Turbos with power feature

25sean

Looking at turbos as an option to train with power.. as my time on the bike seems to be fading away with the arrival of my bundle of joy a while back..

any recommmendation?

I see this by tacx...
http://www.chainreactioncycles.com/Models.aspx?ModelID=68507

thanks

smacl

I use the Tacx flow VR, which includes power output to the PC display. Seems to be a computation based on your weight entered, the resistance it's applying to the brake (i.e. simulated gradient), speed, and cadence. From what I gather this is just an approximation of what you'd get with a proper power meter, but I've no idea beyond that what the shortcomings are. FWIW, CRCs 42% discount is still more expensive than the same product on bike24.

kumate_champ07

http://www.jedi-sports.de/product_info.php/info/p3718_Kinetic-Road-Machine.html

kumate_champ07

I made this table, still have to complete it, its based on this:
http://www.kurtkinetic.com/documents/Power_Curves419.pdf

20 km/h = 12.43 mp/h = 102 watts
21 km/h = 13.05 mp/h = 110* watts
22 km/h = 13.67 mp/h = 119 watts
23 km/h = 14.29 mp/h = 129 watts
24 km/h = 14.91 mp/h = 140 watts
25 km/h = 15.53 mp/h = 152 watts
26 km/h = 16.16 mp/h = 164 watts
27 km/h = 16.78 mp/h = 176 watts
28 km/h = 17.40 mp/h = 190 watts
29 km/h = 18.02 mp/h = 206* watts

30 km/h = 18.64 mp/h
31 km/h = 19.26 mp/h
32 km/h = 19.88 mp/h
33 km/h = 20.51 mp/h
34 km/h = 21.13 mp/h = 290 watts
35 km/h = 21.75 mp/h
36 km/h = 22.37 mp/h
37 km/h = 22.99 mp/h = 353* watts
38 km/h = 23.61 mp/h
39 km/h = 24.23 mp/h

40 km/h = 24.86 mp/h
41 km/h = 25.48 mp/h
42 km/h = 26.10 mp/h
43 km/h = 26.72 mp/h
44 km/h = 27.34 mp/h
45 km/h = 27.96 mp/h = 567* watts
46 km/h = 28.58 mp/h
47 km/h = 29.21 mp/h
48 km/h = 29.83 mp/h
49 km/h = 30.45 mp/h

50 km/h = 31.07 mp/h = 733* watts
51 km/h = 31.69 mp/h
52 km/h = 32.31 mp/h
53 km/h = 32.93 mp/h = 854 watts
54 km/h = 33.56 mp/h
55 km/h = 34.18 mp/h
56 km/h = 34.80 mp/h
57 km/h = 35.42 mp/h
58 km/h = 36.04 mp/h = 1083* watts
59 km/h = 36.66 mp/h

60 km/h = 37.28 mp/h
61 km/h = 37.91 mp/h = 1235 watts
62 km/h = 38.53 mp/h
63 km/h = 39.15 mp/h
64 km/h = 39.77 mp/h
65 km/h = 40.39 mp/h
66 km/h = 41.01 mp/h = 1536* watts
67 km/h = 41.63 mp/h
68 km/h = 42.26 mp/h
69 km/h = 42.88 mp/h

25sean

fair play kumate.. so could that, in theory, be done with every turbo, calculating speed to power ratio?

8kvscdpglqnyr4

I started training on an indoor trainer this winter - I signed up for this:
http://www.trainerroad.com/
If you have a Garmin with speed sensor, then this is the best piece of software you'll come across. It doesn't matter if the power reading is 100% accurate or not ... the important thing is the power reading is consistent and you can track your improvements. There are over 100 workouts, sortable by duration or intensity.

Will work with most trainers. I paid €100 for my trainer and it works perfectly with it

kumate_champ07

25sean wrote: »

fair play kumate.. so could that, in theory, be done with every turbo, calculating speed to power ratio?

it may be possible but much more complicated and requiring a powertap wheel or srm cranks for testing.
kurt kinetic made the resistance/power curve to match normal road riding, they have a power computer but all it does is convert speed to power, I use the formula instead
http://www.jedi-sports.de/product_info.php/info/p3726_Kinetic-Wireless-Power-Computer-T-725WL.html

25sean

divil a bit, that sounds good, for my pocket, I probably have everything to set that up already.. I'll read into it.. thanks

kumate, complicated alright.. back to my homework! thanks

25sean

Still doing the homework here..

Kumate, link is gone but is that the kinetic road machine turbo you recommend?

Does it have a speed reading display on it or do you attach your own computer to it and then convert using the chart?

thanks

doozerie

I have a basic Tacx Flow and as smacl says the power reading from it is considered approximate. However, from what I've read, people have tested their Flow with a real power meter and found that the Flow produces consistent readings. So, even if the absolute figures it displays are not necessarily accurate, their degree of (in)accuracy remains consistent over time, in which case it should give reliable feedback on whether you are improving or not. I like to imagine that my Flow is giving power readings significantly lower than the actual power I am churning out, and I feel disinclined to acknowledge (the substantial) evidence to the contrary

One thing I like about the Flow is that it gives average figures (speed, cadence, power - and also max and accumulative figures for these) at the end of a session. I don't have a compatible HRM strap for my Flow and rely on my Garmin to provide HRM info (and speed and cadence too). It'd be great if the Flow provided a profile of power for the entire session so that I could compare this with my Garmin output but for the cost of the Flow I'm happy enough with what it does provide.

Again from reading stuff online I gather that the Kurt Kinetic algorithm is unique to their turbo trainer and therefore may not be accurate for other brands of turbo trainer. Also I'm presuming it doesn't/can't take into account the variable resistance that can be applied on many turbo trainers - obviously maintaining 24km/h at a resistance setting of zero requires less power than maintaining 24km/h at a resistance setting of +1 or more, for example.

25sean

Thanks for getting back..

A lot on the net about the flow with inaccurate power readings, then again they all agree that it is consistent so just to note your own progress.. some say they 'drift' as well.. overall though the flow gets good reviews, and its more affordable than many of the others... talk of setting it up and calibrating it every time for a more reliable reading, 10min warm up etc...

I think Im going to go for the flow for more info to look at and work off, mixture of being unsure if Im making progress on my VERY basic turbo and getting bored of watching my heart rate!

thanks doozerie

nak

Or you could rent a powermeter from. I know a good few who have rented from these guys:
http://www.cyclepowermeters.com/powermeter-rental-24-c.asp

doozerie

For info, the calibration on the Flow is very quick. You select the calibration option from the LCD display, hit the start button and start pedaling. When the trainer reckons you've hit the appropriate speed (I'm not sure what speed that actually is) it'll display a "Stop" message to tell you to stop pedaling, and once it has stopped or sufficiently slowed the wheel it'll display the brake calibration figure it will apply for the session. It all takes no more than a minute or so, it depends largely on how long you take to get up to the necessary speed which can obviously vary depending on which gear you are in, etc.

Bambaata

doozerie wrote: »

For info, the calibration on the Flow is very quick. You select the calibration option from the LCD display, hit the start button and start pedaling. When the trainer reckons you've hit the appropriate speed (I'm not sure what speed that actually is) it'll display a "Stop" message to tell you to stop pedaling, and once it has stopped or sufficiently slowed the wheel it'll display the brake calibration figure it will apply for the session. It all takes no more than a minute or so, it depends largely on how long you take to get up to the necessary speed which can obviously vary depending on which gear you are in, etc.

Dont forget you need to warm it up first though, from memory they say only a few minutes but from experience ive given 10-15mins pedalling before doing it.

doozerie

Hmm, that's a good point. For my recent sessions I've just hopped on and kicked off the calibration right away (about the only eagerness I show in relation to turbo trainer sessions is to get them started quickly so that they finish sooner!), but that's a silly thing for me to be doing.

Bambaata

You can work that part into your warmup and then start the main set parts once properly calibrated. I just found serious drift even after 4 to 5 mins of warmup in calibration so use to go 10/15mins. It seemed to yield better accuracy.