Zwift training shopping list?
#27
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2015
Location: reno, nv
Posts: 2,298
Bikes: yes, i have one
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1136 Post(s)
Liked 1,179 Times
in
686 Posts
The difference in feel between pushing a low gear up a hill vs pushing a big gear on the level vs. any old exercise bike in the gym is noticeable and easy to understand why. The outdoor bike is either mostly hill or mostly aero drag. The exercise bike is pure rolling resistance. You can feel the difference. Does a smart trainer not, somehow? What makes the difference?
#28
Kamen Rider
Join Date: Aug 2017
Location: KL, MY
Posts: 1,071
Bikes: Fuji Transonic Elite, Marechal Soul Ultimate, Dahon Dash Altena
Mentioned: 11 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 351 Post(s)
Liked 277 Times
in
164 Posts
The example you provide would occur if I used a Wahoo Snap(smart trainer). The flywheel would spin faster if I generated more power).
As for the flywheel helping to get a rider up a hill, I definitely havent experienced that. The flywheel on my bike simply keeps the wheel rolling for a short coasting time. If I stop pedaling on a hill climb in Zwift, I quickly slow down, even with the flywheel. That is opposed to if I stop pedaling on a downhill in Zwift, I continue to coast in the game.
By no means am I declaring any of this is relatable to real world riding, but I struggle to understand the stated concerns about a dumb trainer on Zwift as none of them apply to my dumb trainer when I ride Zwift. I am for sure not getting any assistance up hills(other than the computer algorithm that everyone default benefits from).
If anything, I would say Zwift shows me as faster on the flats and slower on climbs compared to real life. Im going for a ride this afternoon and I wont average 23mph on flat road and I wont average 4mph on 8% climbs.
Maybe I am just misunderstanding.
As for the flywheel helping to get a rider up a hill, I definitely havent experienced that. The flywheel on my bike simply keeps the wheel rolling for a short coasting time. If I stop pedaling on a hill climb in Zwift, I quickly slow down, even with the flywheel. That is opposed to if I stop pedaling on a downhill in Zwift, I continue to coast in the game.
By no means am I declaring any of this is relatable to real world riding, but I struggle to understand the stated concerns about a dumb trainer on Zwift as none of them apply to my dumb trainer when I ride Zwift. I am for sure not getting any assistance up hills(other than the computer algorithm that everyone default benefits from).
If anything, I would say Zwift shows me as faster on the flats and slower on climbs compared to real life. Im going for a ride this afternoon and I wont average 23mph on flat road and I wont average 4mph on 8% climbs.
Maybe I am just misunderstanding.
On a dumb trainer, none of that generally* applies and regardless of whether you're on the flat or climb, the resistance remains the same. So depending on how much manual resistance was initially applied to the trainer, you're either going to make riding the virtual flats feel like climbs, or make riding the virtual climbs feel like flats. I'll make another generalization and assume most people will setup their dumb trainer for the latter, which means they might get a little benefit of (micro coasting, for a lack of better term) when climbing.
Caveat then goes to your pedaling efficiency - the differences will be less (or none) with very good pedaling efficiency, and more apparent for people "pedaling squares" or similar; I guess it's similar to how some people can hold wattage better on climbs than on flats outside.
* - Well technically, you could turn the manual resistance dial of the dumb trainer yourself to simulate the gradient, but who does that?
#29
Kamen Rider
Join Date: Aug 2017
Location: KL, MY
Posts: 1,071
Bikes: Fuji Transonic Elite, Marechal Soul Ultimate, Dahon Dash Altena
Mentioned: 11 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 351 Post(s)
Liked 277 Times
in
164 Posts
The difference in feel between pushing a low gear up a hill vs pushing a big gear on the level vs. any old exercise bike in the gym is noticeable and easy to understand why. The outdoor bike is either mostly hill or mostly aero drag. The exercise bike is pure rolling resistance. You can feel the difference. Does a smart trainer not, somehow? What makes the difference?
The main difference is that the smart trainer can automatically change the resistance, whereas the dumb trainer doesn't. Which, depending on your riding and training objectives, may or may not matter. For me, it matters. If I see my virtual self going up a virtual hill on Zwift, I like the feel that it's getting tougher to pedal and either I have to mash up or shift to a lighter gear, just like how it works outside. If I'm doing a set of intervals and for the upcoming block I'm supposed to do X watts at Y cadence, I prefer not to mess with my gearing to figure out which combination gives me those results, and let the trainer automatically adjust the resistance for me.
Although once you go up in price and start getting into special/unique features, you start getting things like the Wahoo Climb, Wahoo Headwind fan, Tacx's road feel, and that Zwift steering device thingy whose name I can't remember at the moment, all which are "quality of life" type of improvements which to some, are great additions and to others, are completely useless gadgets.
Last edited by atwl77; 11-19-20 at 09:47 PM.
#30
Disco Infiltrator
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2013
Location: Folsom CA
Posts: 13,446
Bikes: Stormchaser, Paramount, Tilt, Samba tandem
Mentioned: 72 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3126 Post(s)
Liked 2,102 Times
in
1,366 Posts
I'm thinking that shifting is what makes the difference, because of the flywheel. Power at low wheel RPM and high resistance is going to feel different than the same power at high RPM and lower resistance. That might be enough to simulate drag, or at least better than nothing. It also answers the question of, why even shift or have a smart trainer if you're just going to land at 200W at 90 cadence? It's still not going to give you that kick-back feeling you get in granny gear, like if you let go it's going to unwind.
I'm still just talking out my butt and wife won't be drawn about what she bought. I think she's afraid I'll look at the price and judge it prematurely. We might be in that "first season I tried..." situation
I'm still just talking out my butt and wife won't be drawn about what she bought. I think she's afraid I'll look at the price and judge it prematurely. We might be in that "first season I tried..." situation
__________________
Genesis 49:16-17
Genesis 49:16-17
#31
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2017
Location: Seattle
Posts: 1,952
Bikes: Specialized Roubaix, Canyon Inflite AL SLX, Ibis Ripley AF, Priority Continuum Onyx, Santana Vision, Kent Dual-Drive Tandem
Mentioned: 20 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 871 Post(s)
Liked 726 Times
in
436 Posts
At steady state, one can approximate grades and resistance with a dumb trainer by shifting. Where a smart trainer provides a noticeable difference is when conditions vary, so in Zwift that would either be over uneven terrain and when experiencing draft effect.
#32
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Sacramento, California, USA
Posts: 40,865
Bikes: Specialized Tarmac, Canyon Exceed, Specialized Transition, Ellsworth Roots, Ridley Excalibur
Mentioned: 68 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2952 Post(s)
Liked 3,106 Times
in
1,417 Posts
Putting it in another way, when you are on a smart trainer, resistance changes depending on whether you are on a flat, or when climbing. When the resistance increases, your wheel tends to slow down to a halt much faster than when you are on a flat. On the flat - i.e. with less resistance - your wheel tends to spin more before slowing down and coming to a stop.
On a dumb trainer, none of that generally* applies and regardless of whether you're on the flat or climb, the resistance remains the same. So depending on how much manual resistance was initially applied to the trainer, you're either going to make riding the virtual flats feel like climbs, or make riding the virtual climbs feel like flats. I'll make another generalization and assume most people will setup their dumb trainer for the latter, which means they might get a little benefit of (micro coasting, for a lack of better term) when climbing.
Caveat then goes to your pedaling efficiency - the differences will be less (or none) with very good pedaling efficiency, and more apparent for people "pedaling squares" or similar; I guess it's similar to how some people can hold wattage better on climbs than on flats outside.
* - Well technically, you could turn the manual resistance dial of the dumb trainer yourself to simulate the gradient, but who does that?
On a dumb trainer, none of that generally* applies and regardless of whether you're on the flat or climb, the resistance remains the same. So depending on how much manual resistance was initially applied to the trainer, you're either going to make riding the virtual flats feel like climbs, or make riding the virtual climbs feel like flats. I'll make another generalization and assume most people will setup their dumb trainer for the latter, which means they might get a little benefit of (micro coasting, for a lack of better term) when climbing.
Caveat then goes to your pedaling efficiency - the differences will be less (or none) with very good pedaling efficiency, and more apparent for people "pedaling squares" or similar; I guess it's similar to how some people can hold wattage better on climbs than on flats outside.
* - Well technically, you could turn the manual resistance dial of the dumb trainer yourself to simulate the gradient, but who does that?
https://www.kurtkinetic.com/fluid-resistance
Last edited by caloso; 11-19-20 at 10:58 PM.
#33
Full Member
A smart trainer will give you a tough work out as you are not in control of the resistance. The app you are using does that. I bought a new smart trainer this year and it is way hardier than a non smart trainer. While I have Zwift it is not the only indoor training app. As the one spending a.lot of ad money getting people to sign up. The streets are getting crowded to the point it is not fun watching all the people all over the road.
#34
I think I know nothing.
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: NE PA
Posts: 709
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 233 Post(s)
Liked 290 Times
in
204 Posts
If you really think about it, is having as close to an exact duplicate of IRL conditions (as provided by a high end smart trainer) as possible in a platform such as Zwift really all that important?
From the perspective of Zwift racing the rules generally require that users use a trainer that reports in zPower. Here is a quote from an article in Zwiftinsider:
See the link above for the complete discussion. There is also a link in that article to another article by Zwift with a list of trainers that are capable of zPower and vPower. But all of this pertains to Zwifters that are interested in racing not general fitness riding or social rides.
When I pair up my Kinetic trainer with InRide to Zwift, I get connected to a "Power Source" via ANT+ not a "Speed Sensor". In my mind this indicates that Zwift will report my data in zpower, this allows me to race in zwift against those using smart trainers. Oddly, sometimes while paring in Zwift, my trainer reports to Zwift that I have a "controllable" trainer. Still, my data in Zwift (and on Zwift Power) shows up in zPower. That is because i'm using one of the supported dumb trainers mentioned in the above articles. I see zwifters flying up the Alpe in zpower all the time. They are either very good pro level cyclists or cheating. I have concluded that many cheaters are cheating with smart trainers because they are showing zPower data reporting.
OK my point is not about cheating or racing issues rather it is about the overall virtual experience. Is it really necessary for most of us to recreate as close as possible the IRL experience on our trainers? I would say no, it isn't. There is the risk that a zwift user may get smacked upside the head, living with delusions thinking that because they have achieved a certain level of competence on the zwift platform that automatically they will be an tearing up the road in club rides. As there is more to riding IRL this isn't easy to do. Maybe there should be a law passed by congress mandating that all zwift users using a dumb trainer should have a caution label attached to their trainer warning that their zwift performance may not match their IRL performance. Perhaps all trainers should have that label.
But still, I can point to my own case, using a supported dumb trainer last winter, no real riding outside for 6 months, all on zwift. In fall of 2019 I was riding just barely better than rank beginner. Winter comes, 3000 miles on a dumb trainer via zwift. Then came the spring 2020 and now I'm doing fast C class club rides and some hilly B rides, and keeping up with the big dogs. Not beating the big dogs but keeping up with them.
So the question for me is would having a smart trainer make me a better rider if I spend half of the year training inside?
Again, if it were not for the fact I already had my dumb trainer (Kinetic RM with InRide) then I would advise myself to get a smart trainer. At $500 I would get the Kickr Snap. Or if you can get a low cost used dumb trainer that is capable of zpower then ok. I have about $150 total invested in my trainer. I have tossed around the question in my head regarding what I have vs. the advantages of upgrading and as much as it appeals to my sense of self worth, the advantages of smart vs dumb are not worth it to me as long as my dumb trainer is ticking along. I'm more interested in watts per kg not in bragging rights.
We all have our priorities. We all have our budget caps. I have a friend that thinks I'm crazy because I put $1000 worth of power meter on my 15 year old AL road bike that I paid $300 for . He thinks I should have a $3000 road bike. This is the same individual that has a $3000+ CF elec shifting road bike on the least expensive smart trainer available.
At the end of the ride up the Alpe, I need to generate the same amount of watts (in zPower) as any smart trainer rider to make it to the top. A typical fun ride for me IRL is 25 miles with 3000 feet of ascent. I live in the mountains. I can do that kind of riding at age 62 with just two years of riding experience because (not in spite of the fact that) I spent all of last winter riding riding riding and climbing climbing climbing on Zwift using a supported zPower dumb dumb dumb trainer.
On Edit: personally I'm not smart enough to cheat my power numbers in Zwift using a dumb trainer. What I report to zwiftpower and Strava is what my trainer reports based on my actual (and honest) performance.
On Edit Edit: This discussion regarding using Zwift with dumb trainers with people, nice as they are, who do not understand the difference between using a zwift supported dumb trainer and an unsupported dumb trainer is getting tiresome.
From the perspective of Zwift racing the rules generally require that users use a trainer that reports in zPower. Here is a quote from an article in Zwiftinsider:
- zPower Classic Trainer and speed sensor: Zwift has calculated a specific “power curve with acceleration” for a very short list of higher-end classic trainers. Capped at 1200 watts, as long as your trainer is set up properly (see below) your numbers should be fairly accurate even when changing speeds. (While the term “zPower” is often used by Zwifters to refer to all virtual power numbers, only a small set of trainers use zPower.) (my add: a number of people who have an opinion on the topic of using dumb trainers vs smart trainers, including some that have used both, do not understand the difference between zPower and vPower).
See the link above for the complete discussion. There is also a link in that article to another article by Zwift with a list of trainers that are capable of zPower and vPower. But all of this pertains to Zwifters that are interested in racing not general fitness riding or social rides.
When I pair up my Kinetic trainer with InRide to Zwift, I get connected to a "Power Source" via ANT+ not a "Speed Sensor". In my mind this indicates that Zwift will report my data in zpower, this allows me to race in zwift against those using smart trainers. Oddly, sometimes while paring in Zwift, my trainer reports to Zwift that I have a "controllable" trainer. Still, my data in Zwift (and on Zwift Power) shows up in zPower. That is because i'm using one of the supported dumb trainers mentioned in the above articles. I see zwifters flying up the Alpe in zpower all the time. They are either very good pro level cyclists or cheating. I have concluded that many cheaters are cheating with smart trainers because they are showing zPower data reporting.
OK my point is not about cheating or racing issues rather it is about the overall virtual experience. Is it really necessary for most of us to recreate as close as possible the IRL experience on our trainers? I would say no, it isn't. There is the risk that a zwift user may get smacked upside the head, living with delusions thinking that because they have achieved a certain level of competence on the zwift platform that automatically they will be an tearing up the road in club rides. As there is more to riding IRL this isn't easy to do. Maybe there should be a law passed by congress mandating that all zwift users using a dumb trainer should have a caution label attached to their trainer warning that their zwift performance may not match their IRL performance. Perhaps all trainers should have that label.
But still, I can point to my own case, using a supported dumb trainer last winter, no real riding outside for 6 months, all on zwift. In fall of 2019 I was riding just barely better than rank beginner. Winter comes, 3000 miles on a dumb trainer via zwift. Then came the spring 2020 and now I'm doing fast C class club rides and some hilly B rides, and keeping up with the big dogs. Not beating the big dogs but keeping up with them.
So the question for me is would having a smart trainer make me a better rider if I spend half of the year training inside?
Again, if it were not for the fact I already had my dumb trainer (Kinetic RM with InRide) then I would advise myself to get a smart trainer. At $500 I would get the Kickr Snap. Or if you can get a low cost used dumb trainer that is capable of zpower then ok. I have about $150 total invested in my trainer. I have tossed around the question in my head regarding what I have vs. the advantages of upgrading and as much as it appeals to my sense of self worth, the advantages of smart vs dumb are not worth it to me as long as my dumb trainer is ticking along. I'm more interested in watts per kg not in bragging rights.
We all have our priorities. We all have our budget caps. I have a friend that thinks I'm crazy because I put $1000 worth of power meter on my 15 year old AL road bike that I paid $300 for . He thinks I should have a $3000 road bike. This is the same individual that has a $3000+ CF elec shifting road bike on the least expensive smart trainer available.
At the end of the ride up the Alpe, I need to generate the same amount of watts (in zPower) as any smart trainer rider to make it to the top. A typical fun ride for me IRL is 25 miles with 3000 feet of ascent. I live in the mountains. I can do that kind of riding at age 62 with just two years of riding experience because (not in spite of the fact that) I spent all of last winter riding riding riding and climbing climbing climbing on Zwift using a supported zPower dumb dumb dumb trainer.
On Edit: personally I'm not smart enough to cheat my power numbers in Zwift using a dumb trainer. What I report to zwiftpower and Strava is what my trainer reports based on my actual (and honest) performance.
On Edit Edit: This discussion regarding using Zwift with dumb trainers with people, nice as they are, who do not understand the difference between using a zwift supported dumb trainer and an unsupported dumb trainer is getting tiresome.
Last edited by Thomas15; 11-20-20 at 11:17 AM.
#35
FLIR Kitten to 0.05C
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Lincoln, Nebraska
Posts: 5,331
Bikes: Roadie: Seven Axiom Race Ti w/Chorus 11s. CX/Adventure: Carver Gravel Grinder w/ Di2
Mentioned: 30 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2349 Post(s)
Liked 406 Times
in
254 Posts
If you really think about it, is having as close to an exact duplicate of IRL conditions (as provided by a high end smart trainer) as possible in a platform such as Zwift really all that important?
From the perspective of Zwift racing the rules generally require that users use a trainer that reports in zPower. Here is a quote from an article in Zwiftinsider:
See the link above for the complete discussion. There is also a link in that article to another article by Zwift with a list of trainers that are capable of zPower and vPower. But all of this pertains to Zwifters that are interested in racing not general fitness riding or social rides.
When I pair up my Kinetic trainer with InRide to Zwift, I get connected to a "Power Source" via ANT+ not a "Speed Sensor". In my mind this indicates that Zwift will report my data in zpower, this allows me to race in zwift against those using smart trainers. Oddly, sometimes while paring in Zwift, my trainer reports to Zwift that I have a "controllable" trainer. Still, my data in Zwift (and on Zwift Power) shows up in zPower. That using one of the supported dumb trainers mentioned in the above articles. I see zwifters flying up the Alpe in zpower all the time. They are either very good pro level cyclists or cheating. I have concluded that many cheaters are cheating with smart trainers because they are showing zPower data reporting.
OK my point is not about cheating or racing issues rather it is about the overall virtual experience. Is it really necessary for most of us to recreate as close as possible the IRL experience on our trainers? I would say no, it isn't. There is the risk that a zwift user may get smacked upside the head, living with delusions thinking that because they have achieved a certain level of competence on the zwift platform that automatically they will be an tearing up the road in club rides. As there is more to riding IRL this isn't easy to do. Maybe there should be a law passed by congress mandating that all zwift users using a dumb trainer should have a caution label attached to their trainer warning that their zwift performance may not match their IRL performance. Perhaps all trainers should have that label.
But still, I can point to my own case, using a supported dumb trainer last winter, no real riding outside for 6 months, all on zwift. In fall of 2019 I was riding just barely better than rank beginner. Winter comes, 3000 miles on a dumb trainer via zwift. Then came the spring 2020 and now I'm doing fast C class club rides and some hilly B rides, and keeping up with the big dogs. Not beating the big dogs but keeping up with them.
So the question for me is would having a smart trainer make me a better rider if I spend half of the year training inside?
Again, if it were not for the fact I already had my dumb trainer (Kinetic RM with InRide) then I would advise myself to get a smart trainer. At $500 I would get the Kickr Snap. Or if you can get a low cost used dumb trainer that is capable of zpower then ok. I have about $150 total invested in my trainer. I have tossed around the question in my head regarding what I have vs. the advantages of upgrading and as much as it appeals to my sense of self worth, the advantages of smart vs dumb are not worth it to me as long as my dumb trainer is ticking along. I'm more interested in watts per kg not in bragging rights.
We all have our priorities. We all have our budget caps. I have a friend that thinks I'm crazy because I put $1000 worth of power meter on my 15 year old AL road bike that I paid $300 for . He thinks I should have a $3000 road bike. This is the same individual that has a $3000+ CF elec shifting road bike on the least expensive smart trainer available.
At the end of the ride up the Alpe, I need to generate the same amount of watts as any smart trainer rider to make it to the top.
From the perspective of Zwift racing the rules generally require that users use a trainer that reports in zPower. Here is a quote from an article in Zwiftinsider:
- zPower Classic Trainer and speed sensor: Zwift has calculated a specific “power curve with acceleration” for a very short list of higher-end classic trainers. Capped at 1200 watts, as long as your trainer is set up properly (see below) your numbers should be fairly accurate even when changing speeds. (While the term “zPower” is often used by Zwifters to refer to all virtual power numbers, only a small set of trainers use zPower.) ( my add: a number of people who have an opinion on the topic of using dumb trainers vs smart trainers, including some that have used both, do not understand the difference between zPower and vPower).
See the link above for the complete discussion. There is also a link in that article to another article by Zwift with a list of trainers that are capable of zPower and vPower. But all of this pertains to Zwifters that are interested in racing not general fitness riding or social rides.
When I pair up my Kinetic trainer with InRide to Zwift, I get connected to a "Power Source" via ANT+ not a "Speed Sensor". In my mind this indicates that Zwift will report my data in zpower, this allows me to race in zwift against those using smart trainers. Oddly, sometimes while paring in Zwift, my trainer reports to Zwift that I have a "controllable" trainer. Still, my data in Zwift (and on Zwift Power) shows up in zPower. That using one of the supported dumb trainers mentioned in the above articles. I see zwifters flying up the Alpe in zpower all the time. They are either very good pro level cyclists or cheating. I have concluded that many cheaters are cheating with smart trainers because they are showing zPower data reporting.
OK my point is not about cheating or racing issues rather it is about the overall virtual experience. Is it really necessary for most of us to recreate as close as possible the IRL experience on our trainers? I would say no, it isn't. There is the risk that a zwift user may get smacked upside the head, living with delusions thinking that because they have achieved a certain level of competence on the zwift platform that automatically they will be an tearing up the road in club rides. As there is more to riding IRL this isn't easy to do. Maybe there should be a law passed by congress mandating that all zwift users using a dumb trainer should have a caution label attached to their trainer warning that their zwift performance may not match their IRL performance. Perhaps all trainers should have that label.
But still, I can point to my own case, using a supported dumb trainer last winter, no real riding outside for 6 months, all on zwift. In fall of 2019 I was riding just barely better than rank beginner. Winter comes, 3000 miles on a dumb trainer via zwift. Then came the spring 2020 and now I'm doing fast C class club rides and some hilly B rides, and keeping up with the big dogs. Not beating the big dogs but keeping up with them.
So the question for me is would having a smart trainer make me a better rider if I spend half of the year training inside?
Again, if it were not for the fact I already had my dumb trainer (Kinetic RM with InRide) then I would advise myself to get a smart trainer. At $500 I would get the Kickr Snap. Or if you can get a low cost used dumb trainer that is capable of zpower then ok. I have about $150 total invested in my trainer. I have tossed around the question in my head regarding what I have vs. the advantages of upgrading and as much as it appeals to my sense of self worth, the advantages of smart vs dumb are not worth it to me as long as my dumb trainer is ticking along. I'm more interested in watts per kg not in bragging rights.
We all have our priorities. We all have our budget caps. I have a friend that thinks I'm crazy because I put $1000 worth of power meter on my 15 year old AL road bike that I paid $300 for . He thinks I should have a $3000 road bike. This is the same individual that has a $3000+ CF elec shifting road bike on the least expensive smart trainer available.
At the end of the ride up the Alpe, I need to generate the same amount of watts as any smart trainer rider to make it to the top.
There's what you 'need' then there's what motivates you to actually do the workout. For some people it is a zoot bike; for others it is having a smart trainer. Either way, it gets them working on physical fitness.
Likes For Marcus_Ti:
#36
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2017
Location: Seattle
Posts: 1,952
Bikes: Specialized Roubaix, Canyon Inflite AL SLX, Ibis Ripley AF, Priority Continuum Onyx, Santana Vision, Kent Dual-Drive Tandem
Mentioned: 20 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 871 Post(s)
Liked 726 Times
in
436 Posts
If you really think about it, is having as close to an exact duplicate of IRL conditions (as provided by a high end smart trainer) as possible in a platform such as Zwift really all that important?
From the perspective of Zwift racing the rules generally require that users use a trainer that reports in zPower.
From the perspective of Zwift racing the rules generally require that users use a trainer that reports in zPower.
And you have zPower completely confused with zwiftpower.com - they are totally different and opposing concepts. Fundamentally, virtual power is unreliable and automatically disqualifies you from official race results that zwiftpower.com produces.
#37
I think I know nothing.
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: NE PA
Posts: 709
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 233 Post(s)
Liked 290 Times
in
204 Posts
I have my results posted on zwiftpower.com and know exactly what it is and what it does.
Nice try though.
Last edited by Thomas15; 11-20-20 at 03:36 PM.
#38
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2017
Location: Seattle
Posts: 1,952
Bikes: Specialized Roubaix, Canyon Inflite AL SLX, Ibis Ripley AF, Priority Continuum Onyx, Santana Vision, Kent Dual-Drive Tandem
Mentioned: 20 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 871 Post(s)
Liked 726 Times
in
436 Posts
ZPower riders cannot win in any category.
Last edited by surak; 11-20-20 at 03:48 PM.
#41
Disco Infiltrator
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2013
Location: Folsom CA
Posts: 13,446
Bikes: Stormchaser, Paramount, Tilt, Samba tandem
Mentioned: 72 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3126 Post(s)
Liked 2,102 Times
in
1,366 Posts
OP, here. I just want to ride my bike in the MMO with my wife. We both have bum tickers and surging waistlines, we are not going to be anywhere near your leaderboards.
__________________
Genesis 49:16-17
Genesis 49:16-17
#43
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2017
Location: Seattle
Posts: 1,952
Bikes: Specialized Roubaix, Canyon Inflite AL SLX, Ibis Ripley AF, Priority Continuum Onyx, Santana Vision, Kent Dual-Drive Tandem
Mentioned: 20 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 871 Post(s)
Liked 726 Times
in
436 Posts
If you really are only going to care that your avatar moves when you pedal and have no interest in knowing how your fitness in-game would translate outside, then any trainer with a speed sensor is fine. Just know that some of the gamified aspects of Zwift, such as hitting target watts or climbing Alpe du Zwift in under an hour, will be cheapened by inaccurate power estimation.
Likes For surak:
#44
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
Given the bikes you own, I would go with a wheel-on smart trainer. I would maybe start easy with an affordable Tacx wheel on smart trainer on sale. You don't need the massive hill % grade of the expensive smart trainers given what you've described. I'm only 157lbs and 16% in Zwift on my 39t inner ring is a leg breaker! So if you don't need that, the Tacx will be fine.
So, on sale that's like $350.
Then, I'd add in some kind of tray or computer holder. I've done the whole big screen TV thing but got tired of lugging the trainer out and setting it up. It now stays in a corner setup and ready. I highly recommend leaving it setup somewhere to eliminate any distraction to working out. Doesn't need to be a name brand expensive tray, just something you can bring up to the handlebars and hit the directional turns on Zwift if you want.
OR, buy a handlebar phone mount and run the companion app on it and use that to direct your rides.
I never ran a trainer tire, just use an old tired road tire or whatever you have that's no longer good.
You'll need a rubber sweat mat of some kind. Something easily wipeable. I also recommend a little fabric "bike bra". It catches sweat from going in the headset or into the crank area.
Let's see....uhmm....I'd toss in a cadence sensor if you don't own one. It will then show if your rider is spinning or standing to climb.
That'll get you started. Things will come up where you're like "that may be nice", just buy it when you need it.
So, on sale that's like $350.
Then, I'd add in some kind of tray or computer holder. I've done the whole big screen TV thing but got tired of lugging the trainer out and setting it up. It now stays in a corner setup and ready. I highly recommend leaving it setup somewhere to eliminate any distraction to working out. Doesn't need to be a name brand expensive tray, just something you can bring up to the handlebars and hit the directional turns on Zwift if you want.
OR, buy a handlebar phone mount and run the companion app on it and use that to direct your rides.
I never ran a trainer tire, just use an old tired road tire or whatever you have that's no longer good.
You'll need a rubber sweat mat of some kind. Something easily wipeable. I also recommend a little fabric "bike bra". It catches sweat from going in the headset or into the crank area.
Let's see....uhmm....I'd toss in a cadence sensor if you don't own one. It will then show if your rider is spinning or standing to climb.
That'll get you started. Things will come up where you're like "that may be nice", just buy it when you need it.
#45
Disco Infiltrator
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2013
Location: Folsom CA
Posts: 13,446
Bikes: Stormchaser, Paramount, Tilt, Samba tandem
Mentioned: 72 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3126 Post(s)
Liked 2,102 Times
in
1,366 Posts
I've got an enlarged heart and had open heart surgery February 2019. I'm a lot better than I was but I'm not quick, and how good I feel is really inconsistent. So racing successfully is pretty much out of the question. That doesn't mean I don't want to measure what I'm doing. I do. But I don't think I'm going to get up to a situation where it's relevant to compare it to other people's for bragging rights, and so if things are +-5% and not +-1%, it's probably not important.
__________________
Genesis 49:16-17
Genesis 49:16-17
#47
Disco Infiltrator
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2013
Location: Folsom CA
Posts: 13,446
Bikes: Stormchaser, Paramount, Tilt, Samba tandem
Mentioned: 72 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3126 Post(s)
Liked 2,102 Times
in
1,366 Posts
One of the trainers arrived. It's a Saris Mag+ with a five-position resistance shifter. By all appearances it's smart as a sack of hammers. The box nevertheless says it's compatible with all the apps, so I find it in the list of "Virtual Power Classic" trainers, and I need to buy a BT speed sensor for the bike.
It seems like my brand new single speed is DQ'd. The skewer fits inside the thru-axle but I doubt that's really intended, and it's not long enough.
So, I am up/down to the following:
It seems like my brand new single speed is DQ'd. The skewer fits inside the thru-axle but I doubt that's really intended, and it's not long enough.
So, I am up/down to the following:
Choice of two old but decent steel bikes (and it's going to be the Diamondback, not the Paramount, unless for some reason the former doesn't work and the latter does)
Dumb trainer
Windows 10 PC
Apple iPhone and watch, which should get me HR
Just bought/downloadedDumb trainer
Windows 10 PC
Apple iPhone and watch, which should get me HR
PC app, phone helper app, app membership
Speed sensor, BT which should get me estimated power. Ordered a Xoss pair, intending one for each our bikes, for now, not speed+cadence
Next up?Speed sensor, BT which should get me estimated power. Ordered a Xoss pair, intending one for each our bikes, for now, not speed+cadence
"bra"
Phone mount
Nose wheel block
Pad (maybe not, it's going in the garage)
Need to find outPhone mount
Nose wheel block
Pad (maybe not, it's going in the garage)
What "speed" to put the trainer in
__________________
Genesis 49:16-17
Genesis 49:16-17
#48
Full Member
Join Date: Jul 2018
Posts: 394
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 237 Post(s)
Liked 177 Times
in
95 Posts
You need a smart trainer. I've had both - there's no comparison. The Saris is a new toy and will satisfy you for a few months, but a) you're going to wind up frustrated if you want to race; and b) you'll wind up dead-ending in your usage. Currently the phrase 'smart trainer' is used to refer to trainers that can be controlled by the software, not 'trainers that can send info TO the trainer.' There's a great big difference, not only in user experience but in how Zwift will accept your information.
For example, if you want to race, you'll minimally have to feed HR info to have your results verified (and thus the data kept on Zwift) by Zwiftpower.
I'd suggest reading DC Rainmaker's pieces on these topics; he is an acknowledged authority, and has great insights into this.
If you run Zwift on the laptop, feeding video to the TV, you'll be fine. The only extra device you'll need is a HR monitor, and perhaps an ANT+ dongle. However, you're going to have to negotiate the limitations of BLE (bluetooth) connections. They run on a frequency similar to standard WiFi (2.4 GHz) so it's important to set up a 5G SSID for the laptop, and turn off the phone's bluetoothwhile you're Zwifting. Otherwise there are a lot of competing signals and it's frustrating.
For example, if you want to race, you'll minimally have to feed HR info to have your results verified (and thus the data kept on Zwift) by Zwiftpower.
I'd suggest reading DC Rainmaker's pieces on these topics; he is an acknowledged authority, and has great insights into this.
If you run Zwift on the laptop, feeding video to the TV, you'll be fine. The only extra device you'll need is a HR monitor, and perhaps an ANT+ dongle. However, you're going to have to negotiate the limitations of BLE (bluetooth) connections. They run on a frequency similar to standard WiFi (2.4 GHz) so it's important to set up a 5G SSID for the laptop, and turn off the phone's bluetoothwhile you're Zwifting. Otherwise there are a lot of competing signals and it's frustrating.
#49
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Sacramento, California, USA
Posts: 40,865
Bikes: Specialized Tarmac, Canyon Exceed, Specialized Transition, Ellsworth Roots, Ridley Excalibur
Mentioned: 68 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2952 Post(s)
Liked 3,106 Times
in
1,417 Posts
I'm cheap. Instead of buying a bike bra, I just use a crappy old towel. Wrap one end snugly to the top tube and secure it with some tape. Drape the loose end over the headset and bars. I also don't bother with a trainer tire. Every roadie I know has at least one old tire that's getting too unreliable for winter roads, but is fine for a trainer. Run it till the cords show.
Likes For caloso:
#50
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2015
Location: reno, nv
Posts: 2,298
Bikes: yes, i have one
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1136 Post(s)
Liked 1,179 Times
in
686 Posts
You need a smart trainer. I've had both - there's no comparison. The Saris is a new toy and will satisfy you for a few months, but a) you're going to wind up frustrated if you want to race; and b) you'll wind up dead-ending in your usage. Currently the phrase 'smart trainer' is used to refer to trainers that can be controlled by the software, not 'trainers that can send info TO the trainer.' There's a great big difference, not only in user experience but in how Zwift will accept your information.
For example, if you want to race, you'll minimally have to feed HR info to have your results verified (and thus the data kept on Zwift) by Zwiftpower.
I'd suggest reading DC Rainmaker's pieces on these topics; he is an acknowledged authority, and has great insights into this.
If you run Zwift on the laptop, feeding video to the TV, you'll be fine. The only extra device you'll need is a HR monitor, and perhaps an ANT+ dongle. However, you're going to have to negotiate the limitations of BLE (bluetooth) connections. They run on a frequency similar to standard WiFi (2.4 GHz) so it's important to set up a 5G SSID for the laptop, and turn off the phone's bluetoothwhile you're Zwifting. Otherwise there are a lot of competing signals and it's frustrating.
For example, if you want to race, you'll minimally have to feed HR info to have your results verified (and thus the data kept on Zwift) by Zwiftpower.
I'd suggest reading DC Rainmaker's pieces on these topics; he is an acknowledged authority, and has great insights into this.
If you run Zwift on the laptop, feeding video to the TV, you'll be fine. The only extra device you'll need is a HR monitor, and perhaps an ANT+ dongle. However, you're going to have to negotiate the limitations of BLE (bluetooth) connections. They run on a frequency similar to standard WiFi (2.4 GHz) so it's important to set up a 5G SSID for the laptop, and turn off the phone's bluetoothwhile you're Zwifting. Otherwise there are a lot of competing signals and it's frustrating.