Which crank power meter?

cougie

ben@31 wrote:

cougie wrote:

What are you going to do with it though ?
Unless your going to take training seriously - it's an expensive toy.

I actually own and use a powermeter.

From experience, I completely disagree with you.

My powermeter is one of the best things I've bought for my bike. Its the best way to determine the effort of your cycling (by the percentage of your FTP).

I soon realised that looking at speed is totally irrelevant when you have wind, gradients and so many other factors influencing it.

A powermeter will take all of these influences into account.... 200W is 200W no matter if it's doing 14 mph into headwind, or 25 mph with a stonking tailwind, or slogging uphill or on a long gentle decline that I never really noticed before.

I thought I was cycling fast, but it wasn't me that was cycling hard but just the decline and tailwind!

I do have a power meter that I use when I'm training and to judge my efforts when I race.

I don't bother with it for my weekend café rides though as I'm out with my mates. I'm not bothered how many Watts I'm at then.

If you aren't training seriously then it's just another thing to distract you. Spend the money on a trip or two to the Alps instead. Much more fun.

joey54321

I agree with Cougie, unless a powermeter is going to inform your training then they really are a waste of money. If you are going to change the rides you do or how you do them then sure, but if you are still going to ride around at the same pace or in the same groups or do the same things you haven't really gained anything from knowing your power. I think that is where the toy part comes in. If you look at all the data for a few days then stop.

However, I don't think the OP has said he doesn't intend to use it for dedicate and specific training (preferably with a coach) so this may not apply to him.

ryan_w-2

I have a Rotor In-Power on my commuter/CX bike and a Quarq DZero on my race bike.

Both have their advantages.

It’s helped me with climbs / segments and knowing if I’m being a fairy or not.

Just get one, they’re cool.

jif1969

I've just got a Quarq DZero, early days but power in line with expectations (from trainer) easy to setup and calibrate and relatively cheap for dual sided measurement (I know from use of a Wattbike that I am biased around 52:48 to the right at lower power and the opposite at higher power so didn't want to go left only).

What works for you will be dependent upon what has the best fitment options for your frame and whether you want to swap between bikes which I didn't.

Vanilla Bikes currently have the DZero at £549 for aluminium and £647 for carbon or Red.

ryan_w-2

Quarq DZero isn’t dual sided.

jif1969

Ryan_W wrote:

Quarq DZero isn’t dual sided.

Incorrect use of words from me, it measures the power from both legs at the spider but the split is then estimated

ryan_w-2

Jif1969 wrote:

Ryan_W wrote:

Quarq DZero isn’t dual sided.

Incorrect use of words from me, it measures the power from both legs at the spider but the split is then estimated

Correct, a ‘total power’ meter

sir_les

I can only speak from personal experience. I have a Stages which was absolutely fine all summer, then I used it in a typically UK Autumn/ Winter and have had no end of problems.

The battery dies if the bike is left in the garage in the cold weather, so I have to remove it after every ride or I end up using one a week at the moment. I also had frequent cadence and power dropouts, especially when raining. Having researched online since this happened, it appears it's a common fault with Stages and the CR2032 batteries. I personally would not buy it again and would be very tempted by the new Garmin Vector 3 pedals (single sided). You then have the flexibility to swap between bikes really easily.

Depends on your level, but at Amateur level a single sided power meter will still give you a power number to train to and pace yourself on, which I think is all you need.

stueys

From the vector pedals I know that my l/r power split normally runs 49/51. But, I’ve got examples where I’ve been 48/52 and even parts of rides where I run at 46/54. A single sided power meter would always just double one leg and you can see the types of variance that would introduce.

Let’s say I then buy a smart turbo with an inbuilt power meter. Both would be accurate within their manufacturer tolerances of +/- 2%, but potentially that could be quite a spread if one is at the top of that band and one at the bottom. If you introduce the potential variability of single sided into that mix then it’s a significant potential variant for the two to diverge.

Single sided definitely had its place when full was a hefty premium, nowadays the premium for full is far smaller and well worth paying IMHO.

StillGoing

If you're training to power and have two or more power meters, it doesn't matter what the variable is between them as long as you train to the percentages of the power meter at the time. 80% effort of 100% is 80% no matter what the actual FTP number achieved on that particular power meter is.

I don't get all the attention to L/R balance. What are you going to do to change it? A variable of 48/52 isn't going to be detrimental to your ability and I wager there are few riders out there that have a true 50/50 balance. Plenty of trainers advocate just get on with it as trying to change you technique can do more harm than good.

http://alex-cycle.blogspot.co.uk/2013/1 ... lance.html

philbar72

personal experience with me is 2 power2 maxes, fantastic power meters. stages, utter junk. pioneer great up to a point and 4IIII a very good single sided power meter.

the stages used to dropout everywhere, the others have all been stable.