Concept2 Forum

What are the differences between the Model C and D?

The D is a bit more quiet, Baby Blue, with an updated PM.

The C is not particularly loud, Grey/Black, A bit more robust (IMO), will have a PM2 usually, but could be updated to the latest PM if desired.

I'd buy a Mint condition C for $500-600 in a heartbeat, and do upgrades if desired. More than that and may as well consider a D/PM4 or E.

PaulS wrote:D ... Baby Blue

C ... Grey/Black

That's why I'll keep my C forever.

Thanks for the information. I found a model C with a PM2 in good condition for $600. What does the PM3 have that you can't get from the PM2?

The pm2 is by far the more accurate monitor, more useful, easier to read, and is much faster programming your sessions. It has quite a few functions that the pm3/4 don't.

The pm3/4 has a force curve, and a current split average, both of which have some utility. It works with the latest computer programs. Any of the pm's work with ErgMonitor.

I prefer the pm2 monitor 100 to 0 over the pm3/4 and would be using it now if it worked with the model D erg.

The pm2 is by far the more accurate monitor

The PM2 is not more accurate than a PM3 or 4. They are all comparable in terms of scoring accuracy and repeatability. Check out http://www.concept2.com/us/products/mon ... ompare.asp
for a list of PM3-4 features.......C2JonW

c2jonw wrote:

The pm2 is by far the more accurate monitor

The PM2 is not more accurate than a PM3 or 4. They are all comparable in terms of scoring accuracy and repeatability. Check out http://www.concept2.com/us/products/mon ... ompare.asp
for a list of PM3-4 features.......C2JonW

You know better than to state the facts regarding this... don't you?

c2jonw wrote:

The pm2 is by far the more accurate monitor

The PM2 is not more accurate than a PM3 or 4.

I think this is related to John's constant gripe about how the PM3/4 runs the interval timer and can start before you're ready to row; compared to how the PM2 waits until it detects the leading edge of the first stroke after the timer expires.

I work around that "problem" by starting the new stroke when the interval counter gets to 0:01 rather than 0:00.

The pm2 is far more accurate, which is not only easy to prove but has been stated many times by different people on the forum.

Even the pm3 intermediate splits and stroke rates are way off.

And the memory gives different times than were recorded during reps.

Citroen wrote:I think this is related to John's constant gripe about how the PM3/4 runs the interval timer and can start before you're ready to row; compared to how the PM2 waits until it detects the leading edge of the first stroke after the timer expires.

Yes, that's another example.

What puzzles me about the PM3 is that the total number of meters does not equal the sum of the meters recorded for each piece. I sent in a PM to one of the C2 staff about this but never received an answer. It wasn't a matter of unrecorded "rest" meters. I checked that out. Using my log card data I made a spread sheet of all the recorded pieces for the first 7 months of the season and did a sum for each month. In every case, the sum was higher than the monthly total showing on the monitor. Significantly higher, not must a few meters, but more like scores of meters.

I know nothing about the PM2. I have never had one of my own and I have had very limited experience with it on club machines — not enough to become familiar with its features or even remember how to use it from one time to the next.

Bob S.

Bob S. wrote:What puzzles me about the PM3 is that the total number of meters does not equal the sum of the meters recorded for each piece. I sent in a PM to one of the C2 staff about this but never received an answer. It wasn't a matter of unrecorded "rest" meters. I checked that out. Using my log card data I made a spread sheet of all the recorded pieces for the first 7 months of the season and did a sum for each month. In every case, the sum was higher than the monthly total showing on the monitor. Significantly higher, not must a few meters, but more like scores of meters.

I know nothing about the PM2. I have never had one of my own and I have had very limited experience with it on club machines — not enough to become familiar with its features or even remember how to use it from one time to the next.

Bob S.

perhaps the sum also includes meters measured when checking drag and at the end of single distance and time when the PM stops counting but you may continue rowing to cool down (these would not be rest meters since your not doing intervals).
Don't know if this is the case but that would make sense to me. I'll check this out tomorrow.

Bob S. wrote:
What puzzles me about the PM3 is that the total number of meters does not equal the sum of the meters recorded for each piece. I sent in a PM to one of the C2 staff about this but never received an answer. It wasn't a matter of unrecorded "rest" meters. I checked that out. Using my log card data I made a spread sheet of all the recorded pieces for the first 7 months of the season and did a sum for each month. In every case, the sum was higher than the monthly total showing on the monitor. Significantly higher, not must a few meters, but more like scores of meters.

I know nothing about the PM2. I have never had one of my own and I have had very limited experience with it on club machines — not enough to become familiar with its features or even remember how to use it from one time to the next.

Bob S.

Bob, this is from Scott at C2 in response:

1) If dates on monitors were mixed up from clubs, this might have done some interesting things: LogCard Utility might clean it up (Have him send a copy of his LogCard backup file).
2) The monthly totals has 100m resolution, so he could loose (49 or 99?) meters per workout… again LogCard Utility will probably fix it up to within 100m.
If there is nothing out of order to repair, the LCU won’t do anything to monthly totals; to force it to recomputed, backup the card and then restore it (under maintain users).

And I stand by my original post regarding PM3-4 accuracy.....C2JonW

c2jonw wrote:

Bob S. wrote:
What puzzles me about the PM3 is that the total number of meters does not equal the sum of the meters recorded for each piece. I sent in a PM to one of the C2 staff about this but never received an answer. It wasn't a matter of unrecorded "rest" meters. I checked that out. Using my log card data I made a spread sheet of all the recorded pieces for the first 7 months of the season and did a sum for each month. In every case, the sum was higher than the monthly total showing on the monitor. Significantly higher, not must a few meters, but more like scores of meters.

I know nothing about the PM2. I have never had one of my own and I have had very limited experience with it on club machines — not enough to become familiar with its features or even remember how to use it from one time to the next.

Bob S.

Bob, this is from Scott at C2 in response:

1) If dates on monitors were mixed up from clubs, this might have done some interesting things: LogCard Utility might clean it up (Have him send a copy of his LogCard backup file).
2) The monthly totals has 100m resolution, so he could loose (49 or 99?) meters per workout… again LogCard Utility will probably fix it up to within 100m.
If there is nothing out of order to repair, the LCU won’t do anything to monthly totals; to force it to recomputed, backup the card and then restore it (under maintain users).

And I stand by my original post regarding PM3-4 accuracy.....C2JonW

You know better than to state the facts regarding this... don't you?

John will make up anything to support his fantasy, and repeat it endlessly.

c2jonw wrote:
Bob, this is from Scott at C2 in response:

2) The monthly totals has 100m resolution, so he could loose (49 or 99?) meters per workout… again LogCard Utility will probably fix it up to within 100m.

And I stand by my original post regarding PM3-4 accuracy.....C2JonW

Jon,

I think that #2 covers it. I don't remember the exact numbers any more, but something in the order of 49-99 m (or less) per workout is in the right ball park. I'll give it another check when I get a little time.

Thanks for your response.

Regards,

Bob S.

P.S. The total meters on the LogCard seem to be consistent with the sum of the monthly totals rather than the workout totals. Is that the case?

PaulS wrote: Bob,
You know better than to state the facts regarding this... don't you? :wink:

Paul,

I didn't intend to open a can of worms, but I was wondering what was going wrong, i.e. why didn't the total of my LogBook entries equal the total on the LogCard. I checked my LogBook entries thoroughly and did, indeed, find a couple of (minor) errors. I corrected these, but still had a significant discrepancy. That's when I did a spread sheet of the LogCard data and found that it was in agreement with my corrected LogBook, but not with the LogCard total and that the monthly totals were not consistent with the workout data. I am satisfied with the information that the totals have only 100 meters resolution. As far as I am concerned, that explains it completely. The books should balance, but only to within the limits of the resolution of the data. If that is on the order of up to 99 meters per workout, so be it.

Bob S.