So is the new Ergomo any good?
- Thread starter DRAwpt
- Start date
The TSS/IF/NP display option looks really great for training, as does the Watts/AvgWatts for intervals. Altitude features look neat too - seeing rate of climb and %Grade are good excuses to feel as whiped as you are when doing those hills.
On my wish list.
On my wish list.
I downloaded the manual. the offset procedure looks very complicated and needs to be repeated every 1000km 
Actually it's very easy to do. And mine hasn't changed at all in any event. It took less than 5 minutes to do and that included the time it took to pull my stand out and put it back upstevevinck said:I downloaded the manual. the offset procedure looks very complicated and needs to be repeated every 1000km
The worst con IMHO is the biennial maintenance at $350 and the time to/from Germany for this service versus the others - depends on where you live, etc. Promising stuff, time will tell.stevevinck said:I downloaded the manual. the offset procedure looks very complicated and needs to be repeated every 1000km
Hi:DRAwpt said:I did a search for "ergomo" and the last post was dated 09/16/04.
Anyhow, thanks for the input. I may pull the trigger later today...
It is because they relaunched the ergomo and it is now available with more features, check www.ergomo.net. They have a distributorin the US: www.gitabike.com
ergomo accurancy is +/- 0,5%!
Their support is pretty reliable I think, they have a bulletin where you can ask all kinds of questions: http://www.ergomo.net/phpbb2/
Also they are offering their customers periodically new software updates/ downloads from the ergomo website.
Have a good day,
Rocket^ said:I ordered mine last week. The Ergomo seems to have the best features for the price. BTW, anyone want to buy a new (less than 600 miles) Dura Ace Crank?
Hi Rocket,
I reckon you have been using your Ergomo Pro for 5 months now - so how has it performed? Reliable or not? Especially in wet weather? If you were buying again would you go for the PowerTap SL or the Ergomo Pro?
Thanks!
The Ergomo has performed very well. I rode a TT last month in pouring rain without any problems at all. In fact, I am thinking about buying an additional one for my new bike next season.JungleBiker said:
While I like the Ergomo, it isn't perfect. If you look around, you will see a common problem with the factory "K" factor setting. The "K" factor is written on each individual bottom bracket. This is the number you are supposed to put in the computer. There are factors that influence this number such as installation and leg discrepencies. Installation can skew the "K" factor. I'm convinced that proper installation may still require and adjustment to the "K" factor. Leg strength discrepencies will also require you to adjust the number.
I installed my bb in accordance with the installation notes. I used a torque wrench and applied the appropriate torque. For what it's worth, my computrainer spin scan shows that I don't have any leg discrepencies. My unit came with a "K" factor of 186. This number gave power readings that were way too low. This wasn't a factor of me being far weaker than what I thought, the numbers were indicating that I was either an infant, or someone who must have a severe medical condition. I reset my Ergomo to match the Computrainer and ended up with a "K" factor of 204. The readings seem to be consistent with my racing performance this year.
There is also a period where your bottom bracket will settle in. This will affect the power readings, but has an easy solution. When this occurs, you simply need to do the calibration. This process only takes a couple of minutes. Basically you select the calibration test on the computer. You then turn the right crank with the big ring/small cog combo at 50-70 rpm. The Ergomo will then come up with a number and ask you to save, or reject that number. There are two other numbers at the bottom left and right of the screen. I have found that if these numbers are anything but zero, the test should be repeated. After the calibration, you can test the unit by turning the right crank 50-70 rpm. Once stabilized at the rpm, you should be seeing less than 5 watts. Following the same process with the left crank should produce less than 15 watts. If this procedure is done correctly, the Ergomo will stay very accurate and consistent.
The only other improvements that I would like to see for the ergomo would be a new mount, and a different screen display in the interval mode. The current mount leaves the unit sitting really high above your handlebars. There was some talk from Ergomo about a new mount that would move the unit down, and in front of the stem (see the SRM position). They still haven't come out with this as far as I know. In the interval mode, it would be nice to have average speed displayed. It currently shows rpm, current watts, average watts, heart rate, and time. For me, I would much rather have speed in lieu of heart rate (YMMV).
All said, I am very satisfied with the Ergomo. The "K" factor issue does require a comparison to another PM to ensure the wattage readings are correct. This isn't a problem if a person has something to compare it to. If you don't, then it may in fact not be showing the correct power once installed on your bike. It would be beneficial if Ergomo would address and fix this problem. The good part is the unit is consistent as long as you do a periodic calibration that ensures the alignment is still valid. I also like the fact that the unit can be updated via a firmware release. This means that someday I might see my wish for the interval mode come true. The ability to update via firmware is a really nice feature. I don't believe it is offered on any of the other models.
So it's not perfect, but so far I am very satisfied with the product. As I said earlier, I plan on purchasing an additional unit next season.
Hope this helps!
Hi Rocket!
Yes, ergomo will come out with a new mount which is in front of the handle bar and not on top. I guess it is only a matter of weeks, maybe they will come out with it at the Interbike. You are right, the correct installation of the bb is very important for the power reading. The manufacturer gives the details on the exact postioning. Also, it is recommended to do an offset every other ride or so (Settings,Bike, Offset sensor). Then the readings are fine.
Take care,
Yes, ergomo will come out with a new mount which is in front of the handle bar and not on top. I guess it is only a matter of weeks, maybe they will come out with it at the Interbike. You are right, the correct installation of the bb is very important for the power reading. The manufacturer gives the details on the exact postioning. Also, it is recommended to do an offset every other ride or so (Settings,Bike, Offset sensor). Then the readings are fine.
Take care,
Hi Squint,Squint said:
the ergomo is already calibrated before delivery from the manufacturer. This is shown by the "K" factor written on the sensor. The "offset sensor" mode in your ergomo computer is for matching the bb sensor with your ergomo computer. I would recommend to do the offset sensor frequently to get acurate readings. It does not take longer than 2 minutes. How to do this is written in the useres guide.
Hope this helps..
Yes it is calibrated, and even comes with a certificate from the German Weights and Measurements Division verifying the accuracy. With that being said, there still seems to be some kind of problem that affects this number once the bb is mounted on the bike. There are way too many people who have seen numbers both high and low. There are many that have verified this with other powermeters. Taking into consideration the accuracy limits and differences in measurment locations of the various PM's. The numbers on many of the Ergomo's are still too far out to think that it is accurate with the factory supplied K factor.NGART said:
My unit was installed to the letter. After installation the factory "K" factor needed a large adjustment to make the PM give accurate wattages. I still think the Ergomo is a great product, but those that are considering purchasing one should definately be aware of this problem. Once you are able to verify or adjust the "K" factor, it works great.
Question to anyone who has cross checked a Ergomo Pro to a PT or SRM:
What procedure did you use? Over a few days or a single test? Various power levels?
Mine seems about 10% high. Do I adjust the K-factor up or down, and by what magnitude to achieve the correct reading? My K-factor is 197
I plan to run the PT and the Ergomo side by side for a few days with various tests. Can you adjust the k-factor for a single ride file, or do I have to guess the changed value and input it via my pc, then install to the bike check again, remove connect to PC, change value, try again? Lord I hope not, but I bet I do!
More calrity is required about temperature variations as well. I reset the calibration offset before a very hot race a few weeks back and got crazy high values.
What procedure did you use? Over a few days or a single test? Various power levels?
Mine seems about 10% high. Do I adjust the K-factor up or down, and by what magnitude to achieve the correct reading? My K-factor is 197
I plan to run the PT and the Ergomo side by side for a few days with various tests. Can you adjust the k-factor for a single ride file, or do I have to guess the changed value and input it via my pc, then install to the bike check again, remove connect to PC, change value, try again? Lord I hope not, but I bet I do!
More calrity is required about temperature variations as well. I reset the calibration offset before a very hot race a few weeks back and got crazy high values.
Check this out, thought it was interesting and a good idea by Rich.
Power readings would be linearly related to K-Factor, then you could try with a K-factor 10% lower (such us 177).gza said:
My Ergomo Pro was way low with the factory supplied K-Factor (198) with respect to my Power Tap Pro. After several rides I ended with K-Factor 220 that gives me similar readings, for ex. on a casual ride:
PT: AP=153 NP=178
EP: AP=147 NP=177
If I export both rides to .csv (PowerTap) format and run a linear regression the R^2 was only 0.47.
Doing a 30sec rolling average of power values the R^2 goes to 0.94 (EP-Watts = 1.017 * PT-Watts - 8.087).
At this point I was (relatively) satisfied, the problem was that the Ergomo readings were not stable from day to day varing +/- 20-30 watts with offset values ranging from 1069 to 1075.
The offset inestability was never solved (several weeks of updating firmware/software, redoing offset, comparing readings, etc.), my reseller offered the chance to return the Ergomo Pro and I returned it tired of the inestability of the readings.
Ale Martinez.
