atwl77

To add to @ingo's post, there's also the speed differential, where it's easy to have enough speed to just fly past slower riders on both flats and downhills. On a steep hill, where a light rider has the least disadvantage with the most decent fighting chance (comparatively speaking), the slow speeds uphill means its a long, steady crawl to pass the slower riders there. And then all those gains are quickly lost when those slow uphill riders just blast past us at 70+ km/h on the downhill while we're struggling just to stay above 60+ km/h.

himespau 

Maybe but the difference in time between 8 and 12 kph uphill is a lot more than the difference between 60 and 70 kph over the same distance downhill. Going faster uphill always wins.

burnthesheep

I find the speeds much more realistic for the road bike when I "world hack" and the world is mostly empty. Much more realistic. I gave that a try and it was nice.

I now chalk up some of the weird speed stuff I see on there to the road bike draft in busy worlds.

atwl77

You don't get that big of a difference in kph if you are racing in the same W/kg category. Which actually illustrates a problem with the W/kg categorization. On the flats pure wattage is king, so the heavier riders can all cruise at Z3 pace while the lighter ones are struggling at Z4-Z5 just to keep up, even with the aid of the draft. Then uphill we slug it out at threshold (or above threshold, if it's a shorter rise like the Hilly KOM in Watopia), maybe snag a minute or two advantage but the heavier guys aren't really that far behind because they're in the same W/kg group as us and therefore climb at around the same effort as us. Then they eat up that little gap we made on the downhill, blast past and are gone forever, never to be seen again until the end of the race.

I have learnt to mitigate that by going full aero with what my drops can afford -- which for now is a good aero bike frame and Zipp 808 wheels -- and this does make a noticeable difference especially on downhills (and even better with the aero helmet power-up), but it's still a lot of effort to follow the heavier guys during a race.

himespau 

For us taller guys, pure wattage is not king. I do a TTT with some short light guys and I'm routinely putting out 30-50W more on my pulls than they do on theirs to get the same speed. On the flat parts of Richmond last week, we set a goal of ~38 kph. The ~80 kg short guys were pulling in the 250-260 W range. I was pulling ~300-310 to keep the speed the same. Sure, it's not perfectly flat like say Tempus Fugit, but pretty flat. When we got to the climbs, they only had to add 60-70W from their pulling power to get to 4 W to climb up the hills, while I had to add 120 W. Sure, our total W/kg might have been the same up the hills, but that doesn't mean that finding 120 W is easy just because I'm bigger.

genejockey 

Yes. I did the experiment, by accident. I think I mentioned it upthread - accidentally changed height from 6' to 3' while keeping weight at 205 lbs.12 mph difference in max speed downhill, supertucked. Also, on the flats at 3' I was keeping up with some folks pushing 4 W/kg while putting out about 3 W/kg. I wondered why I was able to keep up with the pack on that Stage on the flats, when otherwise I've been just hanging on by the skin of my teeth - cannonballs have better aerodynamics, under every condition.

Cyclist0100

I had no interest in signing up for Zwift before reading this thread, but I was curious. After reading this thread my curiosity has vanished... poof! Zwift sounds like a hot mess.

genejockey 

Oh, it's not that bad. It wiles away the time on a trainer better than anything else I've tried. The most important thing to recognize is that it's really just a video game that you play with your legs.

spelger

i agree with genejockey. zwift does keep me engaged while on the trainer when doing free rides, beats staring at a wall or a graph or map. when doing a workout i usually am watching something else so sometimes not even zwifting.

if you have a smart trainer then i would suggest you give the free trial a go.

unterhausen

Yeah, don't sign up for zwift. Nobody goes there any more, it's too crowded.

I find it keeps me engaged a lot better. I was using trainer road and it was going so well that I managed to overtrain. Ever since then I have had trouble making gains on TR. So it's hard to make myself do the workouts. With zwift, I can go as fast or slow as I want. Although if it weren't for group rides with people I know, I probably would just sign up for Rouvy.

If you just want to do workouts, I am pretty sure you can use Golden Cheetah.

Eric F 

Depends on the user, and what you're trying to get out of it. I haven't found it a mess at all. Personally, my schedule demands that almost all weekday rides are in the evening. Not being a fan of riding solo in the dark on busy roads, my weekday sessions are on the trainer in the garage. Zwift makes those sessions WAY more interesting by allowing me to interact with other riders, in real time. Whatever kind of ride I want to do (solo ride, group ride, race, structured training session, etc.), I can do it.

genejockey 

When I'm on Zwift, I find myself trying to beat PRs, or chasing down that guy(or gal) in front of me, or trying to hold a certain wattage for certain period of time, or do a climb just to see how fast I can go down the other side. It's easy to get a good session in. I've gone as long as 2 hours, and I almost always end up going harder than I planned, whereas without it I can barely go 40 minutes without getting bored out of my skull.

ingo

Zwift is a great platform. The rider physics are accurate when solo or climbing, it's known that the draft is less than real life, and there are many ways to enjoy using the app. I would not be able to ride the trainer for 1/4 of the time that I do now that I use Zwift. This discussion is more about how the W/kg metric affects the way that rides and races are structured. Once you are familiar with the shortcomings of W/kg relative to your weight and height, you can adjust your expectations for group rides and find a ride that suits you. Our local club is now doing group meetups on Zwift to get together through the winter which adds to the engagement when you know the people in the group.

unterhausen

I just did Muir and the mountain on zwift and I thought it was very realistic. They even had a runner pass me just before the top, just like IRL

I should have eaten, that was the first time I have felt that drained on the trainer. Climbing up the last hill was a chore.

spelger

i hate it when runners pass me. it usually only happened when doing a workout and i happened to be going up a hill. i generally don't do workouts in zwift anymore.

genejockey 

I happened to look at my speed while doing the 15% part of the Radio Tower climb last week. 3 mph. DEFINITELY in 'fall over' range in the real world.

Eric F 

I will happily skip that climb for the rest of my time on Zwift. Done it once. That was plenty for me.

unterhausen

I feel the same way about that climb. I was pretty disappointed with myself for taking it when I realized it was an out and back.

Cyclist0100

Fair enough. I know Zwift is quite popular and some people really enjoy it. I can also undertstand wanting to add a live, interactive element to what is otherwise a pretty boring activity. At this point in time it's just not for me. I'd rather put on my earbuds and zone out for about an hour.

atwl77

Considering some of the short, punchy hills in my country, I love the availability of climbs like the Radio Tower. However not a fan of its location, immediately after the Epic KOM climb, which gives you practically no rest before it comes up. And if you're doing it from the reverse direction, you won't complete the Reverse Epic KOM segment since you have to make the turn before the end of that segment.

spelger

If you think the radio tower climb is bad wait till you do the big hill in France. That horrid affair takes me ~90 minutes. Because it is shorter I figured 60 mins, boy was I wrong.

clasher

I like Ventoux more than alpe de zwift, a bit less steep, especially in the second half and there isn't a screen full of clutter. I'm doing more alpe climbs these days just on a quest to get the 'masochist' badge, only 11 more climbs to go.

blacknbluebikes 

It's a great game, quite amazing, really. And the scale - you've sometimes got 20,000 users running concurrent intersecting simulations of cycling. Perfect? No. Awesome? Yes. And as soon as it warms up out there, I'm glad to return to "IRL"

spelger

i've only ridden that hill in france twice so i don't have a very good memory of it but i do recall it being much steeper in sections but also much flatter in others compared to the alpe. maybe i am remembering wrong and i need to climb it again.

the alpe is easier in my opinion. i happen to like the added info on the ride. what is missing is previous times/powers/hr.

<rand>i don't know why they need to limit this stuff to the last 30 days. just shove the latest data into an xml file and load, update when done.</rant>

genejockey 

Or you do what I did one crazy night last month - do the Reverse KOM (which is harder, BTW!) all the way to the arch, then turn around and ride back to the turn off for the Radio Tower, and do that. I don't know what I was thinking, because the Reverse KOM doesn't have any of those little flat bits the forward version has and I was tired already.