Joined
·
157 Posts
Is there any other cons on 180 mm cranks (as opposed to 175s) than possibly weight and perhaps more pedal strikes that I am not thinking about?
This subject has been hammered over the years; suggest you do a search. You'll find a ton of info.Cycle Snack said:Is there any other cons on 180 mm cranks (as opposed to 175s) than possibly weight and perhaps more pedal strikes that I am not thinking about?
I'm not sure I get your logic on this one.Sparticus said:This subject has been hammered over the years; suggest you do a search. You'll find a ton of info.
Pedal strikes are caused by a too-low BB, not too-long cranks. If your cranks are the right length for your legs but you're suffering too many pedal strikes, then you need a new frame with a higher BB, not shorter (ie: wrong size) cranks.
Most people choose to resist this notion because they don't want to consider fixing the root of the problem (a new frame is expensive and they may like their current one). Regardless, it is truth.
--sParty
My Inbred 29er does have a 13.5" BB with a taller 100mm fork and big tires thoughMMcG said:I'm not sure I get your logic on this one.
So let's take a On One Inbred 29er for example. If you get pedal strikes by using 180mm or longer cranks it is the fault of the frame, and not the length of the crank arms??
So someone who would need to use 180 or longer cranks should have a frame that has a 13.5" or so bottom bracket height??
Doesn't add up.
I'd say you just have to deal with pedal strikes if you want to use a particular frame. It is not the fault of the frame/nor of the crank length per se. Just a factor you have to deal with based on one's normal riding terrain, their crank length of choice and a frames bottom bracket height.
No real "wrong" part in the equation IMHO.
Boomn gets my point.MMcG said:I'm not sure I get your logic on this one.
So let's take a On One Inbred 29er for example. If you get pedal strikes by using 180mm or longer cranks it is the fault of the frame, and not the length of the crank arms??
So someone who would need to use 180 or longer cranks should have a frame that has a 13.5" or so bottom bracket height??
Doesn't add up.
I'd say you just have to deal with pedal strikes if you want to use a particular frame. It is not the fault of the frame/nor of the crank length per se. Just a factor you have to deal with based on one's normal riding terrain, their crank length of choice and a frames bottom bracket height.
No real "wrong" part in the equation IMHO.
"Severely reduced pay for everyone!"boomn said:"Technically correct is the best kind of correct"![]()
I am an opinionated son of a *****.umarth said:I think Cycle Snack was paid to post the query so ssParty could get on his soapbox.
The longer I ride a bike & the more learn about cycling, the more I'm convinced this is the bottom line truth.Thor29 said:... I don't think that crank length matters all that much. ... It's really just a matter of preference. ...
... with pedal strikes is poor pedaling technique.Sparticus said:This subject has been hammered over the years; suggest you do a search. You'll find a ton of info.
Pedal strikes are caused by a too-low BB, not too-long cranks. If your cranks are the right length for your legs but you're suffering too many pedal strikes, then you need a new frame with a higher BB, not shorter (ie: wrong size) cranks.
Most people choose to resist this notion because they don't want to consider fixing the root of the problem (a new frame is expensive and they may like their current one). Regardless, it is truth.
--sParty