Performance measurement

[simonp]

Just need to buy one then...

Which one ? Any advantage over the basicest model ?

Not sure.  Mine is now 3 years old and doesn't match the spec of any of the current offerings, so I can't offer a direct opinion on any of the current versions.  ANT+ now seems to be the standard.  If you get one which does that then it'll also talk to Garmin kit, such as the Edge 705, so you can log climbing alongside power, should that interest you.

The main price differentiator seems to be weight, the more expensive models are a carbon-alloy mix whereas the cheaper ones are all-alloy.  Mine is carbon/alloy; I paid £665 for a complete rear wheel, but prices seem to have gone up a lot since then (and Sterling down).

[simonp]

mmm

I was only ever going to use this on the turbotrainer; it seems much cheaper just to buy a new TT with a built in power meter....I really CBA converting a bike to 8-speed just to fit a Power Tap, or buggering about fitting a Fixxer to one.

If you want to only use power for indoors then that makes a lot more sense.

[amaferanga]

mmm

I was only ever going to use this on the turbotrainer; it seems much cheaper just to buy a new TT with a built in power meter....I really CBA converting a bike to 8-speed just to fit a Power Tap, or buggering about fitting a Fixxer to one.

I don't think any of the cheaper turbo trainers that provide power 'measurements' are really up to much.  I have an Elite digital chrono with power display that is both very optimistic and hopelessly unstable.  In reality its actually no use at all.  The Tacx Flow may be a better as its magnetic resistance, but to get proper power measurements IMO you'd need to invest in a PowerBeam Pro which is actually more expensive than a PowerTap.  There's a fixed PowerTap (Google Powertap Track) now anyway....

[simonp]

Make sure it's waterproof.  The SRM Track isn't.

[Greenbank]

There's a fixed PowerTap (Google Powertap Track) now anyway....

It's not an official product from Saris. It just looks like someone who converts PowerTap hubs and sells them on.

I do note that Saris have introduced a new 'PowerTap COMP' at just $599 with the old style wired connection rather than ANT+. I'm guessing this is their budget option.

[Greenbank]

There are some PowerTap comments in the Accessories Thread: CycleOps PowerTap

Very close to my purchase (SLC+ bundled with Edge 705 rather than the CycleOps headunit).

If I do get one I'd be bringing it on the next few Audaxes (on either the Aravis or the Wilier).

I'm not that worried that there isn't a fixed version.

[simonp]

Turns out they don't make 'em fixed but you can buy pre-converted ones online.

not what I want to hear.

[simonp]

I tried my first interval session based on the LT data I got.

5 minutes at 225W, 3 minutes recovery at 110W, repeat 4x.

Fairly hard work but not OTT.  Eventually I'm looking at doing slightly longer (8 minutes) with 3 minutes rest, on this one.

[Rich753]

5 x 8 mins @ 280 watts on the Wattbike( http://www.wattbike.com/), with 2-3 mins rest (unstructured).  280W is about 115% of FTP so VO2 Max territory according to Coggan, but as mentioned earlier I suspect this needs recalibrating.

Didn't have a HR monitor, but i can report that I was glowing like a porcine. L/R was either 49/51 or 50/50, so that's pleasing.

Last two were pretty ragged, and I needed a good lie-down afterwards 

[simonp]

My HR was low 160s during the 225W intervals.  250W+ was the advice, so will aim to do that once I'm used to doing 'em.

[nmcgann]

I tried my first interval session based on the LT data I got.

5 minutes at 225W, 3 minutes recovery at 110W, repeat 4x.

Fairly hard work but not OTT.  Eventually I'm looking at doing slightly longer (8 minutes) with 3 minutes rest, on this one.

Most of the recommendations for intervals to work on raising LT (& FTP) are longer in duration than this. 15-20mins is typical (usually as 3x15 or 2x20 with 5-10min rests)

It seems to me that there are two processes at work in this kind of training - 1) raising fitness to produce less lactate at a given power level and 2) learning to tolerate elevated lactate levels for longer periods. I think the shorter intervals concentrate on raising fitnesss by accumulating time at LT (e.g. 1x30 and 6x5 gets the same time at LT) but miss out on the tolerance building.

There's a bit in Chris Boardman's "complete book of cycling" where he talks about him being able to tolerate 9mmol peak lactate concentration at the start of base training and 15mmol at the top of form when trained for prologues/pursuits.  This extra tolerance must have allowed quite a bit more power to be produced!

[Rich753]

My HR was low 160s during the 225W intervals.  250W+ was the advice, so will aim to do that once I'm used to doing 'em.

This seems sensible - it takes time to get used to the device and then pacing appropriately.  I've been surprised how variable my power output is, when I think I'm riding smoothly and consistently in fact I'm varying maybe 50 watts over a 10 second period!

The wattbike has a nice feature which graphs your power output, so yesterday I could compare my first three runs where the graph was relatively stable with the last two where I was very ragged! Few seconds at 220w then overcompensate at 350, and yo-yoing all over the place.  It was this raggedness that convinced me not to do another set - that and the fact that I was absolutely smashed 

[simonp]

I tried my first interval session based on the LT data I got.

5 minutes at 225W, 3 minutes recovery at 110W, repeat 4x.

Fairly hard work but not OTT.  Eventually I'm looking at doing slightly longer (8 minutes) with 3 minutes rest, on this one.

Most of the recommendations for intervals to work on raising LT (& FTP) are longer in duration than this. 15-20mins is typical (usually as 3x15 or 2x20 with 5-10min rests)

It seems to me that there are two processes at work in this kind of training - 1) raising fitness to produce less lactate at a given power level and 2) learning to tolerate elevated lactate levels for longer periods. I think the shorter intervals concentrate on raising fitnesss by accumulating time at LT (e.g. 1x30 and 6x5 gets the same time at LT) but miss out on the tolerance building.

There's a bit in Chris Boardman's "complete book of cycling" where he talks about him being able to tolerate 9mmol peak lactate concentration at the start of base training and 15mmol at the top of form when trained for prologues/pursuits.  This extra tolerance must have allowed quite a bit more power to be produced!

Thanks for the tips.

My peak lactate during the VO2max test was only ~13mmol.  Ouch!

[vorsprung]

I look at gizmos like powertaps and kurt kinetic trainers with power meters...

I do have a HRM and a old magnetic turbo.  This was very useful when I broke my collar bone.  But I haven't used it since....

And I wonder, is this really much better for me than doing a bunch of hill repeats?
As for assessment, I have the "time up Wallaces Hill" gold standard

[mattc]

And I wonder, is this really much better for me than doing a bunch of hill repeats?

Depends on your definition of "much".

Personally I think the cost-benefit curve flattens off a lot once you've bought an HRM (and an internet connection to some training zones articles).

[amaferanga]

I look at gizmos like powertaps and kurt kinetic trainers with power meters...

I do have a HRM and a old magnetic turbo.  This was very useful when I broke my collar bone.  But I haven't used it since....

And I wonder, is this really much better for me than doing a bunch of hill repeats?
As for assessment, I have the "time up Wallaces Hill" gold standard

Maybe not for you but the reason I bought a PowerTap was so I could precisely control my training and track my progress as I prepare for my first year of racing.  It removes a lot of the guesswork involved with using RPE and HR to judge effort and gives me more numbers to play with after each ride.

Unless you have specific goals I'd say a power meter is unnecessary.

[vorsprung]

Unless you have specific goals I'd say a power meter is unnecessary.

My big event is the Mille Cymru 1000k
So general speaking my goals are

1) get quicker up hill
2) be able to ride on that kind of terrain at LSD pace for the full 1000km under Audax conditions, ie minimal sleep, eating beans

If I was to break down my "get quicker up hill" goal, I might decide that it would be both good and possible to generate 10% more power.  Then I'd have a quantifiable target.

As for the "LSD pace for 1000km" goal I could raise my power and this would drag up the power at LSD rate. ( see  Ultra Cycling:  Intensity Training )
Again, I could figure out some numbers

So, I could have very specific targets for my general goals.  But if I just do what I'm going to do it is my belief that I will meet the general goals.

I guess the point is that some people say that using a power meter  works better than a "do the hill repeats" approach.  By this I mean that if I was to train in the power meter way for a few hours a week i could meet my goals, whereas with a "do the hill repeats" approach it would be many more hours.  Or I could put the same time in and with the power meter I'd be fitter.

I'm just not sure that this is really the case.   I am not a talented bike rider in the sense of natural aerobic capacity.  There is a limit to how much any training is going to benefit me.  A power meter can't make a purse out of a sows ear.

[simonp]

Hill repeats require access to a hill.  Nearest hills to me are nearly 10 miles away.  So that's adding 1h20 to my work-out where I'm not actually doing the target work-out.

[simonp]

Hmm, set a PB 5-minute power today on the 200k ride.  Higher than I managed in interval training a few weeks ago. And as I've lost weight, it's a jump in power-to-weight also. Roughly middle of the "fair" band (equivalent to cat-5 racer).  Not stellar, but an improvement.

[simonp]

I think it's time to think about repeating the tests to see how much I've improved.  I can't work out when to do it though.  I have the Elenith next weekend then the Brevet Cymru is two weeks later, and two weeks after that the Bryan Chapman, and two weeks after /that/ the Kernow & SW 600.

I need to recover from the previous event before doing the test (otherwise the data will not be meaningful) and I also need to have time to recover from the test. 

[gonzo]

(equivalent to cat-5 racer)

There is no cat 5 in this country!

[simonp]

(equivalent to cat-5 racer)

There is no cat 5 in this country!

I thought that was the case. The software is American.  My training is mainly focused on longer rides at lower than FT - e.g. 160W average yesterday. I should ride at TT with the power meter.

[inc]

I think it's time to think about repeating the tests to see how much I've improved.  I have the Elenith ,the Brevet Cymru, the Bryan Chapman,  the Kernow & SW 600.

I need to recover from the previous event before doing the test

simonp it is good to see you back,  Is this not missing the point of the training to enable you to ride actual events better ( whatever that means to you)  You will know if the training has had any effect by how you ride the event. It should be interesting to see how your average  power output copes with such a relentless load. I would save the test for much later in the year when you have recovered from a heavy season.

[simonp]

I think it's time to think about repeating the tests to see how much I've improved.  I have the Elenith ,the Brevet Cymru, the Bryan Chapman,  the Kernow & SW 600.

I need to recover from the previous event before doing the test

simonp it is good to see you back,  Is this not missing the point of the training to enable you to ride actual events better ( whatever that means to you)  You will know if the training has had any effect by how you ride the event. It should be interesting to see how your average  power output copes with such a relentless load. I would save the test for much later in the year when you have recovered from a heavy season.

Well, yes - the goal is about going from 22kph rolling average on PBP and LEL to around 24kph rolling average (even if on the Mille Cymru and Mille Miglia Italia I'm then dragged back down to 22kph by the harder terrain).

I think the advantage I'm looking for is that I can get a more objective feedback.  I can look at my performance on The Dean and say "That was my fastest 300k, so I must have improved".  However, it's also the 300k on which I spent least time stopped, and that means my rolling average was actually slower than my first-ever 300k in 2006.  But then there was twice the amount of climbing on The Dean, and I effectively rode it on my own, doing almost no draughting of other riders, unlike on that 2006 300k.  But the weather conditions were helpful (growing wind during the day with against in the morning and with in the afternoon).

Much more objective is noting that on the 24th of January, I cycled 62km, with an average power output of 159W, and an average HR of 143bpm.  Yesterday,  I cycled 84km, with an average power output of 162W, and an average HR of 132bpm.

Of course this probably means I need to train with higher intensity to hit LT than before.  So whilst I can increase my training targets, I need to really do something to determine my new LT, whatever that is.

[amaferanga]

Hmm, set a PB 5-minute power today on the 200k ride.  Higher than I managed in interval training a few weeks ago. And as I've lost weight, it's a jump in power-to-weight also. Roughly middle of the "fair" band (equivalent to cat-5 racer).  Not stellar, but an improvement.

Sorry to shatter your illusions, but with power figures in the middle of the Cat 5 band from the book you wouldn't last long in a Cat 4 race in the UK.  Last race I did (mostly Cat 3/4 riders) had an average speed of 39.6km/h and my NP for the race was 295Watts.  I got dropped in the last couple of miles (the crash ahead of me didn't help, but I was never going to win anyway).  As I've recently discovered, road racing in the UK at even the lowest level is hard.  It'd be near impossible to train for 300km+ events while training to race.