Login required to started new threads

Login required to post replies

Prev Next
NEO VS KICKR power feel difference...
Quote | Reply
I recently bought a NEO... and previously had a KICKR.

Both trainers were being controlled by my SRM.

I have noticed that using TR... the NEO has more variability than the KICKR. In other words doing 225 for 15 min... my average power will be 225... but even at a steady cadence of 90... the variation has spikes up to 250 which really makes it harder to hit the 225 number.

Have you guys seen this???
Quote Reply
Re: NEO VS KICKR power feel difference... [Donzo98] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Yes. I put it down to a real flywheel (Kickr) vs a simulated flywheel (Neo). They're close on ride feel/inertia/momentum... just not the same.

Shane Miller - GPLama

YouTube[/url] |
Web | Twitter | Instagram | Facebook | Strava
Quote Reply
Re: NEO VS KICKR power feel difference... [gplama] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
gplama wrote:
Yes. I put it down to a real flywheel (Kickr) vs a simulated flywheel (Neo). They're close on ride feel/inertia/momentum... just not the same.

You notice that it feels harder than the KICKR???
Quote Reply
Re: NEO VS KICKR power feel difference... [Donzo98] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
It's not as smooth on the Neo, so yes, harder than the Kickr.

My explanation might clear it up... and is purely my own observation from years of experience on egos.

ERG mode for anything >90% FTP sucks. It's horrible. The way most smart trainers hold wattage means it's not smooth like outside on the road or a LeMond Revolution (oh so buttery smooth!). They'll hit -+%2-5 in the ballpark wattage you set, some spiking and dipping more. If you're truly on the limit during the interval then 105% burns a lot of energy and the 95% "correction" of the resistance doesn't give you anywhere near the time needed to recover. Repeat, over, and over, and over.. and... you're cooked pretty quickly. I find time to fatigue is reduced greatly. I find the inertia on the Kickr/Drivo/Hammer a lot better than the Neo for keeping on top of things in ERG mode. This isn't to say the Neo isn't a good workout though, it's just different. I assume you're across this.. as it's even more obvious with the spikes/dips in resistance being the topic you raised.

A few weeks back I set ERG on the Neo. I only managed 339 for 15mins. Followed up a few days later with 356 for 20mins on the Lemond (wind trainer). Both sessions were good training but ERG on the Neo had me at less watts and pulling the pin 5 minutes earlier. I'd need to do the same on the Kickr to bring this paragraph back on topic... but this session isn't on the cards any time soon.

Over on a UK TT forum someone has suggested using the Tacx training app and putting the Neo in -0.5% slope mode, then selecting TT bike under the user profile. This seems to give the thing a little more road-feel... indicating that the Neo itself is capable of performing a little better. As to who's job it is to make it feel better, I don't know... TrainerRoad / Zwift / etc ?

Sorry for the rambling, the answer you were after was the first line.

Shane Miller - GPLama

YouTube[/url] |
Web | Twitter | Instagram | Facebook | Strava
Quote Reply
Re: NEO VS KICKR power feel difference... [gplama] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Perfect response :)

Yes... >90% is brutal. No question.

Thanks for the thoughtful response. I'm glad it's not just me... :)
Quote Reply
Re: NEO VS KICKR power feel difference... [Donzo98] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Donzo98 wrote:
Perfect response :)

Yes... >90% is brutal. No question.

Thanks for the thoughtful response. I'm glad it's not just me... :)

yes Neo is harder then kickr... and has little spikes in ERG mode... guess we all have that in common.
Quote Reply
Re: NEO VS KICKR power feel difference... [gplama] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
gplama wrote:
It's not as smooth on the Neo, so yes, harder than the Kickr.

My explanation might clear it up... and is purely my own observation from years of experience on egos.

ERG mode for anything >90% FTP sucks. It's horrible. The way most smart trainers hold wattage means it's not smooth like outside on the road or a LeMond Revolution (oh so buttery smooth!). They'll hit -+%2-5 in the ballpark wattage you set, some spiking and dipping more. If you're truly on the limit during the interval then 105% burns a lot of energy and the 95% "correction" of the resistance doesn't give you anywhere near the time needed to recover. Repeat, over, and over, and over.. and... you're cooked pretty quickly. I find time to fatigue is reduced greatly. I find the inertia on the Kickr/Drivo/Hammer a lot better than the Neo for keeping on top of things in ERG mode. This isn't to say the Neo isn't a good workout though, it's just different. I assume you're across this.. as it's even more obvious with the spikes/dips in resistance being the topic you raised.

A few weeks back I set ERG on the Neo. I only managed 339 for 15mins. Followed up a few days later with 356 for 20mins on the Lemond (wind trainer). Both sessions were good training but ERG on the Neo had me at less watts and pulling the pin 5 minutes earlier. I'd need to do the same on the Kickr to bring this paragraph back on topic... but this session isn't on the cards any time soon.

Over on a UK TT forum someone has suggested using the Tacx training app and putting the Neo in -0.5% slope mode, then selecting TT bike under the user profile. This seems to give the thing a little more road-feel... indicating that the Neo itself is capable of performing a little better. As to who's job it is to make it feel better, I don't know... TrainerRoad / Zwift / etc ?

Sorry for the rambling, the answer you were after was the first line.


Interesting, I have Kickr my 3rd and was thinking about moving to NEO, due to noise. I use P1 pedals to control power.

What I noticed recently riding in small ring on kickr solves noise issues for me, but introduced spikes you are experiencing on NEO. Riding at 90% I go anywhere between 80% and 105%, average will be always the same at the end or very close +-2-3W

Are you riding in big or small ring at the front?
Quote Reply
Re: NEO VS KICKR power feel difference... [sebo2000] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Have all of you experiencing large swings on the Neo updated to the newest firmware? They addressed this issue about a month or two ago. I saw large swings on TrainerRoad and Zwift workouts, but it has since gotten much better and the swings are only +/- 8-10W. As in, if my target is 330, it may go down to 320 and up to 340.
Quote Reply
Re: NEO VS KICKR power feel difference... [sebo2000] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
sebo2000 wrote:
gplama wrote:
It's not as smooth on the Neo, so yes, harder than the Kickr.

My explanation might clear it up... and is purely my own observation from years of experience on egos.

ERG mode for anything >90% FTP sucks. It's horrible. The way most smart trainers hold wattage means it's not smooth like outside on the road or a LeMond Revolution (oh so buttery smooth!). They'll hit -+%2-5 in the ballpark wattage you set, some spiking and dipping more. If you're truly on the limit during the interval then 105% burns a lot of energy and the 95% "correction" of the resistance doesn't give you anywhere near the time needed to recover. Repeat, over, and over, and over.. and... you're cooked pretty quickly. I find time to fatigue is reduced greatly. I find the inertia on the Kickr/Drivo/Hammer a lot better than the Neo for keeping on top of things in ERG mode. This isn't to say the Neo isn't a good workout though, it's just different. I assume you're across this.. as it's even more obvious with the spikes/dips in resistance being the topic you raised.

A few weeks back I set ERG on the Neo. I only managed 339 for 15mins. Followed up a few days later with 356 for 20mins on the Lemond (wind trainer). Both sessions were good training but ERG on the Neo had me at less watts and pulling the pin 5 minutes earlier. I'd need to do the same on the Kickr to bring this paragraph back on topic... but this session isn't on the cards any time soon.

Over on a UK TT forum someone has suggested using the Tacx training app and putting the Neo in -0.5% slope mode, then selecting TT bike under the user profile. This seems to give the thing a little more road-feel... indicating that the Neo itself is capable of performing a little better. As to who's job it is to make it feel better, I don't know... TrainerRoad / Zwift / etc ?

Sorry for the rambling, the answer you were after was the first line.



Interesting, I have Kickr my 3rd and was thinking about moving to NEO, due to noise. I use P1 pedals to control power.

What I noticed recently riding in small ring on kickr solves noise issues for me, but introduced spikes you are experiencing on NEO. Riding at 90% I go anywhere between 80% and 105%, average will be always the same at the end or very close +-2-3W

Are you riding in big or small ring at the front?

The spikes on the KICKR are different... at least in my experience. The KICKR (version 1)... had some crazy spikes up to 400+ watts. They really sucked!! The NEO doesn't do that... it just adds time above the the prescribed wattage by it's inherent variability.

I always ride in the small ring... as speed is no issue on the trainer.
Quote Reply
Re: NEO VS KICKR power feel difference... [Donzo98] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Donzo98 wrote:
I recently bought a NEO... and previously had a KICKR.

Both trainers were being controlled by my SRM.

I have noticed that using TR... the NEO has more variability than the KICKR. In other words doing 225 for 15 min... my average power will be 225... but even at a steady cadence of 90... the variation has spikes up to 250 which really makes it harder to hit the 225 number.

Have you guys seen this???


Is there an advantage in controlling the Neo using the SRM (or any other PM)? Would it be smoother if it was controlled by its own power output? It's pretty accurate compared to other trainers.
Last edited by: gus77: Mar 30, 17 8:23
Quote Reply
Re: NEO VS KICKR power feel difference... [gus77] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
The advantage is that you know it's accurate... assuming your PM is.

I would think that things would be a bit smoother without the intermediate step in between... but not sure 100%.
Quote Reply
Re: NEO VS KICKR power feel difference... [sebo2000] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
sebo2000 wrote:
What I noticed recently riding in small ring on kickr solves noise issues for me, but introduced spikes you are experiencing on NEO. Riding at 90% I go anywhere between 80% and 105%, average will be always the same at the end or very close +-2-3W

Are you riding in big or small ring at the front?

This is an interesting one... The flywheel speed on the Kickr (and other flywheel trainers) has an impact on the feel/inertia/etc of the pedal stroke. 300W in the 39/25 at 90rpm feels* a lot different to 300W in the 53/11 at 90rpm. So changing into the small ring may not be exactly what you're after training load wise.

I'm typically in the 53 11/14/15/whatever to get that flywheel cranking along and the pedal stroke / firing patterns matched as closely to real world riding as possible.... that typically being flat TTs for me. The LeMond Revolution is still my pick for most interval work.


*I dislike the world 'feels', so I am in the process of trying to quantify this with numbers. I've got a set of P1 pedals and possibility a set of Rotor 2INpower cranks that might be put to use for this.

Shane Miller - GPLama

YouTube[/url] |
Web | Twitter | Instagram | Facebook | Strava
Quote Reply
Re: NEO VS KICKR power feel difference... [gplama] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
gplama wrote:
*I dislike the world 'feels', so I am in the process of trying to quantify this with numbers. I've got a set of P1 pedals and possibility a set of Rotor 2INpower cranks that might be put to use for this.

Not sure what you want to quantify, but the lower inertia means your wheel slows down more in the "dead" parts of the stroke, requiring you to re-accelerate over and over. I have a KK which is better than most, but it still feels very different from riding on the road, and I can't come close to hitting the same power.
Quote Reply
Re: NEO VS KICKR power feel difference... [rruff] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
rruff wrote:
gplama wrote:
*I dislike the world 'feels', so I am in the process of trying to quantify this with numbers. I've got a set of P1 pedals and possibility a set of Rotor 2INpower cranks that might be put to use for this.


Not sure what you want to quantify, but the lower inertia means your wheel slows down more in the "dead" parts of the stroke, requiring you to re-accelerate over and over. I have a KK which is better than most, but it still feels very different from riding on the road, and I can't come close to hitting the same power.

This is starting to become really interesting. So we've got 'ability to hold steady power in ERG mode' which varies amongst the various trainers (direct drive or tire based) in terms of how accurately and rapidly they adjust. Too quick and you feel like you've just ridden into sand. Tire based introduces slip and wear but this isn't the subject of this thread. Then you have the flywheel speed or inertia, which differentiates the 'feel' of these devices. Plus you have the funky features like bumpy road feel and positive spin to mimic downhill but neither are really that important unless you want the immersive experience. What are the benefits of low/high inertia? Dumb direct drive trainers come in various flavours, the Lemond is middle of the road whereas the BT ERG and RevBox are all about low inertia so they force "you to re-accelerate over and over". If that is a benefit then it would suggest gearing on ERG mode is relevant. Any consensus on this?

SteveMc
Quote Reply
Re: NEO VS KICKR power feel difference... [SteveMc] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
High inertia is the natural way to simulate riding outdoors. My understanding is that most flywheel based trainers have only have a fraction of the inertia of a bike+rider on the road. However, if you're riding erg mode, you've basically given up on simulating the feel of riding outdoors.

This thread has some really good information on the mechanics of how a Neo works to simulate intertia in slope mode: http://www.timetriallingforum.co.uk/...oo-kickr/&page=4
Quote Reply
Re: NEO VS KICKR power feel difference... [rowancbrown] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
In slope mode -0.5% a neo.blow everything (except monster trainers like the lynx) out of the water on inertia and road feel.
In erg mode it feels garbage, like a kickr feels all the time.
Whenever people escape the need for erg mode and just hold their own power manually they'll find they can hold much more on a neo. Particularly close hip angled TT positions who need all the inertia they can get.
Quote Reply
Re: NEO VS KICKR power feel difference... [rowancbrown] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Great thread, thanks. Having had great success with ERG training (on a CT) I'm less inclined to get so excited by 'road feel' but I see what the argument is (i.e. able to produce same power inside as out). The ERG mode taught me that training a particular variable, with less realism, was effective and time efficient. Having weekly TTs helped convert the indoor training to the road. The arguments against low inertia are more in terms of ridiculing the manufactures claims, rather than the potential training effect. A week diet of long steady alpine climbs always translates into flat TT speed for me, and seeing respected national track coaches advocate low inertia means I'm less willing to dismiss it. Similarly rollers might fail the realism test but they do provide a host of other benefits which do translate to the road.

No doubt the debate rages on....

SteveMc
p.s. I'm looking forward to what Sportcrafters are doing with their hard-drive trainer. I understand that building it wasn't as easy as they initially expected but it might solve some of the tire based problems of conventional turbos but also bringing a distinct feel to the ride that might be very close to reality; much like the Lemond which gets ample praise on the aforementioned thread.
Quote Reply
Re: NEO VS KICKR power feel difference... [Donzo98] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Great post. I always have this debate with my colleague who has a Kickr 2 and Stages. I have a Neo and Stages (also used to ride on a CT with Quarq) and have had to adjust my wattage due to the different readings. Basically Neo and Stages are a lot lower than CT, Quarq, and Wattbike (at work). Colleague says his Kickr 2 and Stages are pretty consistent with Wattbike (and higher).


For context:


Jan 29, 2017
Tri bike
20 min FTP -

Tacx Neo: 210-215w
Stages: 188w
HR threshold: 158

Jan 31, 2017
Wattbike (like a computrainer and road bike position)
20 min FTP - Wattbike: 246w
HR threshold: 167



I know there are a lot of factors that could effect the test, but it's pretty consistent in terms of PE as well the past 3-4 months. Like 240-250w on the Wattbike (same as CT/Quarq) feels like 220ish on the Neo...Stages just seems all over the place and about 20-30w lower than Neo (maybe leg imbalance, but can't believe it's that bad).


Quote Reply
Re: NEO VS KICKR power feel difference... [gplama] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
gplama wrote:
sebo2000 wrote:

What I noticed recently riding in small ring on kickr solves noise issues for me, but introduced spikes you are experiencing on NEO. Riding at 90% I go anywhere between 80% and 105%, average will be always the same at the end or very close +-2-3W

Are you riding in big or small ring at the front?


This is an interesting one... The flywheel speed on the Kickr (and other flywheel trainers) has an impact on the feel/inertia/etc of the pedal stroke. 300W in the 39/25 at 90rpm feels* a lot different to 300W in the 53/11 at 90rpm. So changing into the small ring may not be exactly what you're after training load wise.

I'm typically in the 53 11/14/15/whatever to get that flywheel cranking along and the pedal stroke / firing patterns matched as closely to real world riding as possible.... that typically being flat TTs for me. The LeMond Revolution is still my pick for most interval work.


*I dislike the world 'feels', so I am in the process of trying to quantify this with numbers. I've got a set of P1 pedals and possibility a set of Rotor 2INpower cranks that might be put to use for this.


Very interesting you mentioned this. I use ERG mode for everything except climbing and sprints. 90% of my training.

I use P1 pedals to control Kickr, I have to admit ERG mode at eg 300W in 53-11 will "feel" smoother than 36-23 despite the fact average power is 300W in both cases, it feels easier in 53-11. I will record pedal phase in both cases. In both cases power is the same 300W but 53-11 "feels" smoother\different.
Quote Reply
Re: NEO VS KICKR power feel difference... [sebo2000] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I think a lot may have to do with how the resistance is controlled in the two trainers. Totally electronic (simulated flywheel) in the Neo vs an actual flywheel.
Quote Reply
Re: NEO VS KICKR power feel difference... [SteveMc] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
SteveMc wrote:
seeing respected national track coaches advocate low inertia means I'm less willing to dismiss it.

Who is specifically advocating low inertia?
Quote Reply
Re: NEO VS KICKR power feel difference... [gplama] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
gplama wrote:
This is an interesting one... The flywheel speed on the Kickr (and other flywheel trainers) has an impact on the feel/inertia/etc of the pedal stroke. 300W in the 39/25 at 90rpm feels* a lot different to 300W in the 53/11 at 90rpm. So changing into the small ring may not be exactly what you're after training load wise.

That was my experience with the Kickr as well. Bigger gear = more inertia from the flywheel and better "road feel" particularly when getting up to 95% of FTP and above. With a smaller/easier gear it seems that the power fluctuates more which in turn causes the resistance to fluctuate more.

I don't think it matters as much with the Neo, though. I've found there doesn't seem to be much inertia at all with the Neo in Erg mode - especially since the last update. While Erg mode is more "accurate" on the Neo after the update, I think it now micro-manages the resistance too aggressively which can make intervals really brutal, especially in that 2-5 minute VO2Max range. I'm actually thinking I may need to try slope mode on the Neo for my hard intervals, I just can't do them very well in Erg mode.
Quote Reply
Re: NEO VS KICKR power feel difference... [jsk] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
jsk wrote:
I'm actually thinking I may need to try slope mode on the Neo for my hard intervals, I just can't do them very well in Erg mode.

Using slope mode with the Neo works very well. There's no need to worry about the "erg death spiral" either when you're doing really hard intervals.

Hugh

Genetics load the gun, lifestyle pulls the trigger.
Quote Reply
Re: NEO VS KICKR power feel difference... [rruff] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
rruff wrote:
SteveMc wrote:
seeing respected national track coaches advocate low inertia means I'm less willing to dismiss it.


Who is specifically advocating low inertia?

RevBox go pretty hard on it on their website. Pulling in scientificy looking people to sell...er.. talk about it.

Shane Miller - GPLama

YouTube[/url] |
Web | Twitter | Instagram | Facebook | Strava
Quote Reply
Re: NEO VS KICKR power feel difference... [sciguy] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
sciguy wrote:
jsk wrote:
I'm actually thinking I may need to try slope mode on the Neo for my hard intervals, I just can't do them very well in Erg mode.


Using slope mode with the Neo works very well. There's no need to worry about the "erg death spiral" either when you're doing really hard intervals.

Hugh

I'm so happy you guys agree :) This was today... 3x10 @ 95 97 and 99%... BRUTAL...


Quote Reply

Prev Next