Always somebody who brings up world tour riders, Tour de France or Team whatever (usually Sky) to debunk the trend to shorter cranks. Most of them are just slow to change, bound by sponsorship parts (165mm and up), don't give a shit about time trialing, mired in the myth and lore of cycling and leverage, ride their ride bikes 40+ hpur a week and TT bikes less than 40 hours a year, etc, etc.
And most of them don't have a bike fitter that has taken thousands of riders to the limits of their existing crank length on a modern dynamic fit bike before changing lengths, thereby allowing the riders intuitive sense of "right" to dictate the fit instead of the fitters opinion or preconceived notions. But sure, I'm trying to generate traffic or business or whatever.
Time trial bikes in response to your question. Or triathlon bikes if you prefer. No difference really.
"WorldTour teams including Team Sky appear to believe that shorter cranks are more efficient..."
https://www.cyclingweekly.com/...cranks-better-188288
And most of them don't have a bike fitter that has taken thousands of riders to the limits of their existing crank length on a modern dynamic fit bike before changing lengths, thereby allowing the riders intuitive sense of "right" to dictate the fit instead of the fitters opinion or preconceived notions. But sure, I'm trying to generate traffic or business or whatever.
Time trial bikes in response to your question. Or triathlon bikes if you prefer. No difference really.
"WorldTour teams including Team Sky appear to believe that shorter cranks are more efficient..."
https://www.cyclingweekly.com/...cranks-better-188288
Last edited by:
FindinFreestyle: Jul 30, 18 17:59