Well, I'm long in the leg (34" to 35"inseam) 6' 3/4" short torsoed and I ride mostly 170's.
I picked up a color-mismatched Icon crankset for my Trek 850 Antelope MtB. For the dirt cheap price I figureed I could live with the color difference (two different shades of teal).
But I discovered that the one crank was a 175 & the other was a 170. RATS!
Then a remembered a factor I'd never considerd an issue---one leg is about .5" longer than the other.
Which leads me to wonder if dif length cranks can compensate for differing leg lengths?
Don't ask me if it'll work.....The 175 crank was on the side of my longer leg.
Calvert"Leveraged to the Max" Guthrie Kansas City
In a message dated 9/20/2001 9:51:24 PM Central Daylight Time, Wdgadd@aol.com writes:
> Subj: Re: [CR]Crank length, today and yesterday
> Date: 9/20/2001 9:51:24 PM Central Daylight Time
> From: Wdgadd@aol.com
> Sender: classicrendezvous-admin@bikelist.org
> To: Huemax@aol.com, CaptBike@sheldonbrown.com, LouDeeter@aol.com,
> classicrendezvous@bikelist.org
>
>
>
>
> I'm reminded of a man I met in about 1975 at a shop called the Broken
> Spoke in Dover Point, NH, named James Farnsworth. He advocated what he
> called
> "full throw cycling" which essentially meant using extremely long cranks,
> huge rings, and a lowish cadence. He had a custom chrome Schwinn Paramount
> with a very high bracket to suit the long cranks, which were T.A. 180's
> with
> machined bolt on block extensions giving perhaps 4 or 5 cm. more length.
> The
> largest of the triple T.A. rings was at least a 65 or 70. The bike had some
> rather weird and rather crude modified components, like the SunTour GT rear
> changer that had it's cage lengthened by cutting and brazing in a Mafac
> wrench! He let me try the bike (with my wheels) and any impressions I had
> are
> lost in time, even if they had not been hopelessly colored by teenage
> enthusiasm. I wonder how he talked Schwinn into building this for him? Does
> anyone else remember this guy? By the way, I use 170's and one set of
> 172.5's
> on 60 cm c to c frames. I'm thinking of going shorter for fixed gear, say
> 165's(don't think 167.5's would make much difference).
>
> Best Regards,
> Wes Gadd