You are reading a single comment by @Bugno and its replies.
Click here to read the full conversation.
-
Tnx, yes I agree that they are definitely not this big revolution but maybe finally finding their niche in triathlons? Maybe little aero advantage combined with a more similar motion to the running movements?
Bugno-
a more similar motion to the running movements?
Your feet are still going in circles. Maybe if somebody rotated this drive through 90° it would make pedalling more like running :-)
And yes, I did say all this 4 years ago
-
maybe finally finding their niche in triathlons?
If I were selling snake oil, I'd certainly go after the triathlon market :-)
gbj_tester
Yes, and yes-ish. A properly centred oval chainring is no worse than many of the not-quite-round circular ones in terms of variation of chain slack around the crank revolution
So far I've been unable to loose any worthwhile power with short cranks, but in general crank length is indeed an irrelevance except for when they are too long. The jury is out on the aero advantage. Just switching to shorter cranks makes little difference, if it frees up positional options which were barred by longer cranks there might be gains to be had.
No, because oval chainrings are snake oil. They get reinvented approximately every time everybody who wasn't around last time has got old enough to be suckered into paying for something which clearly doesn't work. Don't you think that after about a century of charlatans trying to flog non-circular chainrings that they would by now be universal if they were any good?