sgy wrote:
Actually, I use both (powercranks with SRM during training, SRM during racing) so no bubbles to be burst... Your ability to pull for a long time when training consistently with pc increases your average wattage (in my case by 40W avg over IM distance - of which probably halve due to increased fitness and the other half because of the pulling).
How do you know that it is not just just the training you are doing? Rather than an anecdote I would prefer a comparison between a group of riders using PC's and a group using uncoupled cranks. Just fortunately there are several well performed, even if the
creator would beg to differ, studies showing this.
Quote:
That is not the most important reason for using powercranks though: the gains are way bigger for running and especially your running endurance.
Well fortunately there was a study presented at ACSM two years ago showing that running performance was not improved after a 10 week period of using uncoupled cranks.
Quote:
To summarize: a powermeter is very useful but it is nothing more than a measuring tool.
Excellent to see PCer who understands what a PM is meant to do. Looking at another thread there are still some people who believe that a PM is meant to improve ones performance.
Quote:
It doesn't force you to engage extra muscles. Powercranks do!
I thought in endurance sport the aim was engage less muscle. I would assume that was more efficient!
Quote:
If you can afford it: get powercranks with SRM and a fixed SRM. If you have to make budget induced choices, my recommendation is to go for the powercranks and have yourself tested on the computrainer (or whatever device) regularly.
That claim runs counter to the published research on uncoupled crank use .
Quote:
You will notice that biking improves. But way before noticing improved cycling, you won't really care because of the feedback on running which is so positive.
Another unproven claim that runs counter to the only study published in abstract form from ACSM two years ago.
Hamish Ferguson: Cycling Coach