Power output at threshold

From what I understand 275W is a good threshold. I am not sure as to the profile of your test, however, weight also plays a huge part in all this.

If I am quoting correctly, Lance can produce 5.9watt/kg. He is about 72Kg upon entering the tour.

Tom.

275watts at threshold is about average for the competitive cyclist, or about a cat 4 level racer.

i have read that armstrong's threshold is in the 450watt range. yes, that is insane. good euro pros are around 400watts.

i am 79kg and at about 320watts and just about to upgrade to cat 2.

brother,

Look here under "power profiling":

http://www.cyclingpeakssoftware.com/power411.html

Quoted post said:

Originally posted by tomUK
From what I understand 275W is a good threshold. I am not sure as to the profile of your test, however, weight also plays a huge part in all this.

If I am quoting correctly, Lance can produce 5.9watt/kg. He is about 72Kg upon entering the tour.

Tom.

Good point, since power-to-weight would be the key factor for climbing speed. I've read that Lance can climb at a sustained rate of 1800 m/hr (0.5 m/s) vertical speed, where the average in the TdF peloton is around 1300-1500 m/sec.

At his weight, his sustained climb level of 0.5 m/sec vertical would seem to check with your figures. At 392 n-m/sec for the uphill work (80 kg Lance plus bike), plus another 50 watts for aero drag/rolling resistance at 10 mph, the results seem to correlate.

Quoted post said:

Originally posted by velomanct
275watts at threshold is about average for the competitive cyclist, or about a cat 4 level racer.

i have read that armstrong's threshold is in the 450watt range. yes, that is insane. good euro pros are around 400watts.

i am 79kg and at about 320watts and just about to upgrade to cat 2.

So........
... at 65 kilos I would theoretically do better over hilly courses and struggly a bit on flatter courses!

Is watts generally a good predictor of performance or is there something else which gives a better indication of what you are theoretically capable of😕

Quoted post said:

Originally posted by the brother
So........
... at 65 kilos I would theoretically do better over hilly courses and struggly a bit on flatter courses!

Is watts generally a good predictor of performance or is there something else which gives a better indication of what you are theoretically capable of😕

power (watts) is the best predictor of performance, as power is what is needed to move your bike forward. what sort of duration you look at power over, will depend on your goals. for e.g., 200-m track sprinter need a very high peak power, whereas, someone riding a 50 mile TT will need a much lower, much more sustained power output.

when you were tested, how was 'lactate threshold' defined? was this (LT) at a fixed lactate (e.g., 2.5 mmol/L) or a 1 mmol/L increase over exercise baseline levels, or was this (275 W) thought to be your 1-hr TT power?

As others have mentioned, you need to scale the 275 W to other data. these data, might be power to mass ratio (good predictor of climbing ability) or power to mass^0.67 (better 'all-round' ability). for example, if you had a mass of 90 kg and were 1.90m your speed under given conditions at 275 W, would be a less than if you had a mass of 55 kg, and were 1.55 m tall. add into this your position on the bike, and the equipment you use...

Power (watts) is what it's all about!

Ric

Quoted post said:

Originally posted by ricstern
power (watts) is the best predictor of performance, as power is what is needed to move your bike forward. what sort of duration you look at power over, will depend on your goals. for e.g., 200-m track sprinter need a very high peak power, whereas, someone riding a 50 mile TT will need a much lower, much more sustained power output.

when you were tested, how was 'lactate threshold' defined? was this (LT) at a fixed lactate (e.g., 2.5 mmol/L) or a 1 mmol/L increase over exercise baseline levels, or was this (275 W) thought to be your 1-hr TT power?

As others have mentioned, you need to scale the 275 W to other data. these data, might be power to mass ratio (good predictor of climbing ability) or power to mass^0.67 (better 'all-round' ability). for example, if you had a mass of 90 kg and were 1.90m your speed under given conditions at 275 W, would be a less than if you had a mass of 55 kg, and were 1.55 m tall. add into this your position on the bike, and the equipment you use...

Power (watts) is what it's all about!

Ric

The LT was defined as a 1mmol/l increase over exercise baseline during a step test with 4min increments at increasing(+25watts) power output.
I am just a little guy (170 tall and 65kg) so would certainly struggle around the track but have more interest in distance events.
I understand the thinking behind power to mass, but why is .67 mass used as an "allround ability" indicator. Is this figure generally used by sports scientists and where does it come from?

How much difference does the position on the bike make?
If you were cycling on your own(ie not drafting) at a constant power, how much faster would you travel if you were in a very good aerodynamic position(aero bars) compared to a relaxed position on the brake hoods?