# StageONE Power Meter... I'm Stoked!



## MaddSkillz (Mar 13, 2007)

I haven't yet seen a thread on this but check this out! 

DC Rainmaker: StageONE $699 ANT+ & Bluetooth Smart crank-based power meter announced
Stages Cycling StageONE Power Meter ? Interbike 2012 - BikeRadar

It's a crank-based power meter that only requires a switch out of the cranks to modified versions of your same crank. Once installed, you wouldn't even know it's there. Communicates to a head unit of your choice in ANT+ or blue tooth.

I have been holding out for Garmin's pedal-based system but it's vaporware at this point and their continued push-back of release dates has caused me to lose much faith in that type of setup. 

So, take a look. Looks like a good alternative and the price is right for me! :thumbsup:


----------



## Cableguy (Jun 6, 2010)

I'm skeptical. Looks like it only measures the power from the left crank arm, or the left leg, and then uses a "special algorithm" (most likely just multiplying by 2) to extrapolate the total power. I'm sure in their internal tests they're using people with perfect leg power distribution in order to claim 1-2% accuracy... I personally use a Quarq, but if I had to go for a lower priced PM I think I'd rather have a PowerTap over this.


----------



## MaddSkillz (Mar 13, 2007)

Cableguy said:


> I'm skeptical. Looks like it only measures the power from the left crank arm, or the left leg, and then uses a "special algorithm" (most likely just multiplying by 2) to extrapolate the total power. I'm sure in their internal tests they're using people with perfect leg power distribution in order to claim 1-2% accuracy... I personally use a Quarq, but if I had to go for a lower priced PM I think I'd rather have a PowerTap over this.


Did you see the chart BikeRadar posted for a comparison in numbers against a PowerTap hub? The numbers were lower, but if this is your only method of reading your power data, I think it's great. An improvement in power is an improvement in power.


----------



## Lazy Spinner (Aug 30, 2009)

Regardless of your preferred system, having a good low cost competitior like this forces the others to re-evaluate their products and pricing. This works to the consumer's advantage.


----------



## eriku16 (Jul 27, 2011)

> There will be much more comparison data available soon. We have been testing for over 2 years and yes our bikes look as "interesting" with all the devices to record the data. We did end up creating an app so we can make recording multiple devices much easier and with data that overlays each other perfectly. Not to mention we got rid of some of the head units on our bikes. Our website will be going live on Tuesday and will have much more information. We will continue to provide comparison data, we have ridden thousands and thousands of miles with just about every make of power meter out there at the same time as ours. Yes, we have ridden with a Quarq on the other side of our power meter.
> 
> We also have a very high end Dyno, so we can test all the different variations of power meters.
> 
> ...


Their site is up now... Stages Cycling


----------



## natedg200202 (Sep 2, 2008)

Very, very exciting. Limited to metal cranks at this point, but the price is very good. ANT+ and Bluetooth. VERY light. Use any pedals; interchange your training and race wheels. Lots of pluses. 

Accuracy may take a hit compared to some like SRM, but if it's consistent then that matters more to me.


----------



## Chainstay (Mar 13, 2004)

Lots of advantages. Previously I couldn't justify the cost of power measurement, now I can. As long is it's consistent, that's all I need.

I like the ability to switch wheels


----------



## xls (Nov 11, 2004)

Oh this is great. I've been thinking to ask Santa to get me a powermeter this year. I'll be keeping a close eye on reviews for this one. Hopefully they'll come out with a crank that's BBRight compatible.


----------



## Eyorerox (Feb 19, 2008)

Campagnolo users lose out again.


----------



## :-) (Jan 19, 2012)

The product looks interesting. As an engineer I think a more affordable solution has been long overdue. 

While the left-leg-only might be an issue, it will be interesting to read more hands-on reviews. After all, their algorithm might be a bit more advanced that "x2". Besides, how large a difference does there tend to be between legs anyway?

One thing bothers me though. The fact that I need to exchange my sram Force crank for a PM fitted Rival... not cool.


----------



## spade2you (May 12, 2009)

Eyorerox said:


> Campagnolo users lose out again.


I got my hopes up, then I saw that. LOL.

I use a Quarq with Rotor 10.5 speed rings and it works just fine. No way in hell would I pay for the Campagnolo SRM. For that price, I could get 2 Quarqs.


----------



## danl1 (Jul 23, 2005)

:-) said:


> The product looks interesting. As an engineer I think a more affordable solution has been long overdue.
> 
> While the left-leg-only might be an issue, it will be interesting to read more hands-on reviews. After all, their algorithm might be a bit more advanced that "x2". Besides, how large a difference does there tend to be between legs anyway?
> 
> One thing bothers me though. The fact that I need to exchange my sram Force crank for a PM fitted Rival... not cool.


I wonder if you'll be able to swap out the left crank only.


----------



## the mayor (Jul 8, 2004)

danl1 said:


> I wonder if you'll be able to swap out the left crank only.


I believe the pricing is for the left arm only.
I wonder if it will ever be sold....or just be more vapor ware?


----------



## :-) (Jan 19, 2012)

the mayor said:


> I believe the pricing is for the left arm only.
> I wonder if it will ever be sold....or just be more vapor ware?


That is correct, the lowest price is for one crank arm only. So if I want the lowest possible cost, I would end up with one Force and Rival crank arm...


----------



## stevesbike (Jun 3, 2002)

anyone know what the weight difference is between a Rival and Red left crank arm? The active temperature compensation feature sounds interesting.


----------



## ukbloke (Sep 1, 2007)

:-) said:


> While the left-leg-only might be an issue, it will be interesting to read more hands-on reviews. After all, their algorithm might be a bit more advanced that "x2". Besides, how large a difference does there tend to be between legs anyway?


Their algorithm is "x2". The accuracy of this will vary between individuals. It could also potentially vary across a training season or even across a ride. Obviously the data will be bogus for one-leg drills, but that's hardly a problem. Their claim is that their measurements will be consistent for a particular rider (e.g. rider x is always 5% stronger on the right leg), so it does not matter when looking for a self-relative improvement. This remains to be seen.


It is curious that:
The traditional spider and hub powermeter guys will tell you that one aggregate power number summing left and right power is all you need
The pedal powermeter guys will tell you that you must measure the power output of each leg independently and compare them
Some spider powermeter guys now say that they can do left/right power too and that you can have that if you want to pay more
The one-sided crank powermeter guys tell you that you just need to measure one side and then double it, and that left/right power is bunk
Hmmmm.


----------



## nightfend (Mar 15, 2009)

I have a computrainer at home that does left/right leg testing with spinscan. I usually ride with a 49/51 split. So pretty close and I don't try and concentrate on evening out my pedal stroke or anything. So I'd guess that most people will have pretty similar balanced left/right leg power.


----------



## ukbloke (Sep 1, 2007)

nightfend said:


> So I'd guess that most people will have pretty similar balanced left/right leg power.


Based on your population sample size of 1?


----------



## burkeqc (Sep 25, 2006)

I hope this works! I got zinged on the IBike so I can wait. Less than $1000 makes it feasible


----------



## Kerry Irons (Feb 25, 2002)

*Data*



nightfend said:


> I have a computrainer at home that does left/right leg testing with spinscan. I usually ride with a 49/51 split. So pretty close and I don't try and concentrate on evening out my pedal stroke or anything. So I'd guess that most people will have pretty similar balanced left/right leg power.


Actually there has been a fair amount of reported data on this. Even power left right is quite rare. Differences as high as 60/40 have been reported. The data I have seen sugests that a 5% difference is not unusual. That said assuming this is repeatable you could still use it as a power meter for training purposes with no issues. Your absolute power might be off but everything would be fine on a relative basis and that is what training with power is about.


----------



## CleavesF (Dec 31, 2007)

The important thing is not the actual power number (though we would all love a 100% accurate number), what is important is that is can be sensitive enough to measure improvement in power for a given perceived efforts. If it can tell me that for 25% the price of an on-sale SRM... I might be game.


----------



## OldZaskar (Jul 1, 2009)

Assuming the system relies on the deflection of the crank arm, the only way it can tell the difference in pedaling and other forces, e.g. impacts from bumps, roots, jumps (mountain bikes), drops, etc. is with the cadence sensor. And to further ASSume... if the cadence sensor senses no movement, it ignores that strain input. But how would it handle pedaling over rocks, roots, etc. Seems like the mtb application would be hugely inaccurate. 

Full Disclosure: I have an SRM, so I want every less expensive option to be dismissed as junk ;-)


----------



## spade2you (May 12, 2009)

ukbloke said:


> Based on your population sample size of 1?


Who cares? If it's that big of a deal, pony up for a crank based system.


----------



## ukbloke (Sep 1, 2007)

spade2you said:


> Who cares? If it's that big of a deal, pony up for a crank based system.


Already went with a custom wheel build using a PowerTap, thanks. It came in at the same $700 price. Another big saving is that it prevents me from spending another $1-2K on carbon wheels!


----------



## champamoore (Jul 30, 2012)

OldZaskar said:


> Full Disclosure: I have an SRM, so I want every less expensive option to be dismissed as junk ;-)


You have been enjoying the premium of PM data ahead of those of us who couldn't/didn't afford it at its higher cost. If your archaic technology works, why dislike the less expensive technology that follows? 

Especially considering that that is the nature of technology improvements/pricing in this interweb world we live in, it seems such an anti-innovation stance would only provide more and more frustration for the holder. (Yes, I saw the wink, this is something of a rhetorical response. ;])


----------



## nightfend (Mar 15, 2009)

ukbloke said:


> Based on your population sample size of 1?


True. But I know it will work for me. So I'll probably buy one.


----------



## triumph.1 (Jun 21, 2011)

:cryin: No campy


----------



## stevesbike (Jun 3, 2002)

I can see their motivation to come in at a low price point, but they could also offer a 2 sensor version with a drive-side sensor as well. Or at least set up demos in shops to get a left/right analysis then enter a compensation user-defined value into the algorithm.


----------



## ukbloke (Sep 1, 2007)

stevesbike said:


> I can see their motivation to come in at a low price point, but they could also offer a 2 sensor version with a drive-side sensor as well. Or at least set up demos in shops to get a left/right analysis then enter a compensation user-defined value into the algorithm.


I think the 2-sensor version requires the electronics/packaging to shrink significantly because of clearance issues to the chain rings. They have to do this without compromising the strength/stiffness/reliability of the OEM crank arm, which means that they can't embed it all within the crank either. Maybe a very slimline version could fit on the outside of the crank and still have clearance with respect to the shoe?

Also, I suspect that if they double up the sensor then the cost is going to be close to a Quarq, or more than other lower cost spider-based power-meters that are likely to come out in the future (see PowerMax).

The shop demo is a good idea. But since they don't have a left/right version, they'll have to calibrate the device rider's left/right balance using somebody else's powermeter, like a Quarq, SRM or PowerTap.

All in all, I think the powermeter market is going to get really fractured by all these new entrants, and I wonder which companies will survive long term. I think Saris has done a good job making as much money as they can by shifting lots of PowerTaps before all these new devices become available. They also have plenty of other products to sell. Quarq is owned by SRAM, and SRM has the high-end niche. I guess Garmin could be the big loser - very late to the game, and not at all competitive on price.


----------



## OldZaskar (Jul 1, 2009)

champamoore said:


> You have been enjoying the premium of PM data ahead of those of us who couldn't/didn't afford it at its higher cost. If your archaic technology works, why dislike the less expensive technology that follows?
> 
> Especially considering that that is the nature of technology improvements/pricing in this interweb world we live in, it seems such an anti-innovation stance would only provide more and more frustration for the holder. (Yes, I saw the wink, this is something of a rhetorical response. ;])


Oh no - I'm actually with ya. It kills me that my SRM is fast becoming outdated - no L/R data? WTF? Seems like an easy software fix - the computer can see the power in surges. Obviously each one corresponds with a pedals stroke. Calibrate it entering left and right and it's done - left and right data. But nope. My $3,400 crank provides one averaged number... while the Quark does L/R... 'cause it's newer, and that's the way technology happens.


----------



## CleavesF (Dec 31, 2007)

triumph.1 said:


> :cryin: No campy


If you can afford campy... nevermind, that would just be a biggoted statement. 

A PowerCrank Powermeter though would be soooooo tight. That would really tell you a lot of information.


----------



## spade2you (May 12, 2009)

CleavesF said:


> If you can afford campy... nevermind, that would just be a biggoted statement.
> 
> A PowerCrank Powermeter though would be soooooo tight. That would really tell you a lot of information.


While it's true Campagnolo is a little pricy, the Campy SRM is just plain insanely priced. For the price of one SRM, you could get 2 Quarqs.


----------



## stevesbike (Jun 3, 2002)

spade2you said:


> While it's true Campagnolo is a little pricy, the Campy SRM is just plain insanely priced. For the price of one SRM, you could get 2 Quarqs.


my understanding is that quarqs are plagued by drift and that even without extreme temperature variation they consider a shift in zero offset equivalent to 15 W at 90 rpm normal.


----------



## spade2you (May 12, 2009)

stevesbike said:


> my understanding is that quarqs are plagued by drift and that even without extreme temperature variation they consider a shift in zero offset equivalent to 15 W at 90 rpm normal.


I haven't heard that. Haven't noticed any issues with mine being off. Doing many of the same steady state workouts at the same gearing, I haven't noticed anything out of the ordinary. 

I typically do a given interval in the same gearing as I did before and my power there has been about the same, too. 

I recently hit some high numbers (for me) in my last crit, but that was more likely because it was a really difficult crit.


----------



## Cableguy (Jun 6, 2010)

stevesbike said:


> my understanding is that quarqs are plagued by drift and that even without extreme temperature variation they consider a shift in zero offset equivalent to 15 W at 90 rpm normal.


A shift of 15W would be a change in zero offset of about 45 during the ride. Between the start and end of rides I normally see the offset differ by only about 5-15... which would only be like 2-5 watts.

I've heard that after doing a fresh install, it can take a few rides for the offset on the Quarq to stabilize though. No biggie.


----------



## pista86 (Jan 2, 2011)

Any Body has any info on what Mobile phone app well be this work with?


----------



## Sheepo (Nov 8, 2011)

Anybody know any word on a release date for these? I need a power meter stat and im not really interested in replacing my current wheels...


----------



## r.shoemaker78 (Feb 23, 2012)

I can't seem to find a release date for this. Hopefully they still plan to move forward.


----------



## 2Slo4U (Feb 12, 2005)

I sent them an email a while ago.. They said they were on track to start taking pre-orders sometime in November, with shipping in Jan/Feb.


----------



## ddimick (Aug 9, 2011)

pista86 said:


> Any Body has any info on what Mobile phone app well be this work with?


If you're investing in a power meter, you won't be using it with a phone. It will work with any ANT+ unit, lie a Garmin.


----------



## Alex_Simmons/RST (Jan 12, 2008)

A few comments:

L-R power is rarely symmetrical - asymmetry is the norm. 

The degree of asymmetry not only varies between people (and ranges from minimal to quite a bit), it also varies for the same person depending on relative and absolute power output (i.e. you might be 45-55% at one power level but 48-52% at another power level). It is also affected by fatigue and the nature of the riding you are doing.

The Stages product calculates power by taking measured power from the left crank and multiplying by 2.

Given the above two, then they may be able to claim an accuracy pertaining to the left crank, but they cannot justifiably claim the same level of accuracy for overall power.

There is no big necessity for L-R power to be 50-50. Performance is not impacted by chasing this "goal", even if rehabilitating from injury. The focus still should be on overall power output.

No power meter on the market can give you left leg - right leg power. They can't since the cranks are connected. However some meters can provide a breakdown of the _net power attributed to each half of the pedal stroke_. That's not the same thing as left and right leg power. _One needs to be very careful when interpreting this data._

Computrainers via Spinscan infer even less than power meters that report torque data (such as SRMs with torque analysis).

L-R data as currently promoted is a feature that doesn't provide any actionable intelligence, and has little if any performance benefit. It's mostly a gimmick but manufacturers are going to be providing the feature anyway. Even SRM are starting to do it.

Nevertheless, armed with this knowledge, then should the Stages product make it to market it may prove to be a useful entry level power meter for some.

We of course have no idea about their longevity, reliability, service, support, etc.
_
Disclosure: I retail SRM & Quarq power meters in Australia. Although I'd sell some other brands if I had distribution access._


----------



## Got Time (Jan 23, 2009)

Alex_Simmons/RST said:


> No power meter on the market can give you left leg - right leg power. They can't since the cranks are connected.


Even though the cranks are connected, the pedal based power meter measures the applied force for each leg separately, right? Are you saying that they are unable to distinguish between the force from the leg and the force coming from the other side? As they have the data for both sides, they should be able to calculate what each leg provides, right?

BTW: I don't really care much about this data (even though it's interesting to look at with my old Polar powermeter -- I know it's just a calculated value, not measured data), I'm just curious why it isn't/shouldn't be possible with the Polar/Look version right now.


----------



## Alex_Simmons/RST (Jan 12, 2008)

Got Time said:


> Even though the cranks are connected, the pedal based power meter measures the applied force for each leg separately, right? Are you saying that they are unable to distinguish between the force from the leg and the force coming from the other side? As they have the data for both sides, they should be able to calculate what each leg provides, right?
> 
> BTW: I don't really care much about this data (even though it's interesting to look at with my old Polar powermeter -- I know it's just a calculated value, not measured data), I'm just curious why it isn't/shouldn't be possible with the Polar/Look version right now.


I have my doubts, but I did forget about the Polar.

By the way, here is a chart from an SRM torque analysis showing the left-right side power split (keep in mind this is not true L-R power) for the same rider at different power outputs.










and another showing relationship versus cadence for a different rider:









Charts courtesy of Andy Coggan.

It gets even more interesting when you look deeper into the nature of the force application, which can change quite a bit, even though the L-R power balance does not.


----------



## Wookiebiker (Sep 5, 2005)

When they are able to offer road BB30 versions (other than Cannondale due to price) ... Then I'll be excited.

However, due to the cut out on the back of the crank arms on BB30 cranks ... they can't offer that option right now because the crank arm needs to have a flat back. Two of my bikes have BB30's which means I can't use one of these power meters on it without adapters, which is a pain and leads to creaks more often than not.


----------



## Sheepo (Nov 8, 2011)

Im not too excited about this anymore. Especially with Quarqs selling on ebay for a few hundred more.


----------



## r.shoemaker78 (Feb 23, 2012)

I've been riding for several years but last year was my first year taking it more seriously and trying to vastly improve my riding ability. That being said, I am seriously considering this product since it is so easily incorporated. The several hundred dollars it will save over a Quarq will allow me to get the Garmin head unit. 

My only training tool at the moment is a cheap HRM, I don't even have cadence or speed computers. So this will be a massive improvement as a training tool and more budget friendly for someone with no other components to work with. Having young kids and working a bunch, I am really just looking for something to maximize the time I have to ride. I'm just hoping this is the right tool for the job.


----------



## romanovsky (Nov 4, 2012)

*x2 algorithm*

I cannot agree with guys who say the only possible algorithm is x2.
They have accelerometer in the device. So it can measure bike's horizontal acceleration on left (LA) and right stroke (RA). It would be pretty fairly to assume LA/RA correlates with the LP/RP (where LP power produced by left leg, RP -- right leg).


----------



## Alex_Simmons/RST (Jan 12, 2008)

romanovsky said:


> I cannot agree with guys who say the only possible algorithm is x2.


Well it's StageONE themselves that say it assumes symmetry and doubles left leg power. Quote from their website:



> Measuring power at the left arm requires one assumption — that your left and right legs have a balanced power output. We have found with thousands of miles of testing, that power differential between legs has no significant influence on ride data and its value as a training tool. This assumption is the tenant to our ability to keep the complexity and cost of our system lower, all the while providing power measurement with ±2% accuracy.


So while I am happy they might claim a 2% accuracy of their strain gauge (although that itself needs to be verified), there is no way they can legitimately claim that level of accuracy for total power output.

There are other forms of asymmetry that I haven't shown, and _this asymmetry is normal, not the exception_.



romanovsky said:


> They have accelerometer in the device. So it can measure bike's horizontal acceleration on left (LA) and right stroke (RA). It would be pretty fairly to assume LA/RA correlates with the LP/RP (where LP power produced by left leg, RP -- right leg).


I'm sure they'd love to hear from you about your theory. However I'm not so sure since the pattern of force application also changes with cadence and intensity, even though the level of L-R asymmetry may not.


----------



## robdamanii (Feb 13, 2006)

ddimick said:


> If you're investing in a power meter, you won't be using it with a phone. It will work with any ANT+ unit, lie a Garmin.


Unless you use an ANT+ key on the phone, but that's a pain in the butt.


----------



## MaddSkillz (Mar 13, 2007)

The release date is January 2013 for those asking. They have a Facebook page that they update rather frequently.


----------



## nightfend (Mar 15, 2009)

MaddSkillz said:


> The release date is January 2013 for those asking. They have a Facebook page that they update rather frequently.


I'll believe it when I see it in stores. We were burnt once already with the Garmin powermeter.


----------



## MaddSkillz (Mar 13, 2007)

nightfend said:


> I'll believe it when I see it in stores. We were burnt once already with the Garmin powermeter.


I agree but the device itself isn't nearly as complex as the Garmin power meter.


----------



## robdamanii (Feb 13, 2006)

nightfend said:


> I'll believe it when I see it in stores. We were burnt once already with the Garmin powermeter.


We're STILL being burned on the Garmin power meter (Vector.)


----------



## Sheepo (Nov 8, 2011)

Well shucks! Too late. I just bought a set of 2011 404 clinchers with a Powertap pro + on ebay for <$1000. :thumbsup:


----------



## MaddSkillz (Mar 13, 2007)

Sheepo said:


> Well shucks! Too late. I just bought a set of 2011 404 clinchers with a Powertap pro + on ebay for <$1000. :thumbsup:


You're gonna feel that in the hills. Will probably lose minutes on others and will probably end up quitting cycling altogether. 

I'm sorry.


----------



## Sheepo (Nov 8, 2011)

MaddSkillz said:


> You're gonna feel that in the hills. Will probably lose minutes on others and will probably end up quitting cycling altogether.
> 
> I'm sorry.



Dawg, you must have misread my post. I said *zipps*. 

That means I am automatically .4 mph faster at all times. Even when sitting still at a red light.


----------



## 2Slo4U (Feb 12, 2005)

the last two post are funny.....


----------



## Rex Chan (Apr 7, 2012)

I've got 4500 Tiagra cranks (compact) on my 2011 Orbea Aqua. I can't find if it is a Hollowtech II crank. Does anyone know if the StageOne 105 crank will work on my bike?


----------



## Rex Chan (Apr 7, 2012)

Pre-order is now open, but only to US customers...


----------



## refthimos (Aug 15, 2008)

*Price of Track Crank is Mighty A-ttrack-tive*

As the owner of three SRMs looking to put together a track bike, the Stages track PM is enticing at its price point - the track version of the SRM is insanely priced, even by SRM standards.


----------



## deviousalex (Aug 18, 2010)

refthimos said:


> As the owner of three SRMs looking to put together a track bike, the Stages track PM is enticing at its price point - the track version of the SRM is insanely priced, even by SRM standards.


Since a track bike is fixed, would this mean it's more accurate in this situation?


----------



## Alex_Simmons/RST (Jan 12, 2008)

deviousalex said:


> Since a track bike is fixed, would this mean it's more accurate in this situation?


No.
5 chars


----------



## JackDaniels (Oct 4, 2011)

I got my hands on one of these early and have around 700 miles riding along with a quarq on the other side to compare with. It's been extremely consistent so far. I know the quarq should read a little high with the TT chainring (5.2% according to their site), so the numbers are what I would expect. I'm going to recalibrate the quarq when I get a chance...


----------



## robdamanii (Feb 13, 2006)

JackDaniels said:


> I got my hands on one of these early and have around 700 miles riding along with a quarq on the other side to compare with. It's been extremely consistent so far. I know the quarq should read a little high with the TT chainring (5.2% according to their site), so the numbers are what I would expect. I'm going to recalibrate the quarq when I get a chance...


How did you install on carbon crank arms? I thought it was aluminum only.


----------



## JackDaniels (Oct 4, 2011)

It's an aluminum left arm...


----------



## VKW (Jul 26, 2009)

JackDaniels said:


> I got my hands on one of these early and have around 700 miles riding along with a quarq on the other side to compare with. It's been extremely consistent so far. I know the quarq should read a little high with the TT chainring (5.2% according to their site), so the numbers are what I would expect. I'm going to recalibrate the quarq when I get a chance...


Can you post some comparison data between the quarq and stages power meter? I am thinking of picking one of these up myself. I know there have been some people adamant that measuring left power only and multiplying by 2 is not as simple as it sounds but for my intended purposes, I think it would suit me. Just wanted to see how big the differences if any were.


----------



## JackDaniels (Oct 4, 2011)

I'd want to get the quarq calibrated first. The best I can say now is that the 3 second and 30 second power (watching while I ride) and average power (at the end of the ride) between the two meters seems consistent with an offset that would be expected per the quarq calibration tables.


----------



## adam_mac84 (Sep 22, 2010)

So are these being shipped now? Think it will be a better option for me than a PT. Because of riding multiple bikes... A 105 crankset is pretty cheap to pick up (already have one on my primary road bike, and could swap it to pit CX bike), and could get a crankset for the TT bike all for less than a SRM or new PT


----------



## PDex (Mar 23, 2004)

I talked with someone who was doing testing on this with an SRM and a PowerTap. The SRM and StageOne were identical and the PowerTap had a small bias in the results. The test was done with someone with a good left/right power profile so the potential of having a stronger left or right leg did not enter into the equation.


----------



## deviousalex (Aug 18, 2010)

What I'm wondering is you can just send it back to 'upgrade'. I.e. now I have a dura ace 7900 group, if I get a 9000 can I jsut send it back and get them to calibrate it on the 9000 crank arm and pay way less.


----------



## VKW (Jul 26, 2009)

Just pre-ordered the Dura Ace 9000 crank arm! I can't wait! Expected shipping for the DA9000 left crank arm only option was late March.


----------



## PDex (Mar 23, 2004)

VKW said:


> Can you post some comparison data between the quarq and stages power meter? I am thinking of picking one of these up myself. I know there have been some people adamant that measuring left power only and multiplying by 2 is not as simple as it sounds but for my intended purposes, I think it would suit me. Just wanted to see how big the differences if any were.



I don't have the data from the test that I mentioned in my post, but Neal Henderson posted his data a few days later:

Stages: TrainingPeaks | Public Activity Viewer
SRM: TrainingPeaks | Public Activity Viewer
Powertap: TrainingPeaks | Public Activity Viewer


----------



## VKW (Jul 26, 2009)

Thanks! Very informative. The comparison data definitely looks acceptable and within a variance you'd see between other established power meters.


----------



## bsmith201 (Aug 28, 2011)

From Stages in regards to ship dates/availablity:

"Thank you for your inquiry and interest in Stages Cycling and our power meter solutions. We completely understand a need to see us ship and get some 3rd party comparison data before committing to buy. With that said, our first shipments should leave our Boulder location late this week (maybe early next as we are in the middle of a press event in Boulder). Presently, we have about a 6 week backorder of units and are quoting early/mid-March for shipment of new orders. If, after seeing us ship units and reading some of the 3rd party reviews that will likely hit the street in less than 2 weeks you are comfortable with what you see, please be prepared for late March/early April delivery if you choose to order. As an alternative to waiting for this validation, if you ordered online we do not charge your card until we ship and it would allow you to at least get in line. If we fail to ship when we say or the 3rd party data doesn’t look good to you, you could always cancel. Otherwise you will likely be pushed back even further for delivery. This only matters though if you need the unit before summer. Please like us on Facebook or sign up for updates on our website for the latest Stages Cycling news."


----------



## deviousalex (Aug 18, 2010)

PDex said:


> I don't have the data from the test that I mentioned in my post, but Neal Henderson posted his data a few days later:
> 
> Stages: TrainingPeaks | Public Activity Viewer
> SRM: TrainingPeaks | Public Activity Viewer
> Powertap: TrainingPeaks | Public Activity Viewer


The 1h30m power on the Stages looks kinda off compared to the other two. ~25 watts is quite a bit for that amount of time I reckon.


----------



## JackDaniels (Oct 4, 2011)

deviousalex said:


> The 1h30m power on the Stages looks kinda off compared to the other two. ~25 watts is quite a bit for that amount of time I reckon.


The ride times are all different, if you look close the 90min avg is probably pulling from a different segment.


----------



## PDex (Mar 23, 2004)

Neal provides some background on the test on his Twitter feed. 

https://twitter.com/nealhenderson


----------



## bsmith201 (Aug 28, 2011)

w w w .dcrainmaker.com/2013/01/stages-power-meter-in-depth-review.html

After reading this I am still unsure on it. My big question is, for someone without a power meter, would this still provide a better training tool than HR, or is the inaccuracy and unkown of the L/R balance make it too unpredictable. 

Also hoping that future firmware allows a user to input their L/R balance, and makes it more accurate.


----------



## nightfend (Mar 15, 2009)

Definitely better than heart rate as it still responds rather quickly to changes in effort. Heartrate can be all over the place depending on if you are sick/overtrained/caffeinated.


----------



## JackDaniels (Oct 4, 2011)

bsmith201 said:


> w w w .dcrainmaker.com/2013/01/stages-power-meter-in-depth-review.html
> 
> After reading this I am still unsure on it. My big question is, for someone without a power meter, would this still provide a better training tool than HR, or is the inaccuracy and unkown of the L/R balance make it too unpredictable.
> 
> Also hoping that future firmware allows a user to input their L/R balance, and makes it more accurate.



I haven't seen the issues that he is reporting in his test and I have around 1500 miles on both units now. I would also like to have the ability to enter in an offset value if I knew I had a leg imbalance. Since it's bluetooth, it seems like this would be feasible.

Personally I use a power meter for ftp testing, intervals, tt pacing, and recovery days (keep under certain wattage). I primarily use the HRM to tell if I'm close to going anaerobic in a race.


----------



## bsmith201 (Aug 28, 2011)

I shot Stages an email regarding my order and asked them to comment on what they thought of DCrainmaker/ray's article, here is the response:

"Thank you for your support and willingness to move forward with our product. As for the DCR review, I will admit it really caught us by surprise. We are working with Ray to better understand his data and the conclusions that he came to. Quite honestly, he provided data to the public unlike anything we have ever seen and we want to understand how he did this. We have other coaches/dealers/research partners posting data that shows our power meter falls right on top of the data of Quarq, PT, and SRM. So who’s to say which is the accurate test. If you look at the below twitter post on our Facebook page, it links to data collected by Neal Henderson (Director of Sports Performance at Boulder Center for Sports Medicine). This is the kind of data we see daily internally and from the folks who are riding our power meter in the Boulder area.

It was a painful pill to swallow yesterday as we didn’t see it coming. Again, we want to work with Ray to understand what he did. Me personally, I left the review wondering how we only scored a 6.5/10 and he gave both Powertap and Quarq 9/10 scores? The data between those two was just as different as ours was to either the PT or Quarq, so why did we end up with the low score and PT did not (if Quarq was the true GOLD standard).

Regardless, we will continue to move forward and start shipping units late this week. Regrettably we can’t just DEFEND ourselves as that just looks like sour grapes from a bad review. The backlash from trying to discredit DCR is not something we want to get involved with. He’s very well respected, but we just feel he “missed” on the power portion of his review. Everything else was spot on. There will be additional reviews coming from the folks that attended our press camp and more data from other sources and we feel like in the end the public will see we have succeeded in our goal “to build an affordable, consistent power meter all cyclists can use to improve their performance.”


----------



## ukbloke (Sep 1, 2007)

JackDaniels said:


> I would also like to have the ability to enter in an offset value if I knew I had a leg imbalance. Since it's bluetooth, it seems like this would be feasible.


How would you know how much of a leg imbalance to compensate for? How do you know that your leg imbalance number is reasonable across all variables (cadence, fatigue level, type of riding, etc.). Stages can hardly tell people to get their legs calibrated with a left/right balance powermeter (like Garmin Vector)! I think if they admit that some users need an offset value, then they saying their powermeter isn't going to be accurate for some users.

Anyway, if you did know your leg imbalance number and you wanted to compensate it is trivial to do later. If you have a 49:51 imbalance from left to right, you need to take the Stages power number divide by 2 to get left power and then multiply by 100/49 to get total "compensated" power.


----------



## JackDaniels (Oct 4, 2011)

I suppose in my case it would be easier to compare with last years numbers. Even though that would be to compensate for my quarq reading high. I honestly don't know about the L/R thing, I don't think any power meter can account for all variables. I know the quarq can get wonky if you are not diligent about doing the backward pedal thing to reset it, especially this time of the year with the temperature changes.

Anway as soon as I get the factory calibration on the quarq, it should give me a better idea where the two stand.

Hopefully there will be some better comparison data coming out soon as these get out...


----------



## cha_cha_ (Sep 27, 2008)

JackDaniels said:


> Hopefully there will be some better comparison data coming out soon as these get out...


this. really looking forward to seeing more real-world comparisons coming in.

i'm still on the fence - i have an srm on my track bike and a quarq on my roadie. considering an XT stages for my mtb. if it can give me worthwhile stress scores and relatively accurate power data then i'm keen. i'm not sure whether the stochastic nature of mtb will help or hinder the single leg powermeter's ability to give quality data...


----------



## deviousalex (Aug 18, 2010)

JackDaniels said:


> I honestly don't know about the L/R thing, I don't think any power meter can account for all variables.


Rotor Power Meter Crank - YouTube

This Rotor Power looks impressive. Can do L/R and a few other nifty things.


----------



## djconnel (May 7, 2006)

Quarq is not a gold standard. But the most important plot in Rainmaker's review is the plot showing consistency with the LeMond trainer. The fan resistance should be fairly constant at a given speed. The LeMond trainer has a power estimation algorithm as a function of speed, and that's not going to be perfectly right, but at a given speed power should be close to constant, and fluctuations in LeMond power should be fairly close to fluctuations in real power, even if there's a speed-dependent offset.

When you look at the LeMond data versus the Quarq data the two track fairly well near a given power level. On the other hand Stages is off the map.

The reason is it is well documented that L-R power distribution is a function of many things, including cadence, level of exertion, how "inertial" the riding is, and fatigue, not to mention rider-to-rider. Ray already showed using the Look/Polar pedals that he's not 50:50, and that he varies significantly from 50-50. This is typical. 

Additionally, Ray showed that Stages' cadence extraction has issues during cadence transients. This was validated by Robert Chung, who knows his stuff. If Stages makes a cadence error, it makes a power error.

So Stages "working with Ray" doesn't mean much to me. The results were exactly as I personally expected, as anyone who seriously follows the field expected. It's basic physics: you've got to measure both legs.


----------



## Corndog (Jan 18, 2006)

While reading DC's review, as soon as I saw the issues with cadence transients I knew there were going to be abnormalities in the power data. Just a bit down the page, there it was. I was surprised they (Stages) didn't get this right... as it's so fundamental to power measurement. 

The L/R thing is enough of a limitation... but at least you can do things to account for that (or at least accept the tradeoff for cost). However, the nature of the inconsistencies of the power data make it hard to use this product.


----------



## djconnel (May 7, 2006)

I completely agree. For L-R balance, they could make the multiplication factor settable rather than fixed @ 2. They could even make it a function of cadence and power. But of course that would require elaborate calibration. They want people to put it on and go. Most people have no way of knowing, nor do they particularly care, how accurate it is. They assume precision, but have no way of verifying that either. But on cadence you make an excellent point. I would love to be working with them on improving their cadence measurement. Unfortunately it wouldn't fit into their compact package.


----------



## Local Hero (Jul 8, 2010)

Is it internally consistent? 

I need help understanding something:

If I have a left leg bias and I use the StageOne to get my left leg's FTP, and I train using StageOne for 3X20 minutes at that FTP, what's the problem? 

In other words, as long as thing is consistent for the rider, what difference does it make if I am doing 295FTP, 300FTP, 305FTP or potato? Isn't the goal to hit the same numbers and look for a change in numbers over time, etc?


----------



## djconnel (May 7, 2006)

It's not constant with effort, with cadence, or with fatigue, so it's not constant with the rider.

But form can be trained. If you give someone a goal they can adjust their form to maximize attainment of the goal. And in this case the way to most readily attain that goal is to do as much work with left leg as possible. I'd like to see an experiment if L-R balance shifts to the L after training with Stages.


----------



## Corndog (Jan 18, 2006)

Exactly, the whole point of DC's review is that it _isn't_ internally consistent. Even if you do pretty aggressive smoothing, it's still evident.


----------



## balatoe (Apr 15, 2009)

I just cancelled my order today. I think I would wait for a while and get more feedback from others before I commit myself to it.


----------



## Brad the Bold (Jun 8, 2010)

Well crap. What do I do? I currently have no powermeter.

I got into long course Tri last year with a new Cervelo P2 it was a budget stretcher. The bike has an FSA Gossamer crankset. 

But, Stages doesn't offer a FSA left crank arm. And the "powers that be" seem to be in the process of pissing all over the Stage's accuracy anyway.

So there continues to be no "approved" power options for those that simply can't justify adding 50-100% of the cost of our bike.


----------



## HammerTime-TheOriginal (Mar 29, 2006)

Brad the Bold said:


> So there continues to be no "approved" power options for those that simply can't justify adding 50-100% of the cost of our bike.


You can get an "approved" powermeter without adding anywhere near 50-100% of the cost of your bike.

How, you may ask? By getting a more expensive bike, that's how.


----------



## Brad the Bold (Jun 8, 2010)

HammerTime-TheOriginal said:


> You can get an "approved" powermeter without adding anywhere near 50-100% of the cost of your bike.
> 
> How, you may ask? By getting a more expensive bike, that's how.


I laughed, but I'm imagining the wife won't think it's as funny.


----------



## deviousalex (Aug 18, 2010)

Brad the Bold said:


> Well crap. What do I do? I currently have no powermeter.
> 
> I got into long course Tri last year with a new Cervelo P2 it was a budget stretcher. The bike has an FSA Gossamer crankset.
> 
> ...


I'm in the same boat. Right now I'm betting on the Rotor Power to be good once it comes out. I like the idea of a universal axel that works with all BBs (except for the new Madone for some reason).


----------



## simonaway427 (Jul 12, 2010)

Brad the Bold said:


> Well crap. What do I do? I currently have no powermeter.
> 
> I got into long course Tri last year with a new Cervelo P2 it was a budget stretcher. The bike has an FSA Gossamer crankset.
> 
> ...


But for a marginal price increase, you can get the whole crank....thank said, "that review" isn't very promising.


----------



## nhluhr (Sep 9, 2010)

Brad the Bold said:


> Well crap. What do I do? I currently have no powermeter.
> 
> I got into long course Tri last year with a new Cervelo P2 it was a budget stretcher. The bike has an FSA Gossamer crankset.
> 
> ...


You can't really think of a power meter as just a bike part. It is a tremendously valuable training tool, end of story. The fact that it happens to replace a part of your bike is beside the point and therefore the percentage of cost of the bike is irrelevant. Everybody will get better if they use power for training (you really do need to pick up a book and read how to do this correctly though). They have different cost points, but the lowest (new) for said "approved" power meter is going to be a powertap. Used power meters can be even cheaper. I've heard of people getting used powertap wheels for like $200.


----------



## NWS Alpine (Mar 16, 2012)

ddimick said:


> If you're investing in a power meter, you won't be using it with a phone. It will work with any ANT+ unit, lie a Garmin.


Actually since it's BTLE then it's more likely users will be using it with a phone. No Ant+ dongle needed for the iPhone 4s and 5. It's already supported by a ton of apps because it follows a standard power profile. Throw a Wahoo RFLKT on the bars and keep your iPhone in your pocket and it's a perfect setup.


----------



## ukbloke (Sep 1, 2007)

NWS Alpine said:


> Actually since it's BTLE then it's more likely users will be using it with a phone. No Ant+ dongle needed for the iPhone 4s and 5. It's already supported by a ton of apps because it follows a standard power profile. Throw a Wahoo RFLKT on the bars and keep your iPhone in your pocket and it's a perfect setup.


There's a lot of new stuff in that set up. I'd love to hear some details on how their works out in practice. I'm still not convinced that I would want my smart phone in the loop (e.g. how much latency does it add to the display?), but it is certainly a use case that has Garmin worried.


----------



## Blue CheeseHead (Jul 14, 2008)

*StageOne Review*

Well, I have one of these bad boys that was provided as a gift. I can tell you that it more closely matches the power readings of my computrainer than my Power Tap did. 

In my mind this whole concern about symmetry of power is bunk. Think about it, if you are out putting in a given effort, your left leg will be proportional, if not equal, to your right leg. Power measurement is about consistency of measurement, not an absolute value. You get just as useful information from this tool as you will a Power Tap or SRM with regard to performance gains and how to pace yourself during a ride/training so as to achieve your target output.

The only time I have found this meter to be useless is during one legged drills. I cannot seem to generate any power out of my right leg.


----------



## kbiker3111 (Nov 7, 2006)

Blue CheeseHead said:


> Well, I have one of these bad boys that was provided as a gift. I can tell you that it more closely matches the power readings of my computrainer than my Power Tap did.
> 
> In my mind this whole concern about symmetry of power is bunk. Think about it, if you are out putting in a given effort, your left leg will be proportional, if not equal, to your right leg. Power measurement is about consistency of measurement, not an absolute value. You get just as useful information from this tool as you will a Power Tap or SRM with regard to performance gains and how to pace yourself during a ride/training so as to achieve your target output.
> 
> The only time I have found this meter to be useless is during one legged drills. I cannot seem to generate any power out of my right leg.


The problem is, power output is not proportional across the spectrum. At l2, you may be very asymettrical and at L5 you may be nearly 50 50. 

That said, I still think there is some value to the Stages for setting personal bests, TSS, CTL, etc.


----------



## nhluhr (Sep 9, 2010)

kbiker3111 said:


> The problem is, power output is not proportional across the spectrum. At l2, you may be very asymettrical and at L5 you may be nearly 50 50.
> 
> That said, I still think there is some value to the Stages for setting personal bests, TSS, CTL, etc.


Agree; low resolution data is better than no data at all, I'd think. I'll stick with my Powertap though.


----------



## Blue CheeseHead (Jul 14, 2008)

kbiker3111 said:


> The problem is, power output is not proportional across the spectrum. At l2, you may be very asymettrical and at L5 you may be nearly 50 50.
> 
> That said, I still think there is some value to the Stages for setting personal bests, TSS, CTL, etc.


It might be fun to throw my wired Power Tap on and do a side by side comparison. I could even use the computrainer as a 3rd power measuring source... Hmmm.


----------



## frisbie17 (Jan 17, 2012)

View attachment 278208
View attachment 278209
View attachment 278210
View attachment 278211
View attachment 278212
View attachment 278213


Lightest power meter on the market. Mine is very consistent between rides. I baselined the data with several rides on rollers then road the same route outside. Used heart rate, cadence to try and ride the same pace over and over to test. Power between rides was very close. Definitely worth the money and will be a great tool to measure changes in performance.


----------



## deviousalex (Aug 18, 2010)

frisbie17 said:


> Lightest power meter on the market. Mine is very consistent between rides. I baselined the data with several rides on rollers then road the same route outside. Used heart rate, cadence to try and ride the same pace over and over to test. Power between rides was very close. Definitely worth the money and will be a great tool to measure changes in performance.


I'm sure it's consistent when you are pedaling smoothly, but what happens at extremes. Have you been up any long climbs? When I'm _really_ pushing my limits or on super steep grades (> 15%) my form tends to break down very quickly and I think is where I think it would become very inaccurate.


----------



## frisbie17 (Jan 17, 2012)

deviousalex said:


> I'm sure it's consistent when you are pedaling smoothly, but what happens at extremes. Have you been up any long climbs? When I'm _really_ pushing my limits or on super steep grades (> 15%) my form tends to break down very quickly and I think is where I think it would become very inaccurate.


So far it seems to measures energy put into one crank arm consistently no matter how sporadic I ride. I have not rode up any long grades greater then 15 percent. So I cannot answer that question. But I have rode sections where my form has broken down. Same ride several times. The sections are relatively consistent from one to the next. Again if you vary greatly from one leg to the other, it may not give you very accurate readings for overall power. But for my training purposes, I really do not care if I am 5% or more off actual power. But the consistently in measuring seems as good or better then other power meters out there.


----------



## bsmith201 (Aug 28, 2011)

First off, I have been using my Stages power meter and while I have nothing scientific, my feeling is that it is working great, and is an amazing tool. FTP test lined up with my expectations, and the data looks consistent and accurate for what I expected. I do not own a computrainer, or other power meter to compare it to.

I have discovered something else, which I believe contributed to the poor results for Ray (DCrainmaker)'s tests. I recently also upgrade my head unit to the garmin edge 510 and began noticing "jumps"/"drops" in power readings. Upon searching the garmin forums I realized that this is actually a known and common issue with the new Garmin 510/810 which you can read about here:

https://forums.garmin.com/showthread.php?34165-Power-Readings-Issue/page2

When I went back and looked at Ray's tests, sure enough he used both a 510 and 810 as head units at different times during his test. When I did side by side tests with my 500 and 510 running I too saw jumps and discrepancies in the data. My thought is that the issues he saw, were more a factor of the buggy new Garmin head units, rather than the stages power meter.

I am disappointed in Ray's use of new Garmin technology for these tests, especially when we all know Garmin's poor track-record with buggy releases.


----------



## VKW (Jul 26, 2009)

Do your drops in power look similar to his?


----------



## asv (Aug 13, 2010)

Ray is planning on writing an update about stages soon according to a few hints he dropped on his blog and a podcast. He also hinted that firmware updates have improved some of the issues seen in his original review.


----------



## frisbie17 (Jan 17, 2012)

bsmith201 said:


> First off, I have been using my Stages power meter and while I have nothing scientific, my feeling is that it is working great, and is an amazing tool. FTP test lined up with my expectations, and the data looks consistent and accurate for what I expected. I do not own a computrainer, or other power meter to compare it to.
> 
> I have discovered something else, which I believe contributed to the poor results for Ray (DCrainmaker)'s tests. I recently also upgrade my head unit to the garmin edge 510 and began noticing "jumps"/"drops" in power readings. Upon searching the garmin forums I realized that this is actually a known and common issue with the new Garmin 510/810 which you can read about here:
> 
> ...


I am using the Garmin 800. Have not had any issues with drops in power. Mine is very consistent. I love it. Great purchase.


----------



## Carverbiker (Mar 6, 2013)

I have been following the reviews and had been put off by the spikes/drops as I have powertaps and computainer data that I am used to using. Thanks for reporting real world results.


----------



## VKW (Jul 26, 2009)

bsmith201 said:


> When I went back and looked at Ray's tests, sure enough he used both a 510 and 810 as head units at different times during his test. When I did side by side tests with my 500 and 510 running I too saw jumps and discrepancies in the data. My thought is that the issues he saw, were more a factor of the buggy new Garmin head units, rather than the stages power meter.
> 
> I am disappointed in Ray's use of new Garmin technology for these tests, especially when we all know Garmin's poor track-record with buggy releases.


It looked like he is using this new WASP data collector to capture Ant+ data from all devices now. That may eliminate discrepancies with the head units.


----------



## bsmith201 (Aug 28, 2011)

Yes, they do appear similar to his drops, and certainly noticed what he said about pacing. The power readings on the 510 jump around and sometimes cut out or "pulse" making it hard to pace.

This does NOT happen on the edge 500. Also, the very fact that the edge 510 and 810 are buggy with power makes me discredit his test overall. Ray is the one that is so hard set on consistency of measurement. The fact that 2 of the 3 head units he used for his tests have known issues with measuring and displaying power says more than enough. I look forward to his update, and hope he does not utilize a 510 or 810 unit for it.

What is truly a shame, if this theory is accurate, is the fact that his review cut deeply into the sales, credibility, and hype for Stages. In an industry such as this, it may be very difficult for them to gather the momentum they had going again, even if Ray writes a new and favorable review.


----------



## VKW (Jul 26, 2009)

It might be good to shoot him a quick email to tell him what you found. That way if he does a second review he can make sure it's not a contributing factor. I've emailed him before and he's pretty responsive.


----------



## hamsey (Aug 16, 2010)

Anyone contact Ray? Any response? Looking forward to an update from him on this one.


----------



## bsmith201 (Aug 28, 2011)

hamsey said:


> Anyone contact Ray? Any response? Looking forward to an update from him on this one.


I did. He acknowledged the data errors but was not convinced they caused all the issues he saw. Regardless he said to look for an update here soon that would test the new firmware, and avoid the 510/810, initial reports look promising he hints.


----------



## hamsey (Aug 16, 2010)

Anyone care to provide an update on how theirs is working? Thinking about it. Waiting for Rays update but would like to hear from those who have it and what they think. Pros/Cons.

Thanks!


----------



## JackDaniels (Oct 4, 2011)

Mine's been working well for around 4k miles. 

Pros:works good, hasn't broken
Cons: crankset limitation

I haven't done any active comparison to other power meters lately, nor do I intend to. But it looks like someone still is. I wonder which meters these are:


----------



## bsmith201 (Aug 28, 2011)

Had mine over a month now and it is working great. The new firmware also enhanced my already positive experience. Numbers are stable and exactly what I would expect them to be. No scientific experiments from me, but no complaints either.

Pro: Weight, ease of switching between bikes, ease of calibration, Stages customer service.

Con: Still the potential that measuring left leg only has a downside, however, I have been following a power based training program using Stages and have seen big gains in performance and results. 



hamsey said:


> Anyone care to provide an update on how theirs is working? Thinking about it. Waiting for Rays update but would like to hear from those who have it and what they think. Pros/Cons.
> 
> Thanks!


----------



## ziscwg (Apr 19, 2010)

bsmith201 said:


> Yes, they do appear similar to his drops, and certainly noticed what he said about pacing. The power readings on the 510 jump around and sometimes cut out or "pulse" making it hard to pace.
> 
> This does NOT happen on the edge 500. Also, the very fact that the edge 510 and 810 are buggy with power makes me discredit his test overall. Ray is the one that is so hard set on consistency of measurement. The fact that 2 of the 3 head units he used for his tests have known issues with measuring and displaying power says more than enough. I look forward to his update, and hope he does not utilize a 510 or 810 unit for it.
> 
> *What is truly a shame, if this theory is accurate, is the fact that his review cut deeply into the sales, credibility, and hype for Stages. In an industry such as this, it may be very difficult for them to gather the momentum they had going again, even if Ray writes a new and favorable review*.


This is unfortunate for Stages for sure. It also cuts into Ray's credibility also.


----------



## 67stang (Sep 17, 2012)

Have had one for about 6 weeks now. Today it stopped working... started showing 100W higher than normal; then I noticed it was responding slow - I'd stop pedaling but it would show power for a few seconds, and prior to that it was very instantaneous with cadence change. I stopped a few times to re-calibrate...noticed the calibration numbers were all higher than normal (not sure what the calibration number is really)... finally I stopped at a store and bought a new battery. 10 minutes after that it went to 0 Watts and seems done for good. 

I did notice, while changing the battery, the plastic cover for entire meter isn't all that sealed against the crank arm - and it did rain recently. 

Emailed Stages today, let's see how their support is...


----------



## Fireform (Dec 15, 2005)

Keep us posted. I've ridden in the rain with mine without incident.


----------



## 67stang (Sep 17, 2012)

Well, they shipped one out to me today next day air... two days after I reported the problem, and they didn't require me to ship the thing back to them first. Excellent customer service. Suspicion is water got into the unit.


----------



## albert1028 (Jan 21, 2013)

DCrainmaker 2nd Stages Cycling Review is up! 

The Stages Power Meter In-Depth Review Update | DC Rainmaker

And it looks much more positive than the first review. This is not an update but an entirely re-review.


----------



## Fireform (Dec 15, 2005)

Thanks for posting the link.


----------



## horvatht (Feb 27, 2012)

I sure wish it worked w SRAM Red BB30


----------



## djconnel (May 7, 2006)

So the messages are:1. Stages seems now, not previously, do a decent job of measuring left leg power and cadence under a variety of conditions.
2. Quarq can have some appaling errors in changing weather. 3. DC Rainmaker's integrity is and always was fully intact. His tests blow away almost anything else out there. For example checking for quick agreement with a Computrainer doesn't come close. They actually should not agree, since there is power loss between the crank and trainer.

It's not so bad. But they claim 2% total power accuracy, and as one poster noted, 5% is more typical given asymmetry. I recently crashed on my right side so obviously stages won't be reliable until I'm more symmetric again. And fatigue also affects it according to pedal tests. But for doing your intervals, it's fine. For gauging small changes in fitness probably not the best tool.


----------



## looigi (Nov 24, 2010)

Oops. Never mind.


----------



## Chainstay (Mar 13, 2004)

It was actually more stable over temperature variations within the ride than the Quark, and slightly more stable than the PowerTap.


----------



## pagey (Oct 30, 2009)

Any news of when they will be offering Stages outside of the US?


----------



## masont (Feb 6, 2010)

pagey said:


> Any news of when they will be offering Stages outside of the US?


They're working on it now. You won't have to wait much longer.


----------



## JackDaniels (Oct 4, 2011)

I've logged about 6000 miles on my stages pm so far. Still going strong.


----------



## Fireform (Dec 15, 2005)

JackDaniels said:


> I've logged about 6000 miles on my stages pm so far. Still going strong.


I can say the same. No complaints.


----------



## genux (Jun 18, 2012)

Can you mix-and-match crank arms? Shimano 105 on the left + FSA Gossamer BB30 (existing) on the right?


----------



## robdamanii (Feb 13, 2006)

genux said:


> Can you mix-and-match crank arms? Shimano 105 on the left + FSA Gossamer BB30 (existing) on the right?


As long as they have the same spline pattern, yes. For example, SRAM Red GXP with Rival left arm. Dura Ace crank with 105 arm, etc.


----------



## Fireform (Dec 15, 2005)

My unit finally failed the other day--the epoxy holding the housing onto the crankarm separated, allowing water in. But they sent me a replacement by next day air and a ups label to return the faulty unit, so I was without a power meter for exactly two days.

Can't beat that.


----------



## nhluhr (Sep 9, 2010)

Fireform said:


> My unit finally failed the other day--the epoxy holding the housing onto the crankarm separated, allowing water in. But they sent me a replacement by next day air and a ups label to return the faulty unit, so I was without a power meter for exactly two days.
> 
> Can't beat that.


You say "finally" as if it has been in service for a really long time. How long have you had it? That has been my concern on these units for awhile - the epoxy fastening.


----------



## Fireform (Dec 15, 2005)

Since early March--a lot of wet miles. I imagine they've been trying various epoxy strategies, as that is the weak point.


----------



## Alex_Simmons/RST (Jan 12, 2008)

Fireform said:


> My unit finally failed the other day--the epoxy holding the housing onto the crankarm separated, allowing water in. But they sent me a replacement by next day air and a ups label to return the faulty unit, so I was without a power meter for exactly two days.
> 
> Can't beat that.


Not failing would beat that.


----------



## Fireform (Dec 15, 2005)

True. I guess other power meters never fail.


----------



## caad9er (Oct 25, 2011)

Just bumping to see if anyone has any updates to add regarding the Stages PM. All things considered this seems to be a good option for the price and the data junkie recreational rider.

There does seem to be some ongoing issues with bonding and water issues. At least it sounds like Stages has top notch customer service.


----------

