Seems going with the one pedal sensor system over the 2 pedal is a good way to save a few bucks.
Anyone have experience using both 1 and 2 pedal systems?
Any recomendations? Substantive shortcomings of the one pedal system?
DC Rainmaker doesn’t address the issue in great detail and my ST search didnt reveal a great deal of discussion on this issue.
Thanks
and my ST search didnt reveal a great deal of discussion on this issue.
I would recommend reading about the Stages’s shortcomings, and go from there. It’s going to share many of the same theoretical issues, since they’re both half of a power meter.
Seems going with the one pedal sensor system over the 2 pedal is a good way to save a few bucks.
Anyone have experience using both 1 and 2 pedal systems?
Any recomendations? Substantive shortcomings of the one pedal system?
DC Rainmaker doesn’t address the issue in great detail and my ST search didnt reveal a great deal of discussion on this issue.
One-sided power measurement = half of a powermeter.
Thank you, big help.
Let me out it this way: Is it typical that many athletes have a substantive difference between left and right output over sustained intervals?
Yes.
Thank you, big help.
Let me out it this way: Is it typical that many athletes have a substantive difference between left and right output over sustained intervals?
Andrew has been a big help, he is absolutely right here.
Many athletes do have substantive differences between left and right power, but also the same athlete may have substantive differences at different power levels and the differences may vary day to day with fatigue.
I know this from my own personal testing with various power meters which measure left right balance.
Andrew knows this because he probably has vast amounts of data from many athletes.
Thanks Trev, that’s what I was looking for, just a touch of detail. Quick follow up: Has the availability of L versus R power changed the way you train? Is so, how?
Thanks in advance
I have a Stages. I also have a Comoutrainer. When I’m riding the power that is shown is pretty close. Over an hour ride they are within 1% of each other (generally closer than 1%). I’ve only done this comparison a few times but while riding I’ll look at my 3s power on my Garmin and Comoare to the power on the CT and they are close as long as I’m not changing my effort at that time. The CT and the 3s power on my Garmin update at different rates (maybe CT is instantaneous whereas I’m using 3s on my Garmin)?
Anyway, I was pleasantly pleased to see that they were that close.
Of course, when doing one legged drills with the right leg, you don’t get any power (nor cadence as I’m using the Stages for that as well).
I don’t care about power split as I have the CT for that. And at this point, the other metrics that Garmin has come up with haven’t been around long enough for us to know how useful they may be.
I think if you are only going to have 1 power meter than it shouldn’t be an issue. Test on it, train on it and race on it. Unless you’re in the mix for a world championship or the likes it’s not that serious. Just have a consistent baseline in which to measure and train to and you’ll see all the improvements the rest of us with power meters have seen. Many people use Powertap hubs and this doesn’t measure any “independent” L/R data either. It does however measure at a different point in the drive train.
If you’re going to have more than 1 power meter (which would be absurd where these can so easily move from bike to bike) then I would explore the full on L/R power functionality of the full Vector pedals and not the Vector S.
Thank you, big help.
Let me out it this way: Is it typical that many athletes have a substantive difference between left and right output over sustained intervals?
Asymmetry in human movement is the rule, not the exception, and cycling is no different. Perhaps even more importantly, the degree of asymmetry while pedaling can vary from one occasion (or even moment) to another depending on power, cadence, fatigue, etc.
Lastly, there are some developments just over the horizon that require a dual-sided powermeter to utilize.
Many people use Powertap hubs and this doesn’t measure any L/R data either.
The PowerTap does measure the power of both legs, it just can’t tell you how much came from the L and R.
Seems going with the one pedal sensor system over the 2 pedal is a good way to save a few bucks.
Anyone have experience using both 1 and 2 pedal systems?
Any recomendations? Substantive shortcomings of the one pedal system?
DC Rainmaker doesn’t address the issue in great detail and my ST search didnt reveal a great deal of discussion on this issue.
Thanks
I was lucky and bought the Vector S + other pedal for price of the set -20% and I had 30 days to return the other pedal.
So I tried the single pedal, it worked of course.
But then I put on the other pedal and saw I was off a blanced 50/50 quite often, as much as 55/45.
I had one ride, I was left dominant on the warm up, 50/50 in the VO2max intervals and then I turned right dominant at the end during cool down, ie fatigued. This to show you that it is not consistent, hence a single sided system would be a crap shoot for me. I kept the 2 and am happy with them. They are within a watt or 2 of my quarq.
I’ve been training on Vectors for about a year. Probably 95% of the time I’m within 48%/52%. The majority of my imbalances have been due to initial calibration. I’ll usually recalibrate once or twice during a ride, and if it was off at the beginning it will usually drop down to right around the 50/50 line. The L/R balance has not changed the way I train at all.
I’ve been flipping these between my bike and my wife’s. I’m considering a second power meter and strongly considering the S, if that helps any at all.
**So for your informative reading, I’ve *cut-pasted-lightly re-formatted *a recent thread from the Google Groups Wattage forum regarding L/R balance metrics and training of this L/R balance. **
Josh
Hi All,
I just installed a Pioneer power meter and it turns out my left / right power seems to be pretty off. I had a ver surgeries on my left knee in the past so I knew the right leg is stronger. It has a visibly bigger muscle too. I never noticed this power discrepancy in the past with my SRM. The power balance was 43% left / 57% right. So my questions are:
Possibly completely unrelated, but I flew to an event, built my bike in a hurry and went out to recce it.
Got back, looked at the data and saw figures like yours- lowered my saddle and the next day I was much closer to being symmetric.
Very much anecdotal etc etc.
Duncan
Andy,
Does that mean that you disagree with Hunter on the utility of measuring asymmetry? Or it’s not so straightforward and more will be revealed? (From a thread last November: “Anyhow, if you think you have an issue, then the only way to correct it is to become aware of the exact issue of how you create power. Then start to address that. We have some pretty bad ass new metrics coming in WKO4, that will help everyone using a L/R Power meter.”)
Jordan
On one hand asymmetry is the rule, but on another poor bike fit can cause issues. I know some fitters try to balance power generation l/r but to me, this is not the right approach. That means that you are trying to fix the symptoms of am issue not the issue (typically that you are stable on your saddle). There are other things that can cause discrepancies, such as previous injuries and such. Serious muscle imbalances can cause more issues so if that is the case, PT may be a solution but if it isn’t, if you just don’t generate power symmetrically, then meh go ahead and continue on with your life.
Andrew
“The power balance was 43% left / 57% right.”
What exactly do you mean by that? Was this an interval workout or just a general ride? Some further breakdown of what those numbers mean, might help.
djconnel
I thought consensus is left right, and pedal stroke, matter most when muscularity limited (sprinting) less when aerobically limited (20 minutes), even less when metabically limited (long distance).
Josh
That was after a 4 hour ride and the data I uploaded.
The mentions of fit may be part of the problem. I felt like my saddle was higher. I need to measure it.
mebo
I found that when I ride a computrainer 3D course with real time spin scan, my L/R power split will vary dependent on effort going from 53/47% for easy to medium efforts to close to 50/50 for hard efforts. When I tried to to correct the 53/47% with practice, I found that I could reach close to 50/50, but my power output did not go up, which leads me to believe that I subconsciously decreased the power in my dominant leg, and increased the power in my weak leg. I did get an Andy Pruitt fit in 2010, but he didn"t have any L/R measuring device. Now, I don’t worry about L/R split and just look at time in wattage zones.
a
Better balance at higher powers is a common finding.
That said, the CompuTrainer (and Quarq and Power2Max) only measures your “pseudo balance”, as it can’t really differentiate between the actions of your right and left legs.
Even dual-sided powermeters, e.g., Garmin, Verge, etc., don’t calculate balance “correctly”, i.e., in a manner that reflects the differing (or not) physiological demand on/output of each leg. Instead, they tell you how much each leg contributes to the net power that pushes you forward, which is a slightly different thing.
mebo
“Psuedo Balance”? So when I’m riding in spin scan and showing L/R of 53/47% and then make a harder effort on my left leg while easing up on my right leg and see a 64/36% and then reverse the procedure ie. pedalling harder with the right leg while easing up with the left leg and seeing 36/64%, what would you call that? To me that’s differentiating between the actions of your right and left legs. Or did you mean the accuracy? I don’t have an SRM, so I couldn’t check that, but Alex S has one and a computrainer.
DailyEvil
On Monday, 12 January 2015 13:25:18 UTC-7, mebo wrote:
“Psuedo Balance”? So when I’m riding in spin scan and showing L/R of 53/47% and then make a harder effort on my left leg while easing up on my right leg and see a 64/36% and then reverse the procedure ie. pedalling harder with the right leg while easing up with the left leg and seeing 36/64%, what would you call that?
Unclip one leg completely and just let it dangle. Pedal only with the other leg. Does the power meter read 100%/0%
a
“Psuedo Balance”? So when I’m riding in spin scan and showing L/R of 53/47% and then make a harder effort on my left leg while easing up on my right leg and see a 64/36% and then reverse the procedure ie. pedalling harder with the right leg while easing up with the left leg and seeing 36/64%, what would you call that?
Pseudo-balance (for want of a better word). The only way to truly measure the independent contribution of one leg is to measure that leg independently of the other. The only way to do that is to have independent sensors on both sides.
NorCalRacer
The Vector does have strain gauges on both sides?
I hope they change the software in the future to display the wattages of each leg rather than percentages of the total. This will prevent the confusion that occurs by having the L/R balance approach 50/50 as power increases. One leg is still stronger than the other, it’s just no longer > 1% of the total.
a
The Vector does have strain gauges on both sides?
Yes.
I hope they change the software in the future to display the wattages of each leg rather than percentages of the total. This will prevent the confusion that occurs by having the L/R balance approach 50/50 as power increases. One leg is still stronger than the other, it’s just no longer > 1% of the total.
Yeah, balance (pseudo- or not) really isn’t the best way of looking at things.
Jesse “AeroObsessive” Graham
My pithy take on pedalling asymmetry is : “It’s not a problem unless it’s a problem.”
If you are starting to experience, or are experiencing, any biomechanical issues, pain, discomfort etc then seek help to rectify, otherwise changing it could do more harm than good.
KW
I’ve had fitters try to get power balance equal on the trainer only to find its not equal on the road. Or that it mattered. Crosswinds, road tilt, even crap in your jersey pockets can throw you off a hair. I’ve lowered my saddle, raised my saddle, etc. and found that it pretty much always stays the same. I have an x-ray verified shorter right femur and there is not much I can really do to fix it. Fitters have tried all sorts of wedges, saddle positions, saddle types, etc and in the long-run it always returns to 53/47 or 52/48 with the power biased towards my shorter leg as I tend to drop my hip more on that side to protect it. If I drop my saddle enough to get it to 50/50 my left leg feels cramped under power. To me that is close enough not to care. If it were 60/40 or something then maybe it would be a sign of something more serious.
IMO this is a neat little feature people will play around with, like I did, and then after quite some time get bored as they realize there isn’t a ton they can do to directly see fine tuning of such a metric.
a
My pithy take on pedalling asymmetry is : “It’s not a problem unless it’s a problem.”
PPP! Can I quote you on that?
Jesse “AeroObsessive” Graham
All yours. This runs as my second best quote along with, “Carbs - so unnecessary that the body goes through complex biological processes to create a poor facsimile.” 
Back to topic. My personal experience echoes KW, attempts to “fix” an imbalance created problems that were not there before. Similarly, with those I coach, there have been those who have nearly perfect 50/50 but a raft of other biomechanical issues and those that ran at 60/40 and not a issue in decades of cycling. FWIW.
billb
Yogi Berra may already hold the copyright.
Best,
Bill Black
mebo
Good point. Just tried that and on either dangling leg I couldn’t get it to show less than 35%
Scott Manning
Did you pull up? If so that would make sense because you’re still inputting force into the crank to move the bike forward. I suppose to do it properly (have no pull force) you would have to use platform pedals. Actually that raises an interesting question; how does the PM handle negative forces? What happens when you push down on both pedals at once? If you are not lifting one leg, the other leg is pushing it up so energy is lost to the drive line there. Does a PM account for that? Should it even since you’ve still put the effort in/expended the energy just not efficiently. Hrmm… some things for me to try tomorrow morning.
/Scott
Good point. Just tried that and on either dangling leg I couldn’t get it to show less than 35%
a
Good point. Just tried that and on either dangling leg I couldn’t get it to show less than 35%
Hence the term, pseudo-balance.
Alex Simmons
Did you pull up? If so that would make sense because you’re still inputting force into the crank to move the bike forward. I suppose to do it properly (have no pull force) you would have to use platform pedals. Actually that raises an interesting question; how does the PM handle negative forces?
It depends on where the forces are being measured.
For meters in crank spiders or further downstream in the drivetrain (e.g. SRM, Power2Max, Quarq, Powertap, Wattbike, Computrainer, Kickr), then they don’t need to as the resultant net torque is all they can measure. The only time they’ll see a negative torque is on a fixed gear when rider is actively opposing the forward pedal rotation in an effort to slow down, or on a freewheel when backpedalling and you have some freewheel friction (typically very little but a bad freewheel or drivetrain can show up).
For meters that measure crank or pedal forces independently and upstream of the BB (e.g. both crank arms or pedals), then they need to calculate a net force value from the independent left and right side force measurements. Such measurements can potentially provide more insight into pedal forces than the downstream devices since they are measuring the independent pedal force / crank torque values.
What happens when you push down on both pedals at once? If you are not lifting one leg, the other leg is pushing it up so energy is lost to the drive line there. Does a PM account for that?
If the cranks are moving, remember that the weight of one leg going up is balanced out (mostly) by the weight of the other leg going down. It’s nearly a zero sum game but not quite due to changes in the relative position of the feet/legs changing through a pedal stroke. This is why when doing single leg drills, it helps to use a counterweight on the opposite pedal as it mimics the variation in gravitational potential energy of the opposing leg. Around 10kg usually does the trick.
If the cranks are not moving, no matter how much force you apply to each crank, there is zero power. E.g. track stand = zero power.
Should it even since you’ve still put the effort in/expended the energy just not efficiently. Hrmm… some things for me to try tomorrow morning.
/Scott
Scott Manning
Thanks for that insight.
/Scott
Rodrigo Bini
Hi all,
just would like to add some on the discussion.
Asymmetries in pedaling have been an issue because when asymmetries are observed, there is either a larger injury risk or a sub optimal usage of muscle power. These are theoretical perspectives and there are no strong evidence leading to either options for cycling. The only evidence we have is that injured subjects present a very large (>300%) asymmetry in bilateral forces. The observed difference for uninjured cyclists is up to 60% (http://jsc-journal.com/ojs/index.php?journal=JSC&page=article&op=download&path[]=15&path[]=46).
As you may be aware, there are many factors that have an influence on asymmetry level (e.g. power output, cadence, etc). The key question is really whether reducing asymmetries can improve performance or reduce injury risk.
Therefore, we do not well designed studies to test if cyclists can revert their asymmetries and improve performance. Assumming that asymmetries are linked to differences in neural contral at the central nervous system (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16859927) there is room to test how much improvement can we get from asymmetrical cyclists. From our recent testing, cyclists with larger asymmetries can reduce their asymmetries to those similar to symmetrical cyclists.
DailyEvil
On Tuesday, 13 January 2015 16:34:27 UTC-7, Scott Manning wrote:
Did you pull up? If so that would make sense because you’re still inputting force into the crank to move the bike forward.
It makes sense in the engineering analysis, yes. But it means that the power balance number is bogus. Pull up, push down, whatever - if you are unclipped, 100% of your power is coming from one leg. If your power meter reads anything other than 100%/0%, then it’s balance numbers are bogus and should be ignored.
I suppose to do it properly (have no pull force) you would have to use platform pedals.
If you can’t pull up on platform pedals, you’re doing it wrong. Check out a BMX race sometime.
Jesse “AeroObsessive” Graham
I would wager that unless there is a gross imbalance that causes significant biomechanical issues you would see ZERO net benefit (read: power output) in correction (partial or full) of pedalling asymmetry.
Rodrigo Bini
The very first issue is that asymmetrical subjects do not really “fell” how much asymmetry they have (see Carpes, F, Bini, R, and Mota, C. Training level, perception and
bilateral asymmetry during multi-joint leg-press exercise. Braz J Biomotr 1: 51–62, 2008.). Therefore, target training can indeed reduce asymmetries (see http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22158262). At the bottom line, an asymmetrical cyclists is doing so largely because he has not learned to practice balanced pedaling actions. That means that his automated motor control drives uneven to one leg but he certainly has brain potential to drive evenly to both legs. That is clearly mitigating his muscle potential for power production. In a long term scenario, asymmetrical subjects can develop unbalance adaptation in their skeletal muscle system (see
Bohm, S., Mersmann, F., Marzilger, R., Schroll, A., & Arampatzis, A. (in press). Asymmetry of Achilles tendon mechanical and morphological properties between both legs. Scandinavian Journal of Medicine and Science in Sports, n/a-n/a.doi: 10.1111/sms.12242).
We are observing (ongoing study) that once given feedback, asymmetrical cyclists can indeed balance their pedal forces quite symmetrically. We will need to assess further how much training they need to sustain this symmetrical profile and how much improvement we can see in their performance at the long term perspective.
M Sullivan
On 1/15/2015 12:34 PM, Rodrigo Bini wrote:
That means that his automated motor control drives uneven to one leg
but he certainly has brain potential to drive evenly to both legs.
That is clearly mitigating his muscle potential for power production.
So this something I have been wondering about for a bit. My
understanding is that the lynch pin for power production is ATP
production. So is there ATP production that is being under utilized in
my weaker leg?
or is my weaker leg muscles utilizing all it potential ATP production
and it grows with training?
If my weaker leg muscles ATP production is relatively less than my
stronger leg does it have the potential to increase more rapidly by
training similar to a new person starting out?
Is there a limit to muscle increasing ATP production or fall off in the
rate of increase to produce ATP through training? In other words my
stronger leg could theoretical plateau or diminish the rate of increase
in power production by training?
Maybe you mean something totally different about mitigating muscle
potential for power production, could you please elaborate on what you
think?
Jesse “AeroObsessive” Graham
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/m/pubmed/21330612/
Power output for a single leg far exceeds half the power output of two legs.
In other words - the individual leg is generally not the limiter for power production. Hence I don’t see how “correction” of power balance will change this in any way.
mebo
So I wonder if that study puts Power Cranks back into the game or is that still a taboo subject?
Jesse “AeroObsessive” Graham
The study has been discussed previous on this forum, and given it’s premise relies on the COUNTERWEIGHT, it makes any of mention of The Cranks That Shall Not Be Named punishable by severe and unrelenting interwebz beastings.
Whareagle
When a twin engine aircraft loses the power in one engine, how much overall power is lost? The answer might surprise you…
Jesse “AeroObsessive” Graham
Did you bother to read the study I linked?
Single leg power is far greater than half of double leg power.
Your analogy is flawed.
Whareagle
Not when you look at drag…
There’s a reason the P38 and Mosquito were such incredible aircraft.
Jesse “AeroObsessive” Graham
Ok, you’ve lost me completely.
Rodrigo Bini
Hi Mark,
I agree that the end point is ATP, but you may be aware there are many steps before we burn ATP at the muscles. Before taken into ATP, the central nervous system must drive action potentials to muscle cells, otherwise, there is no ATP produce. There is where the tricky starts, for some reason, the central nervous system does not control both legs evenly (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16859927). That means that we learn to kick balls with one leg but not with both in order to perform similarly. However, some studies on motor control from football players have been showing that it is possible to achieve similar performance with both legs once you train them.
Taken together, yes, the weaker leg is burning less ATP and producing less power. It is not a active chosen action, but a subconscious control from the brain who was potentially not trained to do pushing efforts similarly with both legs.
On your question about ATP increases, I cannot help you with that. Probably someone with stronger exercise physiology background can add more then myself.
My point on mitigating muscle potention is that if you drive one leg weaker than the other, you are flying with a broken wing. There is no clear anatomical or physiological reason on why you would not have the same potential to produce very similar power with both legs. The only reason is that we are not trained in daily life activities (and many sports actions too) to do that. Cycling is one of the few symmetrical sports actions (along with running, swimming and rowing). Many non-continous efforts lead to asymmetrical motions (like tenis, voleyball, basketball, football, etc).
Hope that has been more clear.
Rodrigo Bini
Hi Jesse,
we agree that the limitation is not at leg power. What I am willing to state is that the limitation is on the way the central nervous system drives each leg. Assuming as similar engines, there is a learning process that leads to an uneven control of the legs. We must remember that the muscle system is redundant and we have more muscles and more potential to power production that needed.
If we take a cyclists from a level riding (sub maximal effort) and put him into a hilly climb (towards maximal effort), asymmetries should be reverted once you get into full power (maximal effort). However, we observed in previous studies that that is not the case. Asymmetrical cyclists tend to become more asymmetrical. The potential reason for that is because they were not trained to push their legs evenly. The training must involve feedback from pedal power (preferably force) in order to provide feedback to re-set the automated motor control and achieve more similar pedal power.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/m/pubmed/21330612/
Power output for a single leg far exceeds half the power output of two legs.
In other words - the individual leg is generally not the limiter for power production. Hence I don’t see how “correction” of power balance will change this in any way.
Jordan
“We will need to assess further how much training they need to sustain this symmetrical profile and how much improvement we can see in their performance at the long term perspective.” Until this has been assessed it would not make any sense to advise people to become more symmetrical because they can. It sounds as though you are making assumptions that symmetrical will be better for power production and general health, before having actually done the analysis.
“That is clearly mitigating his muscle potential for power production.” Why is that clear to you? What evidence do you have that makes it clear? This line of reasoning reminds me a lot of people who say that 'it is clear that if you pull up on the pedals and push down on the pedals you will generate more power cause you are making power the whole pedal stroke." Funny thing is that it is quite clear to me, that those people have made poor assumtions and are in fact wrong.
bikalot
I didn’t have time to read through all of the many responses, but, I would suggest that if you have that significant a leg power imbalance (potential sources of data error notwithstanding), I would recommend that you find a good local bike fitter and get yourself a fresh bike fit. I am a fitter and coach (and also have the Pioneer PM). I have been monitoring my athletes L/R balance for several years now, and it seems (anecdotally) that a discrepancy of about 6% is max of normal. Beyond that, one either desperately needs a bike fit, and/or, has some significant structural imbalances that should be assessed by a PT or chiropractor. You wouldn’t believe how many asymmetries I see in my bike fit practice.
Rodrigo Bini
Hi Jordan,
I agree that we do not have sufficient evidence to state that asymmetrical cyclists can have lower performance (compared to their individual performance). However, we do not have anything on the line that being asymmetrical is beneficial, even theoretically. My point is that there are strong theoretical support that asymmetrical cyclists can be anticipating their injury risk and reducing their performance.
On the pushing/pulling comment, we must keep in mind that that depends on joint flexors (hip, knee and ankle) flexors efficiency, which tends to be lower than the observed for extensor muscles. I am not “in favor of this or that”, but there is more evidence for the pushing technique in general. However, we must see the other side (Theurel, J., M. Crepin, et al. Effects of different pedalling techniques on muscle fatigue and mechanical efficiency during prolonged cycling. Scandinavian Journal of Medicine and Science in Sports, v.22, n.6, p.714-721. 2012.) and then we may see that having the ability to change the technique to a more active pulling profile at some points can be beneficial.
Thanks Trev, that’s what I was looking for, just a touch of detail. Quick follow up: Has the availability of L versus R power changed the way you train? Is so, how?
Thanks in advance
Knowing that my right leg delivers less power at lower cadence on a turbo has encouraged me to train at at higher cadence where the imbalance is much less.
I also found that changing foot position on the pedal allowed my right leg to contribute a higher percentage of power.
The result of this was less pain in my right knee. I didnt set out to cure knee pain - it just seemed to me it would be better to try and even out the balance. I think that subconsciously I must have been protecting the knee, it isn’t something I was aware I was doing until I tested for balance.
The most important thing is to know total power though. Most people don’t have an injury like mine so I can’t speak for the benefits for others.
One-sided power measurement = half of a powermeter.
One-sided power measurement = half of a powermeter ± 10%… 
I have the full Vector set. It works well and either way I think you’ll be pleased, don’t forget you can always buy the necessary bits from your Garmin dealer to take the S model and convert to the full set anytime you want. Also, like one of the previous posts mentions with regard to the L/R, for me, under a good upper L3 and beyond effort, I’m seeing 50/50. Under light load, 48/52, fairly consistently, 49/51 post ride average. Lastly with respect to one of the previous posts, just use it as your guide to get the workout done as precisely as possible. It is one of your instruments to gain fitness levels and to see what you’re doing. Have fun, either way, I think you’ll be pleased.
One-sided power measurement = half of a powermeter
Isn’t the real question then for the cash strapped cyclist “is half a power meter better than no power meter?”
.
One-sided power measurement = half of a powermeter
Isn’t the real question then for the cash strapped cyclist “is half a power meter better than no power meter?”
You could buy used. Or, a few weeks ago I saw a new PowerTap in an alloy rim + front wheel + Joule head unit for < $700.
One-sided power measurement = half of a powermeter
Isn’t the real question then for the cash strapped cyclist “is half a power meter better than no power meter?”
Yes, it is better.