Related

Neo 2T no good for Zwift racing?

5601726
over 2 years ago

There is a recent review and test of the Tacx Neo 2T on Zwift insider which shows the 2T gives slower climb times and lower sprint power numbers than Garmin power pedals and other trainers.  It looks like using a 2T to race on Zwift means you are at a disadvantage.

zwiftinsider.com/.../

https://zwiftpower.com/analysis.php?set_id=263204

Having one of the most expensive trainers, and then finding out it is a disadvantage on Zwift isn't great.  Anyone who hears about this will not buy a Tacx trainer.

Is there anything that can be done to make the 2T more comparable to the other trainers for racing on Zwift? 

  • 0 over 2 years ago

    Thats called neo effect. ;-)

    You must cheat to get better results.

    Or buy external power meter.

    I have neo 2t and its about 5% of versus power2max.

  • 0 over 2 years ago in reply to Jone88

    Great, another well known Garmin problem they are doing nothing to fix it seems. 

    I'll make sure the 300 people on my Zwift racing team, and all the people in my local bicycle club, know not to buy a Garmin trainer.  I guess I'm stuck with the expensive thing.  I wish I'd known before I got it.

  • 0 over 2 years ago in reply to Jone88
    Jone88 said:
    I have neo 2t and its about 5% of versus power2max.

    A hub based power meter, which in effect the NEO2T is, will always show a lower power reading that a peddle, crank, or spider power meter because of transmission losses.

    5601726 said:
    Is there anything that can be done to make the 2T more comparable to the other trainers for racing on Zwift?

    That would be for Zwift to correct in their virtual world algorithms that create the level playing field that is supposed to exist there. I can't see how Garmin can correct the outputs for Zwift users without affecting the non-Zwift users. (I'm not a Zwift user.)

  • 0 over 2 years ago in reply to Scillonian

    A hub based power meter, which in effect the NEO2T is, will always show a lower power reading that a peddle, crank, or spider power meter because of transmission losses.

    Really

  • 0 over 2 years ago in reply to Scillonian

    It is a real world Neo 2t problem, not a Zwift issue.  If you are trying to compare your indoor Neo 2t results to outdoor power pedal results, you will have lower power numbers from the Neo 2t for sprints and other spiky efforts such as climbs.

    This is not a power train loss issue.  That is a small effect, and the Neo 2t shows the same power as two sets of power pedals for steady state efforts.  The virtual flywheel on the Neo 2t is giving more load and lower power numbers only for spiky efforts like sprinting and climbing.

    I suggest you read the Zwift Insider article.  The Neo 2t is off only for spiky efforts.  The Neo 2t is the same for steady efforts, so it is not a power train loss issue.  Other trainers are not, compared to power pedals including Garmin's Vector pedals. losing 100W on sprint efforts is not great, even if you are trying to compare indoor to outdoor training.

    Garmin needs to correct this.

  • 0 1 month ago in reply to 5601726

    I agree with this, I have compared PM pedals and a spider PM for steady state intervals and they match the Neo almost exactly. So the Neo is very very accurate.  However, if racing, when there are lots of surges, it seems that these surges in power are not properly reported by the Neo, and this can make a big big difference in a race. I reckon on short climbs, speed changes, etc it's close to 5%, the difference between getting placed and getting dropped.

    I feel the Neo's virtual flywheel means you have to push harder through the dead spots, however the Neo power readings down reflect this extra effort. Using my PM pedals the extra effort is reported...... my own wild theory.

    The other affect with the Neo is constant, instantaneous resistance, all the time..... whereas with a physical flywheel you always have some intertia.  This is most obvious  when climbing or sprinting you ease of for one second, the Neo will quickly apply the resistance and all intertia is lost, whereas I find with a physical flywheel, as with outdoors/IRL, you can ease of for a second or two then get back on it easier with the intertia of the IRL physics or the physical flywheel.

    I love my Neo, it's my second model after upgrading from a v1, but for Zwift racing I have started to use PM pedals for power reporting.  Which is a shame, this shouldn't be needed with such an expensive trainer which Garmin claim to be a market leader.

  • 0 1 month ago

    As people take virtual racing more seriously, some will seek an advantage by choosing trainers that give more flattering watt readings. I'm waiting for manufacturers to start claiming that their devices are "more accurate during key efforts in Zwift, with a X% higher watt reading than the other leading brand." Or maybe they will just depend on "independent testing," to confirm that their devices are most "accurate" (generous).

    While I enjoy the extra motivation from an occasional virtual race, there are too many ways to cheat online to take the results seriously. When I really want to compare myself to others, I sign up for real-life events--and I know that my Neo 2T will help get me ready to rock!

  • 0 1 month ago in reply to tobygadd

    Ii don't dissagree but the only zwift racing I do is team events, and I want to do the best for my team, not so much myself.  I have noticed that with my Neo's my indoor best power numbers have always been 5-10% off my outdoor power. This wasn't the case with my previous trainer, and with a Kickr I tested.
    I therefore tried using my PM for power whilst on the Neo with the Neo taking care of resistance...... for hard race efforts, the PM reflected my outdoor power, still on the Neo, same resistance, same PM that agreed with my Neo for steady state intervals.... just slightly over 5% higher power for hard race efforts.

  • 0 1 month ago

    I may have found a solution to my 'Neo effect' and Zwift racing. If I use the Neo alone for power, cadence and resistance, then the feeling is that it's slightly harder, taking away some of my performance (compared to outdoors and a previous 'ther brand' trainer).

    Recently I started using my very accurate Wahoo power meter pedals as the power source on the Neo. So pedals for power reading, Neo for cadence and resistance..... the difference is a much more realistic power reading and better feeling from the Neo itself.

    Not great that you need to buy another power meter option when the Neo is so expensive, but strangely it does help the Neo experience for racing..... for non-racing I use the Neo in it's standard setup as the PM.