Login required to started new threads

Login required to post replies

accuracy, Kickr vs quarq
Quote | Reply
I had the chance to compare kickr and quarq power data noted a big discrepancy. The kickr has felt hard to me compared to outside. I initially chocked it up to indoor is harder since I focus on the effort with fewer distractions inside. I wanted an outside validation so rode the TT bike with the quarq on the kickr. I calibrated both units after 10 minutes of warm up. The difference is 12-16W higher on quarq data just using 20 min intervals at pretty steady state getting ready for next week's tri. (214 kickr, 226 quarq, )

which should I trust ? I of course like the higher numbers and will use those when I race. The kickr is getting old, I looked but did not see an option for a factory recalibration. I'd be reluctant to ship it back anyway since it's so heavy.

Brian
Quote Reply
Re: accuracy, Kickr vs quarq [TriBri00] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
All power meters are going to be a little different. The measurements are done in different spots and not the same sensors. Rides outside are generally easier anyways. They are both accurate, but measure a little different. I wouldn't trust one more or less than the other. If you know that discrepancy is the case, then you can make the adjustments on race day.
Last edited by: Etexag: May 13, 18 10:47
Quote Reply
Re: accuracy, Kickr vs quarq [Etexag] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
FYI.... I ran 70.3 Galveston at my trainer FTP. I was able to maintain for the entire bike split. There are discrepancies. Just know what the difference is for your meters
Quote Reply
Re: accuracy, Kickr vs quarq [Etexag] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Etexag wrote:
All power meters are going to be a little different. The measurements are done in different spots and not the same sensors. Rides outside are generally easier anyways. They are both accurate, but measure a little different. I wouldn't trust one more or less than the other. If you know that discrepancy is the case, then you can make the adjustments on race day.

Yep. Last year was going to a cycling studio with computrainers. My ftp for computrainer was higher than my stages power meter
Quote Reply
Re: accuracy, Kickr vs quarq [TriBri00] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Be happy it's not the other way around :)
Quote Reply
Re: accuracy, Kickr vs quarq [TriBri00] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
You can verify the slope/accuracy of the Quarq with static hanging weights. It can be an expensive exercise finding a calibrated weight for the task though.

Shane Miller - GPLama
YouTube | Twitter | Instagram | Facebook | Strava | Web
Quote Reply
Re: accuracy, Kickr vs quarq [TriBri00] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
TriBri00 wrote:
214 kickr, 226 quarq, which should I trust?

I'm in the same boat. But the answer is pretty straight-forward. On the kicker, you train at 214, in the race on the quarq, you use the 226. Then, whenever you retest your ftp on the kicker, make another comparison test and use the new quarq number.
Quote Reply
Re: accuracy, Kickr vs quarq [TriBri00] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
i would rely on Quarq
trainers do not have a real powermeter inside (statement with very few exceptions...)
it is an estimation for kickr (although very good estimation)
Quote Reply
Re: accuracy, Kickr vs quarq [TriBri00] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
The Quarq is presumably at the crank, while the Kickr is measuring power output from either the wheel or cassette depending on whether it's wheel on or direct drive.

The whole reason people worry about chains lubes, jockey wheel sizes, and bearings is because there is some energy lost there. If wheel on, there's also rolling resistance which can be pretty significant depending on tyre.

So:

Quarq = Kickr + losses

And on top of that, you've got any measurement errors. I don't know the claimed accuracy of those two but I assume we can expect 1-2% errors even if everything is well calibrated? That's potentially another 8W or so when you sum the errors at ~200W

I wouldn't worry too much about 14W difference if the lower value is downstream on the power system as it is here. Who knows, you may be able to narrow the gap by improving drive train efficiency, but regardless, just pick one and use that. It's repeatability that matters far more than actual values.
Quote Reply
Re: accuracy, Kickr vs quarq [gplama] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Is it worth mentioning that it doesn't have to be a specific weight, just a known weight? So if you get hold of something roughly the right shape and heavy enough then all you really need is access to some calibrated scales.
Quote Reply
Re: accuracy, Kickr vs quarq [TriBri00] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I did an FTP test last week.

I used a kickr and also a garmin connected to my quarq. It was 4 watts difference over the 20 mins.

280 for kickr
284 for quarq. I have an old one bought in 2010.



Rhymenocerus wrote:
I think everyone should consult ST before they do anything.
Quote Reply
Re: accuracy, Kickr vs quarq [TriBri00] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
You could have been part of a very long Kickr owner thread back that spanned from the fall of 2014 into 2015. Lot's of us were trying to figure out how to manage the difference.
Skip ahead to current day and I have gone from a very disappointed buyer to being very content.

One of my first options before the applications saw a need to provide a solution was to record the Quarq on a Garmin Edge, let the Kickr control the session and then use the Quarq data in WKO for a more accurate and consistent data source.

It works for me as I have a dedicated Quarq on a trainer bike. There are several applications that now provide these options and I have been using PerfPro for my training. In the program it allows me to use the power meter as the controller and the data source. Another thing that happened was in one of the firmware updates for the original Kickr to change the mode in how it determines power or at least from my understanding. Once I applied that firmware update it brought the Kickr and Quarq power very close, but I still use the power meter to control the Kickr.

Another option for some of the applications is being able to apply an offset in the application that supposedly brings the two closer together. However, I find that the Kickr still drifts pretty bad at times or it is not as consistent daily as the Quarq. I tried putting in a number into the offset and it was not as accurate as just power meter control.

Along with some of the other responses my point is don't give up just yet. There could be a solution that will work for you.
Quote Reply
Re: accuracy, Kickr vs quarq [TriBri00] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
i was in the same boat when i added a quarq to my setup. prior was using a powertap and didn't know how it compared to the kickr. ever since getting the quarq and doing the initial comparison, i haven't used the kickr powermeter since. just use powermatch in trainerroad. you should do the same. forget the kickr even has a powermeter and go off of the quarq.

Strava I Instagram
Quote Reply
Re: accuracy, Kickr vs quarq [TriBri00] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
TriBri00 wrote:
I had the chance to compare kickr and quarq power data noted a big discrepancy. The kickr has felt hard to me compared to outside. I initially chocked it up to indoor is harder since I focus on the effort with fewer distractions inside. I wanted an outside validation so rode the TT bike with the quarq on the kickr. I calibrated both units after 10 minutes of warm up. The difference is 12-16W higher on quarq data just using 20 min intervals at pretty steady state getting ready for next week's tri. (214 kickr, 226 quarq, )

which should I trust ? I of course like the higher numbers and will use those when I race. The kickr is getting old, I looked but did not see an option for a factory recalibration. I'd be reluctant to ship it back anyway since it's so heavy.

Configure quark to control kickr, set your devices to read power data from quark. Kickrs are $hit if it comes to power measuring.
Quote Reply
Re: accuracy, Kickr vs quarq [sebo2000] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Any idea on how I can do this with iOS devices? It used to be possible to get an ANT+ key for Apple devices, however, apparently they no longer work with the latest version of iOS. I contacted Wahoo about the possible use of a CABLE of 4iii to convert ANT+ to Bluetooth so that the Quarq could control the KickR. The response was that this would not work since power meter control of the KickR is only possible with ANT+. Perhaps it's time to dust off an old notebook computer and get an ANT+ dongle for that.
Quote Reply
Re: accuracy, Kickr vs quarq [TriBri00] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
By chance, I tested my Quark Riken (2013) against my Wahoo Kickr (1st gen.) this morning. I've just mounted my race bike onto my trainer, so this is the first time I've had more than one source of power data. I calibrated both today.

The Kickr reads about 5-10w higher than the Quark when holding a steady "erg" power of 200w on the Kickr.

The Kickr reads about 20w higher for peak power on 30-second sprints at ~500w.

I'll post an update if anything changes.


<The Dew Abides>
Quote Reply
Re: accuracy, Kickr vs quarq [Felt_Rider] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
thanks for all the advice. I don't usually have the quarq bike on the kickr. I do now getting ready to race this weekend. My usual trainer bike is an older bike without a crank based PM.

I was already planning to go by the quarq data since that will be all the data I have to use on race day. I was hoping for a way to make the kickr more accurate for the usual days.

But now I'm really energized to get my frictional losses to a minimum.

Brian
Quote Reply
Re: accuracy, Kickr vs quarq [TriBri00] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
You don't mention what application you use with the Kickr. Is it an application that has a trainer / power meter offset or difference value option?
For example in PerfPro there is an option if the difference between the Kickr and power meter is 12 watts you can plug in that value and it supposedly brings the data closer. That may be an option since your trainer bike doesn't have a PM. I am not sure what other applications have this option. Maybe TrainerRoad since they usually have a good array of setting options?
Quote Reply
Re: accuracy, Kickr vs quarq [Scott_B] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Scott_B wrote:
Any idea on how I can do this with iOS devices? It used to be possible to get an ANT+ key for Apple devices, however, apparently they no longer work with the latest version of iOS. I contacted Wahoo about the possible use of a CABLE of 4iii to convert ANT+ to Bluetooth so that the Quarq could control the KickR. The response was that this would not work since power meter control of the KickR is only possible with ANT+. Perhaps it's time to dust off an old notebook computer and get an ANT+ dongle for that.

You need particular version of kickr firmware that allows on using power meter to control kickr. Open ticket with support they will send you link and instructions. You will flash kickr with iPhone and load new firmware, then from iPhone via Bluetooth enable the feature to control kickr via Ant and enter power meter ANT+, next time when you will have power meter close buy it will control your kickr.
Quote Reply
Re: accuracy, Kickr vs quarq [sebo2000] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
This must be a very recent development. I will get in touch with Wahoo. Thanks.
Quote Reply
Re: accuracy, Kickr vs quarq [TriBri00] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
My kickr reads 20-25 watts higher then my quarq. A few years back a buddy and I went out recalibrate each of our quarq and bought a ~50lb kettle bell and followed the instructions on the quaq app. Its true that we did not need to find a specific weight but rather a known weight. Took the weight to a UPS store and got a measurement to three decimal places. We were as careful as we could be with the procedure but Im not sure it was any more accurate than it was before. I ended up reverting back to my old slope # because I was at least familiar with the offset from quarq to kickr.
Last edited by: tritontoby: May 16, 18 11:51
Quote Reply
Re: accuracy, Kickr vs quarq [Felt_Rider] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
the offset is similar between TR, wahoo, and zwift. I found using zwift to control the wattage to be jumpy, watts did not hold steady.

Brian
Quote Reply
Re: accuracy, Kickr vs quarq [tritontoby] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Many first gen kickrs read 20-25w over,
This has been well documented in the past and long denied by kickr
Until they brought out the newer versions.

I have a v1 and all emails to support would be denial and to do spindowns until the cows came home.
Only until they changed the firmware last year to modify the way it read power did he issue get resolved for the most part.
With the newer firmware, my v1now reads 5-10w over.
I previously used trainerroad and luckily they came out with an option to use a secondary power meter e.g. Quarq if you had the luxury
Quote Reply