Oval chain ring
#1
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Sunny Florida
Posts: 66
Bikes: Trek fx 7.2, Giant Defy Advanced 3
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 15 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 2 Times
in
2 Posts
Oval chain ring
Was wondering what you folks think of an oval chainring? Hype or help? I live in Florida but think that the big ring may help. Anyone have any experience? Thanks
#2
climber has-been
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Palo Alto, CA
Posts: 7,007
Bikes: Scott Addict R1, Felt Z1
Mentioned: 10 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3341 Post(s)
Liked 3,442 Times
in
1,740 Posts
Gimmick that comes and goes about every 20 years.
__________________
Ride, Rest, Repeat. ROUVY: terrymorse
Ride, Rest, Repeat. ROUVY: terrymorse
#3
Mother Nature's Son
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: Sussex County, Delaware
Posts: 3,111
Bikes: 2014 Orbea Avant MD30, 2004 Airborne Zeppelin TI, 2003 Lemond Poprad, 2001 Lemond Tourmalet, 2014? Soma Smoothie
Mentioned: 14 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 838 Post(s)
Liked 1,414 Times
in
801 Posts
I have not ridden with oval rings since I had a bike with biopace rings many years ago. Hopefully someone with recent experience/knowledge with oval rings will chime in. I know I had no problem with them, but I had nothing to compare them to at the time. There are people that swear by them, supposedly help the pedal stroke efficiency. If I remember correctly, some riders say it eases knee pain.
#4
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2016
Location: San Mateo,Ca.
Posts: 4,350
Bikes: TRIMMED DOWN THE HERD
Mentioned: 46 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1089 Post(s)
Liked 928 Times
in
594 Posts
I have a few bikes with Biopace, specially on one of my main road bikes, and I can't tell a difference from round. They all feel the same to me, climbing,sprinting,etc.
#5
Have bike, will travel
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Lake Geneva, WI
Posts: 12,392
Bikes: Ridley Helium SLX, Canyon Endurance SL, De Rosa Professional, Eddy Merckx Corsa Extra, Schwinn Paramount (1 painted, 1 chrome), Peugeot PX10, Serotta Nova X, Simoncini Cyclocross Special, Raleigh Roker, Pedal Force CG2 and CX2
Mentioned: 46 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 910 Post(s)
Liked 288 Times
in
158 Posts
I have the Absolute Black 46 & 30 chainings on my Ridley Helium which is my climbing bike. Installing the chainring set gives me a deep range for 15-20% climbs that are common enough in southern Wisconsin. The oval shape may have some benefits, I do like the feel of the oval shape and I'm getting improvements on my steeper Strava segments. However, the primary benefit is the gearing. I like to keep my cadence above 65 rpms while climbing and these smaller chainrings along with an 11-32 eleven speed cassette keeps my legs fresh on longer days.
The Absolute Black chainrings install with an altered chain-line compared to the standard Ultegra 50 & 34 chainrings on the 6850 crankset. This can work on a rim brake bike, but I would not ever install these on my disc brake bike with 142mm dropouts. The chainline on the disc brake bike would be extreme while on the small chainring and several of the smaller cogs.
Even on the rim brake bike, the reduced chain-line is problematic. The front derailleur limit adjustment just barely aligned on the inner chainring. The chainrings don't shift as well, I have a SRAM eTap drivetrain which was always perfect with the SRAM crankset but is intermittently temperamental on the oval chainrings. Finally, the chainrings are noisy with a dry lubricant, but a heavy wet lubricant eliminated most noise.
BTW: Most current oval rings are are significantly different from Shimano Biopace design. I've ridden both, they are not in anyway comparable.
Personally, I don't recommend the Absolute Black chainrings unless the user wants to change the gearing to help on steeper climbs if the bike has rim brakes. The benefits on flat roads at a higher cadence are minimal. The installation and shifting problems are significant.
The Absolute Black chainrings install with an altered chain-line compared to the standard Ultegra 50 & 34 chainrings on the 6850 crankset. This can work on a rim brake bike, but I would not ever install these on my disc brake bike with 142mm dropouts. The chainline on the disc brake bike would be extreme while on the small chainring and several of the smaller cogs.
Even on the rim brake bike, the reduced chain-line is problematic. The front derailleur limit adjustment just barely aligned on the inner chainring. The chainrings don't shift as well, I have a SRAM eTap drivetrain which was always perfect with the SRAM crankset but is intermittently temperamental on the oval chainrings. Finally, the chainrings are noisy with a dry lubricant, but a heavy wet lubricant eliminated most noise.
BTW: Most current oval rings are are significantly different from Shimano Biopace design. I've ridden both, they are not in anyway comparable.
Last edited by Barrettscv; 07-28-19 at 06:15 AM.
#6
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Huntington Beach, CA
Posts: 7,079
Bikes: Cervelo Prodigy
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 475 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 87 Times
in
67 Posts
Try this Rotor site. It shows the various teams that use Rotor, in on way or another.
https://rotorbike.com/athletes/
https://rotorbike.com/athletes/
#7
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Colorado Springs, CO
Posts: 5,962
Bikes: 2015 Charge Plug, 2007 Dahon Boardwalk, 1997 Nishiki Blazer, 1984 Nishiki International, 2006 Felt F65, 1989 Dahon Getaway V
Mentioned: 54 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1359 Post(s)
Liked 1,658 Times
in
822 Posts
It's a 20-year elipitcal cycle.
My 1984 Nishiki International came with them. I replaced the smaller front ring with an even smaller round ring. I shift between the two and don't notice any difference, nor am I aware of anything different from my other two round-ring bikes. But that's not to say the oval rings make no difference, it's just that I don;t notice one.
My 1984 Nishiki International came with them. I replaced the smaller front ring with an even smaller round ring. I shift between the two and don't notice any difference, nor am I aware of anything different from my other two round-ring bikes. But that's not to say the oval rings make no difference, it's just that I don;t notice one.
Last edited by BobbyG; 07-27-19 at 02:48 PM.
Likes For BobbyG:
#8
- Soli Deo Gloria -
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: Northwest Georgia
Posts: 14,782
Bikes: 2018 Rodriguez Custom Fixed Gear, 2017 Niner RLT 9 RDO, 2015 Bianchi Pista, 2002 Fuji Robaix
Mentioned: 235 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6844 Post(s)
Liked 736 Times
in
469 Posts
Love, love, love Absolute Black oval rings. They feel fantastic to pedal.
Unfortunately I could not get the 46/30 ovals to shift well with an 11-42 MTB cassette on a road bike. This setup is completely out of bounds, way beyond what any manufacturer supports and the ovals were just a bit too much. I went to round rings and they shift better but I'm saving the ovals for another project because they feel so great to pedal.
-Tim-
Unfortunately I could not get the 46/30 ovals to shift well with an 11-42 MTB cassette on a road bike. This setup is completely out of bounds, way beyond what any manufacturer supports and the ovals were just a bit too much. I went to round rings and they shift better but I'm saving the ovals for another project because they feel so great to pedal.
-Tim-
#9
Me duelen las nalgas
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: Texas
Posts: 13,522
Bikes: Centurion Ironman, Trek 5900, Univega Via Carisma, Globe Carmel
Mentioned: 199 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4559 Post(s)
Liked 2,798 Times
in
1,798 Posts
Some dude named Chris Froome uses asymetric chainrings. Seems to work for him when he's not crashing.
I have an old Biopace road double on my Trek 5900, the standard 130 bcd 52/42 set. I like the small ring effect on climbs. Seems to mesh with my less-than-smooth cadence. I tend to pedal squares when climbing. But I'd prefer a 38 or 39T small ring. I'd have to go to a 110 bcd crankset to get a ring smaller than 40 or so.
Can't tell any difference in the 52T, but that may be operator error.
The Biopace really aren't radically different from round, so don't expect a big difference. And it doesn't cause any shifting problems on my bike.
I prefer to spin around 90 rpm and the Biopace seems to thwart my natural cadence. So I'm trying to modify my style a bit on that bike and pedal around 60-80 rpm.
There's a theory that the Biopace rings should be re-oriented for some cyclists, depending on where their power stroke begins. I'm going to try that and see how it feels.
But as the newer makers of oval/asymetric chainrings usually say in their promotional material, they don't like to have their products compared with Biopace.
I have an old Biopace road double on my Trek 5900, the standard 130 bcd 52/42 set. I like the small ring effect on climbs. Seems to mesh with my less-than-smooth cadence. I tend to pedal squares when climbing. But I'd prefer a 38 or 39T small ring. I'd have to go to a 110 bcd crankset to get a ring smaller than 40 or so.
Can't tell any difference in the 52T, but that may be operator error.
The Biopace really aren't radically different from round, so don't expect a big difference. And it doesn't cause any shifting problems on my bike.
I prefer to spin around 90 rpm and the Biopace seems to thwart my natural cadence. So I'm trying to modify my style a bit on that bike and pedal around 60-80 rpm.
There's a theory that the Biopace rings should be re-oriented for some cyclists, depending on where their power stroke begins. I'm going to try that and see how it feels.
But as the newer makers of oval/asymetric chainrings usually say in their promotional material, they don't like to have their products compared with Biopace.
#11
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: NWNJ
Posts: 3,704
Bikes: Road bike is a Carbon Bianchi C2C & Grandis (1980's), Gary Fisher Mt Bike, Trek Tandem & Mongoose SS MTB circa 1992.
Mentioned: 9 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 722 Post(s)
Liked 353 Times
in
226 Posts
i do feel more powerful and faster maybe BS but I think it is helpful
many pro’s use them
#13
Version 7.0
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: SoCal
Posts: 13,100
Bikes: Too Many
Mentioned: 297 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1327 Post(s)
Liked 2,440 Times
in
1,426 Posts
I used the Rotor oval rings for awhile and I liked them meaning they felt good. I quit using them because of problems shifting the chainrings, power readings slightly off and different from my track bike. In reality, it took a couple of laps on the track to adjust from the oval rings but my thinking was why train on oval rings on the road with the goal of racing on the track.
I would not reject them out of hand and I think they are athlete specific. And of course, if you think you are better off with them than without them...you are.
I would not reject them out of hand and I think they are athlete specific. And of course, if you think you are better off with them than without them...you are.
#14
Senior Member
I have Wolftooth elliptical rings on my mtbs and they make a slight but unmistakable difference in smoothing my pedal stroke and adding a bit of oomph to climbing. I like them a lot.
#15
Bicyclerider4life
I have 28/36/42 Biopace rings on my 1989 LHS Montana Summit. (originally 28/38/48 I changed out the middle and big rings. My "racing days" ended roughly 15 years before I was born.)
My knees and hips don't hurt as bad after riding the KHS as they do riding a bike with round rings (and comparable over-all gearing) over the same route and distance.
My knees and hips don't hurt as bad after riding the KHS as they do riding a bike with round rings (and comparable over-all gearing) over the same route and distance.
Likes For bicyclridr4life:
#16
Banned
I have 28/36/42 Biopace rings on my 1989 LHS Montana Summit. (originally 28/38/48 I changed out the middle and big rings. My "racing days" ended roughly 15 years before I was born.)
My knees and hips don't hurt as bad after riding the KHS as they do riding a bike with round rings (and comparable over-all gearing) over the same route and distance.
My knees and hips don't hurt as bad after riding the KHS as they do riding a bike with round rings (and comparable over-all gearing) over the same route and distance.
#17
Me duelen las nalgas
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: Texas
Posts: 13,522
Bikes: Centurion Ironman, Trek 5900, Univega Via Carisma, Globe Carmel
Mentioned: 199 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4559 Post(s)
Liked 2,798 Times
in
1,798 Posts
Since my July post I've experimented with re-orienting the alloy road style Biopace 52/42 double. With the typical 5-bolt pattern we're limited to shifts of 72 degrees.
The 42T small Biopace didn't feel right in any orientation other than the original. It created dead spots that I didn't notice before. And I tried standard round 38 and 39 chainrings in place of the 42 but missed the Biopace. So it's back on the Trek 5900 in conventional orientation.
The 52T Biopace did feel better to me shifted 72 degrees clockwise, viewed from the drive side. It seemed to mesh better with my pedaling style. It's not as noticeable as the smaller 42T chainring which is more eccentric with noticeable elongation of the lobes. The larger 52 is only slightly eccentric, so it's pretty subtle.
And my Ironman still has conventional round chainrings. The only change I've made is to switch from the original Suntour plain 52/42 to Vuelta ramped and pinned 50T big ring and either 38 or 39 small ring -- depends on which freewheel I'm using and the anticipated terrain for a long ride. The Ironman is my easier effort bike, comfortable for longer rides and more casual group rides. I spin more, around 90-100 rpm. With the Biopace on the Trek I concentrate on lower cadence and more effort per stroke.
Still not a radical difference from round chainrings, but I'm tempted to try some real oval chainrings for another bike project I'm building up.
The 42T small Biopace didn't feel right in any orientation other than the original. It created dead spots that I didn't notice before. And I tried standard round 38 and 39 chainrings in place of the 42 but missed the Biopace. So it's back on the Trek 5900 in conventional orientation.
The 52T Biopace did feel better to me shifted 72 degrees clockwise, viewed from the drive side. It seemed to mesh better with my pedaling style. It's not as noticeable as the smaller 42T chainring which is more eccentric with noticeable elongation of the lobes. The larger 52 is only slightly eccentric, so it's pretty subtle.
And my Ironman still has conventional round chainrings. The only change I've made is to switch from the original Suntour plain 52/42 to Vuelta ramped and pinned 50T big ring and either 38 or 39 small ring -- depends on which freewheel I'm using and the anticipated terrain for a long ride. The Ironman is my easier effort bike, comfortable for longer rides and more casual group rides. I spin more, around 90-100 rpm. With the Biopace on the Trek I concentrate on lower cadence and more effort per stroke.
Still not a radical difference from round chainrings, but I'm tempted to try some real oval chainrings for another bike project I'm building up.
#18
Senior Member
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: Ontario, Canada
Posts: 4,655
Bikes: iele Latina, Miele Suprema, Miele Uno LS, Miele Miele Beta, MMTB, Bianchi Model Unknown, Fiori Venezia, Fiori Napoli, VeloSport Adamas AX
Mentioned: 16 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1324 Post(s)
Liked 927 Times
in
640 Posts
#19
rebmeM roineS
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Metro Indy, IN
Posts: 16,217
Bikes: Bacchetta Giro A20, RANS V-Rex, RANS Screamer
Mentioned: 15 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 653 Post(s)
Liked 345 Times
in
225 Posts
I rode with a Sugino Cycloid ring at some point in the '90's on a Cannondale hybrid set up with a single ring. Can't remember if I could tell a difference from round.
More recently, have used one (Cycloid) to create an avatar.
More recently, have used one (Cycloid) to create an avatar.
__________________
Bacchetta Giro A20, RANS V-Rex, RANS Screamer
Bacchetta Giro A20, RANS V-Rex, RANS Screamer
#20
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: northern michigan
Posts: 13,317
Bikes: '77 Colnago Super, '76 Fuji The Finest, '88 Cannondale Criterium, '86 Trek 760, '87 Miyata 712
Mentioned: 19 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 659 Post(s)
Liked 595 Times
in
313 Posts
I avoid them. To me, the Oval Tech rings are very noticeable when comparing to BioPace but then these are rather oldschool these days. I avoid them. About 3 years ago I nabbed an ‘87 Miyata with BioPace rings and regarded the changing of chainrings to be factored in with tires, bar tape and cables.
#22
feros ferio
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: www.ci.encinitas.ca.us
Posts: 21,765
Bikes: 1959 Capo Modell Campagnolo; 1960 Capo Sieger (2); 1962 Carlton Franco Suisse; 1970 Peugeot UO-8; 1982 Bianchi Campione d'Italia; 1988 Schwinn Project KOM-10;
Mentioned: 44 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1384 Post(s)
Liked 1,294 Times
in
819 Posts
My Schwinn had a 38T Biopace middle ring, but when I replaced it with a 40, I went for round, which I prefer. (More uniform pedal cadence, and better shifting.)
__________________
"Far and away the best prize that life offers is the chance to work hard at work worth doing." --Theodore Roosevelt
Capo: 1959 Modell Campagnolo, S/N 40324; 1960 Sieger (2), S/N 42624, 42597
Carlton: 1962 Franco Suisse, S/N K7911
Peugeot: 1970 UO-8, S/N 0010468
Bianchi: 1982 Campione d'Italia, S/N 1.M9914
Schwinn: 1988 Project KOM-10, S/N F804069
"Far and away the best prize that life offers is the chance to work hard at work worth doing." --Theodore Roosevelt
Capo: 1959 Modell Campagnolo, S/N 40324; 1960 Sieger (2), S/N 42624, 42597
Carlton: 1962 Franco Suisse, S/N K7911
Peugeot: 1970 UO-8, S/N 0010468
Bianchi: 1982 Campione d'Italia, S/N 1.M9914
Schwinn: 1988 Project KOM-10, S/N F804069
#23
Old fart
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Appleton WI
Posts: 24,936
Bikes: Several, mostly not name brands.
Mentioned: 153 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3571 Post(s)
Liked 3,368 Times
in
1,916 Posts
Whether or not you might like oval or other non-round chain rings is something only you can decide.
FWIW, Shimano spent a great deal of money on ergonomic research to develop their BioPace rings. Unlike most other non-round rings, the BioPace eccentricity changes with tooth count. The larger rings are almost round, while the smallest rings are almost square. They are designed to be used in a certain orientation with the crank arm (there are index marks to line them up), but some people find they prefer to shift them from Shimano's intended orientation. Do whatever works for you. Shimano's assumptions in designing BioPace rings may be different from your own riding style.
FWIW, Shimano spent a great deal of money on ergonomic research to develop their BioPace rings. Unlike most other non-round rings, the BioPace eccentricity changes with tooth count. The larger rings are almost round, while the smallest rings are almost square. They are designed to be used in a certain orientation with the crank arm (there are index marks to line them up), but some people find they prefer to shift them from Shimano's intended orientation. Do whatever works for you. Shimano's assumptions in designing BioPace rings may be different from your own riding style.
Likes For JohnDThompson:
#25
Me duelen las nalgas
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: Texas
Posts: 13,522
Bikes: Centurion Ironman, Trek 5900, Univega Via Carisma, Globe Carmel
Mentioned: 199 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4559 Post(s)
Liked 2,798 Times
in
1,798 Posts
I'd heard some reports of shifting problems with Biopace but haven't had any problems myself, even after re-orienting the 52T ring. But as other folks noted the Biopace chainrings aren't as extreme in eccentricity as others. The effect is pretty subtle.