I have both but haven’t installed SRM Training System Software yet since my bike is still at the shop, should i stick to cyclingpeaks or is there more insightful information to be had from the SRM Training System Software?
Ben
Cycling peaks srm software is useless except to clear the srm and setup up the offset and such.
Grant
I agree with Grant… the SRM software is good for ease of download and clearing the SRM memory, as well as adjusting the Powercontrol’s settings. The Cyclingpeaks software wins hands down for ease of use and actually analyzing the data.
Ben, you are going to have to install the SRM software. You will need it to change/update the PC (recording interval, date, time, etc)
Also, some times it is good to download the files to SRM, then transfer to CP. The SRM software allows you to go back and make changes if you find the slope is ever off (rare)…but just a thought.
Enjoy the SRM.
Kurt
I use both.
I download and change setup with the SRM software, then I copy the file into Cyclingpeaks.
That way you can go back and correct the slope if you need to in the original SRM file, plus you have a data backup.
I use both.
I download and change setup with the SRM software, then I copy the file into Cyclingpeaks.
That way you can go back and correct the slope if you need to in the original SRM file, plus you have a data backup.
What he said…
Kurt,
quick question, why do they have USB drivers for OSX but no software for it or am i missing something?
the crank is sweet. i can’t wait to get my bike back.
Ben
Cycling Peaks.
Not that it adds valueable information, but when depressed about a low wattage, the “normalized watts” will make you smile. Today I averaged 170 Watts on a medium ride, hills at 270, easy in between. Normalized tells me “200 average”. Unfortunately I still need 210 “real” watts to ride 5:00 in Austria in July …
For me personally riding a high normalized wattage is far easier, than riding high average watts, no problem whatsoever to get 230 normalized over 5hrs, but can’t to 230 average …
What everyone else said…plus I use the SRM software to manually create the intervals (h/c FTP test for example) before loading into CP.
adal, I assume you dont race long course tris?
Kurt
as far as I know…no Mac Software.
check the wattage forum, a few guys are beta testing some new Mac software though…
I am a PC guy.
Kurt
adal, I assume you dont race long course tris?
Kurt
Ironman Austria twice, IM distance Roth, IM distance Elba (lovely tri in Italy - highly recommended) twice, Nice (the “old” long distance 4-120-30) and several HIM … But still struggling to break 10:00 … this years goal …
wow, cool.
On this forum, there is a lot of commercial interest mixed into the discussion. What is the real advantage of Cyclingpeaks? The main difference is “normalized watts” and all the figures derived from it.
And I do not see ANY point (after using it for a while), how to gain from this information whatsoever. I own a registered copy of cyclingpeaks for a few weeks now and use SRM for two years. All the information I get from SRM are within the SRM software:
- How hard did I ride
- How did the effort develope (I like to analyze 1/2 hour chunks and look at the average for each 1/2 hour from the beginning to the end)
- Most important - where can I be more efficient. How much time do I (on a long downhill) gain, hammering with 220 watts against just coasting and saving those watts.
- Did I improve?
And during the ride all I have is SRM anyway, thats when it REALLY benefits. Even Coggan etal. use the regular average from a time trial (CP30) and not the normalized one …
some good points.
I think you are missing a few things in CyclingPeaks that might help you. But you obviously have experience racing long course and know how to pace a proper bike split so that your run split is reflected by that properly paced bike split…no?
Kurt
BTW : NO commercial interest in CP…just in SRM;-)
some good points.
I think you are missing a few things in CyclingPeaks that might help you. But you obviously have experience racing long course and know how to pace a proper bike split so that your run split is reflected by that properly paced bike split…no?
Kurt
BTW : NO commercial interest in CP…just in SRM;-)
Hmh … don’t know.
**Datum** **Art** **Ort** **Watt** **S-km** **Zeit** **R-km** **Zeit** **L-km** **Zeit** **Total T** 04.07.2004 IM Klagenfurt 3,8 01:12:13 180,0 05:38:33 42,2 04:06:52 11:07:14 26.09.2004 ITU Langdistanz Nizza 4,0 01:20:13 120,0 04:39:54 30,0 02:39:15 08:39:22 04.07.2005 IM Klagenfurt 3,8 01:06:50 180,0 05:22:09 42,2 03:49:08 10:26:07 02.10.2005 IM Elba 3,8 01:11:26 180,0 06:33:55 42,2 04:01:09 11:46:30 02.07.2006 IM Roth 193,4 3,8 01:08:19 176,0 05:21:41 42,2 03:55:02 10:30:30 01.10.2006 IM Elba 181,9 3,0 00:48:46 176,0 06:21:25 42,2 03:48:40 11:03:38
But again, how could I benefit from cycling peaks? I know I need 210 Watts for my goal of a 5:00 bike split. I know, that my run is more influenced by the time out on the course, than by intensity on the bike. And in order to average 210 Watts and not kill myselve I do:
- Stay under 300 Watts at all times
- Ride all hills and headwinds at 250-260 watts
- Sit at 220-225 watts in the flat
- Start with a heart rate of 138-145 and never exceed 150 for longer times
sounds like you have a method…
I am NOT going to offer any advise though, that is far too dangerous on Slowtwitch.
Good luck to you.
Kurt
sounds like you have a method…
I am NOT going to offer any advise though, that is far too dangerous on Slowtwitch.
Good luck to you.
Kurt
Why dangerous? I would like to hear your opinion.
Maybe there is some hidden switch in cycling peaks, that sets my missing 20 watts free 