Power/Weight Thread

Updates based on 2016 numbers:
Username - One More Solo
Age - 27
Height - 5ft 11in
Weight - 68KG
FTP (60min) - 273w FTP W/KG - 4.01
CP (20min) - 309w CP W/KG - 4.54
5min - 341w
1min - 546w
5sec - 942w
1sec - 1,271w
Gear - Power2Max and Garmin 800
Info -
FTP taken from a local 25
CP20 based on a climb in Mallorca.
 
xdcx, not sure if it was in this thread or not, but do you have a resouce that can be used to estimate TSS based off HR, got my CX race yesterday but obviously no power, so want to try to estimate fatigue.
 
I've recently got a PM and will be using TrainingPeaks PMC and other metrics to keep tabs on my CTL, ATL and TSB.

I've backloaded the last few months of rides (1 with a PM and the other 2 using HR-TSS) and including a short week in Germany it's pretty indicative of my standard volume which equates to a weekly TSS of 300, a high of 700 and the odd few at 4-500.

Now my standard TSS over the week is going to include around 65% of that coming from a Saturday club ride. The remainder coming from two 60-75min turbo sessions or marginally longer less intense outdoor rides but probably with similar TSS.

Of course TSS & IF are objective measures but am I right in thinking that from a recovery & performance perspective, particularly for my TSB that spreading this more evenly across the week would avoid sharp increases in TSB at the weekend and keep it more consistent overall and allowing better (i.e - quicker) recovery? whilst also allowing me to manage a growing CTL and avoid a big jump at the weekend in ATL? In other words, less more often - to the same volume being more productive long term.

The club run on a Saturday is only 30-40m at 16-17mph avg but last week I rode the 15m there and back which almost doubles the distance and time on the bike. I can always drive there and park up which would save time but is a bit of a faff or of course set off earlier and ride there & back at lower intensities which probably sounds the easiest option.
 
Last edited:
Does anybody else here have a rather large road/trainer discrepancy in FTP?

I've only tested once recently (20 min) on an old Mag turbo and it was quite warm in the garage, about 25 degrees :eek: I was adamant I could sustain higher out on the road and I was right.

This weekend taking an 8 min split from Saturday's ride makes my road FTP 17% higher! I'm not quite sure how comparable the two testing types are though the multiplier is lower on the 8 min.

I've since upgraded to a smart turbo but know for a fact in ERG mode I would struggle to hold that power for that duration but have yet to ride for longer than a testing minute on slope mode which I think will be more forgiving... Nevertheless it's consistent in ERG mode so any improvement will still be valid.

I need to read this on my lunch but know I'm probably not alone in this boat?
 
Your output on the road will be higher than on a turbo. You are definitely not alone on this boat.

I completely changed in belief regard FTP testing and now say FTP testing should be done on the turbo as it is the only enviro you can properly level for each and every test to accurately measure increase/decrease in output.

I've produced 343w on the road for 20 odd minutes but my best on the turbo for 20mins is 313w.

I don't think doing testing on the road should be disregarded if someone wants to do it that way but they should do their upmost for fairness and true progression value on themselves as an individual by ensuring they make their road testing as identical and comparative as they can each and every time. Easily achievable you might think by using the same bit of road but weather/time of day etc are all then factors outside.
 
xdcx said:
Your output on the road will be higher than on a turbo. You are definitely not alone on this boat.

I completely changed in belief regard FTP testing and now say FTP testing should be done on the turbo as it is the only enviro you can properly level for each and every test to accurately measure increase/decrease in output.

I've produced 343w on the road for 20 odd minutes but my best on the turbo for 20mins is 313w.

I don't think doing testing on the road should be disregarded if someone wants to do it that way but they should do their upmost for fairness and true progression value on themselves as an individual by ensuring they make their road testing as identical and comparative as they can each and every time. Easily achievable you might think by using the same bit of road but weather/time of day etc are all then factors outside.
Click to expand...

Thanks, I plan to continue to test FTP on the turbo as like you say the only variable condition there can be time of day & temperature and of course, form.

I've updated my GPS to my 'road' FTP as my rides were coming in at 1.0 for IF which for 4 hours is a little far fetched...

I'll leave my TrainerRoad FTP unchanged. The only conflict I can see is in the PMC but might be something I have to live with within TrainingPeaks as I can't see myself using GoldenCheetah (over TP for ease).
 
Last edited:
BennyC said:
Username - BennyC
Age - 26
Height - 5ft 10in
Weight - 81KG
FTP (60min) - FTP W/KG -
CP (20min) - 331w CP W/KG - 4.09
5min - 379w
1min - 560w
5sec - 825w
1sec -
Gear - Cycleops Mag + Garmin HRM & GSC10 + Trainer Road (Virtual Power)
Info: https://www.trainerroad.com/career/bennyc
Click to expand...

I've been training/riding with a PM now for a few weeks and as alluded the VP readings from TR were a little ambitious. Based on a variance between the turbo & road I thought they were waaaay out but having got some longer climbs in they're not that far adrift albeit not that close :o

I'll target the 1s & 5s specifically in the next few weeks as these are figured that have just happened rather than balls out efforts. Should drop down to 75KG in the next few weeks as well.

Username - BennyC
Age - 27
Height - 5ft 10in
Weight - 78KG
FTP (60min) - 277w FTP W/KG - 3.55
CP (20min) - 266w CP W/KG - 3.41
5min - 325w
1min - 475w
5sec - 822w
1sec - 879w
Gear - Powertap P1 Pedals & Wahoo Elemnt
Info - From previous 6 weeks of training ride data
Click to expand...

Not quite sure what the difference between CP & FTP is? have held 308w for 8 minutes during a ride which puts my FTP at 277w (x 0.9).

Short term goal is 4w/kg FTP.
 
Last edited:
CP, Critical Power, 20mins.
FTP, Functional Threshold Power, 60mins.

FTP typically calculated as CP x 0.95. If pure diesel endurance machine I'd use that calc, for most average folks I would say use x 0.94 and some use x 0.93 if you now your endurance is lacking somewhat.

20mins typically used as basis to establish estimated FTP 60mins as getting somewhere and conditions to do a full 60min solo is a ball ache. Unless it's a 25TT where you will have the perfect chance to get a full near to 60mins power down. But 20min as above can be fully controlled and done on turbo on a regular basis to monitor progress etc.

I personally don't think CP8's and CP12's (8min and 12min) should be used as a testing protocol. They should be used as @ CP sessions or FTP+10% sessions. 20 mins is short of the majorities 10TT time so has some relevance to most people regards being an actual amount of time you may spend at that threshold. 8 and 12 minute is just too short then calculate CP and FTP from in my opinion so really cannot see the benefit in it for testing.

316watts @ 75KG as your CP should roughly work out to around 4w/kg (300watts) for FTP. Based on your numbers and for forward training a good goal that is tough but achievable would be to drop your weight to 75kg (not saying you need to lose weight!! purely because you mentioned it!) and achieve your 300watts for a 20min test. Dropping to 75KG alone boosts your W/KG so much, if you can maintain and add 10-20watts as well as drop the weight over the next 8 weeks, you are doing something very right!
Enjoy it and good luck :D
 
Last edited:
xdcx said:
316watts @ 75KG as your CP should roughly work out to around 4w/kg (300watts) for FTP. Based on your numbers and for forward training a good goal that is tough but achievable would be to drop your weight to 75kg (not saying you need to lose weight!! purely because you mentioned it!) and achieve your 300watts for a 20min test. Dropping to 75KG alone boosts your W/KG so much, if you can maintain and add 10-20watts as well as drop the weight over the next 8 weeks, you are doing something very right!
Enjoy it and good luck :D
Click to expand...

Thanks for clarifying :)

75KG is well within reach without too much difficulty and so far I've not noticed any drop in performance or power (by feel until I got a PM) having come down gradually from the high 80's.

I've got a segment 15m away which is aptly named which I will attack in the near future. 300w+ feels sustainable and not too much of a stretch for 20 mins and my fitness/VO2 max is only going upwards currently.

I had a solo blast yesterday on a route I haven't ridden in about 2-3 months and since increasing my cycling and focusing largely solely on it (reducing lifting volume significantly to do so) my average speed was over 1.5mph quicker 35m/1,600ft and despite pushing hard in places my HR was much lower and steadier than in the past :)
 
Username - Saddler
Age - 39
Height - 5'7"
Weight - 55kg
FTP (60min) - 166 (3w/kg)
CP (20min) - 179
5min - 217w
1min - 260w
5sec - 460w
Gear - Tacx Vortex smart Turbo power meter
Info - Stats from Zwift

Though I'd add my figures (based on riding on Zwift). Think i've set some new record lows:D Probably not as accurate as a real power meter but probably not far off. I'd love to try a running power meter as i'm sure i can output more power running than cycling.
 
I remember reading a while ago that a very broad approximation for running w/kg is your speed in m/s on flat ground i.e. 4m/s is 4w/kg. No idea how accurate that is but 4w/kg is what I would consider a good level of cycling fitness and translates to a near 40 min 10km which again seems like a good standard. Maybe our resident triantelopes could chip in? :D
 
One More Solo said:
I remember reading a while ago that a very broad approximation for running w/kg is your speed in m/s on flat ground i.e. 4m/s is 4w/kg. No idea how accurate that is but 4w/kg is what I would consider a good level of cycling fitness and translates to a near 40 min 10km which again seems like a good standard. Maybe our resident triantelopes could chip in? :D
Click to expand...

I don't think that can be correct :(
4m/s is approx 6:40 per mile. 4w/kg is pretty good standard in cycling for a decent club rider but 6:40 minute per mile for a decent club runner is easy/steady running.
6:40 or 4m/s is only worth a 41:30 10K. Sub 38 is what I would class as an OK standard alongside 4w/kg being decent standard so can see these mismatch quite a bit at that level.

However.... playing about with numbers as I write, it might not actually be that out there!
My 5K pace when fit was 5:10 per mile which = 5.20m/s
My 5K best was 15:50 or thereabouts so ties in with my last 20min test I done on the bike which was 5.11w/kg.

10K wise I done a 33:00 which is 5:18 minute miling and 5.06m/s. So using logic to that would equate to a roughly 5w/kg equiv on the bike.

I think this becomes a closer comparative the higher each metric goes but yeah, could be very very broad way of comparing the two.
 
Shamrock said:
Last month I finally PB'd 5K and 10K. 17:56 and 37:01 respectively.:D

My FTP however hasn't ever been measured at 4W/kg. I think my Stages is b0rked, clearly under-reads.:p
Click to expand...

Sub 18 and sub 38 seriously good standards. You'll go quicker over 10k, sure I spoke to you about that before ;)
Ahh Stages, you're definitely putting out 30watts more on the leg it isn't measuring ;):p
 
Not to turn this into running chat but your times are seriously rapid! I know some guys running those sort of times on Strava. I'd like to get close eventually, but don't want to sacrifice my cycling either.

xdcx said:
Sub 18 and sub 38 seriously good standards. You'll go quicker over 10k, sure I spoke to you about that before ;)
Ahh Stages, you're definitely putting out 30watts more on the leg it isn't measuring ;):p
Click to expand...

I just felt better on the 10K race than the 5K race. I think my 5K should be more convincingly sub-18 but it often comes down to how you feel on the day, same for a bike race or TT.
 
Conditions and how you feel are just as fundamental with running as they are for bike racing/TT'ing. I ran 15:30 on a training run for 5K, then went altitude training for 3 weeks, came back fitter than ever but felt rubbish and ran a 16:05 in the Scottish Nashy 5k. It's all so relevant to your on the day condition but reckon your 5 and 10 times will come down. I would focus on the 10k though!

Local race wise back then it was rapid enough for wins and top 3's but the guys I was consistently beating with no problem have been working as part of the training group I got up and running prior to my injury and they are now regularly running sub 32's.... If I was still running I would have been running 30's for 10K and looking at top 15 national XC up here and stuff as I had proper potential with my running :( It still really depresses me now looking back on it all and to what "could have been"....
 
Well based on those calculations I should have a cycling ftp of at least 203w at 3.7w/kg so I guess there's work to do. My main problem is I tend to put quantity over quality. I've done over 400hrs of running and riding this year equating to 3000 miles of cycling and 1500 miles of running.
 
saddler said:
Well based on those calculations I should have a cycling ftp of at least 203w at 3.7w/kg so I guess there's work to do. My main problem is I tend to put quantity over quality. I've done over 400hrs of running and riding this year equating to 3000 miles of cycling and 1500 miles of running.
Click to expand...

You're a skinny minny (not a bad thing!) and from that split of cycling/running you are actually more focused to running I would say. Take that into equation with your weight also you are not going to push big FTP numbers doing both.... Unless you are a full time athlete!

I trained a lot with a guy who wanted so hard to be a triathlete, but worked full time as a solicitor so I eventually got the point one day when he was moaning about struggling to break 18mins for 5k when so fit and told him that he doesn't have the time or the physical capability to train for all 3. His best bet was to focus on the sport he enjoyed the most if he wanted to be competitive at any of them. He decided running was his thing, something I agree'd with, and he is running a hell of a quicker now over 5k and is competitive on local scene.... Sure he enjoyed doing all 3, but it was a proper jack of all trades situation which was enjoyable but he would never be competitive. The compromise was to focus mainly on cycling but still do swimming and cycling for fun/cross train/recovery.

Shamrock will know better than me but if you could push 3.5w/kg and run a 38min 10K in a duathlon that is likely bloody good standards is it not?

Whereas in a road race on the bike, 3.5w/kg will see you dropped swiftly and a 38min road 10k will not even see you top 50 at decent club level races. so all these things have to be taken with relevance to the people you are competing against and the specialisms they focus on versus the specific race you are targeting.
 
xdcx said:
Conditions and how you feel are just as fundamental with running as they are for bike racing/TT'ing. I ran 15:30 on a training run for 5K, then went altitude training for 3 weeks, came back fitter than ever but felt rubbish and ran a 16:05 in the Scottish Nashy 5k. It's all so relevant to your on the day condition but reckon your 5 and 10 times will come down. I would focus on the 10k though!
Click to expand...

My next goal is actually a sub-3h marathon in early April, but focusing on speed/short distance during the miserable winter period.

Cycling is going to take a big hit due to the run training I expect.:(
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom