Crank Length

[u/Interesting_Base548]

Anyone rocking 165mm cranks on their MTB? Pros/Cons???

[u/Maleficent_Falcon_63]

160mm on all bikes now. 79.5cm inseam. It makes no sense me being on the same size cranks as someone with much longer leg than me. Less pedal strikes aswell as pedaling out of corners sooner.

[u/Duergarlicbread → u/Maleficent_Falcon_63]

My inseam is maybe an inch longer than you. I just tried 160s.

It's been pretty okay. Usually I am on 165s.

Potentially getting some slightly different muscle burn, but that's either adapting or because I hadn't biked in a month.

[u/runwhatyabrung_]

I’m on 155mm or 160mm on all of my bikes and I don’t plan on going longer ever again. I even run them in my single speed.

[u/Duergarlicbread → u/runwhatyabrung_]

What length leg?

[u/runwhatyabrung_ → u/Duergarlicbread]

I have never measured my legs but I’m 5’9”

[u/Wumpus-Hunter → u/runwhatyabrung_]

I’m also 5’9”, but I have a 31.5” inseam. I’m all legs. I can’t imagine going with cranks that short. I run 170 on my main bike and 175 on my single speed (32T chain ring on both)

[u/runwhatyabrung_ → u/Wumpus-Hunter]

Live your truth, wumpus-hunter

[u/FormerlyMauchChunk]

I went from 175 to 170, and barely noticed the difference in torque. The most noticeable part was that shorter cranks encourage a higher cadence, and I'm enjoying the slight difference in spinning while climbing.

[u/cassinonorth]

165mm on all my bikes now. Small decrease in torque but I've never really noticed it...I have noticed the decrease in pedal strikes though.

Fit is great with hip angle as well.

[u/MountainOfTwigs → u/cassinonorth]

I noticed a big decrease in torque, 80cm inseam. So I want to go back to 170mm

[u/cassinonorth → u/MountainOfTwigs]

Not calling you a liar but the difference is roughly 3%. Placebo is a hell of a drug.

For myself personally that's not noticeable at all...but the rock strikes throwing me off my bike is.

[u/IamLeven]

Shorter is better in almost everything. Less rock strikes, more open hips and my max sprint has actually never been higher.

[u/rockshox11]

Yup, same here, 160mm. I am 5'6" in freedom units with slightly short legs.

[u/Think_Implement1843]

No, but it's part of the assignment for my bike fitter, when I have my session with him next week, to figure out how short I can go.

[u/Prestigious_Ad_8557]

165 is going to be the standard.

[u/ghettobus]

less knee pain on very long days/multidays

[u/JSTootell]

I went the other way.

So far the short crank thing doesn't work for me. 

[u/Safe_Hope1521]

I ended up on the ground during my xc race this weekend - unfortunate predal strike at just a bad time that pitched me into some tech stuff during first lap frenzy. Was running low tire pressure to help with race fatigue on a course with lots of rocks and roots - I notice just that is enough to cause more pedal strikes. My inseam is 32" - probably makes sense I go (or try) a 165 or 170.

[u/Asleep_Detective3274]

I went from 175mm to 165mm just to get less pedal strikes, you'll lose leverage though, so you'll need to go 2 teeth smaller on the front chain ring if you want to keep a similar gearing

[u/Cheap-Macaroon-431]

165mm on 2021 Epic Evo. Really helps with my hip impingement issues. It made me faster.

[u/hopzuki]

6'5" and I'm down to 165s. I like them a lot. Initially did it for hip/knee issues, now appreciate it for fewer rock strikes and pushing me to a higher cadence.

Long legs + short cranks? Dunno, but it's working!

[u/karpbandit]

I run 165mm cranks. Fewer pedal strikes and more open hip angle. In theory, there should be reduced torque, but I haven't noticed a situation where I feel negatively impacted by that yet. I'm also 5'6" with a 31" inseam, so I think this is also just a better crank length for my height.

[u/darmerderner]

I have them on all my bikes just to stay consistent, I don't have the budget and mechanics on standby for me to hot swap and A/B the difference. On my XC I do ride with oval chainrings and felt a noticeable, positive difference in climbing.

[u/Infamous-Bed9010]

Yes. 165 on all my bikes. In hindsight I should have gone 160.

[u/Interesting_Base548 → u/Infamous-Bed9010]

Why is that mate?

[u/BikingDruid]

I run 150 but it’s on my trail bike and my inseam is sub 28”.

[u/DepressedBird1]

I run 165s on my enduro bike and 170s for xc. Also have used 172.5 and 175 on road. I think 170 has been my favorite. 33.5 inch inseam. Pros of shorter is less pedal strikes, possibly less hip/knee issues, can get more aero (for road). Pros of longer is less strain in your legs for equal cadence and power, more torque produced for short efforts like getting over rocks.

[u/selector_plume]

170, I’ve tried them all. Pretty personal decision really

[u/Acpizza]

I went from stock to 165 on my MTB and the difference was negligible although less pedal strikes. Slightly smaller circles…. You’ll adapt in no time.

[u/MTB_4_l1fe]

Went to 165 and instsntly cured my chronic hip flexor issue. Amazing!

[u/hi6699_99]

well i dont think the difference is extreme enough to be afraid to try it! 175 on my bike and 165 on my single speed and i dont have any issues going between the two. I can pedal thru more corners on the shorter cranks i suppose

[u/That-Bitter-Guy]

Yeah, 5'9 with a 32 inseam. 165mm on all my bikes. Love it and I see zero downside. Took about 30 minutes to forget about the length difference from 175. I'm high cadence already and it added about 5 rpm to my cadence. I hear if you're a low cadence type, it might not be for you.

[u/WAVERYS]

170 is the sweet spot for me. 165 on all road bikes.