The Indoor Riding/ Zwift/ TrainerRoad etc. Thread

[#Chri5#]

Do people recommend TR or SF? Or both? The integration looks good, but does it work well?

I started with TR and purchasing individual SF videos.

Cancelled TR and sub'd to Sufferfest once they launched the Windows app. Had a couple of bugs which they've very quickly patched. Getting all the videos for a similar price to just TR is good - means you get the sessions varied.

App has virtual power plus smart trainer control, so it's pretty well featured.

 

[Irish_Tom]

I do with the iPad connected to a tv. Works faultlessly.

Great, thanks — I'll hook up my sensors to the Turbo Trainer and give it a go.

 

[batfink]

I think I'll try an FTP test tonight (haven't done one for a while) and see where that gets me.

Ripped myself to shreds on the FTP test tonight, averaging 261w for the 20 minutes which gives me a new FTP of 253w. I'm slightly unfit at the moment but I think an equivalent effort on the KK would have given me circa 295-298w FTP. That's a big difference, although not quite as bad as I thought it would be.

 

[BennyC]

You can free ride after a workout but not before.

I don't know about the workout builder but I've done one of the set workouts on there and there are cadence targets in the workout like hold 250w at a cadence of 60rpm for 2 mins then speed up to 90rpm etc.

If you set a watt upper limit and a cadence specified on that effort, it will come up on screen to "spin faster" or "spin slower". I think it is when you go +/- 4RPM to your specified RPM.

If you set your watts as 250w @ 60RPM on an effort, the smart trainer will ramp up the resistance and punish you if you were to try and sit at 90RPM for example. It would tell you on screen to spin slower and it would really smack you with resistance on the trainer to try and get your cadence down and level you out at the 250w you specified. Same idea as with power, if you are way over or way under, the resistance will alter automatically in accordance to get you within your specified values. Plus you get the on screen messages.

Nifty in the workout builder I only found yesterday was you can insert a text message to pop up at any point. So I put in text messages 20 seconds before an effort saying what the effort is and it's pretty cool. I know the session I am doing but it's a nice thing to be able to do.... Now, if we could share our custom workouts or a coach could create and share workouts that could be imported to Zwift and used, that would be nice!!

Thanks guys.

Make the suggestion to Zwift and I'm sure like TR, they'll take it onboard and make it available if there's enough want. There's quite a few workouts from TR I plan to replicate within Zwift shortly.

Snip Power Woes.

I'd be pretty happy if it was as close as that! My concern is that 200w is now a real effort to hit and maintain and 300w I can hold for no more than a few seconds whereas before, 200w was 'steady state' pace and 300w was a hard, but sustainable effort.

That's a big difference and removes some of the enjoyment from Zwift because it has a huge impact on my w/kg for the same level of effort. Holding 2 w/kg now requires considerable effort.

Ultimately you're putting in the same effort and still deriving a training benefit but just that your true TSS and IF is going to be rather borked for the purpose of Performance Management. And also that your on screen Avatar will be getting dropped like a stone.

To give some perspective here's my Vortex Smart, calibrated with a spindown vs my P1's which I verified against a WattBike last week. There is some loss due to my turbo inertia and I accept that to be in the region of 10% based on my observation of sustainable road power on recorded segments. In this instance I would have said the effort compared to around 235-240w on the road.



Drop in to a facility with a WattBike and perform some short drills or an FTP test.

What sort of speed, distance & elevation are you covering outdoors? It'll be hard to derive but might provide some clarity as to whether your VP previously was what's mislead you.

 

[One More Solo]

Another alternative is to ride up a hill of known distance and elevation gain and plug the numbers in here: http://spinloose.co.uk/estimate-wpk.php

Stand on the scales in your kit with your bike and put that weight at the bottom. Provided there isn't a massive head or tailwind, it usually spits out numbers within 5% of my powermeter. Granted you won't have a 20 minute climb nearby but it'll give you an idea of what power you're capable of for a shorter duration and you can extrapolate from there.

 

[xdcx]

Ripped myself to shreds on the FTP test tonight, averaging 261w for the 20 minutes which gives me a new FTP of 253w. I'm slightly unfit at the moment but I think an equivalent effort on the KK would have given me circa 295-298w FTP. That's a big difference, although not quite as bad as I thought it would be.

OK from this and your above reply, I would say stick to the Kickr and gather the data for a bit. I would trust anything actually measuring power over anything estimating it and it does seem the KK has been boosting numbers for you.

253w FTP would put your top end of z2 around 190ish watts so at 200w you say you are struggling to maintain on the Kickr that is right in your z3 so should be tough and not easy spinning you might have been used to on the KK?

Only thing throwing me off is you saying that 2w/kg is a struggle to maintain? 150w spinning away for someone who just done a test for 253w doesn't sound right at all. 2w/kg firmly down in your z2 so should be a comfortable pace for you to maintain sat on a turbo.

Without another power meter to compare and with Wahoo coming back saying it is fine I would reckon, I think you need to build your zones off the FTP test you done and see how things go. It does look like that KK was over reading massively for you, which is not a bad thing really, it didn't stop you training effectively, you were just training on different number values so time to adjust to the Kickr now. As I say, only thing throwing me is you struggling to sit at 2w/kg?

Edit, on your post between what you got on the Kickr and what you would expect from the KK, 40 odd watts doesn't seem as bad as first seemed I would agree. I think that would fall in nicely with measured vs estimated power discrepancy.

 

[batfink]

OK from this and your above reply, I would say stick to the Kickr and gather the data for a bit. I would trust anything actually measuring power over anything estimating it and it does seem the KK has been boosting numbers for you.

253w FTP would put your top end of z2 around 190ish watts so at 200w you say you are struggling to maintain on the Kickr that is right in your z3 so should be tough and not easy spinning you might have been used to on the KK?

Only thing throwing me off is you saying that 2w/kg is a struggle to maintain? 150w spinning away for someone who just done a test for 253w doesn't sound right at all. 2w/kg firmly down in your z2 so should be a comfortable pace for you to maintain sat on a turbo.

Without another power meter to compare and with Wahoo coming back saying it is fine I would reckon, I think you need to build your zones off the FTP test you done and see how things go. It does look like that KK was over reading massively for you, which is not a bad thing really, it didn't stop you training effectively, you were just training on different number values so time to adjust to the Kickr now. As I say, only thing throwing me is you struggling to sit at 2w/kg?

Edit, on your post between what you got on the Kickr and what you would expect from the KK, 40 odd watts doesn't seem as bad as first seemed I would agree. I think that would fall in nicely with measured vs estimated power discrepancy.

Thanks xdcx, really useful and informative post. When training on my own, the numbers are the numbers and are useful as a benchmark, I've only noticed it become an issue now I'm using Zwift more and more. Eg. last week I could hold pace with a 3.5w/kg group relatively easily (with the KK) whereas this week I lasted no more than a couple of minutes before I was spat out of the back.

Based on last night's FTP test, I need to give a few group rides a go and see if there are any that I struggle to hold pace with. Maybe I'm not trying hard enough or the 2w/kg groups were actually going harder than the stated pace!

I wonder whether my KK results were affected by the fact I'm a naturally high cadence person (95-100rpm most of the time)? I know it shouldn't because virtual power reads speed AND cadence but perhaps I now have a more accurate basepoint.

BennyC - weekend rides can be anything up to 60 miles in 3.5-4hrs, depending upon terrain but being on the edge of the Yorkshire Dales this can be 3,000ft or more of climbing.

One More Solo - thanks for the link. I've never come across that site before so will have to give it a go.

 

[xdcx]

Thanks xdcx, really useful and informative post. When training on my own, the numbers are the numbers and are useful as a benchmark, I've only noticed it become an issue now I'm using Zwift more and more. Eg. last week I could hold pace with a 3.5w/kg group relatively easily (with the KK) whereas this week I lasted no more than a couple of minutes before I was spat out of the back.

Based on last night's FTP test, I need to give a few group rides a go and see if there are any that I struggle to hold pace with. Maybe I'm not trying hard enough or the 2w/kg groups were actually going harder than the stated pace!

I wonder whether my KK results were affected by the fact I'm a naturally high cadence person (95-100rpm most of the time)? I know it shouldn't because virtual power reads speed AND cadence but perhaps I now have a more accurate basepoint.

3.5w/kg should be pretty tough to hold for a sustained time it certainly shouldn't be easily spinning away like what 2w/kg should be for example. 3.5w/kg for you is going to be around 260watts from your 20min test yesterday. That is above what you can hold for 60mins if your test was an accurate enough one! Stick with the 2w/kg group for now, you are more than capable of sticking to that pace, keep an eye on what guys are actually putting out, I have no idea about these group ride things in Zwift but would imagine people slightly more capable enter lower ranked ones so they look like heroes!

Maybe with the Kickr it is due to it being controlled by Zwift so the resistance is changing on you with climbs/downhills so sustaining a w/kg figure isn't as straightforward as spinning away regardless as it was with the KK?

Persevere with it, once you get to grips with your new watt ranges and the Kickr overall I think it will all come into its own and you'll actually see benefits from it all. Regarding your high cadence, I don't think that is too much of a worry, 95-100RPM is fairly average cadence for most these days I would say and from the sessions I have done both high and low cadence in ranges 50-60RPM and 94RPM as I ride normally, the watt numbers coming back are very consistent as far as I have seen.

 

[Roady]

Spoiler

Here's the current Turbo/Roller roomgarage. Work commences this weekend..

Looks... Not very welcoming at all lol!

I'm sure with a few things cleared & cleaned it'll be warm and cosy!

I've been using Trainerroad with a Kurt Kinetic Road Machine for a few years. The output figures were always consistent and I averaged around 300W for my FTP.
<snip>
I'm now getting into Zwift and to enhance the experience, I've upgraded to a Wahoo Kickr. <snip>I struggle to hold over 200 Watts for any length of time and 300W is a serious effort (that I couldn't hold).

One of the main differences I can see here is comparing two totally different trainers on two different platforms. It's very difficult to acquire a 'baseline' to know which is the most accurate. As the KICKR is a Smart Trainer the logic follows that it should be the most accurate. But of course it could have a fault/bad offset etc etc.

BennyC - weekend rides can be anything up to 60 miles in 3.5-4hrs, depending upon terrain but being on the edge of the Yorkshire Dales this can be 3,000ft or more of climbing.

That kind of distance+elevation:time I'd be surprised if your FTP was as low as 250W. My FTP is around 270W and I'd be hard pressed to do a solo 3.5 hour 60 miler around here without some long descents to offset the climbing (it's 17mph avg). Away from traffic, junctions, windless & totally flat I should be able to do a 21/22mph avg, but almost impossible on the roads around here!

Previously, I came from using a KK Road Machine. I found a number of varying results due to on-wheel tightening variation. I'd always fitted it to tyre, then done 3 full turns. If I experienced any tyre slip I tightened it another half turn. Without any 'app' or way to calibrate things I just assumed it was correct. My various FTP tests over 3 winters were all over the place (217W-280W). I got an InRide pod and could never get the thing working correctly (had multiple replacements), then after reading KK's responses to peoples questions over their 'Smart Control' unit on DCRainmakers blog I really lost faith in the brand. The basic RnR & RM are fantastic dumb trainers (some of the best), but I wouldn't encourage anyone to spend money on the InRide or Smart Control modules. Their attitude towards FE-C & training software suppliers just stinks.

I invested my money instead on a Tacx Vortex Smart. Fitted it 'on-wheel' similar to my Road Machine & tightened the same way to avoid tyre slip. Ran the spin-down calibration and things were far far too tight! Off the top of the scale! I had to loosen things considerably to fall between the 'calibrated' lines on the Tacx app. So for the last 3 years I'd been overtightening my Road Machine, screwing up any FTP data. As I'd mounted/unmounted frequently & swapped out the wheel (1 bike for road & turbo) probably none of my training had been consistent.

EDIT: final thought around power data, have a look at some strava segment data for local climbs and flat sections you know you've been pushing quite hard along. The Strava 'leaderboards' can be filtered by rider weight & age. Using this alongside your data see which other similar rider times power data is and compare to yours. I know its all estimated power averages, but at least it's a ballpark figure. You might even find some riders with actual power data from PWM's with similar times, if you do (and have Strava Premium), you can check out power curves from their rides. Looking at these, providing they're long and have a high intensity (such as TT's and club rides) you can roughly figure out peoples FTP (bad example as intensity is so low).

 

[Bear]

I invested my money instead on a Tacx Vortex Smart. Fitted it 'on-wheel' similar to my Road Machine & tightened the same way to avoid tyre slip. Ran the spin-down calibration and things were far far too tight! Off the top of the scale! I had to loosen things considerably to fall between the 'calibrated' lines on the Tacx app. So for the last 3 years I'd been overtightening my Road Machine, screwing up any FTP data. As I'd mounted/unmounted frequently & swapped out the wheel (1 bike for road & turbo) probably none of my training had been consistent.

In theory how much you tighten the trainer shouldn't make any difference to your power figures because the purpose of the spin down calibration is to subtract the transmission losses of the tyre/trainer interface from the running data to give you your power figures taking out any variation.

For instance, if you over tighten the trainer, the drag will be higher so there will be a greater subtraction of the calibration coefficients from your running data as it should be harder to ride. Likewise if you lightly tighten the trainer (no slip) the calibration coefficients will be smaller to the subtraction from your running data which is reflected in an easier amount of effort to ride.

 

[BennyC]

EDIT: final thought around power data, have a look at some strava segment data for local climbs and flat sections you know you've been pushing quite hard along. The Strava 'leaderboards' can be filtered by rider weight & age. Using this alongside your data see which other similar rider times power data is and compare to yours. I know its all estimated power averages, but at least it's a ballpark figure.

Strava estimate powers are lolbad I would really disregard them because you've no idea of rider weight or if solo/group.

For example on a local climb (not accounting for weather conditions):



(Not in date or general ride intensity or, nor factoring in increases in fitness & power/breathing skills from varying heart rates)

 

[One More Solo]

Not sure if anyone ever does the ZSUN rides on Zwift but I really recommend them. Ride leaders are good at keeping everyone in check.

 

[BennyC]

Is there a 'powermatch' facility in Zwift like there is with TrainerRoad? Whereby a Smart trainer can be controlled by another device such as a PowerMeter?

Can't find any confirmation, just threads from 2015 requesting the feature. Couldn't see any settings this morning...

 

[booyaka]

Remembered how much I love and hate sufferfest videos in equal measures!!

https://www.strava.com/activities/825480828

Free 7 day trial of the sufferfest app. It was in ERG mode, but have options to select levels instead.....not sure what to do?

 

[Berger]

4 laps of hilly Wattopia tonight, worked hard up the hill, my legs can feel it now!

 

[#Chri5#]

Tried the new Sufferfest mashup yesterday - It Seems Like Thin Air

https://www.strava.com/activities/825258297

Two hours and 30 minutes of suffering - the last climb lasts 40 minutes!

 

[Conanius]

Hi Everyone,

Without doubt, the weakest and worst indoor cyclist here.

I used to do a decent amount (In my mind) of cycle commenting (Circa 24 miles a day in Central London 5 days a week) but picked up an injury a few years ago and spun my first pedals on Thursday night on a turbo setup I've picked up.

Now I have kids its far easier to do a session at night and going out at 8pm in the pitch black on icy unlit Gloucestershire backroads doesn't fill me with joy.

I've got one hell of a hill to climb - I'd say I'm about 1.5-2 Stone overweight, and I need to start my running again soon as I am sure I couldn't even do 5k now. So... scene suitably set !

I've picked up a Elite Qubo Digital Smart B+ turbo which seems pretty good and integrates with Zwift on my iPhone.

However, I noticed that whilst my cadence rate looked about right (it apparently guesses this as there are no on bike sensors) the speed was wildly variable. I could be in top doing a quick spin section and I'd be doing 6mph....a minute into a cool down I'd suddenly start doing 26mph.

I think I'll probably buy a BTLE on bike speed and cadence sensor as I can then use that with a cycle computer so I have a constant when I start going out for rides. Looking at getting the Wahoo one as I've also got their HRM and that seems pretty good.

Bike went in on Saturday for a service - sounds like rear hub is shot and all the cables need replacing as it sat dirty in the garage for nearly 2 years - but I'm aiming to do 2-3 sessions a week and build up to doing some proper cycling later in the year. Collect it later today so hope to do a ride tomorrow night.

 

[platypus]

Cannot find a cheat rear wheel for love nor money. Looking like the £50ish from wiggle will probably get it.

 

[platypus]

Cannot find a cheat rear wheel for love nor money. Looking like the £50ish from wiggle will probably get it.

Ok wtf. Just logged onto Wiggle to buy this. And I ordered one 3 days ago .

If Wiggle do truly ever get predictive ordering, I'm screwed .

 

[Derek W]

Two months off the bike. New year, new diet and fitness kick again.

https://www.strava.com/activities/826699564

45 minute turbo session doing my usual youtube video. Will probably sort out that Zwift malarky once I've got a few sessions under my belt and mix it up a bit more. Hopefully I'll keep the motivation going and get way more miles in than i did last year cos that was pitiful after my crash in April.

EDIT

Only did 217 miles last year most of them were on my turbo at the back end of the year as well.