I think you need to specify your total gearing, e.g. cassette cog and crank arm length, in addition to the chain ring. For both old and new setups.

I'd assume that you'd be shifting cogs in order to self-select whatever cadence feels best. But if you're trying to use the same cog with the new ring, that could definitely change your power at a given perceived effort.

Yes it has the same cassette as before. The only new in the set up is the crank set. I dont know the cassette as it came with my kickr.

And crank arm length went from 172 to 170.
Thanks

Yes, or at least from my experience. Went from 54 to 55 for training.

Possibly. But with this caveat. It's important, in my experience, to recalibrate the unit after swapping rings. Even with powermeters - both SRM and Quarq - that were supposed to be largely insensitive to ring swaps, I've found some variance. The newest DZero Quarq seems immune to this, but I've only been on it for about a month. But all of the older crank-based units I've used - both SRM and Quarq - were sensitive to the ring swap. So it's important to make sure that the units are actually measuring the same. In my experience, the slope between rings certainly can change. Especially if you change the "type" of ring - e.g. going from a lighter-weight ring to a solid-aero ring.

With that said, I've certainly found a preference for rings of a certain size. I've had the majority of my success in races with a 54T front. Now, some of this is terrain related, I think. I.e., a course where you need a 55T plays less to my strengths than one where a 54T is optimal. But some of it certainly is comfort related. I've been able to settle right into my sweet spot for cadence/comfort with a 54T more easily than I could on a 55. Some of this, I'm sure, is muscle memory. I also have more time on a 54T in the front than anything else. But I do also believe in individual preference as well. In my case, I like a lower cadence, and I like a hilly course, so 54T certainly suits me much more than, say, a 52T front.

So two things to consider:
- is the power really different; or is the powermeter just reading differently?
- do you have a preference for a higher or lower cadence? If you're switching from a 50T -> 54T, and your cadence is 5-10rpm lower than what you prefer, certainly that could affect power quite a bit. My best TT efforts are always within about a +/-2rpm differential (for me: 76-80rpm and a heavy center at 78rpm).

---

"Non est ad astra mollis e terris via." - Seneca | rappstar.com | FB - Rappstar Racing | IG - @jordanrapp

I didnt change the chainring in my old broken quarq. I got a brand new whole crankset with 54T.
Your second point made sense as with this new crankset i tend to be hovering 80rpm vs 85rpm on the old one for the same power.

I rode again today and I think it is the chainring and my cadence thats making the power hard. So I changed the cassette to 11-28 and that made all the difference. I could hold the same wattage for the same time as before. Not sure of this is all accurate as I am also 5days into taper 😕
Thanks Jordan

For my own vase, it worked out that Q-rings QXL have allowed me to put down more power, more efficiently for longer!

Ex: today's race was 23.1 speed avg per 249 and NP 254 regular rides not at race speeds (20~22mph) with round rings and I could not avg a watt over 197watts lol

As far as compact vs standard is a in my opinion a hard thing to explain as you prolly spin a high cadence and low gear with a compact and the opposite with the 53T.

I think you'll eventually adjust to the 53T and prolly never go back to the compact and should sooner go back to your higher Candace just my.02

---

Speed kills unless you have speed skills!!!

Oval rings net you ~25% more power than round rings? Or was that supposed to be in pink?

Nope, maybe something is wrong with me or what not but honest to God the only thing changed was the QXL and if I was to post all of my other workout with round rings you'd see that they very well match the lower output ride



Tho remember i did say the other power file is from my race today... anyone have any thesis for this phenomena? Any time I rode in round rings I felt slow, sluggish and would tire out fast!

---

Speed kills unless you have speed skills!!!

Did you change your power meter settings to reflect the non round chain ring usage?

No powermeter setting changes, I use powers P1 duals and crankarm length is set to 165 as per crank!

---

Speed kills unless you have speed skills!!!

I think it is a question of cadence. Assuming no delta in the rear cog, you will be pedaling at a lower cadence. Depending upon your pedaling style and habit, lower cadence will either feel easier or harder...

If you changed the crank length, then that also adds another variable to the equation. Shorter cranks = less torque, which generally means harder top push a bigger gear. FWIW, several years ago, i tested various crank lengths and I settled on 172.5mm or 175mm. That could have been simply because of habit / experience / muscle memory, but I did find that below 170mm i lacked "ooomph". I now ride with 172.5 or 175mm crank lengths (nothing scientifc, just depends on what came with the bike) and I honestly can not tell the difference when riding my 172.5 vs 175m cranks - on a RPE basis, HR, or wattage basis.

Hope this helps

the only to change from this setup was the chainrings, same crankset, same crankarms, same powermeter, and more of less the same terrain aisde from the fact of the face location had very little wind and for my usual training route has a lot of wind... either way I have been on Q-rings just about from the beginning of my cycling career and it appears my body has contoured to Q-rings and anything other than oval rings causes problems on my pedaling stroke

---

Speed kills unless you have speed skills!!!