Rotor Rings work! say Rotor Rings

Some interesting studies have been done on http://www.noncircularchainring.be/, they basically go on to say that the best position for oval chainrings is completely different from what the manufacturers suggest. I still want some Osymetrics though.

@alotronic, localsurfer. ta for that, was interested to know how they felt different, and now i know!.

(never tried them myself, my sister had some on an old bike of hers, when she got me to sell it i spose i should have taken them off to have ago myself..still next time eh).

Biopace actually worked the other way round to rotor rings, it increased the time in the dead spot, which made them terrible for riding in slippery conditions (due to a power surge in the middle of the power stroke), what I and many others did was rotate them 90 degrees to get a similar effect to rotor rings.

Within the next 5 years, Shimano, Sram, and Campy will probably start making more oval rings themselves.

Its all part of development, I think.

If the pro's didn't like the O-rings they'd have circular chainrings with an o-ring sticker on them.

I seem to remember some of the pro's having o-ring chainrings, but with shimano stickers as they arn't sponsored by them.

Besides, the paper does have a clear trend in it, however since they tested the O rings more than the circular rings it was clear what the researches wanted to prove.

Sometimes researchers work very hard to prove their theory, but I think they are on to something with O-rings.

Biopace... I remember...

They did feel different @fringe, becuase the power comes in a different way - have you tried any? I didn't mind the feeling and I can't remember struggling with spinning them at all, but they did feel different.

The problem with biopace was that they were probably too conservative. If you look at the newer rings they are more aggressive in shape - and you can rotate them on spider as well.

I used to have a massive book written by an American in the early 80s that had stacks of interesting stiff in it (was it called Bicycle Performance? by Richard someone?) and his evidence I remember being compelling but the 'ovality' he was suggesting was much more than Biopace.

Then there's the cost - for my three bikes it would cost in the region of £450.... Gulp.

Five weeks of maximal and sub maximal training will bring about improvements in anybody, bio paced or not. Even with well trained cyclists the amount of improvement will vary and top pros will always be positive about something they are paid to use.

how can oval rings (biopace etc) feel 'odd' when its not you foot/ankle/leg that is subjected to the oval shape, its just the chainrings that are oval, your crank is still the same length and turns on a an axle that stays in the same position (if you get me drift)..

Biopace again. I'm surprised the pros like these, as the old biopace rings felt rather odd when spinning at a high cadence and I can't imagine these are much different?

Biopace anybody?

It does seem obvious that this idea would/should work.
I mean its not hard to find or realise that there is a point in the peddle stroke that it is hard to get any power from, and reducing that point makes sense.
By the time this is accepted as fact though the UCI will probably have changed their minds and banned them, citing that they are too expensive for normal riders or some other malarky.