This discussion has been locked.
You can no longer post new replies to this discussion. If you have a question you can start a new discussion

RS200: Inconsistent high power offet to Neo2 - temperature?

Hi.

I see significantly higher power from my RK200 when comparing to a Neo 2.  This is seen as an offset in wattage across a session, as opposed to % drift.  The delta varies between 10-30+W, and tends to be on the higher side, usually around 25W.  This is significantly higher than the bounds of each power source's accuracy claim, even when taking opposite extremes.  A torque test on the pedals show then to be in spec (actually very slightly low).  I religiously calibrate pedals before each ride.  Both pedals and trainer are in the same environment all day woth no large temperature shift.  I run a low gear on the turbo as am aware of turbo drift when flywheel speeds are high.

The issue is not so much the offset which could be compensated for, but the inconsistency of the offset.  The most recent ride saw me perform multiple calibrations, including resetting install angles, ahead of the ride.  I saw approx 10W higher reading on the pedlas (i.e. a "good one").  Upon ride completion, I peformed a recalibration out of curiosity and kicked off the workout again - I then saw a 25w hgiher reading from the pedals.  Multiple recalibrations to check and this new offset value remained consistent.  During this session of one hour there was an approximate 3 degree (C) temperature drop.  See compare here: DC Analyzer Compare - Feb 09.  Plus many more examples as needed.

It striked me that this may well be a temperature offset issue.  Can anyone tell me whether the pedals are actively compensating for temperature drift, and what they are actually doing?  I would not expect such a large shift in power if this was being taken into account.  If there a best practice to get around such issues?  As it stands I simply do not trust these pedals and can't use them for structured training.  If this is a temperature issue, how are they going to cope with the much larger variation seen when climbing high mountain passes?  Really unimpressed so far.

I appreciate that the turbo could well be reading low, however, the inconsistent offset is most certainly stemming from the pedals.  The offsets are also not down to drivetrain losses which I have a decent handle on.  Prior to these I used PowerTap P1 pedals which showed much more consistent behavior.

(And sorry for the username - I can't change it!)

R.

  • Do You have similar dual recording with P1 duals? did You pedal in same gear through the workout , especially at the end where the difference increased?. the base offset diff i think the Neo2's issue, there are many undercalibrated units out there (easily noticed in ERG tests) , and some of them have speed issue as You wrote  (the diff is changing heavily with the change of speed, usually i make tests in small ring front and middle at rear, so 34-19 or similar) ofc, hard to validate it only with 1 bike powermeters, dont You have a friend who has a bike with a spider based pmeter or with any dual pedals? 

  • I might have some old data from the P1.  They tracked marginally high as expected given they are upstream of the turbo.

    For the dataset shown the workout and subsequent repeats at the end were all performed in the same low gear and also cadence.  It may be that the Neo is actually low, however, the issue is more the inconsistency of the pedal after recalibration in those final sets.

  • ok, clear. then something is not ok with the pedals