Next generation power meters as predicted

bahzob

http://www.bikeradar.com/news/article/rotor-qxl-rings-launched-power-meter-shipping-37699/

As I predicted the next generation of power meters will start to show more than just what power you put out but how you are doing so in terms of pedalling style.

(It's still early days yet, it's not clear if the Rotor can provide as much insight as a Wattbike does atm, but it's only a matter of time before you will be able to see a real time view of how you are pedalling on your bike computer).

I'll stick to my related predictions:
- Riders will be able to use this information to produce power more efficiently and ride better as a result
- In a few years time most coaches will be advising their clients to choose power meters that with capabilities like that above.

imposter2.0

Congratulations on predicting the inevitable. Whether or not 'pedalling style' is a factor in power output remains entirely unproven though, and I don't see this 'development' changing anything in that sense. I know - let's have another debate about it, where everyone trots out the same arguments as before..?

slowbike

Imposter wrote:

Whether or not 'pedalling style' is a factor in power output remains entirely unproven though

Are you suggesting that there is no point in changing a pedalling technique from stomping on each downstroke to a smoother, all-round pressure?

I would've thought a better technique would allow you to channel the available power more efficiently - and the stomp on the downstroke is equivalent to persistent acceleration/deceleration which I believe isn't as efficient as a constant powerinput/speed.
Of course, I've got no data or training to back up that thought and you could just as well argue that the muscles used in stomping are more efficient than when trying to maintain a constant pressure on the pedals.

(how am I doing for repeated arguments?)

jibberjim

Slowbike wrote:

I believe isn't as efficient as a constant powerinput/speed.

Why do you believe humans are designed like that? none of the natural activities of humans require constant exertion - indeed try it, hold a static force position you'll tire a lot quicker than doing the same amount of work repeatedly.

A constant pressure on the pedals will also give up the mechanical advantage of the cranks - pushing down with loads of force when the cranks are at 12 and 6 achieves absolutely nothing in forward propulsion.

Tom Dean

bahzob wrote:

I'll stick to my related predictions:
- Riders will be able to use this information to produce power more efficiently and ride better as a result

It's still not clear that this data can be of any use, but we'll see. It's early days right? (according to their website, Wattbike was in development pre-2000) :roll:

slowbike

jibberjim wrote:

Slowbike wrote:

I believe isn't as efficient as a constant powerinput/speed.

Why do you believe humans are designed like that?

I don't ...

jibberjim wrote:

none of the natural activities of humans require constant exertion - indeed try it, hold a static force position you'll tire a lot quicker than doing the same amount of work repeatedly.

However, if you try constant exertion at a lower level can you not achieve that for longer than if you do intervals with the same average power output? (it's a question - not a statement)

jibberjim wrote:

A constant pressure on the pedals will also give up the mechanical advantage of the cranks - pushing down with loads of force when the cranks are at 12 and 6 achieves absolutely nothing in forward propulsion.

Don't you push forward at the top of the stroke and pull back at the bottom? And by doing that you're utilising different muscles giving the main ones a bit of a rest whilst maintaining a more level input of power? (again - a question - not a statement)

imposter2.0

and so it begins (again)...

mentalalex

amaferanga

Why don't you post your fascinating insights on the Wattage list?

You're wasted on Bikeradar.

Let's just hope noone humours you this time.