Anyone have the Neo 2T?

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%


I suggest you refer to, which has been discussed above in this thread.

Your findings are not in line with theirs, suggesting there’s an issue with your particular unit.

Except it’s not just me. I had a discussion one of the tacx faqx posters on garmin forum. He claimed nothing was wrong with Neo 2T and that I was a liar. (top fella). I directed him to several known data crunchers’ findings who are way smarter than me. He said it’s just us. This was during 0.0.32

Then after 0.0.34 I saw a post from them saying all the power mismatch issues are resolved.

lol… yeah super reliable info right there!

How did you test all these pm against each other? This seems quite elaborate :muscle:

So you dont’t believe those who say their issues had been solved?

Don’t get me wrong it’s very interesting what’s wrong with your 2T!

(I would be the happiest person on earth when my 2T also was reading low by 10%)

i just think it’s bs to ignore problems that clearly exist for other people and be treated like we’re doing something wrong.

I don’t think you’re doing something wrong, I just want to understand what you did (It’s not a trust issue, actually, I hope mine is reading low as well :stuck_out_tongue_winking_eye:)

I strongly believe the 2T allmost has zero linearity issues. I think the tacx faqx test blend in some power floor issue as you say. I did test my 2T from 50/28 to 50/11 @100W, 150W, 200W and 250W, the only time the 2T didnt report same as target was 50/11@100W. My PM shows consistent difference vs 2T, maybe 1-2% higher on 50/11 than 50/28, hard to tell because my PM is a bit unstable. Will test again when my warranty is received.

DrewTacxFaqx refused the power floor theory and told in the FB-post about the test that he would provide data from higher power, but he hasnt. All the data I have seen from higher power is only from Neo OG or Neo 2.


I had same issue with my first Neo 2, constantly reading 6-7% lower than severel PMs. Tacx replaced it and second Neo 2 was spot on my PMs.

My Neo 2T has been spot on, sounds like you received a faulty unit.

It seems like it is very hard for people to admit there are faulty Neos, I dont know why.

I reported the linearity issue on the Neo 2 allmost a year ago but no one would listen, of course it all changed when GPLama posted his linearity graph.


First ride on my 2T tonight. Cadence reading all over the place, but turns out there’s a firmware update for that. Found erg mode ok - power shifts not too harsh, as some others have commented.

I quite like the small side to side rocking motion when seated. However, when out of the saddle … holy cow. It’s like that Tacoma Narrows bridge video they show in secondary school physics lessons. Huge sideways oscillation. Is that normal? Seems to happen at both low and high power. This is on an alloy CX bike.

  • That means you need to “take control” of the handle bars.

  • We have gotten lazy, from rigid trainers, and stop using our upper body as we should be doing.

  • You need to stabilize yourself with bar control in the much the same way you do when riding outside.

  • See if this helps. It’s my rocker use video, but the concept is the same since the Neo includes a small amount of flex (not free rocking):

1 Like

Replaced my Kickr 2018 with a Neo 2T. I used my Vector 3 pedals to compare the power of the two and the Neo reads around 5 watts lower than the kickr at both 200 and 300 watts. Not sure which is “correct” though since the V3 is pretty much the same as the Neo and my Quarq dzero on my other bike is in line with the Kickr. Anyway, don’t really care about 5 watts -but will of course add 5w to my FTP whenever talking about it :sunglasses:

Short comparison between the two:
like the inertia feeling the wheel gives
have had it replaced twice in the 1.5 years I’ve owned it due to vibration/sounds (getting a new back from wahoo next week but will be selling it right away since I’m worried about the quality and more faults)

I like how it feels more instant in power changes.
easier to get going after doing a backpedal
the more flexible side motion is nice
great that there is no calibration needed. The calibration button is still there in devices though, think that should be disabled -or am I missing something?

One thing I’ve not been able to work out is how to set where the purple light changes to red. I’ve only seen red during sprint intervals of 500w+, feels like there should be a setting for where the red kicks in…


Correct. It shouldn’t be there. There’s no calibration or zero-offset function on the Neo.

1 Like

We asked for it to be removed when we were testing the updated beta desktop app. I thought it got removed, but can’t say I’ve looked in quite some time.

If they did there, hopefully it will also be remo ed in the pending update to the mobile app.

Anticipating the delivery of my Neo 2T tonight and did some reading on the forum. One thing I don’t understand is why everyone fusses over discrepancy in power readings between their power meter and their trainer. Isn’t the power meter supposed to be the source of truth and the trainer just along for the ride (ERG + PowerMatch)? Why would you expect a power pedal and trainer to read the same? Or am I missing something? To be clear I understand why you would be concerned about power readings when the trainer is the only source. Hoping the Neo 2T is a mega upgrade from my 2014 Kickr when it comes to responsiveness to intervals.

And that is exactly the case for many riders. There’s a notable investment in something that claims to have high accuracy (per their own specs), but seems to fall short of those claims.

This shouldn’t hinge on whether you do or don’t have a second power device. It should match the claims as stated (and it seems many examples are shown that they don’t).

1 Like

FWIW, I just upgraded my Neo 2 to a 2T and had DesFit come over and we tested both trainers against his Assioma Duos. The Neo 2 was actually reading about 3.5% low, and the 2T was spot on (within 3-4w average at 230w over 10 minutes, including some sprints).

I don’t have a power meter to continue to verify the 2T, but the feel hasn’t changed from the day we tested. I bumped my FTP in TR up 9w to compensate for the low reading of my previous Neo 2. YMMV.


Congrats on that FTP bump! :grin:

Following up on this…I have a pair of Assiomas and a Neo 2. I’m sure everyone does the same but I TR or Zwift (whichever i’m using) set up to take power readings form Assiomas as they’re going to be the power meter i’m using outdoors also.

When i got the Neo 2 (previously had Vortex), I did a few rides to test them out and found the difference between the Neo to be between 5-10% lower than Assiomas. Never really bothered me but now that i’ve read this thread I’m starting to think I should send the Neo back and request replacement.

So…did anyone go ahead and leave their Neo back and did Tacx offer replacement which power output matched their power meter pedals? I suppose i’m wondering how do you prove that the Neo is incorrect and not the Assiomas??

And is there any real downside to not leaving the Neo back and just accepting that it is 5% lower?

1 Like