Poll: Do you have a power meter?

Slideshowbob

Just curious

Slideshowbob

Interesting results so far.

Sometimes I think publication of wattage after a race is done by some people as a means of saying "hey I didn't win the race, but I was the most powerful".

If only racing was that simple we could hold goldsprints all the time and never touch the roads.

A few years back before powermeters became as prevalent as they are now you didn't see riders going on about their average speed or pulse!!

Lumen

Slideshowbob wrote: »

Sometimes I think publication of wattage after a race is done by some people as a means of saying "hey I didn't win the race, but I was the most powerful".

Which people?

Beasty

No

At the pro level, pretty much everyone uses them, and I never hear anyone making such claims

At the amateur level there are so few riders that have them it would not be a claim anyone could reasonably make

I mention power output because it gives me something tangible I can compare my own performances and ultimately fitness by. Whether other posters are interested in that does not particularly bother me. It's a fantastic tool for tracking training and fitness, and pacing in TT events.

Anyway, as we have covered in numerous threads it's W/kg that matters more than absolute power, and I for one am well down the list on that one

Bambaata

Wheres the "No, but im just about to buy one" option ;-) Hoping to get the P2Max unit ordered next week.

ednwireland

i'm in the "i'd get one if they were cheaper" camp. i dont race but like toys so if they were a couple of hundred quid i'd probably buy one

Inquitus

ednwireland wrote: »

i'm in the "i'd get one if they were cheaper" camp. i dont race but like toys so if they were a couple of hundred quid i'd probably buy one

Aye, same here.

ROK ON

I would never got one regardless of price as I simply do not have the discipline to analyse the data for it to be any value.
Several guys I know who are very strong cyclist are not ultra light. Which leads me to believe that in Ireland power is more important the watts/kg.

fran83

No

People think it rocket science training with a powermeter it's not.
Once you do the 20 minute and 5min test this give you your vo2 and your threshold. All you have to do is add it to your program instead of your heart rate!

Personally I find that is excellent to track how much you have improved over the year. It does take a bit getting use to but once you train with power correctly you will start improving a lot quicker than just heartrate alone.

They are expensive brand new but you can pick a second hand one up on ebay for about €500. People spend that on stupid stuff for there bike that they think will make them faster which won't. Thats my 2 cents on this subject

morana

No

as a training tool I find it invaluable just for motivation purposes. Most complain about doing Turbo sessions but add in a pm and it becomes addictive. From acoaching perspective it is a great insight into how the athlete is doing. I used it on a number of occasion where a rider is saying I am creepin and usually if you get them to do a power test lo and behold the test is low.

If I had a choice brim brothers pm or a pair of Zipp 808's....Brim Bros wins out everytime

yutta

No

Wireless DA on each of my 5 bikes.

8kvscdpglqnyr4

I'd love a power meter but can't justify the price.

I have a Garmin Edge 500 and I just can't get enough data ... love analysing/comparing rides, love creating segments on Strave and comparing myself to others etc.

All my training is based around my heart rate now ... would love to be able to add power to the equation.

levitronix

No

As a training tool theres nothing better to nail out those intervals, great way of charting your progress if your making any. but i only raced about 6 times with mine last year and it show me a lot things like how much energy i was wasting during a race, i learned from that and got the upgrade, so worth every penny for me

If you have the cash buy one you wont look back

Diarmuid

Lumen wrote: »

Which people?

Mr and Mrs Strawman.

Slideshowbob

Well the votes are in.

Less than 14% of respondents have meters.

Interestingly, over half would buy one if they were cheaper.

ryan_sherlock

No

Slideshowbob wrote: »

Sometimes I think publication of wattage after a race is done by some people as a means of saying "hey I didn't win the race, but I was the most powerful".

I put up my data for three reasons (probably more, but these pop into my head)

1) I'm hugely interested to see what other Pro/Non-Pro riders do in races and know therefore if I put my data up, it may entice others to do so too. More and more, top Pro riders are putting some stuff online - I find it fascinating... Don't you? I find it funny that some people are so secretive about this stuff - all my training for the last year is online for anyone to view (minus indoor sessions - the website doesn't support it)

2) I'm a technology geek - I have had many long chats with folks in the know about my training etc... because they have seen I have an interest in it.

3) Anti-doping - I wish it was (and I think LeMond talked about this) compulsory for the top riders to publish their race data - Ivan Basso has since his suspension. Cycling has a murky background, showing what the riders did to win races (assuming proper PM calibration) can help calm critics... If I saw Contador ride at 7 W/Kg for 25 minutes I would be going "hmmmm" (fortunately VAM etc... can be used to back calculate rough estimates - the Tour etc... seems a LOT cleaner than it was 8 years ago - riders are climbing 10% slower)

I don't get the "hey I didn't win but I was the strongest" comment - unless the winner showed their data (including weight etc...) that doesn't make sense. What it only illustrates is, hey, this is what I did but was STILL not enough to beat the winner - holy moly - better train harder.

manwithaplan

No, but I'd get one if they were cheaper

They look like great yokes altogether.

I don't even have a speedometer. I would love to say that I train and race by feel but I don't have that either.

Slideshowbob

who's Mr Strawman?

seamus

Slideshowbob wrote: »

Well the votes are in.

Less than 14% of respondents have meters.

Interestingly, over half would buy one if they were cheaper.

I think for most of those people "cheaper" isn't €500, it's €200. Unless I had serious money burning a hole in my pocket or I was racing at the high end (like Ryan), I couldn't really justify one just out of statistical curiosity.

g0g

No idea how one of those yokes could possibly benefit someone like myself who's new to cycling and still doesn't have a road bike, but I'm a stats geek and the more figures the merrier! Edge 500 doing the job for the moment but you can never have enough info IMO!:)

Beasty

No

Slideshowbob wrote: »

who's Mr Strawman?

Mrs Strawman's husband, I believe...

FrankGrimes

No

Another one to add to the power meter user list. I find them brilliant -to be honest I don't do enough retrospective analysis of the data but I mainly use it to determine what my Functional Threshold Power is and then that helps me figure out a pacing strategy for time trials, sportives etc. (it was invaluable in the Race Around Ireland last week).

In particular I find a power meter incredibly useful on rolling terrain, particularly on slight downward slopes where there may be a tendency to ease off cos you feel like you're going fast enough - I often looked down and saw I was coasting at 150w on those stretches so soon got to working all the way up and down rolling terrain and my avg. speed increased a good bit. I now know what 150w, 180w, 200w, 250w, 270w, 300w etc. all 'feel like' to a reasonable degree of accuracy and it really helps.

A good example of how the data comes in handy real-time was my 2-5pm session in the Race Around Ireland last Monday heading due Soutwest from Ballybofey in Donegal to Sligo: I was directly into the storm force gales coming from the southwest on exposed roads for 3hours and out of the saddle just to keep going at times. It was pretty demoralising to see my average speed was only 20km/h but early into the shift I saw my average power was something like 260-265watts - I decided that would be a pretty decent effort level to sustain for 3hours so kept it exactly in that range and didn't worry about speed. That kept me at 20km/h all the way and it turned out that was good enough to take a sizeable chunk of time back out of both teams in front. Without the power data, I'd have been thinking 'jaysus, I'm giving it socks and only doing 20km/h, I must be falling behind here'.

In sportives my focus is to get as good a workout as possible and hopefully that'll lead to a good time, cos I generally use them to build towards some other specific goal. So I set a wattage target in my mind and go for it and that helps me decide what groups to stay with, which ones to go off the back of and which to go off the front of: ideally I'd find a group that lets me sustain the wattage I'm after and also get a good time, but mostly I end up cycling most of it on my own jumping between groups trying to sustain my wattage. That's what works for me and I love it, makes it interesting from start to finish cos I'm always checking progress against my target and it means I dip in and out of various groups along the way instead of sticking with one. As an FYI, in the Sky Etape Hibernia, I dropped off the back of the front group while having a sambo and to close the 200 yard gap I had to do about 340watts for a couple of minutes. When I got to the back of the group I was almost freewheeling at about 190watts - gives an indication of how much less work it takes to stay in a group than to ride off your own steam.

Now, in a race scenario, things change completely - only "races" I've done are Sky Etape Hibernia twice and it was very much about staying in the front group for as long as possible while conserving as much energy as possible. So if someone is saying 'yay, I did more wattage per kilo than the winner' someone needs to realise they must've been tactically naieve cos it's about getting to the line first and not about a wattage target.

I love the things and would say that most semi-serious cyclists that spend a fair bit of wedge on fancy wheels would probably see more performance gains from putting their money into a power meter instead.

Lumen

FrankGrimes wrote: »

Now, in a race scenario, things change completely - only "races" I've done are Sky Etape Hibernia twice

The Etape Hibernia is not a race.

The Race Around Ireland is a race. The boards TT was a race.

An easy way to tell is whether you vomit during them. Vomit = race. No vomit = sportive. :pac:

FrankGrimes

No

Lumen wrote: »

The Etape Hibernia is not a race.

The Race Around Ireland is a race. The boards TT was a race.

An easy way to tell is whether you vomit during them. Vomit = race. No vomit = sportive. :pac:

Dammit, I even went back to edit the post to put the "" around the word race cos I knew that was coming

The mindset of those in the front group was akin to that of a race situation so the reality isn't all that relevant as it demonstrates the point. Oh no, what I have I done, the worm-laden can is well and truly open now isn't it?

tunney

No

One of the options should be changed and another option should be added :

3) I'd get one if they were cheaper and use it properly
4) I'd get one if they were cheaper and use it like my HRM, that is I have one cause the fast people have one but I'm not arsed using it properly.

triggermortis

No, but I'd get one if they were cheaper

Don't own one and have no desire to get one. I'm purely recreational and have no need to know my power output.

ryan_sherlock

No

For me, I think the people that can get most from a PM are those that want to get a lot faster as efficiently as possible or racers. It is interesting for people outside of that but not a tool really needed (just like a HRM, which for me is useless as a training tool).

Racing - I never use a PM to guide my race other than if it is a TT to try and hold me back a bit at the start. Racing is art & I go by instinct (for better or worse).

Training - I use the PM a lot to guide intervals and try to replicate the demands of racing (I may not have used the PM while racing, but I sure do collect the data) - it has been interesting to find out that for certain types of racing I wasn't doing the right type of training at all... Training is science.

(Stole the Art/Science thing from Joe Friel)

Sr. Assumpta

http://velonews.competitor.com/2011/09/bikes-and-tech/brim-brothers-zone-power-meter-it-works-and-it%e2%80%99s-coming_192848

hf4z6sqo7vjngi

No

I have my PM arriving next week:). Whilst they are expensive i would rather buy and use one properly than invest in a funky set of race wheels.

Home:Ballyhoura

Arjun Bumpy Quarter wrote: »

I have my PM arriving next week

What did you go for?

Bambaata

I just ordered one today. Also ordered a book to get through while i wait for it to arrive!

Fazz

No, but I'd get one if they were cheaper

I too am in the Market for a power meter.
However I'm going to hold out for the Garmin Vector next March/April most likely.
Reason being i plan to use it training and racing, and don't want to swap my existing Zipp crank (came on tt bike I bought 2nd hand).
The current options are limited to crank or wheel based, and I train on different wheels to races so that would mean 2 x pm which ain't gonna happen.
So afaik that's powertap out (limited to certain wheel), srm/quarq out (need diff crank and v costly), and not sure other options that suit.


There is a hr strap which comes out next month and will estimate power to within 5% and is ant+ compatible.
For circa €150 it may be an option until prices decrease or pedal systems release.

http://ow.ly/6BhaM


Then there's computrainers but damn costly too.

Diarmuid

Fazz wrote: »

There is a hr strap which comes out next month and will estimate power to within 5% and is ant+ compatible.
For circa €150 it may be an option until prices decrease or pedal systems release.

Save your €150. IMHO while it might work when you are at LT and lower, forget about using it above that.

ryan_sherlock

No

Diarmuid wrote: »

Save your €150. IMHO while it might work when you are at LT and lower, forget about using it above that.

Yeah - save your money - a PM based on HR is just snake oil.

tunney

No

ryan_sherlock wrote: »

Yeah - save your money - a PM based on HR is just snake oil.

I 90% agree with you - but I venture a guess that you, like I, when trained can tell what power they are producing based on HR when sub maximal.

tunney

No

Fazz wrote: »

I too am in the Market for a power meter.
However I'm going to hold out for the Garmin Vector next March/April most likely.
Reason being i plan to use it training and racing, and don't want to swap my existing Zipp crank (came on tt bike I bought 2nd hand).
The current options are limited to crank or wheel based, and I train on different wheels to races so that would mean 2 x pm which ain't gonna happen.
So afaik that's powertap out (limited to certain wheel), srm/quarq out (need diff crank and v costly), and not sure other options that suit.


There is a hr strap which comes out next month and will estimate power to within 5% and is ant+ compatible.
For circa €150 it may be an option until prices decrease or pedal systems release.

http://ow.ly/6BhaM


Then there's computrainers but damn costly too.

I would be very very wary of the Garmin PM for two reasons:
1)Its Garmin and they c0ck up the first few iterations of a product
2)Its never been proven that a pedal (or cleat) based system works. Until they are released and the likes of Simmons, Chung and Coggan get them and test them properly I'm reserving judgement.

I am putting money aside for a year or two when my SRMs die by then there will be a whole new world of PMs in the sub 1000euro market.

As for computrainers - if you have kids and can't ride when/where you'd like they are the dogs....

ryan_sherlock

No

tunney wrote: »

I 90% agree with you - but I venture a guess that you, like I, when trained can tell what power they are producing based on HR when sub maximal.

No - not me. I can usually tell roughly what wattage I'm putting out by feel but there is very little wattage to HR relationship that is consistent.

If I rested for 2 days and did a 10 minute interval at sweet sport (90% of Threshold power) - HR may average 162. If I had done intervals the day before (or drank more/less water or rode earlier in the day etc...) then the HR might be 150...

Also, the feedback from power changes is very slow - one of the things that make PMs so interesting is the instant feedback.

If you want to use a PM based on HR, just use a standard HRM... at least then you are not fooling yourself into thinking power figures are in any way accurate.

tunney

No

ryan_sherlock wrote: »

No - not me. I can usually tell roughly what wattage I'm putting out by feel but there is very little wattage to HR relationship that is consistent.

If I rested for 2 days and did a 10 minute interval at sweet sport (90% of Threshold power) - HR may average 162. If I had done intervals the day before (or drank more/less water or rode earlier in the day etc...) then the HR might be 150...

Also, the feedback from power changes is very slow - one of the things that make PMs so interesting is the instant feedback.

If you want to use a PM based on HR, just use a standard HRM... at least then you are not fooling yourself into thinking power figures are in any way accurate.

yes I should have qualified by saying "after 20-30 minutes of a consistent output I know what my HR and power will be roughly".

That being said its probably fairer that Saris take the money for a HR-PM from people who "want a PM but don't really" than screw them for the full proper PM whack.

Lumen

tunney wrote: »

Its Garmin and they c0ck up the first few iterations of a product

This.

The quality of the 705 (software and hardware) was absolutely woeful for years and only got sorted out shortly before it was superceded by the 800.

The Garmin 500 is OK, but they've probably reused so much of the 705 engineering that it's not really a new product.

Also, I can't get my head around a €1500 set of pedals. It just doesn't seem sensible to put so much tech in something so fragile.

tunney

No

Lumen wrote: »

This.

The quality of the 705 (software and hardware) was absolutely woeful for years and only got sorted out shortly before it was superceded by the 800.

The Garmin 500 is OK, but they've probably reused so much of the 705 engineering that it's not really a new product.

Also, I can't get my head around a €1500 set of pedals. It just doesn't seem sensible to put so much tech in something so fragile.

310xt took 2 years to be useable and still doesn't do heart rate.........

Rumour I heard was ANT+ was being phased out in favour of low powered bluetooth (like polars).

Pity Polar,SRM and Garmin couldn't collaborate on a GPS and HR equiped PM.

Diarmuid

tunney wrote: »

Rumour I heard was ANT+ was being phased out in favour of low powered bluetooth (like polars).

Polar currently use a proprietary protocol called W.I.N.D. not BT-LE. And the rumours mentioning that the industry could go to low power Bluetooth seem to be coming from Polar. ANT+ looks like it has the momentum. What BT-LE accessories are on the market at the moment?

hf4z6sqo7vjngi

No

Home:Ballyhoura wrote: »

What did you go for?

I went for the Power 2 Max/ option.

Bambaata wrote: »

I just ordered one today. Also ordered a book to get through while i wait for it to arrive!

Did you go for the Power 2 Max option in the end? What leadtime did they quote you?

tunney

No

Diarmuid wrote: »

Polar currently use a proprietary protocol called W.I.N.D. not BT-LE. And the rumours mentioning that the industry could go to low power Bluetooth seem to be coming from Polar. ANT+ looks like it has the momentum. What BT-LE accessories are on the market at the moment?

That is very true - the source of the BT-LE rumours that is.



I just hate garmin........

carthoris

tunney wrote: »

4) I'd get one if they were cheaper and use it like my HRM, that is I have one cause the fast people have one but I'm not arsed using it properly.

Now that you have made the suggestion, any brief pointers as to how HRMs are not being used properly and how they should be used ?

blorg

seamus wrote: »

I think for most of those people "cheaper" isn't €500, it's €200. Unless I had serious money burning a hole in my pocket or I was racing at the high end (like Ryan), I couldn't really justify one just out of statistical curiosity.

I think anyone racing would get one at €500, they would be mad to buy anything else ahead of it at that price. I will certainly get one when/if I get back to Europe and start racing again.

Bambaata

Arjun Bumpy Quarter wrote: »

Did you go for the Power 2 Max option in the end? What leadtime did they quote you?

Yup also went for the P2M on the Rotor 3D+. Going to get the Aero Rings too. I was given a 7 week lead time so i wont expect it before mid November. Any earlier is a bonus. I wasnt willing to wait til November for the Lightning to start being an option. It would prob be end of January before that would arrive as they are only starting to get them from November.

ashleey

No, but I'd get one if they were cheaper

2 things are interesting:

1. Next time I get dropped off a group in a sportive, I'll know that it is some of the racers here using the sportive as training, so I won't be as disheartened!

2. Is there room for a collaborative effort here to work on a better algorithm for calories consumed and then power based more accurately on weight, heart rate, ascent, distance, cadence, time, for example as just a few of the variables? We could then guage model predictions against actual results from some who have power meters?

ryan_sherlock

No

ashleey wrote: »

2. Is there room for a collaborative effort here to work on a better algorithm for calories consumed and then power based more accurately on weight, heart rate, ascent, distance, cadence, time, for example as just a few of the variables? We could then guage model predictions against actual results from some who have power meters?

Whatever Ascent (software on the Mac) does is pretty accurate 90% of the time under normal conditions (based on comparing against my PM). I think it uses HR, weight (maybe elevation) and Vo2max for it's calculations.

Outside of certain races (hot/cold/well rested etc...) it is usually within 95% of what my PM tells me.

Fazz

No, but I'd get one if they were cheaper

tunney wrote: »

I would be very very wary of the Garmin PM for two reasons:
1)Its Garmin and they c0ck up the first few iterations of a product
2)Its never been proven that a pedal (or cleat) based system works. Until they are released and the likes of Simmons, Chung and Coggan get them and test them properly I'm reserving judgement.

I am putting money aside for a year or two when my SRMs die by then there will be a whole new world of PMs in the sub 1000euro market.

As for computrainers - if you have kids and can't ride when/where you'd like they are the dogs....

Regarding Garmin and initial versions having issues - I'd hope with power meter this will be better.
However, I would only purchase the Vector if a solid review by Www.dcrainmaker.com warranted it.
He's very unbiased as I'm sure most of us know and is likely to have a review done by launch date.

My 310xt has been pretty solid and I love it.
Hr has been good, only odd weakness is ow swim when on wrist but that's my too critical for me.

I don't see the pedals as being fragile at all. The parts are replaceable and I've not damaged a pedal yet, despite having a recent slide it was my shoe that took brunt of it really.
The pm parts are on the inside so really not an issue at all.


The quality of the power reading has to be just as good or it wouldn't have got this far.
Again a solid review with comparisons to output against other products will reveal all.
I think dcrainmaker has a Quarq and a Computrainer so it will be evident if the pedal based system is as accurate or not when he does comparisons.

Seems to be a bit of Garmin phobia here but my experience is good as are many others.

Regarding the HR estimate belt, I would see this as a temporary option if reviews prove performance.
I certainly wouldn't expect accuracy above threshold but if calibrated correctly from the start (catch official power meter required here), then it could be quite useful for training to and just under threshold.


Let's see how reviews go regarding useability.

For me not wanting to change crank and wanting a device that can move from training bike to racing bike wheels etc then I'm limited at present and pedals seems a good solution if they work.

Lumen

ashleey wrote: »

Is there room for a collaborative effort here to work on a better algorithm for calories consumed and then power based more accurately on weight, heart rate, ascent, distance, cadence, time, for example as just a few of the variables? We could then guage model predictions against actual results from some who have power meters?

To what end?

Accurate calorie counting is not necessary for weight loss, and power numbers are only useful for training if they're accurate.

Also, Garmin has licenced better calorie algorithms for the 500. I'd doubt a home-grown effort would produce anything nearly as good.

Home:Ballyhoura

Fazz wrote: »

Regarding Garmin and initial versions having issues - I'd hope with power meter this will be better.
However, I would only purchase the Vector if a solid review by Www.dcrainmaker.com warranted it.
He's very unbiased as I'm sure most of us know and is likely to have a review done by launch date.

http://www.dcrainmaker.com/2011/09/everything-you-ever-wanted-to-know.html?utm_campaign=Argyle%2BSocial-2011-09&utm_medium=Argyle%2BSocial&utm_source=facebook&utm_term=2011-09-15-11-49-00