Smart trainer and real world resistance

Discuss light weight issues concerning road bikes & parts.
User avatar
wheelsONfire
Posts: 2993
Joined: Mon Jul 07, 2014 8:15 am
Location: NorthEU

by wheelsONfire

It's possibly it was!?
It was a Rose. He did get a new frame (but no new fork).
The frame he got was a later and more expensive model.

Canyon as an example, didn't even warrant frames damaged on a trainer. Don't know if that is true for now, but it was.
Not sure how and what tests is done on frames torture devices?
I usually ask support if i buy a frameset (which is not very often)
Anyway, going for my second Ax Lightness which is due to arrive pretty soon.
But i have no intention on sprinting on a trainer with this.
I know the new Ax frames are reinforced, so they are stiffer (also a little weight gains) so it should probably not be a problem.
But better safe than sorry.

My guess is that the bending forces are alot higher, especially rear dropouts to BB, than riding for real.
Bikes:

Ax Lightness Vial EVO Race (2018.12.21)
viewtopic.php?f=10&t=156137
Paduano Racing Fidia (kind of shelved)
Open *UP* (2016.04.14)


Ex bike; Vial EVO D

by Weenie


TobinHatesYou
Posts: 4310
Joined: Mon Jul 24, 2017 12:02 pm

by TobinHatesYou

If anything is going to break, it's going to be around the dropouts. That's where the bike is anchored by the trainer and where all the twisting forces originate. By the time that force travels up the chainstay to the bottom bracket it's been spread out through a lot of material. TBH you're a lot more likely to kill the bearings / drive wheel assembly in the smart trainer than any part of your bike unless your QR has been done up loosely.

User avatar
Lewn777
Posts: 869
Joined: Thu Mar 09, 2017 5:35 am

by Lewn777

All trainers are just a tool. They allow you to keep training in the depths of winter or when time crunched, and for that they are a god-send. However when you analyze something like 'Alpe du Zwift' vs 'Alpe d'Huez' real world you can clearly see that no matter how hard you try there is only going to be an approximation of the real world.
Real:https://www.strava.com/segments/652851
Zwift: https://www.strava.com/segments/17267489?filter=overall
KOM is 4 minutes apart, which is a pretty good comaparison, I think Zwift have actually done a good job but the difference is obvious. Also being unable to turn the bike, and as has been pointed out no brakes and not use real bike handling skills sucks.

robertbb
Posts: 1123
Joined: Thu Jul 23, 2009 3:35 am
Location: Melbourne, Australia

by robertbb

Agree with Lewn777. And is really why I have no intention of wasting money on an interactive or smart trainer.

Hop on. Smash out some quality interval sessions. Hop off.

Love my direct drive Turbo Muin 2...

ParisCarbon
Posts: 1402
Joined: Mon Feb 05, 2007 5:39 am
Location: Winnipeg Canada

by ParisCarbon

Lewn777 wrote:
Sun Dec 09, 2018 11:52 pm
All trainers are just a tool. They allow you to keep training in the depths of winter or when time crunched, and for that they are a god-send. However when you analyze something like 'Alpe du Zwift' vs 'Alpe d'Huez' real world you can clearly see that no matter how hard you try there is only going to be an approximation of the real world.
Real:https://www.strava.com/segments/652851
Zwift: https://www.strava.com/segments/17267489?filter=overall
KOM is 4 minutes apart, which is a pretty good comaparison, I think Zwift have actually done a good job but the difference is obvious. Also being unable to turn the bike, and as has been pointed out no brakes and not use real bike handling skills sucks.
I own a Tacx Neo, if you actually want to feel almost true resistance, run the neo at 100% realism, your actual weight, and get Tacx TDA software and do the Alpe... my real time vs the Neo time were within 3 minutes of one another.. I was 10 minutes faster on zwift .. the video game is out to lunch in my opinion.. I also run another companies software bigringvr on my Neo and my Col D'Ornon times are within 2 minutes of one another...

User avatar
Lewn777
Posts: 869
Joined: Thu Mar 09, 2017 5:35 am

by Lewn777

ParisCarbon wrote:
Mon Dec 10, 2018 4:48 am
Lewn777 wrote:
Sun Dec 09, 2018 11:52 pm
All trainers are just a tool. They allow you to keep training in the depths of winter or when time crunched, and for that they are a god-send. However when you analyze something like 'Alpe du Zwift' vs 'Alpe d'Huez' real world you can clearly see that no matter how hard you try there is only going to be an approximation of the real world.
Real:https://www.strava.com/segments/652851
Zwift: https://www.strava.com/segments/17267489?filter=overall
KOM is 4 minutes apart, which is a pretty good comaparison, I think Zwift have actually done a good job but the difference is obvious. Also being unable to turn the bike, and as has been pointed out no brakes and not use real bike handling skills sucks.
I own a Tacx Neo, if you actually want to feel almost true resistance, run the neo at 100% realism, your actual weight, and get Tacx TDA software and do the Alpe... my real time vs the Neo time were within 3 minutes of one another.. I was 10 minutes faster on zwift .. the video game is out to lunch in my opinion.. I also run another companies software bigringvr on my Neo and my Col D'Ornon times are within 2 minutes of one another...
Yeah, I'd love a good smart trainer, but with our short but brutal winters here it's not at the top of my priority list......quite yet.
You've gotta cut Zwift some slack, it's cartoonland and not trying to be simulation software.

I hope budget smart trainers and accurate photoreal simulation software are somewhere in the future. I think it's entirely possible to do. A few problems are simulating wind (can be done) and the lower levels or oxygen (also possible) at higher altitude. I think that the software is just around the corner and once there are established cycling simulation players I think I'll invest in the next generation of smart trainer especially if the hardware people work instensively with the software people.

TobinHatesYou
Posts: 4310
Joined: Mon Jul 24, 2017 12:02 pm

by TobinHatesYou

Personally I don’t need realism past a certain point. I just need real people to push myself against. Zwift is the established platform for that. Lewn777 you should check out Rouvy.

User avatar
Lewn777
Posts: 869
Joined: Thu Mar 09, 2017 5:35 am

by Lewn777

TobinHatesYou wrote:
Mon Dec 10, 2018 5:43 am
Personally I don’t need realism past a certain point. I just need real people to push myself against. Zwift is the established platform for that. Lewn777 you should check out Rouvy.
True enough but most people on Zwift seem to be less than honest about their bodily dimensions. :o
So pushing yourself along up a hill can suck if you're honest when the person behind you is pretending they are Richie Porte on a diet with the real life dimensions of Ronald McDonald. :roll:

I'm looking for something with those European climbs that can simulate each corner and my approximate speed, power and gradients to give me more knowledge should I be lucky enough to visit them in real life. Will check out Rouvy and Big Ring VR.

ParisCarbon
Posts: 1402
Joined: Mon Feb 05, 2007 5:39 am
Location: Winnipeg Canada

by ParisCarbon

Zwift is what it is... unfortunately so many people have flocked to it that its become the norm so to say.. Tacx TDA is developing nicely and far better in my opinion... I much prefer doing a ride with Bob Jungels or George Bennet in full HD and real gradients getting sent to my Neo than watching a bunch of cartoon characters, but thats just me...

packetloss
Posts: 31
Joined: Fri Dec 11, 2015 2:29 pm

by packetloss

The reason zwift is a sucess is not because people like looking at cartoon graphics or prefer riding with Bob Jungles recorded but because they like being able to ride (and draft) with other people in real time. If all you wanted were real videos and to ride with pros you could have been using Ergvideo for the last 10 years. They are good and have their place, but I can't do more than an hour and a half of that. In Zwift, riding with other folks, I've done some 5 hour rides. It's just more immersive. At least to me it is but apparently to a lot of other folks too.

TobinHatesYou
Posts: 4310
Joined: Mon Jul 24, 2017 12:02 pm

by TobinHatesYou

Nothing works me more efficiently than an approximately 1hr long Zwift “A” race.

ParisCarbon
Posts: 1402
Joined: Mon Feb 05, 2007 5:39 am
Location: Winnipeg Canada

by ParisCarbon

TobinHatesYou wrote:
Tue Dec 11, 2018 10:57 pm
Nothing works me more efficiently than an approximately 1hr long Zwift “A” race.
What trainer are you using out of curiousity.. Im on a Neo, but find there is a delay from the watts produced to what zwift shows (Ive had my SRM running in conjunction with the Neo, and I see the SRM generally a bit higher, in the end it balances out, but I think on some of the teetering moments of the high watts on zwift Id be better pairing my SRM as the pwr source) I race in the B group, just seems to have a bigger group of guys and its as hyper as A most of the time!

TobinHatesYou
Posts: 4310
Joined: Mon Jul 24, 2017 12:02 pm

by TobinHatesYou

ParisCarbon wrote:
Tue Dec 11, 2018 11:58 pm

What trainer are you using out of curiousity.. Im on a Neo, but find there is a delay from the watts produced to what zwift shows (Ive had my SRM running in conjunction with the Neo, and I see the SRM generally a bit higher, in the end it balances out, but I think on some of the teetering moments of the high watts on zwift Id be better pairing my SRM as the pwr source) I race in the B group, just seems to have a bigger group of guys and its as hyper as A most of the time!
I’m using a Hammer, but I generally use one of many power meters as the paired power source. I do not experience any delays on any of the power sources, though the Hammer is inaccurate above 300w or so. The Hammer also suffers lots of dropouts over ANT+ in my environment, but I have many devices broadcasting and recording concurrently. Over Bluetooth, the connections never drop out,

The difference between A and B in flat races is minimal. Usually it’s just bigger guys in B. Adhering to strict ZP or Zwift categories though, I am easily an A, plus it it a little bit harder. Usually in A races, I hang on until the final 5km or so, and then someone starts pushing the pace and there’s a 50/50 chance I get dropped. With double draft, this has become more likely.

I’ll record a race tomorrow on my Vectors, DZero and Hammer and overlay the results so you can see.

ParisCarbon
Posts: 1402
Joined: Mon Feb 05, 2007 5:39 am
Location: Winnipeg Canada

by ParisCarbon

TobinHatesYou wrote:
Wed Dec 12, 2018 1:00 am
ParisCarbon wrote:
Tue Dec 11, 2018 11:58 pm

What trainer are you using out of curiousity.. Im on a Neo, but find there is a delay from the watts produced to what zwift shows (Ive had my SRM running in conjunction with the Neo, and I see the SRM generally a bit higher, in the end it balances out, but I think on some of the teetering moments of the high watts on zwift Id be better pairing my SRM as the pwr source) I race in the B group, just seems to have a bigger group of guys and its as hyper as A most of the time!
I’m using a Hammer, but I generally use one of many power meters as the paired power source. I do not experience any delays on any of the power sources, though the Hammer is inaccurate above 300w or so. The Hammer also suffers lots of dropouts over ANT+ in my environment, but I have many devices broadcasting and recording concurrently. Over Bluetooth, the connections never drop out,

The difference between A and B in flat races is minimal. Usually it’s just bigger guys in B. Adhering to strict ZP or Zwift categories though, I am easily an A, plus it it a little bit harder. Usually in A races, I hang on until the final 5km or so, and then someone starts pushing the pace and there’s a 50/50 chance I get dropped. With double draft, this has become more likely.

I’ll record a race tomorrow on my Vectors, DZero and Hammer and overlay the results so you can see.
Cool... I raced today on the Velocious 20km race.. I paired my SRM as the powersource tonite instead of the Neo.. I ended up with about a 10 watt increase on average overall.. The top 20 were a combination of A/B tonite and we were within 9 seconds of one another... they're good for a change of pace, I prefer the videos myself.. rouvy now has cyclist avatars overlaying the videos onthe road , tacx has plans for this as well from what I understand...

by Weenie


TobinHatesYou
Posts: 4310
Joined: Mon Jul 24, 2017 12:02 pm

by TobinHatesYou

ParisCarbon wrote:
Wed Dec 12, 2018 2:24 am

Cool... I raced today on the Velocious 20km race.. I paired my SRM as the powersource tonite instead of the Neo.. I ended up with about a 10 watt increase on average overall.. The top 20 were a combination of A/B tonite and we were within 9 seconds of one another... they're good for a change of pace, I prefer the videos myself.. rouvy now has cyclist avatars overlaying the videos onthe road , tacx has plans for this as well from what I understand...

10W difference is big even at A/B race pace. I wonder which power source is misbehaving...possibly both. All of my PMs are within 1-2W of each other up to about 260W. If the race is really punchy, then the Hammer will peak higher and skew the average. Generally the Neo is thought of as being incredibly accurate and I can't imagine you are losing 10W to drivetrain losses.

Post Reply
  • Similar Topics
    Replies
    Views
    Last post