Which would you buy: A 3k bike; or a 1.8k bike + SRM power meter?
07-26-11, 02:28 AM
#26
Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: UK
Posts: 44
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
THIS. I will say there is a good number of FAST riders I ride with who do not have computers. They really do not care how fast they are going, their HR, or their cadence. They just know their body very well and have been riding so long, they say they just do not need the data.
But what has taken them thirty years, I would like to achieve in three years. And it seems to only be possible to make this expedited progress with daily training the active utilisation of workout data (as Hunter Allen and Andrew Coggan prove in their authoritative treatise).
To suggest that cycling power data is irrelevant and unnecessary, is uninformed and ignorant.
07-26-11, 05:13 AM
#27
Senior Member
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Boone, North Carolina
Posts: 5,094
Bikes: 2009 Cannondale CAAD9-6 2014 Trek Domaine 5.9
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
If you're not already training with power, you dont need a £3000 bike. Get the less expensive bike, a Garmin 705 or 805 plus a power tap.
07-26-11, 06:35 AM
#28
Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Needham, MA
Posts: 419
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
You are both missing an important factor. Yes, there are many "master riders" (as ericm979 puts it) in my club too. They have been riding 200+ miles per week for over thirty years. It has taken them the majority of their lifetime to gradually build their impressive levels of natural strength.
But what has taken them thirty years, I would like to achieve in three years. And it seems to only be possible to make this expedited progress with daily training the active utilisation of workout data (as Hunter Allen and Andrew Coggan prove in their authoritative treatise).
To suggest that cycling power data is irrelevant and unnecessary, is uninformed and ignorant.
But what has taken them thirty years, I would like to achieve in three years. And it seems to only be possible to make this expedited progress with daily training the active utilisation of workout data (as Hunter Allen and Andrew Coggan prove in their authoritative treatise).
To suggest that cycling power data is irrelevant and unnecessary, is uninformed and ignorant.
Eric even suggested reading Allen/Coggan. You've clearly done that. And you clearly seem to think power has immense training value. I think you've answered your question.
07-26-11, 07:12 AM
#30
Senior Member
Get the bike with a powermeter. You can always upgrade the bike but deciding on a powermeter really focuses what you can/can't do. For example if you get a BB30 SRM then you've determined what kind of frame you need to get in the future (like I did). Or if you
I don't train scientifically but I like the numbers and such I get from the SRM. It's fun. Fun is good. I bought an SRM equipped bike and it's been great.
I used to have a working "SRM" for my car, the G-Tech RR, did g-force, 0-60 mph (or whatever, like 0-80 etc), and I could chart it when I was at a computer. It made my 90+ minute commute very interesting. I don't race cars, I don't even do any drag races, I just wanted to see what the car did. If it still worked I'd still use it (it eventually broke physically).
Also, once you get riding you'll realize that other than wheels and fit, the bike makes little difference in the scheme of things. One of the local domestic pros totally spanks everyone, and his bike is an off-the-shelf bike with Ultegra, with aluminum wheels, and he's killing guys who have 10 lbs bikes with aero wheels. Another guy, a Cat 1, uses a heavy frame (his sponsor), has Dura Ace fine, but pretty low end non-aero wheels. He'll go off the front solo, go so hard he can shell half the field, and he's doing on a bike that probably weighs 16 or 17 lbs.
It's like anything else - you're limited genetically to some level of cycling performance. Without genetic variation we'd all be as good as Lance on the bike, as good at chess as Bobby Fischer, play soccer like Pele, and write like, oh, Victor Hugo. Life is interesting because we aren't all the same.
So if you will be downloading data from the SRM, look at your data, and enjoy it (like I do), then get the SRM. If you are a diligent athlete and like following a training plan, get the SRM. If you don't care one iota about power or speed or heartrate then skip the SRM.
I don't train scientifically but I like the numbers and such I get from the SRM. It's fun. Fun is good. I bought an SRM equipped bike and it's been great.
I used to have a working "SRM" for my car, the G-Tech RR, did g-force, 0-60 mph (or whatever, like 0-80 etc), and I could chart it when I was at a computer. It made my 90+ minute commute very interesting. I don't race cars, I don't even do any drag races, I just wanted to see what the car did. If it still worked I'd still use it (it eventually broke physically).
Also, once you get riding you'll realize that other than wheels and fit, the bike makes little difference in the scheme of things. One of the local domestic pros totally spanks everyone, and his bike is an off-the-shelf bike with Ultegra, with aluminum wheels, and he's killing guys who have 10 lbs bikes with aero wheels. Another guy, a Cat 1, uses a heavy frame (his sponsor), has Dura Ace fine, but pretty low end non-aero wheels. He'll go off the front solo, go so hard he can shell half the field, and he's doing on a bike that probably weighs 16 or 17 lbs.
It's like anything else - you're limited genetically to some level of cycling performance. Without genetic variation we'd all be as good as Lance on the bike, as good at chess as Bobby Fischer, play soccer like Pele, and write like, oh, Victor Hugo. Life is interesting because we aren't all the same.
So if you will be downloading data from the SRM, look at your data, and enjoy it (like I do), then get the SRM. If you are a diligent athlete and like following a training plan, get the SRM. If you don't care one iota about power or speed or heartrate then skip the SRM.
07-26-11, 07:20 AM
#31
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Antioch, IL
Posts: 2,330
Bikes: 2013 Synapse 4
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 70 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time
in
1 Post
just my .02, if you are planning on racing at a very high level, this kind of data is invaluable (if you know how to use the data properly and translate it to your training regimen for positive effect)... however... it seems to me that someone who is racing for personal satisfaction/enjoyment would be better served getting the cheaper bike and saving the cash for a replacement bike after you crash (and you will crash)... power meter would be nice, but far from a requirement until you plan on going after pro/cat1 guys... it seems to me that a power meter is an awfully expensive training tool and nothing more...
disclosure, i do not race, have no intention of it any time soon, though I do enjoy a friendly competition with friends on short climbs or sprints... but I also can't afford replacement bikes and etc... that disclosure being stated, if I had the cash I'd get one, though I don't think it would do me any good... and for the record, both of those bikes are pretty damn nice, would love to try a Wilier some day
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
OptimalCycling
"The 33"-Road Bike Racing
26
02-05-11 02:49 PM
