Re: Advantage on a short arm crankset?

[GeoB]

> Will there be any advantages in using a
> short arm crankset?

A number of us are answering this question for ourselves. There has
been a number of posts on the topic recently. Perhaps a search using
"155 mm" or "150 mm" etc would yield information. I dropped down to a
155mm Dotech crank set and dropped several *minutes* off my best
commute time. Traveling is simply easier now. I am a 5'9" mezomorph,
muscular legs, somewhat rotund, 52 yo male. I ride a SWB USS Vision
R40. Been 'bent for a year.

[Don]

Ole, It is impossible to answer that question without knowing what
you are riding and how much knee flex you have at the closest position
(pedal closest to you). Do a search. This topic has been thoroughly
discussed including places to buy shorter cranks.

The big concern with too long cranks is knee soreness and damage.
Higher BB bikes seem to exaggerate the effect. Riders switching to
shorter cranks have reported NO loss in power. They have generally
been very positive regarding the switch. If your cranks are too long
your stroke is not effective because your leg becomes too compressed
and you are not in your power zone. Your knees and RPMs will suffer.
Please do a search. There is a lot of information already on this
forum regarding crank length.

Good luck, Don


Ole Carlsen > wrote in message >...
> Hi!
> Will there be any advantages in using a short arm crankset? I'm using a
> 170mm noname today, but will I gain anything apart from a lower
> periphery speed?

[Don]

Ole, It is impossible to answer that question without knowing what
you are riding and how much knee flex you have at the closest position
(pedal closest to you). Do a search. This topic has been thoroughly
discussed including places to buy shorter cranks.

The big concern with too long cranks is knee soreness and damage.
Higher BB bikes seem to exaggerate the effect. Riders switching to
shorter cranks have reported NO loss in power. They have generally
been very positive regarding the switch. If your cranks are too long
your stroke is not effective because your leg becomes too compressed
and you are not in your power zone. Your knees and RPMs will suffer.
Please do a search. There is a lot of information already on this
forum regarding crank length.

Good luck, Don


Ole Carlsen > wrote in message >...
> Hi!
> Will there be any advantages in using a short arm crankset? I'm using a
> 170mm noname today, but will I gain anything apart from a lower
> periphery speed?

[Jay]

>> Will there be any advantages in using a
>> short arm crankset?

>GeoB at wrote:
> A number of us are answering this question for ourselves. There has
> been a number of posts on the topic recently. Perhaps a search using
> "155 mm" or "150 mm" etc would yield information. I dropped down to a
> 155mm Dotech crank set and dropped several *minutes* off my best
> commute time. Traveling is simply easier now. I am a 5'9" mezomorph,
> muscular legs, somewhat rotund, 52 yo male. I ride a SWB USS Vision
> R40. Been 'bent for a year.

I switched to 150mm cranks and love it!
Much better for spinning like a hummingbird!
I am sized like an elf with a 28 1/2 inch inseam.

Jay <-- the happy elf-like triker

[Jay]

>> Will there be any advantages in using a
>> short arm crankset?

>GeoB at wrote:
> A number of us are answering this question for ourselves. There has
> been a number of posts on the topic recently. Perhaps a search using
> "155 mm" or "150 mm" etc would yield information. I dropped down to a
> 155mm Dotech crank set and dropped several *minutes* off my best
> commute time. Traveling is simply easier now. I am a 5'9" mezomorph,
> muscular legs, somewhat rotund, 52 yo male. I ride a SWB USS Vision
> R40. Been 'bent for a year.

I switched to 150mm cranks and love it!
Much better for spinning like a hummingbird!
I am sized like an elf with a 28 1/2 inch inseam.

Jay <-- the happy elf-like triker

[Rich]

Ole Carlsen > wrote in message >...
> Hi!
> Will there be any advantages in using a short arm crankset? I'm using a
> 170mm noname today, but will I gain anything apart from a lower
> periphery speed?
Take a look a http://www.cranklength.info\

[GeoB]

> Will there be any advantages in using a short arm crankset?

I went to:
http://www.cranklength.info/cranks.htm

Then "Crank length -- The debate" choice.

And did some reading. Very fascinating. this guy has done a lot of
work on this very informational site. In one place he sums up his
opinions in a chart he has constructed (search for the string "Here's
a visual representation of my crank-length scheme:"). Using this
chart, as well as the others shown that attempt to correlate leg size
and geometry to crank length, I find that I should be using a
150-155mm crank arms. Note that I switched from 170mm to 155mm and
found a very favorable result in efficiency and comfort.

This may be an interesting site for many of us to explore.

Other posts said "This topic has been thoroughly discussed". I don't
agree with that. Yes, we had shared experiences and ignorance, but
there remains much to be explained/wondered at. This site delves
deeply where we have previously skimmed.

[Don]

I have just started riding my new Giro Supreme with 150mm Thorn cranks
(26/36/46T rings). I have ridden for four years with a 170mm Campy
Racing triple (26/40/50T rings) on my Haluzak Leprechaun Hybrid/Race.

I do not miss the 170 at all. My knees feel better and I am riding
faster and climbing better. Of course, I confounded the experiment by
buying a new bike. I do not feel like the 150s are too short. I am
loving them and think it was a great decision on my part. The rings
seem to be working out well also. If I start to spin out too often, I
will get bigger rings. It was all kind of a guess/experiment that is
working.

FYI, I am 5/3" with long torso and short legs if that helps anyone
evaluate the viability of shorter cranks for themselves. My cadence is
in the low 80s. Other factors to consider are BB elevation relative to
the seat and femur length. Good luck. Don

[Torsten Lif]

GeoB wrote:
> I went to:
> http://www.cranklength.info/cranks.htm
> (...)Using this
> chart, as well as the others shown that attempt to correlate leg size
> and geometry to crank length, I find that I should be using a
> 150-155mm crank arms.

Interesting. Can anyone guide me to a source for the 190 mm cranks I
should be looking for...

/Torsten

[Torben Scheel]

"Torsten Lif" > wrote in message
...
>
>
> GeoB wrote:
> > I went to:
> > http://www.cranklength.info/cranks.htm
> > (...)Using this
> > chart, as well as the others shown that attempt to correlate leg size
> > and geometry to crank length, I find that I should be using a
> > 150-155mm crank arms.
>
> Interesting. Can anyone guide me to a source for the 190 mm cranks I
> should be looking for...

Turn a crank shortener around? ;-)

[GeoB]

> Interesting. Can anyone guide me to a source for the 190 mm cranks I
> should be looking for...

Do a search. There is a lot of information already on this forum
regarding crank length. I remember seeing a number of sources listed.