| Power Training This is the place to talk about training and racing with power (watts) measuring devices such as Polar 710/720, Power Tap, SRM or any other power measuring device. |
| | |
![]() |
| | LinkBack | Thread Tools | Search this Thread | Display Modes |
|
#1
| |||
| |||
Long time lurker, first time poster. I've been using a 1-year-old Fluid2 trainer with a rear-wheel speed sensor to extrapolate power with the following power number from a spreadsheet I've been using... Quote:
Enter a Powertap Pro. Same wheel circumference and with the PT zero-torqued. At 20 mph I'm showing about 214W on this trainer. I know everyone says you'll realize how slow you actually are but there seems to be a huge discrepancy. Anyone else get this big of a difference? Can the PT be setup wrong? Am I just facing reality?Thanks. |
|
#2
| |||
| |||
I think the fluid 2's changed sometime in the last year or two. Your formula is pretty close to what I am seeing with my 3 year old fluid 2. However, your actual reading with the PT is pretty close to what some of my friends are seeing with their new fluid 2's. I understand that Cycleops made a change in the last year or so, that made the trainers have less resistance. Not sure why, but if I had to buy one now, it would be a Kurt Kinetic. Its got a similar resistance curve to the original fluid 2's. |
|
#3
| |||
| |||
I assume you've already gone through the standard idiot-check items? -- wheel rollout and correct diameter entered. -- no tire slippage on the resistance wheel -- PT computer set for mph v. kph -- trainer adequately warmed up (for some reason, people have reported Fluid2 resistance *increasing* after warmup) -- power/speed averaged over at least several seconds to account for the jumpiness Is this a new PT Pro, or just new to you? |
|
#4
| |||
| |||
Quote:
Quote:
Thanks. |
|
#5
| |||
| |||
Nothin' like checking for idiots ![]() The truth sucks sometimes but hey, better to know than wonder.... I suppose a calibration check of the PT would be in order. As for speed, ride with both computers to compare.
__________________ Custom Training Plans -- cyclecoach.com -- My Blog -- Power Meter Hire in Australia |
|
#6
| |||
| |||
|
#7
| |||
| |||
Quote:
To the OP, if you want to check the calibration of the hub, you'll find one method here: http://www.cyclingforums.com/t451571.html |
|
#8
| |||
| |||
|
#9
| ||||
| ||||
Quote:
|
|
#10
| |||
| |||
|
#11
| |||
| |||
Quote:
http://www.cyclingforums.com/showpos...6&postcount=41 |
|
#12
| |||
| |||
|
#13
| |||
| |||
Quote:
![]() I think OP meant an increase the power shown on the KK computer, not the PT.
__________________ Custom Training Plans -- cyclecoach.com -- My Blog -- Power Meter Hire in Australia |
|
#14
| |||
| |||
Quote:
![]() Quote:
with previous real-wheel-speed-power-extrapolator --> wheel speed is higher than trainer speed --> displayed power is higher than trainer curve would indicate. with powertap --> measured torque is lower than trainer would provide --> displayed power is lower than trainer curve would indicate for the measured speed. both cases would seem to support the dramatic drop in displayed power that the OP has experienced in switching to the PT. |
|
#15
| |||
| |||
Quote:
|
![]() |
| Bookmarks |
| Tags |
| firsttime, realization, stinks, user |
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
| Display Modes | |
| |
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 11:28 AM.
Translations delivered by vBET 3.2.2
Powered by: vBulletin Copyright © 2000 - 2009, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0
Copyright © 2001 - 2009 cyclingforums.com
Translations delivered by vBET 3.2.2
Powered by: vBulletin Copyright © 2000 - 2009, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0
Copyright © 2001 - 2009 cyclingforums.com







I know everyone says you'll realize how slow you actually are but there seems to be a huge discrepancy. Anyone else get this big of a difference? Can the PT be setup wrong? Am I just facing reality?







Linear Mode


















