Concept2 Forum

Totally minor improvement proposal: the handle hook (PN 1058 in the schematics for a RowErg) doesn't hook enough. It's too easy to hit the handle accidentally and dislodge it from the hook, sending it fly towards the chain guide (PN 1003) and hitting it.

It's easy to avoid that by extending the hook with "lips" on the top part of the hook, like shown on this picture: just add the red and/or blue parts on the top part of the hook. To un-hook the handle you;ll have to pull it back much more than without the lips, reducing the chances of un-hooking it accidentally.

Or somebody could 3d print this and sell it for cheap

Never had a problem with the Model D one to be honest ever since they changed it from the Model C version which had no lip on it at all. As long as the shock cord is not 10 years old there is plenty there to keep it engaged so modification is not required.

I suspect if its coming off to easy the shock cord is stuffed.

With another thread mentioning shock cord strength has me thinking. Is there a ‘weight’ that the shock cord should have? I’m thing hook one of those luggage scales to my handle to see how many Kg or pounds it pulls back at, but what numbers should I be looking for?

Also never had a problem with it on a new model rowErg (January, slightly >million meters, identical to model D).
I could measure on the new machine, but I have no such scale

Someone from C2 can chip in on the shock cord but from memory its about 7 to 9lbs of return force on a new cord.

On a cord 10 to 13 years old its dropped by about half of that, which is still fine if the chain and rollers are like new and your technique is good and the rating is not extremally high or else the chain simply doesn't retract fast enough and it starts to flap about and dip in the centre during the recovery.

The whole RowErg (incl. the shock chord) is 14 months old (just above 2M meters) so there's no tension problem.

I'm talking more about "you walk casually next to the rower and you hit the handle with your leg" situations.

But I've read a comment somewhere on this forum (I think it was from Carl Watts) that it may even be better to keep the handle off the hook when not using the rower as that could help the shock chord lifetime. So yeah, that avoids the hook "issue" too.

Yes if you wish to maximize the cord life, leave the handle at the cage when not in use. Probably doesn't make a huge difference but every bit helps.

If you lube the chain and lube the chain rollers inside the frame now and again its possible to get like 15 years out of the cord as it still has enough tension to overcome the resistance for the chain return. The friction of the two flywheel shaft bearings is pretty small and they last and last.

Used or not, the cord is rubber and it will simply perish over time anyway with contact to the air, the elastomers just gradually leak away from it.

Thx Carl, useful. That said, even if one had to replace the shock chord after 5 years, given the price of the spares it doesn't sound like a big deal.

Carl Watts wrote: ↑

October 29th, 2022, 8:04 pm

Yes if you wish to maximize the cord life, leave the handle at the cage when not in use. Probably doesn't make a huge difference but every bit helps.

If you lube the chain and lube the chain rollers inside the frame now and again its possible to get like 15 years out of the cord as it still has enough tension to overcome the resistance for the chain return. The friction of the two flywheel shaft bearings is pretty small and they last and last.

Used or not, the cord is rubber and it will simply perish over time anyway with contact to the air, the elastomers just gradually leak away from it.

I've seen this advice before, but never followed it. Is there concrete evidence to support it? An alternate theory is that additional mechanical exapansion/contraction causes more stress, so you should leave the handle on the hook.

Mine's 19 years old without replacement or even tightening. Works fine. My wife's is 10 years newer, stored 5 years with handle against the cage. It works fine, too.

My old rower was an AirRow by an outfit called Inside Fitness. It was sort of like Concept 2 in that it was 2 guys in Montreal in a garage who made nothing but ergs: A rower and a bike trainer. Maybe a stair climber -- I think they patented one but never saw it.

Unfortunately, the were acquired by BodyGuard who marketed it for a while, but then themselves went out of business.

Here's the patent for the rower. It appears that Whipr has built a (much flimsier) version. This one used airplane cable which had a much nicer feel than the Concept 2 chain. Window-blind takeup mechanism. No bungees.

https://cormack.uwaterloo.ca/airrow1.pdf

gvcormac wrote: ↑

October 30th, 2022, 9:04 am

Carl Watts wrote: ↑

October 29th, 2022, 8:04 pm

Yes if you wish to maximize the cord life, leave the handle at the cage when not in use. Probably doesn't make a huge difference but every bit helps.

If you lube the chain and lube the chain rollers inside the frame now and again its possible to get like 15 years out of the cord as it still has enough tension to overcome the resistance for the chain return. The friction of the two flywheel shaft bearings is pretty small and they last and last.

Used or not, the cord is rubber and it will simply perish over time anyway with contact to the air, the elastomers just gradually leak away from it.

I've seen this advice before, but never followed it. Is there concrete evidence to support it? An alternate theory is that additional mechanical exapansion/contraction causes more stress, so you should leave the handle on the hook.

What would be the additional mechanical expansion/contraction ?

I guess the advice comes from the fact that it's better to store anything elastic with less tension (handle at the cage) than with more tension (handle on the hook ), no ?

HornetMaX wrote: ↑

October 30th, 2022, 10:18 am

What would be the additional mechanical expansion/contraction ?

I guess the advice comes from the fact that it's better to store anything elastic with less tension (handle at the cage) than with more tension (handle on the hook ), no ?

An extra foot or so of retraction, and the complementary extra foot of stretching each time you stow and unstow the handle. Larger range of motion may induce plastic deformation more easily than shorter.

I'm not asserting this is the case, just that I haven't seen any convincing evidence one way or the other.