topflightpro

Except for when in six months you have to send it in to Quarq for a warranty replacement. And again six months after that. And then six months after that...

chil2makefun

Are those first hand experiences or...?

bikepro

I would look at the Stages system. If they're good enough for a professional team: Team Sky switch to Stages Cycling power meters for 2014 | road.cc

Silvercivic27

Well, I have 2 neither of which have gone back. I have many friends and teammates who have them none of whom have needed to send them back as far as I know. Also, everything breaks. I definitely know people who have sent SRMs and Powertaps back, and I definitely know 2 people who have sent Stages back. So to say they are any less reliable than anything else I think is a bunch of bull unless you have data.

RJM

I bought the Garmin Vector S for pretty much the same reasons here. I figured if I ever wanted to go to both legs I could and so far I have been happy with Garmin stuff. Using Look pedals didn't bother me as I was already on them anyway.

I just started using them and so far it has been going well. Setup and installation was easy...really couldn't be much easier.

ljsense

I didn't see a whole lot of support for my opinion, but let me go on anyway.

First off, I heard people throw around some terms such as "arrogant," "dismissive," "condescending" and "the worst," and call for me to not just turn pro, but win the TdF to gain standing.

Look, I'm talking to all of you in the same voice I use with my racing buddies. It's conceivable that we're all a-holes. I don't know. This is just how I sound.

Most of the people who tell you about power meters are either selling you one, running a publication that needs manufacturers' ads, or have one themselves and want the company.

I've been immersed in data. I've had my VO2 Max tested. I've owned power meters. I've gotten bored and attacked all the Strava KOMs around my house in August.

And I just think if you're on the brink of buying a power meter, one lone voice should be out there offering an alternative: Dude, why not use the 2 grand to get or do something fun?

I know that pros use power meters. Pros also take ambien so that they can more easily fall asleep hungry. Pros measure blood lactate as part of interval training. Pros take PEDs. Pros do a lot of stuff. Some of it is dictated by their sponsors and teams.

None of that influences my view that power meters are stupid. So are cycling computers and heart rate monitors. You don't have to use any of that stuff. It's not mandatory. Life's better without it.

I like the lap countdown cards at the finish line. I like seeing where people are in the field. That's the real data to watch.

And when I'm training I like the scenery and my friends and the coffee shop.

Dunbar

First off, you don't have to spend $2k to get a power meter. Secondly, some of us are already training with power meters and find them the be fun and rewarding.

grolby

Q: do power meters, when used appropriately, allow better and more precise training than other methods?

A: yes.

The data is in on this. It's unequivocal. That you personally don't enjoy using or aren't able to use a power meter effectively is your thing and that's cool. It doesn't make them a stupid thing for someone else to consider getting. Some people think life is better when they can use data to train better and perform better in bike races. Or just ride faster, I suppose, though I'll grant that using a PM to get faster on the local group ride seems strange to me. But whatever.

There's no doubt that there is a hell of a lot more to racing well than power data and fitness. Duh. There's a long way from there to thinking that data doesn't matter or can't help you get better. Smart racing can tell you which attack looks like it might be the winning break. The kind of targeted interval training that a PM makes easier to do can help make you more likely to be able to follow that attack and contribute to the break.

I know this might be a shock, but your opinion represents your own experiences and not objective reality. As does mine. Your word is not the definitive statement on whether power meters are useful, cool, or fun. You are just one person with an opinion and a keyboard. So are all of us.

RJM

Maybe people were calling you arrogant, dismissive, and condescending because you were and are being arrogant, dismissive, and condescending????

You began by dismissing power meters as fun or useful then you went on to assume the Op needs to lose weight.

Both your posts to this thread are ridiculous.

ghause

I'm in a similar position as the OP.
Given the cost of the two pedal system, plus the expense of tools to set them up correctly, I'm planning on just going with Stages.
Watch some setup videos.
I personally don't see the ROI in measuring both legs.

ljsense

I want to hear someone describe the "fun" they're having through the use of a power meter.

I can think of only one example: testing your 5s max. That is where a power meter is fun. Blast out some sprints, see the big watts. That's what I did when I had my first power meter. Boom! Pretty fun.

And then on the second day it's just marginally useful data that you could basically get for much cheaper, like a wrist watch and a 20 km course or a 2 km climb. And you fret that it's not on your cross bike or your MTB or needs to be sent in for new batteries or is not communicating properly with your twitter account.

ljsense

Here's what I said: "Intervals, you say. Measuring effort and exertion. Training effectively. Ok, fine. But give me a bit of a break. Get completely lean first. Ride 15 or more hours a week."

I'd say that I was debating the arguments I've typically heard in defense of power meters. I wasn't specifically saying that the OP needs to lose weight. But, come on, the only way he doesn't have to lose weight is if he's not a serious cyclist. Every single serious cyclist needs to lose weight all the time. It's just part of the deal.

So if you don't need to lose weight, you are not a serious cyclists. Therefore, why bother with a power meter? Because they're fun? I challenge once again anyone to describe this fun.

chil2makefun

Did it ever occur to you that 'fun' is different for everyone? Some like to analyse the data afterwards. Some like to see their improvements in fitness. And than there's also the group of people who use one not because it's fun but because it helps to train more efficiently. In your first post you mentioned he should ride more than 10 hours a week or something... Well while you go do that some of the more time crunched cyclists train smarter and get the same results in half that time. There are way more aspects to a powermeter than you seem to understand, which makes me think you didn't use yours fairly well.

ljsense

All I keep hearing in this thread is problems with me: I don't know how to use a power meter, I am a jerk, etc.

Which makes me think my arguments are fairly strong.

This is my argument: Your success as a cyclist will not be determined by whether you use a power meter. In fact, you may well be a better cyclist without one. You will definitely save some money by not buying one, and you could use that on something else.

Think about other athletes -- swimmers, xc skiers, runners, rowers, speed skaters. They all find a way to their top performances without so much digital record keeping going on in front of their faces as they train.

One thing too I think worth mentioning is it's possible that some posters here actually are connected to the cycling industry in some way. Forums have good SEO and if you're, say, Garmin, it's not a bad thing to have a thread about how much sense a pedal-based power meter makes. And by the way, theirs are accurate, unlike those crappy Look pedal based power meters.

chil2makefun

And that's where you're wrong. For one a powermeter can show you things you were actually doing wrong without you even noticing. Or as I said, some of us are a bit time crunched so we have to train in the most efficient way possible and the best way to do that is with a powermeter. There are lots of upsides to owning a powermeter and yet you seem reluctant to see them.

ljsense

My eyes are wide open to any benefits of using a power meter. They tell you with what force and for what duration you turned the pedals.

A good training plan with hard intervals will help with training efficiency and limited hours. You don't need a power meter. There are a lot of ways to know you're doing the right work. And I think there is an unacknowledged risk that a power meter could actually skew training in the wrong direction. You might hold to the wrong numbers. It is not as if you will be guaranteed to train smart because you have this data. You need the ability to make sense of it, and if you or a coach really has this expertise to know what drives progress, they'll know how to get there with or without a digital screen.

How can a track runner get in top form? She has no power meter for her legs. And yet with structured training she will reach top form.

chil2makefun

And on what will you base your hard intervals? Heartrate? Cadance? Speed? These are al highly variable. Your heartrate may indicate that you're going to hard while your muscles aren't actually performing the workload they should. Besides the real hard intervals are nearly impossible to do precisely without a powermeter because of the lag between increase in pace and increase in heartrate. You were also talking about a coach... A coach will have a way harder time determining wether your plan works for you without a powermeter.

ljsense

Sure, a power meter and HRM can give you that data, and the right response is to rest. It's a sign of overtraining. But there are a lot of other signals of over training that the body presents quite plainly with no capital costs. The problem with your example is that the numbers on the power meter might drive the user to respond exactly wrong. They see lower numbers than usual, it feels hard, so they really crank on it to get the data that they're used to, so they don't feel a sense of failure.


How do you imagine that athletes in other sports successfully complete interval training? How did cyclists get into competitive form before computers? I think the benefit that power meters bring to interval training depends so much on expertise and is so marginal it is only relevant for very very elite cyclists.


I think for most cyclists, a coach has a very easy time confirming progress. I mean, for a lot of cyclists, a hill and a stopwatch would work fine.

chil2makefun

1: Heartrate depends on way more factors than being overtrained or not. So you might just be in a very good form while your heartrate says otherwise.

2: Your references to other sports are irrelevant. If the tools are there, why not use them? Not using them simply because they didn't use them 30 years ago doesn't make sense.

3: Ever thought about the fact that a lot of people have a coach who only analyzes their data and makes new plans based on that? Not every one spends that much cash on a coach so he could actually be there on your training rides.

But you know what? I'm done trying to convince you. I can perfectly understand why you wouldn't want to use a powermeter. But the fact that you are simply denying that a powermeter has some serious benefits makes you very ingnorant and naive.

ljsense

Wait, in the example you set up for me, you said the muscles weren't performing the workload they should (low power numbers) and the heart rate was too high. Now you're saying this is someone in very good form with a mysterious heart rate? All right. How is the power meter helping you here?

Citing the other sports was to demonstrate that top physical conditioning can be achieved without power measurements. Why not use a tool that's there? When it's not necessary.

Right, skip spending $1K to $2K on a power meter, get a coach who rides with you instead. That's one option. Fun company, might actually learn about bike handing, how to descend, a bunch of other good stuff.

I'm open to debate; my opinion is based on my experience with measuring power and other metrics. I've tried it. It has some use. But I think it's pretty narrow. And I think that if you're just considering buying a power meter, it doesn't hurt to honestly reflect on whether that's a good choice. My advice would be to put your energy and money elsewhere.

Wesley36

Lol, that seems like the obvious and logical conclusion.

Darth Steele

ljsense is hung up on the word "fun", which of course is a relative term. I say spend the money on a trip to the Dominican Republic, get some viagra and 2+ hot ******* and party like it's 1999...to me that is fun

As for the power meter, there is no argument on whether or not it maximizes your training efforts.

ljsense

You're exactly right in that there is no argument in this thread that a power meter maximizes training efforts. Not a single person has put forward their case study for how a power meter allowed them to achieve results they couldn't get without one. People just act like it's this fact. I'm here to say it's not.

jtwilson

I vote for Vector S. I have the Vector and don't use any of the cycling dynamics stuff because I have an older Edge. My power balance is almost always 50/50 or close enough, so I might as well be on the Vector S.

I also greatly enjoy, and have an increased amount of "fun" cycling with a power meter. If I had to start all over from scratch, my first priority for a new bike would be a power meter. I would rather ride a $2,000 bike with a power meter than a $3,500 bike without one.

RChung

Oh, that. I improved my watts/drag using a power meter. I also decreased my training time without any loss of power using a power meter (I had to -- I had changed jobs and moved to a new city and was forced to cut back my training time from around 10 hrs/wk down to a bit less than 6). Net effect was no loss in power for fewer hours of training time but faster.

[Edited to add] I'm not sure I could have done the drag reduction with something like the Vector S or the Stages.