Beginners Pedaling Stroke

[ratz]

Since we've had some threads recently about the pedaling stroke leg bend etc. I thought it might be help to take some video of the leg length I setup people with when I put them on our Quests.

I didn't have the Quest on the trainer so I adjusted the Silvio to match and we made this short video. In the video I am pedaling at 95 rpm; and recording with the iphone slow motion; it's still a bit fast but you can see the motion pretty good.

I try start people with a setup like this, that gives them a max bend in the knee of 90 degrees, and at the same time prevent full leg extension (about 3-5% shorter than normal). It has been my experience that when beginners get their leg all the out that they have more trouble controlling the bike because of the larger deep spot and the lack of control inherit in a fully extended leg.

Seasoned riders would move the boom out further than shown here as the skill level improves.

Feel free to comment on how you started. This is what we've been doing; doesn't mean it's the best way, but I thought it would be instructional.

 

[jond]

ratz this is exactly what happened to me. as i got a bit more experience i have let out the boom an inch or so for a straighter leg extension. still not 100% sure it is set to my liking exactly. small increments can make a big difference to the right "feel" of the bike.

i am persisting with the 170mm fsa crankset. i am 6ft one inch and a bit. but still think i could go shorter crank length allowing me to snug up the cockpit and lower the handle bar like it was in my avatar. my thigh would occasionally touch the handle bar prior to raising it with a stem extender one inch.

those q rings are making me curious too. rick larry yourself and others seem to swear by them for a performance increase. thinking about some aero rims too for an obvious gain.

what shorter armed cranksets would you recommend to pair with the q rings?

 

[ratz]

Down to 165mm you can pretty much go stock SRAM, Shimano, FSA etc. I'm partial to the 5 bolt pattern because it's interchangeable at the 110BCD and 130BCD size the Shimano 4 arm stuff, see the Silvetto Steve posted, is nice but then you are pretty much locked in; you can get Q-Ring but you won't be changing out. If you want shorter than 165mm in GXP style cranks the best place to go is http://bikesmithdesign.com Mark has put tons of time into figuring which ones can be shorted and which ones can't. You can source an entire setup from him rings and all. Recognized that he has bad chronic arthritis and only makes so many at a time and he may be slow to respond to email depending on if he can type that day. I the U.S. he pretty much will call the customer to discuss.

We run 165mm SRAM Rivals because we are using Stages power meters. If I had it to do over probably would have gone with 110BCD APEX 155mm's from Mark; and some thing like 4iiii power meters (didn't exist last year) which would allow us cheap power and pedal agnosticism.

In either case I would be in the 110BCD for our hills allowing for a 34T small ring setup; which with Qrings lets you pair it with 46T, 48T, 50T or a 52T and still shift nicely and have nearly all gears available. with 52T you might not be able to get 34T x 11T to run depending on the chain length; an extension improves the likelihood.

Once we deal with the funding of the kids to college (two leaving over 2 years) then we'll probably come back the cranks topic and shorten our up. For now it's 165mm for consistency.

 

[jond]

Down to 165mm you can pretty much go stock SRAM, Shimano, FSA etc. I'm partial to the 5 bolt pattern because it's interchangeable at the 110BCD and 130BCD size the Shimano 4 arm stuff, see the Silvetto Steve posted, is nice but then you are pretty much locked in; you can get Q-Ring but you won't be changing out. If you want shorter than 165mm in GXP style cranks the best place to go is http://bikesmithdesign.com Mark has put tons of time into figuring which ones can be shorted and which ones can't. You can source an entire setup from him rings and all. Recognized that he has bad chronic arthritis and only makes so many at a time and he may be slow to respond to email depending on if he can type that day. I the U.S. he pretty much will call the customer to discuss.

We run 165mm SRAM Rivals because we are using Stages power meters. If I had it to do over probably would have gone with 110BCD APEX 155mm's from Mark; and some thing like 4iiii power meters (didn't exist last year) which would allow us cheap power and pedal agnosticism.

In either case I would be in the 110BCD for our hills allowing for a 34T small ring setup; which with Qrings lets you pair it with 46T, 48T, 50T or a 52T and still shift nicely and have nearly all gears available. with 52T you might not be able to get 34T x 11T to run depending on the chain length; an extension improves the likelihood.

Once we deal with the funding of the kids to college (two leaving over 2 years) then we'll probably come back the cranks topic and shorten our up. For now it's 165mm for consistency.

THANKS RATZ FOR THE LINK AND INFORMATION. AS EVER DETAILED AND INFORMATIVE. GREATLY APPRECIATED.

 

[battleaxe0]

For crank shortening without actually shortening, I found these while looking for something else:
http://www.bikewagon.com/ride2-crank-arm-shorteners-for-23-28mm-wide-9-16-arms#14484
Kind of expensive, but probably easier to deal with for testing than Larry's setup.

 

[battleaxe0]

Would these work?
http://www.cobbcycling.com/shop/accessories/compact-crank-sets
What about these (significantly less expensive):
http://www.amazon.com/Origin8-Triple-Alloy-Crankarms-Silver/dp/B002I7ICCG
or
http://www.amazon.com/Origin8-Alloy-Crank-Set-165mm/dp/B000AOC5GI

 

[ratz]

The Cobb will it's GPX assuming the external cups are the right size;

The Origin8 are Square Taper those won't work; nothing to clamp the chain-stay too.

 

[super slim]

Jond, I am also 6'1" with a 46.3" x seam, and going to 151 mm FSA Gossamer triple cranks with GXP external bearings, from Bikesmith from my 175 mm Ultegra triple cranks was a godsend for my knees, AND increased (but still small) my climbing ability!

http://www.bikesmithdesign.com/Short_Cranks/apex.html

He can also supply and install the Q rings with the correct timing

 

[Ifan Payne]

What about Rotor compact 110 BCD cranks cranks? They start as short as 155mm but I don't know whether any of their bottom brackets are compatible.

 

[ratz]

What about Rotor compact 110 BCD cranks cranks? They start as short as 155mm but I don't know whether any of their bottom brackets are compatible.

That would be the 3D+ 110bcd. Super expensive $539 for the 150mm and then you still need the $100 adapter.

You'd be far better off with a custom set from bikesmith of APEX; and then pair that with the XD-15 bottom bracket; you'd spend less and the cranks would spin and spin and spin....

With the advent of Competitors to Stages I'd be going bikesmith 150 or 155 all the way instead of my 165mm rivals.

Anyone want a deal on two stages 165 mm power meters

 

[jond]

Jond, I am also 6'1" with a 46.3" x seam, and going to 151 mm FSA Gossamer triple cranks with GXP external bearings, from Bikesmith from my 175 mm Ultegra triple cranks was a godsend for my knees, AND increased (but still small) my climbing ability!

http://www.bikesmithdesign.com/Short_Cranks/apex.html

He can also supply and install the Q rings with the correct timing

thanks slim. will give it some serious thought. being able to spin faster with shorter cranks is a good idea. definitely need another option for climbing above 6% at less than 250 watts besides walking...... wolftooth or compact crankset with shorter crankarms. they both make sense. one cheaper and one giving a new range and feel. time to try an option or accept my Vendetta bike does not do great big stonkin hilly hills with me as a pilot. below a certain speed i tend to wobble over the road. not sure how much more i will improve on low speed climbing. definitely need a lot more practice.

 

[Ifan Payne]

Sorry that this post is not related to hardware but the truth is, there is only one solution to improving hill climbing and it hurts: practice and more practice. At 72 years young I can climb 14% grades at 7000 to 8000 ft altitude but only through hard work - repititions on the hills. On short hills, up down, up down, over and over again. It's pretty brutal but it's the only way. On long hills up to 6% I also find that repititions of short sprint intervals going up hill also works wonders (either 100 yards sprint, 100 yards rest, or sprint to 18mph and rest until heart rate falls to what is a comfortable rate for you - I prefer heart rate to wattage as an indicator of my effort). So now, I actually enjoy climbing. It can be done. Two weeks ago a group of 11 of us set off on a 20 mile up hill ride. The last 4 miles climbed over 2000ft. I was the oldest rider in the group and crested the top third of the 11. I describe this only to say that it can be done but it takes more perseverence rather than more teeth in the largest cog of the cassette. (By the way, I have severe arthritis in one knee so there is no way that I can mash my way up in the big chain ring, but I also do not need a 40 tooth rear cog.)

 

[super slim]

With more practice you will as "straight as an arrow" below 5 kph!!!!!
More sprinting practice on 5% hills will definitely improve your power!!!

The Wolftooth is the cheapest way of reducing your gearing at $105, as a 60 cadence for me is the optimum climbing speed.
http://www.mountainbikesdirect.com.au/wolf-tooth-giant-cog-gc

 

[Robert Holler]

Ifan is correct. Ride the hills to ride the hills better.



Robert

 

[LarryOz]

a 60 cadence for me is the optimum climbing speed

Slim - are you serious: 60 rpm? You didn't mean 160 and forgot the "1" by accident?
60 just seems so slow. To me pushing "any" gear, 100 rpm is much more optimal, especially for the pressure on my knee joints.
But I know many fast cyclists, who really love to mash down in the 60 rpm ranges. To each his own - it just isn't for me!

 

[super slim]

Larry on the flats I sit on 85 to 95 rpm, but on climbs I slow down and tend to push into the 45 degree seat back.
Going from 175 mm crank to 152 mm meant that my knee bent decreased to below 90 degree so more push available!!!

 

[jond]

Sorry that this post is not related to hardware but the truth is, there is only one solution to improving hill climbing and it hurts: practice and more practice. At 72 years young I can climb 14% grades at 7000 to 8000 ft altitude but only through hard work - repititions on the hills. On short hills, up down, up down, over and over again. It's pretty brutal but it's the only way. On long hills up to 6% I also find that repititions of short sprint intervals going up hill also works wonders (either 100 yards sprint, 100 yards rest, or sprint to 18mph and rest until heart rate falls to what is a comfortable rate for you - I prefer heart rate to wattage as an indicator of my effort). So now, I actually enjoy climbing. It can be done. Two weeks ago a group of 11 of us set off on a 20 mile up hill ride. The last 4 miles climbed over 2000ft. I was the oldest rider in the group and crested the top third of the 11. I describe this only to say that it can be done but it takes more perseverence rather than more teeth in the largest cog of the cassette. (By the way, I have severe arthritis in one knee so there is no way that I can mash my way up in the big chain ring, but I also do not need a 40 tooth rear cog.)

yes ifan is right practice makes perfect.....well improves.... . the old adage "you need to learn to love hills." holds true except i have never learned to love them. so i wish to be able to climb hills without burning matches (or hurting my recently operated knee) so much for long distance endurance purposes. i have goals hatching. time to buy the wolf tooth and give it a try on a hill or three.

 

[ratz]

The one I always remember is

"Don't buy upgrades, ride upgrades. "

 

[skipB]

I just bought a Quest 559.

Well folks I am really struggling to find the right technique. I am not in a real hurry but, after nearly 4 dedicated hours of work, I must admit I can not complete a full revolution of the pedals . I can do figure 8s with my feet off the pedals holding my legs up. But the second I touch the pedals I lose control of the bike. What am I doing wrong . when I am gliding feet off the pedals I force myself not to grip the handlebars open palm but when my feet hit the pedals I really have to fight the steering to maintain any kind of purposeful direction . when I start to pedal the bike, it dives away from the extended leg . I am using ratz beginners pedal stroke set up. I just can't control this thing when applying power of any kind . I do appreciate the absolute wealth of knowledge on these forums . I will figure it out

 

[Robert O]

I just bought a Quest 559.

Well folks I am really struggling to find the right technique. I am not in a real hurry but, after nearly 4 dedicated hours of work, I must admit I can not complete a full revolution of the pedals . I can do figure 8s with my feet off the pedals holding my legs up. But the second I touch the pedals I lose control of the bike. What am I doing wrong . when I am gliding feet off the pedals I force myself not to grip the handlebars open palm but when my feet hit the pedals I really have to fight the steering to maintain any kind of purposeful direction . when I start to pedal the bike, it dives away from the extended leg . I am using ratz beginners pedal stroke set up. I just can't control this thing when applying power of any kind . I do appreciate the absolute wealth of knowledge on these forums . I will figure it out

On my V20, I found that I was more stable with the leg reach set a little longer. Not saying that Ratz' setup is wrong, just that my stability was so variable with small adjustments in reach that maybe a tiny bit too short might add to your wobbles. Outside of a five minute test ride at Rose City when I ordered my V20, I have not ridden a Quest. I had a tough time with the Quest in that short roll, I was used to a lot of tiller on my previous recumbent. As with anything, YMMV.