Crank Brothers pedals

[[email protected]]

I know they are more MTB-orientated but I have the chance to buy a
cheap pair of new CandyC pedals for my single-speed Langster. Do you
think these would be suitable? Or should I spend three times as much
on the more road biased Quattro? I am new to going clipless and I
thought that if I got on with the Candys I could always upgrade to a
more expensive model later.

Bill Rutter

 

[Doki]

<[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>I know they are more MTB-orientated but I have the chance to buy a
> cheap pair of new CandyC pedals for my single-speed Langster. Do you
> think these would be suitable? Or should I spend three times as much
> on the more road biased Quattro? I am new to going clipless and I
> thought that if I got on with the Candys I could always upgrade to a
> more expensive model later.

I'd go for the ones you can get cheap. I can't see any point clipless pedals
with any sort of platform - I have Time ATAC pedals which were marketed as
being a bit more freeride or all mountain orientated because they had a
platform. Only a lunatic would ride on them not clipped in off road at all,
because the clipless bits have to stick out above the pedal, giving you no
purchase at all with normal shoes.

FWIW I once emailed crank brothers about their eggbeaters compared to one of
their "freeride" offerings. The axle and bearings in both were identical,
all that was different about the "freeride" pedal was the provision of a
platform.

 

[Adrian Godwin]

[email protected] wrote:
> I know they are more MTB-orientated but I have the chance to buy a
> cheap pair of new CandyC pedals for my single-speed Langster. Do you
> think these would be suitable? Or should I spend three times as much
> on the more road biased Quattro? I am new to going clipless and I
> thought that if I got on with the Candys I could always upgrade to a
> more expensive model later.
>

I have Quattros on my geared touring/roady bike and the simple
eggbeaters on a fixie. I don't notice a whole lot of difference
between them, though the Quattros are a little more convenient for the
odd journey I make without cleated shoes. The only reason for having
them that way round is that I was buying / building when those
particular pedals came up cheap. It might be sensible to put the
Quattros on the fixie, since it's more often used as a pub bike.

I do think it's worth paying for stainless bits, though, and AFAICR
the Candys are CrMoly (Candy SL for stainless ??). This might explain
the difference in price. For what it's worth, I paid about ?50 for
the Quattros (LBS closeout) and ?25 for the (stainless) eggbeaters
(last year's Mildenhall rally .. they sold out quickly).

Which reminds me .. I have a crank bolt that's started to rust,
probably as a result of exposure to seaside air. Are these things
generic or do I need to find a stainless replacement by the same
manufacturer (RPM) ?

-adrian

 

[Peter Clinch]

Doki wrote:

> I'd go for the ones you can get cheap. I can't see any point clipless
> pedals with any sort of platform - I have Time ATAC pedals which were
> marketed as being a bit more freeride or all mountain orientated because
> they had a platform. Only a lunatic would ride on them not clipped in
> off road at all, because the clipless bits have to stick out above the
> pedal, giving you no purchase at all with normal shoes.

You're not meant to ride them not clipped in though, the idea of the
platform is to give you better feedback with the bike (whether it works
or not I have no idea, but that's the idea, *not* that you should ride
unclipped)

> FWIW I once emailed crank brothers about their eggbeaters compared to
> one of their "freeride" offerings. The axle and bearings in both were
> identical, all that was different about the "freeride" pedal was the
> provision of a platform.

Same goes as for the ATACs: it's about standing on a bigger platform
rather than a smaller one, in both cases you're clipped on.

Pete.
--
Peter Clinch Medical Physics IT Officer
Tel 44 1382 660111 ext. 33637 Univ. of Dundee, Ninewells Hospital
Fax 44 1382 640177 Dundee DD1 9SY Scotland UK
net [email protected] http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/

 

[Doki]

"Peter Clinch" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Doki wrote:
>
>> I'd go for the ones you can get cheap. I can't see any point clipless
>> pedals with any sort of platform - I have Time ATAC pedals which were
>> marketed as being a bit more freeride or all mountain orientated because
>> they had a platform. Only a lunatic would ride on them not clipped in off
>> road at all, because the clipless bits have to stick out above the pedal,
>> giving you no purchase at all with normal shoes.
>
> You're not meant to ride them not clipped in though, the idea of the
> platform is to give you better feedback with the bike (whether it works or
> not I have no idea, but that's the idea, *not* that you should ride
> unclipped)

Not something I can discern through SPD shoes. With flat shoes, the cleat
engaging bit sticks up a fair way above the rest of the pedal, so I doubt
the SPD shoes are making much contact with the pedal body. Certainly the
amount of paint left on the pedals suggests there's not much contact.

It's also not how they seem to be sold IMO. Certainly for downhill and
freeride use, it's very handy to be able to ride tricky bits not clipped in.

 

[Peter Clinch]

Doki wrote:

> It's also not how they seem to be sold IMO. Certainly for downhill and
> freeride use, it's very handy to be able to ride tricky bits not clipped
> in.

That never seemed to be what Time's marketing said though... Coming
unstuck because you're /not/ clipped in tends to happen at low speed
when the consequences aren't that bad. A lot of the point of pedal
attachment is to keep your feet where they need to be over tricky sections.
I'd originally assumed they were targeted for clip/unclip use, but it
was soon pointed out to me (here, I think) that they're not really meant
for that, and aren't much good for it because of the mech sticking up.

Googling about, I can't see much mention of using them without shoes, at
least for technical riding.

Pete.
--
Peter Clinch Medical Physics IT Officer
Tel 44 1382 660111 ext. 33637 Univ. of Dundee, Ninewells Hospital
Fax 44 1382 640177 Dundee DD1 9SY Scotland UK
net [email protected] http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/

 

[Peter Clinch]

Peter Clinch wrote:

> That never seemed to be what Time's marketing said though... Coming
> unstuck because you're /not/ clipped in tends to happen at low speed
> when the consequences aren't that bad. A lot of the point of pedal
> attachment is to keep your feet where they need to be over tricky sections.
> I'd originally assumed they were targeted for clip/unclip use, but it
> was soon pointed out to me (here, I think) that they're not really meant
> for that, and aren't much good for it because of the mech sticking up.

To clarify further, I believe the point of the platform is to give you a
second stable platform in addition to the mech, so you have less chance
of sliding around on the pedal (with all that nice float they give you)
and unintentionally unclipping in particularly bonkers sections where
you're stood with all your weight on the pedals and being thrown around
a lot.

Pete.
--
Peter Clinch Medical Physics IT Officer
Tel 44 1382 660111 ext. 33637 Univ. of Dundee, Ninewells Hospital
Fax 44 1382 640177 Dundee DD1 9SY Scotland UK
net [email protected] http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/

 

[Doki]

"Peter Clinch" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Doki wrote:
>
>> It's also not how they seem to be sold IMO. Certainly for downhill and
>> freeride use, it's very handy to be able to ride tricky bits not clipped
>> in.
>
> That never seemed to be what Time's marketing said though... Coming
> unstuck because you're /not/ clipped in tends to happen at low speed when
> the consequences aren't that bad. A lot of the point of pedal attachment
> is to keep your feet where they need to be over tricky sections.
> I'd originally assumed they were targeted for clip/unclip use, but it was
> soon pointed out to me (here, I think) that they're not really meant for
> that, and aren't much good for it because of the mech sticking up.
>
> Googling about, I can't see much mention of using them without shoes, at
> least for technical riding.

I probably picked it up from one of the mountain bike comics.

 

[Agent Orange]

On Wed, 08 Aug 2007 08:43:21 -0700, [email protected] wrote:

>I know they are more MTB-orientated but I have the chance to buy a
>cheap pair of new CandyC pedals for my single-speed Langster. Do you
>think these would be suitable? Or should I spend three times as much
>on the more road biased Quattro? I am new to going clipless and I
>thought that if I got on with the Candys I could always upgrade to a
>more expensive model later.
>
>Bill Rutter

I have (on my mtb) a pair of mallets, and I've found them to much
better than the SPDs I was using a few years back. I've never used
road clipless pedals, so I don't know what they are like, but these
crank bros pedals have been excellent.