Why I think an Assault bike is better than a Rowing or skiErg for weight loss

[Dave Neve]

Hello

This might put the cat among the pigeons and I love the Concept2 rowErg, but I think an Assault bike is better for weight loss, especially for very overweight people at the start.

Being overweight comes with a lot of disadvantages when doing cardio, some of which are not discussed often even on these forums, like heat retention.

In general, it also makes overweight people more prone to joint and ligament problems if their bodies are not supported, hence many people say it's better for them to cycle or row as they are sitting down.

But the problem with any rowing machine if you have a big gut is that its much harder to get into a decent catch position as a big belly gets in the way, and even if you manage that, it puts more pressure on the diaphragm, making it harder to breathe.

Therefore, I think that the sitting position on a bike is better for overweight people than the sitting position on a RowErg. That said, I'm a big fan of Assault bikes too, which let you exercise not only your legs and lats, but also your pecs when you push the handles.

For that reason, the Assault bike means users don't risk overtiring their legs as much as on a bike or even the RowErg as they can bring their pecs into play, and your pecs are quite a big group of muscles. So over time, you can do far more on an Assault bike than on a RowErg at the start.

The only thing I don't like about many Assault bikes for overweight people is the small saddles that they often have, designed for leaner people.

So what do you think as the goal is only to discuss this and give the best advice possible to newbies wanting to lose weight

[Carl Watts]

A bike and Zwift has been better for me for pure weigh control but then again my upper body has probably lost muscle mass.

I find a bike easier to stay in the heartrate bands, breathing is easier and its just easier to be able to sit there and spin the legs for an hour or just do longer rides overall.

For really overweight probably just walking would be the best start. The bike is probably easier than the rower if you just want to drop few pounds.

[iain]

Not used an "Attack bike", but think exercise to do is one that the weight-loser (is that a word?) is most likely to keep up. The differences are trivial between machines compared to the effects of stopping. Not sure how more sophisticated bikes factor speed, but the fact that the muscles previously used to counter gravity can lead to a better pace on rower does encourage some who have been put off other exercise forms.

[JaapvanE]

Not used an "Attack bike", but think exercise to do is one that the weight-loser (is that a word?) is most likely to keep up. The differences are trivial between machines compared to the effects of stopping.

Yeah, that is the key difference to be honest. Bikes are just a means of transport for me (about 50K a week), so adding additional meters there would be boring for me. Rowing is much more appealing for me and thus a lot easier to keep up.

[jamesg]

especially for very overweight people at the start.

Rowing can't be much use for them, since all the work done when rowing is concentrated in a very short time, since boats go fast. Maybe little more than half a second per stroke; so high force and full length are essential in each one.

Given this highly uneven power distribution, I'm finding it hard on the erg to get my HR up to levels that a slow walk uphill with sticks provides easily. Having quite a long rowing history, I don't want (or can't anyway) to pull 35-40 a minute at ratio 3 (W/rate).

Maybe there are machines that by their action allow a more distributed effort in time. A bike might let me give it 100W quite easily, with the continuous action rather than one pull very 3 seconds.

[JaapvanE]

especially for very overweight people at the start.

Rowing can't be much use for them, since all the work done when rowing is concentrated in a very short time, since boats go fast. Maybe little more than half a second per stroke; so high force and full length are essential in each one.

My experience differs. My drivetime is about 1 second (ratio roughly 1:2) and getting beyind 200W is plenty of energy needed. Asides, much zone 2 training can actually burn off fat, especially if you do it on longer diatances.

Given this highly uneven power distribution, I'm finding it hard on the erg to get my HR up to levels that a slow walk uphill with sticks provides easily. Having quite a long rowing history, I don't want (or can't anyway) to pull 35-40 a minute at ratio 3 (W/rate).

At 18 SPM and decent strokes I easily hit 100 watts and keep in Zone 2. When needed I can leave zone 2 easily and hit 200-250W with heartrates near maxHR.

[Ombrax]

I'm finding it hard on the erg to get my HR up to levels that a slow walk uphill with sticks provides easily.

I have to say, based on how my body behaves I'm a bit surprised by this. A few data points from my experience: My max is in the mid-170's (I'm 62 years old) but don't have much trouble getting up to and spending a while in the 150's. Above 160 gets more and more painful, and 170 and up is final 300m sprint territory.

[jamesg]

I'll have to alter erg style. Pulling a stroke for 2k use is no longer an option.

It's probably peak power that stops me. Ergdata showed me over 500N peak force and 1.8m/s which is >900W peak power, too much for me, even at rate 20.

This a.m. worked at 1.7m/s and 450N peak, rate 25, same average Power but much easier.

[JaapvanE]

This a.m. worked at 1.7m/s and 450N peak, rate 25, same average Power but much easier.

What kind of pace are you aiming for James? I am a heavyweight which uses a lot of drag, but a peak of 450N with similar speeds is normal in my Zone 2 training sessions, roughly 2:18/500m.

[jamesg]

Recently I've been doing Wods, trying to stay at 1.5W/kg, so 120W, rating 24 or less.

This a.m pulled 345 strokes in 14 minutes (7*2') to 2951m, which is 3.5m/s, 120W and stroke 4.9W', mostly at 25.

I'll be trying to stay at that level for a few months.

[Tsnor]

... I'm finding it hard on the erg to get my HR up to levels that a slow walk uphill with sticks provides easily. Having quite a long rowing history, I don't want (or can't anyway) to pull 35-40 a minute at ratio 3 (W/rate).

You on any medications ? Many common meds mess with HR, especially max HR.

HR should scale with watts in the aerobic range.

Walking 2.5-3mph should be a power output of about 75 watts. Rowing 75w is about 2:45 split. So you should see higher HR rowing than walking if you row at 2:45 or better.

Given "This a.m pulled 345 strokes in 14 minutes (7*2') to 2951m, which is 3.5m/s, 120W " Your HR should be higher rowing that piece at the end than walking.

How are you measuring HR? MANY of the watches drop out HR rowing. Belts usually work. Can you look at the graph of HR in your log and see the trend?

[jamesg]

You on any medications? HR should scale with watts in the aerobic range.

Yes, three, for the last 25 years.

When I looked I was at 2W per beat over rest rate, as in (120HR - 60RR)*2 = 120W; but always some drift.

My walks are on small hills, which is like intervals. Climbing with sticks, the action musclewise is better distributed than rowing and far more continuous than in a rowing stroke: at rate 20 on erg at low drag I do nothing for 80% of the time. So I guess my killer is the high peak force/power.

So on Rowerg I'm moving from rate 20x6W to rate 24x5W or worse; maybe even using *high* drag to keep the pull really weak and slow.

Correction: low. Did 4x4 2R. The only decent one was the last, 108W@22 DF 86 despite a 20second stop in the middle.

[JaapvanE]

at rate 20 on erg at low drag I do nothing for 80% of the time. So I guess my killer is the high peak force/power.

So on Rowerg I'm moving from rate 20x6W to rate 24x5W or worse; maybe even using high drag to keep the pull really weak and slow.

My experience is that I was able to flatten the forcecurve. I made my stroke stronger (a lot of focus on my backswing in my case) to reduce the peak of the force curve but keep the overall work done under the curve identical. Might work for you.

[jamesg]

I'm not keen on backswing. Went out of favour in the 1950s. Clearly it was an attempt to lengthen the stroke, and had been in use since the days of Fairbairn.

We used an American style, upright but an inch through the work, so more frontend and legs, get hold of the water early, still in use today at the 40+ rates we see afloat.

Right now I'm trying everything; what worked today in the Wod was slightly higher rate, slightly lower Watts (108), drag 86, peak force <480N, average force <300N.

The action still looks and feels like rowing, believe it or not.

[Dave Neve]

Hello jamesg and all

I've been taught to use backswing on the RowErg

Firstly, the posterior muscle chain is extremely powerful. In our gym, we have a back extension machine with weights which I happened to use today; with around 75 kg of weights on the pulley system. That's more than I generally use when using a seated row pull machine

I have also been impressed by two videos in particular. One was on RowAlong where the presenter rowed just using a backswing, without leg push or arm pull. I was stunned by the split time he achieved (can't find this video again though)

The other one is Brian Shaw's record breaking 100 m row in 12.8 seconds, where he uses backswing

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SVl0Zt-kZys