Originally Posted by
ThermionicScott
Hence my consternation at these threads -- however the rings are oriented, they seem like a way to compensate for uneven pedalling technique. Biopace made the gear "big" during the dead spot to carry more momentum through it. Rotor/Q makes the gear "small" during the dead spot because you're not applying power then. Neither approach is necessary if you shift to the right gear and pedal it smoothly.
I agree with what you are saying.
There is an inherent problem in cycling in that humans are up-down-motile bipedalists, whereas bicycles require us to be circular motion cyclists. Biopace unrotated attempted to force bipedalists to become bicyclists. Take for example the comment
Originally Posted by
ljbike
I have them on my old Klein bike which I used for everyday and for touring. Rarely ride them now. But it was with those rings that I learned the proper way to pedal.
Whereas Osymetric and Q-Rings force the bicyle to have, as it were, pistons to conform more to the bipedal rider.
So a suggestion: use the Biopace (or round rings) in their old, unrotated form for training, to force yourselve to spin, and then rotate them -- to become Osymetric, Rotarized, Q-Ringal -- on race days to give yourself a bipedal boost.
This may be a bit like altitude training.
I will start gently. I have bid 20USD on a pair of Biopace HP. I think I will only use them Rotarized.