Will Oval Chainrings Make You Faster? The Science
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 1 ต.ค. 2024
- Do oval chainrings improve performance or are they just another bike industry gimmick? Today I’ll be jumping into the science on oval rings to answer this question. I’ll also touch on what company makes the best shaped oval ring, will oval rings save your knees, what types of riding potentially benefit most from oval rings and whether or not they screw up power meter readings.
Check out the New WWBHDD? T-shirts and stickers: teespring.com/...
Bikeblather blog post on oval ring power inflation: bikeblather.blo...
Thanks to Jordan Sands for the extra footage: / jordansandsknoxfan
If you are ready to take your training to the next level by hiring a coach head over to trainright.com/ and use code CTSDJ to waive the $40 registration fee.
Patreon: / backwardhatdylan
If you like the gloves I use they are made by Handup. Handup makes some pretty rad stuff, not just gloves but other apparel as well. I've been on their gloves for a while now and absolutely love them. Using the promo code JOHN$ON (all caps) at checkout supports me and the channel as well! Check em out.
Handup Gloves: bit.ly/2FPtKKN
Promo code: JOHN$ON
What are those things on my handlebars? Togs, check em out: togs.com/
Follow me on Instagram, twitter, and Facebook for more coaching content:
Instagram: @dylanjawnson
Twitter: @djdylansjohnson
Facebook: Dylan Johnson Cycling Coach
Strava: / strava
My Niner JET9 RDO: ninerbikes.com...
My Niner RLT9 RDO: ninerbikes.com/....
My Niner RKT9 RDO: ninerbikes.com...
The studies I used in this video:
www.ncbi.nlm.n...
link.springer....
www.trainsharpc...
www.tandfonlin...
www.ncbi.nlm.n...
www.tandfonlin...
bikeblather.blo...
www.eurjhm.com...
www.ncbi.nlm.n...
www.ncbi.nlm.n...
www.ncbi.nlm.n...
link.springer....
www.ncbi.nlm.n...
www.sciencedir...
The views and opinions expressed in this video are my own and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of Carmichael Training Systems, Inc, their sponsors, and/or partners.
Have you ever used oval chainrings? Do you think they helped your performance?
Oval chainring causes rear derailleur to move twice per crank revolution. Any idea on what power loss is there?
Yes I only use oval (Absolute Black). I started in 2011 after I required a significant knee surgery following an injury. The round chainrings where giving me lots of knee pain on the surgical knee at the top of the pedal stroke. As soon as I went to the oval 'no pain'. Just as you said LOL. However I did go back to round for a few rides with no pain a few years ago. I do find the oval better on the mountain bike especially in the technical climbs. So I went back to oval. Anecdotal I know.
Biopace on the road, ditched them because round felt and shifted better. absoluteBlack oval is on one of my MTB's, can't tell much difference with gears in the back but I also run it single speed with a tensioner and it definitely helps with traction going up hills at a low cadence.
Oval chainrings saved my knees, now I can ride again! Just like you said!
@Funbot15th for rotor rings the rear derailleur movement is almost that of a round ring and it isn't too extreme with other designs either. If there is there is excessive derailleur movement this may be costing you but I don't know how much.
Oval chainrings boost my performance, but only when used with Beast Mode Power Enhancer in cupcake flavor.
I've ridden them. I have had a catastrophic knee injury (semi pro soccer) and i noticed less patellar tendon pain. Also, my ACL,LCL repair was a hamstring tendon graft. I found that the round rings caused more hamstring cramping. Sure this could be placebo effect; personally i love placebo effect since the side effects from a dose of placebo are nil.
No wonder i can ride better nowadays. Had the same injury. Haven't complain about knee pain after changing to oval since then.
I have a good 250k miles on oval rings. I bought a fat bike to get through Wisconsin winters and I thought all the gear and cold would make me not care about the rings so I used it as is. Never had any knee issues on the bike until a few long rides on the fat bike. Switched over and they went away in a couple rides.
Oval chainrings saved my knees... now I can ride again... Don't take that away from me... I am going to keep using them... Do I win the prize for being 'that comment' guy?
🤣🤣🤣
Oh look it's that guy
@@lesterroberts1628 it was a joke...
this is like the best cycling training related channel
if it's just like the best, which one is the best?
@@1835dueber For me,
Fastfitnesstips and Hambini= The mechanical part of cycling (Aerodynamics, *Bearings* ,rolling resistance etc...)
Dylan=The training and physiological part of cycling
Norcal Cycling and Lantern Rogue= Race analysis and race tips
Vegan cyclist and Jasper verkuijl = Life of a cyclist
Nationsnumber1beast= Shattering my dreams of winning a big P/1/2 race.
So moral of the story: Ride with oval chainrings for one year, switch back to round and have your best year ever. ✔
I’m using Absolute Black as the small ring (but sticking to round on the large ring) of my road and gravel/ adventure bikes for climbing. When under load for low-mid cadence climbing it feels smoother to me. When not under load e.g. easy pedaling on the flat, the oval feels odd but as soon as load comes in it feels good. I’ve never tried oval on the main (big) ring
I’ve used rotor qrings on the road and both rotor, absolute black, and sram’s oval on the mountain bike. All my mtb’s are 1x so shifting isn’t an issue.
The main benefit of oval rings that I’ve found (on road and mtb) is seated acceleration is better. When mountain biking, being able to burst from the saddle helps maintain traction. I have felt no difference between the rotor, sram, or AB oval mtb rings.
On the road, I generally prefer them during the winter when doing base. I seem to time trial better with the oval. And I treat those rides as long no coasting time trials.
However when crit season comes around, I don’t like them for all out sprinting, seated bursts / accelerations = yes, but in crits you have to leave the saddle more. When in a full sprint (nose out over the front wheel) I find the oval comes at a weird position in relation to the hip that has moved forward significantly in the sprinting position. But I have bridged up to several breaks with a quick snap, and strong seated acceleration using the qrings.
On a weird note, I find when I switch back to round from oval, I have a short period where I feel stronger. Like the oval rings where weight training my legs??
Power meter difference was ab 3% overstated. I tested on the Tacx neo and had my quarq going to a separate computer.
I use oval rings. I don't think I'm faster at all but I feel like I'm simply more comfortable from the pedal stroke feel.
Oval is good for uphill ans trails
@@thedistance1155 yup, they're much easier to pedal imo. I ride most of the time in rough roads and trail daily i lived in rural and i used my bike as a second mode of transport 34T oval seems easier to pedal than a 34T round specially when uphill.
I shared a lunch with a current top european pro team rider & this question came up .. He said... " Chris Froome gets€5 million a year or something to ride them, but it they actually even gave 1watt power extra we'd all be on them" :)
I'm a bike messenger and one of my colleagues gave me his cargo bike with oval chainring for a day. I had never used oval chainrings and after a day of using it, I realized that it really uses my leg muscles differently. At the end of the day I felt as if my legs were falling apart, but when i went back to my cargo with round chainring after work I didn't feel as if my legs where falling apart. There is also a huge difference in bike movement when you accelerate where oval fells more steady, but round has that kick. The gearing was pretty much the same on both bikes, difference was that he had 44t and I had 42t chainrings, but my cassette was starting with 11, 12, 14, 16, 19 and his with 12, 13, 15, 17, 20 sprockets.
as long as sagan use round ring.. i wont use oval ring😂
The problem is... You are not sagan
My physics intuition says they can't increase your average power, but merely smooth the delivery, increasing creature comfort
I did a dozen cx races on a 40T rotor Q-ring. Definitely didn't go faster, felt that it held me back on the fast sections where I couldn't put down high cadence power. However, my legs felt amazing afterwards. Muscles were very fresh and I had a lot of spring in my step.Might be good if you're doing a duathlon or a stage race. Could be due to not activating all my muscles and hence limiting power output. This is very sensitive to ring orientation, I found but didn't want to investigate further as my performance was going backwards.
Well at least the science doesn't show a DIS-advantage to oval chainrings, so if you like them.. go for it. (If I would switch to a one-by setup I might consider it, just for fun)
wazzup105
Exacty what I did! Been riding for 50 yrs. but I’m probably too old to feel the difference. 🧐
I don’t think they would be testing the correct thing that make it a “disadvantage”, one example of which is the inconsistency in torque transfer throughout the pedaling stroke. When going over certain obstacles on a trail some people like to know that regardless of their foot position, they can eek out the same torque. Thus, allowing them to clear the obstacle. With oval that continuity of potentially needed torque doesn’t exist.
My experience with Q rings using them in mtb for a long time:
The feeling of pedaling is more "round", more natural, more even during the stroke.
The traction in very steep and very technical climbs is noticeably better.
About the studies of power, I think that there is no way to test it properly as the subjects would need quite a long time to "learn" to pedal with them, and by then, you don't know which other factor could be affecting a maybe marginal gain.
P.S my way of pedaling tends to be more towards low rpm and off the seat
I don't think you need more than 10 minutes to learn how to pedal with them, my first experience with them was with an all road bike. On pavement they felt so identical that I forgot they were oval, then I went onto some grass with tree roots. I thought I was going to stall because I was going very slow and forgot to change gear, and yet I was able to push on.
I don't spin up climbs so oval helps me stay on top of the pedal stroke and ge over stuff. I swapped one to my singlespeed and it was amazing😀👊
@@TrailBreaker that's my next experiment. I didn't think it would work without a chain tensioner until someone somewhere said it can work depending on the ring used.
This was my experience with them also. It completely evened out the power input needed to just ride. I rode on ovals for a long time, then I went back to round rings and, wow, it felt like a bit of struggle in comparison for the same amount of work performed.
If you don't think ovals take out effort/work, tell that to a compound bow user after they switch from a recurve.
littlegoobie yeah it may be a bit loose when between power strokes but a retention device could fix any drops
although anecdotal...I find that when climbing steep slopes I do not loose traction as easily.
Dylan, I just wanted to say thanks for making this content. I went to an Education Conference this weekend where several complaints of professors were that their work is trapped behind a paywall making scientific journals only accessible to other professors which then leads to misinformation to the general public. I couldn't help but keep thinking of your channel where you use your expertise to funnel through the scientific literature and disseminate it to the public. Not sure if the literature you use is public or private, but I think more channels like yours across a wide variety of subjects would do wonders for the "pseudoscience/fake news" public of today. ...or maybe these professors should publish the results of their studies on TH-cam!
I wasn't going to mention it but...Oval chainrings saved my knees and now I can ride again.
I love that everything you post up here is based on actual research. Thanks for taking the time to sift through all of those articles for each of your videos.
he's like the Hambini of human performance in cycling :D
I use them but not so much for performance reasons. I have nerve damage in my right leg where I can no longer pull up my toes at all. The condition is called "drop foot". I read alot of Steve Hogg's bike fitting on folks with drop foot and among the suggestions he makes are to run shorter cranks, mid-foot cleat positioning, & oval chainrings. While I don't have true mid-foot cleat positioning, I do have them as low as they go (away from toes). I'm running 170 cranks. The main effect this all has for me is to help eliminate the dead spot in my pedal stroke where I'm coming over the top. I never had consistent good luck with shifting on double cranks & now run 1x on my gravel bike where the ovality is a non-issue.
love my Ovals have used Q-ring and Absolute black love the Absolute black best never going back to round
i have had oval wheels, they slowed me down! marketing.
Duh, you should shop for round wheels, why would you buy oval?
@@happydays8171 oh dear! it's called irony. I don't believe the hype around oval chainrings, so i made a quip about oval wheels. Metaphorical not literal.
I'll buy your oval wheels. Then you don't need suspension. I'm sure they'll roll better over uneven surfaces.
I'd buy that
I have been riding both for years and the difference is that oval rings make pedaling easier and definitely helps you climb much easier. Round chainrings cost more energy and make it harder to keep momentum going. Don’t look at all those studies and just try it for yourself. You will be surprised.
I watched this video a while back and a comment you made stuck with me. You mentioned that the year after you came off the oval rings you had one of your best years ever. I've noticed that round rings feel easier to push after I've been on the ovals for awhile. Could it be that ovals effectively change the gearing, gain ratio, as they go through a revolution so the effect is somewhat like pushing a larger sprocket but at a higher rpm than you'd likely push that bigger sprocket because you get through the dead spot faster. Maybe it results in more muscle or maybe it trains you to push harder where it does the most good. I don't know, but I do know that standing is a bunch easier for me on ovals because I don't have the grace out of the saddle my friends have and round rings feel easier to push after I've been on the ovals in spite of my ovals being 52 and my round rings being 53. I started riding a bike 16 years ago when I was 52 after being a runner up till then and I'm still working it out. Your videos are some of my favorites because you're honest and committed to helping. Thank you.
Yes! Thank you for sharing the research and your own personal experience! ...I still might get one though, 'cause I watched another TH-cam video that said oval rings are awesome: "The Little Secret THEY Don't Want You to Know About...100x your cycling ability in 2 weeks!"
Nice video! At about 5:10 you mention this comparative biomechanical study. These authors have then gone on to commercialise a set of non-circular chainrings that should be optimal according to their mathematical parameterisation ( www.poweroval.com/home ). It's a small Belgian company and I think it's not well-known, certainly much less than Rotor or Osymetric but at least they are transparent with their science, the others are more marketing blabber. I have yet to try them though. Besides the suggested power improvement (~10 W at the crank at 100 rpm, so about 5% when pushing 200 W) it should also help with reducing peak loads in hip and knee joints and lead to less fatigue for a given effort. The interesting thing about their model is that it also predicts/confirms the relative ineffectiveness of the Q rings etc. You are very right though that there is a lack of systematic testing for these things. Something else; some modern power meters like Rotor INpower or INspider and the Favero Assioma pedals measure the real instantaneous angular crank velocity (and not only the average), so these systems should not over-report torque and power data when using oval chainrings and should be able to be used for measuring any improvements or changes ( cycling.favero.com/blog/tech-tests/whats-iav-power ). Cheers!
I've had 10 years of experience with Q-rings and circular rings as an age grouper triathlete (half IM, IM distances). Also gravel biking. On flats, basically no difference. Power output mostly a function of cardiopulmonary fitness and energetics (glucose, fat metabolism). On long hills, power output again dependent on cardiopulmonary fitness. On steep hills with out of the saddle max power effort, oval rings have a clear advantage. Per distance traveled, there is more opportunity to exert power which better maintains speed. On steep gravel hills, there is more continuous delivery of power with oval rings and less gravel slip/spin. On steep gravel hills out of the saddle effort with round rings, there are higher power peaks which more easily leads to slips.
In the end, flat endurance races - oval/round no difference. Hilly races - 2x setup with oval inner and round outer is better for speed up the hills. Gravel grinder (5+ hour effort) with steep hill climbs - 2x setup with oval inner and round outer is best to power up the hills and minimize wheel slips.
Lets see, larger lever when you have more power in the pedal, smaller lever when you have less porwe in the pedal. if you can tune the position of the ring to balance your force peaks you are smoothing the stroke and thats a good thing. used qrings many years
Most of the peloton is under heavy pressure from Shimano and Campy. So they cant use them. Its not 2005 anymore. I believe lot more people would use em but they simply aren't allowed to. Plus these guys cant risk losing time/contracts getting used to oval. Round simply works and so does Oval. Its not for everyone and not for every race/situation tho. Btw in 2011 Vuelta the whole podium was non-round cuz Cobo had qrings too. And notably Sastre won his tour on em, aka before it was cool.
I ran rotors on my mountain bike, round on my road bike for a few years. The ovals just felt more comfortable, so I switched my road rings. For me they really are more comfortable, and I'm usually a sceptic. It's not drastic and I didn't do it for any perceived performance gains. So, just like saddles, go with your personal preference. Just know that you stand little chance of holding someone's wheel if they are using ovals 😂.
Did you use them with the largest ring measurement at top of stroke or opposite?
Have been riding Rotor Q-rings for over a decade. I didn’t test if the made me faster, they did help me not be so fatigued coming off the bike leg in triathlons, helping me run faster, so in the long run, pun intended, they did help me be faster. No knee issues during that time. Rode a set of round rings for the first time this past weekend on a new bike, and my knees were aching at mile 15. Ordered another set of Q rings when I got home.
I've used them for years, I just like them. Re the Tour De France. Carlos Sastre won using Q Rings in 2008, his team, CSC, were sponsored by Rotor. Some of the riders used Q Rings, some used round rings made by Rotor, it was all down to a riders preference.
Oval on the Epic, Round on the Tarmac.
Hey Dylan, Great videos. From my very little experience on oval I can tell you I'm sold on them but only under certain circumstances. I did some personal testing on my Tacx Neo trainer over the winter and did notice a power benefit. I do a lot of long climbs on Rouvy where I spend 30 to 60min at 90% FTP and relatively high cadence so it was perfect to test oval. I tried Rotor and AbsoluteBlack and found AbsoluteBlack the better one for me. The biggest thing I noticed right away was less muscle fatigue (less leg burn), I was able to hold the same power for longer, vs. round, which translated into higher nominal power for long climbs. My overall FTP did not change. It was neat as it felt like I had a smaller chain ring, so made it a bit easier on the climbs. If anyone want's to try it, I would encourage just swapping out the inner ring where I think you'll get the most benefit. And, it won't affect your shifting! Shifting was terrible with AbsoluteBlack and SRAM eTap.
When riding round rings, I switch between pushing “vertical power” and circling with more “horizontal power.” When I first switch to horizontal, my power goes up, levels off, and I then fatigue. I go back to vertical for a bit, rest the smaller muscles, and then go horizontal again. Using those two systems works well for me.
I tried Absolute Black rings. They put me more into a single mode (vertical) and my power numbers (at the hub) didn’t show significant improvements. Shifting and setup are more fiddly. I wanted oval to work, but round is best for me. I could see how some vertical mashers might prefer them though.
Jon Fairhurst this is the exact disadvantage I explain to people, too. There’s no real advantage to oval, but there’s certainly a disadvantage. It puts your pedaling stroke in one mode.
Deveren Fogle - One advantage could be smooth pedaling up rough, steep terrain. This might be especially good for newer or less skilled riders, or riders who naturally mash the pedals. (I’m not saying that I’m skilled, but I have a very steep ride home. For the first two years it was hard to pedal smoothly and manage traction on the steepest parts.) But for normal road riding, the benefits are questionable.
My experience with the AbsoluteBlack ovals (used exclusively on my #1 race MTB since 2016) is that "I think" I maintain more even traction at low rpm climbing on loose stuff. As well, I feel like I get into a better cadence rhythm for long stretches (think: rail trail at Mohican). Even if it is true, it's quite possibly a BandAid for less than optimal body positioning and gear selection, as I tend to be more of a grinder than spinner in those two scenarios. I've been riding my #2 MTB (hardtail with round chain ring) a lot so far this off-season and don't seem to miss the oval at all. Not feeling really hard over for either position. In the end, I think this may simply fall into the "comfort yields confidence" category, like saddles and grips.
Hi Dylan,
How to train speed? Do you need to train behind a scooter or moped to gain speed and why is that. Or can you train without a ‘windblocker’ and just speed up your cadence. Greeting from The Netherlands
No need for a scooter although if you have a fast group ride you can get with it’s great practice but again not necessary.
So if all the studies either show an improvement or no improvement I think the better question is why not go with an oval? At least when I built my last MTB, the cost was the same for an AB oval ring as a round ring. No idea if the ring makes me go faster, but the ring definitely improves traction on technical climbs and it feels like it lowers exertion for long steep climbs. Sure, the improvement may not be enough to justify replacing a perfectly good chainring, but when building a bike from scratch or replacing a worn chainring, why not go with an oval?
Good point.
Short term studies didn't focus on disadvantages. Possibly: 1) Poor shifting 2) Development of other pains long term (e.g. Tendency to use lower cadences causing more knee wear) 3) Increased noise 4) Cost differences vs quality of chain ring (IMO, Shimano may last longer and definitely shift better than most other rings)
Plus, I have five bikes - to switch over is just an unnecessary expense; $ that could go towards something else.
Blame it on Triathletes! First it was aerobars then it was shimano bio-pace.
Man, you are on of the few TH-camrs that really have useful content. Thank you!
Oval rings are much better for climbing period!!
I started using them to help with a groin injury, which they did but I found a noticeable improvement in my climbing.
Speaking to my club mates, I've found that sprinters (like myself) really like them and climbers found they made no difference.
dude, lighten up on the exfoliation loofah and/or proactiv
I am a singlespeeder and used the AB oval in 17 and went back to roubd in 18 and now switched to oval again. I can bot answer the power question but two things I notice on SS is that climbing traction is definitely better in loose, techy stuff. Also, medium cadence around 70-85 seems smoother but over that it rpm it seems the same to me where the bounce cones back(maybe this is showing my pedal inefficiency. For the record I often ride the road to and from my local park on my ss(7 miles each way) and I noticed this running 34/19 and 34/16. Thanks for all these videos. I really enjoy them.
I just installed a 34t oval chainring on my cross bike and on the rides on a familiar loop i do and being not in the greatest shape-it made the climbs much easier imo. in the final sprint I cant say i noticed my difference. Ill keep it on there.
Using an oval ring on my single speed I felt I could use one tooth less on the rear cog. Felt I could get through the 6 o'clock position when pedaling quicker. But like in the one study discussed, you often find yourself pedaling a low cadence while on a single speed.
I used oval on my moutain bike, they only help when I was 1 gear doing about 40 rpm on a very step climb...
I recently added an absolute black to my tall boy, (32t) with sram eagle 12 speed gx drivetrain. I agree that I think most of it's just mental, the biggest difference that I noticed his maybe in the low RPMs and a lot of chain noise. The chain noise itself is why before the race season and I will switch back to round.
Nice objective no B.S. overview. I have a 34 tooth Absolute Black oval on my road bike. It's barely oval LOL. It "feels" comfortable when I use it on my usual steep terrain. Can't really say if it made me faster or more efficient. You really do some excellent videos.
Yes, i have used Absolute Black Ovals (50t, 52t, 36t) for the past 2 years. i started out as a mountain biker and had a "masher" spin. in the begging i had a hard time pushing a ROUND 52t ring (stock bike part). i switched to a 50t OVAL because of what i hoped it would do. after about a year i began to "spin out" on the 50t and switched to a 52t OVAL. now that my cadence has increased to 95-100, the OVAL doesn't seem to "work" for me. i feel that "dead zone" way too much. even using the 36t up a hill has that "dead zone", unless i lower my cadence do 75. i will also say, sprinting on an OVAL has done me no favors. In the beginning when my cadence was between 50-70, the OVALS greatly helped me stay with the pack and was giving me some good PR's. I personally feel that if you come from Mountain biking, using an OVAL may help train you to have a "roadie spin". i have now "graduated" to a 52t ROUND ring, and i have instantly improved my PR's. i absolutely (see what i did there) loved my Absolute Black Ovals, but it's time to move on to something that fits my spin better.
Thanks for the great video Dylan. I have used them for a few years but after getting my pedal based power meter and seeing how my power zone in the pedal stroke changed tremendously when climbing and standing, I figured that there was no point because I was no longer in the "optimal zone". I believe this is why you see Chris Froome seated most of the time during his hard efforts. I also found that the research didn't support any benefit. So I did away with them due to compatibility issues on some bikes, knee pain, and change in power zone while climbing.
8 show benefit (statistical)
9 either show no benefit or a statistically insignificant benefit
0 show disadvantage. (or were there some showing disadvantage)?
Looks like on balance of evidence my next bike will go oval. (Subject to cost)
Gimmick! Terrible on steep climbs...old news..
My Strava times at my favorite local trail has not shown a time improvement on my trail bike after switching to Absolute Black ovals. But I did see the ability to drop 1-2 cogs higher (smaller) during climbs and my knees are happier.
I like it enough that I just bought another oval for my fat bike.
I'd wager most Single Speeders & Gear Mashers will say they perceive a definite benefit, w/ the provision you install them allowing for the 90 deg offset between crankarm & chain/ring pull point. PS nothing wrong with a placebo if it works
More room for placebo all the time!
Very interesting video, thanks for making it!
I've been using ovals for a while now (i guess they're medium ovality), and yes i _think_ i'm benefitting from them. Two separate reasons:
1. i have a slightly 'varus' left foot, causing my knee to go towards the top tube when pressing the downstroke, which after many years of cycling (even with inner soles and wedges underneath the cleat) caused a lot of knee pain on the inner side. Switching to ovals greatly reduced that pain, and i strongly believe it must have something to do with the more even distribution of force during the full stroke, which reduces the pressure needed on the downstroke. This is only anecdotical evidence of course, hardly scientific. But still, there seems to be a pattern here, judging from the other comments.
2. I know my sprints are bad (my power build-up is not explosive at all), and i have much to improve on my climbing. My long-punch and TT skills are pretty OK though. So i've concluded that clearly my muscles are slow twitch. Since using the ovals, both my climbing (only the small oval ring is needed) and my (even seated) sprinting have improved, while my punch and TT have not suffered. I don't see this discussed anywhere, but might this be a big reason why ovals (anecdotically) work for about half the people and do not for the other half? I can imagine the fast-twtch muscles thriving on the on-and-off mechanic of pushing the downstroke, and slow-twitch muscles being more comfortable during a more even circumvence? Do any of the papers you studied even mention this rather crucial difference between athletes? I'm really curious!
Came back to rewatch this a year later, after experience riding with an oval ring. First, _nothing_ can increase your power except training, your equipment can only eliminate losses. Is an oval ring wildly more efficient at transferring power? No, it's likely equal if anything. What about load matching? So think of your whole legs, chainring, chain, transmission and tires as an interconnected torque transfer system. Your legs have the least mechanical advantage at 0 and 180 degrees, and a massive mechanical advantage at 90 and 270. This leads to uneven torque transfer across the pedal stroke. Many commenters, and honest manufacturers like OneUp components, say the only advantage of Oval chainrings is traction because the cyclical torque transfer graph is flattened. By removing the spikes in torque, you are less likely to break a tire loose in a rock garden or slick surface. Your average power remains the same (same work delivered in one full rotation of the cranks), but the curve in the work is delivered is smoothed out rather than having spikes at 90 and 270 degrees. My intuition tells me experienced cyclists subconsciously manage torque output to keep from breaking tires loose with a round ring. An oval ring assists a newer rider with the same skill.
I used Q-Rings on one of my road bikes for about five years. Switching between that bike and my other bikes, I never felt any difference.
Thanks for the review, I just install one and I like it, working for me, took away my knee pain and it’s easier in climbing. Did it make me a faster cyclist? No but it made it easier for me to paddle.
Steve King I did go faster, broke some segments on strava. Was easier for climbing. Not sure if it’s the placebo or the chain ring.
I found Rotor QXL and Osymetric work for me. I think pedalling style has a lot to do with if they work for you. They definitely reduce pedalling deadspots in my opinion and if they feel good I'll use them. Probably work better for trained high cadence riders. Adam Hansen said he considered changing teams to use them.
My guess is most sponsored teams don't allow it and of course increased risk of chains dropping in racing situations could be a big problem. That's my view anyway.
Would love to make a test in the snow!
That could be interesting to se how good they are.
But for now im going with my cargo bike this winter. To tired to commute with a MTB :D
Hey Dylan,
maybe an idea for a future video. With companies / apps like WHOOP, HRV4Training, Polar (with their watches and straps) getting more and more customers, what is the science of Heart Rate Variability (HRV) as an indicator of training / recovery?
Thanks and keep up the great content!
BuexxTM agreed. This would be a great topic. Especially since I’ve tried 5 different companies/ products doing HRV and not one seems reliable.
@@trbeyond I just ordered the WHOOP strap after seeing and hearing a lot of their claims. Hope I don't regret it. 😉
I use them, but mainly because I find them more comfortable when in and warp tuck. My highest ever 20min power was set on round rings but there’s only 2w between that and my best on oval rings. I don’t feel like oval rings give me and advantage or disadvantage other than more comfort in the aero tuck when my hip angle is at the minimum. Worth noting that I’ve only used Qrings and Absokute black which I believe have the same amount of ovality.
I tried to change back once but pedaling the round rings just felt too weird for too long so went back to oval. Personally, when I’m asked I recommend people stick with round figments for the superior shifting...and because they might not like changing back to round should they choose to
Stages power states that their meters read 4-5% high with non-round chainrings. However, my experience on my MTB with an Absolute Black ring was that the Stages PM was reporting about 10% high. Here's a link to Stages' statement: support.stagescycling.com/en/support/solutions/articles/1000158537-can-i-use-the-stages-power-meter-with-oval-or-osymetric-chain-rings-
I basicaly watch your videos for the guy with cap and hilarious comments! :D
GR8!!
⚙⚙⚙⚙⚙⚙⚙⚙
JOOI has anyone ever tried the *orientation displaced* by 90° ??? How would it feel ???
⚙⚙⚙⚙⚙⚙⚙⚙
I had a muddy fox in the late 1997 and it had the 1st gen of oval chainlinks that Shimano made.
I found that from a standstill, on the take off i was faster than round rings .
I found that climbing steep hills and rocky uneven surfaces, that the ease of the task and the performance was better for me, just a easier and less physically tiring for me personally.
I haven't used them but about all the faster people I know seem to use them. One thing they do is help get you through the dead part of your pedal stroke easier. Great for if you get caught out in the wrong gear or are just a masher in general. One thing they have said is it helps to even out the power and keep them from spinning out on technical climbs. IDK I will try them at some point. I am either going to replace my cranks on my gravel bike with grx or fit the super compact ovals to it.
That once was called Biopace in the early 1990's my first ATB had those, felt a bit weird but was ok, I do not recall that I missed those when I changed to circular chainrings!
Yes biopace
BioPace had the wrong orientation, so they had a reputation for hurting knees. With the modern oval rings, they seem to help the knees
I have Rotor Q-rings on my road bike, I see absolute no difference in performance as well as in power meter readings to the previously used round rings. To be honest, I don't even feel a difference when I change to my other bikes with round rings. But there is a significant difference in shifting performance, the road bike is the only one where the chain now and then drops - and that happened not before with round rings. So when they are worn out I will go back to round (...probably earlier...)
I use them but without a power meter so hard to really back it up with any data. I got no idea if they helped my performance because at the same time a lot of other factors changed which helped my performance. I just switched to Qrings to try them and still have them on. But probably will switch back to round when my chainrings need to be replaced, I feel like it bothers me too much with shifting, even on Di2 with the light oval rings of Rotor.
While I don't see front shifting issues at all, oval chainrings have a few drawbacks : chains last a little less and the small/small combo isn't really recommended cause it rubs against the chainring during part of a pedal revolution. Also one thing to note is it recruits muscles a bit differently so it takes some time to adapt to them which is something I'm not sure the studies can really account for when comparing round vs oval.
I’m oval rider - came back to road bikes 3 years back after 20+ years on mtb’s when i bought a TT bike which came with Qrings - did not think too much about it as it was a supplied - until I bought a road bike to go on group rides (hmmm still generally ride solo but it’s another bike) this came with round dura ace rings and I was back to back making more power with the Q rings on my local flat TT course with the oval rings fitted.
What hammered it home for me and it’s mentioned elsewhere here in comments is when on my fat bike (another bike) when going flat out (or fat out?) in top gear (35f-11r) there is a real smoothing out of the pedal stroke as that mashing cadence.
Placebo? Possibly but I have now swopped all my bikes apart from the emtb to ovals - works for me but osymetric were just one too far when it came to shopping out the road bike rings
If you walk and run daily we know the oval ring works efficiently in cycling, Gravity teaches people to strengthen what is natural to humans that is pushing down your weight. Once the user adapts physiologically on the oval ring, the user ultimately enjoys the difference.
Try using the same "Cycling program" on the "Oval chainring" then compare it on your previous Round ring performance. There is a power difference.
If you are an Oval chainring user and go back to Round chainring you'll notice a "smoothness" in the round ring but "decrease" in power especially on a higher gradient or simply some uphills.
I've never tried them. In theory, a sprint performance could benefit from reducing the gap between power strokes. I'm not sure for aerobic riding at your power threshold. I'm thinking your peak (within a pedal cycle) to average power ratings will be closer with oval but I'm not sure how much this benefits the body in terms of maximum average power within a pedal stroke. Climbs where you're about to stall I could see the benefit. I just watched a video of a guy who said his times improved dramatically although it's hard to compare day to day efforts.
As an aside I do think they'd feel weird on my mid-drive e-bike. I bet I could feel the surges in acceleration. Also the chainring can freewheel with respect to the pedals so it might end up being out of phase of optimum performance.
I just discovered oval chainrings two days ago and I seem to be an outlier in my experience. The first 5 minutes felt weird, but after 20 minutes I realised that I was riding 2k an hour faster with the same effort. After two 4 hour rides, I've saved 15 minutes each time. They are fantastic and feel like magic. They're so much better than round rings I'm amazed not everybody uses them. I must be unusual in some way. Perhaps it's because I ride 15,000 miles a year and I've reached my maximum efficiency, so switching to oval makes a bigger difference to me than others. BTW, the ring is an absoluteBLACK 39t which I'm running 1X.
Informative video, Dylan, thanks. I use AbsoluteBlack oval 2x rings on my road and gravel bikes. Why? Mainly b/c I could get into a sub-compact range. I'm 50, and relatively new to consistent riding. Getting the lower gear range was a plus as I build up fitness, strength, and experience. Plus... I'm not going to ride the Tour or DK at the front, so why clobber my knees? The AB rings, oval or no, allowed me to do what I wanted where Shimano didn't, at the time (thanks, no, GRX), the lower range I wanted. Have the ovality of my rings made any really difference otherwise? I doubt it. Better fitness and time on the bike will be a bigger benefit. Oh, and you mentioned shifting... my AB's shift well, but every once in a while there is a bit of skipping that would never happen if I was running a fully Ultegra or Dura Ace set of rings. So, yeah, ride what works and just ride.
After 14yrs on Rotor Q-Rings (I was one of the very first clients) on an MTB: they do help on steep technical terrain. On my road- and triathlon bike, I ride O-Symmetric since 5yrs and they help during climbs, given you maintain a higher then average cadence. On my tri-bike, it helps most since it helps to save my hamstrings and glutes for the small issue of running 1/2 or full marathon after the ride...
I'm running the same set of QRings since 37.000km on my road bike. Honestly I don't think they improve any short duration performance much for me. They might be beneficial on longer duration rides of 4h+. I also don't feel a noticeable difference when I switch to my other bikes with round chainrings. However, I feel like they helped me with my knee problems. Even if that's just a placebo it's one worth keeping. Thanks for the excellent video as always Dylan.
Hello there I”m new to you’re channel in a couple days have seen many of you’re videos. So far I like them all . This is my personal Opinion I been using Rotor Q rings since 2010. So 9 years with over 70.000 miles on Q rings . Qxl rings won’t work for me To much . But since I have many bikes There is tow bikes with regular round rings . Honestly I only found deference in sprinting big deference in performance on favor of Q rings. but combined rides with Q rings and Round rings what I gain is what bunch of crumps .
Contact Christie O'Hara - she is at CalTech and while she did work for Rotor and did a study on them using a VeloTron, she has no love for Pablo and she can give you an ubiased opinion on their effectiveness. Might be worth a friend-up on FB and a chat.
Nice video! Im giving a try the oval(first day today) but i have many questions! Can it help with overall economy because it moves at the dead spots faster?! Can it help a rider that misses hill training so he or she is not so well adapted to heavy gears, to climb faster(the main reason i buy one)?! Also, are we really use that ring in real life to bypass the deadspot faster or we adapt to it and just go with heavier gear so basically the time we need on the dead spot are the same?! Does it have any difference if you ride lets say 32 or 36 but in the same gear ratio? Mini review from the first ride: I started on a hilly XC course, generally i liked it, it does indeed feel smoother bypassing the dead spots. I like it especially when i was pushing it out of the saddle on a big incline. Then i moved to a flat course and just no, cant really find the pacing on faster rpm, it feels so strange!
Yeah, not sure I'd plunk the money down on an Absolute Black in hopes it's an upgrade until my current chainring is shot. Even then I'm skeptical if I even want it on my bike.
I'll save my money. Thank you Dylan
Good use of literature for a more scientific perspective. Good work! Thanks. To increase your personal credibility, I recommend that you improve your diction. You compete almost every sentence with a drop in voice pitch and vocal fry (rough air, typical of American girls). Could you drop your voice less and keep you voice clear? Also watch out for slurred words, such as "peal" for "pedal," and "all" for "I'll". Thanks again for your content.
Absolute Black now refer to them as "traction rings". That's my finding as well. Lower cadence standing climbing? Oval rings all day long. More pronounced on the single speed than geared.
Fran McGowan Wouldnt just going down a gear help in the same way?
@@alejandro9rojas Not on a single speed :) It's mainly a standing climbing thing vs sitting climbing. Standing, you quite often can't drop to a lower gear as you'll just lose traction.
Good Stuff Dylan,,, In the tests I've seen they never say what sizes they are using, a 32t round, vs a 32t oval is an unfair advantage, I call a 32t oval a part time 34t because of the height.. just go from a 32t round to a 34t round and you'll see a good improvement.. people changing from a 32t round to a 32t oval should see a difference, its TRICKNOLOGY !!! it sells stuff, I'm waiting for oval wheels...;) !!!
I used the Rotor's Q's for a few weeks on my road & TT bikes. I could feel a difference in the pedaling but this never translated into any gain of power. This perceived pedaling difference felt odd at increased RPM, like power surges that were going nowhere...
Never tried them MTB'iking.
I would have thought that biopace would help with knee issues. They put the lower gearing at the place where the cyclists would otherwise put out maximum power and pressure on the knees. I see Biopace as a knee saver and training tool to encourage a more even pedal stroke but they can be rotated for a O-ring type experience.
The only area where non-circular chainrings excel is enhancing the profits of the company making those rings.
The studies don't exist, or are 50/50 for and against. Honestly, the litmus test for new "ZOMG, get XYZ watts for free!" or "Save 30 grams!" gear in cycling and triathlon is if the claim is 2 - 10 watts, and it costs at least $200, and half a dozen professionals use it, then it's probably mostly hype.
It's like when you optimize software and you improve performance of part of the code by 1000% which sounds awesome, except it runs once a day and even unoptimized only took 2 seconds. Instead, you could have focused in an area that matters. For cycling it's like, "Dude, use 3d printed aerobars! So much less drag." but it would cost a ton less and be far more effective if the cyclist just lost 10 lbs.
2:15 how is a 5% increase not significant? In sprints that get decided within mm i'm betting on the one with the 5% advantage
Also, if the studies show either a positive effect or no effect at all, then there is no downside in using one.
Here is my thoughts on oval rings on my single speed mountain bike……let’s just say you climb a steep hill for 1 mile.
With the oval chainring on a single speed mountain bike you will be in the “sweet spot” of your stroke a higher number of times in the same distance…AND you are using a larger gear (momentarily but in the high power part of your downstroke) while in the “sweet spot” of your stroke.
So if bike #1 has a round 34 tooth ring let’s say they do 1,000 rotations in this 1 mile climb.
Bike #2 has an oval 34 tooth ring. (32 - 36 tooth depending on what part of the rotation) Given the same rpm on bike #1 and #2, bike #2 (oval) has been in the “sweet spot” of the stroke more often AND while turning a 35-36 tooth ring through that part of the rotation.
I hope that makes sense.
Combine this fact with one of the studies mentioned by Dylan about low cadence efforts show a positive effect on performance and it seems like there may be some benefit when using a oval with a single speed. (You are lower cadence while climbing) The BMX study showed and improvement in performance also….those are single speeds! Those riders are in the “sweet spot” of the chainring more often and they are turning a larger gear while in the sweet spot.
The oval chainrings were designed around the idea of a swimmer’s stroke (I hear). Meaning…they get out of the “dead spot” of their stroke by bringing their arms inward to their body and RAPIDLY getting back into the power part of the stroke. The oval chainring attempts to mimic this by bringing the rider’s foot RAPIDLY through and out of the “dead zone” of the rotation (by getting smaller) and getting back into the power part of the rotation….While turning a harder gear through that sweet spot.
It seems to me that a geared bike MAY negate the benefit in some way…maybe. The BMX study leads me to believe that is true.
I switched to a Wolftooth oval a few years ago (it is not a pronounced oval) but only on my SS mountain bike. I can’t know if it is the placebo effect or not. But as I saw my performance improve (measured in time to climb) I started to try and figure out how an oval chainring could help and I think what I stated above is the answer.
Hell…I entered the SouthernCross race here in North Georgia on that SS mountain bike and got the win in the SS category in 2019 Lol…I don’t even train for racing anymore. I wasn’t expecting a podium slot at all. I was eating my post race meal and heard my name called as the winner! Lol. Can’t argue with results! I haven’t entered a race since then. So I don’t know for sure. Let me know if you believe there is something to my theory or not.
Thanks!🤟👍
Been using Rotor QXL, after a year or 2 just on the Q's QXL are more extreme, I have been riding them for 10 years. I have 9 bikes, 2 with ovals are my fastest, cervelo R3 & S5. I sprint really well, but I also find contrary to what Dylan is saying is that I spin better with ovals, and it feels smoother. Change bikes mid ride to rounds, and feel like part of the stroke is missing. I do and have for years focused on turning around the circle (pedal) for me, I just feel better on QXL. The studies Dylan shows, some say better some say the "same" none say worse
I recently did a test on the same climb (~10* grade) and with identical 5-minute power (397w) to see if there was a difference between round rings and qrings. By holding the power constant, what I did find was a significantly difference power phase (based on the Garmin cycling dynamics power phase definition). With round rings, power began ~19* sooner than qrings in the standard position - it would be interesting to see if there's research to say what degree is optimal for the start/finish of the power phase. This is where I could see the value of the qrings come forward given you can find tune where in the cycling stroke/vector the ovality if focused.
To me is purely financial. Absolute Black oval double set is cheaper than OEM shimano. Shimano DA 9100 big ring is $238 while AB Big and Small chainring set cost $189. Thats a game changer on my wallet.
Thanks for the info Dylan, you're the man
Started using Rotor Q rings 4 years ago then found Absolute Black, in my humble opinion AB are the best oval chain rings on the market I am 60+ and rode over 18K last year all on Absolute Black 50-34 pedal more efficiently, Keep heart rate lower, Ride faster.... and it’s legal
I use a 54t 1x oval Garbaruk with GRX 810 and i saw significant change when moving from 50t round chainring. Of course there are other factors
1) Straight chain line for the start of the sprint.
2) Totally 1 piece /closed (no cut out) blade design of the ring and
3) 54 being the bigger ring also being the more efficient ring
That said, it reduced my knee strain when sprinting but has 0 benefit during zone 2 training. The effect is more pronounced on my weaker leg, which feel more even in terms of power. And it changed my sprinting efficiency by giving my left leg a bit of help.
I still would go with round without reservation. the Oval was not a let down.
I have never used oval chainrings, but I have studied anatomy a fair bit. I think oval rings may help flat pedal riders more than they would those who use a clipless set up. For a rider who spins properly, I don't see much use for oval rings and they may even impact a good spinner's efficiency negatively. In sprinting, it makes sense that oval rings help. Basically, if the rider is just pumping down, right then left, and not following the whole circle of crank duration more, oval rings may help that.