# Speed and Power calculator is back. :D

• 10-09-08, 10:07 PM
Tom Stormcrowe
Speed and Power calculator is back. :D
• 10-10-08, 12:11 AM
Mr. Beanz
My best was 22.6 for 10 miles on my roadie. Filled in my weight and bike weight.
Gave me a time of 26 minutes 32 seconds 398 watts.

Is 398 watts for 10 miles good? I know nothing about wattage when it comes to cycling.

Then 32 mph for 1/8 mile on a seated sprint read 1085 watts.

What's good number?
• 10-10-08, 12:14 AM
400w is the Magic Threshold. How long can you hold it for is the question :D
• 10-10-08, 12:28 AM
Mr. Beanz
Quote:

400w is the Magic Threshold.

What is a magic threshold?
• 10-10-08, 06:18 AM
CJKarl
Here's a magic threshold that you don't want to nail.
http://www.marketoracle.co.uk/images...ly-28-6-08.png
• 10-10-08, 06:20 AM
flip18436572
The only thing that worked for me was when I put in speed it gave me watts. 825 watts at 16.8 mph.

Since I know nothing about it or how it is calculated, I would assume that over the 2 hour ride there is no way that I was putting out 825 watts. It also said I burned 4515 calories, and my Garmin 305 said 2245 and I think the Garmin is high on calories burned.
• 10-10-08, 07:31 AM
tomdaniels
The main thing I liked about this is the ability to see what a certain amount of effort at a given speed does for you. Enter typical values, then use the diagram. For me, the first 100 watts, gets me to 12mph, the next 100 gets me another 4 mph, the next 100 gets me another 3 mph, the next 100, gets me 2 mph, and then it stays about 2 mph gain per 100 watts for reasonable speeds.

Also, If I get to my goal weight, I will gain about 3 mph at 300 Watts.
• 10-10-08, 07:55 AM
Tom Stormcrowe
If you scroll down on the page, you will see the mathematics of the site, as well as how they established these baselines.
• 10-10-08, 09:38 AM
nobull60
Quote:

Originally Posted by Tom Stormcrowe
If you scroll down on the page, you will see the mathematics of the site, as well as how they established these baselines.

Man I haven't seen math like that since college. :wtf:
• 10-10-08, 09:50 AM
TechKnowGN
Im evidently some sort of epic fail. It says my ride to work is 99 watts. I would think pulling my big ass 5 miles would be more than that.
• 10-10-08, 10:05 AM
CliftonGK1
Quote:

Originally Posted by TechKnowGN
Im evidently some sort of epic fail. It says my ride to work is 99 watts. I would think pulling my big ass 5 miles would be more than that.

That's an average wattage calculation, if I understand wattage/power readings. I've got some hellacious hills on my route, but my average wattage according to the site is 116 if I just put in a distance and my rider stats, and allow for an incline of 0%.

Now, if I go and calculate all the hills separately, it would be quite a different story.
• 10-10-08, 10:11 AM
evblazer
I'm glad this is back now I know I can't do the hill at the upcoming paluxy pedal (which they say 90% of riders walk up)
bikely profile of the "Wall" with a little 21% kicker in there
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3147/...2b082e.jpg?v=0
555 watts to go 4mph up that? ew I can't do that

The 99 watts is instantaneous based on the slope/weight/wind you put I believe. If I put in a 0 slope, no wind and my weight i'll get 84 watts to hold 14 mph which was my average for my commute today. Ugh I'm a wimp and for me it gives 1032 calories for my 3 hours and 8 minutes of riding today now that is depressing.
• 10-10-08, 10:17 AM
whrl1
Quote:

Originally Posted by Mr. Beanz
My best was 22.6 for 10 miles on my roadie. Filled in my weight and bike weight.
Gave me a time of 26 minutes 32 seconds 398 watts.

Is 398 watts for 10 miles good? I know nothing about wattage when it comes to cycling.

Then 32 mph for 1/8 mile on a seated sprint read 1085 watts.

What's good number?

Wattage numbers are all relative to one's weight, so it's more your power to weight ratio that is important. For example, you and Lance ( and me ) are actually pretty close on wattage over 10 miles ( an analysis of a TT that LA did going up Aple d'Huez in a recent TdF showed an approximate avg watts of 400 ). The (big) difference is in the respective weights. ( And remember that Lance was about two weeks into the hardest stage race in the world, not exactly "fresh")

Try looking at the following articles and tables ( though you may note that the tables don't always agree on what's "good", and you may be better at one distance than another ):

http://cozybeehive.blogspot.com/2008...ght-ratio.html

http://www.trainright.com/articles.asp?uid=3431

If you can estimate your lean mass, you can also roughly compare how you would stack up if you were a lean mean machine.

Keep in mind that there are also many other factors like riding position, weather, etc that can effect the calculation. Most people also can maintain higher watts ( for me it's about 10-20% ) on a climb than they can on flat terrain, due to the different muscles involved. If you have a steep climb that you can do, this can be a good way to estimate wattage without a power meter, because you can reduce factors like wind/riding position/rolling resistance in the equation.
• 10-10-08, 11:57 AM
Tom Stormcrowe
OK, I've been emailing back and forth about the online calculator with it's creator,Walter Zorn. A factor you need to know:

It assumes constant pedaling

This explains why the wattage figures and caloric burn seem high. You need to also factor in your average ratio of pedal vs coast time, as a percentage and multiply the output by the daecoam. If, for example, you coast 25% of the time, you need to multiply the resulting wattage and caloric burn by 0.75.

The raw result is correct for a fixed gear application. The tool is really designed for competitive racing cyclists that never stop pedaling.
• 10-10-08, 12:32 PM