If that summary helps you understand it better, great!

---

Carl Matson

Actually...I'm going to rephrase...

if that interpretation helps you understand it better, great.

Cheers!

---

Carl Matson

I swear I'm not trying to troll. My point, in case it wasn't clear, is that the Trek language is warning people to be especially careful with trainers that comprise 99.9 percent (actually, probably more) of the trainer market. It's written as though there's some sub-category of trainers for which special care is warranted, and in a way that none of us could confidently decipher without further explanation from you (and whatever my faults, I'm fairly literate). Anyway, thanks for clarifying!

I've rode mine on the trainer and never had issues, I think what helped me though was riding while on carpet and not a solid floor, the trainer itself ever so slightly rocks side to side when I get out of the saddle and sprint, its really forgiving and gives it more feel of out on the road. I know when I moved it to my dining room for a couple of rides it felt much more rigid and I could see where you could apply some serious torque. I'm on a cervelo R2 with a tacx vortex and I can sprint all I want with it.

No worries! I knew posting anything on the topic would bring a bunch of questions. My sense is that the language of the manual predates the widespread use of powermeters (indoors) and spin classes...where big efforts and/or out-of-saddle intervals are a key element of the workout...i.e. something many riders take for granted these days.

I should also note that one of the many development tests Trek does above and beyond the industry norms looks rather like a really strong rider is locked into a truly rigid trainer (this is in addition to the ISO chainstay fatigue test, where the rear end is allowed to rock side to side). Passing this doesn't mean the trainer concern goes away, but maybe it'll add a little margin when you forget your head and try to come around a virtual Nizzolo.

---

Carl Matson

Now I guess I got the excuse I needed to sell my Kickr and buy a Taxc Neo




Personally, I just put a bike on the trainer that I don't care too much about. I don't mind riding on the trainer with my race bike every once in a while but it does make me nervous, especially if I'm doing shorter intervals.

I do not put my fancy carbon bikes on a trainer. Well, by new bike is a Dimond so I can't do so but my previous bikes (Felt B2, Gen 1 and Gen 2 Trek SC) either saw rare use of the trainer (Felt, Gen 1 SC) or never saw the trainer (Gen 2 SC).

While I'm sure everything would have been fine using the bikes on a trainer, there's also no good that came come from it either... at least as far as your bike is concerned. You are putting undue stress on the bike no matter what. I'm fine with having my aluminum roadie attached to the trainer 24/7 and leaving the fancy bike riding to when I go outdoors.

---

Favorite Gear: Dimond | Cadex | Desoto Sport | Hoka One One

can you further define what is considered monster watts? pretty sure I don't have those, but it is rather vague. are you saying no 400w intervals, no 800w intervals or no 1500w intervals?

I agree. If you have some padding under it, you can feel it give a little bit side-to-side. Just a tiny bit of give can make a huge difference on materials. Also, I stand and climb calmly while trying to keep the bike vertically straight. Maybe 300 watts max.

---

----------------------------------------------------------
Zen and the Art of Triathlon. Strava Workout Log
Interviews with Chris McCormack, Helle Frederikson, Angela Naeth, and many more.
http://www.zentriathlon.com

ive pushed many 800+ watt intervals, followed by several minute out of the saddle climbing and sprinting, seriously its awesome with carpet, ive even cut a scrap piece just for if I train somewhere without any padding. Plus it really cuts down on noise as well

When I asked Parlee about this, they said they had no restrictions on using their frames in trainers.

---

~Kevin

nope. because as soon as I throw a number out there it'll ignite a firestorm of questions and arguments regarding the science behind it, and what-ifs, and anecdotes & counter-anecdotes & counter^n anecdotes. what one person understands and another person thinks they understand sufficiently is the same thing yet another needs a peer-reviewed white paper written for...error bars and all.

it's entertaining to watch that kind of thing play out in the Lavender Room...not so much here.

/rant

Jeff, I know you're a strong rider, but I know nothing else about how you ride or what constitutes a hard interval for you. In my mind's eye I envision my scrawny son out of the saddle violently sawing the frame back and forth at a wattage that would barely raise your heart rate and that being potentially more risky (when locked into a rigid trainer) than a rock-solid & smooth you in the saddle @900w. I hope you see the difficulty here in answering your question. And that my mini-rant wasn't directed at you personally.

And that I fully appreciate the irony of having just thrown a pseudo-anecdotal what-if out there to try and make my point :-)

---

Carl Matson

That is a good excuse not to do megawatt intervals on the trainer, only do kilowatt intervals on the trainer.

here`s a good video to watch - he mentions only issues using a carbon frame on the trainer is not wiping the sweat off the bike which get into the nooks and crannies of the frame. Personally i still do not stand while doing hard sprints or all out sprints even when seated.

---

"Pain is NOT temporary,you remember every bit of it"

my pink button was broken. glad to see yours isn't. ;-)

---

Carl Matson

so essentially, I will take it, that you(trek) are more concerned about the bar torqueing folks. I don't sprint on the trainer, I do stand but as a reprieve from saddle intermittently and it Is completely different than standing outside. outside bike is thrown under me, inside I am essentially hopping from pedal to pedal but not actually hopping(can do this one handed) rarely do I exceed 400w on trainer and when I do, it Is seated. mostly SS and below. but I get what your pink font is saying. maybe a pink paper is in order

The primary concern is further back than the bars of course, but inasmuch as bar-torquers may be frame-rockers too, yes. Thanks for understanding.

---

Carl Matson