FTP Trainer/Road



specialized31

New Member
Aug 3, 2006
35
0
0
Based on testing I typically average about 15-20 watts more on the road than on the trainer. I currently do all of my intervals on the trainer due to the fact that I really like the static environment and can measure improvement consistently. My question is, on cyclingpeaks should I enter my trainer FTP or my road FTP on my home page?. I want to make sure my TSS scores are as accurate as possible. Weekend rides are always on the road by the way.

Also, I'm using a cheap mag trainer, would I close the gap on my trainer/road FTP numbers by switching to say a cycleops fluid2 or a KK?
 
specialized31 said:
Based on testing I typically average about 15-20 watts more on the road than on the trainer. I currently do all of my intervals on the trainer due to the fact that I really like the static environment and can measure improvement consistently. My question is, on cyclingpeaks should I enter my trainer FTP or my road FTP on my home page?. I want to make sure my TSS scores are as accurate as possible. Weekend rides are always on the road by the way.

Also, I'm using a cheap mag trainer, would I close the gap on my trainer/road FTP numbers by switching to say a cycleops fluid2 or a KK?
This debate of indoor vs outdoor is being nearly beat to death over here on this thread:

http://www.cyclingforums.com/t343971.html

I think the general point of the thread is that the lack of inertial loading (forward momentum), any wattage you hold for a sustainable amount of time will "feel" harder on RPE. You can theoretically close the gap with a larger flywheel. I'm not convinced and I think a large portion of it is the fatigue of simply not going anywhere. My KK road machine arrived in the post today and it'll get some work this weekend. I'll be curious to compare its performance to my rollers w/resistance (sans flywheel) and compare the RPE at wattages.
 
NomadVW said:
This debate of indoor vs outdoor is being nearly beat to death over here on this thread:

http://www.cyclingforums.com/t343971.html

I think the general point of the thread is that the lack of inertial loading (forward momentum), any wattage you hold for a sustainable amount of time will "feel" harder on RPE. You can theoretically close the gap with a larger flywheel. I'm not convinced and I think a large portion of it is the fatigue of simply not going anywhere. My KK road machine arrived in the post today and it'll get some work this weekend. I'll be curious to compare its performance to my rollers w/resistance (sans flywheel) and compare the RPE at wattages.
Yes, I've read through most of that thread. I guess my main question was cyclingpeaks related and wether I should use my trainer or road FTP on my athlete page. I want to get an accurate TSS number. I'm thinking I should use the FTP I tested at on the road since that is where I primarily ride. But it will lower my TSS scores on interval days on the trainer.
 
specialized31 said:
Yes, I've read through most of that thread. I guess my main question was cyclingpeaks related and wether I should use my trainer or road FTP on my athlete page. I want to get an accurate TSS number. I'm thinking I should use the FTP I tested at on the road since that is where I primarily ride. But it will lower my TSS scores on interval days on the trainer.

Where do you race ? ;) I'd use that FTP#.
 
specialized31 said:
Yes, I've read through most of that thread. I guess my main question was cyclingpeaks related and wether I should use my trainer or road FTP on my athlete page. I want to get an accurate TSS number. I'm thinking I should use the FTP I tested at on the road since that is where I primarily ride. But it will lower my TSS scores on interval days on the trainer.
My data history from 2003 tells me I'm typically around 0.96 indoor versus outdoor power at the 1-hr mark. Alternately, my indoor 30MP is usually very close to outdoor FTP.

But I figure if I were really well-cooled, well ventilated and well motivated that I could match road FTP indoors. I believe the inertial loading arguments are red herring :)

So road FTP for me .. though it does modestly depress my TSS scores, CTL etc. in winter.
 
specialized31 said:
Yes, I've read through most of that thread. I guess my main question was cyclingpeaks related and wether I should use my trainer or road FTP on my athlete page. I want to get an accurate TSS number. I'm thinking I should use the FTP I tested at on the road since that is where I primarily ride. But it will lower my TSS scores on interval days on the trainer.
This is a great question and one I struggle with all the time. I wish I had a good answer myself. I usually use my road FTP and just deal with the fact that it's not ever going to be "exact" but at least I can try to keep it simple.
I notice things like my 1 year old son keeping me from not sleeping the night before a ride can effect my wattage numbers and RPE just as much at the trainer. So does that mean I didn't get as much Training Stress even though the workout seemed incredibly hard?
I wish I knew.
 
Why can't you use the road ftp during the road riding season then switch to the trainer ftp during the indoor season?
 
tbowren said:
This is a great question and one I struggle with all the time. I wish I had a good answer myself. I usually use my road FTP and just deal with the fact that it's not ever going to be "exact" but at least I can try to keep it simple.
I notice things like my 1 year old son keeping me from not sleeping the night before a ride can effect my wattage numbers and RPE just as much at the trainer. So does that mean I didn't get as much Training Stress even though the workout seemed incredibly hard?
I wish I knew.
I would think that you should use your "normal" FTP regardless of outside conditions that might cause you to have to workout at a lower power. Your body is still producing a lower level of output, thus causing a slower rate of adaptation, so you don't "deserve" the higher TSS, even though RPE might be through the roof.
 
rr9876 said:
Your body is still producing a lower level of output, thus causing a slower rate of adaptation, so you don't "deserve" the higher TSS, even though RPE might be through the roof.
Are you syaing that doing intervals on a trainer induces a slower rate of adaptation than doing them on the road? Because I certainly disagree with that based on my past results.
 
specialized31 said:
Are you syaing that doing intervals on a trainer induces a slower rate of adaptation than doing them on the road? Because I certainly disagree with that based on my past results.
Not necessairily. What I'm saying is that doing intervals at a lower power than you are capable of causes slower adaptation than doing them at a higher power, whether the reason for the lower power is riding on the trainer, lack of sleep, or even altitude (this is why people like to "live high, train low," so that they can get the benefits of being at altitude while resting, but don't have to train at a lower power like they would at altitude).
 
rr9876 said:
Not necessairily. What I'm saying is that doing intervals at a lower power than you are capable of causes slower adaptation than doing them at a higher power, whether the reason for the lower power is riding on the trainer, lack of sleep, or even altitude (this is why people like to "live high, train low," so that they can get the benefits of being at altitude while resting, but don't have to train at a lower power like they would at altitude).
I hear what you're saying. But if you believe that a lack of intertial momentum is created by riding on trainer, which I do depending on the type of trainer you are using, then the load placed on my legs at 280 watts on the trainer would be equal to 290-300 watts on the road. Plus on the trainer I can narrow my target to a 10 watt window and stay there the entire interval which I believe is also of great benefit.