Interesting. The article I read was here
https://singletrackworld.com/2023/07/hope-evo-155mm-crankset-review/
A new build... its a Stif Squatch
- Thread starter coomber
- Start date
https://singletrackworld.com/2023/07/hope-evo-155mm-crankset-review/
2manyoranges
Old School Grand Master
- Feedback
- View
- Feedback
- View
Very nice bike. 
Spent many a happy hour in the original Stif, looking at early 90's Orange. My first Clockwork actually came from a second hand ad in the shop.
I'll be reading the crank info as my Pace HT and Orange FS both have really low bb's. Ace for how the bike feels, not so ace for pedal strike!
Spent many a happy hour in the original Stif, looking at early 90's Orange. My first Clockwork actually came from a second hand ad in the shop.
I'll be reading the crank info as my Pace HT and Orange FS both have really low bb's. Ace for how the bike feels, not so ace for pedal strike!
Whilst I live too South to visit the store in person, the adverts in MBUK were always drool worthy. Always stocked some tidy bikesVery nice bike.
Spent many a happy hour in the original Stif, looking at early 90's Orange. My first Clockwork actually came from a second hand ad in the shop.
I'll be reading the crank info as my Pace HT and Orange FS both have really low bb's. Ace for how the bike feels, not so ace for pedal strike!
2manyoranges
Old School Grand Master
- Feedback
- View
Very nice bike.
Spent many a happy hour in the original Stif, looking at early 90's Orange. My first Clockwork actually came from a second hand ad in the shop.
I'll be reading the crank info as my Pace HT and Orange FS both have really low bb's. Ace for how the bike feels, not so ace for pedal strike!
023 - you might find this helpful. I can’t track down the original study, which I read at the time - where they used experimentally 145 to 180 cranks. But this is a good summary of the main findings. They found little difference regarding power output and impact on energy in the joints, which is very important. They did recommend going from 32 to 30 front to up the cadence. In the original study, there was a long discussion of the kinetics of rotating your legs. If you are tall and therefore have large leg mass, longer cranks (the old assumption) means you have to rotate all that mass through a larger circle, with more hip rotation. Smaller cranks reduce this effort, which is biodynamically far better. Very interesting, Hope have looked at all of this and are promoting 155 cranks...for sure if you have pedal strikes then shorten cranks - this indeed made a massive improvement on my Ragley, which with 170 cranks tore up the local landscape with pedal strikes...165...very much better
https://www.pinkbike.com/news/why-shorter-cranks-are-better-according-to-science.html
Last edited:
- Feedback
- View
Cheers mate, I'll have a read as I have long legs and a sore hip!
2manyoranges
Old School Grand Master
- Feedback
- View
well people may laugh at your short cranks and tiny chainring(s) but it is the 'new normal' in my view - coming everyone's way shortly
Forgot to take a picture out on it, but 15 miler today. Very nice. Feels normal straight away. Very good climber. Low bottom bracket and short chainstays really shoot you out of the turns.
few pedal strikes, technique needs adjusting a bit. But very happy.
few pedal strikes, technique needs adjusting a bit. But very happy.
2manyoranges
Old School Grand Master
- Feedback
- View
Hey...nice
As I mentioned, moving from 170mm to 165mm on my Mmmbop made a world of difference re strikes. And that was only 5mm. The reduction in leverage, the change in position when standing, and the increase in cadence all felt very weird for the first few hours, and now I do not notice these things AT ALL on the bike.
Raise the saddle a bit, drop a gear, up the cadence and all's well....
Do post up your experience....
Similar threads
Latest posts
-
-
-
For Sale PAUL components crankset- Latest: sawston_vulcan
-
