I know I am biased, but I believe that this is a fair description :)

What is the difference between Rotor Cranks and Powercranks?


How Rotor Cranks work - and the benefits:

Rotor Cranks work by increasing the force required on the drive side crankarm which propels the non-drive crank are past the 12 o'clock point ... also known as the dead point. This happens 180 times a minute in a 90RPM ride. Over 10,000 times an hour. The cyclist is now "permanently pushing" the cranks as there is no gap between when the legs take over push/recover duties. This elimination of the dead point makes pedaling more efficient, reduces muscle requirements to complete the pedalling revolution, and reduces lactic acid in the bloodstream. The reduction of lactic acid allows the rider to produce more wattage at his/her lactate threshold. It "raises the roof" if you will, you can crank out more wattage before hitting LT. The extra wattage is converted to speed in the amount of 2-3 minutes per 40k.


How Powercranks work - according to their web site:

PowerCranks teach your neurologic system to unconsciously "pedal in circles." By pedaling in circles, more of the energy you are now expending actually gets to the wheel. For the same overall effort, the more efficiently you pedal, the faster you go. So the cyclist gets more efficient use of the muscles he/she has already trained and, as noted above, the ability to incorporate new muscle mass into the now unused portions of the pedal stroke. Powercranks are based on "pulling" up on the pedal stroke using the weaker hip flexor muscles. Unlike normal cranks, each crank arm spins independently of one another.



Difference between Rotor Cranks and Powercranks:

Rotor Cranks eliminate the dead point, allowing for "permanent push" to the pedals, making legs efficient at what they do best: pushing. This allows for lowered lactate levels and increased wattage at LT, which translates directly to the 2-3 minute per 40k speed increase. They are scientifically proven to reduce lactate levels, reduce cardiac effort, and improve the health of a cyclists knees by eliminating the dead point.

Rotor Cranks are not perpetual motion machines and do not claim to increase power by 40% (for more information on this topic, ask Kraig Willet about the Redshoe Brand Shoes he has been using). As we all know, there is no such thing as "free power" in cycling, especially a 40% gain just by using a set of cranks, there is a tradeoff here. Rotors do however make a claim to lower lactate levels and heart rates. They do not raise your power without the rider having to apply more resources for the mechanical advantage, and then by 16 percent net gain, but they offer you the opportunity to ride harder and at a higher wattage output - before reaching your lactate threshold. For a TT'ist or Triathlete, this is important. Your lactate threshold is probably your biggest limiter for trained athletes in endurance cycling events.

Powercranks give you an immediate feedback system as to when you start to pedal improperly so you can retrain your neurological system to fire your muscles in a different coordination changing the pedaling dynamic to improve pedaling efficiency. They are great for developing a smooth and efficient spin and are a much better alternative than one-leg pedaling drills. They improve the strength of hip flexor muscles which benefit running and "lifting the leg".

Ok I am a complete idiot. What is the red shoe joke? I don't get it. Someone help my little brain.

---

customerjon @gmail.com is where information happens.

The question is, what is the expected performance differences.

This is a tough question as what people see will vary a lot and the RotorCranks claims don't seem to make any sense to me (2-3 minutes off a 40 k TT without regard to how fast you are now).

PowerCranks I think the typical PowerCranks user can expect a 40% increase in power in the first season with another increase (maybe another 20% the second) with smaller increases beyond that. Many people at this site have reported speed improvements compatible or exceeding the above estimates, goatboy comes immediately to mind. In addition, there seems to be a HUGE running benefit to those who care about this.

I think the typical RotorCranks user will see an increase in power of no more than 10%. This will occur quickly and, beyond increases that come from training effect, there will be no further increases due to the RC's with time and one must use RC's to see the benefit. However, this increase will be additional to PC's improvements as they act through different mechanisms. There is no claimed or reported running benefit to training with RC's that I am aware of.

My guess of the data. We will have to await the studies to "know".

Frank

---

--------------
Frank,
An original Ironman and the Inventor of PowerCranks

[reply][reply]
<selective snippage all in reference to Rotor Cranks>

The reduction of lactic acid allows the rider to produce more wattage at his/her lactate threshold.


<more snippage>


This allows for lowered lactate levels and increased wattage at LT, which translates directly to the 2-3 minute per 40k speed increase.

<snippage>

They do not raise your power, but they offer you the opportunity to ride harder and at a higher wattage output - before reaching your lactate threshold. [/reply]


I am confused by the statements above:

Do you claim that RC's increase power?

FWIW, my Redshoe Brand Shoes have already increased my power by 20%+ after only 5 weeks!

[url "http://www.biketechreview.com/projectredshoe.htm"]http://www.biketechreview.com/projectredshoe.htm[/url][/reply]

Rotor Cranks have never claimed increased power, but by reducing the lactic acid a rider produces when racing, Rotor Cranks allow the rider to increase their wattage without the side effect of increased lactic acid. If you are a car and LT is your "governor", then Rotors increase the setting to allow you to ride faster. You still have to produce the extra wattage, but you can do so without increased lactic acid buildup. Its really not all that complicated.

By the way, do the Redshoes come in any other colors than red? ... I'm looking for a gold colored set of "power shoes" to match my color theme.

Do Redshoes come with a moneyback guarantee?

If so, how many have returned their Redshoes?

[reply]The question is, what is the expected performance differences.

This is a tough question as what people see will vary a lot and the RotorCranks claims don't seem to make any sense to me (2-3 minutes off a 40 k TT without regard to how fast you are now).

PowerCranks I think the typical PowerCranks user can expect a 40% increase in power in the first season with another increase (maybe another 20% the second) with smaller increases beyond that. Many people at this site have reported speed improvements compatible or exceeding the above estimates, goatboy comes immediately to mind. In addition, there seems to be a HUGE running benefit to those who care about this.

I think the typical RotorCranks user will see an increase in power of no more than 10%. This will occur quickly and, beyond increases that come from training effect, there will be no further increases due to the RC's with time and one must use RC's to see the benefit. However, this increase will be additional to PC's improvements as they act through different mechanisms. There is no claimed or reported running benefit to training with RC's that I am aware of.

My guess of the data. We will have to await the studies to "know".

Frank[/reply]

Again Frank, Rotor Cranks do not increase power.

They never claimed to do so.

They increase lactate threshold by eliminating additional lactic acid in the bloodstream. Cyclists are already very efficient, Rotors allow them to achieve faster speeds with the power that they already produce, at a lower heart rate as well.

This isn't rocket science - its been proven to really reduce lactic acid levels, I can't name names yet, but you will also see them in the Giro and Vuelta this year.

They do work, and a cyclist can immediately benefit from Rotor useage from the very first ride

PCs are great for developing a spin if you race on traditional cranks ... Rotors on the other hand, give the rider an edge that PCs cannot match.

"A 40% increase in power would mean a 10-15% increase in speed, or 2.5-3 mph for somebody who could average 20 mph on normal cranks. Add another 20% increase in power and you'd be going nearly 24 mph. Has anybody ever posted claiming such a large increase?"

Yes, Goatboy reported a 12 mile TT increase from 20 to 25 mph in one year and another 2 mph (to 27 mph) in the second year.

2-3 mph improvements in one year are common although everyone does not see those gains.

who is WTF?

---

--------------
Frank,
An original Ironman and the Inventor of PowerCranks

"Again Frank, Rotor Cranks do not increase power. They never claimed to do so. "

Gary,

You had better go back to the inventor/manufacturer and clear this statement with him. It is nonsense and your credibility will suffer. With constant aerodynamics, one doesn't go faster unless one has more power. It is as simple as that. Go to analytical cycling and see if they have a lactate elimination category to plug in?

---

--------------
Frank,
An original Ironman and the Inventor of PowerCranks

I'm definitely not an expert here, but it seems to me that the phrase "increase power" is pretty meaningless without a qualifying phrase like: "at aerobic efforts", "at lactate threshold", "at VO2 max", etc since these hve different implications.

Seems like no one claims Rotor Cranks increases maximum power, but rather increases LT so that the rider prodces more power at LT. Right?

---

_______________________________________________

RCs claim to do two primary things (also comfort & injury reduction): (1) the offset cranks eliminates "power vacuums" (as RC site calls it) or "dead spots" in cycle stroke; and (2) over time and with use they supposedly raise LT roof thus allowing rider to product higher wattage at LT.

Im guessing that it is only with respect to claim (2) that Gary can mean "RCs do not increase power" so although he is being less than clear i dont think he disagrees with Franks point that "with constant aerodynamics, one doesn't go faster unless one has more power." Gary is saying, i think, that with respect to this "LT raising effect", RCs do not in themselves "increase power" as against ordinary cranks but that they raise LT which in turn allows rider to generate more power.

But Gary then is ignoring the whole "elimination of dead spot" claim, which to me is much more intuitive and believable than the idea that a crank set up will somehow reduce the amount of lactate in my blood (as the RC web site claims).

Considering this first RC claim about the elimination of dead spot in stroke I think Tibbs had it right: RCs attempt to do instantly & mechanically what PCs attempt to teach over time physiologically, which is to make pedalling more efficient (which is to generate more power at same effort). I dont think that PCs and RCs are necessarily enemies - a single (very wealthy) person could use both. But FWIW I am leaning towards the PCs (if they weren't so damn expensive) because I think the idea of continuous forced one-legged drills will be great conditioning and will have the most impact in terms of seeing real results in the capacity of my body to bike and run after biking. If i had even more fantasy cash I would get the RCs to play with them, too.

one other question for gary...

RCs were developed in 1995 and there are science reports etc on the site backing up what seems like a good intuitive claim - that offset crank arms eliminate deadspot and are thus more efficient (and may also have this LT effect and better for knees). looks like you are also getting some good athletes interested in your product. my question is: why haven't shimano or campy offset their crank arms? have you pitched your idea to them? as with most innovations, the proof is in the pudding. if RCs work, ordinary cranks will go (or should already have gone) the way of betamax and you would be or will be a very very rich man. I am interested but wouldnt consider your product until the jury of public opinion returns (in the form of more widespread use).

PCs it seems are an independent training device - no one i think would use them for racing so not the same possibility for Frank's design.

May I suggest....

Power = Torque * RPM

You can view this relationship as either instantaneous or as an average, but all terms must be consistent.

So rotorcranks can increase your speed (theoretically) by increasing your average power, without ever increasing your instantaneous power. So the claim of increasing speed without increasing (instantaneous) power could be valid. As an example, suppose you produce 250 Watts from 2 o'clock to 5, but only 150 for the rest of the other half of the cycle (considering both legs and ignoring that the increased wattage would make that portion of your stroke actually occur slightly faster). Your average power would be 200W. If using rotorcranks you now crank out 225 through the whole cycle (the peak will be lower because you are now storing some of that energy to help your leg through the dead spot), the average of 225 will make your time split faster. By bringing up the lower end of your power cycle, your average wattage is increased.

Disclaimer: I have no idea what I am talking about (never seen rotorcranks).

Frank

I'll try to clarify

Rotors do no not increase power, nor does the manufacturer make those claims

By eliminating the dead point, making the cyclist more efficient, Rotor Cranks reduce the creation of lactic acid. This reduction of lactic acid, coupled with a lowered heart rate, allows for an increase in a cyclists lactate threshold.

The higher Rotorized LT allows for the cyclist to increase wattage to the new LT limiter level, in comparison with the non Rotor LT.

Rotors are not magical "Redshoe" cranks, only hard work and training can improve a cyclists power, Rotors help improve the cyclists lactate threshold limiter to let the rider apply the power, which translates to a 2 to 3 minute speed increase per hour/40k.

"Poof ... You are now 40% faster" ... Sorry, only Redshoe makes those claims.

He Kraig , you racing Fiesta TT on Sunday?
Maybe I'll take a look at those shoes...

I disagree with RC's claimed mechanism of action. They don't eliminate the dead spot (they simply change the dynamic) and may even worsen the back pressure on the upstroke (I suspect). What they do which is positive, I believe, is slow down the leg during the power phase to a more efficient muscle contraction speed to get more power to the wheel for the same effort. To say that racers will race with less lactate is hogwash. The only way to race with less lactate is to race less hard.

I believe this is what they do and all they can do. It is something however so, for the serious racer, is probably worth something. All this other gobbledygook in trying to explain their effectiveness is just that in my mind.

---

--------------
Frank,
An original Ironman and the Inventor of PowerCranks

"The higher Rotorized LT allows for the cyclist to increase wattage to the new LT limiter level, in comparison with the non Rotor LT. "

Gary, wattage is power. Rotor is making the claim that Rotors increase power to make you faster. All this stuff about the lactate is just an explanation as to how they are increasing power. To say they make one faster without increasing power (or without improving aerodynamics) makes them and you look foolish.

---

--------------
Frank,
An original Ironman and the Inventor of PowerCranks

Dapper Dan, for someone that has never seen RC's, I think you have a very good idea about what they do. Plug in a slightly slower (and therefore slightly more efficient) downstroke power phase into your equation, and I think you may have nailed it!

---

Quid quid latine dictum sit altum videtur
(That which is said in Latin sounds profound)

Frank

Rotor makes no such claim

That's a "Redshoe" claim

Rotors don't magically increase power, however they enable a cyclist to ride at a higher wattage by raising the lactate threshold, which makes the cyclist 2 to 3 minutes faster per 40k

The power stroke on Rotors carries the non power crank through the dead point

In the pedal revolution it requires additional/less effort in certain positions of the stroke at the same rpm

It is very subtle and non noticeable after a few rides

Anyone who ha tried Rotor Cranks can attest to this

They are not anything like PCs becuase they actually improve a cyclists efficiency whereas PCs improve circular pedaling

Circular pedaling is fine and works well, Rotors add to this by fat forwarding the recovery crank through the dead point into tge 1 o'clock position

Don't say I didn't try. Whatever.

Frank

---

--------------
Frank,
An original Ironman and the Inventor of PowerCranks

I think this may be the new Campy vs Shimano debate. Count me with the RC's.

---

------------------------------------------------------------

only 250 watts? I thought they raised your power by 40%?

what gives?

[reply] I dont think that PCs and RCs are necessarily enemies[/reply]

I agree. I have both, and though I have very limited time on the RCs so far, the PCs would definitely benefit an RC user. Pedaling "PC style" on RCs works better than just mashing up and dpwn as per both SpinScan and power output.

By the way, the RCs are not just "bolt-on horsepower". There is definitely an adaptation period with these things (which Gary very accurately describes on his web site). My first ride on the RCs was 6.5 hours, and my legs were not happy campers for awhile after that. The trick is going to be finding the right balance between the two in training.

Haim

---

-------------------------------------------------------
"Sometimes you need to think INSIDE the box!" -- ME
"Why squirrel hate me?"