Best Oval Direct Mount Chain Rings? Weights?

[Jmdesignz2]

Best Oval Direct Mount Chain Rings? Weights?

Looking for one for my Lightning cranks which has S-works direct mount

Wanting a 32T to use with 11-36T rear - is that going to be OK gearing or should I go with 30T or 34T ?

Currently running a double 39/26T and I normally only climb in my 26/36 about 3% of the time.

This would be for recreational riding - North Carolina / Pisgah terrain

(asking for weights since I could not find any oval rings let alone direct mount weights in the listings. Am I blind?

[Jmdesignz2]

found some scientific paper:


"For the incremental exercise test, no significant differences were found in the maximal power output (P=0.12), oxygen consumption (P=0.39), and heart rate (P=0.32) between Q-rings and C-rings. Throughout the incremental test, lactate levels were comparable when using both the C-rings and Q-rings (P=0.47). During the short sprints, power output was 2.5–6.5% greater for Q-rings than for C-rings (P=0.22). The decline in EMG RMS amplitude observed during the incremental tests was comparable for Q-rings and C-rings (0.42). These findings indicate that the oval chainring design, presented here as “Q-rings”, did not significantly influence the physiological response to an incremental exercise test as compared to a conventional chainring."
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3990898/

Not sure how they did not find any physiologic benefit for the Q-rings/Oval rings when there was 2.5 to 6.5% greater power in short sprints?

I have heard from Leduke that he has experience better traction on climbs and other benefits - anyone else made the switch?

[Jmdesignz2]

what would be really sweet is a Carbon Direct mount chain ring with Titanium teeth....

[LeDuke]

I'm using mine over the border in Blacksburg, VA.

I wouldn't hesitate to ride it in Bent Creek or Dupont. I've only done FS road up, trail down rides in Pisgah NF proper, though, so I'm not sure how well they'd do in terms of gearing going up the trails.

What kind of bike would you be putting it on?

Perhaps "no physiological benefit", to them, means no change in oxygen requirements at maximum effort (despite higher wattage outputs)?

[Jmdesignz2]

Leduke!
Thanks- this is going on my new vintage project:

Titus Racer X 26er, currently 21.3 lbs with pedals and 2.1/2.2 tires - might crack the sub 20 lb barrier going to 1x10

[DanW]

Absolute Black have some of the lighter direct mount rings and list accurate weight on their website

[Jmdesignz2]

they don't seem to list an S-works/Lightning direct mount...

http://www.absoluteblack.cc/mtb-chainrings/

[Krackor]

Garbaruk does an S-Works DM oval. I have no experience with their chainrings so I can't tell you if weights are accurate. 54g claimed for 32t, which is 5g lighter than AbsoluteBlack's claimed weight (for Sram DM version).

http://garbaruk.com/single-oval/oval-sp ... lized.html

[Jmdesignz2]

For a 26" wheel, with 11-36t rear am i ok wth 32t or 34t oval?
Do i need a clutch rear der?

[Itsadrianduminy]

Go for a 32T oval. Also yes otherwise you will experience eventual chain drop..

[pptso]

I have a 32T from Garbaruk and it is 52 grams, works great would recommend.

[Jaker]

I have the DM Specialized 32t Melon from Garbaruk, and it was 57g. I'd show a scale pic, but it's on the bike now. I've mentioned this already elsewhere, but since changing to N/W rings, I have not had any chaindrops, and that's without a clutch RD. I really think the key here for me anyways is the 11 speed chain.

[Vicpt]

found some scientific paper:


"For the incremental exercise test, no significant differences were found in the maximal power output (P=0.12), oxygen consumption (P=0.39), and heart rate (P=0.32) between Q-rings and C-rings. Throughout the incremental test, lactate levels were comparable when using both the C-rings and Q-rings (P=0.47). During the short sprints, power output was 2.5–6.5% greater for Q-rings than for C-rings (P=0.22). The decline in EMG RMS amplitude observed during the incremental tests was comparable for Q-rings and C-rings (0.42). These findings indicate that the oval chainring design, presented here as “Q-rings”, did not significantly influence the physiological response to an incremental exercise test as compared to a conventional chainring."
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3990898/

Not sure how they did not find any physiologic benefit for the Q-rings/Oval rings when there was 2.5 to 6.5% greater power in short sprints?

I have heard from Leduke that he has experience better traction on climbs and other benefits - anyone else made the switch?

I switched and very happy i did.
I advise you to try and forget that paper.