I do hope this hasn’t been posted…
http://www.cyclingnews.com/tech.php?id=tech/2003/reviews/PowerCranks
Good article (re-posted below) about the Power cranks. If you read the Rotor article (also below - same author) you will see that he got immediate gains in speed from the Rotors, and in my experience this is definately true. The author claims 1.5 - 2 minute faster 40k times using the Rotors, I am right around 2 minutes faster over the 40k after 3 weeks of use.
I would definately reccomend the Rotors RCK over the Powercranks if you are in search of huge instant quantifiable gains in speed on the bike. They really do work as claimed.
I am also writing a review on the Rotor RCK system, will have it available in about 3 weeks.
Read more at www.rotorbike.com
Gary
Reviews PowerCranks: Crank it up
By Ben Larsen
Independent fabrication & operation
Photo: © Ben Larsen 
One of the most hotly debated aspects of cycling mechanics is one’s pedalling action and the inherent ‘dead spots’ at the top and bottom of the pedal stroke. Most attempts to overcome the issue to date have been mechanical, and have led to mechanically-minded solutions such as ovalised chainrings (Biopace) and more recently, eccentric crankarms (Rotor).
Rather than changing the mechanics of the bike, PowerCranks looks at changing the mechanics of the rider. Intended as a training tool, PowerCranks are a modified set of cranks that use a clutch bearing in each crank arm to allow only the crank to engage in a forward direction and as a result, the cranks operate independently of one another.
By isolating each leg to prevent the dominant leg from compensating for the weaker one, PowerCranks claim to achieve gains by training the hip flexor muscles to incorporate new muscle mass into their pedalling action, and subconsciously teach your neurologic system to pedal in circles.
How PowerCranks work
The easiest way to get your head around how PowerCranks work is to think about one-legged drills. One-legged drills are usually performed on a stationary trainer by unclipping one leg and resting it on a chair while pedalling with the other leg. The technique isolates one leg from the other and forces the rider to exert even force throughout their pedal stroke. These are quite tough drills and often people struggle with them. Riding PowerCranks is like doing one-legged drills, with both legs, all the time.
The basic principle behind PowerCranks is that by removing the assistance of the downstroke of the opposing pedal stroke you are forced into lifting through the upstroke and pedalling through to achieve any semblance of a normal pedal stroke. By riding PowerCranks regularly, you can train away the weak spots in your pedal stroke and become a more efficient (and faster) cyclist.
Now this all sounds pretty simple right? Apply power through the complete revolution, how hard can it be? The answer is that is not quite that simple, and it can be harder than you think, but the benefits are potentially enormous.
007 Goldfinger edition
Photo: © Ben Larsen 
First Looks
PowerCranks are solidly constructed and the bearings and finish are all very high quality. Function and durability are the key words here and they look the goods too. PowerCranks come in several lengths and also an adjustable-length version that will allow you to adjust your crank length over time. I went for 175mm standard version.
Set-up
PowerCranks come in versions capable of being used with a standard square bottom bottom bracket or a Shimano-splined bottom bracket. I had the splined version and found them no more difficult to install than a normal Shimano crank. The only real difference is that you have to be a little more careful to get the splines lined up properly; without the ability to push each crank backwards, the feel is less pronounced. The dust cap/fixing caps also need to be installed to hold the crank on, but this is also a straightforward task for even the least mechanically minded.
The cranks do not come with chainrings, so you will need to install some, but again, this is a simple task in itself. I have changed the cranks back and forth several times in the first three months to revert to normal cranks for races and have not had any problems. Total time to swap cranks is less than 15 minutes after the first time.
Month 1
As per the instructions, I started off on the stationary trainer to get used to them before venturing onto the road. For the first two weeks, my rides were daily 5-10 minute sessions after which I was glad to get off the bike. My biggest initial problems were not so much muscular as they were co-ordination related; I really struggled to keep my legs synchronised, and my left leg kept lagging behind my right or stalling altogether. At times, I was reduced to laughter as my legs simply refused to do my bidding - it is strange and humbling that such a basic and familiar action should prove so difficult after only five minutes.
On the road
On and off-the-bike performance
Photo: © Ben Larsen 
After a fortnight, I hadn’t got far beyond the 10 minutes mark in any session, so I decided to bite the bullet and just get on the road. I have always struggled with the motivation to ride indoors and I had promised to train exclusively on PowerCranks, so figured if I did not hit the road soon, my weekly training mileage would remain in double digits.
I made all my early rides on a 30km flat and relatively low traffic route to avoid any undue trouble. Normally 30km might be a warm-up or recovery ride but these early sessions were quite challenging. Early troubles on the road include starting from traffic lights and the fact that it is initially impossible to get out of the saddle. Each day’s ride brought rapid adaptation, but I would still rate most sessions in the first month as quite hard.
Month 2
After a fortnight on the flatter roads, I started to increase the distance and add hills to my rides. Seated climbing is no big problem and is probably the easiest riding situation on PowerCranks, because even on normal cranks there is a far more even distribution of power. Mastering riding out of the saddle after a month of seated riding is like your first time without training wheels and quite liberating.
The fatigue at this point is still very neuromuscular and finishing a 60-70km training ride feels like a combination of a normal long training ride without the normal fatigue of the big muscle groups (quads and glutes) and a three hour exam. Pedalling continually for long periods is difficult and I still coast regularly for short rest periods on longer rides.
Month 3
Riding is now becoming almost natural and I have started commuting through heavy Sydney traffic without serious concerns, although stopping and starting is still a pain in the butt. Every ride is still a serious workout but not in the sense of being uncomfortable, just that I still have to think at all times. My legs are now well synchronised and I am just getting to the point where I can start to really fatigue my leg muscles. I have got back up to my normal mid-winter mileage of ~200km/week and have started cycle racing.
Report card
Unlike mechanical solutions like the Rotor, PowerCranks are a long-term proposition and the cycling benefits are not immediately available in empirical terms. It is expected that first big gains can take up to six months. After three months of training exclusively on PowerCranks, I can report changes in the following areas:
Synchronisation: Having to synchronise my pedalling has been the most profound change and unexpected challenge with PowerCranks. In my attempt to using both legs in a co-ordinated fashion, I believe my pedalling has significantly improved and my stroke timing is smooth and consistent.
Circular pedalling: This was the expected challenge of PowerCranks but the extent of how much this impacted on my riding was still surprises me. While not yet perfect, my pedalling force is now applied more evenly and the levels of muscle fatigue are well below historical levels for similar efforts.
Balance: I have always had a right leg dominance on the bike. This was quite noticeable at the start, but has become more and more balanced as I have adapted. This imbalance often caused tight glutes on the one side after hard training or racing, yet is something I have not experienced in recent weeks.
As for results on the bike, I resumed road racing in Month 3 and managed two wins from two starts and have now been promoted to A-grade. While the race results are my best in over a year, I would not say that I feel significantly stronger yet as a result of training on PowerCranks, I can certainly say that I am far more conscious my of pedalling - even while I race on normal cranks and that my perceived effort during these races was lower than expected.
As for my performances off the bike (no, not those performances!-Ed), the PowerCranks web site promotes early improvement in running as an additional benefit, so I decided to run the Sydney Morning Herald Half Marathon as a test after 6 weeks. I surprised myself on minimal training with a sub-85 minute race, bettering my 89 minute mark from the year before on the same very hilly course. The synchronisation benefit from using PowerCranks appears to apply to running mechanics as well, and the ‘picking up’ of your feet meant that my running felt faster and smoother than before.
However, the impact of training on PowerCranks is difficult to evaluate numerically without a testing facility of some sort (sorry, no pro team contract just yet), but I expect the benefits to be more obvious as race distances become longer. Gradual improvements in technique and efficiency are easily blurred by testing variances and training volumes each week, but I am already racing faster than my fitness would suggest and my ability to turn a gear over is improved, so it’s a good start.
Conclusion
Whatever your level of pedalling efficiency, it is hard to imagine that these cranks won’t make your training sessions more effective. Initial adaptation is challenging and some initial discomfort (especially on your rear end and lower back) from staying seated for longer periods is experiened during those early weeks; however, in a comparatively short period of time, PowerCranks have forced marked changes in my pedalling technique and application of force on each pedal stroke. Follow-on benefits to running and your body’s core stability are also a plus.
Recommended retail price: US$690.00
Pro: Improved technique and efficiency
Con: Some tenacity required to get past the initial adaptation, cost
More information: PowerCranks website
Cyclingnews Rating: 
Rotor Cranks: Power to the people By Ben Larsen
Cam and get it
Photo: © Ben Larsen 
The ROTOR Concept Kit (RCK or, for the sake of convenience, Rotor crank) is an integrated set of cranks and bottom bracket that is designed to improve pedalling efficiency. The makers claim that by varying the angle between the cranks, RCK optimises power output by significantly reducing the dead spots at the top and bottom of your pedal stroke while still using circular chain-rings. What the?
Legs evolved to walk, run and to push down when we’re, say, walking uphill. Pedalling involves the feet going round in circles, and to many people that means there are inefficiencies getting power from the up and down movement of our legs to match the movement of our cranks. The big problem has been that at the top and bottom of the pedal stroke, it is extraordinarily difficult to transfer much power to the axle as a turning force.
The RCK is not the first attempt to overcoming this limitation. Previous solutions have ranged from systems like PowerCranks, which force the rider to apply force more continually throughout the pedal cycle, to oval or ecliptical chain rings such as Shimano’s Biopace rings back in the mid/late 1980s.
Each of these solutions however, has had its detractors or practical limitations. PowerCranks may be a great training tool but are not practical to race on, and the oval chain-ring variations never shifted really well, felt strange to many people eventually vanished in the early 1990s amid never-proven allegations of contributing to knee problems. Development of the Rotor Cranks
The Rotor idea first came from Aeronautic Engineering School students in Madrid in 1995. Seeing that the idea had merit, the designers then set up a business to finish the development and start manufacturing them.
Early versions became available in 1998 along with claims that the RCK system increases power by 16 percent, reduces lactate production by 15 percent, and reduces heart rate by 5 percent.
Since then, the RCK design has been refined from a complex system that needed a special frame to the current model that can be fitted to any bike without any changes. The RCK system has also been approved by UCI officials for competitive use and has seen some pro’s using it (most notably members of the Relax Fuenlabrada team), especially in Spain where the company is based. How the Rotor Cranks work
Cam and get it
Photo: © Ben Larsen 
The theory behind RCK is simple but the practical application is a little hard to get your head around.
The RCK System is a crankset in which the cranks are not fixed at 180º, but are variable during a pedal cycle. The cranks are synchronised through a set of cams that change the angle between the crank arms producing a variation in transmission ratio during each cycle.
The system relies on an eccentric bearing on the bottom bracket (BB), and the right crank movement is then controlled by the two cams accelerating the crank through the ‘dead spot’ at the top and bottom of the pedal stroke and prolonging the power stroke phase.
What all this means in real terms is that by the time one crank is at the bottom of the stroke and in the six o’clock position, the opposite crank has been accelerated through to the one o’clock position and has already started the power stroke phase. Set-up
Set-up is a relatively simple process and the instructions that are included are pretty good. Firstly you need to remove your current cranks and bottom bracket. The RCK right crank arm and bottom bracket are integrated and are simply wound into your bottom bracket shell as you would a normal cartridge bottom bracket. You then fix the bottom bracket in place using a lock ring as you normally would with some micro adjustment to set the cranks (the cranks can be set to change the amount of leverage in the power phase) and tighten into place using the supplied lock ring tool. Attach the left crank arm and tighten as you normally would and - voila! you are ready to start “rotoring”. Total time required is 30-45 minutes. On the road
Initially, pedalling on a Rotor equipped bike feels quite weird. The back of your pedal stroke especially feels a little bit like riding slowly on a fixed wheel bike where the pedals are forced over the top of each stroke by the back wheel rather than by the force you are applying yourself. Putting a few different riders on the bike to get a range of first impressions, it seems that more proficient cyclists who normally ‘pick up’ their feet during the upstroke found it far stranger than cyclist with poor technique who are perhaps lazier in this area of their stroke anyway.
Cam and get it
Photo: © Ben Larsen 
Areas of continued weirdness include back-pedalling, and high speed cornering. The eccentric movement is more noticeable when back-pedalling and the cornering position of your inside pedal is moved forward which takes a little getting used to. The fact that both of these actions tend to happen when careering down hills is perhaps why the effect is initially so obvious.
As peculiar as the Rotor cranks initially felt, the adaptation was almost complete inside three rides on consecutive days and I started getting a feel for what the cranks were actually doing. The big difference riding these cranks is that you don’t get stuck on the top of too-big gears. This leads to the inevitable tendency to ride huge gears just because you can still turn them over - this is particularly true on climbs and at high speeds on the flat. In contrast to the increased big gear turning ability, there is an obvious lack of smoothness in your new stroke making it difficult to maintain high cadences (115rpm+) comfortably.
After a week of regular riding I was completely adapted and getting back on ‘normal’ cranks felt weird. Changing back is perhaps the best illustration of what the cranks are doing for you - you become acutely aware of just how dead the ‘dead spots’ are and how choppy your pedalling motion is. The RCK actually allows you to be a lazier rider and simply lets you use your leg muscles to do what they do best: push. Testing
During the months I have had the cranks on my bike I have repeated a 10km time-trial course several times and raced a few criteriums, a road race, and the Hawaii Ironman. During this period my focus was on Hawaii so the vast majority of my training was long and slow, the kind of training that builds fitness and endurance but not a lot of out and out speed.
The 10km time-trial course is close to my home and is rolling hills; I ride it often and have three years of periodic testing over the same course with heart rate files so it works pretty well as a real-life laboratory. Over three years of testing my times tend to range from 13m40s to 13m50s with average heart rates of 163-165 (Hrmax = 182) when I am in good form. The only repeatable variations from that pattern came when I was part of the EPO test validation program in 2000. During this period I managed to ride the course consistently at 13m00s-13m10s with slightly lower heart rate averages but I have never managed to consistently get that low again - until now.
With the Rotor cranks on the bike I have managed to consistently complete the course in 13m05s-13m15s over a three month period with average heart rates of 161-163 being a few beats lower than without. I have ridden the course on several occasions during that same period on standard cranks and been unable to ride within 20 seconds of my RCK times, even at slightly higher average heart rates.
My other race experiences were positive. The road race was a 40km handicap that I managed to attack early and ride 37km solo to win, and the crits were fine albeit cornering was a little crazy due to the 3-4mm drop in effective BB height making pedalling through corners a little more daring. The lack of smoothness may also curtail top end sprint ability, but I am a crappy sprinter so this is not objective in any way.
At Ironman in Hawaii I rode a personal best time of 4hr56m for the 180km course and made an 11m30s improvement on my Ironman New Zealand bike split in March. By contrast, the average variance of the 77 qualifiers from NZ who subsequently raced Hawaii was a 4m30s deterioration over their NZ splits. Conclusion
The positives: The Rotor crank is different from alternative solutions like Biopace because it almost completely eliminates the ‘dead spot’ when the crank is in the vertical position. Excluding sprints, the RCK system seems to improve performance in all aspects of road cycle racing for all riders, whereas other systems tend to offer most improvement to poorer riders. The quality and machining is really high.
The negatives: The set up is slightly heavier than its standard counterpart weighing 240gm (25 percent) more than Dura-Ace, but this is not something that I could notice while riding. Cornering is slightly compromised due to a slightly lower effective bottom bracket - at least it is on my frame. Sprinting and maintaining high cadences (115rpm+) for prolonged periods is not as fluid as with standard cranks. Long-term reliability is unproven, although I have done 6,000km without issues. They are not cheap, costing about 25 percent more than Dura-Ace.
**The bottom line: **The RCK works, it is simply a matter of how much. My personal testing almost reflects Rotor’s claims of improvement but I would probably say they are worth around 1.5 - 2 minutes an hour rather than 3. The fact is that is still a lot of time that I cannot find elsewhere and especially for tri’s and time trials this is easily the difference between 1st and 10th. The weight is negligible and even on a really hilly race the advantage would easily eclipse the weight penalty. The only road racing situation in which they are perhaps less suited is in criteriums but even then it may be a trade-off, otherwise there is a clear advantage.
Existing sponsorship deals will prevent these from being on many pros bikes anytime soon and road cyclists’ general aversion to anything radically new (remember tri-bars?) will mean that these will be a product that must prove themselves repeatedly before they are picked up on a broad scale.
The question begs, “If Lance Armstrong was winning the Tour de France on them and Shimano’s marketing team was on the case, would we not already all be riding them?” Photos
**Weight: **1200g (complete cranks/bottom bracket/chain-rings 39-53)
Recommended retail price: £390 with titanium axles (£295 with steel)
**Pro: **You go faster for the same effort
Con: Weight, cost
More information: Rotor’s website
Cyclingnews Rating: 
I can see how the Rotorcranks could give you an almost instantaneous increase in speed on the bike. Powercranks are not about instantaneous speed at all. The former does immediately what the latter takes months to achieve. BUT, Powercranks helped my running in the first week, and my running has improved dramatically over the months. Now, my biking speed improvements are coming along nicely.
It seems to me that PowerCrank speed improvements could be additive to Rotorcrank speed improvements, but, definitely not vice versa. Either crankset seems like it would help the person with the worst pedal stroke habits…but, there again, the Powercranks would be the only one of the two to help running speed.
I think it would be interesting to get on a set of Rotorcranks now that I have 8 months of PowerCranking…I’ve set PR’s in all my biking and running speeds, I wonder how much more speed I could get on a Rotorcrank system. Again, I wouldn’t want to train on Rotorcranks because of the run benefits of PowerCranks. I’m going to post hard numbers after my last race of the season in a couple of weeks. It will take a little time to get all the info from the last couple of years together.
I have read the Rotor Cranks also really help triathlete’s run split, although I am not running right now, just TT training.
Powercranks enable you to perfect the circular pedaling style.
The rotor system gives you extra pedaling time by
making it possible to begin the main down power
stroke earlier than when using normal cranks.
From the photos that I have seen, the upper pedal
does not appear to be in the exact 1 o’clock position
when the lower pedal is at 6 o’clock. Can anyone
guarantee it has got as far as 1 o’clock.
With normal cranks and linear pedaling your main
power stroke covers 11 to 5 o’clock, giving continuous
maximum power application without any expense.
I cannot understand why Ben rated the Powercranks
higher than the Rotor system.
or, for the first time, like bolting on a disc wheel, donning a skinsuit and lining up for a time trial to go faster than ever. RCK is a mechanical device. It is definately not free speed. Your legs have to work harder to produce the extra power on your drive side leg to propel your other leg into the 1 oclock position - yes they do rotate it into the 1’ position when the other leg is a 6’.
the Rotor system is completely different than PCs - the two should not be compared really as each system produces different results, not similar results.
I have the same initial reaction too, Francois. But then again the instant gain is why I bought aerobars, race wheels, and a wetsuit. I think this line in the Rotor article is what sticks with me: “The RCK actually allows you to be a lazier rider and simply lets you use your leg muscles to do what they do best: push.” I have no way of knowing if this is a fair statement but I do know that I’m interested in becoming a better and faster rider. Not just a faster rider. I’m obviously making the assertion that being lazy will not help me become better.
These are both very cool tools though and I hope they’re around long enough to get some better info on their impact. For some reason there are way too many cyclists who prefer to bad mouth new ideas rather than encourage and explore them. Obviously none on this board. (Overwhelming sarcasm intended)
Thanks for posting both articles together Gary.
Rotor Cranks are allowed by the UCI, not sure about PC’s. Rotor Cranks do take some time to adjust to, but the benefits can be seen from the first ride. RC’s make the rider pedal about 8% harder on the drive leg, the non drive leg is 8% easier, the reason I say this is because the drive side moves the non drive side into the 1 oclock position passing it through the dead spot of 12 ’ oclock.
For me, riding makes me more fatigued as my muscles are being used more, I can really feel it after riding. I will likely get a set for my road bike so the ‘weirdness’ is not noticeable and so that I can continue to reap the benefits of the system while training on my primary bike.
THe adaptation that I am working through now is trying to get my HR up to race level and making my legs match their pace. Right now my speed is faster but my HR maxes out at 85% at the same gearing and RPM level as my dura ace cranks. I will have to raise my cadence or gearing to get my HR up to 90-92% at race pace.
Out of curiousity, how funky is it to back pedal with these things?? I’d love to take the rotors for a spin just to see what they ride like, but I don’t see me picking up a pair any time soon.
the cam action is slightly noticeable during backpedalling with the RC’s. I rarely ever backpedal though. I have noticed that they make my legs work more at the same heart rate and my speed is higher. I am working toward getting myself back up to riding at my LT (about 174-178 bpm) during TT’s with the Rotors. I have a race Sunday and it will be the first test with them. In a practice 20k TT I was 1 minute faster than with the dura ace in the previous week, or likely 2 mins faster over the 40k.
http://www.rotorbike.com/eng/generalfaqs.htm
UCI authorization:
- Is the Rotor System authorized for official competitions?
The Rotor System was authorized by the UCI (International Cycling Union) for professional road bike competition in October, 2000. The Rotor System fulfils the criteria presented in the UCI rule:
Art 1.3.010 UCI: “The bicycle should be propelled solely, through a chainset, by the legs moving in a circular movement”.
In Triathlon competition, use of the Rotor System is permitted:
a) Olympic Distance: ITU reference to the decisions of the UCI.
b) Long Distance: There are no types of restrictions on materials used.
a couple things here. . . .
first off it appears that this testor has summed up pretty thoroughly the same findings as most of the PC users who have posted here. indeed, right down to the “anecdotal” gains, and the internallized verification that even without empiracal proof the benefit of the PC’s is significant.
i will agree with our pain-loving friend gary that RC’s and PC’s are really quite different beasts. it would seem that the appeal of one sorta precludes the other to a person. 
tho it also seems likely that a PC trained person could then use that on Rc’s cumulatively, and not vice versa.
it seems obvious to me that the reason PC’s received a higher ranking than the RC’s with this person is because PC’s made HIM better, while RC’s made his BIKE better. i mean, what, are you gonna put the RC’s on yer 'cross bike, yer road bike, yer singlespeed, etc etc. ?? as soon as you get off them the benefit is gone. PC’s make ya better on two wheels no matter. . . . . .
finally, as noted, PC’s have now edged out RC’s by a 'half jersey ! now, do you suppose we can get this guy to finalize the debate by going over to perfection’s place and finding out just whatinthehell the " antequil linear style" IS, and then riding that way for a few months?? and then, of course he should ride on flat BMX pedalls in a pair of checkboard slip-on Van’s also, stomping mightily downwards in honour of that other guy who sez all you need to do is stomp. maybe we can settle this once and for all !!
yes, I’m getting a set of RC’s for my road bike also.
I trained 100% on PC’s for a couple of months, then cut back to about 90%, now, I go about 80%. The reason I don’t race on PC’s is that I cannot hold my best “aero” position for long periods of time…maybe next year. A good thing about PC’s is, once you get acclimated, you can continue that efficient pedalling style when you are on regular cranks. With the obvious exception that if you get lazy or tired on regular cranks, you can still pedal, on PC’s…well, you don’t pedal until you recover. So, you can (and probably do) revert back towards your normal, less efficient stroke on regular cranks, especially as you get tired.
If you’ve been riding for long, you have millions of less efficient pedal strokes grooved into your brain/muscles…it takes a while to change that…think about a golf swing that has been bad for a long time and you’ve suddenly been able feel how to swing correctly…it takes lots of practice to make that new swing take the place of your old swing.
IF I were adapted well enough, I’d race on PC’s…because of the instant feedback they give when I get sloppy. As I race now, I periodically consciously pay attention to my pedal stroke to make sure I can feel my foot pulling back on the heel of my shoe, and the top of my foot pulling up on the top of the shoe. Anyone can do this technique, and if you are on a level road at a steady effort, you will probably see your speed increase a little, or, at least you’ll see a couple of more rpms in your cadence. PC’s just make you do this efficiency drill with every stroke.
The old saying of “practice makes perfect” is incorrect. Practice makes PERMANENT.
In order to try and make this more efficient stroke permanent, I mostly stay on PCs. I can’t see a reason not to ride them almost all the time, except I don’t have them on my TT bike, and I like to practice that aero positioning once a week if I’m not racing that week. On weeks that I race, I warm up on my non-PC TT bike once that week and then race on it. The rest of the time is PCing.
I’ve got some interesting race comparisons coming up next month re: pre-PC race results and post-PC results. I’m convinced PC’s are what really improved my results this year…but to be sure, I’m going to have to go back and look at training regimens to see if I changed anything else that could have contributed to this season’s success. I don’t think I did, but my log books will tell the story very accurately in case something else was changed, too.
I guess I should chime in here.
I tested both, liked both, see the value in both, will probably continue to use both and feel that PC’s in training can compliment Rotors in racing.
At this point, I could not imagine racing on PC’s. I have simply not adapted that far as yet.
The one thing I did not genuinely notice is the jersey rating was different, I did not reference the old Rotor review when writing this one but will stand by the PC’s getting the half extra - it is a fundamental shift in training and I think is a tool that can help me to make an overall larger jump in performance in the long term.
I still doubt the validity of the Anquteil technique and exactly what is so special about it but don’t want an argument with Noel.
Ben : www.onlinetriathlon.com
Let us know the results of your ‘tests’ yaquicarbo. Very interested to hear of any improvements or otherwise.
At this point, I could not imagine racing on PC’s. I have simply not adapted that far as yet.
Not sure why anyone would want to race with 'em. I can’t see any possible way they could make you faster in a race.
I guess I should chime in here.
I tested both, liked both, see the value in both, will probably continue to use both and feel that PC’s in training can compliment Rotors in racing.
At this point, I could not imagine racing on PC’s. I have simply not adapted that far as yet.
The one thing I did not genuinely notice is the jersey rating was different, I did not reference the old Rotor review when writing this one but will stand by the PC’s getting the half extra - it is a fundamental shift in training and I think is a tool that can help me to make an overall larger jump in performance in the long term.
I still doubt the validity of the Anquteil technique and exactly what is so special about it but don’t want an argument with Noel.
Any advantage with equipment or technique will soon
disappear when everyone is using it, it will be back
to a level playing field (but maybe more expensive).
For that reason the most important advantage that
Anquetil’s technique has to offer is the complete
elimination of even the worst "on the bike " lower
back pain, it will last forever.
At this point, I could not imagine racing on PC’s. I have simply not adapted that far as yet.
Not sure why anyone would want to race with 'em. I can’t see any possible way they could make you faster in a race.
Eric, it depends. The way they can make you faster in a race is this: if you begin to revert to the “usual” way of pedalling, so your rising leg is at least partially assisted by your power stroke leg…that’s power wasted to raise that lazy leg, instead of driving the chain. IF you have completely overhauled your pedal stroke and never make a mistake as you tire, this wouldn’t be an issue.
For me, as I get tired, when I’m riding PCs I begin to have more and more pedal strokes that are out of phase…because I’m not fully lifting that rising foot quickly enough. SO, if I were racing on them, I would immediately realize this inefficiency was occuring and would have the opportunity to try and correct it. If you are able to fight off this inefficiency-related tendency, you will be faster…even if it is only a little faster. If you get so tired you can’t correct it…and it gets too bad…you will become slower on PC’s at some point…for me, that is at about 2 hours…OR much less time if the road is flat with no downhills in which to rest my hip flexors.
For those of you that have your brain wrapped around the Rotor Cranks benefits, consider this: some of the same benefits can occur with PowerCranks. If your rising leg is slightly slow to reach the top of the stroke, your power stroke leg has already begun the downward stroke…slightly out of phase…but with no wasted power used to raise that slower rising leg. As your power stroke leg becomes the rising leg and if IT is also slightly slow to reach the top, now the same thing is happening to the other side…slightly out of phase cranks on each side over and over. The bike surges more when pedalling this way…do Rotorcranks have a slight surge when ridden?
This surging is what begins to happen as I fatigue, but the surging speed is still not much slower. However, when the fatigue gets to the place where a pedal stroke is becoming obviously out of phase, temporary hip flexor melt-down causes an obvious slowing of pace.
Another time you can be faster on PC’s is uphills. I always climb better on PC’s…standing or sitting. But, especially standing…it makes you pedal more efficiently as far as timing AND balance. You can’t just crank hard on PC’s when standing, you have to keep the bike in a good balanced position, and the better timing of pulling up while pushing down is illuminating…especially at the top and bottom of the stroke. BUT, again, if your hip flexors get too tired…you’re dead. AND, I almost never stand when racing in a triathlon except to stretch. I pass a lot of standing-up riders going uphill by just motoring along seated…and even get cursed at sometimes 
But, if you are one of those that stands…PC’s may increase your race speed up the hills. Downhill is another story…having both legs dangling straight down is not the best aerodynamics…pulling both legs up to the top is fast…but my hip flexors are asking for a rest at the top of the hill, so this isn’t practical for me.
So, while I can see how PC racing would be faster to those adapted well enough, I’m not adapted well enough to trust myself not to have a hip flexor meltdown. Furthermore, if one was to completely adapt their pedal stroke to have very little or no inefficiencies in raising that leg, PC’s wouldn’t result in increased speed.
The bigger question to me is…can I actually learn to pull up significantly, effectively adding power to the stroke with my rising leg? Of course, it can be done for short periods of time, but, if I could do this for LONG periods of time…that would be a wonderful high-level adaptation, one that I am going to try and achieve.