# Compact Cranks



## JM714 (Jan 22, 2004)

Why doesn't Campagnolo offer a 180mm compact crank? I'm 6'5" and run 180's on my bikes and would like to try compact gearing, but Campagnolo only offers a 175. Shimano offers a 180 and SRAM a 177.5 and Zipp has a 180, but I don't want to go in that direction.

Is there any logic in their reasoning why they don't? A shop guy told me "what's the point, you want to spin fast with compacts and 180's would negate that." Any truth to that?


----------



## Daren (Jul 25, 2008)

Italian hate for the vertically gifted? :idea:


----------



## orange_julius (Jan 24, 2003)

JM714 said:


> Why doesn't Campagnolo offer a 180mm compact crank? I'm 6'5" and run 180's on my bikes and would like to try compact gearing, but Campagnolo only offers a 175. Shimano offers a 180 and SRAM a 177.5 and Zipp has a 180, but I don't want to go in that direction.
> 
> Is there any logic in their reasoning why they don't? A shop guy told me "what's the point, you want to spin fast with compacts and 180's would negate that." Any truth to that?


Unfortunately just like with other things, manufacturers focus on the majority 95% of the market segment and the other 5% will have to go to extra effort.

This has been asked a few times, you may want to read up on some of the previous comments:

http://forums.roadbikereview.com/showthread.php?t=199015

Seems that you should try asking in weightweenies, too.

Good luck in your search.


----------



## ComesAtime (Dec 27, 2009)

Use a bigger cluster (unless you're already using the largest) or give 175's a shot. I have a feeling you won't feel the diference. At least I didn't when I went from 172.5 to 170


----------



## tubeman (Feb 12, 2010)

Can you just change out the big chain ring for a smaller one?


----------



## orange_julius (Jan 24, 2003)

tubeman said:


> Can you just change out the big chain ring for a smaller one?


No, they are incompatible. BCD (Bolt Circle Diameter) size and pattern are not compatible with each other.


----------



## ultimobici (Jul 16, 2005)

orange_julius said:


> No, they are incompatible. BCD (Bolt Circle Diameter) size and pattern are not compatible with each other.


It should be possible to replace the outer ring with another make in 50t. TA or Stronglight?


----------



## Nielly (Sep 21, 2009)

JM714 said:


> Is there any logic in their reasoning why they don't? A shop guy told me "what's the point, you want to spin fast with compacts and 180's would negate that." Any truth to that?


In my experience there may be some truth to that. I'm not as tall as you so it may be a different story for you but I run 170's on the road and 175's on the geared mountain bike and both seem fine to me but I also have a single speed mountain bike and for whatever reason they spec'd a 180 crank and I find it hard to spin as well especially when I start to run out of gear (like on a downhill run).


----------



## SystemShock (Jun 14, 2008)

Even 180s aren't all that long, for the really big guys. Doesn't Lennard Zinn (6'6") happily run 200+mm cranks?

Seems surprising in this day and age when 180s aren't offered. Ppl are getting bigger/taller in general, guys over 6'3" aren't as rare as they used to be.
.


----------



## ComesAtime (Dec 27, 2009)

SystemShock said:


> Even 180s aren't all that long, for the really big guys. Doesn't Lennard Zinn (6'6") happily run 200+mm cranks?
> 
> Seems surprising in this day and age when 180s aren't offered. Ppl are getting bigger/taller in general, guys over 6'3" aren't as rare as they used to be.
> .


And most people that size seem happy w/ 175's. Go figure.


----------



## JM714 (Jan 22, 2004)

ultimobici said:


> It should be possible to replace the outer ring with another make in 50t. TA or Stronglight?


I looked in that direction, but because of the bolt pattern you can only run a 52/39 or bigger.

I have run the 13-26 cassette, but I miss the the 11 or 12 on the flats.

Maybe I'll pick up a used 175 compact to see how it works for me.


----------



## ComesAtime (Dec 27, 2009)

JM714 said:


> Maybe I'll pick up a used 175 compact to see how it works for me.


:thumbsup: Worst case, you lose 10 bucks when you resell.


----------



## BryanSayer (Sep 22, 2009)

I just ordered 160mm compacts from Zinn. He said that with FSA rings it works with the 11 speed.


----------



## RussellS (Feb 1, 2010)

JM714 said:


> I looked in that direction, but because of the bolt pattern you can only run a 52/39 or bigger.
> 
> I have run the 13-26 cassette, but I miss the the 11 or 12 on the flats.
> 
> Maybe I'll pick up a used 175 compact to see how it works for me.


While it is true 39 is the smallest ring you can use on 135mm bcd cranks, the outer ring can be anything. See Peter White Cycles and StarBike for TA rings of about any size to fit 135mm bcd.


----------



## SystemShock (Jun 14, 2008)

ComesAtime said:


> And most people that size seem happy w/ 175's. Go figure.


Well, if they've never been able to ride anything bigger, they don't know what they're missing.

LeMond rode 175s back in the day, IIRC. I think he's 5'10"? Something's wrong with this picture.
.


----------



## ultimobici (Jul 16, 2005)

SystemShock said:


> Well, if they've never been able to ride anything bigger, they don't know what they're missing.
> 
> LeMond rode 175s back in the day, IIRC. I think he's 5'10"? Something's wrong with this picture.
> .


Lemond had the strength to turn 175's and didn't have the option of using compact cranks.
Couple that with freewheels with no more than 8 cogs and longer cranks were an aid in the mountains.
A compact coupled with a 26 or 28 on a 10 speed rig and you don't necessarily need the extra leverage unless you are unable to spin.


----------



## ComesAtime (Dec 27, 2009)

SystemShock said:


> LeMond rode 175s back in the day, IIRC. I think he's 5'10"? Something's wrong with this picture.
> .


You're kidding, right?


----------



## SystemShock (Jun 14, 2008)

ComesAtime said:


> You're kidding, right?


Not a bit.

I have plenty of taller friends who either complain that 175s aren't enough for 'em, or are on something bigger and are happier for it.

I'm just surprised that you don't.

It's not like you even have to be that huge... Marc Madiot had an 86cm inseam, yet rode 180mm cranks year-round.
.


----------



## ComesAtime (Dec 27, 2009)

SystemShock said:


> Not a bit.
> 
> I have plenty of taller friends who either complain that 175s aren't enough for 'em, or are on something bigger and are happier for it.
> 
> ...


The whole Lemond 7 speed comment is hilarious. I see you don't get it.


----------



## SystemShock (Jun 14, 2008)

ComesAtime said:


> The whole Lemond 7 speed comment is hilarious. I see you don't get it.


You quoted my post when responding, not Ultimo's. That's the confusion.

But I agree, the 'he only had 8 cogs' thing was a pretty silly justification as to why LeMond ran 175s while being far from tall.
.


----------



## ultimobici (Jul 16, 2005)

SystemShock said:


> You quoted my post when responding, not Ultimo's. That's the confusion.
> 
> But I agree, the 'he only had 8 cogs' thing was a pretty silly justification as to why LeMond ran 175s while being far from tall.
> .


Not justification, just that having 7 or 8 speed means one had to choose between a close ratio block OR a low bottom gear. One had to compromise. With the progression to 9 and then 10 it made that compromise less extreme as one could have a 12-25 that was actually closer stacked than an old 7 speed 12-24 freewheel. I have climbed the same mountain route in Italy one year on 53/42 to 12-25 on 175's and the following year on a compact with the same cassette but 172.5's. The extra length cranks were "too long" for my height/inseam but made it possible to turn the gear over out of the saddle. The subsequent year it was not necessary to stand anywhere near as long as I was able to spin in a lower gear.
But, crank length is not only a function of pure height, it is also a function of the ratio of one's femur to overall leg length.
If you look at the attached scans from Hinault's book you'll see that Lemond and Madiot were not as out of the ordinary as you might think.


----------



## SystemShock (Jun 14, 2008)

Well, first off Ultimo, you don't have to keep posting scans of the Hinault/Genzling book– I own it. It's a great read.

Second, I don't think LeMond or Madiot are out of the ordinary by much at all... in fact, that was sort of my point in saying that Campy should make 180mm compact cranks. If medium-height guys are using 175s very successfully, and slightly tall guys are using 180s, why wouldn't you offer the 180s? Does Campy dislike tall people?

What I didn't agree with is your point about having fewer cogs in the old days plus no option to use compact cranks forcing the use of longer cranks by pro racers. 

Not only does that not seem to line up with historical reality (racers in the day of 5- to 8-spds did not seem to use longer cranks on the whole than 10- and 11-spd racers do today), but you're also forgetting that pro racers seldomly use compact cranks, period... it's still a 53/39 world there.
.


----------



## ultimobici (Jul 16, 2005)

SystemShock said:


> Well, first off Ultimo, you don't have to keep posting scans of the Hinault/Genzling book– I own it. It's a great read.
> 
> Second, I don't think LeMond or Madiot are out of the ordinary by much at all... in fact, that was sort of my point in saying that Campy should make 180mm compact cranks. If medium-height guys are using 175s very successfully, and slightly tall guys are using 180s, why wouldn't you offer the 180s? Does Campy dislike tall people?
> 
> ...


Seeing as I'm an optimistic 5'10" I'm not too worried about the availability of 175mm+ cranks!! 
That said Campag didn't do 180mm Carbon Records so Boonen had to stick with Alloys for a season or so. So I suspect 180's will be available at some point.


----------



## SystemShock (Jun 14, 2008)

Hope you're right.

Shimano will give you a 180mm compact crank (in Dura Ace). 
SRAM will give you a 180mm compact also (in Rival). 
Why Campy can't or won't do the same, is beyond me.
.


----------



## ComesAtime (Dec 27, 2009)

SystemShock said:


> Hope you're right.
> 
> Shimano will give you a 180mm compact crank (in Dura Ace).
> SRAM will give you a 180mm compact also (in Rival).
> ...


Sounds like you have options and should switch. All you do is complain about cycling/cycling gear. Why do you still do it? Or do you?


----------



## SystemShock (Jun 14, 2008)

ComesAtime said:


> Sounds like you have options and should switch. All you do is complain about cycling/cycling gear. Why do you still do it? Or do you?


I'm sure I'm far from the only one who thinks a wider array of choices would be good. In fact, I wasn't even the one who first brought this up or started this thread, lol.

But, why attack someone for supporting an option that would make more riders happy, and might sell Campy a few more cranks? That seems far more negative than seeking/asking for improvement.

No need to be so defensive.
.


----------



## ComesAtime (Dec 27, 2009)

SystemShock said:


> I'm sure I'm far from the only one who thinks a wider array of choices would be good. In fact, I wasn't even the one who first brought this up or started this thread, lol.
> 
> But, why attack someone for supporting an option that would make more riders happy, and might sell Campy a few more cranks? That seems far more negative than seeking/asking for improvement.
> 
> ...


A) If there was a need/market, they would be making them.

B) Again, you/we have choices. Exersise that choice.

C) :mad2:


----------



## SystemShock (Jun 14, 2008)

*and I say this as someone who likes campy...*



ComesAtime said:


> A) If there was a need/market, they would be making them.


Sure. Because, y'know, Campy always judges the market perfectly. That's why they're #1.

Oh, wait...
.


----------



## ericjacobsen3 (Apr 27, 2007)

*Logical Explanation - Let's hope we are all spouting a bit tongue in cheek*

Anyway, I have a logical explanation.

I would guess Campy sells 10% as much of all their stuff as Shimano sells of just DA and Ultegra. In the US it is likely 1% but Europe is probably 20%.

So, if you have 10% of the market and 180mm cranks are likely 5% of what you would sell, you don't get many cranks you would sell to justify the forging dies or carbon molds. I don't think Campy tries to cover a 5mm range with the same crank shape and a different hole location closer or farther to the end. This further increases tooling cost for a rare size.


----------



## RussellS (Feb 1, 2010)

SystemShock said:
 

> Sure. Because, y'know, Campy always judges the market perfectly. That's why they're #1.
> 
> Oh, wait...
> .


You make a very poor assumption if you think market share has anything to do with quality of the product. Price, contacts, whatever determine market share. Quality has nothing to do with it. I think there is pretty good consensus Edge rims are exceptional quality. Yet Mavic and Shimano factory built wheels outsell them 10,000+ to 1. How is that possible?


----------



## SystemShock (Jun 14, 2008)

RussellS said:


> You make a very poor assumption if you think market share has anything to do with quality of the product.
> 
> more stuff about quality that doesn't really pertain


And you make a very poor assumption if you think that's what I was talking about. I didn't say a peep about quality... you did. 

My point was more along the lines of catering to customer needs. I think we can all agree that Campy usually makes high quality stuff.
.


----------



## SystemShock (Jun 14, 2008)

ericjacobsen3 said:


> Anyway, I have a logical explanation.
> 
> I would guess Campy sells 10% as much of all their stuff as Shimano sells of just DA and Ultegra. In the US it is likely 1% but Europe is probably 20%.
> 
> So, if you have 10% of the market and 180mm cranks are likely 5% of what you would sell, you don't get many cranks you would sell to justify the forging dies or carbon molds. I don't think Campy tries to cover a 5mm range with the same crank shape and a different hole location closer or farther to the end. This further increases tooling cost for a rare size.


Well, that's the most reasonable argument I've heard against Campy doing 180s in compact... certainly a lot better than saying, in effect, "STFU, Campy's always right, switch to SRAM or Shimano if you don't like it!", or mistakenly accusing me of saying Campy's problems stem from low quality (which just gets a big "Whaaa?" and a facepalm from moi). 

The questions I'd offer to that very reasonable argument would be:

1) Looking at Campy's US website and counting cranks (different lines, different lengths, different BCDs, but _not_ different ring configs on the same BCD cranks) Campy already offers *54* different cranks... assuming a discrete mold/tooling for each crank length, as you were saying, and assuming Record and Super Record aren't the same crank with different bolts (something I've heard but never confirmed).

Given that... what's it hurt to offer a few compacts in 180? Does it break their backs to offer, say, 57 cranks instead of 54? :idea:

Even if the number of cranks offered is actually bit lower, same logic still holds.


2) Campy _already_ offers 180mm cranks... in 53-39, in Record and Super Record. 

Should standard double riders then be treated better than compact double riders?  

Just sayin'.
.


----------



## JM714 (Jan 22, 2004)

Hey everyone thanks for the responses. It seems there are some people that share my frustration. Maybe someday Campagnolo will figure it out.


----------



## orange_julius (Jan 24, 2003)

ericjacobsen3 said:


> Anyway, I have a logical explanation.
> 
> I would guess Campy sells 10% as much of all their stuff as Shimano sells of just DA and Ultegra. In the US it is likely 1% but Europe is probably 20%.
> 
> So, if you have 10% of the market and 180mm cranks are likely 5% of what you would sell, you don't get many cranks you would sell to justify the forging dies or carbon molds. I don't think Campy tries to cover a 5mm range with the same crank shape and a different hole location closer or farther to the end. This further increases tooling cost for a rare size.


Yes, this is the basic constraint of mass production. Like I said, manufacturers target 95% of the market, and the remaining 5% has to look elsewhere or put up with limited selection. 

Or maybe the market for Campagnolo compact cranks are much smaller than for standard cranks. Notice that they don't offer CT-specific FDs anymore. I doubt that the current FD is now "so much better that it can do both standard and CT equally well", but maybe they just didn't sell that many of them in the first place. 

For the same reason it's hard to find road frames with 52 effective seat tube and 57 effective top tube. One has to go to artisanal (custom) makers and pay the extra price. Or use a 140mm stem, which is also hard to find. 

Unfortunately, the price penalty for custom construction of a hollow carbon crankset is probably much higher than for custom frames. For a solid stamped piece of aluminum it's probably not so bad. 

As always, one cannot always have a cake and eat it, too.


----------



## SystemShock (Jun 14, 2008)

JM714 said:


> Hey everyone thanks for the responses. It seems there are some people that share my frustration. Maybe someday Campagnolo will figure it out.


No prob, JM. Hope you're right about Campy figuring it out someday.

I think always saying, "We're niche, we can't do it" is a one-way ticket to remaining niche permanently. 
.


----------



## gun2head (Sep 3, 2006)

Did you ever find a compact crank solution? In the same boat here.

Thanks


----------



## ultraman6970 (Aug 1, 2010)

At 9.5 you should better buying a basket ball...

.


----------



## spade2you (May 12, 2009)

Bit of a zombie thread and I'd assume the OP found something.

Rotor makes some Campy compatible rings that can be mounted to something like a Sram or Shimano spider. Then you'd be able to use the 180mm Sram arms.

I recently snagged a Quarq with Rotor rings and Sram crank arms since I wanted a compact power meter.


----------

