Training & Nutrition - Best Indoor Training Device

We're considering buying some kind of trainer. We have 2 bikes so and a small apartment so it will be one trainer and switching bikes. How easy or difficult is this plan and what do people consder to be the best?

I really like the Cycleops fluid trainer. I've had mine for about 4 years now, and have put some serious winter miles on mine. It's never skipped a beat. The legs fold up so it's small enough to store in the closet.

Just buy a cheap tire to put on the rear wheel because the roller of the trainer tends to chew tires up.

Check out the many trainer reviews at RBR and MTBR. Kurt Kinetic and 1UP trainers are very popular. Switching is very easy as long as both bikes are using the same size wheels, otherwise it's a bit of a pain, or you can have the bike with smaller wheel propped up a little higher to avoid adjusting the axle cup heights every time you switch bikes.

I am using a CycleOps FL2 trainer also, every day for one hour as my exercise. I do not have tire wear.
Using 700 x 38 Bontrager tire and use the same tire to ride Limestone Rails to Trails. I am doing this for over two years.
Perhaps the reason for no tire wear is that I set the pressure of wheel to friction wheel very low. Just as low as I can and still bike at 20 MPH standing up. My regular routine is 17 MPH at 90 RPM. I have also a HRM mounted on this training bike. I am training for XC rides and have done a six hour 100 mile session on this trainer.
This trainer is very reliable and simple to use. I am glad I bought it.

I've also have a Cyclops Fluid2 and have been putting some serious intervals miles on it already. The key to riding an indoor trainer is to somehow make it interesting. For the winter, on longer endurence rides when the weather is a bit frightful, I'll read. On shorter, intense intervals, I'll either watch something or listen to music.

I've also been told - but have no basis to back this - that trainer hours "count" for more than road hours, owing to the difficulty and the fact that you cannot coast.

In reference to the above poster, I'm not sure if I'd calibrate my workouts using speed. Speed is partially dependent on the number of turns you place the unit against the tire, and thus that dictates resistance to a large degree. When doing a workout, time and heart rate should be the main factors one looks at. As you're not really going anywhere, speed and distance are a bit meaningless. It's more, I think, about the amount of force you put out. And it just so happens that it takes a bit more force to keep a bike tire moving at speed on a trainer than on the road.

I'm no expect, however, so if anyone has anything to add, feel free.

I'm not fan of the trainer, but here are a few things i used to do to make long trainer rides interesting

1. Football intervals. Watch a game while training. Only go balls to the wall from the snap to the downing of an actual play. I remember reading that in a 60 min game there is only about 11 min of actual play. So the workout wont kill you and you can get off the bike for halftime.

2. I used to video tape the 1/2 hr ESPN TDF broadcasts before OLN took over and then those only until this year. I used to watch the old tapes and would do all out intervals durning the commercial breaks. This is a good weekday workout for about 1 hr.

I picked up a trainer today - it's the cycleops mag (bike shop guy really recommended it).

I just started riding a few months ago, so this will be my first time on a trainer. I have a Polar bike computer with HR and Cadence, but I was concerned about using it on the trainer since it is front wheel speed, not rear - based on reading this, that shouldn't really matter, huh? I guess I should just go by heartrate and/or cadence for a set length of time?

Since I have just recently started, I don't know what I should shoot for without using distance/speed as a gauge.

Should I work on longer/slower (easier) rides, or harder effort rides?

I would assume that the long easy ride is better for building endurance, where a shorter harder ride would be better for building strength - is that even close to accurate?

Obviously, my long term goal would be to improve both :D - but right now where I really struggle is in the hills - as long as it's flat, I'm pretty good to go at about 18-20mph, cadence 65-80, HR 140-150, but even a little incline sends my HR through the roof, and I just don't have the leg strength to do anything other than granny gear my way along at about 6mph. Before I started, I called my Dr to ask what my HR limits should be - I was told 130 - 170. I set my Polar to alarm at those points. I'm 5'1" or so, about 260lbs, 38 years old. Sure, I'd love to drop about 60 pounds, but I'd really just like to be faster/stronger/better on the bike. I'm not as concerned with the weight number. (I don't feel as big as I know I actually am - make sense?)

I'm also considering weight training - I have a 5 year old brand new :eek: weight bench/dust collector that might come in handy about now huh?

Looked at a Computrainer today as an early xmas present to myself. Looks like all the other trainers at 5x the price but I really liked the computer gimmick, plus the store that sells them will let me bring my bike in and ride a course. I also like the fact that I can load in routes I have ridden from my gps and have it duplicate the course. Anyone tried one of these?

In reference to the above poster, I'm not sure if I'd calibrate my workouts using speed. Speed is partially dependent on the number of turns you place the unit against the tire, and thus that dictates resistance to a large degree. When doing a workout, time and heart rate should be the main factors one looks at. As you're not really going anywhere, speed and distance are a bit meaningless. It's more, I think, about the amount of force you put out. And it just so happens that it takes a bit more force to keep a bike tire moving at speed on a trainer than on the road.
I'm no expect, however, so if anyone has anything to add, feel free.

OK, I am doing the best I can to communicate.
My normal training ride is a Wisconsin Limestone trail of 50 miles. It is mostly flat. Wind is not an issue because I go North and then South. An all out effort is about 17.6 MPH average with 700 x 38 tires.
It so happens that a 17.6 MPH average is a significant effort on this hydraulic trainer. In fact it is a bit too much. !7.3 MPH is more realistic.
My goal is a XC trip at 16.5 MPH average. That is 120 miles a day for 25 biking days. To do that, I and others, did 100 miles on a trainer for 6 hours. Believe me, that is a tough job.

I definitely recommend a Kurt Kinetic. Great warrenty, they won't leak, and are super stable.

Here's some links:

http://www.nashbar.com/results.cfm?category=123&subcategory=1087&storetype=&estoreid=&init=y&pagename=Category:%20Trainers%20and%20Rollers

https://www.usasportstraining.com/shop/bike-trainer_7/

http://www.shopping.com/xGS-Kurt_Kinetic_Trainer~NS-1~linkin_id-8001703~r-1~CLT-INTR

If you've never ridden a trainer you might be interested that many people, including myself, find it incredibly boring. A lot of people manage to ride the trainer a lot in the winter, but not me. I prefer to ride outside, even when the temps are well below freezing.

My trainer hangs in the garage and gets used very sparingly. Fortunately i didn't spend a lot on it.

I have a Kurt Kenetic trainer and a set of Kreitler rollers. I don't use the Kurt much. I really like the rollers. They give me much more of a workout than the Kurt. Just my two cents.

The Computrainer is the best I have found. It is like the SRM but on EPO…errr…. steroids……errr….never mind. If you really want to get better and improve your power and your cycling technique there is nothing better. It will show you live time how much power you are putting to the pedal on every revolution.

Not cheap...but powerful

Cheers,
Dusk

I got a kurt kinetics road machine from my lbs. it works great. not too loud. a little slippage at first but now it works great.

I really like the Cycleops fluid trainer. I've had mine for about 4 years now, and have put some serious winter miles on mine. It's never skipped a beat. The legs fold up so it's small enough to store in the closet.

Just buy a cheap tire to put on the rear wheel because the roller of the trainer tends to chew tires up.

What he said.

here is the real deal


1) trainers are not boring. those who think trainers are boring are 'weak minded' cyclists who do not understand
the need for pain and improvement in a controlled environ... period. that is my opinion.

2) anything you strap your bike to, is weak. better to dig deep and get a lemond revmaster or star trac v-bike. these are the only 2 types which go the distance (so to speak) and provide ultimate feel

3) rollers, eh....you need a trainer AND rollers. neither one or the other. you need both...if your goal is
to maximize your time and training.

4) spinervals dvd's. drop 250 bucks and get the whole shebang. you will never get bored, and if you do them correctly, no one will be kicking your butt. YOU will be dominating in the spring. nuff said.

do as I say and what I say. period. end of story. bye. this is the opinion of 'not people' but someone who is hardcore and takes no prisoners. take no crap. kick butt on the bike or don't even leave the house.

your mileage may vary

and....
I have had a few beers recently(like just now), and my fervor and demands listed above may or may not be alcohol induced. the bottom line
is...kick butt six ways to sunday, and maximize your training...riding a bike (even a stationary) is never boring. I wanna
smack anyone who thinks any type of pedaling is 'boring'. to those, stfuplzkthxby

harharhar *burp hic* har


=;^)

+1 with the spinervals and kurt kinetic trainer
get at least a hard time trial and an easier aerobic one.

using an indoor trainer should be approached with a lab mentality
where you go for a particular plan which you can monitor over time to see if you
are improving upon, eg particular dvd getting easier etc

if you just use the trainer to hop on and burn some calories aimlessly
it will get boring fast

A rowing machine. It gets the upper half of the body. bk

I used my trainer for the first time today due to the darkness at 5:00 in the morning. Put in the Carmichael TT video and it was a good workout. I have been putting in consistent weekly mileage of 150 - 200 and the video was still a good kick in the butt.

A rowing machine. It gets the upper half of the body. bk
100% agree with the rower/erg. I have a Concept2 erg that I use during the winter for a good bit of my winter cross training. It's unreal the heart rates that you can work with when you're using that many muscles. I can drive my HR up to about 185 during training on the bike, maybe 190-195 during a race. I can row comfortably over 180 for minutes at a time.

I love using the erg as my high intensity training during the winter while I use my rollers for skill work and keeping my spin on the bike.

I use the trainer only for the high intensity indoor efforts on the bike, especially tests.

Rollers and Aflac, a good combo lol

rollers w/resistance unit. if you have $$ buy small diameter kreitlers. you can do everything you should need to do indoor on rollers. If you want a mashing workout, you should want to be outdoors anyway.

We're considering buying some kind of trainer. We have 2 bikes so and a small apartment so it will be one trainer and switching bikes. How easy or difficult is this plan and what do people consder to be the best?




"IF YOU HAVE THE MONEY"

Any old trainer (I like cycleOps) and a Powertap

"IF YOU HAVE LESS MONEY"

TravelTrac RealAxiom

"EVEN LESS MONEY"

CycleOps Magneto

I can't take the boredom on the trainer. I use a treadmill in the winter instead, which for some reason I find less boring. Keeps my cardio and weight in shape so that I can get up to speed, so to speak, pretty quickly on the bike after the weather breaks.

I have the Kinetic Road Machine and it's the best I ever used.
http://www.spinervals.com/index.php?main_page=product_info&cPath=58&products_id=211

Should I work on longer/slower (easier) rides, or harder effort rides?

I would assume that the long easy ride is better for building endurance, where a shorter harder ride would be better for building strength - is that even close to accurate?

Obviously, my long term goal would be to improve both :D - but right now where I really struggle is in the hills - as long as it's flat, I'm pretty good to go at about 18-20mph, cadence 65-80, HR 140-150, but even a little incline sends my HR through the roof, and I just don't have the leg strength to do anything other than granny gear my way along at about 6mph. Before I started, I called my Dr to ask what my HR limits should be - I was told 130 - 170. I set my Polar to alarm at those points. I'm 5'1" or so, about 260lbs, 38 years old. Sure, I'd love to drop about 60 pounds, but I'd really just like to be faster/stronger/better on the bike. I'm not as concerned with the weight number. (I don't feel as big as I know I actually am - make sense?)

I'm also considering weight training - I have a 5 year old brand new :eek: weight bench/dust collector that might come in handy about now huh?


Honestly, go buy a book. I'm reading "The Ultimate Ride" by Chris Carmichael/Jim Rutberg right now and love it. Truthfully, I think it's a better read than Friel's bible, too.