Is the erg the human-power-optimized machine?

[sharp_rower]

In terms of wattage in say a 5-minute effort, does the rowing machine optimize the amount of power a well-built and physically fit human being can generate? Are there other machines out there significantly different than the rowing motion that come close?

[Bob S.]

Whether or not it optimizes the power, the monitor does not measure the full power put out - only the portion of it that goes into spinning the wheel. Something as simple as running up an incline using handrails to get the upper body involved would come closer to it. The power output can be determined fairly accurately from careful measurements of the person's weight and the rate of climb.

[jamesg]

There's that thing with two wheels that seems to let us do quite a good job.

[hjs]

In terms of wattage in say a 5-minute effort, does the rowing machine optimize the amount of power a well-built and physically fit human being can generate? Are there other machines out there significantly different than the rowing motion that come close?

No, the pushing momentum is not being used. Optimal would be if both the pushing and pulling are used. I believe there is such, sort of bike ish, machine. Can,t come up with its name right now.

[jackarabit]

Power output is optimized by % muscle involvement. Schwinn Air-dyne or foot cranks and hand cranks to avoid the inertial pulse of reciprocating levers? Interesting that our familiar "erg" measures the application of that pulse to a driven flywheel.

[Carl Watts]

In theory it can do a great job as its static and doesn't suffer from outside influence. The flywheel could be driven by a motor and power consumed for a given rpm could be accurately plotted. The monitor self calibrates based on drag factor so in theory the Wattage produced by you can be accurately reproduced on the screen so relative to some other form of exercise equipment its going to be more accurate.

There are losses in the likes of the chain, bearings etc but there will be losses in any machine used to do a test.

You really cannot compare the Erg to a bike, there are more muscles used on a Erg but the action is totally different.

From memory the feedback from cyclists in that the equivalent Watts on the Erg were harder to achieve, I may have that wrong but I'm sure there are cyclists here that can confirm this or not. This would tend to suggest its not optimized to get the best power, but hey its a better all over body workout than cycling alone.

[Bob S.]

The Schwinn Air-Dyne is not just for cycling. It is also operated by alternating hand levers. You can get an upper body workout as well as a leg workout and the hand lever action can include both pushing and pulling the hand levers. The torso muscles don't get as much involved as they do in rowing, but the combination of push and pull uses more of the shoulder and arm muscles than rowing. Of course, it depends on how you use it. Most people use both the arm levers and the foot pedals, but the ratio of work distribution can range from legs only to arms only.

Some elliptical trainers have both the leg and arm movements as well. The elliptical does a better job than cycling in giving the legs a workout, since it is a more complex movement and it also requires more trunk involvement as well. My comments on the elliptical are strictly from observation. The only time I ever tried one, many years ago, my knee protested vigorously and I never tried it again.

[jackarabit]

Spent a lot of time on an Air-Dyne. I must have short-circuited my thinking on that subject. Did not intend to suggest that it is only a stationary bike.

[Psmith]

I was going to plug the Airdyne, but I see I'm a bit late. Notwithstanding the potential for differing watts calculation formulas, yes, I think most people can produce significantly higher wattage on the Airdyne than they can on a C2, especially if they don't have a practiced stroke.

Also, the standard peak power test in ex phys uses a Wingate bike. Peak power is of course not the same as "highest power that can be sustained over five minutes," but take from that what you will.

[Bob S.]

Frankly, I don't think that a machine can be designed to really measure your total output. A machine can only measure the work that goes into the machine and not the extra work that the body does in moving its parts - torso, legs, arms, whatever. That's why I suggested running up stairs, since the work done there is raising the mass of the body against the force of gravity and all the necessary data can be measured. The one item that would not be counted there would be arm swing. To include arm movement in the measured data, I specified that handrails would be used, so that the arm movement would be included in the work done.

Bob S.

[Balkan boy]

There used to be a miner in these lands that mined 152 tons of coal in one shift.
That's a human-power machine.

[jackarabit]

Bet he made a coal "face" when done.

[Zach]

From memory the feedback from cyclists in that the equivalent Watts on the Erg were harder to achieve, I may have that wrong but I'm sure there are cyclists here that can confirm this or not. This would tend to suggest its not optimized to get the best power, but hey its a better all over body workout than cycling alone.

I'm mostly a cyclist that occasionally rows (as opposed to a rower that occasionally cycles) during March-November. December-March, I row a lot more, but it's more like 50/50 bike and erg. I race Cat. 3/Expert on road, MTB, and cyclocross, which just means that I still mostly suck.

Anyway.

Yes. You're right. In terms of perceived effort, 300 watts on the rower is a lot harder than 300 watts on the bike. I can sustain 300 watts of effort on the bike for 15 minutes. On the erg, that kind of effort is sustainable for maybe a 1/3 of that. I wouldn't know –– I've tried and failed.

[Bob S.]

Yes. You're right. In terms of perceived effort, 300 watts on the rower is a lot harder than 300 watts on the bike. I can sustain 300 watts of effort on the bike for 15 minutes. On the erg, that kind of effort is sustainable for maybe a 1/3 of that. I wouldn't know –– I've tried and failed.

That is exactly what what should be expected, since a lot of the work your body does on a grounded indoor rower does not contribute to work done on the wheel. Thus it is not measured by the monitor. There is also some unmeasured work done while cycling but a lot less than on an erg.

Bob S.