Why compact cranks can make you weak
posted on January 21st, 2010 in Cycling, Cycling Tips, Reviews, Ride Reports, Strength Training by Stephen
A slow growing trend these past few years has been compact cranks…..now they seem to be everywhere.
I’m shocked to see that new Time Trial bikes are being sold with compact cranks. I mean these TT bikes are made to put the rider in the most Aero position possible, and the rider is about 75% of the non-aerodynamics on the bike. This is all done so that said rider can now pedal the bike as Fast as possible…. yet, the cranks they are putting on them are for climbing? Why are they cranking on your chain like this?
It is all done in the name of Marketing and Sales! When you look over the specs of a fancy new bike, you check many things, frame/fork, manufacturer, components, wheel-set, WEIGHT. And this is where the compact cranks come in – the total weight of the bike. By putting on compact cranks, they are able to save about a half pound (220 grams) from a bike with a 39/53 chain rings….marketing at it’s least finest – tricky. Only later will you find out that the ‘lightest’ TT bike you got may have compact cranks on it – and the makers have done this b/c they know this will be a selling point for many Tri-athletes that are very meticulous about their bike purchase. Yet, in the long run, it’s not ideal for the rider.
Are compact cranks Good? Yes! Are compact cranks Bad? Yes!
Climbing
The problem that I have with Compact cranks is that it gives you a bail out gear….and most riders use it – way too much! So, what happens? in your training you are allowing your body to ‘bail out’ on many climbs and sections that instead you should be pushing 1 larger (harder) gear and challenging your legs more. It is part of the ‘on the bike strength training’. Don’t believe me? Ever ride single speed? Remember how tough the climbs are? Now guess why they will make you stronger. You will have gained strength through using a single gear to climb.
Guess what happens with compact cranks in the long run. You bail out more and more, therefore, your legs begin to loose strength, and you are only be able to spin up climbs. You can look at gear ratios all day, but if you can’t spin that gear, you are off the back of the pack, and always spinning does not strengthen you legs. Only by stressing the muscles AND allowing adequate time for recovery do you strengthen.
This became overly clear to me when I was able to out ride a guy doing 3 gap, yet I also outweighed him by about 40 .lbs (HEY, it was height and Muscle 
. He should have walked away from me! As I chatted with him I was able to find out that he was indeed on compact cranks and attempted to spin up each climb b/c ‘he didn’t feel he had the leg strength to push a larger gear…..well, I guess by now, because of the compact, he didn’t.
Don’t get me wrong, I think compact cranks can be good when used properly. In the off season and base season, there would be nothing wrong with compact cranks and being able to maintain a lower Heart Rate while going over hills. I myself have stopped on hills to lower my Heart Rate before during base building.
Another excellent reason for compact cranks is if you are going to be doing more climbing than you are used to in a short period of time…. if you are from a much flatter area and are suddenly going to the mountains with a training camp, a compact will give you a bail out gear, just in case.
say you are going to Europe to watch a big stage race – compact cranks will make your rides much more enjoyable and less painful. Plus, if you are doing multi-day ride in the Mountains, recovery and less fatigue in your legs can be achieved with more spinning up the climbs using compact cranks.
Now if you already have compact cranks on your bike; no need to rush out and replace them. Actually during the winter, they maybe good to be able to spin the legs. But especially in the spring and summer months, don’t ‘bail out’ every time the road points upward, and you will see your ability to go up that killer climb in a larger gear after a few weeks!
Want to know how to get stronger on the climbs?! Download my ebook ‘Drop Pounds Gain Watts’
Get the Program that
~Pro Cyclist Tim Henry (former West Viginia, Jittery Joe’s, & rider/director for Team Type 1)
~ Pro-Cyclist Daniel Holt Track National Elite Points Champion & Team Type 1 member
~ADIDAS sponsored Pro Runner Jennifer Feenstra – 2nd place at Canadian national Marathon 2010
~Georgia Chain Gang Jerome Rossetti and Tony Myers used to get into the best shape possible before the 2010 RAAM – Race Across America. They finished in 7days!
Similar Posts:
- compact cranks can make you weak
- compact cranks can make you weak
- compact cranks can make you weak
- Focus on your Motor
- Focus on your Motor
StrongerCyclist.com is the site of Stephen Carhart, personal trainer, author, and cyclist.
Does the girl have compact crank or full size?
The girl has full size triple, because she is on a Mt bike!
This is bad information, and misinformation. Compact cranks are easier to spin, and will subsequently allow a rider to ride for longer periods of time. I burn up faster on a standard crank, and if you look at Sheldon Brown’s gear ratio calculator, you will see that the difference between a compact crank and a standard crank is only about 1.5mph. I think your information is unfounded, and you should do more research before you start making opinions and giving out information on things you obviously know nothing about. Don’t be jealous because a guy weighing 40lbs more than you is outriding you, are you going to go to the race committee and complain because he is riding a compact crank? Weiner…
Dave,
I agree compact cranks are easier to spin, in fact that is part of my point, many people spin too much to ever gain any leg strength.
PS. It was me that out-weighted him by 40lbs & I was ahead of him on every climb.
Thanks for the comment.
Very good article indeed. From my personal experience. Compact crankset does tend make your legs lazier and weaker. It is because I tend to use the easier gear for climbing until I exhaust all the gears available. In contrast when I use standard chain ring I haven’t got a choice and have to push hard and as a result my legs got much stronger. It is a matter of practise. I use 39/53 and 12-25 for training and race on 12-27 as it gives me ‘bail out’ if needed. I do lot of hill climbs anyway. As a conclusion, I achieve better time and able to keep up with the big boys.
Sorry, but this is rubbish! For a start, whether or not you are running a compact crank is only one determinant of your gearing. A 50/36 with an 11-23 cassette gives you for all practical purposes exactly the same gearing as the ubiquitous 53/39 + 12-25 (including the same range on each chainring), and a 50/34 + 11-23 provides the same total range of gears (if not the same ranges on each chainring) as a 53/39 + 12-27. So you could equally well say “12-25 cassettes make you weak” or “12-27 cassettes make you weak”. The ONLY advantage of a 53/39 chainset over a 50/36 is if you need to use a 39 11 highest gear.
Secondly, the argument that lower gearing makes you weaker (not that a compact needs to mean lower gearing) is very dubious. You should be able to get your HR just as high by spinning a lower gear on a hill as mashing a larger one if you are doing it properly.
Typo in the above – should have been “The ONLY advantage of a 53/39 chainset over a 50/36 is if you need to use a 53 11 highest gear”.
Neil you bring up an excellent point that a 12-27 cassette ‘can’ make you weak. It’s not the gearing that I am attempting to point out, but the way that it is used – too many people continually ‘bail out’ on climbs, thus they do not create on the bike leg strength.
Secondly: I can also spin a lower gear on flat ground and get a high HR. A high HR & spinning will make you more efficient, but do not create stronger legs (or a StrongerCyclist).
Watching the UK Eurosport coverage of the Tour of Lombardy this year, while Nibali was storming up the Ghisallo Magnus Backstedt was making the point that the gearing the pros use these days is so much lower than 10 or 20 years ago (I think Nibali had something like a 39/ 27 or 28 lowest gear). He was saying that the riders were just as strong, but in a different way. I wonder if it has something to do with the stiffness of the frames these days – it seems to me that it is easier to crank around a higher gear at a low cadence if there is some “give” in the frame, while if the frame is solid that tends to encourage a lower gear and higher cadence. Just a theory. Anyway, it’s just a pet peeve of mine that people always assume that a compact = lower gearing. My preferred gearing is a 50/36 with 11-23 cassette, which has all of the advantages of a 53/39 12-25 but allows closer spaced gears in the middle of the cassette. Also, if I DO need lower gearing for serious mountains, then it’s actually cheaper these days to swap the 36 chainring for a 34 than to buy a wider range cassette. Lighter too.
While I am still a beginner, I agree with the post for the most part. When I got back to biking a few months ago, I started with a mountain bike with a triple crankset and trained with that bike for a month. The next month, I switched to a road bike that that had a standard, double crankset (52/39). The first week was a killer, but the weeks after made me stronger and much faster. On a 20-mile run that has a solid mix of rolling hills, long, steep climbs and descents, and a few long straights, I averaged around 1 hr 30 mins on the mountain bike. On the road bike, I have been averaging around 1 hr 15 mins. I continually get faster and when I do get another road bike, it will be another standard, double with a few different cassettes.
I have been riding for 5 years, while my own bike is a 53/39, I have also ridden a 50/34 while testing a bike, and I agree that I didn’t feel the need to exert much power on the compact, and it became more of a leisure ride. On a standard I’m exerting simply raw power on short steep climbs or long gentle climbs. I only use the 39 when I cannot sprint up a long steep climb and I have to pace myself. That’s why I’ll never ride compact. Having said that though, I cannot generalize that all compact crank cyclists are weak. I have ridden with compact crank cyclists who are very strong, although they are rare. Most compact crank cyclists cannot keep up with the big boys when we turn up the heat, but some odd ones can. Another disadvantage of compact crank is on descent. While you normally don’t pedal too fast on a descent, if the big boys are cranking it up, I have seen compact crank folks who just keep pedaling on a downhill and still can’t keep up. Besides, the province where I live is quite flat overall, no need for a compact.
I’ve been an active cyclist for over 30 years. For most road riding a standard 42/52 or 39/52 evolved over the past 100 years of cycling as the best overall chain wheel sizes. For touring, or for out of shape or significantly overweight cyclists, a compact 34/50 will certainly make hills “easier.”. However, easier will also equal slower climbing, as rate of climb is simply power. If you do work slower, you do so at lower power. To climb the same hill, you do the same total amount of work either way. It’s the power level, or speed that changes. Your choice: climb easier and slower for longer time, or harder and faster quicker.