Today's Forum Topics
Set as homepage
|
View
New Forum Topics Today's Forum Topics Set as homepage |
 |
|
|||||||
Welcome to CyclingForums.com You are currently viewing our website as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions. You will have to register before you can post to this thread. By joining our free online community you will have access to post new topics, communicate privately with other cyclingforums.com members (PM), respond to polls, upload photos and access other special features like product reviews and classifieds. |
 |
|
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread | Display Modes |
09-01.-2005, 05:17 AM
|
#1 |
|
Registered User
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 2
|
Turbo Trainer Accuracy
I have an Elite Volare Fluid trainer and have been training quite a bit on it recently. I was wondering does any know how accurate one of this would be to the real world. i.e. Is the power required to go from 46 to 50 kph on the trainer similiar to the power required to do the same speed increase say on an indoor track.
Also does anyone know what the optimal number of times per week is for doing Anaerobic Threshold sessions. Currently I've been trying to do 3 sessions a week (don't always manage to get them done though). Also I've noticed that my optimal cadence is around 88-94 for speed generated at AT. However except for Obree everyone else who's ever broken the hour record has pedalled at over 100. So whats the best way to improve effiency at higher revs. Rich
__________________
richmcc |
|
|
|
02-02.-2005, 06:10 PM
|
#2 | |
|
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: nr. Milton Keynes, UK
Posts: 216
|
Re: Turbo Trainer Accuracy
Quote:
Rich, I'm not sure if thinking in terms of power required for acceleration isn't confusing the issue. You might rather better ask if the power required to maintain a particular speed is the same. Either way, IME the power-measuring abilities of most turbos are extremely unreliable, and inaccurate to the point of being worthless. As far as the number of threshold sessions you can do a week, I'm afraid that's one of those 'it depends' answers. Lastly regarding cadence, are you planning on having a crack at the hour record?;-) If not, you might want to consider a few other variables before you 'decide' on trying to 'train your cadence'. Efficiency in cycling is mostly a physiologically-governed varibiable. Artificially altering your cadence may not be a desirable thing, nor a prudent way to spend valuable training time. Lindsay.
__________________
MSc (Applied Sport and Exercise Science) RST Associate Coach ABCC Level 3 Coach Doctoral Student (Physiology), University of Oxford, UK. www.cyclecoach.com www.science4sport.com |
|
|
|
|
|
03-02.-2005, 09:09 AM
|
#3 | |
|
Registered User
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 2
|
Re: Turbo Trainer Accuracy
Quote:
Thanks for the reply. On the cadence thing I usually am most comfortable at about 88-94 rpm. I was thinking that because all th etop guys seem to pedal faster that I should try increase my cadence. About the trainer, I've been doing 2 sessions a week at what I assume is around my threshold 168+or-3 bpm for an hour and in the last 6 weeks the speed I can maintain has gone up 8kph. As I have no way of knowing what power I'm doing I was wondering did anyone who had an SRM, power tap etc and the same type of fluid trainer know how the power ramps up on one of these. I'm assuming that is not quite the same(or as hard) as out on the road or track or otherwise at this rate I might have a go at the land speed record.
__________________
richmcc |
|
|
|
|
|
03-02.-2005, 06:27 PM
|
#4 | |
|
Community Team
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Newport, South Wales
Posts: 3,830
|
Re: Turbo Trainer Accuracy
Quote:
you've got a long, long way to go before you approach the land speed record... i think your trainer will probably fall to pieces first!!!!! If you're most comfortable TTing at 88 - 94 revs/min then i'd stay with that. You'll likely find that the comfortable cadence outdoors will be different to your trainer's most comfortable cadence. Many pros do only ride at ~ 90 revs/min. As BL mentions artificially increasing your cadence may not be a good thing. Typically, cyclists are most efficient at around 60 - 70 revs/min. However, it feels uncomfortable at such low cadences and will tend to increase fatigue at a faster rate at such low cadences, so intuitively we pedal at a faster rate that we self-optimise -- one that isn't so fast it's very inefficient but also fast enough to reduce the forces involved. People going for the hour record are, of course, generating far more power than others can do for the same time period. At this higher power, more force is required on the pedals at a particular power and cadence. To minimise the fatigue and forces, cadence is increased. As most people can't generate the same power as hour record holders for the same period of time (i.e., your power is likely significantly less than hour record power) the forces involved will already be much lower, and you therefore select a more comfortable cadence. Efficiency increases, with increasing power output, as the most efficient cadence increases as power increases. ric
__________________
http://www.cyclecoach.com |
|
|
|
|
Linear Mode
