I think there are ways to determine precision and potentially accuracy independent of platform.
Triathlon Forum
Login required to started new threads
Login required to post replies
Re: NEW: Rotor INspider power meter [Rappstar]
[ In reply to ]
Re: NEW: Rotor INspider power meter [warlockuy]
[ In reply to ]
warlockuy wrote:
I have it, I am very happy with it. Charge the battery once alone.
It is very stable, responds very well to fast peaks.
The truth is happy with him. I have a theme only with the chainring that I am using one of the old version, and the ocp is not the same, I have a monoplate to travel.
I'm also waiting for some 155 levers since I have about 165 to test.
Compliant with rotor inspider.
.
I'm happy with it the unit! I think we can always wish that our watts were higher, but the unit hasn't given me any reason not to be happy with it thus far! I actually plan on picking up a second unit, so I don't have to switch it as often.
dcrainmaker wrote:
Hmm...that's less than ideal separation, especially in that order (your trainer should definitely be lower - and given it was with the Quarq, that's two data points already). I assume you've done all the calibrations/etc on all units?
Edit: Though, in diving into the sets a bit more - it's not horrifically off for duration's longer than a few mins.
Here is a data set between the now sold Quarq Riken and the Hammer. https://zwiftpower.com/...ysis.php?set_id=3043
Data set between the Hammer and the SRM https://analyze.dcrainmaker.com/...87-6442-c980a74f4a2b
Calibrations are done pre-race.
I guess this come off as a complaint. I did not mean it to be as such, I hoped it was merely an observation. I'm sure they are close enough to keep Zwift happy, should i be asked to verify my performances. Anyway I have a LOT of fitness to gain back if I even want to think about that again.