Wahoo Kickr Climb

whyamihere wrote:

I have one. It's ok, but not much more than that. On the plus side, it allows you to adopt a similar position on the bike to the position you would adopt in reality on a similar gradient. For training specificity, that's good. However, when it's moving, it doesn't feel very natural in my opinion. It's also worth noting that, for Zwift at least, if you don't have your trainer difficulty set to 100%, there's no point. Reducing the trainer difficulty (and from memory it's set to something like 40% by default) just reduces the gradient number being sent to the Kickr, which passes that on to the Climb, so if you're going up a 10% gradient in Zwift with your trainer difficulty set to 50%, the Climb will only move up to 5%.

I don't think I'd buy one again. I got mine on a reduced price and had some spare disposable cash, but I don't think it's worth the money.

whyamihere wrote:

ibr17xvii wrote:

Not sure if you're aware of this but there is hack to get round what you say about the gradient:

https://zwiftinsider.com/kickr-climb-tr ... ifficulty/

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7AZ_j0HDDeQ

I'd deffo be doing this if I get one.

I wasn't aware of this, it's good to know, thanks. Slightly controversially though, I do think that everyone who has a smart trainer should have trainer difficulty set to 100%, especially when racing on hilly courses, otherwise you may as well just do flat races.

whyamihere wrote:

There is a bit of latency, but it's around the same as the latency of the Kickr reacting to the gradient change to change the resistance, as would be expected. As the two effectively change together, it's not that bad.