GARMIN unveil POWER PEDALS

essex-commuter

Interesting...

http://garmin.blogs.com/pr/2011/08/garm ... ctor-.html

jonginge

Yep, finally after a couple of years of Metrigear vapourware.

Great idea with some really nice features but:

1) Shame that the price is about 500 dollars higher than the metrigear forecast and about 500 dollars higher than it should be. The price point should be comparable to the cheapest PowerTap system...
http://www.trisports.com/mavic-open-pro ... eter1.html
2) LOOK. Really?
3) Won't work with Garmin 705 you need 800/500 to cope with the data rate

optimisticbiker

£1000 for a set of pedals definitely one for the pro riders

Interesting bit of lateral thinking in the technology though...

airbusboy

$1499.99 seems quite steep (£950). If it works well i could be tempted!

Looks identical to the polar keo pedal!

rgds

jonginge

Actually excited that Garmin may add power metrics to the Connect website though. Things like NP, IF, TSS will be cool to see.

jonginge

airbusboy wrote:

$1499.99 seems quite steep (£950). If it works well i could be tempted!

Looks identical to the polar keo pedal!

rgds

But, and it's a big but, the polar system uses a proprietary data format whereas Garmin uses Ant+. That means with the Polar you are tied into the Polar computer and for the Garmin, in theory, you can use any ANT+ device that understands how to display power data.

usedtobefast

The lump that will be sticking out behind the crank arm isn't as well styled as the original Metrigear product.

Glad they've moved away from using Speedplay, but bit surprised by using Look because of the partnership between Look and Polar. Personal preference was for Shimano.

The price is not competitive and bit of a shocker when compared to what's already out there, of course the advantage of these is the simplicity of swapping between bikes esp. compared to SRM. I'm wondering what the packaging options will be ? I'm hoping the price shown is for the top package (pedals + Edge 800 + sensor kit) and they'll be cheaper options - all I want is the pedals to use with my Edge 500. Have to wait and see.

StageWinner

Are they actually Look pedals or just something that looks like Look (pardon the pun)?

jonginge

Look keo compatible

iPete

Talk to me when somebody inovates this @ $500!

Wrath Rob

Wow, that's not cheap. I was hoping/expecting it to be around the £500 mark, not the £1500 mark! No power meter for me then...

Wrath Rob

Wow, that's not cheap. I was hoping/expecting it to be around the £500 mark, not the £1500 mark! No power meter for me then...

il_principe

Really narked off about this, had high hopes especially as the original plan was to use Speedplays. I was planning on buying, but that price and look pedals = no f*cking way. Here's hoping that they get it in other pedal systems at some point. I think the techy gubbins is in the spindle so it should be possible.

meanredspider

Yup - disappointing to say the least. I bet the price ends up being nearer £1200 in this country - almost nothing is the equivalent to the $ price - especially once VAT is included. And LOOK Keo is probably my least favourite pedal. I won't be in the market for this and I'm currently wondering who will.

StageWinner

FYI - they aren't Look pedals. They are Look compatible made by Exustar.

meanredspider

StageWinner wrote:

FYI - they aren't Look pedals. They are Look compatible made by Exustar.

It's the LOOK cleats that I hate

Stiff_Orange

£1200 for pedals!!!!!

For that price I'd be expecting a Team Garmin rider to be turning them for me.

StageWinner

Whilst £1200 'for pedals' seems like a lot of money - if they work and are accurate - they will probably be the lightest form of power measurement that you can get for a bike. (Big 'ifs' there). That alone will appeal to a lot of racing folk that want to race with power but are tired of heavy SRMs or power tap wheels, etc.


I know people were hoping for power measurement for the masses, but Garmin sees this as a money-making venture. Give it some time and the prices will drop.


And there are other cheaper alternatives out there for power measurement if you really need it.

greg66_tri_v2.0

JonGinge wrote:

Actually excited that Garmin may add power metrics to the Connect website though. Things like NP, IF, TSS will be cool to see.

I wonder about that. I think NP (and possibly the others) are proprietary calculations the use of which require a royalty payment to Andrew Coggan. If so, evidently Garmin and Coggan haven't been able to come to terms yet.

I may be in the minority, but since these are unlikely to break a magic price point I struggle to see the USP they have over a PT/SRM/Quarq. Personally, I can move a wheel or a crankset from frame to frame quicker than I can move a pair of pedals.

joelsim

I may try to nick some in the next set of riots? Is there a stockist in Tottenham?

jonginge

Greg66 wrote:

JonGinge wrote:

Actually excited that Garmin may add power metrics to the Connect website though. Things like NP, IF, TSS will be cool to see.

I wonder about that. I think NP (and possibly the others) are proprietary calculations the use of which require a royalty payment to Andrew Coggan. If so, evidently Garmin and Coggan haven't been able to come to terms yet.

I may be in the minority, but since these are unlikely to break a magic price point I struggle to see the USP they have over a PT/SRM/Quarq. Personally, I can move a wheel or a crankset from frame to frame quicker than I can move a pair of pedals.

I agree. (Been occasionally looking a quark cranks lately...). I guess it's why GoldenCheetah uses subtly different terms for its metrics... can hope, though

spasypaddy

the main benefit i see using these over a powertap is that you can use these on multiple bikes easily.

is it really quicker for you to swap a crankset over than a set of pedals? REALLY?

powertaps are brilliant but unless you buy multiple powertaps you can only build them into one wheel be it a race wheel or a training wheel. plus if you snap a spoke/puncture mid race and get a spare wheel you lose your power data.; plus weight of a powertap will be a substantial amount more than the pedals.

the two main issues i see with these though are:
price point, silly expensive and not where it was meant to come out at
look pedal style, doesn't appeal to everyone.

if it comes out in a self install style to be used with any pedal spindle then i'd probably consider getting some but using speedplays for my knees and comfort is more important to me than getting these power pedals.

cjcp

Presumably, anyone buying these will already have to be blinged to the eyeballs. Buying these over a great wheelset would be madness.

greg66_tri_v2.0

spasypaddy wrote:

the main benefit i see using these over a powertap is that you can use these on multiple bikes easily.

is it really quicker for you to swap a crankset over than a set of pedals? REALLY?

powertaps are brilliant but unless you buy multiple powertaps you can only build them into one wheel be it a race wheel or a training wheel. plus if you snap a spoke/puncture mid race and get a spare wheel you lose your power data.; plus weight of a powertap will be a substantial amount more than the pedals.

But (but, but) you can move wheels and cranksets across multiple bikes. You don't need multiple PTs for multiple bikes. Admittedly, you *do* have to make a decision as to which wheel your PT is to be built into, but after that, you have an easily moveable power meter.

Moving my crankset takes about 90 seconds. I usually manage to find one pedal needs a lot of grunt to get it off, and then threading them cleanly first time is something I often bog up.

If I look at my rear wheel hub, my crankset and my pedals, one of the three shows a lot more wear than the other two. I've managed to ground a pedal once or twice, and I wonder how the Garmin system would react to that. Perhaps of longer term concern though would be how accurate the Garmins would be over an extended period of time. Presumably they have worked out how to provide float whilst at the same time maintaining accuracy of data. But what happens to the accuracy of the data as the cleat wears, and you get more movement in the cleat/pedal interface, I wonder.

rolf_f

cjcp wrote:

Buying these over a great wheelset would be madness.

I'd disagree with that - eg my Neutrons hardly count as a great wheelset (in price terms) but they are pretty light for clinchers. I could get some carbon wheels but what difference would that make? Nothing that could be observed without a computer download! On the other hand, a means of measuring power would provide a very valuable training aid (those with power meters would regard them as essential but I don't recall Fausto Coppi using a powertap so I think those folk must be talking rubbish!) - still, more useful than the equivalent money spent on a wheelset I reckon.

Not that I'll be bothering until the price comes a long way down.......

But then I wouldn't bother with the great wheelset either

cjcp

Rolf F wrote:

cjcp wrote:

Buying these over a great wheelset would be madness.

I'd disagree with that - eg my Neutrons hardly count as a great wheelset (in price terms) but they are pretty light for clinchers. I could get some carbon wheels but what difference would that make? Nothing that could be observed without a computer download!

Not necessarily. I've never downloaded data, but one lap of Richmond Park told me the difference between my alu clinchers and my carbon wheelset. Six laps even more so. They're just a lot faster along the straight, and accelerated more quickly on the inclines (allowing me to at least stay in touch with JG for most of the laps we did).

On the other hand, a means of measuring power would provide a very valuable training aid (those with power meters would regard them as essential but I don't recall Fausto Coppi using a powertap so I think those folk must be talking rubbish!) -

still, more useful than the equivalent money spent on a wheelset I reckon.

I agree that they can be useful training aids, but so can better wheelsets. I guess it depends on what each rider regards as "useful". I know the pedals won't make me go faster, but the wheels will. But I don't train by reference to power readings, just time taken over a particular distance.

That said, I think power meters (in whatever form) are ace toys. As far as the pedal form is concerned though, and as Greg pointed out, what happens when the pedal is worn? Looking at the state of my pedals, I'm not sure I'd go for them.

rolf_f

cjcp wrote:

I agree that they can be useful training aids, but so can better wheelsets.

I'm not quite sure how better wheels can actually be a training aid! They might make you go ever so slightly faster (sorry, I don't buy 'a lot faster' unless your alloy clinchers have concrete tyres fitted to them! If you haven't any data, you really don't know if you are faster or not) but they can't really improve your skills that much unless I'm missing something. Good wheels don't improve technique.

cjcp

Rolf F wrote:

cjcp wrote:

I agree that they can be useful training aids, but so can better wheelsets.

I'm not quite sure how better wheels can actually be a training aid! They might make you go ever so slightly faster (sorry, I don't buy 'a lot faster' unless your alloy clinchers have concrete tyres fitted to them! If you haven't any data, you really don't know if you are faster or not) but they can't really improve your skills that much unless I'm missing something. Good wheels don't improve technique.

When I first rode the wheels, they "felt" fast. I was pondering whether to sell them because I didn't think they were worth holding onto. Then, the first time I accelerated hard with them, I thought "Bloody hell!". I looked at the speedo and was doing a good 3 mph more on a particular stretch than I'd ever done previously. I also found I was able to sustain that speed for a longer period than I was previously able to.

Also, before using these wheels, I'd never done a sub-2 hr six laps of RP, let alone a 1:50, or a 2:59 for nine laps (and I was feeling as rough as badger's @rse during the latter, in some pretty dismal conditions).

To give a practical, but non-data centric, example, the only occasions I have ever been able to force JG to raise his heart rate in a training ride above "Not Remotely Troubled" status were with these wheels. I shamelessly confess to buying speed.

With regard to technique, they taught me to descend better i.e. they forced me to brake differently, to avoid heat build-up in the rims. They made me more conscious of just how much I used to apply the brakes. The effect was that I was much faster down the descents in the Marmotte this year. Ok, other riders may not have needed to learn their lesson this way, but it certainly helped in my case. I was also more conscious of sidewinds and had to anticipate the movement of the bike more.

rolf_f

cjcp wrote:

With regard to technique, they taught me to descend better i.e. they forced me to brake differently, to avoid heat build-up in the rims. They made me more conscious of just how much I used to apply the brakes. The effect was that I was much faster down the descents in the Marmotte this year. Ok, other riders may not have needed to learn their lesson this way, but it certainly helped in my case. I was also more conscious of sidewinds and had to anticipate the movement of the bike more.

I see what you mean there but those are really new techniques rather than better techniques. If you don't run deep rims, you don't need to worry so much about the crosswinds and if you don't run carbon rims, you don't need to worry about heat build up.

As for 3mph; unless your old wheels were really heavy or you had gravel for bearings, I suspect there'd be a lot of 'rofls' on the road forum for that claim (I can't manage that improvement between my 26lb Raleigh Record Ace and my carbon bikes - and I think an overall weight saving of 10lbs is going to have a far bigger impact than any amount of messing around with fancy wheels!). My understanding is that deep rims only confer a benefit when you are already going pretty fast and, of course, until that point they are actively slowing you down due to the extra weight (though I suppose a deep rim carbon could weigh the same as a shallow rim so maybe that makes no difference - but then that just implies you'd be better off with a still lighter shallow carbon rim!).

Of course, ironically, the only way to really prove whether the wheels were really giving you a 3mph benefit would be to fit a power meter. If the wheels made the difference, your power output would be similar. If the performance improvement was psychologically drive, you'd see it in the greater power output.

For me, I can see that a power meter would add a whole additional depth to my random attempts to train properly (just as using GPS training devices with HRM and cadence and computer downloads etc already has). On the other hand, for me, wheels are bling that can make me a little quicker but I doubt there is much out there that will make a noticeable improvement on the Neutrons. If I did dabble with carbon rims, I suspect it keep them fairly low profile as anything heavier than the Neutrons would be a retrograde step - weight matters more to me than rim depth (eg Zipp 404s weigh more than my Neutrons so £2000 for a pair of wheels that weigh more than my Neutrons is not a sane spend) - I suppose I'd have to go to tubulars to make it worthwhile and I can't see that happening!

Of course, if your motive for buying the wheels is to mildly irritate and push JG, then that is fair enough

cjcp

Rolf F wrote:

cjcp wrote:

With regard to technique, they taught me to descend better i.e. they forced me to brake differently, to avoid heat build-up in the rims. They made me more conscious of just how much I used to apply the brakes. The effect was that I was much faster down the descents in the Marmotte this year. Ok, other riders may not have needed to learn their lesson this way, but it certainly helped in my case. I was also more conscious of sidewinds and had to anticipate the movement of the bike more.

I see what you mean there but those are really new techniques rather than better techniques. If you don't run deep rims, you don't need to worry so much about the crosswinds and if you don't run carbon rims, you don't need to worry about heat build up.

You have to improve your braking technique for the descents, so you do develop a better technique. And, unfortunately, you still need to worry about heat build-up on the alu rims. They are still very hot to the touch.

As for 3mph; unless your old wheels were really heavy or you had gravel for bearings, I suspect there'd be a lot of 'rofls' on the road forum for that claim (I can't manage that improvement between my 26lb Raleigh Record Ace and my carbon bikes - and I think an overall weight saving of 10lbs is going to have a far bigger impact than any amount of messing around with fancy wheels!). My understanding is that deep rims only confer a benefit when you are already going pretty fast and, of course, until that point they are actively slowing you down due to the extra weight (though I suppose a deep rim carbon could weigh the same as a shallow rim so maybe that makes no difference - but then that just implies you'd be better off with a still lighter shallow carbon rim!).

Nope, my Kinlins are gravel-free. My carbon wheelset doesn't benefit me only when I'm up to speed; they accelerate faster, both uphill and on the straight; you can feel the bike pick-up faster when you ride it. I guess they can ROFL and LMAO all they like, but the particular section of road I used as an example is one I've ridden countless times over the last six years, and I know what speeds I manage and when I'm going fast. That's why my reaction was "Bloody hell!", because it just hadn't felt that fast before. It's a gentle decline, where the road flattens out, rises very slightly as it bends to the left and is then straight (with a slight decline again) for half a mile or so. The way I was able to accelerate, then sustain my speed on that stretch is not something I'd previously been able to do.

For me, I can see that a power meter would add a whole additional depth to my random attempts to train properly (just as using GPS training devices with HRM and cadence and computer downloads etc already has).

This shows that people train in different ways, some focusing on certain numbers more than others. I used to use a HRM, but haven't for about four years and even that was more for running rather than cycling. I'm considering whether to go for the Garmin 500 with the HRM function, but I'm not sure: I tend to know when my heart's beating like a f**ked clock.

As for cadence, I don't use that function on the road because I choose my cadence based on how my legs and lungs feel rather than focusing on a magic number or range - perceived effort, I guess. I started off using cadence on the turbo this year, but I just reverted to going by how my legs felt and knowing that I had to get to a certain distance within a particular period of time, so you select a gear and cadence based on that feeling. It's rudimentary by modern standards, I guess, but I find it to be effective.

On the other hand, for me, wheels are bling that can make me a little quicker but I doubt there is much out there that will make a noticeable improvement on the Neutrons. If I did dabble with carbon rims, I suspect it keep them fairly low profile as anything heavier than the Neutrons would be a retrograde step - weight matters more to me than rim depth (eg Zipp 404s weigh more than my Neutrons so £2000 for a pair of wheels that weigh more than my Neutrons is not a sane spend) - I suppose I'd have to go to tubulars to make it worthwhile and I can't see that happening!

It's not just weight that's relevant though, but stiffness, isn't it?

Of course, if your motive for buying the wheels is to mildly irritate and push JG, then that is fair enough

Certainly, I need to keep up with him somehow, but it was to go faster generally.

It seems to be accepted that the best upgrade to your bike after your frame is to your wheelset. So, at the end of the day, if I was asked to get from A to B as fast as I could, and to choose between a pair of pedals and a carbon wheelset to achieve this, I know which one I'd choose. That's why my original point was that you're better off with a great wheelset before buying the pedals. I'd probably even buy a second wheelset before buying these pedals at their present price-point.

spasypaddy

Greg66 wrote:

spasypaddy wrote:

the main benefit i see using these over a powertap is that you can use these on multiple bikes easily.

is it really quicker for you to swap a crankset over than a set of pedals? REALLY?

powertaps are brilliant but unless you buy multiple powertaps you can only build them into one wheel be it a race wheel or a training wheel. plus if you snap a spoke/puncture mid race and get a spare wheel you lose your power data.; plus weight of a powertap will be a substantial amount more than the pedals.

But (but, but) you can move wheels and cranksets across multiple bikes. You don't need multiple PTs for multiple bikes. Admittedly, you *do* have to make a decision as to which wheel your PT is to be built into, but after that, you have an easily moveable power meter.

Moving my crankset takes about 90 seconds. I usually manage to find one pedal needs a lot of grunt to get it off, and then threading them cleanly first time is something I often bog up.

If I look at my rear wheel hub, my crankset and my pedals, one of the three shows a lot more wear than the other two. I've managed to ground a pedal once or twice, and I wonder how the Garmin system would react to that. Perhaps of longer term concern though would be how accurate the Garmins would be over an extended period of time. Presumably they have worked out how to provide float whilst at the same time maintaining accuracy of data. But what happens to the accuracy of the data as the cleat wears, and you get more movement in the cleat/pedal interface, I wonder.

depends on the crankset doesnt it. my 695 has a propriorary crankset. and its awesome!

i also ride speedplays so have never grounded them and the cleats dont wear very much. there is also a very easy technique for taking pedals on and off. can take even the stiffest of pedals off in seconds.

but yes i see your point. its horses for courses. if these were reasonably priced and speedplay based i'd definitely be considering getting them