What is a good power output?
- Thread starter woj
- Start date
there seems to be a mixup between average and max power output.
1537 wil be a max
400 an average sustainable load
Whats good? difficult to say more imortant is what you do with it.
Max of over 2000 and in the 2250 regions have bean measured(Eadie, Gane, Tournant)
For average whatts per kilogram is important when you reach 7watts a kilo your well up there with the better(or maybe even best) amateurs. (not for kids they tend to way less versus the development of there muscles/cardivascular system thats also why there VO2 max'es are not straigtlined comparable with these from adults)
But its only a test its not because your test is better on watts a kilo that you will winn for sure.
1537 wil be a max
400 an average sustainable load
Whats good? difficult to say more imortant is what you do with it.
Max of over 2000 and in the 2250 regions have bean measured(Eadie, Gane, Tournant)
For average whatts per kilogram is important when you reach 7watts a kilo your well up there with the better(or maybe even best) amateurs. (not for kids they tend to way less versus the development of there muscles/cardivascular system thats also why there VO2 max'es are not straigtlined comparable with these from adults)
But its only a test its not because your test is better on watts a kilo that you will winn for sure.
The *very* best can sustain ~7 W/kg (likely less) for not too long, probably around 20-mins at the outside.
The world record for the individual pursuit was at ~ 7.7 W/kg, whereas the hour record was ~ 6.6 W/kg
Ric
The world record for the individual pursuit was at ~ 7.7 W/kg, whereas the hour record was ~ 6.6 W/kg
Ric
As Cateye acknowledge the Cyclosimulator is not accurate, and nor is it repeatable between machines. i.e., x watts on one machine is likely to be y watts on another machine. If you want to know what's a good power output for sprinting, you'll need to test using either an SRM crank or a Power Tap hub (not a Polar S710 as the power is recorded at 5-sec intervals and is likely to miss the peak).
At 67 kg, and 1537 W, that'd give a power to mass ratio of 22.9 W/kg, which would put you into world class level of track sprinting, i.e., a track sprinter who has a mass of 85 kg at 22.9 W/kg would put out 1950 W.
Ric
extra add
400watt as example for output reached on ergo test(3min interval 50watt increase) same for the 7 watts a kilo (was probabely unclear in first post)
Note that different test(interval time, increase in watts or even different lab can give significant different results)
400watt as example for output reached on ergo test(3min interval 50watt increase) same for the 7 watts a kilo (was probabely unclear in first post)
Note that different test(interval time, increase in watts or even different lab can give significant different results)
that's why it's important to calibrate the equipment, and use only valid instrumentation e.g., SRM Cranks, Power Tap hub, Monark Ergometer, etc.
Ric
Lots of riders are into watts these days. Measuring watts is probably the best way to gauge a riders current fitness. Most of the riders measuring their wattage are doing it on indoor trainers like the Computrainer,Tacx, or the Cateye.
The most important thing to consider on wattage measurement is repeatable accuracy. There are two basic types of wattage measurement - electronic trainers, and on-the-bike devices like the Powertap and SRM. The trainers are the most INACCURATE!!! Even Computrainers have to be factory recalibrated, and they can cost over $1000 U.S. Now think about the Tacx and the Cateye costing in the $300+ dollar(U.S.)range.
Trainers can also suffer huge calibration errors by the abount of tire contact (pressure)the roller makes. Too much or too little pressure can seriously effect the accuracy of the wattage reading. When using a trainer, ALWAYS use the same wheel with the same tire, adjust the roller pressure the same every time, and keep tire pressure constant every time. Doing so will ensure your wattage readings will at least be consistant as long as your resistance device is working properly.
I've heard of some name-brand trainers being more than 60-80+ watts off actual watts. That's a lot of watts!!! Your 400 watts might only be 320!!! I've seen lots of posts by amateur riders saying they are cranking out 400+ watts at AT (anaerobic threshold).
When Lance Armstrong became World Champion in 1993, he put out 340 watts at his AT. It's doughtful any of these amateurs would have been able to finish the World's wheelsucking the whole way, let alone win the race!!!
I'm not bagging on electronic trainers. Indoor training is one of the best ways to get speed on the bike. Having accurate wattage data is valuable. Use it as a barometer, but not an absolute. Finally, what do your watts mean in the real world? 1500 watts sounds great, but on a flat road with calm wind, can you spin a 53x13 at 95 rpm for 10 minutes??? What's your top speed? Can you hold 60+ km/hr for 200 meters? That's real, and not subject to calibration errors.
The most important thing to consider on wattage measurement is repeatable accuracy. There are two basic types of wattage measurement - electronic trainers, and on-the-bike devices like the Powertap and SRM. The trainers are the most INACCURATE!!! Even Computrainers have to be factory recalibrated, and they can cost over $1000 U.S. Now think about the Tacx and the Cateye costing in the $300+ dollar(U.S.)range.
Trainers can also suffer huge calibration errors by the abount of tire contact (pressure)the roller makes. Too much or too little pressure can seriously effect the accuracy of the wattage reading. When using a trainer, ALWAYS use the same wheel with the same tire, adjust the roller pressure the same every time, and keep tire pressure constant every time. Doing so will ensure your wattage readings will at least be consistant as long as your resistance device is working properly.
I've heard of some name-brand trainers being more than 60-80+ watts off actual watts. That's a lot of watts!!! Your 400 watts might only be 320!!! I've seen lots of posts by amateur riders saying they are cranking out 400+ watts at AT (anaerobic threshold).
When Lance Armstrong became World Champion in 1993, he put out 340 watts at his AT. It's doughtful any of these amateurs would have been able to finish the World's wheelsucking the whole way, let alone win the race!!!
I'm not bagging on electronic trainers. Indoor training is one of the best ways to get speed on the bike. Having accurate wattage data is valuable. Use it as a barometer, but not an absolute. Finally, what do your watts mean in the real world? 1500 watts sounds great, but on a flat road with calm wind, can you spin a 53x13 at 95 rpm for 10 minutes??? What's your top speed? Can you hold 60+ km/hr for 200 meters? That's real, and not subject to calibration errors.
J-MAT
Do you mean aerobic or anaerobic threshold?
I heard a rumour that at world championships at Zolder one German professional rider had SRM cranks and he had an average of about 350 watts and on last lap about 400 watts. Whole race average sounds bit too much for me...
Races are the best tests there is.
Do you mean aerobic or anaerobic threshold?
I heard a rumour that at world championships at Zolder one German professional rider had SRM cranks and he had an average of about 350 watts and on last lap about 400 watts. Whole race average sounds bit too much for me...
Races are the best tests there is.
Anaerobic threshold.
That sounds high to me too, but you never know. It's generally accepted today that a good pro can hold 300 watts for long periods and 400+ watts for an hour or so. Anything is possible. I would hope that after all that work he at least placed well!!!
The nature of cycling or any other sport is to always perform better. You would think that with all we know about exercise physiology we would be approaching some kind of limit on how many watts a human can generate. Look at the mile record in running. Human nature is to aspire to a higher level, a higher focus. Maybe in 50 years a good pro will put out 600 watts for an hour, who knows???
That sounds high to me too, but you never know. It's generally accepted today that a good pro can hold 300 watts for long periods and 400+ watts for an hour or so. Anything is possible. I would hope that after all that work he at least placed well!!!
The nature of cycling or any other sport is to always perform better. You would think that with all we know about exercise physiology we would be approaching some kind of limit on how many watts a human can generate. Look at the mile record in running. Human nature is to aspire to a higher level, a higher focus. Maybe in 50 years a good pro will put out 600 watts for an hour, who knows???
Unfortunatly cyclists often use a number of means to push their power up, including drugs. I am afraid that the limit to power production might keep increasing as the team Dr's get better.
I guess that you could predict the highest average power output values acheivable from the maximum recorded physiological values for a cyclists. Any 'super' cyclist will be the product of good parentage (or genetic engineering) and training.
This prediction has been made for running (can't remember the ref) and has shown that a sub 2hr marathon will be very difficult and will take a very special person! Women's records tend to be 10% off mens when they plateux, therefore women's performance is likely to be 90% of mens in most events.
I guess that you could predict the highest average power output values acheivable from the maximum recorded physiological values for a cyclists. Any 'super' cyclist will be the product of good parentage (or genetic engineering) and training.
This prediction has been made for running (can't remember the ref) and has shown that a sub 2hr marathon will be very difficult and will take a very special person! Women's records tend to be 10% off mens when they plateux, therefore women's performance is likely to be 90% of mens in most events.
You can get a good idea of how power relates to speed and hill climbing at http://www.analyticcycling.com/
You can get quite a good workout at 200 watts, push a mean time trial at 300 watts, and tour the Alps fast at 400 watts.
So if you're regularly peaking at 1.5 kilowatts, I will not let you ride my bike. I like my cranks straight.
You can get quite a good workout at 200 watts, push a mean time trial at 300 watts, and tour the Alps fast at 400 watts.
So if you're regularly peaking at 1.5 kilowatts, I will not let you ride my bike. I like my cranks straight.
I do believe that woj did say "seated SPRINT" telling us that he was doing an all out effort. This is a rather high output for such an activity, but not unusually so. So 1500 watts is a good figure for a top amateur in a sprint especially for somebody his size (did somebody say 65kg?)
Veloflash, weight does have some effect on sprinting in that it is much easier to accelerate with less weight, thus leaving more energy to increasing the length of the sprint or to reach the top speed faster.
finally Supplesse, i am sure u would have no troubles with woj riding your bike as the top sprinters in the pro peleton would reach these figures daily. The figures u have read are averages for those activities, and woj was sprinting remember? a sprint is much shorter than climbing an Alpe.
Veloflash, weight does have some effect on sprinting in that it is much easier to accelerate with less weight, thus leaving more energy to increasing the length of the sprint or to reach the top speed faster.
finally Supplesse, i am sure u would have no troubles with woj riding your bike as the top sprinters in the pro peleton would reach these figures daily. The figures u have read are averages for those activities, and woj was sprinting remember? a sprint is much shorter than climbing an Alpe.
I would agree with you if the (rare) occasion occurs when a breakaway of two riders with time and distance up their sleeves play 'cat and mouse' approaching the line. Power to weight and fast twitch compositon would play a role accelerating from a low speed.
But in the real world nearly all sprints occur from high starting speeds where the bunch or a leadout have picked up the pace. The sprinters main adversary then is Mother Nature not their weight plus the bikes weight or even mechanical friction or rolling resistance.
A dedicated track sprinter's bike is beefed up and heavier than the normal track bike. If weight was a deciding factor in determining the winner then elite track sprinters would not weigh around 100kgs and have custom made heavier bikes.
Re-energizing an old thread here. I'm new to the power training concept. Purchased a Computrainer to help get through the long winter months before I can get back on the roads. I seem to hold 230-250 watts for 10-12 min. T-hold intervals (165 HR), and recover at 150-180.
I'm familiar with HR training zones, and am wondering if there is a training protocol based on power out put as well. What is "map" refered to above? I assume maximum average power, but how does this translate to traing intensity levels?
I'm familiar with HR training zones, and am wondering if there is a training protocol based on power out put as well. What is "map" refered to above? I assume maximum average power, but how does this translate to traing intensity levels?
The MAP is maximal aerobic power. The zones i developed are based on this, and the protocol for testing, and the zones themselves can be found here http://www.cyclingnews.com/fitness/?id=powerstern
hope that helps, and if you want to know please ask
ric
The World Pursuit Record time for 4K of 4min11.114sec was by Boardman in superbike position is 57.344473km/hr in around August 1996 at Manchester.
The World Hour Record was 56.375km/hr soon afterwards with superbike at Manchester.
The relative difference in speeds of pursuit to hour records is 57.345/56.375 or 1.72% as against W/Kg difference of 18.5%. This doesn't look right and I don't think can be explained by the 1.7% increase in speed having disproportionate effect on drag (1e 1.017 cubed is around 5%).
Similar threads
