The short crank trend
15/03/25 16:36 Filed in: Gear
Pogacar swapped his 172.5mm cranks for 165s and suddenly the shorter length is sold out everywhere. I do not know if these are connected, but they seem to be. Pogacar is unusually gifted at winning bike races and so what he's using MUST be right for me - right?
Not so clear to me, but maybe.
It would only apply if you were of a similar height to Pogacar, and probably only if you had an amazing cardiovascular system like Pogacar. Meaning, probably not.
Incidentally, I swapped to 10mm shorter cranks over the past years (it took about two years to change all the bikes). I did this not for any aero- or bio-dynamic gains, but for homogeneity across bicycles. I moved to 170 cranks on the Enduro bike in 2018 (for fewer pedal strikes). The trail bike followed in 2020. My singlespeed has 175s on board, but I always have my eyes open for a sale pair of cranks in 170mm length to bring it on board too. When my long Red cranks broke, I replaced them with lightly-used second-hand Rotor cranks in 170mm. When that frame was warranty replaced, the new bike was built with 170mm Red cranks. The Rotor cranks went on my trainer bike, changing it from 180mm to 170mm. Finally, I put new Record 170mm cranks on the race bike, removing the 180mm Super Record cranks that were on there.
I really like consistent crank lengths across all my bikes.
Should you go shorter? You can get lower at the front and not get knees in your chest. You have to remember to diminish your gears by a similar amount as you decrease your crank length - you can't push the same gears with the shorter cranks. It seems particularly useful on a TT bike, where getting an aero position with long cranks can be challenging. Remember that most studies have shown the power benefits of long cranks (a minuscule 1% per 5mm increase). And that this shifts load from "strength" to "cardio". So what is right for Pogacar is not likely right for the rest of us, but people are very adaptable and shorter is probably not worse!
Not so clear to me, but maybe.
It would only apply if you were of a similar height to Pogacar, and probably only if you had an amazing cardiovascular system like Pogacar. Meaning, probably not.
Incidentally, I swapped to 10mm shorter cranks over the past years (it took about two years to change all the bikes). I did this not for any aero- or bio-dynamic gains, but for homogeneity across bicycles. I moved to 170 cranks on the Enduro bike in 2018 (for fewer pedal strikes). The trail bike followed in 2020. My singlespeed has 175s on board, but I always have my eyes open for a sale pair of cranks in 170mm length to bring it on board too. When my long Red cranks broke, I replaced them with lightly-used second-hand Rotor cranks in 170mm. When that frame was warranty replaced, the new bike was built with 170mm Red cranks. The Rotor cranks went on my trainer bike, changing it from 180mm to 170mm. Finally, I put new Record 170mm cranks on the race bike, removing the 180mm Super Record cranks that were on there.
I really like consistent crank lengths across all my bikes.
Should you go shorter? You can get lower at the front and not get knees in your chest. You have to remember to diminish your gears by a similar amount as you decrease your crank length - you can't push the same gears with the shorter cranks. It seems particularly useful on a TT bike, where getting an aero position with long cranks can be challenging. Remember that most studies have shown the power benefits of long cranks (a minuscule 1% per 5mm increase). And that this shifts load from "strength" to "cardio". So what is right for Pogacar is not likely right for the rest of us, but people are very adaptable and shorter is probably not worse!