Oval Chain Rings do have a benefit over round. On Shimano 110BCD, the lowest sprocket is 34, but with Oval ring such as Absolute Black, you can get a 32 or a 30 while still using Ultegra / Dura Ace Cranks. That really helps with climbing the steep stuff !! I have 32 / 48 on my Dura Ace 9000 chainset and works well. make double digit gradient much easier !!
Agree, the availability of AB 46-30 ovals was what broke me away (finally) from triples on my long-distance machine. The ovals seemed to me to reduce fatigue. Improvement of about 15 minutes over a 9 hour hilly course, although that could have been down to particularly favorable air density on the day, or minor improvement in fitness, or even placebo effect. Shifting was perfectly fine, so not changed away from them.
I'm curious as to how that works - you'd think the smallest ring that would fit a given (circular) BCD would itself be circular? I mean maybe the long axis of a 32T ellipse would fit a 110 BCD but the short axis wouldn't, would it?
@@The1trueDave I'm wondering the same thing. But maybe it has to do with the bolt pattern on newer Shimano cranks: 4 bolts, unevenly spaced. Maybe there's an oval that covers those four points more tightly than a circle could?
Oval chain rings? I have discovered Osymetric and they are a revelation. They were a bit tricky to set up for the changing but I have managed to find a workable arrangement. Mine are 24/32/42. When I was young all the bikes I had were 1by, not that we called them that and if lucky with a 3 speed sturmey archer and I managed that ok. But now as I've got older I find hills more difficult and even at the lowest gear the 'dead spot' of round rings made me ride about 2 gears lower than ideal. Oval rings have let me enjoy riding better again and I would recommend them to anyone getting on a bit and losing leg strength. I can't speak for strong riders (I never was "strong") because I got old before I tried them. Brad was still a bit quick in the TTs wasn't he.
Thanks for answering my question and even making it part of this episode’s title😂My life is now complete and I don’t need to worry about buying oval chain rings. Thanks Dr. Bridgewood. Hope you had a relaxing holiday☀️👍🚴♂️
I'm 64 yrs old and weight 83kgs, (Ollie isn't so, has a different perspective), and my knees ain't so good... and I live in mountainous Andorra. Using Oval from Absolute Black have given my knees a new lease of life and have allowed me to climb mountains more smoothly. I only use an internal oval ring, my outer is still round. Totally smooth faultless changing from small to big, big to small chain rings. My different bike set ups (all outer rings are round all inner are oval Absolute Black) are 54/36, 53/36, (TT) 53/39, 2 of 50/34 and a one-by mtb of 34 which I changed to from a 30 round. Having changed I was able to climb more easily with the 34 oval than the 30 round My biggest gain is that for rides over 200km my knees are much less stressed after the ride, particularly noted the following day I can only recommend oval and see that the resistance to oval rings comes from the youngsters! (Ollie....)
It was the rebound effect that they were banned for. Not sure it was a particularly useful analogy to compare running shoes to cycling shoes on this occasion.
Yup the bounciness and the sizing and shape of the superb foam has a speed increasing effect too so Ollie oversimplified things. Understandable for a non runner because most runners do not follow the tech only personal bests.
I just bought an old MTB to convert to a commuter bike. It’s got old Biopace oval chainrings and a friction front derailleur. I thought for sure I wanted to swap it for a modern drivetrain, but honestly I kind of love it and am gonna keep the originals on since they all work so well! Plus it’s got a cool look to it!
Biopace from Shimano is flawed by design. The allignment is totally different to modern oval chainrings and many people have complained about it that it has caused knee pain and complaints on this knee cap so Shimano abandoned it.... (Forever i believe...not sure )
Touring cyclists love them. I've used them for 15 years and love them. They're great for anyone who maintains a steady cadence. Every time I find an old bike with them I buy it just for the cranks. I have a whole bin full of them.
@@sooryanandanans236 I’m not terribly worried about it, as I’ll only be putting like 10-12 miles a week on this bike. And it’ll be at a pace far lower than that of my actual riding bike.
I once mounted my osymetric rings wrongly, shifted by 1/4 of a turn, which made them work exactly like biopace. Oh my god I did a few pedal turns and it was just horrible.
About 3x9 Tiagra: actually there are 4 clicks because of trim function. Triple derailleur may stay, the angles per click are same, it's just the cage is excessive (so going from 2x to 3x would require a derailleur swap). You may swap only the lever assemply, keeping the hooded hadle, since the mechanism is enclosed in the subassemply. For that unscrew a set screw underneath and tap out the pivot. Lastly, DA/Ultegra/105/Sora shifters would fit. And there are plenty second hand Ultegra left shifters since the right ones due to faulty design break much earlier and are not so repairable
Hey friend, you got me hooked up with this information. I'm using a 3x9 MicroNew Shifters with Altus FD (max of 48T 3x) and an Ltwoo A5 Elite 2:1 RD. From small to mid chainring I got 3 clicks going up. And from mid to big chainring, 2 clicks going up. Going down from big to mid, and even mid to small, have 2 clicks. I wanted to know if I can get away using a 2x Left Shifter on a 3x front derailleur? (This would mean I'm removing the smallest chainring) just leaving out the middle and big chainring
@@guandasin3099 cheers, mate! I don't have experience with micronew parts, but definitely see why you want to switch: that is way too many positions and one can easily miss. So, as a speculation, we are still talking Shimano pull ratios, so any 2x shifter must work. If you keep the chainset together with FD, ony ditching one ring, is always a plus
My first bicycle was a 87 Cannondale road bike that I restored, so oval Shimano biopace cranks, 38cm wide handlebars, and downtube shifters are among the funky things it had that I haven't really missed.
biopace rings were set up "wrong" compared to modern ovals, but they were super proud of their computer assisted design! I have them on my old, old bike that I keep around mostly for nostalgia, they are pretty subtle to be honest.
@@All4Grogg Yeah, I also have a 1988 specialized I used for crits somewhere around here with a biopace chainring. I found that when switching between bikes I'd notice the difference, acclimate to it, and then it simply didn't make a difference. I have to chuckle at all the power analysis for oval chainrings...at the end of the day power output = drag + climbing rate x weight + loss to flexing etc, and chainrings don't play into it much. The human body can do a darned good job at flattening out any spikes in the power curve with some variations per person. Since the variations are per person, I think the concept of a single oval shape that is "generally best" is merely a festival of naivety.
I've been riding with Q-Rings for about 10 years now. Just feels more organic to me. Regular (round) chain rings feels less efficient now. Been also interested in OSymetric as Froome rode/ride with them. Never went ahead and purchased them, but would still like to try them out once.
I rode from 1986-2016. Had to quit after a never fatal accident. But, the last couple of years I was riding Rotors, and like you, I found them to be more efficient. In fact, a friend and I had the chainring/cassette set up, and I was riding down the block by 1-2 gears. Never bought them for power, but for the concept of eliminating or reducing the “dead spot” when pedaling. I didn’t have to think as much about pulling up when the foot hits 6 o’clock. When I got mine, I immediately sent them, and my SRM meter to SRM US, to have the meter calibrated.
Same here, I know they don't give me more power but the transfer of power is better as is the cadence using oval chainrings. And they just look good and isn't that all that matters anyway? 😁
scientific studies have been done on show stiffness, and they could not find an improvement from nylon to carbon. Using floppy running shoes do show degradation, but once your shoes feel stiff you have already reached the point where further stiffness makes immeasurable difference (other than improved climbing performance due to a lighter wallet).
Hi guys oval chainrings are biomechanically more efficient by a few percent because they reduce the deadspot at the top of the pedalstroke. Its simple, undeniable geometry, really. They are better, most particularly for hill climbing. Back in the day, the knock against them was in accelerating, but that was based on feel. Too bad most bike reviews, including Ollie's in this rare case, are completely subjective and unscientific. As for shifting, how often do most riders change their front chainrings, Ollie? Lets let Andrew Feather test oval vs round chainrings on a significant climb!
You make a statement about reviews being unscientific, then proceed to suggest Andrew Feather tests one which is still unscientific. 🤷 Absolutely no independent peer reviewed research paper concludes or supports the suggestion that oval rings are biomechanically more efficient. All the tests sponsored by ring manufacturers use small samples of riders (under 20 people) who are usually young elite males with a race licence in conditions designed to promote oval rings, in the real world it does not translate.
I just recently put oval rings on both my gravel and road bikes (AbsoluteBlack and Rotor QRings respectively). After about 25miles I was used to the new muscle engagement and honestly, I love them! It does feel like a smoother pedal stroke especially while climbing. And the shifting isn't noticeably worse; in fact the Absolute Black ones shift somewhat better than the prior chainrings I had (although that was an Ultegra 11sp chainset and FD with Chorus 11sp shifters)
6:46 - I couldn't find the original question under past tech clinics but: I had a Giant TCR 2 (2017) with Tiagra groupset. For some mysterious reason, the Left shifter was a 3x, but the bike had only 2 chain-rings in the front. It worked, but I had an extra click one way (i don't know if it was an extra up or down-shift). So, by setting the limit screws the right way, there was no problem with shifting. It was just a bit strange to use.
I switched a 105 3x chainring to a 2x, I just replaced the front derailleur. The shifting between the 2 chainrings is not perfect but it works. A 10 speed 105 2x lever is still around 100 euros...
Good thing I shelled out for an oval Wolf Tooth chainring on my cross bike. I do like how it smoothed my pedal stroke out a bit, but it didn't transform the bike by any means.
Oval chainrings. I have two bikes and one of them has an oval chainring (1x so no dramas shifting chainrings). I find I am more comfortable and can pedal smoother at higher cadences on the oval chainring. However, like Ollie says, you can probably adapt to either. I'm trying to adapt to both! Going from the 3x to 2x front chainring setup. You can keep the original derailleur if you go to a friction shifter on that side. That's old school with no pre-set cable pull click.
Carbon soles definitely make a difference. I recently got both my cycling and running shoes upgraded to carbon (well, one pair of running shoes in my 4 shoe rotation) and I immediately felt very different. In a running shoe you just get a better spring effect in your step (but you do need to have proper running form/gait/stride or whatever it's called and I do definitely need to pay more attention to my step while running to get the full benefit) and in a cycling shoe it just feel more "precise" if that is the right word for it. Like the power transfers from my foot to the cleat and the pedal just more precisely instead of being a bit laggy or sluggish or whatever word you could use for it.
Energy is always lost when you flex something. Power is energy/unit time. If you can engage more of the force of your foot to the sole, without flexing or bending it, you will have greater energy transfer, and therefore power. Of course, your foot has to be able to tolerate that stiffness given the force you can produce. The other factor with carbon soles, which go in scale with higher-end cycling shoes, is that they are lighter. Moving less mass in each revolution translates to less muscle fatigue in the long run. It could be argued that if you had perfect L/R balance (engagement of muscle groups around the crank circle), under constant crank speed (think in scale of revs/second) there wouldn't be much advantage to lighter shoes. But that isn't the real world, where any change in grade, gear selection, wind or draft position, causes you to change the angular speed.
Clement tub cement. Ahh memories. When a tub is inflated, the inside diameter reduces squeezing it onto the rim. Your spare tub under the saddle is pre-cemented. It will not feel secure when first fitted, but when it's inflated, it sticks like glue.
For the guy that wants to go 3x to 2x- I disagree with the advice given. You likely don't need to swap your shifter- careful/precise installation of the derailer and cable will allow you to use the top two or bottom two gears of the shifter as your two gear positions (if you're using the lower two positions, you need to make sure to block the top position out with the derailer limit screws and cable tension, or you can jam the shifter when you accidentally shift to the nonexistent third gear). If any parts are changed, I would swap out the derailer- a 2x and 3x derailer are different shapes. But beyond that, you'll find at the end of the exercise that the net effect is that you've just cut off your climbing gears for not much of a reason.
I agree. I would suggest using the bottom 2 gears instead of the top 2. That way you wont have an empty gear below that you may accidentally shift into. Install the cable with the mech set over the small ring on the limit screw. Then shift up to the middle gear on the shifter and set the upper limit screw. Aside from some tweaking, that should be everything needed.
@@markgambrill only issue with not using the low gear position is that if you shift into the nonexistent low gear, there's a lot of slack in the cable and the housing could slip out of the stop. A trade off on which issue you want to deal with on a hack/bodge drivetrain. Edit: I may have misread your post, I think we both prefer it the same way, but I'll just leave this post here as-is.
I think Ollie gave the easiest advice so someone could shift without having to think about over shifting the front derailer. Simon said in the video on changing gear ratios that you could still use a triple shifter, just would take care not to overshift. A double would be easier but, not necessary.
@@fredmcgough748 that's true, but we're also talking about buying parts just so they can use free parts (I've forgotten if this is about just a trigger shifter, or brifters, which would be even more silly). I'm trying to suggest how to do it while still being free. Honestly, if a friend came to me with this intent, and budget was an issue to them, I'd give them a long list of reasons of why it is impractical and to just stash the free crank for later use.
Placebo effect or not, I smashed multiple Strava PR's after installing a AbsoluteBlack oval chainring. This was on a 1x mountain bike and I only feel a difference at low rpm/high torque situations like climbing. I'm keeping round rings on my 2x road bike where rpm is generally higher and to avoid shifting concerns with the ovals.
I bought a used bike with ovals already fitted, I've had PR's too but the bike is 3kg lighter than the old one. I'm not sure if they make a difference but I'm happy with them. I agree that they don't magically produce more power but I'm assuming that there is some kind of leverage effect which my novice mind assumes might help with climbing.
Tubular tape is awesome. Given how sticky it is, I really doubt it impacts rolling resistance, has this ever been tested? And it's so much simpler and cleaner than glue.
A couple of nerdy technical points. 1) the crank arms of current shimano cranks are asymetrical and mirror the shape of oval chainrings. Is that because the downstroke is the point of greatest stress? 2) my oval rings seem to wear far less, with much slower deformation of the teeth. Again, is that due to the ring reflecting the power production during the pedal stroke? 3) I use an oval small ring and a round big ring and this solves the pesky shifting issues, and gives one a sense of using slightly different muscles depending on the ring. 4) Most of my riding is low to very low intensity commuting up longish climbs where I'm in the sweet spot between grinding and spinning. The sweet spot seems very pronounced.
The loading on running shoes is different from cycling shoes - why refer to them at all for cycling? I think it would be easy to test if cycling shoe stiffness has any influence on speed (instead of just using a vague tern like 'power transfer'). Certainly the bike industry would have us think it does but GCN has the resources to test this, so, give it a shot.
The difficulty with testing this lies within the challenges of measuring the same forces applied by the human on two seperate occasions. The only way to measure this would be measuring oxygen consumption while riding on a stationary bike, on two occasions with two (or more sets of different stiffness shoes) then calculating mechanical efficiency and seeing which shoes led to the lowest oxygen cost.
@@matt_m126 Thanks, you are right. But that was testing short maximum sprints. I suspect the differences would be much less for, say, steady TT efforts.
I would replace the triple crank with the double, reattach the cable and adjust the stops before replacing the shifter or front derailleur. It might work fine. Lots of non-tubeless rims can be run tubeless. Just make sure the rim joint is welded, not pinned.
Simple answer for me, i dont have knee pain with ovals vs rounds. Did rounds for several years always had knee pain after long rides. Tried ovals, no knee pain since.
The 'old' Biopace Oval rings were set up where the +1 is at dead spot position (12/6 o'clock) but the modern oval rings are at power phase position(~3/9 o'clock)... However, u can rotate biopace ring 1 chain bolt hole forward (or was it backward??), 72 degree, to change the oval profile to something similar to the modern oval rings. Whether or not it works is down to individual. Personally, I feel the difference on high cadence pedaling. Then again, I have been using oval rings for the last 10 years. They worked for me so I'm sticking with oval.
About the carbon application, I think both try to achieve the same goal - efficiency, but go about it differently: Cycling shoes do this directly. The stiffness of carbon soles prevent energy loss (in the form of distortion, compression.etc.). With maximised power transfer / minimized power loss, a cycling spent the least energy to accomplish an effort. Running shoes do it with compensation. The spring-like carbon plates give the exerted energy back to the runner. With those ‘returned’ energy, a runner spent the least (total) energy to cover certain distance.
I use absolute black chain rings on my bike. There are good and bad things about them. They definitely smooth out my power while climbing. That is probably less of an issue for a pro rider with a perfect pedal stroke, but for us amateurs it makes a difference. On flat terrain it doesn't make a difference at all to me. Also, if you're doing a balanced pedal stroke they'll feel the same as a round chain ring, but if you're favouring one leg you'll feel it right away. It's improved my roller riding considerably because it makes it easy to tell when my stroke is off. The shifting is noticeably worse than round chain rings though. If you switch between big and small rings in the front frequently they're probably not the best choice. Your mileage will vary, but I enjoy them. They're definitely not giving me any kind of wattage boost or making me faster, but there are minor benefits to them.
I have a point to add about 2 and 3 speed front shifters. You can absolutely use a 3 speed shifter for a 2 speed derailleur. It's a bit of a bodge but just set it up normally, lowest gear in the lowest click of the shifter and then make sure your H limit screw is properly adjusted. This way you will be able to shift 2 speed, trying to shift further will bottom out on the H screw and stop you from over shifting. I've had this setup for years on my bike. No need to buy a whole new shifter.
I've ridden with oval rings for about 7 years now. Absolutely love them and I honestly don't think I'll ever go back to round. However I do agree shifting is not as good but I dont race so it's not an issue for me.
The main benefit of oval chainrings is to stop the surging effect on low cadence, high power situations like climbing. They don’t work great with front shifters though.
The way oval rings are clocked these days, the peak power phase occurs when the chainring is “largest” and the deadspot is where it’s smallest. If we assume a constant rpm, then that would cause even bigger surges because the waveform would spike during the downstroke and dip even lower through the bottom of the stroke. The real main benefit of oval rings is that the peak power phase is driven by your two largest leg muscles, the glutes and quads. In essence you are maximizing your contributions from those muscles and deemphasizing the contributions of the lower leg.
I had Ultegra Biopace chainrings on my bike in 1993. I didn't ever even think about it until I eventually got round chainrings and the powerstroke feel changed a bit.
You don't necessarily need to change your front shifter when going from a triple to a double. My Shimano 5600 shifter (10 speed) is compatible with both triple and double front chain rings. In may also be the case with your Tiagra x3 shifter.
If you are using Continental Tubs, ALWAYS use Conti glue. For some strange reason, Vittoria Mastik 1 tends to loosen the glue that holds the base tape on Conti tires. I've seen people leaving the base tape stuck to the rim when they pull off a Conti, glued with Vittoria glue. To be on the safe side, I also use Mastik 1 when I'm gluing Vittoria tires. PS. Save your Tubs for race day. Use clinchers when training.
Oval rings don’t give you more power they change the leverage. When you are on a steep climb in a big gear it’s at 6 and 12 that you get the most resistance so surely (effectively) changing down only at that point gives you the best of both.
In 1987 I bought a Centurion Ironman Dave Scott that had Biopace chain rings. It was a somewhat new and popular idea at the time. It felt different but I got used to it. I gave it to Salvation Army about 15 years ago. I kind of wish I'd kept it now just to have a vintage bike. I currently ride a 2010 Specialized Roubaix Comp. It's a bit outdated compared to recent bikes but I have no plans on replacing it anytime soon.
And the Biopace chainrings are so long lasting and therefore eco-friendly too! Still have the origninal 52/42 chainring on my Koga Miyata Roadwinner from 1989 which came with 2x7 Shimano 600 tricolour groupset.
I've said this several times: I road on USED road tires on a Kurt Kinetic Road Machine and they lasted and lasted. I tried both red and black trainer specific tires and managed to destroy them in a matter of weeks. As to the question, if you don't overtighten, you should be able to use your road tires without significant wear. You should remove any debris before mounting though. Oh, and you will do more damage by undertightening as the tire will rub against the rollers.
Thanks James, Great to hear you've had good experience using road tyres on your turbo. Turbo tyres are great if you plan on doing a longer stint inside and want to keep those road tyres fresh. 👍
Gears. 1970s 9kg Peugeot race bikes had 52/42 to a 14-21 5 speed. That's what we used in mass-start events. "These youngsters don't know there're born."
In the 1960s I rode 54/44 with a 14-21 6 speed (ahead of the game back then!). And I didn't walk up hills, ever! Ah, except the Drove in Brighton when I rode back from Preston Park on my track bike - that was a steep one. One way down nowadays - exciting to approach it as the road just disappears in front of you!
I use an old fashioned fluid trainer in the winter, and never bother to use a "trainer" tire. Usually, I just use the worn tire that I've ridden all summer. If that tire is shot, I put on a cheap wire bead tire.
Great episode! Oval chainrings, I had more negatives than positives back in 1988, looks like some fads don't improve! Glued tubular tires... good one Mr. local bike shop, experience is still worth more than gold!
Compact chain rings in the motorcycle world is called out by saying "close ratio" verses "wide ratio" gears. So it's not the number of gears but rather the change in ratio from one gear to the next. This would make a bicycle "compact chainring" equal to a motorcycle "close ratio" transmission.
"Compact" and "standard" doesn't refer to the chainrings at all, but to the crankset, specifically the bolt circle diameter. Smaller bolt circles allow a smaller minimum size chainring to be fitted, but larger chainrings were not limited. The compact or standard crankset is an outdated term, which refers to an older 5-bolt standard, where the standard was 130mm bolt circle, and the compact was 110mm. The smaller bolt circle would allow smaller chainrings to be fitted, down to 34t compared to 39t minimum on standard cranks. Now that Shimano has gone with 110mm with all their models with the 4 bolt cranks, you can just fit chainrings as you like from 34t and up.
Team sky knew about the power overreading with oval chainrings. They even precisely measured the exact value (it was 6% for Froome). They used Stages powermeter and it's not a thing of the past. In fact, most powermeters even today would still overread by ~10% (I have Stages, 4iiii and Quarq).
@@randellgribben9772 On my road and gravel bikes yes I use Osymetrics, but not on my TT bike (because there is more inertia at high speed, therefore less dead spots, and my cadence is higher). I manage to cope with both, switching back and forth without much trouble :)
In regards to oval chain rings, I had them put on my new 2018 Cervelo S 3, they immediately felt better, maybe more efficient but my chain tended to jump off more frequently which got to be very irritating. Traded the S 3 for a Cervelo Caledonia 5, I would not use the ovals again, it got to be to stressful worrying that my chain would jump off at any given time.
Power equals work done per unit time. Oval chainrings extend the perpendicular distance of the line of action of a force from the axis of rotation (simply said: extend the torque) for the time spent in the ranges where your legs' power output are most optimal. Therefore, the lower your cadence, the more benefit one MAY have from oval chainrings. This is also influenced by one's physical attributes and pedaling technique. There is also the psychological factor mentioned by Ollie. In local ultracycling circles almost everyone who have tried them, would never use anything else. The pros have equipment sponsors who pay them to show off their products, so drawing a conclusion from there is highly colored. Truth be told, it is much easier with 1x systems, but if you are interested, just go out and try whenever you need new chainrings. First they will be a bit weird especially in high cadence, but once you get used to it, you may never go back.
Ollie, you mention that the rim will have a hook on it. While this definitely might be true, there are of of course hookless rims and the person must be sure to buy compatible tires for these.
I’ve put mine on and taken it off for several seasons now on my trance I really notice the benefit on chunky sections uphill I’m able to muscle up stuff I normally couldn’t with a round Other than that it does keep a slightly better cadence when pedaling for those who may have a stronger leg than the other The biggest con is if you’re in the hardest gear at top speed I feel some slack in the pedaling That’s non existent with a round Is it worth $100 ? I say sure if it’s burning a hole in your pocket I prefer to ride with than without on my local trails Will also say if it doesn’t fit my next bike I won’t order another
I recently started using Absolute Black oval chainrings, only because I switched to a second hand SRAM Red crankset and the rings were preinstalled. I do "feel a difference". What's the difference? I don't know, really....it just feels different than round rings. I'm not any faster, though. And shifting from the small ring to the big ring can take some finessing, but that may have more to do with my FD setup than the rings? Who knows. They do look badass, though.
i just installed an Absolute black oval ring 30t onto my santa cruz nomad v5 full suspension bike , fully expecting the pulsing sensation that comes with the oval. zip....nothing i took a spin , i felt absolutely nothing , it rides just like a round ring, apparently my bike mech says its the suspension linkage thats negating the pulsing feeling
Please it would be interesting to see a video of testing how much diference makes a carbon sole shoes to a starter option during a climb and standard socks vs compression socks to see if compression benefits performance during a climb for example
Hello. Great show! I have a 1984 Cannondale Sr300 with 126 mm rear drop width. Could I fit a 10 speed cassette wheel setup. If not what would you recommend?
O symmetric. I love them. And once upon a time I did some measurements of the osymetric rings and calculations and found about a 10% increase in torque/ power if the pedals were powered only by gravity, straight down. I think it's actually intuitive , looking at the shape of the o symetric rings that they would be faster.
Regarding stiff shoes vs soft shoes I switched from a Shimano 3/10 stiffness plastic sole shoe to 7/10 from another manufacturer. It felt better on the 7/10 in sprinting. The real difference for a casual rider is how the cleat presses against the groove between the balls of the feet. There are sensitive nerves there that can feel like the foot is on fire on longer rides. I have had that on the 3/10 shoe and never on the carbon fibre 7/10 shoe. YMMV.
@@felixbelanger2659 Yes but the added advantage is that a stiff sole does not bend upwards above the cleat to press foot nerves. Reducing the chance of hot foot aka burning sensation between the balls of the feet.
@@JanneRasanen2 Combine stiff carbon soles with Specialized footbeds (3 arch height choices and metatarsal lift) for nirvana in comfort! Greater tolerance of forces at balls and overall foot engagement.
Can you adjust upper or lower limit screw to use triple front derailer to work with a double chainring, essentially blocking out the 1st or 3rd position?
In your first question today, you assume that the rims are clincher. What if they are tubular rims? 25 years ago, I bought a quantity of Wolber tubular rims, dirt cheap, from our team director, who was the DS of the Domestic Pro Schwinn - Icy Hot Team, back in the 80's. I would build up all my race wheels with them. As for inexpensive wire bead clinchers, I use them on wheels that I use on the trainer, in winter.
#AskGCNTech I was lucky enough to purchase my first road bike secondhand - its from the early 2000s. It is set up with older shimano 105s and is a 3x9. I am thinking about buying new brake levers. Since it is a 9-speed, I was wondering if I should change this out for Shimano Sora levers or wait be able to afford to change everything to 11-speed. Would the new soras be an upgrade compared to the older 105s? Thank you!
If lubricating the inner tubes was a downgrade, would doing the opposite - creating more friction - be an upgrade? Doing the same test, but using chalk instead of lubricant, would be an interesting follow-up experiment!
#AskGCNTech I have an Ultegra 11s 11-34 cassette on my road bike. My indoor trainer came with a 11-28 cassette. Can I just switch between the two with no problem or should I fit my indoor trainer with the same cassette as my bike?
NP using 11-28. As long as you stay inside the 11-34 range you are fine. Your bike's chain length and long-cage RD are sized to handle the big-to-largest ring/gear.
Oi found oval noticebly different (better) on my mtb within the first 50 feet of pedaling. On a road bike ….. or even a downhill mtb….whats the point ?
How much weight could be saved by helium filling tyres, frame, seat post, handlbars, stem and any other orifice capable of being made airtight. I suspect very little, but would be nice to know.
I went from round to oval chainring and e!imitated knee pain. Therefore it works for me but apparently not everyone. I cycle (MTB) more now that I am retired.
I was steered to oval chain rings and shorter cranks after total hip replacement to give me a bit more power to my weaker left leg (all done after a thorough bike fitting).
@@gcntech I've not noticed anything different in terms of pedaling cadence or style, but I certainly can push hard up the big hills around here. And definitely plenty of power for a rolling course.
As a triathlete After switching to ovals and shorter cranks (175 to 165mm ) I no longer get muscle cramps ( usually my thighs ) and feel fresher off the bike and better run times afterwards.
always always always glue your tubulars on tape just doesn't cut it. I know some will argue the point but having seen a tubular roll off on the track is not a pretty sight.
Speaking of indoor trainer tyres, all the ones I've seen seem to be 23mm, are those going to be okay on a 21mm rim? that feels like pushing it a bit in terms of getting it firmly seated and most sizing guides i've seen seem to say to not go below 25mm with a 21mm wheel.
Mostly good stuff as always but please talk to GTN before bringing up carbon-plated running shoes! They are completely different from bike shoes. A running shoe is designed to be as bouncy as possible whereas a cycling shoe should be stiff. Also most of the extra speed in the Vaporflys isn't in the carbon plate but in the foam.
I used some Shimano biopace rings on a MTN bike before. Feels different. Pretty clear it didn't make more power, it just feels different. Some people may like the feel
@@veganpotterthevegan the claims made that Biopace were clocked the wrong way has only been stated by the manufacturers of other oval rings and has never been accepted as correct by Shimano themselves. A recent study by Université Joseph Fourier, in Grenoble, France. found that Shimano’s Biopace chainrings vastly increase a rider’s ability to maintain threshold power over standard and current elliptical chainrings bringing the commonly held view of them being wrong into question. The biospace debate has not been concluded yet, like that for all non round rings
#AskGCNTech Is it possible to fit a Campagnolo chainset, either Power Torque or Ultra Torque to a Shimano BB86 press fit bottom bracket or would I have to replace the Shimano with a Campag bottom bracket?
My uncle had a 1938 Claud Butler Tour d'Angleterre with Simplex Thetic elliptical chain ring. Three sprocket Cyclo gears. Hand lever front changer. Another uncle, his brother, sold the bike instead of giving it to me. Oval rings are not new.
#AskGCNTech Hi folks! Oli said to be persistent, so here I am. How do you manage when getting sweat into your cycling glasses during hard efforts? When trying to clean my Oakley glasses with the cloth that was provided by the company, everything gets more blurry. I often end up putting my glasses away for the rest of the ride, which is often inconvenient.
Do you have any tech related questions? Leave them in the comments below using #AskGCNTech and we'll answer your question in a future clinic!👇
Loving my garbaruk 52t oval on my road bike!
On a single speed I just love how an oval chain ring feels especially on climbs
the pull up is easier if you set it up right but that means the down is harder
@@brutalitops5876down is not harder.
Oval Chain Rings do have a benefit over round. On Shimano 110BCD, the lowest sprocket is 34, but with Oval ring such as Absolute Black, you can get a 32 or a 30 while still using Ultegra / Dura Ace Cranks. That really helps with climbing the steep stuff !! I have 32 / 48 on my Dura Ace 9000 chainset and works well. make double digit gradient much easier !!
Agree, the availability of AB 46-30 ovals was what broke me away (finally) from triples on my long-distance machine. The ovals seemed to me to reduce fatigue. Improvement of about 15 minutes over a 9 hour hilly course, although that could have been down to particularly favorable air density on the day, or minor improvement in fitness, or even placebo effect. Shifting was perfectly fine, so not changed away from them.
I'm curious as to how that works - you'd think the smallest ring that would fit a given (circular) BCD would itself be circular? I mean maybe the long axis of a 32T ellipse would fit a 110 BCD but the short axis wouldn't, would it?
How do you find the shifting on your oval chainrings? 🔍
@@The1trueDave I'm wondering the same thing. But maybe it has to do with the bolt pattern on newer Shimano cranks: 4 bolts, unevenly spaced. Maybe there's an oval that covers those four points more tightly than a circle could?
@@DrewLevitt that is an excellent point, I'd forgotten about those! I'll have to draw that up on CAD and see how it works...!
Oval chain rings? I have discovered Osymetric and they are a revelation. They were a bit tricky to set up for the changing but I have managed to find a workable arrangement. Mine are 24/32/42. When I was young all the bikes I had were 1by, not that we called them that and if lucky with a 3 speed sturmey archer and I managed that ok. But now as I've got older I find hills more difficult and even at the lowest gear the 'dead spot' of round rings made me ride about 2 gears lower than ideal. Oval rings have let me enjoy riding better again and I would recommend them to anyone getting on a bit and losing leg strength. I can't speak for strong riders (I never was "strong") because I got old before I tried them.
Brad was still a bit quick in the TTs wasn't he.
Thanks for answering my question and even making it part of this episode’s title😂My life is now complete and I don’t need to worry about buying oval chain rings. Thanks Dr. Bridgewood. Hope you had a relaxing holiday☀️👍🚴♂️
No worries Martin! Thanks for asking the question 🙌
I'm 64 yrs old and weight 83kgs, (Ollie isn't so, has a different perspective), and my knees ain't so good... and I live in mountainous Andorra. Using Oval from Absolute Black have given my knees a new lease of life and have allowed me to climb mountains more smoothly. I only use an internal oval ring, my outer is still round.
Totally smooth faultless changing from small to big, big to small chain rings. My different bike set ups (all outer rings are round all inner are oval Absolute Black) are 54/36, 53/36, (TT) 53/39, 2 of 50/34 and a one-by mtb of 34 which I changed to from a 30 round. Having changed I was able to climb more easily with the 34 oval than the 30 round
My biggest gain is that for rides over 200km my knees are much less stressed after the ride, particularly noted the following day
I can only recommend oval and see that the resistance to oval rings comes from the youngsters! (Ollie....)
Just a quick note. The specific vapourflys that were banned weren't due to the carbon sole but the thickness of the midsole
actually both. They had 3 carbon blades in them too...
It was the rebound effect that they were banned for. Not sure it was a particularly useful analogy to compare running shoes to cycling shoes on this occasion.
Yup the bounciness and the sizing and shape of the superb foam has a speed increasing effect too so Ollie oversimplified things. Understandable for a non runner because most runners do not follow the tech only personal bests.
I just bought an old MTB to convert to a commuter bike. It’s got old Biopace oval chainrings and a friction front derailleur. I thought for sure I wanted to swap it for a modern drivetrain, but honestly I kind of love it and am gonna keep the originals on since they all work so well! Plus it’s got a cool look to it!
Biopace from Shimano is flawed by design. The allignment is totally different to modern oval chainrings and many people have complained about it that it has caused knee pain and complaints on this knee cap so Shimano abandoned it.... (Forever i believe...not sure )
@@sooryanandanans236 Nonsense.
Touring cyclists love them. I've used them for 15 years and love them. They're great for anyone who maintains a steady cadence. Every time I find an old bike with them I buy it just for the cranks. I have a whole bin full of them.
@@sooryanandanans236 I’m not terribly worried about it, as I’ll only be putting like 10-12 miles a week on this bike. And it’ll be at a pace far lower than that of my actual riding bike.
I once mounted my osymetric rings wrongly, shifted by 1/4 of a turn, which made them work exactly like biopace. Oh my god I did a few pedal turns and it was just horrible.
I will always go oval on a one-by or single speed, I just love how they feel.
If it works for you that's great 👍
About 3x9 Tiagra:
actually there are 4 clicks because of trim function. Triple derailleur may stay, the angles per click are same, it's just the cage is excessive (so going from 2x to 3x would require a derailleur swap). You may swap only the lever assemply, keeping the hooded hadle, since the mechanism is enclosed in the subassemply. For that unscrew a set screw underneath and tap out the pivot. Lastly, DA/Ultegra/105/Sora shifters would fit. And there are plenty second hand Ultegra left shifters since the right ones due to faulty design break much earlier and are not so repairable
Hey friend, you got me hooked up with this information.
I'm using a 3x9 MicroNew Shifters with Altus FD (max of 48T 3x) and an Ltwoo A5 Elite 2:1 RD. From small to mid chainring I got 3 clicks going up. And from mid to big chainring, 2 clicks going up. Going down from big to mid, and even mid to small, have 2 clicks.
I wanted to know if I can get away using a 2x Left Shifter on a 3x front derailleur? (This would mean I'm removing the smallest chainring) just leaving out the middle and big chainring
@@guandasin3099 cheers, mate! I don't have experience with micronew parts, but definitely see why you want to switch: that is way too many positions and one can easily miss.
So, as a speculation, we are still talking Shimano pull ratios, so any 2x shifter must work. If you keep the chainset together with FD, ony ditching one ring, is always a plus
My first bicycle was a 87 Cannondale road bike that I restored, so oval Shimano biopace cranks, 38cm wide handlebars, and downtube shifters are among the funky things it had that I haven't really missed.
biopace rings were set up "wrong" compared to modern ovals, but they were super proud of their computer assisted design! I have them on my old, old bike that I keep around mostly for nostalgia, they are pretty subtle to be honest.
Ahahaha yes, some classic retro tech there 🤣
@@All4Grogg Yeah, I also have a 1988 specialized I used for crits somewhere around here with a biopace chainring. I found that when switching between bikes I'd notice the difference, acclimate to it, and then it simply didn't make a difference. I have to chuckle at all the power analysis for oval chainrings...at the end of the day power output = drag + climbing rate x weight + loss to flexing etc, and chainrings don't play into it much. The human body can do a darned good job at flattening out any spikes in the power curve with some variations per person. Since the variations are per person, I think the concept of a single oval shape that is "generally best" is merely a festival of naivety.
I've been riding with Q-Rings for about 10 years now. Just feels more organic to me. Regular (round) chain rings feels less efficient now. Been also interested in OSymetric as Froome rode/ride with them. Never went ahead and purchased them, but would still like to try them out once.
It's worth trying different things and seeing what works for you 👀
I rode from 1986-2016. Had to quit after a never fatal accident. But, the last couple of years I was riding Rotors, and like you, I found them to be more efficient. In fact, a friend and I had the chainring/cassette set up, and I was riding down the block by 1-2 gears.
Never bought them for power, but for the concept of eliminating or reducing the “dead spot” when pedaling. I didn’t have to think as much about pulling up when the foot hits 6 o’clock.
When I got mine, I immediately sent them, and my SRM meter to SRM US, to have the meter calibrated.
Same here, I know they don't give me more power but the transfer of power is better as is the cadence using oval chainrings. And they just look good and isn't that all that matters anyway? 😁
And some people find they are kinder on the knees - gets more important as you get older and arthritis sets in
scientific studies have been done on show stiffness, and they could not find an improvement from nylon to carbon. Using floppy running shoes do show degradation, but once your shoes feel stiff you have already reached the point where further stiffness makes immeasurable difference (other than improved climbing performance due to a lighter wallet).
Hi guys oval chainrings are biomechanically more efficient by a few percent because they reduce the deadspot at the top of the pedalstroke. Its simple, undeniable geometry, really. They are better, most particularly for hill climbing. Back in the day, the knock against them was in accelerating, but that was based on feel. Too bad most bike reviews, including Ollie's in this rare case, are completely subjective and unscientific. As for shifting, how often do most riders change their front chainrings, Ollie? Lets let Andrew Feather test oval vs round chainrings on a significant climb!
You make a statement about reviews being unscientific, then proceed to suggest Andrew Feather tests one which is still unscientific. 🤷 Absolutely no independent peer reviewed research paper concludes or supports the suggestion that oval rings are biomechanically more efficient.
All the tests sponsored by ring manufacturers use small samples of riders (under 20 people) who are usually young elite males with a race licence in conditions designed to promote oval rings, in the real world it does not translate.
I just recently put oval rings on both my gravel and road bikes (AbsoluteBlack and Rotor QRings respectively).
After about 25miles I was used to the new muscle engagement and honestly, I love them! It does feel like a smoother pedal stroke especially while climbing. And the shifting isn't noticeably worse; in fact the Absolute Black ones shift somewhat better than the prior chainrings I had (although that was an Ultegra 11sp chainset and FD with Chorus 11sp shifters)
6:46 - I couldn't find the original question under past tech clinics but:
I had a Giant TCR 2 (2017) with Tiagra groupset. For some mysterious reason, the Left shifter was a 3x, but the bike had only 2 chain-rings in the front. It worked, but I had an extra click one way (i don't know if it was an extra up or down-shift). So, by setting the limit screws the right way, there was no problem with shifting. It was just a bit strange to use.
I also used 3x shifters for 2x and it worked pretty good as you said. I wouldn't spend the big extra money for a new shifter!
I had a tiagra 2x10 and the front shifter had a middle position to reduce noise when riding in the extremes (small small/big big).
@@lithanas It sounds like a 3x shifter, set that way.
I switched a 105 3x chainring to a 2x, I just replaced the front derailleur. The shifting between the 2 chainrings is not perfect but it works. A 10 speed 105 2x lever is still around 100 euros...
Good thing I shelled out for an oval Wolf Tooth chainring on my cross bike.
I do like how it smoothed my pedal stroke out a bit, but it didn't transform the bike by any means.
Oval chainrings. I have two bikes and one of them has an oval chainring (1x so no dramas shifting chainrings). I find I am more comfortable and can pedal smoother at higher cadences on the oval chainring. However, like Ollie says, you can probably adapt to either. I'm trying to adapt to both!
Going from the 3x to 2x front chainring setup. You can keep the original derailleur if you go to a friction shifter on that side. That's old school with no pre-set cable pull click.
Carbon soles definitely make a difference. I recently got both my cycling and running shoes upgraded to carbon (well, one pair of running shoes in my 4 shoe rotation) and I immediately felt very different. In a running shoe you just get a better spring effect in your step (but you do need to have proper running form/gait/stride or whatever it's called and I do definitely need to pay more attention to my step while running to get the full benefit) and in a cycling shoe it just feel more "precise" if that is the right word for it. Like the power transfers from my foot to the cleat and the pedal just more precisely instead of being a bit laggy or sluggish or whatever word you could use for it.
Glad you are enjoying the new shoes... Maybe the GTN guys are the best to talk running shoes 😳
Energy is always lost when you flex something. Power is energy/unit time. If you can engage more of the force of your foot to the sole, without flexing or bending it, you will have greater energy transfer, and therefore power. Of course, your foot has to be able to tolerate that stiffness given the force you can produce. The other factor with carbon soles, which go in scale with higher-end cycling shoes, is that they are lighter. Moving less mass in each revolution translates to less muscle fatigue in the long run. It could be argued that if you had perfect L/R balance (engagement of muscle groups around the crank circle), under constant crank speed (think in scale of revs/second) there wouldn't be much advantage to lighter shoes. But that isn't the real world, where any change in grade, gear selection, wind or draft position, causes you to change the angular speed.
have an oval chainring and would never swap it out...
Dr. Ollie, thank you for answering the compact chainset question, but you forget to mention sub-compact! now my knowledge is incomplete
Clement tub cement. Ahh memories.
When a tub is inflated, the inside diameter reduces squeezing it onto the rim.
Your spare tub under the saddle is pre-cemented. It will not feel secure when first fitted, but when it's inflated, it sticks like glue.
For the guy that wants to go 3x to 2x- I disagree with the advice given. You likely don't need to swap your shifter- careful/precise installation of the derailer and cable will allow you to use the top two or bottom two gears of the shifter as your two gear positions (if you're using the lower two positions, you need to make sure to block the top position out with the derailer limit screws and cable tension, or you can jam the shifter when you accidentally shift to the nonexistent third gear). If any parts are changed, I would swap out the derailer- a 2x and 3x derailer are different shapes. But beyond that, you'll find at the end of the exercise that the net effect is that you've just cut off your climbing gears for not much of a reason.
I agree. I would suggest using the bottom 2 gears instead of the top 2. That way you wont have an empty gear below that you may accidentally shift into. Install the cable with the mech set over the small ring on the limit screw. Then shift up to the middle gear on the shifter and set the upper limit screw. Aside from some tweaking, that should be everything needed.
@@markgambrill only issue with not using the low gear position is that if you shift into the nonexistent low gear, there's a lot of slack in the cable and the housing could slip out of the stop. A trade off on which issue you want to deal with on a hack/bodge drivetrain. Edit: I may have misread your post, I think we both prefer it the same way, but I'll just leave this post here as-is.
I think Ollie gave the easiest advice so someone could shift without having to think about over shifting the front derailer. Simon said in the video on changing gear ratios that you could still use a triple shifter, just would take care not to overshift. A double would be easier but, not necessary.
@@fredmcgough748 that's true, but we're also talking about buying parts just so they can use free parts (I've forgotten if this is about just a trigger shifter, or brifters, which would be even more silly). I'm trying to suggest how to do it while still being free. Honestly, if a friend came to me with this intent, and budget was an issue to them, I'd give them a long list of reasons of why it is impractical and to just stash the free crank for later use.
That's the one benefit of the old friction shifters. You can use any gears setup you want. But, of course the shifting is not as precise.
Placebo effect or not, I smashed multiple Strava PR's after installing a AbsoluteBlack oval chainring. This was on a 1x mountain bike and I only feel a difference at low rpm/high torque situations like climbing. I'm keeping round rings on my 2x road bike where rpm is generally higher and to avoid shifting concerns with the ovals.
I bought a used bike with ovals already fitted, I've had PR's too but the bike is 3kg lighter than the old one. I'm not sure if they make a difference but I'm happy with them.
I agree that they don't magically produce more power but I'm assuming that there is some kind of leverage effect which my novice mind assumes might help with climbing.
Shifting on my ovals is fine. No worse than round. Pedalling is smoother. Less fatigue.
I'm still riding biopace, just love it.
Tubular tape is awesome. Given how sticky it is, I really doubt it impacts rolling resistance, has this ever been tested? And it's so much simpler and cleaner than glue.
Always a great presentation. Thanks Ollie!
Glad you enjoyed it 👍
A couple of nerdy technical points. 1) the crank arms of current shimano cranks are asymetrical and mirror the shape of oval chainrings. Is that because the downstroke is the point of greatest stress? 2) my oval rings seem to wear far less, with much slower deformation of the teeth. Again, is that due to the ring reflecting the power production during the pedal stroke? 3) I use an oval small ring and a round big ring and this solves the pesky shifting issues, and gives one a sense of using slightly different muscles depending on the ring. 4) Most of my riding is low to very low intensity commuting up longish climbs where I'm in the sweet spot between grinding and spinning. The sweet spot seems very pronounced.
The loading on running shoes is different from cycling shoes - why refer to them at all for cycling? I think it would be easy to test if cycling shoe stiffness has any influence on speed (instead of just using a vague tern like 'power transfer'). Certainly the bike industry would have us think it does but GCN has the resources to test this, so, give it a shot.
The difficulty with testing this lies within the challenges of measuring the same forces applied by the human on two seperate occasions. The only way to measure this would be measuring oxygen consumption while riding on a stationary bike, on two occasions with two (or more sets of different stiffness shoes) then calculating mechanical efficiency and seeing which shoes led to the lowest oxygen cost.
GCN tech has done a video about this in the past. I am surprised Ollie did not refer to it.
ruclips.net/video/5uHVYHJE-PA/видео.html
@@LindseyH24 I understand, thanks. Still it seems like a myth to me so I wish it could be checked one way or another.
@@matt_m126 Thanks, you are right. But that was testing short maximum sprints. I suspect the differences would be much less for, say, steady TT efforts.
I would replace the triple crank with the double, reattach the cable and adjust the stops before replacing the shifter or front derailleur. It might work fine.
Lots of non-tubeless rims can be run tubeless. Just make sure the rim joint is welded, not pinned.
I’ve got a vintage Italian Duegi shoes with wood inserts in sole 👌🏻 can wait to try them😃
Simple answer for me, i dont have knee pain with ovals vs rounds. Did rounds for several years always had knee pain after long rides. Tried ovals, no knee pain since.
The 'old' Biopace Oval rings were set up where the +1 is at dead spot position (12/6 o'clock) but the modern oval rings are at power phase position(~3/9 o'clock)... However, u can rotate biopace ring 1 chain bolt hole forward (or was it backward??), 72 degree, to change the oval profile to something similar to the modern oval rings.
Whether or not it works is down to individual. Personally, I feel the difference on high cadence pedaling. Then again, I have been using oval rings for the last 10 years. They worked for me so I'm sticking with oval.
About the carbon application, I think both try to achieve the same goal - efficiency, but go about it differently:
Cycling shoes do this directly.
The stiffness of carbon soles prevent energy loss (in the form of distortion, compression.etc.). With maximised power transfer / minimized power loss, a cycling spent the least energy to accomplish an effort.
Running shoes do it with compensation.
The spring-like carbon plates give the exerted energy back to the runner. With those ‘returned’ energy, a runner spent the least (total) energy to cover certain distance.
I run a Oval chainring on my Fixed gear bike 51T X 17T......luv it but once a year have to change the Chain due to stretched.
I use absolute black chain rings on my bike. There are good and bad things about them. They definitely smooth out my power while climbing. That is probably less of an issue for a pro rider with a perfect pedal stroke, but for us amateurs it makes a difference. On flat terrain it doesn't make a difference at all to me. Also, if you're doing a balanced pedal stroke they'll feel the same as a round chain ring, but if you're favouring one leg you'll feel it right away. It's improved my roller riding considerably because it makes it easy to tell when my stroke is off. The shifting is noticeably worse than round chain rings though. If you switch between big and small rings in the front frequently they're probably not the best choice. Your mileage will vary, but I enjoy them. They're definitely not giving me any kind of wattage boost or making me faster, but there are minor benefits to them.
If you find that it makes your riding easier and more enjoyable, then go for it
Thanks Ollie, I decided to try out those Zero Aero pedals because I think you’ve raved about them in some previous videos 😁
I have a point to add about 2 and 3 speed front shifters. You can absolutely use a 3 speed shifter for a 2 speed derailleur. It's a bit of a bodge but just set it up normally, lowest gear in the lowest click of the shifter and then make sure your H limit screw is properly adjusted. This way you will be able to shift 2 speed, trying to shift further will bottom out on the H screw and stop you from over shifting. I've had this setup for years on my bike. No need to buy a whole new shifter.
Great little hack, can save some good money 🙌
Love how he looked for, and found his phone to show us how to use the cycle computer apps, and never used it, just held it 🤣
I've ridden with oval rings for about 7 years now. Absolutely love them and I honestly don't think I'll ever go back to round. However I do agree shifting is not as good but I dont race so it's not an issue for me.
Have you ever considered a 1x system to get rid of the shifting issue? 🔎
@@gcntech I have both a mountain and road bike. Mountain is 1x, but my road I don't think 1x will work too well lol. Thanks for the suggestion tho.
The main benefit of oval chainrings is to stop the surging effect on low cadence, high power situations like climbing. They don’t work great with front shifters though.
All the more reason for me to pedal harder and stay out of the little ring. 😎
Nor do they work well with rear clutched derailleur. Was running oval 52 with 1x and the shifting was horrendous.
They make no difference other than to degrade shift quality and lighten your wallet.
The way oval rings are clocked these days, the peak power phase occurs when the chainring is “largest” and the deadspot is where it’s smallest. If we assume a constant rpm, then that would cause even bigger surges because the waveform would spike during the downstroke and dip even lower through the bottom of the stroke. The real main benefit of oval rings is that the peak power phase is driven by your two largest leg muscles, the glutes and quads. In essence you are maximizing your contributions from those muscles and deemphasizing the contributions of the lower leg.
@@kidsafe If that were true, you'd see an overall power gain, but as Ollie says, you don't.
I had Ultegra Biopace chainrings on my bike in 1993. I didn't ever even think about it until I eventually got round chainrings and the powerstroke feel changed a bit.
You don't necessarily need to change your front shifter when going from a triple to a double. My Shimano 5600 shifter (10 speed) is compatible with both triple and double front chain rings. In may also be the case with your Tiagra x3 shifter.
You can just get 2 pairs of pliers and bend the cage to clear the chain for odd chain line 3x also
If you are using Continental Tubs, ALWAYS use Conti glue. For some strange reason, Vittoria Mastik 1 tends to loosen the glue that holds the base tape on Conti tires. I've seen people leaving the base tape stuck to the rim when they pull off a Conti, glued with Vittoria glue. To be on the safe side, I also use Mastik 1 when I'm gluing Vittoria tires.
PS. Save your Tubs for race day. Use clinchers when training.
Oval rings don’t give you more power they change the leverage.
When you are on a steep climb in a big gear it’s at 6 and 12 that you get the most resistance so surely (effectively) changing down only at that point gives you the best of both.
In 1987 I bought a Centurion Ironman Dave Scott that had Biopace chain rings. It was a somewhat new and popular idea at the time. It felt different but I got used to it. I gave it to Salvation Army about 15 years ago. I kind of wish I'd kept it now just to have a vintage bike. I currently ride a 2010 Specialized Roubaix Comp. It's a bit outdated compared to recent bikes but I have no plans on replacing it anytime soon.
Ah... the one that got away 😔
My brother tried out oval rings because he has knee problems. He insists that his knee feels better with them.
That's great 🙌
Shimano needs to bring back Biopace. Chainrings of the people!
And the Biopace chainrings are so long lasting and therefore eco-friendly too! Still have the origninal 52/42 chainring on my Koga Miyata Roadwinner from 1989 which came with 2x7 Shimano 600 tricolour groupset.
I have oval Rotor Q rings on one of my bikes and never felt much of a difference between them and my round ones.
I've said this several times: I road on USED road tires on a Kurt Kinetic Road Machine and they lasted and lasted. I tried both red and black trainer specific tires and managed to destroy them in a matter of weeks. As to the question, if you don't overtighten, you should be able to use your road tires without significant wear. You should remove any debris before mounting though. Oh, and you will do more damage by undertightening as the tire will rub against the rollers.
Thanks James, Great to hear you've had good experience using road tyres on your turbo. Turbo tyres are great if you plan on doing a longer stint inside and want to keep those road tyres fresh. 👍
@@gcntech Notice I said USED. These were tires I wouldn't take out on the road.
Gears.
1970s 9kg Peugeot race bikes had 52/42 to a 14-21 5 speed. That's what we used in mass-start events.
"These youngsters don't know there're born."
In the 1960s I rode 54/44 with a 14-21 6 speed (ahead of the game back then!). And I didn't walk up hills, ever! Ah, except the Drove in Brighton when I rode back from Preston Park on my track bike - that was a steep one. One way down nowadays - exciting to approach it as the road just disappears in front of you!
I use an old fashioned fluid trainer in the winter, and never bother to use a "trainer" tire. Usually, I just use the worn tire that I've ridden all summer. If that tire is shot, I put on a cheap wire bead tire.
Great episode! Oval chainrings, I had more negatives than positives back in 1988, looks like some fads don't improve! Glued tubular tires... good one Mr. local bike shop, experience is still worth more than gold!
Compact chain rings in the motorcycle world is called out by saying "close ratio" verses "wide ratio" gears. So it's not the number of gears but rather the change in ratio from one gear to the next. This would make a bicycle "compact chainring" equal to a motorcycle "close ratio" transmission.
"Compact" and "standard" doesn't refer to the chainrings at all, but to the crankset, specifically the bolt circle diameter. Smaller bolt circles allow a smaller minimum size chainring to be fitted, but larger chainrings were not limited.
The compact or standard crankset is an outdated term, which refers to an older 5-bolt standard, where the standard was 130mm bolt circle, and the compact was 110mm. The smaller bolt circle would allow smaller chainrings to be fitted, down to 34t compared to 39t minimum on standard cranks.
Now that Shimano has gone with 110mm with all their models with the 4 bolt cranks, you can just fit chainrings as you like from 34t and up.
Team sky knew about the power overreading with oval chainrings. They even precisely measured the exact value (it was 6% for Froome). They used Stages powermeter and it's not a thing of the past. In fact, most powermeters even today would still overread by ~10% (I have Stages, 4iiii and Quarq).
do they still use them?
@@randellgribben9772 On my road and gravel bikes yes I use Osymetrics, but not on my TT bike (because there is more inertia at high speed, therefore less dead spots, and my cadence is higher). I manage to cope with both, switching back and forth without much trouble :)
In regards to oval chain rings, I had them put on my new 2018 Cervelo S 3, they immediately felt better, maybe more efficient but my chain tended to jump off more frequently which got to be very irritating. Traded the S 3 for a Cervelo Caledonia 5, I would not use the ovals again, it got to be to stressful worrying that my chain would jump off at any given time.
Power equals work done per unit time. Oval chainrings extend the perpendicular distance of the line of action of a force from the axis of rotation (simply said: extend the torque) for the time spent in the ranges where your legs' power output are most optimal. Therefore, the lower your cadence, the more benefit one MAY have from oval chainrings. This is also influenced by one's physical attributes and pedaling technique. There is also the psychological factor mentioned by Ollie. In local ultracycling circles almost everyone who have tried them, would never use anything else. The pros have equipment sponsors who pay them to show off their products, so drawing a conclusion from there is highly colored. Truth be told, it is much easier with 1x systems, but if you are interested, just go out and try whenever you need new chainrings. First they will be a bit weird especially in high cadence, but once you get used to it, you may never go back.
Thanks for the comment. Do you use Oval chainrings?
@@gcntech yes, for 2 years on my gravel bike that I race. My training bikes use either belts or regular chainrings due to costs.
And I never went back!
2x is really best. A 22 low front with an 11-36 cassette gives you the same low gear as those pizza pie 51 tooth $400 cassettes.
Ollie, you mention that the rim will have a hook on it. While this definitely might be true, there are of of course hookless rims and the person must be sure to buy compatible tires for these.
I still rock a BioPace chainring on 2 bikes. So not dead.
Been running rotor’s Q rings for a while now…don’t know if it’s nonsense but to me it feels like I can climb a tad better. Probably all BS IDK
#AskGCNTech
I have shimano sora and i’m thinking about updgrading the jockey wheels to ones with bearings in it. Is it worth it? (£9)
I’ve put mine on and taken it off for several seasons now on my trance
I really notice the benefit on chunky sections uphill I’m able to muscle up stuff I normally couldn’t with a round
Other than that it does keep a slightly better cadence when pedaling for those who may have a stronger leg than the other
The biggest con is if you’re in the hardest gear at top speed I feel some slack in the pedaling
That’s non existent with a round
Is it worth $100 ?
I say sure if it’s burning a hole in your pocket
I prefer to ride with than without on my local trails
Will also say if it doesn’t fit my next bike I won’t order another
I recently started using Absolute Black oval chainrings, only because I switched to a second hand SRAM Red crankset and the rings were preinstalled. I do "feel a difference". What's the difference? I don't know, really....it just feels different than round rings. I'm not any faster, though. And shifting from the small ring to the big ring can take some finessing, but that may have more to do with my FD setup than the rings? Who knows. They do look badass, though.
No need to change the left Tiagra shifter. Just get any double front derailleur and adjust the limiters. The extra click won't engage.
i just installed an Absolute black oval ring 30t onto my santa cruz nomad v5 full suspension bike , fully expecting the pulsing sensation that comes with the oval.
zip....nothing i took a spin , i felt absolutely nothing , it rides just like a round ring, apparently my bike mech says its the suspension linkage thats negating the pulsing feeling
8:25 it helps A LOT if you're only using ERG mode and stay in low gear
Please it would be interesting to see a video of testing how much diference makes a carbon sole shoes to a starter option during a climb and standard socks vs compression socks to see if compression benefits performance during a climb for example
Another website did this test They found not much of a difference in performance. The way the shoe fit made the biggest difference
Hello. Great show! I have a 1984 Cannondale Sr300 with 126 mm rear drop width. Could I fit a 10 speed cassette wheel setup. If not what would you recommend?
O symmetric. I love them. And once upon a time I did some measurements of the osymetric rings and calculations and found about a 10% increase in torque/ power if the pedals were powered only by gravity, straight down. I think it's actually intuitive , looking at the shape of the o symetric rings that they would be faster.
We love a good test 🤓
Regarding stiff shoes vs soft shoes I switched from a Shimano 3/10 stiffness plastic sole shoe to 7/10 from another manufacturer. It felt better on the 7/10 in sprinting. The real difference for a casual rider is how the cleat presses against the groove between the balls of the feet. There are sensitive nerves there that can feel like the foot is on fire on longer rides. I have had that on the 3/10 shoe and never on the carbon fibre 7/10 shoe. YMMV.
So basically the stiffer shoe distributes the load more uniformly on the foot you mean?
@@felixbelanger2659 Yes but the added advantage is that a stiff sole does not bend upwards above the cleat to press foot nerves. Reducing the chance of hot foot aka burning sensation between the balls of the feet.
@@JanneRasanen2 Combine stiff carbon soles with Specialized footbeds (3 arch height choices and metatarsal lift) for nirvana in comfort! Greater tolerance of forces at balls and overall foot engagement.
@@andyknapp212 I have combined them for years and share your experience.
Can you adjust upper or lower limit screw to use triple front derailer to work with a double chainring, essentially blocking out the 1st or 3rd position?
In your first question today, you assume that the rims are clincher. What if they are tubular rims? 25 years ago, I bought a quantity of Wolber tubular rims, dirt cheap, from our team director, who was the DS of the Domestic Pro Schwinn - Icy Hot Team, back in the 80's. I would build up all my race wheels with them.
As for inexpensive wire bead clinchers, I use them on wheels that I use on the trainer, in winter.
#AskGCNTech I was lucky enough to purchase my first road bike secondhand - its from the early 2000s. It is set up with older shimano 105s and is a 3x9. I am thinking about buying new brake levers. Since it is a 9-speed, I was wondering if I should change this out for Shimano Sora levers or wait be able to afford to change everything to 11-speed. Would the new soras be an upgrade compared to the older 105s? Thank you!
you answered my ? about oval rings, tnx dude
Had biopace that came on a new bike decades ago. Don’t miss it.
Biopace is ovalized the exact opposite way to modern oval chainrings. No wonder it is garbage.
If lubricating the inner tubes was a downgrade, would doing the opposite - creating more friction - be an upgrade? Doing the same test, but using chalk instead of lubricant, would be an interesting follow-up experiment!
I could swear that Gravel Bike fit question was done in another GCN episode.
#AskGCNTech I have an Ultegra 11s 11-34 cassette on my road bike. My indoor trainer came with a 11-28 cassette. Can I just switch between the two with no problem or should I fit my indoor trainer with the same cassette as my bike?
NP using 11-28. As long as you stay inside the 11-34 range you are fine. Your bike's chain length and long-cage RD are sized to handle the big-to-largest ring/gear.
Oi found oval noticebly different (better) on my mtb within the first 50 feet of pedaling. On a road bike ….. or even a downhill mtb….whats the point ?
#ASKGCNTECH Is it worth balancing your wheels? Assuming yes, what's the best way to do so without adding an aerodynamic penalty?
yes and golf waights under the rim tape
Chris Froome loves them
How much weight could be saved by helium filling tyres, frame, seat post, handlbars, stem and any other orifice capable of being made airtight. I suspect very little, but would be nice to know.
I went from round to oval chainring and e!imitated knee pain. Therefore it works for me but apparently not everyone. I cycle (MTB) more now that I am retired.
That's great! We are all different, sounds like oval rings are the ones for you. 🙌
I was steered to oval chain rings and shorter cranks after total hip replacement to give me a bit more power to my weaker left leg (all done after a thorough bike fitting).
How are you getting on with them?
@@gcntech I've not noticed anything different in terms of pedaling cadence or style, but I certainly can push hard up the big hills around here. And definitely plenty of power for a rolling course.
As a triathlete After switching to ovals and shorter cranks (175 to 165mm ) I no longer get muscle cramps ( usually my thighs ) and feel fresher off the bike and better run times afterwards.
always always always glue your tubulars on tape just doesn't cut it. I know some will argue the point but having seen a tubular roll off on the track is not a pretty sight.
Speaking of indoor trainer tyres, all the ones I've seen seem to be 23mm, are those going to be okay on a 21mm rim? that feels like pushing it a bit in terms of getting it firmly seated and most sizing guides i've seen seem to say to not go below 25mm with a 21mm wheel.
I had Shimano BioPace on a mountain bike in the early '90s.
Very retro. How did you find them? 🔍
The asymetric chain rings put more load where leverage is greatest. But the effect is not that much.
Oval chainrings on a hardtail is definitely noticeable imo. Its less punchy on those technical climbs.
I love my Oval Osymetric rings
Mostly good stuff as always but please talk to GTN before bringing up carbon-plated running shoes! They are completely different from bike shoes. A running shoe is designed to be as bouncy as possible whereas a cycling shoe should be stiff. Also most of the extra speed in the Vaporflys isn't in the carbon plate but in the foam.
I used some Shimano biopace rings on a MTN bike before. Feels different. Pretty clear it didn't make more power, it just feels different. Some people may like the feel
Those rings were clocked totally the wrong way.
I have some road ones Ive never used. Always heard they were set up wrong.
@@veganpotterthevegan the claims made that Biopace were clocked the wrong way has only been stated by the manufacturers of other oval rings and has never been accepted as correct by Shimano themselves. A recent study by Université Joseph Fourier, in Grenoble, France. found that Shimano’s Biopace chainrings vastly increase a rider’s ability to maintain threshold power over standard and current elliptical chainrings bringing the commonly held view of them being wrong into question.
The biospace debate has not been concluded yet, like that for all non round rings
@@kidkarbon4775 and Shimano by realizing they shouldn't sell them due to countless complaints of knee pain
#AskGCNTech Is it possible to fit a Campagnolo chainset, either Power Torque or Ultra Torque to a Shimano BB86 press fit bottom bracket or would I have to replace the Shimano with a Campag bottom bracket?
Replace the BB with Campagnolo's BB86 cups.
Do you apply carbon paste on the part of an alloy steerer tube that a carbon stem clamps on? #AskGCNTech
My uncle had a 1938 Claud Butler Tour d'Angleterre with Simplex Thetic elliptical chain ring. Three sprocket Cyclo gears. Hand lever front changer.
Another uncle, his brother, sold the bike instead of giving it to me.
Oval rings are not new.
#AskGCNTech Hi folks! Oli said to be persistent, so here I am. How do you manage when getting sweat into your cycling glasses during hard efforts? When trying to clean my Oakley glasses with the cloth that was provided by the company, everything gets more blurry. I often end up putting my glasses away for the rest of the ride, which is often inconvenient.
Disposable glasses cleaning wipes are handy to bring with you. I specifically use Zeiss Pre-Moistened Lens Cleaning Wipes.
@@MrKevinWhite Thanks so much for the tip!