Anyone have any experience with the SmartRow handle yet?

[JaapvanE]

I was pointed to this handle: https://smartrow.fit/smartrow-power-handle/

The concept is promissing, especially as a load cell should be able to produce more accurate force curves than the PM5 can. But measuring displacement (and thus power and speed) is mire difficult. Any experience with this device and how it stacks up against our trusted PM5? Anyone have rowed with it and how the feel compares to the stock RowErg handle?

[gvcormac]

Looks interesting. Only in NL so far.

I'd be more interested in controlling apps well enough to use web and email than to get force curves.

I agree with you that measuring position might be a challenge. Maybe they have some sort of gyro/geo built in but if they do they don't seem to brag about it. And I don't know how accurate it would be. I wonder how precisely the tech from a smartphone/smartwatch would be able to guess displacement.

[JaapvanE]

I'd be more interested in controlling apps well enough to use web and email than to get force curves.

There is the ErgRemote, which is more budget friendly and has more buttons.

I agree with you that measuring position might be a challenge. Maybe they have some sort of gyro/geo built in but if they do they don't seem to brag about it. And I don't know how accurate it would be. I wonder how precisely the tech from a smartphone/smartwatch would be able to guess displacement.

They were not the first to try this approach. Getting displacement right is tough, which made their predecessors fail. A gyro/accelerometer tells you acceleration, and thus finding speed and displacement sounds easy in theory, but getting past measurement noise is tough. Especially when it involves three axis. In essence it is the same issue the PM5 has, only from the opposite side: the PM5 knows the displacement, but getting the force is dependent on the second derivative of the displacement, which is total chaos due to measurement noise.

And drive length isn't that large. A few centimeters makes a huge difference in overall power. But having exceptional components might work. Given their price (roughly 300 euro), I'd expect better components than a smartwatch or smartphone.

[Tsnor]

The ONE thing I'd like in a smart handle is sadly lacking. Embedded HR monitor.

Smart handle is the perfect place for a heart rate monitor. Trivial cost off-the-shelf sensor used in tons of fitness equipment, and the handle needs battery power and bluetooth regardless. Jsut standard metal grip pads and the rowers hands stay on the grips. With this you'd no longer needs a HR belt to get accurate HR measurements.



Interesting point on better force curve. How would this be used?

Question, if you had this handle, and your were (correctly) 100% sure the handle's wattage and split were correct, and you rowed a 7:05 2K according to your PM5, but the smart handlebar said 6:55... which would you put in your signature and tell your friends? Likely you post whatever the PM5 says, right or wrong.

I don't really understand how the handle helps if you already have a C2 erg. C2 reported metrics are hugely consistent. It's less clear they are accurate, but not sure who cares about that. If the smart handle results are different than C2 PM5 results, then not clear what benefit you have by putting this on your non-C2 erg... you exchange one (incompatible) measurement for another (more accurate, but still incompatible) measurement.

[Tsnor]

I'd be more interested in controlling apps well enough to use web and email

VOICE. Look into some of the voice control apps. Think you can do this with your current phone without new hardware.

android for example, https://support.google.com/accessibilit ... 1848?hl=en IOS has similar.

(Aside: it would kill me to do email while rowing.)
(Aside2: How exactly do you pretend to be a bot? I'm struggling)

[gvcormac]

I'd be more interested in controlling apps well enough to use web and email

VOICE. Look into some of the voice control apps. Think you can do this with your current phone without new hardware.

android for example, https://support.google.com/accessibilit ... 1848?hl=en IOS has similar.

(Aside: it would kill me to do email while rowing.)
(Aside2: How exactly do you pretend to be a bot? I'm struggling)

1. I BikeErg every day while I do email, read papers, etc. I'm not sure if anything would give me enough control to row while doing same, but it might be interesting to try. Or maybe SkiErg ... there you can take one hand away for a while but if you let go of the handle you need to break stride.

2. Me?

[Tsnor]

I'd be more interested in controlling apps well enough to use web and email

VOICE. Look into some of the voice control apps. Think you can do this with your current phone without new hardware.

android for example, https://support.google.com/accessibilit ... 1848?hl=en IOS has similar.

(Aside: it would kill me to do email while rowing.)
(Aside2: How exactly do you pretend to be a bot? I'm struggling)

1. I BikeErg every day while I do email, read papers, etc. I'm not sure if anything would give me enough control to row while doing same, but it might be interesting to try. Or maybe SkiErg ... there you can take one hand away for a while but if you let go of the handle you need to break stride.

Voice should work fine for you. Free, and very well tested by the accessibility community. No need for hands.

2. Me?

sorry, bad wording. (Aside2: How exactly does a person (me) pretend to be a bot? I'm struggling) Going back to this post which died an early death. viewtopic.php?f=7&t=209739

[gvcormac]

sorry, bad wording. (Aside2: How exactly does a person (me) pretend to be a bot? I'm struggling) Going back to this post which died an early death. viewtopic.php?f=7&t=209739

I haven't seen anything here that resembles a bot. Troll, yes (one in particular), bot not bot. On the other hand, YouTube is infested with AI-generated crap. It is almost impossible to find anything new beyond your current subscriptions that isn't AI. How sad.

[c2jonw]

A couple of concerns I have with this regarding their method of attaching their handle to the C2 chain swivel. They are using a steel (probably stainless steel) fastener that interfaces with the stainless steel swivel body. With any movement between these two parts there will be resulting wear. But the bigger issue is that by removing the U-bolt they introduce side forces to the chain in the event that you are not pulling perfectly straight on the handle, which can lead to chain failure. Early chain attachment methods on the C2 Model B did not utilize the swivel connector and there were an unacceptable number of chain failures. The swivel connector virtually eliminated this problem and unless there is something I'm not seeing in the video I would think it's use would not be advised.

[Ombrax]

A couple of concerns I have with this regarding their method of attaching their handle to the C2 chain swivel.

Totally agree with this.

I'm thinking that either 1) they're aware that they have an issue that will undoubtedly be a medium to long term problem for users, but haven't bothered to fix it, or 2) they're a bunch of software guys, so they haven't recognized a mechanical problem, and haven't put enough time on their design for the issue to become obvious to them. Either way, it's a bad sign about their compatibilities as a team to provide a quality product.

[t2o]

I'm thinking that either 1) they're aware that they have an issue that will undoubtedly be a medium to long term problem for users, but haven't bothered to fix it, or 2) they're a bunch of software guys, so they haven't recognized a mechanical problem, and haven't put enough time on their design for the issue to become obvious to them. Either way, it's a bad sign about their compatibilities as a team to provide a quality product.

Though I appreciate using logic, there's some fallacy in missing axioms. Reducing it to (1) and (2) may be such a situation. Thus I suggest adding (3): The history of the swivel connector as pointed out by c2jonw may not be known publicly very well. So how could they know then?

I can assure you that Smartrow put some considerable effort and time in developing that device and also had it tested more than a year before the release. They are not "just a bunch of software guys". It's a family business with dedicated people, I had the chance to get to know a little. The "not-software-only" aspect can be seen in the handle and also the pulley they developed on their own. It's not just a matter of software. This also requires some serious knowledge in electrical engineering and physics and how to measure power in rowing at all. Their pulley has also been tested by/with the university of Amsterdam, so I assume that there is also some science behind it.

I had the chance to participate in that test of the SmartRow handle. I know of at least two other indoor-rowers using that handle during that time, one of which is John Steventon (Rowalong on YT). The handle could be spotted in some of his videos. Also a little disclaimer before I go on, I am not Oliver Zeidler nor Steve Redgrave. I am rather pushing at average power for an end-forty-hobby-indoor-rower. My C2 is used privately and I am not offering gym service. That being said, I did around 2500km-2800km within 15months with a prototype of the handle (having the same connection but a different locking and cork grip, which is now silicon in production model). After reading this thread I checked my rowerg but could not spot visible tear on my C2s chain or the connector. I am also not aware of pulling not-straight but I also handle my rowerg with some care, which others may not. That experience of course is no statistically relevant data, but at least it's an anecdotal data point to take into account.

Therefore, suggesting they don't care is way of reality, unfair or at least predjudiced. In order to fix that, I did inform them about this suspicion of a possible point of failure and I'm quite confident they will check and evaluate this, now that they're aware of the situation.

regards, T.