I have never trained with a power meter have no idea. I just got a Tacx Flux 2 so i can now do a FPT 20 minute test or a ramp test that is shorter. In some way I don't want to kill myself so going give this a try since doing it outside without a power meter is impossible. It seems the full 20 minute test actually takes about an 1 hour to complete but the ramp test you just go till you can't pedal anymore.

Anyone try either and get same results or close, and then possible compared to outside. I am asking us older folks here because in some ways it makes no difference to me what it actually is but could be a guide.

My ZWIFT 20 minute ramp tests’ FTP is 20 points higher than my Garmin estimated outdoor FTP. I just split the difference.

My indoor Zwift ramp tests are always significantly lower than outdoor 20-minute tests. In general I find indoor rides harder at the same power. I do very little indoor riding as I hate it with a passion.

Also, I rarely do FTP tests. I think they have their place as a benchmark for creating training targets, which is important. But, if you’re not following a training plan, I find it close to useless as a gauge of general bike fitness. Or rather, I find my average power over a given route to be a better gauge.

I did one the morning and seem low to me. I did not go all out or give what I think is a complete max out effort. Had me a 147 FTP. I don't think I some wonderful cyclist, but I have a lot of endurance been riding over 7000 miles a year past 3 years. My crash and broken collarbone and hand in May got in the way of riding outside but I kept up inside. Finally getting back outside but after the big crash my instinct is to be much more cautious.

I’ve estimated mine to be 225 based on hour-long high-effort rides on my CycleOps Fluid2 trainer and its published power curve.

I’ve done numerous outdoor rides where my Normalized Power (with a 4iiiii Precision 3, left-side power meter) were 215-220, so I think my estimate is good enough for calculating zones and using them for training.

One of these days, I’m going to do an actual FTP test on my trainer….

I don't like doing tests, and I also don't care much about FTP.

But for what it's worth, there are a couple apps that will give you a "just riding along" estimate of FTP:

• trainerroad.com
• hrv4training.com

If you have the trainer, why not do the real test which is a full hour's average?

I used by daughter's indoor trainer about 4 years ago. 247 was my number. Don't think I could repeat it today. Data and numbers do not improve my experience while riding a bicycle outside; in fact = they detract.

It’s a popular misconception that FTP is defined as the power someone can hold for a hour. Rather, FTP is power output at LT2 or some steady state around that intensity, called “ functional threshold,” by Andrew Coggan et al. They observed that the trained athletes in their studies could hold that output for something like an hour. However, the population range is really about 40-70 min for trained athletes and likely shorter for some of us “alter kackers.” A 60 min all out effort to complete exhaustion is extremely difficult even for elite athletes under anything but competition conditions, which is why 60 min for time to exhaustion at FTP was always just an approximation and why Coggan and coworkers validated the 95% of 20 min power estimation technique.

whatever.
an hour is the standard.
estimate any way if you wish.

who thinks they can hold 95% of a 20 minute effort for an additional 40 min.?
But the result will yield a higher 'FTP', so have at it.

Thanks for the info, btw

if one hour = approximation, then 20 min X .95 is another unknown variable added to the approximation. An approximation of an approximation.

I find FTP useful for Zwift sessions as it tells my smaht trainer how much resistance to provide in a planned workout. FWIW, mine is 180, which usually feels right.

Agree. All of these measures are just ways of estimating a somewhat theoretical quantity. However, the difficulty of giving a prolonged max effort is a key source of error and making the test more doable reduces it.

Agreed. Constant recalculation of FTP during your workouts: much easier than a 20-min test, and likely equally useful.

Another app: https://www.xertonline.com/

From their home page:

No more FTP tests. Ever.

The dreaded 8 or 20 minute FTP test is finally dead! With Xert, your Threshold Power is calculated more often, more accurately, and without testing, than ever before.

Learn More

instant gratification.

I want to know my ftp, but don't have an hour to check and don't wish to exert myself. .

I'm the same way on many topics -- complacent in my ignorance. "C'mon -- how hard can it be to hold your breath for 10 or 15 minutes!" (Budimir Šobat of Croatia holds the record for the longest voluntary breath hold underwater at 24 minutes and 37.36 seconds.)

Budimir's wife = "you haven't finished the Honey Do List, can't you soak your head for a minute and then calculate an approximation!"

Paraphrasing Thomas Mann (on what makes a writer a writer), "A racer is someone for whom cycling is more difficult than it is for other people."

People who don't race have no idea how painful it is. Back in the mid-'80's, I inadvertently set a course record on a popular regional 10-mile circuit during my second-ever time trial, having decided to chase down the guy who started before me. I was a Cat 3, and I didn't know that the guy in front was a Cat 1.

I caught him about 2/3 of the way around. He looked at me, chuckled, and said, "Go for it." I gasped, "I can't," and slid slowly backward, but managed to then just catch him at the line. As soon as I stopped pedaling: tunnel vision, a grayed-out world. I vowed never to do another time trial.

Sure: a casual rider, or even many older guys here who might think they're pretty fast, would have no trouble completing a 1-hour FTP test, or even a dozen, except for the boredom.

Do the first one right, though, and you'll never want to do another one. I sure don't. I'm still capable of hurting myself on a bike beyond what most people would be willing to tolerate, but I'd be an idiot not to go for the FTP background calculation method.

Not only do I not know what my FPT is, I don't know what FPT is.

Do you have many long, long mountain climbs in the DFW area? Then it doesn't matter practically unless you race.

For me it's nice to know periodically, if I'm headed into the Cascades. (ie, Can I ride at this pace and this gradient for an hour? ...to catch my companions.) Luckily the altitude does not catch us for most of our routes.

Yeah but I don't know what FPT even means.

But no, no especially tough climbs. Typically 1,000 feet of elevation over 30 miles.

Here's a definition I follow. 1 hour and not to utter exhaustion.

What is functional threshold power?

Functional threshold power (FTP) is the maximum power output an athlete can maintain in a quasi-steady state without fatiguing for 1 hour. FTP is, in my opinion, is a better way to analyze current fitness and improvements because it is more readily available to the athlete, isn’t invasive, and can be repeated multiple times for FREE! More about FTP here.

How did FTP and LT become confused to mean the same thing? Because your maximum effort for 1 hour is commonly the same as your lactate threshold. Dr. Andy Coggan realized this so he came up with the FTP concept and simplified things for everyone (yippee!). However, your FTP is not your LT and your LT is not your FTP, got it!?

So, to recap: what is the difference between lactate threshold and functional threshold power? LT is the point at which lactate increases in the blood stream exponentially whereas FTP is the maximum effort an athlete can maintain for 1 hour without fatiguing

The beauty of tracking FTP over time is watching it decline with age. Nothing like having a reminder that you’re only declining. Over four years I have gone down 16 points, but Garmin cheers me on with my calculated VO2 max for my age group. Big whoop!

I used Xert for my indoor workouts last winter. They've ditched the requirement for doing FTP tests in favor of AI real-time analysis of the changes in power and heart rate resulting from variations in the work load. My "threshold power" (the term that they use in preference to FTP) increased slowly but steadily during those two months, ending 17 watts above where it was when I first logged into Xert.

That increase might have had less to do with the specific workouts I was given, which were very easy in early December but became pretty difficult by the end of January, and more with my having likely been over-training during the season, averaging 20 hours of fairly hard rides per week.

(Editing to add that, while it's likely that some of the improvement was a consequence of the software providing easy workouts to start with, thus giving me a lot of time to recover from accumulated fatigue, that just demonstrates how valuable the AI analyses were for determining how hard or easy a given workout should be for maximum gains.)

Regardless of FTP or threshold, what I have learned (mostly through error) is to not push so hard on the flats so I have reserves stored for the climbs. It used to be, ‘go hard all the time’ and now I count my matches and try to only burn them when necessary. YMMV

I had a CycleOps Fluid2 trainer that I used to estimate my FTP, then I bought a power meter. It wasn't even close. The cycleops was high by about 40 watts. I was doing The Sufferfest back then and when I switched to real power I could no longer do the rides based on my FTP/4DP numbers that were based on virtual power. The other thing about the Cycleops is that you can spin it out even though it is a fluid trainer. At some point it stops providing enough resistance. I eventually switched to a smart trainer and the smart trainer was almost spot on with the power meter's numbers.

The last time a truly gassed myself was about 5 years ago on a climb in Caberfae Ski resort near Cadillac Mi. I was trying to go up as hard as I could and it really is about 1 mile at 6% grade nothing for most but I live in the flatlands of Illinois. The last 400 meters is 9% according to the sign. I got up to the top my heart rate was 162 much higher than it normally every goes. Back then I could sprint and getting about 145 is hard. At the end at the crest I was beat and gasping for air. Not something i am used to doing.

I was primarily a long distance runner of 40 years and could manage in my best year a 39 minute 10K. That would leave me completely spent for the rest of the day and pretty much nothing happening for another 49 hours training wise. The difference then was I was 33 years younger and just went at it. Now at 63 I am much more cautious too many things can happen and go wrong. what might a normal FTP be for someone 60-65 who rides regularly and fit, but not gifted? My guess is about 200.