Q about Q...

User avatar
MattyK
Posts: 2232
Joined: Fri Oct 01, 2010 1:07 pm
Location: Melbourne

Q about Q...

Postby MattyK » Fri Oct 09, 2015 1:26 pm

Why?

Image

Surely about 50 mm could be knocked out of the stance width with little effort...

User avatar
MattyK
Posts: 2232
Joined: Fri Oct 01, 2010 1:07 pm
Location: Melbourne

Re: Q about Q...

Postby MattyK » Mon Oct 12, 2015 9:43 pm

Noone huh? FWIW these are 102mm cranks, with a Q of about 175mm. No idea what the BB length is, but there is a good 8mm gap on the NDS between crank and frame, similar on the right side, plus that bend in the cranks which seems to serve no purpose (there's plenty of gap between crank and chainstay).

Mububban
Posts: 938
Joined: Wed Feb 20, 2008 12:19 pm

Re: Q about Q...

Postby Mububban » Thu Oct 15, 2015 2:07 pm

Sorry, I'm not that technical when it comes to bike design. What are you getting at Matty? Is it something that causes problems for young riders? I've got 2 of these on layby for the kids for Christmas.
When you are driving your car, you are not stuck IN traffic - you ARE the traffic!!!

Nobody
Posts: 8456
Joined: Thu Sep 18, 2008 12:10 pm
Location: Sydney

Re: Q about Q...

Postby Nobody » Thu Oct 15, 2015 2:37 pm

MattyK wrote:Noone huh? FWIW these are 102mm cranks, with a Q of about 175mm.
As usual with kids bikes, just poor design. Cheap generic parts designed to fit anything.

User avatar
MattyK
Posts: 2232
Joined: Fri Oct 01, 2010 1:07 pm
Location: Melbourne

Re: Q about Q...

Postby MattyK » Fri Oct 16, 2015 10:27 pm

I'm not aware of anyone concluding that it causes any problems. But one would expect that pedals be roughly as wide as the riders stance, not splaying their legs out wide. But kids aren't typically going to over exert themselves like a middle aged lycra clad geek, so the chance of knee pain is minimal. Still, it doesn't make much sense to make the parts that wide for any reason I can understand.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users