Ok I know STRAVA is a long way from being accurate, but realisticaly how quickly can you add to your threshold power?

Currently averageing 160W ish, how long would it take to be able to ride an average roughly double that? 3 months? 6 months? A year? Genetic mutation?

I’m a numbers person, I can deal with being the last up a climb but stick that in quantifiable numbers on a pice of paper (I’m 50% heavier and half the power of the KOM on a local climb) seems to have been a kick in the arse.

The weigh’s obvious, if I try it’ll be 1-2lb a week untill I get back to my 17yr old self weighing ~75kg, but I’ve never looked at power outputs before.

my results using a powertap (borrowed from a friend) are on average around 25-30% higher than the strava estimates. I race at a decent level in my age group and i cant see the advantages (for me), however people are different. Remember it not the power number thats important but your power to kg figure.

I’d recommend borrowing one or renting before you blow your wad!

You want to average 320w….how long for? that is quite a lot tbh!

As Tom said, there’s a big difference between 320Watts for 1 second, or 1 hour.
The former just means you can get out of a comfy chair without difficulty, the latter means you can do a sub hour 25mile TT

FTP, or Functional Threshold Power (average over 60min) takes ages to improve.
It is likely to be higher than 160w, but reaching 320w will take lots of training.

Best ignore Strava’s measurement unless you are using a power meter.

Currently averageing 160W ish

I dunno how you are defining threshold power but I bet you’ll be doing more than 160W.

I can do 220W for a long ride, 3 hours or more, 250 for 2 hours, and probably 330 for 30 mins. Those are reasonable numbers but I am heavy so they don’t count for much 🙂

You’ll probably find quick KOMers will be close to my power levels but be skinny buggers and weigh 30% less than I do.

FWIW when training to improve my 30 min power (known to me as anaerobic threshold) I started at about 290W, then after a few proper sessions I began to learn how to apply myself to it mentally so went up to about 315W. Few more sessions I got to 325W, then I’d gain maybe 1W each time.

FWIW when training to improve my 30 min power (known to me as anaerobic threshold)

30 minutes exercising will be almost all aerobic.

Not sure about doubling it but going on Strava figures my 5 min power has improved by about 50W so far this year. That along with losing a couple of kg has made a noticeable improvement to my climbing.

This year is the first that I’d say I’ve trained rather than just gone out for a ride. I’m riding more but I think adding a few hill repeat sessions and some core stability exercises has made a difference plus going out and pushing myself harder than I used to on hills to chase those KOM’s.

I know there are plenty of Strava haters out there but I think it’s great as a motivational tool to get you fitter.

30 minutes exercising will be almost all aerobic.

Yes, my coach explained to me that above that threshold would be anaerobic, but below it would be the highest sustainable aerobic.

Certainly matched up with my experience. When working at a steady state on a steady climb or on the flat, any attempt at going over this value would last for a few seconds, and I’d revert to the same point. Generally that ceiling can be sustained for half an hour ish, could also be considered 10 mile TT pace.

When people quote threshld, they normally mean FTP (Max power for an hour) Many people advocate working this out from a 20 minute test (20 minute max ~ 105% FTP) as riding hard for 20 minutes is much less demanding than riding hard for an hour.

I dunno how you are defining threshold power but I bet you’ll be doing more than 160W.

Well STRAVA (probably inaccurately) says 160W average, 250W for 10min and 300W for 5. And I’m 95kg to put that in context.

I guess threshold might well be higher as

a) SRAVA can’t ‘see’ some of the climbs round here, so one section that takes me 10min and is actually up-down-up-down-up and really hard work it registers as a decent (and almost zero power).
b) it’s average, so on a normal ride riding at what I’d judge to be my threshold 33% is probably spent going downhill.
c) does it account for knobly tyres and rough surfaces sapping power (i.e the same gradient must be ~30% harder on horse hoof dimpled hard earth covered in long grass vs the road)? Should I go out on the road bike and do some long climbs to see what the results of those are?

I doubt I’ll buy a powermeter, not worth the money to me and I’m not actually training for an event, just wondering what degree of training the guys higher up the tables are likely to be doing and how long it takes to reach those kind of numbers.

Yes, my coach explained to me that above that threshold would be anaerobic, but below it would be the highest sustainable aerobic.

Understand what you are saying now, you are training to improve your threshold – rather than suggesting you are training for 30min anaerobically.

Strava tells me I have a 5min power of 797w and 10min power of 614w.

Whilst I’d love to say they were accurate as they would probably give me a spot on the GB Team Pursuit team, realistically they are nearer 400-450w.

So basically what I am saying is ignore the power that strava shows.

just wondering what degree of training the guys higher up the tables are likely to be doing and how long it takes to reach those kind of numbers.

Well, in reality it depends on so many factors. Even the profile of the route you are testing on makes a big difference. You could be a puncheur and hammer up short steep bits at the right times to get a good time, or just stay at your threshold and get the same time. Wiggins v Froome if you like.

I don’t have a power meter on mtb, but here’s an interesting anecdote (well I think it is). One Mayhem where I rode in a good mixed team I did 6 or 7 laps, riding each as hard as I could, I was in good shape and felt good on each one. My HR for the first averaged 178 bpm, and by lap 4 and above I was registering about 160bpm average. But my lap times were within a minute each time (and not getting slower towards the end either, they were randomly up and down). The drop in HR shows that I was putting out less power, but my times were the same because I was learning the course and putting short sprints in at the right times to keep my speed up.

I don’t have a power meter on mtb, but here’s an interesting anecdote (well I think it is). One Mayhem where I rode in a good mixed team I did 6 or 7 laps, riding each as hard as I could, I was in good shape and felt good on each one. My HR for the first averaged 178 bpm, and by lap 4 and above I was registering about 160bpm average. But my lap times were within a minute each time. The drop in HR shows that I was putting out less power, but my times were the same because I was learning the course and putting short sprints in at the right times to keep my speed up.

Either that or there’s little difference between your power at 160bpm and 178bpm (a Wiggins).

Anecdotally I’m a Caverndish, I’ll sit in the group generally struggling all day, get dropped repeatably on climbs and then smash it for 30 seconds on the last 500m to the pub.

Either that or there’s little difference between your power at 160bpm and 178bpm

There is, plenty! The average of 178bpm hides lots of 185bpm efforts and a few 190bpms. The 160bpm laps were basically the same but without any efforts over about 168 or so

i meant to put a tongue in cheek smiley there :p

The drop in HR shows that I was putting out less power,

No, it just shows your heart rate was lower. There is a strong correlation between HR and power output, but it’s not a simple linear effect.

I used to race a 3 stage race in Holland, and my HR on the first stage, a time trial was always bouncing off my maximum aerobic limit. It would be lower during the evening criterium style race, but I was going a lot faster for a lot longer. The following days road race stage would be done at a lower rate still, but was far, far harder in terms of percieved effort, distance and actual effort.

HR is an indication of the rate your heart is beating at, inferences regarding power and effort and speed can be made, but carefully…

I bought a PowerTap at the start of the year and have been using it consistently to monitor my training. As a numbers person I find at a real aid to training at the correct intensities, which were often higher than I imagined.

If you know your FTP then riding 2 * 20 minutes at just below that twice a week will improve your power a lot. reference

I went from doing that session in late Feb at 3.5W/KG to 3.8W/KG in three months but with my average working heart rate decreasing from 160 to 154 per interval.

As a reference I’d say I’d be mid pack expert at MTB, somewhere near njee20, course depending

Numbers, love ’em.

There is a strong correlation between HR and power output, but it’s not a simple linear effect.

Yes but cardiac drift shows an upward trend of hr at constant power, not downward!

Yes but cardiac drift shows an upward trend of hr at constant power, not downward!

Over a single session, and usually associated with heat stress.

HR does not equal power output.

Out of interest, how do you know what your FTP is if it’s always going up?

Out of interest, how do you know what your FTP is if it’s always going up?

By re-testing it. Most people training with power will retest every month or so. Without getting too geeky, unless you have an accurate FTP then its pointless training with power, so retesting frequently is important.

HR does not equal power output.

Yes, I know. I’ve never experienced power staying the same after dropping from 180 to 160 and 6 hours of riding as hard as possible, though.

As for knowing what your power is – you can find anaerobic threshold by feel easily enough. If it gets rapidly impossible to sustain a certain power, then it’s too high, so you ease down to where it’s sustainable.

As a reference I’d say I’d be mid pack expert at MTB, somewhere near njee20, course depending

With my mediocre fitness at the moment I suspect you’d be a fair way ahead 😉

I’d echo everything Matt and The Swedish Chef have said.

I must say I’ve got properly slack with ‘training’, I tend to just ride my bike these days, work and what not gets in the way, but I still use my PowerTap, mainly because it’s there, but I find it reasonably useful even for retrospective analysis and I really like numbers!

Hmmmm, maybe I’ll get one when i move back down south, the hills round here mean power output = gradient * (bottom gear + ‘poo face’)!

I was about to ask what the difference between SRM, quarq and power tap is in use, then realized that you can buy 3 powertaps for the cost of an SRM!

SRM is the reference point for power, the most accurate (+/- 1%) and well proven. A crank system is ideally better because its closer to the power input, but obviously the price is very high.

But Powertaps have been out for a while now and also well proven and generally reliable and accurate enough for consumer use (+/-2%). I use one and it has been great.

Quarq I don’t know much about, but I’ve not heard anything bad about it unlike Power/Look system and various other systems that have tried to come to market.

You can hire a power meter, which might be a good idea at first.

i dont want to know my power output because i like deluding myself that i’m a powerful pedal masher, if i measured it and found out i was rubbish then that’d really rustle my jimmies.

Was thinking of selling my PowerTap to get a Power2Max chainset instead.

Jury’s out on the reliability, but sure it’d be good enough for my menial requirements, and I’d rather be able to use some tarty wheels without having multiple £800 hubs!

The Garmin Vector pedals look great in theory, but I wonder if they’ll ever come to market frankly!

There are a lot of older wired powertaps around on ebay for £300 or even less. Easily the best value for money.

I’m power meter curious. But I wonder the point really.

I’m more interested in seeing my average speeds improve than anything.

Power meters are the future.

If you’ve got a limited amount of time to ride, are dedicated to training as a means to get quicker then power meters are a huge help.

However like all training schedules they can take the fun out of riding, (if your idea of fun is not interval training). Most people would gain more by simply riding longer and quicker.

I am considering treating myself to a power meter over the winter, was waiting for the garmin ones to come out, but they are looking more expensive than I would have hoped.

Anyone got a view on what is a decent cheap introduction into power meters? and any books worth reading about power training beforehand?

Power is constant. No matter what else changes, such as the weather, roads, bikes, etc your power output is essentially constant. If your power increases then you are stronger.

Just watching average speed is no judge of fitness/speed/power. Power is only really of use to people willing to invest time in training properly.

Anyone got a view on what is a decent cheap introduction into power meters? and any books worth reading about power training beforehand?

Powertap, software called WKO+ and a book called “training and racing with a power meter”.

^^ this, although ‘decent’ & ‘cheap’ with regards to power meters doesn’t really work!

and any books worth reading about power training beforehand?

I’ve found this site interesting: http://www.training4cyclists.com

The WKO/Training Peaks website has some good ‘basics’ info too, mainly written by Hunter Allen and Andrew Coggan, who wrote the book Matt recommends.

If you’re going down the route of measuring power, I’d suggest buying a proper power meter with a strain gauge rather than a turbo that uses a calculation. I found my tacx one to be miles out when I finally bought my powertap, and not consistently so which made it difficult to apply changes as a percentage.

That said, I only really use my powertap on the turbo as I find it quite difficult to keep it in the zones out on the road.