Tuft averaged 415W for the last hour to win US Open
- Thread starter velobob
- Start date
EpicriderGMAC said:
I doubt two riders, even of the same height, will "punch a similar size hole in the air" if one is 12kg heavier than the other. IMO, raw power is over-valued - and frontal area under-valued. Those 12 kilos are somewhere, and they're probably causing drag.
Sure but a rough order-of-magnitude calculation on mass(M) and frontal area (A) has it that:acoggan said:
M is proportional to A^(3/2)
or
A = k * M^(2/3), where k is a shape constant.
This is sub-linear, meaning that if you double the rider's mass, you less-than-double his frontal area.
Pelotonium said:
Sure - but again, the point is that even on flat ground, bigger guys need to produce more power to travel the same speed. That's why, e.g., all of the hour record holders in history except for Indurain and Sosenka have been of rather average build (for a road cyclist).
....so that aerodynamics is more important then having that raw power when it comes to time trials right? I still wonder what is faster....having an extreme aero position and losing x amount of watts, or being able to push your max watts during a tt and being less aero. I know only testing will tell and this year I hope to ride an aggressive aero position and give up a little power to see.
Does anyone know when Obree was using his funky bikes and positions to break the hour record if he had a loss of power in those positions? Just curious....
Does anyone know when Obree was using his funky bikes and positions to break the hour record if he had a loss of power in those positions? Just curious....
There is a lot more to bike race than just good numbers. Also, like anything, moving up in the ranks takes time. You have no idea if these people are lieing. I personally take it as an insult to my character. I would not make these accusations just because your upset at being at the bottom.
K50 said:
It may not be that a lot of people lie about their power. Instead the case may be that many people just don't realize that they're not accurately measuring their power, or they might suspect that their power measurement isn't quite accurate, but they like the readings that they're getting.
Case in point: Yesterday on a large group training ride a guy comes up beside me using a power meter. We were on the front, and after awhile cruising side by side he asks me what my power is. My power was 220, his was 300. He was my size or smaller, neither of us was drafting, the road was almost level, and I've done enough calibration of my meter to believe that I was within 10 watts of the correct power. His comment was "I think my power is right." My response was "I hope it is."
Other examples: Take a look at the power files from the Tour de Georgia. The wattage these pro riders are putting out is underwhelming. They're averaging maybe 180 watts with NP in the 250 range for the whole ride. Even on the hard climbs wattage doesn't get much over 700 and then only for brief periods. I have to figure that the power meters these guys are using are pretty well set up and calibrated.
Case in point: Yesterday on a large group training ride a guy comes up beside me using a power meter. We were on the front, and after awhile cruising side by side he asks me what my power is. My power was 220, his was 300. He was my size or smaller, neither of us was drafting, the road was almost level, and I've done enough calibration of my meter to believe that I was within 10 watts of the correct power. His comment was "I think my power is right." My response was "I hope it is."
Other examples: Take a look at the power files from the Tour de Georgia. The wattage these pro riders are putting out is underwhelming. They're averaging maybe 180 watts with NP in the 250 range for the whole ride. Even on the hard climbs wattage doesn't get much over 700 and then only for brief periods. I have to figure that the power meters these guys are using are pretty well set up and calibrated.
Ergoman said:
Hmm, not sure which files you're looking at, but John Devine's from Brasstown Bald didn't leave me underwhelmed - averaging 3.8 w/kg for 4.5 hours and then 5.9 w/kg for the last 20m of the race is astounding.
As for your experience on the group ride, I have two questions: what kind of PM was the other rider using? and, given your user name, how are you 'calibrating' your Ergomo?
Also, was he massive? The only thing I can think of given maybe a slight calibration error is the power it takes if one guy is 55kg vs 80kg.peterpen said:
Hmm reading again you say he's your size. That's a massive (!) discrepancy. If yours is calibrated to +-10W, his must be way out of whack. Maybe his tire was flat haha.
peterpen said:
Check all the pro's power files and report back. My point is not that the pros are wimps, but that their power is most likely realistic whereas there are a lot of folks riding around who are satisfied to believe off-the-chart power for reasons known only to them.
Based on your previous "drive-bys" in other threads, I'm sure you know what kind of power meter I use and how I calibrate it.
Ergoman said:
I had been following the files posted. When looking at the length of their efforts, and looking at #'s for shorter duration efforts, it all is impressive to me. As for the numbers in the 'What is Your FTP' thread, they don't seem particularly inflated to me.
And I'm not trying to pick on you about calibration, just pointing out that calling another PM's #'s into question based on your own (given your choice of PM and faith in 'certificates of calibration') is err, somewhat questionable.
You may be much stronger than you give yourself credit for! Or maybe not, since there's some doubt about whether the Ergomo tracks power in a linear fashion.Similar threads
