RChung

Every power meter has strengths and weaknesses. For my particular needs the PT is ideal but for others with different needs it may not be, and I try not to think that just because something works for me that everyone else should do what I do. I tend to focus on data quality because most other people focus on features or price or usability but ignore data quality. From a data quality point of view, the most consistent products out there are the SRM and PT, with the Quarq and Power2Max and Vector just a smidge behind. The PT and SRM do have idiosyncrasies but they're known and relatively minor. Here's the interesting thing: both SRM and PT manufacture their own head units that are specifically designed to work with their power meters, while the other manufacturers rely on third party head units (a market which is dominated by Garmin). The Look Keo Power pedals also use a specific head unit (from Polar) but the data quality for that power meter is kinda iffy, so just having a dedicated head unit doesn't appear to be sufficient. I don't have a large enough sample size to make comments yet on the Rotor, or Panasonic, or others. I haven't looked at the data quality of the iBike for a while so I don't know where its current model stands (but previous models would have put it below the others in terms of data quality).

As it happens I use different crank lengths and chainrings on my road and TT bikes. Different crank lengths allowed a bigger improvement in aero drag than the difference between a "race wheel" and my PT wheel with a wheel cover -- so for me using the same cranks on my bikes is a bug, not a feature. But not everyone cares about drag estimation or has a TT bike so it would be silly for me to insist that everyone do what I do. If you just care about training and you don't care about the other stuff the Stages could be a reasonable choice. So could the PT.