In high-cadence riding, many cyclists swear by shorter crank lengths for increased efficiency and lower injury risk. However, Im curious about the flip side of this equation - specifically, how shorter cranks truly impact power output when youre spinning at 100+ RPMs.
Assuming proper fit and technique, its often argued that shorter cranks allow riders to maintain higher cadences without dramatically sacrificing power output. But how accurate is this claim, really? If were talking about a difference of 5-10mm in crank length, are we truly seeing a net gain in terms of power output at high cadences?
Take the example of a rider whos normally running 175mm cranks and switches to 165mm. In theory, this rider should be able to spin more easily and maintain higher cadences, but what about the actual power output at those high cadences? Are we talking about a 1-2% gain, or a more significant 5-10% bump?
Its also worth considering the role of rider strength and pedaling style in this equation. If a rider is already generating a significant amount of power through their legs and core, do the benefits of shorter cranks become less pronounced? Conversely, if a rider is struggling to maintain a high cadence due to strength or technique limitations, might shorter cranks actually exacerbate this issue by reducing their overall power output?
Looking for some hard data and expert insights on this topic. Have there been any studies or experiments that directly compare power output at high cadences across different crank lengths? And what are the key takeaways for riders looking to optimize their setup for high-cadence riding?