Rotor Q-ring question

Back by popular demand, the general all-things Road forum!

Moderator: robbosmans

muntos
Posts: 247
Joined: Wed May 29, 2013 5:41 pm
Location: Romania

by muntos

Again this question pops up in my mind, if these oval chainrings bring such advantage why we don't see more of them in the Pro peloton?

dmoneysworks
Posts: 166
Joined: Tue Aug 07, 2012 6:35 am
Location: Parakai, New Zealand

by dmoneysworks

Tinea Pedis wrote:I have just gone back to round rings on my road bike - but keeping QXL on my TT rig. Run P2M on all my bikes. Have found a slight power difference between the Q-Rings and round (same as found in the Twitter link). I liked the q-rings, just gone to round rings to see if I can feel a difference. So far...not. But would not be without them on the TT bike.


I'm really interested to hear your personal results on this... as the osymetric guy is all about using round rings for training and oval for racing (I've heavily paraphased of course)

by Weenie


Visit starbike.com Online Retailer for HighEnd cycling components
Great Prices ✓    Broad Selection ✓    Worldwide Delivery ✓

www.starbike.com



addictR1
Posts: 1878
Joined: Sun Jun 10, 2012 1:11 am

by addictR1

Thanks Nifty

User avatar
Mario Jr.
Posts: 2174
Joined: Sat Jun 12, 2004 8:49 am
Location: Denmark
Contact:

by Mario Jr.

muntos wrote:Again this question pops up in my mind, if these oval chainrings bring such advantage why we don't see more of them in the Pro peloton?


Sponsor issues. Shimano, Campa and SRAM will not accept having their sponsored riders using non-sponsor material, as they pay a lot to have the teams use their stuff. So it's not a choice.

Grill
Posts: 662
Joined: Mon Aug 20, 2012 12:12 pm
Location: Oop North

by Grill

It's not a sponsor issue at all. The fact of the matter is that they don't actually offer an advantage over traditional round rings. Froome would have all the same results and ITT times regardless of which rings he used. It's simply a matter of preference and as pros are given equipment, they see no need to pay out in for a lateral move. Even on Rotor sponsored teams there are more pros using No-Q's than Q or QXL rings as they don't see the benefit and simply prefer the action of round rings.

User avatar
Mario Jr.
Posts: 2174
Joined: Sat Jun 12, 2004 8:49 am
Location: Denmark
Contact:

by Mario Jr.

I work with teams all the time. Trust me, there's a lot of sponsor considerations... Just in the three best Conti teams here, two of them don't allow the riders to use other cranks/rings than the sponsor supplied stuff.
Also, we are having pros in the house regularly for bike fits. Many of them don't want to try oval rings for the reason, that if they ride in a team where they are allowed to use them or are even sponsored, they don't want to bother anyway or risk getting fond of them if they are in an other team next year where this is not possible. This you would know if you had spend time with the pro riders. I have.
If we do a session with elite riders where we get the OCP position right with the INpower cranks, most of them keeps them on the bikes as they prefers the feel. So the number of elite riders using oval rings are increasing here at least.
I'm impressed that you seem to know Froomes numbers with and without oval rings. ;-)

Oh, and let's not forget that pro riders are the most old fashion and stubborn demographic I have met. Luckily, this is slowly changing.

superdx
Posts: 524
Joined: Sun Jun 29, 2014 1:27 pm

by superdx

It's sponsorship, but mostly you can't just install q-rings and get benefit from them the next day. You have to train with q-rings and if your team suddenly loses Rotor sponsorship or another vendor says you gotta use their standard circle cranks+rings then you need to re-train. Muscles & technique need to get used to it to get see measurable results. Maybe 15-20s faster after 4-5 months of conditioning? That's extremely time consuming, and no team would be willing to put up with that, and it's dependent on your sponsor allowing you to use Rotor products. Cycling sponsorships are already unpredictable as it is, and Rotor isn't exactly rolling in cash to sponsor teams.

I gotta say though, I did see a next-day benefit when I got my q-rings installed, I wasn't as tired on a multi-hour ride and my chronic knee aches were nowhere near as bad with standard rings. Pros obviously aren't concerned with these issues though!

addictR1
Posts: 1878
Joined: Sun Jun 10, 2012 1:11 am

by addictR1

superdx: that's exactly one the reason why i decided to try the rotor qxl. i've heard and read ppl who usually cramps doesn't when riding long distances with rotor. so migth as well give it a try and see. :)

nga
Posts: 58
Joined: Sun Nov 22, 2009 7:49 am
Location: Helsinki, Finland

by nga

I would personally like to see independent scientific research on pros and cons of oval chainrings. That kind of research which does take into consideration possible false power data from power meters when using oval chainrings.

addictR1
Posts: 1878
Joined: Sun Jun 10, 2012 1:11 am

by addictR1

nga: i found something that might offer some support.. but i'm taking it with a grain of salt.

http://cyclingcenterdallas.com/blog/201 ... s-q-corner

Krackor
Posts: 257
Joined: Tue May 31, 2011 9:48 pm

by Krackor

The article linked on page 1 of this thread refers to this study:

http://digitalcommons.calpoly.edu/cgi/v ... t=kine_fac

They found a ~26 Watt increase in a 1 km time trial. Power was measured with a Computrainer so the chainring ovality would have no effect on power measurement, unlike a crank-based power meter.

Grill
Posts: 662
Joined: Mon Aug 20, 2012 12:12 pm
Location: Oop North

by Grill

Krackor wrote:The article linked on page 1 of this thread refers to this study:

http://digitalcommons.calpoly.edu/cgi/v ... t=kine_fac

They found a ~26 Watt increase in a 1 km time trial. Power was measured with a Computrainer so the chainring ovality would have no effect on power measurement, unlike a crank-based power meter.


This study is a joke. Show me a kilo rider using these. Loads more studies show no gain.

http://ro.ecu.edu.au/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=7377&context=ecuworks
http://www.jssm.org/volume08/iss3/cap/jssm-08-463.pdf

addictR1
Posts: 1878
Joined: Sun Jun 10, 2012 1:11 am

by addictR1

kracker: thanks for the info! this is a good read!

User avatar
phips
Posts: 85
Joined: Sat Dec 06, 2008 10:38 am

by phips

It's such a personal thing. For me, they work - I wrote a blog post some years back with my findings.

Shifting is fine once you learn the optimum spot. O.Symetrics are worse than Qs, and I sorted that OK - and did a little video to show when to shift.

by Weenie


Visit starbike.com Online Retailer for HighEnd cycling components
Great Prices ✓    Broad Selection ✓    Worldwide Delivery ✓

www.starbike.com



addictR1
Posts: 1878
Joined: Sun Jun 10, 2012 1:11 am

by addictR1

phips: thanks for chiming in. i ordered the QXL 52/36 for my red crank. just hope setting up the FD will be easy as pie.

Post Reply