Login required to started new threads

Login required to post replies

Prev Next
tacx neo 2 or wahoo kickr 2018
Quote | Reply
Looking for some recommendations, I'm torn between the Kickr 2018 and Tacx Neo 2. I've poured over reviews and videos of both systems, both companies stated they will have a XDR freehub coming out this year for the trainer and I'll never get the climb or fan. Just looking to get some candid feedback on both trainers from people that own them and why they chose one over the other. Thanks in advance for any help!
Quote Reply
Re: tacx neo 2 or wahoo kickr 2018 [cscameron82] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I had a KICKR. I had an opportunity to buy a Neo 2 at a great price, so I jumped on it. Waiting on delivery, so I will have a little more feedback soon.

I absolutely loved my KICKR. It was the pre-silent version, but had a good feel and performance over hundreds of trainer hours. I had seen so many comments about the Neo being the best and the go-to, that I could not resist.
Quote Reply
Re: tacx neo 2 or wahoo kickr 2018 [cscameron82] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
The Neo is better. Source, I have a Neo and Neo 2. GF is using my Kickr. Nothing touches the Neo.
Quote Reply
Re: tacx neo 2 or wahoo kickr 2018 [turdburgler] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Agree with this as I have used both and love the NEO...so much that I bought the NEO 2 despite hating to ride indoors...



"Only those who risk going too far can possibly find out how far one can go." T.S. Elliot | Cycle2Tri.com
Sponsors: SciCon | | Every Man Jack
Quote Reply
Re: tacx neo 2 or wahoo kickr 2018 [CPT Chaos] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I've never tried the Kickr, but the Neo is the gold standard and I love mine.
Quote Reply
Re: tacx neo 2 or wahoo kickr 2018 [cscameron82] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Was torn between the two, ended up getting the Kickr 2019 because it was more than 100€ less all added but more importantly much less footprint when stowed away and easier to take in/out the press.
Unless you want the vibration/simulation for Zwift or using it sans power outlet, you'd be splitting hairs between the two.
Quote Reply
Re: tacx neo 2 or wahoo kickr 2018 [cscameron82] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Thanks for the feedback guys, I've had a kicker since 15/16. I'm at that point now to upgrade as they wont make older versions(at least kickr) compatible with the new 12 speed groups. I've heard so much about the neo I figured I should at least solicit for feedback before I jump the gun on a new trainer.
Quote Reply
Re: tacx neo 2 or wahoo kickr 2018 [turdburgler] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
turdburgler wrote:
The Neo is better. Source, I have a Neo and Neo 2. GF is using my Kickr. Nothing touches the Neo.

Get your hand off it. The Kickr is as quiet if not quieter than the Neo now, and otherwise they are much of a muchness
Quote Reply
Re: tacx neo 2 or wahoo kickr 2018 [cscameron82] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
So, I now have 2 rides on my Neo 2. I came from a KICKR2. Honestly, at $250 more for a Neo 2 (including the fact you need to buy a cassette), it is hard to justify. They are both great. Here are a few of my initial impressions after a couple Neo 2 hours (and hundreds of Wahoo KICKR hours).
  • The Neo 2 feels great, it may be smoother and more natural than the KICKR
  • The Neo 2 is huge, ungainly, and difficult to carry; as bulky, 50 lbs. objects go, the KICKR is relatively easy to carry around
  • The glowing LED under the Neo 2 is really cool
  • I like that you do not need to block the front wheel with a KICKR
  • The slight sway the Neo 2 allows is a huge feel upgrade
  • My Neo 2 reads about 15W lower than my Assioma pedals. This is probably a personal problem I need to investigate, given the Neo is known for its power accuracy. My Assioma pedals were less tan 1% different from my Wahoo KICKR power. And, my former P1 pedals were also very close to the Wahoo, so this is probably a Neo thing.
  • The Neo 2 is very quiet, so my 20" fan is by far the loudest thing in the room
  • The Neo 2 works without power, which is super cool
  • I am a TrainerRoad guy, so I will never experience the Neo's other slick features like downhill coasting simulation and road surface simulation
  • I never experienced the virtual tire slip thing, but I have not done any big intervals yet either

I am glad I have it, because I got it on a great sale. But, IMHO, it is not worth a huge price premium over a KICKR unless the simulation features or some of the other intangible features are important.
Quote Reply
Re: tacx neo 2 or wahoo kickr 2018 [exxxviii] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
What happened to your KICKR2?
Quote Reply
Re: tacx neo 2 or wahoo kickr 2018 [nickwhite] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Passed it on to my neighbor when I got the opportunistic buy for a cheap Neo.
Last edited by: exxxviii: Apr 4, 19 5:55
Quote Reply
Re: tacx neo 2 or wahoo kickr 2018 [exxxviii] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
exxxviii wrote:
Passed it on to my neighbor when I got the opportunistic buy for a cheap Neo.

I need to live next to someone like you...

Blog | Strava
Quote Reply
Re: tacx neo 2 or wahoo kickr 2018 [exxxviii] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Did you find that your watts read higher on the Wahoo than the Neo? I have a friend who trains a pro triathlete and they always talk about the Wahoo's 'Free 30' i.e. the Wahoo always showed a 30W higher reading than what they were actually pushing. When I went from the Wahoo to the Neo I found about the same thing - that my first FTP test on the Neo resulted in a FTP of ~30W lower than what I had on the Wahoo.
Quote Reply
Re: tacx neo 2 or wahoo kickr 2018 [bjgwoody] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
During the warm-up last night, my Assioma pedals were reading about 165W while the Tacx was reading about 145W. I had a 90 minute ride at 85% FTP ahead, so I aborted the comparison and turned PowerMatch back on, so the Assioma pedals were driving the Tacx power from that point forward.

When I compared my Assioma pedals to my Wahho last month, they were only 0.9% different. And prior to that, my PowerTap P1 pedals were very close to the Wahoo (though I did not do the detailed analysis like with the Assioma). My P1 pedals also very closely matched the virtual power of my old Kirt Kinetic Road Machine with its InRide virtual PM.

I am about 90% sure that the Assioma pedals are the correct number.

My TrainerRoad ride tonight is only 60% to 70% FTP, so I may switch off the PowerMatch again and let Tacx run the power to see if it ever aligns with the Assioma over a longer time period.

Based on all DCR's analysis and many other recent reviews and comments I have read about Wahoo, I do not think the idea of a "free 30" has been a thing for at least five years. That was a problem with the Gen 1, before the 2015 firmware. But Gen 2 forward have been very good.
Quote Reply
Re: tacx neo 2 or wahoo kickr 2018 [exxxviii] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I noticed a power drop from kickr 2017 to neo2.

Not a very detailed comparision (using V3 to cross compare on the road), but my impression is Neo2 = SRM < V3 < power2max = rotor2inpower = kickr 2017... somewehere between 10-15 watts range, but it isnt linear across the powerband...

I would pick neo as gears never aligned properly for me when using kickr. Don’t know how general the issue is, but i dont experience it on the neo.
Last edited by: jakesdk: Apr 4, 19 11:49
Quote Reply
Re: tacx neo 2 or wahoo kickr 2018 [exxxviii] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I’m always amused that when there’s a power discrepancy between devices the person almost always chooses to believe the one that reads higher is the accurate one ....

full disclosure: my power sucks no matter what device is used to measure it.
Quote Reply
Re: tacx neo 2 or wahoo kickr 2018 [exxxviii] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
exxxviii wrote:
So, I now have 2 rides on my Neo 2. I came from a KICKR2.
  • My Neo 2 reads about 15W lower than my Assioma pedals. This is probably a personal problem I need to investigate, given the Neo is known for its power accuracy. My Assioma pedals were less tan 1% different from my Wahoo KICKR power. And, my former P1 pedals were also very close to the Wahoo, so this is probably a Neo thing. .


Try this:

(Note: I am assuming you have at least two devices that can record power over ANT+ from the Pedals or can borrow them for an experiment. If you have Zwift, that counts as one.)

Do a ride with the pedals and the Neo each connected to a different ANT+ power-recording device.

Make sure the ride is at least 30 minutes long.

When you are done, look at the average recorded power. Is it as far apart as it seemed while you were riding? I'll bet it isn't.

When I first got my Neo2, I was very concerned about how it was reading compared to my Pioneer crank-based PM. The Pioneer had always come very close to agreeing with my Powertap wheels (I have two) and was not far off the readings I would tend to get on the Computrainer (at least no more than I would expect for crank vs wheel power)

But once I started comparing the final, average data from my Garmin-edge-logged rides (connected to the Pioneer) vs the data that Zwift had, it was typically 5-7 watts or less. Given the crank vs wheel difference, that's not much.
Last edited by: JoeO: Apr 4, 19 16:43
Quote Reply
Re: tacx neo 2 or wahoo kickr 2018 [JoeO] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
JoeO wrote:
Try this...Do a ride with the pedals and the Neo each connected to a different ANT+ power-recording device.
That was/is my plan. I had planned to do it on last night's ride, and had two devices setup for dual recording. The ride was 85% FTP for 90 minutes, and I could not afford to be high, so I killed the comparison and switched PowerMatch back on. My next ride is 65% FTP, so I can afford to over-bake on that one, and I will dual-record the workout.
Quote Reply
Re: tacx neo 2 or wahoo kickr 2018 [logella] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Thought I'd close the loop on my comparison experience. First, Clever Training has great support and got me a replacement Tacx Neo 2. The new one is much closer to my Assioma pedals. At the end of the day, though, I think I like my old KICKR a lot more than the Neo 2. I bought into the Kool-Aid.

I did a dual comparison with one device capturing power from the Neo 2 and another capturing my Assioma pedals. I captured lap splits to see both overall for 60 minutes of riding and 3-4 minute intervals. The pedals averaged 6W higher for my usual gear (53-17, because it is quieter and has a relatively straight chainline). What I found unsettling is that when I shifted to my easy 36-25 gear, the Assioma pedals read ~3W lower than the Tacx. Then, when I shifted into my hardest 53-11 gear, the Assioma pedals were about 20W higher than the Tacx. Cadence was constant, and power was around 235W, as measured by the Neo 2's power meter.

That told me that the power meter in the Neo 2 is not linearly measuring power based on its speed. Or, I have significant drivetrain losses that increase as the gear length increases.

In general, a 6W difference makes sense for drivetrain losses. But, that was only valid for the one gear selection.

IMHO, the power meter in the Neo 2 is worse than a bike PM (based on Assioma & P1 pedals and two Neo 2s).

Also, I disliked the way the Neo 2 felt when in the 36-25 gear at 235W. I could feel that virtual flywheel "slip" people comment about on every pedal stroke. The KICKR, by contrast, is glass smooth in all gears. I rate the feel of the KICKR massively better than the Tacx Neo 2.
Last edited by: exxxviii: Jun 19, 19 8:26
Quote Reply
Re: tacx neo 2 or wahoo kickr 2018 [cscameron82] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
For what it’s worth, I had a 2017 KICKR (pre-silent). Sold it to get a NEO so I could run a Campy cassette which shifts a bit more crispy and didn’t require a slight RD adjustment every time I went on/off trainer (all my bikes were Campy at the time). Returned it after a few months when it started making weird grinding sounds and got the new 2018 KICKR.

I like the KICKR better. I recently also got a climb and really like it.

Problems with the NEO were:
1) Because of the shape of the plastic, it was a huge PITA to get my TT bike with horizontal dropouts on and off. There just wasn’t room in the rear triangle to do this without banging up my frame. I had no issues with my road bikes though but it’s my TT bike that I use on the trainer most often.
2) It broke. The way the system uses magnets to create resistance just seems less robust to me.
3) Huge and hard to move around. I don’t move it often but when you do it’s a bitch. I thought since it didn’t need power maybe I’d bring it to races for warm ups. Hell no. That never happened.

They felt about the same to me. The way the NEO rocked was kind of nice for sprints and things. I don’t use Zwift so never experienced the rumble or whatever but it seems like a gimmick. The NEO is no more or less quiet than the new KICKR. The loudest thing is likely to be your drive train or fan.

I think the Climb is a valuable training too as it allows you to activate different muscles for climbing and descending.

I’d go KICKR + Climb which is probably about the same price as a NEO + Cassette.
Quote Reply
Re: tacx neo 2 or wahoo kickr 2018 [exxxviii] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
exxxviii wrote:
That told me that the power meter in the Neo 2 is not linearly measuring power based on its speed. Or, I have significant drivetrain losses that increase as the gear length increases.

In general, a 6W difference makes sense for drivetrain losses. But, that was only valid for the one gear selection.

IMHO, the power meter in the Neo 2 is worse than a bike PM (based on Assioma & P1 pedals and two Neo 2s).

Also, I disliked the way the Neo 2 felt when in the 36-25 gear at 235W. I could feel that virtual flywheel "slip" people comment about on every pedal stroke. The KICKR, by contrast, is glass smooth in all gears. I rate the feel of the KICKR massively better than the Tacx Neo 2.

You're on the money, on all counts. The accuracy of the Neo power reporting is dependent on the flywheel speed. Gear selection in ERG is important.

I came across this when trying to answer why so many people report "My Neo reads different to my power meter". The Neo is commonly quoted as the 'gold standard' for accuracy... and power meters these days are 'usually' pretty good. So why were people reporting so many issues? It was usually around 20-30W difference. Typically in ERG mode. Turns out ripping into intervals in the big ring and having the Neo flywheel spinning at high RPM isn't a good thing for power accuracy.

Findings: Anything >35-40km/h flywheel 'speed' the readings start to drift from other known good sources of power (on bike meters Assioma/P1/P2/Vector3/other cranks etc). I've done a lot of test runs in ERG with different gearing testing for drivetrain losses. The difference in power readings while cross chaining is minimal. The difference in power readings with low-mid-high flywheel speed is significant. Up to 30W at 230W-240W in ERG in the 52/11.

I'm still using the NEO 1 as my baseline comparison for most power meter testing indoors. It's reliable when correct gearing is used (flywheel speed 20-35km/h).

Another *nod* about the low gear 'slipping'. It's a thing with the design. The Zwift Giro TT with the brutal climb at the end was like pedalling in squares.

Time for Tacx/Garmin to release the next evolution of their high end trainer. We've had this one too long that we're sitting around starting to poke holes in it. :)

Shane Miller - GPLama
YouTube | Web | Twitter | Instagram | Facebook | Strava
Quote Reply
Re: tacx neo 2 or wahoo kickr 2018 [gplama] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
gplama wrote:
Time for Tacx/Garmin to release the next evolution of their high end trainer. We've had this one too long that we're sitting around starting to poke holes in it. :)
Say what? I just got the Neo 2... that’s my next gen.

You were the lone dissenting voice that the Neo is not all that. I didn’t listen. I don’t dislike the Neo, but I had high expectations. The glowing led is cool, and I like the side-to-side action. The virtual freewheel is crap and the power accuracy is bogus.
Quote Reply
Re: tacx neo 2 or wahoo kickr 2018 [exxxviii] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
:)

It's not a 'bad' trainer by any means. There's just a few edge cases where it's not the best.

Shane Miller - GPLama
YouTube | Web | Twitter | Instagram | Facebook | Strava
Quote Reply
Re: tacx neo 2 or wahoo kickr 2018 [gplama] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Seems like you found the same as I did. I tested chains in the same gear at around 30-35 kph and it seemed quite good/accurate. I then wanted to test cross-chaining losses, but the accuracy went out the window as it seemed like I lost 15-20W or so at 250W in the highest gear (biggest cassette cog) vs. straight chain line, which didn't seem right at all.
Quote Reply
Re: tacx neo 2 or wahoo kickr 2018 [gplama] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
gplama wrote:
exxxviii wrote:
That told me that the power meter in the Neo 2 is not linearly measuring power based on its speed. Or, I have significant drivetrain losses that increase as the gear length increases.

In general, a 6W difference makes sense for drivetrain losses. But, that was only valid for the one gear selection.

IMHO, the power meter in the Neo 2 is worse than a bike PM (based on Assioma & P1 pedals and two Neo 2s).

Also, I disliked the way the Neo 2 felt when in the 36-25 gear at 235W. I could feel that virtual flywheel "slip" people comment about on every pedal stroke. The KICKR, by contrast, is glass smooth in all gears. I rate the feel of the KICKR massively better than the Tacx Neo 2.

You're on the money, on all counts. The accuracy of the Neo power reporting is dependent on the flywheel speed. Gear selection in ERG is important.

I came across this when trying to answer why so many people report "My Neo reads different to my power meter". The Neo is commonly quoted as the 'gold standard' for accuracy... and power meters these days are 'usually' pretty good. So why were people reporting so many issues? It was usually around 20-30W difference. Typically in ERG mode. Turns out ripping into intervals in the big ring and having the Neo flywheel spinning at high RPM isn't a good thing for power accuracy.

Findings: Anything >35-40km/h flywheel 'speed' the readings start to drift from other known good sources of power (on bike meters Assioma/P1/P2/Vector3/other cranks etc). I've done a lot of test runs in ERG with different gearing testing for drivetrain losses. The difference in power readings while cross chaining is minimal. The difference in power readings with low-mid-high flywheel speed is significant. Up to 30W at 230W-240W in ERG in the 52/11.

I'm still using the NEO 1 as my baseline comparison for most power meter testing indoors. It's reliable when correct gearing is used (flywheel speed 20-35km/h).

Another *nod* about the low gear 'slipping'. It's a thing with the design. The Zwift Giro TT with the brutal climb at the end was like pedalling in squares.

Time for Tacx/Garmin to release the next evolution of their high end trainer. We've had this one too long that we're sitting around starting to poke holes in it. :)

Ha! I’m not crazy then! I remember a thread awhile back where you said the Neo was the gold standard for accuracy and I said that’s weird because mine is crap (and stated that it’s more accurate when using the small ring than the big ring). Glad you looked into it, thanks for the info!
Quote Reply

Prev Next