|
|
|
|
RBR's Product Tests
We review a new cycling product once or twice a month.
(Hey, it takes some serious mileage to find out how stuff
really works.)
Our newest review remains on this page until the next one
is ready. Then it moves to our archive
on the premium
site.
Rotor
Q-Rings Chainrings
By Ed Pavelka
    
http://www.rotorusa.com/s1-q-rings.shtml Product:
50/36-tooth 110-BCD alloy
chainrings Price:
$199 Weight: 115g (50), 40g
(36) Source: Rotor website, other
websites Warranty: 2 years RBR
advertiser: yes How obtained:
sample from company Tested:
3,397 miles (5,470 km)
HOT!
not!
|
zoom!
| |
|
Are they better or are they just
different?
After some 220
hours on Q-Rings, my answer is yes. Compared to round
chainrings, Q-Rings are certainly different and I think they've made my
pedaling better.
How much better is tough to say. And believe me,
I've thought about it during lots of rides on my hilly southeastern
Pennsylvania roads. Unfortunately, the testing has been in cold winter
weather with me bundled up like the Michelin man. Not the conditions in
which improvements in speed or power are very noticeable.
My
first ride with Q-Rings was a 44-miler on November 19. Their unique,
non-round shape felt different to legs that had turned nothing but
circular rings for 33 years. But not as different as I
expected.
After that ride I had no leg soreness or anything else
unusual. So five days later I did something that's certainly not
recommended for a second ride on new pedal-stroke-altering equipment and
went for 129 miles. The course that day had 6,700 vertical feet and my
average speed of 17.4 mph was about 1-1.5 mph faster than normal for
late November. Hmmm . . . .
How They Work
Q-Rings are not a copy of Shimano's ill-fated Biopace
chainrings of the 1980s. Nor are they radically elliptical or oval like
the old Durham rings or the recent incarnation from Osymetric (the brand
that Team CSC's Bobby Julich uses).
When Q-Rings turn they
have two low and high points in each revolution. These coincide with a
rider's foot position at the top and bottom "dead spot" of the pedal
stroke and with the power portion from about 2 to 5 o'clock. The idea is
to reduce the effective chainring size where power isn't applied and
increase the effective size where legs naturally push with greatest
force.
For example, if you normally use a 53-tooth large
chainring, a Q-Ring turns it into a 56 during each stroke's power phase.
But through the dead spots it's reduced to the equivalent of 51 teeth.
For this test I used the 50/36-tooth compact setup with corresponding
gear increases and decreases.
The changes are subtle and my legs
don't feel them at 90+ rpm whether I'm spinning or pushing. Where I
notice a benefit is on seated climbs in the 36-tooth ring at a slower
cadence around 80 rpm. I can feel my feet coming over the top with
greater smoothness. The sensation is hard to describe -- it just feels
like an improvement. At least it did during early rides. But then, as
more miles went by, I lost the sense that Q-Rings weren't round
rings.
So am I really getting a benefit? We're back to the basic
question -- better or just different?
Science Behind
the Shape
Q-Rings are made in Spain by the same
company that produces the Rotor crankset with its variable crankarm
position. The crank is designed to eliminate the dead spots;
these rings attempt to reduce them. (Rotor crankset rings are
conventionally round.)
Obviously a good deal of engineering has
gone into Q-Rings (patent pending). The company provides engineering
studies that describe the precision of the shape and lab studies that
show benefits. Each ring can be installed in many different positions
relative to the pedal stroke. But five bolt holes are marked with 1-5
dots to indicate the positions most riders will find most beneficial.
New users are advised to start with each ring at No. 3 and then
experiment with other orientations after they’ve adapted.
The
Rotor website has advice on chainring positions and other technical
information. It tells how to test yourself to determine which
orientation is optimum. Among the advice: "When deciding between two
consecutive settings (i.e. 2 and 3, or 3 and 4) the lower number will
give you more speed and the larger one will allow for faster
acceleration."
Changing the orientation is easy -- just unscrew
the fixing bolts and rotate the rings (no need to remove the crankarm).
But unless you have a heart monitor and/or power meter, the difference
between any two settings will be pretty subjective. You can tweak to
your heart's content, even setting each ring on a different number. So
far I've kept both rings in position 3 because I'm not sure what I'd be
looking for by making a change.
Promises,
Promises
If you do have a means of measuring
your performance, Rotor says you'll find these physiological advantages
of Q-Rings:
-
An average 4.1% increase in
power. By increasing the gear size when your legs are in position
to produce the most power, your muscles are used more efficiently.
Rotor says a recreational cyclist will see a larger power gain than
someone at an elite fitness level.
-
An average 9.1% decrease in
lactate levels. Rotor contends that lactic acid buildup occurs
because hamstrings and quadriceps are disengaged at the dead spots
while smaller knee muscles and tendons are engaged. This on/off cycle
is not as pronounced on Q-Rings because they speed you through the
dead spots, keeping the hamstrings and quadriceps engaged longer
around the pedal stroke.
-
Quicker recovery.
Rotor's theory is that lactic acid buildup can prolong recovery time,
so the less produced by pedaling, the better. The benefit is less
fatigue during the current ride and on tomorrow's
ride.
-
Less knee stress. This
is said to result from Q-Rings reducing use of knee tendons throughout
the pedal stroke.
Knee stress interests me because
I've had three surgeries related to cartilage damage and associated wear
in my left knee. I'm riding on borrowed time, so I'm usually not one to
take risks with equipment that messes with my pedal stroke. In fact,
when the Q-Rings arrived I was undergoing a series of injections with a
drug intended to improve the viscosity of knee fluid. So the rings sat
on a shelf for three months. I kept procrastinating.
But I also
kept reading about road, MTB and cyclocross riders having success on
Q-Rings. One is Dutch cyclist Marianne Voss. She started using
Q-Rings in late 2005 and the next year won the world road championship,
the world cyclocross championship and European U-23 road championship.
She calls Q-Rings her "little secret.”
In checking online
websites and forums, I found a number of other success stories and
personal perspectives. Examples:
-
"I made the change to Q-Rings
because it just makes sense. No matter how well adapted to pedaling
circles we can become, there is no getting around the inherent
weaknesses of the pedal stroke. Q-Rings do not eliminate the dead
spots, but they do lighten the load for the weaker areas and transfer
that load to the stronger muscles."
-
"With Q-Rings the pedal stroke
remains circular. It is only the rings that are elliptical. This is
one reason why the system is an excellent one for trained athletes.
The biomechanics do not effectively change, only the load-bearing
profile of the pedal stroke changes."
A cyclist and coach named
Richard Wharton reported that he tested Q-Rings on a CompuTrainer
and found:
-
In a 5-second sprint he
reached 1,279 watts with Q-Rings vs. 1,125 watts with round rings, a
13.6% improvement.
-
In a 1-minute test, he
averaged 480 watts with Q-Rings vs. 400 watts with round rings, a 20%
improvement.
I read other positive personal
experiences and very few negative comments. It seems that Q-Rings are
winning converts and their popularity is growing. I decided to put them
on.
Installation
Q-rings are
easy to install. You don't even need to remove the right crankarm. Just
unbolt the round rings and slip the unround rings into place, being
careful to note the numbered orientation of each one. As mentioned,
starting with both in the No. 3 position on the appropriate crank spider
arm (illustrated directions included) is recommended.
Next you
need to relocate the front derailleur. Keep the outside edge of the cage
in line with the big ring, then reset the height so the bottom of the
cage is 1-2 mm above the tallest teeth of the rotation. This leaves a
gap of about 7 mm to the lowest teeth. When you see this you might think
front shifting will be a disaster, but it's practically as good as with
round rings. Most upshifts are clean and noiseless thanks to chain
pickup pins effectively placed on the inner face of the large ring.
Shifts to the small ring are just as good. Rotating one or both rings to
different positions doesn't affect front derailleur setup.
While
pedaling you can glance down and see the chainrings bobbing. The amount
looks significant but it doesn't affect anything else in the drivetrain.
The rear derailleur cage barely moves in response to the out-of-round
rings turning the chain.
Q-Rings are available in sets for road
double cranks, road triple, mountain bike and cyclocross, and as single
rings that can be mixed with round ones. The many choices and various
bolt circle diameters are described and priced on the Rotor
website.
Caveats
So far,
all good. But if you're thinking about installing a set of Q-Rings
you'll be out of luck with certain cranksets. For example, the outer
compact 50-tooth ring (110 bolt circle diameter) does not fit Shimano
compact cranks or 2004-2006 Campagnolo compact cranks. However, the
inner 36T will fit all compact models.
Q-Ring technology isn't
cheap. My 50/36 compact pair retails for $199 -- the least expensive set
available. In comparison, a Shimano FC-R700 compact crankset (arms as
well as rings) costs $250. Individual Q-Rings range from $42 to
$155.
Despite the cost and high-quality appearance, two of the
four 50-tooth Q-Rings I've now used were not true. One had minor lateral
wobbles while another was worse. Rotor people expressed surprise and
said they'd take it up with the factory. They said they hadn't heard of
crooked rings from any other user and mine might have been bent in
shipping. But the box showed no signs of damage.
How was I able
to check additional rings? Because I bought extra sets of Q-Rings to go
with the sample I was testing. I liked the feel of Q-Rings on the first
ride and figured that to get the full impression I should have them on
all the bikes I ride regularly. In retrospect, it wasn't necessary.
After riding Q-Rings for hundreds of miles and then getting on my
round-ring trainer bike or tandem, I couldn't feel the difference. I
didn't need to readapt. Lately I've been switching back and forth
between round and Q regularly, and even riding both shapes on the same
day. No difference.
Or maybe my legs can't sense it but my
performance will reflect it. I am sure of one thing: My left knee hasn't
felt as good in several years as it has in the last 700 miles on
Q-Rings. The improvement wasn't immediate -- it took more than 2,000
miles -- but I'm thinking the rings have had something to do with
it.
My three main bikes are now Q-Ringed, so Iet's see how my
power, lactate levels, recovery and knees do in a 2007 season full of
long miles and endurance events. I haven't found a downside to Q-Rings
other than the cost. My hunch is that there's an
upside.
[Back
to top]
|
Product Tests Archive on the premium
site
Most recent
on top
Hutchinson Fusion 2 Tubeless Road Tire Shimano Dura-Ace
7801-SL Wheelset
Garmin
Edge 305HR GPS Cyclecomputer Spinervals Hardcore 100 DVD CTS
Fitness, Cadence, Power DVDs Blackburn TrackStand Ultra Indoor
Trainer iBike Pro Power Meter
Recoverite Recovery
Drink Easton EC90 SL Carbon Fork Profile Design Airstryke
Aero Bar Specialized Body Geometry Gel Gloves Selle San
Marco Aspide Glamour Women's Saddle
Ritchey
WCS Compact Crank Hammer Nutrition Organic Energy
Bar GearStash GS 1.25 Storage System Spenco Ironman Elite
Summer Gloves Continental Grand Prix 4000 Clincher
Tire
CicloMaster CM434 Cyclecomputer "Race Day" Training
DVD Nature's Path Optimum Rebound Cereal Specialized BG
Radiant Winter Gloves Showers Pass Elite Winter
Jacket
Pearl
Izumi Microsensor 3D Bib Shorts E3 Form Saddle Lance
Armstrong's War by Daniel Coyle Co-Motion Speedster
Tandem Crotch Guard Skin Care Oil
Ritchey
BreakAway Travel Bike Sidi Genius 5 Mesh Road Shoes Vetta
V100A Cyclecomputer Rido Saddle Sampson Stratics Carbon
Brakes
Park Tool
PRS-20 Team Race Stand Showers Pass Club Jacket Look's Keo
Carbon Pedals DoWrap SweatVac Winter Hats Specialized 05
Alias Saddle
Osymetric
Chainrings Edge Cycles Pellegrino Frame Neuvation R530
Wheelset Boure Custom Cycling Shorts Bike Friday TiLite XL
Road Tandem
Burley
Rock Point Rain Jacket Pace Flex 500 Cycling Shorts Purple
Extreme Chain Lube New Accelerade & Endurox
R4 RockyMounts Noose SL Bike Carrier
fi'zi:k
Arione Saddle FSA Energy Compact Crankset Rivendell's
Atlantis Frame Baggins Adam Saddlebag Park Tool CC-3 Chain
Wear Indicator
Spinervals Trainer Workouts CycliStats Training
Software SKS Raceblade Fenders Schmidt Hub Generator
Light Rotor Crank System
SaddleCo Flow Saddle Shimano
PD-R600 Pedals Specialized Bar Phat Tape Brooks B17
saddle Specialized 03 Pro Shoe
Chamois BUTT'r Koobi
PRS Saddle Sky Mounti Inclinometer Endurox R4 Recovery
Drink Shimano PD-7750 Pedals
Cateye HL-EL300
Headlight Specialized Comp Saddle Specialized S-Works E5
Road Bike ProLink Chain Lube Rivendell Rambouillet Road
Bike
Specialized Telluride Saddle Honey Stinger Energy
Gel Cannondale R5000 Road Bike Serotta Ottrott Road
Bike Showers Pass Century Jacket
[Back to
top] | |