For most people, FTP would be between 70% and 90% of VO2max.

Note that cycling economy/efficiency DOES influence performance (power output); it is simple less variable between individuals than, e.g., running economy. That is why runners tend to talk about the latter a lot (despite usually not really understanding the topic), whereas cyclists generally do not (except when, e.g., buying into gimmick cranks, "pedalng in circles", etc.).

To complete the picture:

Having an adequately high VO2max is a necessary, but not a sufficient, condition for success in endurance sports.

Okay that is a wider range than I had hoped for. Am I correct in assuming that an individual who doesn't have years of cycling experience will likely start off in the lower end of the range and increase to a higher % as he gets a better base?
And is the efficiency aspect of it more trainable than with running?
So if my W at Vo2max is 390, I can expect my FTP to be anywhere between 270 and 350.

---

Terrible Tuesday’s Triathlon

http://www.hunterallenpowerblog.com/...-vo2max_24.html#more

I saw that before, but it is way off. According to that my vo2max is 47, but I have reached 68 in lab testing.

---

Terrible Tuesday’s Triathlon

Likely was your absolute vo2, not your relative

---

_________________________________
Fit Endurance Coaching - Head Coach|Facebook
USAT L1 Coach | BikeFit Certified Fitter | Contributing Writer - Triathlete Magazine | ROKA

No 68 is my relative max.

---

Terrible Tuesday’s Triathlon

How does your 68 vo2 max compare to the running paces? What are your 5K, 10k, 1/2 M, full Marathon times?

They aren't what they should be, though I'm guessing the biggest reason for this in both running and cycling is that I have only been training seriously for one and a half year with only about 6 months of high volume stuff.
Im in about mid 17 shape for 5k, 36 high for 10k. Not sure about 1/2 or full but shooting for 1:19/2:48 this summer.
I ran a 9:57 indoor 3k a few weeks ago which would make my vVo2max around 5:20 (3:20) pace, whereas a 68 vdot shows a 8:50 3k.

---

Terrible Tuesday’s Triathlon

I wouldn't say, having now gotten there, that a 4.0w/kg is "that" impressive. For me, I don't feel it's a number that really is at the limit of what I could probably do with another couple years and a couple more hours a week.

I'd be curious as to what the ratio is for myself.

So your running pacing doesn’t match up with your vo2, and the biking doesn’t according to the link provided. So don’t you think it might be the vo2 isn’t really 68? A 68 puts you at 15:xx 5K times which is a looong ways to go from a mid 17s.
I’m supposedly a 56 according to my garmin. Just did my first marathon yesterday and 5K split was 20:09 min, best 10k split was 40:26 min, half M was 1:26:32 but my legs gave out at 22m and finished at 3:09. I can also do 1-2 mile sprints at 5:30ish pace, and a stand alone 5k at low 18s. 68 vo2 should be waaaay faster.

Although it's always good to know what setup was used to measure in the lab, and what the protocol was, you're still more likely to know what your VO2max is from direct measurements rather than from indirect ones based on races etc.

I’ve done 3 separate tests in a lab so the figures are accurate.
I agree that 17 is far from 15, however that could depend on a few factors. First I could have a terrible running economy (I hope not), or I could just be severely underdeveloped (which could be true since I am still improving a lot and haven’t been training too long).

---

Terrible Tuesday’s Triathlon

But clearly that’s not the case here. The lab told him 68, but he performs around a 57-58.

We run into this issue a lot tuning and building race cars. We use Dyno’s to measure the HP. However the 70k dollar machine we use to measure it can give vastly different results that the same machine at a different shop. Therefor we end up having to use results at the track to compare the different lab measured results. For example if one car makes 600hp and can do 1/4 mike in 11 seconds, and using a different dyno a similar car makes 500hp and runs the 1/4 mile in 10.5 seconds, clearly the first dyno is very generous with the numbers.

Therefor lab results should be taken with a grain of salt and they are better at measuring improvements then comparing against other performance metrics.

Honestly, I bet garmin has by far and away the best correlation between FTP and vo2 max. They have the biggest sample set of real world results, and could make the correlation better then a lab could with a very small sample set.

I assume you're talking about power at VO2Max? My recollection was you've used an equation relating FTP to VO2Max (ml/kg-m) in the past. I could be mis-remembering.

You are confusing things a lot. And a car is not a person.
Across top marathoners, you can see variations of about 15 units in relative VO2max (from just under 70 for someone like Derek Clayton, to around 85).
All you can say is that his running economy is subpar.

I was actually referring to VO2 @ FTP relative to VO2max. It is easier to think about it that way since power at VO2max is a bit more nebulous (due to VO2 drift on one hand, and the fact that you should achieve a supra-maximal power output at the end of a VO2max test on the other).

The conversion from power to VO2 used in that article is the standard ACSM equation.

Where it is incorrect is in using 20 min power, as VO2max represents an intensity that can only be sustained for a handful of minutes.

Here is a better reference (even if I do say so myself):

http://www.trainingandracingwithapowermeter.com/...max-using-power.html

Finally, note that WKO4 will estimate your VO2max to within (on average) better than +/- 2%. It does, however, require that you feed it a relatively robust set of mean maximal power data.

Given that Garmin doesn't do any physiological testing or collect VO2max data from people using their products, I don't see how.

im not talking about the car. im talking about the machine used and process/procedures of measuring the respective parameter. for the car, thats HP, for the person, its vo2 max (although, we are now trying to corrolate the vo2 to FTP, which is a power measurement... literally exactly the same as my car dyno). and you just proved my point in that two top level runners have a ~20% difference in vo2 max yet are within what, 1-5% in speed over distance? if both runners are tested on the same day on the same machine and show a 20% delta, yet perform the same, then what is the purpose of using vo2 max to correlate to FTP or pacing in a race? you are telling me there is no correlation.

LOL, okay :-)

show me the testing procedures you use for measuring it, and the equations used to generate the results. I've worked with many very, very smart people, and the truely smart people are never afraid to show their work or explain it.

taken from an article on vo2 max testing:

"

• comments: There is often variability between the performance of different analysis systems. Stringent calibration is necessary for both the expired gas and ventilation measurement systems

"


my point exactly.

There is so many different things that can influence time. Different torque profile, gearing (probably the biggest differentiation), different tire size, tire compound, suspension characteristic, temperature, wind, dew point, elevation, track type, track temperature, aerodynamics, weight and many other factors.
Were you able to control all of those aspects?

you are exactly right. on the track i can only control a few of those parameters.

on the dyno i can control most, but not all of them, and as such, the dyno has built in a "correction" factor written by SAE. that is supposed to correct for tem/pressure (and it does a fantastic job). however, i can still take one car, use one dyno, and on the same day go use a different dyno and see a 15% difference. which shows the machines have a lot of variability.

and in the hour of reading and pondering this post, ive read enough about vo2 max testing to tell me it also has a lot of room for error... so much so i just read an article about all the error in vo2 max testing. :P