Any benefits to super low drag factor?

[Cyclingman1]

Does anyone have any experience with using very low drag factors, that is, less than 100? If so, in what way do you do it? Strictly, long, slow distance? Pace? Or even faster efforts? Pace? What SPM is used? Etc? Thanks, Jim G

[Carl Watts]

Depends on your body type and height.

I'm relatively short for a rower and rely on power and not speed so 100 is totally useless for me at the pace I row at. Just cannot get the leg speed or rating required on 100 to get the pace I can get on 136 at a much slower rating and less effort.

[sharp_rower]

I don't know if this really addresses what you're after, but in my early erging days, I was rowing with a drag factor in the 90s. At the time it didn't feel super low at all; in fact, my strokes felt quite "heavy", though that's probably because I was rowing at a relatively low spm (low 20s). It wasn't until someone on this forum pointed out that they would get nowhere with a drag factor that low that I worked on increasing it. But it's not clear to me how much of an impact the increase to around 125-135 has had on my scores.

Drag factor is an interesting thing because I have spoken to three experienced on-the-water rowers for whom drag factor is just an afterthought. One rowed for one of the highly-ranked universities in the US and didn't know how to calibrate the drag factor. Another one also rowed for the varsity eight of a similar US university program, and told me: "I'm not too sure about the drag factor, I just set the fan on 4-ish and just go with that for pretty much any piece." Finally, I once asked the winner of the Open Men at CRASH-Bs what drag factor he had used, and he said: "Honestly, I have no idea." He did later estimate it to be at around 125.

I guess the moral of the story is that drag factor might not be as important of a factor to the bottom line as one might think.

[Edward4492]

I'm kind of the new kid on the block compared to the other posters, but I'm coming up on 3M meters for my first year. I've settled in on a 102df after running fairly long experiments with drags up to 124. I've done a decent amount of long (15k) peices at a 20r and 200w and felt very comfortable at the light drag. My goal has been to pull 10 watts/stroke and carry that same form into a 2K, Which I did successfully pulling 6:59 at around 304w and a 31 rate. My next target will be to try and build up to 10.5 w/s. Maybe because I'm 165 lbs and tend to over-compress a bit and lean back just a hair too far to go for a long stroke,and really accelerate the wheel; maybe the low drag allows for that. I know now that even recent experiments with 108 - 110 make the wheel feel like it's in quick sand.One thing I'm convinced of is the need for the 20r rows, assuming that a decent amount of power is applied. And, I guess, that the low DF forces an improvement of drive speed to maintain a decent pace/power.

[rhr]

Does anyone have any experience with using very low drag factors, that is, less than 100? If so, in what way do you do it? Strictly, long, slow distance? Pace? Or even faster efforts? Pace? What SPM is used? Etc? Thanks, Jim G

Hi Jim. Hopefully these are the stats you are looking for.

Up until recently I rowed everything under 100 DF, as low as 92 on sprint / speed work. Low DF rowing requires a fast stroke and your legs do the vast majority of the workload. Higher DF relies more on the upper body / arms and puts pressure on your lower back. Recently I have adjusted to 'higher" DF rowing to ease the pressure and reduce the workload of my legs. Being an accomplished cyclist your legs are better suited to low DF rowing than mine.

For long slow distance I used a similar DF to speed work at 92. My C2 fan at 0 = DF 82 so I could hardly go much lower anyway!

Pace / SPM combinations at DF 92: Roughly 12W' / stroke
1:40 / 500m SPM 30
1:35 / 500m SPM 34
1:30 / 500m SPM 38

Since then I have raised the DF to 115-120 and my power output is now 13W' for the same SPM and distances. 2-3 SPM lower for the same paces above.

A key variable in deciding drag factor is drive / recovery times. Lower DF means a shorter drive time and greater recovery. As I've got fitter my ability to cope with the reduced recovery time has improved plus I have practiced to keep the stroke length the same. Previously my stroke length shortened on a higher DF which equated to a much higher required handle force to maintain pace and I tired quickly.
http://www.biorow.com/RBN_en_2011_files ... News01.pdf

Hope this helps.

P.S. saw your 2nd thread - there is no way the drive time is 0.5s - I would estimate 0.75-0.85 for the 1:40 SPM 30 DF 92

[hjs]

Does anyone have any experience with using very low drag factors, that is, less than 100? If so, in what way do you do it? Strictly, long, slow distance? Pace? Or even faster efforts? Pace? What SPM is used? Etc? Thanks, Jim G

I used relative low drag, and still like it, this to protect my back. Trained and raced at drag 103 on the 2k pulled 6.22 around 40 years old. Pulled 123 500 drag 108 age 43/44.
And used drag 85 very early on, pulled around 35.30 on the 10 k on this.

For longer work, low drag is not difficult, the fan keept spinning faster and you have less recistance. So the drive needs to be quick and the recovery easy. Lower rating is needed often.

The above number where done on rate 41 ish on the 500, 30 on the 2k and 25/26 on the 10.

[hjs]

Depends on your body type and height.

I'm relatively short for a rower and rely on power and not speed so 100 is totally useless for me at the pace I row at. Just cannot get the leg speed or rating required on 100 to get the pace I can get on 136 at a much slower rating and less effort.

I am your height, if you can,t get speed your technique is not good. The higher drag, the less technique you need. Rating is not an issue, normal rating or lower works best.

[Cyclingman1]

Appreciate the responses and the experiences. I've been using 135-145 DF and am not really happy with it. I, like many others, do have complicating factors like age, 68, and a setback this summer with a hospitalizatiun for DVTs which really knocked me low and the recovery to full strength has been slow. Perhaps lower DF will help.

I've always been a 29-32 SPM rower, so the higher SPMs mentioned I'll be used to. DF has always been a nebulous factor for me. When I first rowed nearly three years ago, I was around 170 DF - no particular reason why. But if I was not having a particularly good day, it seemed like the energy was being sucked right out of me. Then I dropped to 155-160 for a while. Same thing. The last couple of years I've been at 135-145. It might take a while to evaluate what a 100 DF or so will do for me. I'll keep you posted.

[Cyclingman1]

Well it is probably too early for any kind of evaluation on low DF, but I have an initial effort.

On 11/1:
5K: 18:23 @1:50.3 DF/SPM 135/30 W/stroke: 8.7. 5min: (L,1) 1:49.0; (H,2,3) 1:51.1.

On 11/7:
5K: 18:39 @1:51.9 DF/SPM 100/31 W/stroke: 8.1. 5min: (L,1) 1:51.3; (H,3) 1:52.8.

I know I’m not used to low DF, but it felt like I wasn’t getting bang for my buck. I think I was working harder for a slower result. Also, someone commented about legs being more important at lower DF. Maybe so. Despite all of my cycling [much less in the last 2,3 yrs], I don’t feel that I have an extremely strong leg drive. Actually, it is the sprinter cyclists that have the massive quads. I actually have a relatively strong upper body. The experiment is still a work in progress.

[Cyclingman1]

On 11/1:
5K: 18:23 @1:50.3 DF/SPM 135/30 W/stroke: 8.7. 5min: (L,1) 1:49.0; (H,2,3) 1:51.1.

On 11/7:
5K: 18:39 @1:51.9 DF/SPM 100/31 W/stroke: 8.1. 5min: (L,1) 1:51.3; (H,3) 1:52.8.

More rather inconclusive data:

11/8:
5K: 18:42 @1:52.2 DF/SPM 115/31 W/stroke: 8.0. 5min: (L,4) 1:50.7; (H,1) 1:53.6.

Perhaps I need to be doing the 20 SPM bit and let the pace rise to 2:00 or above or some equivalent SPM/W ratio.

[Bob S.]

It looks like we have come full cycle here. As I remember, your first posts here, almost 3 years ago were about drag factor. At the time, you were not at all happy with the responses. There were no concrete answers to your questions, just nebulous suggestions. the only real answers are that it is highly personal and that each one has to experiment a lot to find his own best level at various rates and paces - a daunting task.

My first introduction to the Concept 2 Rowing Ergometer (as it was called then) was in the late 1980s on club model Bs with the unnumbered PM. I got my own model B about 5 years later and for about 10 more years, I was blissfully unaware of the concept of drag factor. Then I had the good fortune to acquire a PM 3, configured to the model B. It took awhile longer before I learned that there was such a thing as drag factor available on that performance monitor. I learned at the time that the minimum Df on an unmodified B was in the order of 140 or so and that this was a lot higher than what was available on the newer rowers. That explained why I was puzzled when I first encountered a model C at the 1996 Beach Sprints. The pull seemed much too light and I had trouble adjusting. I had been using a sort of mid range damper setting on the model Bs, so I suppose that the DF was in the order of 170-180. I don't know what the C had, but my guess is around 120 - a shock at the time, although nowadays I stick to around 115 and feel comfortable with that. I have never felt the motivation to embark on a serious attempt to find my DF sweet spots for the many rate and pace combinations that I might use. My fullest respect to anyone who takes on that formidable task.

Bob S.

[Cyclingman1]

It looks like we have come full cycle here. As I remember, your first posts here, almost 3 years ago were about drag factor. At the time, you were not at all happy with the responses. There were no concrete answers to your questions, just nebulous suggestions.

Bob, I'm sure early on in my rowing that I started asking about drag factor. It seems to be rather important, but it is hard to nail it down. Especially since it interacts with force on the handle and SPM and, no doubt, other factors, such as the kind of rowing being done: long, short, slow, fast. Maybe this time I'll get it figured out.

[lindsayh]

For what it is worth (maybe not too much) I am not sure the DF is all that critical and the difference from person to person is related to comfort and what suits rather than science. I am a 135 - 165 kind of guy depending on what sort of session I am doing but I am sure I could do them at <120 with a bit of practice and technique adjustment without a major impact on times.

[hjs]

For what it is worth (maybe not too much) I am not sure the DF is all that critical and the difference from person to person is related to comfort and what suits rather than science. I am a 135 - 165 kind of guy depending on what sort of session I am doing but I am sure I could do them at <120 with a bit of practice and technique adjustment without a major impact on times.

Agree, only for the extremes drag matters, high drag is needed to go really fast on the sprints. I myself find the feeling of low drag nice on longer stuff, but with lower ratings. The needs some time to stop a bit. If you keep the rate, you are pulling air.

[sharp_rower]

Please bear with me for a moment…So as I understand it, one's desired drag factor should be a function of:
Rating (if high then df high)
Drive speed (if high then df low)
Power per stroke (if high then df high, the "resistance" factor)
?
If so, what percentage weight assigned to each to determine your target df?