The whole argument behind training with power seems very convincing, but suffers from the need to buy expensive equipment to get the accuracy. Since I'm going to a gym twice a week to get some non-dark training over the winter anyway, could anyone advice on the accuracy of the power readouts on the static bikes? My gym has the "top of the range" Lifecycle C9i, but I know that the 'calories burned' read-out is just a guess and the speed given is always ridiculously high so should I trust the power measurement as far as I can throw it? If it's anywhere near it would kill 2 birds with 1 stone.
Originally posted by rob of the og Hi all, sorry if this has been covered before:
could anyone advice on the accuracy of the power readouts on the static bikes? My gym has the "top of the range" Lifecycle C9i, but I know that the 'calories burned' read-out is just a guess and the speed given is always ridiculously high so should I trust the power measurement as far as I can throw it? If it's anywhere near it would kill 2 birds with 1 stone.
In the gym where I go, the power measurement was very optimistic and very unreliable (cybex bikes). I'd guess they were reading 50 to 75w high.
My advice would be to pick one bike in the gym and always use it. Also, be prepared to get new baseline power levels when you switch equipment.
Originally posted by rob of the og Hi all, sorry if this has been covered before:
The whole argument behind training with power seems very convincing, but suffers from the need to buy expensive equipment to get the accuracy. Since I'm going to a gym twice a week to get some non-dark training over the winter anyway, could anyone advice on the accuracy of the power readouts on the static bikes? My gym has the "top of the range" Lifecycle C9i, but I know that the 'calories burned' read-out is just a guess and the speed given is always ridiculously high so should I trust the power measurement as far as I can throw it? If it's anywhere near it would kill 2 birds with 1 stone.
i don't know the the gym bike you use, but i'm confident it's unlikely to be anywhere near accurate. energy expended is just a function of power x time, so if power is out so is energy (and vice versa). if a basic function such as speed is wrong, there's no chance power is!
one theory I had was that because this particular model is powered by the cyclist (ie no external electric supply for the display) then it ought to have been pretty easy for it to measure the wattage being provided to the electric circuit then factor it up to allow for the (in)efficiency of the generator. This I imagine would make the power reading pretty accurate.
By contrast any value for speed is always essentially just a random number (because you're not going anywhere!) and I believe these things work out calories on an estimation based on your age, weight and heart rate.
Perhaps the answer as suggested above is just to use it as a comparison measure between sessions on the same bike.
