Longer Legs = More Speed?

A quick question on form: Does having longer or shorter legs give a cyclist an advantage over someone with "average" length legs? For example, with running, supposively one with long legs can outstride others (especially on down hill). Also, having smaller feet makes for quicker turnover when stepping. (I'm sure none of this makes any substantial difference over say, being fit, but I was just curious.) This is of course assuming the bike is "perfectly" fit for the individual. Thanks!

 

I have noticed that pro cyclists on average have longer legs (especially the thighs), but I don't know how much this accounts for their success. Anyone seen any studies on this?

Niek

 

Longer legs means greater leverage so would be good for pushing big gears. Thats why time trial riders like Millar, McGee and Olano (taller riders with long legs) are good at what they do (they also are freaks aerobically).

I was reading in a magazine that the average elite pursuiter is 6'4 then kilo rider is a bit over 6' and track sprinters are 5'10 or 11.

 

not necessarily true

in runners the advantages of stride length from height is often outweighed by a corresponding loss in stride frequency and also by the fact that as dimensions increase linearly volume and thus mass increase as a cube so therefore taller and bigger generally means worse power to weight

i suppose two cyclist of the same and height with different length legs may exhibit different power per stroke and different frequencies but it might be hard to tell if these are directly related to leg length