You'll see plenty of Rotor Rings in the pro peloton so there's obviously fit folk out there who believe they work. The latest bit of science we've seen – okay, Rotor sent it to us – does seem to suggest a measurable and statistically significant advantage. Let's look at the test. It's a bit dry (aren't they always) but here's some highlights...
The study dates to August last year and the guinea pigs were eight racing cyclists and triathletes from California Polytechnic State University where the research was conducted by the Kinesiology department. The test was a 1km time trial in laboratory conditions. Not one, in fact, but seven: a practice go, then one effort on round rings followed by four on Rotor Rings and a final one back on a standard dinner plate. Athletes were tested mid season to minimise any effect of increasing cardiovascular performance.
And what did they learn? "Evidence from this study indicated that for these well-trained cyclists and triathletes, performance improved after just one week employing the Rotor Q-Rings," says the report. "Week 5 Post-test (back on circular rings) further demonstrated that positive performance effects were only evident with the Rotor Q-Rings. Furthermore, these improvements were specific and did not transfer to circular rings after four weeks of training, racing, and testing with Rotor Q-Rings."

"Subjects completed the time trial on average 1.6 seconds faster, increased average speed approximately 0.7 kph and increased average power approximately 26 watts. During submaximal testing, oxygen consumption and heart rate were significantly lower with Rotor Q-Rings compared to circular chainrings." Improvements were evident in both maximal and submaximal testing, with oxygen consumption and blood lactate both lower in the submaximal tests.
There's lots of data in the full report (attached below) and the experiment looks to be well designed for its goal. The authors acknowledge that they're by no means the first to have a look at the claimed efficiency/power/speed gains of non-circular rings, with previous studies throwing up a variety of results, sometimes conflicting. But it's an interesting experiment, and worth a read if you like that sort of thing. If you're more academic than us (not hard) we'd love to hear your thoughts on the construction of the experiment, and the findings.
Because it was a last minute change, I didn't have time to fester over it. Given more time I would probably have talked myself out of it!
Got it! <slaps forehead> Ever had one of those days where you Need More Coffee...?
This is why i do a little jump rope on days im not on the bike. I do 20-30mins of jump rope in the garden. some people go for longer.
Where do you suppose the "real thing" comes from? Not Smethwick.
Not to mention the "3 to 4 hours sleep" at most. How irresponsible can one person be?
You're welcome. I find the history of cycling fascinating as so many feats seem to have got lost in the mists of time (or due to the British in...
wow, she was very calm and collected. I would have been screaming blue murder at the fckwit!
They ban lots of vehicles normally allowed on normal roads, it is not just cyclists.
May be I'm missing something, but you need an XDR free hub to run SRAM 12 speed not a Fulcrum/Campagnolo one. I have a set from Reynolds and a set...
Just prosecuting for the assault with a 'metal pole' which resulted in significant injuries would be an improvement on the usual mitigation because...