Would you recommend Q rings

[Wannabe]

IvanB

Went out for a few rides this past weekend. Now qualified to make more experienced comments.

Yes, HR is definately lower, using Q Rings. Speed is also up, by quite a margin. On my regular "Long" route (one I do at least once a weekend), my avg speed has gone up by almost 1.5km/h over the route. My avg HR was down by almost 10bpm. My max Hr also did not go near to what it normaly goes on that route. Was feeling a lot stronger during ride and at end of ride. Even my training partners commented on it.

Only negative I experienced is that I can not climb with these things. Cannot get my cadence up on a steep climb. Climbing out of the saddle also feels strange, as if I am now really pedalling in squares.

IvanB, my Rings are in the normal #3 setting. Do you suggest another setting to try and improve my climbing. This is my weak point, and one I want to improve on by using the Q Rings.

Wannabe2007-08-14 07:01:15

[Gumpole]

IvanB

Went out for a few rides this past weekend. Now qualified to make more experienced comments.

Yes' date=' HR is definately lower, using Q Rings. Speed is also up, by quite a margin. On my regular "Long" route (one I do at least once a weekend), my avg speed has gone up by almost 1.5km/h over the route. My avg HR was down by almost 10bpm. My max Hr also did not go near to what it normaly goes on that route. Was feeling a lot stronger during ride and at end of ride. Even my training partners commented on it.

Only negative I experienced is that I can not climb with these things. Cannot get my cadence up on a steep climb. Climbing out of the saddle also feels strange, as if I am now really pedalling in squares.

IvanB, my Rings are in the normal #3 setting. Do you suggest another setting to try and improve my climbing. This is my weak point, and one I want to improve on by using the Q Rings.

[/quote']

 

That is amazing (1.5km/h faster AND 10bpm lower) 

how long have you been cycling?

 

either you are lieing (which I don believe), or the rings do make REAL huge performance differences (which I dont believe), or you are a new cyclist who is improving very quickly - hence the question above.

[Marius]

don't want to be the skeptical one, but I've done 10Watts more on a ride with a lower AV Speed many a time, it all depends how much wind is blowing. I've also done more watts on Lower HR than usual, this is nothing new..I'm not saying they are not making you faster, but maybe you just had a good day?? <?:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" />

 

Think you need to do that ride a few more times and see if you continue getting good results.

[Gumpole]

well Marius, If it is a 'regular weekly ride' then I can understand a day when you are cycling extremely badly due to 10 or so factors, but I have never have rides where I am 1.5km/h faster than my normal 'fast time' for a route, especially with a low HR.

 

 

[Ivanb]

FYI: I have 40+ rider who results were:

Indoor with Tacx Exel

 

01/12/2006 no Q Rings: 20km time trial Time 29m58 HR avg 146.3, Power average 264w

 

11/02/2007 with Q Rings: 20km time trial 24min43 HR Avg 125.2, power Avg 450w

[Gumpole]

FYI: I have 40+ rider who results were:

Indoor with Tacx Exel

 

01/12/2006 no Q Rings: 20km time trial Time 29m58 HR avg 146.3' date=' Power average 264w

 

11/02/2007 with Q Rings: 20km time trial 24min43 HR Avg 125.2, power Avg 450w

[/quote']

 

Now we have passed from the ridiculous to the sublime! Thats a 70% improvement... this guy should be challenging the 1 hour record he will give it a klap!

[BikeMax]

 

FYI: I have 40+ rider who results were:

Indoor with Tacx Exel

 

01/12/2006 no Q Rings: 20km time trial Time 29m58 HR avg 146.3' date=' Power average 264w

 

11/02/2007 with Q Rings: 20km time trial 24min43 HR Avg 125.2, power Avg 450w

[/quote']

 

Ivan - you might want to revisit those figures;

 

A 70% increase in power over a 20km TT is not humanly possible (let alone in 2.5 months)

 

450w ave power over 20kms is a phenomenal output for any rider - certainly not likely in a 40+ vet (unless he added lots of weight over Christmas..) FYI - world champ 40+ vets at 20km TT are only putting out about 5w/kg so unless your man is a 90kg world class athlete...

 

Tacx does not measure power (only estimates)

 

You are getting close to the realms of wild marketing that Frank Day at Power Cranks uses - even he only promises a 40% increase in power for no extra work.

 

40-70% increase would see all your riders cleaning up at the Tour next year.

 

[bruce]

FYI: I have 40+ rider who results were:

Indoor with Tacx Exel

 

01/12/2006 no Q Rings: 20km time trial Time 29m58 HR avg 146.3' date=' Power average 264w

 

11/02/2007 with Q Rings: 20km time trial 24min43 HR Avg 125.2, power Avg 450w

[/quote']

 

Well, he clearly wasn't going hard enough on the second TT

[Ivanb]

FYI: I have 40+ rider who results were:

Indoor with Tacx Exel

 

01/12/2006 no Q Rings: 20km time trial Time 29m58 HR avg 146.3' date=' Power average 264w

 

11/02/2007 with Q Rings: 20km time trial 24min43 HR Avg 125.2, power Avg 450w

[/quote']

Ivan - you might want to revisit those figures;

A 70% increase in power over a 20km TT is not humanly possible (let alone in 2.5 months)

450w ave power over 20kms is a phenomenal output for any rider - certainly not likely in a 40+ vet (unless he added lots of weight over Christmas..) FYI - world champ 40+ vets at 20km TT are only putting out about 5w/kg so unless your man is a 90kg world class athlete...

Tacx does not measure power (only estimates)

You are getting close to the realms of wild marketing that Frank Day at Power Cranks uses - even he only promises a 40% increase in power for no extra work.

40-70% increase would see all your riders cleaning up at the Tour next year.

 

Yes I know that. Those are the figures put out by the software. I accept what you say.

Just interesting to see what guys are getting.

 

It also shows that not all 'measuring tools' are perfect, as you say some only estmate..

[BikeMax]

 

FYI: I have 40+ rider who results were:

Indoor with Tacx Exel

 

01/12/2006 no Q Rings: 20km time trial Time 29m58 HR avg 146.3' date=' Power average 264w

 

11/02/2007 with Q Rings: 20km time trial 24min43 HR Avg 125.2, power Avg 450w

[/quote']

 

Ivan - you might want to revisit those figures;

 

A 70% increase in power over a 20km TT is not humanly possible (let alone in 2.5 months)

 

450w ave power over 20kms is a phenomenal output for any rider - certainly not likely in a 40+ vet (unless he added lots of weight over Christmas..) FYI - world champ 40+ vets at 20km TT are only putting out about 5w/kg so unless your man is a 90kg world class athlete...

 

Tacx does not measure power (only estimates)

 

You are getting close to the realms of wild marketing that Frank Day at Power Cranks uses - even he only promises a 40% increase in power for no extra work.

 

40-70% increase would see all your riders cleaning up at the Tour next year.

 

Yes I know that. Those are the figures put out by the software. I accept what you say.

Just interesting to see what guys are getting.

 

It also shows that not all 'measuring tools' are perfect, as you say some only estmate..

 

Sure - but you have a duty to make sure that the numbers you post are valid and reasonable before using them to market your product.

 

Not all of the readers know that these numbers are absolute hogwash - and so some may be tempted to buy your product on the basis of those improvements.

 

They are misleading and you should correct them or remove them IMO.

 

[Willehond]

Is it just me or is this starting to sound like a Glomail ad?! Semething even better and more amazing than than Bio SLim Fat Attack

 

But wait, there's more...

[Marius]

Gummi, 1.5km/h AV is not much, depending on the wind my weekly training rides are anything between 30km/h to 34km/h, the wind plays a moerse roll in the Westen Cape, dunno if you guys even get wind. Temp also plays a roll on the HR, a big one.

[Wannabe]

Gummi, cycling for six years now.

Wind, could be a factor, as it was not blowing quite as much as it normaly does (went out a bit earlier in the pm, wind changes direction later in pm), but I must state it clearly, I did not pedal/work as hard as I normaly do. One section is a drag of about 5km. Went up very easily at lower hr, higher cadence and speed than I normaly do.

Must admit, training harder/better lately. Doing more intense training during week and LSD/Recovery rides over weekends when not racing.

I am not all that technicaly inclined and conversant, but as a CYCLIST, I know what is working for me, and I feel that the Q Rings does its bit!!!!!

[Ivanb]

FYI: I have 40+ rider who results were:

Indoor with Tacx Exel

 

01/12/2006 no Q Rings: 20km time trial Time 29m58 HR avg 146.3' date=' Power average 264w

 

11/02/2007 with Q Rings: 20km time trial 24min43 HR Avg 125.2, power Avg 450w

[/quote']

Ivan - you might want to revisit those figures;

A 70% increase in power over a 20km TT is not humanly possible (let alone in 2.5 months)

450w ave power over 20kms is a phenomenal output for any rider - certainly not likely in a 40+ vet (unless he added lots of weight over Christmas..) FYI - world champ 40+ vets at 20km TT are only putting out about 5w/kg so unless your man is a 90kg world class athlete...

Tacx does not measure power (only estimates)

You are getting close to the realms of wild marketing that Frank Day at Power Cranks uses - even he only promises a 40% increase in power for no extra work.

40-70% increase would see all your riders cleaning up at the Tour next year.

 

Yes I know that. Those are the figures put out by the software. I accept what you say.

Just interesting to see what guys are getting.

 

It also shows that not all 'measuring tools' are perfect, as you say some only estmate..

Sure - but you have a duty to make sure that the numbers you post are valid and reasonable before using them to market your product.

Not all of the readers know that these numbers are absolute hogwash - and so some may be tempted to buy your product on the basis of those improvements.

They are misleading and you should correct them or remove them IMO.

 

Bikemax Nothing is misleading that is the information is put out by the training units used. You should be telling them their units are hogwash in your opinion.

 

The fact is positive changes are shown when using q rings. Itis not here for marketing purposes but for interest.

 

Every one will have different readings, different times dependant on what they use to measure, whether it is in your facility on the road or in their bedroom. What is important is that when they measure with the same tools  or units the results are consistent.

 

So I'm not interest in product bashing whether its q rings or now tacx devises in your opinion, but rather an interesting discussion

[Gumpole]

Jaa I know Marius, but wind or temp never make someone faster (assuming a circular course).

 

For example I often ride at kyalami, always 10 or 12 laps. My times vary according to wind, temp and mainly my fitness... but I would never suddenly improve my speed by 1.5km/h - especially with a lower HR...

 

[BikeMax]

 

FYI: I have 40+ rider who results were:

Indoor with Tacx Exel

 

01/12/2006 no Q Rings: 20km time trial Time 29m58 HR avg 146.3' date=' Power average 264w

 

11/02/2007 with Q Rings: 20km time trial 24min43 HR Avg 125.2, power Avg 450w

[/quote']

 

Ivan - you might want to revisit those figures;

 

A 70% increase in power over a 20km TT is not humanly possible (let alone in 2.5 months)

 

450w ave power over 20kms is a phenomenal output for any rider - certainly not likely in a 40+ vet (unless he added lots of weight over Christmas..) FYI - world champ 40+ vets at 20km TT are only putting out about 5w/kg so unless your man is a 90kg world class athlete...

 

Tacx does not measure power (only estimates)

 

You are getting close to the realms of wild marketing that Frank Day at Power Cranks uses - even he only promises a 40% increase in power for no extra work.

 

40-70% increase would see all your riders cleaning up at the Tour next year.

 

Yes I know that. Those are the figures put out by the software. I accept what you say.

Just interesting to see what guys are getting.

 

It also shows that not all 'measuring tools' are perfect, as you say some only estmate..

 

Sure - but you have a duty to make sure that the numbers you post are valid and reasonable before using them to market your product.

 

Not all of the readers know that these numbers are absolute hogwash - and so some may be tempted to buy your product on the basis of those improvements.

 

They are misleading and you should correct them or remove them IMO.

 

Bikemax Nothing is misleading that is the information is put out by the training units used. You should be telling them their units are hogwash in your opinion.

 

The fact is positive changes are shown when using q rings. Itis not here for marketing purposes but for interest.

 

Every one will have different readings, different times dependant on what they use to measure, whether it is in your facility on the road or in their bedroom. What is important is that when they measure with the same tools  or units the results are consistent.

 

So I'm not interest in product bashing whether its q rings or now tacx devises in your opinion, but rather an interesting discussion

 

Ivan - lets get this 100% straight.

 

I am not interested in product bashing - what does upset me is when guys like you post unreliable and patently incorrect data in support of your product.

 

You acknowledged in your previous response that this data is likely to be wrong, and now you try and hide behind the fact that the accuracy of the data is not your responsibility... you can't have it both ways.

 

The fact remains that you posted that data, and you did so in support of the claims that you make for your product.

 

So I ask you - are you willing or able to confirm the accuracy of this data, and do you stand behind it as proof that Q rings have elicited a 70% improvement in this rider ? (if not then you have a duty to remove it as the rubbish it so patently is)

 

This thread has become a joke - which is a shame, as it was a reasonable discussion of the merits of a product.