My first stages didn't survive it's first cold wet February ride. Pod fell off! They've improved the bonding since then.
Pod fell off!
😯
Took the misbehaving vectors off last night to give them a good clean and re-install to see if that sorted the problem. Noticed that the LHS must have taken quite a knock as it wasn't on straight and the pod arm slightly bent inwards. No idea when or how this might have happened. Anyway re-installed and torqued up and all appears fine now with believable power numbers again 🙂
Waiting for the Favero Assioma. Heard only good things about the BePro pedals, and would like Bluetooth and easy no torque swapping. Cheaper than P1s, which have poor reliability. I'm planning on using single sided and will run with the TT Powerpod# for CdA estimation. Raced with the other PP on my road bike yesterday and the average and normalised power was almost identical to my team mates stages. This was on standard settings for drop bars.
Also considering a powertap in a Hed disc, as my Hed going back. The other solution is a Quark, but I like the original Dura Ace 7400 cranks too much.
#Calibrated at Hillingdon by riding 33 laps (50 km) - average power 207W. Bikecalculator predicted power (at 95% rolling resistance and 95% aero) 208W. These fine tunings reflect the tubeless Corsa Speeds and my arms up position.
Just had a code pop into my inbox for 20% off the 4iiii PM's at ProBikeKit. Code is 4EYE20 and brings the 105 version down to 302 quid. Bargain.
Thanks for the heads up, just ordered one 😀
Waiting for the Favero Assioma.
FWIW I've had only good experiences with my BePro pedals, and wouldn't hesitate to get Assiomas. The only slight drawbacks that I can see are that:
- Installing the BePro pedals was really very easy, but would be a slight faff to switch and swap. No torque wrench required, but a couple of bits (though I strongly believe that I could just do it by eye).
- The 'pod' doesn't clear some shoes without cleat shims. I shaved one of my pairs of shoes slightly, the others were fine as-is.
- The battery life is not massive, and the flaps / micro USB cables are a bit fiddly.
The Assiomas improve on all of those. I can't think of any good reason to get P1s over them.
Assiomas do look very good. I've got some warranty replacement P1s on the way, but wondering about flogging them, seems the reliability isn't the best, and they're out of warranty in 6 months time.
could have done with this a few months ago haha, the 4iiis seemed to be having stock shortages so I got a stagesJust had a code pop into my inbox for 20% off the 4iiii PM's at ProBikeKit. Code is 4EYE20 and brings the 105 version down to 302 quid. Bargain.
Got my 4iiii from probikekit 24hrs after placingbthe order with free delivery
3 1/2 years after getting a stages, (x9's & a 7900 dura ace) i seem to have developed my first issue, seems to have come after a firmware update on the garmin, stages kept dropping out, less than 30 days left on the warranty so its gone back
Does anyone know if the quarq xx1 eagle is retro-fitable to a standard xx1 eagle or even xx1 11 sped crankest? My 11 speed x01 crankset didn't appear to have the correct fittings, but I haven't laid my hands on an xx1.
https://www.powermeter24.com/de/quarq-sram-xx1-eagle-powermeter-spider-1032?number=PM24-16-10377
no, its 8 bolt, rather than the usual 3 - you need a prior xx1 powermeter for that to fit
no, its 8 bolt, rather than the usual 3 - you need a prior xx1 powermeter for that to fit
Why don't quarq just make the power meter with the standard 3 bolt sram fixing then you could add the spider to xx1/x01/eagle etc.
It is a bit silly, quarq are part of sram, so you would think there could be some computability, I expect it would be good for sales.
Picked up an XT stages late last year. Had first ride on it on Saturday. Unsurprisingly the battery was flat 🙂
got my stages around january/february, been getting low battery warnings already
Got my warranty replacement (brand new boxed) set of P1s last week. Sadly, despite what I'd hoped, turbo training has not given me grand tour winning levels of power output, it just overstates things. Back to mediocrity now! Will do a comparison between the Tacx turbo and the P1s, country mile of difference between them I reckon!
Which Tacx turbo, out of interest?
I have a vague theory about my stages - which could be wrong.
I have 3 across my commuter, road and mtb. The commuter used the most lets sat 3 - 5 times a week road once a week and mtb once a fortnight at the moment.
The battery on the road runs down the quickest by far. Now this could be due to the fact these are longer rides, 3hr+ or it might be, randomly thinking, because it lives inside.
My theory is possibly the Bluetooth devices I have going on might be 'waking' up the powermeter? As it lives next to the mule bike on the wahoo kickr. And therefore its switching on and off much more than the other 2 stages which are stored in the garage / asgard.
Anyone else spot a trend with where the bike is located?
Which Tacx turbo, out of interest?
I couldn't remember, it's a Vortex, so about he cheapest one!
About batteries - I just got 16 x Panasonic CR2032's on amazon for £3.
My 4iii seems so far to be matching the 100hrs battery duration, but at that price I've no issue changing the batteries - the phone app connects and shows battery level immediately pre/post ride for education as to where it is.
Sadly, despite what I'd hoped, turbo training has not given me grand tour winning levels of power output, it just overstates things
A few weeks ago I was warming up at the gym and decided to use an exercise bike (sorry no idea which one). According to it I was happily sitting at 400W during my warm up (FTP is ~300W). It did make we wonder how many people use it and decide the TDF riders aren't trying very hard after all.
I guess the funny thing is that you don't actually know which is right. Perhaps my P1s underread by 5%, and my Tacx overreads by 5%, 10% difference, but neither is actually better or worse.
I'm pretty confident the Vortex is more like 20% over reading though!
Would be pretty typical of a vortex sadly 😉
Yep, I never expected any less, just amused by it!
Think Nath's Vortex was over reading similarly.
What is a typical inside / outside difference in power if it's the same meter? My bepro's read 15% higher for a hard effort outside (e.g a ten) than on the turbo (e.g. a 20 min ftp test). It's even higher outside on a big hill, prob 20% diff. I understand outside is often higher, but that sounds like quite a divergence.
It's interesting to me that you would expect pinning the number on, catching the minute man etc etc to give you a kick up the aris and add some watts. But mentally it actually feels the opposite way round to me - I can empty the tank dry, 100% arid nothing left, sat on the turbo staring at a number. This feels so much harder to achieve in the tens, but then my output is actually higher.
Im now using the same crank on both to road and turbo bike for comparative workouts.
At Gary - on a turbo you're supported, theres no wind resitiance, no mental presence of danger etc. Your legs might be working the same but the stress on the rest of your body os higher outside. As long as youre calibrating against temp changes, its just that you make more effort.
I did quite a bit of testing of my Vortex against my Powertap hub and then Favero pedals. My Vortex is actually not too far out when calibrated well, but it's very temperature sensitive. It's effective calibration can shift by 5% or more within a hard 5 minute interval as it gets hotter. So for some kinds of workout you can get it to be roughly right for the bits that matter, but in general it's not great. I've had mixed experiences with PowerMatch. I'm thinking of getting a Kickr, Neo or Direto for the winter...
link!!!About batteries - I just got 16 x Panasonic CR2032's on amazon for £3.
I just got 6 for £1.84 and now I feel ripped off!
The Trainerroad podcast backs up my personal experience- if you take care of cooling (mahoosive fans) and motivation (Zwift 😉 ) then there is no reason other than practice that your indoor and outdoor performances should differ.
batteries off Amazon will be fake surely? been another thread on it here
then there is no reason other than practice that your indoor and outdoor performances should differ.
This is a good article outlining some of the issues...
http://alex-cycle.blogspot.co.uk/2009/01/turbocharged-training.html
Discussed elsewhere on this forum but there is the obvious difference as to why they differ. Turbo is a steady effort, outdoor is highly variable effort. You can do things to approximate it on the turbo, get a controlled turbo, or do highly variable over/under sessions, but it's not the same. I'm down a fair few watts down on my turbo 20MP when riding outdoors. Doing a turbo test I can push an optimal gear, optimal cadence, steady effort, good position for pushing on the pedals and breathing. As soon as you add some variability, changes of gear, cadence, wind, rolling terrain, getting aero, the avg power drops. On the TT bike even more so as breathing and position for power are compromised for aero gains. I'm quite surprised when I hear of people who put out more power riding outdoors, seems odd to me, but then some people deal with the variability a lot better than others or maybe are more motivated.
batteries off Amazon will be fake surely? been another thread on it here
Mine came in proper panasonic packaging and had over 200 positive reviews. However in 6 months time when its time to change Ill let you know.
MrBlobby- I was more talking physiologically. 250w indoors or out on the same power meter should have the same cost to your body. Whether you can get two rides to match is a bit of a different point with the obvious challenges you mention.
Crosshair, it's not though. Maybe one for the next Sunday ride 🙂
I mean as a snapshot in time- not the average for the ride. The more variables you introduce, the less comparable the results yes- but that just means the outdoor number is likely to be the 'wrong' one- high or low.
TiRed for example, wants to get a number he can use for pacing- often on the same circuit, so tests outdoors where the variables, whilst huge, are nevertheless consistent.
For setting FTP based training zones manually, or automatically via Zwift workout sliders or Trainerroad however, the number required needs to be as noise free as possible.
We could go on and on in this section and try to dissect every little variable that could lead to a difference in test results, but ultimately I think it’s better to end this post simply: Because there are less variables to consider, assessing your FTP inside will provide more sound data, i.e. accurate assessment results, than what you’ll get outside. What’s more, because there are so many variables and differences to consider between the two approaches, you simply cannot compare your test data from an outdoor test to your test data from an indoor test, and vice versa.
http://blog.trainerroad.com/ftp-testing-outdoors-vs-indoors/
But the differences are not- with practice- physiological 😉
Interesting stuff - sounds like I need to start putting my back into the turbo 🙂 tbh I think the difference is too big to put down to differing efforts, motivation etc, although maybe another fan might be significant (I use one, not placed with particular care).
I did revolver the other night ont turbo and was pretty folded - no way on earth is there an untapped 15% hiding away in there.
I'm pretty similar I think. Just before my last surgery I did a two hour ride outside, with a normalised power about 5% higher than my indoor FTP. I was trying reasonably hard but was by no means completely spent when I finished. Of course NP doesn't perfectly do what it aims to, but I'm pretty sure that I could have done an outdoor test that day and smashed my indoor FTP.
I am a sweaty old sweater though, and think that I suffer in heat. I suspect that for me it's a combination of cooling and micro-rests that makes outdoors easier.
Whilst one does need to do some extra work outdoors (e.g with core muscles), I think that's not a massive amount on the road. I suspect that the level of trainedness is a factor in how much of a factor this is. I'm relatively untrained, so I suspect that the ability of my specific cycling (i.e leg) muscles to deliver work might be more of a limiter than my body's overall ability to mobilise energy. So using core muscles a bit doesn't cost me as much as I gain from better cooling and micro rests. I am obviously breathing hard, but my legs are definitely a limiting factor in an FTP test. Maybe someone like mrblobby is butting up against the limits of the total work rate that his system can deliver, so energy wasted keeping him upright and wiggling round pot holes is a more noticeable cost?
I have also heard speculation that the type / quality of trainer might slightly affect this too. A bit more inertia and 'road feel' might be a bit gentler on the legs and. I can't remember where I heard that though - might have been someone selling expensive trainers. 🙂
Gray, that last bit is mostly what I was going to say but isn't that relevant to the PM thread. Turbo properties are a big factor in how much power you can put out. It's a bit like riding on the flat vs riding a hill. The feel is different, the torque pattern around the pedal stoke is different so you work muscles and firing patterns differently. And one may be more optimal for you than the other in terms of making the most power.
cheap 105 stages on Evans
https://www.evanscycles.com/stages-shimano-105-5800-g2-ex-demo-ex-display-EV313798
Interesting aero stuff here Garmin have bought out alphamantis
https://www.dcrainmaker.com/2017/07/aerodynamics-alphamantis-acquired.html
Interesting stuff there dirtyrider, definitely one to watch.
New from 4iiii....
And the new Vector's look good with a price drop too. Don't have a problem with the pods myself but I know it puts many off.
I'm liking the Favero Assioma's personally. I think the P1s now look dead in the water. I also think £300 for single sided pedal option would be a milestone.
