I just did my first ride with my new ergomo. I did a 3 hour hilly ride with an average speed of about 19 mphr. The Watts average was 247 Watts. I have no idea if the Ergomo needs calibrating but do these numbers sound about right?
Thanks,
Will
You need to calibrate the Ergomo before/after every ride in the beginning.
Have you entered the K-factor also?
I have seen the screen with the K factor, but I have no idea what it is? I read the leaflet that came with my system but there was no mention of calibration or the K factor. Is there a file somewhere that I should have read, or what is the K factor?
Thanks,
Will
The K-factor should be written on the unit, and on a certificate of calibration that comes with the unit… you enter it once (hopefully).
There’s a calibration procedure which works out an “offset” number that you need to perform regularly, particularly after its just installed.
Here’s a link to the manual
http://www.bicyclepowermeters.com/Ergomo_Manuals/Manual%20ergomo%20pro.pdf
Many thanks, I think I’ve got some reading and fiddling to do before I do any more ‘playing’!!
Will
Doesn’t look like it’s ever able to be calibrated based on this study…Ouch…
IJSPP, 2(3), September 2007, Copyright (c) 2007
Validity and Reproducibility of the Ergomo(r)Pro Power Meter ComparedWith the SRM and Powertap Power Meters
Sébastien Duc ; Vincent Villerius; William Bertucci ; Frédéric Grappe
Full Article Table of Contents for Vol. 2, Iss. 3
AbstractPurpose:
The Ergomo¨Pro (EP) is a power meter that measures poweroutput (PO) during outdoor and indoor cycling via 2 optoelectronicsensors located in the bottom bracket axis. The aim of this study wasto determine the validity and the reproducibility of the EP comparedwith the SRM crank set and Powertap hub (PT).
Method: The validity ofthe EP was tested in the laboratory during 8 submaximal incrementaltests (PO: 100 to 400 W), eight 30-min submaximal constant-power tests(PO = 180 W), and 8 sprint tests (PO > 750 W) and in the field during8 training sessions (time: 181 ± 73 min; PO: ~140 to 150 W). Thereproducibility was assessed by calculating the coefficient of POvariation (CV) during the submaximal incremental and constant tests.
Results: The EP provided a significantly higher PO than the SRM and PTduring the submaximal incremental test: The mean PO differences were+6.3% ± 2.5% and +11.1% ± 2.1%, respectively. The difference wasgreater during field training sessions (+12.0% ± 5.7% and +16.5% ±5.9%) but lower during sprint tests (+1.6% ± 2.5% and +3.2% ± 2.7%).The reproducibility of the EP is lower than those of the SRM and PT(CV = 4.1% ± 1.8%, 1.9% ± 0.4%, and 2.1% ± 0.8%, respectively).Conclusions: The EP power meter appears less valid and reliable thanthe SRM and PT systems.