Shhh, if you don't stop threads like these, I'll never find a trade for my 175 SRAM Red cranks

It is for some fitters, the decent ones. Although just because they don't mention it doesn't mean its not considered. 17--175mm cranks come on the vast majority of bikes and are just fine for the vast majority of bike riders.

---

Styrrell

Yes it should.

And also the pedal axle length. Cleat adjustment can only go so far in or out before you need to change the pedal axle. And they aren't easy to obtain either. One size fits all is sitting on the shelf at an LBS. It's a custom order for anything other than that. At least that's how Speedplay rolls.

Almost a month ago I had my first real "fit" and I went all out for the Retul (Grasky Endurance, Tucson). We thoroughly discussed my shape (just as odd at 6'1" myself) and I had borrowed cranks for the test because I just got my first tri bike. The bike fit was great, but my knees were coming up and reducing my ability to get a full breath and the same hip action you had. We assumed that the cranks were 172.5-175 and I could go down a size, but our jaws dropped when they turned out to be 170s. The discussion went on to tracking down some 165s to try/convert to, but I am still on the daily hunt online. I have only been "sized" before this, so my fitting knowledge is minimal. Past experience from my road bike that "one size fits all" construction isn't the best way to go, but it took me 2 years to figure that out.

Glad to hear short cranks worked for you; now if I can only find some for me. While it is more comfortable, do you feel robbed of power? I just went from 175 compacts on my road bike to 170 standards and I am still trying to adjust to the increased force, so I am concerned about the odd spin of short cranks. Any add'l details from your experience would be nice to hear.

I actually feel increased power. I should add that I did get q rings that may add to that feel but I really feel the shorter cranks have made the difference. I think my increased power comes from a smoother pedal stroke since I am not getting caught at top and my leg isn't bowing out.

I'm nearly the same size (6', 34.5 inseam) and have experimented with a lot of crankarm lengths. 155-195mm In all of that I can tell you that the only reason it really matters is if you are trying to achieve a fit for purposes of improved aerodynamics that constricts your hip angle. In that case, a shorter crankarm will help open up your hip angle and likely allow you to generate more power.
I've raced on 165s successfully when I had a very tight aero position.
A fitter should be aware of crank length, but for most folks it is a non-issue.
Chad

Maybe they don't discuss "crank length" because its hard to keep a straight face....

My inseam is 27" and I hated my 165's. I went back to 170's a felt so much better.
Hope they work for you.

jaretj

Literally LMAO

I still like my 200's


.

---

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

5"11, 32 inseam, very flexible. Love my new 175s.

I got fit this year and I had my 165s that I was experimenting with on and they said to go back to 175s because they have more "leverage" which if you ever read any of the million threads about crank length you know it's BS. I also couldnt get my seat post high enough which was a better reason to go go back to 175s but I told them I liked the shorter cranks because it opens up my hip angle. They said to fix that they would raise my 80mm stem which is the opposite of what I wanted which was go lower with a longer stem.

After that I decided I'll just fit myself. I bought a longer seat post clamp (Scott plasma ie integrated seat post) and put my 165s back on and it is much better than any fit I've gotten. I also got my longer stem which they didn't want to put me on.

---

---

Sometimes you just have to do what you know is right and gives you the best results despite what any local fitter or article may say.

Along with that, we should still be open minded enough to try what seems to be illogical but raising the stem 80mm is quite a bit.

jaretj

That was my stem length that was 80mm. I guess I worded it badly. I felt like I needed a longer stem since I switched to an Adamo because I was able to rotate my hips forward more so my torso is stretched more. They wanted me to sit farther back on the Adamo and raise my stem. I felt like my saddle was on the right place but I needed more reach. We both agreed on how my arms should look but we didn't agree on how to get that. I wanted to sit farther forward with more drop and a longer stem and that wanted me to sit farther back with less drop.

---

---

I understand now, I apparently read it wrong.

With that said, I think it's worth the time to look at, maybe not now during the season but after your big races.

My thoughts are that if your seat is further back then you may be able to start your pedal stroke earlier and give you a little bit more power. Obviously there are other factors to consider too. I've gone back and forth with this a few times and I always wind up at the position that puts me further back but I suppose that is relative.

I think it works for me because I sit on the bike with a slightly hunched back (postierior pelvic tilt compared to others) and drop my heel at the top of the pedal stroke so I can start it earlier. I have a really flexible back so I can get away with that and still be fairly low. I also think that because of my dropped heel I don't like the 165's I had on for a few months.

Just some thoughts...

jaretj

I like my seat farther back too. During my last race I found my self sitting toward the back more because it felt better on my knees. But since Im farther back my hip angle gets smaller so that's why I switched to the 165s. Im thinking about going to 155s

---

---