Absolute Black Premium Oval Chainrings

[DocS]

Good morning my Cruzbike Brethren and Sistren!

I've been wondering about changing out my round chanrings for oval for a bit and was wondering about user's opinion... Is there really much difference? Enough to warrant changing them out?

Does anyone have experience with Absolute Black Premium Oval Chainrings? If so, please share...

These are the ones I was thinking about getting for my 2x10 Vendetta...
https://absoluteblack.cc/oval-road-110-5-bcd-shifting-chainring/

Blessings,
DocS (Rudy)

 

[Lief]

There is a difference - but it is marginal.
You *might* see some of those benefits with these rings but they don’t offer you the different mounting hole options that you will likely require because the “bottom” of your stroke is different than the “bottom”’of an upright bike.

even a tall or a short person on any given bent will have a different “bottom”’of their stroke.

If it’s right - the positioning of the bottom of your stroke / compared to the sweet spot of the oval then yes - you will probably see a bit of a difference - arguably marginal, maybe even noticeable. (I defer to the folks who have data)
If it’s wrong - you will feel like you are peddling on square rings and you will definitely hate it.

The chances it will be wrong are high with these rings IMO because they don’t have the different mounting options and they were likely designed for uprights. (If they were “designed” at all).

 

[trplay]

They never worked for me. I've used them for years, not days, not months, but years. The propaganda is total BS, but of course you will find other opinions that claim ovals/bios/asymmetric/rotors took them to the Pro stratosphere. Who knows? Maybe they'll be magic for you. I have tested on the road, off the road, on the trainer. I have them right now on my Neo. I can, and I have taken them off and compared power with a wide variety of rings and crank lengths. I have years of stats showing my power on the trainer. The trainer is the perfect place to test as everything is the same during the test. Rings make no difference for me. I have put them on wrong, right, and in between. It really makes no difference. If your rings are worn out and you can find some at a price equal to regular rings go ahead, worst case it will not hurt you. If not spend that extra money, you will never be happy until you do.

 

[DocS]

Lief and Trplay, I appreciate your thoughts/opinions...

I know a local Vendetta rider with Q Rings and she swears they may have a placebo effect for some riders, but she doesn't thing they really do anything. She's been riding with them for about a year and is changing back to round ringsets...

At this time, I think I'll save the money for other options I want to explore. I'm getting around pretty good on round rings

Blessings Ya'll (from Texas)!

DocS (Rudy)

 

[Lief]

Is it a cognitive bias to both agree with @trplay(and your local rider) and still think 'there is a difference'? Maybe. I really like to 'check-in' with myself when I hear things like that coming from such respectable folks and experience.

My reasoning is: if it is different then by definition it must make a difference. And I agree with TRPLAY and with your local rider; it is possible perhaps even likely that the *physical* difference is minor enough to be unnoticeable for most riding.

I DEFINITELY noticed issues on the QRings I ride when I had them mis-configured; at a cadence of 95-105-110 it got worse and worse and harder and harder to pedal 'naturally'.

I *believe* (a faith-based word) that the ultra-distances >200mi will have the opportunity to see the most gain; if it adds the ability to add just a few more watts from a slightly longer pedal stroke (and more muscles) for 12-24-36+ hours then...well I believe it does that. I'm not capable of measuring it tho. My racebikes have q-rings, my commuters do not.

AND I don't ever knock placebo effects (I don't think your local rider is either). Just like I ride faster/harder/longer with the right music vs no music, in a race vs not in a race. At the margins...everything counts.
Most of us aren't at the margins most of the time.

Thanks for the question!

 

[trplay]

Here is another viewpoint but to a slightly different question. Using our current Cruzbike time trial as an example you can see week to week riders making huge gains in their performance and to some extent decreases. So in these cases if one of these riders were to use the latest gadget how do they differentiate between if the performance result is due to the gadget or their natural increase/ decrease in abilities? I would think it is impossible.

 

[DocS]

Again, thank you

I'm not a racer, just a rider
I have been interested in gaining a bit of speed on my average rides though and now average around 21 mph on solo rides. I tend to ride slower in groups (unless challenged by someone who think recumbents are slow).

I just noticed that a lot of Cruzbikers seem to use these rings and was trying to decide if it's something I should try...

I agree about Placebo effect. If I believe I can go faster, I usually can...
like you, I ride with music (Bone Conduction Bluetooth Ear phones) and can tell the difference when I'm listening to music with a nice fast cadence...

Blessings,
DocS

 

[RojoRacing]

Here is another viewpoint but to a slightly different question. Using our current Cruzbike time trial as an example you can see week to week riders making huge gains in their performance and to some extent decreases. So in these cases if one of these riders were to use the latest gadget how do they differentiate between if the performance result is due to the gadget or their natural increase/ decrease in abilities? I would think it is impossible.

That could be possible with someone like myself who at this point is only making 1% gains if at all. If something helped 2-3% straight away you'd definitely see it and if it didn't help at least that much was it really worth it in the first place? I can't recommend using absolute black oval because of how critical the oval timing can be for some bikes but I will say I do use QXL rings on my V20. Initially I tried them to help smooth the pulses of torque in my pedal stroke when grinding up those +15% grades, I believe it helped if only maybe 10%. Overall the gains from oval are tiny if at all to your power but noticeable in a drop in front shifting reliability. You will drop your chain more often on oval than you will on round.

 

[Beano]

For me they smooth out the pedal stroke, cannot vouch for an increase of power but have noticed that going to round rings it is more of a mashing style than a smoother pedal stroke through the dead spot which is what they are designed for.

You'd want to buy the Q rings though rather than the chainrings in your OP. That chainring is designed for a DF bike where the chain line is horizontal, with Q rings they have holes all around the where the spider would attached which allows for better set up.

Like what is in the link as an example.
https://www.bikeinn.com/bike/rotor-...I_SMzPw6FW68nuyHXjRoCqlAQAvD_BwE&gclsrc=aw.ds

 

[bladderhead]

Oval rings may or may not be a good idea. There is no consensus on the benefits of oval rings but at least they should be adjustable. Everybody agrees about that. Everybody wants them at a different angle, even DF riders. If you use them at the wrong angle you could even hurt your knees. Get an adjustable one.

 

[castlerobber]

I use older Rotor Q-rings on my S30, and my Quest came equipped with a slightly elliptical Cruzbike e-ring (a brief experiment, apparently, long since discontinued). I can't say they make me faster, but my knees like them. I had previously used Q-rings in the middle and outer positions of a triple crankset on my tadpole trike and was happy with them. I even had one in the middle position on my road bike triple (with no outer ring, basically a compact double before that was a thing).

No experience with the Absolute Black.

 

[Andrew Wilson]

I have the Rotor Q ring for the big ring and a round for the small. I have not noticed any power or speed increase but it is smoother. I have shifted to the small round and shifted the rear to maintain speed and rpm, felt 'lumpy' then I wound shift to the Rotor ring and shifted the rear to maintain the same speed and rpm and it's noticeably smoother. BUT....just the other day I rode for several miles on the small round ring and I smoothed back out so I only notice the difference when going back and forth.

 

[DavidCH]

My 10 cents... ovals are better with bigger cranks 165 plus. I have 155 cranks now and I prefer circular chainrings because my cadence is higher. So it depends on how you ride.

 

[DocS]

Thank all of you for your input! I think I'm gonna stick with round for now...

Blessings,
DocS

 

[trplay]

Good decision. https://journals.humankinetics.com/view/journals/jab/33/6/article-p410.xml

 

[Osiris]

Good morning my Cruzbike Brethren and Sistren!

I've been wondering about changing out my round chanrings for oval for a bit and was wondering about user's opinion... Is there really much difference? Enough to warrant changing them out?

Does anyone have experience with Absolute Black Premium Oval Chainrings? If so, please share...

These are the ones I was thinking about getting for my 2x10 Vendetta...
https://absoluteblack.cc/oval-road-110-5-bcd-shifting-chainring/

Blessings,
DocS (Rudy)

I've used oval chain rings for years, but I've never seen any advantage to them. There was no advantage in pedaling efficiency that could be measured in speed, power production, or lower fatigue. I finally gave up on them and went back to conventional round chain rings. Some people swear by oval rings, but it's very easy to convince yourself of something, especially when you've spent a considerable sum of money and you're hoping that it hasn't been wasted.

 

[Dave Arnold]

Good decision. https://journals.humankinetics.com/view/journals/jab/33/6/article-p410.xml

In the above referenced study, N=10 is a very small sample size for a RCT.

 

[billyk]

Agree with everybody! Mostly with @Lief 's two comments: It depends on the rider and style. Having ridden with a single Q-ring on my Q45, and before that with the same ring on my Q559, I also agree with @Beano that they tend to smooth the power stroke; for me, especially on hard uphills with low cadence. Just feels good to my legs. I have no data on speed or power, and I'm no racer for sure, but it works for me so I keep using it.

Somewhere on these forums is a post by John Tolhurst explaining how to find the "bottom" of the stroke to set where the long axis should be. Must be like 2012, way back.

 

[TransAm]

My 10 cents... ovals are better with bigger cranks 165 plus. I have 155 cranks now and I prefer circular chainrings because my cadence is higher. So it depends on how you ride.

Yes, this makes sense if one of the reasons for shorter cranks on a 'bent is to reduce pedal forces going over top/bottom. But if the issue is reducing peak pedal force, then oval rings would need to be oriented 90 deg out of phase with the typical orientation.

The one thing that would matter especially on a rear wheel drive 'bent is peak-to-peak chain tension. If oval rings reduced chain stretch, that would reduce mechanical losses. I wonder if anyone has measured this?

 

[ed72]

I wonder if anyone has measured this?

The interesting experiment is power meter on crank or pedals and a Powertap hub to compare rear drive bent against V20. I would not be surprised to see 5 watts advantage for 250 watt rider. I have never seen such data. WRT to reducing mechanical losses due to less chain stretch......doubtful. It is also very difficult to measure 1-3% power improvement. Power meter variance is within that range.