Recommend Rowing machine-?WaterRower
Peter Callen
machine for home (both for son, myself and my wife). We went to a store
and were shown the WaterRower, with the water tank. It looked
interesting. How does it compare to either the Concept-II or the
Tunturi. It appeared that there was no way to vary the resistance on the
WaterRower. I am not sure that is necessary.
Any comments or advise.
Peter
RowH2O
wrote:
>My son is trying out for crew and we are thinking of buying a rowing
>machine for home (both for son, myself and my wife). We went to a store
>and were shown the WaterRower, with the water tank. It looked
>interesting. How does it compare to either the Concept-II or the
>Tunturi.
The WaterRower is in many respects a superb machine and very rewarding
to use.
It does have two significant disadvantages however, one of which you
have already touched on...
>It appeared that there was no way to vary the resistance on the
>WaterRower. I am not sure that is necessary.
You can indeed vary the resistance on a WaterRower by changing the
water level - not a very convenient procedure but effective.
WaterRower themselves take the line that "Rowing is not about
Resistance" but of course both hull design/weight and gearing affect
resistance in a real boat and each should ideally be adjusted to
optimise speed/power delivered.
The problem is that in your case you will need to settle on an
intermediate Water level that suits all your family (not impossible),
or be resigned to a lot of water siphoning (but you will soon get fed
up with that...)
The other main issue with the WaterRower is far more serious - the
SIII Performance Monitor suffers from a design defect which makes the
distance, speed and power values *totally* wrong. The monitor merely
measures handle travel, multiplies that by x5 and calls that distance
travelled.
If you think about that, it means that the monitor does NOT consider
how fast you whip the paddle through the water e.g. faster power
stroke, slower recovery means more power = faster boat.
WaterRower to the WaterRower Users Group has acknowledged this serious
design defect, but (AFAIK) not to the wider buying public, who have
been buying defective WaterRowers for over 8 months since WaterRower
were made aware of the problem and WaterRower continue not to tell
them.
It is sad to think of all the people plugging away on WaterRowers who
think they are getting fitter and stronger but just can't get the
speed indicated to go faster. This is a real problem and a serious
disincentive when training hard.
WaterRower are 'working on it' (they know about the problem by early
February 2002) but until they fix it, the only way to get any kind of
sensible data is to hook the SIII monitor up to a PC serial port and
use RowH2O WaterRower Software - which factors in the power applied
and also calibrates for different water levels in the tank, which
again the SIII monitor fails to consider (another reason why Watts
indicated on an SIII monitor are a complete joke).
You can get more independent information on WaterRowers here:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/waterrowerusers/
and
http://www.aimoo.com/waterrower
but be informed about the monitor before you buy a WaterRower.
Colin
RowH2O WaterRower Software
http://www.rowh2o.com
RowYo Rowing Machine Cadence Training Software
http://www.rowyo.com
RowH2O
wrote:
>My son is trying out for crew and we are thinking of buying a rowing
>machine for home (both for son, myself and my wife). We went to a store
>and were shown the WaterRower, with the water tank. It looked
>interesting. How does it compare to either the Concept-II or the
>Tunturi.
The WaterRower is in many respects a superb machine and very rewarding
to use.
It does have two significant disadvantages however, one of which you
have already touched on...
>It appeared that there was no way to vary the resistance on the
>WaterRower. I am not sure that is necessary.
You can indeed vary the resistance on a WaterRower by changing the
water level - not a very convenient procedure but effective.
WaterRower themselves take the line that "Rowing is not about
Resistance" but of course both hull design/weight and gearing affect
resistance in a real boat and each should ideally be adjusted to
optimise speed/power delivered.
The problem is that in your case you will need to settle on an
intermediate Water level that suits all your family (not impossible),
or be resigned to a lot of water siphoning (but you will soon get fed
up with that...)
The other main issue with the WaterRower is far more serious - the
SIII Performance Monitor suffers from a design defect which makes the
distance, speed and power values *totally* wrong. The monitor merely
measures handle travel, multiplies that by x5 and calls that distance
travelled.
If you think about that, it means that the monitor does NOT consider
how fast you whip the paddle through the water e.g. faster power
stroke, slower recovery means more power = faster boat.
WaterRower has acknowledged this serious design defect to the
WaterRower Users Group, but (AFAIK) not to the wider buying public,
who have been buying defective WaterRowers for over 8 months since
WaterRower were made aware of the problem and WaterRower continue to
not tell them...
Neil Wallace
"Peter Callen" <p...@itsa.ucsf.edu> wrote in message
news:pwc-7BFA4D.1...@newssvr21-ext.news.prodigy.com...
Peter,
"resistance" on a concept 2 is a term applied to the "air braking" or drag
on the flywheel. The mass of the flywheel remains constant. Airflow is
altered.
This is useful for training in that you can apply your power in different
ways, and train different systems (strength, speed, etc..) Quite how this
relates to a boat is debatable, but as a training aid, few would argue
against it's efficacy and track record.
A waterrower is very much different. Putting more water into the tank
changes the "resistance" in that the wetted area changes, and so more
braking friction in the system, BUT IT ISN'T THAT SIMPLE...............
putting more water into the system ALSO changes the effective mass of the
flywheel (as water doesn't compress and little slippage occurs this is the
easiest way to model it.)
meaning that due to increased momentum despite this increased "braking", you
are still picking up a faster flywheel at the catch (opposite of a c2).
A good way to think of this is that by adding more water you are going up
the boat classes, as an 8 obviously has more momentum than a pair etc....
Incidentally, I have tried to convince waterrower (via the usergroup
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/waterrowerusers) that it would be nice if the
gearing could be altered easily by the user, such that the distance moved by
the flywheel each power stroke could change (similar to gearing of a boat),
I think this would be possible with a change in the pulley system for future
models.
and, as you will see from Colin's post, there are problems with the monitor,
such that it doesn't matter how hard you pull.
Unbelievable. I would suggest you do not buy one until they fix this.
Neil
Pm_wi...@notmail.com
>and, as you will see from Colin's post, there are problems with the monitor,
>such that it doesn't matter how hard you pull.
>
>Unbelievable. I would suggest you do not buy one until they fix this.
>
>Neil
Hello,
Former "water rower evangelist" here.
I use both machines on a regular basis. I spend way too much time in
my cellar on the WR. It's quiet, I can listen to music, I like the
soothing woosh of the water, and the smoothness of the catch. The
space that machine does not take up. and the general look of the
wood/water.
In the club we have C2's, we do group seesions, on ten together, the
noise is phenomenal. My lower back always feels these sessions,
perhaps because of pushing that bit harder.
I agree that there are problems with the monitor, suggest that you
choose the model without the performance monitor at a saving of €200.
And spend the difference on a Argos cycle computer , and a Polar heart
rate monitor.
Wilf
s k harker
>> perhaps because of pushing that bit harder.
Could using a C2 cause lower back problems? Mine always feels
dreadfully tired after even a short session, yet i can go for hours on
the river! I admit that my technique is somewhat lacking, and im on the
wmoend lightweight boundary, but I am worried that long (compulsary)
club sessions could put me out of action!
Sarah
RowH2O
>Could using a C2 cause lower back problems? Mine always feels
>dreadfully tired after even a short session, yet i can go for hours on
>the river! I admit that my technique is somewhat lacking, and im on the
>wmoend lightweight boundary, but I am worried that long (compulsary)
>club sessions could put me out of action!
>Sarah
This is one area where I do think that WaterRowers have an advantage
over other 'static ergs'.
In my opinion, the resistance load at the catch is presented more
progressively on a WaterRower than on a C2 - and thus may help avoid
lower back jarring. This is particularly evident from a standing start
where the differences in dynamics are most apparent.
Jon Anderson
> Could using a C2 cause lower back problems?
Using it wrongly certainly could.
I have been teaching beginners to keep their backs in a strong position
when on the ergs and deliberately setting the erg to lower resistances
for them.
Your back muscles need to develop along with the rest of you.
I imagine you're simply doing less work in the boat than you do on an
erg which is why your back hurts less.
Jon
--
Durge: j...@durge.org http://users.durge.org/~jon/
OnStream: acco...@rowing.org.uk http://www.rowing.org.uk/
[ All views expressed are personal unless otherwise stated ]
Pm_wi...@notmail.com
wrote:
>s k harker wrote:
>> Could using a C2 cause lower back problems?
>
>Using it wrongly certainly could.
>I have been teaching beginners to keep their backs in a strong position
>when on the ergs and deliberately setting the erg to lower resistances
>for them.
Agreed
>Your back muscles need to develop along with the rest of you.
>
Agreed
>I imagine you're simply doing less work in the boat than you do on an
>erg which is why your back hurts less.
Agreed but Less so
On the C2 the resistance is a large heavy flywheel, with a direct
connection to your spine, assuming strong back, and stong legs.
If you whack the catch, the only thing that can give is your lower
back, and since whacking is rewarded in speed on the C2 monitor one
(well me at least) is tempted to really slam the catches, and give an
unnatural yank to the finish.
In a boat the resistance is cushioned, the looms flex a little, the
water piles up in front of the blade if you yank to hard, the blade
might dive, it may pop out, the boat wobbles. Whacking is evidently
not a good thing.
On the WR similar conditions to the boat, if you do not engage the
catch at the correct speed, and accelerate smoothly through the stroke
the water "splits" , and just turns to an air water mix. Also since
the monitor is crap, you are not constantly staring at the 1:50 split,
or time etc. I focus on hear rate and SR for a perception of work
done.
Evidently it is possible to hurt the back in all three conditions,
after all it's not crochet is it ?
Wilf
Martin Harris
time on the C2 machines. "Yup - me too" I hear you say!
If you are not training to race, then there are several benefits of
waterrower over the C2. It looks MUCH nicer, is a lot quieter, can be
stored most places - even as a conversation piece amongst your
non-rowing friends.
A downside is that if you don't change the water regularly it goes
stagnant and turns a lovely shade of emerald green!
If you wear a heart rate monitor, ANY type of exercise machine
(bike/nordic Ski/treadmill) will have an effect, assuming a structured
program.
Training on the C2 does mean that you can compete in your age/weight
category at an indoor regatta. Not entirely sure if that's a good
thing or not...?
Your son will have ample opportunity to train with his mates on C2s at
his club. I dunno if he will want to do more when he gets home, his
ears ringing with the familiar erg whoosh !
Better suggestion - why not take a trip down to the river now and
again? Personally I would rather be on the water than sitting on
either machine :)
Nick Suess
"Martin Harris" <Martin...@bpp.com> wrote in message
news:77a4b773.02100...@posting.google.com...
> As a training rower, I have the opportunity to spend vast amounts of
> time on the C2 machines. "Yup - me too" I hear you say!
> If you are not training to race, then there are several benefits of
> waterrower over the C2. It looks MUCH nicer, is a lot quieter, can be
> stored most places - even as a conversation piece amongst your
> non-rowing friends.
> A downside is that if you don't change the water regularly it goes
> stagnant and turns a lovely shade of emerald green!
Hi Playmates
You all know I'm a WaterRower distributor, and I've been quiet on this
thread up to now. I appreciate and endorse Martin's nice comments about the
WaterRower, but I have to say that Martin's experience of emerald green
water does not match mine, even though I am in a sub-tropical climate.
I think it probably depends on the water. I usually have one unit here
assembled and full of water as a demonstrator, and have never experienced
this problem. How often do I change the water? Well, for the longest
interval, I can remember distinctly that I refilled my demonstrator model
when I returned from the Nationals at Penrith in March 2000, and only
drained it to go off to Queensland for the 2001 Nationals, which were later
in the year. So that was a full 12 months. I haven't repeated that as I have
since sold both that unit and a subsequent demonstrator.
And even though WaterRower provides puri-tabs with each unit, I have never
found it necessary to use them. Clearly Perth tap water contains sufficient
chlorine to keep the algae at bay (not sure what it's doing to our guts, but
I keep healthy enough). But even if you have water that is not treated thus,
use of the puri-tabs should do the trick and allow a water change frequency
of several months, maybe even a year or more.
Nick Suess
Scull Success
WaterRower Distributor
Bayswater, Western Australia
Ph +61 8 9271 0466
Neil Wallace
"Nick Suess" <ni...@scull.com.au> wrote in message
news:3da4df68$0$31...@echo-01.iinet.net.au...
> And even though WaterRower provides puri-tabs with each unit, I have never
> found it necessary to use them. Clearly Perth tap water contains
sufficient
> chlorine to keep the algae at bay (not sure what it's doing to our guts,
but
> I keep healthy enough). But even if you have water that is not treated
thus,
> use of the puri-tabs should do the trick and allow a water change
frequency
> of several months, maybe even a year or more.
My waterrower water has never needed changing either (2 years with 1
puritab).
Can't believe that Nick doesn't fill his machines with beer
though...........
I have thought about using milk.............. anyone for butter??
Neil
Martin Harris
> puritab).
>
> Can't believe that Nick doesn't fill his machines with beer
> though...........
>
> I have thought about using milk.............. anyone for butter??
>
> Neil
Hmmm - I have seen one with laundry in it, and another with some
fairly robust goldfish... How about resistance training by mixing
cookie dough? Omlettes?
Blades on the bottom to make a lawnmower....
The possibilities are endless ! :)
Nick Suess
"Neil Wallace" <rowing.golfer@*NOSPAM*virgin.net> wrote in message
news:Vqap9.915$fV4....@newsfep1-win.server.ntli.net...
Like Carl, I am a real ale enthusiast, and CAMRA aficionados tend to frown
on WaterRower-agitated beer. But I mix a mean tequila sunrise in there, and
the banana daiqiris come out pretty good too.
WaterRower - the cocktail mixer that can also be used as an erg!
PES949
if the points are good. Here is my twist on the subject...
Want to see what Rowers are in demand?
Look at eBay listings under cardio equip/rowers... You will see tons of
machines listed with no bids at all except for the C2 which sells on regulary
on eBay for nearly the new price. Lots of bids on C2's indicates the C2 is a
highly desired machine. Basically you can buy it new and if you don't like
it... it will be easy to get most of your money back.
Iain Cheyne
@newssvr21-ext.news.prodigy.com:
> My son is trying out for crew and we are thinking of buying a rowing
> machine for home (both for son, myself and my wife). We went to a store
> and were shown the WaterRower, with the water tank. It looked
> interesting. How does it compare to either the Concept-II or the
> Tunturi. It appeared that there was no way to vary the resistance on the
> WaterRower. I am not sure that is necessary.
Don't forget to consider the Rowperfect (http://www.rowperfect.com).
It's more expensive than the other machines you mention, but it helps
develop good technique.
--
Iain Cheyne
Remove the numbers and change "invalid" to "net" to reply.
MisteurKotte
I have not read the whole thread but just a little remark to tell you that
C2 France has set up a rental system. You can rent a C2, use it at home on
this rental service basis, then keep the machine (or not) by buying it (of
course, your rental is taken into account when you buy).
Hope it can help
Cheers,
Tristan
Rowing Frog
C2 model C at home
"PES949" <pes...@aol.com> a écrit dans le message de news:
20021011121354...@mb-fc.aol.com...
Henning Lippke
>
> It's more expensive than the other machines you mention, but it helps
> develop good technique.
And as I just found out, it's cheaper than a C2 + slides... don't compare
peas with apples.
-HL
Mark Campbell
Thanks HL - 100% right. And putting slides under a C11 does not make a
Rowperfect - just as bolting wings to a Ferrari doesn't make a Lear
Jet. If you want to fly, properly and safely, you choose the aeroplane
which was designed from the ground up! By the way, has anyone seen the
article below from Sports Biomechanics? Regards, Mark
> Contents of Volume 1, Issue 2
> ORIGINAL RESEARCH
> Rowing
>
> The RowPerfect Ergometer: A Training Aid for On-Water Single Scull Rowing
> Bruce Elliott, Andrew Lyttle, and Olivia Burkett
> The purpose of this study was to compare rowing technique on the dynamic
RowPerfect ergometer with a single scull. Eight national-level rowers
performed on both the RowPerfect ergometer and in a single scull over
500m,
at rates of 24, 26 and 28 strokes/minute. Blade force and oar angle
(on-water) and handle force and stroke length (on the ergometer) were
measured. Both force and stroke angle/length were normalised from 0 to
100
(where 100 was the peak value.) Body positions of the subjects at both
the
catch and finish of each of these rowing strokes were also compared
for each
stroke rate. The coefficient of multiple determination (CMD) was used
to
measure the consistencey of force curves over a sample of five
sequential
storkes for each rower. Cross-correlations were performed between the
left-
and right-side on-water sculling force curves and a mean of these
values
with the ergometer curve for each rowere. Stroke angle/length, which
did not
vary with rate, was similar for both forms of rowing. The CMDs showed
a high
consistency across the normalised strokes of each subject (=0.98).
Cross-correlation values of 0.91, 0.92 and 0.93 were recorded between
the
force curves from the ergometer and on-water trials for stroke rates
of 24,
26 and 28 strokes/minute, respectively. The mean trunk, thigh and
lower leg
angles at the catch and finish of the stroke were also similar across
the
stroke rates as determined by t-tests. Results indicate that technique
used
on the RowPerfect ergometer was similar to that for on-water sculling,
thus
validating its use in off-water training.
Cas Rekers ROWPERFECT BV
Publications, ARA Senior rowing conference and in the Injury prevntion
section.
Regards
Cas Rekers.
"s k harker" <s.k.h...@durham.ac.uk> wrote in message
news:3DA2CCDE...@durham.ac.uk...