Re: [CR] It's a Personal thing! Crank length/Vintage Bicycle Quarterly


Example: Framebuilders:Mario Confente

From: GPVB1@cs.com
Subject: Re: [CR] It's a Personal thing! Crank length/Vintage Bicycle Quarterly
To: classicrendezvous@bikelist.org
Date: Thu, 12 Sep 2002 12:23:57 EDT


> From: Mark Bulgier <mark@bulgier.net>
> To: Bike Bike List <classicrendezvous@bikelist.org>
> Subject: RE: [CR]It's a Personal thing! Crank length/Vintage Bicycle Quart
> erly
> Date: Wed, 11 Sep 2002 18:28:23 -0700
>
> Chuck Schmidt wrote:
> >
> > I'm the opposite: I ride 165, 170, 172.5 and 175 mm cranks on my
> > different bikes and it's all good!
>

To which Mark added:
> Yeah, my comfort range is from 165 to 185. The extremes take a while (part
> of a ride) to get used to, then I do fine, no blown knees. I suspect I
> could like cranks beyond that range but haven't tried any.
>
> Mark Bulgier
> Seattle, Wa
> USA
>
>

Mark:

Wow! That's quite a range. I suspect you are more versatile/skilled than most folks. Clearly this is a "personal preference" sort of thing, as we've seen from all of the other posts in this thread, but my guess is that most riders have a typical range of about +/-5mm from their "favorite" crank length, like Chuck's comments might suggest.

At 6'2" with a 34" inseam, I typically ride a 60-cm frame (c-t) with 165-170 on the track and 172.5 or 175 on the road. I prefer the 175s on the road.

My wife, at 5'2" with a 30" inseam, rides 49-cm frames with 170s exclusively on the road (she doesn't have a track bike, but I would probably set her up with 165s if she did). I suspect she is just so used to the 170s that whether or not to try 165s is kind of moot for her. As far as I know, she has never ridden any other length!

Chuck and Mark, what crank length do you prefer on your road bikes?

Cheers,

Greg Parker
A2 MI USA