Q ring upgrade - Ahhhhhhhhhhhhh......

[Rick Youngblood]

Oh, forgot to mention, I did

Oh, forgot to mention, I did my chain roller engagement on one of the middle cogs. Nothing in instructions clarifying which cog to use. If I used the biggest cog, most likely our V's would match exactly.

 

[ratz]

rub a dub dub

Rick,

You got it; 110 everywhere around here so I can swap at will; and 165mm cranks so any bike can get the power meter.

I think the reason we loose 11,12,13 on the Silvio when in the 34 ring and you only loose 13; is that we have a Wifli medium cage derailleur and you have a long cage one. That puts your pivot/bend point of the chain just a little bit closer to the BB and that probably makes the different in the angle of approach. So that's a plus for using an X series clutch derailleur.

I do find it interesting that we are all about the same setup; but that just means we are all about the same height (aka short).

 

[Rick Youngblood]

Okay, the long cage may make

Okay, the long cage may make the differenced and makes sense.

Another interesting thing about the Q-rings, is when I've changed them between other rear drive high and low racers and even the tour easy, there is not a whole lot of change, maybe a hole or two adjustment.

But there is quite a significant difference between the typical rear drive recumbent (which I will never own again) and the Cruzbike MBB front drive (which I will never give up), it just makes sense looking at chain roller engagement.

I would like to see how Larry has his setup, he followed PDF too, and he is just a little shorty than me, I think.

The crankset pictured on my V is 155mm done by Mark. I normally run 165mm - and have a beautiful CF SL-K Light's sitting on the work bench (they are the nicest cranks I've ever owned, and was proud to mount them on the Vendetta). But with my knee suddenly giving me a problem out of the blue, I decided to go with the 155mm just incase. So far the swap has not helped.

 

[ReklinedRider]

Q set up

Bob,

As per my usual luck, the photos I took this afternoon won't import to iPhoto. No idea why. So I will try to answer your question without a pic.

The spider arm (leg?) opposite/in line with the crank arm is bolted to the hole in the chain ring that Rotor has pre-marked with three etched dots (i'm using standard road rings not the aero like yours). You can clearly see the '3' bolt-up hole in the chain ring in Rick's photo above. That was the part of Rotor's instructions I followed; I did so just to have a reference point and not have to hand mark anything to start with. In his pic, the arm he has marked as OCP is the one I have bolted to the '3' hole. Once I did that, I set the crank/pedal in the dead spot and then rotated the crank back 70 degrees. Somewhat magically, the tallest tooth on the ring (major axis of the Q-ring?) was just then beginning to engage the chain (large chain ring/smallest cog selected for the set up). Probably sheer luck, but it made sense at the time to start where Rotor recommends starting on a DF bike, and then to translate that starting point to the recumbent instructions.

Hope that makes sense. It's easy for me to confuse my own self with this stuff since before I built this Silvio up from the frame my total bike mechanicking (sp) experience was limited to fixing the occasional flat and changing out pedals here and there. Thank goodness for this forum, Zinn's, and YouTube.

KM

 

[ratz]

A picture would tell alot

Kline,

yes yours is the situation we were hoping to compare with, you are setup a fair bit out of phase from the pictures posted so far. But that might be completely correct.


When your pedal is in the dead spot what is its angle relative to the ground?

If my vendetta is at zero degrees, then my wife's silvio is at 3-5 degrees and ricks vendetta is at 10-12 degrees. If you are in ocp position 5 as described then your pedal would likely be down at around 25 degrees -or- your boom is shorter and you BB is higher.

is that a silvio 1 or 2 that you have?

as an example in ricks picture his ring is orientated to the chain correctly. So for his to be set the same as you his crank would have to rotate forward to move the bolt in position five. On his bike and boom height that would be too far forward and it would be harder to pedal through the dead spot because the flat part of the oval would be late to engage the chain, and the power side would also arrive late. It would be rideable but not optimal.

This doesn't mean yours is incorrect, it is simply interesting.

 

[John Tolhurst]

That a lot of explaining. 
i

That a lot of explaining.

i tried to boil it down to a procedure here: ?http://cruzbike.com/adjusting-elliptical-or-ovoid-chainwheels

 

[Rick Youngblood]

...and just to

...and just to clarify.

Thanks to Bob's hack with my Frogs - by swapping the bodies to create full float - I re-installed the frogs on the vendetta. Went for a ride today and rechecked my full extension (prior pedals were SPD's). Well, funny thing, it changed, and is now identical to Bob's full extension in his photo above in post #15, which means I needed to rotate the Q-ring clockwise one hole. By doing so, my Q-ring is now exactly orientated just like Bob's.

 

[ReklinedRider]

Bob, Confusing, but

All in all I think all the rings being discussed here are set up similarly.

1. When in the dead spot my crank arm is similar to Rick's. It is (without going out and measuring) 10-15 degrees below horizontal to the ground.

2. The spider arm that is essentially a continuation of the line made by the crank is in the 3 position not the 5 which results in my ring being rotated in a backwards direction a few degrees from Rick's, and from your Vendetta and Mrs Ratz' Silvio. Put another way, keeping Rick's crank at the same angle relative to the ground, imagine rotating his chainring backwards until that spider arm is bolted to the hole in the ring marked with three dots. Then you have the way mine is set up. (If my terminology is wrong please correct me).

3. When in the dead spot my set up looks very similar to all three of yours, with only a few degrees difference. This could be due to boom length etc or because mine is a 1.5 not a 2.0.

4. What I would like to see is pictures of all three of your set ups with the chain on the big ring and your cranks rotated backwards 70 degrees from your dead spots so I can see where the tallest tooth begins to engage the chain. That will tell me if mine is massively out of phase.

5. Out of sheer desperation I am going to use my iPhone instead of my camera and go out and take some more photos. If I can't get them to post to the forum perhaps I can email them to you and you may be able to load them. When I try to use iPhone pics the forum has always said the file was too large.

Kline

 

[ratz]

Yep wordy

John,

Yes wordy with a goal...

I appreciate that blog post; and I did read that first. I consider myself somewhat technical and that just made my eyes glass over. It was just a little to much science/engineering and not enough tangible. From a "do it myself" standpoint it left me confused. Now that I've mounted them it makes much more sense to me when I read your instructions. So it seems that it could be a case of too close to the problem.

The Rotor instructions on the other hand; while not precise in the measurements and more of a fuzzy do this do this do this approach; did work for me. I posted the pictures above and asked the questions to see if I could bridge the gap between the physical doing it; to your post; figuring the photos would help people as confused as I was.

In the end it was far easier than I thought it would be; and it's nice to see that others got similar results from their setups. It is important to get it, because the subtle changes mean you have to adjust the ring too. Rick just changed his pedals and now he thinks he needs to rotate his ring one position. I wouldn't have considered that; now that he said it; it's a forehead slapper.

Any how I think the Qrings are working great on the cruzbike platform; My switch was inspired by my Quest; it simply pedaled smooth and I attributed that to the eplitical you provided with the bike. Great stuff; and now I actually know how to go adjust my ring on my Quest which baffled me until this excerise.

 

[ratz]

Can do

I can do those big ring photos on Sunday, sounds like a good exercise..

 

[ReklinedRider]

Also

Just re-read John's blog on this and happened to look at the pics. The middle pic appears to be a Silvio 1.0 in the early early yellow color; in any event, when I rotate my crank 70 deg backwards from BDC, my set up looks exactly like that photo. Never noticed that til just now.

Kline

 

[ReklinedRider]

(Trying to delete pics. I

(Trying to delete pics. I selected pics from my files but the forum replaced them with "Cruzbike stock photos")

 

[ReklinedRider]

What?!?

That's not even my bike!! And certainly not related to Q-rings. Any idea how to remove that??

Kline

(apparently i succeeded in deleting the pics from the above post. Now if i can ever have any luck posting the real pics...)

 

[ReklinedRider]

Another try

crank at DBC

 

[ReklinedRider]

And at -70 from DBC

 

[ReklinedRider]

The pics

Bob,

I hope the above pics shed some light on things and provide answers to your questions about the set up.

Even though the Q-rings feel just fine to me I still wonder if I have them set up properly.

Kline

 

[ratz]

Here is the 70 degree photo

Ok Here here is the 70 degree photo.

If John's calculations are correct (no reason to doubt) That would be the strongest moment of my pedal stoke. The way the bike feels in my legs; that would be correct.

The QRing engagement at that moment is at the Mid-point of the Major radius; meaning that running up to the power moment my ring size was build up for more power and my legs could provide it. In this photo I would be just about to push the strongest part of the rotation. As the foot travels from there towards the weak point the radius will now decrease and the minor radius will coincided with the weakest point of my pedal rotation when my legs is the weakest the ring should be the easiest to push.

Comparing my photo to your's Kline; I do believe your rings need to rotate forward as the appear to be "late" to get to the highs and the lows. That's just my interpretation. Your angle looks the same as Rick SPD setup and Mrs Ratz Silvo.

I'll be curious if Robert and Rick see the same thing but I think you might want to try this: Move your ring so Hole 4 is on the bolt immediately in front of the rotor crank arm. I'm not sure what is up with your photo I also couldn't embed it in the post show here's a link showing the bolt I mean

https://www.dropbox.com/s/jkg7nk06e63d7w3/klingring1.jpg?dl=0

 

[Rick Youngblood]

Yes, I'm seeing what you are

Yes, I'm seeing what you are Bob, in Clines images. It appears to me the Q-ring is rotated to-far counterclockwise, and should be rotated clockwise. I can't see where the chain roller engages the Q-ring or the # etchings on the Q-ring

The simplest non-technical way that I can explain how to get the Q-rings setup - if I'm not mistaken - is this:

1. Ride the bike and extend you right leg several times noting your full leg extension.

2. Mark left crank arm and BB with tape, so you have a reference point of exactly where the full leg extension is. I use masking tape and a magic marker.

3. With right crank arm at full extension, find where the first chain roller engages the Q-ring.

4. Rotate Q-ring so that DF OCP #1 (mine are little dimples) hole is lined up with first chain roller engagement.

That's it - this position should please most riders.

 

[ReklinedRider]

Bob and Rick I see what you

Bob and Rick I see what you mean. And Rick yes the etchings are hard to see unless you can (like on this iPad) expand the pic size; then they are plainly visible. The OCP spider arm is bolted to the 3 hole on the chainring. The lighting and angle do make it hard to see where the ring engages the chain but the silver dot just above the word ROTOR on the periphery of the ring is the apex of the major axis; the tooth just clockwise of that engages the roller of the chain.

I don't know if that means the ring needs to be rotated clockwise relative to the crank or not. The more I read the more confusing it seems. One source states that engaging the chain sooner is better for either 'mashers' or for those who feel like they want to feel increased resistance earlier, while later engagement is better for spinners. No matter which, I would agree that mine engages at the late end of the spectrum. Whether that puts me too late into the power phase of my pedal stroke to be optimal, or whether it's ok, I don't pretend to know. I'd love to hear from John T, Robert, Doug, or whoever set up Maria's bikes on how soon that tallest tooth of the main axis should engage the chain.

Barring that I think I will rotate the chainring clockwise and bolt the OCP spider arm 2 or maybe 3 holes counterclockwise from its current position and see how it feels. I'm not a speed demon by any stretch of the imagination; I went with the Q-rings mainly to cut down on knee pain with long rides, and they have instead completely eliminated it. So I'm already a happy camper, but always open to being even happier, and if even a little faster in the bargain I'm totally good with that!

This has been a good discussion. Thanks to both of you for your input as well as for your curiosity about how these things are working for others.

Kline

 

[Robert Holler]

I would concur with ratz

I would concur with ratz after seeing your pictures. If you do rotate it and go for some miles you will know if there is a change by the feel.

Robert