# anyone else think powercranks are great?



## markhr (Mar 20, 2005)

unashamed product plug - because they WORK REALLY WELL! hard work yes but what a difference and it's immediate too.

www.powercranks.com
https://www.pezcyclingnews.com/?pg=fullstory&id=3353
https://www.cyclingnews.com/tech.php?id=tech/2003/reviews/PowerCranks


----------



## Dave_Stohler (Jan 22, 2004)

...sure look ugly....


----------



## weiwentg (Feb 3, 2004)

markhr said:


> unashamed product plug - because they WORK REALLY WELL! hard work yes but what a difference and it's immediate too.
> 
> www.powercranks.com
> https://www.pezcyclingnews.com/?pg=fullstory&id=3353
> https://www.cyclingnews.com/tech.php?id=tech/2003/reviews/PowerCranks


I use these, but I don't think the benefits are immediate. I've used them for a year and I'm only just starting to see an improvement in my pedaling style when I go back to regular cranks. I think it takes more than a year to get significant improvement, and I think the designer himself agrees that Powercranks are a long-term deal.


----------



## markhr (Mar 20, 2005)

weiwentg said:


> I use these


Post some pictures.


----------



## carioca (May 27, 2005)

What I read about them sounds good, they should help you develop a great pedal circle on the long run, but they are fugly ugly, maybe the manufacturer should hire a designer.


----------



## Kerry Irons (Feb 25, 2002)

*The "power" of self-belief*

I'm glad that you think they're working for you.

Power Cranks, Rotor Cranks, etc. just like their innumerable predecessors over the past 100 years (!) work on the assumption that the human body is not designed for rotary motion and that therefore performance can be improved by allowing the body to deliver power in some fashion that is "less rotary." Such "breakthroughs in technology" occur every 10-15 years. I've seen about 4 such innovations in my cycling career. 

The funny, and telling thing is, they NEVER catch on in any significant way. They make a splash in the cycling press, they get some positive reviews, they get some top riders testifying for them, they get some anecdotal praise, but (I repeat) they NEVER catch on. My take on them is that hope springs eternal in the hearts of both the inventors and riders - "There MUST be a better way!" Power Cranks are about at the point in their cycle (pun intended) where, after 3-4 years, there will be a last gasp of publicity and we will not hear about them again. That is until the next breakthrough comes along and a few old timers pipe up: "It sounds like those Power Cranks back in the early 00s."


----------



## weather (Feb 6, 2004)

Kerry Irons said:


> I'm glad that you think they're working for you.
> 
> Power Cranks, Rotor Cranks, etc. just like their innumerable predecessors over the past 100 years (!) work on the assumption that the human body is not designed for rotary motion and that therefore performance can be improved by allowing the body to deliver power in some fashion that is "less rotary." Such "breakthroughs in technology" occur every 10-15 years. I've seen about 4 such innovations in my cycling career.
> 
> The funny, and telling thing is, they NEVER catch on in any significant way. They make a splash in the cycling press, they get some positive reviews, they get some top riders testifying for them, they get some anecdotal praise, but (I repeat) they NEVER catch on. My take on them is that hope springs eternal in the hearts of both the inventors and riders - "There MUST be a better way!" Power Cranks are about at the point in their cycle (pun intended) where, after 3-4 years, there will be a last gasp of publicity and we will not hear about them again. That is until the next breakthrough comes along and a few old timers pipe up: "It sounds like those Power Cranks back in the early 00s."



er...i think you got the wrong idea about power cranks and their intended effect.


----------



## markhr (Mar 20, 2005)

other powercrankers post some pics - thanks


----------



## psycleridr (Jul 21, 2005)

*Looks like a good product*

Only thing is that they cater to a niche in the market. I am not a racer and purely ride for pleasure and enjoyment, but I would love to try these things if they weren't so damn expensive. Kinda reminds me of the STRENGTH shoe back when I was in highschool. Don't know if anyone ever heard of these or tried them. They were for increasing your vertical in jumping sports or increase your overall speed for runners/sprinters. They were the same in that they catered to a small market but everyone that used them (serious atheletes not recreational ones) swore by them. I suspect the same for the power cranks. It will only make you better in the long run. The question is can you acheive the same results without them? Of course but they offer a simpler way of getting there IMHO.


----------



## Sintesi (Nov 13, 2001)

weather said:


> er...i think you got the wrong idea about power cranks and their intended effect.



How so? I thought he was spot on actually. If these cranks actually made you more powerful in a meaningful, noticable way then every Pro and his wanna-be brother would be training on these things. Lets factor in the fact that these cranks aren't very fun to use and the fact that people who train w/ regular cranks are doing just fine and I see a recipe for eventual demise. 

The whole idea of "pedalling circles" is almost a zen ideal rather than a real world affair. Remember when it was de rigeur to train on a fixed gear bike in the off season to make your spin more efficient? Seems kind of quaint these days. Some people swear you need roller work to create souplesse.

I'm not saying these training methods aren't effective but I am saying they aren't anymore effective that just getting on your bike and riding and concentrating on your efficiency. There's no real world discernable improvement so why do it?


----------



## weather (Feb 6, 2004)

Sintesi said:


> How so? I thought he was spot on actually. If these cranks actually made you more powerful in a meaningful, noticable way then every Pro and his wanna-be brother would be training on these things. Lets factor in the fact that these cranks aren't very fun to use and the fact that people who train w/ regular cranks are doing just fine and I see a recipe for eventual demise.


here's the original quote form his post:


> Power Cranks, Rotor Cranks, etc. just like their innumerable predecessors over the past 100 years (!) work on the assumption that the human body is not designed for rotary motion and that therefore performance can be improved by allowing the body to deliver power in some fashion that is "less rotary." Such "breakthroughs in technology" occur every 10-15 years. I've seen about 4 such innovations in my cycling career.


powercranks do NOT make your body to deliver power in a new fashion, it only trains you to get better at what you have been doing (the "rotary" fashion). the design intention for power cranks is not to be the only pair of cranks you have. it's not meant to be something that you use on the race day or even a serious club ride. 

rotor cranks are different. it is designed to replace the regular cranks you have. it does not improve your "rotary" pedaling techniques. you pedal in a manner totally different from regular pedal stroke--your two crank arms are not at 180 degrees to each other most of the time. 

these two crankset simply lead you toward completely different pedaling manners. that's what i call intended effect.


----------



## Sintesi (Nov 13, 2001)

weather said:


> here's the original quote form his post:
> 
> 
> powercranks do NOT make your body to deliver power in a new fashion, it only trains you to get better at what you have been doing (the "rotary" fashion). the design intention for power cranks is not to be the only pair of cranks you have. it's not meant to be something that you use on the race day or even a serious club ride.
> ...


I see what you're saying. You're right the Powercranks aren't some sort of cheat to get past the dead spot at the top of the pedal stroke but rather a way to train your hip flexors and glutes to be more powerful. But for me the larger point was these type devices are fads/gimmicks and don't really make much of a difference from traditional "ride lots" school of training.


----------



## CFBlue (Jun 28, 1999)

*Catching on has no bearing on whether they work or not...*

They probably don't/won't "catch on" due to the fact that they:

1. Are expensive
2. Results are highly individual
3. Require harder work on the bike
4. Dependent on current riding style (making them harder/easier on the rider)
5. Are highly adaptive (like changes in crank arm length)

Thanx,


----------



## markhr (Mar 20, 2005)

hombredesubaru said:


> Who has Powercranks?
> Good question.
> 
> There was one guy who was a great climber and wanted to do well in stage races but couldnt TT. He worked with powercranks and his TT improved dramatically. Like 2-3 minutes better over 50 km ITT. Thats like 50 watts better at least sustained over an hour. My money is he'll win the Tour someday.
> ...


----------



## CFBlue (Jun 28, 1999)

*Tried Them*

On a friends bike, locked into the wind trainer.

Possibly one of the most frustrating cycling experiences I've ever had on a bike. It must take a good deal of time to get the coordination to keep the pedals at 180, then to get out and ride with them, I can't imagine. But in that sort time on the trainer I really felt the legs working in new ways, so I can see its long term potential benefits.

Rotors, on the other hand, are for a very different reason, and have the real benefit of helping with knee problems.


----------



## markhr (Mar 20, 2005)

named and shamed - reads like a who's who of bicycle sports

http://www.powercranks.com/news/index.htm


----------



## weiwentg (Feb 3, 2004)

markhr said:


> named and shamed - reads like a who's who of bicycle sports
> 
> http://www.powercranks.com/news/index.htm


they seem to be more a hit with triathletes rather than roadies. however, I heard (from the owner, who posts on slowtwitch) that Bjarne "Mr 60%" Riis ordered a dozen pairs for CSC. given all this, I decided to give them a try for a couple of years before I start doing a Kerry Irons on them.


----------



## markhr (Mar 20, 2005)

exactly - if a guy who won the tour thinks they could improve performance...look out for CSC dominating next year.


----------



## Jesse D Smith (Jun 11, 2005)

Sintesi said:


> How so? I thought he was spot on actually. If these cranks actually made you more powerful in a meaningful, noticable way then every Pro and his wanna-be brother would be training on these things. Lets factor in the fact that these cranks aren't very fun to use and the fact that people who train w/ regular cranks are doing just fine and I see a recipe for eventual demise.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Have your read the testimonials that quote real-work improvements in watt output and race results? They contradict what you say. Just because all pro's don't train based on watts doesn't mean training based on watts isn't more effective. If that were the case, powermeters would have disappeared years ago. Why aren't they "fun" to use? Because it's hard? People thought training by just going out and randomly riding for six hours were doing just fine until someone came along with a better idea.

At their current price, much like SRM, they aren't designed for mass production and to be included as standard equipment on all Trek bikes. They seem to be designed for only the most hardcore, dedicated riders willing to invest years into their training. The fact that they aren't "fun" to use further supports this. 
You sound like you think their effectiveness and worth should be judged by how many jump on their bandwagon. Cyclists have jumped on many unaffective bandwagons, and cyclists have ignored and neglected many effective methods.


----------



## markhr (Mar 20, 2005)

Jesse D Smith said:


> Cyclists have jumped on many unaffective bandwagons, and cyclists have ignored and neglected many effective methods.


exactly - ignore the hype and prejudice and actually try them - e-mail [email protected] for a list of trade shows and sporting events where they hold demo's - try before you buy


----------



## Coolhand (Jul 28, 2002)

Markhr do you work for the company or sell these cranks?


----------



## Jesse D Smith (Jun 11, 2005)

markhr said:


> exactly - ignore the hype and prejudice and actually try them - e-mail [email protected] for a list of trade shows and sporting events where they hold demo's - try before you buy



I'd be more skeptical about them is their website was filled with testimonials from riders saying, "I noticed an immediate improvement after just *one ride*!" or 
"These things are so simple to use, it's made improving my power *easier* than I ever imagined! Everyone should get a pair."


----------



## markhr (Mar 20, 2005)

no -  wish I did though

Having bought them($$$$ - that hurt a lot) and started using them I was quite suprised and dismayed at all the "I've never used them therefore they must be sh*t" trolls.

Personally I try to only give positive comment and only about products I've actually used. Admittedly, if having used a product and I find that it absolutely, 100%, blows and is dangerous too then I'll warn people off about that product.


----------



## Sintesi (Nov 13, 2001)

Jesse D Smith said:


> You sound like you think their effectiveness and worth should be judged by how many jump on their bandwagon. Cyclists have jumped on many unaffective bandwagons, and cyclists have ignored and neglected many effective methods.



I'm not saying that at all but I do think this is a fringe item that will burn itself out when all those riders killing themselves on these things don't get noticable results. Maybe I'm wrong but i doubt it.

Vee shall see.


----------



## Squint (Jan 22, 2004)

The funny thing is that whenever I see pictures of pros training, the cranks they use are SRMs and not Powercranks. This has been going on for years even before SRM sponsored any teams such as CSC or T-Mobile.

When all the podium spots are filled with people using a certain product (SRMs), then I'll look into it.




Jesse D Smith said:


> Have your read the testimonials that quote real-work improvements in watt output and race results? They contradict what you say. Just because all pro's don't train based on watts doesn't mean training based on watts isn't more effective. If that were the case, powermeters would have disappeared years ago. Why aren't they "fun" to use? Because it's hard? People thought training by just going out and randomly riding for six hours were doing just fine until someone came along with a better idea.
> 
> At their current price, much like SRM, they aren't designed for mass production and to be included as standard equipment on all Trek bikes. They seem to be designed for only the most hardcore, dedicated riders willing to invest years into their training. The fact that they aren't "fun" to use further supports this.
> You sound like you think their effectiveness and worth should be judged by how many jump on their bandwagon. Cyclists have jumped on many unaffective bandwagons, and cyclists have ignored and neglected many effective methods.


----------



## wooden legs (Oct 20, 2003)

*get em on ebay*

you can find them for 4 to 6 bills on ebay, i sold mine for 600 a few months ago. wish i could have kept them but they payed my rent.

they are a pretty amazing training tool, and really gratifying too once you get used to them.


----------



## Jesse D Smith (Jun 11, 2005)

Squint said:


> The funny thing is that whenever I see pictures of pros training, the cranks they use are SRMs and not Powercranks. This has been going on for years even before SRM sponsored any teams such as CSC or T-Mobile.
> 
> When all the podium spots are filled with people using a certain product (SRMs), then I'll look into it.


It sounds like you don't understand the purpose of either the SRM or Powercranks. 
SRM and Powercranks are used for two totally different reasons. They're not competing products. 
SRM is strictly used for monitoring effort, much like a HR monitor, while Powercranks are strictly a physiological training device, much like single-legged pedaling exercises or hill repeats. . How many photos have you seen of pro's doing single-legged pedaling exercises during a race? How many photos have you seen depicting pros doing single-legged exercises in training? Does this mean they don't perform them? How many MORE photos exist of riders using DA cranks vs. SRM. Does this mean DA cranks are a superior training device? Or does this mean the photos don't exist? 

It's possible no podium spots are filled with riders using Powercranks because those riders believe they already have a perfect pedal stroke. They are not even designed to be used in competition. It could even be said that they might be dangerous to use in a race where riders want to rest during a decent. And if the decent contains many tight twists, or a criterium, you don't want to risk catching an inside pedal because you forgot, or were unable, to hold the inside crank upright at the 12 o'clock position. 

Powercranks are designed to be used in training, for riders who think they need to improve their pedalstroke. They're also designed to correct leg-strength imbalances, so when you race on your regular cranks, you no longer have one leg compensating for a weakness in the other. The end goal of all this to to make the rider more efficient on the lighter cranks they'll use in a race. 

Concluding that a product used by podium winners is the product for you is a mistake. If all the podium spots are filled with riders using superlight frames that only last a single season, would you then conclude it's a good training device for you? If all the podium spots are filled with riders using a rail-thin carbon shell saddle, would you then decide it's a superior product over your current saddle?


----------



## mprevost (Jul 30, 2005)

*Powercranks*

Powercranks are more about unweighting the opposing leg rather than pedaling in circles. Every time the pedals go around you are moving the bike forward and pushing up the weight of the opposing leg. With Powercranks you are forced to unweight the opposing let (or else it just sits there), so all of your power goes toward moving the bike forward. That is why they trash your hip flexors. Once your hip flexors adapt, you go faster because all of the power in your "push" goes toward going forward because you are using your "pull" to unweight the opposing leg. 

That said, I sold mine. It was just too hard! I worked up to a century on the things after a few months but riding them was always a chore. There are NO easy rides on the Powercranks. It is always hard. I started riding my powercranks bike less and less. Some people seem to think that riding these are fun. I did not.

For triathletes, these things are a real plus. They work your legs much differently than regular cranks. It is more of a whole leg fatigue. Your hamstrings and hip flexors get much more of a workout. For triathletes, it is a way to work some of your running muscles on the bike. I firmly believe that Powercranks will make you a better runner. 

Initially, Powercranks will force you to pedal in a big gear. Try them and you will instantly know why. It is very hard to ride these at a high cadence. This made me faster immediately as I am a gear masher and I respond well to big gear intervals. 

If Powercranks were 300 bucks, I think many more people would have them. At their current price, many people opt for a computrainer or power tap instead.

Mike P.



Sintesi said:


> How so? I thought he was spot on actually. If these cranks actually made you more powerful in a meaningful, noticable way then every Pro and his wanna-be brother would be training on these things. Lets factor in the fact that these cranks aren't very fun to use and the fact that people who train w/ regular cranks are doing just fine and I see a recipe for eventual demise.
> 
> The whole idea of "pedalling circles" is almost a zen ideal rather than a real world affair. Remember when it was de rigeur to train on a fixed gear bike in the off season to make your spin more efficient? Seems kind of quaint these days. Some people swear you need roller work to create souplesse.
> 
> I'm not saying these training methods aren't effective but I am saying they aren't anymore effective that just getting on your bike and riding and concentrating on your efficiency. There's no real world discernable improvement so why do it?


----------



## markhr (Mar 20, 2005)

mprevost said:


> Powercranks are more about unweighting the opposing leg rather than pedaling in circles.


are you sure you were using them correctly?

I can deliver power through out the circle - hence the obvious benefit of pedalling in circles. At a guess you were trying to do too much too soon at too high a cadence.

It's a pity you don't have the cranks as I'd recommend doing one legged drills, i.e., 10 revolutions one side, both sides, the opposite side, both sides and repeat. This is recommended by powercranks as part of the initial adaptation phase.

Using this drill you should be able to keep your speed constant through out the circle - it's definitely worked for me and forced me to pedal complete circles, i.e., no mashing, no squares and definitely no letting my leg momentum drive the follow through on the up stroke.

Jesse D Smith - thanks for the pro bike photo - I tried to find that earlier but couldn't remenber were I'd seen it (cycling news and the bike is a Liquigas team member from Italy?)


----------



## Jesse D Smith (Jun 11, 2005)

markhr said:


> are you sure you were using them correctly?
> 
> I can deliver power through out the circle - hence the obvious benefit of pedalling in circles. At a guess you were trying to do too much too soon at too high a cadence.
> 
> ...



The photo came along with a short write-up by Lennard Zinn on VeloNews.com. It's Stephano Garzelli's bike. 

Zinn believes in them saying, 
"If I were still racing, I would probably want to have a bike set up with them."
http://www.velonews.com/tour2005/tech/articles/8519.0.html


----------



## markhr (Mar 20, 2005)

thanks again - I blew it up using photoshop and, yeah, it's garzelli's bike


----------



## al0 (Jan 24, 2003)

Jesse D Smith said:


> Have your read the testimonials that quote real-work improvements in watt output and race results? They contradict what you say. Just because all pro's don't train based on watts doesn't mean training based on watts isn't more effective. If that were the case, powermeters would have disappeared years ago..


It is not very related to this thread, but training based on watts IS NOIT and CAN NOT BE more effective. It is big gimmik. You train your body and body vital signs provide much better picture of how body is affected by trainig that those watts.


----------



## Florentine Pogen (Dec 5, 2004)

*Powercranks work!*

Not for me though, I like to enjoy riding a bike and I do not race enough to train on them.

I did use them for awhile and they trained muscles I did not use before.

Get a pair on ebay! I did then I sold them on ebay. I made $100 bucks to try them for a year. Not bad, huh?


----------



## markhr (Mar 20, 2005)

Florentine Pogen said:


> Not for me though, I like to enjoy riding a bike and I do not race enough to train on them.
> 
> I did use them for awhile and they trained muscles I did not use before.
> 
> Get a pair on ebay! I did then I sold them on ebay. I made $100 bucks to try them for a year. Not bad, huh?


yeah - the adaptation phase sucks but unless you actually put the miles in then you just end up stuck in a rut where you avoid riding because you're not fit and, because you avoid riding, you're not getting any fitter.


----------



## Jesse D Smith (Jun 11, 2005)

*Nitpicking*



markhr said:


> thanks again - I blew it up using photoshop and, yeah, it's garzelli's bike


Wonder why only one water bottle cage and the unnecessarily long housing section for the rear brake? I guess sponsorship obligations mean they have to tape off the Power Cranks logo. I wonder if his is an older model. The end of the crank is squared off instead of rounded off as in the other pics.


----------



## markhr (Mar 20, 2005)

Jesse D Smith said:


> Wonder why only one water bottle cage and the unnecessarily long housing section for the rear brake? I guess sponsorship obligations mean they have to tape off the Power Cranks logo. I wonder if his is an older model. The end of the crank is squared off instead of rounded off as in the other pics.


Those are the older version powercranks (model number?) - the powercranks with rounded ends and allen key crank bolts are model 4 (at least according to the blurb in my shipping box).


----------



## markhr (Mar 20, 2005)

Karl's training bike - https://klbarrus.blogspot.com/2005_08_01_klbarrus_archive.html


----------



## mcfly (Feb 19, 2004)

a friend of mine has a set on his bike that was stolden, they found it a couple days later on the other side of town, i guess the poor bastard couldnt figure out how to ride it , plus i guess he didnt know that he could sell them for 500.00 either


----------



## psycleridr (Jul 21, 2005)

*lol*

Power Cranks- The next best bike theft deterrent! Better than any lock. Gauranteed to confound even the fittest thief! (Considering a normal cyclist can barely ride them).


----------



## markhr (Mar 20, 2005)

another one year later report

https://www.liquidfitness.com/articles/2005/03/powercranks-diary-one-year-later.html


----------



## wipeout (Jun 6, 2005)

For that extra trippy ride, install PowerCranks on your fixed gear bike.

Tried em, hated em, yet another gimmick. Hey, I have a car that runs on water, wanna buy it?


----------



## CFBlue (Jun 28, 1999)

*"Do, or do not. There is no try."*

"Tried em, hated em, yet another gimmick. Hey, I have a car that runs on water, wanna buy it?" [/QUOTE]

Do, or do not. There is no 'try.'" Jedi Master Yoda


----------



## markhr (Mar 20, 2005)

Yeah - trippy all right - there's some guy who does ultra long distance cycle races/tours on a fixed gear who trains with powercranks - if anyone can remeber the guy's name or post a link that'd be great

...and, no, it's not Colo


----------



## markhr (Mar 20, 2005)

https://www.rightzone.co.uk/logs/PCWeek.html


----------



## asgelle (Apr 21, 2003)

al0 said:


> It is not very related to this thread, but training based on watts IS NOIT and CAN NOT BE more effective. It is big gimmik. You train your body and body vital signs provide much better picture of how body is affected by trainig that those watts.


The only relevant measure of how the body is affected by training is performance; anything else is a poor surrogate. The purpose of measuring power during training is not to measure the body's response, but to measure the intensity and volume of training. What vital signs would you propose to use for this purpose?


----------



## hrv (Dec 9, 2001)

Yeah, was riding with the guy who runs Race Across Oregon last weekend and he told me about that fixed gear dude. Said he used his fixed , with power cranks, on an STP (Seattle to Portland) ride. 200 miles. Insane I tell you!!


----------



## markhr (Mar 20, 2005)

SolsticeMan said:


> Yeah, was riding with the guy who runs Race Across Oregon last weekend and he told me about that fixed gear dude. Said he used his fixed , with power cranks, on an STP (Seattle to Portland) ride. 200 miles. Insane I tell you!!


lol - thanks


----------



## markhr (Mar 20, 2005)

Frank Day doing the hard sell


----------



## pik20b (Mar 14, 2004)

*Power Cranks*

I think they are great for training. I primarily race mountain bikes (Sport Class); but I do my much of my endurance and hill workouts on my road bike with Power Cranks.

However, I would not recommend using them in races, psuedo-races, or crits.

They have helped me overcome an imbalance in my pedal stroke that manifested itself while recovering from a knee injury.

I have also noticed an improvement (after about 40 hrs w/Power Cranks) in my climbing on my mountain bike; much smoother strokes, especially climbing ledges. I thought I was smooth before but I still saw an improvement.

Pros:
1. Excercises your hip flexors and hamstrings.
2. Theft Deterrent.
3. Adds weight (good for training)

Cons:
1. Can't ride fast on steep downhills.
2. It took me about 40 hours of riding to get back up to my normal workouts.
3. Need to change out with your regular crankset for races or psuedo-races.
4. Need to plan more when riding in traffic. It is more difficult to get going at traffic lights.
5. Can't trackstand.

 





markhr said:


> unashamed product plug - because they WORK REALLY WELL! hard work yes but what a difference and it's immediate too.
> 
> www.powercranks.com
> https://www.pezcyclingnews.com/?pg=fullstory&id=3353
> https://www.cyclingnews.com/tech.php?id=tech/2003/reviews/PowerCranks


----------



## Timmons (Jul 6, 2005)

*Is there any reason?*

Are these locked into a parallel position or what is the trick? Can't you do that with your regular cranks?

Mind you I may be asking a really dumb question as I've never taken apart my bottom bracket, but I did have the left crank arm off once and I believe I had to line it up opposite the other to reinstall.


----------



## CaptCaliber (Feb 3, 2002)

*They work...*

I am a cat 1 who has used power cranks.

I will try to hit the high points, because much has been covered here.

1. Kerry Irons is wrong. Power cranks are not at all similar to Rotor, Bio-Pace, Bobby Julich's chain rings or any such nonsense. Those products work to reduce the dead spot at the top and bottom of the pedaling stroke by accelerating the foot thru those low power positions. Power cranks make you do MORE work, not less, and they are advertised as suck. I don't think even the most ardent Powercrank user would describe them as fun or easy to ride.

2. Powercranks are for training ONLY. You can't race on them because even tempo and LSD rides on them will push you to your limit, racing is out of the question unless you are a sanbagger. In addition they are heavy as hell. You rarely see pros pics from training, that's why you never see the pros riding these.

3. Garzelli's cranks are the old style. These cranks are from a batch that Frank Day sent to the Mapei sports and training institute early in the product's life. Thru mapei is where Bettini, Garzelli, Museeuw, evans, and others were introduced to the product. Day sent them to try out, and Mapei refused to return the sample, and in fact ordered more.

4. They haven't caught on because Frank Day doesn't really sponsor anybody. Their take on sponsorships and prodeals is simular to SRM and Lightweight wheels. They are bloody expensive, and that limits the appeal. Also, the only people who should/will ride them are elite racers... There is no reason to subject yourself to the torture of PowerCranks just to pep up the group ride.

5. THEY DO NOT MEASURE POWER. They are a training device, not a training monitoring device.

6. Getting used to them isn't than bad. Just put your pedals on and go for a ride. It will be a short one, and it takes a while to build up time on them, but it can be done by any non-pansy.

7. Doing one-legged drills on powercranks is redundant. The entire time you are riding powercranks it is as if you are doing on legged drills. If you want to know what they feel with, go for a two hour ride, on the way out, pedal one legged with the other foot clipped out, on the way home, switch legs... That is what 30min on the PCs feels like.

8. The best way to use powercranks is to put them on your bike, break down any other bike you have with normal cranks and do ALL of your winter base training on the PCs... In the spring switch back to regular cranks for shorter high cadence rides, but retain the PCs for long intervals. Slowy wean yourself onto the normal cranks as the race season draws near. You may need to do your long ride of the week on the PCs to keep the movement fresh in your mind.

9. The biggest powercrank benefit is that it forces you to eliminate the backpressure of your left leg on the cranks as the right leg pushes down and vice versa. You would be amazed how much down stroke force is wasted simply lifting the 'off' leg back to top dead center. Even people who think they have great pedal strokes, ride rollers, ride fixie, etc, can benifit form this. Over rthe course of a race, probably 20% of your downward pedal force is simply overcoming the backforce of lifting the 'resting' leg to the top of the pedal stroke. As you become tired, you pedal stroke deteriorates, and you rase the back leg with less and less snap. By strengthening your hip flexors with the powercranks, it takes much longer for the 'rising' leg to tire and begin taking free rides on the crank ferris wheel, allowing you to pedal harder for longer.

I started riding powercranks in the winter after my 1st season as a cat 1. That year I had been pretty good, with many top 10's, but no wins... The year after a winter of PCs, I won 8 races, got 6 2nd places and 20 3rd-5th place finishes. The results speak for themselves, they work.
The next winter I didn't ride the powercranks at all and used normal bike-result- this season I am back to mostly top 10 finishes and only 1 win so far this year.

I will be back on the powercranks for sure this winter. There is simply no better tool to build muscular endurance than powercranks.
peace.


----------



## asgelle (Apr 21, 2003)

*They work...*

You know what else works? Training in a green jersey. It's been shown repeatedly that riders who train all winter in a green jersey improve over the previous year. The question is did they improve more or less in the green jersey than they would have in a red one. So far, no one's shown me any data to support the claim that training with powercranks increases performance more than training on standard pedals.

As to comparing results over two years, that hardly proves anything. First, did you compare training logs to insure that you did the same training for the two years; second what do placings prove regarding fitness. You might have improved over the year you trained with powercranks but the competition improved even more.


----------



## Jesse D Smith (Jun 11, 2005)

asgelle said:


> You know what else works? Training in a green jersey. It's been shown repeatedly that riders who train all winter in a green jersey improve over the previous year. The question is did they improve more or less in the green jersey than they would have in a red one. So far, no one's shown me any data to support the claim that training with powercranks increases performance more than training on standard pedals.
> 
> As to comparing results over two years, that hardly proves anything. First, did you compare training logs to insure that you did the same training for the two years; second what do placings prove regarding fitness. You might have improved over the year you trained with powercranks but the competition improved even more.


First off, Power Cranks are cranks, not pedals. 
What kind of data are you looking for? For a Cat 1 racer, results are the ultimate data. His listing of the before and after results aren't some mental anomoly like your riduculous green jersey example. 
If you believe any amount of downstroke power is used "overcoming the backforce of lifting the 'resting' leg to the top of the pedal stroke", then eliminating this energy waste will put more power into moving you forward. Why invest in a power meter if you're just going to use the power you have inefficiently? 
This "show me the data" catch-all mindset is an easy way out for the terminally cynical who can't make logical conclusions without the crutch of hard numbers backing them up.

When you ride with the brake rubbing hard, you're using a certain amount of your finite power to overcome the drag. Eliminating brake rub isn't going to increase your power output or your fitness. Using your logic, there's no reason to think overcoming brake rub would improve performance until you have hard data supporting the practice. 
I don't understand your statement about the competition improving. Even if the competition improves, is that a reason to write off techniques that helped you improve?


----------



## Jesse D Smith (Jun 11, 2005)

al0 said:


> It is not very related to this thread, but training based on watts IS NOIT and CAN NOT BE more effective. It is big gimmik. You train your body and body vital signs provide much better picture of how body is affected by trainig that those watts.


Wrong. Vital signs like VO2 max, lung capacity, heart volume, and LT indicate what you could be capable of. Watts indicate what you are capable of doing on a bike. Vital signs change. You could stay off the bike and start running, loose a ton of weight, and muscle mass, and still see an improvement (whatever that means) in your vital signs. Maybe your resting heart rate is lower. Maybe your blood pressure is lower. But that doesn't mean you will ride faster.
Take your vital signs while riding at the same speed on a hot day vs. a cold day. The signs will be different. Take a vital sign when you first wake vs. later in the date. They will not be the same. Take your vital signs at age 24 vs. age 74. The signs will be different. If a 24 yr-old fat smoker has a max heart rate of 187, then quits smoking and rides his bike for the next 30 years, and sees his max heart rate decrease, does this mean his performance has decreased? 
Let's take indoor track riding as an example because it eliminates terrain and climate differences. If I know I can ride a certain distance maintaining a certain amount of watts vs knowing I can ride a certain distance maintaining a certain heart rate, which tells me more about how fast I rode or am capable of riding? Should I be more confident if I rode the distance at a lower heart rate, but fewer watts? 
What if I'm in a track race. Me and my competitor both race all out. We weight the same and have the same bikes. My competitor is riding at more watts than me, but riding at a higher heart rate. He'll finish first, but I'll win the prestigous "Lowest heart rate" medal. 
Power Cranks aren't intended to help people win the Miss Fitness competition. They strictly for on-the-bike performance efficiency.


----------



## asgelle (Apr 21, 2003)

Jesse D Smith said:


> This "show me the data" catch-all mindset is an easy way out for the terminally cynical who can't make logical conclusions without the crutch of hard numbers backing them up.


So looking at Capt. Caliber's results, as I understand them; he used powercranks in 2004 and had a good season, he didn't use them in 2005 and had a bad season, therefore, powercranks can be logically shown to improve performance in even number years? What should we do in the odd numbered ones? To me it all comes down to this: powercrank users all make roughly the same claim. "I trained with powercranks and my performance improved." What they ignore is the fact that for most cyclists below a certain age, performance improves each year without special training equipment. They also never seem to make the slightest attempt to control for other possible variables that might affect the outcome. I have a friend who started training with powercranks last fall and had the best season of his life. He was also able to increase his training volume by over 50% from previous years. At least he had enough sense not to conclude his improvement was necessarily due to using powercranks.


----------



## Jesse D Smith (Jun 11, 2005)

asgelle said:


> So looking at Capt. Caliber's results, as I understand them; he used powercranks in 2004 and had a good season, he didn't use them in 2005 and had a bad season, therefore, powercranks can be logically shown to improve performance in even number years? What should we do in the odd numbered ones? To me it all comes down to this: powercrank users all make roughly the same claim. "I trained with powercranks and my performance improved." What they ignore is the fact that for most cyclists below a certain age, performance improves each year without special training equipment. They also never seem to make the slightest attempt to control for other possible variables that might affect the outcome. I have a friend who started training with powercranks last fall and had the best season of his life. He was also able to increase his training volume by over 50% from previous years. At least he had enough sense not to conclude his improvement was necessarily due to using powercranks.


Well, if you say that performance improves each year without special training equipment, how do you explain CC's declining performance? The only factor we absolutely know that changed was the use of Power Cranks. If you rely so heavily on the data you have, you can't ignore this factor and move on assuming things like other riders ALL improving. You have no data to support that. 
It just seems that with all these first hand accounts of Power Cranks, people who say they don't work are going out of their way to ignore the testimonials. If I spent that much money on a product that didn't work, I'd be sure to be VERY vocal about it. We have pro's, semi-pros, and knowlegable experts like Lennard Zinn saying they work. On the other side, we have amateurs who've never used them saying they couldn't possibly work.


----------



## asgelle (Apr 21, 2003)

Jesse D Smith said:


> If I spent that much money on a product that didn't work, I'd be sure to be VERY vocal about it. We have pro's, semi-pros, and knowlegable experts like Lennard Zinn saying they work. On the other side, we have amateurs who've never used them saying they couldn't possibly work.


A google search will show many people who've written first-hand accounts that powercranks didn't help them. And I think after spending that much money on powercranks, most people would be motivated to convince themselves that the money was well-spent and the cranks helped. It's a lot easier for someone to post how smart they were to spend the money and get the improvement than how dumb they were to spend the money for nothing.

The psychological aspects shouldn't be overlooked. There are probably a lot of things going on at once when someone buys powercranks. That person is probably looking to make a jump in performance for the coming season and is willing to commit to that goal as evidenced by spending a fair amount of money on training equipment and changing their training methods. The trouble is that the rider probably makes other changes at the same time. The increased commitment to training might also include better diet and nutrition, improved recovery techniques, and increased training load and improved workout design. The trouble with all the testimonials I recall is that the rider never addresses these other factors and attributes all the improvement to the cranks. Just look at CC's post below. He (she?) says he started using them after his first season as a Cat 1 and had these great results, but never even mentions what if any other changes he made that year. And something's been bothering me since I saw his post. If powercranks were so great, why stop using them after the first year?


----------



## Kerry Irons (Feb 25, 2002)

*Back in it*

asgelle has done a great job of explaining the fundamentals behind my first reply on this topic, so I have to chime in here and support him. It is SO easy to get confused by what we want to believe. As in, there are two kinds of people, those who believe it when they see it, and those who see it when they believe it. I will repeat my first contention, that these units fall into the same category as so many other "innovations" that have come and gone over the years. The simple fact that the anecdotal evidence is all over the map should tell us that they are questionable. It's like attributing Bobby J's successes this year and last to the Ossymetric chain rings. You can be sure he tweaked his training in many ways to get where he is, and Barjne Rijs has given him all kinds of motivation that he was lacking in years past. Believe in the chain rings if you want, but if they were that great, many more riders would be using them. Same for Power Cranks. Sorry, but until there is proven testing instead of "I'm using them and I'm faster so it must be them," then you should remain skeptical. It's nice to believe in things, but that belief should be based on solid data and logic, not what we hear in this thread.


----------



## Jesse D Smith (Jun 11, 2005)

asgelle said:


> A google search will show many people who've written first-hand accounts that powercranks didn't help them. And I think after spending that much money on powercranks, most people would be motivated to convince themselves that the money was well-spent and the cranks helped. It's a lot easier for someone to post how smart they were to spend the money and get the improvement than how dumb they were to spend the money for nothing.
> 
> The psychological aspects shouldn't be overlooked. There are probably a lot of things going on at once when someone buys powercranks. That person is probably looking to make a jump in performance for the coming season and is willing to commit to that goal as evidenced by spending a fair amount of money on training equipment and changing their training methods. The trouble is that the rider probably makes other changes at the same time. The increased commitment to training might also include better diet and nutrition, improved recovery techniques, and increased training load and improved workout design. The trouble with all the testimonials I recall is that the rider never addresses these other factors and attributes all the improvement to the cranks. Just look at CC's post below. He (she?) says he started using them after his first season as a Cat 1 and had these great results, but never even mentions what if any other changes he made that year. And something's been bothering me since I saw his post. If powercranks were so great, why stop using them after the first year?



We're both in the same boat. Neither of us has used them, neither of us has first-hand experience with them. But the name of the site is roadbikereview.com. We rely on the experience of others to help us make our decisions. I googled it and although I didn't read all the results pages, all the reviews I found by people who made any attempt at keeping accurate date show improvement. 
http://www.howieenduranceproject.com/triathlon_tips/power_cranks_review.htm
http://www.gearsandtears.com/cranking_ideas/reviews.htm
http://www.xtri.com/article-p.asp?id=539
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/...ve&db=PubMed&list_uids=14666944&dopt=Abstract
http://www.pezcyclingnews.com/?pg=fullstory&id=3026


----------



## CaptCaliber (Feb 3, 2002)

asgelle said:


> It's a lot easier for someone to post how smart they were to spend the money and get the improvement than how dumb they were to spend the money for nothing


I paid cost for mine, so the amount of $$ wasn't really that great (less than a power tap)



asgelle said:


> Just look at CC's post below. He (she?) says he started using them after his first season as a Cat 1 and had these great results, but never even mentions what if any other changes he made that year. And something's been bothering me since I saw his post. If powercranks were so great, why stop using them after the first year?


The reason I stopped using them was very simple, I made the mistake of having a road bike with standard cranks built up and available to me during the second winter, which was not the case the first winter. I will not lie, the Powercranks suck to ride. It takes a lot of mental fortitude to get on those things and do 5hr rides from central NC where I live up to the VA border and back. When one has an option to hop on regular cranks, it is easy to take the weak way out during the winter (doing the same ride on regular cranks). This year I have to turn my team bike back in at the end of the season, so i will have PCs only on my personal bike to avoid the temptation of slacking off them.


PS. HE


----------



## markhr (Mar 20, 2005)

thanks for all the great arguments in favour of powercranks. I'm yet again amazed at all the "I've never used them therefore they must be sh*t" trolls. I guess some things never change.


----------



## markhr (Mar 20, 2005)

Alienator was right, this is starting to look like spam so I'll make this my last addition.


----------



## asgelle (Apr 21, 2003)

Jesse D Smith said:


> We're both in the same boat. Neither of us has used them, neither of us has first-hand experience with them.


I can't speak for you, but why do you say I haven't used them?


----------



## alienator (Jun 11, 2004)

Jesse D Smith said:


> We're both in the same boat. Neither of us has used them, neither of us has first-hand experience with them. But the name of the site is roadbikereview.com. We rely on the experience of others to help us make our decisions. I googled it and although I didn't read all the results pages, all the reviews I found by people who made any attempt at keeping accurate date show improvement.
> http://www.howieenduranceproject.com/triathlon_tips/power_cranks_review.htm
> http://www.gearsandtears.com/cranking_ideas/reviews.htm
> http://www.xtri.com/article-p.asp?id=539
> ...


To show an improvement that is directly attributable to PowerCranks or any other training modality, you would need to identify all variables that could contribute to that improvement and isolate and hold constant those variables or otherwise mitigate their effect. Testimonials are in no way fact of anything. Neither is any improvement that is not directly and objectively attributable to a given variable. Most people, it seems, report in their reviews of their new bikes that they're faster on their new bike. Does this mean, then, that new bikes are faster than old bikes?

Opinion is fine when couched as such. But making claims that cannot be empirically verified is wrong. Note that manufacturer opinions and white papers do not qualify as empirical evidence.

There's naught wrong with expressing an opinion or a belief that PowerCranks are wonderful, but saying there is proof that they work as alleged is a bald face lie.


----------



## BATMAN (Aug 15, 2005)

I wonder how they would work on a Softride, which tends to punish a few riders for poor circular pedal pattern.


----------



## peadhill (Sep 5, 2005)

I've been using PowerCranks for a few years. I bought them to address foot pain while cycling. I've tried five different makes of cycling shoes and multiple orthotics. I loved cycling, but foot pain was a significant issue, really limiting my enjoyment. 

My hypothesis: if I pull up more on the upstroke, I'll take the pressure off of the bottom of my feet, increasing blood flow and putting less pressure on nerves.

So far I've been very happy with the results. I did a century a couple of days ago (with the PowerCranks on, just for fun). My foot pain was minimal.

I'm not a doctor, just a guy who loves to ride his bike. I have no training logs. I have no idea if the problems I experienced cleared up due to the PowerCranks usage or not. 

Getting used to the PowerCranks was horrible. I can only imagine that I had one of the worst pedal strokes going. I tried them for a year, then abandoned them for the next. I've now been using them consistently for the last two years. 

Oh, I seem to go a lot faster too. I'm about to turn 47 and keep up with the fast group on most club rides. That wasn't a goal, but it is a nice side-benefit.


----------



## markhr (Mar 20, 2005)

Frank Day said:


> Here it is. This should add a little fuel to this threads fire.
> 
> Stephen J. Dixon, Michael F. Harrison, Kenneth A. Seaman, Stephen S.Cheung and J.Patrick Neary. University of New Bruswick, Fredericton, NB; Dalhousie University, Halifax, NS; University of Regina, SK , presented at the Canadian Society for Exercise Physiology (CSEP) Nov 3, 2006
> 
> ...


woohoo! - just confirms what us powercrankers knew all along - they work, they work quickly and they work extremely well


----------



## j__h (Jun 16, 2006)

We have a guy who rides them in our group, they work and work well.


----------



## asgelle (Apr 21, 2003)

markhr said:


> woohoo! - just confirms what us powercrankers knew all along


I'd go along with the part of confirming what you accepted (on faith) all along rather than providing anything new of value. Since the abstract doesn't mention anything about a control group, it's impossible to know if the group training with these cranks did better, the same, or worse than a group performing the same training on normal cranks. I guess the study does show one thing: training can improve performance, and yes that confirms something that's been known for a long time.


----------



## Argentius (Aug 26, 2004)

Talk about ressurecting the dead! This thread is more than a year cold!


----------



## Marc (Jan 23, 2005)

Argentius said:


> Talk about ressurecting the dead! This thread is more than a year cold!


No $hit--I remember laughing @ this thread when it was 1st argued...let dead horses lie peoples.:mad2::mad2::mad2::mad2::mad2::mad2::mad2::mad2::mad2::mad2::mad2::mad2::mad2::mad2::mad2:

thx for many laughs, I'm sure you'll keep providing markhr./


----------



## markhr (Mar 20, 2005)

knew I'd get support here - hiya folks










https://www.nyvelocity.com/content.php?id=689


----------



## Argentius (Aug 26, 2004)

ROFLMAO, etc. I'm trying to figure out what's going ON there.


----------



## pr0230 (Jun 4, 2004)

*Looks like the bottom bracket broke!*



markhr said:


> unashamed product plug - because they WORK REALLY WELL! hard work yes but what a difference and it's immediate too.
> 
> www.powercranks.com
> https://www.pezcyclingnews.com/?pg=fullstory&id=3353
> https://www.cyclingnews.com/tech.php?id=tech/2003/reviews/PowerCranks


Get a better set of cranks! :blush2:


----------



## Marc (Jan 23, 2005)

Argentius said:


> ROFLMAO, etc. I'm trying to figure out what's going ON there.


Perhaps I should poast an p()l3 in teh Laoungé to find out?:idea:

PS-with a linkee over here & like dat & etc.

PPS-NTTAWWT

PPPS-Do I have any karma left to blow causing touble here in Général?


----------



## Marc (Jan 23, 2005)

markhr said:


> knew I'd get support here - hiya folks
> 
> 
> http://www.nyvelocity.com/content.php?id=689


Didn't ya ever see the Twilight Zone episode, "To Serve Man"?


////////////It's kinda like dat


----------



## reparent (Jul 10, 2006)

CaptCaliber said:


> I started riding powercranks in the winter after my 1st season as a cat 1. That year I had been pretty good, with many top 10's, but no wins... The year after a winter of PCs, I won 8 races, got 6 2nd places and 20 3rd-5th place finishes. The results speak for themselves, they work.
> The next winter I didn't ride the powercranks at all and used normal bike-result- this season I am back to mostly top 10 finishes and only 1 win so far this year.
> 
> I will be back on the powercranks for sure this winter. There is simply no better tool to build muscular endurance than powercranks.
> peace.


This doesn't sound right to me, you say you got an excellent season after a winter of using them, I assume you didn't use them during your racing season but the next year you didn't use them you lost all your fitness? (or got back at roughly the same level as 2 years before using them..)

I have no doubt that maybe they do help, I don't know since I've never tried them but for $1000 I'd expect a revolutionary product and from what I read so far this is not the case.
I think one of the best ways to test them would be to try them over a 3 months period and doing a 20K or 40K a couple times before trying them and then after 3 months doing it again and compare.. Just a tought.


----------



## Andrea138 (Mar 10, 2008)

Welcome to RBR.


BTW- The last post on this thread before yours was in 2006


----------



## Creakyknees (Sep 21, 2003)

hey Andrea, could you use your resources at work to see what kind of studies, if any, have been done on the metabolic cost of pulling up / pedaling round, vs pedaling squares / pushing down?


----------



## Andrea138 (Mar 10, 2008)

I found an article like that when I was searching for eccentric chainring research. It showed a positive correlation of sorts between riding ability and disproportionate amounts of pushing down to pulling up... 
Though I don't recall if they measured riding ability with some sort of test or if they went solely by racing category. I do remember that they described subjects as "amateurs, elite amateurs, and professionals cyclists"

The basic gist of it was that really good cyclists don't actually "pedal circles." If I have time next week, I'll see if I can find that one as well as something about Powercranks. They've been out long enough that there has to be something out there...


----------



## Guest (Oct 18, 2008)

wow, this thread was brought back from the dead once before, creepy.


----------



## CleavesF (Dec 31, 2007)

I'd buy them... if they came in SRM version. I guess I'll stick to my stupid GXP rouleur.


----------



## markhr (Mar 20, 2005)

CleavesF said:


> I'd buy them... if they came in SRM version. I guess I'll stick to my stupid GXP rouleur.


----------



## GirchyGirchy (Feb 12, 2004)

I peddle squarz.


----------



## soulfly_nyc (Feb 16, 2007)

Where is the best place to buy these?

How hard is it to switch between FSA SL-K cranks and Powercranks basics?

Thanks


----------



## MR_GRUMPY (Aug 21, 2002)

Can I use them with my Biopace chainrings?????

Hey!! Why aren't the crank arms drilled??????


----------



## rdolson (Sep 2, 2003)

*Drilled?*

Or milled like this?

Still the goofiest thing I've seen for bikes...


----------

