more efficient mechanism can not be made and you can not make it with cyrcle shape movement. The reason is W=F.s and P=W/t ---> P=F.s/t --> P=F.v (v is speed, F is force, t is time, s is distance W is work, P is power). As your body can not produce more power than it can, you can just spread it. Lets say, with normal pedaling mechanism you produce 50% of work in the front half of cyrcle of pedaling mechanism and 50 in the back. With "more" efficient mechanism you would produce x>50% in the front part and 100-x% in the back position. To achieve it you would have to move your foot faster in the front half of cyrcle and slower in the rear half of cyrcle. The reason is that your foot would have to make longer distance (W=F.s) in the front and shorter in the back. Because of that your pedaling would be asynchronous and that means very unnatural. My conlusion is, more efficient pedaling mechanism with normal natural and cyrcle shape can not be made.
Marking this as comedy: intended or mistake?
Is the same effort, maybe just more or less confortable, should be a documented test with proper measurements..
more efficient mechanism can not be made and you can not make it with cyrcle shape movement. The reason is W=F.s and P=W/t ---> P=F.s/t --> P=F.v (v is speed, F is force, t is time, s is distance W is work, P is power). As your body can not produce more power than it can, you can just spread it. Lets say, with normal pedaling mechanism you produce 50% of work in the front half of cyrcle of pedaling mechanism and 50 in the back. With "more" efficient mechanism you would produce x>50% in the front part and 100-x% in the back position. To achieve it you would have to move your foot faster in the front half of cyrcle and slower in the rear half of cyrcle. The reason is that your foot would have to make longer distance (W=F.s) in the front and shorter in the back. Because of that your pedaling would be asynchronous and that means very unnatural. My conlusion is, more efficient pedaling mechanism with normal natural and cyrcle shape can not be made.
indeed !
Have you tried it? Or checked the actual numbers? It is not a circle but an ellipse that they developed here.
Work is still, in 2017, defined as W=F*s. This ellipse has the same effort and only one "innovation": The gearing changes during one revolution.