open topic, for anything cycling related.
Your thoughts on this unit and it's limitations (if any) for measuring true power output?
- less accurate with significant asymmetrical pedaling technique. nevertheless, I suppose it depends on what a cyclist wants to use power data for. If he wants to train to improve output, then asymmetry error won't be an issue. It's only when someone wants to compare their power output to someone else that it might be an issue.
- doesn't work on carbon cranks.
Comparing with others isn't the primary issue, although it helps if a power meter is accurate as usually people do change meters at some stage and inaccurate meters can make season on season tracking problematic.
Asymmetry in left side-right side power output is:
- variable from person to person (meaning that even if two people have the same total power output, this unit may not report them as the same)
- variable for the same person depending on cadence, absolute and relative power output, fatigue level, bike fit, type of riding, changes in fitness etc.
e.g. you can be 46:54 at one power level and 49:51 at another (and this would be completely normal). Which means the accuracy will vary somewhat as the unit assumes you are always 50:50 (which would be pretty unusual). In other words it might be accurate at one power level and much less so at another power level.
I'd say it has potential to be a good intro product into training with power, provided one recognises the limitations of the data and what it can be sensibly used for (and what it shouldn't be used for), similar to how other such products in the past, like the Polar chain based power meter, provided a cheaper entry to the power meter club.
Keep in mind that for a regular trained cyclist, threshold power will only vary by ~ 10% from under trained to peak fitness, and that often we are seeking to assess changes in power of only a percent or two when fitness is at personal best levels.
I can't comment on things like ability to validate calibration, durability, consistency, warranty, service and support etc
http://www.cyclingnews.com/features/int ... ower-meter
It's due to the carbon. Hysterisis or something like that. Reason to go DA9000?
I really have to question the wisdom of putting a power meter on a 105 crank. If you are throwing around 1250 bucks at a power meter and Garmin, perhaps you have money to pony up for a new crankset as well?
Don't need to go O/S to get them for less then $2k.
I sell complete Quarq SRAM crank sets from $1869, and much less for Specialized/Cannondale Quarq spiders.
In fairness to the Stages system, it's MUCH simpler than the powertap, and I am guessing the "elite" systems are much cheaper to implement because the expense is from the crank (which you are unlikely to swap) and you don't need to build the crank into a wheel etc which I am guessing is going to extend the cost enormously. The cheap powertap system is a similar price, but I'm thinking that it would be cheaper for the Stages system. Just seems a shame that you can either swap wheels, or swap bikes... most dudes sinking dollars have more than one bike lol
Yes, Quarq were keen to ensure I could still supply their product here in Australia via SRAM's distribution network.
It's launched, reviews are starting to appear:
http://lavamagazine.com/gear/tested-sta ... z2JJnLDyfG
http://www.dcrainmaker.com/2013/01/stag ... eview.html
Edit: both reviews basically back up what Alex Simmons said. Sounds like I will have to look at a power tap.
DC Rainmaker has changed his opinion. Updates to the firmware now make it a very viable option.
As usual all backed up with in depth data and charts
http://www.dcrainmaker.com/2013/06/stag ... pdate.html
From his conclusion;
"Based on what I’ve seen, they’ve done that work (and put in that time) – into the software. The physical unit I have has not changed since the original review. It’s the same unit I’ve had since the very beginning. They’ve just updated the software within it. And they took a lot of feedback from the original review and addressed issues of concern we had.
For me, I have no issues in using any of the power meters I’ve used in this review – including the Stages. I do in fact from time to time pick different ones, and the data is generally similar enough that there’s no discernable difference. Further, in some situations (such as nonstop climbing with shifts in temperature), the Stages simply performed better than two other units. This likely due to its automatic temperature compensation algorithms."
I've been riding the SRAM version since January and have in the last month purchased an Ultegra version as well (new bike). Couldn't be happier. I have no comparison data as Stages is the only PM I've ever ridden with (after having a deposit down on a the Garmin pedals for a long time!)
I was able to purchase through a bike shop in the States who was happy to send to Australia.
Yes please, I tried to make contact with stages via the standard online contact channels though the line has been dead. Pretty comprehensive review.
BNA Feature: Online Australian Cycling Marketplace Report 2013
I wonder if DC is smarting from durianrider's scathing attack LOL
In fairness though, the level of effort DC has gone to trying to get his data together has been impressive. Maybe a PT isn't the answer? Something tells me that the Beater (my Trek 2.1) would look funny with a DA crankarm just on one side
if you want to know PM me your email address and ill email you the order form.
took me a loooooong time to find one that would send it..
cost is rrp plus $70 freight and insurance
so was $925aud for ultegra delivered
hoping mine will be here with in 2 weeks
stages them selves were painfull. I offered to buy 10-15 of them and they still wouldn't ship them too me...
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: MSNbot Media