Powermeters

MrCreosote

I've caught myself thinking about powermeters a lot recently.

Can anyone explain in simple terms how they work, the different types and pros/cons of these. And what is the benefit over a heart rate monitor?

Thanks!

mloc123

Not being smart or anythng... But if you don't know why you 'need' one you probably shouldn't be lookig to buy one.

This topic has come up alot tho' and is worth searching the forum.

MrCreosote

Fair point, although I never said I was thinking of buying one. Just curious really.

I did do a search (I'm not THAT lazy :pac:)- plenty of discussion about specific meters, but no generic threads and no comparisons etc

ednwireland

MrCreosote wrote: »

Fair point, although I never said I was thinking of buying one. Just curious really.

I did do a search (I'm not THAT lazy :pac:)- plenty of discussion about specific meters, but no generic threads and no comparisons etc

comparison, do you think anyone has 2

Beasty

ednwireland wrote: »

comparison, do you think anyone has 2

levitronix

I think sherlock has more than one ?

ryan_sherlock

levitronix wrote: »

I think sherlock has more than one ?

Yeah - Powertap on the MTB, SRM on the road bike. Do some searching (there is a HUGE amount of info on this) and come back with more concise questions.

Lumen

If you're interested, you may as well just buy this:

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Training-Racing-Power-Meter-Hunter/dp/1934030554/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1290843105&sr=8-1

It's only £12 and very interesting. If spending that money with no guaranteed return bothers you, powermeters are not for you.

Regardless of whether you end up using a powermeter or not, the training approaches advocated by Hunter Allen are a bit different to those of Joe Friel, so it's nice to have some breadth.

MrCreosote wrote: »

And what is the benefit over a heart rate monitor?

Accurately measuring output rather than inaccurately measuring effort.

billy.fish

ednwireland wrote: »

comparison, do you think anyone has 2

Ive 3

2 Powertaps, a polar system.

Technically if you count the Wattbike and Velotron 5.

Not to mention the broken Ergomo.

mloc123

billy.fish wrote: »

Not to mention the broken Ergomo.

I've yet to hear of a working Ergomo

ednwireland

billy.fish wrote: »

Ive 3

2 Powertaps, a polar system.

Technically if you count the Wattbike and Velotron 5.

Not to mention the broken Ergomo.

ryan_sherlock wrote: »

Yeah - Powertap on the MTB, SRM on the road bike. Do some searching (there is a HUGE amount of info on this) and come back with more concise questions.

Beasty wrote: »

allright allright i get it, you all have more than one

but which is best ............................... fight (to quote harry hill)

Beasty

Just to be clear I only have the 2 Powertaps (always worth having a spare, just in case;))

Can't compare them with the Quarq yet - it's for the TT bike, when I get the new wheels.:p

fondriest

mloc123 wrote: »

I've yet to hear of a working Ergomo

I have an ergomo that works. Of course its on the tt bike and only gets used about 5 times a year . 3 powertaps ,2 for the road and 1 on mtb.

billy.fish

ednwireland wrote: »

allright allright i get it, you all have more than one

but which is best ............................... fight (to quote harry hill)

What car is best.

Its not that easy.

Main thing is not best so much as consistent. Accuracy is secondary to that believe it or not.

Michelin

fondriest wrote: »

I have an ergomo that works. Of course its on the tt bike and only gets used about 5 times a year . 3 powertaps ,2 for the road and 1 on mtb.

Why use one on a mtb?

Hardly any point is there?

billy.fish

Michelin wrote: »

Why use one on a mtb?

Hardly any point is there?

Depends if you want to quantify the training you've done or not really...oh wait thats the same as on the road

Michelin

billy.fish wrote: »

Depends if you want to quantify the training you've done or not really...oh wait thats the same as on the road

Yes but it will hardly produce anywhere near the consistancy of what you should be doing on the road? If you were serious about training with a power meter you would hardly go mountain biking?

billy.fish

Michelin wrote: »

Yes but it will hardly produce anywhere near the consistancy of what you should be doing on the road? If you were serious about training with a power meter you would hardly go mountain biking?

Consistency has nothing to do with the nature of how the power is produced. MTB can be less stochastic than road cycling. Consistency comes down to how the power is measured and data captured.

As for the second comment, i'm not going to even bother to answer that.

levitronix

Michelin wrote: »

Yes but it will hardly produce anywhere near the consistancy of what you should be doing on the road? If you were serious about training with a power meter you would hardly go mountain biking?

Cadel evans was mtb national champion !

ryan_sherlock

Michelin wrote: »

Yes but it will hardly produce anywhere near the consistancy of what you should be doing on the road? If you were serious about training with a power meter you would hardly go mountain biking?

lol - funniest thing I have read in a while!

What about if you are a mountain biker that trains with power? Hardly think it is surprising that you would train on a mountain bike, with a power meter of all things!

It is great for seeing what a race really 'looks' like so that you can then train those attributes...

As a racing MTBer, if I had to go with one, I would still go with it on the road bike though - just for consistent tempo/threshold/V02max training.

tunney

fondriest wrote: »

I have an ergomo that works. Of course its on the tt bike and only gets used about 5 times a year . 3 powertaps ,2 for the road and 1 on mtb.

I think the point is that ergomos cannot by design actually work.

tunney

billy.fish wrote: »

Depends if you want to quantify the training you've done or not really...oh wait thats the same as on the road

You need to be fit for MTBing?

tunney

I have tried SRMs, PT and if you count it CT. Would love to try Quargs and if I thought I'd a need for a new PM I'd get one.

billy.fish

tunney wrote: »

I think the point is that ergomos cannot by design actually work.

No...they can work, they just were not made right.

It is by far the best place to mount a power meter

billy.fish

tunney wrote: »

You need to be fit for MTBing?

Yeah, so i'd avoid it if i were you Tunney. Your puny vo2 and AEP would not help.

Leave it to the strong boys ok....

tunney

billy.fish wrote: »

No...they can work, they just were not made right.

It is by far the best place to mount a power meter

I'm not talking about the BB being the best location for a PM just the ergomos implementation of a BB PM.

Kebel

I have been using Ergomo for a couple of years on 5 bikes (Two Race Bikes, CX Bike, Winter / Tourer Bike and my TT Bike, which BTW I use weekly from Mar thru to Sept) - in total I have ridden over 1000 hours with no problems other than needing to replace a battery on one which I bought second hand on e-Bay. I also train / race with a couple of guys who use ergomo as well (no complaints there either). They are reasonably popular in Germany, Austria and that general area.

Yes there were some problems with some of the earlier versions but the later versions work well and after some financial problems Ergomo are back in business and provided a good back-up service.

Back to the OP's original Q- PMs are a useful training aid, but they are not cheap and the PM itself will not make you a good rider - effective training (and recovery) is the key to that - A PM is very useful for helping with that but you need to use it properly, I would suggest either with a coach or someone who understands power - there is more to understanding training with power that just reading a book, you need to understand what the data is telling you and learn to understand your own body, it's strengths and weaknesses, and how you respond to the different loads and stresses hard training place on it. Also be prepared to suffer, because if you are not prepared to put in the work, then you are wasting you money.

That said I would recommend a PM if you are serious about getting most out of yourself, especially if you have limited time for training. - Enjoy:D

morana

Forget about the pm just focus on the software used to interpret the data because there is a hell of a lot. As Ryan says the level of precision used for interval work is far better than HR which as we know is affected by quite a number of factors as well as a day to day variability.

WKO was the best but imho I think Golden Cheetah has surpassed it. I am doing some good stuff on the track with a rider and his position and hope to be able to share with the community when finished!!

tunney

morana wrote: »

Forget about the pm just focus on the software used to interpret the data because there is a hell of a lot. As Ryan says the level of precision used for interval work is far better than HR which as we know is affected by quite a number of factors as well as a day to day variability.

WKO was the best but imho I think Golden Cheetah has surpassed it. I am doing some good stuff on the track with a rider and his position and hope to be able to share with the community when finished!!

I've used GC with the Aerolab plugin - which is what i am assuming you are doing on the track. Chung et Al recommend the use of a very very large high for proper CdA testing rather than a track - you conisdered that in your testing?

morana

tunney wrote: »

I've used GC with the Aerolab plugin - which is what i am assuming you are doing on the track. Chung et Al recommend the use of a very very large high for proper CdA testing rather than a track - you conisdered that in your testing?

Shush!!!!!

very very large ?

tunney

morana wrote: »

Shush!!!!!

very very large ?

the bigger and more accurately the size of the hill the better.

Going to do alot of this this year. No excuse for not having your optimal position now.

billy.fish

morana wrote: »

Shush!!!!!

very very large ?

Yeah pretty damn high.

morana

Okay hill I get it now.

You dont have to to use a hill, I think wind is the enemy so we will have to do it on a still morning.

billy.fish

morana wrote: »

Okay hill I get it now.

You dont have to to use a hill, I think wind is the enemy so we will have to do it on a still morning.

Wind, air temp, barometric pressure, road surface, tire pressure, rider fatigue and training status are all your enemy.

Its not just as easy as'go ride that a few times mate' it takes a good bit of work

tunney

morana wrote: »

Okay hill I get it now.

You dont have to to use a hill, I think wind is the enemy so we will have to do it on a still morning.

Could be an idea to read the research. I had a lovely discussion (one sided, as I was just asking questions ) with Robert Chung about this. Hills are required. given he did the research and supervised (if not wrote) the Aerolab software I'm going to defer to him

morana

Thanks guys! I have read extensively (and his presentations on VE) on the subject but never actually talked to Chung! Yes in his inital work the idea was that you use a hill or a bowl shaped course etc but I think it has moved on a little since. Anyway we shall see if I can get meaningful results.


Thanks bill but I think that most of those variables are measureable so it should nt be an obstacle. I dont think training status has an effect on CdA well I suppose if the guy hasnt trained much and is a bit fatter then CdA would be higher LOL!!!

tunney

morana wrote: »

Thanks guys! I have read extensively up on the subject but never actually talked to Chung. Yes in his inital work the idea was that you use a hill or a bowl shaped course etc but I think it has moved on a little since. Anyway we shall see if I can get meaningful results.


Thanks bill but I think that most of those variables are measureable so it should nt be an obstacle. I dont htink training staus has an effect on CdA well I suppose if the guy hasnt trained much and is a bit fatter then CdA would be higher LOL!!!

Have you looked at the aerolabs software and tried to measure CdA without a hill?

There is only one value for Crr and Cda that will allow multiple runs of the same hill to match - and for those graphs to match the known elevation of the hill. Without the hill Crr and wind and all the rest will impact the results.

morana

tunney wrote: »

Have you looked at the aerolabs software and tried to measure CdA without a hill?

There is only one value for Crr and Cda that will allow multiple runs of the same hill to match - and for those graphs to match the known elevation of the hill. Without the hill Crr and wind and all the rest will impact the results.

Mods & OP apologys I have taken this OT and if you would like to move then please do.


what version of GC are you using?

tunney

morana wrote: »

Mods & OP apologys I have taken this OT and if you would like to move then please do.


what version of GC are you using?

An old one - apr 11 2010 build

morana

okay so thats good because I was thinking I was wrong

Aerolab has now got separate Crr and CdA parameters which makes it more useable. attached is the new layout this is from RC 2.0 Nov 7th

Anyway we can now decouple Crr from CdA whereas we could only get a cumulative value for the 2 variables before and if one was high the other would have to be low to give the correct avaerage....

tunney

morana wrote: »

okay so thats good because I was thinking I was wrong

Aerolab has now got separate Crr and CdA parameters which makes it more useable. attached is the new layout this is from RC 2.0 Nov 7th

Anyway we can now decouple Crr from CdA whereas we could only get a cumulative value for the 2 variables before and if one was high the other would have to be low to give the correct avaerage....

Nope - thats the same in the version I was using. Discussions with Chung were online and should be searchable. Either on Google Wattage or Slowtwitch. Worth a read.

A flat circuit will be a rough value. A hill will make it closer and repeatable.

morana

ok I am beaten I give up!!:D

but I will still go ahead and do it and let you have a look!!

I am a long standing member of the Wattage lists...