Login required to started new threads

Login required to post replies

Prev Next
Re: POWER CRANKS [Andrew Coggan] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Andrew Coggan wrote:
sgy wrote:

- If you state - as some did - that there is research suggesting powercranks are/are not beneficial, post the link to the study.


That's not allowed.





Three possibilities when training on PC's vs conventional cranks:


1. they make you a better cyclist
2. they make you a worse cyclist
3. there is no difference


What does the most current evidence suggest?
Quote Reply
Re: POWER CRANKS [Dreadnought] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
IIRC, he isn't allowed to answer that question.

-----
Two roads diverged in a wood, and I--
I took the one less traveled by,
Which is probably why I was registering 59.67mi as I rolled into T2.

Quote Reply
Re: POWER CRANKS [sgy] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
sgy wrote:
- I am still waiting for people who used powercranks extensively that have something bad to say about them.

I used PCs several years back for a little over a year. They definitely strengthened my hip flexors which I felt benefitted my run. When I stopped racing Tri, ditched the PCs and rode more, my hip flexor strength decreased. It seems that training specifically for cycling (standard cranks) does not produce significantly developed hip flexors.

In my experience, PCs are great tools for developing hip flexors. It is not clear to me that this has any impact on cycling performance.

Other observations:
- They are expensive
- They are heavy
- The clutches (at least in the older models) are easy to break
- They are often not well received in group rides
- They definitely do hurt to use and this definitely gives a feeling of accomplishment (though not all pain is gain)
Quote Reply
Re: POWER CRANKS [gabbiev] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
gabbiev wrote:
jackmott wrote:
They appeal intuitively to people because part of the mythos of cycling is that a smooth, round pedal stroke is efficient. Thus it seems plausible that power cranks could force your body to adopt a more smooth, round pedal stroke where power is applied more evenly around the pedal circle.

Unfortunately, reality is that this idea has been thoroughly investigated and there is no evidence that evenly applying the power around the pedal stroke is more efficient, nor do the worlds best cyclist have round pedal stroke even if they think they do. ( lab and real world in agreement in other words)

It is an aerobic sport and pushing down, not pulling back or up, is actually the most efficient way to use your oxygen.

So anyway of course people suggest all kinds of indirect benefits because it is hard to cognitively accept something you have bought into is completely pointless. ( http://en.wikipedia.org/...oice-supportive_bias )



This is a really good response. I've been a very long time PC user and do most of my training on them for a number of reasons, none of which have to do with trying to increase my efficiency in pedaling circles.

1. I started using them after the first time I was struck by a car while riding to strength my hips, which were heavily damaged.
2. I kept using them on long rides--I need to work a harder with them, which makes it easier to maintain a spouse-friendly pace.
3. I like them because they reinforce a specific pattern on the pedal upstroke, which I want to maintain when I race on standard cranks.

Burke actually points to PowerCranks briefly in High Tech Cycling when he talks about how elite riders tend to be better than those less accomplished in that they are able to generate a lot more force on the pedal's downstroke and that they are able to minimize the weight of the foot on the upstroke (some reference this as negative force--I don't). What I found that PCs do for me is to help me with the process of unweighing the foot on the upstroke, which is a lot different than actively pulling up on the pedals to generate any appreciable power.

Like I said, I've used them over the years very, very heavily and like them enough to keep a spare set if one fails (which is not often). I'm sure that some of the benefits are psychological, but I'm comfortable in saying that for me, I've gained from their use, with most of the gains coming when I switch to standard cranks for races. To further accentuate the concept of unweighing the foot during pedal upstroke, I've been racing with Osymetrics, which are based on the exact opposite concept as PCs.

Heck, worst case, they won't hurt your power long-term, and you might even realize some gains in collateral sports. Just be patient with their use.

To me this is the biggest benefit. I also agreeing with it helping unweighting, but one other area that is highlighted in the downstroke is when we are also starting to pulling back (the Greg Lemond "scape the mud off your feet phase" analogy). Of course you can do that on regular cranks too, but it becomes apparent in that phasee on powercranks. I would be interested to know if there are any power gains being made here since all the prime downstroke muscles are still engaged. Is that a Lemond/Cyrille Guimard myth? This part of the pedal stroke is analgous to the part of the running stride where you have just landed on a foot and the quads are working to support you, while the hamstrings are pulling back. A fair amount of running force is generated here and I'd think that the human body will want to keep generating force in this manner even when strapped into pedals.

In my case, recovering from a torn hamstring and nerve damage from an accident a few years ago in my left leg, this entire chain being weak is very apparent on PC's where there is almost a dead spot but this is totally hidden on standard cranks (which is funny because the right hip flexor is compensating on regular cranks for my left hamstring doing almost nothing). In running my left hamstring has been doing nothing useful and I am compensating by throwing my right foot forward only (instead of doing both). Trying to work on all of this is a work in progress!!!
Quote Reply
Re: POWER CRANKS [sgy] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
sgy wrote:

- If you state - as some did - that there is research suggesting powercranks are/are not beneficial, post the link to the study. In that case it will easy for people to judge.

I would but censorship of the relevant science has been a policy on this forum. Posts providing such links have previously been removed and members banned for doing exactly that.

Indeed wouldn't it be nice to post a link to the previous threads on the topic where such things were provided. However that's not possible because they've been removed.

sgy wrote:

- I am still waiting for people who used powercranks extensively that have something bad to say about them.


I am still waiting for people who used power balance bands extensively that have something bad to say about them.
Last edited by: Watt Matters: Nov 25, 13 13:50
Quote Reply
Re: POWER CRANKS [gabbiev] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
gabbiev wrote:
Heck, worst case, they won't hurt your power long-term,

I don't think one can even make that claim. Using them results in an opportunity cost (time spent training and money) that most likely would have been better spent on other things.

gabbiev wrote:
and you might even realize some gains in collateral sports. Just be patient with their use.

Better than gains available through simply training for that other sport? I very much doubt it.
Quote Reply
Re: POWER CRANKS [Thomas Gerlach] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Thomas Gerlach wrote:
I can echo Sam's comments about Powercranks. I wouldn't ride without them. Love them. I think the key is to use them when tired. Everyone can use them when they are fresh, the key is when you are dead tired do you opt for a bike without PCs because you are dreading the use of Powercranks? That is IMO when you really get strong and break thru performance barriers. At some point, PCs just become normal.

How well do you climb on powercranks? Do you climb dolphin style? How about out of the saddle climbing efforts?
Quote Reply
Post deleted by Administrator [ In reply to ]
Re: POWER CRANKS [Watt Matters] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Watt Matters wrote:
gabbiev wrote:
Heck, worst case, they won't hurt your power long-term,


I don't think one can even make that claim. Using them results in an opportunity cost (time spent training and money) that most likely would have been better spent on other things.

gabbiev wrote:
and you might even realize some gains in collateral sports. Just be patient with their use.


Better than gains available through simply training for that other sport? I very much doubt it.

??? If I ride for 2 hours @ 200w on PC or 2 hours @ 200w on standard cranks, why is my time on PC's not "training"?

Not making any claims about improved training.....just straight up comparison between time and watts.

Chicago Cubs - 2016 WORLD SERIES Champions!!!!

"If ever the time should come, when vain and aspiring men shall possess the highest seats in government, our country will stand in need of its experienced patriots to prevent its ruin." - Samuel Adams
Quote Reply
Re: POWER CRANKS [Pantelones] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Pantelones wrote:
Thomas Gerlach wrote:
I can echo Sam's comments about Powercranks. I wouldn't ride without them. Love them. I think the key is to use them when tired. Everyone can use them when they are fresh, the key is when you are dead tired do you opt for a bike without PCs because you are dreading the use of Powercranks? That is IMO when you really get strong and break thru performance barriers. At some point, PCs just become normal.


How well do you climb on powercranks? Do you climb dolphin style? How about out of the saddle climbing efforts?

I climb the same as I would with regular cranks, no differently, every once in a while I won't make it over the top of the pedal stroke before I start pushing and that usually results in it going backwards, but that is once in a great while. Climbing with power cranks is a non issue, the only really issue is going off curbs, or taking turns since you can't really keep the inside leg up very effectively.


Save: $50 on Speed Hound Recovery Boots | $20 on Air Relax| $100 on Normatec| 15% on Most Absorbable Magnesium

Blogs: Best CHEAP Zwift / Bike Trainer Desk | Theragun G3 vs $140 Bivi Percussive Massager | Normatec Pulse 2.0 vs Normatec Pulse | Speed Hound vs Normatec | Air Relax vs Normatec | Q1 2018 Blood Test Results | | Why HED JET+ Is The BEST value wheelset
Quote Reply
Re: POWER CRANKS [Andrew Coggan] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Reading this thread, I think I just time traveled 10 years ago.
Quote Reply
Re: POWER CRANKS [Francois] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Francois wrote:
Reading this thread, I think I just time traveled 10 years ago.
Were you the guy who climbed faster on Powercranks but TT'd on the flats faster on Rotor cranks? (by the way that would make sense because one is a low inertia environement and the other is high inertia).

Dev
Quote Reply
Re: POWER CRANKS [devashish_paul] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
devashish_paul wrote:
Francois wrote:
Reading this thread, I think I just time traveled 10 years ago.
Were you the guy who climbed faster on Powercranks but TT'd on the flats faster on Rotor cranks? (by the way that would make sense because one is a low inertia environement and the other is high inertia).

Dev

Oh I hope it was Francois. I can't outride him but I would have something to make fun of though.



Heath Dotson
HD Coaching:Website |Twitter: 140 Characters or Less|Facebook:Follow us on Facebook
Quote Reply
Re: POWER CRANKS [Francois] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Francois wrote:
Reading this thread, I think I just time traveled 10 years ago.

I actually looked over at the date on that response, to make sure I hadn't pulled up an old thread.
Quote Reply
Re: POWER CRANKS [Watt Matters] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Watt Matters wrote:
Dreadnought wrote:
Well I don't know what you mean by conventional training methods.

Let me give you some examples of conventional training methods.

Among many traditional road cyclists, it is fairly common for them to do a fair amount of high RPM training on a fixed gear bike. It would seem to violate the principle of specificity since they're not racing on a fixed gear, but many old pros swear by this training method. Where is the evidence that this method of training helps?

Another traditional training method is motorpacing, riding behind the draft of a motorcycle. Where is the evidence that it is more effective than just gutting it out on your own?

I'm not saying that these methods are not effective; they probably are. Is their use based more on tradition, or do we have any hard evidence to support their effectiveness?
Quote Reply
Re: POWER CRANKS [BrianB] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
BrianB wrote:
Francois wrote:
Reading this thread, I think I just time traveled 10 years ago.


I actually looked over at the date on that response, to make sure I hadn't pulled up an old thread.

I did a google search on "rotor cranks powercranks francois" and the good guys over in Mountainview California pulled up this thread, where he replied with his old user account :-)

http://forum.slowtwitch.com/...anks_Article_P41340/

....

Aug 24, 03 15:13

Post #11 of 23 (1477 views)
Re: Good PowerCranks Article [TimeTrial.org] [In reply to]Quote | Reply

HR wise, I have the same problem with PC as it is still hard to pedal at a higher rpm like 100 or so.
in a tri, I will keep the cadence low so, it's no big deal but for a TT, I will up the cadence, which I can't do for extended periods of time with PC, so my HR remains relatively low.

Quote Reply
Re: POWER CRANKS [gabbiev] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
gabbiev wrote:
Watt Matters wrote:
gabbiev wrote:
Heck, worst case, they won't hurt your power long-term,


I don't think one can even make that claim. Using them results in an opportunity cost (time spent training and money) that most likely would have been better spent on other things.

Of course one can. Also can say this about a whole lot of things that multisport athletes do.



gabbiev wrote:
and you might even realize some gains in collateral sports. Just be patient with their use.


Better than gains available through simply training for that other sport? I very much doubt it.


Who the hell said that?


No-one, but if using such a device (or anything for that matter, like a supplement, or whatever) doesn't result in measureable improvement beyond what's attainable without using it, or worse means that you miss an opportunity to do or use something that's more effective, why on earth would you waste resources on using it?
Quote Reply
Re: POWER CRANKS [Power13] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Power13 wrote:
Watt Matters wrote:
gabbiev wrote:
Heck, worst case, they won't hurt your power long-term,


I don't think one can even make that claim. Using them results in an opportunity cost (time spent training and money) that most likely would have been better spent on other things.

gabbiev wrote:
and you might even realize some gains in collateral sports. Just be patient with their use.


Better than gains available through simply training for that other sport? I very much doubt it.


??? If I ride for 2 hours @ 200w on PC or 2 hours @ 200w on standard cranks, why is my time on PC's not "training"?

Not making any claims about improved training.....just straight up comparison between time and watts.

You might not be making such claims, but others are and have. So if the training is not improved, or the outcome of training not improved, why would anyone spend their hard earned on such a thing?

As for time and watts, how long before you were attaining the same chronic workload using such cranks? I'm assuming you were not a few hours a week kind of rider, but someone doing decent volume of training.
Quote Reply
Re: POWER CRANKS [Dreadnought] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Dreadnought wrote:
Watt Matters wrote:
Well I don't know what you mean by conventional training methods.


Let me give you some examples of conventional training methods.

Among many traditional road cyclists, it is fairly common for them to do a fair amount of high RPM training on a fixed gear bike. It would seem to violate the principle of specificity since they're not racing on a fixed gear, but many old pros swear by this training method. Where is the evidence that this method of training helps?

Another traditional training method is motorpacing, riding behind the draft of a motorcycle. Where is the evidence that it is more effective than just gutting it out on your own?

I'm not saying that these methods are not effective; they probably are. Is their use based more on tradition, or do we have any hard evidence to support their effectiveness?

Ah, I see what you mean. By conventional I was thinking of sound evidence based training. I realise now that equating evidence based with conventional was my error.

As for the traditional road cyclists, you know I've been involved in competitive road cycling for a long time, and I think I've come across two riders in the last twenty years that use road fixed gear bikes specifically for training purposes. Most that use such a bike are not doing so for specific training. They might be just having fun or want to do something a little different. I doubt there is any evidence such training is of any particular benefit over using a regular road race bike, but then I've not claimed there is any, nor that such training is particularly beneficial of riding a regular bike. I've ridden plenty of fixed gear, but then I used to do a lot of track endurance racing, so that makes sense.

As for Motorpace, there are several reasons for it, but mostly it's about replication of race pace high inertia riding with highly variable power demands, which are hard to replicate if you do a lot of solo training. It also provide some additional motivation to push yourself. Metabolically there's very little difference between a hard motor pace ride and a hard solo ride, but there are significant neuromuscular differences that means the motorpace ride more readily replicate those emands experienced in mass start road racing. IOW the principle of specificity applies, plus having a buddy out there can help to bring along extra supplies for a long day and so on or look after things if trouble occurs. It's also bloody good fun but you need a quality motoman.

Even so, such things are red herrings.

Bringing up something else that may not be any more effective than regular training even though people might still choose to do it doesn't imply the use of such cranks is any more sensible.
Quote Reply
Re: POWER CRANKS [Watt Matters] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Watt Matters wrote:
Power13 wrote:
Watt Matters wrote:
gabbiev wrote:
Heck, worst case, they won't hurt your power long-term,


I don't think one can even make that claim. Using them results in an opportunity cost (time spent training and money) that most likely would have been better spent on other things.

gabbiev wrote:
and you might even realize some gains in collateral sports. Just be patient with their use.


Better than gains available through simply training for that other sport? I very much doubt it.


??? If I ride for 2 hours @ 200w on PC or 2 hours @ 200w on standard cranks, why is my time on PC's not "training"?

Not making any claims about improved training.....just straight up comparison between time and watts.

You might not be making such claims, but others are and have. So if the training is not improved, or the outcome of training not improved, why would anyone spend their hard earned on such a thing?

Eliminating muscle imbalances, for one. I bought PC's about 8 years ago, long before I started tri's and there was a buzz about them. Was shocked at how quickly they identified a significant strength imbalance on my left side (result of a knee surgery 10 years prior). It was never an issue for me on the bike, so never really used them much. Once I started rri's, that imbalance we raked havoc on my running. PC's halved helped reduce that deficit.

Quote:
As for time and watts, how long before you were attaining the same chronic workload using such cranks? I'm assuming you were not a few hours a week kind of rider, but someone doing decent volume of training.
. None....I supplemented my regular rides with PC's and gradually increased my time on PC's.

But you are moving the goal posts - you said using them comes at the opportunity cost to training.....if is m doing the same work on PC's as standard cranks, how am I not "training"?

I am hardly a PC zealot or even enthusiast....I have used them to address my imbalance issue in the past and likely will this winter as I recover from a stress fracture in my heel. So for awhile, they will supplement my aerobic exercise time on my run days as I re-build my running base. If my schedule class for 1 hour of running but I am still dealing with heel issues, I'll maybe ride 30 min w/ PC's and then run 30 min, etc.

Chicago Cubs - 2016 WORLD SERIES Champions!!!!

"If ever the time should come, when vain and aspiring men shall possess the highest seats in government, our country will stand in need of its experienced patriots to prevent its ruin." - Samuel Adams
Quote Reply
Re: POWER CRANKS [Power13] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Power13 wrote:
Watt Matters wrote:
Power13 wrote:
Watt Matters wrote:
gabbiev wrote:
Heck, worst case, they won't hurt your power long-term,


I don't think one can even make that claim. Using them results in an opportunity cost (time spent training and money) that most likely would have been better spent on other things.

gabbiev wrote:
and you might even realize some gains in collateral sports. Just be patient with their use.


Better than gains available through simply training for that other sport? I very much doubt it.


??? If I ride for 2 hours @ 200w on PC or 2 hours @ 200w on standard cranks, why is my time on PC's not "training"?

Not making any claims about improved training.....just straight up comparison between time and watts.


You might not be making such claims, but others are and have. So if the training is not improved, or the outcome of training not improved, why would anyone spend their hard earned on such a thing?


Eliminating muscle imbalances, for one. I bought PC's about 8 years ago, long before I started tri's and there was a buzz about them. Was shocked at how quickly they identified a significant strength imbalance on my left side (result of a knee surgery 10 years prior). It was never an issue for me on the bike, so never really used them much. Once I started rri's, that imbalance we raked havoc on my running. PC's halved helped reduce that deficit.

Quote:
As for time and watts, how long before you were attaining the same chronic workload using such cranks? I'm assuming you were not a few hours a week kind of rider, but someone doing decent volume of training.
. None....I supplemented my regular rides with PC's and gradually increased my time on PC's.

But you are moving the goal posts - you said using them comes at the opportunity cost to training.....if is m doing the same work on PC's as standard cranks, how am I not "training"?

I am hardly a PC zealot or even enthusiast....I have used them to address my imbalance issue in the past and likely will this winter as I recover from a stress fracture in my heel. So for awhile, they will supplement my aerobic exercise time on my run days as I re-build my running base. If my schedule class for 1 hour of running but I am still dealing with heel issues, I'll maybe ride 30 min w/ PC's and then run 30 min, etc.

I'm unconvinced on the PCs fixing a muscle imbalance claim, but that's an anecdote in any case and it's impossible to sensibly ascribe such causation without control.

As for opportunity cost:
- I'm not moving goal posts, I mentioned opportunity cost in my first post on this thread since I see those that report being unable to do anywhere near the same workload as with regular cranks
- But I see your training was mostly on regular cranks with a transition to greater use of PCs over time to help keep overall workload similar. OK, I get that, makes some sense instead of a square wave transition. But could have you performed more work (time or power) had you not made that transition?

And how do you then attribute performance gains from training with PCs to be above and beyond what would be attained from training on regular cranks?

The answer of course is you can't. Which is why research looks at these things using proper controls, and tests are repeated by others to see if results are replicated. Once such rigour is applied, we see the performance claims melt away...
Quote Reply
Re: POWER CRANKS [Watt Matters] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I don't think I attributed performance benefits above and beyond what could be achieved with standard cranks. Please let me know where you think I did so and I will clarify. The one year that I was still bike racing and used them extensively, I did have a great year....but my training was also up significantly, so I cannot say it was due to my time on the PC's.

How could I have trained more had I not made a gradual transition? Say my schedule called of a 2 hour ride, and I then rode 1 3/4 hours on my regular cranks and then 15 minutes on PC's. How could I have trained "more" other than going over my scheduled training time?

It is no different than people who are transitioning to newton's or other low heel drop shoes.....you gradually make the transition over time. No one is claiming that the transition to these shoes comes at a training "opportunity cost."

As for the muscle imbalance, it is pretty clear.....if i achieved complete muscle fatigue on my left side after 15" of pedaling when I first tried PC's (which I did) and gradually extend that time to intervals over 1 hour with no muscle failure, I have strengthened muscles that were previously not as strong. It is my belief, as well as my docs and PT's, that this muscle imbalance is a significant contributor to my running injuries (all on my left side).

Yes, the above is anecdotal evidence. I do not claim otherwise, but contrary to popular belief, the entire knowledge base re: human performance is not available on Pubmed.

Chicago Cubs - 2016 WORLD SERIES Champions!!!!

"If ever the time should come, when vain and aspiring men shall possess the highest seats in government, our country will stand in need of its experienced patriots to prevent its ruin." - Samuel Adams
Quote Reply
Re: POWER CRANKS [Watt Matters] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Watt Matters wrote:

I'm unconvinced on the PCs fixing a muscle imbalance claim, but that's an anecdote in any case and it's impossible to sensibly ascribe such causation without control.


Is this based on your time using PC's? How long did you ride on them?
Quote Reply
Re: POWER CRANKS [sn00zedoc] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
As usual lots of opinions - most of which I won't even consider commenting on.
Some people doubt there effectiveness in the areas I stated before. Try and you will know better (or at least get your money back - coupon code in earlier post :-) )
If there's one thing: training on powercranks will not make you slower...
I started in January 2011 and broke every single record of mine since that period in biking and running (e.g. 2h56 run split in Kona, 4h29 bike split in Kona, AG winner in the 5 IM races I did since 2011 - including 3 times Kona, etc...).
I will not say that all this is because of powercranks but powercranks training is the only thing that structurally changed in my training and I train hard and lots!
I used to be a 250W avg rider and a 3h10 runner before - now I am more a 270-280W biker and a 3h runner in IM races.
Unfortunately, there is no transfer of powercranks towards swimming...
Sam
samgyde.com
Quote Reply
Re: POWER CRANKS [Will132] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Will132 wrote:
Watt Matters wrote:


I'm unconvinced on the PCs fixing a muscle imbalance claim, but that's an anecdote in any case and it's impossible to sensibly ascribe such causation without control.



Is this based on your time using PC's? How long did you ride on them?

You're asking for a (lack of an) anecdote to disprove his doubt about anecdotes?

----------------------------------
"Go yell at an M&M"
Quote Reply

Prev Next