Long cranks.

[Rapparee87]

Has anyone here ever used cranks longer than 170mm?

Maybe some of the testers here? If so what was your experience of them? Indurain used 180's I think.

I've seen pics here of some with the L shaped cranks, what were they like to ride?

I'm just curious.

 

[Agency_Scum]

It's a very subjective area. I rocked around on Sram 180s for years with my Bob Telfer racer and, honestly, felt no difference in performance to the regular 175s. I'm 6'6" with long legs so I DO fell a tiny tiny difference when I've tried 165 cranks though, then again, that was when I knew the cranks were 165. These days I go with the thinking that 175 is about right and the true difference is in the gearing. See if you can find any articles by Mike Burrows ( the designer of the Olympic winning Lotus bike ) who is a total nut case for the shortest cranks going; interesting stuff.

 

[Nob]

I’ve been using 177.5’s since 1979

 

[Nob]

Has anyone here ever used cranks longer than 170mm?

Maybe some of the testers here? If so what was your experience of them? Indurain used 180's I think.

I've seen pics here of some with the L shaped cranks, what were they like to ride?

I'm just curious.

Did all my PB’s on PMP cranks which I have in rare 177.5 length

 

[paton]

It can depend on the bike, bottom bracket height: but longer cranks can mean more pedal strikes/ hitting the ground while pedaling round corners and roundabouts.
Longer cranks means your feet travel further in bigger circles.

Hip angle and ankle / foot / knee speed

Phil Burt

 

[paton]

There are lots of opinions on crank length..
Geoff Apps says
https://crosscountrycycle.wordpress.com/2014/11/13/crank-length/
Chris Boardman says
“I don’t think anybody’s really messed around with crank length yet because we’re constrained by history. I’d like to see a lot of people using 150mm cranks. All of the physiology data I’ve ever seen says that for an endurance athlete crank length actually doesn’t make any difference. But shorter cranks mean you’re more aerodynamic – if you’re trying to get into a tuck you can get lower because your knees aren’t coming up. So shorter cranks could produce a really big net gain but it’s a fashion thing.”
https://roadcyclinguk.com/gear/chris-boardmans-seven-tech-trends-2016.html
Phil Burt says
There is no “correct” crank length, as there is no appreciable difference in power output between 150 – 180mm cranks
http://velocitysportscycling.com/cycling-myth-busting-from-team-sky/
https://books.google.co.uk/books?id...AG#v=onepage&q=phil burt crank length&f=false

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/11417428/

 

[paton]

Banana cranks

http://pardo.net/bike/pic/mobi/d.pmp-cranks/index.html

 

[paton]

At about 11:50 in

https://road.shimano.com/stories/short-crank-curious

 

[Splatter Paint]

I’ve tried 170, 172.5 and 175mm. Only 175mm feels comfortable to me. I understand the benefits of short cranks, but I just can’t get on with them. I feel I can’t get full extension on my leg - I’m 5’10”.

 

[ibob]

I'm 6'3" with pretty long legs & have 180mm on mtb, 175mm on tourer, 165mm on fixed gear. They're all fine to ride, but I think 180 is the most "comfy" for me. When I switch from mtb to fix I can feel my legs moving in tiny circles, maybe it is more aero but it feels like I'm not using the muscles in the way they want to be used... if I could be bothered I would go to 180mm on tourer & at least 170mm on fix...

Back of the envelope I think reduce your chainrings by 2 teeth when you go up 5mm of crank, otherwise you're changing gear ratio more than anything else?