Who's doing what this winter - TrainerRoad, Zwift, Sufferfest, Xert etc?

A light bike doesn't replace good fitness.

Moderator: Moderator Team

User avatar
Lewn777
Posts: 876
Joined: Thu Mar 09, 2017 5:35 am

by Lewn777

I still use Zwift which is for me a love and hate affair. I love the races and some of the courses they've based from the real world like Surrey Hills, Alpe Du Zwift and Innsbruck. I love Zwiftpower with all it's stats, and I've made some great gains. Loving the TT races too.

Not really a fan of the cartoonish graphics, weight dopers, loads of game bugs like remaining distance, and the way the code seems to be borderline crashing when loading and expensive subscription for what seems little more than a cell phone game.

Another thing I'm not sure about is being beaten by 55-60kg people in TT races based on their watts per kg being better than mine marginally, but surely in the real world I'd smoke them? I'm cranking out 307w for 25 minutes and weigh 80kg, they weigh 59kg and put out 240w and beat me. Would that really happen if you had less than perfect road surfaces and wind?

Zwift could really face competition as someone else with real imagination and ability could take a massive part of their market. Interested in Veloton.

TobinHatesYou
Posts: 4380
Joined: Mon Jul 24, 2017 12:02 pm

by TobinHatesYou

Lewn777 wrote:
Sun Dec 01, 2019 1:36 pm
I still use Zwift which is for me a love and hate affair. I love the races and some of the courses they've based from the real world like Surrey Hills, Alpe Du Zwift and Innsbruck. I love Zwiftpower with all it's stats, and I've made some great gains. Loving the TT races too.

Not really a fan of the cartoonish graphics, weight dopers, loads of game bugs like remaining distance, and the way the code seems to be borderline crashing when loading and expensive subscription for what seems little more than a cell phone game.

Another thing I'm not sure about is being beaten by 55-60kg people in TT races based on their watts per kg being better than mine marginally, but surely in the real world I'd smoke them? I'm cranking out 307w for 25 minutes and weigh 80kg, they weigh 59kg and put out 240w and beat me. Would that really happen if you had less than perfect road surfaces and wind?

Zwift could really face competition as someone else with real imagination and ability could take a massive part of their market. Interested in Veloton.

Please link ZP results for a TT where a 59kg rider putting out 240W beat your 80kg/307W. Zwift’s physics are actually quite good. You will suffer a slight aero penalty for being taller, but not simply for being heavier. The only way that 59kg rider beats you is if the TT has major climbing elements.

For me, the graphics are fine. I don’t want uncanny valley “realism.” All the more realistic looking platforms look off to me, mostly because their animations suck. My biggest complaint about Zwift is the pre-ride UI...it’s pretty terrible.

e: Found it. What TT bike and wheelset are you using? All the people with low watts, but fast times are midgets apparently. 163cm, 168cm, 168cm...

by Weenie


User avatar
Lewn777
Posts: 876
Joined: Thu Mar 09, 2017 5:35 am

by Lewn777

TobinHatesYou wrote:
Sun Dec 01, 2019 2:46 pm
e: Found it. What TT bike and wheelset are you using?
It was Tempus Fugit (mostly flat) and on Specialized Shiv disk with Zipp 808s.
Sure, Zwift could be exactly correct in it's calculations but it seems a bit off for larger riders, I feel like I gain too much down hills, lose too much on the flats, but about right on the longer hills. I believe it's so people can ride together so w/kg is used, but that largely only matters on hills not so much on the flat, but Zwift overplays it on purpose on the flats to make the game more entertaining. I'm certainly useless at Math and Physics so I'm not claiming knowledge or proof, but just personal 'gut feel' compared with decades of IRL cycling, maybe because things change when you have real life rough roads and wind where the extra power gives more advantage. Also on a TT bike due tot the position I think maybe the difference between the sizes of riders is overplayed because of how flat a TT rider sits.

All in all I don't mind that much because my goal of using Zwift is to lose weight and keep in shape, so being rewarded for doing what I'm trying to achieve is no problem.:thumbup:

TobinHatesYou
Posts: 4380
Joined: Mon Jul 24, 2017 12:02 pm

by TobinHatesYou

Lewn777 wrote:
Sun Dec 01, 2019 3:16 pm
TobinHatesYou wrote:
Sun Dec 01, 2019 2:46 pm
e: Found it. What TT bike and wheelset are you using?
It was Tempus Fugit (mostly flat) and on Specialized Shiv disk with Zipp 808s.
Sure, Zwift could be exactly correct in it's calculations but it seems a bit off for larger riders, I feel like I gain too much down hills, lose too much on the flats, but about right on the longer hills. I believe it's so people can ride together so w/kg is used, but that largely only matters on hills not so much on the flat, but Zwift overplays it on purpose on the flats to make the game more entertaining. I'm certainly useless at Math and Physics so I'm not claiming knowledge or proof, but just personal 'gut feel' compared with decades of IRL cycling, maybe because things change when you have real life rough roads and wind where the extra power gives more advantage. Also on a TT bike due tot the position I think maybe the difference between the sizes of riders is overplayed because of how flat a TT rider sits.

All in all I don't mind that much because my goal of using Zwift is to lose weight and keep in shape, so being rewarded for doing what I'm trying to achieve is no problem.:thumbup:

In a real time trial on a Madone with just drop bars and 60mm wheels, I averaged 24mph at 250W. People keep telling me a full TT bike setup with 80mm+disc would make me 2mph faster. It looks like you did 26mph in your TT, which I agree is slow given ideal body position, your height/weight and power.

User avatar
LeDuke
Posts: 1545
Joined: Sun Oct 07, 2012 2:39 am
Location: Front Range, CO

by LeDuke

One thing that Zwift doesn’t/can’t account for (yet) is the actual elevation of the rider.

I realize there are multiple, slightly different ways of attempting to calculate the impact of altitude on wattage at LT. But, pick one, do an average of several, whatever.

It was a little frustrating doing 340w+ at 7,200ft, watching some sea level guys slowly pulling away. And not all realistic.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

mcfarton
Posts: 94
Joined: Thu Mar 15, 2018 5:15 pm

by mcfarton

I like zwift because I won’t ride in the dark, cold, or rain. With zwift I can keep spinning all year. It has made me a stronger rider. I would rather ride outside but the trainer is better than nothing. I actually get cabin fever and started running more. It gets me outside more often. I am ok running in the cold or dark. When it rains I am back on the trainer.

I started leading two rides a week on zwift and it helps keep me motivated. At least twice a week I make sure that I am on time for my ride


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

User avatar
Lewn777
Posts: 876
Joined: Thu Mar 09, 2017 5:35 am

by Lewn777

TobinHatesYou wrote:
Sun Dec 01, 2019 3:39 pm
Lewn777 wrote:
Sun Dec 01, 2019 3:16 pm
TobinHatesYou wrote:
Sun Dec 01, 2019 2:46 pm
e: Found it. What TT bike and wheelset are you using?
It was Tempus Fugit (mostly flat) and on Specialized Shiv disk with Zipp 808s.
Sure, Zwift could be exactly correct in it's calculations but it seems a bit off for larger riders, I feel like I gain too much down hills, lose too much on the flats, but about right on the longer hills. I believe it's so people can ride together so w/kg is used, but that largely only matters on hills not so much on the flat, but Zwift overplays it on purpose on the flats to make the game more entertaining. I'm certainly useless at Math and Physics so I'm not claiming knowledge or proof, but just personal 'gut feel' compared with decades of IRL cycling, maybe because things change when you have real life rough roads and wind where the extra power gives more advantage. Also on a TT bike due tot the position I think maybe the difference between the sizes of riders is overplayed because of how flat a TT rider sits.

All in all I don't mind that much because my goal of using Zwift is to lose weight and keep in shape, so being rewarded for doing what I'm trying to achieve is no problem.:thumbup:

In a real time trial on a Madone with just drop bars and 60mm wheels, I averaged 24mph at 250W. People keep telling me a full TT bike setup with 80mm+disc would make me 2mph faster. It looks like you did 26mph in your TT, which I agree is slow given ideal body position, your height/weight and power.
I don't even think in MPH.

HShimada
Posts: 9
Joined: Fri Dec 06, 2019 2:25 am

by HShimada

Trainerroad!
All mid volume (gonna start with trainerroad only for 5 week days. Once it's warmer I'll add 1 weekend unstructured ride outside)
Sweet Spot Base I > Sweet Spot Base II > Sustained Power Build > Rolling Road Race

The end of the Rolling Road Race aligns perfectly with my race in June! Gives me a few days to taper / recover.

Jugi
Posts: 571
Joined: Sun Jun 24, 2018 8:10 am

by Jugi


Lewn777 wrote: All in all I don't mind that much because my goal of using Zwift is to lose weight and keep in shape, so being rewarded for doing what I'm trying to achieve is no problem.Image
Good for you. It's not supposed to be a simulation, just an entertaining training tool. If it motivated you to go all out on your effort, and that effort resembles the IRL performance, I'd say it has executed rather well.

Personally I like Zwift racing as an additional type of workout. However, although competition is fun, results shouldn't be taken too seriously. As long as the races aren't properly governed, it's completely possible half of the peloton is riding on a couch with an XBox controller. If I happen to ride my ass off against somebody like that, it's my gain and their loss as I'll get the training effect.

TobinHatesYou
Posts: 4380
Joined: Mon Jul 24, 2017 12:02 pm

by TobinHatesYou

Jugi wrote:
Sat Dec 07, 2019 6:03 pm

Good for you. It's not supposed to be a simulation, just an entertaining training tool. If it motivated you to go all out on your effort, and that effort resembles the IRL performance, I'd say it has executed rather well.

Honestly, Zwift is banking on the game/simulation aspect because that's going to be the biggest customer category. I would bet that ~75% of riders "on course" at any given moment are just free riding instead of using the event or workout module. I would bet the same percentage of total subs have never touched either module.

Post Reply
  • Similar Topics
    Replies
    Views
    Last post