other with 172.5 length crank arms?

    Almost nil. 1.4% difference in the pedaling circle diameter. It boggles my mind that parts
    manufacturers will offer 170mm, 172.5mm, and 175mm cranks, but no 160mm or 190mm cranks.

    Maybe they save costs by making them all the same size and just stamping them with different
    dimensions-- I am sure no rider could distinguish the difference in a blind test. I'd lay
    money on it.

    Chalo Colina

  12. Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    What is the significance to my training/general riding of pedaling two different bikes one with
    175 and the other with 172.5 length crank arms?

    Almost nil. 1.4% difference in the pedaling circle diameter. It boggles my mind that parts
    manufacturers will offer 170mm, 172.5mm, and 175mm cranks, but no 160mm or 190mm cranks.

    Maybe they save costs by making them all the same size and just stamping them with different
    dimensions-- I am sure no rider could distinguish the difference in a blind test. I'd lay
    money on it.

    Chalo Colina

    You are a cynical man, Chalo. But you are likely right in this case.

    However (ah, I love that word), you can get short cranks from the cute little world of kids' bikes,
    and long cranks have been made by Bullseye, if memory serves.

    There is an exception to the idea that crank length doesn't matter and is not noticeable: for fixed
    gear bikes, where 5mm can make a significant difference in how far you can lean in a turn before you
    suffer a pedal strike. And suffer is the right word here.

    --
    Ted Bennett Portland OR

Active in the last 60 minutes

Active in this thread

0 users · 0 guests ·0 bots ·0 total

No signed-in users are active right now.

No known search crawlers active right now.