Rotor Crank..what is it ?

"Mike Beckett" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

I read of someone fitting a Rotor articulating crank to his recumbent and was pleased with the
results..(he replaced his Dura Ace crank !) What is different with this crank ?

No experience, but google is your friend : rotorbike.comwhatisrotor.htmOpen ↗

"Torben Scheel" wrote in message

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

I read of someone fitting a Rotor articulating crank to his recumbent and was pleased with the
results..(he replaced his Dura Ace crank !) What is different with this crank ?

I can see how this would work for "mashers", or people without clips, but would it have any great
benefit for people who pedal "round" strokes?

Tom Balmer Goatbiker/V2

Yeah. I saw a guy mashing at about 125 rpm at somewhat north of 35 mph and
doing a seventy second ± 1 k TT.
"Thomas Balmer" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

"Torben Scheel" wrote in message

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

I read of someone fitting a Rotor articulating crank to his recumbent and was pleased with the
results..(he replaced his Dura Ace crank !) What is different with this crank ?

I can see how this would work for "mashers", or people without clips, but would it have any great
benefit for people who pedal "round" strokes?

Tom Balmer Goatbiker/V2

Mike,

I posted this to the BROL list the other day.

Systems for reducing effort at the dead spot have been around since the late 1800's.

Elliptical sprockets are the simplest way to do this.

However, I believe that it is at least as important, if not more so, to reduce the gearing on
the upstroke!

This is not possible with elliptical chainrings since both legs must be in the same gear. The only
point where both legs benefit from the same gearing is at the dead spot. At any other point in the
stroke their optimum gearing would be at opposite extremes!

I have been doing a little looking into the history of Rotor Cranks. Again, similar systems have
been around since the late 1800's.

All require the cranks to be hooked together through a variable gearing system, allowing each leg to
be in its optimum gear at all points in the stroke. This has been done using sprockets, gears, cams,
or over-center links. Rotor Cranks tried/patented two more complicated systems before settling on
the over-center link setup. There are prior examples cited in their patent, so there is an opening
for Shimano to enter the market by making small changes to the design.

This could get very interesting!

Interestingly, the Brown PowerCam system worked just the opposite of the Rotor Crank, and similar
systems, in that it INCREASED the gearing on the upstroke/dead center part of the stroke. This just
demonstrates how adaptable the human body is, and why it is so difficult to determine what is
really better.

Elliptical chainrings have had similar conflicting designs....the traditional ellipticals reduce the
gearing at the dead spot, while Biopace chainrings increased gearing at the dead spot.

Logic tells me that gearing should be lowest on the upstroke/dead spot.

Warren

Then there is this idea about changing the crank arm length:

easycrank.commain.htmlOpen ↗

This is one of those ideas that keeps coming up over the years, but unlike the Rotors, I haven't
actually heard of anyone using them.

John Riley

Quoted post said:

Originally posted by Mike Beckett
What is different with this crank ?

I saw one of these at the Hotter 'n Hell 100 this year. It is a very interesting system. I cannot speak intelligently about what it does so I will not try. Several people locally own them and think their MPH has increased about 2-3mph

How Rotor Cranks work - and the benefits:

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

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

Rotor Cranks are not perpetual motion machines and do not claim to increase power by 40% (for more
information on this topic, ask Kraig Willet about the Redshoe Brand Shoes he has been using). As we
all know, there is no such thing as "free power" in cycling, especially a 40% gain just by using a
set of cranks. Rotors do however make a claim to lower lactate levels and heart rates. They do not
raise your power, but they offer you the opportunity to ride harder and at a higher wattage output -
before reaching your lactate threshold. For a TT'ist or Triathlete, this is important. Your lactate
threshold is probably your biggest limiter for trained athletes in endurance cycling events.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Gary Tingley

[email hidden] rotorcranksusa.comrotorcranksusa.comOpen ↗ Rotor Cranks: 2-3 minute faster 40k bike split

[email hidden] (Warren Berger) wrote in message
news:<[email hidden]>...

Quoted message said:

Mike,

I posted this to the BROL list the other day.

Systems for reducing effort at the dead spot have been around since the late 1800's.

Elliptical sprockets are the simplest way to do this.

However, I believe that it is at least as important, if not more so, to reduce the gearing on the
upstroke!

This is not possible with elliptical chainrings since both legs must be in the same gear. The only
point where both legs benefit from the same gearing is at the dead spot. At any other point in the
stroke their optimum gearing would be at opposite extremes!

I have been doing a little looking into the history of Rotor Cranks. Again, similar systems have
been around since the late 1800's.

All require the cranks to be hooked together through a variable gearing system, allowing each leg
to be in its optimum gear at all points in the stroke. This has been done using sprockets, gears,
cams, or over-center links. Rotor Cranks tried/patented two more complicated systems before
settling on the over-center link setup. There are prior examples cited in their patent, so there
is an opening for Shimano to enter the market by making small changes to the design.

This could get very interesting!

Interestingly, the Brown PowerCam system worked just the opposite of the Rotor Crank, and similar
systems, in that it INCREASED the gearing on the upstroke/dead center part of the stroke. This
just demonstrates how adaptable the human body is, and why it is so difficult to determine what is
really better.

Elliptical chainrings have had similar conflicting designs....the traditional ellipticals reduce
the gearing at the dead spot, while Biopace chainrings increased gearing at the dead spot.

Logic tells me that gearing should be lowest on the upstroke/dead spot.

Warren

Hmmm.... lesee... 2-3 minutes faster over 40k (25 miles). So if I average 17 MPH that's 0.4 to 0.6
MPH avg speed increase. Base model rotor crank retails for $620. That's $1033 to $1550 for a 1 MPH
increase in average speed. But a more competetive rider who averages 25 MPH will see 0.9 to 1.3 MPH
avg speed increase. For a world-class racer who needs every advantage, it's probably worth it. For
the typical recumbent cyclist, however, that $620 would be better spent on aerodynamic improvements
like a fairing, tailbox, bodysock, or going to a larger front wheel/fork to reduce frontal area (see
mine at community.webshots.comwjantonOpen ↗). Or you could use the $620 to buy an EZ-1 for
someone you love to ride with you, and still have enough left over for accessories.
--
Bill Anton 2001 Vision R-40 26x26 SWB OSS Lubbock, TX, USA

"Gary Tingley" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

How Rotor Cranks work - and the benefits:

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

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

Rotor Cranks are not perpetual motion machines and do not claim to increase power by 40% (for more
information on this topic, ask Kraig Willet about the Redshoe Brand Shoes he has been using). As
we all know, there is no such thing as "free power" in cycling, especially a 40% gain just by
using a set of cranks. Rotors do however make a claim to lower lactate levels and heart rates.
They do not raise your power, but they offer you the opportunity to ride harder and at a higher
wattage output - before reaching your lactate threshold. For a TT'ist or Triathlete, this is
important. Your lactate threshold is probably your biggest limiter for trained athletes in
endurance cycling events.

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

------

Quoted message said:

Gary Tingley

[email hidden] rotorcranksusa.comrotorcranksusa.comOpen ↗ Rotor Cranks: 2-3 minute faster 40k
bike split

[email hidden] (Warren Berger) wrote in message

news:<[email hidden]>...

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Mike,

I posted this to the BROL list the other day.

Systems for reducing effort at the dead spot have been around since the late 1800's.

Elliptical sprockets are the simplest way to do this.

However, I believe that it is at least as important, if not more so, to reduce the gearing on
the upstroke!

This is not possible with elliptical chainrings since both legs must be in the same gear. The
only point where both legs benefit from the same gearing is at the dead spot. At any other point
in the stroke their optimum gearing would be at opposite extremes!

I have been doing a little looking into the history of Rotor Cranks. Again, similar systems have
been around since the late 1800's.

All require the cranks to be hooked together through a variable gearing system, allowing each
leg to be in its optimum gear at all points in the stroke. This has been done using sprockets,
gears, cams, or over-center links. Rotor Cranks tried/patented two more complicated systems
before settling on the over-center link setup. There are prior examples cited in their patent,
so there is an opening for Shimano to enter the market by making small changes to the design.

This could get very interesting!

Interestingly, the Brown PowerCam system worked just the opposite of the Rotor Crank, and
similar systems, in that it INCREASED the gearing on the upstroke/dead center part of the
stroke. This just demonstrates how adaptable the human body is, and why it is so difficult to
determine what is really better.

Elliptical chainrings have had similar conflicting designs....the traditional ellipticals reduce
the gearing at the dead spot, while Biopace chainrings increased gearing at the dead spot.

Logic tells me that gearing should be lowest on the upstroke/dead spot.

Warren

Meaning to say that, as an average, if you can ride a 40k time trial in one hour, you will be able
to ride the same course in 57-58 minutes with Rotor Cranks.

This is a very big difference as Rotor Cranks will make you faster and more efficient than aero
front, with a disc and TT frame combined which can easily cost over $4000. Add a Rotor to your
recumbent, or TT machine and with a little adaptation and work you are guaranteed to go faster and
have a more efficient ride - even if you do not race.

Plus they have lowered my heart rate and made the PFS in my knees virtually disappear since August.

Gary Tingley www.rotorcranksusa.com

"Bill Anton" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:<uZNUb.16194$Q_4.5373@okepread03>...

Quoted message said:

Hmmm.... lesee... 2-3 minutes faster over 40k (25 miles). So if I average 17 MPH that's 0.4 to 0.6
MPH avg speed increase. Base model rotor crank retails for $620. That's $1033 to $1550 for a 1 MPH
increase in average speed. But a more competetive rider who averages 25 MPH will see 0.9 to 1.3
MPH avg speed increase. For a world-class racer who needs every advantage, it's probably worth it.
For the typical recumbent cyclist, however, that $620 would be better spent on aerodynamic
improvements like a fairing, tailbox, bodysock, or going to a larger front wheel/fork to reduce
frontal area (see mine at community.webshots.comwjantonOpen ↗). Or you could use the $620
to buy an EZ-1 for someone you love to ride with you, and still have enough left over for
accessories.
--
Bill Anton 2001 Vision R-40 26x26 SWB OSS Lubbock, TX, USA

"Gary Tingley" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

How Rotor Cranks work - and the benefits:

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

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

Rotor Cranks are not perpetual motion machines and do not claim to increase power by 40% (for
more information on this topic, ask Kraig Willet about the Redshoe Brand Shoes he has been
using). As we all know, there is no such thing as "free power" in cycling, especially a 40% gain
just by using a set of cranks. Rotors do however make a claim to lower lactate levels and heart
rates. They do not raise your power, but they offer you the opportunity to ride harder and at a
higher wattage output - before reaching your lactate threshold. For a TT'ist or Triathlete, this
is important. Your lactate threshold is probably your biggest limiter for trained athletes in
endurance cycling events.

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

------

Quoted message said:

Gary Tingley

[email hidden] rotorcranksusa.comrotorcranksusa.comOpen ↗ Rotor Cranks: 2-3 minute faster 40k
bike split

[email hidden] (Warren Berger) wrote in message

news:<[email hidden]>...

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Mike,

I posted this to the BROL list the other day.

Systems for reducing effort at the dead spot have been around since the late 1800's.

Elliptical sprockets are the simplest way to do this.

However, I believe that it is at least as important, if not more so, to reduce the gearing on
the upstroke!

This is not possible with elliptical chainrings since both legs must be in the same gear. The
only point where both legs benefit from the same gearing is at the dead spot. At any other
point in the stroke their optimum gearing would be at opposite extremes!

I have been doing a little looking into the history of Rotor Cranks. Again, similar systems
have been around since the late 1800's.

All require the cranks to be hooked together through a variable gearing system, allowing each
leg to be in its optimum gear at all points in the stroke. This has been done using sprockets,
gears, cams, or over-center links. Rotor Cranks tried/patented two more complicated systems
before settling on the over-center link setup. There are prior examples cited in their patent,
so there is an opening for Shimano to enter the market by making small changes to the design.

This could get very interesting!

Interestingly, the Brown PowerCam system worked just the opposite of the Rotor Crank, and
similar systems, in that it INCREASED the gearing on the upstroke/dead center part of the
stroke. This just demonstrates how adaptable the human body is, and why it is so difficult to
determine what is really better.

Elliptical chainrings have had similar conflicting designs....the traditional ellipticals
reduce the gearing at the dead spot, while Biopace chainrings increased gearing at the dead
spot.

Logic tells me that gearing should be lowest on the upstroke/dead spot.

Warren

Nice lookin' bike. Needs a RotorCrank.

Jude

"Bill Anton" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:uZNUb.16194$Q_4.5373@okepread03...

Quoted message said:

Hmmm.... lesee... 2-3 minutes faster over 40k (25 miles). So if I average 17 MPH that's 0.4 to 0.6
MPH avg speed increase. Base model rotor crank retails for $620. That's $1033 to $1550 for a 1 MPH
increase in average speed. But a more competetive rider who averages 25 MPH will see 0.9 to

1.3

Quoted message said:

MPH avg speed increase. For a world-class racer who needs every

advantage,

Quoted message said:

it's probably worth it. For the typical recumbent cyclist, however, that $620 would be better
spent on aerodynamic improvements like a fairing, tailbox, bodysock, or going to a larger front
wheel/fork to reduce frontal area (see mine at community.webshots.comwjantonOpen ↗). Or you

could

Quoted message said:

use the $620 to buy an EZ-1 for someone you love to ride with you, and

still

Quoted message said:

have enough left over for accessories.
--
Bill Anton 2001 Vision R-40 26x26 SWB OSS Lubbock, TX, USA

"Gary Tingley" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

How Rotor Cranks work - and the benefits:

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

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

Rotor Cranks are not perpetual motion machines and do not claim to increase power by 40% (for
more information on this topic, ask Kraig Willet about the Redshoe Brand Shoes he has been
using). As we all know, there is no such thing as "free power" in cycling, especially a 40% gain
just by using a set of cranks. Rotors do however make a claim to lower lactate levels and heart
rates. They do not raise your power, but they offer you the opportunity to ride harder and at a
higher wattage output - before reaching your lactate threshold. For a TT'ist or Triathlete, this
is important. Your lactate threshold is probably your biggest limiter for trained athletes in
endurance cycling events.

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

Quoted message said:

Gary Tingley

[email hidden] rotorcranksusa.comrotorcranksusa.comOpen ↗ Rotor Cranks: 2-3 minute faster 40k
bike split

[email hidden] (Warren Berger) wrote in message

news:<[email hidden]>...

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Mike,

I posted this to the BROL list the other day.

Systems for reducing effort at the dead spot have been around since the late 1800's.

Elliptical sprockets are the simplest way to do this.

However, I believe that it is at least as important, if not more so, to reduce the gearing on
the upstroke!

This is not possible with elliptical chainrings since both legs must be in the same gear. The
only point where both legs benefit from the same gearing is at the dead spot. At any other
point in the stroke their optimum gearing would be at opposite extremes!

I have been doing a little looking into the history of Rotor Cranks. Again, similar systems
have been around since the late 1800's.

All require the cranks to be hooked together through a variable gearing system, allowing each
leg to be in its optimum gear at all points in the stroke. This has been done using sprockets,
gears, cams, or over-center links. Rotor Cranks tried/patented two more complicated systems
before settling on the over-center link setup. There are prior examples cited in their patent,
so there is an opening for Shimano to enter the market by making small changes to the design.

This could get very interesting!

Interestingly, the Brown PowerCam system worked just the opposite of the Rotor Crank, and
similar systems, in that it INCREASED the gearing on the upstroke/dead center part of the
stroke. This just demonstrates how adaptable the human body is, and why it is so difficult to
determine what is really better.

Elliptical chainrings have had similar conflicting designs....the traditional ellipticals
reduce the gearing at the dead spot, while Biopace chainrings increased gearing at the dead
spot.

Logic tells me that gearing should be lowest on the upstroke/dead spot.

Warren

Gary, Everything that you do to increase performance adds up. If you willing to pay the price for
the increased performance of the RotorCrank...what of it, after all it's your money. It may not be
worth it from one persons point of view and well worth it from another. Howie almost had me talked
into a set of them in October. Gary you after all don't have an interest in promoting these
cranksets. Do you?...Seriously, most reports from users have been positive. Personally I'm in favor
of anything that will improve my recumbents performance and decrease wear and tear on my knees.
However, none of this stuff will make up for an overall lack of conditioning and fitness. That's
reality. Still its fun to trick out your steed with the latest and greatest.

Jude

"Gary Tingley" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Meaning to say that, as an average, if you can ride a 40k time trial in one hour, you will be able
to ride the same course in 57-58 minutes with Rotor Cranks.

This is a very big difference as Rotor Cranks will make you faster and more efficient than aero
front, with a disc and TT frame combined which can easily cost over $4000. Add a Rotor to your
recumbent, or TT machine and with a little adaptation and work you are guaranteed to go faster and
have a more efficient ride - even if you do not race.

Plus they have lowered my heart rate and made the PFS in my knees virtually disappear
since August.

Gary Tingley www.rotorcranksusa.com

"Bill Anton" <[email hidden]> wrote in message

news:<uZNUb.16194$Q_4.5373@okepread03>...

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Hmmm.... lesee... 2-3 minutes faster over 40k (25 miles). So if I

average

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

17 MPH that's 0.4 to 0.6 MPH avg speed increase. Base model rotor crank retails for $620. That's
$1033 to $1550 for a 1 MPH increase in average speed. But a more competetive rider who averages
25 MPH will see 0.9 to

1.3

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

MPH avg speed increase. For a world-class racer who needs every

advantage,

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

it's probably worth it. For the typical recumbent cyclist, however,

that

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

$620 would be better spent on aerodynamic improvements like a fairing, tailbox, bodysock, or
going to a larger front wheel/fork to reduce

frontal

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

area (see mine at community.webshots.comwjantonOpen ↗). Or you

could

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

use the $620 to buy an EZ-1 for someone you love to ride with you, and

still

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

have enough left over for accessories.
--
Bill Anton 2001 Vision R-40 26x26 SWB OSS Lubbock, TX, USA

"Gary Tingley" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

How Rotor Cranks work - and the benefits:

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

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

Rotor Cranks are not perpetual motion machines and do not claim to increase power by 40% (for
more information on this topic, ask Kraig Willet about the Redshoe Brand Shoes he has been
using). As we all know, there is no such thing as "free power" in cycling, especially a 40%
gain just by using a set of cranks. Rotors do however make a claim to lower lactate levels and
heart rates. They do not raise your power, but they offer you the opportunity to ride harder
and at a higher wattage output - before reaching your lactate threshold. For a TT'ist or
Triathlete, this is important. Your lactate threshold is probably your biggest limiter for
trained athletes in endurance cycling events.

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

Quoted message said:

------

Quoted message said:

Gary Tingley

[email hidden] rotorcranksusa.comrotorcranksusa.comOpen ↗ Rotor Cranks: 2-3 minute faster 40k bike
split

[email hidden] (Warren Berger) wrote in message

news:<[email hidden]>...

Quoted message said:

> Mike,
>
> I posted this to the BROL list the other day.
>
> Systems for reducing effort at the dead spot have been around since the late 1800's.
>
> Elliptical sprockets are the simplest way to do this.
>
> However, I believe that it is at least as important, if not more so, to reduce the gearing
> on the upstroke!
>
> This is not possible with elliptical chainrings since both legs must be in the same gear.
> The only point where both legs benefit from the same gearing is at the dead spot. At any
> other point in the stroke their optimum gearing would be at opposite extremes!
>
> I have been doing a little looking into the history of Rotor Cranks. Again, similar systems
> have been around since the late 1800's.
>
> All require the cranks to be hooked together through a variable gearing system, allowing
> each leg to be in its optimum gear at all points in the stroke. This has been done using
> sprockets, gears, cams, or over-center links. Rotor Cranks tried/patented two more
> complicated systems before settling on the over-center link setup. There are prior examples
> cited in their patent, so there is an opening for Shimano to enter the market by making
> small changes to the design.
>
> This could get very interesting!
>
> Interestingly, the Brown PowerCam system worked just the opposite of the Rotor Crank, and
> similar systems, in that it INCREASED the

gearing

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

> on the upstroke/dead center part of the stroke. This just

demonstrates

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

> how adaptable the human body is, and why it is so difficult to determine what is really
> better.
>
> Elliptical chainrings have had similar conflicting designs....the traditional ellipticals
> reduce the gearing at the dead spot, while Biopace chainrings increased gearing at the dead
> spot.
>
> Logic tells me that gearing should be lowest on the upstroke/dead spot.
>
> Warren

"However, none of this stuff will make up for an overall lack of conditioning and fitness."

Nothing will, you are right. Rotor Cranks were meant for riders looking to improve performance. They
are not magical and do not create power without the rider having to use more effort on the
downstroke. Its not free speed by any means. Your "gas tank" is depleted more quickly with Rotors,
but you go faster.

Gary Tingley [email hidden]

"Wheel Doctor" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:<[email hidden]>...

Quoted message said:

Gary, Everything that you do to increase performance adds up. If you willing to pay the price for
the increased performance of the RotorCrank...what of it, after all it's your money. It may not be
worth it from one persons point of view and well worth it from another. Howie almost had me talked
into a set of them in October. Gary you after all don't have an interest in promoting these
cranksets. Do you?...Seriously, most reports from users have been positive. Personally I'm in
favor of anything that will improve my recumbents performance and decrease wear and tear on my
knees. However, none of this stuff will make up for an overall lack of conditioning and fitness.
That's reality. Still its fun to trick out your steed with the latest and greatest.

Jude

"Gary Tingley" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Meaning to say that, as an average, if you can ride a 40k time trial in one hour, you will be
able to ride the same course in 57-58 minutes with Rotor Cranks.

This is a very big difference as Rotor Cranks will make you faster and more efficient than aero
front, with a disc and TT frame combined which can easily cost over $4000. Add a Rotor to your
recumbent, or TT machine and with a little adaptation and work you are guaranteed to go faster
and have a more efficient ride - even if you do not race.

Plus they have lowered my heart rate and made the PFS in my knees virtually disappear since
August.

Gary Tingley www.rotorcranksusa.com

"Bill Anton" <[email hidden]> wrote in message

news:<uZNUb.16194$Q_4.5373@okepread03>...

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Hmmm.... lesee... 2-3 minutes faster over 40k (25 miles). So if I

average

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

17 MPH that's 0.4 to 0.6 MPH avg speed increase. Base model rotor crank retails for $620.
That's $1033 to $1550 for a 1 MPH increase in average speed. But a more competetive rider who
averages 25 MPH will see 0.9 to

1.3

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

MPH avg speed increase. For a world-class racer who needs every

advantage,

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

it's probably worth it. For the typical recumbent cyclist, however,

that

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

$620 would be better spent on aerodynamic improvements like a fairing, tailbox, bodysock, or
going to a larger front wheel/fork to reduce

frontal

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

area (see mine at community.webshots.comwjantonOpen ↗). Or you

could

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

use the $620 to buy an EZ-1 for someone you love to ride with you, and

still

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

have enough left over for accessories.
--
Bill Anton 2001 Vision R-40 26x26 SWB OSS Lubbock, TX, USA

"Gary Tingley" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...
> How Rotor Cranks work - and the benefits:
>
> Rotor Cranks work by increasing the force required on the drive side crankarm which propels
> the non-drive crank are past the 12 o'clock point ... also known as the dead point. This
> happens 180 times a minute in a 90RPM ride. Over 10,000 times an hour. The cyclist is now
> "permanently pushing" the cranks as there is no gap between when the legs take over
> push/recover duties. This elimination of the dead point makes pedaling more efficient,
> reduces muscle requirements to complete the pedalling revolution, and reduces lactic acid in
> the bloodstream. The reduction of lactic acid allows the rider to produce more wattage at
> his/her lactate threshold. It "raises the roof" if you will, you can crank out more wattage
> before hitting LT. The extra wattage is converted to speed in the amount of 2-3 minutes per
> 40k.
>
>
> Rotor Cranks eliminate the dead point, allowing for "permanent push" to the pedals, making
> legs efficient at what they do best: pushing. This allows for lowered lactate levels and
> increased wattage at LT, which translates directly to the 2-3 minute per 40k speed increase.
> They are scientifically proven to reduce lactate levels, reduce cardiac effort, and improve
> the health of a cyclists knees by eliminating the dead point.
>
> Rotor Cranks are not perpetual motion machines and do not claim to increase power by 40%
> (for more information on this topic, ask Kraig Willet about the Redshoe Brand Shoes he has
> been using). As we all know, there is no such thing as "free power" in cycling, especially a
> 40% gain just by using a set of cranks. Rotors do however make a claim to lower lactate
> levels and heart rates. They do not raise your power, but they offer you the opportunity to
> ride harder and at a higher wattage output - before reaching your lactate threshold. For a
> TT'ist or Triathlete, this is important. Your lactate threshold is probably your biggest
> limiter for trained athletes in endurance cycling events.
>
>
>

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

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

------
> Gary Tingley
>
> [email hidden] rotorcranksusa.comrotorcranksusa.comOpen ↗ Rotor Cranks: 2-3 minute faster 40k
> bike split
>
>
>
>
> [email hidden] (Warren Berger) wrote in message

news:<[email hidden]>...

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

> > Mike,
> >
> > I posted this to the BROL list the other day.
> >
> > Systems for reducing effort at the dead spot have been around since the late 1800's.
> >
> > Elliptical sprockets are the simplest way to do this.
> >
> > However, I believe that it is at least as important, if not more so, to reduce the gearing
> > on the upstroke!
> >
> > This is not possible with elliptical chainrings since both legs must be in the same gear.
> > The only point where both legs benefit from the same gearing is at the dead spot. At any
> > other point in the stroke their optimum gearing would be at opposite extremes!
> >
> > I have been doing a little looking into the history of Rotor Cranks. Again, similar
> > systems have been around since the late 1800's.
> >
> > All require the cranks to be hooked together through a variable gearing system, allowing
> > each leg to be in its optimum gear at all points in the stroke. This has been done using
> > sprockets, gears, cams, or over-center links. Rotor Cranks tried/patented two more
> > complicated systems before settling on the over-center link setup. There are prior
> > examples cited in their patent, so there is an opening for Shimano to enter the market by
> > making small changes to the design.
> >
> > This could get very interesting!
> >
> > Interestingly, the Brown PowerCam system worked just the opposite of the Rotor Crank, and
> > similar systems, in that it INCREASED the

gearing

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

> > on the upstroke/dead center part of the stroke. This just

demonstrates

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

> > how adaptable the human body is, and why it is so difficult to determine what is really
> > better.
> >
> > Elliptical chainrings have had similar conflicting designs....the traditional ellipticals
> > reduce the gearing at the dead spot, while Biopace chainrings increased gearing at the
> > dead spot.
> >
> > Logic tells me that gearing should be lowest on the upstroke/dead spot.
> >
> > Warren

I'll tell you guys right now that it's too bad and you don't know what you are missing. I agree that
fairings are a bigger advantage as far as speed on the flats. But gee.......now you have to drag
that extra weight of the fairing up the hill. I've only had my rotors over a week and I'm 2.5 to 3
mph faster on all grades up to 9%. It is physically easier to pedal uphill. My heartrate has gone
down 5 to 7 beats per minute at any given wattage output. I find myself able to pedal even harder
now with no stress on my knees ........create higher wattage before I reach my heartrate max. Just
cruising on the flats seems easier and smoother. For me, the rotor crank even though it costed more
is a way better upgrade than my tailbox or aero wheelsets. Guess what.... I still have my wheels and
my tailbox. Now I can drag that box up the hill so much easier. I've gotten over 1.5 minutes faster
on a 13.9 mile time trial course I do. I can after only a week feel my legs gaining more strength
compared to training on my regular carbon cranks I had. I now plan on buying another rotor crank for
my new race bike. Going to sell my profile elite carbon crank. The carbon crank is a half pound
lighter than the rotor crank......but guess what? It doesn't make any difference. A half lb extra
but I'm way faster......easier to climb........can hammer for longer periods of time........ yeah
I'm giving up standard cranks period end of story. Carbon profile crank going on ebay today.

(ckaudio1) said:

It is physically easier to pedal uphill. My heartrate has gone down 5 to 7 beats per minute at any
given wattage output. I find myself able to pedal even harder now with no stress on my knees
........create higher wattage before I reach my heartrate max. Just cruising on the flats seems
easier and smoother. For me, the rotor crank even though it costed more is a way better upgrade
than my tailbox or aero wheelsets. Guess what.... I still have my wheels and my tailbox. Now I can
drag that box up the hill so much easier. I've gotten over 1.5 minutes faster on a 13.9 mile time
trial course I do. I can after only a week feel my legs gaining more strength compared to training
on my regular carbon cranks I had. I now plan on buying another rotor crank for my new race bike.
Going to sell my profile elite carbon crank. The carbon crank is a half pound lighter than the
rotor crank.....

You have wattage output readings? So precise, yet the weight difference between the rotor and carbon
cranks seems a bit off, compared to other reviews and reports - more like well over a pound. In any
event, if effort is down and everything is easier, why are your legs getting stronger, exactly?

Excuse my cynicism, sounds like a rigged promo to me.

Curtis L. Russell Odenton, MD (USA) Just someone on two wheels...

"Curtis L. Russell" skrev...

Quoted message said:

Excuse my cynicism, sounds like a rigged promo to me.

Well he forgot to say you can ride on water with them and turn the water into wine at the same time.
;o) Sounds good but the price doesn't.

/M.

"Mikael Seierup" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:<[email hidden]>...

Quoted message said:

"Curtis L. Russell" skrev...

Quoted message said:

Excuse my cynicism, sounds like a rigged promo to me.

Well he forgot to say you can ride on water with them and turn the water into wine at the same
time. ;o) Sounds good but the price doesn't.

/M.

Oh and the price of a vk-2 sounds good?

This testing was done on my Tacx I-magic virtual trainer. This is a report which I posted recently
on another board. A board which does have rotor crank users on it.

Also, on the weight issue which so many do not believe. My cranks that I have been using are profile
elite carbon 175 mm Strong light 54 t 42 t 30 t The bottom bracket is a BB-6500 118.5 width splined
shimano. The rotor crank comes with it own bottom bracket included in the weight specifications. You
guys that say the crank is a pound heavier arent weighing your bottom brackets which would be saying
bye bye. My previous profile crank + bb was 2.9 lbs total......... the rotor triple with 54t 42 t
30t is 3.4 lbs total with included bb. So NO it is not a POUND heavier.

Tonight I did my first max output test on the trainer with the rotor crank installed. Here are some
results to compare to my last weeks max output test with standard cranks.

Both tests were done with 54/12 gearing.

This test is on a virtual velodrome with a 10 kilo distance. Last weeks best time was 15 min 30 sec,
which was an overall personal best. I generally every 2 weeks or so am able to gain a second or two
from previous times. Todays run with the rotor crank yielded a 15min 17 sec time.

Standard Cranks 54/12 75mm arm length

min average max ---- --------- ------
24.4 mph 27.8 mph

25.5 watt 486 watt

26.7 rpm 89 rpm

106 bpm 175.8 bpm 186 bpm heartrate

27.6 KCal expended 15 min 30 sec for 10 kilometers

rotor crank 54/12 gearing 175mm arms set to medium postion.

min average max ----- ------------ --------

28.7 mph 26.8 mph

29.4 watt 457 watt

30.8 rpm 87 rpm

109 bpm 171.3 bpm 182 bpm

15 min 17 seconds

So it appears my heartrate was lower. watts very slightly lower, speed faster, time for course
much better.

"ckaudio1" skrev...

Quoted message said:

Oh and the price of a vk-2 sounds good?

The price I paid was very reasonable for a state of the art carbonbike. Buying directly from the
manufacturer helps there. 1400 euros for the carbonparts and maybe 1000 for the rest of the stuff I
bought at home.

I'm following the posts about Rotorcranks with interest though. And I guess I was thinking about the
Ti-versions price. The Cro-Mo double is not so bad. But there doesn't seem to be a dealer list on
the spanish homepage.

Regards Mikael