Advertise on Bikeforums.net



User Tag List

Results 1 to 8 of 8
  1. #1
    Junior Member Gary Tingley's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    11
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    new Rotor Cranks web site

    www.rotorcranksusa.com

    Hi all, I put together lots of good info on the new Rotor Cranks RS4, and some suggested chainring sized for bent riders.

    Feel free to contact me with questions.

    Gary Tingley
    gary@rotorcranksusa.com

  2. #2
    Kev
    Kev is offline
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Posts
    1,652
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Interesting idea, but problem I can see with that is on one part of the revolution of the cranks one foot is more forward so that will work well, but what about the other way when one foot is farther back on the revolution. Wouldn't this make it harder?

  3. #3
    Junior Member Gary Tingley's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    11
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Kev
    Interesting idea, but problem I can see with that is on one part of the revolution of the cranks one foot is more forward so that will work well, but what about the other way when one foot is farther back on the revolution. Wouldn't this make it harder?
    www.rotorcranksusa.com/simulator.htm

    the cams prevent this, it is very efficient on a recumbent and increases speed substantially as well as making climbing easier

    Gary Tingley
    gary@rotorcranksusa.com

  4. #4
    lowracer ninja master lowracer1's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Posts
    870
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Gary Tingley
    www.rotorcranksusa.com/simulator.htm

    the cams prevent this, it is very efficient on a recumbent and increases speed substantially as well as making climbing easier

    Gary Tingley
    gary@rotorcranksusa.com

    I must agree with Gary on this one...... A friend of mine......Frank Geyer races with them and of course also trains with them. He races a challenge jester and gained even more speed with these cranks plus lowering his heartrate at the same time. I plan on getting a set........ just don't know yet which set to plunk the money down for yet. Still waiting on my new carbon frameset yet.

    The rotor cranks appear to be way worth the money. Huge gains for recumbent riders.
    chris@promocycle.net

  5. #5
    Kev
    Kev is offline
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Posts
    1,652
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Out of curiousity are they more efficient on a bent? and why if so.

  6. #6
    lowracer ninja master lowracer1's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Posts
    870
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Kev
    Out of curiousity are they more efficient on a bent? and why if so.
    I'm sure that Gary can list more reasons than I. I've come to the conclusion that they may be more efficient for bent riders, because we tend to have slower cadence due to the position we are sitting. More leg weight to lift up and down. Spinning can be more fatiguing on a bent than a wedgie. These are the perfect cranks for mashers. Constant all on power all the time. Frank now tends to pedal at a slower cadence but with more power per stroke. At the same time, the cardio vascular has slowed at the same given wattage output. It does take some time to adjust to them to bring your heart rate back up to previous levels. At the same time the wattage output goes up further. This means faster. Most of you guys don't race though, so it may not be of any interest to you to go any faster with less percieved effort.
    chris@promocycle.net

  7. #7
    horizontally adapted bentrox!'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2001
    My Bikes
    Specialized Stumpie, Bianchi Pista, Optima Baron
    Posts
    566
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Rotor Crank

    Chris and Gary, I like speed, though I don't have the opportunity to race others hereabouts. I tend to mash the big ring so I'm intrigued by the stroke-efficient concept of Rotor Cranks, but I'm also concerned with the extra weight of those things. If Chris (and Frank and Garrie, et. al.) go to the extent of weight-saving carbon frames (and, I'd assume, light-weight wheels and everything else) then why heavier cranks? Do they really more than compensate for the extra rotational weight?
    I'll gently rise and I'll softly call
    Good night and joy be with you all.

  8. #8
    lowracer ninja master lowracer1's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Posts
    870
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by bentrox!
    Chris and Gary, I like speed, though I don't have the opportunity to race others hereabouts. I tend to mash the big ring so I'm intrigued by the stroke-efficient concept of Rotor Cranks, but I'm also concerned with the extra weight of those things. If Chris (and Frank and Garrie, et. al.) go to the extent of weight-saving carbon frames (and, I'd assume, light-weight wheels and everything else) then why heavier cranks? Do they really more than compensate for the extra rotational weight?

    I was concerned with the extra weight also, but according to everyone that uses them..... it doesn't seem to be a penalty. The extra efficiency overcomes the weight penalty. I will still have a sub 19 lb bike anyhow. They all claim hill climbing is much easier now on the recumbent.
    chris@promocycle.net

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •