ergomo or power tap?
- Thread starter tmctguer
- Start date
gza said:
My local shop ordered a few for us through Gitabike. They had placed the order a couple months back when there was first talk of the mount and they just showed up last week. Have your shop give Gita a call and see if they have any left. PM me if you want a picture of it and I'll snap a couple tonight. I should have taken some of the mount itself before I mounted it as the design is really well thought out.
Agreed!! In fact I am considering switching from PT to ergomo because of this. I find the altitude profile puts the route into context. This is especially important for race data where you are able to remember where on the route certain events took place and then you want to go bak and look at them.peterpen said:
Am seriously missing this function on the PT
Bruce Diesel said:Agreed!! In fact I am considering switching from PT to ergomo because of this. I find the altitude profile puts the route into context. This is especially important for race data where you are able to remember where on the route certain events took place and then you want to go bak and look at them.
Am seriously missing this function on the PT
i'm *not* being funny, but can't you work out what your route was like without altitude data? Seems easy enough for me to do.
ric
IME the jury is still out on Ergomo - I have one and have just about got it to match up with a PT and SRM, but it remains to be seen whether it remains that way from session to session.
The major flaw in my book, is that you can't statically check it for accuracy, and you can't change the kfactor within data files - so you have to run a trial on a trainer, download data, check against PT/SRM data on the PC, guess a new kfactor value to bring it in line, re test, download again to check. Quite laborious.
The offset number is also laborious as you have to turn the pedals for a period of time with no load - its actually quite dificult to do this smoothly, and far more involved than the PT or SRM.
I'm also concered about its temperature sensitivity, but have no data on this yet.
I'm only bothering as my MTB is disc only and I've not heard great things about the SRM MTB crank. Having TSS and NP is a major plus though, and the altitude data is nice to have once you've got it.
The major flaw in my book, is that you can't statically check it for accuracy, and you can't change the kfactor within data files - so you have to run a trial on a trainer, download data, check against PT/SRM data on the PC, guess a new kfactor value to bring it in line, re test, download again to check. Quite laborious.
The offset number is also laborious as you have to turn the pedals for a period of time with no load - its actually quite dificult to do this smoothly, and far more involved than the PT or SRM.
I'm also concered about its temperature sensitivity, but have no data on this yet.
I'm only bothering as my MTB is disc only and I've not heard great things about the SRM MTB crank. Having TSS and NP is a major plus though, and the altitude data is nice to have once you've got it.
Yeah you can, but to me the altitude data is almost a must have… if nothing else I have now decided the PT is out just because of this…especially when doing training/racing in mountains or just with some significant climbs, the altitude data is as important to me as speed, distance etc. While I agree if you are a hardcore train/race by power alone type cyclist, you don’t need anything else. But I for one like to know how much climbing I have done, looking at the elevation profile of a ride/race after, calculate grades, etc. It may not be necessary, but once you get used to it, I can’t imagine not having it.ric_stern/RST said:
wilmar13 said:
i have it on my Polar. It didn't add anything ime. once i'd done my stock rides and found out they climbed X metres there wasn't anything else to do. So, if you have a PT, why not get a Polar, collect altitude data there? You can already see some of the Ergomo issues in GZA's post above.
ric
Already use Polar… but it seems kind of overkill to keep it just for altitude. I rarely do the same routes and like to know if I did 100 miles with 2000’ or 12000’ of climbing, I mean intuitively you know, but it is nice to have exact quantification. Plus even if it is non value added for training… sometimes I go out and have a total elevation gain goal.ric_stern/RST said:
For me Ergomo was always out as I have seen some issues with them locally that turn me off… SRM seems to be the way to go if money is not an issue (ah if only it wasn’t).
From a pure analytical perspective - you are right. I just find that in the area where I live we have mostly rolling hills. I know the profile of most of the terrain around my area. When looking back at a race file, having the altitude data allows me to know where certain events occurred more easily than pure km data. For example, two weekends ago, there was an attack, I managed to bridge across to the attack and when I hooked up, there was another attack. I popped off the back but joined another rider and rode at a lower level then tried to bridge again. Having the route profile makes it easy to identify these events because I know where we were when these things happend. I don't know the exact distances. As I said, it just adds context to the data, it doesn't add any more data as such - meta data really. This is especially true when looking back more historically, I find I can remember events in the context of a race, but if I try to remember purely on power efforts it all becomes a bit blurry.ric_stern/RST said:
With regards to having Polar and PT - been there, done that it doesn't work. The Polar sensors cause chaos with the PT sensors. Plus the newer Polars only work with coded straps and the PT, as we all know, is not coded. So, short of wearing two straps and figuring a way to stop the Polar speed sensor from interfering with the PT, this can't be done.
Bruce Diesel said:
Two things: don't bother with a HR strap, or just wear one of them.
collect speed data with the PT.
My S720 works fine with all of my PTs
ric
I have a 625X (I think - the triathalon one) and could not get it to work with a non-coded strap. Anyway, since there is no way to overlay the two sets of data without serious gymnastics (especially if the polar data doesn't have speed, therefore distance) it all became way too much hassleric_stern/RST said:
. Will do without the altitude data for now.I tend to look at Normalised Power vs. Average Heartrate for similar types of rides in order to track a general improvement - kind of like the PulsePower indicator on the Computrainer. So I certainly would want to keep HR data.
Time matching the data would be a complete pain in the **** (how do you ensure exact same start time and manage data drop outs?). But assuming clean data and if you were so inclined - you could:PaulMD said:
- independently upload to CP the ride file from each device
- select the section from each that is the part of ride you want to match and create a new wko for each
- export them as an SRM .txt file (which will force the data into 1 sec intervals despite the original recording interval)
- then match the files in excel and combine data
- then re-configure file to .csv specs
- then re-import the modified file into CP.
I have no idea if it would work though and what impact it would have on data integtrity and ain't planning on trying it (I sold my polar after buying the PT). I still think one data drop and it would all be out of sequence.
use your coded one with your polar ?Bruce Diesel said:I have a 625X (I think - the triathalon one) and could not get it to work with a non-coded strap. Anyway, since there is no way to overlay the two sets of data without serious gymnastics (especially if the polar data doesn't have speed, therefore distance) it all became way too much hassle
this doesn't actually mean anything (unless you were able to e.g., always train in exactly the same conditions, and even then it's not much use)
ric
You are certainly far more knowledgable abut this subject than I, but I'm not sure why you discount HR data completely. Surely HR is a physiological response to load - albeit somewhat affected by other variables, so it should be a reasonable indicator of improved response over a period of time - to the same load.ric_stern/RST said:
Since I do a significant amount of training on a Computrainer, the load is highly repeatable, and I have certainly noticed a trend in terms of average HR reducing as my condition improves.
This data might not tell me anything right now, but in the future will give me a reference baseline and enable me to assess the effect of my training program. As I am quite new to cycling (2 years) and self-trained I beleive this info to be good from a baseline perspective.
Then again, I could be completely wrong
Bruce Diesel said:As I am quite new to cycling (2 years) and self-trained I beleive this info to be good from a baseline perspective.
Then again, I could be completely wrong
I think in another 2 years you'll find that the HR/Power data tells you nothing and in fact can lead you in the wrong direction if you try and read something into it.
