Just started training with Power? Post your questions/comments here!
#76
Senior Member
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 778
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
Nope...IMHO, HR is redundant if you've got a PM.
After all, HR isn't a measure of the effort/load, it's a measure of a response to the effort/load...and a highly damped one as well. Not to mention the myriad of other things that can adversely affect HR one way or the other.
It seems to me that power and PE together work pretty well without any other "measures"
That said, HR is better than nothing if you don't have a PM, at least for long, steady-state efforts.
After all, HR isn't a measure of the effort/load, it's a measure of a response to the effort/load...and a highly damped one as well. Not to mention the myriad of other things that can adversely affect HR one way or the other.
It seems to me that power and PE together work pretty well without any other "measures"
That said, HR is better than nothing if you don't have a PM, at least for long, steady-state efforts.
#77
Banned
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Santa Barbara, CA
Posts: 28,387
Bikes: Specialized Tarmac SL2, Specialized Tarmac SL, Giant TCR Composite, Specialized StumpJumper Expert HT
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 2 Times
in
2 Posts
Nope...IMHO, HR is redundant if you've got a PM.
After all, HR isn't a measure of the effort/load, it's a measure of a response to the effort/load...and a highly damped one as well. Not to mention the myriad of other things that can adversely affect HR one way or the other.
It seems to me that power and PE together work pretty well without any other "measures"
That said, HR is better than nothing if you don't have a PM, at least for long, steady-state efforts.
After all, HR isn't a measure of the effort/load, it's a measure of a response to the effort/load...and a highly damped one as well. Not to mention the myriad of other things that can adversely affect HR one way or the other.
It seems to me that power and PE together work pretty well without any other "measures"
That said, HR is better than nothing if you don't have a PM, at least for long, steady-state efforts.
#78
slow up hills
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 4,931
Bikes: Giant TCR, Redline CX, Ritchey Breakaway, Spec S-works epic
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
#80
Senior Member
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 778
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
Technically, the minimum sample rate on the PT is 1.26s and that's the best rate to use (if you aren't "memory limited" for the ride at hand) because selecting anything longer ends up in data being "thrown away" since the PT head unit will just store whatever happened in the last 1.26s before it stores...otherwise known as "downsampling"...not good
#81
Carpe Diem
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: MABRA
Posts: 13,149
Bikes: 2007 CAAD9; 2014 CAADX; PedalForce CG1
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time
in
1 Post
I still wear a HR strap, because i'm a data junkie. Plus when I preach about power meters to my teammates I can show them the graph and say "See how my HR goes up over the course of my 1-hr SST session, but power remains constant? If I was training based on HR alone, I'd be way under-doing it in the last half of the interval!"
__________________
"When you are chewing the bars at the business end of a 90 mile road race you really dont care what gear you have hanging from your bike so long as it works."
ΛΧΑ ΔΞ179 - 15% off your first Hammer Nutrition order!
"When you are chewing the bars at the business end of a 90 mile road race you really dont care what gear you have hanging from your bike so long as it works."
ΛΧΑ ΔΞ179 - 15% off your first Hammer Nutrition order!
#82
Senior Member
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 778
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
The Polar is close to coming off since it's not telling me anything I don't know already about it, or about the other PMs...however, I promised one of the guys at Velocomp that I'd throw him a sample Polar output on a trainer to show how "flaky" it can be. The interest is if one could still use a Polar to "calibrate" an iBike for "trainer mode" despite the flakiness.... hmmm, maybe I'll do that at lunchtime today since I decided to take an "easy day"...then I can finally take that off.
My bike will suddenly be 1/2 lb lower weight
#83
slow up hills
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 4,931
Bikes: Giant TCR, Redline CX, Ritchey Breakaway, Spec S-works epic
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
Yes...the nice thing is that they are separately selectable.
Technically, the minimum sample rate on the PT is 1.26s and that's the best rate to use (if you aren't "memory limited" for the ride at hand) because selecting anything longer ends up in data being "thrown away" since the PT head unit will just store whatever happened in the last 1.26s before it stores...otherwise known as "downsampling"...not good
Technically, the minimum sample rate on the PT is 1.26s and that's the best rate to use (if you aren't "memory limited" for the ride at hand) because selecting anything longer ends up in data being "thrown away" since the PT head unit will just store whatever happened in the last 1.26s before it stores...otherwise known as "downsampling"...not good
#84
Batüwü Creakcreak
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: The illadelph
Posts: 20,787
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 228 Post(s)
Liked 287 Times
in
160 Posts
I'm pretty sure I have my SRM set at 1 second intervals. I'll download data after every ride or two and since most of my rides aren't longer than 2-3 hours, the 6 hour setup works well.
I do need to go back and read the manual since I kept going into interval mode while trying to calibrate it yesterday. I couldn't get out of interval mode, so I just kept pressing buttons till something else happened haha.
I do need to go back and read the manual since I kept going into interval mode while trying to calibrate it yesterday. I couldn't get out of interval mode, so I just kept pressing buttons till something else happened haha.
#85
Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Just this side of insanity.
Posts: 575
Bikes: Too many
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
OK, I just got my powertap two days ago. I purchased the Allen & Coggan book about a month ago and read it cover-to-cover. So tonight I did the test from Chapter 3 on Functional Threshold Power, and I would like to make sure that I'm on the right track.
I followed their instructions religiously by taping a small guide on my handlebars while on my Kurt Kinetic trainer. I did the warmup as they proscribe, and then the 20 minute time trial. Oh, and if it matters, yesterday was my "rest" day and I did about an hour's worth of light spinning.
After downloading the data, the 20 minute time trial average power was 263.2 watts. According to the book, that means that 95% of that number, or 250.04 is my FTP. Since I weigh 155 pounds, or 70kg, that means my wkg value at FTP is 3.57
Does this sound like the right methodology and conclusion? Is doing the TT on the trainer good or bad?
I followed their instructions religiously by taping a small guide on my handlebars while on my Kurt Kinetic trainer. I did the warmup as they proscribe, and then the 20 minute time trial. Oh, and if it matters, yesterday was my "rest" day and I did about an hour's worth of light spinning.
After downloading the data, the 20 minute time trial average power was 263.2 watts. According to the book, that means that 95% of that number, or 250.04 is my FTP. Since I weigh 155 pounds, or 70kg, that means my wkg value at FTP is 3.57
Does this sound like the right methodology and conclusion? Is doing the TT on the trainer good or bad?
#86
Batüwü Creakcreak
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: The illadelph
Posts: 20,787
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 228 Post(s)
Liked 287 Times
in
160 Posts
OK, I just got my powertap two days ago. I purchased the Allen & Coggan book about a month ago and read it cover-to-cover. So tonight I did the test from Chapter 3 on Functional Threshold Power, and I would like to make sure that I'm on the right track.
I followed their instructions religiously by taping a small guide on my handlebars while on my Kurt Kinetic trainer. I did the warmup as they proscribe, and then the 20 minute time trial. Oh, and if it matters, yesterday was my "rest" day and I did about an hour's worth of light spinning.
After downloading the data, the 20 minute time trial average power was 263.2 watts. According to the book, that means that 95% of that number, or 250.04 is my FTP. Since I weigh 155 pounds, or 70kg, that means my wkg value at FTP is 3.57
Does this sound like the right methodology and conclusion? Is doing the TT on the trainer good or bad?
I followed their instructions religiously by taping a small guide on my handlebars while on my Kurt Kinetic trainer. I did the warmup as they proscribe, and then the 20 minute time trial. Oh, and if it matters, yesterday was my "rest" day and I did about an hour's worth of light spinning.
After downloading the data, the 20 minute time trial average power was 263.2 watts. According to the book, that means that 95% of that number, or 250.04 is my FTP. Since I weigh 155 pounds, or 70kg, that means my wkg value at FTP is 3.57
Does this sound like the right methodology and conclusion? Is doing the TT on the trainer good or bad?
Also, I would do a MAP test and see if your 20 minute interval falls in the range of 72-78% of MAP. Use it as a check.
Heh, your FTP and W/KG is right around mine. I'm ~68Kg.
#87
Making a kilometer blurry
95% is a very rough estimate.
On the trainer, you will likely be a little underpowered because of the inertial effects on your pedal stroke.
So, figure +/- 5% on the 95% number, and +/- 10% on the trainer effect, and you're at +/- 15%.
Just go train for a while and see what the numbers are showing you.
On the trainer, you will likely be a little underpowered because of the inertial effects on your pedal stroke.
So, figure +/- 5% on the 95% number, and +/- 10% on the trainer effect, and you're at +/- 15%.
Just go train for a while and see what the numbers are showing you.
#88
Batüwü Creakcreak
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: The illadelph
Posts: 20,787
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 228 Post(s)
Liked 287 Times
in
160 Posts
95% is a very rough estimate.
On the trainer, you will likely be a little underpowered because of the inertial effects on your pedal stroke.
So, figure +/- 5% on the 95% number, and +/- 10% on the trainer effect, and you're at +/- 15%.
Just go train for a while and see what the numbers are showing you.
On the trainer, you will likely be a little underpowered because of the inertial effects on your pedal stroke.
So, figure +/- 5% on the 95% number, and +/- 10% on the trainer effect, and you're at +/- 15%.
Just go train for a while and see what the numbers are showing you.
When standing this isn't the case since you can't really move the bike under you and this generates power.
#89
Banned
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Santa Barbara, CA
Posts: 28,387
Bikes: Specialized Tarmac SL2, Specialized Tarmac SL, Giant TCR Composite, Specialized StumpJumper Expert HT
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 2 Times
in
2 Posts
Hm. I'm a little perplexed. I was under the impression that your seated W/Kg on a trainer would be higher since you're meeting resistance in every part of the pedal stroke and you can't 'con' your way out of your dead spot as easily as you can on the road.
When standing this isn't the case since you can't really move the bike under you and this generates power.
When standing this isn't the case since you can't really move the bike under you and this generates power.
#90
Batüwü Creakcreak
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: The illadelph
Posts: 20,787
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 228 Post(s)
Liked 287 Times
in
160 Posts
Why do you think this is?
Is my logic reversed? Are we forced to spend more time in our deadspot while on the trainer?
This would reduce power during the dead spot, force more time there, and decrease average power.
Is my logic reversed? Are we forced to spend more time in our deadspot while on the trainer?
This would reduce power during the dead spot, force more time there, and decrease average power.
#91
Writin' stuff
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Durango, CO
Posts: 3,784
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 19 Times
in
4 Posts
I would attribute it to having nothing else to think about but my legs hurting.
At least outside I have to use some brain power to not fall over.
At least outside I have to use some brain power to not fall over.
#92
Batüwü Creakcreak
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: The illadelph
Posts: 20,787
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 228 Post(s)
Liked 287 Times
in
160 Posts
I watch movies or blast movies while on the trainer. I actually don't mind riding the trainer while doing that. 1 hour max (with intervals) if just listening to music. I can go for 1.5+ hours if I'm watching a race, show, movie, whatever.
#93
Making a kilometer blurry
I think it has to do with the inertial differences between the road and the trainer. If you stop pedaling on the trainer, it doesn't take long to come to a complete stop. On the road, it takes a really long time. So, on the trainer, the dead part of your stroke (with reduced power) is going to decelerate more than on the road.
This means that you're spending energy accelerating the wheel more with each pedal stroke, which means that your normal applied torque will be multiplied by a lower angular velocity on the crank or the wheel, until you get back up to speed during the stroke. Lower angular velocity means less power.
This means that you're spending energy accelerating the wheel more with each pedal stroke, which means that your normal applied torque will be multiplied by a lower angular velocity on the crank or the wheel, until you get back up to speed during the stroke. Lower angular velocity means less power.
#94
Batüwü Creakcreak
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: The illadelph
Posts: 20,787
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 228 Post(s)
Liked 287 Times
in
160 Posts
I think it has to do with the inertial differences between the road and the trainer. If you stop pedaling on the trainer, it doesn't take long to come to a complete stop. On the road, it takes a really long time. So, on the trainer, the dead part of your stroke (with reduced power) is going to decelerate more than on the road.
This means that you're spending energy accelerating the wheel more with each pedal stroke, which means that your normal applied torque will be multiplied by a lower angular velocity on the crank or the wheel, until you get back up to speed during the stroke. Lower angular velocity means less power.
This means that you're spending energy accelerating the wheel more with each pedal stroke, which means that your normal applied torque will be multiplied by a lower angular velocity on the crank or the wheel, until you get back up to speed during the stroke. Lower angular velocity means less power.
#96
bf is my facebook.
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Greensboro, NC
Posts: 1,156
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
#97
I am the cheese
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Cycling Purgatory (Brooklyn, NY)
Posts: 236
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
I think it has to do with the inertial differences between the road and the trainer. If you stop pedaling on the trainer, it doesn't take long to come to a complete stop. On the road, it takes a really long time. So, on the trainer, the dead part of your stroke (with reduced power) is going to decelerate more than on the road.
This means that you're spending energy accelerating the wheel more with each pedal stroke, which means that your normal applied torque will be multiplied by a lower angular velocity on the crank or the wheel, until you get back up to speed during the stroke. Lower angular velocity means less power.
This means that you're spending energy accelerating the wheel more with each pedal stroke, which means that your normal applied torque will be multiplied by a lower angular velocity on the crank or the wheel, until you get back up to speed during the stroke. Lower angular velocity means less power.
#98
Making a kilometer blurry
That's part of it. The other part is that it can be hard to stay cool indoors. If you have a trainer with a massive flywheel and a huge fan nearby you might actually be able to exceed the power that you can generate outdoors. However, I've read that after a few weeks of adapting to the trainer indoor and outdoor power numbers start to converge, so if you're on the trainer a lot there might not be a significant difference.
#99
I eat carbide.
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Elgin, IL
Posts: 21,626
Bikes: Lots. Van Dessel and Squid Dealer
Mentioned: 25 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1324 Post(s)
Liked 1,304 Times
in
559 Posts
Watt?
__________________
PSIMET Wheels, PSIMET Racing, PSIMET Neutral Race Support, and 11 Jackson Coffee
Podcast - YouTube Channel
Video about PSIMET Wheels
Podcast - YouTube Channel
Video about PSIMET Wheels
#100
bzzzz
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 360
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
OK, I just got my powertap two days ago. I purchased the Allen & Coggan book about a month ago and read it cover-to-cover. So tonight I did the test from Chapter 3 on Functional Threshold Power, and I would like to make sure that I'm on the right track.
I followed their instructions religiously by taping a small guide on my handlebars while on my Kurt Kinetic trainer. I did the warmup as they proscribe, and then the 20 minute time trial. Oh, and if it matters, yesterday was my "rest" day and I did about an hour's worth of light spinning.
After downloading the data, the 20 minute time trial average power was 263.2 watts. According to the book, that means that 95% of that number, or 250.04 is my FTP. Since I weigh 155 pounds, or 70kg, that means my wkg value at FTP is 3.57
Does this sound like the right methodology and conclusion? Is doing the TT on the trainer good or bad?
I followed their instructions religiously by taping a small guide on my handlebars while on my Kurt Kinetic trainer. I did the warmup as they proscribe, and then the 20 minute time trial. Oh, and if it matters, yesterday was my "rest" day and I did about an hour's worth of light spinning.
After downloading the data, the 20 minute time trial average power was 263.2 watts. According to the book, that means that 95% of that number, or 250.04 is my FTP. Since I weigh 155 pounds, or 70kg, that means my wkg value at FTP is 3.57
Does this sound like the right methodology and conclusion? Is doing the TT on the trainer good or bad?