To late now.
Also, I looked at DC Rainmakers recommendations and bought on Black Friday for a good discount.
.
Same bike, same gears, similar courses (typically flat to slightly rolling), same settings, calibrated prior to each workout.If the gears are the same and the speed is lower, then you are riding your workouts at a lower cadence? Is that happening? If your cadence and gears are the same on both, then the trainers are calculating speed differently.
Hope you figure it out. I went from a Cycleops Fluid 2 to the same Tacx Flux S trainer as you. I like the Fluid 2 trainer and find that I can’t seem to figure out the new Tacx. I have it in ERG mode and it will sometimes get randomly really hard or I have to spin at 110 rpms to hit my power number. I don’t get it.
I am probably doing something wrong, but not sure what…
I think what you are describing is not related to a specific trainer. When in ERG mode, the trainer will increase the resistance if you drop below target - so to get back to target power you have to work harder until it “figures out” that you are above target and reduce resistance.
Some trainers are better than others in smoothing it, but it generally works the same with all trainers. The higher the target power, the harder you will feel this. Total pain when doing threshold/vo2 intervals.
Perhaps I’ve missed it but you haven’t mentioned power anywhere. The list of activities just provides speed and distance.
Wheel speed (and thus distance) is completely irrelevant in terms of performance. Forget them, they are confusing you.
If these are similar power based sessions, and you are using the trainers to measure power, the difference is almost certainly down to trainer accuracy.
If you have been using a power meter that remains the same with old and new trainer, and cadence and power are similar but the sessions feel different, then there is a mystery. Otherwise you’re just not comparing like with like.
I do have and use this when I use the desktop:
Tacx Antenna with ANT+® Connectivity
https://www.garmin.com/en-US/p/690897
.
Jeepers that’s expensive.
Here’s roughly the same thing, but $50 cheaper.
https://www.amazon.com/CooSpo-CycleOps-TrainerRoad-Extension-Included/dp/B07L49ZNRQ?th=1
Perhaps I’ve missed it but you haven’t mentioned power anywhere. The list of activities just provides speed and distance.
Wheel speed (and thus distance) is completely irrelevant in terms of performance. Forget them, they are confusing you.
If these are similar power based sessions, and you are using the trainers to measure power, the difference is almost certainly down to trainer accuracy.
If you have been using a power meter that remains the same with old and new trainer, and cadence and power are similar but the sessions feel different, then there is a mystery. Otherwise you’re just not comparing like with like.
I was thinking about power as well but I was waiting to see how this played out before I mentioned something.
Yep, without discussing power, I really don’t understand what the OP means when they say it’s easier or harder. What is?
OP - are you saying the same workout with the same target power is physically “much much more challenging” on the new trainer? You have to totally ignore speed on the trainer - it’s not a valid metric for comparison. Effort here needs to be measured in watts and perceived exertion.
I will post power numbers when I get home this evening. The primary issue is how difficult it is to even spin the pedals. I struggle to get to the 19mph to calibrate the trainer whereas the Vortex I could.
.
I will post power numbers when I get home this evening. The primary issue is how difficult it is to even spin the pedals. I struggle to get to the 19mph to calibrate the trainer whereas the Vortex I could.
.
Yeah that’s odd. During calibration there should be almost no resistance. As not everyone can even hit the speed for some calibrations. Like on a Kickr to do a spindown it might take 100w to spin it up to the needed speed then coast down. Spindown cals might not even have any resistance, might only be the flywheel weight to get it up to speed.
Should be similar for your smart trainer.
Well, after 2 months of pissing and moaning bought the 15 dollar Amazon version with a USB extension cord and boom! Zwift bliss.
I think it’s important to point out that a USB extension cable (USB A male to USB A female) is not part of the USB spec and therefore may not provide the intended results. Many companies make USB extension cables, you may have one and it may work. But USB was not designed with extension cables in mind.
Just an FYI in case that does this solution does not fix someone’s problems.
The extension does work for the Vortex.
.
Here you go. The first was on the Tacx Votrex and the second on the Flux S.
.
That is kind of weird.
How were the Crispy Baked Chicken Thighs?
Yeah, the data suggests at least one if the trainers is giving very inaccurate data.
Similar power figures (second activity looks to have slightly lower interval power setting, bug for longer) and dramatically different HR and perceived effort. Cadence is significantly lower for the second one but that would tend to drop your HR slightly, not raise it enormously.
The crispy baked chicken thighs were good. We had to cook them forty five minutes rather than the 30 minutes in the recipe. Here you go:
https://www.yellowblissroad.com/wprm_print/recipe/27286
.
You know something is off when your heart rate is higher than your power.
Is the 213 max HR from the Flux run accurate? Are both those runs connected via ANT+ or BLE? Given how little change in power there is between the intervals and the rest periods it almost seems like the Flux isn’t getting resistance information from. TR (or it’s getting it in some super inconsistent way).
You could try the Tacx iPad app connected over BLE and ride at the same power in ERG mode and see if the issue crops up there. If so, it’s probably a case for Garmin support.
I agree that the power in the recovery sections (too high vs target) is a key here. If you are sure that the Flux is in ERG mode, why don’t you try a short experiment in level mode at a low setting? Can you achieve the interval power and the recovery power by changing speed/cadence/gearing? If not, then something is terribly wrong. WRT to the current data, is it possible that TR/computer is still connected to the Vortex while you are using the Flux? Thus, you are sure you are in ERG (and you are) but the computer is controlling the unused Vortex, leaving the Flux without ERG control and the Flux is in some default level mode that is reasonably high - thus ‘hard’? Maybe this happens b/c TR only allows one smart trainer to be connected, forcing you to ‘disconnect’ the Vortex and ‘re-pair’ the Flux? (As an aside, the new SYSTM - but not the old Sufferfest - only remembers one ANT+ HR strap for me. So, when I change from my ‘cycling only’ HR strap to the ‘running dynamics’ strap for a brick workout, I get no HR until I disconnect the 1st strap and reconnect the 2nd. A PITA and Wahoo says that should not happen. But it does, repeatably, for me. Back to the original Q…) I’m not familiar with TR, but there is likely a screen that shows the sensor connections? This might be tricky to diagnose as the report is probably just the ANT+ ID and not the name of the trainer, so you may need to watch that screen while you plug/unplug the trainers. BTW, I have a Vortex Smart and, for a bit, also had the Garmin power pedals. My Vortex and the Garmin pedals were in pretty good agreement and not much change from ride start to end, so little impact of heat, etc. The Vortex did read a few % higher than the Garmin - I’d have to go back and look to be sure but IIRC, about 5%. Not so bad and quite consistent from ride to ride. Maybe I got a ‘good’ one!
The HR on the second chart looks odd. It has a lot of point to point variability for an effort where the curve should look more like the first chart. Even if power fluctuates weirdly for the second chart and we don’t see it…HR shouldn’t respond that quickly that much.