Login required to started new threads

Login required to post replies

zwift miles?
Quote | Reply
So I am just starting out with zwift and my new wahoo kickr snap. I am noticing differences between the mileage/speed of my wahoo kickr and my zwift app.

The difference is on average about 10%. I am just starting to build my mileage back up so I am starting small, but need to know which is more accurate, wahoo app or zwift?
Quote Reply
Re: zwift miles? [140.6sj] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Zwift calculates based off of virtual elevation changes and aero, so theoretically I'd assume zwift is more like real life. However it doesn't really matter, the watts are all that count.
Quote Reply
Re: zwift miles? [imswimmer328] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
imswimmer328 wrote:
Zwift calculates based off of virtual elevation changes and aero, so theoretically I'd assume zwift is more like real life. However it doesn't really matter, the watts are all that count.

I understand watts are what counts but you also have to be able to hold them for a distance.

Is it better to raise my watts first and then add time, or go with time first and try raising the watts as they come?

Im only averaging 200 watts or so
Quote Reply
Re: zwift miles? [140.6sj] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
140.6sj wrote:
I understand watts are what counts but you also have to be able to hold them for a distance.

No. You need to be able to hold those watts for time, not for distance. Your body doesn't know or care how far you went. It does care how hard you went and for how long (time).

The equation for work is simply work = power x time. Distance is a non-factor beyond the fact that you need to cover x distance for a race.

Favorite Gear: Dimond | Cadex | Desoto Sport | Hoka One One
Quote Reply
Re: zwift miles? [The GMAN] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Spot on GMAN. It's all about the hours and powers.

Shane Miller - GPLama
YouTube | Web | Twitter | Instagram | Facebook | Strava
Quote Reply
Re: zwift miles? [140.6sj] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
140.6sj wrote:
imswimmer328 wrote:
Zwift calculates based off of virtual elevation changes and aero, so theoretically I'd assume zwift is more like real life. However it doesn't really matter, the watts are all that count.


I understand watts are what counts but you also have to be able to hold them for a distance.

Is it better to raise my watts first and then add time, or go with time first and try raising the watts as they come?

Im only averaging 200 watts or so
If your goal presumably is to increase your sustainable power. Since you have access to power data the best way to do this is generally accepted to power based training in or around your threshold power. Start by testing your Functional Threshold Power (FTP) if you haven't already. Most people do this using a 20min max effort and extrapolating from that. You can enter your FTP manually in Zwift or if you use the workout specifically provided for testing FTP, it will update automatically once you've tested. The test takes 73mins and involves a thorough warmup protocol including some high intensity work, a 20min max effort and a cooldown.

Then the typical FTP improvement sessions are things like:
  • 2x20mins @90-100%FTP with anything from 3 to 10 minutes recovery between intervals
  • 4x10min Over-Under intervals with 3 to 5 mins recovery between sets. Each 10min set consists of alternating 1 minute at 110%FTP, 1 minute 90%FTP and repeat.
  • 5x5min VO2max with 3 to 5 minutes recovery between intervals. I target about 110%FTP for the intervals.

You could easily set up a very simple schedule using one or more of these workouts and repeating continuously, retesting FTP and updating your session power requirements as you go. However, I'd get very bored and de-motivated without more variety so I tend to mix and match. Zwift adds further options since you can always use a race or group ride to give your session some structure, if you want a change from a programmed workout. Since last October I have been doing a lot of training on Zwift. I've been doing two hard evening sessions on Zwift during the week and often a couple of easier sessions in between. Then at the weekend I'd get a long ride in, anything from about 2.5 - 6hours. I've been doing those in the mountains as much as possible but any terrain will do.
One of my hard midweek sessions is usually either 2x20min at 90-100%FTP, 4x10min OU or 3x15min OU. Depending on what I was in the mood for, the second one could be another programmed workout or perhaps a race or a group ride. For targetted effort group rides I'd aim for something that would keep my intensity at 80% or higher. Ideally say 80-90%FTP for an hour if it was ride targeting a specific W/kg range which many of them do.
Another session I've been doing a bit recently as my second ride is just trying to set new PBs on the "Epic" climb in Watopia. Depending on your ability that climb might take you anything from say 20mins to 40mins. For me that's a very high intensity 25min session and I'd often do another block of near threshold intensity in the same session (such as taking a couple of minutes recovery after the KOM banner and then turning left and continuing up to the antenna at a 85-100%FTP effort depending on how I'm feeling.
The hill is just a psychological tool to keep me focused on maintaining the effort and there's the bonus of extra satisfaction if I can beat my previous best time.

Most of my sessions on Zwift are around 70-85mins in duration including a warm-up and cool-down.
Quote Reply
Re: zwift miles? [140.6sj] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
To answer your original question, the distance that zwift reports is close to the distance I would normally see on the road for the same power, time and type of terrain but generally a little bit longer.

Closer than what my garmin reports but: While going uphill, zwift shows a lower speed than my garmin, it shows a higher speed while going downhill and it shows a slightly higher speed while riding on flat sections.

Just as a statistic, I'm only 64" tall and weigh 64 Kg.

Like others have said, it's all about time and power.
Quote Reply
Re: zwift miles? [jaretj] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
jaretj wrote:
To answer your original question, the distance that zwift reports is close to the distance I would normally see on the road for the same power, time and type of terrain but generally a little bit longer.

Closer than what my garmin reports but: While going uphill, zwift shows a lower speed than my garmin, it shows a higher speed while going downhill and it shows a slightly higher speed while riding on flat sections.

Just as a statistic, I'm only 64" tall and weigh 64 Kg.

Like others have said, it's all about time and power.
Yep, my experience is similar. Zwift gives more or less appropriate speeds and the average for a ride is usually reasonably close to what I would expect on a real outdoor ride on similar terrain.
However, I would avoid using that as a measure of the training effort you've put in because it could adversely effect your choices of workouts and terrain. For example, in my previous post I mentioned I've been doing a lot of virtual hill climbs. If you are setting targets for yourself in terms of distance and you do workouts like this it will appear you did very little, whereas you may have worked your ass off and benefited greatly from the session. It's just not the right metric to measure. Time and average power is better. TSS is better still and both of these are available from Zwift.
Quote Reply
Re: zwift miles? [Ai_1] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Thank you all for your replies so far. I will def. look more into their structured training plans and FTP testing as I increase my time. I took WAY too much time off from riding and have gotten significantly out of shape, so I am still building my in saddle time.

Right now I am only riding 30 min or less at a time, but I ride atleast once daily, twice if I can get away with it.
Quote Reply