I have been using powercranks for training for almost a year now. I don’t use them exclusively, and I’m ccertainly not ready to use them in an event.
I find that when monitoring power output, it is much lower for the same perceived effort when using powercranks compared to regular cranks. Should I expect this to change with time?
oh no…this could get ugly.
look around, I think there are a few “hot” PC threads right now.
Cold Beer! Pretzels! Cold Beer!
I experience the same thing. Perhaps a good reason to train on them but not race on them.
oh no…this could get ugly.
look around, I think there are a few “hot” PC threads right now.
No, no…I think this a different (and legit) question. I almost asked the same thing on the other thread, but my head hurt after looking at it for 3 minutes…
I think the question he’s asking is “are PC’s more ‘inefficient’”, i.e. does it take more energy to produce the same power, given the design? My guess would be that a crank set with connected arms would be more efficient, no?? If so, this would explain (to me, at least) why they ‘work’ for some people.
I am shocked to hear about this… SHOCKED!!!
I have been using powercranks for training for almost a year now. I don’t use them exclusively, and I’m ccertainly not ready to use them in an event.
I find that when monitoring power output, it is much lower for the same perceived effort when using powercranks compared to regular cranks. Should I expect this to change with time?
Yes, this should change with time. But, if you don’t use them exclusively, it could take a very long time, depending upon how much you do use them. The effort you are experiencing is the effort you are needing on the least trained muscle you are using. Until those new muscles become pretty much the equivalent of the old muscles you can expect the effort when riding PowerCranks to be more than when riding regular cranks. The more you use them the faster you will adapt and the more improvement we would expect you to see.
I have been using powercranks for training for almost a year now. I don’t use them exclusively, and I’m ccertainly not ready to use them in an event.
I find that when monitoring power output, it is much lower for the same perceived effort when using powercranks compared to regular cranks. Should I expect this to change with time?
In teaching you the circular pedaling style PC’s divert your concentration from that downward pedal stroke to the upward pedal, where compared to downward pedal power, you are getting minimal power return for maximal effort. If you use them continuously you will develop the perfect circular technique but this will always be a weaker pedaling style than the normal mashing technique and this fact was proved by Coyle and other researchers many moons ago.
I had the same experience when I started using the PCs. After a couple of months (of using the PCs for about 25% of my total bike training), however, I found that I was able to hold the same power with my PCs as with my regular cranks. Keep with them and you will get stronger with them.
Is there a role for supplemental training such as fixed gear spinning, or is that counterproductive as well?
Everything is counter productive if it doesn’t go towards Franks theory of pedaling.
Grant
Is there a role for supplemental training such as fixed gear spinning, or is that counterproductive as well?
Well, there can be a role for fixed gear riding but I personally think you would be better off trying to do that spinning on your PowerCranks. If you are short on time and want a hard workout just ride your PC’s at high cadences. If you can “spin” on PC’s you can spin on anything. From a training perspective, I just can’t see any benefit to training on regular cranks unless one is preparing for a race which they will do on regular cranks, and then that would be to try to learn how to ride regular cranks in the PC fashion.
We have a customer who called the other day who finds himself short on time so what he is doing is adding several lbs of lead weight under his pedal and spinning (he has dual sided pedals and can “click” the weights on the other side from his shoe - ankle weights would work almost as well). He says he feels like he is getting a 90 minute workout in 30 minutes. Once the cranks became easy for him he looked around for ways to make them harder. Training is supposed to be hard so the race seems “easy”.
I am having a set of PCs installed on my training bike next Tuesday. Despite Franks’s recommendations, I plan to use both PCs and fixed cranks for training. While I hope that given sufficient time my cycling will improve with the use of PCs, I purchased them primarily to help my running which is truly emabrassing.
I am having a set of PCs installed on my training bike next Tuesday. Despite Franks’s recommendations, I plan to use both PCs and fixed cranks for training. While I hope that given sufficient time my cycling will improve with the use of PCs, I purchased them primarily to help my running which is truly emabrassing.
It doesn’t appear you have to use them full time to see running benefits. Good luck.
Hi Frank,
Yes that is what I have read. I plan on using them daily, even if only for a short period of time, in order to help with the adapatation. Once race season is over (September) I plan on spending a lot more time on the PCs, the exception being interval work and possibly some long rides on fixed cranks in order to maintain quadracept strength and comfort in the aero position.
Hi Frank,
Yes that is what I have read. I plan on using them daily, even if only for a short period of time, in order to help with the adapatation. Once race season is over (September) I plan on spending a lot more time on the PCs, the exception being interval work and possibly some long rides on fixed cranks in order to maintain quadracept strength and comfort in the aero position.
I don’t think you can know what is going to be best for you yet. Until you see how you adapt you can’t really know what your weaknesses are or where you will be on the PC’s as things get serious next season. Everyone is different. While what you are planning is fine, be sure to try to do some of that interval/quad work on the PC’s and also aero work on the PC’s. And, do spin-ups, as that will be good for your running. You should be trying to get to the point you don’t know nor care which cranks are on your bike (except you will when you coast).
I will definitely give PCs a fair shake, and post-race season attempt what you are suggesting. However, if adaptation is taking a long time I will be doing fixed crank work to ensure that bike fitness is not lost. I am really looking forward to my first sessions with PCs next week (it should be really humiliating - oh well at least it will be in the privacy of my basement 
).
I will definitely give PCs a fair shake, and post-race season attempt what you are suggesting. However, if adaptation is taking a long time I will be doing fixed crank work to ensure that bike fitness is not lost. I am really looking forward to my first sessions with PCs next week (it should be really humiliating - oh well at least it will be in the privacy of my basement ).
If you are pretty good and really afraid of losing something if you start them during the year I have no problem with that approach if it gets you on them. Everyone is different and you might be surprised how “easily” you adapt. But, then again, you might not.
Play it by ear and use your good judgment. You know where you can find me if you need for me to tell you to use them more.
Training is supposed to be hard so the race seems “easy”.
This is an interesting theory, but it is wrong.
Training is supposed to be hard because it simulates the demands of a race. That is: racing is hard; training mimics the demands of racing; therefore training is hard. One could go farther with this principle of specificity and speculate on the specificity of training with powercranks too, but I’ll leave that for someone else.
I just wanted to point out that the idea of making racing “easy” is barking up the wrong tree. Frank, I realize you were at least partially joking, but I see this attitude kind of often so wanted to point it out.
Training is supposed to be hard so the race seems “easy”.
This is an interesting theory, but it is wrong.
Training is supposed to be hard because it simulates the demands of a race. That is: racing is hard; training mimics the demands of racing; therefore training is hard. One could go farther with this principle of specificity and speculate on the specificity of training with powercranks too, but I’ll leave that for someone else.
I just wanted to point out that the idea of making racing “easy” is barking up the wrong tree. Frank, I realize you were at least partially joking, but I see this attitude kind of often so wanted to point it out.
I am not sure how “wrong” it is as the key phrase is “seems easy”, not “is easy”. Racing is never easy but for a pro who has done the work it is more like a day at the office than a dreaded thing that one can only think about doing once a year. It all depends upon how one has prepared. The harder the preparation the “easier” the race will “seem” in comparison to the preparation.