thoughts on this used C2 (and meaning of numbers)

[Ombrax]

Maybe the people who build aircraft simulators could build one

But at what cost? And for what % of the potential market would the cost be worth the benefit?

I'm not an OTW rower, nor am I willing to pay for perfection, so I have to say, C2 ergs are just fine for me. I'll go out on a limb and say that's the case for both the vast majority of present users and future buyers.

[Sakly]

Maybe the people who build aircraft simulators could build one

But at what cost? And for what % of the potential market would the cost be worth the benefit?

I'm not an OTW rower, nor am I willing to pay for perfection, so I have to say, C2 ergs are just fine for me. I'll go out on a limb and say that's the case for both the vast majority of present users and future buyers.

Fully agree.

[Slidewinder]

Please, no. C2 has better flywheel feel than any other rower. Magnetic does not increase resistance enough with velocity, and it typically coupled to inadequate inertial and a too-flexy (and too flimsy) pull strap (excluded from warranty, of course). Overall, the rigidity, inertia, and increasing speed of the C2 mechanism can't be beat. Does it perfectly simulate rowing? No, but I daresay the force-velocity-impulse curve is better than many that purport to do so.

... the magnet provides a constant changing magnetic force, based on some profile.

Some companies claim to use similar technology to provide variable resistance during the stroke, closely resembling a true on the water experience. Technically this is possible: force profiles for oars are known, so you can easily replicate them. So from a resistance perspective, the machine could clone the behaviour of any specific boat and oar combination on a specific type of water. The electronics certainly is fast enough to do this. Aside the obvious benefit of noise reduction, it would open doors for different training scenario's (like simulating coastal rowing with waves) and even specific loads to targeted training.

This is very exciting. There are many patents related to eddy current flywheel braking, but I wasn't aware that the technology had advanced this far. Include this in my list of predictions for future developments in rowing exercise technology - a smooth vaneless flywheel disk, spinning whisper quiet, and enabling a high fidelity replication of the force profile of actual OTW rowing, and retaining the inertial element necessary for that realistic 'feel'.
It also offers the potential of improving the visual aesthetics of rowing ergometers. I have never liked the asymmetry of a single flywheel hanging off one side of the machine. The rest of the machine is perfectly symmetrical, but then the visuals are spoiled by the single flywheel. Imagine a pair of smooth, slender flywheels mounted on each side of the forward moving mass of a dynamically balanced rowing ergometer. Very slick. Maybe having two flywheels, each with its microprocessor controlled magnetic braking, would enable a superior fine tuning of the resistance to replicate all manner of OTW conditions - wind, direction of current, wave chop... Wow!

[Dangerscouse]

I'm not an OTW rower, nor am I willing to pay for perfection, so I have to say, C2 ergs are just fine for me. I'll go out on a limb and say that's the case for both the vast majority of present users and future buyers.

Maybe I agree too because I'm not an OTW rower, or of a scientific mind to consider all of the possibilities, but this feels like they'd just be gilding the lily.

There are some small changes that would be welcome, but I'm very happy with what I've currently got.

[Slidewinder]

Please, no. C2 has better flywheel feel than any other rower. Magnetic does not increase resistance enough with velocity, and it typically coupled to inadequate inertial and a too-flexy (and too flimsy) pull strap (excluded from warranty, of course). Overall, the rigidity, inertia, and increasing speed of the C2 mechanism can't be beat. Does it perfectly simulate rowing? No, but I daresay the force-velocity-impulse curve is better than many that purport to do so.

... the magnet provides a constant changing magnetic force, based on some profile.

Some companies claim to use similar technology to provide variable resistance during the stroke, closely resembling a true on the water experience. Technically this is possible: force profiles for oars are known, so you can easily replicate them. So from a resistance perspective, the machine could clone the behaviour of any specific boat and oar combination on a specific type of water. The electronics certainly is fast enough to do this. Aside the obvious benefit of noise reduction, it would open doors for different training scenario's (like simulating coastal rowing with waves) and even specific loads to targeted training.

This is very exciting. ... Imagine a pair of smooth, slender flywheels mounted on each side of the forward moving mass of a dynamically balanced rowing ergometer. Very slick. Maybe having two flywheels, each with its microprocessor controlled magnetic braking, would enable a superior fine tuning of the resistance to replicate all manner of OTW conditions - wind, direction of current, wave chop...

Further to this imagined future rowing ergometer equipped with an intelligent-microprocessor-controlled-eddy-current-braking-of-a-smooth-disk-flywheel-system (someone with have to come up with a descriptor better suited for an acronym): Whatever the state of the art at the time it gets built, experts in the field of microprocessor control will obsess over improving the fidelity of the replication of OTW rowing - to enable a dynamically variable force profile at the rowing ergometer handle that is indistinguishable from what is experienced during actual rowing as the blade moves through the water from catch to finish - and they will do it - and all that will be required to implement these improvements to the benefit of rowing athletes training on the machine (around the world if you like), would be to upgrade the software on the units. Beautiful.