Results 1 to 74 of 74
  1. #1
    Rollin 29s
    Reputation: isleblue65's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    699

    Ripmo XL - a ton of pedal strikes

    When I picked up my 2019 XL Ripmo with 175mm crank arms, The rear shock was soft at the recommended pressure, so I aired it up to almost 300psi to stop blowing through the travel. This prevented the shock from using even 2/3 of the available travel most of the time, so I installed a volume spacer last week, lowered the pressure to achieve 25% - 30% sag, and it feels great. The fork is setup the same.

    Iím 210# geared up and 6í4Ē.

    However, now I get 5 or 6 pedal strikes on every ride, eject my cleats from the pedals, and itís just not working.

    The bottom bracket height (34.5cm) and crank arm length of the Ripmo is exactly the same as my Jet 9 was (and I never got pedal strikes with that bike). The difference is that the Niner rear travel was 100mm vs 145 on the Ripmo.

    The Ripmo is amazing and awesome in every other aspect, but where I ride is one of the most rocky spots in the country, and strikes are unavoidable with the Ripmo as it is.

    Should I buy 165mm crank arms? The only other option I can think of is inflate my shock more and sacrifice travel.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    Whoever invented the bicycle deserves the thanks of humanity.
    - Lord Charles Beresford

  2. #2
    Ride Fast Take Chances :)
    Reputation: alexbn921's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    2,484
    The BB on most new bikes is low. The Ripmo is no exception. I to wish that they had raised the bb 5mm or so on the xl bikes as us tall guys use 175 cranks. Rubber fork boots are your friend.

    Couple things to help:
    Adjust sag form 25-30% to 22ish% or there about.
    Run 2.5 or 2.6 tires.
    Extend the fork to 170mm
    Get thinner pedals. XTR are some of the thinnest.
    Swap to 170mm cranks


    You don't need to compromise suspension travel or feel to avoid pedal strikes. Most of the time you only need a couple mm to avoid a rock. Try 5 psi at a time in the shock and 1psi in the fork.
    Making shit harder than it needs to be isn't awesome, it's just...harder.

  3. #3
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    351
    I wonder if u might want to go direction of custom rear shock tune. I rented a ripmo for for a weekend and was dismayed with how much more air the rear shock needed. The leverage ratio is very linear on the ripmo (i have rip9 and we are used to progressive leverage ratio). Iím also a clyde and always send rear shock in to have it custom tuned. iím eyeing the ripmo and would likely try a rockshox super deluxe custom tuned by avy.

  4. #4
    Rollin 29s
    Reputation: isleblue65's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    699

    Ripmo XL - a ton of pedal strikes

    Quote Originally Posted by alexbn921 View Post
    The BB on most new bikes is low. The Ripmo is no exception. I to wish that they had raised the bb 5mm or so on the xl bikes as us tall guys use 175 cranks. Rubber fork boots are your friend.

    Couple things to help:
    Adjust sag form 25-30% to 22ish% or there about.
    Run 2.5 or 2.6 tires.
    Extend the fork to 170mm
    Get thinner pedals. XTR are some of the thinnest.
    Swap to 170mm cranks


    You don't need to compromise suspension travel or feel to avoid pedal strikes. Most of the time you only need a couple mm to avoid a rock. Try 5 psi at a time in the shock and 1psi in the fork.
    Do you mean rubber crank arm boots are your friend? I installed these a dozen rides in, but at least the dings and dents wonít continue to happen.

    The point on tires and shock/ fork sag makes sense, but the bike has the 2.5 Minion/ Aggressor combo already. Iím not sure a 2.6 would make any noticeable difference, which leaves me with shock/ fork incremental pressure or shorter crank arms. I had forgotten that the Fox 36 could be adjusted to 170mm. That would certainly help along with the other suggestions.

    My pedals are Egg Beaters, which are pretty low profile as is, but the design of them does mean that a pedal strike often opens up the beater bars on the opposite side of the pedal, releasing the cleats. If XTRs are lower profile and donít tend to release with pedal strikes, Iím completely open to switching. I rode SPD for years and they are bullet proof.

    The custom tune could help, but I think there are some other low hanging items that would make a bigger difference initially. Iíd be open to a tune if the returns were significant enough though


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    Whoever invented the bicycle deserves the thanks of humanity.
    - Lord Charles Beresford

  5. #5
    mtbr member
    Reputation: titusquasi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    1,407
    I'm 6'3" on an XL Wreckoning. I was noticing the same issue and went to 165 mm cranks. It felt a bit odd at first but now it feels normal. If you are going to change cranks 5 mm isn't much. 10 mm is a noticeable difference. These lower bottom brackets have certainly helped me refine my pedal timing through rough terrain.

  6. #6
    This place needs an enema
    Reputation: mikesee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    12,370
    Quote Originally Posted by alexbn921 View Post
    The BB on most new bikes is low. The Ripmo is no exception. I to wish that they had raised the bb 5mm or so on the xl bikes as us tall guys use 175 cranks. Rubber fork boots are your friend.

    Couple things to help:
    Adjust sag form 25-30% to 22ish% or there about.
    Run 2.5 or 2.6 tires.
    Extend the fork to 170mm
    Get thinner pedals. XTR are some of the thinnest.
    Swap to 170mm cranks


    You don't need to compromise suspension travel or feel to avoid pedal strikes. Most of the time you only need a couple mm to avoid a rock. Try 5 psi at a time in the shock and 1psi in the fork.

    Agreed that all of these things can make a difference.

    Or, Ibis (and practically everyone else) can pull their heads out of their asses and stop the insanity.

  7. #7
    Rollin 29s
    Reputation: isleblue65's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    699

    Ripmo XL - a ton of pedal strikes

    Iím not seeing DUB Boost cranks available in 165, only non Boost in the GX Eagle level. Boost seem to be 170 and 175.

    Second, Iím assuming that the Ripmo has a Boost crankset since it has boost hubs - although this isnít specifically called out on Ibisí Ripmo page.
    Last edited by isleblue65; 6 Days Ago at 04:52 AM. Reason: Crank set confusion
    Whoever invented the bicycle deserves the thanks of humanity.
    - Lord Charles Beresford

  8. #8
    No Clue Crew
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    5,962
    SRAM doesnít offer Boost cranks. The chainline spacing is achieved by ring offset.

    Iím a bit lighter (190 in gear) on an XL Ripmo riding in Phoenix, which is certainly one of the rockiest places in the country. While I do get an occasional strike, itís nothing out of the ordinary for modern bikes. Iíve owned several recent rigs that were MUCH worse (Fuel EX, Capra, etc).

    Something in your setup if off or the shock is bad. X2 or DPX2? Ibis is pretty specific about 25% sag on this bike. The bike seems very sensitive to sag; ie, 30% is radically different than 25%, whereas on other frames it makes little difference.
    Just like a raindrop, I was born to fall.

  9. #9
    mtbr member
    Reputation: huckleberry hound's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Posts
    731
    Quote Originally Posted by isleblue65 View Post
    Iím not seeing DUB Boost cranks available in 165, only non Boost in the GX Eagle level. Boost seem to be 170 and 175.

    Second, Iím assuming that the Ripmo has a Boost crankset since it has boost hubs - although this isnít specifically called out on Ibisí Ripmo page.
    Here are some. https://www.worldwidecyclery.com/pro...=1347547955205
    I made the switch to 165mm cranks and I absolutely love them. I'm 6'1" btw. I actually climb better because of a smoother pedal stroke.
    Change begins by doing something different.

  10. #10
    Rollin 29s
    Reputation: isleblue65's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    699
    Quote Originally Posted by Blatant View Post
    SRAM doesnít offer Boost cranks. The chainline spacing is achieved by ring offset.

    Iím a bit lighter (190 in gear) on an XL Ripmo riding in Phoenix, which is certainly one of the rockiest places in the country. While I do get an occasional strike, itís nothing out of the ordinary for modern bikes. Iíve owned several recent rigs that were MUCH worse (Fuel EX, Capra, etc).

    Something in your setup if off or the shock is bad. X2 or DPX2? Ibis is pretty specific about 25% sag on this bike. The bike seems very sensitive to sag; ie, 30% is radically different than 25%, whereas on other frames it makes little difference.
    DPX2. The shock was just rebuilt under warranty actually because the internal seals were leaking allowing oil to transfer into the air chamber. I will check the sag setting, but I believe the shock is ok.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    Whoever invented the bicycle deserves the thanks of humanity.
    - Lord Charles Beresford

  11. #11
    Rollin 29s
    Reputation: isleblue65's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    699
    Quote Originally Posted by huckleberry hound View Post
    Here are some. https://www.worldwidecyclery.com/pro...=1347547955205
    I made the switch to 165mm cranks and I absolutely love them. I'm 6'1" btw. I actually climb better because of a smoother pedal stroke.
    Thanks! Just ordered some. As others have mentioned, Iím sure I will get used to the shorter cranks, and in combination with some of the other adjustments mentioned here, including sag, 170mm travel (if needed), etc, the rock strike issue will improve.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    Whoever invented the bicycle deserves the thanks of humanity.
    - Lord Charles Beresford

  12. #12
    I'm with stupid
    Reputation: hitechredneck's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    5,804
    http://canfieldbrothers.com/components/am-dh_cranks

    For others looking for a good short option.

  13. #13
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    5,188
    Don't fear shorter cranks, they're not just an answer to lower BB height, they also improve rideability. Long cranks are a hold over from road biking where BB height is a non issue.

    All my bikes are set up with 165mm cranks, regardless of BB height. I have no issue climbing all day long, making tough moves, really no disadvantage.

    Most of the naysaying is from overthinking, being stuck in a paradigm, even research supports shorter cranks.

    Enjoy!

    Edit: there are DUB and dub, make sure you get the right spindle size. The "real" DUB spindle is a smidge under 30mm. Some of the newer bikes are being sold with a 24mm spindle, Descendent series cranks. I had to replace the BB and cranks on my Full Stache to run DUB.

    Quote Originally Posted by isleblue65 View Post
    When I picked up my 2019 XL Ripmo with 175mm crank arms, The rear shock was soft at the recommended pressure, so I aired it up to almost 300psi to stop blowing through the travel. This prevented the shock from using even 2/3 of the available travel most of the time, so I installed a volume spacer last week, lowered the pressure to achieve 25% - 30% sag, and it feels great. The fork is setup the same.

    Iím 210# geared up and 6í4Ē.

    However, now I get 5 or 6 pedal strikes on every ride, eject my cleats from the pedals, and itís just not working.

    The bottom bracket height (34.5cm) and crank arm length of the Ripmo is exactly the same as my Jet 9 was (and I never got pedal strikes with that bike). The difference is that the Niner rear travel was 100mm vs 145 on the Ripmo.

    The Ripmo is amazing and awesome in every other aspect, but where I ride is one of the most rocky spots in the country, and strikes are unavoidable with the Ripmo as it is.

    Should I buy 165mm crank arms? The only other option I can think of is inflate my shock more and sacrifice travel.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    Lrg GG Pedalhead 29/27+
    XMed GG Smash 29/27+
    Lrg Devinci Hendrix 27+ (Loaner)
    Pivot Shuttle 27+ (wife)

  14. #14
    Rollin 29s
    Reputation: isleblue65's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    699
    Quote Originally Posted by Nurse Ben View Post
    Don't fear shorter cranks, they're not just an answer to lower BB height, they also improve rideability. Long cranks are a hold over from road biking where BB height is a non issue.

    All my bikes are set up with 165mm cranks, regardless of BB height. I have no issue climbing all day long, making tough moves, really no disadvantage.

    Most of the naysaying is from overthinking, being stuck in a paradigm, even research supports shorter cranks.

    Enjoy!

    Edit: there are DUB and dub, make sure you get the right spindle size. The "real" DUB spindle is a smidge under 30mm. Some of the newer bikes are being sold with a 24mm spindle, Descendent series cranks. I had to replace the BB and cranks on my Full Stache to run DUB.
    Thanks Ben! Looks like I might be in the situation you mention. These are my 175mm cranks:



    And this is what I ordered (165mm):



    Will I need a bottom bracket?

    Are there 165mm Descendant cranks that could save me some $$ by using my BB?


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    Whoever invented the bicycle deserves the thanks of humanity.
    - Lord Charles Beresford

  15. #15
    May contain nuts
    Reputation: Haggis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    2,201
    Quote Originally Posted by Nurse Ben View Post
    Don't fear shorter cranks, they're not just an answer to lower BB height, they also improve rideability. Long cranks are a hold over from road biking where BB height is a non issue.

    All my bikes are set up with 165mm cranks, regardless of BB height. I have no issue climbing all day long, making tough moves, really no disadvantage.

    Most of the naysaying is from overthinking, being stuck in a paradigm, even research supports shorter cranks.

    Enjoy!

    Edit: there are DUB and dub, make sure you get the right spindle size. The "real" DUB spindle is a smidge under 30mm. Some of the newer bikes are being sold with a 24mm spindle, Descendent series cranks. I had to replace the BB and cranks on my Full Stache to run DUB.
    Youíre missing the caveat - as long as you have the gearing tolerance required for shorter cranks.

  16. #16
    Rollin 29s
    Reputation: isleblue65's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    699
    Everything Iím reading indicates that the DUB standard is 28.99mm, and everything with DUB on it is 28.99mm, and cross compatible. My Truvativ Descendant cranks are DUB, so the bottom bracket ID is 28.99mm, which should mean that it is compatible with the SRAM GX Eagle DUB crankset I just ordered.

    I donít understand the claim that Descendant DUB components are incompatible with SRAM DUB components.

    https://reviews.mtbr.com/deep-dive-i...new-dub-system




    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    Whoever invented the bicycle deserves the thanks of humanity.
    - Lord Charles Beresford

  17. #17
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    5,188
    Maybe that changed, though I doubt it, I just went through this three months back.

    Or you can order the Descendent crank in a 165mm, assuming you can find them; theyíre listed as available.

    Essentially the Descendant is a heavier, lower grade aluminum than the GX.

    Pull s crank arm and measure it or call SRAM and ask,

    Quote Originally Posted by isleblue65 View Post
    Thanks Ben! Looks like I might be in the situation you mention. These are my 175mm cranks:



    And this is what I ordered (165mm):



    Will I need a bottom bracket?

    Are there 165mm Descendant cranks that could save me some $$ by using my BB?


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    Lrg GG Pedalhead 29/27+
    XMed GG Smash 29/27+
    Lrg Devinci Hendrix 27+ (Loaner)
    Pivot Shuttle 27+ (wife)

  18. #18
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    5,188
    No caveat, you wonít notice the difference, the increases efficiency offsets the change in torque.

    Try it, youíll be surprised how little crank length matters.

    Quote Originally Posted by Haggis View Post
    Youíre missing the caveat - as long as you have the gearing tolerance required for shorter cranks.
    Lrg GG Pedalhead 29/27+
    XMed GG Smash 29/27+
    Lrg Devinci Hendrix 27+ (Loaner)
    Pivot Shuttle 27+ (wife)

  19. #19
    Rollin 29s
    Reputation: isleblue65's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    699
    Quote Originally Posted by Nurse Ben View Post
    Maybe that changed, though I doubt it, I just went through this three months back.

    Or you can order the Descendent crank in a 165mm, assuming you can find them; theyíre listed as available.

    Essentially the Descendant is a heavier, lower grade aluminum than the GX.

    Pull s crank arm and measure it or call SRAM and ask,
    DUB is DUB. Same axle diameter.




    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    Whoever invented the bicycle deserves the thanks of humanity.
    - Lord Charles Beresford

  20. #20
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Velorangutan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    212
    Low bottom brackets are an industry trend with ever brand. On my Devinci I have installed an offset bushing on the rear shock to essentially lengthen it a couple mm which results in a higher bb. The Ripmos look like one of these bushings will fit, but I have not tested it.
    Best Source for Ibis, Devinci, and Ventana!
    Velorangutan... the pedal type.
    Motorangutan... the motorized type.

  21. #21
    Rollin 29s
    Reputation: isleblue65's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    699

    Ripmo XL - a ton of pedal strikes

    Quote Originally Posted by Velorangutan View Post
    Low bottom brackets are an industry trend with ever brand. On my Devinci I have installed an offset bushing on the rear shock to essentially lengthen it a couple mm which results in a higher bb. The Ripmos look like one of these bushings will fit, but I have not tested it.
    I know, The low BB trend is a really bad idea in general.

    Interesting solution. That sounds like a decent way to retain full shock travel (unlike the method of reducing sag under 25%), and a few mm would not significantly change the geometry. Did you make the bushing?


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    Whoever invented the bicycle deserves the thanks of humanity.
    - Lord Charles Beresford

  22. #22
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Posts
    1,833
    Quote Originally Posted by Haggis View Post
    Youíre missing the caveat - as long as you have the gearing tolerance required for shorter cranks.
    This is true, 10mm drop in crank lenth will feel like loosing 4 teeth on the climbing gears. You'll get used to it, or drop 2 teeth on the chainring to compensate.

  23. #23
    Rollin 29s
    Reputation: isleblue65's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    699
    Quote Originally Posted by Cerberus75 View Post
    This is true, 10mm drop in crank lenth will feel like loosing 4 teeth on the climbing gears. You'll get used to it, or drop 2 teeth on the chainring to compensate.
    I rarely need the 50t on my Eagle cassette, so this isnít a concern for me. Avoiding pedal strikes is priority #1.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    Whoever invented the bicycle deserves the thanks of humanity.
    - Lord Charles Beresford

  24. #24
    mtbr member
    Reputation: huckleberry hound's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Posts
    731
    Quote Originally Posted by Cerberus75 View Post
    This is true, 10mm drop in crank lenth will feel like loosing 4 teeth on the climbing gears. You'll get used to it, or drop 2 teeth on the chainring to compensate.
    This has not been my experience at all. I can climb better with the same gearing using 165mm cranks vs 175mm cranks because of smooter strokes.
    Change begins by doing something different.

  25. #25
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    5,188
    Very nice! Glad that'll work, I had to replace my BB because the spindle was 24mm, so it appears there are two Descendent crank standards, Trek is using old stock?

    The GX DUB cranks are solid, not that heavy, got two sets and love em.

    Quote Originally Posted by isleblue65 View Post
    DUB is DUB. Same axle diameter.




    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    Lrg GG Pedalhead 29/27+
    XMed GG Smash 29/27+
    Lrg Devinci Hendrix 27+ (Loaner)
    Pivot Shuttle 27+ (wife)

  26. #26
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    5,188
    That's a bunch of BS, seriously, where do folks come up with this nonsense?

    There is no correlation between crank length and gearing, any more so than the oval vs round chainring crap that mfgs try to feed us.

    You will notice a difference in the "feel" when you spin, but that difference will be minimal and hardly a bother. You will need to raise your seat 10mm to maintain the same leg extension.

    And you will no longer have pedal strikes constantly, yeah!

    Quote Originally Posted by Cerberus75 View Post
    This is true, 10mm drop in crank lenth will feel like loosing 4 teeth on the climbing gears. You'll get used to it, or drop 2 teeth on the chainring to compensate.
    Lrg GG Pedalhead 29/27+
    XMed GG Smash 29/27+
    Lrg Devinci Hendrix 27+ (Loaner)
    Pivot Shuttle 27+ (wife)

  27. #27
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Pedalon2018's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2018
    Posts
    252
    I play around with gear calculators and one has a data field for crank length. If you move the length up or down in the cal, it does cause the gearing to change a tad. Is it real or just baked into the calc. At one time I had the math skills to figure it out but those are mostly gone.

  28. #28
    mtbr member
    Reputation: tungsten's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    513
    Most of the naysaying is from overthinking, being stuck in a paradigm, even research supports shorter cranks.
    Yeah ok.
    Youíre missing the caveat - as long as you have the gearing tolerance required for shorter cranks.
    Ah, but the shamens of shorter will tell you the smaller "dead spot" in the stroke makes up for lost leverage.

    As if climbing rough singletrack is the same as spinning in the peloton.

  29. #29
    Barely in control
    Reputation: Schulze's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    1,835
    The gear will remain the same but since power equals torque times the rotational angle of the crank, and radius has been decreased, force on the pedals will need to increase to achieve the same power compared to a longer crank.

  30. #30
    mtbr member
    Reputation: tungsten's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    513

    Or, Ibis (and especially Transition!) can pull their heads out of their asses and stop the insanity.
    dingdingdingdingding..........!

    The bb of my '15 Scout was so low I had to overfork it and add two (2) offset bushings to bring it up to 336 (13.2) making it just ridable w/supplied 175 cranks.

    Interestingly, after all those mods the head angle still measures as advertized?
    Last edited by tungsten; 3 Days Ago at 09:58 PM.

  31. #31
    No Clue Crew
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    5,962
    I donít doubt there are riders that can drop down that far on crank length. And Iím not smart enough to ascertain power transfer. I can say, personally, Iíve owned several bikes recently with shorter-than-175 cranks and I can definitely tell a difference. And not for the better.

    Sample size of one, but perhaps worth consideration.
    Just like a raindrop, I was born to fall.

  32. #32
    Ride Fast Take Chances :)
    Reputation: alexbn921's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    2,484
    Crank size has a pretty wide range where you can make max power. With that being said 175mm already feels on the short side for me with a 36" inseam.
    Rear stays, BB height, seat tube angle, stack, reach... all need to be adjusted as you size up on bikes.
    Making shit harder than it needs to be isn't awesome, it's just...harder.

  33. #33
    Rollin 29s
    Reputation: isleblue65's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    699
    Quote Originally Posted by alexbn921 View Post
    Crank size has a pretty wide range where you can make max power. With that being said 175mm already feels on the short side for me with a 36" inseam.
    Rear stays, BB height, seat tube angle, stack, reach... all need to be adjusted as you size up on bikes.
    Iíve got a 35Ē inseam, but I donít know of any other way to see how the shorter cranks work than to try them. Worst case, I sell them slightly used at a loss. Best case, I donít deal with pedal strikes anymore and the cranks donít bother me. Iíve only ever had 175mm cranks on my mountain bikes, so I really donít have any experience with anything else.

    What I do know is that something has to change.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    Whoever invented the bicycle deserves the thanks of humanity.
    - Lord Charles Beresford

  34. #34
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    5,188
    Cranks are way cheaper than frames.

    So way back in the day, I rode whatever crank length came on my bike, then I started riding unicycles. For a decade I only rode muni, got pretty good at, built my own gear, and spent a lot of time swapping wheel sizes and crank lengths.

    When you donít have gears, wheel size and crank length are the closest thing.

    I rode cranks ranging in length from 180mm down to 75mm, but the best all around length was 150mm. Strangely enough, that also happens to be the most popular length for experienced muni riders.

    Now that Iím all grown up, got me a second wheel and some gears, I find the shorter cranks are still more efficient and comfortable, esp for spinnning while climbing.

    Some might call it the koolaid effect, but after more than a decade riding short cranks, Iím pretty sure I like them because they work... and let me tell ya, I climb a lot of very rocky, very steep, very technical single track and Iím generally the one who walks the least.

    Quote Originally Posted by isleblue65 View Post
    Iíve got a 35Ē inseam, but I donít know of any other way to see how the shorter cranks work than to try them. Worst case, I sell them slightly used at a loss. Best case, I donít deal with pedal strikes anymore and the cranks donít bother me. Iíve only ever had 175mm cranks on my mountain bikes, so I really donít have any experience with anything else.

    What I do know is that something has to change.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    Lrg GG Pedalhead 29/27+
    XMed GG Smash 29/27+
    Lrg Devinci Hendrix 27+ (Loaner)
    Pivot Shuttle 27+ (wife)

  35. #35
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Velorangutan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    212
    Quote Originally Posted by isleblue65 View Post
    I know, The low BB trend is a really bad idea in general.

    Interesting solution. That sounds like a decent way to retain full shock travel (unlike the method of reducing sag under 25%), and a few mm would not significantly change the geometry. Did you make the bushing?


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    Search ebay for offset bushing. There's a place that makes them relatively cheap.
    Best Source for Ibis, Devinci, and Ventana!
    Velorangutan... the pedal type.
    Motorangutan... the motorized type.

  36. #36
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Velorangutan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    212
    Quote Originally Posted by Nurse Ben View Post
    That's a bunch of BS, seriously, where do folks come up with this nonsense?

    There is no correlation between crank length and gearing, any more so than the oval vs round chainring crap that mfgs try to feed us.

    You will notice a difference in the "feel" when you spin, but that difference will be minimal and hardly a bother. You will need to raise your seat 10mm to maintain the same leg extension.

    And you will no longer have pedal strikes constantly, yeah!
    I give credit to Oval chainrings for alleviating my hamstring pain that forced me to quit riding for 10 years. I saw many Dr's , MRI's, and did a bunch of rehab stuff. None of that helped at all.

    Oval chainrings were the biggest factor in me being able to ride at least once a week. It is night and day noticable for me. Stretching my back muscles and calves also helps.
    Best Source for Ibis, Devinci, and Ventana!
    Velorangutan... the pedal type.
    Motorangutan... the motorized type.

  37. #37
    Rollin 29s
    Reputation: isleblue65's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    699
    Quote Originally Posted by Nurse Ben View Post
    Cranks are way cheaper than frames.

    So way back in the day, I rode whatever crank length came on my bike, then I started riding unicycles. For a decade I only rode muni, got pretty good at, built my own gear, and spent a lot of time swapping wheel sizes and crank lengths.

    When you donít have gears, wheel size and crank length are the closest thing.

    I rode cranks ranging in length from 180mm down to 75mm, but the best all around length was 150mm. Strangely enough, that also happens to be the most popular length for experienced muni riders.

    Now that Iím all grown up, got me a second wheel and some gears, I find the shorter cranks are still more efficient and comfortable, esp for spinnning while climbing.

    Some might call it the koolaid effect, but after more than a decade riding short cranks, Iím pretty sure I like them because they work... and let me tell ya, I climb a lot of very rocky, very steep, very technical single track and Iím generally the one who walks the least.
    How tall are you and whatís your inseam?

    Iím pretty adaptable, and find that my muscles and body adjust to changes in geometry, suspension, gearing, handlebar width, etc - so Iím not terribly concerned.

    I may play with the bushing idea too - maybe even before installing the 165mm cranks.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    Whoever invented the bicycle deserves the thanks of humanity.
    - Lord Charles Beresford

  38. #38
    mtbr member
    Reputation: tungsten's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    513
    Installing one of these https://www.offsetbushings.com/colle...offset-bushing will raise the bb 3mm but also steepen the frame angles .75 deg.
    So adding two is making a significant change to the geo.

    I'd try higher volume tyres and overforking first.

  39. #39
    Rollin 29s
    Reputation: isleblue65's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    699
    Quote Originally Posted by tungsten View Post
    Installing one of these https://www.offsetbushings.com/colle...offset-bushing will raise the bb 3mm but also steepen the frame angles .75 deg.
    So adding two is making a significant change to the geo.

    I'd try higher volume tyres and overforking first.
    Those bushings look good. I canít go much higher volume than the 2.5s I have now. Would overforking and bushings balance out the steepening of the angles?


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    Whoever invented the bicycle deserves the thanks of humanity.
    - Lord Charles Beresford

  40. #40
    Ride Fast Take Chances :)
    Reputation: alexbn921's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    2,484
    Quote Originally Posted by isleblue65 View Post
    Those bushings look good. I canít go much higher volume than the 2.5s I have now. Would overforking and bushings balance out the steepening of the angles?


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    Yes it will. Make sure you have enough clearance between the frame and shock yoke after installing the bushings
    Making shit harder than it needs to be isn't awesome, it's just...harder.

  41. #41
    Rollin 29s
    Reputation: isleblue65's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    699
    Quote Originally Posted by alexbn921 View Post
    Yes it will. Make sure you have enough clearance between the frame and shock yoke after installing the bushings
    Thanks, would this be a better place to start than shorter crankset?


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    Whoever invented the bicycle deserves the thanks of humanity.
    - Lord Charles Beresford

  42. #42
    Ride Fast Take Chances :)
    Reputation: alexbn921's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    2,484
    Bushing are cheap and easy to install. Bushing, 170 fork and slightly less sag would be my first steps. Interested in hearing your thoughts on the smaller cranks too.
    Making shit harder than it needs to be isn't awesome, it's just...harder.

  43. #43
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Posts
    1,833
    Quote Originally Posted by huckleberry hound View Post
    This has not been my experience at all. I can climb better with the same gearing using 165mm cranks vs 175mm cranks because of smooter strokes.
    I experienced the same as you, I have short legs though. So it was taking more energy to pass over the top of the stroke.

    But this is where everyone argues about the leverage of longer cranks. When honestly its all about ratios. And with long range cassettes its not an issue for most.

  44. #44
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    5,188
    Iím 6í/33Ē inseam

    My son is 6í5Ē, also runs 165mm, also rides unicycles with 150mm cranks

    The ďsmoother strokeĒ argument is all about spinning a smaller circle, less motion = faster turn over and lower energy expenditure. If you go into the unicycle forum, the discussion is popular, pretty solid consensus, folks who tout on big wheels and they all run 125-150mm cranks.

    I get that some folks feel they need a big lever to power over rocks and up ledges, but those of us who ride tech also recognize that technique is what matters most vs brute strength; think ballet vs football analogy.

    Itís an old argument, few mountain bikers agree, but there are some happy converts out there like me

    Quote Originally Posted by isleblue65 View Post
    How tall are you and whatís your inseam?

    Iím pretty adaptable, and find that my muscles and body adjust to changes in geometry, suspension, gearing, handlebar width, etc - so Iím not terribly concerned.

    I may play with the bushing idea too - maybe even before installing the 165mm cranks.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    Lrg GG Pedalhead 29/27+
    XMed GG Smash 29/27+
    Lrg Devinci Hendrix 27+ (Loaner)
    Pivot Shuttle 27+ (wife)

  45. #45
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Posts
    1,833
    Quote Originally Posted by Nurse Ben View Post
    That's a bunch of BS, seriously, where do folks come up with this nonsense?

    There is no correlation between crank length and gearing, any more so than the oval vs round chainring crap that mfgs try to feed us.

    You will notice a difference in the "feel" when you spin, but that difference will be minimal and hardly a bother. You will need to raise your seat 10mm to maintain the same leg extension.

    And you will no longer have pedal strikes constantly, yeah!

    Ben, I'm very pro short cranks. But it's all in the math of the ratios of spinning circles. Your crank rotations account in the equation. If you notice the difference or your bio mechanics make shorter crank better(i fall in this category) doesn't change the math.

  46. #46
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    291
    I was pro long cranks for a long time as a tall guy (6'3" ~36 cycling inseam) with 180s on all my bikes. I have recently gone to 170s on my cargo bike and mtb because that's what they came with. I am getting fewer pedal strikes on my sentinel with 170s than my old RIP9 (125 version) with 180s but the trails here aren't rocky (PNW). I quickly adapted to pedaling the shorter cranks and actually prefer the closer stance for descending.

  47. #47
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2016
    Posts
    86
    This is an interesting discussion. I guess crank length is a much more popular topic in BMX racing, where there are numerous charts and formulas, etc. But generally there is a stronger preference for longer cranks for adults (I use 180s, although the formulas and charts would suggest 190s). The idea is that you want to maximize your power on the first few pedal strokes since the person who gets the early lead often prevails, but I am not sure if this is bro science or if there is any research to back this up. The first few pedal strokes in MTB are not that critical. Even as a very tall person (6'6", 35.5" cycling inseam), the 180s feel pretty choppy after riding 175s my whole life and so I've been considering going to 180s on my MTB just for consistency, but now I'm not sure.

  48. #48
    mtbr member
    Reputation: tungsten's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    513
    Quote Originally Posted by isleblue65 View Post
    Would overforking and bushings balance out the steepening of the angles?
    Increasing the fork travel 10mm will slack the angles .4 deg.

    One of those offset bushings will steepen them .75 deg.

    Do the math. Do you really want steeper angles with the possible concommitent alteration of the rear suspensions kinematics?

    Does the shock have a "pedal" mode?

    You're only gonna' get 3mm from a bushing.

    Ibis says the bb height w/ 2.5 Maxxis Minons is 341 and that the bike takes 2.6 tyres. I'm sure you can find taller tyres that'll fit.

    I wish my bb height was 341! I had to learn to work with 175's @ 336 +/- .

    Putting a bushing in that boutique carbon frame should be your option of last resort. Tyres, shock tune, practice, then overfork if you must.

  49. #49
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Posts
    92
    165 cranks feel much more natural for me, did not notice one bit of difference in gearing. My pedal strikes reduced greatly

  50. #50
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Brisco Dog's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    282
    Instead of speculating what crank length is best, I suggest you get a real bike fitting. I had a fitting at a company called Cyclologic and they actually put me on 155mm crank on my gravel bike. Part of the reason has to do with flexibility and form. If you are not flexible enough or pedaling with proper form, you are losing energy/power by having cranks that are too long. I moved to 165mm Raceface SixC on my mountain bike and it makes technical climbing easier. Just a thought.

  51. #51
    Rollin 29s
    Reputation: isleblue65's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    699
    Quote Originally Posted by tungsten View Post
    Increasing the fork travel 10mm will slack the angles .4 deg.

    One of those offset bushings will steepen them .75 deg.

    Do the math. Do you really want steeper angles with the possible concommitent alteration of the rear suspensions kinematics?

    Does the shock have a "pedal" mode?

    You're only gonna' get 3mm from a bushing.

    Ibis says the bb height w/ 2.5 Maxxis Minons is 341 and that the bike takes 2.6 tyres. I'm sure you can find taller tyres that'll fit.

    I wish my bb height was 341! I had to learn to work with 175's @ 336 +/- .

    Putting a bushing in that boutique carbon frame should be your option of last resort. Tyres, shock tune, practice, then overfork if you must.
    Yes, shock has pedal mode and lockout, but I've always been a set it and forget it rider. The active suspension allows the rear to track and climb over features on the trail that are in places right around the corner from pedal strike objects where pedal mode or lockout might prevent a strike. If I had remote control of it, I might use it like I use my dropper - but constantly reaching down to flip it on or off isn't practical where I ride.

    I'm undecided on what I'm going to do yet, but leaning toward trying the shorter cranks before doing anything else.

    Quote Originally Posted by alexbn921 View Post
    Bushing are cheap and easy to install. Bushing, 170 fork and slightly less sag would be my first steps. Interested in hearing your thoughts on the smaller cranks too.
    I'll report back on the cranks which are on the way, and should arrive on Monday.

    Quote Originally Posted by Dave Mac View Post
    165 cranks feel much more natural for me, did not notice one bit of difference in gearing. My pedal strikes reduced greatly
    Good to hear. Hopefully I will feel the same being a tall rider.

    Quote Originally Posted by Brisco Dog View Post
    Instead of speculating what crank length is best, I suggest you get a real bike fitting. I had a fitting at a company called Cyclologic and they actually put me on 155mm crank on my gravel bike. Part of the reason has to do with flexibility and form. If you are not flexible enough or pedaling with proper form, you are losing energy/power by having cranks that are too long. I moved to 165mm Raceface SixC on my mountain bike and it makes technical climbing easier. Just a thought.
    I ordered 165mm cranks which will be here early next week. I chose 165 based on someone's comment earlier that 5mm would hardly be a change (from 175), while 10mm will be a noticeable improvement regarding pedal strikes.

    the bike fitting was 1-hour at my LBS included with my bike purchase. Nothing I hadn't already done such as plumb from knee to pedal, saddle position, stem height and handlebar positioning. The tech said "Everything looks pretty much right where I would recommend it." I would not have been happy if I had paid separately for it based on the tech's inability to solve some fitment issues, and am not convinced their premium $300 fitting would have helped me either.
    Whoever invented the bicycle deserves the thanks of humanity.
    - Lord Charles Beresford

  52. #52
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Brisco Dog's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    282
    The fitting I had was $400 and took 3 hours. The plumb bob method is not something I would pay for either. Take a look at this video. This is what I had done. Simple things like leaning to one side on your saddle or having your knee flare out makes a huge difference. Crank length will effect these things.


  53. #53
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    5,188
    Bike fittings don't take into account terrain or how a particular bike will work in different situations. I'd say bike fitting is at it's least effective for mountain bikers.

    Perhaps bike fitting might help a racer trying to achieve a certain aerodynamic efficiency, but really, it's usually somebody who took a couple classes and is trying to make some money.

    What's really funny is how many people are sized incorrectly, then come on MTBR and complain. Too much subjectivity, not enough objectivity.

    $400, seriously? Clearly I'm in the wrong profession.

    That said, at least they got you on shorter cranks, so maybe that was a short cut to the good life; it took me ten years of muni to learn about short cranks
    Lrg GG Pedalhead 29/27+
    XMed GG Smash 29/27+
    Lrg Devinci Hendrix 27+ (Loaner)
    Pivot Shuttle 27+ (wife)

  54. #54
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    351

    Ripmo XL - a ton of pedal strikes

    Quote Originally Posted by Nurse Ben View Post
    Bike fittings don't take into account terrain or how a particular bike will work in different situations. I'd say bike fitting is at it's least effective for mountain bikers.

    Perhaps bike fitting might help a racer trying to achieve a certain aerodynamic efficiency, but really, it's usually somebody who took a couple classes and is trying to make some money.

    What's really funny is how many people are sized incorrectly, then come on MTBR and complain. Too much subjectivity, not enough objectivity.

    $400, seriously? Clearly I'm in the wrong profession.

    That said, at least they got you on shorter cranks, so maybe that was a short cut to the good life; it took me ten years of muni to learn about short cranks
    was wondering same thing. these fitters always seem to be road bike specific. reminds me of how mountain bikes have finally evolved away from road bike biases that took years to overcome. isnít mountain biking a different sport with unique fit needs?

    re crank length, for me it is related to femur length. it does matter and not everyone benefits from shorter cranks. surprised that so many are advising such a tall rider (I believe 6í4Ē puts him in the 99th percentile) to move to 165mm cranks. iím gonna guess these recommendations are coming from riders nearer to the 50th percentile. That might be the equivalent of asking a 5í9Ē rider to try cranks off a kids 20 inch bike.
    Last edited by attaboy; 2 Days Ago at 08:54 PM.

  55. #55
    Rollin 29s
    Reputation: isleblue65's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    699
    Quote Originally Posted by attaboy View Post
    was wondering same thing. these fitters always seem to be road bike specific. reminds me of how mountain bikes have finally evolved away from road bike biases that took years to overcome. isnít mountain biking a different sport with unique fit needs?

    re crank length, for me it is related to femur length. it does matter and not everyone benefits from shorter cranks. surprised that so many are advising such a tall rider (I believe 6í4Ē puts him in the 99th percentile) to move to 165mm cranks. iím gonna guess these recommendations are coming from riders nearer to the 50th percentile. That might be the equinox asking a 5í9Ē rider to try cranks off a kids 20 inch bike.
    What are my options? We have pro short cranks and pro long cranks opinions on this thread. We have pro and con opinions on bushings, and over forking and higher volume tires and more shock pressure, and fix it vs learn the skills to adapt. I donít believe that a fitting is going to solve a low bottom bracket issue, nor a custom shock tune. I donít want to throw a bunch of money at it but I would like it to be resolved.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    Whoever invented the bicycle deserves the thanks of humanity.
    - Lord Charles Beresford

  56. #56
    mtbr member
    Reputation: huckleberry hound's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Posts
    731
    I'm 6'1" with 34" inseam. My 165mm cranks were among the best $100 I have ever spent on my bike. My frequent pedal strikes have been reduced to rare pedal strikes. My climbing has improved and my overall comfort has improved. I'm even considering putting them on my N+1 bike which has a higher BB just because I like them so much.
    You have already order them so just put them on when they come in. Give them a chance for several rides and see how they do. For me it was love at first pedal, for others it takes a bit of adjustment time. I think you will be pleasantly surprised.
    All of this bickering reminds me of the wheel size debates. It must be winter.
    Change begins by doing something different.

  57. #57
    mtbr member
    Reputation: tungsten's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    513
    Quote Originally Posted by tungsten View Post
    Increasing the fork travel 10mm will slack the angles .4 deg.

    One of those offset bushings will steepen them .75 deg.

    Do the math. Do you really want steeper angles with the possible concommitent alteration of the rear suspensions kinematics?

    Does the shock have a "pedal" mode?

    You're only gonna' get 3mm from a bushing.

    Ibis says the bb height w/ 2.5 Maxxis Minons is 341 and that the bike takes 2.6 tyres. I'm sure you can find taller tyres that'll fit.

    I wish my bb height was 341! I had to learn to work with 175's @ 336 +/- .

    Putting a bushing in that boutique carbon frame should be your option of last resort. Tyres, shock tune, practice, then overfork if you must.
    Oh yeah, forgot to add that going all the way down to 165 cranks is nuts. Just because d/h'rs like spinning tiny circles gravity assisted doesn't mean 165's are the beans for trail riding.
    Shortening to 170's is a more reasonable, measurable, and physiologically less risky compromise.

  58. #58
    mtbr member
    Reputation: rusty_ss's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    167
    I am 6'3" and have 175mm cranks on my singlespeed mtb but I come from a track background where 165mm is the norm to prevent strikes on the banking. It is easy to swap between the two and only ever feels awkward going back to the 175s after using 165s as the top of the stroke seems dead with too much knee bend.

    I would give the cranks a try. You can always sell them if you hate them after a week or two.

    Sent from my SM-N950F using Tapatalk

  59. #59
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    351

    Ripmo XL - a ton of pedal strikes

    Quote Originally Posted by isleblue65 View Post
    What are my options? We have pro short cranks and pro long cranks opinions on this thread. We have pro and con opinions on bushings, and over forking and higher volume tires and more shock pressure, and fix it vs learn the skills to adapt. I donít believe that a fitting is going to solve a low bottom bracket issue, nor a custom shock tune. I donít want to throw a bunch of money at it but I would like it to be resolved.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    itís confusing. no doubt. itís just that, as u mentioned i your OP, the bottom bracket is same height as ur previous bike which suggests how bike is riding in its travel is possible issue. iíve ridden the bike at approx ur weight and had problems with rear shock too. other large riders also report blowing through travel too easily because itís leverage ratio is linear. shorter cranks will help pedal strikes but not the issue with travel, thatís all. and, wanted to put out there that short cranks arenít for everyone, maybe especially someone of your length. all meant to be helpful not critical. i went fron180s to 175s when the former became unavailable with XX1. i really disliked the loss of what felt like a more powerful stroke circle. i did notice fewer pedal strikes and have adjusted. hey, maybe i should try some
    165s and see for myself.

  60. #60
    Elitest thrill junkie
    Reputation: Jayem's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    29,984
    Here's another perspective, they tend to run real light compression tunes on the DW Link bikes because they "don't need them for pedaling", as far as acceleration and efficiency. This is generally true, but I find that this light compression tune means less chassis stability, less low-speed compression and resistance to movement, so harder to push against terrain, preload, etc. This usually contributes to "blowing through travel" and a good custom shock tune will allow it to be very firm with the LSC and not go far into the travel on the uphills and off of things like curbs, while still reacting for the high speed sharp hits. These days I just factor the cost of a custom shock tune into the frame purchase, it's always worth it in the end.

    Also, most OEM stuff is valved very stiff in HSC, which means you can't run much LSC without making it feel like a jackhammer (if you even have an LSC adjuster). This combines with the flat-middle-stroke spring curve of an air-spring to exaggerate the "blowing through travel" feeling, because you have to run the shock "open" to counter the overly-stiff HSC. Custom tune can fix this.
    "It's only when you stand over it, you know, when you physically stand over the bike, that then you say 'hey, I don't have much stand over height', you know"-T. Ellsworth

    You're turning black metallic.

  61. #61
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    5,188
    The OP could try playing with volume spacers, try for a faster ramp up. I almost bought a Ripmo, didnít think about B.B. height at the time, short cranks have been my safety buffer from this industry trend.

    What I worry about is the trend broadening to the point that low bbís become the standard, then what do you? Iím gonna stick with my Smash.

    Quote Originally Posted by Jayem View Post
    Here's another perspective, they tend to run real light compression tunes on the DW Link bikes because they "don't need them for pedaling", as far as acceleration and efficiency. This is generally true, but I find that this light compression tune means less chassis stability, less low-speed compression and resistance to movement, so harder to push against terrain, preload, etc. This usually contributes to "blowing through travel" and a good custom shock tune will allow it to be very firm with the LSC and not go far into the travel on the uphills and off of things like curbs, while still reacting for the high speed sharp hits. These days I just factor the cost of a custom shock tune into the frame purchase, it's always worth it in the end.

    Also, most OEM stuff is valved very stiff in HSC, which means you can't run much LSC without making it feel like a jackhammer (if you even have an LSC adjuster). This combines with the flat-middle-stroke spring curve of an air-spring to exaggerate the "blowing through travel" feeling, because you have to run the shock "open" to counter the overly-stiff HSC. Custom tune can fix this.
    Lrg GG Pedalhead 29/27+
    XMed GG Smash 29/27+
    Lrg Devinci Hendrix 27+ (Loaner)
    Pivot Shuttle 27+ (wife)

  62. #62
    Rollin 29s
    Reputation: isleblue65's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    699
    Thanks for the suggestions. I will start with the short cranks since they are coming anyway, and Iíll give those several rides.

    My shock already has a volume spacer, and Itís set to between 20 and 22% sag. The spacer helped a lot to keep me from blowing through the travel, and made the shock feel more stable and controlled while pedaling.

    If the cranks donít work out or I feel like I need something more, Iíll consider a tune. In fact Iíll look into it now so I have the information. Depending on cost and downtime, I may or may not do it.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    Whoever invented the bicycle deserves the thanks of humanity.
    - Lord Charles Beresford

  63. #63
    No Clue Crew
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    5,962
    Wait a second, youíre running 20% sag and still striking? Man, thatís just not right. Something else is going on here, unless youíre physically jumping up and down on the saddle as youíre climbing.

    The Ripmo is low-ish, but not unusually so for a modern bike. And 210 pounds isnít overly heavy. Obviously try the cranks since you already ordered, but I still think thereís something going on with the shock. Does it lose air? For giggles, Iíd try riding it in the different compression positions to see if it makes a difference.

    Barring a technique issue (no offense), or incorrect sag setup, it just seems weird.
    Just like a raindrop, I was born to fall.

  64. #64
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Posts
    92
    I can tell you one thing when I was reading up on the 165mm cranks most all responded positive, most of the negative talk came from people who had not done it !

  65. #65
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Rngspnr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2016
    Posts
    701
    You say you weren't getting pedal strikes with your Jet9. Are the gear ratios the same on both bikes? I notice that if I have different gear ratios I run into a pedal timing issue and get strikes. I run same gearing on both my bikes to avoid this.
    2016 Evil Following V1
    2016 Dartmoor Primal+

  66. #66
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    1,356
    33" inseam, 5'11". I swapped from 175s to 170s and really prefer it and flat ride better with them.

    That said, I couldn't recommend to such a tall guy to buy such short cranks.

    What I could recommend is some 2.5 tires and some very flat pedals. I'd also encourage you, when shopping for your next bike to very carefully consider sagged BB height as a major consideration when shopping for your next bike. For me, it was a huge factor. I personally settled on the Foxy 29 in part for this specific reason.

    Good luck!

  67. #67
    mtbr member
    Reputation: In2falling's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    448
    Quote Originally Posted by isleblue65 View Post
    Thanks for the suggestions. I will start with the short cranks since they are coming anyway, and Iíll give those several rides.

    My shock already has a volume spacer, and Itís set to between 20 and 22% sag. The spacer helped a lot to keep me from blowing through the travel, and made the shock feel more stable and controlled while pedaling.

    If the cranks donít work out or I feel like I need something more, Iíll consider a tune. In fact Iíll look into it now so I have the information. Depending on cost and downtime, I may or may not do it.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    I hate low bottom brackets, if I was you I would go all out. Raise fork to 170, do the offset shock bushing (that combo should keep HA about same). Then look at 170mm cranks and maybe also oval chainring. That should give you good clearance probably close to 14" also with 170mm cranks and oval chainring should make pedal strikes thing of the past and make climbing chunky stuff much more fun.

  68. #68
    Rollin 29s
    Reputation: isleblue65's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    699
    Quote Originally Posted by In2falling View Post
    I hate low bottom brackets, if I was you I would go all out. Raise fork to 170, do the offset shock bushing (that combo should keep HA about same). Then look at 170mm cranks and maybe also oval chainring. That should give you good clearance probably close to 14" also with 170mm cranks and oval chainring should make pedal strikes thing of the past and make climbing chunky stuff much more fun.
    Interesting on the oval chainrings. I'll try the cranks first and see what that does.

    Quote Originally Posted by Blatant View Post
    Wait a second, youíre running 20% sag and still striking? Man, thatís just not right. Something else is going on here, unless youíre physically jumping up and down on the saddle as youíre climbing.

    The Ripmo is low-ish, but not unusually so for a modern bike. And 210 pounds isnít overly heavy. Obviously try the cranks since you already ordered, but I still think thereís something going on with the shock. Does it lose air? For giggles, Iíd try riding it in the different compression positions to see if it makes a difference.

    Barring a technique issue (no offense), or incorrect sag setup, it just seems weird.
    Let's say my sag is 22% on the Ripmo. 22% of 145mm travel is 32mm. On my niner I ran 30% sag. 30% of 100mm travel is 30mm. Not a big diference, but the travel difference of both bikes, means I'm still sagging more on the Ripmo, and the shock compression ramp up would be different between the two as well. this could mean that at the same point in the pedal stroke, or the same situation, the Ripmo is probably earlier in compression, and then goes deeper into compression when a load is applied.

    Quote Originally Posted by Rngspnr View Post
    You say you weren't getting pedal strikes with your Jet9. Are the gear ratios the same on both bikes? I notice that if I have different gear ratios I run into a pedal timing issue and get strikes. I run same gearing on both my bikes to avoid this.
    Jet 9 is 1x9 with 30t chainring and 11-36 cassette. Ripmo is Eagle system with 32t chainring and 10-50 cassette.

    Quote Originally Posted by Suns_PSD View Post
    33" inseam, 5'11". I swapped from 175s to 170s and really prefer it and flat ride better with them.

    That said, I couldn't recommend to such a tall guy to buy such short cranks.

    What I could recommend is some 2.5 tires and some very flat pedals. I'd also encourage you, when shopping for your next bike to very carefully consider sagged BB height as a major consideration when shopping for your next bike. For me, it was a huge factor. I personally settled on the Foxy 29 in part for this specific reason.

    Good luck!
    I think I can find a compromise that will work and not impact geometry or spinning very much. I have nothing to lose to try the 165mm cranks other than maybe losing $25 by selling them lightly used with the unused chainring (I'll swap my chainring over to the new cranks). I do have 2.5 tires, so the next step would be 3.0. Pedals are Egg Beaters. Is there anything lower profile? Note, I'm hitting not just my pedals but my crank arms on occasion.
    Whoever invented the bicycle deserves the thanks of humanity.
    - Lord Charles Beresford

  69. #69
    No Clue Crew
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    5,962
    I think you just solved your own problem. Sag in mm is a percentage of stroke, not travel. For reference, I run around 14mm sag.
    Just like a raindrop, I was born to fall.

  70. #70
    Rollin 29s
    Reputation: isleblue65's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    699
    Quote Originally Posted by Blatant View Post
    I think you just solved your own problem. Sag in mm is a percentage of stroke, not travel. For reference, I run around 14mm sag.
    22% sag is about 11mm. What am I missing?




    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    Whoever invented the bicycle deserves the thanks of humanity.
    - Lord Charles Beresford

  71. #71
    No Clue Crew
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    5,962
    Perhaps I misread. I thought you were suggesting you set your sag at 32mm.
    Just like a raindrop, I was born to fall.

  72. #72
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    5,188
    That's not much sag in my book, must be a pretty firm ride.

    Looking forward to hearing your impression on the short cranks.

    Quote Originally Posted by isleblue65 View Post
    Thanks for the suggestions. I will start with the short cranks since they are coming anyway, and Iíll give those several rides.

    My shock already has a volume spacer, and Itís set to between 20 and 22% sag. The spacer helped a lot to keep me from blowing through the travel, and made the shock feel more stable and controlled while pedaling.

    If the cranks donít work out or I feel like I need something more, Iíll consider a tune. In fact Iíll look into it now so I have the information. Depending on cost and downtime, I may or may not do it.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    Lrg GG Pedalhead 29/27+
    XMed GG Smash 29/27+
    Lrg Devinci Hendrix 27+ (Loaner)
    Pivot Shuttle 27+ (wife)

  73. #73
    Rollin 29s
    Reputation: isleblue65's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    699
    Quote Originally Posted by Blatant View Post
    Perhaps I misread. I thought you were suggesting you set your sag at 32mm.
    No, sorry if I wasnít clear. I was talking about what percentage of a 100mm travel and a 145mm travel shock those sag numbers were.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    Whoever invented the bicycle deserves the thanks of humanity.
    - Lord Charles Beresford

  74. #74
    Rollin 29s
    Reputation: isleblue65's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    699
    Quote Originally Posted by Nurse Ben View Post
    That's not much sag in my book, must be a pretty firm ride.

    Looking forward to hearing your impression on the short cranks.
    I also prefer as close to 30% as possible, as I want to be able use almost all of my available travel under the right conditions (and I donít do drops of more than a foot or two). Itís a lot smoother than my Niner would be with 22% sag, but the o-ring only gets about 3/4Ē from the end of the piston after most rides.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    Whoever invented the bicycle deserves the thanks of humanity.
    - Lord Charles Beresford

Similar Threads

  1. Pedal strikes and chainring/bashguard strikes = frame damage?
    By Varaxis in forum Bike and Frame discussion
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 09-25-2013, 12:45 AM
  2. Replies: 5
    Last Post: 06-24-2011, 06:24 AM
  3. Tallboy - low BB - frequent pedal strikes?
    By Variateur in forum 29er Bikes
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 03-14-2011, 07:38 AM
  4. Replies: 18
    Last Post: 03-03-2011, 11:13 AM
  5. Replies: 11
    Last Post: 02-21-2011, 07:25 PM

Members who have read this thread: 322

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

THE SITE

ABOUT MTBR

VISIT US AT

© Copyright 2018 VerticalScope Inc. All rights reserved.