Go Back  Bike Forums > Bike Forums > Clydesdales/Athenas (200+ lb / 91+ kg)
Reload this Page >

Weight Loss on the Bike using a Power Meter

Clydesdales/Athenas (200+ lb / 91+ kg) Looking to lose that spare tire? Ideal weight 200+? Frustrated being a large cyclist in a sport geared for the ultra-light? Learn about the bikes and parts that can take the abuse of a heavier cyclist, how to keep your body going while losing the weight, and get support from others who've been successful.

Weight Loss on the Bike using a Power Meter

Old 05-03-16, 05:51 AM
  #26  
dr_lha
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Central PA
Posts: 4,813

Bikes: 2016 Black Mountain Cycles Monster Cross v5, 2015 Ritchey Road Logic, 1998 Specialized Rockhopper, 2017 Raleigh Grand Prix

Mentioned: 11 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 355 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Cychologist View Post
I assume since they are coming out with a Bluetooth/ANT+ model, I got mine for $100 off plus the additional discount from Rainmaker's review site.
OK, at that price, I'd buy one too. Was that Kickstarter discount?
dr_lha is offline  
Old 05-03-16, 08:27 AM
  #27  
Cychologist
Getting older and slower!
 
Cychologist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Bowling Green, Kentucky
Posts: 419

Bikes: Trek Domane 6 series Project One, Bike Friday Pocket Rocket, Trek XO1, Specialized Turbo Vado 6.0

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 17 Post(s)
Liked 2 Times in 1 Post
Originally Posted by dr_lha View Post
OK, at that price, I'd buy one too. Was that Kickstarter discount?
No, that was the markdown on their website a couple weeks back.
Cychologist is offline  
Old 05-05-16, 09:36 PM
  #28  
DrIsotope
Non omnino gravis
 
DrIsotope's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: SoCal, USA!
Posts: 6,730

Bikes: Nekobasu, Pandicorn

Mentioned: 99 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3590 Post(s)
Liked 157 Times in 118 Posts
All I know at this point is that the addition of the Stages has given me a whole bunch more numbers that I really don't know what to do with. Actual recorded power numbers are above pre-meter Strava estimates on my handful of recorded rides, but I've simply lacked the gusto to attempt an FTP test... so I have literally no idea what to do with the numbers, or even what numbers to shoot for. The instantly available power data has, if anything, made Z2 riding (which was easy on HRM alone) really difficult, because (in my limited use so far) there is absolutely no relation between HR and power output. I've averaged 244w (unweighted) at an HR average of 128bpm (which for me is barely out of Z1) and also averaged 242w (unweighted) at an average of 147bpm. So I have yet to determine the relation. The ride I brought in the screenshot below had a lot of wind swirling, so I think that's some of the higher HR/lower speed relative to others, but I'm more interested in figuring out the power numbers.

I also don't know what to focus on-- weighted numbers or unweighted numbers. Strava also apparently estimated my FTP for me at 287w (I have no idea if that's applicable to anything, but regardless. This is from yesterday on the 4th. Some of these numbers I get, some mean nothing to me. Training load? Intensity? Wuzzat?

__________________
DrIsotope is offline  
Old 05-06-16, 05:50 AM
  #29  
dr_lha
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Central PA
Posts: 4,813

Bikes: 2016 Black Mountain Cycles Monster Cross v5, 2015 Ritchey Road Logic, 1998 Specialized Rockhopper, 2017 Raleigh Grand Prix

Mentioned: 11 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 355 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
I'd say averaging 254W over 78 miles means you're doing pretty well.
dr_lha is offline  
Old 05-06-16, 06:40 AM
  #30  
Heathpack 
Has a magic bike
 
Heathpack's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 12,118

Bikes: 2018 Scott Spark, 2015 Fuji Norcom Straight, 2014 BMC GF01, 2013 Trek Madone

Mentioned: 680 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4037 Post(s)
Liked 51 Times in 18 Posts
Originally Posted by DrIsotope View Post
All I know at this point is that the addition of the Stages has given me a whole bunch more numbers that I really don't know what to do with. Actual recorded power numbers are above pre-meter Strava estimates on my handful of recorded rides, but I've simply lacked the gusto to attempt an FTP test... so I have literally no idea what to do with the numbers, or even what numbers to shoot for. The instantly available power data has, if anything, made Z2 riding (which was easy on HRM alone) really difficult, because (in my limited use so far) there is absolutely no relation between HR and power output. I've averaged 244w (unweighted) at an HR average of 128bpm (which for me is barely out of Z1) and also averaged 242w (unweighted) at an average of 147bpm. So I have yet to determine the relation. The ride I brought in the screenshot below had a lot of wind swirling, so I think that's some of the higher HR/lower speed relative to others, but I'm more interested in figuring out the power numbers.

I also don't know what to focus on-- weighted numbers or unweighted numbers. Strava also apparently estimated my FTP for me at 287w (I have no idea if that's applicable to anything, but regardless. This is from yesterday on the 4th. Some of these numbers I get, some mean nothing to me. Training load? Intensity? Wuzzat?


How long have you had the power meter? Strava estimates will be pretty decent with enough data- like a few months worth. An FTP test would be better.

Why did you get the power meter? What goals were you hoping to achieve by getting it? Or did you just get it because it was affordable & you just wanted to see what you'd be able to do with it?

Here's how I use my power meters (I know my FTP is set correctly):
1. Set power targets for interval workouts and TT training efforts
2. Quantify training intensity of unstructured rides, sometimes to stay within a certain intensity and sometimes just to track training stress
3. Track calories burned
4. Keep on top of overall training load, which helps to plan rest & when you will be in peak performance for an event (in reality my coach does this better, so I don't care too much about this)
5. Pacing, especially in a TT
6. Communication between myself & my coach.

Power meters can also be used in aero testing.

Weighted average power is the same thing as Coggans' normalized power- its an algorithm that corrects your average power to account for the extra physiologic "cost" of surges in effort. Generally speaking, it's more relevant than average power.

Intensity is your average (or maybe weighted average) power for the ride divided by your FTP. It's a measure of how hard you rode. Strava seems to also use HR data to come up with this number. 89% for 4.5 hours means you rode really hard. If your ride did not seem really hard, your FTP might be set too low or there could be another issue with your data. Typically a 4.5 hr ride would be ridden at around 65-75% intensity if you were being casual about it.

Training load is another algorithm, I don't remember the exact formula- but it takes into account the power output and duration, then Strava tracks the cumulative effect of each ride's training load and compares your acute training load to your chronic training load to come up with a training stress balance. Basically this helps to determine when you're in peak form (TSB is close to zero, say -2 to +10), when you need some rest (TSB is negative -40 to -60), and when you really need to get back to training (TSB is a high positive number, say +20 and above).

Power and HR correlate somewhat but they tell you different things. Power changes instantly and HR changes slowly. HR is influenced by emotional state, heat, hydration, fatigue. Power is not. I often use HR as a check against the power data, but not a primary thing- for example, in an FTP test or a TT, I might wonder if I could have gone harder. But if I had my HR pegged at LTHR within the first 2 minutes and it stays there unwavering, I know I got that effort right. Otherwise, I might use HR to assess emotional state (adrenaline rush at the beginning of a TT for example, which will change your perception of your power output) or to assess hydration status on a long ride.

All this stuff is in the book Training and Racing with Power by Coggans. And in a more piecemeal manner on the Training Peaks website.
Heathpack is offline  
Old 05-06-16, 07:47 PM
  #31  
DrIsotope
Non omnino gravis
 
DrIsotope's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: SoCal, USA!
Posts: 6,730

Bikes: Nekobasu, Pandicorn

Mentioned: 99 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3590 Post(s)
Liked 157 Times in 118 Posts
Originally Posted by Heathpack View Post



How long have you had the power meter? Strava estimates will be pretty decent with enough data- like a few months worth. An FTP test would be better.

Why did you get the power meter? What goals were you hoping to achieve by getting it? Or did you just get it because it was affordable & you just wanted to see what you'd be able to do with it?
I've had it for all of a week now, and got it (primarily) because I feel like I'm plateauing-- I can ride most any distance, even on back-to-back days, but my improvements in climbing and average speed have been incremental since the beginning of the year. I know I can go farther, but I want to go farther faster. Riding almost exclusively solo, I seem to unwittingly fall into a sort of high-endurance/low-tempo pace on rides, a spot I can sit all day long, because when I look at the Strava after the ride, my HR is usually right in the mid-zone, the tip of Z2 and the bottom of Z3. I needed something to help me break out of that.

Intensity is your average (or maybe weighted average) power for the ride divided by your FTP. It's a measure of how hard you rode. Strava seems to also use HR data to come up with this number. 89% for 4.5 hours means you rode really hard. If your ride did not seem really hard, your FTP might be set too low or there could be another issue with your data. Typically a 4.5 hr ride would be ridden at around 65-75% intensity if you were being casual about it.

Training load is another algorithm, I don't remember the exact formula- but it takes into account the power output and duration, then Strava tracks the cumulative effect of each ride's training load and compares your acute training load to your chronic training load to come up with a training stress balance. Basically this helps to determine when you're in peak form (TSB is close to zero, say -2 to +10), when you need some rest (TSB is negative -40 to -60), and when you really need to get back to training (TSB is a high positive number, say +20 and above).
[/FONT]
This is good stuff. This is the stuff I need to know. And after reading your response, I decided to just suck it up and do the test. Warmed up for about 10 minutes, then headed out on an unobstructed route, at what felt like pretty much full-out intensity-- pulled in 6 PRs in that 20 minutes, on segments I've ridden near a hundred times-- so I know I was pushing it.



So I guess un-weighted FTP is 336w, 3.88w/kg. I have no idea what that's indicative of. But there it is.
__________________
DrIsotope is offline  
Old 05-06-16, 08:17 PM
  #32  
Heathpack 
Has a magic bike
 
Heathpack's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 12,118

Bikes: 2018 Scott Spark, 2015 Fuji Norcom Straight, 2014 BMC GF01, 2013 Trek Madone

Mentioned: 680 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4037 Post(s)
Liked 51 Times in 18 Posts
Originally Posted by DrIsotope View Post
I've had it for all of a week now, and got it (primarily) because I feel like I'm plateauing-- I can ride most any distance, even on back-to-back days, but my improvements in climbing and average speed have been incremental since the beginning of the year. I know I can go farther, but I want to go farther faster. Riding almost exclusively solo, I seem to unwittingly fall into a sort of high-endurance/low-tempo pace on rides, a spot I can sit all day long, because when I look at the Strava after the ride, my HR is usually right in the mid-zone, the tip of Z2 and the bottom of Z3. I needed something to help me break out of that.



This is good stuff. This is the stuff I need to know. And after reading your response, I decided to just suck it up and do the test. Warmed up for about 10 minutes, then headed out on an unobstructed route, at what felt like pretty much full-out intensity-- pulled in 6 PRs in that 20 minutes, on segments I've ridden near a hundred times-- so I know I was pushing it.



So I guess un-weighted FTP is 336w, 3.88w/kg. I have no idea what that's indicative of. But there it is.
Your FTP is actually 95% of your average power on a 20 min test, provided it was max effort. That works out to 319 watts.

You can assess how good of a test it was by looking at your HR. If 164 is close to your LTHR, then it's a good test. The shape of your HR data curve looks right, though. HR should rise rapidly & plateau like yours did.
Heathpack is offline  
Old 05-06-16, 11:42 PM
  #33  
DrIsotope
Non omnino gravis
 
DrIsotope's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: SoCal, USA!
Posts: 6,730

Bikes: Nekobasu, Pandicorn

Mentioned: 99 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3590 Post(s)
Liked 157 Times in 118 Posts
It was probably... close. Last LTHR test (for HRM) had me at 166bpm, and while I was a bit gassed at the end of 20 minutes today, I didn't feel like I couldn't go any further (I rode another 12 miles after.) I still don't know what "all out" feels like. I'm sub-consciously always holding something back, ever since by one full-bonk and one near-bonk episodes (both of which occurred over 10 miles from home.) So now I genuinely feel like I'm never giving it 100%. But this number will work for now. I'll spend the rest of the month getting used to having the meter.
__________________
DrIsotope is offline  
Old 05-07-16, 05:08 AM
  #34  
Heathpack 
Has a magic bike
 
Heathpack's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 12,118

Bikes: 2018 Scott Spark, 2015 Fuji Norcom Straight, 2014 BMC GF01, 2013 Trek Madone

Mentioned: 680 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4037 Post(s)
Liked 51 Times in 18 Posts
Originally Posted by DrIsotope View Post
It was probably... close. Last LTHR test (for HRM) had me at 166bpm, and while I was a bit gassed at the end of 20 minutes today, I didn't feel like I couldn't go any further (I rode another 12 miles after.) I still don't know what "all out" feels like. I'm sub-consciously always holding something back, ever since by one full-bonk and one near-bonk episodes (both of which occurred over 10 miles from home.) So now I genuinely feel like I'm never giving it 100%. But this number will work for now. I'll spend the rest of the month getting used to having the meter.
If LTHR is 166ish, you got it right. Use 319 as your FTP for now. You can set it manually in Stravs.
Heathpack is offline  
Old 05-10-16, 08:12 AM
  #35  
dr_lha
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Central PA
Posts: 4,813

Bikes: 2016 Black Mountain Cycles Monster Cross v5, 2015 Ritchey Road Logic, 1998 Specialized Rockhopper, 2017 Raleigh Grand Prix

Mentioned: 11 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 355 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
I splashed out $450 today on a 2nd generation 4iiii power meter (pre-installed on a 6800 left crank arm). Won't ship until June apparently, but given that baby #3 is due in a two weeks, I doubt I'll be on my bike much before then.
dr_lha is offline  
Old 05-23-16, 12:50 AM
  #36  
JakiChan
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 809

Bikes: Specialized Sirrus Comp

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
I have more money than sense. So of COURSE I have a great Quarq power meter. Look that left/right data! That's helping me, right?

One thing it will do is show people how even their HR-based calorie estimates are way off. I was hopeful when my Apple Watch was showing me realistic numbers for steady-state cardio (like the elliptical) - but for riding it still doesn't know when I'm coasting. Some people won't listen, and still think they're burning 2000 kcal/hr riding, but hey - I trust my power meter. If I go on a long ride and need to eat some more that day I trust the calorie count from the ride. (I just don't eat it all.)
JakiChan is offline  
Old 05-23-16, 04:23 PM
  #37  
DrIsotope
Non omnino gravis
 
DrIsotope's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: SoCal, USA!
Posts: 6,730

Bikes: Nekobasu, Pandicorn

Mentioned: 99 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3590 Post(s)
Liked 157 Times in 118 Posts
Originally Posted by JakiChan View Post
One thing it will do is show people how even their HR-based calorie estimates are way off. I was hopeful when my Apple Watch was showing me realistic numbers for steady-state cardio (like the elliptical) - but for riding it still doesn't know when I'm coasting. Some people won't listen, and still think they're burning 2000 kcal/hr riding, but hey - I trust my power meter. If I go on a long ride and need to eat some more that day I trust the calorie count from the ride. (I just don't eat it all.)
My ride data now on PM vs. prior only on HRM, if anything, has gone up in calories per hour. Yesterday was 2.3hrs of Z1 (45% intensity-- that's an average HR of 97bpm for me) and still 470kcal/hr. Today was ~2hrs of weighted Z3 (80% intensity), 890kcal/hr. Last week's metric, just shy of 4 hours (77% intensity,) got me an average of 906kcal/hr.

My pre-PM self-administered LTHR (HRM only) test gave me an estimated 994kcal/hr. My most recent self-administered FTP test ride was 1,126kcal (92% intensity) for exactly one hour in the saddle. Because just as an HRM can't tell when you're coasting, the apps can't tell if it's windy, or if the tires are eating watts, or any of those dozens of other variables. This is why the PM is so good. Power is just power. I ride like someone who doesn't know any better, and is never going to learn.
__________________
DrIsotope is offline  
Old 05-23-16, 04:27 PM
  #38  
JakiChan
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 809

Bikes: Specialized Sirrus Comp

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally Posted by DrIsotope View Post
My ride data now on PM vs. prior only on HRM, if anything, has gone up in calories per hour. Yesterday was 2.3hrs of Z1 (45% intensity-- that's an average HR of 97bpm for me) and still 470kcal/hr. Today was ~2hrs of weighted Z3 (80% intensity), 890kcal/hr. Last week's metric, just shy of 4 hours (77% intensity,) got me an average of 906kcal/hr.
When you say kcal/hr are you converting directly from kj? What was your average wattage for the ride?
JakiChan is offline  
Old 05-23-16, 04:32 PM
  #39  
DrIsotope
Non omnino gravis
 
DrIsotope's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: SoCal, USA!
Posts: 6,730

Bikes: Nekobasu, Pandicorn

Mentioned: 99 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3590 Post(s)
Liked 157 Times in 118 Posts
Taking straight from Strava, which is usually about 1.1:1 conversion kcal:kj.

Most of my rides, regardless of duration, end ~250w average (which is middle Z3.) My FTP test even with the slow-roll home was 288w average. Z1 is a sizzling 145w or so. And yes, the Garmin is counting zeroes. I'd love to turn zeroes off and come home with +290w averages every day, but the numbers would be meaningless.
__________________
DrIsotope is offline  
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Teamprovicycle
General Cycling Discussion
4
12-31-18 08:17 PM
Bigbandito
Clydesdales/Athenas (200+ lb / 91+ kg)
21
08-07-13 06:06 PM
terrain
Road Cycling
7
06-03-11 10:06 AM
USofChay
Road Cycling
4
07-03-10 07:40 PM
dutchmorphology
Classic & Vintage
6
09-24-09 10:34 PM

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.