I also have a number of quarqs and did a comparison between the two. I expected there to be a slight difference. However, it turns out that the difference is actually 20+ watts.
I perform the spindown calibration a number of times. Still the same difference. I have done this every time I have used it to see if perhaps its needs to be ran in.
I leave a phone message with Wahoo, no response.
I submit a support request via their website and do not get a response for nearly 4 days. I kind of appreciate they might be bust with Interbike, but the whole company and not even an acknowledgement of a potential delay.
I finally get told I can get hold of a calibration kit. However, there are none in stock. I can send it back for a refund, but there are none in stock.
I would need to get this shipped in, probably getting charged duty, vat and and administration charge to boot. But hey, I can send it back and if I wanted to, get a refund on the duty and vat once I have filled in about 30 forms. No refund on the admin fee however.
Having just talked to Wahoo on the phone (5th attempt got through to someone). I am again told none of the kits are in stock, at least for me. I am now awaiting a call back.
I bought the kickr as it was supposed to have “accurate power measurement”. It’s not accurate, but I supposed at least it is precise. Is it too much to expect that one of the most expensive turbo trainers on the market actually works. I am very close to sending it back for a refund, not at all happy with the progress so far and beginning to have major doubts about the product.
20 watts at what power level? That has bearing on the % error. Also, maybe your quarq is high by 5% and your kickr is low by 5%. Also don’t forget the drivetrain losses from crank based to rear wheel based power.
As long as the difference is -consistent-, does it really matter?
Just keep using it until they get a calibration kit to you, and just keep in mind the difference between it and your crank based PM.
I also needed to contact them this past week about an issue with my power brick, and they were slow to reply due to being on the road. But once I got them on the phone, they had a Fedex tracking number to me the same day for a replacement part.
20 watts at what power level? That has bearing on the % error. Also, maybe your quarq is high by 5% and your kickr is low by 5%. Also don’t forget the drivetrain losses from crank based to rear wheel based power.
I have only done about 65-75% FTP workouts with both meters running. FTP did appear to be around the same from what I recall, I will know for sure later.
I have 2 quarqs and they both read very close to each other and demonstrate the same variance or thereabouts to the kickr. For what it’s worth, the quarq on the TT bike has just come back from them with a fresh calibration due to crank length change. Based on this, I am inclined to believe that it’s the kickr at fault here.
As long as the difference is -consistent-, does it really matter?
Just keep using it until they get a calibration kit to you, and just keep in mind the difference between it and your crank based PM.
I also needed to contact them this past week about an issue with my power brick, and they were slow to reply due to being on the road. But once I got them on the phone, they had a Fedex tracking number to me the same day for a replacement part.
For a product that costs me close to £1k yes, it does matter. Very much so in my opinion. What is the point of training to a figure that is wrong. I appreciate that I can simply adjust based on the difference, but why should I have to.
To quote their website
**Accurate power measurement **- Wheel off design for direct, lab accurate power measurement at the hub- consistent and calibrated throughout every grueling mile
I do appreciate that there will be a difference between crank and this type of PM but 20+ watts is a little extreme. I do keep my drivetrain in pretty good order!
Glad your situation turned out okay in the end, I am not that hopeful that mine will based on my experience so far.
I see your point. I guess for my needs, I don’t mind as long as its consistent.
But just for argument sake…how do you know for sure which PM is ‘wrong’, the quarq or the kickr? Or maybe both?
When DCrainmaker does PM tests, they all seem to be off a bit from each other.
For a product that costs me close to £1k yes, it does matter. Very much so in my opinion. What is the point of training to a figure that is wrong. I appreciate that I can simply adjust based on the difference, but why should I have to.
So why don’t you use Quarq reading for your training then? KICKR is still very decent trainer and well worth the money I think.
For a product that costs me close to £1k yes, it does matter. Very much so in my opinion. What is the point of training to a figure that is wrong. I appreciate that I can simply adjust based on the difference, but why should I have to.
So why don’t you use Quarq reading for your training then? KICKR is still very decent trainer and well worth the money I think.
This will not work for ERG mode as far as I am aware, which was 99.9% of the reason I purchased kickr in the first place.
This will not work for ERG mode as far as I am aware, which was 99.9% of the reason I purchased kickr in the first place.
Thanks
Fair enough. I personally do not use ERG mode so did not realize it is a big factor for you. In any case I mostly use KICKR for testing. My normal indoor rides are on a way better toy
First, welcome to the club. I ditched a fine working tacx trainer for this kickr which was to be the best thing since sliced bread. I’ve had mine almost a year and still doesn’t worm properly. I reached out to support for the kickr who only cared if the one piece (flywheel) I believe was warped. It wasn’t. They moved in and did not care about the divergence in the stats. The pointed their fingers at trainer road and trainer road did the same back to kickr. ,so here I am the consumer stuck with someone i can hang some old clothes on.
Moral of your story and mine… Buy a computrainer and be done with it
