Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Crank Length Chat

Options
  • 14-11-2009 2:27am
    #1
    petethedrummer
    Registered Users Posts: 7,604 ✭✭✭


    Got this from the Cyclingnews forum:
    Jacques Anquetil 175mm
    Lance Armstrong 175mm
    Magnus Backstedt 177.5mm
    Chris Boardman 170mm
    Santiago Botero 172.5mm
    Angel Casero 175mm
    Mario Cipollini 172.5mm
    Fausto Coppi 171mm
    Malcolm Elliott 172.5mm
    Tyler Hamilton 172.5mm
    Bernard Hinault 172.5mm
    Miguel Indurian 180mm (190mm for second Hour record!)
    Laurent Jalabert 172.5mm
    Greg Lemond 175mm,
    Brad McGee 175mm
    Robbie McEwen 175mm
    Eddy Merckx 175mm
    David Millar 175mm (180mm in TT)
    Francesco Moser 175mm
    Marty Northstein 167.5mm in Keirin (170mm in kilo)
    Graham Obree 175mm
    Marco Pantani 170mm (180mm in mountains)
    David Rebellin 172.5mm
    Roger Riviere 175mm
    Jean Robic 170mm
    Tony Rominger 172.5mm (175mm for Hour record)
    Oscar Sevilla 175mm
    Jan Ullrich 177.5mm
    Rik Verbrugghe 175mm
    Erik Zabel 172.5mm
    Alex Zulle 175mm (180mm in mountains)
    Alberto Contador 172.5
    Fabien Cancellara 177.5
    Tom Boonen 177.5mm
    Allan Davis 172.5mm
    Gord Fraser 172.5mm
    Oscar Freire 172.5mm
    Thor Hushovd 175mm
    Giovanni Lombardi 172.5mm
    Alessandro Petacchi 175mm
    Fred Rodriguez 175mm
    Erik Zabel 172.5mm

    Boardman used 170s on all his hour records

    http://www.bikecult.com/bikecultbook/sports_recordsHour.html

    Rominger 172.5
    Moser 175
    Merckx 175
    Obree 175

    And, according to this site, despite only having an 86cm inseam (33.85"), Marc Madiot used 180s all the time
    http://forum.cyclingnews.com/showthread.php?t=3882&page=2

    Can't say it means much to me at this moment in time as I don't know what length cranks I have on my bike but somebody might find it interesting.


Comments

  • Options
    #2
    sy
    Registered Users Posts: 1,653 ✭✭✭sy


    Surprised so few on 170 and what about Big Mig on 190's :eek:. I have always ridden 170's with 78cm inside leg. Supposedly easier on the knees and good if you are a spinner. Longer cranks, as can been seen from the data, are better for climbing and time trial as more leverage. No mention of Monsieur Kelly? Anybody know his stats?
    Thanks pete


  • Options
    #3
    Quigs Snr
    Registered Users Posts: 4,133 ✭✭✭Quigs Snr


    Sastre rides 170, he used to ride 172.5 but switched to improve his cadence. Anyone looking to change to 172.5, I have a brand new set of Sram Red in their box that I would be prepared to give someone a deal on.


  • Options
    #4
    Lumen
    Registered Users Posts: 31,020 ✭✭✭✭Lumen


    Quigs Snr wrote: »
    Sastre rides 170, he used to ride 172.5 but switched to improve his cadence. Anyone looking to change to 172.5, I have a brand new set of Sram Red in their box that I would be prepared to give someone a deal on.

    I'm still waiting for you to stick them in the adverts subforum.... ;)

    Are they compact or standard?


  • Options
    #5
    chakattack
    Registered Users Posts: 1,315 ✭✭✭chakattack


    I'm surprised that some switch to longer cranks for climbing. I understand the principle of a lever but I was under the impression that spinning smoothly is the best way to climb. Does it depend on your style? Climbing out of the saddle (like Pantini)?


  • Options
    #6
    petethedrummer
    Registered Users Posts: 7,604 ✭✭✭petethedrummer


    I got curious and it turns out I have 170mm cranks, which according to this is probably correct for my 83cm(ish) inseam.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #7
    Raam
    Registered Users Posts: 14,317 ✭✭✭✭Raam


    petethedrummer wrote: »
    I got curious and it turns out I have 170mm cranks, which according to this is probably correct for my 83cm(ish) inseam.

    There's no stopping you now.


  • Options
    #8
    blorg
    Registered Users Posts: 15,989 ✭✭✭✭blorg


    petethedrummer wrote: »
    I got curious and it turns out I have 170mm cranks, which according to this is probably correct for my 83cm(ish) inseam.
    Bear in mind that the figures that calculator spits out bear no relationship whatsoever to the crank length apparently chosen by any of these pro cyclists, or indeed the crank lengths generally specified on bikes of a given size.

    I use 175mm myself, only because that is what came on my first few bikes... but I only ever had to get it changed (from 172.5mm) on one.


  • Options
    #9
    petethedrummer
    Registered Users Posts: 7,604 ✭✭✭petethedrummer


    Raam wrote: »
    There's no stopping you now.
    Yup, just put on slightly longer cranks and I'll be a pro by next tuesday


  • Options
    #10
    Quigs Snr
    Registered Users Posts: 4,133 ✭✭✭Quigs Snr


    Lumen wrote: »
    I'm still waiting for you to stick them in the adverts subforum.... ;)

    Are they compact or standard?

    Standard. I didn't even realise you could get compact Red's, there should be a law against that or at least a euro ruling.


Advertisement