E-motion rollers wattage chart. On target?

[danfoz]

Has anyone who has both the E-motion rollers and a PM confirmed this to be accurate?

I'm wondering if I get a front wheel speedo, can I expect my wattage output to equal the numbers given by inside ride?

 

[mx416]

From recent ride and using the spreadsheet from E-motion, my average power on level one was 199 per my SRM, E-motion says 187

another ride one level one, 18.1mph, 213ap per SRM, 209 per E-motion spreadsheet

Level 0, 19.0mph avg 176 per SRM, 182w per E-motion spreadsheet
Currently using Tacx trainer tires front a rear at 100psi.



Here is the comparison I did with a powertap a few years ago, with 25mm gatorskins
mph ptap rollers 15 160 167 17.5 200 201 20 215 235 21 230 248 22 250 261 23 260 274 24 280 288 25 300 301

 

[Felt_Rider]

My experience is closer to the chart posted by mx. I have not made a chart since I just go by the PM for watts at 3s and elapsed interval time. I rarely look at the other metrics so I am not sure.

I think at Level 1 for what I remember that I typically see is @ 19 mph is close to 200 watts with Mich Pro 4 at 105 psi

Dave posted a different chart not long ago, but I think most of the users agreed that the wattage on the chart is higher than what we have experienced.

 

[danfoz]

Very helpful, Thanks. It will be nice even to have a ballpark idea of indoor power output.

The best part since I'm somewhat proficient at regular rollers (but despise them), I was able to get going in less than a couple minutes. Leaps and bounds in terms of ease of use ahead of regular rollers though.

 

[daveryanwyoming]

When comparing my e-motion rollers to a calibrated and torque zeroed SRM my power to speed relationship is pretty close to one curve lower than what inside ride has published. IOW, I tend to ride with the resistance magnet set to position 1 or 2 with zero being swung all the way away to the furthest indent, 1 and 2 pretty close together and 3 being as close to the inertia drum as possible (and quite stiff resistance at that setting).

Looking at a ride from the other day and taking averages at least thirty seconds long to smooth the data and reduce effects from speed/energy changes:

200 watts = 19.7 mph
220 watts = 21.8 mph
230 watts = 22.7 mph
240 watts = 24 mph
250 watts = 24.8 mph
260 watts = 25.4 mph
270 watts = 26.3 mph
280 watts = 26.9 mph
310 watts = 29.2 mph
340 watts = 30.8 mph

This is at the resistance setting one or the farthest of the two closely spaced indents and not the farthest possible indent away from the inertial drum. The bike had Michelin Pro Race 3 tires pumped up to 110 psi and my total weight with the bike is ~175 pounds right now.

By my eyeball inspection of the published power charts that's closer to the 0 resistance setting or lowest, dark blue line.

YMMV,
-Dave

Originally Posted by Felt_Rider .

My experience is closer to the chart posted by mx. I have not made a chart since I just go by the PM for watts at 3s and elapsed interval time. I rarely look at the other metrics so I am not sure.

I think at Level 1 for what I remember that I typically see is @ 19 mph is close to 200 watts with Mich Pro 4 at 105 psi

Dave posted a different chart not long ago, but I think most of the users agreed that the wattage on the chart is higher than what we have experienced.

 

[danfoz]

Thanks Dave, so if understanding correctly riding on the "1" setting, the power (under the circumstances you describe) would more closely resemble the power curve shown as "0" (lowest black line) on felt's image attachment. After riding a bit yeserday the "1" setting seems where I'll probably spend most of my time.

It's all just SWAG at this point w/o an actual power meter but will be nice to know roughly what I can handle for about an hour, never having attributed my output to a wattage # in any way before.

 

[daveryanwyoming]

Originally Posted by danfoz .

Thanks Dave, so if understanding correctly riding on the "1" setting, the power (under the circumstances you describe) would more closely resemble the power curve shown as "0" (lowest black line) on felt's image attachment. After riding a bit yeserday the "1" setting seems where I'll probably spend most of my time.

It's all just SWAG at this point w/o an actual power meter but will be nice to know roughly what I can handle for about an hour, never having attributed my output to a wattage # in any way before.

Yeah, that's correct. I tend to ride most of my Tempoish workouts on the 1 setting but sometimes kick it up to 2 which feels more like rolling up a steady moderate climb. The zero setting is ok for a fast spin session but feels a bit light for serious workouts and a bit too much for complete rest day spinning.

-Dave

 

[LeeRoySD]

I'll second Dave's assessment above. I ride mostly on position one as well. I was using the trainerroad.com "Virtual Power" curve for my E-motions which was created using these numbers from inside ride prior to getting my power meter. After using a new Quarq with them and doing a couple fairly thorough comparison tests, the numbers on curve zero most closely match the power generated when the rollers are on resistance position one. In fact it is even a little more so for me (like another 5-10 watts lower... as in 250 watts on setting #1 is more like 205 watts). My bike + rider weight is about 205 lbs on Conti GP4000s at about 110 PSI. Hope this helps.

Lee

edit: http://app.strava.com/activities/41569913

This is a ride done today on setting number one under the conditions mentioned above. Feel free to highlight a short and relatively steady state section to see the power/speed correlations.

 

[danfoz]

Originally Posted by LeeRoySD .

I'll second Dave's assessment above. I ride mostly on position one as well. I was using the trainerroad.com "Virtual Power" curve for my E-motions which was created using these numbers from inside ride prior to getting my power meter. After using a new Quarq with them and doing a couple fairly thorough comparison tests, the numbers on curve zero most closely match the power generated when the rollers are on resistance position one. In fact it is even a little more so for me (like another 5-10 watts lower... as in 250 watts on setting #1 is more like 205 watts). My bike + rider weight is about 205 lbs on Conti GP4000s at about 110 PSI. Hope this helps.

Lee

edit: http://app.strava.com/activities/41569913

This is a ride done today on setting number one under the conditions mentioned above. Feel free to highlight a short and relatively steady state section to see the power/speed correlations.

Thanks LeeRoy.

I haven't picked up a speedo yet but after a several one hour sessions I can say this was the best money I've spent for the bike in awhile. It's certainly better than any other indoor solution I have come across incl. old skool rollers and a number of diff trainers.

 

[Felt_Rider]

Originally Posted by danfoz .


Thanks LeeRoy.

I haven't picked up a speedo yet but after a several one hour sessions I can say this was the best money I've spent for the bike in awhile. It's certainly better than any other indoor solution I have come across incl. old skool rollers and a number of diff trainers.

Great to hear

That is what I thought after my first few sessions. I knew it was going to help me increase my training volume compared to what I was doing on the KK trainer.
I have yet to come across a e-Motion roller owner (that takes training seriously) that has made a comment of regret on the purchase.