The Powercrank Thread

[coapman]

Making someone use muscles way beyond where they are trained always is stressful and painful.

After all this stress and pain where in the pedalling circle do these trained muscles apply this extra torque and do you have the evidence to confirm your claim.

 

[FrankDay]

After all this stress and pain where in the pedalling circle do these trained muscles apply this extra torque and do you have the evidence to confirm your claim.

This probably varies from person to person depending upon what their pre-PowerCrank pedaling style looks like. While studies have shown PC's do change pedaling coordination I don't have proof of the range of variation of change but we should be able to better understand what is really going on as soon as we can reliably and easily measure pedal forces.

 

[coapman]

This probably varies from person to person depending upon what their pre-PowerCrank pedaling style looks like. While studies have shown PC's do change pedaling coordination I don't have proof of the range of variation of change but we should be able to better understand what is really going on as soon as we can reliably and easily measure pedal forces.

Why does "one legged" pedalling in which the muscles have the same objectives not cause the same stress and pain. Excluding unweighting, what prevents prolonged "one legged" pedalling from giving that same possible 40% power increase.

 

[FrankDay]

Why does "one legged" pedalling in which the muscles have the same objectives not cause the same stress and pain. Excluding unweighting, what prevents prolonged "one legged" pedalling from giving that same possible 40% power increase.

Because one legged pedaling is hardly ever done for more than a minute or two. The reason for this is most people find one legged pedaling really hard. Try doing one-legged pedaling for an hour or two and see if it is stressful or not.

Further, one legged pedaling only works one leg at a time so to get a one-hour workout on both legs would take 2 hours but beyond that, one legged pedaling does not work on the two legged coordination. If the two legged coordination is not changed it doesn't matter how well the muscles are trained if you aren't going to use them naturally.

 

[coapman]

Because one legged pedaling is hardly ever done for more than a minute or two. The reason for this is most people find one legged pedaling really hard. Try doing one-legged pedaling for an hour or two and see if it is stressful or not.

Further, one legged pedaling only works one leg at a time so to get a one-hour workout on both legs would take 2 hours but beyond that, one legged pedaling does not work on the two legged coordination. If the two legged coordination is not changed it doesn't matter how well the muscles are trained if you aren't going to use them naturally.

Which is easier to do, one legged pedalling on a bike fitted with standard cranks or on one fitted with PC's ?

 

[FrankDay]

Which is easier to do, one legged pedalling on a bike fitted with standard cranks or on one fitted with PC's ?

PC's. It isn't necessary to unclip and get the leg out of the way to pedal one legged on PC's.

 

[coapman]

PC's. It isn't necessary to unclip and get the leg out of the way to pedal one legged on PC's.

I am only referring to the leg doing the pedalling.

 

[FrankDay]

I am only referring to the leg doing the pedalling.

Why would you expect them to be any different then? The hardness comes about because of the unusual position that must be maintained to do one legged pedaling on regular cranks. Is there a difference between standing on one leg with the other leg up about 2 inches and close to the midline or when the other leg is up about 8 inches and a foot off the midline. The supporting leg does the same amount of work but one of these activities is a lot "harder" than the other.

 

[coapman]

Why would you expect them to be any different then? The hardness comes about because of the unusual position that must be maintained to do one legged pedaling on regular cranks. Is there a difference between standing on one leg with the other leg up about 2 inches and close to the midline or when the other leg is up about 8 inches and a foot off the midline. The supporting leg does the same amount of work but one of these activities is a lot "harder" than the other.

What is the difference between the pedaling technique of a rider using the perfected circular technique and that of a rider using the PC technique.

 

[FrankDay]

What is the difference between the pedaling technique of a rider using the perfected circular technique and that of a rider using the PC technique.

I don't have a clue what the "perfected circular technique" is that you refer to. Tell me and I will tell you the difference, if any.

 

[coapman]

I don't have a clue what the "perfected circular technique" is that you refer to. Tell me and I will tell you the difference, if any.

The perfected circular is when both legs of the rider are using the one legged technique at the same time.

 

[FrankDay]

The perfected circular is when both legs of the rider are using the one legged technique at the same time.

There is no difference, although one legged technique can vary because one-legged pedaling is usually done at very low cadences (30) such that people pull up more on the back stroke than they do at the somewhat higher cadences (60-80) typically used when on PowerCranks where they will do little more than simply unweight.

 

[coapman]

There is no difference, although one legged technique can vary because one-legged pedaling is usually done at very low cadences (30) such that people pull up more on the back stroke than they do at the somewhat higher cadences (60-80) typically used when on PowerCranks where they will do little more than simply unweight.

There is a difference, PC's create an added difficulty when getting the crank from 9 to 1 o'c . It is this difficulty that is responsible for the increased stress and pain and there is nothing to be gained from this extra stressful action. With the circular style the crank moves stress free through this sector while the PC'er has to tow it up and over. You should know by now that there is nothing to be gained from pulling up more than is necessary for unweighting because in doing so you will lose more torque in your downstroke than what you can generate in your upstroke.

 

[CoachFergie]

There is a difference, PC's create an added difficulty when getting the crank from 9 to 1 o'c . It is this difficulty that is responsible for the increased stress and pain and there is nothing to be gained from this extra stressful action. With the circular style the crank moves stress free through this sector while the PC'er has to tow it up and over. You should know by now that there is nothing to be gained from pulling up more than is necessary for unweighting because in doing so you will lose more torque in your downstroke than what you can generate in your upstroke.

Well of course he knows that but then once people understand this there is no need for uncoupled cranks. All they do is apply a mechanical constraint that makes people think they are training hard. But when one goes back to normal cranks for competition the time spent training in a non specific fashion is a wasted effort. Frank himself has said that an Ironman athlete produced less power going from uncoupled to normal for competition.

An anecdote based coach could deduct from that that uncoupled cranks harm performance in competition. If they were too lazy to read the wealth of evidence supplied in this thread

 

[FrankDay]

There is a difference, PC's create an added difficulty when getting the crank from 9 to 1 o'c .

Perhaps you could explain to me what this additional added difficulty is. I have never noticed it and I, as opposed to you, have actually ridden on them. So, I look forward to learning about this additional difficulty.

 

[coapman]

There is no difference, although one legged technique can vary because one-legged pedaling is usually done at very low cadences (30) such that people pull up more on the back stroke than they do at the somewhat higher cadences (60-80) typically used when on PowerCranks where they will do little more than simply unweight.

When both legs are using the one legged technique at the same time, power application and cadence rises so pulling up more is not necessary. If there is no difference, why does the perfected circular technique not result in that same possible 40% power increase instead of its lower power output than that of a masher.

 

[FrankDay]

When both legs are using the one legged technique at the same time, power application and cadence rises so pulling up more is not necessary. If there is no difference, why does the perfected circular technique not result in that same possible 40% power increase instead of its lower power output than that of a masher.

It would result in the same improvement if anyone could actually learn how to pedal in this fashion without the need for PowerCranks.

 

[coapman]

It would result in the same improvement if anyone could actually learn how to pedal in this fashion without the need for PowerCranks.

What prevents a PC'er from reverting back to natural pedalling when he uses standard cranks ?

 

[FrankDay]

What prevents a PC'er from reverting back to natural pedalling when he uses standard cranks ?

Nothing absolutely prevents reversion but adequate training using the PC technique such that the PC technique is now the "natural" technique can slow the reversion. The better trained the cyclist on the PC technique the slower reversion back when the rider stops training on the PC's and, it seems, they never go completely back to where they were before.

 

[sciguy]

Nothing absolutely prevents reversion but adequate training using the PC technique such that the PC technique is now the "natural" technique can slow the reversion. The better trained the cyclist on the PC technique the slower reversion back when the rider stops training on the PC's and, it seems, they never go completely back to where they were before.

And you know this how?????????? Are you leaving off the "I think" or "I guess" or "I imagine" to go with this statement?


Hugh

 

[FrankDay]

And you know this how?????????? Are you leaving off the "I think" or "I guess" or "I imagine" to go with this statement?


Hugh

I "know" this because of numerous anecdotal reports of what the first ride is like many years after stopping PowerCranks when going back to them. These people are almost always worried that they will have to start all over again (the first ride lasting 10 minutes or so) yet it never happens - they are always much better than they expected and transition back is much easier than the first time. I have never heard a report where they completely returned to where they were the first time despite several years of zero power cranks use. The only way I can explain this is if the riders never revert back completely to where they were before. If you have a way of explaining how those muscles maintain some increased capability without being used more than before I am all ears. So, my use of the phrase "it seems" looks proper to me and I think it unnecessary to add "I think" or "I guess" or "I imagine" to this statement even though I don't have scientific proof of the statement.

 

[coapman]

Nothing absolutely prevents reversion but adequate training using the PC technique such that the PC technique is now the "natural" technique can slow the reversion. The better trained the cyclist on the PC technique the slower reversion back when the rider stops training on the PC's and, it seems, they never go completely back to where they were before.

If after returning to standard cranks the most a rider can hope for is the perfected circular technique, what was the purpose of all that painful training or where does all that muscle strengthening by a year of exclusive PC use come into play.

 

[FrankDay]

If after returning to standard cranks the most a rider can hope for is the perfected circular technique, what was the purpose of all that painful training or where does all that muscle strengthening by a year of exclusive PC use come into play.

What was the purpose? Well, I suppose it is what most people expect to get from their training, improved performance, except in this instance they hope to get performance improvements that go beyond what they would have expected to get without the help of the PC's.

 

[coapman]

What was the purpose? Well, I suppose it is what most people expect to get from their training, improved performance, except in this instance they hope to get performance improvements that go beyond what they would have expected to get without the help of the PC's.

Riders hope to get increased improvements only because they have been given misleading information with a promise of a possible 40% power gain. The only torque that matters in pedalling is the torque applied in your main power stroke and PC training has a negative effect on that. How do you believe this new 2nd generation PM will confirm your claims.

 

[FrankDay]

Riders hope to get increased improvements only because they have been given misleading information with a promise of a possible 40% power gain. The only torque that matters in pedalling is the torque applied in your main power stroke and PC training has a negative effect on that. How do you believe this new 2nd generation PM will confirm your claims.

Well, people are seeing the power improvements (sometimes inferred from speed improvements) now. The 2nd generation PM's should confirm our explanation as to how and why these improvements are occurring. Or, if we are wrong, give us an alternative explanation as to why these improvements are occurring.