Cycling Training · Public discussion

short legs= poor climbing potential?

Started by sam218 · · Last activity · 8 posts · 2,373 views

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 Training
Published
13 January 2005
Last activity
19 January 2005
Original author
sam218
Posts
8
Discussion status
Public discussion
Total views
2,373
Views / 30 days
0

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

Showing posts 1–8 of 8
Posts remain in their original chronological order.

Text size
  1. Does the length of the legs (leverage) determine ones climbing potential, even if heart/lungs are in good condition?

  2. sam218 said:

    Does the length of the legs (leverage) determine ones climbing potential, even if heart/lungs are in good condition?

    it doesn't make any difference whatsoever, as your legs don't act as levers. nor does crank length (just get the cranks that feel comfy).

    ric

  3. Thanks Ric! There goes my excuse!

  4. Damn! Mine too (excuse). Should a shorter-legged person get cranks to compensate?

  5. Yes, If you've been riding without a crank, getting one will improve your climbing... 😉

  6. Here's an interesting bit among Tom Compton's Analytic Cycling pages analyzing the physics of force application during a pedal revolution. You can play with the various components of the model which include, among others, thigh length and shin length to see how force (and therefore power) generation is affected.

    http://www.analyticcycling.com/PedalModel_Page.html

    My personal experience (as a short (5'6"😉 cyclist, amateur triathlete) is that there are people far taller than I whom I can climb better than and vice versa. I don't think height is a major factor. What you may lose in bone length, you may gain in being lighter or having less leg mass to move around, etc.

    Ric - one question for you. You unequivocally ruled out height (and therefore the length of leg bones) as a climbing performance predictor. I remember reading an article that said Lance is a "natural climber" partially because of his "very long" thigh bones. Is this an oversimplification on the part of the author/media?

    Berend

  7. climbing-geek-> long legs, light (so long legs in compr. with body length).

    I'm 1.81, 90cm inner leg, 58kg in the summer 😎

  8. marlon1 said:

    climbing-geek-> long legs, light (so long legs in compr. with body length).

    I'm 1.81, 90cm inner leg, 58kg in the summer 😎

    Think about it though, a larger gear requires more power to move at the same cadence. Weither that larger gear is because of gearing, or because of longer legs, shorter/longer cranks... so basically you can make up for your legs and cranks by using different gears.

    *agrees with ric* go for comfort

    although, if you have a bike that has the same gearing as someone with longer legs and the same crank length as them, wouldn't your absolute maximum speed be lesser than the longer legged person?

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.