Road Bike, Cycling Forums banner

Power meter or not?

15K views 57 replies 28 participants last post by  stevesbike 
#1 ·
Many say they work great. But is it worth it the money? I'm a avid rider just no more racing. I do train with race team with strong riders that I can keep up with. And many of them use PM because they race every weekend. So my opinion on the PM is that if anyone uses one you must be serious about riding or racing. To me cycling is still fun and I enjoy it. But a PM might be to much for many of us avid riders. I'm debating on getting one. Not sure I'll ever do it. It's just a thought now. Do any of you have one just for training and not racing? If I was to get me one it would be my training tool for Gran Fondo's and that's about it.
 
#3 ·
I don't and won't race, but have a PM on each of my bikes. Like was said, they are great for pacing on long rides or climbs. Data analysis tools will give you quantitative information about improved performance over a time interval (best 5 minute etc) and give an indication of fatigue / fitness too. Certainly not a requirement but more of a nice luxury. Personally, now that I am used to it I would definitely miss riding without one.
 
#4 ·
PM's are for anyone. Not just racer types or pro riders. There are many racers I know that have them but, don't understand how to really interpret the data and adjust training accordingly. There are many guys I know who don't have one yet train very effectively. Kind of depends on the user I guess.

I'd recommend reading a book or too on the subject and try and determine if you will be the kind of guy that will use the data to improve or just look at the data and move on. Either way is fine but, if better performance is what you seek, it wouldn't be logical to buy one and ignore the data.
 
#5 ·
Very good points! It's like a study of your fitness. Or taking a class on PM and data. I'll do some more research as if I'm going to do or not.
 
#7 ·
I'm too lazy and stupid to benefit from one but there's no question that data could help with training and pacing regardless of what you are training for (race or just general riding).
I think most people know themself well enough to know if they'd use or have an interest in the data so if you think you're type to benefit from or simply enjoy knowing power numbers I'd suggest going for it regardless of if you race or not.

I know a few guys who've become slaves to numbers and irritate the heck out of fellow riders by talking stats all the time but other than the slight risk of becoming 'that guy' no reason not to get one if you got the $ and think you'd like to have one.
 
#9 ·
"....I'm toying with the idea of getting a powercal for $50 and then waiting for a crank based system to show up for under $500..."


For many years now I've been oogling a Power Meter, but just can't bring myself to buy one. Still, if they ever get a durable crank-based system under $500, well, I would throw caution to the wind and immediately get one. Among other things, I would love to be able to know how many watts per kilogram I can put out before I enter that zone where I am beginning anaerobic-inducing overload. As it is, despite decades or riding/racing, I am always guessing (usually too optimistically thereby reducing the effectiveness of the workout) at that threshold when out on a hard ride training day.
 
#10 · (Edited)
If you can spend the coin I would do it.
I have one on my trainer bike and it is a great tool for intervals. I am not a racer but I do about 100 miles a week and I am much stronger because of focused training. I also have one on my main roadbike and I use it a lot....some for measured intervals and sometimes to regulate my power -either to make sure I don't blow up on a big climb or to stay right at 85% ftp so I can recover but not back off too much.
 
#11 ·
If you can spend the coin I would do it.
I have one on my trainer bike and it is a great tool for intervals. I am not a racer but I do about 100 miles a week and I am much stronger because of focused training. I also have one on my main roadbike and I use it a lot....some for ,ensured intervals and sometimes to regulate my power either to make sure I don't blow up on a big cling or to stay right at 85% from so I can recover but not back off too much.
I think you nailed it.

The power meter is a far more accurate way to meter out your effort on a ride than HR. I notice that many of my friends who don't use PM's start long climbs at unsustainable power levels only to suffer significantly late in those climbs. This is particularly noticeable when doing multiple mountain passes with pauses to regroup at the bottoms. Perceived effort fails miserably in the early stages of second and third climbs where going out too hot comes with an even higher price.

In addition, the PM is a great way to track the dividends of your training during the season.
 
#12 ·
Forgot to mention - I was not really convinced until i started a computrainer class. One minute in I was sold. I realized that before I would just ride as hard as I could for two hours. Now I maintin a strong zone 2 with plenty of power in reserve.
 
#19 · (Edited)
Many say they work great. But is it worth it the money?
Absolutely provided you're riding at least 1.5 hours at least 4 days a week (that's about the minimum for decent cycling fitness) and a structured training program won't detract from your enjoyment.

You can implement a structured training plan with heart rate or even rated perceived exertion, although power is more effective because it maximizes time stressing systems of interest. It doesn't lag like heart rate or drift upwards so you can pace intervals better. It differentiates between when it feels hard because it is, it feels hard because you're fatigued but can dig deeper, and it feels hard but you can't do more and should stop since you're getting limited benefit but increasing fatigue which will limit workouts a day or two in the future. Power tells you when your current program isn't working so you can make adjustments while heart rate doesn't - starting the season I averaged the same 171 heart rate on my first 10 minute interval in a set at 200W versus 240W now, and if that's not over 250 in my next mesocycle I'll make adjustments.

At $150 for a used wired PowerTap and new power meters (4iii) starting at $400 the price is no longer interesting compared to what many of us already spend on cycling. The incremental cost may even be negative - I have less money in my alloy PowerTap wheelset than co-workers do aluminum setups without power.

Do any of you have one just for training and not racing? If I was to get me one it would be my training tool for Gran Fondo's and that's about it.
Sure. Together with a structured training program that increased my power to weight ratio from under 1.9 W/kg to over 3.5, as in I can climbs hills in a 50 ring where I used to need a 30.
 
#28 ·
Did you create that "structured training plan" yourself or did you get it from somewhere?
How did you create/choose it?
I started with a computrainer class - I learned a lot and that has helped a ton. its funny - very high short intervals are relatively easy for me but the long ones kick my rear.
I think trainer road is the best deal for workouts to do on your own. swift may also have workouts soon
 
#27 ·
I added a G3 power tap to my zipp 303 and barely saw any weight gain...i want to say 100 grams but I am always tinkering so I can't be sure what else was on the bike as far as before and after.
 
#33 ·
I have power meters on both bikes... IMO, they are actually far more useful for training than they are for simply riding.

On the trainer, I use the power meter almost everyday. I've got quite a few structured workouts, aimed at varying goals but each one involves using certain percentages of my FTP number to train and build more power.... with steady training over the winter, I've seen my FTP go from 212 last fall to 270 by this spring.

During actual rides... it really doesn't come into play unless you're trying to pace yourself for sustained efforts over lengths of time.... i.e. you have a 20 minute climb, you know what power level you can hold. This can be useful if you and your buddies are having a bragging rights battle about who can climb the local mountain the fastest. Obviously, It can also help with races and time trials, but if you're not doing much of that stuff then it won't really matter.
 
#37 · (Edited)
This is always an interesting debate. While there's no question that power meters provide a higher degree of accuracy, I also believe you can achieve similar performance gains through HR training--IF you are equally diligent with regards to baseline efforts, training zones and efficiency testing.

The Power Meter, alone, doesn't produce results; it's the purposeful training and consistent effort which allows people to improve their performance. Knowing your threshold, training in the right zones and monitoring progress will make you a stronger rider. But you don't need a power meter to do that.

Sure there's "noise" in HR data (lag, cardiac drift, etc.) but that's not the same as saying it doesn't work. If you want to stick with your HRM, just keep in mind that the zone percentages are different for Lactate Threshold HR (LTHR) vs. FTP and have at it.

Text White Line Style Black-and-white
 
#38 ·
This is always an interesting debate. While there's no question that power meters provide a higher degree of accuracy, I also believe you can achieve similar performance gains through HR training--IF you are equally diligent with regards to baseline efforts, training zones and efficiency testing.

The Power Meter, alone, doesn't produce results; it's the purposeful training and consistent effort which allows people to improve their performance. Knowing your threshold, training in the right zones and monitoring progress will make you a stronger rider. But you don't need a power meter to do that.

Sure there's "noise" in HR data (lag, cardiac drift, etc.) but that's not the same as saying it doesn't work. If you want to stick with your HRM, just keep in mind that the zone percentages are different for Lactate Threshold HR (LTHR) vs. FTP and have at it.

View attachment 306864
but this misses the entire point of power training. It provides a quantitative metric of training stress - TSS, for which you can develop training load metrics in the short term (ATL) and longer term (CTL). This provides a way to structure training, to gauge fitness, and to understand recovery. HRM methods (e.g., TRIMP) don't do this.
 
#41 · (Edited)
I was just going to bring this up. The price of admission has come way down and I think the DA crank arm is compatible with multiple Shimano cranks so you don't have to have an entire DA crankset.

If you've got the money I don't see why it's any different investing in a PM if you already make some effort to use HR and a cycling computer to measure your progress/regress and attempt to create some sort of structured training plan. You are just bringing in another, better tool for the job. Now whether or not you use it correctly is another question.
 
#45 ·
I'm not disputing the utility of using a power meter. What I am disputing is the lack of utility in using HRM for structured endurance training efforts in cycling that you assert. I have no idea how effective TRIMP is or not - I never played with the concept of assigning points for different loads.

Many elite endurance athletes use HR methods for training, including runners, XC skiers, rowers, ... In fact cycling is the only sport that can readily use direct power. That doesn't make it any better, just different. The major downside to HR methods is the lag. The major issue with direct power is the need to frequently retest for correlation of output power with the key physiological parameters. For endurance training, both are equally useful when used properly, and as studies published to date have shown neither is superior to the other for training. I appreciate you don't like the results. Cognitive dissonance can be a real b1tch at times. If you have data or equally credible sources with data to dispute those well published results, not just opinions, then bring it. .

BTW - I used HR for training in the 80's too, both running and cycling. I understand both. Perhaps instead of trying to diminish credible works and those who bring them when they don't comport with your views you could actually bring some real results to support your otherwise unsubstantiated assertions.
 
#46 ·
The fact that you keep referring to studies that compare the efficacy of setting training zones via power vs. HR indicates that you don't really understand how power-based training works. Having a reliable, validated, and accurate method for quantifying training load, integrating it with a reliable measure of fitness (critical power), and being able to track these over time underlies the utility of power-based training. I said HR trimp is not as accurate, doesn't include a measure of fitness, or track accurately changes over time. The fact that you say runners and others still use HR also reveals that you aren't familiar with current training methodology - most runners have abandoned HR-based training and leading tools like training peaks uses non-HR methods for quantifying running training load.

The short-term studies you refer to don't even touch on this. The reason I said they were GIGO is because they are methodologically uninteresting studies, of dubious validity, and don't even address the above issues. The fact that there aren't good training studies doesn't mean we should follow bad ones. To do the proper study over longer-terms would be impractical, but that's the bane of exercise science.
 
#48 ·
Here we go.....he said, they said!! followed by "got proof."

Back to the topic- get the power meter if you need direction. Some people can go by feel or HR. This never worked for me. I got a pm and have seen drastic improvement. My training rides are much more focused, which makes my group rides and friendly racing much more pleasant and satisfying.
 
#51 ·
I know a former world tour rider, multiple national champion etc., who just "winged" it and never had a structured training program. No one is saying it's impossible to be successful without a power meter, but people who are successful without one might still benefit (and have been even better). Greg Lemond didn't have one, and now thinks he was chronically over-training, which shortened his career. That's the sort of mistake a careful power-based approach could also help avoid.

RE iberich, who for whatever reason thinks controlled studies are revealing in this area (hint, they aren't as the gap between the lab and the real world in cycling is still enormous), the only source that really matters is the fact that virtually every serious coach and serious racer has adopted a power-based approach because they see its practical value. I'm guessing you spend more time googling research papers than training/racing/coaching.
 
#50 ·
I'll have to play with the data if I have time. I'm having really good power this year. I still have the usual struggles of being sick on race day or being stuck working at the hospital. For whatever reasons, my power is up and I'm generally a little faster than usual.
 
#52 ·
I'll have to play with the data if I have time. I'm having really good power this year. I still have the usual struggles of being sick on race day or being stuck working at the hospital. For whatever reasons, my power is up and I'm generally a little faster than usual.
Since I got my PM, I appeared to have bad days on my targeted race days or organized rides. I felt like I was dying half the time and did not want to even look at my numbers. Yet, there they were........ PR after PR. At times, I think it was a waste of money. Then, I get some big climb PR or my buddy that normally drops me says, "oh, you are right here."
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top