Inconsistent Wattage Across Kurt & Tranerrroad ?

[Dr Luxurious]

I have a Kurt Kinetic w/ Bluetooth.
I use the Kurt InRide and TR apps.
It seems like a watt ain't necessarily a watt. 300W on InRide seems a lot harder than 300W on TR.
Anybody else notice this?

[dekindy]

Originally Posted by Dr Luxurious

I have a Kurt Kinetic w/ Bluetooth. Inride?
I use the Kurt InRide and TR apps.
It seems like a watt ain't necessarily a watt. 300W on InRide seems a lot harder than 300W on TR.
Anybody else notice this?

Not following you at all. You pair InRide with Trainer Road and read the wattage outputs.

Are you also using the KK phone app simultaneously with TR and noticing different readings?

Comparing InRide in Bluetooth phone app session to a different session using TR using Ant+ speed/cadence sensor and noticing different perceived exertion levels at the same wattage?

I would think that you could run these simultaneously if you have both and not have to compare perceived efforts from different sessions. Different wattage readings due to wheel slippage; measurement at wheel compared to measurement at roller?

I have not used InRide as I did not have Bluetooth phone app capability; implemented TrainerRoad using Ant+ wheel/cadence sensor and heart rate strap using existing accessories.

[MattTuck]

Originally Posted by Dr Luxurious

I have a Kurt Kinetic w/ Bluetooth.
I use the Kurt InRide and TR apps.
It seems like a watt ain't necessarily a watt. 300W on InRide seems a lot harder than 300W on TR.
Anybody else notice this?

The algorithms used to approximate wattage could be different. If you're training with power, pick one to get your baseline and stick with that method of measurement for your training.

[potatochip]

Both are wrong. Pick one.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[MeatPuppet]

I think this might be what you are talking about:

http://www.dcrainmaker.com/2012/12/k...th-review.html

Look about half-way down the page in the section "TrainerRoad with the Kurt Kinetic in Trainer Road ‘Virtual Power’ configuration". Looks like your observations are consistent with Ray's.

John

[dekindy]

Originally Posted by MeatPuppet

I think this might be what you are talking about:

http://www.dcrainmaker.com/2012/12/k...th-review.html

Look about half-way down the page in the section "TrainerRoad with the Kurt Kinetic in Trainer Road ‘Virtual Power’ configuration". Looks like your observations are consistent with Ray's.

John

Ah, so you are comparing apples to oranges. The inconsistency only reinforces what has always said about virtual power. Assuming the tire pressure and roller resistance are the same(tightening the know with consistency) then there is relative accuracy from ride to ride but not relative to other power meters or apps.

OP needs to review virtual power explanation as that is the basis for the difference. Compare Inride app rides to other Inride app rides as they are consistent if you follow the directions, and TR to TR, but do not mix the two.

[shovelhd]

Originally Posted by potatochip

Both are wrong. Pick one.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

This

[Dr Luxurious]

Put it his way: 400W on Inride is a hell of a lot more work than 400W on TR - at least it seems so to me...

I'm not using the virtual power mode.

The Kurt Kinetic has a relatively consistent power curve.
It takes X watts to spin the roller at Y RPMs.
X:Y is a known (non-linear) ratio.
The RPM reading comes right off the trainer's roller.

Seems like it shouldn't be too hard for mfgrs to get it right (?)

[shovelhd]

No fluid unit is the same, nor are they calibrated. It's just a guess. No more no less.

[dekindy]

Originally Posted by shovelhd

No fluid unit is the same, nor are they calibrated. It's just a guess. No more no less.

They do not make any bones about this, at least on TrainerRoad they make clear what Virtual Power can do or not do. Repeatability within an application is all they claim, not comparability.

[dekindy]

Originally Posted by Dr Luxurious

I'm not using the virtual power mode.

This statement confuses me. What were the two power outputs that you were trying to compare? Not sure why I care because if you understood the limitation you would not be trying to compare them in the first place!

[Ti Designs]

Originally Posted by potatochip

Both are wrong. Pick one.

Yup, the only accurate thing about them is the statement above.

Does it matter? As these numbers are only used to gauge performance gains or losses over time, pick one and use it.

I have taken the concept of individual power units to a whole new level. I train in units called Eds. An Ed is the amount of energy it takes to raise a beer the length of my forearm. As the mass of the beer changes (in a glass, can, bottle, funnel...) so do my units, but then I also have good days and bad days, and who's to say they're not related to what I'm drinking? The best thing about training by Eds is that I can ignore stupid comments based on watts from people who clearly don't know how to calibrate their meters.