Originally Posted by Odin
I did a 20 minute TT a couple of months ago on the trainer to try to find my LT.
I came up with an average of 153bpm - 80% MHR.
I went and did our club hillclimb this arvo - takes about 20 min to climb 4-5% gradient
and came up with an average of 159bpm - 85% MHR.
Now, knowing that I have more trouble getting my HR up on the trainer than the road, which one would reckon is more accurate?
I'd go by the road coz with the indoor heat can distort HR readings. My HR will go up to 120 just sitting in a sauna!!
how did you test your max? The '220 - age' method isn't suitable for a racing cyclist; it's just a safe method for fat old blokes joining a gym after not exercising for 40 years. It takes a while to get to know exactly the relationship between your HR and the different situations on the bike.
153 to 159 sounds very, very low for a time-trial type workout, but you never know, you could have a very low max. Regardless, it has nothing to do with power output. Most people's max is over 189, and most racing riders' maximium sustainable HR for time-trials would be more like 92% to 96%, when they're in shape. Armstrong's max is 201, and his time trial HR was 188 to 192. Triathletes often ride at lower HRs than this coz they have to conserve for the run.