silversx80

Comparing anecdote to anecdote, I have nothing but positive experiences with Wahoo products and service (only needed to contact service once, and more due to my idiocy than their products). Don't listen to the naysayers who are never pleased, no matter how good the equipment is (see how easy that was?). Being objective is difficult when your own experience has left you emotionally compromised (the reason I won't buy another Nissan).

Basically, do your research and read the 3 and 4 star reviews. Don't take my advice on the Kickr, because I've got over 500 hours on mine and have been nothing by happy… 5 stars. I would give the Rflkt+ 3 stars (a neat idea, but I really don't like it), the RPM 4 stars (its shortcomings are more due to the technology than the brand), and the tickr 4 stars (no complaints, but nothing impressive).

silversx80

A smart trainer can still make sense. There's TrainerRoad, CycleOps Virtual Training, Full Gaz, etc. You don't need Zwift to get a tremendous structured training program.

So, in 2010 I was i peak physical shape (or so I thought). FTP was just over 4 W/kg, I was getting in 12-15 hours a week, and my CTL was in the 100s. My training gear was a PowerTap wheel, my Scott Addict, and a CycleOps Fluid^2 trainer. A chronic knee injury from my Cross Country days came back so I took a few years off of any serious riding/racing.

Late Spring of 2015 I decided to get back into it and started training again. That June an F-150 took me out, along with my bike. As my broken clavicle and body healed, I researched. The Kickr was really the only game in town for a direct-drive smart trainer. Insurance bought that for me, along with a new bike. I was hit on June 22nd, and was cleared by the ortho to do indoor training rides on August 11th.

I decided not to add an on-board power meter again, and it's been great (except for gauging efforts in head and crosswinds). My FTP is now over 4.5 W/kg, and I attribute my current fitness to the structure of indoor training on a smart trainer (and Zwift). I really can't imagine a training regimen without it now.

Xherion

My 2 cents. I own a gen 1 Kickr and an inexpensive Nashbar fluid trainer. I've used both trainers for 2 years, the fluid trainer with a Powertap wheel and the Kickr using the built in power meter. I've logged over 300 rides on the Kickr and around a hundred on the fluid trainer. I've used the fluid trainer with Trainer Road and TR, PerfPro studio and Zwift on the Kickr.

I will say this right now, if you are an analytical type, if you buy the Kickr, you will end up buying an external power meter at some point for the outdoors. Now with that aside...sim mode and erg mode is very nice. Direct drive is also a very nice thing to have.

Sim mode makes riding on Zwift a lot more tolerable. I don't think I could put in the indoor miles I've done this year without Zwift. I've done over 150 rides indoors this year alone. I ride on Zwift 4x a week, mixing SST (2-3 x 20min) intervals and I'll throw in a sim mode ride once a week a so just to keep myself sane.

Now to the downsides. I've personally found erg mode can make you handicapped if you let it. It's a lot easier to maintain power running erg mode because it's so smooth and it makes micro adjustments for you all the time. Riding outside is a lot more variable and every second your power will naturally fluctuate, pretty significantly. So I've found that maintaining similar power outdoors outside is a lot more difficult because you need to adapt to much greater ranges of power and thus your physiology can become attuned towards what you spend your time training to. In my case, I did so much erg mode training intervals (20+ min intervals) that I became excellent at flat time trial type efforts, but significantly lagged at more real world outdoor demands. It's not the fault of the trainer, but is easy to fall into the trap if you don't vary your workouts and just chase a power number.

Another small gripe is slope mode. Yes, the Kickr can simulate gradients. However, I've found that once you start to get into the higher gradients (12%+) at low RPMs, the pedal motion isn't very realistic compared to outside. It's tough to describe, but at low cadence, high gradient, the pedal stroke has a tendency to not be very even. I think it's actually more of an issue that at very high torque, low RPM, trainers don't handle resistance very well. For instance, at 250+ watts at 45 cadence, it feels really unnatural.

Overall, I'm very happy with my Kickr and think it's worth every penny. But if I could only ever have a dumb trainer and a power meter vs. no power meter and a Kickr, I'd pick the dumb trainer and power meter every time.

ingo

Agree completely. At low cadence and low speed, the trainer flywheel on the Kickr is unrealistic. I don't know if other smart trainers are any better. In real life the bike surges with each pedal stroke and that motion/resistance is impossible to simulate with a flywheel. At high speed (over 30 kph simulated) the road resistance is about right whether at low or high cadence. After several days of on the Kickr, climbing a hill in real life feels weird for a minute. But a wheel driven dumb trainer feels nothing like riding on the road to me.

eyeheartny

If I end up buying a Kickr, Wahoo should give you a commission! You're being very persuasive. Considering the Colorado Cyclist price of $959 shipped I may just jump on the Kickr and give it a whirl. I'm sure prices will continue to come down on power meters as there's more competition, and I can always add one later. I guess now the question is do I get the Kickr Snap or go full-bore and get the original Kickr? Thoughts?

Can you do me a favor? Does the one they're selling here at Colorado Cyclist for $959 look like the 2015 version or the 2016 version? I'm trying to compare it to the one here on the Wahoo site and I can't tell. Apparently there are some small differences between them. Any thoughts as to whether it's a must-have to get the newer one? Wahoo claims quieter operation on the newer one.

Also, 4.5 W/kg is really impressive. That's around, what, Cat 2 level? Good on you for all that hard work and congrats on healing up from what sounds like a crazy accident.

Xherion

That is the gen 1. The gen 2 has the straight handle that is mounted higher.

I think if you're really on the fence, you should wait to see the verdict on gen 1 vs 2. Gen 1 has a strain gauge power meter while the gen 2 measures power based on the brake and reports targeted power.

eyeheartny

Definitely still on the fence.

Complicating matters, there's a guy nearby with a one year old KK Road Machine for $150. That and a Stages crank and I'm in business for less than the cost of a Kickr Snap, but obviously without smart trainer features. I wish I could figure out how make the Tacx Vortex I have work with the new wider axle on my new bike-- if it would fit/close properly I'd keep it in a heartbeat.

Good to know about which gen that version of the Kickr is. I'd rather have a strain gauge, I think, knowing that they're the standard in onboard power meters.

Jazzguitar

I can't comment on gen 1 but my 2016, (gen 2), Kickr consistently measures within a few watts of my PM so I've found accuracy to be well within the stated 1-2%. My understanding is that the new design was mainly to increase reliability and responsiveness.

silversx80

Well, I really enjoy the direct drive of the Kickr, vs a wheel-on trainer, but I don't think it's that critical. There are a few other trainers you may want to consider, so check out dcrainmaker's 2017 guide. The CycleOps Hammer and Tacx Flux look interesting (not out yet).

It was already mentioned, but the one they're selling is the Gen 1 Kickr. The current firmware is great, and I don't feel a need for the Gen 2. It is a good deal, being over $200 less than what I paid, but the new tech always has some appeal.

The FTP is kind of a fluff number… good for setting training zones. I know Cat 1 guys with a lower FTP than me, and I could never keep up with them for very long... unless it was a flat solo TT course.

Bumnah

I have a Kurt Kinetic Road Machine with their inRide2 power meter attached.

The trainer itself is great, their power meter not so much.
I had real issues getting the inRide2 to work on my Mac. I didn't do my research and missed the part where they said the inRide2 doesn't yet work on the Mac. It is now in beta stages.

I do TrainerRoad on there all the time and it's great. My power output has really gone up. The consistency isn't the best. The ride last night on the trainer had my power fluctuating all over the place, maybe the battery is low but it was disappointing.

My next trainer will be the Kickr, I plan to use zwift with it.

bmthom.gis

not having a trainer or power meter, I would say go for the Kickr and Zwift. Once you get back outside, you can either sell the Kickr or wait for PM prices to further drop. It's going to happen, it is happening, PM teh seems to be growing at a rapid pace.

eyeheartny

If you weren't planning on using Zwift, do you think you'd still go with the Kickr or would you just add a power meter? Part of what I'm wrestling with is whether the ERG mode on the smart trainers is really worth it, or whether I could just work hard to hold the right wattage using TrainerRoad and not have the machine adjust for me. That really seems to be the key feature difference for me and my usage, and I can't tell whether it's worth the significant increase in $ over power-based training without the machine adjusting as my cadence changes.

eyeheartny

What metrics do you think matter more? I'm really curious!

silversx80

It's really tough to say that any one metric matters more because it depends on your goals. Someone who does gran fondos will have a different set of needs than a crit racer. FTP is really good for setting your training zones so that you can better structure your training plan.

Some of the Zwift races have a similar set of power demands, and tactics as actual races (yes, I'm opening that can of worms). Just so you can see what may be required I'm posting my TrainingPeaks workout from a Zwift race this past Tuesday. I ended up 4th, and 32 seconds behind the leader. I can at least give the excuse that I did a pretty tough workout the day before.

See my 81.7 TSS bike workout. I did 26.2 mi in 1:00:13.
https://tpks.ws/Qdhij

https://www.zwiftpower.com/v2/race.php?id=1368

Lots of riding above threshold, and lots of need to recover around 85%-95%.

Bumnah

Honestly, if you have the money get the kickr and if you don't like it sell it and do a traditional trainer. I suspect trainers like the kickr will be more future proof. In the long run, companies will use software to control the resistance unit more accurately, creating more accurate road feel and a better experience. You can use zwift with regular trainers too, it's just not as nice.

I tend to view my indoor riding as training and my outdoor riding for endurance and more fun riding.

Xherion

I think any speed on Zwift should be taken with a grain of salt since it doesn't really take into wind resistance into account.

That being said, you're a strong rider. So your FTP is around 336 watts? Nice.

silversx80

A big +1 to Zwift speeds, but I think that since everyone gets that ego boost power is pretty much the best reading. I can tell you that I'm just as beat up after a Zwift race than the real deal… just that Zwift is about 4mph faster for that effort.

FTP is somewhere around there, but I haven't tested since early August. The training plan since then has been just enough threshold work to hold FTP steady and improve variability, micro-recovery, 1-min power, and a lot more tempo. CTL took a hit too, but the next big event I may do isn't until March.

Munk69

I am doing Trainerroad with a PM and Fluid trainer. Works fine for what I am doing. Sweet spot base with the intention of building up as the winter comes in.


Seems to me if you want to really do Zwift, then the Kickr is probably the way to go. If your doing intervals with trainerroad or others, then I would consider a PM / Fluid. Then when it comes time to ride again, you can continue your plan outside with your PM.

PepeM

I'd say no.

If you really want to learn about this (and make your head spin) join the WKO4 Power Users group on Facebook. After a few months you'll know about the metrics that matter (FTP being one of them.)


I've only done like five Zwift races so not an expert on the topic but those races where nothing at all like 'real races.'

Real race: A lot of coasting. A lot of really tough accelerations.
Zwift race: One hour of riding somewhere close to treshold.

Looking at your file there, you didn't coast a single time throughout the whole race. That just never happens in a real race. Not many long, hard efforts either.

Still, Zwift races can be fun.

PepeM

Oh yes, I do love 'Zwift speed.'

Cruising around in zone 2 at 22mph? Sure. In real life I would be doing like 16-17.

silversx80

I guess that wasn't a fair example, just a recent one. Still, it's pretty much what I'd anticipate in a 5-man break… which it was.

You're right, though. There isn't as much coasting in many of the races on Zwift, but I've done a few where there was. In those ones, most people had smart trainers.

RShantz

Don't over-complicate things. If you are wanting power of some type, I'm assuming you want it to train with and improve your power. If my assumption is true, get the one where you are most likely to do your real training. If outdoor, go with the bike mounted PM. If indoors, go with a smart trainer.

eyeheartny

Thanks-- this is the route I'm going. Have a Stages crank coming, picking up a used KK Road Machine today, and will use a Garmin 820 as the head unit for data collection/upload to various services for outdoor stuff, and will use TrainerRoad for indoor workouts.

PepeM

Awesome. I don't think you'll regret your decision.

Bumnah

I'm a big fan of TrainerRoad my cycling has improved quite a bit using it.