Forum menu
What's interesting is that I get the impression that most posters are claiming their outdoor ftp test to be better, just because it gives them a bigger number. While bigger is better for bragging rights, for training to threshold the more accurate number will give you the greater benefits. It may well be that the smaller number is the more accurate one.
I’d say the better one was the one which closely matched your training environment.
Through winter I work off my indoor result since most of my intervals are done on the turbo and long rides with the club at weekends are social opportunities for getting the miles in.
When it’s time to come out of hibernation I’ll do an outdoor test and work off that.
I’d say the better one was the one which closely matched your training environment
Good point.. bang on the money.
I agree with @Haze as well - you should test where you'll train. The whole point of estimating your FTP is so you can structure intervals around it.
Seeing as we're on the subject though, I do find it weird how much people talk about their FTP. It's an estimate of a physiological approximation not some kind of inherent physical attribute like penis size or IQ.
Everything I have read indicates 2 key differences - one overheating, and 2, as kryton has already called out, there is a difference in pedalling mechanics due to not having a 'dead spot' when on the turbo. I've also read that the more time spent on the turbo the quicker the discrepancy drops as your muscles adapt to the slightly different pedalling action. I spend as little time on the turbo as humanly possible.
As for people saying there is no difference, perhaps for them but I can assure you for me there is and its substantial. There is a 1.6 mile hill with about a 6 % gradient at the end of my usual ride. My stages tells me i consistently put out around 250 watts for the 8 - 9 minutes it takes me to get up there - I'm puffing a bit but not exactly bleeding out my eyeballs by the end, as I've still got 8 miles to get home.
On my tacx flux I can hold 250 watts for around 5 min when fresh and I'm totally broken at the end. So basically trying much harder, when fresher, with no external distractions...and I can't get close to the same power output.
I agree that if training indoors its the indoor ftp that counts, however given I'm cycling for fun and only asking out of interest as i seem to be getting faster, doing a 20 min test indoors holds absolutely no appeal whatsoever!
Out of interest. If you’ve never done an ftp test properly indoors or out, why did you buy a power meter?
On my tacx flux I can hold 250 watts
Using the Flux’s power meter or yours? The two will differ.
I found the most useful way of FTP testing was during a 10 TT. Granted going to be difficult to find an event this time of year but you can still ride a course and see. Ride to the course, do the 10 and then ride back, ca.30 miles all in. For me that gave a number that was relevant to where I was testing, and for training against, especially sweet spot. Only mattered in a race to be mindful of not popping. I use a crank pm and have never paid any heed to strava numbers.
I’d say the better one was the one which closely matched your training environment
I'd say the issue there is actually an issue with your training environment if it is not you race environment. Turbo training is brilliant but not a complete replacement for training where you are racing.
A bit like these esports simulation drivers having a got at really Motorsport it could be fascinating in a year or two to have some bit hitter zwift racers who have never raced for real race some elite roadies on actual tarmac and see what happens. Similarly put the roadies on zwift and see what happens to them.
I’d say the issue there is actually an issue with your training environment if it is not you race environment. Turbo training is brilliant but not a complete replacement for training where you are racing
Point was only to address the difference between outdoor and indoor training levels that I've consistently seen since riding with power, not the smaller differences I might expect to see between varying outdoor routes.
I don't TT and rarely ride to power when racing, may have a glance now and then if I'm putting in a sustained effort but mostly the race dynamics dictate how I'm riding. Data is useful for reviewing afterwards.
I've always found my FTP outside is higher than inside. Doing it in inside is like rubbing sandpaper up & down you legs till they are raw then rubbing vinegar & salt in......at least outside you're riding your bike & zooming along to take your mind off the pain! Inside there's no distractions - it's probably harder inside but pffffttt it's hard enough as it is if you do it properly!
I always found my 20 minute power was something i concentrated more on than FTP. I found its very hard to test FTP a lot of the time and could knock out a 20min effort on a trainer or wattbike week in week out. I also found FTP often doesn't translate to cycling performance in races (apart from TT's) .
Worth a read
I found the most useful way of FTP testing was during a 10 TT
But there's a difference between being fast and doing a high average power, the size of which depending on the course. I.e. in an FTP test you won't be tucked right up in an aero position, you won't freewheel and tuck on descents.
I've done a lot more 20 minute tests than TTs, so I always have to remind myself (try) to be fast, not powerful. I actually wrote this on a little note stuck on the garmin last time, otherwise the instinct to pedal through corners and stand on shallow climbs kicks in.
Using the Flux’s power meter or yours? The two will differ
I use the power from the stages on the turbo so same device to measure power
Out of interest. If you’ve never done an ftp test properly indoors or out, why did you buy a power meter
Fair question. .I bought it for a number of reasons .
1-I bought it a few years ago when I was planning to do some racing, had been using trainer road alot and seen some real improvements. Then I lost motivation, my turbo was too noisy for the downstairs neighbours, and I basically became really unfit and fat
2 - I thought it would be a useful tool for pacing myself on climbs, and to be fair it is even with doing a test. I use to start off far to quickly and was dying by the end.. Im finding I'm much fresher now for similar time up hill, despite being less fit than I was 4 years ago
3 - I was interested in seeing how I improved over time
4 - and if I'm honest the main reason, I'm a tart and had a fair bit of spare cash sitting around with nothing better to spend it on. ... Do I need it, of course not, just like I don't need a 7kg race bike with carbon aero wheels given I'm never going to ever enter a road race in my life!
As I mentioned I plan to sign up to trainer road after Christmas so will do a test on trainer then as I plan to do some structured training in 2019. Found that the sufferfest and angels is the way to go as it brought on my training massively when I used it before.
Can you not just do two tests? Put them a week apart...then you will know both values.
My power meter stays on my turbo bike just for training. So I'm only intrested in the indoor turbo values
As others have said, you have to pick the power that is most relevant for what your are doing. For me, I was testing indoors at 40W less than I could hold for an hours climbing at the start of a 100 mile road race. Training rides climbing at tempo were simply too easy, trying to ride indoors at outdoor climbing ftp was impossible. Outdoor flat ftp was between the two. Regardless of what causes it, be flexible which numbers you apply.
For suffer fest I'll be using the lower indoor numbers regardless of how low they are.
Got a few big climbs coming up in gran canaria next week but not planning to buckle myself testing my ftp on the climbs. Would be useful to know a good pace to set however as only time I ever tackled anything similar was a few alps when the stages was broken, and I set off far far to quickly and was buckled after about 2km!
I think 230 Watts will be a good tempo to climb at when out there.
Whatever your avg power is over your sensibly paced 8 minute climb knock 10% off.
I've just made that up off the top of my head but seems reasonable.
Ok, I’m gonna say it.
MTFU and do an ftp test.
Ok, I’m gonna say it.
<span style="font-size: 0.8rem;">MTFU and do an ftp test</span>
I will when I plan to start using the trainer. But at the moment I genuinely don't see the point of doing it indoors when I'm only interested in outdoor pacing. Interested to see why you think differently though.
There isn't a 20 min hill round me to do an outdoor test but apparently I can 2x8 min to get a good idea which I may do.
So basically I can ride up the hill, roll down, then back up again.. And x by 90%. Which will probably give me around 230 Watts if previous Exp tells me anything. I'll let you know how I get on!
I appreciate 230 watt ftp is pretty shit..but I've always wanted to reach a goal of 250, which would give me 3.5 w/kg, which I think would be respectable and pretty achievable given I've only started cycling again in April. Why do I want this figure you ask.. No reason other than personal sense of achievement.
I just genuinely think that there are too many variables in an outdoor test to make it accurate. Using a hill for testing isn’t recommended by TrainerRoad, again due to variables and the way it forces you to recruit muscle groups throughout the pedal stroke. They recommend a 20min or 2x8 min on a flat stretch of road where you can ride constantly at maximum effort.
If you keep yourself cool and avoid thermoregulation issues then indoors is going to be more accurate, however there is also the issue that you get better at doing an FTP test through experience because pacing properly for it is hard to learn initially, that’s one of the reasons why TR brought in their ramp FTP test, it takes even less time than an 8 minute test and you just warm up then follow a rising curve of power until you hit a number you can’t physically sustain, at point the test ends and you get your FTP.
BLOG.TRAINERROAD.COM It's worth doing a MAP (maximal Aerobic Power) test to work out your zones. This is what many professional outfits used to gauge fitness (including British cycling)
I found it was fairly accurate at measuring my 20MP and FTP.
FARM5.STATICFLICKR.COM It’s worth doing a MAP (maximal Aerobic Power) test to work out your zones. This is what many professional outfits used to gauge fitness (including British cycling)
interesting, it looks like the MAP test is basically the same as the ramp test, that's possibly where trainer road got it. I do know that they did a lot of work to assess the accuracy vs 20 min tests and hence FTP calculation from it
I used to geek out on this stuff way too much. I was big into time trialling. Got fitter and fitter, ftp was better than most I raced against. But in a TT race,FTP is just part of the puzzle - FTP/CDa. Then got sick of it all and jack it in. Too focussed.
Don’t go on the timetrialling forum, they’re all mental and will argue for decades about the concept of FTP 😀
TrainerRoad ramp test is definitely the best approach for inexperienced testers, I would thoroughly recommend this to the OP. You can’t pace it wrong, and it only gets painful for the final 3 mins, keep turning the pedals until you really truthfully cannot do anymore.
A 10 mile TT is a good approximation, but I used to hold 105% of my FTP, so for inexperienced you’ll likely get the wrong FTP estimate. Having said that, a 10m TT is far more fun than an indoor 20 min FTP test. 20 min test is just plain horrible. Nobody wants to do that. The ramp is actually quite fun.
Another option is Xert. I had a lot of fun with this platform. You do not need to test.
Well I did a cycle today for 90 min, with the first 25 min pretty much up hill, albeit not consistently uphill. 250 watts average for 20 min of that, 270 normalised for same period. So I'm thinking 240 watts ftp doesn't sound massively off based on those numbers. Especially given I still had an hrs riding to do after.
I'd suggest your FTP was higher than 250 unless you were laid out on the side of the road at the top of the climb barely able to continue? Probably more like 95% of your normalised if not more. What does Strava suggest if you have access to the power curve? That plus a bit if mine is anything to go by.
Said it before but my ftp is set in a one hour race or 25 mile TT. That said my FTP is not overly helpful for my favourite races as I need to maintain 67% of FTP. For 12 hours.
Anyway based on that climb, you are higher than 250 I climb at my FTP and few climbs are longer than about 30 minutes. Most a lot less.