Cycling or Rowing?

[becz]

I had another thought related to this topic as I was rowing this morning and I'd be interested in comments. The work input phase is only about 1/2 to 1/3 of the stroke (depending on how you row, etc.). Does anyone know whether the power reading on the PM is over a whole stroke, or just for the input phase? The obvious difference being that the power input to the bicycle is close to continuous.

[Orc]

Averaged over the whole stroke.

I think this is an important difference between the sports. In rowing you put in fewer but more forceful thrusts to get the same average power. I think this is the reason I find it a lot harder to bike after hard rowing than rowing after hard biking.

marc

I had another thought related to this topic as I was rowing this morning and I'd be interested in comments. The work input phase is only about 1/2 to 1/3 of the stroke (depending on how you row, etc.). Does anyone know whether the power reading on the PM is over a whole stroke, or just for the input phase? The obvious difference being that the power input to the bicycle is close to continuous.

[Orc]

that seems odd- what do you use to measure power in the 2 sports?

Rowperfect machines or C2 on slides shold have less loss due to moving body weight.

marc

Tried some rowing versus biking.


first 20 min row, ut1 ish pace, av watts 261 (240/280)

3 minutes rest

20 min stationaire bike 170 watts (150/190)


That biking of mine is very poor

[hjs]

that seems odd- what do you use to measure power in the 2 sports?

Rowperfect machines or C2 on slides shold have less loss due to moving body weight.

marc

The concept2 D and a stationary bike, don't now the brand.

rated 23/24 on the c2 and 90/100 rpm on the bike setting 5 out of 12

[johnlvs2run]

What is it about rowing that helps cycling?

Is it core strength, or hamstrings and gluts?

How does this development of certain muscles on the erg transfer to being stronger for cycling?

[Orc]

Well, if the brand isn't a good quality power meter, then any meaningful comparison would be impossible. You should try to use somebody's bicycle power meter on a trainer and see how it compares.

marc


[/quote]

The concept2 D and a stationary bike, don't now the brand.

rated 23/24 on the c2 and 90/100 rpm on the bike setting 5 out of 12[/quote]

[hjs]

Well, if the brand isn't a good quality power meter, then any meaningful comparison would be impossible. You should try to use somebody's bicycle power meter on a trainer and see how it compares.

marc

The concept2 D and a stationary bike, don't now the brand.

rated 23/24 on the c2 and 90/100 rpm on the bike setting 5 out of 12[/quote][/quote]

I don,t think it has anything to do with the brand. I have it on several occasions and differant brand's
In my track and field days I had the same, I could never do on a bike compared to what I could do running.
On a stepper though, I can get a higher output, higher then on the, C2 I mean.
With cycling my legs give in long before my hart and lungs do.

[Nosmo]

What is it about rowing that helps cycling?

Is it core strength, or hamstrings and gluts?

How does this development of certain muscles on the erg transfer to being stronger for cycling?

You are training the same major muscles, the quads for a very similar movement, and the cardio vascular requirements are simliar. Rowing is more total body, but the cycling muscles get a very good workout rowing.
Edit: of course the hamstrings and gluts are used a lot cycling also.

The secondary muscles bother me jumping from rowing to cycling. My back and particularly my neck hurt after a few hours on the bike if I haven't been riding. Edit: My back can hurt from doing a lot of hills which I usually do (>1000' of climbing per 10 miles is typical for where I live)

[Nosmo]

Both the bike and the erg have been optimized to match the physics of the human body.

Optimized? In what way?

I just ment that over the years the gears and crank length have evolved so that the rider can maximize their speed and efficiency (and indirectly their power). This has to do with the range of resistance and rotation rate that a rider can efficiently produce. Similarly for the erg (actually the erg is designed to feel like a boat, and a boat is optimized for speed)
There may be marginal improvements in optimization but a lot of really smart people have worked on bikes and boats for years and years to make them fast. (and when we get in a boat most of us just slow them down )

Changing the gear is simliar to changing the drag factor.

I disagree. Changing the drag factor may make the load heavier or lighter, but you still move the handle the same distance with each pull. In contrast, changing the gear allows a greater equivalent lever arm.

One moves the same distance per revolution of the crank. Just like one moves the handle the same distance per stroke on the erg. You could put a different cog on your erg, and also put a different size/weight flywheel changing the mechanical advantage. If you did things right this would not change in the power you could produce but it would change the "lever arm". See below

The analogy would be a lever lifting a weight. With the erg, you can change the load, but not the length of the lever. With a derailleur, the load stays the same, but you can vary the length of the lever (more turns of the wheel for one turn of the crank). They are completely different. Imagine you are asked to produce a certain amount of power (work per unit time) by repeatedly lifting a weight with a lever. You have the choice of a short lever and variable load (the erg) or an adjustable lever and a set load (the bike). I'm guessing you can sustain a higher output with the bike (due to biomechanical reasons).

One can produce the same work by applying a certain force for a certain distance at a certain rate. That force can be applied to different levers and different weights, but the power will be the same. See below.

Of course he could produce the same power with a 1:1 ratio if he was climbing a hill at the appropriate angle

That's exactly my point. If that was required, he probably wouldn't be able to sustain that power output.

I don't completely understand your argument. We may be talking past eachother.

There is a limited range of force and speed that is efficient for a given person for a given motion. The gears on a bicycle provide this adjustment, as does the drag factor for the erg.

The power produced by a cyclist is the product of force on the pedals, the length of the crank arms, and the crank rotation rate. So if under two conditions someone has a certain pedal resistance and is spining at the same rate, the power by definition is the same.
This can be going up a hill in a low gear, or going down a hill in a high gear. If the force on the pedals and the rpm are the same in both case, the power is the same. This is basic physics.
There are other factors: like the rider is likely to change position because s/he is trying to optimize speed not power and the wind resistance will change.

The difference in power output on the erg vs on a bike have to do with the efficiency of the human body for each motion. The erg is less effecient because.
1) The mass or the rower is moving back and forth and is not measured.
2) The legs are moving more intermitantly (though I'm not sure how much of a difference this makes)
3) the range of motion for the legs is much greater on the erg. The legs can produce less force when they are bent a lot.
4) The erg is designed to simulate rowing. The largest resistance is at the catch. I would imagine that if the resistance varied in a different fashion: say it was maximized near mid stroke, then the power output would likely be different. (don't know how this would be done thought) Not sure how much of an effect this is. The erg could have been designed with a much heavier (really larger moment of inertia) so that its speed changed less (or more) during the drive and slowed down less (or more) on the recovery. This would provide a different feel (less like a real boat) and probably would have an effect on the power.

I'm sure there are other factors having to do with the use of different muscles but this is what I came up off the top of my head.

[Nosmo]

I don,t think it has anything to do with the brand. I have it on several occasions and differant brand's
In my track and field days I had the same, I could never do on a bike compared to what I could do running.
On a stepper though, I can get a higher output, higher then on the, C2 I mean.
With cycling my legs give in long before my hart and lungs do.

You are probably doing something wrong. Bad position or bad gears or your are not using your muscles properly or something else entirely. Cycling is not simple.

I've tried a few tread mills and steppers and gotten very different results on various machines. You may have gotten an accurate power reading from a the stationary bike but they are not trust worthy.

[Atorrante]

There should be something indeed. This past weekend I ride 90 miles Saturday with a local team, and Sunday 60 miles on my own. It feel great, averaging 19 MPH both days, and I have never ride over 100 miles on a weekend. I thought that I will need a couple of days to recover, but monday morning, if hasn't go to work, could ride again. In fact at noon I row a PB for the 30 mininutes piece(7860M). Today made 7924 in route to my goal of 8K in 30 minutes. I will continue with my erging training in preparation for a TT cycling century in march.

[hjs]

I don,t think it has anything to do with the brand. I have it on several occasions and differant brand's
In my track and field days I had the same, I could never do on a bike compared to what I could do running.
On a stepper though, I can get a higher output, higher then on the, C2 I mean.
With cycling my legs give in long before my hart and lungs do.

You are probably doing something wrong. Bad position or bad gears or your are not using your muscles properly or something else entirely. Cycling is not simple.

I've tried a few tread mills and steppers and gotten very different results on various machines. You may have gotten an accurate power reading from a the stationary bike but they are not trust worthy.

About the reading you can be I think. Although it most likely a simple matter of lack of training is. I that is the case I have to improve rapidly.

About cycling being difficult I disagree. To me biking/running/erging are a simple. With little training you can use you powers quit well.
Swimming/rowing/skating/crosscountry skying, those are difficult. You can be very fit but without technique you get nowhere.

[yehster]

hjs, is it your quads that fatigue first on the bike? If so, then your problem is one of positioning. The most important muscles to efficient cycling are your glutes, despite popular belief. To address this issue, try shifting your butt further back on the saddle and see if you feel any difference/can generate higher power more easily.

[hjs]

hjs, is it your quads that fatigue first on the bike? If so, then your problem is one of positioning. The most important muscles to efficient cycling are your glutes, despite popular belief. To address this issue, try shifting your butt further back on the saddle and see if you feel any difference/can generate higher power more easily.

Yep the quads are the problem. The problem with these indoorbike is that you can't bend over properly. So using your glutes is not easy this way.

I also try to paddle as light as possible. Other people use much heavier gears, but they work from there back, something I really don,t want to do.


Something in generall, bikers/runners do have a good cv system, they have reasable power in the legs, not great, ans very poor power in the upperbody. So people who have biking as their main sport are able to get good results on the bike but much less on the erg. Their upperbody simply is not strong enough.

[AtlantaCyclist]

[/quote]

I don,t think it has anything to do with the brand. I have it on several occasions and differant brand's
In my track and field days I had the same, I could never do on a bike compared to what I could do running.
On a stepper though, I can get a higher output, higher then on the, C2 I mean.
With cycling my legs give in long before my hart and lungs do.[/quote]

One reason your legs tire more quickly on the bike is cycling requires more power than running, especially in higher gear ratios. And, as others have noted, positioning is critical for efficiency.