Swim Bike Run
Slowtwitch.com
  • Login >
Slowtwitch.com
Search menu
Hot Forum Topics

Poll

Comfort While Cycling
How much does comfort while cycling influence your overall race performance?
View Results


Home > Forum > Triathlon Forum > My testing to try and find best crank length with my Velotron

Triathlon Forum

Back To ForumPrint Thread

Login required to started new threads

Login required to post replies

Prev Next
Tri
Classifieds
Lavender
Jobs
Notices
Re: My testing to try and find best crank length with my Velotron [Kiwicoach] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
h2ofun
Dec 27, 17 15:50
Post #1176 of 1333 (5691 views)
Kiwicoach wrote:
devashish_paul wrote:
h2ofun wrote:
Did Martis today on locked 150mm cranks. Had the fastest time ever on the course.

Some thoughts. Over the years I have used lots of different cranks lengths. 200's, 175's, 185's. The common result is on a flat course, none of these different
crank lengths seem to make any different in my race times.

But since most races I do tend to have lots of big hills, I have been chasing, via crank length, how to get the best times. I had always read you must use long stuff
to get leverage, which is why I have used 200's for so long.

But, with the testing on the Velotron, I seem to have found results that say some of my past assumptions are wrong. Meaning, even in my testing on flat stuff, no matter what
the crank length, my result times are still all pretty close to each other. But in the hills, a huge difference between 125 cranks, and 150's .

Now, if I were in the past, I would have continued to assume well if 150 is good, 200 has to be better. But it seems I also now understand one has to throw in bike fit,
which I had never really added to my thinking. And it seems the shorter cranks has allowed me to get a better aero position, and deal with my knee issue.

Going to try the cranks in PC mode next and see what happens. With all this testing I have not done much PC riding lately, and I do not like that so need to add that back
into my trainer training.


Dave you need lower gearing to climb hills. You can get lower gearing three ways


  1. Bigger rear cluster (cassette)
  2. Small front chain ring
  3. Longer crank arms

Just so you realize your 150mm cranks are 33% harder gearing than your 200mm cranks (200/150 = 1.3333) items 1 to 3 being equal. So you're going faster on your hilly course with harder gearing (assuming your testing does not keep changing out casette and chain rings). So the answer to this 'seems' to be you are going faster due to better fit and PERHAPS better aeordynamics, not because of any magic crank length leverage (you're actually having to apply higher pedal force on the pedal at 150mm cranks to sustain the same crank torque as with 200m at a fixed RPM....and since Power = torque x RPM, you are applying higher pedal force on the 150mm cranks than with 200's assuming of course you are keeping the same power output and getting faster through superior aerodynamics at a fixed RPM.....or you are applying the same pedal force as with 200mm's but your moving at way higher RPM to sustain the same power.


But are you even measuring power on the road, or is it some bogus field test where you don't even control power, forget about controlling wind????


Sorry I have not been on this thread for a while, and maybe with the Xmas lull at work I don't feel bad squandering some time on ST, but it feels like nothing has changed in terms of your understanding of everything Biomcgeek has provided us the foundational knowledge for with countless hours of stringent science based peer reviewed results!!!


This is why I don't waste my time and the time of the World Class cyclists I coach on chasing the optimal crank length, it's simply not worth it.

http://wattagetraining.com/files/JMartinCrankLengthPedalingTechnique.pdf


Same goes for Gimmickcranks, well performed studies in credible journals highlight their lack of efficacy.


Dollars to donuts your good days are due to the training effect and your bad days are due to long term fatigue.




You may be right on crank length. But everyone is different. I do find a difference between 175's and 150's and 125's. As I just said to Dev, it is fun to see what happens.
If there is no difference, then I guess I do not understand why some suggest some should consider shorter stuff. Why not have everyone ride 175's?

I do love the powercranks and will continue to use since I feel very strongly they help my running. They even have helped show me my bike fit and crank length were the pits on
200 cranks since I could not even get in aero to pedal the cranks cleanly over the top.

Thanks for any inputs you are willing to give as I play with this stuff, for my learning.
Dave Campbell | Facebook | @DaveECampbell | h2ofun@h2ofun.net

Boom Nutrition code 19F4Y3 $5 off 24 pack box | Bionic Runner | PowerCranks | Velotron | Spruzzamist

Lions don't lose sleep worrying about the sheep
Quote Reply
Re: My testing to try and find best crank length with my Velotron [h2ofun] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Warbird
Dec 27, 17 18:32
Post #1177 of 1333 (5635 views)
h2ofun wrote:

If there is no difference, then I guess I do not understand why some suggest some should consider shorter stuff. Why not have everyone ride 175's?

Because while there is little or no difference in power, there is a huge difference in *FIT*. A crank length that is fine in a semi-upright position can be too long in a lower more aero position, the shorter crank is needed to open up the hip angle at the top of the pedal stroke...
"I'm thinking of a number between 1 and 10, and I don't know why!"
Quote Reply
Re: My testing to try and find best crank length with my Velotron [Warbird] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
h2ofun
Dec 27, 17 18:42
Post #1178 of 1333 (5624 views)
Warbird wrote:
h2ofun wrote:

If there is no difference, then I guess I do not understand why some suggest some should consider shorter stuff. Why not have everyone ride 175's?


Because while there is little or no difference in power, there is a huge difference in *FIT*. A crank length that is fine in a semi-upright position can be too long in a lower more aero position, the shorter crank is needed to open up the hip angle at the top of the pedal stroke...

Great, then length does have a need for fit, which implies all fits need this to be considered?

With 200's, I would not get over the top of the pedal stroke with powercranks in aero. 175 and below I can in aero.

Going to do some testing trying to stay longer in aero. There is a point I have zero desire to continue this. Meaning, I have zero desire to do the majority of my bike trainer
riding in aero. This is a hobby, for fun, not to see how I get my back and neck messed up. I do no accept I have to be able to train 7 days a week in aero, I have NO
interest in this.

I have not seen a difference in the flats, but see a difference in the hills. I also see a difference depending on cadence and crank length.

Thanks for the inputs, I am listening!!
Dave Campbell | Facebook | @DaveECampbell | h2ofun@h2ofun.net

Boom Nutrition code 19F4Y3 $5 off 24 pack box | Bionic Runner | PowerCranks | Velotron | Spruzzamist

Lions don't lose sleep worrying about the sheep
Quote Reply
Re: My testing to try and find best crank length with my Velotron [h2ofun] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Warbird
Dec 27, 17 19:06
Post #1179 of 1333 (5607 views)
h2ofun wrote:
Warbird wrote:
h2ofun wrote:

If there is no difference, then I guess I do not understand why some suggest some should consider shorter stuff. Why not have everyone ride 175's?


Because while there is little or no difference in power, there is a huge difference in *FIT*. A crank length that is fine in a semi-upright position can be too long in a lower more aero position, the shorter crank is needed to open up the hip angle at the top of the pedal stroke...


Great, then length does have a need for fit, which implies all fits need this to be considered?

And all of the reputable fitters that I know of take this into account. It very rarely needs to be as huge of a difference as what you've been testing.

As FindinFreestyle has posted earlier in this thread and elsewhere:

Quote:
1. The only way to intuitively understand the benefits of shorter cranks is to have a competent fitter utilizing proper equipment take you to the limit of your current crank length before making a change. In other words, if your fit is not at least in the ballpark of optimized, you probably won't notice much, or even worse, you might have a different experience than if you were close to optimal.

2. When done as described above, about 80-90% of riders are going to prefer a crank length from .5 to 1.5 cm shorter than what would typically come on a stock bike in their size.
"I'm thinking of a number between 1 and 10, and I don't know why!"
Quote Reply
Re: My testing to try and find best crank length with my Velotron [Warbird] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
h2ofun
Dec 27, 17 19:15
Post #1180 of 1333 (5595 views)
Warbird wrote:
h2ofun wrote:
Warbird wrote:
h2ofun wrote:

If there is no difference, then I guess I do not understand why some suggest some should consider shorter stuff. Why not have everyone ride 175's?


Because while there is little or no difference in power, there is a huge difference in *FIT*. A crank length that is fine in a semi-upright position can be too long in a lower more aero position, the shorter crank is needed to open up the hip angle at the top of the pedal stroke...


Great, then length does have a need for fit, which implies all fits need this to be considered?

And all of the reputable fitters that I know of take this into account. It very rarely needs to be as huge of a difference as what you've been testing.

As FindinFreestyle has posted earlier in this thread and elsewhere:

Quote:
1. The only way to intuitively understand the benefits of shorter cranks is to have a competent fitter utilizing proper equipment take you to the limit of your current crank length before making a change. In other words, if your fit is not at least in the ballpark of optimized, you probably won't notice much, or even worse, you might have a different experience than if you were close to optimal.

2. When done as described above, about 80-90% of riders are going to prefer a crank length from .5 to 1.5 cm shorter than what would typically come on a
stock bike in their size.

Imo the number 2 is the issue. Meaning first one mentally has to be open to change. Took me years of frank bugging me before i was mentally ready. And then for me i needed to soend time riding different lengths to get over the bias and see data i could repeat tests to show me impacts. This for me has taken a while. I do believe the shorter the better for my bike fot and bidy needs. Right now i am bias to give 150 cranks a try. Have the cadence i like. Lower bike height for stability. Lower bars. Better in hills without having to consider gearing changes on my bike. But need to see what frank thinks.

Going to try 10 mile tts tpmorrow in 100% aero. No desire to do lots of this.

Thanks for the inputs
Dave Campbell | Facebook | @DaveECampbell | h2ofun@h2ofun.net

Boom Nutrition code 19F4Y3 $5 off 24 pack box | Bionic Runner | PowerCranks | Velotron | Spruzzamist

Lions don't lose sleep worrying about the sheep
Quote Reply
Re: My testing to try and find best crank length with my Velotron [h2ofun] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Warbird
Dec 27, 17 19:24
Post #1181 of 1333 (5595 views)
h2ofun wrote:
Warbird wrote:
h2ofun wrote:
Warbird wrote:
h2ofun wrote:

If there is no difference, then I guess I do not understand why some suggest some should consider shorter stuff. Why not have everyone ride 175's?


Because while there is little or no difference in power, there is a huge difference in *FIT*. A crank length that is fine in a semi-upright position can be too long in a lower more aero position, the shorter crank is needed to open up the hip angle at the top of the pedal stroke...


Great, then length does have a need for fit, which implies all fits need this to be considered?


And all of the reputable fitters that I know of take this into account. It very rarely needs to be as huge of a difference as what you've been testing.

As FindinFreestyle has posted earlier in this thread and elsewhere:

Quote:
1. The only way to intuitively understand the benefits of shorter cranks is to have a competent fitter utilizing proper equipment take you to the limit of your current crank length before making a change. In other words, if your fit is not at least in the ballpark of optimized, you probably won't notice much, or even worse, you might have a different experience than if you were close to optimal.

2. When done as described above, about 80-90% of riders are going to prefer a crank length from .5 to 1.5 cm shorter than what would typically come on a
stock bike in their size.


Imo the number 2 is the issue. Meaning first one mentally has to be open to change.

The process described above, when performed on a dynamic fit bike, makes the difference very obvious. A noticeable increase in comfort and/or range of motion tends to make one very open to change...
"I'm thinking of a number between 1 and 10, and I don't know why!"
Quote Reply
Re: My testing to try and find best crank length with my Velotron [Warbird] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
h2ofun
Dec 28, 17 5:18
Post #1182 of 1333 (5518 views)
Warbird wrote:
h2ofun wrote:
Warbird wrote:
h2ofun wrote:
Warbird wrote:
h2ofun wrote:

If there is no difference, then I guess I do not understand why some suggest some should consider shorter stuff. Why not have everyone ride 175's?


Because while there is little or no difference in power, there is a huge difference in *FIT*. A crank length that is fine in a semi-upright position can be too long in a lower more aero position, the shorter crank is needed to open up the hip angle at the top of the pedal stroke...


Great, then length does have a need for fit, which implies all fits need this to be considered?


And all of the reputable fitters that I know of take this into account. It very rarely needs to be as huge of a difference as what you've been testing.

As FindinFreestyle has posted earlier in this thread and elsewhere:

Quote:
1. The only way to intuitively understand the benefits of shorter cranks is to have a competent fitter utilizing proper equipment take you to the limit of your current crank length before making a change. In other words, if your fit is not at least in the ballpark of optimized, you probably won't notice much, or even worse, you might have a different experience than if you were close to optimal.

2. When done as described above, about 80-90% of riders are going to prefer a crank length from .5 to 1.5 cm shorter than what would typically come on a
stock bike in their size.


Imo the number 2 is the issue. Meaning first one mentally has to be open to change.


The process described above, when performed on a dynamic fit bike, makes the difference very obvious. A noticeable increase in comfort and/or range of motion tends to make one very open to change...

Thats great. My experience, starting with me, is when someone tries shorter cranks, like I did, one says nope, feelings funny and not interested. It took me a number of rides, meaning like hour rides, to mentally finally get to the point where "feel" was not an issue. I have now ridden 125mm cranks and the "feel" is not a problem.

So yep, getting the best fit with the cranks and pedal speed is my goal. With that said, I am already going down 50cm from what I have ridden for years. The question I still struggle with if going from 200 to 175's gave me a better fit, which it did, why do some push that I should not go to 150's for which might be a even better fit? This is the question, that if answered, I do not understand. Saying that the seat will be too high and be unsafe does not make an answer to me that makes sense. If it is a better fit, why would someone not do it?
Dave Campbell | Facebook | @DaveECampbell | h2ofun@h2ofun.net

Boom Nutrition code 19F4Y3 $5 off 24 pack box | Bionic Runner | PowerCranks | Velotron | Spruzzamist

Lions don't lose sleep worrying about the sheep
Quote Reply
Re: My testing to try and find best crank length with my Velotron [h2ofun] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Big Endian
Dec 28, 17 7:02
Post #1183 of 1333 (5471 views)
h2ofun wrote:
The question I still struggle with if going from 200 to 175's gave me a better fit, which it did, why do some push that I should not go to 150's for which might be a even better fit? This is the question, that if answered, I do not understand. Saying that the seat will be too high and be unsafe does not make an answer to me that makes sense. If it is a better fit, why would someone not do it?

In order to answer that, you will have to do a real ride on real roads, because riding indoors on a fixed frame does not give you the required feedback. Having your entire body mass cantilevered an additional inch above the bike does make a noticeable difference in the handling of the bike. In the limit, that affects safety.
Less is more.
Quote Reply
Re: My testing to try and find best crank length with my Velotron [h2ofun] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
dado0583
Dec 28, 17 7:08
Post #1184 of 1333 (5461 views)
Over 1100 posts and I'm still trying to figure out if you found the best crank length?
Quote Reply
Re: My testing to try and find best crank length with my Velotron [h2ofun] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Warbird
Dec 28, 17 7:26
Post #1185 of 1333 (5445 views)
h2ofun wrote:
My experience, starting with me, is when someone tries shorter cranks, like I did, one says nope, feelings funny and not interested. It took me a number of rides, meaning like hour rides, to mentally finally get to the point where "feel" was not an issue.

If the process had been where you were on a fit bike and started with 200mm cranks, and your position was gradually brought down lower, you would reach a point where it became uncomfortable to pedal. A quick switch to a shorter length would allow you to see how much of a difference it could make, while you still had the feel of the longer cranks in your mind. Trying different lengths or positions on different days won't.

Quote:
The question I still struggle with if going from 200 to 175's gave me a better fit, which it did, why do some push that I should not go to 150's for which might be a even better fit? This is the question, that if answered, I do not understand. Saying that the seat will be too high and be unsafe does not make an answer to me that makes sense. If it is a better fit, why would someone not do it?

Why do you assume that continuing to go shorter results in a better fit? Is your position actually improving as you continue to go shorter, or was there a point where all you are then doing is raising your center of gravity?
"I'm thinking of a number between 1 and 10, and I don't know why!"
Quote Reply
Re: My testing to try and find best crank length with my Velotron [dado0583] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
h2ofun
Dec 28, 17 7:26
Post #1186 of 1333 (5444 views)
dado0583 wrote:
Over 1100 posts and I'm still trying to figure out if you found the best crank length?

Not yet
Dave Campbell | Facebook | @DaveECampbell | h2ofun@h2ofun.net

Boom Nutrition code 19F4Y3 $5 off 24 pack box | Bionic Runner | PowerCranks | Velotron | Spruzzamist

Lions don't lose sleep worrying about the sheep
Quote Reply
Re: My testing to try and find best crank length with my Velotron [Big Endian] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
h2ofun
Dec 28, 17 7:29
Post #1187 of 1333 (5438 views)
Big Endian wrote:
h2ofun wrote:
The question I still struggle with if going from 200 to 175's gave me a better fit, which it did, why do some push that I should not go to 150's for which might be a even better fit? This is the question, that if answered, I do not understand. Saying that the seat will be too high and be unsafe does not make an answer to me that makes sense. If it is a better fit, why would someone not do it?


In order to answer that, you will have to do a real ride on real roads, because riding indoors on a fixed frame does not give you the required feedback. Having your entire body mass cantilevered an additional inch above the bike does make a noticeable difference in the handling of the bike. In the limit, that affects safety.

Fair. I know when I rode 200 cranks, many folks said they were unsafe, I would hit the pedals on the ground in a turn, and crash. After all the years I rode 200's, I never once hit the ground.

But yes, it will be interesting to see how it feels out on the road. I should give this a try. But first I need to get a video of my current fit with 150 cranks and see what folks think
Dave Campbell | Facebook | @DaveECampbell | h2ofun@h2ofun.net

Boom Nutrition code 19F4Y3 $5 off 24 pack box | Bionic Runner | PowerCranks | Velotron | Spruzzamist

Lions don't lose sleep worrying about the sheep
Quote Reply
Re: My testing to try and find best crank length with my Velotron [Warbird] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
h2ofun
Dec 28, 17 7:32
Post #1188 of 1333 (5430 views)
Warbird wrote:
h2ofun wrote:
My experience, starting with me, is when someone tries shorter cranks, like I did, one says nope, feelings funny and not interested. It took me a number of rides, meaning like hour rides, to mentally finally get to the point where "feel" was not an issue.


If the process had been where you were on a fit bike and started with 200mm cranks, and your position was gradually brought down lower, you would reach a point where it became uncomfortable to pedal. A quick switch to a shorter length would allow you to see how much of a difference it could make, while you still had the feel of the longer cranks in your mind. Trying different lengths or positions on different days won't.

Quote:
The question I still struggle with if going from 200 to 175's gave me a better fit, which it did, why do some push that I should not go to 150's for which might be a even better fit? This is the question, that if answered, I do not understand. Saying that the seat will be too high and be unsafe does not make an answer to me that makes sense. If it is a better fit, why would someone not do it?


Why do you assume that continuing to go shorter results in a better fit? Is your position actually improving as you continue to go shorter, or was there a point where all you are then doing is raising your center of gravity?

That is one of the questions I am trying to understand. What defines a better fit? I know while I go shorter, my knee does not have to bend as much. Would this not be a positive?
As a tall person, my center of gravity has always been higher than a normal person to start with. So how would one determine what is good or bad for center of gravity?
It would seem that for this, using the 200's to have my seat as low as possible would be the best?

Again, for all you folks who know you are 100% right with the answer, great, all I am trying to do is understand this stuff, which may be easy for you, but since I am not that smart, is not as easy for me.
Dave Campbell | Facebook | @DaveECampbell | h2ofun@h2ofun.net

Boom Nutrition code 19F4Y3 $5 off 24 pack box | Bionic Runner | PowerCranks | Velotron | Spruzzamist

Lions don't lose sleep worrying about the sheep
Quote Reply
Re: My testing to try and find best crank length with my Velotron [h2ofun] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
h2ofun
Dec 28, 17 7:35
Post #1189 of 1333 (5427 views)
Okay, time to go for my long run to see if my testing this morning impacted anything.
Dave Campbell | Facebook | @DaveECampbell | h2ofun@h2ofun.net

Boom Nutrition code 19F4Y3 $5 off 24 pack box | Bionic Runner | PowerCranks | Velotron | Spruzzamist

Lions don't lose sleep worrying about the sheep
Quote Reply
Re: My testing to try and find best crank length with my Velotron [h2ofun] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
h2ofun
Dec 28, 17 10:05
Post #1190 of 1333 (5376 views)
My 9.5 mile run in the hills, cold and dark was good. I have yet to see any crank lengths or fit that seem to have had any negative impacts on my run times in training.

Frank wanted me to do longer TT's so I did some 10 mile TT's in 100% AB this morning. SO boring!!
What was interesting is the first ride I just felt like the seat was too far back. I have been lazy as I have raised the seat, I have not
been good about moving the seat forward.

So before the second TT effort pulled the seat forward 25mm so I am not 495mm from the seat to AB's, and 95mm from seat to BB. Felt like a much better fit.

Frank is bugging me for a fit video so I will get this done and post for inputs.
Dave Campbell | Facebook | @DaveECampbell | h2ofun@h2ofun.net

Boom Nutrition code 19F4Y3 $5 off 24 pack box | Bionic Runner | PowerCranks | Velotron | Spruzzamist

Lions don't lose sleep worrying about the sheep
Quote Reply
Re: My testing to try and find best crank length with my Velotron [h2ofun] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
h2ofun
Dec 28, 17 10:29
Post #1191 of 1333 (5355 views)
As I was doing my long run today I was thinking about all the crap I get about my bike. Over the years, my bike times at local races are like the 75 to 80% point.
Seems to me this means 75% of the folks would love to have my crappy bike time.

So if so many folks are doing all the right stuff compared to me, Fits, coaches, FTP training, power meters, outside riding, etc., I just have to ask again, why are they
all not beating me who does everything so wrong? :)
Dave Campbell | Facebook | @DaveECampbell | h2ofun@h2ofun.net

Boom Nutrition code 19F4Y3 $5 off 24 pack box | Bionic Runner | PowerCranks | Velotron | Spruzzamist

Lions don't lose sleep worrying about the sheep
Quote Reply
Re: My testing to try and find best crank length with my Velotron [h2ofun] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
ctflower
Dec 28, 17 10:42
Post #1192 of 1333 (5338 views)
h2ofun wrote:

That is one of the questions I am trying to understand. What defines a better fit? I know while I go shorter, my knee does not have to bend as much. Would this not be a positive?
As a tall person, my center of gravity has always been higher than a normal person to start with. So how would one determine what is good or bad for center of gravity?
It would seem that for this, using the 200's to have my seat as low as possible would be the best?

Again, for all you folks who know you are 100% right with the answer, great, all I am trying to do is understand this stuff, which may be easy for you, but since I am not that smart, is not as easy for me.

Ride your bike outside and evaluate your comfort.

h2ofun wrote:
As I was doing my long run today I was thinking about all the crap I get about my bike. Over the years, my bike times at local races are like the 75 to 80% point.
Seems to me this means 75% of the folks would love to have my crappy bike time.

So if so many folks are doing all the right stuff compared to me, Fits, coaches, FTP training, power meters, outside riding, etc., I just have to ask again, why are they
all not beating me who does everything so wrong? :)

Perhaps with a proper fit you could be in a higher finishing percentile. Perhaps those that you are beating that have done the fits and training would be further behind without any of it.
Last edited by: ctflower: Dec 28, 17 10:42
Quote Reply
Re: My testing to try and find best crank length with my Velotron [ctflower] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
h2ofun
Dec 28, 17 10:47
Post #1193 of 1333 (5328 views)
ctflower wrote:
h2ofun wrote:

That is one of the questions I am trying to understand. What defines a better fit? I know while I go shorter, my knee does not have to bend as much. Would this not be a positive?
As a tall person, my center of gravity has always been higher than a normal person to start with. So how would one determine what is good or bad for center of gravity?
It would seem that for this, using the 200's to have my seat as low as possible would be the best?

Again, for all you folks who know you are 100% right with the answer, great, all I am trying to do is understand this stuff, which may be easy for you, but since I am not that smart, is not as easy for me.

Ride your bike outside and evaluate your comfort.

h2ofun wrote:
As I was doing my long run today I was thinking about all the crap I get about my bike. Over the years, my bike times at local races are like the 75 to 80% point.
Seems to me this means 75% of the folks would love to have my crappy bike time.

So if so many folks are doing all the right stuff compared to me, Fits, coaches, FTP training, power meters, outside riding, etc., I just have to ask again, why are they
all not beating me who does everything so wrong? :)

Perhaps with a proper fit you could be in a higher finishing percentile. Perhaps those that you are beating that have done the fits and training would be further behind without any of it.

I will ride outside, but since some are saying I will have an issue, I am just trying to understand before hand what to look for. What is good or what is bad.

I feel I now have had a proper fit, maybe that is one reasons my martis times are so much better. Proper fit includes best crank length, cadence, etc.

Now, since I have been very happy with my triathlon results over the years, will see what happens.
The reason I do not do crits is I really cannot stand riding the bike outside!! Just way too boring and long for my interest, to risky, and hard on my butt. :)
I have yet to hear a person get hurt riding a bike trainer.

But, is fun chasing can I improve some of the bike and maybe go to 85% in the bike split results.
Dave Campbell | Facebook | @DaveECampbell | h2ofun@h2ofun.net

Boom Nutrition code 19F4Y3 $5 off 24 pack box | Bionic Runner | PowerCranks | Velotron | Spruzzamist

Lions don't lose sleep worrying about the sheep
Quote Reply
Re: My testing to try and find best crank length with my Velotron [h2ofun] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
ctflower
Dec 28, 17 10:57
Post #1194 of 1333 (5321 views)
h2ofun wrote:

I will ride outside, but since some are saying I will have an issue, I am just trying to understand before hand what to look for. What is good or what is bad.

I feel I now have had a proper fit, maybe that is one reasons my martis times are so much better. Proper fit includes best crank length, cadence, etc.

Now, since I have been very happy with my triathlon results over the years, will see what happens.
The reason I do not do crits is I really cannot stand riding the bike outside!! Just way too boring and long for my interest, to risky, and hard on my butt. :)
I have yet to hear a person get hurt riding a bike trainer.

But, is fun chasing can I improve some of the bike and maybe go to 85% in the bike split results.
You've ridden outside before, so use that as an initial point for comparison. Does the bike feel different? Do you feel good in the aerobars putting out power? Can you corner as comfortably? Do you feel unstable descending?

MIGHT be best to do a quick check before a race so you can make any necessary changes to accommodate your new fit.
Quote Reply
Re: My testing to try and find best crank length with my Velotron [h2ofun] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
h2ofun
Dec 28, 17 11:18
Post #1195 of 1333 (5306 views)
It really amazes me that most of you have missed the entire point of this exercise which really involves 3 phases.

Phase one was to find the pedal speed that gave Dave the best efficiency so he would optimize his power.
Phase two is to find the longest crank length that allows him to get into a very aero position without losing much power from his upright, most powerful position.
Phase three would then be to calculate the cadence necessary to ride at his optimum pedal speed at the crank length that works best for him (and to retest to confirm we got it right). In addition, we are trying to take into account his historical issue with back and knee pain especially in the aero position.

My guess right now is the crank length that fits the above criteria will be between 150 and 130 mm. We know there is hardly any difference in these lengths in his Martis performance. Until we see pictures of where he is now it is hard to know how much tweaking might be left to improve his aerodynamics.

Frank Day
Dave Campbell | Facebook | @DaveECampbell | h2ofun@h2ofun.net

Boom Nutrition code 19F4Y3 $5 off 24 pack box | Bionic Runner | PowerCranks | Velotron | Spruzzamist

Lions don't lose sleep worrying about the sheep
Quote Reply
Re: My testing to try and find best crank length with my Velotron [devashish_paul] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
h2ofun
Dec 28, 17 11:20
Post #1196 of 1333 (5302 views)
Dev wrote: "Dave you need lower gearing to climb hills. You can get lower gearing three ways

• Bigger rear cluster (cassette)
• Small front chain ring
• Longer crank arms

Just so you realize your 150mm cranks are 33% harder gearing than your 200mm cranks (200/150 = 1.3333) items 1 to 3 being equal. So you're going faster on your hilly course with harder gearing (assuming your testing does not keep changing out casette and chain rings). So the answer to this 'seems' to be you are going faster due to better fit and PERHAPS better aeordynamics, not because of any magic crank length leverage (you're actually having to apply higher pedal force on the pedal at 150mm cranks to sustain the same crank torque as with 200m at a fixed RPM....and since Power = torque x RPM, you are applying higher pedal force on the 150mm cranks than with 200's assuming of course you are keeping the same power output and getting faster through superior aerodynamics at a fixed RPM.....or you are applying the same pedal force as with 200mm's but your moving at way higher RPM to sustain the same power.


But are you even measuring power on the road, or is it some bogus field test where you don't even control power, forget about controlling wind????


Sorry I have not been on this thread for a while, and maybe with the Xmas lull at work I don't feel bad squandering some time on ST, but it feels like nothing has changed in terms of your understanding of everything Biomcgeek has provided us the foundational knowledge for with countless hours of stringent science based peer reviewed results!!!”

Actually Dev, there are 4 methods of getting lower gearing, the fourth being smaller wheels, remember 650?

And, Dev, he is going faster with harder gearing because that harder gearing slowed his pedal speed to something more efficient for his muscles. So, it may be “harder” from a force on the pedals perspective but it is actually easier from the point of view of the muscles. If it weren’t he wouldn’t be able to increase his power.

And, I missed where BioMcGeek offered anything positive to this thread other than having conducted the original study that led to my ideas here. Unfortunately, he seemed to have missed the real world racing importance of what he published.

Frank Day
Dave Campbell | Facebook | @DaveECampbell | h2ofun@h2ofun.net

Boom Nutrition code 19F4Y3 $5 off 24 pack box | Bionic Runner | PowerCranks | Velotron | Spruzzamist

Lions don't lose sleep worrying about the sheep
Quote Reply
Re: My testing to try and find best crank length with my Velotron [h2ofun] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
DFW_Tri
Dec 28, 17 11:22
Post #1197 of 1333 (5300 views)
“Many” reasons you assumptions are wrong, but for starters, “many” is not the same as 75-80%. So even if you assume that the same percentage of people doing the right thing equates to race results predictiveness—which we know it doesn’t—no one said 75-80% of triathletes are doing things “right”. In a local race my estimate is that 75-80% are doing it wrong. That still leaves “many” who are doing it right. I would guess your genetics is a big part and as ridiculous as you are, you are still probably doing things more right than an average triathlete!!!
Quote Reply
Re: My testing to try and find best crank length with my Velotron [ctflower] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
h2ofun
Dec 28, 17 11:24
Post #1198 of 1333 (5295 views)
ctflower wrote:
h2ofun wrote:


I will ride outside, but since some are saying I will have an issue, I am just trying to understand before hand what to look for. What is good or what is bad.

I feel I now have had a proper fit, maybe that is one reasons my martis times are so much better. Proper fit includes best crank length, cadence, etc.

Now, since I have been very happy with my triathlon results over the years, will see what happens.
The reason I do not do crits is I really cannot stand riding the bike outside!! Just way too boring and long for my interest, to risky, and hard on my butt. :)
I have yet to hear a person get hurt riding a bike trainer.

But, is fun chasing can I improve some of the bike and maybe go to 85% in the bike split results.

You've ridden outside before, so use that as an initial point for comparison. Does the bike feel different? Do you feel good in the aerobars putting out power? Can you corner as comfortably? Do you feel unstable descending?

MIGHT be best to do a quick check before a race so you can make any necessary changes to accommodate your new fit.

All great points.

I just keep thinking, if I come back and say I had no issues, I just know some folks will say I am wrong.

So lets take an example, descending. I DO NOT like going down anything over 30 mph! Does this mean anything negative? Some will try to spin it that way. But I just do not like the risk of riding downhill fast. Has nothing to do with bike fit, my handling skills, etc. But of course many say I am wrong.

I just see too many get hurt riding outside. I just have zero interest in riding outside other than in races where clearly, I have no choice. If this means I am not as "good" as I could be, great. I make up for this by frequency, consistency, duration training.
Dave Campbell | Facebook | @DaveECampbell | h2ofun@h2ofun.net

Boom Nutrition code 19F4Y3 $5 off 24 pack box | Bionic Runner | PowerCranks | Velotron | Spruzzamist

Lions don't lose sleep worrying about the sheep
Quote Reply
Re: My testing to try and find best crank length with my Velotron [DFW_Tri] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
h2ofun
Dec 28, 17 11:36
Post #1199 of 1333 (5274 views)
DFW_Tri wrote:
“Many” reasons you assumptions are wrong, but for starters, “many” is not the same as 75-80%. So even if you assume that the same percentage of people doing the right thing equates to race results predictiveness—which we know it doesn’t—no one said 75-80% of triathletes are doing things “right”. In a local race my estimate is that 75-80% are doing it wrong. That still leaves “many” who are doing it right. I would guess your genetics is a big part and as ridiculous as you are, you are still probably doing things more right than an average triathlete!!!

Fair
Dave Campbell | Facebook | @DaveECampbell | h2ofun@h2ofun.net

Boom Nutrition code 19F4Y3 $5 off 24 pack box | Bionic Runner | PowerCranks | Velotron | Spruzzamist

Lions don't lose sleep worrying about the sheep
Quote Reply
Re: My testing to try and find best crank length with my Velotron [h2ofun] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
JasoninHalifax
Dec 28, 17 11:40
Post #1200 of 1333 (5268 views)
You train 3 hours per day. That's the big thing you do right, and that's 90% of the battle right there. You really need to compare yourself to others who are training similar volumes. There aren't that many of you.
Swimming Workout of the Day:

Favourite Swim Sets:

2020 National Masters Champion - M50-54 - 50m Butterfly
Quote Reply
Prev Next
Back To ForumPrint Thread

Our Partners

transition-DOT-area-AT-slowtwitch-DOT-com

Advertise with us

©1999-2024 Slowtwitch, Inc., and Slowtwitch.com
Reproduction of material from any Slowtwitch.com page
without written permission is strictly prohibited.