Power Meters (Why?)
#101
Tragically Ignorant
Join Date: Jun 2018
Location: New England
Posts: 15,613
Bikes: Serotta Atlanta; 1994 Specialized Allez Pro; Giant OCR A1; SOMA Double Cross Disc; 2022 Allez Elite mit der SRAM
Mentioned: 62 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 8186 Post(s)
Liked 9,098 Times
in
5,054 Posts
So, OP originally asked why he/she needed one if he/she is not going to race.
My answer was that I don't have any use for it, but recognize that's only one possible answer.
So, I guess the question is, does the device have any use other than as a tool to train to go faster over distance?
@doctorisotope mentioned he uses it as a fuel gauge, but isn't that really an endurance/racing issue? Honest question.
My answer was that I don't have any use for it, but recognize that's only one possible answer.
So, I guess the question is, does the device have any use other than as a tool to train to go faster over distance?
@doctorisotope mentioned he uses it as a fuel gauge, but isn't that really an endurance/racing issue? Honest question.
#102
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Nor Cal
Posts: 6,016
Mentioned: 17 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1814 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 923 Times
in
569 Posts
So, OP originally asked why he/she needed one if he/she is not going to race.
My answer was that I don't have any use for it, but recognize that's only one possible answer.
So, I guess the question is, does the device have any use other than as a tool to train to go faster over distance?
@doctorisotope mentioned he uses it as a fuel gauge, but isn't that really an endurance/racing issue? Honest question.
My answer was that I don't have any use for it, but recognize that's only one possible answer.
So, I guess the question is, does the device have any use other than as a tool to train to go faster over distance?
@doctorisotope mentioned he uses it as a fuel gauge, but isn't that really an endurance/racing issue? Honest question.
You also don't need to measure speed or distance to, as you say, go fast when you feel like it,
so you could ask the same question about the speedometer/odometer.
Likes For woodcraft:
#103
Newbie racer
Join Date: Feb 2018
Posts: 3,406
Bikes: Propel, red is faster
Mentioned: 34 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1575 Post(s)
Liked 1,569 Times
in
974 Posts
The best indicator of performance is performance itself. This applied to competition means the meter goes way down in importance. It goes up importance racing/simulated racing more.
In training, this means the meter goes way up in importance.
Training the body and training for racing are two different things that are inextricably linked together to succeed.
You can hit range balls and never play on the golf course and do pretty well, but never succeed. You can play golf on the course all the time and give up a lot of muscle memory hitting balls working on technique. Then not succeed also.
Same with the power meter. It's a tool in training and possibly a crutch in racing. I don't recall looking at it more than a glance at the computer to see miles to go or my HR once or twice. The wheel in front of you or wheels chasing you don't care one bit what your power meter says.
Now, TT.......I'll glance a couple times initially to not go out too hard. Then it's a lot of RPE and focusing on staying aero. You're not aero if staring at a meter constantly (maybe if you've got a heads up display).
Replace the word "race" with "fondo", or "weeknight worlds", or "riding a century" and apply accordingly.
Also, meters and racing on Zwift is mandatory so that it functions. You can't race most stuff on Zpower. You need a meter and HRM for most A/B/C stuff. Especially A/B.
In training, this means the meter goes way up in importance.
Training the body and training for racing are two different things that are inextricably linked together to succeed.
You can hit range balls and never play on the golf course and do pretty well, but never succeed. You can play golf on the course all the time and give up a lot of muscle memory hitting balls working on technique. Then not succeed also.
Same with the power meter. It's a tool in training and possibly a crutch in racing. I don't recall looking at it more than a glance at the computer to see miles to go or my HR once or twice. The wheel in front of you or wheels chasing you don't care one bit what your power meter says.
Now, TT.......I'll glance a couple times initially to not go out too hard. Then it's a lot of RPE and focusing on staying aero. You're not aero if staring at a meter constantly (maybe if you've got a heads up display).
Replace the word "race" with "fondo", or "weeknight worlds", or "riding a century" and apply accordingly.
Also, meters and racing on Zwift is mandatory so that it functions. You can't race most stuff on Zpower. You need a meter and HRM for most A/B/C stuff. Especially A/B.
Likes For burnthesheep:
#104
Tragically Ignorant
Join Date: Jun 2018
Location: New England
Posts: 15,613
Bikes: Serotta Atlanta; 1994 Specialized Allez Pro; Giant OCR A1; SOMA Double Cross Disc; 2022 Allez Elite mit der SRAM
Mentioned: 62 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 8186 Post(s)
Liked 9,098 Times
in
5,054 Posts
So my question, which is an honest one, not a smart-alecky one, is can you explain its non-racing, non-speed maximization uses? I'm trying to learn something here, not trying to prove "I'm right and you're wrong."
#106
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Southern California, USA
Posts: 10,475
Bikes: 1979 Raleigh Team 753
Mentioned: 153 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3374 Post(s)
Liked 371 Times
in
253 Posts
If your goal is power, it makes perfect sense.
And what's foolish is that you've taken advice given to someone coming from an endurance background and transitioning to a short event that has a large glycolitic component and thinking this applies to the general cycling population. It's also pretty foolish to use training advice from the 1980s. The vast, vast majority of cyclists, even those doing events as short as a 4km pursuit are spending far more than one hour a week on their bike. Yes, I'm sure just about every pursuit rider is also lifting weights, but I'm equally confident that if they had to choose between dropping workouts on the bike or workouts in the gym, the vast majority would drop the latter without hesitation.
<3 min (Track)
3min -> 90min (Some track, Crits, group rides, pros and amateurs in MTB, cx, TTs)
>90min->300min (USA amateur RR, pro single day)
>300min (Fondos and Pro RR)
Multi day and depends on length of daily races (Pros in stage races, nutjob amateurs like RAAM)
I don't see the foolish part about thinking short time events and longer events in that 2nd group cross well. This year:
Colby Lange is a USA pursuit rider that trains under Chris with weights) won the Boulder Roubaix race this year.
Wurf I named earlier was a 7 min event guy (WC rower) now an Iron man guy. Sure, I doubt he would have broken the Kona record had he spent the time just in the boat, but I think he would have done well.
Of course they train a lot of hours a week. For a non pro competitive cyclist, on limited hours, doing a routine that decrease time on the bike in favor of high resistance exercises can generate higher numbers on that PM. If those numbers are your goal, you certainly need a PM to measure that. If getting Strava KOMs, winning races, being faster on the group ride, or lowering a time on a course are goals (like those I know personally) the PM may not help.
#107
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Nor Cal
Posts: 6,016
Mentioned: 17 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1814 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 923 Times
in
569 Posts
Right, which is why I said "use" not "need" in MY question. OP used the word need, I didn't except to quote/paraphrase.
So my question, which is an honest one, not a smart-alecky one, is can you explain its non-racing, non-speed maximization uses? I'm trying to learn something here, not trying to prove "I'm right and you're wrong."
So my question, which is an honest one, not a smart-alecky one, is can you explain its non-racing, non-speed maximization uses? I'm trying to learn something here, not trying to prove "I'm right and you're wrong."
My point was that since you have speedometer/odometer for non-racing, non-speed maximization uses, you could compare to that- PM is just another measurement.
For me it's useful to measure relative fitness- average watts for rides, max 10 second power, 20 minute FTP test.
Also for pacing for climbs and long (DC) rides. Good for assessing proposed group rides- my (W.A.P.) is high 180s at best, so if I see that folks are showing over 200 watts then I know I will be dropped for
sure. Entertaining to watch the numbers, compare side by side to others, and compare others' numbers post-ride (Strava). Only have PM on road bike so other miles have less or no measurements.
Likes For woodcraft:
#108
Cycleway town
Likes For MikeyMK:
#109
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Alpharetta, GA
Posts: 15,280
Bikes: Nashbar Road
Mentioned: 71 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2934 Post(s)
Liked 341 Times
in
228 Posts
The fact of drafting, and the relative value of drafting, is *irrelevant* to this, except to note as an example that it actually does impact the runner. Since there *is* an impact, regardless of how much more impact it has in cycling, the effects of wind resistance also have an impact on runners which is obviously not captured when they record only their pace.
You seem to be making an assumption about what I do or do not actually realize. I'm aware that drag plays a role, hence why Kipchoge had people he could draft from during his recent sub 2-hour marathon. But, IIRC, the difference was something like 1.5 to 2 minutes which is far, far less than the time a cyclist could gain from a draft over 2 hours.
8-10% vs roughly 90%.
8-10% vs roughly 90%.
#110
Tragically Ignorant
Join Date: Jun 2018
Location: New England
Posts: 15,613
Bikes: Serotta Atlanta; 1994 Specialized Allez Pro; Giant OCR A1; SOMA Double Cross Disc; 2022 Allez Elite mit der SRAM
Mentioned: 62 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 8186 Post(s)
Liked 9,098 Times
in
5,054 Posts
My point was that since you have speedometer/odometer for non-racing, non-speed maximization uses, you could compare to that- PM is just another measurement.
For me it's useful to measure relative fitness- average watts for rides, max 10 second power, 20 minute FTP test.
Also for pacing for climbs and long (DC) rides. Good for assessing proposed group rides- my (W.A.P.) is high 180s at best, so if I see that folks are showing over 200 watts then I know I will be dropped for
sure. Entertaining to watch the numbers, compare side by side to others, and compare others' numbers post-ride (Strava). Only have PM on road bike so other miles have less or no measurements.
For me it's useful to measure relative fitness- average watts for rides, max 10 second power, 20 minute FTP test.
Also for pacing for climbs and long (DC) rides. Good for assessing proposed group rides- my (W.A.P.) is high 180s at best, so if I see that folks are showing over 200 watts then I know I will be dropped for
sure. Entertaining to watch the numbers, compare side by side to others, and compare others' numbers post-ride (Strava). Only have PM on road bike so other miles have less or no measurements.
Rather than the comparison to speed, though, I think it's more like when I compare the size of the weights I'm lifting and the number of reps. I'm "competing" with myself.
#111
Tragically Ignorant
Join Date: Jun 2018
Location: New England
Posts: 15,613
Bikes: Serotta Atlanta; 1994 Specialized Allez Pro; Giant OCR A1; SOMA Double Cross Disc; 2022 Allez Elite mit der SRAM
Mentioned: 62 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 8186 Post(s)
Liked 9,098 Times
in
5,054 Posts
Meh, I only "struggled" with what you meant by it - ambiguous as you were. And being charitable with that - fast marathon runners halve my pace, which is a greater variance than in cycling.
The fact of drafting, and the relative value of drafting, is *irrelevant* to this, except to note as an example that it actually does impact the runner. Since there *is* an impact, regardless of how much more impact it has in cycling, the effects of wind resistance also have an impact on runners which is obviously not captured when they record only their pace.
You still don't seem to realize that it doesn't matter if it's 10% vs 90%. The same reasoning for using a more precise measure still applies.
The fact of drafting, and the relative value of drafting, is *irrelevant* to this, except to note as an example that it actually does impact the runner. Since there *is* an impact, regardless of how much more impact it has in cycling, the effects of wind resistance also have an impact on runners which is obviously not captured when they record only their pace.
You still don't seem to realize that it doesn't matter if it's 10% vs 90%. The same reasoning for using a more precise measure still applies.
We need to invent a unit for measuring the intensity of endless extremely low-stakes arguments.
#112
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2015
Posts: 1,794
Mentioned: 14 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1027 Post(s)
Liked 325 Times
in
204 Posts
That may be the core of our disagreement. Outside of this forum, I don't know folks that train to do anything but be faster and/win more (they can be different). Power helps do both. But, certainly if power is the goal, you have a point. I think you'd get more power with the proper gym routine than on the bike, but the PM would be the best tool to measure that for you.
If your goal is power, it makes perfect sense.
Those that do well in the short power aerobic events can do well in semi longer, which is I assume where most posters here ride - in that 2nd group. Obviously the 3min mark is a combo of aerobic and anaerobic power, but the same individual can do well in both.
<3 min (Track)
3min -> 90min (Some track, Crits, group rides, pros and amateurs in MTB, cx, TTs)
>90min->300min (USA amateur RR, pro single day)
>300min (Fondos and Pro RR)
Multi day and depends on length of daily races (Pros in stage races, nutjob amateurs like RAAM)
I don't see the foolish part about thinking short time events and longer events in that 2nd group cross well. This year:
Colby Lange is a USA pursuit rider that trains under Chris with weights) won the Boulder Roubaix race this year.
Wurf I named earlier was a 7 min event guy (WC rower) now an Iron man guy. Sure, I doubt he would have broken the Kona record had he spent the time just in the boat, but I think he would have done well.
Of course they train a lot of hours a week. For a non pro competitive cyclist, on limited hours, doing a routine that decrease time on the bike in favor of high resistance exercises can generate higher numbers on that PM. If those numbers are your goal, you certainly need a PM to measure that. If getting Strava KOMs, winning races, being faster on the group ride, or lowering a time on a course are goals (like those I know personally) the PM may not help.
If your goal is power, it makes perfect sense.
Those that do well in the short power aerobic events can do well in semi longer, which is I assume where most posters here ride - in that 2nd group. Obviously the 3min mark is a combo of aerobic and anaerobic power, but the same individual can do well in both.
<3 min (Track)
3min -> 90min (Some track, Crits, group rides, pros and amateurs in MTB, cx, TTs)
>90min->300min (USA amateur RR, pro single day)
>300min (Fondos and Pro RR)
Multi day and depends on length of daily races (Pros in stage races, nutjob amateurs like RAAM)
I don't see the foolish part about thinking short time events and longer events in that 2nd group cross well. This year:
Colby Lange is a USA pursuit rider that trains under Chris with weights) won the Boulder Roubaix race this year.
Wurf I named earlier was a 7 min event guy (WC rower) now an Iron man guy. Sure, I doubt he would have broken the Kona record had he spent the time just in the boat, but I think he would have done well.
Of course they train a lot of hours a week. For a non pro competitive cyclist, on limited hours, doing a routine that decrease time on the bike in favor of high resistance exercises can generate higher numbers on that PM. If those numbers are your goal, you certainly need a PM to measure that. If getting Strava KOMs, winning races, being faster on the group ride, or lowering a time on a course are goals (like those I know personally) the PM may not help.
#113
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2015
Posts: 1,794
Mentioned: 14 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1027 Post(s)
Liked 325 Times
in
204 Posts
The fact of drafting, and the relative value of drafting, is *irrelevant* to this, except to note as an example that it actually does impact the runner. Since there *is* an impact, regardless of how much more impact it has in cycling, the effects of wind resistance also have an impact on runners which is obviously not captured when they record only their pace.
You still don't seem to realize that it doesn't matter if it's 10% vs 90%. The same reasoning for using a more precise measure still applies.
You still don't seem to realize that it doesn't matter if it's 10% vs 90%. The same reasoning for using a more precise measure still applies.
#114
Tragically Ignorant
Join Date: Jun 2018
Location: New England
Posts: 15,613
Bikes: Serotta Atlanta; 1994 Specialized Allez Pro; Giant OCR A1; SOMA Double Cross Disc; 2022 Allez Elite mit der SRAM
Mentioned: 62 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 8186 Post(s)
Liked 9,098 Times
in
5,054 Posts
And you still seem to be deliberately (I hope for your sake) misunderstanding a straightforward comment.
Uh no. Smaller environmental effect = smaller variance in times = less need for some alternative form of measurement. I don't know how this can be said any simpler: for running, a stopwatch is generally precise enough. For cycling, it isn't. Why? Because an individual's cycling speed will vary far more do to outside influences which, in turn, makes speed an unreliable way to measure progress.
Uh no. Smaller environmental effect = smaller variance in times = less need for some alternative form of measurement. I don't know how this can be said any simpler: for running, a stopwatch is generally precise enough. For cycling, it isn't. Why? Because an individual's cycling speed will vary far more do to outside influences which, in turn, makes speed an unreliable way to measure progress.
Likes For Doge:
#116
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Alpharetta, GA
Posts: 15,280
Bikes: Nashbar Road
Mentioned: 71 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2934 Post(s)
Liked 341 Times
in
228 Posts
Why engage in high stakes arguments? But I think the real reaction is to my implication that either competitive runners or competitive cyclists have fallen prey to fashionable thinking regarding power meters, because they can't both be right.
#117
Tragically Ignorant
Join Date: Jun 2018
Location: New England
Posts: 15,613
Bikes: Serotta Atlanta; 1994 Specialized Allez Pro; Giant OCR A1; SOMA Double Cross Disc; 2022 Allez Elite mit der SRAM
Mentioned: 62 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 8186 Post(s)
Liked 9,098 Times
in
5,054 Posts
Well, in that case I'd have to disagree with you, they both could be right if the difference between speed and power is large in bicycling, but closer to rounding error in running. The problem, as I see it, is that's there is such a thing as a high speed, low-effort ride, and there really isn't an equivalent in running.
I'm not a racer, so I'll leave it to others as to whether it's necessary for that kind of bike training, but the OP specifically stated that wasn't the question.
Likes For livedarklions:
#118
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2017
Location: Pacific Northwest
Posts: 1,993
Bikes: Argon 18 Gallium, BH G7, Rocky Mountain Instinct C70
Mentioned: 11 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 800 Post(s)
Liked 512 Times
in
306 Posts
After pages and pages of responses, I wonder if the OP took the plunge and ended up getting PM or if they just stopped reading after post 5...
#119
Newbie racer
Join Date: Feb 2018
Posts: 3,406
Bikes: Propel, red is faster
Mentioned: 34 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1575 Post(s)
Liked 1,569 Times
in
974 Posts
You all realize runners use stride sensors and some have in-sole power meters now? Also, they track TSS and intensities and zones on Trainingpeaks just like cyclists do.
Likes For burnthesheep:
#120
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Alpharetta, GA
Posts: 15,280
Bikes: Nashbar Road
Mentioned: 71 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2934 Post(s)
Liked 341 Times
in
228 Posts
Well, in that case I'd have to disagree with you, they both could be right if the difference between speed and power is large in bicycling, but closer to rounding error in running. The problem, as I see it, is that's there is such a thing as a high speed, low-effort ride, and there really isn't an equivalent in running.
I don't deny (from the start) that there is greater difference in cycling, from actual power and what you perceive as power, because of the greater impact of wind resistance at higher speeds. Arguments to convince me of that (or instruct me as the case may be) are pointless because it's a fact already assumed. But my premise for the power meter is the need for precision. I could estimate the power on a bike, and I can estimate the power produced while running, and the accuracy is going to be somewhat different but when you actually do that you see that it's not all that much different. If there is an actual need for say 5% precision (the usual real goal, not accuracy) then you're missing that in estimating running effort by pace.
#121
Tragically Ignorant
Join Date: Jun 2018
Location: New England
Posts: 15,613
Bikes: Serotta Atlanta; 1994 Specialized Allez Pro; Giant OCR A1; SOMA Double Cross Disc; 2022 Allez Elite mit der SRAM
Mentioned: 62 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 8186 Post(s)
Liked 9,098 Times
in
5,054 Posts
Fair point. My work is the opposite of that. Every detail in code has to be objectively correct, and corrected when found in a code review or testing. Arguments in code review drive me up the wall.
I personally have no need of either - I'm certainly not going to get stress meter running shoes - for a reason that still needs to be mentioned in this thread. The perhaps most useful result, total training load or total stress, is just about meaningless at my age and level of condition. I have to keep an eye on each system individually, and that's applies even more after my injuries in June But in theory ...
I don't deny (from the start) that there is greater difference in cycling, from actual power and what you perceive as power, because of the greater impact of wind resistance at higher speeds. Arguments to convince me of that (or instruct me as the case may be) are pointless because it's a fact already assumed. But my premise for the power meter is the need for precision. I could estimate the power on a bike, and I can estimate the power produced while running, and the accuracy is going to be somewhat different but when you actually do that you see that it's not all that much different. If there is an actual need for say 5% precision (the usual real goal, not accuracy) then you're missing that in estimating running effort by pace.
I personally have no need of either - I'm certainly not going to get stress meter running shoes - for a reason that still needs to be mentioned in this thread. The perhaps most useful result, total training load or total stress, is just about meaningless at my age and level of condition. I have to keep an eye on each system individually, and that's applies even more after my injuries in June But in theory ...
I don't deny (from the start) that there is greater difference in cycling, from actual power and what you perceive as power, because of the greater impact of wind resistance at higher speeds. Arguments to convince me of that (or instruct me as the case may be) are pointless because it's a fact already assumed. But my premise for the power meter is the need for precision. I could estimate the power on a bike, and I can estimate the power produced while running, and the accuracy is going to be somewhat different but when you actually do that you see that it's not all that much different. If there is an actual need for say 5% precision (the usual real goal, not accuracy) then you're missing that in estimating running effort by pace.
I was told there would be no math on this thread.
I will run to catch a train, maybe. That's about it.
#122
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Southern California, USA
Posts: 10,475
Bikes: 1979 Raleigh Team 753
Mentioned: 153 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3374 Post(s)
Liked 371 Times
in
253 Posts
Lots of us that see no need for a PM have them. I have 5 or 6. Because I want to. I also don't race. I have immense sprint power. I know I do because my PM tells me.
It also tells me my power is going down, so I'm sure that, in part is why I dislike them. I can count my push-ups and they are going down too, and my weight is going up. So there is that.
But if you want to get faster, you do not need a PM. If you want to measure your power, they are great.
#124
Tragically Ignorant
Join Date: Jun 2018
Location: New England
Posts: 15,613
Bikes: Serotta Atlanta; 1994 Specialized Allez Pro; Giant OCR A1; SOMA Double Cross Disc; 2022 Allez Elite mit der SRAM
Mentioned: 62 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 8186 Post(s)
Liked 9,098 Times
in
5,054 Posts
I don't mind math, but I definitely don't want to do math on my bike.
#125
Sunshine
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Des Moines, IA
Posts: 16,613
Bikes: '18 class built steel roadbike, '19 Fairlight Secan, '88 Schwinn Premis , Black Mountain Cycles Monstercross V4, '89 Novara Trionfo
Mentioned: 123 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 10956 Post(s)
Liked 7,486 Times
in
4,187 Posts
Self-install crank based Avios can be had for around $160 from various UK sellers. Avio states they only work with Shimano cranks, but with a bit of ingenuity I was able to mount one to my Campagnolo Potenza crank. It required disassembly of the Avio, and the application of heat to bend the case so that it followed the contour of the crank.
John
John