FTP

[Asterix, the former Gaul.]

Climbing a mountain and testing your FTP are two different exercises though.  As Pedal Castro says, you choose a suitable power according to how long you will need to sustain it. 

Accuracy is a can of worms.  I've set my turbo trainer up as best I can but it's not a scientific instrument and the reading is not as reliable as an expensive power meter.  Perhaps 255 is optimistic!

Here are the Zwift estimates, solo outside on a flat road with no major winds for a longer stretch of time (20+ minutes) to hold various speeds:

25kph (15 mph) – 92 watts
30kph (18-19 mph) – 143 watts
35kph (21-22 mph) – 212 watts
37.5kph (23-24 mph) – 254 watts
40kph (24-25 mph) – 301 watts
45kph (28 mph) – 415 watts

I guess that's riding a reasonably good roadie, which I don't have!  For my bike, putting in 250w I'd only get 35km/h*, which I am fairly sure I could achieve over 20 minutes if I could find a flat, smooth road.

* http://www.kreuzotter.de/english/espeed.htm

[Greenbank]

I guess that's riding a reasonably good roadie, which I don't have!  For my bike, putting in 250w I'd only get 35km/h*, which I am fairly sure I could achieve over 20 minutes if I could find a flat, smooth road.

* http://www.kreuzotter.de/english/espeed.htm

Aerodynamics have such a huge impact. With the default figures (after switching to metric units) and just changing it to 250W:-

hands on the tops: 32.7kph
hands on the drops: 36.7kph
triathlon bicycle: 38.9kph
superman position: 42.7kph

So 10kph difference purely down to the two relative extremes of aero positions.

[Asterix, the former Gaul.]

Did a test ride yesterday in a moderate westerly wind, so not exactly a headwind or a tailwind. 

The route included busy shared use paths, traffic lights and residential streets so some constraints.

The Elment Bolt recorded:

Distance 56.23km
Time  2:11:22
Elevation 138m
Avg. Speed 25.7

On Zwift (no junctions, shared use paths, wind, potholes, etc), my nearest comparable ride was half the time/distance with these stats

Distance 28.1km
Time 0:55:36
Elevation 519m
Avg spd 30.2

This suggests to me that Zwift gives a reasonably close estimate.

[S2L]

Did a test ride yesterday in a moderate westerly wind, so not exactly a headwind or a tailwind. 

The route included busy shared use paths, traffic lights and residential streets so some constraints.

The Elment Bolt recorded:

Distance 56.23km
Time  2:11:22
Elevation 138m
Avg. Speed 25.7

On Zwift (no junctions, shared use paths, wind, potholes, etc), my nearest comparable ride was half the time/distance with these stats

Distance 28.1km
Time 0:55:36
Elevation 519m
Avg spd 30.2

This suggests to me that Zwift gives a reasonably close estimate.

 

Plenty of folks who struggle to average 30 km/h on the road but race at 45 km/h on Zwift... equally, plenty of folks who climb the Alpe du Zwift in under an hour... I'd be surprised if many of them can do the real thing in less than an hour and a half.

It's virtual AND augmented reality... it's designed to make you feel good about your ability... on the road you can never reach those speeds, so why bother? Better to stick to the video game, where you go as fast as the PROs

[Karla]

Then again, CTT's virtual V718 race on RGT was just won in 21:58, with national hillclimb champion Ed Laverack in 4th place with 22:00.  Can you imagine a real V718 race being won in 22 minutes? 

[Asterix, the former Gaul.]

Did a test ride yesterday in a moderate westerly wind, so not exactly a headwind or a tailwind. 

The route included busy shared use paths, traffic lights and residential streets so some constraints.

The Elment Bolt recorded:

Distance 56.23km
Time  2:11:22
Elevation 138m
Avg. Speed 25.7

On Zwift (no junctions, shared use paths, wind, potholes, etc), my nearest comparable ride was half the time/distance with these stats

Distance 28.1km
Time 0:55:36
Elevation 519m
Avg spd 30.2

This suggests to me that Zwift gives a reasonably close estimate.

 

Plenty of folks who struggle to average 30 km/h on the road but race at 45 km/h on Zwift... equally, plenty of folks who climb the Alpe du Zwift in under an hour... I'd be surprised if many of them can do the real thing in less than an hour and a half.

It's virtual AND augmented reality... it's designed to make you feel good about your ability... on the road you can never reach those speeds, so why bother? Better to stick to the video game, where you go as fast as the PROs

I am comparing a real ride to Zwift.  Do you actually have any experience of Zwift? 

Also I have a lot of experience climbing the sort of col that the Alpe du Zwift is modelled on, Pyrenean and Alpine, and I never claimed to be able to do it under an hour!  My time was just under 75 minutes and seems realistic enough for me.

It's true I would rather be doing this!

[S2L]

Then again, CTT's virtual V718 race on RGT was just won in 21:58, with national hillclimb champion Ed Laverack in 4th place with 22:00.  Can you imagine a real V718 race being won in 22 minutes? 

Yes, I have noticed times being quite "slow"... maybe RGT works differently... although they were all 6 W/kg at the top... also, there is no dual carriageway effect, meaning no lorries to draft, which explain most of the under 19 minutes times.
You just have to look at Hutch in the best years of his careers and the fact that he was over 5 minutes off pace at the UCI worlds in 2012.

[Karla]

Then again, CTT's virtual V718 race on RGT was just won in 21:58, with national hillclimb champion Ed Laverack in 4th place with 22:00.  Can you imagine a real V718 race being won in 22 minutes? 

Yes, I have noticed times being quite "slow"... maybe RGT works differently... although they were all 6 W/kg at the top... also, there is no dual carriageway effect, meaning no lorries to draft, which explain most of the under 19 minutes times.
You just have to look at Hutch in the best years of his careers and the fact that he was over 5 minutes off pace at the UCI worlds in 2012.

How many times have you ridden on the V?  The lorry effect is a myth.

[S2L]

Did a test ride yesterday in a moderate westerly wind, so not exactly a headwind or a tailwind. 

The route included busy shared use paths, traffic lights and residential streets so some constraints.

The Elment Bolt recorded:

Distance 56.23km
Time  2:11:22
Elevation 138m
Avg. Speed 25.7

On Zwift (no junctions, shared use paths, wind, potholes, etc), my nearest comparable ride was half the time/distance with these stats

Distance 28.1km
Time 0:55:36
Elevation 519m
Avg spd 30.2

This suggests to me that Zwift gives a reasonably close estimate.

 

Plenty of folks who struggle to average 30 km/h on the road but race at 45 km/h on Zwift... equally, plenty of folks who climb the Alpe du Zwift in under an hour... I'd be surprised if many of them can do the real thing in less than an hour and a half.

It's virtual AND augmented reality... it's designed to make you feel good about your ability... on the road you can never reach those speeds, so why bother? Better to stick to the video game, where you go as fast as the PROs

I am comparing a real ride to Zwift.  Do you actually have any experience of Zwift? 

Also I have a lot of experience climbing the sort of col that the Alpe du Zwift is modelled on, Pyrenean and Alpine, and I never claimed to be able to do it under an hour!  My time was just under 75 minutes and seems realistic enough for me.

It's true I would rather be doing this!

No idea what you are on about... you have a real ride with 2.7 mt/km of elevation at 25.6 km/h Vs a virtual ride with 20 mt/km of elevation at 30 km/h and you say the latter is realistic? I thought you were having a laugh, hence my comment.

If you average 25 on a flat ride, there is no way you will average 30 on a hilly one... averaging 30 km/h on a ride with 20 mt/km is pretty good going... Nibali in training does a bit more, not a lot more

[S2L]

How many times have you ridden on the V?  The lorry effect is a myth.

Yesterday a lorry passed me on the A452, I was doing 40 km/h, slightly downhill, within a few seconds I was doing 60, without much extra effort.
So how do you explain folks averaging 53 km/h on dual carriageways, but then not being able to get anywhere near that speed on closed roads?

[Karla]

How many times have you ridden on the V?  The lorry effect is a myth.

Yesterday a lorry passed me on the A452, I was doing 40 km/h, slightly downhill, within a few seconds I was doing 60, without much extra effort.
So how do you explain folks averaging 53 km/h on dual carriageways, but then not being able to get anywhere near that speed on closed roads?

So the answer is no.

I have several explanations, but it's not worth typing them for you.  If you want to argue from ignorance, it's best that you remain ignorant.

[rob]

Then again, CTT's virtual V718 race on RGT was just won in 21:58, with national hillclimb champion Ed Laverack in 4th place with 22:00.  Can you imagine a real V718 race being won in 22 minutes? 

Yes, I have noticed times being quite "slow"... maybe RGT works differently... although they were all 6 W/kg at the top... also, there is no dual carriageway effect, meaning no lorries to draft, which explain most of the under 19 minutes times.
You just have to look at Hutch in the best years of his careers and the fact that he was over 5 minutes off pace at the UCI worlds in 2012.

How many times have you ridden on the V?  The lorry effect is a myth.

Never got the chance to.   It was banned just as I started to think about making the trip.

[Asterix, the former Gaul.]

Did a test ride yesterday in a moderate westerly wind, so not exactly a headwind or a tailwind. 

The route included busy shared use paths, traffic lights and residential streets so some constraints.

The Elment Bolt recorded:

Distance 56.23km
Time  2:11:22
Elevation 138m
Avg. Speed 25.7

On Zwift (no junctions, shared use paths, wind, potholes, etc), my nearest comparable ride was half the time/distance with these stats

Distance 28.1km
Time 0:55:36
Elevation 519m
Avg spd 30.2

This suggests to me that Zwift gives a reasonably close estimate.

 

Plenty of folks who struggle to average 30 km/h on the road but race at 45 km/h on Zwift... equally, plenty of folks who climb the Alpe du Zwift in under an hour... I'd be surprised if many of them can do the real thing in less than an hour and a half.

It's virtual AND augmented reality... it's designed to make you feel good about your ability... on the road you can never reach those speeds, so why bother? Better to stick to the video game, where you go as fast as the PROs

I am comparing a real ride to Zwift.  Do you actually have any experience of Zwift? 

Also I have a lot of experience climbing the sort of col that the Alpe du Zwift is modelled on, Pyrenean and Alpine, and I never claimed to be able to do it under an hour!  My time was just under 75 minutes and seems realistic enough for me.

It's true I would rather be doing this!

No idea what you are on about... you have a real ride with 2.7 mt/km of elevation at 25.6 km/h Vs a virtual ride with 20 mt/km of elevation at 30 km/h and you say the latter is realistic? I thought you were having a laugh, hence my comment.

If you average 25 on a flat ride, there is no way you will average 30 on a hilly one... averaging 30 km/h on a ride with 20 mt/km is pretty good going... Nibali in training does a bit more, not a lot more

You do realise that if you climb a hill you also descend?  Never stop pedalling.

Descending the Tourmalet I had cars pulling over to let me pass!  Only in France..

[Frank9755]

Then again, CTT's virtual V718 race on RGT was just won in 21:58, with national hillclimb champion Ed Laverack in 4th place with 22:00.  Can you imagine a real V718 race being won in 22 minutes? 

Yes, I have noticed times being quite "slow"... maybe RGT works differently... although they were all 6 W/kg at the top... also, there is no dual carriageway effect, meaning no lorries to draft, which explain most of the under 19 minutes times.
You just have to look at Hutch in the best years of his careers and the fact that he was over 5 minutes off pace at the UCI worlds in 2012.

How many times have you ridden on the V?  The lorry effect is a myth.

Never got the chance to.   It was banned just as I started to think about making the trip.

Me neither, why is it fast? Presumably a good surface, but traffic must be a big part of it, no?

[simonp]

Did a test ride yesterday in a moderate westerly wind, so not exactly a headwind or a tailwind. 

The route included busy shared use paths, traffic lights and residential streets so some constraints.

The Elment Bolt recorded:

Distance 56.23km
Time  2:11:22
Elevation 138m
Avg. Speed 25.7

On Zwift (no junctions, shared use paths, wind, potholes, etc), my nearest comparable ride was half the time/distance with these stats

Distance 28.1km
Time 0:55:36
Elevation 519m
Avg spd 30.2

This suggests to me that Zwift gives a reasonably close estimate.

 

Plenty of folks who struggle to average 30 km/h on the road but race at 45 km/h on Zwift... equally, plenty of folks who climb the Alpe du Zwift in under an hour... I'd be surprised if many of them can do the real thing in less than an hour and a half.

It's virtual AND augmented reality... it's designed to make you feel good about your ability... on the road you can never reach those speeds, so why bother? Better to stick to the video game, where you go as fast as the PROs

I am comparing a real ride to Zwift.  Do you actually have any experience of Zwift? 

Also I have a lot of experience climbing the sort of col that the Alpe du Zwift is modelled on, Pyrenean and Alpine, and I never claimed to be able to do it under an hour!  My time was just under 75 minutes and seems realistic enough for me.

It's true I would rather be doing this!

Looks familiar...

CNV00020 by SimonP2006, on Flickr

CNV00009 by SimonP2006, on Flickr

[rob]

Then again, CTT's virtual V718 race on RGT was just won in 21:58, with national hillclimb champion Ed Laverack in 4th place with 22:00.  Can you imagine a real V718 race being won in 22 minutes? 

Yes, I have noticed times being quite "slow"... maybe RGT works differently... although they were all 6 W/kg at the top... also, there is no dual carriageway effect, meaning no lorries to draft, which explain most of the under 19 minutes times.
You just have to look at Hutch in the best years of his careers and the fact that he was over 5 minutes off pace at the UCI worlds in 2012.

How many times have you ridden on the V?  The lorry effect is a myth.

Never got the chance to.   It was banned just as I started to think about making the trip.

Me neither, why is it fast? Presumably a good surface, but traffic must be a big part of it, no?

I think Karla wrote something on the TT thread years ago.   A lot of it is sheltered by banks on both sides which made it pretty fast most of the time.   There's no gift hill and it wasn't a guaranteed PB course but testers would happily drive a 400 mile round trip to have a go.   That bit of road does carry a fait bit of traffic and I have seen comments about making sure you got an early evening start if Hull City were at home.   There did used to be a nice evening 10 series if you lived nearby.

[Karla]

I think the Hull City thing was a running joke.  I did several rides on there and never noticed a particularly large or particularly variable amount of traffic.  In the three decent rides where when I didn't have a mechanical or other screw-up, my times were all within 10 seconds of each other - it was a very consistent course. 

[Frank9755]

I'd be surprised if there wasn't something in it (unless there isn't extra football traffic)

[rob]

It's a different bit of road I know, but there's a noticeable difference between a Saturday afternoon on the E2 and a Sunday morning on the E2.

[Karla]

I'd be surprised if there wasn't something in it (unless there isn't extra football traffic)

It's a main road so you get main road levels of traffic.  It isn't a country footpath.  The idea that the V was fast because of traffic levels is a baseless one that is put round by unimaginative people who've never been there, who can't think of any other possible reasons and who think that idle speculation is a good way of arriving at true information.

[rob]

I'd be surprised if there wasn't something in it (unless there isn't extra football traffic)

It's a main road so you get main road levels of traffic.  It isn't a country footpath.  The idea that the V was fast because of traffic levels is a baseless one that is put round by unimaginative people who've never been there, who can't think of any other possible reasons and who think that idle speculation is a good way of arriving at true information.

Road surface ?
Downhill start ?
Fast turn ?

[Karla]

0) A fast main road course like any other fast main road course: straight, flat and a non-zero amount of traffic.
1) Decent surface for most of it
2) Fast turn
3) A finish just slightly downhill from the start
4) A small hill near the western end of the course that flips the wind up over it
5) Trees lining most of the course that prevent it from coming down again
5a) The course's west/east orientation means that the wind does make it back down onto it a little bit at the northern side (i.e. when it's a tailwind) but you get the full shelter of the trees for the headwind leg.  Basically, every day is a good day.
6) There were loads of events run on there so everyone got plenty of goes at setting a fast time, as opposed to Levens (reputedly faster on a good day but slow as a dog on a bad one) where the number of good riders riding in good form on good days was miniscule.
7) It was fairly central and easily accessible for most of the population (again unlike Levens) so most of the good riders could get there.
The positive feedback effect where because it was where all the good riders were regularly turning up to race all the other good riders, it became the place to do a time, and the place where all the good people brought their A game.


The shelter was really crucial.  I once dropped my chain near the turn at the eastern end, so after I'd remounted it I pootled back and was in a position to notice things beyond my own burning thighs.  The first five miles to the top of the hill had a slightly noticeable headwind; the last mile after the hill was a case of "F*)# my life I'm being blown off the bike!"

[Greenbank]

I just ordered a 700x25c Schwalbe Marathon Plus tyre for my latest PowerTap wheel.

Seems a bit odd to put a 595g tyre on a wheel like that but I sniped the wheel for cheap off eBay (it's an old PowerTap SL hub that's been upgraded to speak ANT+) and is going on my cheap commuter bike.

That's the 3rd PowerTap hub I have now (an SL+ on the geared bike, a PowerTap track hub on the fixed and now this one on the commuter).

[Ruthie]

114W.

FFS.

It can only improve.

[drossall]

Interesting. I've dabbled in the odd club time trial for years, after racing quite heavily for a few years around 40 years ago. That's heavily in all senses of the word - lots of races, with no noticeable success, in part because of the difficulty of carrying a bit of bulk uphill. Latterly, I've generally been a minute or so outside evens on our somewhat sporting course.

Translating to Zwift in the last 12 months, I started on a virtual power curve, with Zwift estimating me around the 120-130W mark. That doubled when I too got an older PowerTap wheel. I've no interest in doing a proper FTP test, but Zwift has bumped me up every now and then, and currently has me at 269W. That feels a bit on the high side, just as the virtual curve felt low - I'm recording 26-27 minutes in the Tempus Fugit 10s, and sitting in sportive groups at 24-25mph on the flat for prolonged periods, neither of which I think I could do IRL. But it's got me dead right going backwards rapidly when the road turns upwards

I guess I'll find out, when all this is over, how far off the mark it is. I've never ridden with a power meter on the road, but may have to try it, just to make sure that it's a fair comparison.