Row machine

@AnnPT77

I am putting a "call" to Ann since she is a water and indoor rower user, maybe she answers the call. Good luck @mlfen0778.

I use the rower at the gym but mostly for upper body workout and because it is easy on my crappy knees.

Yes, I'm an on-water and machine rower, previously held some coaching certs, competed both on water & machine.

Unfortunately, I don't know much about low-cost rowing machines, and zero about the hydraulic type, so I'm not sure I can be of much help.

Concept 2 is the gold standard, and quite bulletproof (mine in 15+ years old, has needed nothing but a couple rounds of D batteries, and some chain oil). But they are expensive.

I've rowed WaterRower, which has a rep as a quality machine, but it's also expensive. I haven't rowed Hydrow or Ergatta yet. Hydrow looks to have their heads in the right place (from an on-water rower's training perspective), not sure about Ergatta but don't know anything bad about them either. I think the Nordictrack rower's documentation looks a little iffy, but I haven't delved in deeply.

I think Concept 2 may not have much of an order backlog anymore, if any. I don't see the waitlist stuff on their order page anymore. But yes: $900 is expensive. You can save a tiny bit by buying one after a big in-person race (they sometimes bring in new machines, sell at a very slight discount after, but don't ship).

Used ones usually hold their value, which makes it tough for a buyer. Once in a while, you could get lucky in the used market. If you don't need the modern electronics, even much older models can be functional (and some of the more recent older ones will accept a monitor upgrade - plenty of info on the Concept 2 web site about that possibility).

(One implication of a strong used market for C2 is that if you decide you don't enjoy it after a year or two, your net cost may not be huge. They hold their value much better than many other types of exercise equipment, historically.)

I have knee issues (OA, torn meniscus) and have had as long as I've been rowing. For me, straight-line hinging motions of the knee, even with strong pressure on the knees, don't make my knees worse (hurts sometimes, though). That means I can row or bike, but not run, and even large-scale walking is out. Things with torque on the knees (aerobics, fast break games, etc.) are almost guaranteed to worsen symptoms.

Again, not speaking for hydraulic models, but with the rowers (like C2, Waterrower) that simulate on-water rowing, a certain amount of decent technique is necessary, or it will be tough to get a progressively harder workout. They don't have a "resistance" setting on the machine (that's not what that 1 to 10 thing is on a C2). One gets more resistance by putting more energy into the flywheel (on a C2). That requires some technique. What you often see at gyms is people flying up and down the slide at 30+ strokes per minute, not really getting a good workout. With a reasonable level of technique, a person can get a decent workout in the teens of strokes per minute, in the sense of driving heart rate to higher zones. Good coaching/instruction is not necessarily easy to get - even a lot of general gym trainers don't really understand what's needed or do it right themselves. There is some good video instruction online.

Though a C2 doesn't have "resistance" settings, even very, very strong people can get a good workout, with proper technique. It's what elite on-water rowers use to train off-water, and they are strong. The elite *women*, OP, are around 6'+ with long arms and legs, and the men are typically taller than you are, also long-limbed. It's the ideal rower body type.

You're much more likely to find a WaterRower used on sale than a Concept2 for a reasonable price.

The thing about the Concept2 is that they hold up to the test of time and won't break down. If they ever do break, they have world class customer service and I've known many that have fixed their own rower pretty easily. If you take care of them, most last a lifetime. I'd hold off getting a cheap one and try to get the C2.

Make sure you have tried rowing first, ideally at a gym, before you buy one. You have to really like it.

I don't believer that there is any rower that you could buy for $200-600 (new or used) that would be worth spending the $ on.

You can sometimes find a used C2 rower for $600 or less but they tend to be much older models that were used and abused in a gym or older personal rowers w/a lot of kms on them which require some "upgrading" and reconditioning which will end up costing you just as much as if you bought one new.

In my experience, WaterRowers also tend to be more expensive (both new and used) and are much harder to find used than C2s

A new C2 rower "only" costs $900 plus $40 shipping from C2 and they are available for sale right now; no more backlog. If you can't afford that now, I'd strongly suggest you just save up until you can.

There really is NOTHING better than a C2 rower.

On the other hand, you CAN find a used Airdyne, Echo or Assault bike (a spin bike w/fans and moving arms) in reasonably good condition for around $500 which would IMO be a reasonable alternative to a rower.

You won't get the same quality workout on the Airdyne (or equivalent) as you would on a rower but you will get be better workout on one than you would a regular spin bike.

So, if you just have to buy something NOW, I'd suggest looking for an Airdyne (or equivalent) exercise bike instead.

georgiapch70 wrote: »

I2k4 wrote: »

At that price and with a request for resistance, you're probably looking at a hydraulic (piston) rower rather than the more expensive type that are more for body activation and cardio (than strength), replicating rowing on water for extended sessions. I have a sturdy beast of a HealthWare model no longer available, but see the general type is still available. This is only one web search result:

https://www.fitnessverve.com/best-rowing-machine/hydraulic/

For a big person wanting resistance, my preference would go to heavier duty with two pistons, independent rowing arms with a swivel joint that permits different angles of pulling, and a kickstand to elevate the back end. (They can be versatile in creating very challenging resistance, with or without legs, and even reversing seating position to create one or two-arm pushes.) You might do quite well to consider a good used machine, as with any other exercise gear rowers are often bought and then forgotten after that first burst of enthusiasm.

(You'll find most of the current online instruction is for the typical higher tech rowers found in gyms, so best be sure what the goals are before deciding what kind of machine is best for it. I personally use it as a priming exercise for bell and band sessions more than a complete workout, and have never been interested in long moderate cardio sessions as compared with resistance or high intensity workouts.)

Sorry if this is a silly question but what are the details on your priming vs complete workout? Duration/resistance etc? I love the rower and will likely be buying one at some point. Just trying to get a feel for what a “complete workout” looks like if that makes sense. Thx!

Example "complete workouts":

https://www.concept2.com/indoor-rowers/training/wod

Concept 2 also has a workout podcast, there are numerous other video workouts (free), things like Zoomergos, and more, in addition to apps and what not.

For a quick idea what a full rowing workout might be, I thought the link to brief text WODs (workout of the day) would be a quicker intro. The expectation would be that you'd do a short reasonable lower-intensity warm-up, then the WOD, then a short cool-down and some stretching, to create a whole workout session.

I would not accept the implication of a PP that rowing machines are only for long moderate intensity cardio. Rowing - at least the type that simulates on-water rowing, like Concept 2 - is a little bit technical. The machine doesn't have a true resistance setting to increase intensity. (It does have a damper setting that simulates different types of boat feel, but that's not resistance in the sense that other cardio machines use resistance.)

Good technique is what lets a person increase intensity (should be able to increase it to very high levels, i.e., true max heart rate). Pretty high intensity should be achievable even at moderate strokes per minute. (20s) Not being able to reach high intensity on a rower of this type, and do so quite quickly, is a sign of sub-ideal technique. Not being able to reach reasonably high intensity at medium strokes per minute, and instead thinking the only route to intensity is very high strokes per minute, is also a sign of sub-ideal technique. How long a person can stay at high intensity is, of course, a function of fitness level.

Rowing workouts can be anything from short overall duration high intensity (or high intensity intervals), to very moderate low aerobic long, steady distance, depending on the rower's preferences and needs. Formal rowing training programs will generally include a mix of recommended intensities and durations, including all of those and things between, on a particular schedule. There are some free training plans available, I believe the "Pete Plan" is the name of one, but when I've used a structured training program, it was one that my coach gave me.

sgt1372 wrote: »

IDK.

Unless you are into competitive rowing (w/the C2 and/or on water), I think the whole notion of "priming vs complete" rowing workouts and "optimal" technique over-complicates the matter for the rest of us, who are just using a rower to get some basic cardio vascular exercise at home.

I've rowed over 7.5 million meters in 5 years and, while I doubt that my technique is "optimal," I can vary my stoke rate from the high teens to mid 30's) and vary the intensity (from 500-900 cals/hr) but, personally, I prefer to just row moderate distances (5km) per session at a moderate rate (26-28 spm) and a moderate intensity (at about 600 cals/hr) which, for me, "burns" about 270 cals in about 28 minutes.

This is extremely slow when you compare it with other rowers in the C2 database but it gives me a good workout - makes me sweat) w/o tiring me out to exhaustion. I currently do two 5km sessions per day for a total of 10km/day, 5 days/wk, which is equivalent to 2.5 milllion meters/year which is A LOT of rowing; a lot more than most people who record their rowing history on C2.

I occasionally do a "true" Tabata HIIT session on the rower (8 - 20 sec work sessions w/10 sec rest periods in between each) which totally exhausts me and requires at least 30 mins for me to recover. Can't do that too often.

I think that a newbie certainly should try to perfect their technique in order to make their motion more "efficient" but I don't think they need to obsess about it.

If you row long enough, you eventually "get it" especially if you are using C2's ErgData App on their phone while rowing to give them feedback "on the fly" of how efficiently they are rowing.

Like anything, you learn by personal experience and no one will ever learn how to row w/o actually getting on a rower and just "doing it." The nuances can come later.

I don't disagree with you. What I'm saying is that someone who *can't* reach high intensity on a C2-style rowing machine has a technical problem (or a fitness problem, but more likely technical). How one chooses to row is a whole different question. If a person's individual, personal workout objectives are met, I'd applaud that. Leading others to believe rowing is *only* for moderate cardio in some inherent way . . . is inaccurate.

I do think that learning by intuition is an inefficient route in some activities, not just rowing, but some others like golf, tennis, etc., where technique is important. There will be some people who are (I guess) natural athletes, and will get it by intuition more quickly . . . but in certain sports with a strong technical component, average people will make better progress by explicitly pursuing good technique via good coaching, video instruction, or whatever other good routes they can access.

With any technical sport, learning with sub-ideal technique, so that it gets grooved into muscle memory . . . that makes long-term progress more difficult. If particular dimensions of long term progress don't matter to a person, that can be fine. From experience, unlearning poor technique that's in muscle memory, re-learning with better technique, is a slow thing. When it's possible to learn with good technique from the beginning, progress is faster.

georgiapch70 wrote: »

...

Sorry if this is a silly question but what are the details on your priming vs complete workout? Duration/resistance etc? I love the rower and will likely be buying one at some point. Just trying to get a feel for what a “complete workout” looks like if that makes sense. Thx!

Sorry to be late to the party. As noted above, the OP's mentions of price and resistance led to my first post about good experience with my old heavy-duty piston rower with heavier resistance settings than the water-replicating type found in gyms these days. The OP self-identified as a runner interested in alternative cardio training, and that was that.

To your question, with the gym closed, my full home workouts have been 1 to 1.5 hours three or four times a week with bells and bands, sometimes full body but usually focused on upper body or legs. The piston rower at resistance is a very good "primer" activating most of the body, heartrate and respiration for 15 or 20 minutes before heavier work, just sets of 3 or 5 minutes with 1 minute rest intervals - I use a simple timer app on my phone. I like to do jumping jacks or burpees instead some times - requiring no machinery and adding challenges. When my condo's nice and convenient gym reopens I'll add in cycling and a stepper and do heavier sessions on cable machines, though I like the feel of the pandemic home routines. If I didn't already have it, I wouldn't be rushing to purchase any rower, but it's been very fit to purpose. Hope you find the right answer for what you want to do.