Anyone have the Neo 2T?

Very exciting! Looking forward to it!

I haven’t graphed it out but i see EXACTLY the same behavior between my Vector 3’s (yes I calibrate them and yes my weight it is in the TACX app) and my Neo gen1. I mean exactly.

Low power around 135 watts pedals and neo are within a few watts. Def ~1%. As power rises and/or I am in a bigger gear, the powers diverge exactly like your graph. On a VO2max interval tonight there was a disparity in avg powers between the two for 90sec of 45watts.

Typically I ride in a 36-28 and in minimizes the disparity. But and higher power the delta is definitely there still.


This would suggest that this is not a 2T specific issue. Since only 2-3% is accepted as drive-train loss and the NEO OG is otherwise considered as rock-solid, there must be something different at play here.

Does it look exactly the same when controlling the NEO directly and only recording the Vectors (so without the powermatch @brenph was using)?


The interval in question actually was in resistance mode. 345W avg on the TACX 392avg on zwift from my Vectors. I was switching back and forth between erg and resistance between sets.

I’ve tried every combination of Neo settings and the power progression, and diverging power is the same.

I just picked up a Neo 2T last week and I really like it, especially how quiet it runs. Just a couple of issues… one is the cadence is erratic, jumping up and down by 10-15 RPM. I updated the firmware to the latest (.34) and it made no difference. I read about the sensor placement issues that cause this problem with some bikes. As a data point mine is an old 60 cm Trek 2300 with 175 mm Ultegra cranks… pretty standard fare, although many smaller bikes will have shorter chainstays… that never leaves the trainer. I fashioned a short extension out of a scrap piece of aluminum bar and attached it to the left crank… problem solved. Cadence is now rock solid.

The other issue is more puzzling. I have been using a Kurt Kinetic Fluid 2 for maybe 5 years with a bluetooth speed/cadence sensor and virtual power. The Neo2T power doesn’t match it at all. Workouts I could easily do or even exceed on the Kurt I can’t even complete on the Neo2T. I am riding in resistance mode and gradually lowering my FTP manually to get it in a more useful range. Using erg mode is a non-starter until I establish a “Neo 2T” FTP for myself. Probably do a ramp test soon when I am a tad more rested.

My good road bike has Stages cranks so one of these days I’ll pop that on the Neo 2T and try to get a comparison.

Another very minor issue is there isn’t a power switch. My solution, IMO, is even better than a power switch. I simply plug the Neo power supply into a TP-Link Kasa smart mini plug and tell Alexa to turn the trainer on or off.

Bottom line, I really like the Neo 2T. Super solid, super quiet and really overkill for my age and strength. I wish I had this thing 20 years ago.

You should not assume that any power device matches another, especially when one of those is a virtual power number (Kinetic). Make taking a new test a priority and be ready for the gut punch that is likely you new, lower FTP.


Just got my Neo 2T today and pretty frustrated. Came with cracks in the underside of the frame but while I wait for a replacement I installed a cassette and threw a bike on it to give it a go…

TR on erg mode is all over the place. My vortex held a prescribed power 20x better than this thing. What am I missing here? Why is it so erratic? Way over and undershoots intervals.

Do you have a TR workout image to show what you’re talking about? I find (like with all Erg mode smart trainers) greater variability when using taller gearing (e.g., larger front chainring vs smaller).

I can’t speak for the 2T but my 2 holds Erg mode wattage very tight. I’d say +/- 5 watts max at a medium wattage of like 250w, if I’m smooth with my pedaling, and if I’m in the small chainring, and if I’m not changing cadence or standing up.

Did your Vortex have artificially smoothed data that the Neo doesn’t?



I’ve gone from a Vortex to a Neo 2T to an H3 (for cost reasons). Of the three, the graph with the Vortex was much smoother (especially when they are in the big ring).

There’s definitely a lot of smoothing and/or guestimating going on with the Vortex.

The Vortex also reported 30+ watts higher for me.


If you read the thread, there’s a huge chunk of people who report that 2t reports lower wattage than other well known power meters. some people claim it’s cause trainers measure lower in general because of drive train loss but that’s bs since the difference is as high as 12% in some cases for me. That’s with the latest firmware.

Hopefully they are working on it. I would keep an eye on Gplama’s youtube channel.

1 Like

I wouldn’t say it’s a huge chunk anymore given the current firmware

Didn’t expect it to agree, but the difference is huge. For instance on the KK on a good day I could do the 5 minute 107% intervals on Mt Foraker increasing each one progressively by 10-15 watts over the programmed interval so the last one was like 50-75 watts higher. On the Neo 2T in erg mode I can’t even complete the workout at the programmed intervals.

And the real gut punch for FTP isn’t from changing trainers, it is from getting old. FTP (and VO2Max) only goes one way… down. :frowning:

i would. especially given the 1400 price point :confused:
The fact that issue got resolved (did it? i wanna see more people testing and posting data. it seems bu feel for most people right now) for some and not others is pretty unacceptable IMO.

I totally get you’re not happy right now, as you are seeing an offset that is too large to be explained by “drive train loss”.

I want to see more reliable data using the current firmware…

I’ve read about the loss of 70 Watts before when coming from “virtual power” (totally unrelated to Neos). I think it was also mentioned in one of the podcast episodes.

It seems like that should not happen with a good calibration for a specific trainer model. Sure, there could be some variation between units but it shouldn’t depart that much from actual power. So far I have dropped my FTP about 15 watts and might be getting close. But then I may have had my KK FTP underestimated somewhat, too, so the actual difference would be greater. I don’t test often enough.

1 Like

I used a Kurt Kinetic with virtual power about five years ago when I first started with TR. After about a year I switched to a Kickr and then subsequently a Tacx Neo. The KK with VP read much higher, 30 watts or more, than the other trainers and power meters. Definitely retest on the 2T to reset zones.


Not quite exact. The measurements show that the 2T under-estimates power at high spindle speeds (and those tests also blend in some power floor issue into the mix). Unless you do your workouts at 200W on 53/11, you won’t even get close to the problem range.

There’s a lot of assumptions in your post. 0.0.34, always waxed clean drive train, straight chain on a 36/19 or 36/17.

My natural cadence is around 95. Go down to 70 or up to 105 depending on trainerroad workout insturctions.

4iiii, vector 3, kickr, quarq dzero, favero assiomas all agree with each other or within 1-2%

2T is much lower. Anywhere from 5-12% but mostly around 8%