Rotor Q-ring advice

[Winded Lowrider]

Cruzbike Wizards:

Now that I've solved my SRAM Yaw derailleur mystery issues. I'm considering installing Q rings on my V20 prior to the Mt Baker hill climb event in September. I've found some 110 bcd Q rings at a decent price.

My question:

How wise is it to run 52/34 rings? I currently have 50/34 round rings. I feel I need the 34 low for climbing steep hills. I spin out the 50 fairly easily, so a 52 also seems needed.

Hit me with your opinions!

Thanks!

 

[castlerobber]

Here's an exhausting...er, exhaustive thread on the subject of Q-rings to get you started.

Briefly--yes, they'll work, even with a SRAM Yaw FD. Orienting them is different than on a DF. One recommendation is to pair a 52T regular Q-ring with a 36T QXL (the more ovalized version). The smaller Q-rings are barely distinguishable from round rings.

I have 50/34 Q-rings on my S30. One of these days, I'd consider upgrading from the 34T to a 36T QXL.

 

[RojoRacing]

You WILL lose some reliabliity with your front derailler when going to oval rings in the case of dropping your chain more often which could mean as little as once per 100 shifts but the lose will be there. It's also greater with QXL over standard Qrings

 

[Winded Lowrider]

I was Definitely going with standard Q rings, not QXL But now, Castlerobber, you've got me thinking about mixing ....
Rojo: I figured shifting might suffer. Good to know what to expect.

More specifically: will the range 52/34 give me extra troubles?

Thanks for the advice!

 

[RojoRacing]

I was Definitely going with standard Q rings, not QXL But now, Castlerobber, you've got me thinking about mixing ....
Rojo: I figured shifting might suffer. Good to know what to expect.

More specifically: will the range 52/34 give me extra troubles?

Thanks for the advice!

Not enough to be a deal breaker but the standard oval % is 10 but due to the 34t being so small I think it's only 8% oval to avoid interference with the bolts.

 

[ccf]

A 10-42 MTB cassette should make the 50/34 work fine.

 

[Winded Lowrider]

wow 10-42 cassette...that's worth exploring. Today I had to stop climbing a hill that was 8-10 percent. My 34/34 was not low enough. 34/36 might help keep the poor smoother when it gets steep.....

 

[rx7mark]

wow 10-42 cassette...that's worth exploring. Today I had to stop climbing a hill that was 8-10 percent. My 34/34 was not low enough. 34/36 might help keep the poor smoother when it gets steep.....

I went to a 42/49 low gear to be able to make a 16% 1/2 mile hill without dismounting just to give you a reference point.

Very happy with this low gear now on my commuter T50 with 1.85 X 26inch tires.

Mark

 

[Bruce B]

My V-20 has Sram E-Tap and 110 BCD chainrings.

For the big ring I have a 52 QX-1 with 12.5% ovality, which lies between the Q and the QXL.

The small ring is a 36 QXL.

The cassette is a 12-28 with a 11-32 in reserve for the hills.

 

[ed72]

I ran 53/39 QXL on my DF bikes with SRAM 11 speed BUT found Shimano front derailleur dumped the chain less often. 52/34 QXL is a huge spread and personally would not do it.

50x11 vs 52 x11 at 90 rpm works out to 32 mph vs 33 mph.

I must be a lightweight.

I only hit those speeds when time trialing and only on slightly downhill slopes. Spin at 100 or 110 and the speeds are closer to 40 mph. Velo territory

So, you asked for an opinion. You don't need the 52.

 

[Osiris]

I've had Q-rings on one DF and two recumbents. Other than making shifting more troublesome, they didn't do a thing. No reduction in knee pain. No improvement in climbing. No increase in power. No increase in endurance. Like a lot of Q-ring owners I really wanted to believe all the hype, but I've been forced to conclude that they're just an expensive gimmick.

 

[ed72]

Froome and Wiggins are good enough for me.

I put about 45,000 miles on QXL rings over three years. At sub-threshold power level, I tried to quantify using power at the hub, heart rate, RPE and blood lactate. I think there is a small (2-4%) advantage and more comfort, but I was a masher. Those more refined may not notice nothing.

 

[Osiris]

Froome and Wiggins are good enough for me.

I put about 45,000 miles on QXL rings over three years. At sub-threshold power level, I tried to quantify using power at the hub, heart rate, RPE and blood lactate. I think there is a small (2-4%) advantage and more comfort, but I was a masher. Those more refined may not notice nothing.

https://www.cyclingweekly.com/news/product-news/osymetric-chainrings-do-they-work-28044

 

[ed72]

https://www.cyclingweekly.com/news/product-news/osymetric-chainrings-do-they-work-28044

I am aware of the article as well as the challenge of measuring small gains. Like I said, I think there is a small gain subthreshold especially for a masher like me. I could go into why but it wouldn't help. Lots of riders swear by them.

 

[Osiris]

I am aware of the article as well as the challenge of measuring small gains. Like I said, I think there is a small gain subthreshold especially for a masher like me. I could go into why but it wouldn't help. Lots of riders swear by them.

I'm sure they do. Just as lots of people swear by magnetic bracelets and healing crystals.

 

[Gary123]

I put about 45,000 miles on QXL rings over three years.

Thats alot of miles. Pretty good test.

 

[ed72]

I'm sure they do. Just as lots of people swear by magnetic bracelets and healing crystals.

Good enough for Larry Oz during the 100 mile record and Aurélien Bonneteau during the hour record, good enough for old me. Who am I to argue to their superior speed. I doubt either gentlemen would put something on the bike willy nilly.

Like I said, there have been studies showing slight advantages and I think I was able to measure very small gains. I probably spent a hundred bucks on reagents and 6-10 hours of effort. To bring it to a point, at tempo it was several beats less per minute for the same power and I also measured less lactate at the same power at tempo pace. A mere couple percent but I am a masher. Someone with a different pedal stroke might see nothing but then again some top Pros have used them, probably in violation of their contracts. Thus, I am not so quick to dismiss them.

 

[jond]

If it feels good for you then that’s all that matters.

What happens between the ears is fundamental to any cycling performance peak or otherwise.

Just ride with a smile and if oval rings are merely bling with efficacy issues then so be it.

It’s tough to remove confirmation bias. I remember Larry with his exhaustive testing found round rings to be his personal standout yet Larry continues with oval rings.

Talk about an oval ring in a round hole.

 

[Don1]

i use qxl 52/36 with 105 fd and i was suprised by how good it shifted compared with the osimetrics/ultegra i have on the df.

 

[ed72]

Cruzbike Wizards:

Now that I've solved my SRAM Yaw derailleur mystery issues. I'm considering installing Q rings on my V20 prior to the Mt Baker hill climb event in September. I've found some 110 bcd Q rings at a decent price.

My question:

How wise is it to run 52/34 rings? I currently have 50/34 round rings. I feel I need the 34 low for climbing steep hills. I spin out the 50 fairly easily, so a 52 also seems needed.

Hit me with your opinions!

Thanks!

Shifting and chain drops will be a problem. Make sure your chain catcher is ready.

I suspect this is why Rotor sells 52/36 as the biggest tooth difference.

I ran 52/38, 53/39, and 46/34 combinations. I dropped the chain once in a while even with a chain catcher. In contrast, I have not dropped the chain once in 9,000+miles using dura ace rings but this is partly due to using bar ends and a well calibrated hand.