Wattbike 500m times at the Cycle Show

bs147
bs147 Posts: 164
edited October 2009 in Amateur race
Anyone have a go on the Wattbike and do the 500m sprint? I was impressed by how authentic it felt - much more so than a gym bike!

Anyway, who else posted times? I was the quickest of those in that particular line up of 4 but far from quickest posted! My time was 30.03.

Comments

  • APIII
    APIII Posts: 2,010
    31.25 for me, and yeah they are good bits of kit. I like the left leg/right leg analysis, interesting stuff.
  • eddya
    eddya Posts: 2
    I, too, am impressed by the Wattbike. It feels much like you're on a real bike and the pedalling doesn't feel unnaturally 'smooth' like with many stationary bikes.

    Had a go at the 500m challenge on Sunday and did a 29.66s (avg. 763 watts) which got me onto the leaderboard. My legs weren't very happy with the lack of warmup!
  • bs147
    bs147 Posts: 164
    Very true, lack of warm up was felt - plus jeans and walking boots not the best attire!
  • oldwelshman
    oldwelshman Posts: 4,733
    Good for training yes, but not for actuall 50m event :D
    More fun to try that on the boards of a velodrome where you have to steer and control back during the start also!!
    http://s290.photobucket.com/albums/ll245/oldwelshman/
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aK5Bfqj5fxY
  • bs147
    bs147 Posts: 164
    Totally agree - out of interest I looked up 500m records - Victoria Pendletons 500m TT record is 34.070...... so the correlation between actually riding in a velodrome and sitting on a Wattbike in jeans has to be done! It would be interesting to have a go in a real world situation. Great for training though (pricey......) - I too found the measurement throughout the 360 deg turn of the pedal very interesting (and telling).
  • eddya
    eddya Posts: 2
    I don't think a correlation between a Wattbike 500m challenge and a real 500m track sprint should be made at all, as the two are simply not comparable. Best to compare them separately in their own right. The record 500m Wattbike time is 27.23s, now that's something to try and beat, jeans or not!
  • bs147
    bs147 Posts: 164
    Correlation was the wrong word really - I meant it would be interesting to try the same distance on a bike in a velodrome - just to compare the two.
  • shockedsoshocked
    shockedsoshocked Posts: 4,021
    I wouldn't particularly trust the wattbikes measurements either, especially for wattage.
    "A cyclist has nothing to lose but his chain"

    PTP Runner Up 2015
  • Eddy S
    Eddy S Posts: 1,013
    ShockedSoShocked wrote:
    I wouldn't particularly trust the wattbikes measurements either, especially for wattage.
    Why?

    You really ought to look in to the background and endorsement of the Wattbike.
    I’m a sprinter – I warmed up yesterday.
  • tri-sexual
    tri-sexual Posts: 672
    "Victoria Pendletons 500m TT record is 34.070"

    i bet victoria looked better than any of you doing it whatever her time :lol:
  • bs147
    bs147 Posts: 164
    Guaranteed!
  • ozzzyosborn206
    ozzzyosborn206 Posts: 1,340
    do you really think british cycling would use wattbikes if their information was not accurate?
  • shockedsoshocked
    shockedsoshocked Posts: 4,021
    Eddy S wrote:
    ShockedSoShocked wrote:
    I wouldn't particularly trust the wattbikes measurements either, especially for wattage.
    Why?

    You really ought to look in to the background and endorsement of the Wattbike.

    Where accuracy is key, there's a good reason why a wattbike is 2k, and a high quality loader 25k.

    As for endorsement, I'm sure most people will happily endorse anything they're getting for free.
    "A cyclist has nothing to lose but his chain"

    PTP Runner Up 2015
  • SBezza
    SBezza Posts: 2,173
    ShockedSoShocked wrote:
    Eddy S wrote:
    ShockedSoShocked wrote:
    I wouldn't particularly trust the wattbikes measurements either, especially for wattage.
    Why?

    You really ought to look in to the background and endorsement of the Wattbike.

    Where accuracy is key, there's a good reason why a wattbike is 2k, and a high quality loader 25k.

    As for endorsement, I'm sure most people will happily endorse anything they're getting for free.

    And do you trust a bike mounted power meter then, as a Powertap is cheap in comparison to a Watt Bike, is this not accurate then?

    All because something cost 10 times as much doesn't mean it is 10 times as accurate, probably more accurate, but probably not by much.

    It doesn't matter if the Watt bike is slightly out anyhow, as long as the results are repeatable.
  • Climber_Andy
    Climber_Andy Posts: 852
    28.53 on the Thursday put me at the top for all of a few hours... came back on Sat and someone had lowered the best to 27.something.

    Bloody hard though, it felt like riding an overgeared bike to me.
  • bahzob
    bahzob Posts: 2,195
    ShockedSoShocked wrote:
    I wouldn't particularly trust the wattbikes measurements either, especially for wattage.

    Contrary to this ignorant and cynical opinion. I'm lucky enough to have had some extensive time using a Wattbike. I am an also a long term user of power meters both for training and competition.

    The power measurements from the Wattbike appear in my experience to be very comparable to my Powertaps in terms of perceived feel, HR and CPs.
    Martin S. Newbury RC
  • GemmaAtkinson1
    GemmaAtkinson1 Posts: 161
    35.3 i was second in womens open category :(

Categories