|Biomechanical studies indicate that the effort made with Q-Rings becomes a greater performance and pedaling feeling
more rounded and smooth due to their ability to make a better use of the strongest muscle groups while they also compensate the dead spot in pedaling.|
|Q-Ring-Round Ring Comparison|
Far from feeling unusual, a Q-Ring feels much rounder than a round ring.
A spinscan analysis visualize a cyclists power delivery, with a bar graph indicating the variation from maximum to minimum
output and a polar graph showing the rotating shape of the power profile.
By comparing the left hand Round chainring spinscan
and the right hand Q-Ring spinscan below, one can see that Q-Ring graphs are clearly smoother (less variation in torque in the bar graph)
and fuller (less of a peanut shape at the weakest point).
When one projects a polar plot of a typical spinscan over the varying drivetrain resistance of a 53t Q-Ring during its rotation,
the value of a Q-Ring is clearly visible: Maximum power is met with a “56,5t” Time trial sized chainring diameter and minimum power is met with a “50,4”
compact size chainring diameter.
This variation creates the “perfect spin” we all aspire to, that simply isn’t possible with round chainrings.
This is because Q-Rings compensate for the weakest zone of the pedalling stroke and maximize use of the most powerful zone.
|Key benefits (based on ROTOR study)|
- All Q-ring TT’s were faster, with an average gain of 1.6 sec and 0.7 km/h (1.8%).
- All Q-Ring TT’s generated more power, with average increase of 26.7 W (6.2%)
- Reduced oxygen consumption and heart rate in submaximal tests
- An immediate performance increase on switching from round rings to Q-Rings
- An immediate performance reduction on switching back to round chainrings
- It also appears that the more effort a cyclist exerts, the greater the benefit of Q’s
Please see this article for more detailed information.