I swear by Rotor's, both cranks and rings.

---

Team Zoot-Texas, and Pickle Juice

+1 for rotor q rings over these without even trying them simply based on rotor's adjustability and these having one setting.

I'm not saying they don't work, I like the theory behind them, it makes logical sense to me. The question is how to develop them perfectly. I think that designing them assymetrically makes sense as well, coming into and coming out of the dead spots you naturally have different force. And they don't have 1 setting they have 5 assuming you don't care where the chain pin sits.

---

---------------------
Jordan Oroshiba --- Roadie invading Triathlete space for knowledge access

Unless, I'm missing something in the picture you posted of the rings, they do not have 5 "settings" to fine-tune where the lobes are in the pedal cycle. Take a look at the Rotor rings, and you will see that the bolt holes are completely around the circle, thus allowing you to dial-in where the lobe of the ring sits in relation to the crank arm.
Essentially, as I recall (and my memory could be mistaken) the Osymmetrics and the old Bio-Pace rings only have 1 (fixed) position to dial-in the lobe with the crank arm.

---

Team Zoot-Texas, and Pickle Juice

If a position changes the angle with which you interact with the larger/smaller portions of the ring. I can put the crankarm in 5 positions on this ring where it will interact with the shape in distinct different ways in my pedal stroke.

---

---------------------
Jordan Oroshiba --- Roadie invading Triathlete space for knowledge access

true, but MAYBE 2 of the 5 would make sense...

I can find 3 that you could justify one way or another. It certainly isn't as adjustable as the Rotor rings, but it will fit more cranksets because of that AND it is cheap! I just nabbed a set for $121 on eBay brand new. Yay Korea. I will have to test and see how it is.

---

---------------------
Jordan Oroshiba --- Roadie invading Triathlete space for knowledge access

Update: got these rings today. The ramps and pins are very solid and they actually shift better than my Rival chainrings ever have (better ramps and pins, stiffer rings). Overall machine work on them looks alright, some rough edges, certainly more material could have been removed from them. Setting up the front derailleur was a bit tricky but I've got it pretty well down now, rubs a bit in the 52-11 combo but barely. I'll fiddle with this some more later. I plan on doing some tests between these, my round rings and these in the "optimal position" as indicated by noncircularchainrings.be. Since I don't have a power meter I'm thinking of just doing a 10-20 min all out efforts on the trainer for each setup. I'll make sure I have an equal amount of rest going into each test. And hopefully I'll be able to do 2 rounds, 1 before adaptation and one after a couple weeks on them. I'm sure somebody has an idea of how to better this little bit of science, let me know if you do.

The major and minor axis seem to have quite an acute angle. Transitions from a 48 to a 55 with 52 teeth. Small chainring goes for 38 to 42 with 40t. Almost all the documentation that came with it is in Korean and thus totally meaningless to me. Although I did find a section with some wattages percentages and speeds mentioned. No idea what they mean though.

Anyways here is a pic mounted, those two lines in the upper left of the ring indicate largest and smallest diameter:

---

---------------------
Jordan Oroshiba --- Roadie invading Triathlete space for knowledge access

Hi joroshiba,

You can't test non-round rings well without the right inertia (rider+bike). They work by changing pedal speed against wheel speed, and with typical trainers wheel speed changes more instead.

Cheers,

---

Damon Rinard
Engineering Manager,
CSG Road Engineering Department
Cannondale & GT Bicycles
(ex-Cervelo, ex-Trek, ex-Velomax, ex-Kestrel)

Thanks Damon, this makes sense. However, would this not also mean that this rings do not work on a steep climb? Where wheel speed and pedal speed are going to be more closely related. I wouldn't say with a typical trainer wheels speed changes more than pedal speed (this would imply that when I gradually decrease pedal speed, the wheel would stop before I stop pedaling when we know there will in fact be a couple of seconds after I stop pedalling that the wheel keep spinning), but that wheel speed changes quicker than on a flat road. Thus this perhaps wouldn't be the ideal test for non-round rings, but it would be a similar scenerio to a mountain climb where there is less inertia. Would you consider this to be accurate?

---

---------------------
Jordan Oroshiba --- Roadie invading Triathlete space for knowledge access

Hi joroshiba,

No.

I haven't thought it too much because the inertia is so different on a trainer I can't imagine there is any scenario where testing non-round rings on a trainer is worth it.

An intentionally high-inertia ergometer on the other hand...

Cheers,

---

Damon Rinard
Engineering Manager,
CSG Road Engineering Department
Cannondale & GT Bicycles
(ex-Cervelo, ex-Trek, ex-Velomax, ex-Kestrel)

Fair enough. I will likely continue with the test, with the caveat that if I find no improvement it doesn't necessarily mean there isn't one. But it would seem as though if I get an advantage in a scenerio with such a low interia you would simply expect bigger advantages on the road. If there were any mountains near by I would do a test there, but alas the longest climb within a 30 minute drive takes about 3.5 minutes to go up. I might still test here, but I doubt I will find significant enough differences to say that it wasn't simply that I was able to push myself harder on a given day that improved my time up. I could do repeats though, this could test the theory that they reduce fatigue.

---

---------------------
Jordan Oroshiba --- Roadie invading Triathlete space for knowledge access

I was getting fitted on my new tri bike the other day which has some osy rings on there. The fitter kept looking bewildered as I was peddling and I asked him what was going on. He said that my foot came across the top so fast that it really just took him a while to get used to that rythym of the feet. He said it looked like they were doing what they were supposed - allowing the foot to come through the dead spot faster...take that for what it is worth

 
Am I missing something here? Wouldn't this resistance slope need to start and end in the same place since 6 o'clock on one leg is 12 o'clock on the other?

I noticed the same thing, I don't have any idea how they managed to find that. I will say that there is a very sharp transition when going into the dead spot and a gradual increase afterwords maybe they just left a couple degrees off the chart?

---

---------------------
Jordan Oroshiba --- Roadie invading Triathlete space for knowledge access

Since I don't have a power meter I'm thinking of just doing a 10-20 min all out efforts on the trainer for each setup. I'll make sure I have an equal amount of rest going into each test.

You really need to use a Powertap, and do many tests on the road. Even then it will be difficult to tell.

Am I missing something here? Wouldn't this resistance slope need to start and end in the same place since 6 o'clock on one leg is 12 o'clock on the other?

Yes, but 6 on one leg will not be the same as 12 on the other. Each leg will have its own graph with this shape. The graph only shows half of the full circle.

 
The more I think about that graph the more I think it was created by their marketing dept. If the y axis on that graph is resistance, the circular chain ring should be a flat line with the other rings going above the line during the downstroke and below during the deadspot, but averaging the same value.

I would agree with this it looks like it is trying to represent what the resistance feels like.

---

---------------------
Jordan Oroshiba --- Roadie invading Triathlete space for knowledge access

If you really want a good laugh watch their videos. Poor grasp on the English language + metal music = world class marketing. Fortunately the product is of higher quality than these materials. At least from a shifting and build quality perspective. As far as them working goes.... I certainly hope so but who really knows?

---

---------------------
Jordan Oroshiba --- Roadie invading Triathlete space for knowledge access

The reason q-rings are a killer app pretty much in comparison to any other non-round rings: it is not their shape. It is their angular adjustability.

Because you absolutely need to be able to adjust the chainring position to fine tune its position relative to your body position, your saddle position, your specific frame geometry, and even your cassette size. A non-round ring without the ability to adjust ring position is dead in the water.

---

Advanced Aero TopTube Storage for Road, Gravel, & Tri...ZeroSlip & Direct-mount, made in the USA.
DarkSpeedWorks.com.....Reviews.....Insta.....Facebook
--

A non-round ring without the ability to adjust ring position is dead in the water.

Osymetrics have been used very successfully by pros lately... I wouldn't call that "dead in the water".

I would argue that you still might see some benefit in a chainring not in its optimal position. The ovality of qrings is so small that the magnitude of optimized gains will be too small. With a more eccentric shape you could have it not be position optimized and still get better results. Assuming the idea works in the first place.

---

---------------------
Jordan Oroshiba --- Roadie invading Triathlete space for knowledge access