Thread to tell everyone what bike gear you've just bought !

13435373940683

Comments

  • lost_in_thought
    lost_in_thought Posts: 10,563
    What is a Q-ring? I am curious...
  • lost_in_thought
    lost_in_thought Posts: 10,563
    Greg66 wrote:

    Nice.

    For Australia, I take it. Not over here. Uh-uh.

    Why not? I'm not buying a jersey for just 2 weeks...
  • What is a Q-ring? I am curious...

    The Q-Ring is a special chain ring (or pair) to replace the front chain rings on your bike (not, note, the crank arms or the spider - if separate to the crank arms).

    Normal chain rings are circular. The more astute amongst you will have noticed this. Perhaps.

    Q rings are elliptical. The idea is that on the power part of the cycle, they give you the equivalent of an extra tooth (it would be like riding 54 instead of 53) and they eliminate the "dead zone" - the part of the cycle where you can't get any power (11 & 5 o'clock, I guess).

    In principle it all sounds win/win. So there has to be a catch. I can't work out what it is though.

    Bobby Julich them, and Carlos Sastre was and is using them. Apparently.
    Swim. Bike. Run. Yeah. That's what I used to do.

    Bike 1
    Bike 2-A
  • Greg66 wrote:

    Nice.

    For Australia, I take it. Not over here. Uh-uh.

    Why not? I'm not buying a jersey for just 2 weeks...

    Why not? I have some maple-leaf flag backed mitts for Canada.
    Swim. Bike. Run. Yeah. That's what I used to do.

    Bike 1
    Bike 2-A
  • Do you reckon Q-Rings actually work then? I've been watching the Pro uptake with interest, there's something in this isn't there?

    I dunno. I'd like to try them to find out. It's interesting that some pros use them, but then it's interesting that a lot more don't.
    Problem as I see it is this:

    Last of all, (only do this once you feel 100% at ease and natural riding Q-Rings) you may consider going for a ride on a bike with round chainrings again. This will allow you to compare the difference to round rings and Q-Rings, and feel the disadvantages round rings give in regards to your new Q-perspective. If you do this again after 2-3 months riding Q’s, it is likely
    that you will notice a significant increase in lactate concentrations when pushing yourself hard on the round rings.


    I'd only want them on the Prince, and I'm not sure that would work really as you have to retrain your legs & brain. I guess I'd have to commute on the good bike for a month...

    Also not sure they do a Campag compatible 50/34 yet.

    I wonder about that quote; whether the point is really that you need that long on them for them to train your legs, and only then will you notice the difference on regulars.

    Were I to do this, I'd put them on one bike and alternate week on week off. The result of my "trial" would be how quickly either (a) they went on the other bike or (b) they came off that bike.

    I like the idea of being able to try the rings without having to swap the entire crankset. Not too much to write off if it all goes a bit Pete Tong.
    Swim. Bike. Run. Yeah. That's what I used to do.

    Bike 1
    Bike 2-A
  • lost_in_thought
    lost_in_thought Posts: 10,563
    Greg66 wrote:
    What is a Q-ring? I am curious...

    The Q-Ring is a special chain ring (or pair) to replace the front chain rings on your bike (not, note, the crank arms or the spider - if separate to the crank arms).

    Normal chain rings are circular. The more astute amongst you will have noticed this. Perhaps.

    Q rings are elliptical. The idea is that on the power part of the cycle, they give you the equivalent of an extra tooth (it would be like riding 54 instead of 53) and they eliminate the "dead zone" - the part of the cycle where you can't get any power (11 & 5 o'clock, I guess).

    In principle it all sounds win/win. So there has to be a catch. I can't work out what it is though.

    Bobby Julich them, and Carlos Sastre was and is using them. Apparently.

    Ohhhh they're elliptical! Why didn't you say so? ;)

    I have those on the old commuter.... seriously. Not joking.

    I didn't realise you could get them for real bikes, are they expensive?
  • ride_whenever
    ride_whenever Posts: 13,279
    The ones you have quite possibly are very old, shimano made them a while back called biopace, but IIRC biopace and q-rings have the bulge at different points.

    It's a concept that swings in and out of fashion.
  • Feltup
    Feltup Posts: 1,340
    I have some Shimano 105 elipsoidal (sp) ones on my old peugeot from about 20 years ago. I am not sure I like them at all now that I have ridden round rings for so long. I will have to have look and see if I can transfer the rings on to my Felt and give them a proper go.
    Short hairy legged roadie FCN 4 or 5 in my baggies.

    Felt F55 - 2007
    Specialized Singlecross - 2008
    Marin Rift Zone - 1998
    Peugeot Tourmalet - 1983 - taken more hits than Mohammed Ali
  • Feltup
    Feltup Posts: 1,340
    The ones you have quite possibly are very old, shimano made them a while back called biopace, but IIRC biopace and q-rings have the bulge at different points.

    It's a concept that swings in and out of fashion.

    Ahhh those are the ones I have on my Peugeot. I just couldn't remember the name.
    Short hairy legged roadie FCN 4 or 5 in my baggies.

    Felt F55 - 2007
    Specialized Singlecross - 2008
    Marin Rift Zone - 1998
    Peugeot Tourmalet - 1983 - taken more hits than Mohammed Ali
  • itboffin
    itboffin Posts: 20,072
    The ones you have quite possibly are very old, shimano made them a while back called biopace, but IIRC biopace and q-rings have the bulge at different points.

    It's a concept that swings in and out of fashion.

    Thank you very much I was wondering WTH had happened to the biospace chain rings I took of that abandoned British Eagle.
    Rule #5 // Harden The Feck Up.
    Rule #9 // If you are out riding in bad weather, it means you are a badass. Period.
    Rule #12 // The correct number of bikes to own is n+1.
    Rule #42 // A bike race shall never be preceded with a swim and/or followed by a run.
  • The ones you have quite possibly are very old, shimano made them a while back called biopace, but IIRC biopace and q-rings have the bulge at different points.

    It's a concept that swings in and out of fashion.

    The Q-Rings appear to be mountable at almost any angle - there's a concentric ring of mounting points to attach them to the spider. Presumably there's a suggested mounting position.
    Swim. Bike. Run. Yeah. That's what I used to do.

    Bike 1
    Bike 2-A
  • lost_in_thought
    lost_in_thought Posts: 10,563
    Reading about how they work, I wonder whether an elliptical sprocket would be effective as well...

    EDIT: Not overly easy to find for 11sp.... does it really matter?
  • redddraggon
    redddraggon Posts: 10,862
    My "new" commuter frame is "coming" tomorrow, so over the last week I've spent a bit getting new cables, skewers and a 120mm stem :D
    I like bikes...

    Twitter
    Flickr
  • Furbes
    Furbes Posts: 289
    i've bought a pair of continental diggas for the bighit , along with a new syncros stem .
    for the scrap , i bought new wheels (mavic crosstrail) & pro logo saddle .
    that's my spending done for the month :!:
  • always_tyred
    always_tyred Posts: 4,965
    Reading about how they work, I wonder whether an elliptical sprocket would be effective as well...

    EDIT: Not overly easy to find for 11sp.... does it really matter?

    [sarcasm]Yes (but you'd need 11 eliptical sprokets, but only 2 eliptical chainrings, and it would be hellishly difficult to get the freewheel to stop in the same place each time.... [/sarcasm])

    [serious]and No - I think that the 11 speed chain would work with 10 speed chain rings.[/serious]

    [witty and charming]The main difference between the idea behind the eleiptical rotor chainrings and the old ones is that the gearings are in entirely the opposite parts of the pedal stroke. This leads me to wonder - if you can argue for a benefit both ways, perhaps circular is the way to go?[/witty and charming]
  • Clever Pun
    Clever Pun Posts: 6,778
    Record Carbon 10sp levers...wooo
    Purveyor of sonic doom

    Very Hairy Roadie - FCN 4
    Fixed Pista- FCN 5
    Beared Bromptonite - FCN 14
  • Clever Pun wrote:
    Record Carbon 10sp levers...wooo

    Oooh, you little tart!

    What will the netball "boys" say? :twisted:
    Swim. Bike. Run. Yeah. That's what I used to do.

    Bike 1
    Bike 2-A
  • lost_in_thought
    lost_in_thought Posts: 10,563
    Reading about how they work, I wonder whether an elliptical sprocket would be effective as well...

    EDIT: Not overly easy to find for 11sp.... does it really matter?

    [sarcasm]Yes (but you'd need 11 eliptical sprokets, but only 2 eliptical chainrings, and it would be hellishly difficult to get the freewheel to stop in the same place each time.... [/sarcasm])

    [serious]and No - I think that the 11 speed chain would work with 10 speed chain rings.[/serious]

    [witty and charming]The main difference between the idea behind the eleiptical rotor chainrings and the old ones is that the gearings are in entirely the opposite parts of the pedal stroke. This leads me to wonder - if you can argue for a benefit both ways, perhaps circular is the way to go?[/witty and charming]

    To sarky AT: Why does it matter where the freewheel stops? it's the position of the sprockets relative to your feet that's more important, isn't it? And the reason I mentioned it is that we all know sprockets have a greater influence on GI than Chainrings. Agree on the pricier bit though.

    To serious AT: Cool. Thanks.

    To witty and charming AT: I don't understand your point - clearly too witty for me! :D
  • Why does it matter where the freewheel stops? it's the position of the sprockets relative to your feet that's more important, isn't it?

    (if I may contribute here): Indeed so - but whereas with the chainring, one revolution of your feet matches one revolution of the chainring, this isn't the case with the sprockets on the freewheel (which is, indeed, pretty much the whole point of gears). (so, for example, with a 48/12 setup, your rear wheel's going to complete four revolutions exactly for every single pedal stroke. With a 48/13, though, it's going to be just a bit less than four revolutions etc etc)

    So, if you're going to ellipticise the drivetrain so as to synchronise with your pedalling, your only option is to go for elliptical chainrings.
    2008 carrera vanquish - FCN: 8
    2009 giant bowery 72 - FCN: 5
  • Feltup
    Feltup Posts: 1,340
    Sprockets would not work because they rotate at different speeds to the cranks. The idea with Q rings is that the elipse is fixed to transmit more power at the most pwoerful point of your leg stroke and less power at the least powerful part of your leg stroke thus smoothing the whole rotation.

    Sprockets would only occasionally be in phase with your leg movements and therefor would a lot of the time be working against you.

    Still don't like the feel of them.
    Short hairy legged roadie FCN 4 or 5 in my baggies.

    Felt F55 - 2007
    Specialized Singlecross - 2008
    Marin Rift Zone - 1998
    Peugeot Tourmalet - 1983 - taken more hits than Mohammed Ali
  • always_tyred
    always_tyred Posts: 4,965

    To sarky AT: Why does it matter where the freewheel stops? it's the position of the sprockets relative to your feet that's more important, isn't it? And the reason I mentioned it is that we all know sprockets have a greater influence on GI than Chainrings. Agree on the pricier bit though.

    To serious AT: Cool. Thanks.

    To witty and charming AT: I don't understand your point - clearly too witty for me! :D
    Okay - I think that oval chainrings change the gearing through the pedal stroke - and the relationship to the pedal stroke is important. I think, and I'm thinking harder and sweating as I type, there's no way to ensure that a given sprocket is oriented the way you want it to be. No, that's wrong, ish, - its because the wheel rotates a non-integer number of times in relation to the crank, and its different for each sprocket. Would only work for a fixie if the gears were the same size (I think).

    I personally think that its a fad which will pass, or at best be the preserve of elite athletes with particular miomechanical issues. Either that or the UCI will ban them.
  • Reading about how they work, I wonder whether an elliptical sprocket would be effective as well...

    EDIT: Not overly easy to find for 11sp.... does it really matter?

    Umm, the movement of your foot is determined by the shape of the chainring, not the sprocket. So I doubt the shape of the sprocket would make a difference to the movement of your foot.

    Plus the long axis of the ellipsis of a chainring is fixed relative to your crankarm, and so the ellipsis has the same effect at every point of every rotation of the crankarm. The sprockets rotate at different rates and any effect they produce would appear at different points of your pedal cycle (think: a 15 tooth triangular sprocket mated to a 53 tooth chainring: you'd get 3 & 8/15s revolutions of the sprocket per one of the chainring, or 10 (sometimes) or 11 (usually) corners of the triangle per revolution.

    Clear?
    Swim. Bike. Run. Yeah. That's what I used to do.

    Bike 1
    Bike 2-A
  • il_principe
    il_principe Posts: 9,155
    heh heh heh, LiT's dropped the ball big time on this one...

    :lol:

    *sniggers
  • Feltup
    Feltup Posts: 1,340
    3 Flan in the Faces in a row. And there I was thinking she knew about bikes! :D

    Only kidding LiT
    Short hairy legged roadie FCN 4 or 5 in my baggies.

    Felt F55 - 2007
    Specialized Singlecross - 2008
    Marin Rift Zone - 1998
    Peugeot Tourmalet - 1983 - taken more hits than Mohammed Ali
  • Whoops. Let's hope she doesn't run off in tears and get on a plane to somewhere far, far away.

    :twisted:
    Swim. Bike. Run. Yeah. That's what I used to do.

    Bike 1
    Bike 2-A
  • lost_in_thought
    lost_in_thought Posts: 10,563
    Now then...

    I understand about the rotation of the sprocket against the rotation of the chainring, and I agree that the insanely hard calculations would be too much for a maths muppet like myself, but I would reckon that it might well be possible to work out your gearing so that sprocket rotations would divide evenly into chainring rotations. Or just get a single speed with the one possible combination or similar. Not the cleverest way to calculate gearing, I grant you.

    What I was more specifically wondering is if the benefits of varying GI of elliptical chainrings would apply to an elliptical sprocket, ignoring the mathematical difficulty.

    Well? :D

    Also, Jash, if you don't ask you never learn! If I had a pound for every time I'd made a prat of myself asking a silly question... :lol:

    Edit: And the same to the rest of you! :lol:
  • salsajake
    salsajake Posts: 702
    Chris King bottom bracket - for the MTB though, not the commuter, but if it is as good as I think it will be, when the time comes, that will get one too! 5 years guarantee plus the option of a grease injection tool (have one on order for when they come in). Lovely.

    Also upgraded front tyre of commuter bike to a Conti GP 4 season 25, fitted a control tech carbon seat post (1/2 price in CRC flood sale) and a secondhand SLP XP saddle. It is on a big weight loss programme!
  • cjcp
    cjcp Posts: 13,345
    salsajake wrote:
    Chris King bottom bracket - for the MTB though, not the commuter, but if it is as good as I think it will be, when the time comes, that will get one too! 5 years guarantee plus the option of a grease injection tool (have one on order for when they come in). Lovely.

    Also upgraded front tyre of commuter bike to a Conti GP 4 season 25, fitted a control tech carbon seat post (1/2 price in CRC flood sale) and a secondhand SLP XP saddle. It is on a big weight loss programme!

    Good skills. I'm thinking of a BB upgrade to a ceramic Hope.

    I actually snapped the XP after a few thousand miles. I think it eventually succumbed to the state of the road on the commute rather than the size of my backside.
    FCN 2-4.

    "What happens when the hammer goes down, kids?"
    "It stays down, Daddy."
    "Exactly."
  • always_tyred
    always_tyred Posts: 4,965
    Now then...

    I understand about the rotation of the sprocket against the rotation of the chainring, and I agree that the insanely hard calculations would be too much for a maths muppet like myself, but I would reckon that it might well be possible to work out your gearing so that sprocket rotations would divide evenly into chainring rotations. Or just get a single speed with the one possible combination or similar. Not the cleverest way to calculate gearing, I grant you.

    What I was more specifically wondering is if the benefits of varying GI of elliptical chainrings would apply to an elliptical sprocket, ignoring the mathematical difficulty.

    Well? :D

    Also, Jash, if you don't ask you never learn! If I had a pound for every time I'd made a prat of myself asking a silly question... :lol:

    Edit: And the same to the rest of you! :lol:
    So, lets assume that you get an integer number of relative rotations? Then what? Say you have 40 teeth on the front and 20 on the back - your front ring goes round once for every two revolutions of the back. So you'd have to have some fancy cam shaped ring on the back to get the right profile once per pedal stroke. It would be different for each sprocket.

    I'm also fairly sure you couldn't keep the orientation of the crank arms with respect to the whole cassette constant, meaning that all your ramped gearing would change throughout a ride. I can't even begin to get my head around shifting more than one cog at a time and/or shifting part way through a revolution of the cassette (which would be different, depending on which gear you were in).

    I think you'll find that oval chainrings are the way to go!
  • cjcp
    cjcp Posts: 13,345
    Now then...

    I understand about the rotation of the sprocket against the rotation of the chainring, and I agree that the insanely hard calculations would be too much for a maths muppet like myself, but I would reckon that it might well be possible to work out your gearing so that sprocket rotations would divide evenly into chainring rotations. Or just get a single speed with the one possible combination or similar. Not the cleverest way to calculate gearing, I grant you.

    What I was more specifically wondering is if the benefits of varying GI of elliptical chainrings would apply to an elliptical sprocket, ignoring the mathematical difficulty.

    Well? :D

    Also, Jash, if you don't ask you never learn! If I had a pound for every time I'd made a prat of myself asking a silly question... :lol:

    Edit: And the same to the rest of you! :lol:
    So, lets assume that you get an integer number of relative rotations? Then what? Say you have 40 teeth on the front and 20 on the back - your front ring goes round once for every two revolutions of the back. So you'd have to have some fancy cam shaped ring on the back to get the right profile once per pedal stroke. It would be different for each sprocket.

    I'm also fairly sure you couldn't keep the orientation of the crank arms with respect to the whole cassette constant, meaning that all your ramped gearing would change throughout a ride. I can't even begin to get my head around shifting more than one cog at a time and/or shifting part way through a revolution of the cassette (which would be different, depending on which gear you were in).

    I think you'll find that oval chainrings are the way to go!

    AT - it's Friday. Stop thinking so much. It'll do you no good at all. :wink::)
    FCN 2-4.

    "What happens when the hammer goes down, kids?"
    "It stays down, Daddy."
    "Exactly."