# POWER



## VamP (24 Apr 2013)

All the other forums seem to have power training thread.

Do we have enough power meter owners on here to have a discussion of our own?

Just testing water really...


----------



## Rob3rt (24 Apr 2013)

I can think of 5 forum users (including myself), I think, who use power meters.


----------



## VamP (24 Apr 2013)

Borderline then


----------



## Nosaj (24 Apr 2013)

I would have one tomorrow if they cost as much as say a Garmin 800/810 but I just can't justify circa 1.5k. to myself let alone the Mrs. - that's a good winter training bike or large payment towards a decent TT bike.

But would be very interested to read the thread


----------



## T.M.H.N.E.T (24 Apr 2013)

Nosaj said:


> I would have one tomorrow if they cost as much as say a Garmin 800/810 but I just can't justify circa 1.5k. to myself let alone the Mrs. - that's a good winter training bike or large payment towards a decent TT bike.
> 
> But would be very interested to read the thread


Power2Max on FSA Gossamer cranks(requires chainrings) = £731 at todays exchange rate

Hard to beat, will be buying this exact one when financials allow.


----------



## S1mon (24 Apr 2013)

T.M.H.N.E.T said:


> Power2Max on FSA Gossamer cranks(requires chainrings) = £731 at todays exchange rate
> 
> Hard to beat, will be buying this exact one when financials allow.


 
was looking at same ones but by the time id bought chain rings etc was close on 1k again so my lbs did me an amazing deal on an quarq elsa at 1150 yes i know over 1k but i love it


----------



## T.M.H.N.E.T (24 Apr 2013)

Were you looking at gold plated chainrings?  Should barely scratch £800 on a good day for the euro, nevermind £1000


----------



## S1mon (24 Apr 2013)

nope but needed bottom bracket as well and i wasnt putting cheap rubbish on a 2k frameset with di2


----------



## VamP (24 Apr 2013)

With second hand powertaps going for a couple of hundred on the bay, there's little excuse for those who want to train with power to blame costs.


----------



## Nosaj (24 Apr 2013)

T.M.H.N.E.T said:


> Power2Max on FSA Gossamer cranks(requires chainrings) = £731 at todays exchange rate
> 
> Hard to beat, will be buying this exact one when financials allow.


 
Tempting but I was hoping to have something that I could swap between bikes fairly swiftly so was looking at the pedal systems Garmin Vector is close but its still £1,150 (albeit I am sure that it was £1,350 when I last looked) heading in the right direction but still outside my "just about justifiable" range


----------



## T.M.H.N.E.T (24 Apr 2013)

S1mon said:


> nope but needed bottom bracket as well and i wasnt putting cheap rubbish on a 2k frameset with di2


Indeed, particularly if you go for something like the praxis which non-permanantly reduces BB30 frames to 24mm Hollowtech compatible.



Nosaj said:


> Tempting but I was hoping to have something that I could swap between bikes fairly swiftly so was looking at the pedal systems Garmin Vector is close but its still £1,150 (albeit I am sure that it was £1,350 when I last looked) heading in the right direction but still outside my "just about justifiable" range


 
Provided all bikes have the same BB(or a converter like a praxis) it takes little time (10mins? with practice) http://www.dcrainmaker.com/2013/01/power2max-power-meter-in-depth-review.html


ps: If you have BB30 or GXP BB Merlin have quarqs for £999


----------



## Rob3rt (24 Apr 2013)

It takes less than 5 mins to swap a pair of cranks between bikes.


----------



## VamP (24 Apr 2013)

Nosaj said:


> Tempting but I was hoping to have something that I could swap between bikes fairly swiftly so was looking at the pedal systems Garmin Vector is close but its still £1,150 (albeit I am sure that it was £1,350 when I last looked) heading in the right direction but still outside my "just about justifiable" range


 
Honestly, the Vector has been coming such a long time. There's clearly a huge problem witht that system.

Why not go the tried and tested and reliable and CHEAP route.


----------



## Rob3rt (24 Apr 2013)

If you only want to train with power, powertap is a good option, I opted for a Quarq because I wanted to train and race with power. With the Quarq, I can use it with any and all of my wheels and swap it between road and TT bike within 5 minutes.


----------



## VamP (24 Apr 2013)

I had a bigger headache as I race road, cross and MTB. Ended up going with G3 which covers (virtually) all my training, and road racing. And I guess the occasional cross race when tubs aren't needed.

Am now saving up for a second powertap, that will sit on a tubular wheel. May ended with a 26 powertap wheel as well, if I get lucky on the bay one day. But TBH I get enough data from just the one system, and power is not that useful in cross or MTB races from a pacing perspective, it's more of an analytical nice-to-have.


----------



## Nosaj (24 Apr 2013)

I do see your points but I must admit that swapping out cranks etc is a little off putting (for me) I don't have a suitable torque wrench and with my level of mechanical expertise it would probably take me about 2 hours!


----------



## jdtate101 (24 Apr 2013)

I have a P2M on Rotor cranks and rings. I don't rate powertaps as the one I have built into a Mavic wheel keeps going out of true. It's now used exclusively with a turbo tyre on it, as I use it for turbo session on my cross bike. When it's clamped in the frame no amount of force will cause it to warp.


----------



## 400bhp (24 Apr 2013)

STOP

I don't have a power meter and such a thread might make me buy one


----------



## Mr Haematocrit (24 Apr 2013)

Im a big fan of the Quarq, best all round power meter IMHO and the support for the product is exceptional.


----------



## 400bhp (24 Apr 2013)

does the quarq work with a garmin 705? It has ant + so i assume it does.


----------



## Sittingduck (24 Apr 2013)

I was considering renting a Powertap but it's on the back-burner for the moment.


----------



## Rob3rt (24 Apr 2013)

400bhp said:


> does the quarq work with a garmin 705? It has ant + so i assume it does.


 
Should do.


----------



## VamP (25 Apr 2013)

Everybody who's thinking about buying a powermeter but isn't sure - do it! It's by far the best investment I have made in my cycling.

SRM, Quarq, Powertap or P2M - pick your choice to suit your budget, but second hand Powertap is a really affordable route into training with power.


----------



## Mr Haematocrit (25 Apr 2013)

I would not advise on SRM, although its an amazing powermeter and is very reliable at this time it has to be returned to SRM to have a new battery fitted as it is not user replaceable or chargeable. (the owner picks up the cost and risk of shipping) The Quarq power meter battery can be accessed by the user which makes it more viable imho.


----------



## VamP (25 Apr 2013)

I wold say that in the context of the changes one needs to make in order to effectively train with power, the (very) occasional inconvenience of sending your meter off for battery replacement is fairly low on the list of concerns.

Segueing somewhat, what do people use for analysis? Golden Cheetah here


----------



## 400bhp (25 Apr 2013)

VamP said:


> Everybody who's thinking about buying a powermeter but isn't sure - do it! It's by far the best investment I have made in my cycling.
> 
> SRM, Quarq, Powertap or P2M - pick your choice to suit your budget, *but second hand Powertap* is a really affordable route into training with power.


 
My mate has a powertap, but seems to have a lot of problems with the wheel going out of true. Is this a common issue and is there anything that can be done to mitigate it? He runs it on Mavic Aksiums IIRC.


----------



## Rob3rt (25 Apr 2013)

The battery on an SRM lasts ages, should only need doing maybe once a year? The guys at Cyclepowermeters can change the battery and they have a fast turnaround. Could be done during one of your weeks off. If I could have afforded an SRM with the SRM head unit, I would have bought that. But I couldn't so I bought the next best thing, latest gen Quarq (SRAM Red, it is the same spec as the new unit ELSA but a different aesthetic, and probably some weight difference).

Quarq have quirks 

As for software, I use a combination of WKO+ and Golden Cheetah. Golden Cheetah is a bit clunky, for the life of me I can not find how to add trend lines (best fit) to data plots. I prefer the useability of WKO+ but don't like the aesthetic of the plots. I sent some power files to a club mate to analyse for me (he is a sports scientist, coach and top level tester) to see if he could find me some free/easy speed and he seemed to analyse them in depth very quickly, I think using sporttracks with some plugins, so might give that a go as well.


----------



## Rob3rt (25 Apr 2013)

400bhp said:


> My mate has a powertap, but seems to have a lot of problems with the wheel going out of true. Is this a common issue and is there anything that can be done to mitigate it? He runs it on Mavic Aksiums IIRC.


 
I had not heard of this issue, the main issue with them is the torque tube giving up after some time and costing nearly as much as a new unit to replace. I know 3 people with power taps, will ask them about the wheel truing issue.


----------



## Andrew_P (25 Apr 2013)

I have been toying with the idea but with me not intending to compete it would be an indulgence that would end up in the same realm of statistics as the cadence. I keep coming back to fact the cost would a good depoist on an expensive bike.


----------



## VamP (25 Apr 2013)

400bhp said:


> My mate has a powertap, but seems to have a lot of problems with the wheel going out of true. Is this a common issue and is there anything that can be done to mitigate it? He runs it on Mavic Aksiums IIRC.


 
I have only ridden just over a thousand miles on mine, but it's as true as it was out of the box. I guess like any hub, he could get it rebuilt?

The reason I was suggesting a second hand PT is just because there's a lot of them out there for sale, particularly the wired kind, as everybody just had to upgrade, when the ANT+ versions came out.

Ultimately your choice between wheel or crank based systems will come down to where you are with bikes and wheelsets, and what fits into your intended usage. Given my wide-ranging proclivities, I went around and around in a 'paralysis by analysis' and in the end just pulled the trigger on a PT system, which I am very happy with. So based on that I would say any powermeter is better than no power meter  As long as it's one of the established systems I guess.

I wouldn't encourage anyone to be a guineapig for Stages or Vector just yet.


----------



## Rob3rt (25 Apr 2013)

VamP said:


> *Everybody who's thinking about buying a powermeter but isn't sure - do it! It's by far the best investment I have made in my cycling.*
> 
> SRM, Quarq, Powertap or P2M - pick your choice to suit your budget, but second hand Powertap is a really affordable route into training with power.


 
I agree, the long term gains made from training effectivelly (which a power meter helps immeasurably with) far outweigh those you would gain from spending the same money on bikes and/or other equipment.

The worst thing about power meters is that, despite costing well in excess of a grand, they tend not to be fit and forget bits of kit, you need to know how to use them and negate the quirks in order to collect accurate and robust data.


----------



## VamP (25 Apr 2013)

LOCO said:


> I have been toying with the idea but with me not intending to compete it would be an indulgence that would end up in the same realm of statistics as the cadence. I keep coming back to fact the cost would a good depoist on an expensive bike.


 

I disagree with that. I'd rather have power than a new bike, and I see it at the completely other end of the information spectrum from cadence, which is possibly the least useful metric in cycling. Having siad that, you need to have a desire to improve to justify a power meter, so if you're happy where you are then you probably won't use it effectively.


----------



## gam001 (25 Apr 2013)

400bhp said:


> My mate has a powertap, but seems to have a lot of problems with the wheel going out of true. Is this a common issue and is there anything that can be done to mitigate it? *He runs it on Mavic Aksiums IIRC*.


It's on a Mavic Open Pro. (Aksiums are on my other bike  )
Seems to be a lot of lateral movement in wheel between brake pads, and spokes break quite often, so think hubs a little loose. There were some threads on this so must be quite common. Recently sent off rear wheel to Paligap to fix / service and awaiting return.


----------



## gam001 (25 Apr 2013)

VamP said:


> I have only ridden just over a thousand miles on mine, but it's as true as it was out of the box. I guess like any hub, he could get it rebuilt?


 
Done about 8k miles on it now. Sent off to be fixed / serviced.


----------



## jarlrmai (25 Apr 2013)

questions

I have all 105 on my Specialized bike what will I need to do if I buy a Quarq crank set I guess I'll need a Garmin as well? New BB? will I need new everything else?

Should I just get a Powertap wheel set?


----------



## Rob3rt (25 Apr 2013)

It would depend which model of Quarq you buy as to if you will need to change anything. Generally you will need a matching bottom bracket and a Garmin (or other ANT+ enabled device which supports power meters), that is all.


----------



## amaferanga (25 Apr 2013)

gam001 said:


> It's on a Mavic Open Pro. (Aksiums are on my other bike  )
> Seems to be a lot of lateral movement in wheel between brake pads, and spokes break quite often, so think hubs a little loose. There were some threads on this so must be quite common. Recently sent off rear wheel to Paligap to fix / service and awaiting return.


 
That's sounds like a badly built wheel - it's not a PowerTap issue. Play in the hub itself wouldn't snap spokes.


----------



## amaferanga (25 Apr 2013)

My 2p worth.

I'd never recommend anyone buy a used PowerTap. Once they're out of warranty you're looking at around £425 to replace the torque tube. It's impossible to know just how long a torque tube will last, but anything beyond a few years seems to be quite unusual and a couple of years quite normal, especially with the SL+ hub which is poorly sealed and leaks water. My PowerTap Pro+ was trouble free for 2.5 years and then it just died. I decided not to pay the ridiculous £425 for repair and bought a Power2max instead (for about £750).

The other issue with PowerTaps is the restriction on wheel choice. I ended up swapping rims so I'd build the hub into a carbon clincher for summer which I'd use for training and racing and then an alloy rim for the winter. That worked I suppose, but it's not ideal. 

My P2M is the SRAM S900 gxp version. The right crank is a bit tricky to find since its the older version, but they do come up on eBay fairly often. I recently bought a spare for £65 which isn't bad for a really nice carbon crankset. Swapping between bikes is a 2 minute job - it really is that easy with gxp bottom brackets. So the claimed advantage of a PowerTap being easier to swap between bikes isn't really true.

As for data, I've had no reason to doubt the data from either the PowerTap or P2M. Hub based power is much more jumpy and there are more erroneous 1s spikes, but anything beyond a few seconds average is ok. The zero offset on my P2M is stable and as far as I can tell the temperature compensation update does it's job. Mine came with the temperature compensation stuff so I don't know what it'd be like without it. I've had no reason to doubt the data from my P2M even when I go straight out from hot-cold. After around 15min the zero offset settles and varies little through the rest of the ride. One possible negative for the P2M is that you can't set the slope (like you can with Quarq and SRM) so if you calibrate it and find a different slope from the calibration certificate then you'd have to return it to P2M in Germany for them to sort it out. One big plus for P2M is that they offer a half price crash replacement.

I've never owned a Quarq, but from reading the Google Wattage list (where lot's of very smart people (and the occasional idiot) discuss power meters) there do seem to be a lot of warranty returns and quite a few unhappy customers who've had recurrent issues. It's always hard to know just what percentage of owners have issues, but I'd say there are more unhappy Quarq customers than SRM, P2M or PowerTap customers.

SRM still is the gold standard for power meters. Returning them once or twice a year for a battery change is maybe a pain, but that's not a reason to not buy one IMO. I'd have one if I had a spare couple of grand. There's a prototype SRM with usb recharging anyway so the battery change issue may disappear soon.

Keep an eye out for Brim Bros pedal system which is maybe going to be released this year (or maybe not). I don't think we'll ever see the Garmin Vector.


----------



## gam001 (25 Apr 2013)

amaferanga said:


> That's sounds like a badly built wheel - it's not a PowerTap issue. Play in the hub itself wouldn't snap spokes.


There does seem to be an issue with play in PowerTap hubs which is the same issue I am having...
http://www.timetriallingforum.co.uk/index.php?showtopic=55702
Wasn't 100% sure whether it was that causing spokes to break more often that on my other wheels, but seemed a bit too coincidental to not be linked.
I'll see what Paligap say when they've taken a look.


----------



## jdtate101 (26 Apr 2013)

400bhp said:


> My mate has a powertap, but seems to have a lot of problems with the wheel going out of true. Is this a common issue and is there anything that can be done to mitigate it? He runs it on Mavic Aksiums IIRC.


 
I had the same issue. The wheel would go out of true under high torque loads. I had the 21 spoke version laced into Mavic Cosmic Carbone wheels with Sapim spokes. It practically went out of true every 3 rides. I'm not a heavy rider, but when I spoke to the dealer he mentioned this can be a common problem with powertap's. He seem to think it was to do with the large diameter of the hub creating larger than normal rotation stress under high loads and pulling the spokes more than a typical sized hub.
I got my wheel built by a professional builder here in the Midlands, and he first used standard steel spokes. Three of them snapped the first time I sprinted on it!!!! I then got them replaced with the Sapim CX-Ray spokes, the strongest bladed ones I could find. I haven't had any broken since then, but they still go out of true. I've yet to investigate getting some thread locking glue on the nipples to help, but at the moment it's just fine in my turbo setup.


----------



## Sittingduck (26 Apr 2013)

Hmm, this is all putting me off Powertaps. Maybe I should start saving for an SRM, right now


----------



## GrasB (26 Apr 2013)

Interestingly both my rear PT wheels are 1 cross & I've not had any problems with them. One issue with doing this is the spoke tension needs to be very high. One uses sapim CX-RAY spokes & secure lock nipples, the other uses a double butted dt-swiss spoke & sapim secure lock nipples. I'm 81kg & put down some serious power.


----------



## Rob3rt (26 Apr 2013)

What sort of 10 & 25 mile TT times are you laying down @GrasB?


----------



## GrasB (26 Apr 2013)

Rob3rt said:


> What sort of 10 & 25 mile TT times are you laying down @GrasB?


 Typically 25-30min & 75-80min but mostly I do hill climb style TTs. Best 16km has been 18m 27s as art of a 46m 52s 40km... continuing on to 50.92km over the hour. Those are bent timings though, so hard to quantify against a TT bike.


----------



## gam001 (26 Apr 2013)

What


GrasB said:


> Interestingly both my rear PT wheels are 1 cross & I've not had any problems with them. One issue with doing this is the spoke tension needs to be very high. One uses sapim CX-RAY spokes & secure lock nipples, the other uses a double butted dt-swiss spoke & sapim secure lock nipples. I'm 81kg & put down some serious power.


What kind of power GrasB?


----------



## Rob3rt (26 Apr 2013)

GrasB said:


> *Typically 25-30min & 75-80min* but mostly I do hill climb style TTs. Best 16km has been 18m 27s as art of a 46m 52s 40km... continuing on to 50.92km over the hour. Those are bent timings though, so hard to quantify against a TT bike.


 
You put out a lot more power than me (and have a better power/weight ratio, across the board) and my 10TT times are around 24 mins and 25TT times couple of minutes over the hour (hopefully go under the hour soon, especially when the wind dies down enough to ride aero wheels).



gam001 said:


> What
> 
> What kind of power GrasB?


 
@gam001



GrasB said:


> 1s = 1.73-1.91 (1289w-1424w) - depends on where you chop the pedal strokes.
> 5s = 1.70hp (1264w)
> 10s = 1.37hp (1019w)
> 30s = 1.17hp (873w)
> ...


 
and mine



Rob3rt said:


> Duration - Power (W)
> 1s = 981W
> 10s = 840W
> 30s = 605W
> ...


----------



## GrasB (26 Apr 2013)

Rob3rt said:


> You put out a lot more power than me (and have a better power/weight ratio, across the board) and my 10TT times are around 24 mins and 25TT times couple of minutes over the hour (hopefully go under the hour soon, especially when the wind dies down enough to ride aero wheels).


I've also done a lot of things to make me very slippery on the bike. CdA 0.207. In off the shelf & fitted properly trim I was at 0.230. At 30mph that's 35w, or 1.25mph, advantage from about 15 hours of testing.


----------



## Rob3rt (26 Apr 2013)

I have an ok position, relatively flat back and good helmet to back transition, fairly open hip angle but could make improvements. I could get a bit lower at the front and possibly stretch myself out a little by pushing the saddle back. I have an Adamo saddle on loan to test, my current saddle wont let me rotate my pelvis forward any more, but the Adamo may help with this. If it does, I should be able to get a very nice position with only a few small adjustments.

I have a FFWD Trispoke wheel ready to go, but been so windy I haven't used it yet, no idea what I can expect to save from it tbh, but it looks great! Will also buy a speedsuit as soon as money allows.


----------



## GrasB (26 Apr 2013)

Also the small stuff is important. Using a J bar rather than a flat bar gave me improvements as I can now ride with my fingers overlapping making a clean 'flat' surface for the air to flow over. Also not using an attached valve extension but one of these when needed & tape over the valve hole with as trip of insulation tape also made a measurable difference at 30mph.


----------



## Rob3rt (26 Apr 2013)

GrasB said:


> Also the small stuff is important. Using a J bar rather than a flat bar gave me improvements as I can now ride with my fingers overlapping making a clean 'flat' surface for the air to flow over.


 
Also going to change to Ski bend extensions, not for aero reasons though, for comfort as the S bend hurt my wrists.


----------



## GrasB (26 Apr 2013)

Rob3rt said:


> Also going to change to Ski bend extensions, not for aero reasons though, for comfort as the S bend hurt my wrists.


I'm gifted with great flexibility which helps as a lot of stuff 'fits' for me where other people it wouldn't. Unfortunately genetics can't be trained, sure you can maximise what you've got but inherently I can simply bend further than most people.


----------



## gam001 (26 Apr 2013)

GrasB said:


> I'm gifted with great flexibility which helps as a lot of stuff 'fits' for me where other people it wouldn't. Unfortunately genetics can't be trained, sure you can maximise what you've got but inherently I can simply bend further than most people.


GrasB - you're so modest


----------



## VamP (27 Apr 2013)

amaferanga said:


> My 2p worth.
> 
> I'd never recommend anyone buy a used PowerTap. Once they're out of warranty you're looking at around £425 to replace the torque tube. It's impossible to know just how long a torque tube will last, but anything beyond a few years seems to be quite unusual and a couple of years quite normal, especially with the SL+ hub which is poorly sealed and leaks water. My PowerTap Pro+ was trouble free for 2.5 years and then it just died. I decided not to pay the ridiculous £425 for repair and bought a Power2max instead (for about £750).


 

I wonder if that's Paligap thing, as Saris appear to do very competive repairs, or discounts on new against unsupported models.

I think this discussion is pretty typical of the Saris PT experience.

In fact, I believe that people in the states have been buying the older wired taps to get in on the discounts from Saris.


----------



## Rob3rt (17 May 2013)

This thread died fast. Question, how often are you guys testing FTP? Do you continue to test during the racing season or do you lift data from races?

(Not so much looking for advice, just resurrecting the thread )

If that isn't interesting enough to keep the thread afloat for a day or so, someone write me a good guide of using Aerolab, hah I have fumbled about using some out and back 10TT data, no specific testing protocols etc and the results are dubious at best (more likely they are utterly wrong, no way am I more slippery wearing winter kit and riding road wheels than full aero wheel setup and a skinsuit, skinsuit is not a proper speedsuit and has pockets on the back, a speedsuit is on the to buy list, once I ascertain a solid opinion on the best one for £200 or less), it would be good to learn how to use it properly, as I plan to make some positional changes after the weekend and will probably ride the club 10 on Monday with the new position!


----------



## VamP (17 May 2013)

Rob3rt said:


> This thread died fast. Question, how often are you guys testing FTP? Do you continue to test during the racing season or do you lift data from races?
> 
> (Not so much looking for advice, just resurrecting the thread )
> 
> If that isn't interesting enough to keep the thread afloat for a day or so, someone write me a good guide of using Aerolab, hah I have fumbled about using some out and back 10TT data, no specific testing protocols etc and the results are dubious at best (more likely they are utterly wrong, no way am I more slippery wearing winter kit and riding road wheels than full aero wheel setup and a skinsuit, skinsuit is not a proper speedsuit and has pockets on the back, a speedsuit is on the to buy list, once I ascertain a solid opinion on the best one for £200 or less), it would be good to learn how to use it properly, as I plan to make some positional changes after the weekend and will probably ride the club 10 on Monday with the new position!


 
I'll play.

Aerolab - I swing between thinking it's genius, and not having a clue as to how to use it. Right now, I am in the no clue stage 

I tested FTP this week  up 15 watts and about half way to what I'd like to see in August. I have seen some sharp increases in 3 - 10 minute power recently as well which is handy. Still useless at sprinting.

Generally speaking I will test when I think that it looks from other data that FTP has gone up. It's a good workoout in its own right so I don't see any reason not to.


Here's another question - do you guys stomp test, and if so, how often?


----------



## GrasB (17 May 2013)

Rob3rt said:


> If that isn't interesting enough to keep the thread afloat for a day or so, someone write me a good guide of using Aerolab, hah I have fumbled about using some out and back 10TT data, no specific testing protocols etc and the results are dubious at best (more likely they are utterly wrong, no way am I more slippery wearing winter kit and riding road wheels than full aero wheel setup and a skinsuit, skinsuit is not a proper speedsuit and has pockets on the back, a speedsuit is on the to buy list, once I ascertain a solid opinion on the best one for £200 or less), it would be good to learn how to use it properly, as I plan to make some positional changes after the weekend and will probably ride the club 10 on Monday with the new position!


Make sure you're getting data points every second or shorter
Make sure you are NOT using GPS data for speed info
Calibrate your cycle comp correctly.
Once that's done you need to pick a good testing venue. That means not much traffic, easy turns & close to your home. You want it to be long enough that you get a good run but short enough that you can do multiple repeated runs (repetition is good). It's great if it's wind sheltered too but that's a nice to have thing that increases the number of testing days you have. From there do several runs at various speeds, clearly mark your runs with speed marker (say a jab of the brakes to take you down to a much lower speed for a second or two. Then you can use aerolab to get to your Crr & CdA info. You can then use the VE method to confirm the number. You often find that multiple CdA/Crr values can give an accurate fit, using VE you can see the tell tails of this in sagging or cresting in the VE plot with the start & end points the same.


----------



## Rob3rt (17 May 2013)

VamP said:


> I'll play.
> 
> Aerolab - I swing between thinking it's genius, and not having a clue as to how to use it. Right now, I am in the no clue stage
> 
> ...


 
Same with aerolab, I understand you bang in Crr, if you don't test for it, you can look it up based on your tyres (I think), Rho you calculate based on weather data for the day and time, drivetrain efficiency, you guess at it, 0.96 to 0.98  Offset to match the start point elevations, or click auto and it does it for you, total mass = you and bike and kit. Then it is good to go and you fiddle the CdA slider around to fit the virtual and real elevation data, but what I seem to fall over on, is which features to concentrate on fitting. As none of my data is premeditated test data, just TT data etc that I tried playing with to get the hang of the software, none of mine fit that well so I either match 1 or 2 "features" or the end point. Not a clue what to do here!

No idea what a stomp test is? So no I don;t do it.


----------



## GrasB (17 May 2013)

Rob3rt said:


> Same I understand you bang in Crr, if you don;t test for it, you can look it up based on your tyres (I think), Rho you calculate based on weather data for the day and time, drivetrain efficiency, you guess at it, 0.96 to 0.98  Offset to match the start point elevation, total mass = you and bike and kit. Then it is good to go and you fiddle the CdA slider around to it the virtual and real elevation data, but what I seem to fall over on, is which features to concentrate on fitting. As none of my data is premeditated test data, just TT data etc, then none of mine fit that well so I either match 1 or 2 "features" or the end point. Not a clue what to do here!
> 
> No idea what a stomp test is? So no I don;t do it.


Crr has to be 'solved' per venue as does CdA! You can't just guess a Crr & go with it like that.


----------



## Rob3rt (17 May 2013)

GrasB said:


> Make sure you're getting data points every second or shorter
> Make sure you are NOT using GPS data for speed info
> Calibrate your cycle comp correctly.
> Once that's done you need to pick a good testing venue. That means not much traffic, easy turns & close to your home. You want it to be long enough that you get a good run but short enough that you can do multiple repeated runs (repetition is good). It's great if it's wind sheltered too but that's a nice to have thing that increases the number of testing days you have. From there do several runs at various speeds, clearly mark your runs with speed marker (say a jab of the brakes to take you down to a much lower speed for a second or two. Then you can use aerolab to get to your Crr & CdA info. You can then use the VE method to confirm the number. You often find that multiple CdA/Crr values can give an accurate fit, using VE you can see the tell tails of this in sagging or cresting in the VE plot with the start & end points the same.


 
1 sec recording.
GSC-10 sensor for speed.
It is calibrated.

I think getting a good test venue and a relevant value for Crr is the next challenge. Living city centre, test venues don't come easy!


----------



## VamP (17 May 2013)

Rob3rt said:


> Same with aerolab, I understand you bang in Crr, if you don't test for it, you can look it up based on your tyres (I think), Rho you calculate based on weather data for the day and time, drivetrain efficiency, you guess at it, 0.96 to 0.98  Offset to match the start point elevations, or click auto and it does it for you, total mass = you and bike and kit. Then it is good to go and you fiddle the CdA slider around to fit the virtual and real elevation data, but what I seem to fall over on, is which features to concentrate on fitting. As none of my data is premeditated test data, just TT data etc that I tried playing with to get the hang of the software, none of mine fit that well so I either match 1 or 2 "features" or the end point. Not a clue what to do here!
> 
> No idea what a stomp test is? So no I don;t do it.


 
Apparently it only works on wind free days. So there's that to contend with as well 

Stomp test is a calibration test on your PM using a known weight (e.g. 10 kg, suspended from your crankset)


----------



## Rob3rt (17 May 2013)

BTW, given we just generally just want to know of one thing is faster than another, the absolute numbers don't matter right? Just the trend, i.e. lower CdA = less drag, and assuming power output is preserved or even increased, it also = faster. So why care about Crr too much as long as it is constant? Which is will be if using the same venue, same tyres, same tyre pressure in the same conditions, i.e. the same day. Does it not only start to matter when you compare across CdA values from various dates or different venues?


----------



## GrasB (17 May 2013)

Incorrect Crr data will make it much harder to get CdA data which is good enough for marginal gain data.


----------



## Rob3rt (17 May 2013)

How small are you talking when you say marginal gain? Change wise, i.e. with incorrect Crr, would you be able to tell which wheel is faster, road wheel or trispoke? Which is faster helmet resting flat against back vs sticking up in the air? etc. Right now, I am not trying to tell which is faster aero glove or skin and anything quite so small.

The tests I want to perform regard elbow width primarily plus some other changes such as getting my head lower. I want my head lower, elbows closer. This will definitely reduce frontal area.

i.e. I want to crudely optimise my position quickly.


----------



## GrasB (17 May 2013)

Usually it's non-sensical results. Eg a Zipp 808 is less aerodynamic than a generic 50mm V rim. It's worse if you're low on Crr. That's an obviously bad result but if you're tuning you'll be making changes which you're unsure of & at that point you've got to look very carefully at the data. This is why I use two methods to verify everything - VE, back modelling to weight, Coast down (always soft pedal when doing a coast down).

PS. if anyone tells you a coast down regression isn't as accurate as power meter calculation they're talking rubbish. You're doing the same basic process however because the coast down regression assumes 0 power the equations are applied in a different way.


----------



## VamP (25 Jun 2013)

Some random PM musings.

Left my Garmin at work yesterday, so had an unmeasured and unlogged ride to work this morning. Weird feeling. Like being naked. 

Manually entering estimated power data feels like cheating. Ah well.

My performance manager has taken a massive pounding. I was on holiday last week for 10 days - no bike - and my both my STS and LTS have plummeted. STS from 130 to 35. Okay fine I felt rested. LTS from 95 to 75.  That's equivalent to going back 6 weeks on training load. I certainly wasn't expecting that. I have also had a cold since I got back, so I am not on plan for rebuilding STS. Groan.


----------



## GrasB (25 Jun 2013)

I had almost a month of non-training due to an injury (nothing to do with cycling). Everything dropped through the floor, however it didn't take that long once back in training to gain everything back again. Actually in some ways it's been good having so much time off. I've been a little more motivated & fully rested, thus able to put in some epic training sessions.


----------



## VamP (25 Jun 2013)

That's reassuring thanks. I kind of knew that at an intellectual level, but I had a definite visceral rising panic sensation as I realised quite how low the LTS was plunging. It's good to reflect that there is an upside as well.


----------



## Rob3rt (25 Jun 2013)

What is more alarming is that your LTS is/was 95! Sounds like a very large number. I train 8 hours a week and run at ~75 TSS/d.


----------



## VamP (25 Jun 2013)

I train at about 150 TSS per riding day, with about 12 hours per week on average. I did one 500 TSS ride a few weeks back which pushed the LTS up about 10 points all by itself, but dug me a screamer of a hole to climb out of.

Edited: Actually to make a better comparison I average out around 100 TSS/day over the month.


----------



## Sittingduck (25 Jun 2013)

What's LTS?
...and TSS, for that matter


----------



## VamP (25 Jun 2013)

Sittingduck said:


> What's LTS?
> ...and TSS, for that matter


 
We are speaking in code to make you feel like you're missing out.


----------



## Sittingduck (25 Jun 2013)

VamP said:


> We are speaking in code to make you feel like you're missing out.


 
The blue flamingo departs at the stroke of Midnight...


----------



## Ningishzidda (25 Jun 2013)

Sittingduck said:


> What's LTS?
> ...and TSS, for that matter


 
LoTS of ToSSers


----------



## heliphil (26 Jun 2013)

http://www.cyclingmusings.com/2011/11/golden-cheeta-quickstart-guide-part-ii.html

will give an overview of LTS and TSS ( and CTL etc)


----------



## VamP (7 Aug 2013)

Lost my head unit at the weekend, so am riding blind at the moment. No power, no speed , no time. Weird.

Have to keep reminding myself that my legs are still logging the miles.

Replacement on it's way. Hallelujah!


----------



## Rob3rt (7 Aug 2013)

I had a bit of a panic on the start line the other day, selected wrong bike profile and it didn't pair to the PM, didn't realise until I went to do my final zero before being held up. Got sorted just in time, held up with 15 secs to spare!

The PM use was important for this ride, as I had altered my position so wanted the data for assessing whether it was more aero. A guess would be that it was, I got a course PB by 15 seconds, on a couple of W less despite being held up in traffic due to 3 numpty cyclists being all over the road causing a traffic build up. Could also have been due to favourable wind but I have ridden that course 3 times in the last 8 days (times 22:18, 22:26, 22:03) and wind seemed no more favourable than the weekend, it was wet though, so different Crr and a lot cooler (I was actually cold when warming up and even at a couple of points during the race felt a bit chilly) on the faster ride.


----------



## VamP (7 Aug 2013)

It really annoys me the way you have work your way through the sub-menus on the 500 to get to the zeroing field. Wish there was a shortcut! Or a dedicated button!

Well done for keeping it together, it's the sort of thing you really don't need on the start line.


----------



## Rob3rt (7 Aug 2013)

VamP said:


> It really annoys me the way you have work your way through the sub-menus on the 500 to get to the zeroing field. Wish there was a shortcut! Or a dedicated button!
> 
> Well done for keeping it together, it's the sort of thing you really don't need on the start line.


 
It is not my worst start time faux pas, once made it to the start with only 30 seconds to spare, got carried away warming up and forgot how long it takes to get to the start, so had to smash it to get to the start in time, lol!


On another note, I am putting out just under 360W for a 10 now, hoping next few weeks will put me over 360W and that I can make a few more successful aero tweaks, then I will be going PB chasing on fast courses. Looking for a short 20 minute ride on V718!


----------



## VamP (7 Aug 2013)

Rob3rt said:


> It is not my worst start time faux pas, once made it to the start with only 30 seconds to spare, got carried away warming up and forgot how long it takes to get to the start, so had to smash it to get to the start in time, lol!
> 
> 
> On another note, *I am putting out just under 360W for a 10 now*, hoping next few weeks will put me over 360W and that I can make a few more successful aero tweaks, then I will be going PB chasing on fast courses. Looking for a short 20 minute ride on V718!


 
Holy shoot!


----------



## Rob3rt (7 Aug 2013)

I do weigh 77kg (at 6' 3") though! So not a super lightweight.

Power PB for ~20 mins is 366W in the club HC (Cat and Fiddle, 22:45).

Quite typical in the club 10's is high 350's, a few 358's. Last couple more like 355W. Monday 354W, but as said course PB by 15 seconds despite hold up (the hold up might be the reason for lower power) so either favourable conditions or good aero position tweaks.


----------



## VamP (7 Aug 2013)

My best 10 power is 300 so I am somewhat envious. Plus I am more like 79kg (6'1'') so ...

Mind you I have not ridden a 10 in anger for around a month now, and my racing is _sans_ PM at the moment for various reasons.


----------



## Howard (7 Aug 2013)

You 300 watt monsters!

Which headunits are people using? I have a PCV and I find it about as user friendly as a ZX spectrum.

Considering wireless upgrade. Worth it?


----------



## VamP (7 Aug 2013)

What's a PCV?

I use the fairly ubiquitous Edge 500. ANT+ is pretty much standard across all devices these days I thought?


----------



## T.M.H.N.E.T (7 Aug 2013)

VamP said:


> What's a PCV?
> 
> I use the fairly ubiquitous Edge 500. ANT+ is pretty much standard across all devices these days I thought?


SRM Power Control 5


----------



## VamP (7 Aug 2013)

Ooof. Pricey.

Looks a bit like the Joule? As you can see I have no experience it.


----------



## Rob3rt (7 Aug 2013)

I am using a Garmin Edge 810 atm. "Upgraded" from an Edge 500 when the lips on the mount smashed off.


----------



## VamP (7 Aug 2013)

Rob3rt said:


> I am using a Garmin Edge 810 atm. "Upgraded" from an Edge 500 when the lips on the mount smashed off.


 
How are you finding the 810?


----------



## Rob3rt (7 Aug 2013)

At 1st it was a nightmare due to firmware bugs but now it is pretty good. Fairly happy with it.


----------



## Ningishzidda (8 Aug 2013)

Howard said:


> You 300 watt monsters!
> 
> Which headunits are people using? I have a PCV and I find it about as user friendly as a ZX spectrum.
> 
> Considering wireless upgrade. Worth it?


 That's +/- 10%.
Who knows?


----------



## Rob3rt (8 Aug 2013)

Ningishzidda said:


> That's +/- 10%.
> Who knows?


 

?


----------



## Howard (8 Aug 2013)

VamP said:


> Ooof. Pricey.
> 
> Looks a bit like the Joule? As you can see I have no experience it.


 
Actually it was OK - bought used from the US attached to a pair of Hollowgram SI SL cranks. About £800 all in, which isn't bad given the cranks rings and BB, alone, bought new, at the time, would cost that.



Ningishzidda said:


> That's +/- 10%.
> Who knows?


 
I agree I doubt it would be any more help. It would be nice to have power data associated with Garmin traces but I can live without that. I was more interested in what everyone else is doing because I'm really just starting to use it in anger.

An overview of workflows would be really useful, actually. Anyone care to help me out?


----------



## Rob3rt (8 Aug 2013)

Workflow in what respect?


----------



## Howard (8 Aug 2013)

Something like

Every ride I...
a)
b)
c)

Every week I...
a)
b)
c)

Then to understand the changes in performance I...

At the moment I'm at the point where I have a basic training plan and am collecting data. Now comes the tricky bit


----------



## Rob3rt (8 Aug 2013)

Howard said:


> Something like
> 
> Every ride I...
> a) Pump my tyre up to the same pressure
> ...


 
TBH, I don't do a huge amount of analysis, it is just not needed IMO. I would like to be able to use aerolab a bit more to check aero changes but it seems so fickle and no-one has put out a convincing document saying, do this, this and this, the result will be given by. You can get 95% of the benefit from a power meter by using only 5% of the analysis tools available


----------



## Howard (8 Aug 2013)

Hey Rob3rt - thanks for sharing that. Really useful. I've been tentatively playing with training peaks but I think I need to check out GC too.


----------



## Rob3rt (8 Aug 2013)

Training peaks should offer the same, or greater levels of analysis as Golden Cheetah, Golden Cheetah is good though, although a bit less polished, as you would expect from a free piece of software.

I would use WKO+ still if it didn't cost £80 that could be spent on travelling to a couple of fast courses!


----------



## Howard (8 Aug 2013)

Not sure I want greater levels of analysis - I'd just like two things at the moment -

i) am I collecting useful, reliable data, and if so
ii) being able to detect changes in performance, i.e. is my watts/kg going in the right direction or is it static / wrong direction


----------



## Rob3rt (8 Aug 2013)

The data should indeed be useful and provided it is repeatable, then it should be reliable as a training tool and for self appraisal on the most part as even if the values are not spot on accurate, they will still show trends etc. As for absolute values being correct, you could check this is reliable by doing a static torque test to check the calibration, if the calibration is off, there are various places you can have it recalibrated, cyclepowermeters for one (I would recommend them, very good service, fast turnaround and knowledgeable staff including coaches, Bob Tobin and very good racers, Matt Clinton). You will also want to be making notes of zero offset values and checking they do not change too much throughout a session. You would need to check what the spec says as to a healthy drift or absolute zero offset on a SRM, I use a Quarq.

Detecting changes should be pretty easy by reviewing your power over various durations (Golden Cheetah plots this for you, based on your best 5 performances over that duration, per month). You can work this back to W/kg for the different durations and see if it is increasing.

If you don't already have it, I would advise buying Training and Racing with a Power Meter by Hunter Allen and Andrew Coggan. This will cover some analysis that is useful to road racers etc that I have no clue about, such as finding "matches" etc. Dr Andrew Coggan is active on various forums like TTF and the Wattage groups and usually responds to queries.


----------



## Howard (8 Aug 2013)

Monitoring the offset was not something I had considered. I'll add that to pre / post flight. Good advice. The headunit and spider are both due a new battery later this year, so it will go off to cyclepowermeters for service / calibration.

Training and Racing with a Power Meter -> on the kindle. Reading material for downtime whilst touring in France next week. Sadly no wattage to me measured there


----------



## jarlrmai (8 Aug 2013)

Garmin Vector is now available £1349, pedal based power unit with ANT+

http://www.dcrainmaker.com/2013/08/hands-on-garmin-vector.html
http://www.bikeradar.com/road/gear/...uct/review-garmin-vector-power-meter-14-47478


----------



## Howard (8 Aug 2013)

When the Speedplay version comes out I'll be interested


----------



## VamP (8 Aug 2013)

jarlrmai said:


> Garmin Vector is now available £1349, pedal based power unit with ANT+
> 
> http://www.dcrainmaker.com/2013/08/hands-on-garmin-vector.html
> http://www.bikeradar.com/road/gear/...uct/review-garmin-vector-power-meter-14-47478


 
I am moving myself into the agnostic camp on Vectors upon reading that. Long term reliability and firmware issues will make or break it.

Loving DC Rainmaker's test rig with 4 (four!) powermeters


----------



## Mr Haematocrit (9 Aug 2013)

I'm getting my Vectors at the weekend

If they are any good my SRM will go for sale


----------



## amaferanga (9 Aug 2013)

You'd replace the gold standard in power measurement for a newly released product from Garmin? Wow.


----------



## jarlrmai (9 Aug 2013)

when you have the cash to do side by side testing...


----------



## Howard (10 Aug 2013)

Mr Haematocrit said:


> If they are any good my SRM will go for sale


 
If it's a specialised/lightening or Rotor 3D+ I might be interested. Hit me up.


----------



## Mr Haematocrit (10 Aug 2013)

Its the s-works carbon cranks/lightening cranks jobby


----------



## ziggys101 (10 Aug 2013)

Received my stages power meter last week just getting to grips with riding with it. It certainly highlights when your whimping out of a climb :-)


----------



## jarlrmai (10 Aug 2013)

Where did you order a Stages in the UK?


----------



## ziggys101 (10 Aug 2013)

jarlrmai said:


> Where did you order a Stages in the UK?


 
Didn't I work for a US company so ordered on the company VPN and had delivered to company address and a colleague brought it back after a work trip.


----------



## Howard (10 Aug 2013)

Mr Haematocrit said:


> Its the s-works carbon cranks/lightening cranks jobby


 
Drop me a line if you want to sell the SRM spider.


----------



## VamP (13 Aug 2013)

Question for you all.

Can a different head unit affect power readings? I recently lost my Edge 500, and just replaced it with another. AFAIK I set it up exactly the same for power recording (1 sec recording, zero average on) but cannot check, because the old one is... erm, lost.

Last night in a 5x5 session I posted 348, 355, 347, 315, and 327 which is a fair bit higher than last week (320, 305, 309, 319, 310), although not at PB levels. Last week I was somewhat fatigued going into the session and believe that this is the reason for the large difference, but obviously having changed the head unit, I want to eliminate that as being the possible cause.


----------



## Rob3rt (13 Aug 2013)

Is the new device an Edge 500? Did you zero it? Is the number in agreement with the number from your other head unit?


----------



## VamP (13 Aug 2013)

Yes, yes and yes.


----------



## Rob3rt (13 Aug 2013)

Same firmware version?


----------



## VamP (13 Aug 2013)

Not sure.

The new one is v 3.00 but can't check and don't remember what the old one was.


----------



## Rob3rt (13 Aug 2013)

Provided Garmin didn't tinker with the algorithms in software, I would assume you were just tired last week and see how next weeks session goes.

I know when I moved to the 810 all my numbers were different, so I can a 500 and 810 together and found the 810 was riddled with bugs re power data logging and also the averaging schemes were poorly implemented. This has now been ironed out as far as I can tell.


----------



## VamP (13 Aug 2013)

Right.

2x20 session tonight so if I am suddenly blowing my FTP out of the water I will update the firmware and see if that changes things.


----------



## Rob3rt (13 Aug 2013)

The issues with the 810 were lower average values due to random drops to half of the true power for 2-4 seconds and also poor graphic interface average reporting where sometimes it would take more values than at other times into account so you couldn't use it for real time feedback. Looking at the data next to the data from my Edge 500 after the fact, it was immediately obvious the 810 was under reading.


----------



## VamP (15 Aug 2013)

Here's a nice summary of the power meter market place ATM which some may find of interest.


----------



## Andrew_P (15 Aug 2013)

Jesus, having read through the DC Garmin Vector review I found myself looking around for someone with stock, and then V12 finance. Luckily neither were combined!


----------



## VamP (15 Aug 2013)

I actually think the PowerTap price drop is more significant news than the *Vector finally released and appears to work* story.

Reliable and tested cheap power meters. Awesome. Shame I got mine at the old price.


----------



## Rob3rt (15 Aug 2013)

Let's hope they reduce their repair costs to reflect the new product pricing. If not, could be a money spinner, reduce the price, sell more, then over charge for repairs as always, but now there are more in use, thus more repairs!


----------



## VamP (15 Aug 2013)

Rob3rt said:


> Let's hope they reduce their repair costs to reflect the new product pricing. If not, could be a money spinner, reduce the price, sell more, then over charge for repairs as always, but now there are more in use, thus more repairs!


 
Although I think that's more of Paligap issue than a Cyclops one, non?


----------



## amaferanga (15 Aug 2013)

VamP said:


> Although I think that's more of Paligap issue than a Cyclops one, non?


 
I think so. Repair costs in the US seem much more reasonable, it's just Paligap that make them almost not worth bothering to repair (which is why I paid £700 for a P2max instead of >£400 to repair my PowerTap).


----------



## Mr Haematocrit (22 Aug 2013)

... Garmin Vectors are not compatible with my s-works/lightening carbon cranks 

S-Works cranks are only found on high end cycles and this is not the intended market for Garmin Vectors <----- real quote

Wonder what the intended market is for £1300 pedals then 
They are going back


----------



## Howard (22 Aug 2013)

Wut? A crank is... a crank, surely?

Would be interested to know why they won't work with the s-works / lightening crank.

You could always get Rotor 3D+ and sell me your S-works SRM


----------



## Mr Haematocrit (22 Aug 2013)

Howard said:


> Wut? A crank is... a crank, surely?
> 
> Would be interested to know why they won't work with the s-works / lightening crank.
> 
> You could always get Rotor 3D+ and sell me your S-works SRM


 

The pedal needs to connect to the strain gauge in a specific manner, the s-works cranks are constructed in such a way that it apparently stops the pedal from closing on the strain gauge, they know about the issue and are working on it at the moment.

Would never go with rotor cranks as they are ugly as sin.. lol


----------



## Howard (22 Aug 2013)

Curious. I thought the strain gauge was in the pedal spindle?


----------



## Mr Haematocrit (22 Aug 2013)

Howard said:


> Curious. I thought the strain gauge was in the pedal spindle?


 

It is...... not totally sure what the details of the issue was, a few people came to the VIP and press event with these cranks and were informed of this by Garmin themselves. A few people were pretty disappointed with this.
I'm really gutted and hope they address the issues soon, as I already have someone lined up to buy my SRM


----------



## Howard (22 Aug 2013)

According to Garmin the max width of the crank at the pedal interface is 15mm. Guess the S-Works is too fat, then, and the the transmitter pod won't connect properly with the gubbins inside the spindle.

Seems like a bit of an oversight.

Wonder if they'll fit Hollowgrams?


----------



## Mr Haematocrit (23 Aug 2013)

Howard said:


> According to Garmin the max width of the crank at the pedal interface is 15mm. Guess the S-Works is too fat, then, and the the transmitter pod won't connect properly with the gubbins inside the spindle.
> 
> Seems like a bit of an oversight.
> 
> Wonder if they'll fit Hollowgrams?


 
Apparently there are three cranks known not compatible, s-works/lightening, Zipp Vumaquad, and Carbon Dura-Ace.
The thing which surprises me is that these are high end crank sets. I would have thought someone considering spending £1300 on a set of pedals would likely be the same person with a high end crank.


----------



## Rob3rt (23 Aug 2013)

"It's a known issue, we are working on it" LMFAO, classic Garmin! Exactly why I wouldn't touch the Vector!


----------



## VamP (23 Aug 2013)

That is funny.

To be completely fair, they probably weren't targeting SRM customers when they started to design the Vector.


----------



## Howard (23 Aug 2013)

I could understand not having compatibility with Carbon DA / Zipp - they are pretty niche cranks.

No S-Works though...that's a bit of an oversight. It's not hugely popular, but it's not exactly niche either, and you can get the arms dirt cheap on ebay from time to time...


----------



## Rob3rt (23 Aug 2013)

Maybe Garmin think they are as ugly as I do and are trying to de-popularise them to some degree so they don't have to look at them


----------



## Howard (23 Aug 2013)

Meh, they aren't beautiful but they are very light, very stiff, modular and stupid easy to work with. Me Gusta.


----------



## Howard (23 Aug 2013)

Anyway on with the POWER. Going to try to work out my FTP on Monday. Oh yes...


----------



## VamP (23 Aug 2013)

Enjoy.

Try to remember how much fun it is as you soak up the delicious agony of the second 20 minute set.


----------



## Sittingduck (23 Aug 2013)

I'd like to touch briefly on the matter of reduced price of Powertap, if I may,

As best I can tell, the hubs have recently seen RRP reduce by around $500, is that right? I have been considering renting a wheel for some time now and wonder if it would make sense to wait for any knock on reduction to rental rates or even take the plunge and buy a Powertap+ rear wheel for around £650. Does that price seem to take into account the recent reduction? I haven't been following pricing trends so don't know what's a good deal and what's not. 

I really like the idea of pedal based power meters but can't afford 1500 quid if that's the cost... Any thoughts?


----------



## Rob3rt (23 Aug 2013)

I would buy one now the price has dropped, because you could re-sell and get a chunk of money back and probably be less out of pocket than renting. I am not sure if the cost of renting will reduce all that much. Would be worth phoning up Cycle Power Meters or tweet/facebook them, they might be happy to chat something other than Vector  BTW, I think it is the Powertap G3 that has reduced by a load? The Powertap Pro is being discontinued.


----------



## Howard (23 Aug 2013)

As I understand it your best bet for riding the wave of the new prices is to head over the US - the price drop hasn't really had an effect here yet on new kit. On used stuff..well the prices have taken a hammering, so if you feel lucky you could take a punt on a used PT wheel.


----------



## Rob3rt (23 Aug 2013)

Howard said:


> As I understand it your best bet for riding the wave of the new prices is to head over the US - the price drop hasn't really had an effect here yet on new kit. On used stuff..well the prices have taken a hammering, so if you feel lucky you could take a punt on a used PT wheel.


 

Cyclepowermeters have implemented the new pricing plan, however the price is not as low as in the US because of VAT and import duties.


----------



## amaferanga (23 Aug 2013)

Given the short lifespan of torque tubes in PowerTap hubs (particularly the SL+ models with the leaky carbon shell) you'd have to be brave (or foolish) to buy one that's out of warranty.


----------



## Howard (23 Aug 2013)

amaferanga said:


> Given the short lifespan of torque tubes in PowerTap hubs (particularly the SL+ models with the leaky carbon shell) you'd have to be brave (or foolish) to buy one that's out of warranty.


 
Hense my 'if you are feeling lucky' quip


----------



## Sittingduck (23 Aug 2013)

Ok thanks. I had considered that buying might be a wise move because of the option of reselling if I wanted to and potentially it costing me less this way than renting for a few months... Decisions, decisions! 

Is the difference in the Pro and SL mainly just weight?


----------



## Rob3rt (23 Aug 2013)

No idea. But the Pro is being discontinued.


----------



## Sittingduck (23 Aug 2013)

Not sure if that's a bad thing or reason not to get one of not. I suppose replacement parts and servicing will be impacted.


----------



## Andrew_P (23 Aug 2013)

Sittingduck said:


> Not sure if that's a bad thing or reason not to get one of not. I suppose replacement parts and servicing will be impacted.


 If you add the cost of a decent wheel (on their site) you are not that far short of the others in terms of price?


----------



## VamP (23 Aug 2013)

Sittingduck said:


> Ok thanks. I had considered that buying might be a wise move because of the option of reselling if I wanted to and potentially it costing me less this way than renting for a few months... Decisions, decisions!
> 
> Is the difference in the Pro and SL mainly just weight?


 
DC Rainmaker summarises the main differences between the hubs here. He's got a few other articles on Power Taps so have a browse. I don't think you can get the SL anymore, the Pro is the entry level, and G3 is the more performance focused unit.

One of the neat things about the G3 is the ability to change the battery yourself, the Pro I believe has to be sent to Paligap.


----------



## Mr Haematocrit (23 Aug 2013)

jarlrmai said:


> Where did you order a Stages in the UK?


 
Available in UK now but still not working with any carbon crank 
http://www.bikeradar.com/road/news/article/stages-cycling-power-meters-come-to-the-uk-38203/


----------



## Sittingduck (23 Aug 2013)

Ok


VamP said:


> DC Rainmaker summarises the main differences between the hubs here. He's got a few other articles on Power Taps so have a browse. I don't think you can get the SL anymore, the Pro is the entry level, and G3 is the more performance focused unit.
> 
> One of the neat things about the G3 is the ability to change the battery yourself, the Pro I believe has to be sent to Paligap.



Ok cheers, I will read through the Rainmaker stuff and ponder my options.


----------



## amaferanga (23 Aug 2013)

VamP said:


> One of the neat things about the G3 is the ability to change the battery yourself, the Pro I believe has to be sent to Paligap.


 
That doesn't sound right. Every other PowerTap hub has batteries that can be replaced without sending the hub off to Paligap.


----------



## VamP (24 Aug 2013)

amaferanga said:


> That doesn't sound right. Every other PowerTap hub has batteries that can be replaced without sending the hub off to Paligap.


 
You're right. The removable electronics pod that G3 has enables antenna or battery connection repairs, but even the previous PTs had a user serviceable battery. I hadn't realised that.


----------



## Mr Haematocrit (27 Aug 2013)

Howard said:


> According to Garmin the max width of the crank at the pedal interface is 15mm. Guess the S-Works is too fat, then, and the the transmitter pod won't connect properly with the gubbins inside the spindle


 
This is exactly the case the plug in the transmitter pod does not connect properly. The spindle in the sworks cranks seem to be a little recessed which prevents the plug from creating a good connection, its out by nano meters at most.

You can see the plugs on the pods in this image


----------



## VamP (19 Sep 2013)

VamP said:


> It really annoys me the way you have work your way through the sub-menus on the 500 to get to the zeroing field. Wish there was a shortcut! Or a dedicated button!


 

Hahah!

Latest firmware update (3.30) for the 500 includes a functionality, whereby each time it's turned on and detects a PM it asks whether you want to calibrate. Two button presses in place of 10. What am I going to do with all that saved time?


----------



## Rob3rt (19 Sep 2013)

They should add a data field that acts as a zero button and also displays the current calibration figure, so you can either tap the number to update it, or when you freewheel (Powertap/P2M) or pedal backwards (Quarq) the number updates. I zero mine at least 3 times per ride.


----------



## VamP (19 Sep 2013)

Why 3 times?


----------



## Rob3rt (19 Sep 2013)

Once at the start, then again around 20 minutes in, or before the real training efforts start, in order to eliminate any drift during warm-up, taking bike from inside to outside or as the room warms up etc and then once again at the end to check for consistency of data.


----------



## Howard (19 Sep 2013)

I thought power meters had temperature compensation built in? Or do you have an old P2M?

I zero my SRM once, in the house, before I go out.


----------



## Rob3rt (19 Sep 2013)

I have a Quarq.

Most power meters will experience drift throughout a ride.

It is good practice to zero at the end as well, how else will you know if something has gone awry and all the data is compromised.


----------



## VamP (19 Sep 2013)

I typically zero once. very occasionally twice, and never see any drift.

How much drift are you seeing Rob?


----------



## Rob3rt (19 Sep 2013)

VamP said:


> I typically zero once. very occasionally twice, and never see any drift.
> 
> How much drift are you seeing Rob?



Not a lot but for the sake of the best data possible, it is worth doing and you are immediately aware if something has gone wrong.

BTW Powertap's zero whenever you freewheel.


----------



## Howard (19 Sep 2013)

I like the idea of zeroing at the end of the ride, to make sure nothing wacky happened in the middle - but if it did that should be obvious from the power file. 

If my SRM started drifting I'd pack it off back to Deutschland.


----------



## Rob3rt (19 Sep 2013)

Howard said:


> I like the idea of zeroing at the end of the ride, to make sure nothing wacky happened in the middle - but if it did that should be obvious from the power file.
> 
> If my SRM started drifting I'd pack it off back to Deutschland.



Not always, for example, at the start of the year, I had some issues with my Quarq, it worked perfectly on the turbo and for gentle road rides, then in a TT all of a sudden I was averaging 380W (apparently), the power file alone didn't show anything odd since the problem occured at the moment I pulled away from the standing start and applied a huge (relative) torque on the cranks. Turned out that when I pulled away, that huge torque caused the offset to shift by large amounts, you simply couldn't detect this without noting the offsets before and after a race.

In the end I remedied the problem by taking the chainrings off, cleaning all the interfaces and putting it back together and torquing it all back up, been perfect since.


----------



## VamP (19 Sep 2013)

Rob3rt said:


> Not a lot but for the sake of the best data possible, it is worth doing and you are immediately aware if something has gone wrong.
> 
> BTW Powertap's zero whenever you freewheel.


 

Does that mean I don't need to zero at all manually? OMG even more time saved


----------



## Rob3rt (19 Sep 2013)

VamP said:


> Does that mean I don't need to zero at all manually? OMG even more time saved



You should still zero it at the start and end of a ride in order to see the offset value as I don't believe it transmits the latest offset value to the Garmin head unit when it auto zeros itself when coasting, just updates within itself. The Quarq can be zerod on the move by backpedalling 5 times.

BTW my short duration power is on the up, maybe I won't be so puny if this training keeps working  Up to about 500W (on the road, less on the turbo) for 3 minutes or so.


----------



## Howard (19 Sep 2013)

TL;DR Rob's legs are too powerful for Quarq


----------



## VamP (19 Sep 2013)

Rob3rt said:


> BTW my short duration power is on the up, maybe I won't be so puny if this training keeps working  Up to about 500W (on the road, less on the turbo) for 3 minutes or so.


 
Seems more in keeping with your FTP! How's the sub minute stuff coming along? You should try road next year, with numbers like this you should annihilate a 4th cat race.

I have just switched focus to a lot of sub minute and sub 2 minute intervals to reflect the demands of cross, and have a session per week that focuses on short intervals with very short recovery times as well. 

Seems to result in quicker changes than the Z4 stuff. Somewhat surprisingly my 5 second power has crept up also!


----------



## Howard (19 Sep 2013)

^ I need to do just this.


----------



## Rob3rt (19 Sep 2013)

Not looked at my sub-minute power really, but a quick glance in Golden Cheetah says:

1 sec - Don't think you can get a good measure of this so not bothering with it
10 sec - 913W
15 sec - 801W
20 sec - 685W
30 sec - 579W
1 min - 555W

I have mostly been doing sprints up a short (15-20 sec) cobbled climb at ~20% gradient, efforts up 0.5 mile climbs of ~10% (approx 3 mins) and efforts up some longer climbs, 2+ miles at 5-7% (approx 9-9.5 minutes). Trying to pull something out of the bag for the steeper stuff in the Hill climb season. The national starts pretty steep too.


----------



## VamP (19 Sep 2013)

Rob3rt said:


> Not looked at my sub-minute power really, but a quick glance in Golden Cheetah says:
> 
> 1 sec - Don't think you can get a good measure of this so not bothering with it
> 10 sec - 913W
> ...


 
That's a fairly sharp drop off, have you done any fatigue profiling? I am guessing though that if you went out to test 1 minute now, you'd improve on that, given your 2 minute is nearly there as well. That reminds me, I need to re-test, I haven't done a proper test while relatively fresh in erm... about 4 months.

Edit: sorry just saw 3 minutes @ 500. Your 1 minute just has to be way more.


----------



## VamP (19 Sep 2013)

Howard said:


> ^ I need to do just this.


 
It's more fun than 2x20 too


----------



## Rob3rt (19 Sep 2013)

VamP said:


> That's a fairly sharp drop off, have you done any fatigue profiling? I am guessing though that if you went out to test 1 minute now, you'd improve on that, given your 2 minute is nearly there as well. That reminds me, I need to re-test, I haven't done a proper test while relatively fresh in erm... about 4 months.
> 
> Edit: sorry just saw 3 minutes @ 500. Your 1 minute just has to be way more.



Yes, but the Golden Cheetah algorithms just take best power for durations from whatever data you give it, so as I do 15 second efforts, 3 minute efforts and 9-10 minute efforts, I never do a balls out 1 minute, the 1 minute power could be taken from a 3 minute effort for example so the profile is skewed. Much like my 60 minute power is skewed because the only time I would go all out for an hour is during a 25TT, but as I am consistently under 60 minutes for a 25 mile TT, so I don't ever actually record any full 60 minute efforts, so my 60 minute power in GC has dropped off since breaking the hour and going faster and faster over 25 miles because it just takes the best 60 minutes it finds in non maximal efforts.


----------



## VamP (19 Sep 2013)

Rob3rt said:


> Yes, but the Golden Cheetah algorithms just take best power for durations from whatever data you give it, so as I do 15 second efforts, 3 minute efforts and 9-10 minute efforts, I never do a balls out 1 minute, the 1 minute power could be taken from a 3 minute effort for example so the profile is skewed. Much like my 60 minute power is skewed because the only time I would go all out for an hour is during a 25TT, but as I am consistently under 60 minutes for a 25 mile TT, so I don't ever actually record any full 60 minute efforts, so my 60 minute power in GC has dropped off since breaking the hour and going faster and faster over 25 miles because it just takes the best 60 minutes it finds in non maximal efforts.


 
Yep that's pretty much what I said, or meant to say. Your true 1 minute is probably well over 600.

Here's mine just so it doesn't look like I'm ashamed of it. I have had some success in improving my power/weight recently by losing about 10 lbs in the unstructured month of August. It's amazing how much easier it is control your calorie intake when you're not smashing yourself into a TSB hole

5 sec - 1061W
10 sec - 908W
15 sec - 866W
20 sec - 800W
30 sec - 708W
1 min - 576W

As above, this is just taken from interval training, have not done a proper test in months, and most of my racing in the last three months has been _sans_ PM. My TSB is at -25 ATM and dropping, but Vamp jr is due to be born in the next week or so, so I'll re-test once that enforced rest has taken place


----------



## Howard (19 Sep 2013)

You beasts.


----------



## VamP (19 Sep 2013)

Take my 77kgs into account and those numbers quickly start to look very ordinary Howard.


----------



## Rob3rt (19 Sep 2013)

I weigh the same +- a kg or 2.


----------



## amaferanga (19 Sep 2013)

VamP said:


> Does that mean I don't need to zero at all manually? OMG even more time saved



The autozero only works if the new zero point is close to the old one. If there's a big shift (e.g. your last ride was 20 degrees and you've just hauled the bike out of the garage the next morning and it's only 5 degrees) then it doesn't work. So yes you should manually set the zero at the start of every ride.


----------



## VamP (19 Sep 2013)

amaferanga said:


> The autozero only works if the new zero point is close to the old one. If there's a big shift (e.g. your last ride was 20 degrees and you've just hauled the bike out of the garage the next morning and it's only 5 degrees) then it doesn't work. So yes you should manually set the zero at the start of every ride.




And at the end?


----------



## amaferanga (20 Sep 2013)

VamP said:


> And at the end?



Pretty pointless doing it at the end when you have no idea when the last auto-zero occurred. Even without an auto-zero taking place, if there's a big difference between the pre and post-ride zero point you have no idea at what point in the ride the pre or post value was actually most appropriate. 

It's about time that power meter and head unit manufacturers started storing the zero point as a data field that can be viewed post-ride along with the power data. Then you'd actually know if there was a dodgy zero point setting for power meters / head unit combinations that autozero.


----------



## Rob3rt (20 Sep 2013)

amaferanga said:


> *Pretty pointless doing it at the end when you have no idea when the last auto-zero occurred. Even without an auto-zero taking place, if there's a big difference between the pre and post-ride zero point you have no idea at what point in the ride the pre or post value was actually most appropriate. *
> 
> It's about time that power meter and head unit manufacturers started storing the zero point as a data field that can be viewed post-ride along with the power data. Then you'd actually know if there was a dodgy zero point setting for power meters / head unit combinations that autozero.



But at least you know something went wrong, rather than assuming everything is fine.


----------



## amaferanga (20 Sep 2013)

Rob3rt said:


> But at least you know something went wrong, rather than assuming everything is fine.



Sure, but if this is happening regularly then you need to get your power meter repaired. You won't know when it went _wrong _unless it's a huge jump that leads to a sudden significant (say 10%) error in your power numbers.

But if your power meter is auto-zeroing though you have no idea if anything is up.


----------



## Rob3rt (20 Sep 2013)

amaferanga said:


> Sure, but if this is happening regularly then you need to get your power meter repaired. You won't know when it went _wrong _unless it's a huge jump that leads to a sudden significant (say 10%) error in your power numbers.
> 
> But if your power meter is auto-zeroing though you have no idea if anything is up.



It is just nice to have an additional indicator of the health of your data and power meter IMO. It is not critical, but given the ease of checking the value and comparing it to the value before you started it is worthwhile I would say.

Some manufacturers (Quarq) publish values stating what ranges of drift are healthy etc.


----------



## amaferanga (20 Sep 2013)

I agree it's probably worth doing if your power meter isn't auto-zeroing. My P2M auto-zeros so the only way to get a handle on whether or not the zero point is right would be if the zero point were stored in the .tcx file.


----------



## Rob3rt (20 Sep 2013)

But you can still manually check if the start and end point are vastly different no?


----------



## Rob3rt (22 Sep 2013)

Power PB'd (and also PB'd in general) today in a Hill Climb, 371W for 21 mins. That's 4.84 W/kg, making some gains/riding myself into some form (and this was not done on fresh legs having raced a 25TT yesterday).


----------



## VamP (26 Sep 2013)

Cross season has now started, and what I should have done was build a big hole ahead of the season to draw upon, but due to a number of reasons, mainly related to my ineptitude in securing the final point needed for 3rd cat, I kept extending my road season up until the end of August, leaving no time for a big training block to build up TSS.

So I shunted my plans by a month, and spent first half of September winding down with a bit of unstructured riding, and the second half training through the racing, rather than getting fresh, and now have finally reached LTS of 95, that I plan to live the next three months off the back of.







The general consensus is that it's best to go into cross races with a positive STS (+15 apparently ) which might explain why I have found the last two races rather hard. 

I am going to race once or twice per weekend, and have two hard sessions per week (Tuesday with CX sprints workout and Thursday with VO2 max intervals) plus some SST sprinkled here and there, and see what happens by the end of October. If I need another hard training block before the season culminates over Christmas, I will fit that in November.

Thoughts?


----------



## Rob3rt (26 Sep 2013)

I still think your LTS scores are pretty damn high, lol. I ran my highest LTS at about 75 and it wasn't that high for long. ATM it is about 68 after a push in prep for the National HC Champs at the end of Oct.

As for the +15 STS do you mean TSB? TBH, optimal TSB will vary between athletes and also it is worth noting down not only the value but the direction it is moving when you perform best.


----------



## VamP (26 Sep 2013)

Rob3rt said:


> I still think your LTS scores are pretty damn high, lol. I ran my highest LTS at about 75 and it wasn't that high for long. ATM it is about 68 after a push in prep for the National HC Champs at the end of Oct.
> 
> As for the +15 STS do you mean TSB? TBH, optimal TSB will vary between athletes and also it is worth noting down not only the value but the direction it is moving when you perform best.


 
I couldn't get competitive on the road until I got over 80, just kept running out of matches. Above 80 I had no problems. Might be anecdotal...

Yes I do mean TSB, and it's going to be an experiment for me, I have never gone into competition that fresh.

Good point regarding the direction.

Do you use PM to decide how much training volume/intensity to build into your week, or do you just use it to monitor how it relates to your performance? I keep seeing people saying that their best results are at LTS 120 or 130 - which I struggle to conceive of.

I do tend to sway between thinking I'm doing too much, and not enough


----------



## Rob3rt (26 Sep 2013)

I never let my TSB get that high for long, I raced most of the season on around +8, and that was not on purpose, I basically trained less, but more intensely once the season was well underway so my LTS and STS both dropped gradually. I did have one week off when away in which they both dropped and my TSB went up to +25 and I raced like a bag of spanners and completely wasted an opportunity for a fast 10 mile time. ATM I am riding on a negative TSB and doing pretty well in the hill climbs I have entered.

It has been said that TSB has a larger impact on short balls out efforts than on longer efforts, so for example, a negative TSB will go against you more in a 3 min hill climb vs 25 mile TT.

Ultimately it is a tool and you have to calibrate it against yourself really.

As for planning, I have a spreadsheet with the formulas in it, which I use to predict CTL, ATL and TSB up to a target event and I arrange my training sessions (using typical TSS scores for those sessions) to get something that looks like a good idea. But it is not set in stone. ATM, I am doing mostly 2 hour sessions around 4 times per week + a race, most of it is aerobic, then in the middle there are some very hard efforts, with however long it takes to recover before the next one. Basically weight management and working on my hulk rating! I am relying on the TT training throughout the year to carry me through any longer climbs.


----------



## VamP (26 Sep 2013)

My TSB went to +35 at one point this season, when I had a non-cycling 10 day holiday, and I raced very poorly off the back of that. But then had a series of some of the best training sessions all year, so it does all come around.

One of my best performances came from LTS 94 and TSB -20, when I felt absolutely shite before the race and going by perception would have expected to be completely out of it, but then in crits you never know how much it's you and how much it's the race.

In that context TTing is much easier to rationalise.

The difficulty in calibrating against yourself is in finding out how high a LTS is optimal. You could spend 6 weeks getting to 120 and then discover that you've blown yourself up for the rest of the season. 

You are doing very well off a low LTS, but who's to say you wouldn't be doing much better off a high one?


----------



## Rob3rt (26 Sep 2013)

That is true, but you have to look to those with a much higher LTS, those with 30 hour training weeks etc, they are going about a minute and a half faster than me on my 8 hours (although I also know a few people going as fast on 4 hours as those on 30 hours), in which case you see that yes the extra load generates better performance, but the return for time invested is a lot lower.

One thing I have to note in my findings over the last couple of weeks, the return on effort for short higher power efforts is much quicker than for longer threshold efforts. As in I have made large gains in a short space of time in short events like 2-10 minute climbs. I have managed to shave up to 35 seconds off of a 4.5 minute (now sub-4 minute) climb with a considerable 20% gradient section (which I have been going up in 39:23), in just a matter of weeks.


----------



## VamP (26 Sep 2013)

The threshold stuff builds slowly. In my case glacially slowly. But it does stick around once you get it. Shorter durations are more easy come easy go, and you have to time it carefully as it's hard to maintain the peaks. Some of my best form last season coincided with a three week lull in the CX calendar. Doh!

I haven't tested for a long time, and am fatigued, but there are some interesting numbers falling out of training sessions all the same. Will be interesting to do a rested test, and I am thinking of dressing up my PT with a knobbly clincher and taking it racing this weekend, as I haven't any racing power data since early August.

I will do if it's dry!

30 hours training weeks - where do people find the time


----------



## VamP (30 Sep 2013)

Very bumpy course so opted to go with tubs. Still no power data from an actual CX race, but went in with almost neutral TSB (-3) and had a much easier time racing, and best result to date, coming in 5th in the Elite Vets.


----------



## Rob3rt (30 Sep 2013)

Nice 

Did a HC yesterday, -19 TSB, came joint 8th with a power to weight ratio of 6.83 W/kg (3:04 @ 512W, weight 75kg). Had a pretty shitty ride, my pacing strategy (what little there was as I didn't know the climb) went out of the window and I was all over the place, in and out of the saddle, couldn't seem to commit to anything, ended up weaving all over the road blowing up catastrophically. Unlikely I could have gone appreciably faster but could have been a bit more classy in my riding, barely made it to the finish was blowing so bad and could taste blood all evening afterwards, still coughing now! Given that I was racing for 3rd at best, not too bad, but was pretty disappointed with how messy it was.


----------



## VamP (30 Sep 2013)

Rob3rt said:


> Nice
> 
> Did a HC yesterday, -19 TSB, came joint 8th with a power to weight ratio of 6.83 W/kg (3:04 @ 512W, weight 75kg). Had a pretty s***ty ride, my pacing strategy (what little there was as I didn't know the climb) went out of the window and I was all over the place, in and out of the saddle, couldn't seem to commit to anything, ended up weaving all over the road blowing up catastrophically. Unlikely I could have gone appreciably faster but could have been a bit more classy in my riding, barely made it to the finish was blowing so bad and could taste blood all evening afterwards, still coughing now! Given that I was racing for 3rd at best, not too bad, but was pretty disappointed with how messy it was.



Did you ride to power, or just go balls to the wall?


----------



## Rob3rt (30 Sep 2013)

I went, 3,2,1 Kaboom!

No point racing to power on a short HC like that IMO, just smash it as hard as you can for as long as you can and hope some spectators cheer you on for the last little bit then aim for a marshal at the finish line so they can catch you.

When I refer to pacing strategy I mean more gear selection and being either seated or standing. E.g. I may plan to go off in 39:23 or a bit bigger gear and stand up for the 1st third, shift to the 39:25 and sit and grind, then shift back to 39:23 and sprint for the line. I will maybe check my time at 2 points along the course, at known points, to know if I am on a ride or not. But yesterday I was up and down, in and out of the saddle, wobbling all over etc. I shifted down part way up the 1st steep section when I should have committed to just churning the gear I was in as I could have done it, classic mistake and one I have been avoiding doing so far, but yesterday I did it.

Gunnar Grolund makes an interesting point about dropping a gear in a short HC in an article I have seen, he says he avoids doing it because by the time he reaches the point he thinks he needs to do it, he will not get any respite from shifting anyway. IME, this rings true, by the time you start to struggle, if you shift, you won't accelerate, you won't get any respite from the pain and you will probably give up a fraction of a second letting off the pressure to shift, so you may as well just commit and plow on.


----------



## VamP (30 Sep 2013)

Rob3rt said:


> I went, 3,2,1 Kaboom!
> 
> No point racing to power on a short HC like that IMO, just smash it as hard as you can for as long as you can and hope some spectators cheer you on for the last little bit then aim for a marshal at the finish line so they can catch you.
> 
> ...


 

I am planning to have a go at our club's HC in two weeks time, which given the shortness of hills down here will take place on two hills. One a short sharp explosive (sub 2 minutes) and the other shallower and longer (5 minutes). Time intervals that should suit me, but we'll see. I'll just go off flat out and not even bother taking the PT wheel - save a few grams. I've been doing those kind of interval durations all year, so it shouldn't cause any problems.

512 W for 3 minutes? Hmm, that's some wattage!


----------



## Rob3rt (30 Sep 2013)

VamP said:


> I am planning to have a go at our club's HC in two weeks time, which given the shortness of hills down here will take place on two hills. One a short sharp explosive (sub 2 minutes) and the other shallower and longer (5 minutes). Time intervals that should suit me, but we'll see. I'll just go off flat out and not even bother taking the PT wheel - save a few grams. I've been doing those kind of interval durations all year, so it shouldn't cause any problems.
> 
> *512 W for 3 minutes? Hmm, that's some wattage*!



I think it may have been a power PB for me, the taste of blood in my mouth afterwards will indicate how hard I was pushing it, if the finish line had been an extra yard ahead, I'd have fallen off at the finish! Waiting for another rider to send me the footage he caught to see how ragged I looked, lol!

Been coughing like an old chain smoker since ~2:40pm yesterday.


----------



## VamP (30 Sep 2013)

I just posted 620w for 1 minute PB last week - and literally felt like I was drowning at the end of that. Some of these short sharp hill sensations are way too intense


----------



## Rob3rt (30 Sep 2013)

The short ones do hurt a lot, but are also a good experience, the short course makes the small number of spectators seem much more  Can't wait for Monsal Head next Sunday! Live commentary over PA 

Hill climb events are excellent IMO, the atmosphere is great. Very friendly and social.


----------



## VamP (12 Dec 2013)

Had to go back six pages to dig this up again 

Found this interesting statistic and thought I'd share. Kona Ironman take an exit poll of all the equipment their participants used, and these are their findings up to and including this year.


----------



## jowwy (12 Dec 2013)

has anybody tried the stages power meters yet - i'm interested but want some real world feedback


----------



## VamP (12 Dec 2013)

I think DC Rainmaker's comments as valid as ever. It's just too close in price to REAL power meters, to spend it on a glorified toy instead. If it was maybe half-price then it could make sense. In a few year's time.


----------



## 400bhp (12 Dec 2013)

VamP said:


> Had to go back six pages to dig this up again
> 
> Found this interesting statistic and thought I'd share. Kona Ironman take an exit poll of all the equipment their participants used, and these are their findings up to and including this year.
> 
> View attachment 34171



what would be more interesting is seeing a distribution which included competitor placings.


----------



## Rob3rt (12 Dec 2013)

400bhp said:


> what would be more interesting is seeing a distribution which included competitor placings.



Not sure that would yield anything particularly interesting tbh. The effect of using one brands PM vs another's is unlikely to have any meaningful effect on the outcome. The decision on which unit will come down to price, sponsorship, availability etc

The fact many ride Quarq units suggests to me, not that Quarq are likely to be the best performance wise, but that they have struck a good balance between a number of individual needs. Also, it suggests that maybe Quarq/SRAM/Zipp are big into sponsoring athletes :P


----------



## 400bhp (12 Dec 2013)

Rob3rt said:


> Not sure that would yield anything particularly interesting tbh. The effect of using one brands PM vs another's is *unlikely to have any meaningful effect on the outcome*. The decision on which unit will come down to price, sponsorship, availability etc
> 
> The fact many ride Quarq units suggests to me, not that Quarq are likely to be the best performance wise, but that they have struck a good balance between a number of individual needs. Also, it suggests that maybe Quarq/SRAM/Zipp are big into sponsoring athletes :P



Of course not.

Just be interesting that's all.


----------



## jowwy (13 Dec 2013)

VamP said:


> Had to go back six pages to dig this up again
> 
> Found this interesting statistic and thought I'd share. Kona Ironman take an exit poll of all the equipment their participants used, and these are their findings up to and including this year.
> 
> View attachment 34171


you see this a lot in golf - which driver, irons, putters are in play the most - you still have to hit the ball with it, the same as you still have to ride the bike

it all comes down to the person - not what their using


----------



## Rob3rt (13 Dec 2013)

jowwy said:


> you see this a lot in golf - which driver, irons, putters are in play the most - you still have to hit the ball with it, the same as you still have to ride the bike
> 
> *it all comes down to the person - not what their using*



Only to a certain degree.

However, I think you may have missed the mark on why the plot @VamP posted is interesting.


----------



## VamP (13 Dec 2013)

jowwy said:


> you see this a lot in golf - which driver, irons, putters are in play the most - you still have to hit the ball with it, the same as you still have to ride the bike
> 
> it all comes down to the person - not what their using


 
Well for sure. The reason it's interesting is not to do with performance. It's more of a market overview and trends in the development of power meters. You can see the established key players, and the new comers, across a sizeable, serious user base.

Look at 2009 for example - Where is Quarq now, and where are ergomo and polar. Same in 2013 - where will Stages or Vector be in three years time? Will they emulate Quarq, or will they emulate ergomo? I sure as hell don't know. It beats me why anyone would want to spend £1000+ on a product that may or may not be around in three years time.

I also like the way SRM base has not changed at all


----------



## Blue (13 Dec 2013)

jowwy said:


> you see this a lot *in golf* - which driver, irons, putters are in play the most - you still have to hit the ball with it, the same as you still have to ride the bike
> 
> *it all comes down to the person - not what their using*


Tell that to Rory McIlroy


----------



## jowwy (13 Dec 2013)

Blue said:


> Tell that to Rory McIlroy


i think wozniaki is the problem with Mcllroy


----------



## VamP (13 Dec 2013)

Oi - get your own golf thread


----------



## jowwy (13 Dec 2013)

VamP said:


> Oi - get your own golf thread


Sorry VamP


----------



## Howard (17 Dec 2013)

VamP said:


> I think DC Rainmaker's comments as valid as ever. It's just too close in price to REAL power meters, to spend it on a glorified toy instead. If it was maybe half-price then it could make sense. In a few year's time.



I thought his revising of Stages was pretty positive. To the point where I tried to pick a couple of arms up - Rival and XT - in Canada (save about £100 each). Sadly they can't meet demand at the moment, even with two months notice it seems.

Stages has its plus points. It's the only real PM that can be swapped easily between bikes regardless of application, including track. A Rival arm for me would have been swapped between my Track, Cross, Folder, beater fixed, Crit, Sunday Best and both of the wife's bikes.


----------



## VamP (17 Dec 2013)

Yeah, he's positive, except regarding the price. It could be a low cost alternative to a proper PM, especially for the reason you list. As they may not be around in a couple of years, I wouldn't consider it myself at £600+, when you can get PT for same or less.

This thread is also quite sceptical.


----------



## Howard (17 Dec 2013)

PT is trapped in a wheel though isn't it? I can't use the same PT for CX and for racing crits. The closest I can get is a P2M 3D+ but even then I'd need two spiders. 

The negativity of some of the posts on that thread is interesting. It seems mostly driven by the 'its not accurate' argument. To a degree, you can level that against all PMs. Ultimately for the weekend warrior something that will tell you how you are riding and then tell you in which direction the numbers are going is good enough IMHO. 

If you want the most accurate data by all means get an SRM. But to me collecting data across all your interactions with the bike is better than than collecting _possibly_ more accurate data on a bike you only use some of the time.


----------



## Rob3rt (17 Dec 2013)

The limitation of the stages is obvious. It assumes 50:50 power balance. Which is very unlikely to occur. Thus any error introduced by this crude assumption will manifest itself in an error TWICE the magnitude of the degree of the power balance discrepancy.

Further (moving away from accuracy and toward repeatability which is most important to most users) it will not even be consistent to itself as power balance will vary with intensity and fatigue (i.e. the degree to which the assumptions made introduce error will vary with intensity and duration). So, for example if you do a hard 3 minute effort at the end of a 2 hour tempo ride, or you go and do one right at the start, even if in reality the total power output is the same, if your power balance has changed due to fatigue, the stages will read both intervals as different power outputs!

It is what it is, but I wouldn't buy one!


----------



## Howard (17 Dec 2013)

I don't think anyone is overlooking the limitation. 

The question is - in the big picture of training and racing for the enthusiast - what's the worst that can happen?


----------



## Rob3rt (17 Dec 2013)

Howard said:


> I don't think anyone is overlooking the limitation.
> 
> The question is - in the big picture of training and racing for the enthusiast - *what's the worst that can happen?*



Well you aren't going to come to any harm, but you could be pissing away £500 on a device which is not accurate nor precise! You would not be able to detect small changes (well you might be able to, but you would be so unsure of the cause, you probably wouldn't be able to put the data to good use, e.g. aero testing would be out).

Now it is up to people to do what they want with their money, like I said, I wouldn't buy one, others are free to do what they wish.


----------



## Howard (17 Dec 2013)

Or you could spend £500 on some wheels that won't make you quicker. 

Quip aside.

OK let me spell this out. We know that, to a point, all PMs are imprecise. *Is Stages so imprecise that it cannot do what it says on the tin*, i.e. providing usable real time and recorded data to help the enthusiast train and race effectively with power. 

I haven't seen any data that says _No_. I've seen data that says there are issues. I don't see how they extrapolate into negative race and training impacts. I suspect the effect of the issues will get lost in the general noise of amateur training / racing and PM usage. 

I agree in certain circumstances you might be better off with an SRM or similar, say for example if you focus on a single discipline, have a substantial R/L imbalance, own a wind tunnel etc.


----------



## Rob3rt (17 Dec 2013)

Howard said:


> Or you could spend £500 on some wheels that won't make you quicker.
> 
> Quip aside.
> 
> ...



I suspect that it will take some time to find the answers to your questions because many of the people attracted to the Stages won't have a clue what they are doing with it anyway, so knowing what is down to the power meter and what is down to clueless-ness will be extremely hard to decouple 

Same goes for the positives, it will be hard to decouple what is down to training with power from what is down to simply training with a touch of structure for the 1st time for many users.

It is a new product, time will tell!


----------



## VamP (17 Dec 2013)

I have two concerns with Stages. One is that any left-right imbalances will be amplified in a non-linear way. TBH I am less concerned with this than my second worry. Which is that Stages as a company will not around to sort out my issues in 12 months time.

Given the number of reliable and established options in the same price range (PT, Quark or P2M) I couldn't justify looking at this. PT is limited to the wheel granted, but that wheel covers ALL my training needs, and enough of my racing needs* for that not to be a limitation. A lot less of a limitation than having constant doubts about my numbers.

* I have raced road, TT and CX with the PT wheel.


----------



## amaferanga (17 Dec 2013)

Stages cost about the same as a proper power meter (more if you want a high end crank arm). My Power2max cost about £800 including a carbon SRAM S900 crankset. It reliably measures power from both my legs. It doesn't make a difference if I get tired and my L/R balance changes. It doesn't matter if my L/R balance depends on cadence, power output, inertia, etc. It just works. With Stages there are too many uncertainties - the data will always be suspect. If it was a couple of hundred quid then it'd be worth a punt, but when it costs almost as much as a proper power meter then why the hell not just buy a proper power meter? Reviews make no difference really because it has a fundamental limitation. 

If you like the idea of Stages but want something that (potentially) provides good data then this might be worth waiting for:

http://m.bikeradar.com/road/news/article/verve-cycling-teases-2014-power-meter-first-look-39319/


----------



## Mr Haematocrit (28 Dec 2013)

amaferanga said:


> Stages cost about the same as a proper power meter (more if you want a high end crank arm). My Power2max cost about £800 including a carbon SRAM S900 crankset. * It reliably measures power from both my legs.*



Reliably yes, accurately no.. If you pedal with one foot on Power2max and remove the other foot completely from the pedal they still only report 80 - 90% power to the leg in use, the foot which is not attached to the pedal is still contributed power.


----------



## amaferanga (28 Dec 2013)

Mr Haematocrit said:


> Reliably yes, accurately no.. If you pedal with one foot on Power2max and remove the other foot completely from the pedal they still only report 80 - 90% power to the leg in use, the foot which is not attached to the pedal is still contributed power.



What's your point? The P2M is accurate when used in the way intended - why the hell would you pedal with only one leg? I know some folk do this and they think it's some clever training method, but it's just stupid.

What are you comparing the P2M to - another power meter? Let's see the data for both power meters. 

Stages is inaccurate when used as intended due to a fundamental shortcoming.


----------



## Mr Haematocrit (28 Dec 2013)

amaferanga said:


> What's your point? The P2M is accurate when used in the way intended - why the hell would you pedal with only one leg? I know some folk do this and they think it's some clever training method, but it's just stupid.
> 
> What are you comparing the P2M to - another power meter? Let's see the data for both power meters.



My point is yes the stages pm is has fudemental shortcomings and you suggested that one of the advantages of power2max was the ability to reliability measure power independently from both legs as such I felt it was valid to point out that although it has this functionality, it is not providing accurate data even when used as intended. Power2max themselves state that L/R balance is nothing more than estimated data.
http://www.power2max.de/europe/en/support/power2max-explained/
It has also been replicated and confirmed by the highly respected dcrainmaker in his review of power2max and is common knowledge.
http://www.dcrainmaker.com/2013/01/power2max-power-meter-in-depth-review.html

So the question has to be asked, how useful is estimated data or information from power2max? - Estimates can be wrong as such the data must be suspect. Suspect data is the very thing you suggest is a concern with the stages product.

Most power meters are flawed in one way or another, however the most important thing remains being able to interpret the data no matter if its true or estimated and ensuring the device delivers consistent data.


----------



## Rob3rt (14 Jan 2014)

Aero testing using virtual elevation method: Anyone done it? Anyone adept at it?

I have done a few runs and am finding on the day repeatability relatively good and can detect obvious changes to CdA (tops, hoods, drops) etc but am finding that one day to the next, repeatability is low. Of course this can be circumvented by always starting the session with a few runs using the original set up, make some changes and test them, then at the end revert back to the original set up to sanity check the session and simply use the difference from the original set up, on the day, to decide if something is more aero or not, but it would be interesting to be able to compare across days.

Maybe it has just been too windy when I have tested.

I am about to switch out the cockpit on my TT bike for a nice carbon integrated jobbie with low basebar and arm rests on stackers and modified extensions. I will also be changing my position quite a lot with the help of a club mate, it would be good to see how the changes stack up.

On an unrelated note, my power is on the rise, had a few power PB's on the turbo in the last week


----------



## VamP (14 Jan 2014)

This the Aerolab portion within GC? I have not played with it yet, although I probably will once I start my prep for next season. This summer season is going to be all about testing, I am not going to do very much road at all.

Good to see your power going up already! I am just reaching the end of my season, so will take rest of January off from training, and start focused sweetspot and threshold work in Feabruary.

Upgrades for this season include skinsuit, rear wheel covers for my Powertap and Selector.


----------



## Rob3rt (14 Jan 2014)

VamP said:


> This the Aerolab portion within GC? I have not played with it yet, although I probably will once I start my prep for next season. This summer season is going to be all about testing, I am not going to do very much road at all.
> 
> Good to see your power going up already! I am just reaching the end of my season, so will take rest of January off from training, and start focused sweetspot and threshold work in Feabruary.
> 
> Upgrades for this season include skinsuit, rear wheel covers for my Powertap and Selector.



Yeah it is implemented in aerolab. I may try adjusting Crr for temp and see if this improves day to day repeatability. As I said, on the day, I am getting good repeatability so I can work relatively but not extract much in absolute terms.

If you buy wheel covers, I would say go with Raltech 

I am going to get a nice speedsuit in a couple of months when the new Castelli Bodypaint 3.0 comes out. Will also buy some new overshoes. But my main focus this year will be on my position. Had a few hints from those in the know


----------



## VamP (14 Jan 2014)

Rob3rt said:


> Yeah it is implemented in aerolab. I may try adjusting Crr for temp and see if this improves day to day repeatability. As I said, on the day, I am getting good repeatability so I can work relatively but not extract much in absolute terms.
> 
> If you buy wheel covers, I would say go with Raltech
> 
> I am going to get a nice speedsuit in a couple of months when the new Castelli Bodypaint 3.0 comes out. Will also buy some new overshoes. But my main focus this year will be on my position. Had a few hints from those in the know



Yep. Raltech covers being made as we speak. 

However, my main focus will be on power. I am not too concerned about TT times, though there's a few clubmates I want to beat, but my main objective for this summer season is POWER. I want a significant FTP growth, and figured that getting singleminded about TT would be the best way to see improvements there. As well as hopefully get to like this discipline a bit more


----------



## Rob3rt (14 Jan 2014)

VamP said:


> Yep. Raltech covers being made as we speak.
> 
> *However, my main focus will be on power.* I am not too concerned about TT times, though there's a few clubmates I want to beat, but my main objective for this summer season is POWER. I want a significant FTP growth, and figured that getting singleminded about TT would be the best way to see improvements there. As well as hopefully get to like this discipline a bit more



That is essentially what I did last year (I trained and raced hard, but neglected my position), however I was concerned with times  I realise this season I won't make the same power gains, so whilst I will still be aiming to build power (do you ever stop with this? lol) I will be paying more attention to my position, there must be 20-40W worth of savings to be found. Changing the bars from Profile clip-ons and a round tube base bar to some aero profile carbon integrated bars with raised arm pads must be worth 8-12W alone!


----------



## VamP (14 Jan 2014)

I imagine I will also start to get interested in maximising aero gains once I get the basic position resolved, but I am making a statement of intent to not get distracted from the main objective of FTP building, as I know what I'm like


----------



## Andrew_P (14 Jan 2014)

A bit of a coup for Stages http://www.teamsky.com/article/0,27290,17545_9115530,00.html


----------



## jowwy (14 Jan 2014)

After extensive testing and validation Team Sky has chosen to exclusively use the Stages Power meter during the 2014 racing season.


This new sponsorship deal adds serious cache to Stages Cycling’s product design philosophy, and will serve to accelerate further development of the Stages Power meter.



“We are so pleased to announce that Team Sky will race with Stages Power this season; this sponsorship, and what it means for Stages Power, is very exciting for our company,” said Pat Warner, Stages Cycling’s Senior Vice President. “We are humbled and honoured to be collecting data for one of the best teams in the sport. It’s a huge responsibility and we both have great confidence that Stages Power can help Team Sky be successful this season.”


Read more at http://www.teamsky.com/article/0,27290,17545_9115530,00.html#o84DtV4Us3wbeswP.99


----------



## Pedrosanchezo (23 Jan 2014)

VamP said:


> Yep. Raltech covers being made as we speak.
> 
> However, my main focus will be on power. I am not too concerned about TT times, though there's a few clubmates I want to beat, but my main objective for this summer season is POWER. I want a significant FTP growth, and figured that getting singleminded about TT would be the best way to see improvements there. As well as hopefully get to like this discipline a bit more


I got the Raltech covers and they look the part but thought they were quite noisy in action, a bit flimsy IMO. I'm sure they perform reasonably well. 
I got them fitted to 50mm Planet X tubs. Took about 3 weeks from order to delivery. 
2 weeks after getting them a club mate sold me his disc wheel for seriously cheap just because he gave up TT'ing - a true gent! I couldn't refuse!! I kind of don't have a use for the Raltech cover now but these things happen. 

The low rumble of the disc wheel is weird at first. Had me looking for low flying aeroplanes above, lol. Doesn't rattle like the cover either but i was just very lucky to get a proper disc for the same price as the cover. A shame i didn't get it before the cover though.  Might have saved me some cash.

Keen to know how you get on with fitting and how you think it performs.


----------



## Fasta Asloth (23 Jan 2014)

Pedrosanchezo said:


> I got the Raltech covers and they look the part but thought they were quite noisy in action, a bit flimsy IMO. I'm sure they perform reasonably well.
> I got them fitted to 50mm Planet X tubs. Took about 3 weeks from order to delivery.
> 2 weeks after getting them a club mate sold me his disc wheel for seriously cheap just because he gave up TT'ing - a true gent! I couldn't refuse!! I kind of don't have a use for the Raltech cover now but these things happen.
> 
> ...


How have you found the disc wheel performance to be? Have read values of 40sec saved over a 25miler flat course but useful to hear your experiences..cheers.


----------



## Mr Haematocrit (23 Jan 2014)

Movistar using P2max

http://bikeradar.com/road/news/article/movistar-opt-for-power2max-power-meters-in-2014-39638


----------



## VamP (23 Jan 2014)

Pedrosanchezo said:


> I got the Raltech covers and they look the part but thought they were quite noisy in action, a bit flimsy IMO. I'm sure they perform reasonably well.
> I got them fitted to 50mm Planet X tubs. Took about 3 weeks from order to delivery.
> 2 weeks after getting them a club mate sold me his disc wheel for seriously cheap just because he gave up TT'ing - a true gent! I couldn't refuse!! I kind of don't have a use for the Raltech cover now but these things happen.
> 
> ...



The main purpose of the covers is to work with my power meter hub. They should do that without probs.  But yes funny rattles will be annoying. I'll post up once they're here.


----------



## Pedrosanchezo (24 Jan 2014)

Fasta Asloth said:


> How have you found the disc wheel performance to be? Have read values of 40sec saved over a 25miler flat course but useful to hear your experiences..cheers.


Haven't really had the weather to put my experiences to test but i'd suggest the data is roughly accurate for someone travelling at 30mph. So maybe more like 30-33 seconds if you are travelling at a more human 25-27mph. 

Personally i am looking to accumulate gains with several aero bits of kit. Still on the list is decent shoe covers and skin suit. All together, with aero lid etc, should amount to a more quantifiable chunk of time. 

@Rob3rt might be able to give his experience between no disc and disc over 10 and 25??


----------



## Rob3rt (24 Jan 2014)

It is true, must often savings are quoted in time over a 40km TT at ~30mph. But since most of us are somewhat shy of that the quotes don't help much. Contrary to Pedro's estimate of a 40 sec saving reducing to 30-33 secs for a slower rider, I would argue that actually the time saving could be greater.

Rather relevantly, this becomes clearer if you think in terms of power saving (thread on power ), rather than just time.

Consider this:
The time saving going from 25-26 mph (55 seconds for 10 mile) will be greater than the time saving going from 30-31mph (39 seconds for 10 mile).
The power needed to go from 25-26 mph will be much less than that needed to go from 30-31 mph (Google it and look at the equations, or simply use a cycling power calculator website and hold everything constant other than the speed and see the resulting power figures)
The faster rider will likely save a few W more from the disc.

If you think in terms of power savings, even if the faster rider saves more power from the disc, it is entirely possible that this saving doesn't outweigh the fact that to speed up, a hugely larger amount of power is needed than for the slower rider, so actually, while the slower rider saves a few W less, they actually gain the most speed (or even if they gain the same amount of speed) and thus save the most time.

Now I am not sure of the fine details, but in theory, if the numbers are right, it will be the case and in my experience, I gained maybe 30 seconds over 10 miles when I 1st put my disc on, let alone the time saved over 25 miles.

For reference the disc I use is a FFWD lenticular disc wheel with tubular tyres.


----------



## VamP (24 Jan 2014)

In real world conditions it's always hard to know what did what. The disc wheel has a further peculiarity in that it's benefits are not linear, in certain wind yaw angles they can be heavily amplified.

On another note, tested FTP yesterday, fully expecting to see a reduction as I have done no threshold work since September, but tested the same as my last test in October, so that gets my campaign to boost my threshold this season off to a good start!


----------



## Pedrosanchezo (24 Jan 2014)

VamP said:


> In real world conditions it's always hard to know what did what. The disc wheel has a further peculiarity in that it's benefits are not linear, in certain wind yaw angles they can be heavily amplified.
> 
> On another note, tested FTP yesterday, fully expecting to see a reduction as I have done no threshold work since September, but tested the same as my last test in October, so that gets my campaign to boost my threshold this season off to a good start!


Nice one. Should almost certainly lead to gains this year then - all going well. 

My FTP actually dropped around 5% as per my last test. I tested in May 2013 after a lot of indoor training through the winter and my power had increased significantly. As i came into summer most of my riding was outdoor and only knocked out the odd TR session when the weather really sucked. 

Even though i was at my lightest and fittest, by the time i retested in late Autumn i came up lower. I do though fully expect to exceed that number again over the winter months as power increase is, again, my priority. 

@Rob3rt You could be right, i was just going by the 'air resistance increases as speed increases' formula. So my thought process was that the faster you go the more beneficial aero equipment becomes.


----------



## VamP (24 Jan 2014)

Pedrosanchezo said:


> Nice one. Should almost certainly lead to gains this year then - all going well.
> 
> My FTP actually dropped around 5% as per my last test. I tested in May 2013 after a lot of indoor training through the winter and my power had increased significantly. As i came into summer most of my riding was outdoor and only knocked out the odd TR session when the weather really sucked.
> 
> ...



How often do you test, hopefully more than the two tests you mention? I don't test often enough, in fact if I have a NY resolution it's to test more often... Once a month is the plan.


----------



## Rob3rt (24 Jan 2014)

Pedrosanchezo said:


> @Rob3rt You could be right, i was just going by the 'air resistance increases as speed increases' formula. So my thought process was that *the faster you go the more beneficial aero equipment becomes.*



I would say 'critical' or 'important' rather than beneficial, because producing the power to go faster becomes increasingly difficult, so you need to reduce the power needed with aero aids because it will become near impossible to put out the required power at some point.

But 'beneficial', you could argue that both benefit equally, or indeed the slower rider benefits more so in some cases.


----------



## GrasB (24 Jan 2014)

VamP said:


> On another note, tested FTP yesterday, fully expecting to see a reduction as I have done no threshold work since September, but tested the same as my last test in October, so that gets my campaign to boost my threshold this season off to a good start!


Did you do a full 1h pull or just an estimated test?


----------



## VamP (24 Jan 2014)

GrasB said:


> Did you do a full 1h pull or just an estimated test?



No, I do 2x20, and use the second 20 for the calculation. A full hour is too scary


----------



## GrasB (24 Jan 2014)

VamP said:


> No, I do 2x20, and use the second 20 for the calculation. A full hour is too scary


So you might be over-estimating your low fitness FTP. What's the time gap between the two 20min pulls?


----------



## VamP (24 Jan 2014)

GrasB said:


> So you might be over-estimating your low fitness FTP. What's the time gap between the two 20min pulls?




I always do the estimates the same way, so I doubt it. Also it's not really low-fitness, I have been doing a lot of racing and training through the cross season, I just haven't been targeting any threshold work.

Edited: I see I forgot to answer your question. Five minutes rest between sets.

Edit 2: I kept my LTS between 80 and 95 through the cross season, and even now at the end of my rest month it's still at 79...


----------



## GrasB (24 Jan 2014)

VamP said:


> I always do the estimates the same way, so I doubt it.


I tend to find that my 10-30 min power is the slowest to degrade meaning 20min pulls over estimate my FTP when I've been resting/ill/injured. That just might be my body though.



> Also it's not really low-fitness, I have been doing a lot of racing and training through the cross season, I just haven't been targeting any threshold work.
> ...
> Edit 2: I kept my LTS between 80 and 95 through the cross season, and even now at the end of my rest month it's still at 79...


Okay so you may have just managed to maintain your previous fitness.


----------



## VamP (24 Jan 2014)

GrasB said:


> I tend to find that my 10-30 min power is the slowest to degrade meaning 20min pulls over estimate my FTP when I've been resting/ill/injured.



Aha, that's interesting. I haven't really enough data yet to have that understanding of what my body does, but it's one to look out for.


----------



## Pedrosanchezo (24 Jan 2014)

VamP said:


> How often do you test, hopefully more than the two tests you mention? I don't test often enough, in fact if I have a NY resolution it's to test more often... Once a month is the plan.


Hmmm, probably not enough either. I'd say...................4 times a year. 

I don't know many people that actually test their FTP with a 60 minute test. That would be the worst turbo session EVER!! 
The 20 minute method seems accurate enough for me to work with.


----------



## Rob3rt (24 Jan 2014)

Just ride a 25 mile TT...


----------



## Pedrosanchezo (24 Jan 2014)

Rob3rt said:


> Just ride a 25 mile TT...


I don't got a power meter.


----------



## Rob3rt (24 Jan 2014)

Ah.

I test with the 5 min blowout, followed by 20 minute effort protocol and find it matches quite well to what I do for a 25 mile TT.


----------



## VamP (24 Jan 2014)

Odd as it may seem, I have never ridden a 25. But will do a few this year.


----------



## Rob3rt (24 Jan 2014)

If you follow Coggan, then he defines FTP as the power for a 25TT, NOT a 60 minute effort. As such once you start racing, there is no need to formally test.



VamP said:


> Odd as it may seem, I have never ridden a 25. But will do a few this year.



You should race a few even if you aren't that interested in the distance, IME riding 25's makes you a better rider in 10's  Also it should help with your crits and road races.

By the same logic, I should do some 50's, but I simply cba!


----------



## Pedrosanchezo (24 Jan 2014)

Rob3rt said:


> Ah.
> 
> I test with the 5 min blowout, followed by 20 minute effort protocol and find it matches quite well to what I do for a 25 mile TT.


This and the 2 x 20 seem most used methods. 

I will be getting a PM soon, i hope.


----------



## GrasB (24 Jan 2014)

Rob3rt said:


> If you follow Coggan, then he defines FTP as the power for a 25TT, NOT a 60 minute effort. As such once you start racing, there is no need to formally test.


So FTP is anywhere from 41min to 75min maximal effort..

What people seem to be describing is more CP not FTP. At 1 hour CP & FTP should be noticeably different, for me there's 3-4% difference.


----------



## VamP (24 Jan 2014)

Rob3rt said:


> If you follow Coggan, then he defines FTP as the power for a 25TT, NOT a 60 minute effort. As such once you start racing, there is no need to formally test.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



I am actually more interested in the 25's than the 10's. I rode a hilly 40 mile TT last year, and it was one the best things I did all year. In a gruelling kind of way.


----------



## VamP (24 Jan 2014)

GrasB said:


> So FTP is anywhere from 41min to 75min maximal effort..
> 
> What people seem to be describing is more CP not FTP. At 1 hour CP & FTP should be noticeably different, for me there's 3-4% difference.




Does it matter though, if you are always using the same benchmark?


----------



## GrasB (24 Jan 2014)

VamP said:


> Does it matter though, if you are always using the same benchmark?


CP becomes more an exercise in active recovery, FTP is all about sustained effort. FTP wins anything but radically changing condition TTs


----------



## VamP (24 Jan 2014)

I'm puzzled. Every definition I have ever seen gives CP60=FTP. You seem to be assuming a different definition. Can you expand?


----------



## GrasB (24 Jan 2014)

A lot of people assume that but it's actually wrong! Critical Power is the amount of power you can average over a given time, FTP is the amount of power you can sustain over a certain time. That is I could do 30 sets of 1min @ 400w & 1min @ 100w to get a CP60 of 250w. However I might only be able to maintain a constant 240w for 60min. That's a very unlikely case but it illustrates the issue.

I my self find I produce the most power over 1 hour by varying my effort level throughout that 60 min session by about 25%. Those lower than FTP intervals allow me to recover enough to put a higher burst of power in for a short period, the result is a few % gain on CP over FTP. However if I do that on a turbo or at the Velo I'll actually be slower over 1h than keeping to my FTP.

Most riders have a higher CP out to about 2 hours than maximal sustained power. Over two hours CP & maximal sustained power will be almost exactly the same.


----------



## Pedrosanchezo (24 Jan 2014)

GrasB said:


> A lot of people assume that but it's actually wrong! Critical Power is the amount of power you can average over a given time, FTP is the amount of power you can sustain over a certain time. That is I could do 30 sets of 1min @ 400w & 1min @ 100w to get a CP60 of 250w. However I might only be able to maintain a constant 240w for 60min. That's a very unlikely case but it illustrates the issue.
> 
> I my self find I produce the most power over 1 hour by varying my effort level throughout that 60 min session by about 25%. Those lower than FTP intervals allow me to recover enough to put a higher burst of power in for a short period, the result is a few % gain on CP over FTP. However if I do that on a turbo or at the Velo I'll actually be slower over 1h than keeping to my FTP.
> 
> Most riders have a higher CP out to about 2 hours than maximal sustained power. Over two hours CP & maximal sustained power will be almost exactly the same.


Yes but it is just a number! Unless you are comparing to others then it doesn't matter your method. Yours differs to others but the point of FTP is to measure self improvement or decline. If that comes from 2 x 20 mins or 1 x 60 mins then so be it. As long as the test is the same every time then the measurement is accurate. It is merely the measurement of ones condition at the time. Why else use it - in amateur terms?

If one wanted bragging rights then surely we would indulge ourselves in a VAM debate or similar where power and weight are key.


----------



## GrasB (25 Jan 2014)

If you're racing then that is what you're trying to do. If you start to measure your CP not your FTP then you're going to start getting weird results on race day compared to your stats. This is less of an issue for those who race on a power meter but most people I know only have power measurement on their turbo.


----------



## VamP (25 Jan 2014)

Sure. If you race TTs. Any other type of race will be mostly sub FTP with lots of anaerobic efforts.

I have thought about it since yesterday, and I can see that the way I measure might be contributing to the power gap I have on my TT bike compared to my roadbike.

Although nowhere near as much as the fact that I have hardly ridden my TT bike.


----------



## Rob3rt (28 Jan 2014)

After all this talk, I decided to do an FTP test on the turbo for giggles last night! Came out with an estimated FTP of 327W.

Since my last estimate/measurement (332W) was taken from a 25 mile TT on the road (I have actually put out up to 337W in a 25TT but not routinely), this test on the turbo seems to suggest I have improved, taking into account my power on the turbo is always notably lower than the on the road (i.e. much more than 5W lower).

My 5 minute blowout was a turbo PB as well at 417W


----------



## VamP (28 Jan 2014)

Sweet.


----------



## Pedrosanchezo (28 Jan 2014)

Rob3rt said:


> After all this talk, I decided to do an FTP test on the turbo for giggles last night! Came out with an estimated FTP of 327W.
> 
> Since my last estimate/measurement (332W) was taken from a 25 mile TT on the road (I have actually put out up to 337W in a 25TT but not routinely), this test on the turbo seems to suggest I have improved, taking into account my power on the turbo is always notably lower than the on the road (i.e. much more than 5W lower).
> 
> My 5 minute blowout was a turbo PB as well at 417W


Big jump from a year ago. Nice one. 

Think you were around 295-300. That's over 10%.


----------

