Looking to finally go single ring on my Intense this spring. I'm thinking of trying a 34T oval narrow/wide. The only one I know of is from Rotor. Anybody tried it? Anybody know of any other options?
Printable View
Looking to finally go single ring on my Intense this spring. I'm thinking of trying a 34T oval narrow/wide. The only one I know of is from Rotor. Anybody tried it? Anybody know of any other options?
I just picked up a chinese knockoff from ebay. I haven't tried it yet. $.99 plus $12 for shipping. Figured it was worth a shot.
I've been looking at this. Direct mount for X9 GXP crankset.
http://www.amazon.com/B-Labs-Bionico...nring+oval+28t
I have ridden the Rotor briefly and I liked it quite well. Can't compare with the other options, but that one worked nicely, at least for my pedaling stroke. I used it in the middle of the three positions, never tried rotating it.
I have a knee that's driving me to considering shorter crank arms and I might grab one of those instead--or first, at least. They talk it up for high cadence, and it felt fine there, but for me the big plus was very low cadence/high torque, because it noticeably reduced the peak torque required to turn the pedal over at the top of the stroke. Obviously that gets made up 90 degrees later, but I found that part barely noticeable.
Yeah currently I have a Rotor CX1 44T ring on my SSCX and a B-Labs 36T Oval N/W on my 1x11 29er race hardtail.Quote:
Originally Posted by epic
I'm a big fan of both. I tend to notice the effects of the ring mostly when I run them on singlespeeds but that is to be expected I guess.
In my experience Rotor rings tend to wear faster than I would like, but the B-Labs gives me hope that it will last longer. I don't have many miles on it yet, but it at least appears that there is a lot more material in the ring.
The US Distributor for B-Labs is based in the Reno area. I have his email and if you have any questions he is super responsive and ships things quick. PM me if you'd like it.
I had a Biopace ring in the late 1980's. It was the shit, or just shit, cant really remember.
Somebody rotated their Biopace rings a couple holes and invented something completely new! Sheldon Brown was a Biopace believer, maybe there's something to it.Quote:
Originally Posted by xyz
check out Absolute Black rings. Much cheaper than rotor. I haven't used them but generally positive reviews if you're into the oval thing. Lots of interwebs reviews and long mtbr threads on them like this one http://forums.mtbr.com/singlespeed/o...ed-932469.html
Pretty much.Quote:
Originally Posted by bagtagley
FWIW, when I got my first Rotor oval ring a few years ago, I mounted it backwards. And indeed, it had the opposite effect, and it was terrible. Definitely made things much harder. So then when I swapped back to the correct way, bam....nice.
Local guy I know just put the Absolute black ring on his bike. Seems to like it so far. According to their site biopace had the oval shape oriented the wrong way which made it harder to pedal. The AB ring has the narrow part delivering power when you are at the weakest (top) part of the pedal stroke and the widest part delivering power during the most powerful part of the pedal stroke. See "word on Biopace" http://absoluteblack.cc/oval-104bcd-chainring.html. Seems to make sense. I might try one of these next time I need a ring. Not much more than the last ring I bought.Quote:
Originally Posted by bagtagley
I wonder how one of these would work with a shorter crank (165mm or 170mm) for all around trail riding, vs. your standard 175mm?
I thought a bit more about this while riding yesterday. I've ridden clipless exclusively (including racing DH) for about 20 years, and have a pretty well refined circular pedal stroke, meaning that I pull back and push forward when the crank is vertical and don't mash in the mid-stroke. I'm also a very good technical climber and have ridden long travel FSR bikes for years, both things that benefit from a consistant stroke. I'm guessing that I would benefit less from these oval rings, but they are used by road riders who have a refined stroke and ride clipless, sooo....?
http://www.roadbikerider.com/cycling...-pedal-strokes
Quote:
Another way to get feedback is to ride a mountain bike up a steep hill with a loose, gravely surface. If you pedal jerkily, pushing down hard, you'll lose rear-wheel traction. The tire will spin abruptly on the loose gravel, causing you to lose momentum and put a foot down. But if you concentrate on pedaling evenly through the whole 360-degree circle, the rear wheel won't lose traction.
Interestingly, said Broker, among all the riders tested over the years at the U.S. Olympic Training Center in Colorado Springs, mountain bikers had the smoothest pedal stroke, even smoother than pursuit specialists on the track. Off-road legend John Tomac was the smoothest of all.
Interesting perspective. I'm going in the opposite direction. I just switched to flats about a month ago because of a year long knee problem. The knee is responding well to the change, but my shins are suffering dearly!
Since I'm still in the tentative stage of the transition, I'm a bit concerned that the oval will fuck things up enough to set me back from the little progress I've made.
With Shimano's new XT 11 speed drivetrain parts coming out soon though, I'm getting ready to drop a few hundo on my drivetrain, so this would be a logical time to go Oval.
Getting the wolftooth 32t oval mounted right now. will give feedback after a few rides!
It's easy to feel yourself pushing fore and aft on the pedals when the crank crosses vertical, but if you quantify that and compare it with the force applied mid-stroke you'll notice that even a comparatively circular pedal stroke goes almost to zero torque at top dead center. It's not at all like turning a crank using your arm/hand. Even with a "circular" stroke you'll still notice and probably benefit.Quote:
Originally Posted by Damian Sanders
Trying to avoid full geek mode...the torque vs crank angle is commonly accepted to approach a sine wave whose average is half its peak as a rider gets more efficient. If that's accurate (the research goes back to the 1890's, but one study from Japan seems to have the best evidence for correlating efficiency with sinusoidal torque) then even the optimal pedal stroke for an experienced rider falls very close to zero across top dead center. Mountain bikers have a lot more incentive to even out our torque, whether from traction or suspension bob, but we're not going to change it by all that much.
Care to share that link?Quote:
Originally Posted by alewi11
No, I actually have a pretty well refined circular stroke where I'm producing good power with the cranks vertical, while not mashing in the lower part of the downstroke. I pedal seated 90%+ of the time. While it may not be the most efficient or powerful stroke, it works well for technical riding.Quote:
Originally Posted by jono
I was assuming seated pedaling and heavy use of ankles/calves. Having just been through a fair amount of research on this topic, I haven't run into any examples that support what you're suggesting but I'd love to hear it if that's possible so, serious question: have you measured your torque throughout the stroke, or how are you reaching the conclusion that it's even throughout?Quote:
Originally Posted by Damian Sanders
A while back I was hoping to measure torque vs. crank angle myself but discovered that (virtually?) all the power meters out there assume roughly constant speed and have a very low sampling rate relative to cadence so I eventually bagged that in favor of finding existing data. But if there's something I missed I'd be interested.
Most studies are done with pro road bikers riding at high output, who are all basicly pedal mashers, they make very little power when the cranks are vertical.Quote:
Originally Posted by jono
Circular pedaling is very easy to prove, simply pedal with only one foot.
Unfortunately, for that purpose, momentum ensures that you can ride with one leg regardless.
I completely agree that mountain and road differ, but the magnitude is the issue. Assume that Tomac is 3 times as smooth as a roadie and that you're 3 times smoother than that, you'd still vary by about 30% whereas oval rings only correct another ~10-15%. So you'll be better than now with the ability to get more efficient, even if you're in the top 0.1% on smoothness.
Which muscles are you firing at TDC?
They are all the rage today. All the rage.
Is it Elliptical or Oval?
Except I see a lot of mtbr pros racing and winning without them.
Do they work with an E-13 chain retention system?
Any good Enduro races or XC races being won by people that stoup to oval levels?
Will my ankles adjust to working at different points?
Is there any post-purchase dissonance?
Will I enjoy the placebo effect?
Who isn't drinking the koolaid?
I just bought a 34 tooth for me yet to be here bike from wolf tooth. The OP has an oval ring I think he just needs to update what his thoughts on it,
Been riding an absolute black oval on a 1x11 set up and I love it. I definitely was not a proficient climber with an even pedal stroke but this has seemed to correct what I was doing wrong and works great. Not missing anything on the 3x9 set up I got rid of
Bumping this up. Building up a new frame and buying a whole drivetrain, 1x11. Anyone have more feedback on the ovals?
I had the biopace back in the day, haven't missed it.
I have an Absolute Black, and love it much more than the round ring's I rode for 25 years prior.
Absolute black was giving a 30 day trial, just a few days ago probably still going on. If you don't like it they will swap it for a round ring...you won't go back.
iMHO, they are so good that every OEM 1x mountain drive train should come stock with them in a season (or two?).
I will never go back to round unless they wear out the clutch or some other detriment comes to light.
They even out the torque when you are grinding out a climb. I'm a good climber and have a round stroke. Unlike most I cannot feel the difference when getting on my mountain bike after riding my commuter or roadie with round rings, but there is no doubt at all I can maintain far better traction during technical grunt climbs than with a round ring. I have my doubts about any other claimed benefits (I've heard lower fatigue and faster acceleration and I really think those are bullshit).
looking for an ovel for my M950 cranks in 32 ish for single speed use.
do any companies make one for this 5 bolt pattern yet?
I have one, and I think the biggest benefit for me is easier peddling standing when it's steep.
Any chainline concerns putting one on a race face cinch crank? Bolt and ride?
I really doubt it as just not a big enough market to justify the cost of production.Quote:
Originally Posted by mntlion
I had inquired to wolftooth about an oval for a set of M985 and that was their response, so an even older model with such an obscure bolt circle diameter as your M950's would be even less likely I'm guessing.
Yes. Bolt and ride. Even better than that stock chainline. Stock RF are 51mm. AB rings are ~50mm. WT are 49mm. If the ellipse of the WT were similar to the AB I'd have gone with the WT for the 49mm line myself, but the AB's have a slightly more aggressive ellipse.Quote:
Originally Posted by ticketchecker
I think the chainline (again, this is jsut my opinion) should favour the bigger cogs and not just tried to be centered on the cogset.
Also, no offense to RF, they make great products, but the taller squared tooth profiles made by the likes of AB, WT and Blackspire are more durable (longer lasting before you start dropping chains) than the pinner tooth profiles on the RF rings.
Oh, and anyone getting one of these, DO NOT get the next bigger ring size unless you want to turn a harder gear.
If you are running a 30 and like it, get a 30 oval. My first experience with ovals was after reading a lot of conjecture that you could turn a harder gear. You sort of can...once you get one you'll see what I mean: your cadence can almost be stalled to a stop and you can still push through. Anyway, I was used to, and really liked a 30 for around the north shore. I even rode a 28 for a while. My first oval was a 32 and it was doable, but just too much when out for longer (3 to 4 hour) rides. And that's with an 11-42. We have some really steep climbs around here.
I've been running a OneUp traction ring for about a month on my AM bike, and I have a round ring on my hardtail. On the trails, I really don't notice much of a difference. I spin out in the same places, and I get just as tired. So, as OneUp has said themselves, there is no reason to throw away a perfectly good round ring, but there is no downside going oval when it's time for a replacement.
Exactly. And you might as well go oval if ditching the front derailleur while going 1x10 or 1x11. I have an oval ring on my mountain bike and the added smoothness in my pedal stroke helps most with climbing traction on loose surfaces. I ride flats. A 32t oval ring feels like the effort level required for a 30t ring, or fairly similar at least.Quote:
Originally Posted by D(C)
I recently put a oneup traction ring on my hardtail. After just a few rides I'm calling it legit. I've torqued up and over super tech climb moves with surprising ease compared to using a round ring. Noticeable benefit to me.
I also smashed out a few strava climbing PR's too. Pretty sure the oval ring was responsible for it as it was my first ride of the season, on a heavy steel hardtail.
I'm sold on it and just put a traction ring on my FS rig.
I run an Absolute Black direct mount on my SRAM XX1 cranks. I run a 28t, 30t or 32t depending on where I'm riding and the time of year.
I bought a 30t and used it on and off last fall, I really like the smooth pedal stroke it gave me.
Anyone know a good all in one source for chainlink offset numbers between the different ring options? I'm with Sizzler on this, and have especially struggled with the Shimanon 11sp on my wife bike, especially in terms of it falling off the two largest cogs when back pedaling and being generally noisy on climbs. Right now using a NSB round ring because it had the largest offset among the ones I saw when looking around. Seems to have smoothed things out a little bit compared with the MRP one on there previously.
I remember biopace it sucked balls on the road, off-road it just felt wrong but no real effect. I removed them after a few months.
with rear suspension now, I'm not sure it is even useful or helpful, unless you are not pedaling correctly?
The new oval rings are the opposite of biopace.