SLX crank differences
The secret rider
Posts: 812
Afternoon
Now I have decided not to use BB30
I've decided on the best bang for buck price vs weight vs strong for me is SLX
I don't need any rings as I have a 104 BCD race face NW ring.
Can anyone tell me what the diffrence is between the m660 m675 etc etc they look different but seem to weigh the same ?
Also if it helps I've decided at 5,10 to go with 170mm versions
Now I have decided not to use BB30
I've decided on the best bang for buck price vs weight vs strong for me is SLX
I don't need any rings as I have a 104 BCD race face NW ring.
Can anyone tell me what the diffrence is between the m660 m675 etc etc they look different but seem to weigh the same ?
Also if it helps I've decided at 5,10 to go with 170mm versions
0
Comments
-
most of the 67x variants denote different chainring combos. Cranks arms are usually the same.A Flock of Birds
+ some other bikes.0 -
http://bike.shimano.com/publish/content ... ntain.html
http://bike.shimano.com/publish/content ... type-.html
Number of rings."Do not follow where the path may lead, Go instead where there is no path, and Leave a Trail."
Parktools :?:SheldonBrown0 -
I'm 5'9" with short legs and 175mm is fine and gives you more power0
-
If you want double and a bash guard then you will need a triple chainset.Transition Patrol - viewtopic.php?f=10017&t=130702350
-
RockmonkeySC wrote:If you want double and a bash guard then you will need a triple chainset.
There is a specific double with bash though0 -
Thanks for the replies
So basically if I only wan the arms and the axle I can up which ever are cheaper and look nicest. As the rings and bash will be coming off and being sold/binned as I am running 1 x 10
In relation to 170mm this is the right size calculated from inside leg measurement0 -
The secret rider wrote:
In relation to 170mm this is the right size calculated from inside leg measurement0 -
Cqc wrote:The secret rider wrote:
In relation to 170mm this is the right size calculated from inside leg measurement
I used this but ultimately I guess it's what feels right
http://www.machinehead-software.co.uk/b ... lator.html0 -
Why does the 175mm give you more power?0
-
The secret rider wrote:
In relation to 170mm this is the right size calculated from inside leg measurement
Those crank length calculators are for road bikes MTBs usually have cranks 5mm longer. Though to be honest I bought a bike once with 170mm cranks when I usually use 175mm. Didnt even notice till I changed the chain rings about 6 months later.Fig rolls: proof that god loves cyclists and that she wants us to do another lap0 -
stubs wrote:The secret rider wrote:
In relation to 170mm this is the right size calculated from inside leg measurement
Those crank length calculators are for road bikes MTBs usually have cranks 5mm longer. Though to be honest I bought a bike once with 170mm cranks when I usually use 175mm. Didnt even notice till I changed the chain rings about 6 months later.
Ahh ok did not know this !
Good to hear you did not notice the difference ! I guess it also allows for more ground clearance when peddling through trails0 -
supersonic wrote:Why does the 175mm give you more power?0
-
Cqc wrote:supersonic wrote:Why does the 175mm give you more power?
What percentage extra leverage do they give?Transition Patrol - viewtopic.php?f=10017&t=130702350 -
The secret rider wrote:
Good to hear you did not notice the difference ! I guess it also allows for more ground clearance when peddling through trails
Theoretically yes I suppose though 5mm isnt much you could get 5mm of clearance by putting more air in your tyres or running a bit less sag on the suspension.Fig rolls: proof that god loves cyclists and that she wants us to do another lap0 -
Leverage is not power.0
-
Moment= force x distance0
-
But power is the rate you use energy, not work done. So depends on cadence and torque applied, and whether your dimensions can make use of the ergonomics to supply those factors.
Of course a longer crank gives you more torque for a given applied force - but can you keep the cadence the same? Or pedal in a smooth circle to give an even application of torque?0 -
supersonic wrote:But power is the rate you use energy, not work done. So depends on cadence and torque applied, and whether your dimensions can make use of the ergonomics to supply those factors.
Of course a longer crank gives you more torque for a given applied force - but can you keep the cadence the same? Or pedal in a smooth circle to give an even application of torque?
^This. The notion that longer cranks = more 'power' is totally bunk. For a single 1/3 stroke its entirely true, but over the course of a whole ride the amount of energy you expend hoiking your leg up and over on a disproportionately longer crank will outweigh the power benefits if its not the right size. What matters is what FITs you, and what stops you coming to a halt abruptly when you smash a rock (something more common with ever lower BBs).A Flock of Birds
+ some other bikes.0