Put G-ride on some 150s and see how well he can make it up his driveway.
From my own decades of experience and testing with different crank lengths, if you venture a lot shorter with the crank than 21-22 percent of your (measured) inseam length, you won’t climb as fast.
it is like he wants all us tall folks to buy his product... is he making one with a BB30 spindle yet?
No but he does have something rather cool.
One thing in the article I don't buy:
Tall sprinters cannot get a high enough gear to work with a long crank, as 80kph on a 53 X 11 gear is 135RPM, a cadence that is unrealistic when the crank circle gets much bigger than 180mm in radius
I can pretty easily hit 150rpm and push over it with 180mm cranks.
I still would like to find a BB30 180mm crank... why the heck doesn't SRAM make one at least in the Red. Oh well. Pretty clear that equipment isn't my limiter.
5 comments:
Zinn is a nutjob when it comes to the crank lengths.
There are some reputable academic studies showing that from something like 160-180 mm subjects of various heights did not demonstrate significant differences in maximal power regardless of crank length. Use of lower than 150 mm and higher than 200 mm did show measurable differences but they were minor.
Shorter cranks are easier to turn over at high rpm, sure. Use what is comfortable and/or what is readily available to you. That's my take and that of many others with more qualifications.
Jeff,
I'd be more inclined to dismiss him as a nutter if Tatar hadn't picked up a set and really notices the difference.
I guess the tale would be in the tape (or road-results.com and crossresults) since he has a Zinn CX bike and some cranks on his IF.
The biggest problem going longer than 190 is BB height and unless your bike is set up to deal with it you have problems...
It's not a question of whether or not the length is noticeable - I can most definitely _notice_ even switching between a 172.5 and 175 mm crank. The point is while we can detect these differences, academic studies show that they do not impact the cyclist's ability to produce power in a significant way, therefore you should choose what you like best. If extremely long cramkarms are most comfortable for you, use those, but you have to accept the limited availability AND the issues you touch on regarding ground clearance.
Heck I run 175s and clip pedals in crits and cross races all the time. I've considered going to 170s on my TT bike to give more knee/chest clearance for the same reason.
I would discount the value of any power tests because for a seasoned cyclist I think it takes YEARS to fully adapt to a change in crank length. But it's crazy to say a taller person needs 200s in order to have the same climbing efficiency as a shorter rider on 175s but then in the same breath say the tall rider is at some sort of spinning disadvantage due to long cranks. A tall guy on 180s is like a normal person on 165s. If anything riders who are taller in proportion to the commonly available crank lengths should be better spinners.
But yeah why dwell on it? Ride the 180s for which you have millions of revolutions of muscle memory in the bank and quit crying in your non-existent beer about climbing ability. It's not that you are stronger on the flats, it's that the benefit of the draft equalizes things enough for you to stay on. You don't have that benefit on the climbs and stronger riders leave you behind. Plain truth dude.
for the price he wants i can get a couple pairs of Dura Ace 180mm cranks... both lighter and stiffer.
I like to revisit the topic occasionally, mostly because the outcome is always the same and in a way is a positive affirmation that what i've got is good, and focuses what I need (leg strength and a good does of anti-wuss).
TT tonight
Post a Comment