powertap with the Poweragent software. WKO+ from trainingpeaks is supposed to be better but costs per year. Its able to tell some very important information with normative watts and intensity factor. Hopefully poweragent will be including this in their next release
me
· 7 months ago
all interesting info.
quick correction. either 24Nm is wrong or 22% is wrong. why? 22% of 27Nm is 5.94Nm. 27minus 5.9 is not 24. 11% less would be correct or 21Nm would be correct. or am i missing something? Good thing you ride good. ha ha.
cyclingtips
· 7 months ago
oops...you're right. thx
Davo
· 7 months ago
WKO+, trainingpeaks, only costs $100 usd as a one off.
Well worth it...
Tomo
· 7 months ago
Tip Part 2:
How to loose 5-6 kgs?
S
· 7 months ago
Humans have a terrible thirst reaction. We wait too long before feeling thirsty and then when we do feel thirsty, we often mistae it for hunger. Sounds crazy huh?
So, when you feel 'hungry' next, drink a glass of water and wait 2-3min instead. Then decide if you do need to eat.
Anonymous
· 6 months ago
ECA but do your homework first! It still takes a balanced diet with plenty of small meals throughout the day and LOTS of water.
The Big Ring
· 6 months ago
I am confused, looking at the screen shots you have posted.
First climb lists interval data as 4.5 km, 16:33 = 16.31 km/hr Second climb says 6.22km, 19:36 = 18.96 km/hr
Curiously, in both plots, your avg W/kg is listed as 4.5 - so even though you lost weight, your power / kg did not increase. I was under the impression that w/kg was the determinant for speed up a climb (as steep as Devil's Elbow at least) yet it would appear you certainly did go quicker.
Finally, 369W / 4.52 = 81.6kg 361W / 4.51 = 80kg
A loss of 1.6kg, not the 5 or 6 you mentioned...
Publishing stats and power output online is tantamount to releasing trade secrets, Wade, have you posted those screenshots in an attempt to mislead your competitors? ;-)
cyclingTips
· 6 months ago
Hey BigRing,
Good eye... The thing that's misleading is that I don't update my weight in the powertap software. In both graphs my weight is constant and my power is almost constant. same pwr/weight. The main point of the graph was to show the difference in cadence and the power vs torque produced. I just commented that the reason I was going a couple km/hr faster was because I had lost some weight (which I'm quickly putting back on!).
The Big Ring
· 6 months ago
Thanks Wade - have fun in Canada, I hear the maple syrup flows freely there and is delicious on just about everything you can eat ;-)
All Comments
what program/software are the graphs plotted on?
Cheers,
Luke
quick correction. either 24Nm is wrong or 22% is wrong. why? 22% of 27Nm is 5.94Nm. 27minus 5.9 is not 24. 11% less would be correct or 21Nm would be correct. or am i missing something? Good thing you ride good. ha ha.
Well worth it...
How to loose 5-6 kgs?
So, when you feel 'hungry' next, drink a glass of water and wait 2-3min instead. Then decide if you do need to eat.
First climb lists interval data as 4.5 km, 16:33 = 16.31 km/hr
Second climb says 6.22km, 19:36 = 18.96 km/hr
Curiously, in both plots, your avg W/kg is listed as 4.5 - so even though you lost weight, your power / kg did not increase. I was under the impression that w/kg was the determinant for speed up a climb (as steep as Devil's Elbow at least) yet it would appear you certainly did go quicker.
Finally,
369W / 4.52 = 81.6kg
361W / 4.51 = 80kg
A loss of 1.6kg, not the 5 or 6 you mentioned...
Publishing stats and power output online is tantamount to releasing trade secrets, Wade, have you posted those screenshots in an attempt to mislead your competitors? ;-)
Good eye...
The thing that's misleading is that I don't update my weight in the powertap software. In both graphs my weight is constant and my power is almost constant. same pwr/weight. The main point of the graph was to show the difference in cadence and the power vs torque produced. I just commented that the reason I was going a couple km/hr faster was because I had lost some weight (which I'm quickly putting back on!).