How crank length affects seated vs. standing efforts

[midastouch]

Can someone please explain to me why the cycling community still clings to the outdated notion that crank length is a one-size-fits-all solution, when its painfully obvious that seated and standing efforts require drastically different crank lengths to optimize power output? I mean, come on, were talking about a sport where millimeters and grams make all the difference, yet were still using the same crank length for both seated and standing efforts like its the dark ages.

Whats the logic behind using a 175mm crank for both a seated climb and a standing sprint? Dont get me wrong, Ive seen plenty of studies that claim to have found the optimal crank length, but they all seem to ignore the glaringly obvious fact that our pedaling styles and power outputs change dramatically depending on whether were seated or standing.

Id love to hear from the experts on this one - are we really just too lazy to experiment with different crank lengths for different efforts, or is there some actual science behind this that Im missing?

 

[jensK]

Interesting perspective. Have you considered the role of pedaling cadence in determining optimal crank length? A lower cadence during seated efforts might necessitate a longer crank, while a higher cadence in standing efforts could favor a shorter crank. Additionally, how do you account for the impact of individual rider biomechanics and anthropometry on crank length selection?

 

[AndrewGronow]

Seems like you're challenging the status quo, which is commendable. But let's not oversimplify the issue. Finding the ideal crank length isn't just about seated vs. standing efforts. It's a complex interplay of factors, including rider height, leg length, and personal biomechanics. Perhaps the community's reluctance to change stems from a lack of clear-cut evidence, not laziness. Have you considered the practical challenges of frequent crank length swaps? It's not as straightforward as it seems.

 

[chick on wheels]

Aha! At last, a fellow cycling aficionado who sees the light! The antiquated notion of a one-size-fits-all crank length is akin to attaching a anchor to a rocket ship. Absurd, I say!

You've hit the nail on the head. Seated and standing efforts demand different crank lengths to unleash our true power. It's like trying to use a scalpel for a sledgehammer job. Inefficient and unforgivable in this sport where millimeters and grams determine victory or defeat.

Tell me, why would one use a 175mm crank for both seated climbs and standing sprints? It's as if we've been blindly following an outdated doctrine, ignoring the very essence of cycling's complexity.

It's time to embrace the change, dear comrade! Let us champion this cause, and together, we'll revolutionize the cycling world! ‍

 

[davideholl]

The insistence on a one-size-fits-all crank length ignores the significant differences in power output and pedaling style between seated and standing efforts. It's high time the cycling community acknowledges this and starts experimenting with various crank lengths for optimal performance. After all, millimeters and grams do matter in our sport.

 

[123smt]

The notion of a one-size-fits-all crank length is indeed questionable when you consider the different power outputs required for seated and standing efforts. The cycling community's adherence to this standard may be due to a few factors.

Firstly, changing crank lengths can be expensive and time-consuming, which might deter some cyclists from experimenting. Secondly, there's a comfort factor involved - cyclists often stick to what they know and what feels comfortable.

However, it's important to note that power output is not solely dependent on crank length. Pedaling style, cadence, and muscle fiber type also play significant roles. For instance, a sprinter might benefit from a shorter crank length due to the increased force applied during standing efforts, while a climber might prefer a longer crank for more leverage during seated climbs.

In conclusion, while the cycling community's adherence to a standard crank length might be due to convenience and comfort, there's a comfort factor involved. However, acknowledging the different power outputs required for seated and standing efforts could lead to more personalized and efficient cycling setups.

 

[chick on wheels]

C'mon, forum friends, let's face it. This one-size-fits-all crank length thing is as outdated as a rusty chain. Yeah, sure, changing cranks can be pricey and time-consuming, but so is being stuck in the slow lane!

And don't even get me started on the 'but it's comfortable' argument. Comfortable? More like complacent! If we wanna squeeze every last watt outta our legs, we gotta tailor our setups to our riding styles.

Remember, power output ain't just about crank length; pedaling style, cadence, and muscle fiber type all play a part. So, instead of blindly following the crowd, let's embrace the idea of personalized cycling setups. It's time to swap those generic cranks for some that truly fit like a glove! ‍

 

[123smt]

You're not wrong. One-size-fits-all crank length is as outdated as a creaky bottom bracket. Comfortable, my leg! More like an excuse for not pushing harder. True, changing cranks can be a pain, but so is getting dropped.

Power output isn't just crank length; sure, we've heard that before. But let's not forget, different riding styles need different setups. Sprinters, climbers, time trialists - we all got our unique needs.

Embracing personalized cycling setups ain't for the faint-hearted. It means stepping outta the comfort zone, spending some cash, and maybe even tweaking your pedaling style. But hey, if you're serious about squeezing every last watt, it's a ride worth taking. So, ditch those generic cranks and level up your game!

 

[AndrewGronow]

I feel ya. Been there, swapped those creaky cranks. But it's not just about pushin' harder or avoidin' drops. It's about fit, man. We're all built different, ride different. Sprinters, climbers, TT heroes - we got our unique quirks.

Sure, personalized setups might seem daunting, but so is stickin' with somethin' that ain't workin' for ya. Yeah, it might cost ya, but comfort and efficiency? Priceless. And tweakin' your pedal stroke? Part of the game, pal.

So, don't be so quick to dismiss the comfort zone. Sometimes, leavin' it behind can lead to greatness. Or at least, a better ride. So, go ahead, give it a shot. Ditch those generic cranks and see where it takes ya. #CrankRevolution #RideYourWay

 

[davideholl]

You're right, fit matters. But let's not forget, it's not just cranks, it's the whole setup. Saddles, stems, even shoes. All gotta fit right. Customization ain't cheap, but neither is discomfort. #SaddleSavvy #PedalPerfectly. But hey, if you're still stuck with those creaky cranks, don't expect miracles.