Q-rings ant Osymmetric rings are not the same as Biopace or Ovaltech. The modern oval shapes place the "biggest gear" perpendicular to the crank arm, while Biopace and Ovaltech placed the "biggest gear" parallel. The thinking, I believe, with Biopace/Ovaltech was to help alleviate a pedalling dead spot at the top/bottom of the pedal stroke by increasing the relative gear size. Q-rings and Osymmetric look to increase the relative gear size when you have most leverage.

Yeah, I think that's the basis for the old hot tip I remember of rotating Biopace rings. Still can't remember what the rotation was, seems like advancing them two bolt holes was it.

Rotating Biopace/Ovaltech rings one hole would be close, but not quite all the way there (72* not 90*). If you wanted to go the other way -make Q-rings/Osymetrics into Biopace/Ovaltech you face the same problem with Osymetrics (5 holes), but Q-rings have lots of holes so you can place the "peaks" of the ovoid wherever you want them.

https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-Z.../osymetric.gif

http://www.roadcyclinguk.com/news/im...rings_4_hi.jpg

My biggest memory of riding Biopace was the "surge surge surge" feeling when spinning along. I have not tried the modern ovoids yet so have no opinion...

I try not to trash anything: somebody somewhere can probably use it.

I never cared for bio-pace, but I'm a spinner. If you're a cranker they probably feel fine.

Its been the hottest thing now three or four times in the history of cycling.