6 ms·

Great idea! I used to be a competitive rower. When I was working at a gym during my studies I was actually talking with the managers of running some rowing clas

Great idea! I used to be a competitive rower. When I was working at a gym during my studies I was actually talking with the managers of running some rowing classes (similar to spinning). I think the main challenge with rowing machines (and the reason why we didn't do rowing classes), is that for beginners there is essentially only hard or off, i.e. it is difficult to adjust to different exhaustion levels. That leads to high frustration levels and is the reason why one rarely sees someone at the gym using the machines more than 5mins (and those that do are often former rowers). So HIT is probably the right way to go. The other challenge I is related to hardware. The reason why everyone is talking about the C2s is that pretty much every other machine is crap. The forces pulling on these machines are substantive and concept managed to make a machine that held up over time, unlike the others. So I hope you guys made those things sturdy enough. All the best, I hope you succeed!

FullNameAndy 6y ago
Thanks for the feedback! So far customers are happy and we haven't had many issues. Its a big challenge for sure, but someone had to try and do something different :)
kitd 6y ago
The other challenge I is related to hardware. The reason why everyone is talking about the C2s is that pretty much every other machine is crap. The forces pulling on these machines are substantive and concept managed to make a machine that held up over time, unlike the others. So I hope you guys made those things sturdy enough. Robustness isn't the only reason C2s are considered the best. Unlike all the cheap brands, Concept2 have very accurately measured the moment of inertia of their flywheel and have an exacting manufacturing process that ensures it stays true. As a result, the power data you see on the screen is an accurate measure of the work you're doing. Most (not all) machines guesstimate it in comparison. You can just go with HR if you want, but don't pretend you can compare any other figures sensibly with a C2. Point of note: the "distance" figure on a C2 is based on what a coxless four would have covered under the same power.
- FullNameAndy 6y ago
  You might be surprised to hear that regardless of what the damper is set to, the metrics do not change on the display if you were to maintain the same SPM and stroke length.
  - kart23 6y ago
    Not sure what you're claiming, but SPM and stroke length isn't a measure of how much work you are doing. For instance, you could have the exact same SPM, stroke length, and damper settings, and row either a 3:00 or a 2:00 500m time.
- cycomanic 6y ago
  I'm aware of that. I would say that's the main reason why they are popular with all the rowers, but I doubt it's why they are popular with gyms for example. Note of interest, when I was a junior the concepts started to become popular. I was training mainly on the model B, which sounded like a jetplane, incredibly loud! It was such a change when they brought out the model C. I have never seen a model A in real life, but they sure look like made in a garage. model B: https://www.concept2.com/service/indoor-rowers/model-b https://www.concept2.com/service/indoor-rowers/model-b model A: https://www.concept2.com/service/indoor-rowers/model-a https://www.concept2.com/service/indoor-rowers/model-a
  - andylynch 6y ago
    The other reason they are popular with gyms (and boat clubs) is twofold; they are virtually indestructible, and whenever do need to replace worn parts, their product support is ace - details manualed, schematics, and parts, even for that forty year old model A. This support extends right across their lineup - at big regattas, they will be there doing for free oar repairs. If you want, you can retrofit the latest PM5 monitor on every model, even including the A, and use it on Zwift and friends. (I have a C2 from '96, and it still goes just like the new one in the gym)
- jrudolph 6y ago
  Certainly more accurate than most other ergs (that's how we rowers call them). However, it's not perfect. Nothing is ever perfect when it comes to measuring real world biomechanics. I did competitive rowing in my youth + I've spent a couple years building rowing technology, sensors + telemetry, so I can maybe offer a few interesting insights about their issues. Don't get me wrong, C2 ergs are great craftsmanship, built like tanks and I've spent a few hundreds hours on these machines (blaming the weather gods and the winter season). 1) The PM2 units (the old LCD ones, stock on Model C ergs) were particularly bad, suffering from some well known "issues". The sensors in them had not a high enough sample rate + high hysteresis in the sensors. That means that "pulling hard" at the catch (for non-on-the-water rowers: the beginning of a stroke cycle, when your hands are closest to the flywheel) and then backing off the handle force rewards you with higher measured power than actual. 2) This became a lot better with the PM4 generation (stock on Model D and up). However they still have another issue. The force exerted by the suspension cord that pulls the chain back into the housing is not subtracted from the measurement. The sensor only measures effective force/rpm on the flywheel. This is the reason why virtual regattas (serious competitions anyway) are always staged on brand new ergs where the suspension cords have not different levels of fatigue. The ergs are typically sold off after the events (which is of course a marketing/logistics trick just as well). "Proper" testing on a C2 thus involves measuring handle force directly. This can be done by linking a strain gauge between handle and chain. 3) Speaking of racing events, it's pretty interesting how C2 has enabled virtual/digital racing long before "digitalising" things was a big trend. The interface that the PM4s use for regattas is based on RS485 over RJ45 (you can also use USB but that's not the recommended way for large scale > 16 seats races). The PM3 were wired using telephone/RJ11 and I think it was RS232 IIRC. 4) The single most important "calibration" on a Concept rower is the Drag Factor (the displays can show it in an advanced menu). The drag factor is essentially how fast the flywheel slows down, i.e. how much drag it has. Different ergs have different amounts of dust in them and wear on the bearings, which is why the "flap setting" really shouldn't be used as an absolute/comparable measure between machines. Racing with a higher/lower drag factor is purely a matter of preference of the athlete and where their personal optimum for performing mechanical work lies. You can think of it like a gearing to increase resistance. In "on the water" rowing we can change gearing using inner/outer handle length of the oar on the gate to achieve a similar effect. This is very important since speed vs. the water varies a lot between boat classes from about ~4m/s in a single (1x) to ~6m/s in a 8+/4x. Our testing protocols recommended 125-140 (female-male). 5) While everyone obsesses over watts, that's not the whole picture. To move a boat (virtual or real) you need work, not power. Since ergs don't float, their mechanics are a lot simpler than a real rowing boat. Work on an erg is handle force x distance, i.e. you integrate the force-distance curve of the handle. That means long strokes are better - the most common beginner mistake is to waste stroke length. 6) Related to 1) and 5) there's a special "erg technique" of pulling the chord up the chest as you move angle your back backwards at the end. This gains you extra stroke length and "stealing" a bit more mechanical work due to sensor hysteresis. This works on a PM4 and up too. You can only get away with this on an erg. On the water pulling off this sort of trick at race speeds will most likely eject you from the boat. It may look like a funny catapult but ejecting from the boat can 100% kill you if your head hits a rigger or blade. See [0] for a close encounter. 7a) "Ergs don't float" is a saying for another important reason. They fail to simulate the impulse exchange between rower and boat mass. This is very important for real world rowing performance because minimizing boat shell velocity fluctuations means less mechanical work required to travel the same distance [1]. This is also the reason why it's preferable to have a "front-loaded" force curve profile. Coincidentally the sensor hysteresis of the concept ergs rewards that... maybe it's engineered intentionally? :-) 7b) Anyways, Avoiding vertical shell movement is of similar importance as wetted surface (and thus drag) increases massively if you push the boat down into the water. Athletes thus have a to maintain very delicate balance between stretcher and handle forces not to offset the systems center of mass during the stroke cycle. None of that matters on an erg. 7c) And most important: Ergs don't simulate the interaction of impulse exchanges between a whole crew of rowers that can never be perfectly in sync. Concept sells "Sliders" for the C2 ergs that you can use for a single erg but also to link together multiple ergs to a crew. If you haven't tried this, I can highly recommend this as it makes it much more realistic and also a lot more challenging. From my coaching experience I can also recommend it especially to beginners. It may sound counterintuitive, but it's much less forgiving to errors in your motion sequence/force application and will thus make you a better (and more healthier!) rower much quicker. 8) Rowers are an incredible bunch of creative and resourceful people. There's so many tinkerers in the community... a shout to a couple of things in the erg space: - Waterrower hit big thanks to House of Cards. This plus cross-fit certainly made rowing much more popular as a sport. Waterrowers are not used in serious capacity in competitive training though as far as I'm aware. - Augletics are a bunch of former competitive rowers building an erg using a electromagnetic brake (that can support more realistic force profiles/dynamics). And you don't get that "wooooosh" sound ringing in your ears that won't go away for hours after a 90min C2 erg session... - Biorower simulates proper sculling technique, boat rotation and uses mechanical gears instead of a flywheel Anyhow - great to see more innovation like Aviron in the space even if it's "just" targeted at recreational/fitness use case. It's a fabulous sport and I applaud you for making it more accessible. Hope it gets people to dip their toes so they may one day decide to get their feet wet and hit their local rowing club. [0] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pH2k_026KrY https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pH2k_026KrY [1] https://www.rowinginmotion.com/drag-efficiency-rowing/ https://www.rowinginmotion.com/drag-efficiency-rowing/
FullNameAndy 6y ago
We appreciate that. So far the machines have held up in commercial facilities as well as homes and you're right we did our best to make sure they hold up for the long haul!
DennisP 6y ago
Why is it hard or off as a beginner? I had the same issue at first but now I can ease off and do a straight 30 minutes. I assumed it was mental but it sounds like it's technique. Fwiw I have the Oartec DX, and it's very solidly built. On dynamic rowers like this, the seat stays pretty much in one place and it's mainly the footpad that moves. Supposedly it puts less stress on the lower back and knees, and more closely simulates rowing on the water, so some elite rowing teams use them. I don't know about all that but I have a knee that gives me trouble sometimes, and with the Oartec I can put that foot on the ground and row with the other leg. https://oartec.com/ https://oartec.com/ https://www.rp3rowing.com/products/ https://www.rp3rowing.com/products/ Concept2 makes one now too: https://www.concept2.com/indoor-rowers/dynamic https://www.concept2.com/indoor-rowers/dynamic (I guess a drawback is it doesn't really lend itself to a nice big screen like OP's project.)
- malandrew 6y ago
  > I guess a drawback is it doesn't really lend itself to a nice big screen like OP's project. I don't see why not. My RP3 uses any Android tablet. I have like a 7-8" tablet in there, but there is no reason I couldn't put a much larger tablet like an 18.4" Galaxy View.
  - DennisP 6y ago
    How do you like the RP3 in general? I thought seriously about that before getting the Oartec, mainly because it was cheaper and I didn't have a strong need for portability.
    - malandrew 6y ago
      I never tried the Oartec so I can't compare to it, but I'm really happy with it. There's also now the RP3 Model T that was released a few months after I got the regular RP3. I'm in the PNW, so I was able to save on shipping by picking up the RP3 in person from the US distributor. I'm really quite happy with it and far prefer it to a C2. The software is pretty decent too and the force curve in particular is quite useful to help you figure out how to connect all three motions smoothly for mostly consistent even power. Family and friends that have used it have struggled with getting started with it but mainly because they've learned such bad form from static machines like the C2. But near as I can tell that will happen with anyone used to a static rower that's never been on the water or coached on proper form.
malandrew 6y ago
Completely disagree about all other machines being crap. The RP3 is way better than even a C2 with dynamic slides. The C2 is popular because it's the best available at the ~$1k price point and can be purchased locally in most markets.
beloch 6y ago
C2 really is the monster in the room. The rowing machine market is less diverse than exercise bikes, and C2 sits atop the mountain. Anyone who rows seriously (and many who don't) have used a C2 at some point. The Aviron Impact Series (an odd name for a low-impact exercise machine) rower is $2149, while a C2 Model D is $900. The Model D has been in gyms for decades. Literally, your local gym may have one that's decades old and still in perfect shape. Olympic rowers train on them. A significant portion of people who row already have one and aren't going to need a replacement any time soon. The video on Aviron's website focuses heavily on the software, but the rower itself does not look like it should cost twice what a C2 does. The belt is plastic. The rail's finish looks like it will wear off. The rear support looks less sturdy and stable than that of a C2. The ramrod straight handle looks blister-inducing. The whole thing looks very plastic. Note that I'm not saying the rower isn't worth the money. The build quality and ergonomics might be excellent. It just doesn't look like a rower that's worth 2.39 C2's. The display is a big improvement over anything C2 sells, but $1249 can buy a pretty nice display and a basic computer to run it, or a big ol' tablet and a mount. Peloton probably had an easier time entering the exercise bike market because there wasn't any one competitor as dominant as C2 is. However, they do now offer an app that lets people use their software and classes without buying a Peloton bike. The question for Aviron is, can they sell their rower without their software being exclusive to it? They would undoubtedly find more users if they supported other rowers, C2 specifically, but would the extra monthly memberships bring in more than sales from their rower if the software remained exclusive to it?
- FullNameAndy 6y ago
  Let me start off by saying the C2 is an amazing rower, but we thought we could improve on its design for the regular user who cares most about a fun and engaging experience. For example, the belt is industrial nylon (not plastic), the same material as seat belts. The main benefit to this is it makes the rower quieter and feels smoother. The rail is aluminum and legs and frame are made from steel, which makes it stable and is why the Aviron rower weights twice as much as the C2. Finally, it is selling for $1999 with taxes, shipping, and the screen included.
  - 6y ago

FullNameAndy 6y ago

Thanks for the feedback! So far customers are happy and we haven't had many issues. Its a big challenge for sure, but someone had to try and do something different :)

kitd 6y ago

The other challenge I is related to hardware. The reason why everyone is talking about the C2s is that pretty much every other machine is crap. The forces pulling on these machines are substantive and concept managed to make a machine that held up over time, unlike the others. So I hope you guys made those things sturdy enough. Robustness isn't the only reason C2s are considered the best. Unlike all the cheap brands, Concept2 have very accurately measured the moment of inertia of their flywheel and have an exacting manufacturing process that ensures it stays true. As a result, the power data you see on the screen is an accurate measure of the work you're doing. Most (not all) machines guesstimate it in comparison. You can just go with HR if you want, but don't pretend you can compare any other figures sensibly with a C2. Point of note: the "distance" figure on a C2 is based on what a coxless four would have covered under the same power.

FullNameAndy 6y ago
You might be surprised to hear that regardless of what the damper is set to, the metrics do not change on the display if you were to maintain the same SPM and stroke length.
- kart23 6y ago
  Not sure what you're claiming, but SPM and stroke length isn't a measure of how much work you are doing. For instance, you could have the exact same SPM, stroke length, and damper settings, and row either a 3:00 or a 2:00 500m time.
cycomanic 6y ago
I'm aware of that. I would say that's the main reason why they are popular with all the rowers, but I doubt it's why they are popular with gyms for example. Note of interest, when I was a junior the concepts started to become popular. I was training mainly on the model B, which sounded like a jetplane, incredibly loud! It was such a change when they brought out the model C. I have never seen a model A in real life, but they sure look like made in a garage. model B: https://www.concept2.com/service/indoor-rowers/model-b https://www.concept2.com/service/indoor-rowers/model-b model A: https://www.concept2.com/service/indoor-rowers/model-a https://www.concept2.com/service/indoor-rowers/model-a
- andylynch 6y ago
  The other reason they are popular with gyms (and boat clubs) is twofold; they are virtually indestructible, and whenever do need to replace worn parts, their product support is ace - details manualed, schematics, and parts, even for that forty year old model A. This support extends right across their lineup - at big regattas, they will be there doing for free oar repairs. If you want, you can retrofit the latest PM5 monitor on every model, even including the A, and use it on Zwift and friends. (I have a C2 from '96, and it still goes just like the new one in the gym)
jrudolph 6y ago
Certainly more accurate than most other ergs (that's how we rowers call them). However, it's not perfect. Nothing is ever perfect when it comes to measuring real world biomechanics. I did competitive rowing in my youth + I've spent a couple years building rowing technology, sensors + telemetry, so I can maybe offer a few interesting insights about their issues. Don't get me wrong, C2 ergs are great craftsmanship, built like tanks and I've spent a few hundreds hours on these machines (blaming the weather gods and the winter season). 1) The PM2 units (the old LCD ones, stock on Model C ergs) were particularly bad, suffering from some well known "issues". The sensors in them had not a high enough sample rate + high hysteresis in the sensors. That means that "pulling hard" at the catch (for non-on-the-water rowers: the beginning of a stroke cycle, when your hands are closest to the flywheel) and then backing off the handle force rewards you with higher measured power than actual. 2) This became a lot better with the PM4 generation (stock on Model D and up). However they still have another issue. The force exerted by the suspension cord that pulls the chain back into the housing is not subtracted from the measurement. The sensor only measures effective force/rpm on the flywheel. This is the reason why virtual regattas (serious competitions anyway) are always staged on brand new ergs where the suspension cords have not different levels of fatigue. The ergs are typically sold off after the events (which is of course a marketing/logistics trick just as well). "Proper" testing on a C2 thus involves measuring handle force directly. This can be done by linking a strain gauge between handle and chain. 3) Speaking of racing events, it's pretty interesting how C2 has enabled virtual/digital racing long before "digitalising" things was a big trend. The interface that the PM4s use for regattas is based on RS485 over RJ45 (you can also use USB but that's not the recommended way for large scale > 16 seats races). The PM3 were wired using telephone/RJ11 and I think it was RS232 IIRC. 4) The single most important "calibration" on a Concept rower is the Drag Factor (the displays can show it in an advanced menu). The drag factor is essentially how fast the flywheel slows down, i.e. how much drag it has. Different ergs have different amounts of dust in them and wear on the bearings, which is why the "flap setting" really shouldn't be used as an absolute/comparable measure between machines. Racing with a higher/lower drag factor is purely a matter of preference of the athlete and where their personal optimum for performing mechanical work lies. You can think of it like a gearing to increase resistance. In "on the water" rowing we can change gearing using inner/outer handle length of the oar on the gate to achieve a similar effect. This is very important since speed vs. the water varies a lot between boat classes from about ~4m/s in a single (1x) to ~6m/s in a 8+/4x. Our testing protocols recommended 125-140 (female-male). 5) While everyone obsesses over watts, that's not the whole picture. To move a boat (virtual or real) you need work, not power. Since ergs don't float, their mechanics are a lot simpler than a real rowing boat. Work on an erg is handle force x distance, i.e. you integrate the force-distance curve of the handle. That means long strokes are better - the most common beginner mistake is to waste stroke length. 6) Related to 1) and 5) there's a special "erg technique" of pulling the chord up the chest as you move angle your back backwards at the end. This gains you extra stroke length and "stealing" a bit more mechanical work due to sensor hysteresis. This works on a PM4 and up too. You can only get away with this on an erg. On the water pulling off this sort of trick at race speeds will most likely eject you from the boat. It may look like a funny catapult but ejecting from the boat can 100% kill you if your head hits a rigger or blade. See [0] for a close encounter. 7a) "Ergs don't float" is a saying for another important reason. They fail to simulate the impulse exchange between rower and boat mass. This is very important for real world rowing performance because minimizing boat shell velocity fluctuations means less mechanical work required to travel the same distance [1]. This is also the reason why it's preferable to have a "front-loaded" force curve profile. Coincidentally the sensor hysteresis of the concept ergs rewards that... maybe it's engineered intentionally? :-) 7b) Anyways, Avoiding vertical shell movement is of similar importance as wetted surface (and thus drag) increases massively if you push the boat down into the water. Athletes thus have a to maintain very delicate balance between stretcher and handle forces not to offset the systems center of mass during the stroke cycle. None of that matters on an erg. 7c) And most important: Ergs don't simulate the interaction of impulse exchanges between a whole crew of rowers that can never be perfectly in sync. Concept sells "Sliders" for the C2 ergs that you can use for a single erg but also to link together multiple ergs to a crew. If you haven't tried this, I can highly recommend this as it makes it much more realistic and also a lot more challenging. From my coaching experience I can also recommend it especially to beginners. It may sound counterintuitive, but it's much less forgiving to errors in your motion sequence/force application and will thus make you a better (and more healthier!) rower much quicker. 8) Rowers are an incredible bunch of creative and resourceful people. There's so many tinkerers in the community... a shout to a couple of things in the erg space: - Waterrower hit big thanks to House of Cards. This plus cross-fit certainly made rowing much more popular as a sport. Waterrowers are not used in serious capacity in competitive training though as far as I'm aware. - Augletics are a bunch of former competitive rowers building an erg using a electromagnetic brake (that can support more realistic force profiles/dynamics). And you don't get that "wooooosh" sound ringing in your ears that won't go away for hours after a 90min C2 erg session... - Biorower simulates proper sculling technique, boat rotation and uses mechanical gears instead of a flywheel Anyhow - great to see more innovation like Aviron in the space even if it's "just" targeted at recreational/fitness use case. It's a fabulous sport and I applaud you for making it more accessible. Hope it gets people to dip their toes so they may one day decide to get their feet wet and hit their local rowing club. [0] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pH2k_026KrY https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pH2k_026KrY [1] https://www.rowinginmotion.com/drag-efficiency-rowing/ https://www.rowinginmotion.com/drag-efficiency-rowing/

FullNameAndy 6y ago

We appreciate that. So far the machines have held up in commercial facilities as well as homes and you're right we did our best to make sure they hold up for the long haul!

DennisP 6y ago

Why is it hard or off as a beginner? I had the same issue at first but now I can ease off and do a straight 30 minutes. I assumed it was mental but it sounds like it's technique. Fwiw I have the Oartec DX, and it's very solidly built. On dynamic rowers like this, the seat stays pretty much in one place and it's mainly the footpad that moves. Supposedly it puts less stress on the lower back and knees, and more closely simulates rowing on the water, so some elite rowing teams use them. I don't know about all that but I have a knee that gives me trouble sometimes, and with the Oartec I can put that foot on the ground and row with the other leg. https://oartec.com/ https://oartec.com/ https://www.rp3rowing.com/products/ https://www.rp3rowing.com/products/ Concept2 makes one now too: https://www.concept2.com/indoor-rowers/dynamic https://www.concept2.com/indoor-rowers/dynamic (I guess a drawback is it doesn't really lend itself to a nice big screen like OP's project.)

malandrew 6y ago
> I guess a drawback is it doesn't really lend itself to a nice big screen like OP's project. I don't see why not. My RP3 uses any Android tablet. I have like a 7-8" tablet in there, but there is no reason I couldn't put a much larger tablet like an 18.4" Galaxy View.
- DennisP 6y ago
  How do you like the RP3 in general? I thought seriously about that before getting the Oartec, mainly because it was cheaper and I didn't have a strong need for portability.
  - malandrew 6y ago
    I never tried the Oartec so I can't compare to it, but I'm really happy with it. There's also now the RP3 Model T that was released a few months after I got the regular RP3. I'm in the PNW, so I was able to save on shipping by picking up the RP3 in person from the US distributor. I'm really quite happy with it and far prefer it to a C2. The software is pretty decent too and the force curve in particular is quite useful to help you figure out how to connect all three motions smoothly for mostly consistent even power. Family and friends that have used it have struggled with getting started with it but mainly because they've learned such bad form from static machines like the C2. But near as I can tell that will happen with anyone used to a static rower that's never been on the water or coached on proper form.

malandrew 6y ago

Completely disagree about all other machines being crap. The RP3 is way better than even a C2 with dynamic slides. The C2 is popular because it's the best available at the ~$1k price point and can be purchased locally in most markets.

beloch 6y ago

C2 really is the monster in the room. The rowing machine market is less diverse than exercise bikes, and C2 sits atop the mountain. Anyone who rows seriously (and many who don't) have used a C2 at some point. The Aviron Impact Series (an odd name for a low-impact exercise machine) rower is $2149, while a C2 Model D is $900. The Model D has been in gyms for decades. Literally, your local gym may have one that's decades old and still in perfect shape. Olympic rowers train on them. A significant portion of people who row already have one and aren't going to need a replacement any time soon. The video on Aviron's website focuses heavily on the software, but the rower itself does not look like it should cost twice what a C2 does. The belt is plastic. The rail's finish looks like it will wear off. The rear support looks less sturdy and stable than that of a C2. The ramrod straight handle looks blister-inducing. The whole thing looks very plastic. Note that I'm not saying the rower isn't worth the money. The build quality and ergonomics might be excellent. It just doesn't look like a rower that's worth 2.39 C2's. The display is a big improvement over anything C2 sells, but $1249 can buy a pretty nice display and a basic computer to run it, or a big ol' tablet and a mount. Peloton probably had an easier time entering the exercise bike market because there wasn't any one competitor as dominant as C2 is. However, they do now offer an app that lets people use their software and classes without buying a Peloton bike. The question for Aviron is, can they sell their rower without their software being exclusive to it? They would undoubtedly find more users if they supported other rowers, C2 specifically, but would the extra monthly memberships bring in more than sales from their rower if the software remained exclusive to it?

FullNameAndy 6y ago
Let me start off by saying the C2 is an amazing rower, but we thought we could improve on its design for the regular user who cares most about a fun and engaging experience. For example, the belt is industrial nylon (not plastic), the same material as seat belts. The main benefit to this is it makes the rower quieter and feels smoother. The rail is aluminum and legs and frame are made from steel, which makes it stable and is why the Aviron rower weights twice as much as the C2. Finally, it is selling for $1999 with taxes, shipping, and the screen included.
- 6y ago