Concept2 Forum

I have been a member of the C2 Forum for some years and an enthusiastic member of the Forum Flyers.

However, I have just moved to a new job in Riyadh in Saudi Arabia which has involved me moving to a new house on an expat compound. The compound has a nice gym but unfortunately is equipped with a brand of rower called a 'Proteus' which has to be amongst the most dreadful pieces of fitness equipment ever made by man. Last night, for example, I did a 20 minutes piece and covered a laughable 3983m (I was getting close to breaking 5k on the C2 when I left the UK). Worse still the pace calculator was telling me I was pacing at a soul destroying time of around 3:30. If I plug 3983 and 20 min into the C2 pace calculator it gives me 2:30 (dreadfully slow still but not off the scale).

Unless anyone can tell me whether there is any correction factor for this appalling machine, I guess I will have to reluctantly leave the FF . Either that or look around for a C2 machine in Riyadh.

If either of the Dreissigacker brothers ever read this forum you can sleep easy boys because this heap of junk is absolutely no competition.

Gordon

Are you basing your entire opinion on some pace numbers in a display?

If I were to use another rowing ergometer, I would not expect the paces to be comparable to a C2. Pace is a made-up number, which fully depends on the calculation relationship between pace and power decided by the fabricator of the machine.

I would expect the power in watts to be comparable, at least if the design of the rower made it possible for me to row with the same rowing form. And I would also base my judgement on the mechanics and feel of the machine. But you mention neither of those properties.

(I would of course also expect the reported pace, distance and duration to be consistent with each other. Which they seem not to be in your case. But that sounds so strange that I have a feeling that there is something we don't know.)

You're making the assumption that they're using a flywheel sensor and known moment of inertia to calculate dissipated power.

Lots of Brand-X rowers use a much more naïve method like counting strokes and assumptions like 10m per stroke.

Citroen wrote: ↑

November 18th, 2018, 9:55 am

You're making the assumption that they're using a flywheel sensor and known moment of inertia to calculate dissipated power.

Not really. I was expressing myself clumsily. What I was trying to say was that power is the only property where one can have a reasonable expectation of identical values. You are right that this of course requires that there is a (real) power measurement.

I think we're both saying the same thing and describing the same problem with most Brand-X ergos. The ones that do measure watts are more comparable, but we may still be comparing apples to oranges.

Thank both. I looked at what the Proteus was providing as a power output last night for another 20 min piece and it was only registering in the low 90s. Given that even at my worst on the C2 I was at c. 150 watts for 10k those figures do seem strange and Citroen is probably right that we are not comparing like with like. I guess though I am still working up a healthy sweat so it can't be doing me any harm.

I think I'll buy a C2 when I'm next in the UK - shipping weight of 32kg is just on the weight limit for business class checked baggage. I could also buy a new one ex VAT which would be good.

correction factor for this appalling machine

If it has a flywheel and magnetic+fan braking, you can probably find a drag level that will let you pull a rowing stroke, with full length and reasonable force. Control can be by rating (spm), HR or PE. Afloat you'd know your rating.

Proteus paperwork uses the word Watt. If it exists on the machine you use, you could relate to your C2 level to estimate a correction factor. This can be done only with Watts, not with pace or distance, since these are non-linear with power.