# Should I buy a power meter?



## Guest

I think that a power meter is a great training tool, and I am considering purchasing a crank-based product - probably a quarq. Financially, it would be a big deal to buy one. I have heard that they are only useful if you download your rides and preferably have a coach analyzing the power profile. I have limited time to ride and do not believe that I will be dowloading and analyzing my rides. Instead, I expect that I will do testing to establish training and interval zones and train to those until I re-test every 60-90 days. My main goal this season is a sub-one hour 40k TT. Do you think that the power meter makes sense given the limitations of the analysis above?


----------



## Creakyknees

If it's worth the cost of the gear and coaching to meet that goal, then yeah.

Just be aware that your goal is certainly attainable without a power meter; plenty of riders have been doing it for years on standard road bikes with nothing but a stopwatch to train with. Others do it with just an inexpensive HR meter.


----------



## iliveonnitro

If you are not downloading or analyzing the ride files, there is little point in owning one...even if you want to pace yourself for 40km TTs.


----------



## JohnHemlock

doesn't make sense to me unless you are going to geek out on the data.


----------



## petalpower

I'll be ordering a Quarq within the next 2-3 weeks ( after I get my fit ) , but made the decision after reading "Training and Racing With A Power Meter". 

Seems like if you plan on analyzing the data, and using it as described in the above book, yes, a PM will be a useful tool. If not, it might just become another computer to look at while you're riding.

If money is not an issue, by all means, go for it and stimulate the economy. 

What cranks are you planning on going with OP? I'm still up in the air, as my frame doesn't have BB30, and my options are limited to FSA, SRAM and Rotor 3D cranks.

Check out that book for sure.


----------



## hrumpole

Mr. Papagiorgio said:


> Financially, it would be a big deal to buy one. I have heard that they are only useful if you download your rides and preferably have a coach analyzing the power profile. I have limited time to ride and do not believe that I will be dowloading and analyzing my rides.


I gotta say-it's your $$, but if you're not going to analyze that data, then why not just use a stopwatch and intervals, or HRM, or a trainer and speedometer? Most indoor trainers convert from speed to watts by a formula, so you could probably figure out what your power output would be based on speed. Not that you'd want to be on the trainer more than once a week when it's nice out, but as a controlled environment to measure progress it seems a lot cheaper than buying a PM that you're not going to use the way it was intended. A combination of HRM, a trainer, and perceived effort may also do you pretty well for several thousand dollars less.

But I don't race 'cept in triathalons (and then only slowly)https://forums.roadbikereview.com/images/smilies/biggrin.gif and am really new to the sport compared to all the other folks on this board. But that's how I would analyze that decision. For the cost of the quarq power meter you could buy another bike--a nice one.


----------



## stevesbike

I have a powermeter (powertap) but use a non-powertap disc wheel for TTs and a HRM. For pacing efforts, I find the HRM works well and provides good focus for a TT.


----------



## ukbloke

Perhaps try to rent or borrow a PowerTap for a day or a week first to see how much value you can get out of it? It certainly is an eye-opener the first time you ride with a PowerMeter and start watching the numbers. You soon learn a few lessons about managing your power output on the bike.

This is a big investment, and like others I'm not convinced it is worth it if you are not going to download the data. If you want to spend more money on a more powerful head unit, you might like the Saris Joule since it maintains your ride history on the bike computer and gives more interesting metrics than just average power.


----------



## multirider

A power meter is extremely useful for interval training - it shows your output RIGHT NOW instead of trailing like HR and it shows when you are cooked because you can't generate the same power as previous intervals.

I have found that training with power is much more motivational than HR. With HR, I found myself saying "goal was 170bpm for 2 minutes, but 168bpm for 1:50 was close enough". With power, I'm almost always trying to meet or slightly exceed the goal. Not sure why, but it flipped my thinking.

Power is much better for hill training - maintaining 400w up a hill is more meaningful than maintaining 170bpm, especially as fitness increases because HR is slow to ramp up.

Downloading is trivial - it can be done as a background activity on your PC. Since you posted to an internet forum, it seems likely you have a PC.

As stated above, many people have achieved their goals without a power meter. But I can honestly say my training has improved significantly since I began training with power and my race results back it up. I'm very happy to be training with power (SRM on road bike, iBike on TT bike).


----------



## hrumpole

How do you like the ibike? Which version is it?


----------



## DM.Aelis

I say go for it, but make sure you will get the value out of it. It's just a training tool. You can do the same work with a HRM; the information of a PM is what is so key and what guides your work intelligently. Make sure you're into that whole idea.

I just took the plunge. SRM amateur for $675, barely used on eBay.

I'd either do that or a used powertap, personally. No way I could justify $1000+. If I don't get my "money's worth" I can always resell it. Honestly, I'm just excited from finally having a reliable way to quantify progress and work; and be numerically honest with myself so I can't hide from my weaknesses in training/racing, or stealthily "cheat" myself in workouts. I'll let you guys know how it goes; just another guy having a blast racing, going self-coached with Coggan's PM book and Friel's Bible.


----------



## steve_e_f

I say go for it. I do download my data and its nice to be able to really tell where my fitness is and how hard my efforts really are for the first time ever.

its also good for breakaways in road races. It helps me not get excited and ride at an output that will cause me to blow up.

p.s. the quark is excellent.


----------



## multirider

hrumpole said:


> How do you like the ibike? Which version is it?


The short answer: I like it a lot. I find training with power to be VASTLY more motivating and effective for training than HR. I purchased the iBike for use on my road bike, added a mount for it to my cx bike, then got a TT bike and put a mount on there, too. Then I put a mount on my mtb. It's not as useful on a full-suspension mtb due to the effect of suspension on tilt and the varying trail conditions (rolling resistance). But it was never intended for mtb use. And it is an incredibly useful tool on the road bikes.

There is a lot of discussion about the accuracy of iBikes. The iBike folks have a lot of data to back up their claims of high accuracy. Many people continue to disbelieve. Whatever. The main thing about a PM is that it needs to be consistent. If your PM says you're putting out 200w when you are actually putting out 190w or 210w, that doesn't really matter for training purposes as long as it registers the same number for the same force on the pedals. If your PM says 200w for a particular effort one day and 225w for the same effort the next day, that is a significant problem. I find the iBike to be extremely consistent with the sole exception of gusty winds, particularly from odd angles to the bike. Sometimes it feels like it is registering low in those situations. But it could be that I hate riding in gusty winds and that affects my perception of effort.

The long answer is that I started with the first iBike in the summer of 2007. I used it and the Coggan Training With Power book to set up a training plan that fall/winter. My primary goal was to improve fitness for mountain bike racing. I had been training with an HRM and finishing mid-pack (10th-20th) in the Sport class in the Winter Park Mountain Bike Series. After one winter of using the iBike to train with power, I won 4 out of 5 races in the same class in the same mountain bike series against the same competitors that summer. 

Over time, I upgraded to the 2nd generation iBike, then to the iBike Pro Gen 3. The Gen 3 is a pretty significant improvement - easier to use, not affected by road conditions (original version did not like rough roads), more reliable pairing of wireless sensors, etc. The software that it comes with is wonderful - a joy to use! I prefer it to WKO. Anyway, if you get feedback from someone with Gen 1 or Gen 2, please know that Gen 3 is much better and resolves the issues with prior units.

Satisfaction with the iBike typically boils down to whether you can stop wondering about its accuracy. People who can't stop wondering "is the rolling resistance of this road higher than other roads? I changed my hand position, did that change my aero?" and things like that won't be happy with it.

After riding with an SRM for 9 months on the same routes as the iBike, I believe the iBike is very consistent, quite accurate, and a hugely effective training tool.

I got the SRM because it came with a Cannondale SuperSix that I purchased. I got a slightly used SuperSix for $3100. Essentially, I feel like I either got a SuperSix with a free SRM or I got a SRM with a free SuperSix. I am EXTREMELY happy with the purchase of my SuperSix!

Final thought -- the Footon-Serotta team is using the iBike on the Pro Tour such as the Giro d'Italia. That gives it some credibility!


----------



## hrumpole

Thanks. I've been thinking about a new, more-funciton computer, and was toying with Garmin 500 or 705 off of CList vs. an ibike. The SRMs and PTs are simply too much coin.


----------



## ukbloke

hrumpole said:


> Thanks. I've been thinking about a new, more-funciton computer, and was toying with Garmin 500 or 705 off of CList vs. an ibike. The SRMs and PTs are simply too much coin.


For me the only reason to go with the iBike would be cost. However, you can get wired PowerTap wheels off CL or ebay for less money, or for similar amounts of money new at Competitive Cyclist.

There is, of course, the iBike Sport for $200 and that is the cheapest way to get into power. This was a non-starter for me because you can't download the data, but it would appear to meet the requirements of some, eg. the OP.

In conclusion, I went with a wired PowerTap deal off CL, and have few regrets. If I had the money I'd upgrade to a wireless PowerTap with an Edge 500 head unit (assuming that Garmin can fix the bugs), or wait to see what happens with the MetriGear Vector.


----------



## drdiaboloco

hrumpole said:


> I've been thinking about a new, more-funciton computer, and was toying with Garmin 500 or 705 off of CList vs. an ibike.


You can get the full Garmin 500 kit (HR and speed/cadence) from PBK for under $250 shipped. Seems like you're not going to do much better on CL, considering how new the unit is and the relatively small number that have been sold so far.


----------



## ukbloke

drdiaboloco said:


> You can get the full Garmin 500 kit (HR and speed/cadence) from PBK for under $250 shipped. Seems like you're not going to do much better on CL, considering how new the unit is and the relatively small number that have been sold so far.


Considering Garmin's warranty policy, and also the historical failure rate of their devices, I would definitely stay away from CL or ebay! Personally I would also steer towards a trusted US-based company with a good returns policy, like Performance or REI ...


----------



## drdiaboloco

ukbloke said:


> Considering Garmin's warranty policy, and also the historical failure rate of their devices, I would definitely stay away from CL or ebay!


Well, backing this up was the 500 I just got and had to return due to a problem with the screen. PBK gladly set up the return and will allegedly pay for the return shipping when the refund is posted... Just sent it back this week so we'll see how good their return policy really is.

Assuming no problems with the refund, I don't see how spending an additional $100 from a US-based purveyor is a better idea than PBK. Even if you get a bum unit and DID have to pay return shipping you still are $85 to the good.


----------



## ukbloke

drdiaboloco said:


> Assuming no problems with the refund, I don't see how spending an additional $100 from a US-based purveyor is a better idea than PBK. Even if you get a bum unit and DID have to pay return shipping you still are $85 to the good.


If it fails 6 months, 12 months, or 3 years down the line you can walk into REI and ask for a replacement or a refund, and you will get one. You can also do the same if you are unhappy with it and consider the device not fit for purpose - for example, if 3 years of Garmin 500 firmware releases still doesn't fix the device hang bug. With Performance there is also a satisfaction guarantee and you might get the same no-hassle returns treatment (or you might not).

I'm sure that PBK will do the right thing for a DOA unit, but not clear to me what they would do after a few months have passed. Of course, Garmin have a very good returns and service policy themselves (as long as you bought it new and not off ebay), so in most cases you can return via Garmin and not have to return to the point of sale.

I buy lots of stuff at PBK, some at the LBS, and occasionally CL and ebay. I try to balance the cost savings against whatever warranty/rights I'm trading away, and it is clearly a personal judgement call.


----------



## drdiaboloco

Perhaps I don't understand REI's sale terms, but you can walk into their store with a 3 y/o item that they sold you that doesn't work... One that is two years past the end of its warranty... and they will replace it?


----------



## ukbloke

drdiaboloco said:


> Perhaps I don't understand REI's sale terms, but you can walk into their store with a 3 y/o item that they sold you that doesn't work... One that is two years past the end of its warranty... and they will replace it?


Yes. Or refund at your discretion. I presume they have other policies in place to curb abuse. Someone on this forum had a ~3 year old Edge 305 with the common battery disconnect problem, and exchanged it at REI for an Edge 500.

(Costco used to have similar policies for things like TVs but had to stop because of the abuse.)


----------



## drdiaboloco

Thanks for the tip, I was unaware of that policy. That does change the complexion of the purchase decision, to be sure. I think I'd still go for the savings up front, but with a cycle computer I can certainly see how the REI policy is very attractive.

I know about the abuse of the similar Costco policy... They used to make an excellent rollaboard suitcase that was pretty cheap at $75 or so, and coworkers of mine would exchange for a new one every year until the pulled the plug on that one.


----------



## hrumpole

Yep. Cost is the controlling factor. I just ordered a new set of (nonPT) wheels built, so a new wheelset (or wheel) is out of the question. What I want is GPS plus power, but the only one that seems to do that is Garmin. 

There may be a couple of options in the future. For example, if the ibike transmitted in ANT+, it could work with products like pedalbrain or runkeeper in the future. For now, my options seem to be either heart rate plus GPS, or power without GPS. If the ibike had the edge's gps functionality it would be a no-brainer.


----------



## tom_h

Too bad REI always excludes GPS and electronics from their 20% off sales, like the one now in progress. 
Still, you can get the members' 7-8% rebate at year end. That, plus REI's liberal policies, that would push me toward REI for potentially fragile electronics.


----------



## JimT

I am in the same boat as the OP in certain ways. Only thing is I am older, not in top form and just now really getting serious about cycling. I watched a crit a month ago and I am sold. I have been riding 2 years on and off and have about 10 more pounds I need to loose. I have a Garmin 305 that measures everything I really need at this point so I figured the upgrade that would help my riding the most would be some ZIPP 303s and training harder but still considering a PM in the future. 
While training and monitoring HR, inclines, mileage and times, I realized a power meter isn't going to help. I see by the Garmin that when my HR hits 180+ for any amount of time I am done. I can last about 40 minutes at 170 but in the 160s I can last a little more than an hour. My average route of 21 very hilly miles I average 16.4 mph and the 50 mile flatter ride I am averaging 14.8. That tells me I really need to work on everything: base miles, hill climbs and flats and the only way I am going ot get better is to ride. The greatest wheels (IMHO) wont help me too much and a power meter is definately not going to help me get faster... It is seat time. 
I am sure there are magical training routines in books that require a PM and will make you faster but you still need to train to get the results. 
In a nut shell the biggest improvement I can see in cycling is riding but if you have money put it towards making your bike lighter and more aero. I've asked on this board and with the advice the others I have been getting better faster than I ever have. I will consider a PM when I feel I have reached my max potential and then the next step up would be doping which would be training four the Tour de France... (That aint happening) 
My suggestion is find a good training routine, train, buy upgrades on your bike to help with weight/aero then if you feel you still need a PM then get it. 
When I get the cash I am going for better wheels (which would bring bike wgt to 15.3ish) then train more. I really can't say that I would get a PM because for how I ride I have all the info at my hands I really need. I can see where and how my heart rate reacts and I know where I need to keep it before I bonk. The only way to avoid the bonk in your training is to train for it and the folks here have many tips, some will work better than others but trying them all will make you better. 
I am a data geek and feel I dont need a PM. My HR and perceived intensity tell me enough to know I dont need a PM. From my data I know I have to improve all around. Heck, post your progress on here and the folks will tell you what you need to work on if you haven't figured it out. There is really no magic to it, you just have to train like Eddy Merckx, Bernrd Hinault, Miguel Indurain, Jacques Anquetil and others who didn't have PMs.
Good luck 
Jimt

Sorry so long, blame it on Bud light.....


----------



## stevesbike

sorry, but I don't think someone who has never used a powermeter is in a very good position to recommend against one. Comparing it to your heart rate just shows you don't know much about the use of a powermeter. Combined with an analysis package like WKO, it's a way to structure your entire training, giving metrics for time-varying training loads, periodization, peaking, etc. Using it on the bike is just one - relatively small - component of it.


----------



## CEVIS

I've been using a power meter since last September. It's hands down the best training tool I have used since I began cycling in 1984. It's a game changer. The power draws you into the training in a way that speed and heart rate alone cannot. I think it's a great investment on several levels. 

Additionally, I have not talked with anyone who adopted a power meter that does not have similar attitudes towards training with power. And my interactions have ranged from recreational types to very serious cyclists. 

Bottom line: training with power adds a whole new dimension to cycling.


----------



## tone12

If you have goals of improving your racing, then heck yeah! I just commented in another post but it's helped me identify a glaring weakness of mine. I really had no idea it was a weakness, just the opposite. I've thought back over the last couple of seasons and sure enough, every time I've been in trouble, it's been because of that weakness. Having a power meter will really help me improve my training, which should help my racing. I say go for it!


----------



## naisan

yes.

.


----------



## HazemBata

If you have an iphone, then this is cheapest (and perhaps one of the nicest) ways to get power.

http://www.ibikesports.com/ibikedash/idash_ibikedashpower.html


----------



## ukbloke

HazemBata said:


> If you have an iphone, then this is cheapest (and perhaps one of the nicest) ways to get power.


With prices starting at $849, and that you have to use a iPhone, I would disagree that this is cheap. Also, for all that money it is still not a direct measure of power. You can get a wired PowerTap in a wheel new for ~$700, or second-hand typically for ~$400. The entry price of power has never been cheaper.

IMHO, I think that putting an iPhone on your handlebars is ugly and dumb, and adding an expensive case to cover all the shortfalls doesn't solve the problem.


----------



## HazemBata

No system measures power directly. None of them. Power is always a combination of measurements and calculations.

A Powertap may be $700 to start, but a wireless powertap hub (not entire wheel) is about $850. In addition you still need to buy the computer and sensors (cadence, hr, etc). The prior generation wired powertap computer starts at $100. The wireless is about $200. The newer generation one is about $450.

The ibike is completely wireless, comes with all necessary sensors and hr strap, and is $850 new. The case is the computer (not an accessory), the case contains spare batteries to extend battery time, and is sealed.

Plus, I think using the iphone (or ipod touch) as the computer is a huge plus. The screen is bigger than that of any cycling-computer, is in color, displays everything at once, uses google maps, and contains your music - all in one. Plus it's a phone in case you need to stay in touch.


----------



## ukbloke

HazemBata said:


> No system measures power directly. None of them. Power is always a combination of measurements and calculations.


PowerTap, and other so-called "direct" systems, measure force or torque directly and multiply by revolutions. The calculation is trivial. Calibration of the sensors at the factory gets accuracy to around 2%.



> A Powertap may be $700 to start


You can get a new PowerTap wheel, including wired CPU, and including HR strap for about $700. You can buy the same thing second hand for about $400. Nothing else is required. If you want to do this "on the cheap" I think you can put up with running a wire. Sure if you want to spend more money there are many other fancier options with additional features, but more-or-less the accuracy of the power measurement with the cheapest PowerTap is the same as any of them.


----------



## naisan

iBike seems like a good head unit, but the indirect power measurement is very prone to errors, so the power measurements are not as useful as a strain-gauge based system like SRM, quarq, powertap, etc, which all measure at around 2% error bars. 

Best to buy the app, then use a repeatable power meter unit for training.


----------



## naisan

iBike seems like a good head unit, but the indirect power measurement is very prone to errors, so the power measurements are not as useful as a strain-gauge based system like SRM, quarq, powertap, etc, which all measure at around 2% error bars. 

Best to buy the app, then use a repeatable power meter unit for training.


----------



## HazemBata

I stand corrected. The powertap is about $700 for a complete wired system.

I still think the ibike is a nice option. I did a lot of research and the general consensus is that while the ibike may not be quite as accurate as the other systems, it is still sufficiently consistent and accurate to make it a worth while training tool. The prior post by multirider was helpful on this issue. Plus, the system has the advantage of not having to swap parts between bikes (with SRM that's not even a practical option), still being able to use the hubs and wheels and cranks of your choice, and the superior display.


----------



## 32and3cross

JimT said:


> There is really no magic to it, you just have to train like Eddy Merckx, Bernrd Hinault, Miguel Indurain, Jacques Anquetil and others who didn't have PMs.
> 
> 
> 
> They also didn't have 9-5 jobs and 12 hours a week to train if they are lucky, so there are sort of bad examples to use. If they did have PM avalible to them you can be sure they would have taken advantage of them.
> 
> One the main things a PM can do you for is let you train most effectivly in the time you have, quality instead of quantity. While HR and precived effort are somewhat useful metrics they are not as exact as Watts. You can train with out power and achive results but I find for me personally I get much better results training with power.
Click to expand...


----------



## chase196126

HazemBata said:


> I stand corrected. The powertap is about $700 for a complete wired system.
> 
> I still think the ibike is a nice option. I did a lot of research and the general consensus is that while the ibike may not be quite as accurate as the other systems, it is still sufficiently consistent and accurate to make it a worth while training tool. The prior post by multirider was helpful on this issue. Plus, the system has the advantage of not having to swap parts between bikes (with SRM that's not even a practical option), still being able to use the hubs and wheels and cranks of your choice, and the superior display.


From my understanding the Ibike requires coast down calibration if you change bikes in order to get accurate data. I cant imagine that doing 2 or 3 coast downs would be any quicker than switching a wheel or even a crank (assuming the right tools and BB)

I had buddy who rode an Ibike for a while and he said that it was a ball park for accurate data (in comparison to his SRM) but riding in a pack made it not work, changing road surfaces made it read off, changing body positions, etc. 

He tried it on his cross bike as well and it was completely worthless in that application. 

Really, if you want a power meter just buy a unit that directly measures force. If you get more into power you will eventually want data that is actually accurate and that will mean you have to buy a whole new system. If you decide you dont like it a PT or SRM will have better resale value.


----------



## HazemBata

The ibike is currently in its third generation, which supposed to be considerably better than the prior generations. Perhaps your buddy had a first or second generation.


----------



## chase196126

It sounds like you have already made up your mind about wanting to get the Ibike. Thats fine but I would strongly recommend that you look at a used or cheap powertap unit. Here are some reasons I would never use an Ibike myself: 

-Possibly non repeatable/inaccurate data
-Data effected by factors other than human power output
-Cannot be used accurately while drafting
-Cannot be used off road accurately
-Takes longer to switch bike to bike with any sort of accuracy. 
-Cant be used on a trainer for power measurement

If you want a coolish looking power "estimator" the Ibike is the way to go. If you want real reliable data that can be used for effective training, get a Powertap or SRM/Quarq

PS The unit my friend tested was the what ever the last iteration on the market was.


----------



## tom_h

chase196126 said:


> ... some reasons I would never use an Ibike myself:
> 
> -Possibly non repeatable/inaccurate data
> -Data effected by factors other than human power output
> -Cannot be used accurately while drafting
> -Cannot be used off road accurately
> -Takes longer to switch bike to bike with any sort of accuracy.
> -Cant be used on a trainer for power measurement
> 
> If you want a coolish looking power "estimator" the Ibike is the way to go. If you want real reliable data that can be used for effective training, get a Powertap or SRM/Quarq...


I'd also agree with that.
The iBike is not held in very high regard at the Wattage forum, http://groups.google.com/group/wattage 

I'm finding I also prefer to do most of my more intense intervals, uninterrupted, on a stationary trainer. An iBike won't work on a trainer.


----------



## zender

I went back and forth on the ibike, but I wanted the more pricey (6-700 dollar) version if I was going to pull the trigger. After stacking a TON of coupons at Performance, I got the Powertap Pro+/OpenPro/standard yellow headunit setup from performance for 900 bucks shipped. Still not cheap, but this is a system I can transfer between bikes in a few seconds and is super easy to use and requires no set up. Just get on and ride.

Even if you think you're not going to use the software when you start, eventually you'll get to the point where you want to know how the last set of PI's compared to the one a week before. You don't have to spend hours poring over the graphs. Just DL the data while surfing in the foreground, check one or two numbers and move on.


----------



## IAmSpecialized

If these posts have not convinced you to buy a Powertap, Quarq or SRM, nothing ever will. You mentioned the cost issue. Because of that, I would advise a Powertap Pro+ on an Open Pro to get started. Down the road, you can always have it rebuilt in to a really nice rim if you so choose. Go ahead and get Coggan's 2nd edition Training and Racing with a PowerMeter. If we haven't convinced you of a PM's worth, Coggan certainly will.

Once you start training with one, you'll never look back. And, a power meter has an interesting way of making you really really really enjoy your solo training rides. There are so many times now I actually prefer solo training rides. I agree with the poster above who said it adds a completely new dimension to training, riding, etc.


----------



## tom_h

Also budget for some desktop PC software, for most benefit. 

At the very minimum, Sports Tracks ($35). More sophisticated for power analysis is Training Peaks WKO+ ($129). Both are Windows-only.

Some are using open-source Golden Cheetah ("free"), Windows & mac, but I have no experience with it.

Hunter & Coggan, authors of "_Training and Racing with a PowerMeter_" , are also behind Training Peaks ... software and book tie together . 

Using only the bike computer's power readouts will be very disadvantageous, IME.


----------



## IAmSpecialized

S


tom_h said:


> Using only the bike computer's power readouts will be very disadvantageous, IME.


Which is exactly why you train *with power* and not *by power*.


----------



## Kendogz161

Hi all,
Has anybody ever tried the Polar powermeter. Wind I think is the name. I always seem to find those on the cheap. $300 or so for the complete unit. 
Right now I'm demoing a Powertap from the LBS and I'm hooked. The watts does draw you in better than heart rate. My new bike just go put on hold for a power meter.


----------



## tom_h

Kendogz161 said:


> Hi all,
> Has anybody ever tried the Polar powermeter. Wind I think is the name. I always seem to find those on the cheap. $300 or so for the complete unit.
> ...


Here's a review from 2003, comparing powertap, SRM, and the Polar PMs:
http://biketechreview.com/reviews/power-meters/61-power-meter-review

There are some significant concerns on the Polar unit, with regards to setup, accuracy, and data sampling.

The concept itself -- measuring up-and-down vibratory frequency on the chain under tension -- seems flaky and non-robust.

That's probably why the Polar can be found for only c. $300 
;-)


----------



## Kendogz161

Tom H, thanks I guess I'll stick with a Powertap or Quarq. Still trying to decide between the two, working with a Garmin head unit.


----------



## spade2you

Kendogz161 said:


> Tom H, thanks I guess I'll stick with a Powertap or Quarq. Still trying to decide between the two, working with a Garmin head unit.


Having used a Polar for a few years, the lack of reliability on the non-power unit was enough for me not to even consider using one as a power meter. The Garmins are awesome because you can put as little or as much on a screen, which is something Polar lacks. I have my main screen set so I can see everything I'd want during an ITT without having to switch screens.


----------



## Frankinnj

i would recomend getting one. I have had mine for a year and I like the fact that I don't have to wait 2 minutes to get my HR in a particular zone.


----------



## Alex_Simmons/RST

tom_h said:


> Here's a review from 2003, comparing powertap, SRM, and the Polar PMs:
> http://biketechreview.com/reviews/power-meters/61-power-meter-review
> 
> There are some significant concerns on the Polar unit, with regards to setup, accuracy, and data sampling.
> 
> The concept itself -- measuring up-and-down vibratory frequency on the chain under tension -- seems flaky and non-robust.
> 
> That's probably why the Polar can be found for only c. $300
> ;-)


The concept is actually sound and quite clever, however its implementation by Polar left out some key elements by the guy that invented it (Alan Cote).

They do require a lot of care in set up in order for them to work properly (positioning of the chain sensor and accurately weighing the chain are critical), and their accuracy can be variable across the gear ratios. 

They often don't work on indoor trainers, for some reason the lack of random vibrations from the road means the sensor has a lot of trouble picking up the chain vibration. 

Data sampling / memory means earlier Polar watch model had low sampling rate (5-sec) but plenty of memory for recording, then they upgraded recording device to sample more frequently but only provided enough memory for a couple of hours of data. 

But in essence, they are / were pretty much just a gateway drug to strain gauge based power meters.


----------



## multirider

I have a friend with a Polar power meter. He has spent a lot of time trying to get it to be correct. We are approx the same height and weight, yet when riding side by side, his Polar always reads WAY higher than my SRM. The Polar has reported 475 watts while my SRM says 325. This is true of both instant readings and averages over time.

A key question is whether the Polar is consistent with itself. If the same effort always produces the same numbers, then it could be useful in spite of not being accurate. I'm not sure if that is true of the Polar.

My wattage journey started with an iBike. I had it on both my road and TT bikes (separate profiles, of course). I had great confidence that it was consistent on each bike and between the two bikes, so I wasn't too concerned whether it was +/- 5% of "accurate". 

Then I purchased a Cannondale SuperSix with an SRM. That meant accuracy became important. So I borrowed a PowerTap, did extensive testing with the iBike on my TT bike, and am now confident that it is both consistent and accurate.

If the Polar is consistent and the only power meter you use, it could be of value even if not accurate. But if you want to compare its results to other power meters (yours or other people's), it's not a good choice. The iBike can be purchased for about the same price and appears to me (based on n=1 for Polar) to be much more accurate and consistent.

Hope that helps.


----------



## multirider

tom_h said:


> I'd also agree with that.
> The iBike is not held in very high regard at the Wattage forum, http://groups.google.com/group/wattage
> 
> I'm finding I also prefer to do most of my more intense intervals, uninterrupted, on a stationary trainer. An iBike won't work on a trainer.


I missed reading/replying to some prior posts on this thread. Am feeling the need to correct a few things about the iBike.

Calibration consists of doing some coast-downs and creating a Profile for each bike. When you want to move the iBike from one bike to another, you push some buttons and switch Profiles. It is completely trivial. Swapping the iBike from one bike to another is about as complicated and time consuming as putting your helmet on or your gloves on - you hardly think about it.

I used an iBike on my road, TT, and CX bike for a while. Then I got a Cannondale with SRM. To ensure I was getting accurate data, I borrowed my neighbor's PT to test the iBike. For the TT bike, it was about 2% high at low speeds, so I decreased the rolling resistance parameter; it was about 3% low at high speeds, so I tweaked the coefficient of drag. Did more testing, it was spot-on with the PT. 

I tested the iBike on my CX bike, too. The iBike was accurate for the conditions I used to create my CX Profile - hardback. It was not accurate for significantly different conditions (i.e. on soft conditions like sand or mud). But they don't advertise it for off-road and don't recommend it for that. After I got my Cannondale with SRM, I had a spare iBike mount, so I put it on the CX and created a Profile for the most common condition that I ride the CX bike. 

The iBike works perfectly with about a hundred trainers (see their web site for a list). It works perfectly with my Kurt Kinetics Road Pro.

The iBike software can be set to use different parameters at different speeds. Thus, you can set it up so that it assumes you are in the drops above 25mph or whatever. That doesn't really apply to TT or CX, so I played with it a bit but haven't really used it. But if you think that will improve the accuracy of your data, it is available in the software.

The iBike is not well-suited to off-road use such as cyclocross, but it is in the ballpark and good for tracking overall Training Stress Scores (TSS) for training load, periodization, peaking, etc.

Those who don't want to believe the iBike is accurate will continue to refuse to believe no matter what is said on forums. In my experience, however, it works well and is an extremely valuable tool for training and racing. I continue to use my iBike on the TT bike. 

As stated before, I used an iBike to train with power over the winter a couple years ago and went from mid-pack finishes one year to 4 wins in 5 races and going up a category the next year. 

I achieved my goals by training with power with an iBike.

I am very happy with my SRMs as well.


----------



## spade2you

"Calibrating" a power meter by comparing one riders numbers with another's can be very limited. When I got my Quarq, I was surprised with my numbers to say the least. So many variables to consider. A friend of mine and I were climbing at a steady pace and his Power Tap was higher than my "sprint" (if I had one) while I was a little below threshold. Even when it leveled out, our cruising power numbers were quite different.


----------



## Alex_Simmons/RST

spade2you said:


> "Calibrating" a power meter by comparing one riders numbers with another's can be very limited. When I got my Quarq, I was surprised with my numbers to say the least. So many variables to consider. A friend of mine and I were climbing at a steady pace and his Power Tap was higher than my "sprint" (if I had one) while I was a little below threshold. Even when it leveled out, our cruising power numbers were quite different.


+1

I have examples of side by side riding with a client who is similar morphology to me. 

When I inspected his file, he was riding at 30W more than me for that 20-min relatively flat section of road. Since my threshold was higher than his, my tempo level effort was I though going to be about near threshold for him, but because of his aerodynamics it was supra threshold for him and no wonder he was busting to finish our pull and roll back .

It just highlighted how much difference in aerodynamics there was between us (and there was opportunity for him to improve performance even on a road bike by looking at that).


----------



## rcjunkie3000

Looks like im picking up an ibike ipro wireless. As long as the power data remains consistent that is all that matters to me. I wouldnt mind a garmin vector this fall either.


----------



## spade2you

Correct me if I'm wrong and I'm basing things on what a shop told me, but doesn't the iBike not work with indoor trainers?


----------



## Alex_Simmons/RST

spade2you said:


> Correct me if I'm wrong and I'm basing things on what a shop told me, but doesn't the iBike not work with indoor trainers?


It would have to use rear wheel speed and an model for the power-speed relationship for any given trainer to estimate power on a trainer. 

Presumably it can't allow for the variations in that relationship due to different tyre-roller press on force, tyres, tyre pressure, tyre heating up/cooling, changes in kinetic energy and so on.


----------



## spade2you

Alex_Simmons/RST said:


> It would have to use rear wheel speed and an model for the power-speed relationship for any given trainer to estimate power on a trainer.
> 
> Presumably it can't allow for the variations in that relationship due to different tyre-roller press on force, tyres, tyre pressure, tyre heating up/cooling, changes in kinetic energy and so on.


Gotcha. 

I think Power Tap and crank based units offer the ability to be just as useful indoors vs. outdoors for training and racing. 

Maybe a fringe benefit, but when watching actual power, I could see how much power was missing in my dead spot.


----------



## Alex_Simmons/RST

spade2you said:


> I think Power Tap and crank based units offer the ability to be just as useful indoors vs. outdoors for training and racing.


Yes


spade2you said:


> Maybe a fringe benefit, but when watching actual power, I could see how much power was missing in my dead spot.


No. It would not be possible with any currently available power meter to see that.

Powertap only records/displays power at best at 1 second intervals (1.26 seconds for older models). Any fluctuations in displayed power you see on a trainer with a Powertap when riding steady is due to aliasing - an artefact of the way a powertap calculates power. IOW it takes torque samples on a fixed time basis and any given time sample will contain a different number of whole downstrokes or torque pulses, which artificially makes the power numbers on a Powertap jumpier.

An SRM calculates power based on event sampling - whole revolutions of the crank, which means it doesn't have the aliasing problem of a Powertap but it also doesn't distinguish power readings intra pedal revolution. Same for a Quarq.


----------



## spade2you

With crank based power meters sending signals at various parts of the pedal stroke, some of those transmissions should theoretically be during the dead spot.


----------



## tom_h

Alex_Simmons/RST said:


> ...
> Powertap only records/displays power at best at 1 second intervals (1.26 seconds for older models). Any fluctuations in displayed power you see on a trainer with a Powertap when riding steady is due to aliasing - an artefact of the way a powertap calculates power. IOW it takes torque samples on a fixed time basis and any given time sample will contain a different number of whole downstrokes or torque pulses, which artificially makes the power numbers on a Powertap jumpier.
> 
> An SRM calculates power based on event sampling - whole revolutions of the crank, which means it doesn't have the aliasing problem of a Powertap but it also doesn't distinguish power readings intra pedal revolution. Same for a Quarq.


I'm curious, does the SRM & Quarq have a noticeably smoother power display than Powertap? (what I use now).

However, the Garmin500 only records at 1-sec intervals, so aliasing might occur no matter which PM.

The "instantaneous" power display w/ a Powertap & Garmin is virtually unuseable ... I've set the Garmin to display the 3-sec and 30-sec rolling averages.


----------



## Alex_Simmons/RST

spade2you said:


> With crank based power meters sending signals at various parts of the pedal stroke, some of those transmissions should theoretically be during the dead spot.


An SRM samples torque at 200Hz. So in one pedal stroke, if say you were pedaling at 100rpm, it would have taken 120 torque samples in that one pedal stroke, IOW from all parts of the pedal stroke (downstroke, dead spot etc).

However the SRM doesn't calculate, display nor record power based on instantaneous changes in those torque values around the pedal stroke, but it averages them over a whole crank revolution (or revolutions). IOW every time the SRM updates a power number from second to second, it is based on an average of a whole crank revolution.

It does not and cannot distinguish power fluctuation _within _a pedal stroke.

It is the same for a Quarq although right now I can't recall the torque sample rate of a Quarq.

Now SRM (but not Quarq) do have the ability with some additional hardware and software to provide the raw torque data stream, but that is very rarely done, usually in labs on ergo bikes and at the moment the analysis software is pretty crude.


----------



## Alex_Simmons/RST

tom_h said:


> I'm curious, does the SRM & Quarq have a noticeably smoother power display than Powertap? (what I use now).


Yes. However....

Power fluctuations on power meter displays are always going to be jumpy. That is natural and normal because that's what's actually happening.

The Powertap, because of the way it calculates power based on fixed time sampling of torque data (sampled at 61Hz at the hub), is averaging those torque samples that contain a different number of pedal down strokes in each second of power data. Hence it ends up being more variable from second to second than is actually the case. 

How jumpy depends on the cadence.



tom_h said:


> However, the Garmin500 only records at 1-sec intervals, so aliasing might occur no matter which PM.


No. An SRM and Quarq calculate and send power data based on torque from a whole number of crank revolutions, not on a fixed time based sample. Hence they are never subject to an aliasing effect.

The power data is updated each second based on the most recent whole crank revolution or revolutions (if more than one have occurred since the previous second).



tom_h said:


> The "instantaneous" power display w/ a Powertap & Garmin is virtually unuseable ... I've set the Garmin to display the 3-sec and 30-sec rolling averages.


I'd suggest people with Powertaps apply a rolling 3 or 5 second average to the power display.

It probably helps those with SRMs/Quarqs as well.

I don't use a Garmin, I have SRM Powercontrol and I think I have mine set to display a rolling average over 3 pedal revolutions.

These rolling display averages do not affect the actual power data recorded.


----------



## multirider

spade2you said:


> "Calibrating" a power meter by comparing one riders numbers with another's can be very limited. When I got my Quarq, I was surprised with my numbers to say the least. So many variables to consider. A friend of mine and I were climbing at a steady pace and his Power Tap was higher than my "sprint" (if I had one) while I was a little below threshold. Even when it leveled out, our cruising power numbers were quite different.


You didn't indicate if this was a new thought or a response to a prior post. If it was a response to my post about the iBike, please let me clarify - I put my neighbors PT on my bike. I was not riding alongside him to do the comparison.

Specifically, we put his Garmin speed/cadence sensor on my frame, his Garmin head unit on my handlebars, and his PT wheel on my bike. We fired up his Garmin and PT on my bike, then synched it up (which was a very troublesome process because the Garmin failed to recognize the PT many times before finally pairing - even though he didn't change anything at all, just moved the head unit and sensors to my bike). Then I fired up the iBike and did multiple runs on a long stretch of road that included a downhill, some flat, a rolling hill, and more slightly downhill.

I did multiple runs that included charging the initial downhill for high speed to test CdA, hammering the flat section for medium speed, and then cruising out to the end of the road. Then I turned around and did it backwards. I did this multiple times. The uphill provided a good test for slow speed to test CRR and the downhills helped me get up to speed to do some high speed testing for CdA. That is how I determined that there were some minor changes to be made to CRR and CdA to get the iBike to match the PT.

I used WKO to compare the power files. I tweaked the iBike profile very slightly in the iBike software and re-imported into WKO with each change. After a few iterations, I was able to get the iBike power readings to match the PT across all speed ranges. I then did more test runs, more comparisons of the resulting PT and iBike power files, and everything matched up.

The differences in average power were in the 3-8w range. Which, of course, raises the question of whether the PT was accurate. PTs have a +/- 5% range, so the iBike was, in fact, within that range. But I tweaked my iBike profile to produce the same wattage as the PT.

All my testing and comparison and tweaking was focused on 2-20 minute power averages. The short "peak" wattages were a bit further off. Sometimes the iBike registered peaks that were lower and sometimes higher compared to the PT. It has been a few months since I did all the testing and I don't recall the specifics, but it seems like the peaks were 20-30w different in some cases. I'm not a sprinter and <30s power is not important to me, so I didn't put any effort into understanding that. If you're a sprinter or are for some other reason really focused on <30s power, the iBike might not be for you.


----------



## multirider

tom_h said:


> I'm curious, does the SRM & Quarq have a noticeably smoother power display than Powertap? (what I use now).
> 
> However, the Garmin500 only records at 1-sec intervals, so aliasing might occur no matter which PM.
> 
> The "instantaneous" power display w/ a Powertap & Garmin is virtually unuseable ... I've set the Garmin to display the 3-sec and 30-sec rolling averages.


When I purchased an SRM, I had a discussion with the folks at the SRM Repair Center in Colorado Springs because I was concerned about crank / frame compatibility. They asked me which head unit I planned to use - the SRM Power Control or Garmin or?? I had not decided at that point, so we talked about it. I don't recall the specifics, but they essentially convinced me that the Garmin did not record power as accurately as the SRM. Something about the implementation of the ANT protocol and the recording intervals. Apologies for not being able to be clear on what they said, but I decided on the SRM Power Control and then forgot the details. Perhaps Alex has that info.


----------



## Alex_Simmons/RST

multirider said:


> The differences in average power were in the 3-8w range. Which, of course, raises the question of whether the PT was accurate. PTs have a +/- 5% range, so the iBike was, in fact, within that range.


Powertaps have a quoted accuracy specification of +/- 1.5%.

You can check the calibration of a Powertap using a static torque test to know where within that +/- 1.5% your particular unit is.


----------



## Alex_Simmons/RST

multirider said:


> When I purchased an SRM, I had a discussion with the folks at the SRM Repair Center in Colorado Springs because I was concerned about crank / frame compatibility. They asked me which head unit I planned to use - the SRM Power Control or Garmin or?? I had not decided at that point, so we talked about it. I don't recall the specifics, but they essentially convinced me that the Garmin did not record power as accurately as the SRM. Something about the implementation of the ANT protocol and the recording intervals. Apologies for not being able to be clear on what they said, but I decided on the SRM Power Control and then forgot the details. Perhaps Alex has that info.


I'm not aware that a Garmin will record power less accurately (if properly set up).

Certainly if you use Garmin's "smart recording" function then you lose data integrity and I strongly recommend people disable that function.

Also the Garmin cannot record at time intervals of less than 1 second. An SRM Powercontrol has a 0.5 second recording option.

IME of multiple clients using Garmins and Powercontrols - the Garmins are less reliable. Something seems to go wrong every so often for a client and they lose their data. It's happened in races where we really would like to see the data.

I have not however run a Garmin and Powercontrol side by side with same power meter to compare the recorded data.


----------



## multirider

Alex_Simmons/RST said:


> Certainly if you use Garmin's "smart recording" function then you lose data integrity and I strongly recommend people disable that function.
> 
> Also the Garmin cannot record at time intervals of less than 1 second. An SRM Powercontrol has a 0.5 second recording option.


"Smart recording" rings a bell. As I was talking to the SRM folks and they were asking me how I would use my power meter, I told them my focus was on endurance racing this year, that I would be doing 7, 8, even 9 hour rides and races. Since I didn't go the Garmin route, I don't recall, but I'm pretty sure SRM said I might need to use Smart Recording and that would not be as accurate. In the end, I decided my top priority was accurate power, not GPS and bells and whistles, so I went with the SRM Powercontrol.


----------



## ukbloke

The Garmin Edge 500 and 800 turn off smart recording when paired with a power meter, so you get every second recording. On very rare occasions it might miss a single sample but that's really not a significant issue. The battery life-time from a full charge on the Edge 500 is good for > 16 hours with the HRM and speed/cadence sensors in use. I know because I used mine on a 208 mile, 20,000 feet endurance ride and had plenty of juice left at the end! You may run into problems at > 24 hours though, and there is no way that I know of to extend the battery life with external charging (unlike previous Garmin models).


----------



## bradXism

I am one of those who have used both. I have been racing for 35 years and no longer use a speedometer because I will compete with it. A HR monitor is cheaper and covers my other activites. I work on my pedal stroke in the winter on a fan type stationary bike a couple times a week where I can hear a sloppy spin. I also find that by using my ancient trek Y frame MTB helps too as it has pedal 'bob' that can be eliminated by smoothing out my stroke and even though I ride sloppy roads to and from the ski parc as soon as the roads are dry I am on a fixed gear for the start of the season.
I can def see where it would help newbies and racers to train and am not disagreeing at all. I also think there is a large elemnet out there that ride rarely and think life itself is a competition and that money represents winning. We all know the guys that show up at groups with the full sram rad group on a high end custom frame with all of the blings and has a $1.69 in their legs. I would bet that a significant number of sales goes to these types who never even properly use it. I do not feel the initial poster is this type and is buying something he can do with out. I am representing the retrogrouch verses money verses enjoyment of riding. I do not intend to step on anyones toes or am commenting on their advise, I only mean to post what my many years of riding has come down too and that is enjoying the workout and the ride.


----------



## plx

don't buy if you're not pro


----------



## aclinjury

plx said:


> don't buy if you're not pro


Funny thread resurrection


----------



## Cableguy

plx said:


> don't buy if you're not pro


Need power meter for training advantage to become pro...

Can't buy power meter until pro...


Game over man.








Game over.


----------



## multirider

Catch-22!! Can't be crazy if you can fill out the forms saying you're crazy!

And power meters can drive you crazy! Alternatively, they can vastly improve the effectiveness of your training. A year later, I'd like to report that I use my power meter data to manage my short term (ATL) and long term (CTL) training loads just as much as I use it to manage my interval training. 

I've had tremendous success training/racing with a power meter. I went from a 9:16 finish in the Leadville 100 in 2010 to a 8:35 finish in 2011. That is a 40 minute improvement and I believe much of the improvement came from learning to pace based on power readings. 

As before, I continue to believe the iBike is a viable power meter that will help riders obtain the benefits of a power meter at a lower price of admission. Please note that the iBike is compatible with a number of trainers I used it on my Kinetics Pro quite successfully.

I'm still a big believer in power meters, even though I'm an amatuer with no hopes of ever going pro. Of course, there's always the "if you can afford it" cavaet. A power meter makes no sense if you are struggling to afford decent tires or a replacement chain or food for your kids. If you can afford a power meter, it is an extremely valuable tool.

Lots of new power meters on the horizon, will be interesting to see how they fare in the marketplace.


----------



## new2rd

multirider said:


> Lots of new power meters on the horizon, will be interesting to see how they fare in the marketplace.


New power meters? Are you referring to the pedal based systems that aren't really going anywhere? 

I'm leaning towards a Quarq and I fully expect it to drive me crazy. Hopefully I'll look up once in a while so I don't hit anything on the road. :mad2:


----------



## kbiker3111

new2rd said:


> New power meters? Are you referring to the pedal based systems that aren't really going anywhere?
> 
> I'm leaning towards a Quarq and I fully expect it to drive me crazy. Hopefully I'll look up once in a while so I don't hit anything on the road. :mad2:


Probably referring to stage, pioneer, rotor, etc, etc, etc.


----------



## LatvianRider

Plain and simple YES. Matched with a good coach, you and your power meter can take significant steps forward in the most accurate/ fastest possible way. A power meter gives you an ability to be the most specific and specificity is crucial to making big gains.


----------



## zender

"Bring out yer dead, bring out yer dead"

As a cost-saving measure, I lent my powertap wheel to a buddy and we calibrated his indoor trainer for power based on rear wheel speed. Obviously, there is going to be some noise in the system. But, at the cost of a little laminated card stuck to his handlebar that shows speed vs. estimated power, it's a cheap option.

I suspect I'd still be seeing gains without it, just by heart rate or percieved effort, but where the powertap has been very effective is making a workout as short as possible and still accomplish the goal.


----------



## new2rd

Just ordered the S975 Quarq. All it took was 5 rides with a borrowed Powertap wheel to understand the advantages of training and racing with power. I can't wait to get this thing on the bike. This winter/spring I expect to have some incredible training sessions.


----------



## new2rd

The Stage design looks promising and it's a lot cheaper, but I'm not willing to take the chance on a new product at this point. I wanted to use something proven and I'm a big fan of SRAM customer service.


----------



## octobahn

drdiaboloco said:


> Thanks for the tip, I was unaware of that policy. That does change the complexion of the purchase decision, to be sure. I think I'd still go for the savings up front, but with a cycle computer I can certainly see how the REI policy is very attractive.
> 
> I know about the abuse of the similar Costco policy... They used to make an excellent rollaboard suitcase that was pretty cheap at $75 or so, and coworkers of mine would exchange for a new one every year until the pulled the plug on that one.


Not to state in any uncertain terms how good the REI return policy is and to back up what ukbloke is saying, I bought a backpack from REI a few years ago which had the bulky, padded waist straps (or harnesses) to distribute some of the weight on the hips. Well, I didn't like them and I took a knife to them and sliced them off. A few weeks later I realized the backpack wasn't as useful as I thought it would be (long story). I happen to be at REI picking up some odds and ends when I asked the checker if I would be able to return the backpack ---- and yes I explained how I knowingly vandalized (ha) the pack by cutting off the waist harnesses. The checker said to bring it in and they'll take care of it. Sure enough, I brought it in a week later, and they gave me a full refund. I was floored. Now you have to understand that that pack will go to a used gear sale at some point in the year so it'll find a new home. I've been to a couple of the used gear sales and there are a lot of items which are either broken outright or are malfunctioning. The idea is that you're pretty handy you'll be able to repair and save a bit of cash.


----------



## new2rd

Just got the Quarq installed and went out on my first ride with it yesterday. Very impressed and I look forward to a great training fall/winter.


----------



## Srode

new2rd said:


> Just got the Quarq installed and went out on my first ride with it yesterday. Very impressed and I look forward to a great training fall/winter.


Pictures!


----------



## new2rd

*As requested*

http://forums.roadbikereview.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=266219&stc=1&d=1349663884&


----------



## new2rd

http://forums.roadbikereview.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=266220&stc=1&d=1349663973&


----------



## scottzj

The problem with using heart rate verse power is there are so many variables that could change the heart rate, ie. medications, hills, asthma, suppliments, how you are feeling and so on. When having power......its just that....power. You pick your average and stick with it as much as possible. If you want to keep your intervals around the same, power is where its at. Just my $.02.


----------



## multirider

Highly recommend "Training and Racing with a Power Meter": 
Training and Racing with a Power Meter: Hunter Allen, Andrew Coggan PhD: 9781934030554: Amazon.com: Books

I also highly recommend WKO software from Training Peaks. I've heard Golden Cheetah and other free software is good, but I don't have experience with them. WKO is half the power equation for me as it shows acute training load, chronic training load, and much much more. I have a window with my "Top 40 Power" for 5s, 10s, 30s, 1m, 5m, 10m, 30m, and 60m. If I haven't notched a Top 40 in any particular category for more than a month, I make sure to go do a few to keep my power up in that duration.


----------



## CabDoctor

Hands down, a power meter is the best purchase I've ever made for cycling. Even if you're only analyzing data every 60-90 days, just having the real time feedback of "am I going to hard? Should I go harder" during intervals is invaluable. You can push yourself so much harder when you're trying to hold onto that extra 5watts for a few more seconds. I guarantee you will see a lot of improvement.


----------



## Logan21

As above, I have a PT and it is easily the best investment I have ever made. I use WKO+ and I wouldnt say I am a data fanatic, but I do look at the rides, the intervals efforts for example and use the PMC quite a bit. 

I love it, I know exactly what numbers I have to hit to do certain training efforts, it makes 1 hour Turbo Trainer sessions absolutely clinical as well.

The one other thing I love, is if you have had a big week and your feeling tired, you can still see your hitting your numbers. a Few weeks ago I had that, I was really tired from training and although my legs were not fresh, I could still see that I was hitting my numbers and my power figures hadnt suffered.


----------



## noelb

Cyclops Powecal. Yeah, yeah, I know not a real power meter! Well, it has some decent reviews, supposed to be fairly consistent even if it might be less than accurate. Still, if it establishes a base line and the rider can see changes over time, might be of some benefit. I bought one a few days ago based on some Internet reviews. I've only used it 3 times (and have no idea what I'm doing) so can't say either way, but at 99 bucks its not too much of a risk. I needed a new hr monitor strap anyway.


----------

