Power meters · Public discussion

TT power

Started by powermad · · Last activity · 11 posts · 4,260 views

This thread is locked and is currently read-only.

Thread navigation

Jump through the discussion

Go to the original post, the replies on this page, or the latest preserved contribution.

Thread details

What we know about this thread

Original section
Power meters
Published
17 March 2003
Last activity
25 May 2003
Original author
powermad
Posts
11
Discussion status
Public discussion
Total views
4,260
Views / 30 days
0
Topics

The navigation and discussion metadata provide context. Posts remain in their original chronological order.

Showing posts 1–11 of 11
Posts remain in their original chronological order.

Text size
  1. What kind of power (in watts) is needed for get under 1hour for a 40km TT? What kind of power level does everyone on the list achieve at lactate threshold (ie. what's your 1hour power). It would be interesting to know... mine is 260W.

  2. Well, the figures aren't that interesting without the weight of the riders. A heavy rider needs to produce more Watt than a lighter rider to maintain the same speed. Anyway, my threshold is at 320 W and I weigh 73 Kg

  3. Quoted post said:

    Originally posted by powermad
    What kind of power (in watts) is needed for get under 1hour for a 40km TT? What kind of power level does everyone on the list achieve at lactate threshold (ie. what's your 1hour power). It would be interesting to know... mine is 260W.

    The answer will be dependent upon many factors, including, but not limited to

    topgraphy of the course
    environmental conditions
    aerodynamic equipment used
    bike position
    size, frontal area and CdA of the rider
    mass of the rider

    Furthermore, power that can be sustained for ~1-hr is generally far in excess of power at lactate threshold (which is generally defined as a 1mmol increase in lactate over resting levels). There was a discussion on this last year.

    It's also, not of great use to just state an absolute power output without specifying any anthropometric data (e.g., if you can 260 W and are 1.52m tall, and weigh 50 kg, your velocity on a given course would be far greater than if you're 1.80m and weigh 85 kg!)

    Ric

  4. Quoted post said:

    Originally posted by Copenhagen
    Well, the figures aren't that interesting without the weight of the riders. A heavy rider needs to produce more Watt than a lighter rider to maintain the same speed. Anyway, my threshold is at 320 W and I weigh 73 Kg

    CdA and/or frontal area are far more important than body mass, with body mass making little or no difference on flat or generally flat circuits.

    Ric

  5. It's also imperative when talking about power meters, to state, which meter is used as there can be errors and differences associated with certain ones. For instance, Power Tap hubs read about 2% less than (correctly calibrated) SRM cranks, due to power being 'lost' within the drive train.

    Ric

  6. That is an interesting point Ric, I would assume then that SRM cranks give an indication of what is happening at the pedals (i.e. the power produced at the pedals) and PowerTap what is happening at the hub.

    I assume that powertap is better when predicting performance (particularly when different bikes are used) and SRM's are better when training (i.e. the riders power output is the same no matter what the bike is).

    Is this correct? (I appreciate that the difference is very small!)

  7. Quoted post said:

    Originally posted by 2LAP
    That is an interesting point Ric, I would assume then that SRM cranks give an indication of what is happening at the pedals (i.e. the power produced at the pedals) and PowerTap what is happening at the hub.

    I assume that powertap is better when predicting performance (particularly when different bikes are used) and SRM's are better when training (i.e. the riders power output is the same no matter what the bike is).

    Is this correct? (I appreciate that the difference is very small!)

    Obviously, the difference is small, say 5 W at TT power for good riders. You might possibly, think of the SRM as being the power that gets to the pedals and is therefore, what the rider produces, whilst with the PT this is what's available to the rear wheel and thus affects the velocity of the wheel. But, because the difference is so small especially at typical training power it doesn't really make much difference, but is worth bearing in mind!

    Both systems are very accurate and both have their advantages and disadvantages.

    Ric

  8. Thanks Ric, you might have realised by now I am very interested in small differences particularly when they are intereting themselves.

  9. Yes, but to go back to the first post, what power output do I need to hit 25mph?!!! I know it depends on a variety of factors, so I typed them into the analytical cycling web site. Apparently its 593W for the local 25 course I use a lot, for my weight of 78kg. Now Chris Boardman broke the hour with, I think, around 430W. So where do AC get their figures. Am I missing something?

  10. Yes I am - just found out what. The AC model has a slope factor in. Once you sort that out things start to make sense. Thus to answer my own question, it's 287W for 25mph/40km/h. on a good day, on my local course.

  11. Shibumi,

    Your power output at a specific speed, will be highly dependent upon the topographical and environmental conditions encountered within the race, plus of course your equipment choices and your position itself. Furthermore, there's also your own body shape that you need to take into account.

    As a vague idea to ride at about 40 km/hr on a pan flat road, i put out ~ 270 - 280 W on very standard road equipment, i'm 1.75m and ~69/70 kg

    Ric

Active in the last 60 minutes

Active in this thread

0 users · 0 guests ·0 bots ·0 total

No signed-in users are active right now.

No known search crawlers active right now.