I am debating trying the latest trend of going to 165mm cranks. A few things are pushing me to give this a try
I am having a bit of lower back pain this year
I find myself riding a lot more lower/more aero this year and would benefit from reduced hip angle
Everyone on the internet seems to say its been the best thing ever
Specifically on number 3 - maybe its a case of silent majority but has anyone gone to 165mm and not liked it? Would love to hear your thoughts. I already have a pair of 165mm cranks ready to throw on and try but I feel like at this point I will put them and just convince myself they are awesome because I have really yet to hear otherwise.
I’m trying 165 on my SB20 - luckily this is just moving the pedals to a different hole in the claw crank - and so far I’m not noticing any real difference. Granted I’ve only done 2 relatively easy endurance rides, as I’m coming back from knee issues
I wouldn’t say I regret it, but I haven’t noticed much of an improvement. Been struggling with knee pain on right side for years due to a leg length discrepancy and though 165s might help. So far it hasn’t made an impactful difference. I will say switching affects your bike fit and I probably need to go see a fitter yet again.
Went 2 years ago 172.5 → 165. Didn’t feel much difference or anything special. Curiously, temporarily had to go back for couple months to longer cranks again and my knees started hurting during easy Z2 but not during Z3 or higher. To be honest, I really don’t know if it was related or not because I did same time lot of city riding with more frequent stopping/starting.
Anyway, currently in process of buying new bike and planning to go even shorter, 160mm.
If you have the cranks, seems like it’s worth a test and just try to be objective about it. Whatever A/B testing as you can do that takes the subjectivity out of it. If the issue you are trying to address is more comfort in aggressive position, try doing a hard ~20 minute effort with each length back to back in the same position and see if there is obvious difference.
And it’s kind of funny seeing all the buzz about small cranks when it’s been a huge thing in the TT/Tri world for over a decade. Maybe not as small of cranks as folks are talking about now, but plenty of people were going to 165’s many years ago. I took a sip of that coolaid and have been running 170’s on all my bikes for over 10 years (first thing I do on any bike I buy is swapping out the 175’s that comes on it). I’ve though about trying even smaller, but it’s a pretty big leap ($) if I wanted to do it on all my bikes. So, I’m afraid to try since I might like it. As I get older, I feel those hip angles more and more, so I’ll probably try at some point.
I tried 165mm on my Tri-bike my 2023 race season. I don’t regret it, but I didn’t really notice any difference, and will not be switching my gravel or road bike from 172.5. The reduced hip angle and comfort was what I was targeting, but … eh wasn’t magic.
I had no physical issues but read about lower peak loads on the knee and that was important to me so from 175’s I dropped to 165, As far as pedaling was concerned, once I adapted to it the pedal stroke did not seem too different but noticed that on out of the saddle climbs I could remain standing much longer but conversely on long sustained climbs the loss of leverage hurt my climbing ability. I tend to ride pretty big gears and did not switch out my 10-28 so that may be a limiter but that makes up such a small portion of my riding I will stay with the shorter cranks knowing it’s easier in the knees and the by product of better hip angles is a bonus too. For context I’m 5’8.5” with a 75 cm saddle height.
I went 175->170 on road and gravel bikes (I’m 6’3"). Love the change, I feel I can hold a lower position for longer and some niggling back and knee pain has disappeared. Do it, you’ll like it.
I’m currently testing 162.5mm (from 170mm) after a bike fit identified that I have a deteriorating right hip that was leading to various issues whilst riding (I was struggling at the top of the pedal stroke).
So far it has been going ok, although getting used to changes in cadence and gear selection is taking a while.
Based on what I was told, I would give yourself 3 weeks or so to get used to the change before reaching a conclusion..
I’ve been using 155 on my downhill MTB for a couple of years and love that. I’m about to switch from the 172.5 my road bike came with, and am unsure if I should do 165 like everyone does or go full “fuck it” and straight to 160s.
I went from 175mm to 170. It was a welcome change. Raised saddle 5mm. My knees were no longer hitting my stomach. I could spin a higher cadence naturally. The only downside was that I felt I needed one more large cog in the back but with 32s and 34s being much more common now, it’s pretty easy.
I’ve been riding Campagnolo so 165s at the time were prohibitively expensive or unavailable.
In the late 1980s, I started out on 170s. That was pretty much standard on road bikes and everything else was considered exotic. Lemond popularized long cranks and 44 or 46mm wide bars and we all followed suit. I’ve since gone back to 42mm bars.
I’m 6ft tall and won’t be seeking out 165s or 38cm bars.
I went from 172.5 mm to 165 mm, and I love the shorter cranks. I have long limbs and when in an aero position, especially in the aero hoods position, my legs were massaging my belly.
I used to own a Purely custom jig so had 185 to 140 mm cranks to try.
I am so long legged that I assume that 170 and 172 feel like what 165 feels like for people below 6ft.
On my TT bike the shorter cranks made a large difference as I could make my legs not touch my chest.
I settled on 172 but could also ride 170. When I do use 175 or the 180s, I do feel quite powerful but concerns about knees on long rides would make me not use them.
For those of you who made the change, have you changed all your bikes? It would get expensive quick if you have, say, road, gravel, and trainer bike to update.
If you’ve only done one, is it odd bouncing back and forth?
