Billy1111

Hey guys im gonna be getting a new crank and PM....Its either gonna be the quarq crank PM or dura ace 9100 with stages PM. I have a few stages already and am happy with then for the most part. so was just wondering which set up you guys would prefer...thanx

redlude97

dual sided stages or left only? I'd take quarq over a single sided any day

Billy1111

was gonna do single sided but could do the L/R stages! thats an option

TrojanHorse

Is the quarq still ANT+ only? That's the only downside... I'd go quarq.

NB I have a quarq on one bike and 4iiii on the other bike, so I'm not overly concerned with the one-sidedness of the 4iiii but the quarq is just a nice piece of gear.

Dean V

What about the new DA powermeter that comes with the cranks?

colnago62

macca33

MakiNn

quarq every single day of the week

colnago62

acealthebes

Have had only stages so no basis of comparison.

That said, my stages has worked flawlessly for years no despite heavy abuse.

I have only used stages in the past and see no reason to change.

And lets not pretend that dual sided matters vs single sided unless you are recovering from a broken leg or something: all marketing...

Those of us who spend any significant time on a bike will be very close to 50/50

Dean V

I have spent a lot of years cycling. No injuries. Left/Right can be 55/45. Never any closer than 52/48.

acealthebes

And how has having a dual sided power meter effected that?

Did you change your technique once you found out?

Having a power meter is so you can compare your relative efforts.

I suppose if u want 100 accuracy to compare yourself to some professional on strava sure...

Dean V

It was just an example to show that not everyone has 50/50 power.

redlude97

I have a singe side pioneer and a quarq as well as a computrainer and both the quarq and computrainer have me around 53/47 left biased (from an old subluxing ankle issue). I've done the calculations and the pioneer always reads about 5% too high which corresponds with doubling the stronger leg. Super annoying when switching bikes and having your power zones wrong and subsequent NP and TSS for the rides. Pretty hard to get sweet spot power exactly right since its 95% of FTP

RChung

Maier (2017) did a study of the accuracy and precision of power meters, and included not only "laboratory" units but also units owned by "recreational" cyclists. The test is actually a pretty low bar: it was average power at steady-state, so there weren't any sudden changes in power that would show response lag; since we know some power meters are laggier than others, this is kind of a "best-case" scenario. Anyway, here's the summary graph from the paper and his bottom line: "In conclusion, current power meters used by elite and recreational cyclists vary considerably in their trueness; precision is generally high but differs between manufacturers. "

As I've noted elsewhere, not everyone needs accuracy and precison -- but whether you do or don't, you shouldn't be thinking that everyone else in the world is just like you. Different people have different needs, and different power meters have different strengths and weaknesses. They're not all the same.

nycphotography

how is ant+ a disadvantage?

RChung

In some cases, manufacturers have implemented a high-frequency transmission mode, usually via BT, so you can get measurements more frequently than the ANT+ protocol allows; for example, Stages and Pioneer and maybe a couple of others have implemented a 64Hz high-frequency mode. (In fact, ANT+ allows transmission at up to 4Hz, but if there's an ANT+ head unit that records at 4Hz, I'm unaware of it. All ANT+ units I'm aware of only store data at 1Hz). I've analyzed some 64Hz data samples, and they're kind of a PITA.

In addition, on a more practical note, some smartphones can receive BT, so you don't need a separate head unit.

TrojanHorse

For me, it's a disadvantage when I forget my garmin, which happens a few times a year. (or it glitches, or isn't charge, or whatever.) I paired my PM and my HRM with my phone and just use strava on the phone when that happens. Very few phones have an ANT+ chip.

I'll never buy an ANT+ only sensor again, honestly. The manufacturer is just being cheap if they don't have both.

nycphotography

I personally find BT to be about the flakiest protocol out there. Dropouts, interference, you name it. I can't even listen to music in the train some days because BT is too unreliable.

Honestly, I did have an issue w/ Ant+ on my old ORIGINAL Quarq (serial number 304 original) and my oooold 705 garmin, in that the garmin had to be stem mounted and not out front mounted. Every single quarq and garmin since have been 100% dead reliable.

I won't even use bluetooth for my Kickr. Bought an ant+ dongle and it stays connected much more reliably.

But I'm a sample size of one, so YMMV.

As to power meters, I'd take a Quarq over just about anything else at any price. They just plain work, and are accurate. I have an SRM on one bike, it also works and is accurate, but doesn't have left right balance, and the battery is not user serviceable... and I'd rather just have a Quarq.
I think the only thing close to the quarq for functionality is the Rotor left/right model... but it's also way more expensive?

WhyFi

I've never had to fall back on BT during a ride, but I think that it's worthwhile if only for the maintenance side of things - if it's got BT, the manufacturer probably has an app for diagnostics, firmware updates, etc.

nycphotography

Quarq has an app for diagnostics and firmware updates... require a a windows or mac computer and an ant+ dongle. $12 on Amazon.

WhyFi

Sure, and that route is less convenient than a phone that's already in your pocket. If ANT+ only is good enough for you, cool, but having gone through that with my previous GPS head unit, I'd rather not take a step back.

RChung

Two things:

1. Current Quarq models (though not all of the older ones) transmit on both ANT+ and BTLE.

2. Of the current models of all PMs, I think very few do *not* have a BT mode or option. (Not all have a high frequency mode, however).

I guess a third thing would be that whether a PM has BT seems like a characteristic that's pretty far down the list of importance:

99Klein 

LOL, having never had dual side, you may be surprised. I ride 5000+ miles every year for more years than I care to think. Three years ago, I purchased my first Quarq and I was shocked that my split was 43/57, and to top it off, the leg I THOUGHT was strongest, was not. With a couple years of really watching this, I am now very close to 50/50. It was a lot of work to get there, but it payed off.

Now that said, if I had a left only pm, would it have evened out anyway? I don't know, maybe you would kick harder with that leg. I know it was a lot of extra work getting the numbers to even out and I do believe it has made improvements in my cycling performance. I can't imaging Garmin Vector's data to study/train on.

Of course, YMMV.

colnago62