Bests & Worsts Reviews from Amazon

I did not purchase my R100 through Amazon, however I have decided to post this review here since Amazon appears to have the largest free consumer review database online. Many websites that compile consumer reviews actually link into the reviews posted here. And I wanted to get the word about the Lifecore R100 rower, and why I am confused that it is considered a competitor to the Concept 2 rowers. First a note on my rowing background: it is limited to rowing machines only, I have never rowed crew in real life. Also, a vast majority of my rowing has been on Concept 2 rowers. I row regularly for fitness both as a stand-alone workout, and integrated into Crossfit-type circuit training. I am no expert rower, but I do have many many hours logged on rowing machines. After reading the rave reviews I decided to purchase a Lifecore R100 over a Concept 2. I did this against my instincts as I am very familiar with the Concept 2 line of rowers and know that I like them. And I had never used the R100, but I wanted to give the magnetic/wind resistance combination a try. So I picked up a used 2009 R100 in excellent condition from a private seller for $600. And after just one 5K row (approx. 20 minutes), I immediately put the rower up for sale. Here are the reasons why: 1. Poor Ergonomics: One of the big selling points that Lifecore promotes about the R100 is the angled footrests, which are supposed to produce a more ergonomically powerful rowing position. I found the angled footrests to be incredibly troublesome for my rowing. Angling the toes outward causes the legs and knees to spread when you go into the recovery position to begin a stroke. This created a very awkward body position where I couldn't get a good reach toward the front of the rower because my legs were in the way of my arms, which weakened my stroke from the very beginning of the pull. Also, the friction of my arms rubbing my legs was very uncomfortable and caused skin irritation that would likely have become chaffing if I had rowed long enough. This problem was compounded by the fact that the R100 has a very wide monorail which spreads the legs apart even further still. I am 6' and don't have the widest shoulders, but I imagine that one would have to have unusually wide shoulders to not have this problem while using the R100. Aside from my arms being unable to clear my legs, the wide and angled position of my feet felt unnatural and seemed to actually diminish my leg power in the stroke. I did not feel that I was able to generate as much power as I do on a Concept 2. On the Concept 2 my feet are parallel and closer together which creates a tight body position and a good line of power transfer from my hips to my toes, the R100 positions your body in a way that I feel disrupts this power transfer. Finally, when I finished my row and got up to walk it off, I immediately felt discomfort in my knees which felt very much like strained connective tissue. After rowing 5K I knew without a doubt that the R100 was not going to work for me. 2. The handle: I was very disappointed with the handle. Another big selling point on the Lifecore website is the ergonomic handle. I found the handle to be too skinny. It is fashioned out of what appears to be a hollow aluminum tube sleeved with cheap foam, with plastic end caps. I tend to grip wide on the handle, which was especially necessary on the R100 in order to try to clear my legs with my arms due to the problems mentioned above. And I immediately felt the edges of the plastic end caps digging into my palms as the foam compressed. It was very uncomfortable, and surprising and disappointing to find such a cheaply made and poorly designed handle on a rower that retails for around $1200. The handles on Concept 2 rowers are far superior. Even the old straight wooden handles on Concept 2 model B rowers have a good thickness to them, and are sleeved in a nice comfortable foam rubber that is nicely molded around the ends with no end caps to dig into your hands. The ergonomic handles used on newer Concept 2 models are even better. 3. The computer: A critical piece of information while rowing is your instantaneous pace, this is your speedometer while rowing. The algorithm used by the R100's computer to calculate your pace while rowing is a complete mystery to me as there is no explanation in the manual on how it works. But I observed the computer to be insufficient in giving instantaneous feedback on my pace while rowing. This was very frustrating as I would increase my pace through more power in my stroke, but the increase would not reflect on the Time/500M pace display for several strokes. Perhaps the computer's pace display is an average over the workout, but it definitely was not instantaneous, it did not update every stroke. I couldn't determine how many strokes it would take for a change of pace to reflect on the display, nor could I determine what factors were being used to calculate the pace (i.e. stroke power, strokes per minute, resistance setting (both magnetic and wind)). Again, the manual does not explain how the algorithm calculates your pace. Perhaps the R100 relies more on your heart rate as the main feedback on your performance, but I did not use the heart rate monitor features so I cannot comment on that. By the end of the workout I was frustrated and did not have confidence that the computer was giving me high fidelity information based on the amount of work I had done. The Concept 2 manual does a good job of explaining how your pace is calculated through your strokes per minute, wind resistance setting, and stroke power. More importantly, the Concept 2 computers give you feedback after every stroke which makes is very easy to observe the results of your work and to maintain your target pace. 4. Miscellaneous: I found the R100 to be very solidly built overall, perhaps too solid. It is very heavy and requires two people to lift it safely which makes it very impractical to transport to an outdoor fitness event or to your neighbors garage. The Concept 2 breaks down quickly and easily into two parts, and can be lifted by one person and easily loaded into a vehicle. The fact that the R100 required AC power to use all of the features was something I was willing to live with, but in retrospect I don't know what I was thinking. There is a battery compartment on the R100 computer, but I believe that not all of the features of the rower or display are available while operating on battery power. The recent Concept 2 models do not require AC power and are self powering. Concept 2 computers use batteries but they are supplemental, the computers will work with dead batteries as long as you are rowing. Batteries in a Concept 2 computer also last for a very long time, and the latest Concept 2 computer (PM4) uses rechargeable batteries (they recharge as you row). One good thing about the R100 is that is has good resale value. I was able to sell it off in one day for $50 more than I paid for it. The next week I found a Concept 2 Model D that was less than a year old and in perfect condition for $600. I bought it and have never looked back. This isn't a review of the Concept 2, although I have done a lot of comparisons throughout the write-up, but I will say that the Concept 2 is a far superior rower and is the industry standard for a reason. And if you are trying to decide between the Lifecore R100 or a Concept 2, choose the Concept 2 and you will have no regrets.