Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Have narrowed my search down to two and am having a hard time deciding.
Want it to add to my home gym setup. Simple question which one is superior in terms of durability, quality and features.
Location: Winter nightime low 60,summer daytime high 85, sunny 300 days/year, no hablamos ingles aquÃ
700 posts, read 1,499,201 times
Reputation: 1132
All the current and former competitive rowers (including myself) use Concept II. It does not necessarily mean that that Concept II is "the best".
However, it provides a set standard of performance and durability. It is a very well made, long lasting machine.
My first one lasted 10 years of several-times-a-week use, and then (still working 100%) I gave it to a friend when I was moving cross country.
In addition to being a quality machine, it "standardizes" your rowing effort. There are world-wide indoor "regattas" on Concept II ergs, with a lot of current and former Olympians, including Olympic champions, as well as regular Joes, competing.
The main problem with Concept II is that it's noisy. If you live in an apartment, your neighbors won't like you for using it, especially early in the morning or late at night. Other than that, is is a near-perfect piece of exercise equipment.
Now, as far as the 2 machines you posted links to. They use water (vs. air in Concept II) for resistance. I tried some of the water rowing ergs some time ago, and they were definitely quieter compared with Concept II. Other than that, they simulate rowing motion in a way similar to Concept II, which is to say, about 80% approximation of the on-the-water effort. Compared with rowing on the water, rowing ergs place a little more load on the legs, and a little less on the arms, compared with rowing on the water, especially sculling.
None of the ergs provides even a remote approximation of the complexity of the on-the-water rowing technique.
Last, the prices. Concept II costs about $1K in the US, I don't know about the prices in the lands down-under. That is 1/2 to 1/3 of the water rowing ergs that you posted.
I would not hesitate to buy Concept II by mail, sights unseen. It is tried and true, you cannot go wrong with it.
As far as the others, I would definitely want to try them in store. Find a rower in a local rowing club, and bring him\her with you. He\she may offer you valuable advice on what to do.
Historically, most 'serious' rowers would use water rowers because they are more realistic in their resistance and smooth in their pull. But I've used some good water rowers (forgot the brands/models) and have logged many hours on a concept 2 and I do believe the concept 2 offers almost the same rowing experience with a simple, sturdy and convertible design which does not involve water pistons and costs a lot less. So knowing what I know about some different rowers, my advice, like the others is here, get a concept II.
At our gym and almost every other CrossFit gym Ive been in, it's been Concept II's. They get used very often and hold up like a champ. If I were buying a rower, I wouldnt look for anything else.
At our gym and almost every other CrossFit gym Ive been in, it's been Concept II's.
That's because they're very sturdy, but they also aren't being used by serious rowers. Rowers have different criteria for their equipment than most cross-ft people would. I still recommend Concept II's for overall balance of cost, design and reliability, but I don't necessarily agree that they're "the best". Notice that most of the people saying that don't have a lot to compare it to.
That wooden one (S4) looks like a great rower if you can justify the exorbitant cost. I haven't actually used one but I've seen some very much like it and I can tell that it will give you a great out-of-water rowing experience… the next best thing to sculling on a placid lake. (except for maybe a tank)
That's because they're very sturdy, but they also aren't being used by serious rowers. Rowers have different criteria for their equipment than most cross-ft people would. I still recommend Concept II's for overall balance of cost, design and reliability, but I don't necessarily agree that they're "the best". Notice that most of the people saying that don't have a lot to compare it to.
That wooden one (S4) looks like a great rower if you can justify the exorbitant cost. I haven't actually used one but I've seen some very much like it and I can tell that it will give you a great out-of-water rowing experience… the next best thing to sculling on a placid lake. (except for maybe a tank)
1.) I didnt say it was the best.
2.) what makes you think someone who just wants one for a home gym(like the OP states) is a "serious rower"?
For cost, you can buy a used II for 500-1000 bucks, which would give someone years of service. Buying a way more expensive option for a home gym because that's the one "serious rowers" would buy is a little ridiculous.
Location: Winter nightime low 60,summer daytime high 85, sunny 300 days/year, no hablamos ingles aquÃ
700 posts, read 1,499,201 times
Reputation: 1132
Quote:
Originally Posted by otterprods
[Concept II] That's because they're very sturdy, but they also aren't being used by serious rowers.
Serious rowers in clubs with means use rowing tanks:
Rowing tank is the only land-based rowing training that is emulates the rowing effort near 100%, (but not technique)
Majority of serious rowers that do not have access to a rowing tank, use Concept II, because it is relatively inexpensive, the world-wide standard for measuring the rowing effort, and rowing clubs like the reliability and configurability of that machine.
A few 'serious' rowers (with serious $$$) may indeed buy the rowing water ergs for their home use. They are probably a very small minority.
Quote:
Originally Posted by otterprods
most 'serious' rowers would use water rowers because they are more realistic in their resistance and smooth in their pull.
Assumption that since the real rowing is done on the water, then the water-based rowing erg will be 'better' is an example of a Functional Fixedness cognitive bias
In reality, the power curve of the water rowers is very similar to the power curve of the air-based ergs (like Concept II).
Both types try to emulate the sweep rowing motion. Both succeed in, say 80%.
Sitting on both of them is boring as hell, and certainly not "the next best thing to sculling on a placid lake"
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
