The importance of crank length to the cyclist. - Page 175 - CyclingNews Forum

Go Back   CyclingNews Forum > Form & Fitness > General

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1741  
Old 12-24-12, 19:19
coapman coapman is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 611
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by CoachFergie View Post
Ha ha most of my coaching is technique.

It's your technique that doesn't matter.

The techniques I coach have a biomechanical and physiological basis to them.

You never answer questions, instead you try to wriggle your way out with a vague reply. You say Obree explained it, how does it differ from natural pedaling.
  #1742  
Old 12-24-12, 20:00
Joachim Joachim is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 531
Default

There is a 7.5mm difference between the cranks on my track bikes, and those on my race bikes.

I haven't noticed a huge difference, in all honesty. Probably would if I upped the length the same amount.
  #1743  
Old 12-24-12, 22:35
CoachFergie's Avatar
CoachFergie CoachFergie is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Christchurch, New Zealand
Posts: 2,175
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by coapman View Post
You never answer questions, instead you try to wriggle your way out with a vague reply. You say Obree explained it, how does it differ from natural pedaling.
http://www.amazon.co.uk/The-Obree-Wa.../dp/B0094382WC
__________________
Hamish Ferguson
http://coachfergblog.blogspot.co.nz/

Power Meters like Powercranks don't improve performance one bit. But at least with a Power Meter you can see yourself not improving because of it
  #1744  
Old 12-24-12, 22:39
CoachFergie's Avatar
CoachFergie CoachFergie is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Christchurch, New Zealand
Posts: 2,175
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by coapman View Post
You never answer questions, instead you try to wriggle your way out with a vague reply. You say Obree explained it, how does it differ from natural pedaling.
How vague is saying neither way of explaining application of power across the top of the stroke improving performance is unsupported by the data?

Very sad seeing the technology to test the hypothesis has been available for 30 years. Why have you not put your money where your mouth is?
__________________
Hamish Ferguson
http://coachfergblog.blogspot.co.nz/

Power Meters like Powercranks don't improve performance one bit. But at least with a Power Meter you can see yourself not improving because of it
  #1745  
Old 02-06-13, 15:29
FrankDay FrankDay is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: N. California
Posts: 2,502
Default

New anecdote to report. User just reported he has been experimenting with crank length on his basic PowerCranks that will go as short as 145mm. He is a triathlete and used to racing on 175mm cranks. He was having trouble adapting to the PowerCranks at the 175mm length (even when he went "short" to 165) and I suggested that he go as short as possible (145). He agreed after he heard my rational. After just a few weeks of on the 145mm PowerCranks he is reporting he is definitely faster on the 145mm PowerCranks than he is on his 175mm regular cranks. Now his dilemma is to figure out if the improvement is the crank length or the PowerCranks or both. That should be easy to do by simply getting some 145 mm regular cranks and comparing again. My guess is it is a little of both.
__________________
Life is short, both reading my posts and training with PowerCranks will make it seem longer
  #1746  
Old 02-06-13, 22:27
FrankDay FrankDay is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: N. California
Posts: 2,502
Default

Another anecdote I heard today. A bike fitter I know just told me he did two things for someone having a lot of back pain, he shortened his cranks to 150 (he wanted to go a little shorter but the rider couldn't find compatible cranks shorter) and he widened his stance. Not only did his back pain go away he improved his time up a local climb by 18 minutes. PowerCranks not involved in this one.
__________________
Life is short, both reading my posts and training with PowerCranks will make it seem longer
  #1747  
Old 02-06-13, 22:55
FitSsikS's Avatar
FitSsikS FitSsikS is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: 'Taranna', The Great White North
Posts: 337
Default

Ok, I'm jumping in rather late on this one.

I can see power cranks being used by exercise physiologists to test work outputs at various crank lengths.

...and that is all.

Just like rpm there is an optimal crank length for each athlete with the latter being related to femur and foot length.

On a sarcastic note, just imagine how fast Usain Bolt would be if he limited his training stride by tying his ankles together.
  #1748  
Old 02-06-13, 23:15
FrankDay FrankDay is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: N. California
Posts: 2,502
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by FitSsikS View Post
…there is an optimal crank length for each athlete with the latter being related to femur and foot length.
Would you have any science to support that statement? In your opinion, exactly how is optimum crank length related to femur and foot length and what is your formula and where did it come from? Thanks for your participation.
__________________
Life is short, both reading my posts and training with PowerCranks will make it seem longer
  #1749  
Old 02-07-13, 01:21
42x16ss's Avatar
42x16ss 42x16ss is online now
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Perth, Aus
Posts: 2,602
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by FrankDay View Post
Would you have any science to support that statement? In your opinion, exactly how is optimum crank length related to femur and foot length and what is your formula and where did it come from? Thanks for your participation.
That's a good question, one you might want to answer yourself in fact. Since you are the one telling us that our 170 - 172.5 mm cranks are the wrong length and all
  #1750  
Old 02-07-13, 07:31
CoachFergie's Avatar
CoachFergie CoachFergie is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Christchurch, New Zealand
Posts: 2,175
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by FrankDay View Post
New anecdote to report. User just reported he has been experimenting with crank length on his basic PowerCranks that will go as short as 145mm. He is a triathlete and used to racing on 175mm cranks. He was having trouble adapting to the PowerCranks at the 175mm length (even when he went "short" to 165) and I suggested that he go as short as possible (145). He agreed after he heard my rational. After just a few weeks of on the 145mm PowerCranks he is reporting he is definitely faster on the 145mm PowerCranks than he is on his 175mm regular cranks. Now his dilemma is to figure out if the improvement is the crank length or the PowerCranks or both. That should be easy to do by simply getting some 145 mm regular cranks and comparing again. My guess is it is a little of both.
Without power meter data it is just a guess.
__________________
Hamish Ferguson
http://coachfergblog.blogspot.co.nz/

Power Meters like Powercranks don't improve performance one bit. But at least with a Power Meter you can see yourself not improving because of it
Closed Thread

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 00:48.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Copyright 2006 - 2009 Future Publishing Limited. All rights reserved. Future Publishing Limited is part of the Future plc group. Future Publishing Limited is a company registered in England and Wales with company registration number 2008885 whose registered office is at Beauford Court 30 Monmouth Street Bath, UK BA1 2BW England.