Anyone running 165mm cranks on a 29-er?

[rideit]

I have run 175’s for 30 years or so, but I wanna try something less pedal-strikey on my Yeti. Anyone running 165’s, and if so, have you actually noticed any differences in torque (or otherwise?).
Just curious.

[toast2266]

I have. I don't like them. Too short. The pedal circle feels annoyingly small.

But I have similar annoyances with 175's being too long. 170's are just right (although I do still have 165's on the DH bike).

[smmokan]

I'm running 165's on my Canyon Strive (they were stock). The last two years I've been running 170's, and I can't tell the difference in execution of the pedal movement. There are too many variables involved in the torque equation to compare it to previous bikes, or climbing times, so I can't really say if it's better or worse. For the most part, it's fairly unnoticeable in all aspects.

[stradissimo]

I’m running 165s on a Sentinel. I’m shorter than Toast, 5’6”, 30” inseam, and they feel fairly right to me.

In my experience, a 5 psi difference in the rear shock makes more difference in pedal strikes than 5 mm of crank length.

Back when I cared enough to measure stuff, my power numbers for efforts up to 5 minutes were better with 165s. For anything longer than 10 minutes, I did better with 170s. It was counterintuitive, but you can’t fight data.

[beaterdit]

Running 170s for the last three trail bikes. Also had 165s on the DH bike, felt short but fine for that application. I’m an anatomic freak; 5’7”, 33” inseam.

[dexterq20]

I switched from 175 to 170 for my last bike and although I didn't strike too many rocks, the pedal circle felt a little awkward and cramped (I'm 6'1" with a short-ish torso and long-ish inseam). It all depends on your leg length (I think bike fit experts will tell you that femur length is what determines your crank length). I'm building a new bike right now and will be running 175mm cranks just because they feel more comfortable. I can deal with hitting a few extra rocks. As far as power is concerned, I read somewhere recently that you only gain a 3% mechanical advantage with every 5mm of extra crank length, so I can't imagine you'd be able to feel a difference in power or efficiency when switching to shorter cranks (I certainly didn't).

[volklpowdermaniac]

Following this. I’m short-ish 5’8/9, but have short legs 28-29 inseam, curious if this would do anything for my life, climbing efficiency or whatever, i run 170 on all three bikes (road, hardtail, sb5.5) don’t have any issues, but if it ain’t broke, I should fix it until it is.

[rideit]

Running 170s for the last three trail bikes. Also had 165s on the DH bike, felt short but fine for that application. I’m an anatomic freak; 5’7”, 33” inseam.

I’m pretty damn close to that.
I joke that (when it comes to reach measurements) I am shaped like a T-Rex.
Just got a 175mm dropper post, and still could use a 200.

[bagtagley]

Fellow freak here, 5’10” with 34.5” inseam. Preference is 175. dex said it well. I don’t know about efficiency but 170s feel awkward. I get used it when riding 170, but I still notice it. 165 is fine for DH, but I really don’t like it for climbing.

[buttahflake]

The correct length is 172.5
Go on now

[beaterdit]

I’m pretty damn close to that.
I joke that (when it comes to reach measurements) I am shaped like a T-Rex.
Just got a 175mm dropper post, and still could use a 200.

Been liking the 170mm OneUP. Plenty of drop for me. Limited knee flexion here so it's enough that it's at my limit when slammed.

The correct length is 172.5
Go on now

Hahaha.

[buttahflake]

Been liking the 170mm OneUP. Plenty of drop for me. Limited knee flexion here so it's enough that it's at my limit when slammed.



Hahaha.

What’s funny?
I’ve been running this length forever.
All three bikes, road, MTB and gravel

[stuckathuntermtn]

I can't quantify it, but 165 cranks on a 29er sounds like a terrible idea.
Are you like a 28" inseam?

Just hit the rocks, it's ok.

[grskier]

I’m running 175mm at 5’7” and a almost 29” inseam... been thinking about actually going down to a 170mm


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

[rideit]

Are you like a 28" inseam?

.

Pay attention, JONG

[beaterdit]

What’s funny?
I’ve been running this length forever.
All three bikes, road, MTB and gravel

You are. You are funny. LOL

Always felt the 2.5mm increments were silly but if that's what works for ya, you rock it.

[rideit]

“Pick a crank length and be a dick about it”

[buttahflake]

Alrighty then, I’ll see myself out.
Beatyerdick is a fat fuck

[beaterdit]

LOL did I offend you buttah? Don't get your panties in a bunch, I'm just fuckin with ya.

Oh, also run 170 on the road bike. With my inseam I'm sure I could be fine with 175 but like buttah, I like consistency.

[stuckathuntermtn]

180mm cranks, 1,000mm bars, 203mm dropper post.
On a Penny Farthing.

[donutlynx]

I don't think they make 165mm crank arms for 29ers. Need at least 650 B's in the rear.

[toast2266]

I don't think they make 165mm crank arms for 29ers. Need at least 650 B's in the rear.

That's actually the reason for the mullet bike fad. Everyone wants shorter cranks.

[detrusor]

I ran 180mm cranks on my road bike back in the day, knees aren’t what they used to be so I’ve scaled back to 177.5.

If I could find single ring MTB cranks in 177.5 I’d be on it


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

[rideit]

Anyone want to buy a pair of 175 XTR 9100 cranks?
Ten rides on em, $300 shipped.
I bought 170’s.

[CantDog]

I ran 180 M950 XTR cranks for years on my SS because that’s what mountain bike action and dirt rag told me to do. I think I sold them to mtnlion.


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums