Clipped_in

I do structured workouts on a variable resistance dumb trainer utilizing power measurement from a power meter on my bike. Direct drive trainers, smart trainers, rollers, Et al. that provide realistic road feel are all well and good for those that have them, but I'm wondering why that is so important?

I have read the expert explanations about how different types of trainers provide different ride feel types, but I don't understand why that really matters all that much. Yes, this is correctly used to explain that when riding on traditional trainers one cannot hit the same power numbers because they require more consistent force on the pedals throughout the pedal stroke. But in reality, why does that matter if you are just training to build aerobic fitness anyway? I test my FTP when I come inside and adjust accordingly. Same for outside. What’s the problem?

Recent research indicates that "Souplesse" doesn't matter nearly as much as we have been traditionally led to believe.

One of the big selling points for all the new high tech trainers coming out is that they provide better road feel, under the premise that better road feel offers a superior workout. Is this substantive, or simply a way to sell cool new stuff? I have nothing against anyone who wants to use all this great new technology, but I am seeing a lot of people that are mindlessly drinking the KoolAid, and I’m not so sure how “necessary” it is.

Plus, I’m bored at work for once, so please discuss…

jadocs

roadwarrior

The early stationary trainers I used to laughingly refer to as Flintstone trainers. You never really got any momentum and they didn't feel round. Clunky and nasty. Used wind resistance from the spinning wheel on the back to provide the drag. Ick.

I had a fantastic set of rollers years ago. Rather than the gantry looking things today, these had a deck to stand on while getting on the bike and only the tops of the rollers were exposed. Yeah they didn't fold up and slid under the bed, but they were nice. I had regular pedals (this was in the toe clip days) for the rollers. Not doing toe clips on rollers.

Now...my trainer has multiple "feels" if you will but in all cases the faster I go the more resistance I feel. Like outside, The faster I ride the more air resistance I have to overcome. And if I want I can add a climbing gravity feel. So, that's how I define road feel. And my easiest band is like rollers...and is great for high cadence work. Road, intervals, and climbing comprise the rest. I'm not into virtual stuff and I train at a cycling studio as well (train cyclists and triathletes) so I can also ride there at a very intense 45 minute workload. Some power bands slow my wheel faster, like riding into a head wind. My interval band is like riding into a 20mph headwind, I swear. LOL.

That's the long answer. I want to replicate different aspects of what I might do outside. To me that's "road feel".

Voodoo76

I really think it boils down to effective flywheel weight and how that inertia can impact your pedal stroke and muscle fatigue (not to "smart" features). For me the different between a Cycleops Fluid 2 & a Wahoo Kickr (greater effective flywheel effect) is magnified at lower wattage/longer rides, like 2hrs+ Z2 thru Tempo stuff. Or out of the saddle, like a long standing "climb". The difference is less noticeable for high intensity/low duration work. And if you compared either to an 80's era squirrel cage "Turbo" there would be no contest

With properly set up fans I see no difference in 5m to 20m tests between a Kickr indoors and outdoors.

MagicHour

This. The heavier fly wheel has some inertia that needs to spin up and spin down, much more realistic feel and nicer to pedal irregardless of power than say an older or inexpensive magnetic trainer that just feels like pushing dead weight or like an imaginary hand or brake grabbing your wheel and slowing it down.

Sy Reene

I think the smart trainers next evolution will be to add a couple more road-feel attributes, namely: 1) Bring the 'rock n'roll' movement to a trainer. Standing up on a bike in a trainer sux when it's locked in and can't rock a bit side to side; and 2) Every few hours a needle needs to shoot out to puncture a tire so we get a flat-change break in our routine.

Pirkaus

colnago62

Sy Reene

Too much engineering... I just put mine up on the waterbed.

zacster

Having gone from a Fluid 2 with power meter setup to a Kickr Core like Voodoo did was a night and day difference. I get on my new Kickr and feel like I can ride like I do outside. I can take it easy, ride hard, climb, chase people down, all of this in Zwift, and it feels real. On the Fluid 2 it always felt like I could beat the system, and if I wanted realistic efforts I had to watch the screen continuously to monitor my power.

I'm completely hooked on the thing. Now if only my sciatica would go away so I can ride... (Actually I do, it is the only thing I do that DOESN'T hurt.)

superdex

yup. They're called rollers.

jadocs

#1 and #2 you can already do on smart rollers...#3 not so much lol

Clipped_in

Okay guys, thanks for your input.

Central to my thinking on this is simply that I can hit all my target efforts on a dumb trainer and achieve what I am looking for (physiological adaptations) from an indoor workout when I can't ride outside. Bigger flywheels and more inertia don't change that. They may smooth things out, but in reality that does not really matter relative to doing a quality workout. Thus, the premise that smart trainers provide a better workout in and of themselves doesn't hold up.

However, if you are looking to replicate the outside riding experience because it motivates you to do a workout in the first place, then there is a lot of value in that and smart trainers really begin to shine. It is about motivation, not about improving the quality of the workout to produce better fitness.

Here is another thing to consider. Motivation from hi-tec gadgets has the potential to get you to do more and produce more fitness. But, is this causing some people to do too much too soon and burn out?

What do you see?

Hermes

Part of my professional business career was software simulations of electric power plant control rooms. We made simulator / trainers for the operators to use to practice upset / failure modes and effects so that they would know what to do in the real world - millions of dollars to develop.

In aviation, airline and military pilots have flight simulators that allow them to get certified to fly new aircraft and flight against bogies. Those simulators are equal to takeoffs, landings. flight and combat - 10s of millions of dollars to develop.

If smart trainers and associated software and hardware reach the point that they simulate riding a bike in real world outdoor situations then there is no difference between simulation / fantasy and reality. Once parity is achieved, one can ask the same question about simulation or reality. Can one overtrain / burnout on simulation? Yes. Can one burnout or overtrain on the road? Yes.

IMO, it would be fantastic if the brave new world of smart training and video would provide real pack training skill sessions so riders could brake and coast and read the pack and if they make a mistake, crash out unharmed and do it again and again.

If I were to criticize indoor simulation on the bike is that it may be creating neuro muscular response that is NOT correct for the road and puts riders at risk in packs. But that is a big reach. I see over training and burnout risk equal inside and out.

Carbonfiberboy 

And that's exactly why I much prefer my resistance rollers to a trainer: the almost complete lack of a flywheel effect. I'm not after a realistic road ride. I can get that outdoors. On my rollers, I'm after outside-the-envelope training and the positive effects of same. I'm there to train, not to play. I want it to be more difficult, more technical, not less so. If you want a quick demo of the difference, try doing one-legged pedaling on resistance rollers, then the same thing outdoors. There it is.

Voodoo76

My experience has been that trainers with more inertia do change how you may look at and use indoor training. Especially for longer lower intensity training. A 2 or 3 hr Z2/tempo/SS session on a good trainer leaves me physically feeling about the same as outdoors. That was not the case on older trainers, 2 hrs was a death march. You can add the "Smart" distractions on top of that as a slight positive, having to shift or stand & continually adjust your effort based on "terrain" or a virtual pack is often just enough distraction.

My training mix indoors is now much greater. Essentially interchangeable with outdoors, rather than being limited to HIT stuff so I could hurry up & get off the trainer.

Voodoo76

I agree that it can sometimes be beneficial to create functional challenges. Although I wouldn't want to build aerobic base on one legged drills.

My point was I can't get a "realistic road ride" outdoors pretty much every Monday-Friday. It's a real treat if I can get outside during the week any time of the year, I don't normally plan on it. For me equipment that makes indoors & out interchangeable has made it feasible to get back to a consistent schedule. It's been a game changer.

Psimet2001 

Many are incorporating a rock and roll feature in their newest models.

Psimet2001 

Here's the thing: training indoors can be one of the most mind numbing activities associated with our sport and yet it is also one of the MOST effective ways of actually training in terms of benefit for time spent.

A "road feel" doesn't f'n help anyone train at all. It keeps people from wanting to kill the trainer or themselves when they ride it. It's nice to be able to stop pedaling while riding a trainer and not have it immediately stop. It's nice to have it seem to accelerate when riding downhill in a simulator,,,,,but no it doesn't help you with training.

If you have the mental fortitude to endure training on any indoor trainer or specifically the one you already have then you're set. It's really that easy.

....and before anyone says there are actual benefits to riding a trainer that give you a road feel (excluding rollers) hasn't been on one of those early spring rides or races where everyone all of a sudden forgot how to handle their bike.

rower2cyclist

I have a Kurt Kinetic and never ridden a smart trainer so can't compare but I think it depends. I only do intervals and VO2 max workouts on the trainer and never spend more than 90mins and never more than 2-3 times a week. KK pretty much takes care of the job in my case.

Second, I take the trainer with me to races for warm-up. It's very portable and I just fold the legs and put it in the trunk. Easy. I can't really throw around a $1000+ trainer like that.

Third, there's a huge cost difference that I can't justify for reasons above. Having said that, I just purchased a wahoo desk for $250 and think it's probably the best investment that I made.

I have friends who own Kickr and every one of them love their trainers. However, so do my other friends who own traditional trainers. I owned a $100 trainer (tho w/o power data) before my KK and that worked just fine too.

I believe the priority when exercising on the trainer is not the road feel but to work your body physically at a certain intensity for a certain amount of time. I know what a VO2 max or a sub-treshold effort feel like and it really doesn't matter for me as long as some consistent power, cadence etc data are flowing to the screen in front of me. Hope this helps.

Hermes

Voodoo76

DaveSSS 

I've got to look into the new generation of trainers, but some cost $2000 (Peloton) which seems ridiculous to me. I'm using a 15 year old hydraulic resistance trainer from Performance, that can produce enough resistance to ride standing in a 50/12, but it is very unlike the real road. I used the trainer for rehab after two knee replacements. I quit cycling back in 2010 and hadn't been on it for about 7 years. I noticed that my cadence was really low, like 75 rpm felt fast, when I used to do 110 on occasion. After getting back on the road this year, I found that even though I'm 65, I can still spin 110 if the conditions are right. I'd like to have a trainer that didn't feel like I'm climbing all the time, but since I do a lot of hill climbing, it's still relevant training.

MoAlpha

caloso

Hah. It gets worse and worse every spring with more people on Zwift.