Another newbie

[p_b82]

maybe less useful to many but I've found it useful to see how my body handles the different Wmin values by holding the same pace but with different stroke rates. For me currently (with my low pace) it's better to rate higher for a given split time than it is to rate lower in terms of CV load.

aka Heart rate @ 4.3Wmin@r27 < heart rate at 4.68Wmin@r25

[iain]

...aka Heart rate @ 4.3Wmin@r27 < heart rate at 4.68Wmin@r25

Interesting, Coming back from a year away from my metal mistress, I would struggle to hold R27 for 1k, yet I am achieving >90% of the Work per stroke that I was doing when 10S/500m faster before I stopped rowing! The loss is predominantly down to maintainable rating! That said, while fpr me at least rating is normally the largest determinant of my heart rate, increasing my work per stroke significantly above normal levels does lead to a greater increase in heart rate than an equivalent pace increase from rating up. This is seen when you consider that an all out 30' at R20 will get close to max HR despite being at a significantly slower pace than a free rate 30'.

Theory aside, in training it is not always optimum to maximise the pace for a given effort level. Most people find that they can improve their stroke (increasing work per stroke at a given effort level) at a lower rating. Many beneficial changes are only achieved after we have been through a period of rowing less efficiently while mastering the change, particularly as we often compensate for potential inefficiencies in the stroke through corresponding changes. To get the stroke right these compromises need to be eliminated as well as the original errors. As a result, we can't look at aspects of the stroke independently. As an example, I use my back too much at the catch, often being at the 11 O'clock position very early in the stroke. To utilise the momentum at the end of the leg drive I lean back further. If I just adjust the excessive lean-back, I lose much of the work done accelerating my body and therefore go appreciably slower at the same rate even when uprating due to the shorter recovery. To get the benefit, I have to sit up taller through the leg drive as well as reducing the lean-back.

- Iain

[Slidewinder]

Why now transferring to horse power, which is no official physical unit, but only a multiple of watts?
But yes, you are right. Every stroke (taken the recovery time to next stroke into account) is providing the average power shown on the PM, but if you would only pull one per minute that would drop the average power to 200/32 in this specific example.

I converted to horsepower to test if your 6W/stroke made any sense. It doesn't. I have a good sense of how much power one horsepower represents, gleaned from a grade 11 physics experiment in which we calculated the HP each of us developed running up a short flight of stairs. 6W/stroke represents .008 HP. This is absurdly low and therefore must be incorrect. The absurdity of it can also be checked by getting on your machine and trying to row at 6W/stroke. It would probably take you two days to complete 2K.

[p_b82]

I converted to horsepower to test if your 6W/stroke made any sense. It doesn't. I have a good sense of how much power one horsepower represents, gleaned from a grade 11 physics experiment in which we calculated the HP each of us developed running up a short flight of stairs. 6W/stroke represents .008 HP. This is absurdly low and therefore must be incorrect. The absurdity of it can also be checked by getting on your machine and trying to row at 6W/stroke. It would probably take you two days to complete 2K.

You're just arguing semantics here - and it comes across as petty.

if you only did 1 stroke per minute, you're right 6w per stroke would be almost impossible to complete anything.

But it is pretty obvious that in this instance the PM5 displayed power number, divided by the stroke rate - to get a value that corresponds to 6Wmin which can be interpreted by "watts per stroke" in the context of X number of strokes per min

[Slidewinder]

You're just arguing semantics here - and it comes across as petty.

if you only did 1 stroke per minute, you're right 6w per stroke would be almost impossible to complete anything.

But it is pretty obvious that in this instance the PM5 displayed power number, divided by the stroke rate - to get a value that corresponds to 6Wmin which can be interpreted by "watts per stroke" in the context of X number of strokes per min

I am unfamiliar with the watts/min display you describe. All I have on my PM3 is watts and average watts. A watts/minute display makes as much sense to me as would a horsepower/minute display. Power (watts) is the rate of doing work (work/time), so time is already integral to its definition. I am not arguing semantics. 6W/stroke is almost nothing, even at a regular stroke rate. It is barely enough power to stretch the elastic cord.

[p_b82]

I am unfamiliar with the watts/min display you describe. All I have on my PM3 is watts and average watts. A watts/minute display makes as much sense to me as would a horsepower/minute display. Power (watts) is the rate of doing work (work/time), so time is already integral to its definition. I am not arguing semantics. 6W/stroke is almost nothing, even at a regular stroke rate. It is barely enough power to stretch the elastic cord.

apologies for the notation, on a pc it's not as easy to type it in proper mathematical notation

But it's not watts per min (watts x (minutes to the power of -1)) it's Watts x minutes - so that when you multiply it by strokes per minute, you cancel the minutes out to get just the Watts left over.

Wattsmin is not displayed - just Watts even on the PM5.

You're wrong about 6Wmin being nothing - it's not "fast" but it is most definitely capable of moving the stretch cord.

6Wmin * 30spm = 180W (average)
6 * 20 = 120W
etc

It can be used to work out what pace to train at given a different stroke rate, but maintain the same consistently of effort in the stroke.

and/or to spot that when rating up/down there is a change in efficiency of the stroke.

[Slidewinder]

apologies for the notation, on a pc it's not as easy to type it in proper mathematical notation
But it's not watts per min (watts x (minutes to the power of -1)) it's Watts x minutes - so that when you multiply it by strokes per minute, you cancel the minutes out to get just the Watts left over.
Wattsmin is not displayed - just Watts even on the PM5.
You're wrong about 6Wmin being nothing - it's not "fast" but it is most definitely capable of moving the stretch cord.
6Wmin * 30spm = 180W (average)
6 * 20 = 120W
etc
It can be used to work out what pace to train at given a different stroke rate, but maintain the same consistently of effort in the stroke.
and/or to spot that when rating up/down there is a change in efficiency of the stroke.

Thanks. It was what iain (at the bottom of page 5) was explaining.
However useful as a training aid, in using this odd "wattsmin" unit as you describe, people are interpreting, for example, 6Wmin, as 6W/stroke, which is incorrect. As I wrote, power is the rate of doing work, so if you row 30 strokes/min. at a given rate (say 6W), at the end of the minute your rate is still 6W. Analogously, if you were to run at 10 miles/hour for 2 seconds and repeat this pace 30 times until a minute has elapsed, at the end of the minute you would still be running at 10 miles/hour, not (30 X 10) = 300 miles/hour.

I don't know what 6Wmin represents. It makes no sense to me. I do know that 6W/stroke is almost nothing. 6W is .008 HP. (6/746). One horsepower is defined as the power required to move 550 lbs a distance of 1 foot in one second. Therefore .008 HP could move 4.4 lbs 1 foot in one second. This would not even stretch the elastic cord. The equivalent rate of doing work would be 8.8 lbs applied over a .5 foot distance for 1 second. This would stretch the elastic cord, barely. This is confirmed on my machine. Moving the handle very slowly through a distance of approx. 1 foot in 2 seconds (15 s/m) gives a readout of 6W/stroke. It would be difficult to exert less effort.

[iain]

I don't know what 6Wmin represents.

6WMin is 6 x 60 = 360J of work. This used to be called Stroke Power Index "SPI", but this became the obsession of a troll on these pages and so fell out of favour. Purests would say that it is not truly an index as the units don't eliminate, but ultimately it is an easily calculated number that can be compared with others. It is a measure of work per stroke NOT power.

[Doddsy]

Evening.
Hopefully this is the right place to ask a few stupid questions!? I bought a 2nd hand Maxxus Air Rower for my 13yr old to use as part of overall fitness/strength/conditioning, as he's into his rugby and started doing some S and C at school. I decided he needed some encouragement to start using it, so I've jumped on it a few times!! I've never rowed in my life and would no longer consider myself all that fit tbh, having been so once upon a time . We've watched some vids to try and get the basics of the technique, but thus far he's not that into it.
My question however is how do you know how accurate these things are? Can they be calibrated? It has a digital display which has the stroke/rate/distance etc etc and all seems in pretty good condition, to me at least!? I set it to 2,000m and give it my best. My very first attempt was 6:37 which meant absolutely nothing to me, but I was pretty burst. I've done another 6 or 7 x 2ks since, never quite managing to beat it, but always within 2-3 secs. The only time I lost nearly 10secs was when I pushed the lever (damper?) on the side from around my usual 2-3 setting up to 5. I started looking into times the other day and realised sub 7mins is actually quite an achievement and there seems no way on earth I could have achieved that just jumping on it!? I unfortunately don't know anyone else who rows or have a gym membership where I could go and try, but I'd like to know if there is any way to recalibrate what I have?? I appreciate it's not a Concept, but this is the only forum I can find to ask.
Much appreciated
Doddsy

[Dangerscouse]

Evening.
Hopefully this is the right place to ask a few stupid questions!? I bought a 2nd hand Maxxus Air Rower for my 13yr old to use as part of overall fitness/strength/conditioning, as he's into his rugby and started doing some S and C at school. I decided he needed some encouragement to start using it, so I've jumped on it a few times!! I've never rowed in my life and would no longer consider myself all that fit tbh, having been so once upon a time . We've watched some vids to try and get the basics of the technique, but thus far he's not that into it.
My question however is how do you know how accurate these things are? Can they be calibrated? It has a digital display which has the stroke/rate/distance etc etc and all seems in pretty good condition, to me at least!? I set it to 2,000m and give it my best. My very first attempt was 6:37 which meant absolutely nothing to me, but I was pretty burst. I've done another 6 or 7 x 2ks since, never quite managing to beat it, but always within 2-3 secs. The only time I lost nearly 10secs was when I pushed the lever (damper?) on the side from around my usual 2-3 setting up to 5. I started looking into times the other day and realised sub 7mins is actually quite an achievement and there seems no way on earth I could have achieved that just jumping on it!? I unfortunately don't know anyone else who rows or have a gym membership where I could go and try, but I'd like to know if there is any way to recalibrate what I have?? I appreciate it's not a Concept, but this is the only forum I can find to ask.
Much appreciated
Doddsy

Sorry Doddsy, there's literally nothing you can do to make it calibrate to be comparable to a Concept 2. From what I vaguely know of other cheaper rowers you could easily be three minutes, or more, off a properly reliable result.

The good thing is it will get you fitter as the body doesn't care about what you're using, but if you're serious about, and it's possible, I'd definitely recommend buying a C2 as they last for years and retain their value too, especially if you buy a second hand .model.

[Doddsy]

Thanks for taking the time to reply. I've actually been away for a couple of days with Mrs Doddsy and the hotel had something I think was called a 'TechnoGym' machine in the gym. I jumped on and gave it a spin and managed a 7:36 for 2k..almost a full minute slower, but undoubtedly more accurate. No idea but looked a pretty impressive bit of kit?? I'm sure I could have knocked a few secs off, but didn't go full full beans in case I upset the old lady working out next to me

[RWAGR]

Thanks for taking the time to reply. I've actually been away for a couple of days with Mrs Doddsy and the hotel had something I think was called a 'TechnoGym' machine in the gym. I jumped on and gave it a spin and managed a 7:36 for 2k..almost a full minute slower, but undoubtedly more accurate. No idea but looked a pretty impressive bit of kit?? I'm sure I could have knocked a few secs off, but didn't go full full beans in case I upset the old lady working out next to me

I’ve been forced to use the Technogym Aquafeel sometimes when traveling for work. IMO it’s the best of the alternatives (although still a distant second to C2). It also can be set up to show Watts - which I think can help make workouts approximate to what you’d be planning to do on the C2.

[Doddsy]

Yes, Aquafeel, that was it! Very little to go by obviously re comparing machines and settings etc. All I did was set to 3 on the main 'knob' and give it a spin. There was a noticeable difference in effort getting it anywhere near my 'old' 1:40 split, clearly! Anyway, on the lookout for a 2nd hand C2 and will take it from there. There are a couple around for circa £700 (UK) that have less than 100k on them. Just annoyed I didn't get one originally as I may struggle to find another mug like me to take this Maxxus off my hands....! Thanks again.

[alex9026]

There are a couple around for circa £700 (UK) that have less than 100k on them. Just annoyed I didn't get one originally as I may struggle to find another mug like me to take this Maxxus off my hands....! Thanks again.

Facebook marketplace should be a good place to sell the Maxxus should you make the decision too, people will buy anything on there. I paid less than £700 for my Concept 2 (with a PM 5 monitor so latest model) in December that had 4 hours use on it, there is definitely a bargain to be had and as stated above, they hold their value. Concept will often sell refurbished ergs, so they may be worth a look too. Good luck!

[Dangerscouse]

Anyway, on the lookout for a 2nd hand C2 and will take it from there. There are a couple around for circa £700 (UK) that have less than 100k on them. Just annoyed I didn't get one originally as I may struggle to find another mug like me to take this Maxxus off my hands....! Thanks again.

100k is literally nothing. You can expect to get many millions of metres out of it, and I think mine is on circa 14 million without needing anything other than an occasional lube of the chain and a hoover of the fan when and cage.

You'll struggle to find many products that are better value for money...as long as you keep using it. Even if you don't, you'll probably sell it for a similar amount.