Help with PM choice

Check out the Polar CS600. It's going for about $575 new on eBay, which is about 1/2 to 1/3 what you'll pay for a good PT setup. Swaps from bike to bike and you can use it with any wheels. Reviews thus far have been good.

You might find an iBike a little cheaper than the CS600, but it has no heart monitor, and cadence would cost extra, moreover, user reviews have not been too kind.

doulos said:

I'm a 160 lb rider averaging 150 mi/week with 2 bikes, both Shimano 10 sp. Most miles are on a solo commute, with rough roads, usually on the hoods. On the weekends I do long group rides and really enjoy hilly centuries here in SoCal. PM budget max $2000.

1. iBike vrs PT

Would the iBike data between the two bikes and types of riding be reliable?

2. If PT, SL vrs 2.4 and rim recommendations.

Thanks for the help! Tim

Tim,

The iBike has some issues, particularly if you get into group riding because it relies on airflow over/thru the sensors. When you draft, you change the dynamics of airflow. Your better bet is to look towards a power tap or a Polar CS600 or earlier 625X. The advantage of the Polar is you simply put a new harness on each bike. The advantage of the PT is that you have a wheel with the sensors built in and you buy a relatively cheaper harness for that but have to use the same wheel.

I run multiple bikes so I have both the Polar CS600 and a Polar 625X (also use it for running). If you run multiple wheel sets and I do, I prefer the polar CS600. You're going to hear a lot of folks talk down the Polars but they're good systems. Consequently there are a lot of maintenance issues with the PTs (i've rebuilt a number of hubs and wheels for people). All have their plus and minus but if I were you, I'd steer towards PTs and Polars and pass the iBike.

Thanks for the input. Do you know if there are any significant differences in the reliability of power sensor between the older 625 version and the newer CS600? I know the cyclocomputer has several upgrades but I already own a 625 watch.

Thanks again

doulos said:

2. If PT, SL vrs 2.4 and rim recommendations.

If you buy the SL (a bit less expensive) you will need to buy an extra harness (I believe $70) for your second bike, you can then swap wheel and computer between your two bikes. While I have an SL, not a 2.4, I believe for the 2.4 you will need a spare handlebar mount/receiver for the 2nd bike. Mavic OPs are fine all-around rims for a PT wheel - I use mine for both training and all but the hilliest races. But (and I apologize if this is a dumb question) I must ask why you want the power meter. In order to benefit from the PM in training, a lot of your training needs to be solo structured intervals. In other cases (group rides, and commutes - unless you are doing intervals on the commutes) the PM is fun to look at after the ride, but you are not training with a PM, you are merely riding with a PM. The latter is what I'm doing now, since after nearly 3 years of "real training" I decided I wanted the enjoyment of group rides, and simply lost the willingness to do the solo intervals. But the experience taught me that now I am simply enjoying the WKO+ graphs, not using the PM in a productive way.

[quote="palewin"]If But (and I apologize if this is a dumb question) I must ask why you want the power meter.


A good question. My commute is 45 miles round trip with several long stretches that doesn't require stops and 2200 feet of climbing that lends itself to the type of training that others who I know with PM's recommend. My long term goals are to improve my endurance ride performance in flat centuries such as Tucson and hill climbing centuries here in SoCal.

And probably just as important admittedly I'm a gadget guy, just ask my wife.

palewin said:

... In order to benefit from the PM in training, a lot of your training needs to be solo structured intervals...

Hmmm...I think I'd have to disagree with that statement. Prior to the inception of the PMC (Performance Manager Chart) I would probably have been more likely to agree...but, with the use of NP, TSS, and the PMC, I can easily "characterize" the group rides that I do and use them appropriately in my training mix. I have a couple of group rides that I do where I can predict within 5 TSS points what my score will be. The key is to make sure that the you're still targeting the appropriate training WITHIN the group rides.

Oh, I still do "solo" intervals at times...but those typically tend to be either "sweetspot" workouts or L4 focus workouts.

edit: I almost forgot, for the OP, if you already have a 625 watch, just pick up a Polar PM (the price has just been reduced on the original version) and try it out first. If you want to know the "proper" way to set it up, just look here:
http://users.ox.ac.uk/~univ2040/2.html

There's a couple things in there that I don't quite agree with...but it's a good start!

Hope that helps.

Tom Anhalt said:

if you already have a 625 watch, just pick up a Polar PM

Tom, which Polar watches are compatible with the Polar PM? I thought it was only 700 series (and I know you favor the 710 and 720).

jbvcoaching said:

Tom, which Polar watches are compatible with the Polar PM? I thought it was only 700 series (and I know you favor the 710 and 720).

According to Polar, the 700 series plus the S625X:

http://www.polar.fi/polar/channels/eng/segments/Cycling/S725X/accessories/Power_Output_Set.html

palewin said:

If you buy the SL (a bit less expensive) you will need to buy an extra harness (I believe $70) for your second bike, you can then swap wheel and computer between your two bikes. While I have an SL, not a 2.4, I believe for the 2.4 you will need a spare handlebar mount/receiver for the 2nd bike.

I'd go with the 2.4 - I have one and it can easily be swapped from bike to bike. The extra mount cost $10. You can even just buy a bunch of zip ties and transfer the one mount from bike to bike (which is what I have done due to laziness to order a second mount). This seems to be the cheapest option. It seems to be a hassle to transfer the Polar from bike to bike?

TamMan said:

I'd go with the 2.4 - I have one and it can easily be swapped from bike to bike. The extra mount cost $10. You can even just buy a bunch of zip ties and transfer the one mount from bike to bike (which is what I have done due to laziness to order a second mount). This seems to be the cheapest option. It seems to be a hassle to transfer the Polar from bike to bike?

You just need a Polar power module for each bike...and at the cost of a PT 2.4, you could buy at least 5 or 6 of them brand new :eek:

The polar watch swaps easily from bike to bike.

Tom Anhalt said:

Hmmm...I think I'd have to disagree with that statement. Prior to the inception of the PMC (Performance Manager Chart) I would probably have been more likely to agree...but, with the use of NP, TSS, and the PMC, I can easily "characterize" the group rides that I do and use them appropriately in my training mix. I have a couple of group rides that I do where I can predict within 5 TSS points what my score will be. The key is to make sure that the you're still targeting the appropriate training WITHIN the group rides.

Tom: I think this is a matter of training philosophies. When I was training with CTS, my coach provided very specific workouts to target different physiological systems. For example, 3x15min @ 235w, 5x3min @ 265w, 5x30sec with 30 sec recoveries, etc. To do these within a group ride would be very difficult, and probably not appreciated by the rest of the group (unless they liked really long pulls at whatever speed the power levels implied, and lots of surges). Now I could of course look at the NP, TSS, and IF scores of these rides, and duplicate those numbers on a group ride, but the physiological effects wouldn't be the same. In fact, since group rides are much more fun than going out alone, I used to try to "convince" my coach to let me do more of them, especially when the power outputs were very similar to race efforts. But he always countered with the argument (and since I was paying him, I listened) that the efforts on group rides were not the same as the structure he was providing. Understand that I'm not personally being argumentative, just providing the arguments that my coach gave in favor of what he called "structure" vs. the efforts of a group ride.

palewin said:

Tom: I think this is a matter of training philosophies. When I was training with CTS, my coach provided very specific workouts to target different physiological systems. For example, 3x15min @ 235w, 5x3min @ 265w, 5x30sec with 30 sec recoveries, etc. To do these within a group ride would be very difficult, and probably not appreciated by the rest of the group (unless they liked really long pulls at whatever speed the power levels implied, and lots of surges). Now I could of course look at the NP, TSS, and IF scores of these rides, and duplicate those numbers on a group ride, but the physiological effects wouldn't be the same. In fact, since group rides are much more fun than going out alone, I used to try to "convince" my coach to let me do more of them, especially when the power outputs were very similar to race efforts. But he always countered with the argument (and since I was paying him, I listened) that the efforts on group rides were not the same as the structure he was providing. Understand that I'm not personally being argumentative, just providing the arguments that my coach gave in favor of what he called "structure" vs. the efforts of a group ride.

I can understand that...but I've found that the "structure" of my habitual group rides are very consistent. So, I use that structure to my advantage.

The original comment I replied about was that a PM wasn't worth getting unless you were training "solo" all the time. I was just trying to say that it "isn't necessarily so". Besides, you can get training info from a PM from races too. In fact, just last week someone emailed me asking how many w/kg I was putting out on the hill that started each lap of our Sea Otter road race. I knew that because I race with my PM too...and I was able to pass the info along...to help with _his_ training.

Tom Anhalt said:

The polar watch swaps easily from bike to bike.

I don't think every one would agree with this. The watch has to be on super tight, this is one of the cons specific to the Polar, it makes the watch itself more able to withstand moisture without a physical plug on the watch/CPU but I found it an annoyance that it's not as easy to plug and play as either a PowerTap or SRM for mounting/removing the CPU.

If you can wait a while, check out the Quarq powermeters to be distributed in Nov-Dec 2007.

nrhorwitz said:

If you can wait a while, check out the Quarq powermeters to be distributed in Nov-Dec 2007.

Ooh...this sounds like you have some "inside info" about this, so far at least, "vaporware". Anything you can reveal??? 🙂

Tom Anhalt said:

Ooh...this sounds like you have some "inside info" about this, so far at least, "vaporware". Anything you can reveal??? 🙂

I've seen the prototype and it's looking great. Let me copy and paste the URL from fixedgearfever.com which will shed more light on this subject.

FGF Link