Q-factor

[RC2]

I hear a lot about low Q-factor on this board in discussions on pedals, double-vs-triple, and there was even a point made on OLN that LA was using a special BB on his TT bike that was narrowed for a lower Q-factor.

But I don't see much on why a low q-factor is important. Does it make pedaling more efficient? Less stress on knees/joints? Tighter turning radius? What's the primary reason to have a lower q-factor, and to what extent is it a benefit?

 

[boudreaux]

I hear a lot about low Q-factor on this board in discussions on pedals, double-vs-triple, and there was even a point made on OLN that LA was using a special BB on his TT bike that was narrowed for a lower Q-factor.

But I don't see much on why a low q-factor is important. Does it make pedaling more efficient? Less stress on knees/joints? Tighter turning radius? What's the primary reason to have a lower q-factor, and to what extent is it a benefit?

Everyone thinks lower is better.Not true if your body ain't built to handle it. Some claim to be unable to ride cranks that have a 2mm wider Q than others.I think they are full of it.

 

[meehs]

I've heard that the the reason for the move toward reduced Q-factors on the pro's TT bikes was improved aerodynamics. If your feet and knees are in closer to the bike, they catch less wind. I'm sure it makes very little difference but these guys are in wind tunnels looking to shave fractions of a second.

I can't see where reduced Q-factor would make that much difference at all to the average rider.

 

[nutbag]

Jee, I thought a large q-angle meant feet close together...whatever

I have heard/read that having your feet too close together can cause problems on the inner side of the quads and knees for some people, mainly due to increased pronation.