Cranky Musings

Egg shaped works here.

I have heard a couple of things over the years about certain components. I tend to think about claims and then if I think it is interesting enough, I'll play around with stuff to see if I can verify the claims for myself.

Egg Shaped: One of these things I've heard and have been playing with is the concept of ovalized chain rings. The claim goes something like this: The oval is aligned in such a way that when you reach a "dead spot" in your pedal stroke the oval is in the "squished" position and makes getting through that dead spot easier. Then when you reach the power section of your stroke, the oval is at the widest part where your leg power can turn the gear over. Well, something like that anyway.... 

So I got a BioPace ring, a 42T from a seven speed crank, and took it home and then analyzed the Rotor site , which pointed me to how I could align the BioPace ring to best mimic what the Rotor chain ring does. Mounted that ring up, and went riding. (Never mind that it is on a 10 speed drive train. It works fine...)

Okay, so after six months of riding, what do I think? I think there is something to this, if you are more of a power cranker/masher. It does allow you to have momentum in the dead parts of your stroke, and keeps the speed up when you are cranking up a climb, instead of loosing it when you ultimately slow down at each point where your dead stroke is. (Or "deader stroke", if you will! "Anti-power stroke, perhaps?...whatever...) If you are a spinner, I don't know if there is as much of an effect, but it probably also helps you there. I tend to be a slower grinder in cadence on gravel roads, so I think, (for me anyway), this ovalized chain ring thing has merits.

"Spin Cycle" works here.

Short Arms: Years ago, I heard the original pocket of 29"er freaks in Grand Junction, Colorado were all about using 170mm cranks. Said it was better for the big wheels, but I have never really had anyone tell me exactly why. (And I've asked the folks that were at "ground zero" in this area, and they just said, "try it, it works!")

Well, ever since 2007 I have been using a 170mm crank on the OS Bikes Blackbuck. No other crank has ever been on this bike. I have several other bikes that are single speeds with anything from 175mm to 180mm cranks on them , and all are 29"ers.

So, does it "just work"? The answer is "yes" if you like to spin a bit higher cadence. Much like the rotor-esque BioPace chain ring, the shorter arms seem to allow for less "dead stroke" rotation when you are grinding out a climb in a slower cadence, plus you can maintain momentum going up off road/single track climbs better with a spinning cadence. At least I feel this. Now keep in mind, this is all for off road, trail riding, not on pavement or gravel. There the "spin cycle" about drives me nuts, although I must say it has made me a better spinner whenever I spend time on the Blackbuck commuting or using it on gravel.

So, there are my personal thoughts on how those controversial things work for me. I suspect that there are several others who feel at 180° odds with what I've just written, but I believe there is something to the claims. I've felt it, compared it, and it is repeatable. Maybe I need to invest in a power metering device to get into this deeper.

Naw....what am I thinking! I just need to go ride and have some fun already!

Cranky Musings

Egg shaped works here.

I have heard a couple of things over the years about certain components. I tend to think about claims and then if I think it is interesting enough, I'll play around with stuff to see if I can verify the claims for myself.

Egg Shaped: One of these things I've heard and have been playing with is the concept of ovalized chain rings. The claim goes something like this: The oval is aligned in such a way that when you reach a "dead spot" in your pedal stroke the oval is in the "squished" position and makes getting through that dead spot easier. Then when you reach the power section of your stroke, the oval is at the widest part where your leg power can turn the gear over. Well, something like that anyway.... 

So I got a BioPace ring, a 42T from a seven speed crank, and took it home and then analyzed the Rotor site , which pointed me to how I could align the BioPace ring to best mimic what the Rotor chain ring does. Mounted that ring up, and went riding. (Never mind that it is on a 10 speed drive train. It works fine...)

Okay, so after six months of riding, what do I think? I think there is something to this, if you are more of a power cranker/masher. It does allow you to have momentum in the dead parts of your stroke, and keeps the speed up when you are cranking up a climb, instead of loosing it when you ultimately slow down at each point where your dead stroke is. (Or "deader stroke", if you will! "Anti-power stroke, perhaps?...whatever...) If you are a spinner, I don't know if there is as much of an effect, but it probably also helps you there. I tend to be a slower grinder in cadence on gravel roads, so I think, (for me anyway), this ovalized chain ring thing has merits.

"Spin Cycle" works here.

Short Arms: Years ago, I heard the original pocket of 29"er freaks in Grand Junction, Colorado were all about using 170mm cranks. Said it was better for the big wheels, but I have never really had anyone tell me exactly why. (And I've asked the folks that were at "ground zero" in this area, and they just said, "try it, it works!")

Well, ever since 2007 I have been using a 170mm crank on the OS Bikes Blackbuck. No other crank has ever been on this bike. I have several other bikes that are single speeds with anything from 175mm to 180mm cranks on them , and all are 29"ers.

So, does it "just work"? The answer is "yes" if you like to spin a bit higher cadence. Much like the rotor-esque BioPace chain ring, the shorter arms seem to allow for less "dead stroke" rotation when you are grinding out a climb in a slower cadence, plus you can maintain momentum going up off road/single track climbs better with a spinning cadence. At least I feel this. Now keep in mind, this is all for off road, trail riding, not on pavement or gravel. There the "spin cycle" about drives me nuts, although I must say it has made me a better spinner whenever I spend time on the Blackbuck commuting or using it on gravel.

So, there are my personal thoughts on how those controversial things work for me. I suspect that there are several others who feel at 180° odds with what I've just written, but I believe there is something to the claims. I've felt it, compared it, and it is repeatable. Maybe I need to invest in a power metering device to get into this deeper.

Naw....what am I thinking! I just need to go ride and have some fun already!

Crank Length And Single Speeding: An Opinion

<===170mm crank arms.....

Recently  I was asked about what benefits I thought short crank arm lengths versus long crank arm lengths for single speed use brought, if any. I thought about that for a bit, and shot off an answer, but I thought I would expand on that a bit here for all to read.

First, let's set the stage for what "conventional wisdom" says on this subject....

The old line always was that a "longer lever", (longer crank arm length), gave better power going up steep pitches on a single speed bike. Usually this was meant for 26 inch wheeled single speeds, and the crank lengths recommended were 180mm, or185mm if you could get them. (Today the Surly "Mr. Whirly" gives you those options, plus others are also available).

<===They only come out at night! (180mm crank arms on my single speed Gryphon.

Then I heard about some early 29"er freaks up in Crested Butte. Wes Williams and some others that advocated the use of 170mm cranks for 29"ers. Jeff Jones does this to a degree as well. Why? I tried to find out, but not much talking was going on, only that "it works" and I should just try it for myself.

So.....I did. 

I have used 170mm cranks on a 29"er single speed of one sort or another for three solid years or more.  Before that, I rode a 2003 Karate Monkey with Cooks Bros. 177.5mm cranks. (Yeah....weird, I know!) I have also ridden 180mm cranks right alongside the 170mm experiment on two other single speeds. With all this time on all these different crank lengths on single speed bikes, I have come up with a couple conclusions.

The Disclaimer: As anyone who has delved into the crank arm length debates knows, no real conclusions have been arrived at as to what really works in any given situation for any given individual. In fact, it may not matter at all for many riders, and to some, only one length crank will ever do. Me? Heck.....I can't even do the same dance step twice in a row!  I seem to be a pretty adaptable character in regards to this subject, but be that as it may, I have some thoughts to share.

Shorter Arms: In terms of running 170mm cranks on a single speed, I have found that it is at once easier to get on top of a gear and spin like a whirling dervish over any shortish climb. Longer climbs are okay if you can maintain a constant cadence with your gearing choice. Flats are harder, and forget about "mashing", where you simply let your body weight fall into your crank arm till bottom dead center, switch legs and repeat as necessary, slowly walking your way up a hill.

Longer Arms: Besides lending themselves marvelously to "mashing", I find that I like the longer arms on flatter terrain, actually. Bigger gearing, (higher gear inches), flatter terrain, and a "set it and forget it" cadence are awesome with longer arms. Usually, this is a lower cadence than I ride with the 170's. Spinning? Not really all that comfortable with these longer arms.

Conclusions: You can find a way to single speed up and over anything, if you set your mind to it and choose the right gear. That said, I think crank length is a style question perhaps more than anything. If some are pre-disposed to lower cadence, it may be an indication that a longer crank length is necessary. Perhaps those who are spinners should look into shorter cranks. Finally, many 29"er riders may actually find 170's to be an enlightening experience, and I know I did.

Is there an "easy answer"? No. I still would suggest that personal experimentation is required to find ones own crank length that suits them best. Too many variables in the human species to say anything for certain. That said, I think my conclusions are worth considering, and hopefully will be a helpful guide to those looking for crank length solutions on a 29"er single speed.

Crank Length And Single Speeding: An Opinion

<===170mm crank arms.....

Recently  I was asked about what benefits I thought short crank arm lengths versus long crank arm lengths for single speed use brought, if any. I thought about that for a bit, and shot off an answer, but I thought I would expand on that a bit here for all to read.

First, let's set the stage for what "conventional wisdom" says on this subject....

The old line always was that a "longer lever", (longer crank arm length), gave better power going up steep pitches on a single speed bike. Usually this was meant for 26 inch wheeled single speeds, and the crank lengths recommended were 180mm, or185mm if you could get them. (Today the Surly "Mr. Whirly" gives you those options, plus others are also available).

<===They only come out at night! (180mm crank arms on my single speed Gryphon.

Then I heard about some early 29"er freaks up in Crested Butte. Wes Williams and some others that advocated the use of 170mm cranks for 29"ers. Jeff Jones does this to a degree as well. Why? I tried to find out, but not much talking was going on, only that "it works" and I should just try it for myself.

So.....I did. 

I have used 170mm cranks on a 29"er single speed of one sort or another for three solid years or more.  Before that, I rode a 2003 Karate Monkey with Cooks Bros. 177.5mm cranks. (Yeah....weird, I know!) I have also ridden 180mm cranks right alongside the 170mm experiment on two other single speeds. With all this time on all these different crank lengths on single speed bikes, I have come up with a couple conclusions.

The Disclaimer: As anyone who has delved into the crank arm length debates knows, no real conclusions have been arrived at as to what really works in any given situation for any given individual. In fact, it may not matter at all for many riders, and to some, only one length crank will ever do. Me? Heck.....I can't even do the same dance step twice in a row!  I seem to be a pretty adaptable character in regards to this subject, but be that as it may, I have some thoughts to share.

Shorter Arms: In terms of running 170mm cranks on a single speed, I have found that it is at once easier to get on top of a gear and spin like a whirling dervish over any shortish climb. Longer climbs are okay if you can maintain a constant cadence with your gearing choice. Flats are harder, and forget about "mashing", where you simply let your body weight fall into your crank arm till bottom dead center, switch legs and repeat as necessary, slowly walking your way up a hill.

Longer Arms: Besides lending themselves marvelously to "mashing", I find that I like the longer arms on flatter terrain, actually. Bigger gearing, (higher gear inches), flatter terrain, and a "set it and forget it" cadence are awesome with longer arms. Usually, this is a lower cadence than I ride with the 170's. Spinning? Not really all that comfortable with these longer arms.

Conclusions: You can find a way to single speed up and over anything, if you set your mind to it and choose the right gear. That said, I think crank length is a style question perhaps more than anything. If some are pre-disposed to lower cadence, it may be an indication that a longer crank length is necessary. Perhaps those who are spinners should look into shorter cranks. Finally, many 29"er riders may actually find 170's to be an enlightening experience, and I know I did.

Is there an "easy answer"? No. I still would suggest that personal experimentation is required to find ones own crank length that suits them best. Too many variables in the human species to say anything for certain. That said, I think my conclusions are worth considering, and hopefully will be a helpful guide to those looking for crank length solutions on a 29"er single speed.

Gettin' Cranky: Update

<===170mm crank set on a geared bike....

For most of the summer I have been running 170mm long cranks in an effort to figure out if there was anything to this whole "Crested Butte Philosophy" regarding the use of shorter cranks on 29"ers. (If you want to know more, see this post from earlier in the summer.)

Well, I have spent a ton of time on the single speed and have a few good rides on the geared rig. The two applications do have different results which I found interesting.

The single speed is where i think the major difference is to be found from 170mm to anything longer. I used to exclusively run 177.5mm or longer on my single speeds and going to the 170mm felt really different at first. As I rode it more (and exclusively as my main SS rig this summer) I found the initial strangeness to have disappeared. However; I also have noted an increase in my ability to scale steeps that I normally would have crapped out on. The 170mm crank seems to get around to it's power stroke a little sooner for me, therefore I lose less momentum in my pedaling "dead spot" and I can keep those big wheels rolling easier. Of course, spinning like a whirling dervish is achieved easier as well, so running the super low gear I have, (34 X 22) is easier on me when I'm on the flats. I actually commuted on this gear a few times. Talk about spin fests! This was only possible because the smaller circle allowed a higher cadence without bumping up and down off the saddle, which a 180mm crank set would have had me doing for sure.

In conclusion, I'm really sold on the 170mm for single speeding and I'll try it on another rig soon. The 170mm on the geared rig was a bit different though.



<=== ....and on a single speed.

The geared set up was a far more transparent situation. I never did notice anything different here, but almost all my geared experiences are on 175mm crank sets, so perhaps this is why. The 170mm cranks on the 29"er worked just fine and were so easy to just hop on and ride without anything noticeably different that I forgot they were 170mm cranks for several weeks!

It may have proven more useful to have noted what gearing I was using in different situations as compared to a longer crank set on the same terrain. That is a possibility as I have 175mm and 180mm geared set ups here that I can cross compare. I think through the fall I might try to get that set up once or twice to see where there might be a difference. Certainly there is no discernible difference in terms of feel for myself. The length was indistinguishable from a 175mm crank set in my mind.

So, the results so far are inconclusive on the geared side, but on the single speed side, I do think there is an advantage for me. Not only can I power through hills easier, but I have better pedal clearance on trail obstacles too. That's a bonus! I'll have to set up a test on the geared side that scrutinizes the gear choices a bit more closely to see if the length is affecting my gearing choices, and also if certain gearing choices feel different between crank sets.

Okay, more later. Thanks for reading!

Gettin' Cranky: Update

<===170mm crank set on a geared bike....

For most of the summer I have been running 170mm long cranks in an effort to figure out if there was anything to this whole "Crested Butte Philosophy" regarding the use of shorter cranks on 29"ers. (If you want to know more, see this post from earlier in the summer.)

Well, I have spent a ton of time on the single speed and have a few good rides on the geared rig. The two applications do have different results which I found interesting.

The single speed is where i think the major difference is to be found from 170mm to anything longer. I used to exclusively run 177.5mm or longer on my single speeds and going to the 170mm felt really different at first. As I rode it more (and exclusively as my main SS rig this summer) I found the initial strangeness to have disappeared. However; I also have noted an increase in my ability to scale steeps that I normally would have crapped out on. The 170mm crank seems to get around to it's power stroke a little sooner for me, therefore I lose less momentum in my pedaling "dead spot" and I can keep those big wheels rolling easier. Of course, spinning like a whirling dervish is achieved easier as well, so running the super low gear I have, (34 X 22) is easier on me when I'm on the flats. I actually commuted on this gear a few times. Talk about spin fests! This was only possible because the smaller circle allowed a higher cadence without bumping up and down off the saddle, which a 180mm crank set would have had me doing for sure.

In conclusion, I'm really sold on the 170mm for single speeding and I'll try it on another rig soon. The 170mm on the geared rig was a bit different though.



<=== ....and on a single speed.

The geared set up was a far more transparent situation. I never did notice anything different here, but almost all my geared experiences are on 175mm crank sets, so perhaps this is why. The 170mm cranks on the 29"er worked just fine and were so easy to just hop on and ride without anything noticeably different that I forgot they were 170mm cranks for several weeks!

It may have proven more useful to have noted what gearing I was using in different situations as compared to a longer crank set on the same terrain. That is a possibility as I have 175mm and 180mm geared set ups here that I can cross compare. I think through the fall I might try to get that set up once or twice to see where there might be a difference. Certainly there is no discernible difference in terms of feel for myself. The length was indistinguishable from a 175mm crank set in my mind.

So, the results so far are inconclusive on the geared side, but on the single speed side, I do think there is an advantage for me. Not only can I power through hills easier, but I have better pedal clearance on trail obstacles too. That's a bonus! I'll have to set up a test on the geared side that scrutinizes the gear choices a bit more closely to see if the length is affecting my gearing choices, and also if certain gearing choices feel different between crank sets.

Okay, more later. Thanks for reading!

Crank Length Musings

I posted sometime ago about my little experiment with shorter cranks. I actually have had two bikes set up now with the shorter arms, (170mm, to be exact) and here is my take on what it is like so far.

First off, the Salsa El Mariachi is the geared bike with 170mm arms and to be honest, I had completely forgotten that I had put 170mm arms on there! So in terms of feel, I guess I never noticed anything different about my pedal stroke. It feels totally normal every time I get on it.

The next thing I would have an impression about is this: The El Mariachi seems faster to spin up to speed than some of my other bikes. Granted, I have a really nice set of hoops on it, very light for a guy my size at about 1800 grams for the set, but I also have that on another bike. Oddly enough, that bike has 180mm cranks and seems to promote my slower twitch muscles or something, because I just don't feel that it easy to get leg speed up on that bike. Is it all in my head? maybe, but the longer cranked geared bike seems slower to speed.

On the El Mariachi, this translates to a bike I always want to grab for single track rides. I know, (or at least I "feel like it does") it will come out of corners faster than my longer cranked rigs will. I mentally like this bike better for some strange reason, (keeping in mind,I forgot it had shorter cranks), and this may be a reason why. If I think it is faster, it is, no? I figure there is something to that. I'll keep riding, knowing it has the short crank set, and report back later.

The other rig with the short arms is the Blackbuck. And I know this has shorter arms! How could I forget, since I had them anodized antifreeze green before I slapped them on the bike! It is a reminder of that fact every time I ride this rig. Anyway, as many of you know, the Blackbuck is a single speed. The 170mm cranks are definitely not conventional wisdom here!

Okay, so how has it been? Well, I rather like the shorter cranks here too. The spin up is there, yes, but I feel I can roll the crank arm up into the power section of my cadence easier on climbs. I can spin up some steeps that I would have been hammering at with 180mm cranks at a slower speed. The only time I feel that 180mm cranks might be an advantage here is when I am at or below walking speed on a steep climb, hammering out each pedal stroke like a guy swinging a sledge hammer. That longer arm seems to get you a bit further up the hill with every laborious stroke. Other than that, I would choose my 170mm arms for every other single speed situation. A big advantage goes to the 170mm arms on the flats when you can maintain a high cadence without bouncing yourself off the saddle.

Is any of this 29"er specific? Well, since I don't really ride 26"ers anymore, I can't really address that. I know the Crested Butte guys thought so back in the early part of this decade. I can say that there are some things positive going on with the idea. Enough so that I feel encouraged to pursue it further and keep testing it against my longer cranked bicycles here. I'll keep ya'all posted, but until then, there is a lot of riding to do!

Crank Length Musings

I posted sometime ago about my little experiment with shorter cranks. I actually have had two bikes set up now with the shorter arms, (170mm, to be exact) and here is my take on what it is like so far.

First off, the Salsa El Mariachi is the geared bike with 170mm arms and to be honest, I had completely forgotten that I had put 170mm arms on there! So in terms of feel, I guess I never noticed anything different about my pedal stroke. It feels totally normal every time I get on it.

The next thing I would have an impression about is this: The El Mariachi seems faster to spin up to speed than some of my other bikes. Granted, I have a really nice set of hoops on it, very light for a guy my size at about 1800 grams for the set, but I also have that on another bike. Oddly enough, that bike has 180mm cranks and seems to promote my slower twitch muscles or something, because I just don't feel that it easy to get leg speed up on that bike. Is it all in my head? maybe, but the longer cranked geared bike seems slower to speed.

On the El Mariachi, this translates to a bike I always want to grab for single track rides. I know, (or at least I "feel like it does") it will come out of corners faster than my longer cranked rigs will. I mentally like this bike better for some strange reason, (keeping in mind,I forgot it had shorter cranks), and this may be a reason why. If I think it is faster, it is, no? I figure there is something to that. I'll keep riding, knowing it has the short crank set, and report back later.

The other rig with the short arms is the Blackbuck. And I know this has shorter arms! How could I forget, since I had them anodized antifreeze green before I slapped them on the bike! It is a reminder of that fact every time I ride this rig. Anyway, as many of you know, the Blackbuck is a single speed. The 170mm cranks are definitely not conventional wisdom here!

Okay, so how has it been? Well, I rather like the shorter cranks here too. The spin up is there, yes, but I feel I can roll the crank arm up into the power section of my cadence easier on climbs. I can spin up some steeps that I would have been hammering at with 180mm cranks at a slower speed. The only time I feel that 180mm cranks might be an advantage here is when I am at or below walking speed on a steep climb, hammering out each pedal stroke like a guy swinging a sledge hammer. That longer arm seems to get you a bit further up the hill with every laborious stroke. Other than that, I would choose my 170mm arms for every other single speed situation. A big advantage goes to the 170mm arms on the flats when you can maintain a high cadence without bouncing yourself off the saddle.

Is any of this 29"er specific? Well, since I don't really ride 26"ers anymore, I can't really address that. I know the Crested Butte guys thought so back in the early part of this decade. I can say that there are some things positive going on with the idea. Enough so that I feel encouraged to pursue it further and keep testing it against my longer cranked bicycles here. I'll keep ya'all posted, but until then, there is a lot of riding to do!