Rally RS200 on Kickr Core: 10% difference

When i meant that the Core is inaccurate that is fact, usually every (or very high % of all) Cores show higher power with 2-3% above an accurate dual pedal or spider-based powermeter. (so 3-5% overmeasuring) It is a fact, the ZwiftPower is full with tons of such a comparisons. The standard spindown calibration can´t fix it , only the hidden factory spindown can do. In last winter these faulty Cores and Kickrs were the "best" equipments in serious Zwift racings because the riders got 3-5% power boost for nothing... (and was an unfair advantage)

The reference comparison looks like this: Trainer power is lower with 1-2% maximum at 200-400w range than a dual pedal based /spider based bike powermeter , this 1-2% difference is the drivetrain loss (and yes, no more). If any comparison shows totally match or the trainer's power is above than bike powermeter's power then there is something wrong, the trainer is high, or the bike powermeter is low 

but if You TimmyR have such a ZP dual comparisons (or DCRay tool links), i would like to see just for curiosity :) 

Luko79 here's one example. The link is below, be sure to soom in so that you compare when the heart-rates are sync'd. When you stop to calibrate the KICKR during the ride, the Rally's keep broadcasting, so you have to only really compare data between times that all systems are running (at least I think that's how it all works).In this case the data is aligned from about 11:35:23.  Below is the link

DC Analyzer Reinstein/RallyXC/Kickr Core

TimmyR thank You for the link, yeah-yeah, i can "read" these comparisons well, it's my "job" since many years. There is a small offset difference between the beginning and the end (apprx 3w at this 100-200 watt range) , the Core is higher than the pedals (as "common" Wahoo problem...) but it is not so "deadly". So if You can, do an advanced spindown as i described above, and after do a comparison again, the Core's power should go lower a bit, below the Rally's power with 1-2%. After it the normal regular spindown calibration will be enough to keep the Core's accuracy in this range.

Do You have a same link with Neo too? 

I'll get around to a full calibration this week and will post some Neo comparisons this afternoon. So far none of it is a real factor for me. With the difference being so low and using my Rally's to report power across the board and control my TrainerRoad workouts via PowerMatch, I have consistent training and riding numbers. With that said, I like seeing the data and it has been good to know my trainers were close across the board (which I perceived when I switched between them each month).  More data to follow.

TimmyR okie, great! 

Here's a workout with the Neo (first generation) data.

DC Analyzer Osceola-RallyXC/Neo

I find the Neo reports a bit high consistently. Again, it does not matter to me at all. I simply use my RallyXC reported data for all my training across two bikes and two trainers. The percentage difference is not the same across both trainers (the KICKR  Core used to match perfectly but I have not done a spin-down in some time.)

TimmyR somewhy the link is not working , just a small circle is spinning continously... can You check it pls (from incognito window as "viewer"). 

Interest, i have Neo1 also , and it is 1-2watts (the #1 is lower with 1watt than other 2 NGs due to the calibration offset number was fluctuation between 2 numbers, 5 and 6 ,and 1 offset point is apprx 1watt offset modification, so 1watt is the error range ) lower than my 3 Power2Max NGs on 34-19 and these powers , but usually i have 0.5-1.5% difference small/big ring in SIM mode:

But of course, there is no flawless trainer brand/type on the market, there are Neos unfortunately (but usually from 2 and 2T, the Neo1 had much better quality control...  but could be any defect or miscalibration, if your Rallys are static weight calibrated and validated and we assume that these are absolute accurate.) which are calibrated to "low" or "high" , some with 10-15w offset but i have a friend who has a brand new 2T and that overmeasure the power with 10-18% , depending on flywheel's speed, so a totally wrong unit ...

Try the link again....I have not static tested the RallyXCs. Again, I've seen no pressing reason to at this point. Maybe I'll look for a calibration weight and give it a shot. Hopefully the link open now. Thanks for your insight.

@timmyR   yeah it works. what is a bit strange for me is the leg balance by Rallys. On Core, You have ~48-52 L/R balance, on Neo You have the opposite, ~52.5-47.5 L/R , both checking on high power (because @Z4 or higher power the balance is coming from leg muscle difference, below that power there is a few other modifier, the stiffness of the hip 4 example, etc). Is it the same bike on both trainer with same saddle high/position? are both pedals tightened well with 40NM?  if it not result of the pedals ('s slope inaccuracy or tightening problem), then something with the saddle position or one of the trainer is leaning to the left and other is leaning to the right (the Neos a bit leaning to the right, at least mine a bit but i know it is a common problem )