Road Bike, Cycling Forums banner
1 - 12 of 12 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,221 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
I transferred my pedals from my old bike ('06 Lemond Alp De Huez) to my Cervelo RS so I know that is not the issue. The problem started about 200-250 miles after starting to ride my RS (specifically after I swapped saddles and did not go back to the LBS to have height and fore/aft adjusted until after about 100 miles of riding which I have since done - new saddle was too high and too far back). I am experiencing some discomfort in my right knee after riding, not during riding or any type of exercise, but after and when resting. I have no weakness in the knee and it has been examined and turned and pushed on and no discomfort felt at all, but feels more like a very mild 'headache' type pain in the right knee. I have and continue to stretch regularly and I have read all about the IT band and I am pretty sure that is the issue as when I had it deep massaged two days ago, it literally made my eyes water and was advised that it may take 3-4 more times of deep massaging before it loosens up completely. It did help some so I am hoping after 2-3 more rub downs, the issue will go away....but let me get to my question. My old bike was a 2001 Lemond Alp De Huez with external BB and Bontrager cranks. Are there significant difference between BB/pedal widths on different bikes? I would think they would all be interchangeable. I can't compare my old bike to my new, but should there be any significant difference in distance between pedals between my old bike with external BB and bontrager cranks and my new RS with RED BB and RED Cranks?? I just want to make sure that my feet are not significantly wider/narrower than when compared to my old bike maybe resulting in some type of misalignment.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
10,161 Posts
not much...

There is not much difference in the tread width of modern double cranks. Triple cranks are always wider and MTB triples are wider than a road triple.

Be sure that you have your cleats set so the shoe is close to the crankarm, to minimize tread width. I've seen riders with their shoes 1/2 inch away from the crankarm. Sometimes it's because their foot sits so crooked that the only way to keep their heel from hitting the chainstay is to move the shoe outward.

Some people have the opposite problem and claim that they need pedal extenders to widen the tread width.
 

·
Anti-Hero
Joined
·
10,405 Posts
For aerodynamics, a narrower tread is ideal

I've got typical woman hips, so I set my cleats so that my feet are as wide as possible. I also ride Specialized S-works shoes, which feel like they allow for more inward placement of the cleats than the Shimano shoes I used to use. If I try and get narrow, makes my knees hurt within the first mile, so it's definitely worth the aerodynamic trade-off
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,221 Posts
Discussion Starter · #6 ·
One thing I recall..on the old bike I would be toe in (pigeon toed alot) and my knees would almost be 'crossing' the top tube..never had knee issues. Now, it seems like I want to point toes straight ahead and knees are not crossing top tube nearly as much, but I think I am doing this to correct for something..any thoughts? I guess I need to dig out the old bike and measure Q factor compare to 148mm Q factor of the SRAM Red cranks...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,620 Posts
Andrea138 said:
For aerodynamics, a narrower tread is ideal...
I read "Lance Armstrong's War" a few weeks ago and there was a fascinating story about the Trek time trial bike project. Their "secret" was to have a narrower bottom bracket etc for better aerodynamics.

After riding the bike a few times, it was determined Lance's power declined over time as a result of the narrow Q factor so the bike was scrapped.

That's a real brief summary of the story. If you haven't read the book, I'd suggest it. Interesting insight into pro racing as well as Lance's personality.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
10,161 Posts
forefoot varus...

According to Andy Pruit, one of the common consequences of forefoot varus (foot tilting down on the outside) is the knee moving in toward the top tube on the upstroke, which is not desirable. If your knees are now moving straight up and down, that should be mechanically preferable.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,221 Posts
Discussion Starter · #9 ·
Hopefully this will all go away after another couple suffering sessions of massaging the IT band (I am going now and not looking forward to it), but I would rather have undesirable incorrect pedaling with no pain that perfect 'percieved' form with pain...hehe.
 

·
Anti-Hero
Joined
·
10,405 Posts
MerlinAma said:
I read "Lance Armstrong's War" a few weeks ago and there was a fascinating story about the Trek time trial bike project. Their "secret" was to have a narrower bottom bracket etc for better aerodynamics.

After riding the bike a few times, it was determined Lance's power declined over time as a result of the narrow Q factor so the bike was scrapped.

That's a real brief summary of the story. If you haven't read the book, I'd suggest it. Interesting insight into pro racing as well as Lance's personality.
Yeah, I think too often, people sacrifice biomechanics for being more "aero." It's like the guy with football-player shoulders that insists on having his aerobars set as narrow as possible then wondering why he can't breathe during his TT, then can't move his upper body because of muscle pain afterwards.

You gotta find a happy medium :idea:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,620 Posts
C-40 said:
According to Andy Pruit, one of the common consequences of forefoot varus (foot tilting down on the outside) is the knee moving in toward the top tube on the upstroke, which is not desirable. If your knees are now moving straight up and down, that should be mechanically preferable.
I read everything I can on bike fit and the only consensus I can see is there is no consensus on anything.

Again back to the LA War book, Lance's feet are totally out of whack but it worked for him. Trying to "fix" it involved too much risk of introducing a problem.

That's sort of where I've landed. John Howard's fit videos on youtube talk a lot about getting everything lined up and gaining 5% more power here and 10% more power there. I'm not discounting this but I also wonder how many people were riding without pain, tried to align knees etc, and introduced pain into the equation.

Certainly if you are having problems a solution needs to be found and getting things aligned may be the answer.

By the way, Pruitt has received a lot of flack from some other experts regarding his work on the Specialized shoe. I always thought he was "the man" but carefully consider the pros/cons of his ideas now.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,221 Posts
Discussion Starter · #12 ·
Thanks all...just got back from getting the IT band 'grinded on'...not nearly as painful as the first time two days ago which tells me it is loosening up. I really think that is the core of the issue. I did check my Q factor on my old bike (took off non drive crank arm and lined it up with drive said) and it measured 150mm exactly...my RED cranks are 148mm, but a little washer is installed on each side due to them being carbon so I would say pedal width is within 1mm of before so that appears to be a non issue. I plan a nice light ride on Saturday and see how it goes.
 
1 - 12 of 12 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top