Compact crank arm length

[cycledogg]

Hello,
I am considering switching to a compact crank. I am now using a 172.5
crank arm length. If I go to the compact crank would a longer arm (175)
be the thing to do or just keep the same length that I am used to?
Cheers
Rick in Tennessee

 

[David L. Johnson]

On Wed, 11 Oct 2006 09:10:53 -0700, cycledogg wrote:

> Hello,
> I am considering switching to a compact crank. I am now using a 172.5
> crank arm length. If I go to the compact crank would a longer arm (175)
> be the thing to do or just keep the same length that I am used to?

No reason to get a different crank arm length unless you want to, and
certainly I don't see a reason for a longer arm length, since you have the
option of somewhat lower gears with the compact crank.

--

David L. Johnson

__o | Arguing with an engineer is like mud wrestling with a pig... You
_`\(,_ | soon find out the pig likes it!
(_)/ (_) |

 

[sally]

"cycledogg" <[email protected]> wrote in news:1160583053.351840.109890
@h48g2000cwc.googlegroups.com:
> I am considering switching to a compact crank. I am now using a 172.5
> crank arm length. If I go to the compact crank would a longer arm (175)
> be the thing to do or just keep the same length that I am used to?

If anything, I would think about getting shorter crankarms since a compact
crank has smaller gears and you can spin more. Of course, your leg length
(which you did not mention) should be the primary factor in chosing crank arm
length.

 

[John Thompson]

On 2006-10-11, sally <[email protected]> wrote:

> If anything, I would think about getting shorter crankarms since a compact
> crank has smaller gears and you can spin more. Of course, your leg length
> (which you did not mention) should be the primary factor in chosing crank arm
> length.

And ground clearance, particularly if you are considering a fixed-gear.

--

John ([email protected])

 

[Mike Elliott]

On 10/11/2006 9:10 AM cycledogg wrote:

> Hello,
> I am considering switching to a compact crank. I am now using a 172.5
> crank arm length. If I go to the compact crank would a longer arm (175)
> be the thing to do or just keep the same length that I am used to?
> Cheers
> Rick in Tennessee
>

I'm fairly short and can be pretty cranky. I'll check with my tailor for
arm length.

-- mike elliott

 

[Qui si parla Campagnolo]

cycledogg wrote:
> Hello,
> I am considering switching to a compact crank. I am now using a 172.5
> crank arm length. If I go to the compact crank would a longer arm (175)
> be the thing to do or just keep the same length that I am used to?
> Cheers
> Rick in Tennessee

Same length..

 

[* * Chas]

"Qui si parla Campagnolo" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> cycledogg wrote:
> > Hello,
> > I am considering switching to a compact crank. I am now using a
172.5
> > crank arm length. If I go to the compact crank would a longer arm
(175)
> > be the thing to do or just keep the same length that I am used to?
> > Cheers
> > Rick in Tennessee
>
> Same length..
>

cycledogg,

Consider this, changing to shoes with thicker or thinner soles or cleats
can introduce more of a change than 2.5mm (.100 - less than 1/8") crank
length difference.

In my experience, 160mm or 180mm can make a noticeable change over
170mm - 10mm (0.394mm or more than 3/8").

I used to ride 180mm cranks on my climbing and mountain bikes. It seemed
like 180mm gave me a little more leverage when climbing.

I'm now riding bikes with 170mm, 172.5mm and 175mm cranks because that's
what on them. I can't tell any difference.

Chas.