Power output for Etape

jgsi

Q?
Will a power output of between 200 and 250 watts be enough to ride the 3 climbs of Acte1 etape for at least a bronze time?

rozzer32

All depends, is that your power output when just cruzing along or when you're sprinting??

Also climbing is more about your power/weight ratio.

Someone who is heavy and lots of power will climb the same as a light person with not a lot of power.

(I know it's not a technical explanation but just an example)

spokegeezer

This might help.

http://bikecalculator.com/wattsUS.html

inseine

You'll be fine with 250 assuming you can keep it up for 4 or 5 hours, unless you're very heavy, or can't descend or follow a wheel or don't eat enough etc etc.
I don't think power output is a good judge of your performance over a long event like this.

jgsi

Not me sadly.... but an acquaintance who has signed up with up to now pretty low level of prep work... he is neither over or under weight... and will be riding a triple... but I was thinking that he needed to focus on being able to achieve those outputs with just a few months to go. .. emphasis on being achievable ... hence the range from 200 to 250.

(rozzer - I would just love to be that person who can just cruize along at 200+ watts btw)

ut_och_cykla

I've seen somewhere (perhaps on etape.org.uk) that a sustained output of 150W is good enough - but I might be remembering wrong) Certainly it was enough to get me up Lape DHuez in less than 2 hours - which for a fat 50 year old girl wan't bad going. So perhaps a sustainable 200 is plenty - but it needs to be sustainable for hours at a time, and as others have said - the right food, good technique and a head that doesn't get messed with by poor weather, heat etc....

jgsi

ut_och_cykla wrote:

I've seen somewhere (perhaps on etape.org.uk) that a sustained output of 150W is good enough - but I might be remembering wrong) Certainly it was enough to get me up Lape DHuez in less than 2 hours - which for a fat 50 year old girl wan't bad going. So perhaps a sustainable 200 is plenty - but it needs to be sustainable for hours at a time, and as others have said - the right food, good technique and a head that doesn't get messed with by poor weather, heat etc....

even better news for him, then still get him to aim for 200 plus.. he's paid his money , now he can pay his pain

amaferanga

Unless he's a relatively gifted cyclist or very heavy, there's little chance he'll be averaging 250W over 4-5 hours with little preparation. Only time I've ridden hard for 5 hours with a PM was on a sportive last year - average power 231W (NP 259W), which was only about 76% (86%) FTP. The good news is even with that power and a crap group where only 2 or 3 of us did any work, I averaged over 20mph. It was the Cairngorm Mountain sprtive though so nowhere near as hilly as the Etape....

ut_och_cykla

amaferanga wrote:

Unless he's a relatively gifted cyclist or very heavy, there's little chance he'll be averaging 250W over 4-5 hours with little preparation. Only time I've ridden hard for 5 hours with a PM was on a sportive last year - average power 231W (NP 259W), which was only about 76% (86%) FTP. The good news is even with that power and a crap group where only 2 or 3 of us did any work, I averaged over 20mph. It was the Cairngorm Mountain sprtive though so nowhere near as hilly as the Etape....

So something between 150 & 200 should be a good target....

phreak

Think I saw last week that Cancellara only averaged 280 for the Tour of Flanders so 200 should be plenty.

amaferanga

ut_och_cykla wrote:

So something between 150 & 200 should be a good target....

Maybe, but when you take into account all the coasting and soft-pedalling 200W average probably isn't achievable for everyone. 150W should be though....

jibberjim

phreak wrote:

Think I saw last week that Cancellara only averaged 280 for the Tour of Flanders so 200 should be plenty.

For the Marmotte, Andy Bye did 273watts average in 2008, which was good enough for 9th...

phreak

jibberjim wrote:

phreak wrote:

Think I saw last week that Cancellara only averaged 280 for the Tour of Flanders so 200 should be plenty.

For the Marmotte, Andy Bye did 273watts average in 2008, which was good enough for 9th...

My mistake, was for last year. 285 average.

http://adrianfitch.wordpress.com/2010/1 ... ower-data/

Down the Road

Rule 74:

Computers, GPS, PowerTaps, SRMs; If you are not a Pro, then you don’t need a SRM or PowerTap. To paraphrase BSNYC, an amateur cyclist using a power meter is like hiring an accountant to tell you how poor you are. As for Garmins, how often do you get lost on a ride? They are bulky, ugly and superflous. Ditch the HRM and ride on feel; little compares to the pleasure of riding as hard as your mind will allow. Cycle computers should be simple, small and mounted on the stem. And preferably wireless.

http://www.velominati.com/blog/the-rules/

Bronzie

phreak wrote:

Think I saw last week that Cancellara only averaged 280 for the Tour of Flanders so 200 should be plenty.

Data from a pro race is not really relevant as he'd have been freewheeling for a good portion of time. I suspect his normalised power for the 6 hour race would have been well into the 300's.

Fogliettaz

Good job I do not know what power output means I am just putting the miles in every week which should be good enough for the ride in July.

amaferanga

Down the Road wrote:

Rule 74:

Computers, GPS, PowerTaps, SRMs; If you are not a Pro, then you don’t need a SRM or PowerTap. To paraphrase BSNYC, an amateur cyclist using a power meter is like hiring an accountant to tell you how poor you are. As for Garmins, how often do you get lost on a ride? They are bulky, ugly and superflous. Ditch the HRM and ride on feel; little compares to the pleasure of riding as hard as your mind will allow. Cycle computers should be simple, small and mounted on the stem. And preferably wireless.

http://www.velominati.com/blog/the-rules/

Give it a rest you muppet :roll:

jgsi

Fogliettaz wrote:

Good job I do not know what power output means I am just putting the miles in every week which should be good enough for the ride in July.

Sadly I am not with him to drag his arse up the hills, hence my feeble attempt to help him with a few guidelines.. and circa 200 sounds good... as for the troll like reponse about power meters etc keep that crap for cakestop and not in training please.

oldwelshman

Down the Road wrote:

Rule 74:

Computers, GPS, PowerTaps, SRMs; If you are not a Pro, then you don’t need a SRM or PowerTap. To paraphrase BSNYC, an amateur cyclist using a power meter is like hiring an accountant to tell you how poor you are. As for Garmins, how often do you get lost on a ride? They are bulky, ugly and superflous. Ditch the HRM and ride on feel; little compares to the pleasure of riding as hard as your mind will allow. Cycle computers should be simple, small and mounted on the stem. And preferably wireless.

http://www.velominati.com/blog/the-rules/

+1
Or stick it in your pocket like I do some times
I just use the garmin now for recording route distances.
Most phones have sat nav anyway now and even apps for training records and een read from HR monitors, not that I use it for that.

overgeared

250 watts would be a very respectable average for an event of 6-8 hours but, as others have said, the critical thing is power:weight ratio on the climbs which make up the majority of the ride time.

if i were you i'd try to model the ride using the link in my signature and see what you come up with using the rider weight and 250 watts...

inseine

As I said there's simply just not enough info to give a response. This 200-250w is over what time period? Threshold or max etc, you don't say and what does he weigh? If you're rolling on the ground with cramp on the alp power output means nothing I'm afraid . Good luck to him anyway, but there's no way of knowing how he'll get on.

jgsi

inseine wrote:

As I said there's simply just not enough info to give a response. This 200-250w is over what time period? Threshold or max etc, you don't say and what does he weigh? If you're rolling on the ground with cramp on the alp power output means nothing I'm afraid . Good luck to him anyway, but there's no way of knowing how he'll get on.

Indeed good luck to him... ok 1 thing puzzles me tho about power.. and I readily admit a novice in this area..
is not power absolute?
I mean if a riders a and b are both churning out 175 watts, then are they not likely to be going at the same pace even tho rider A may be 10 kilo heavier than rider B? Or have i misunderstood?

doyler78

No because gravity acts more against the heavier rider and therefore he has to put more power through the cranks in order to climb at the same pace as the lighter rider.

If you think about it. If you drop a 1kg lead weight from a roof and at the same time drop a feather. Which fall quicker. Well that's what is happening to the heavier rider. Gravity wants to pull him down the hill again much quicker than the lighter rider.

The steeper the climb becomes the greater the % increase in power required by the heavier rider to keep the same pace as a lighter rider.

inseine

If you think about it. If you drop a 1kg lead weight from a roof and at the same time drop a feather. Which fall quicker. Well that's what is happening to the heavier rider. Gravity wants to pull him down the hill again much quicker than the lighter rider.

Although the weight thing is true for cyclists this is a really bad analogy because things all fall at the same speed exept when air resistance takes over. Which it does with a feather but not with amost things

P_Tucker

inseine wrote:

If you think about it. If you drop a 1kg lead weight from a roof and at the same time drop a feather. Which fall quicker. Well that's what is happening to the heavier rider. Gravity wants to pull him down the hill again much quicker than the lighter rider.

Although the weight thing is true for cyclists this is a really bad analogy because things all fall at the same speed exept when air resistance takes over. Which it does with a feather but not with amost things

That's not true - drop a lead ball and a steel ball from the same height and the lead one will hit the ground first. You'd just need a lab to detect the stupendously small difference.

rick_chasey

P_Tucker wrote:

inseine wrote:

If you think about it. If you drop a 1kg lead weight from a roof and at the same time drop a feather. Which fall quicker. Well that's what is happening to the heavier rider. Gravity wants to pull him down the hill again much quicker than the lighter rider.

Although the weight thing is true for cyclists this is a really bad analogy because things all fall at the same speed exept when air resistance takes over. Which it does with a feather but not with amost things

That's not true - drop a lead ball and a steel ball from the same height and the lead one will hit the ground first. You'd just need a lab to detect the stupendously small difference.

Err no.

http://youtu.be/5C5_dOEyAfk

If you use the basic mechanical equations for acceleration and apply them to vertical motion with gravity, the gravity component cancels out - hence the above phenomenon on the moon.

inseine

Pretty sure Galiloe proved this 300 years ago, but what ever he was right about power to weight ratio.

rick_chasey

Forget power output.

Just ride as much as you can and you'll be fine.

overgeared

is not power absolute?

`
power is only what tends to speed the bike up, the things that tend to slow the bike down include weight, uphill gradients, air resistance, rolling resistance. so the speed that a rider achieves given a certain power can be very different depending on all of those other things.