Pretty sure @enki42’s comment was meant tongue-in-cheek.
1 Like
Don’t, unless you want to feel compelled to buy a third power meter 
(A few months ago I found out the power numbers of my Elite Suito and my Quarq DZero started to diverge substantially. Both have a different slope and offset. In the end, I decided to just stick to the numbers produced by my Quarq power meter.)
By the way, @dcrainmaker written review is even more scathing. 
On 
2 Likes
But I’m always serious… Also the burden of proving a false claim is different when you have an agency actively regulating the market and usually placing the burden on the company to prove their claim vs having to take a company to court and the burden of proof on you to prove them wrong
You need to be able to show that one is wrong and not just the two don’t agree. Make sure you get more devices to record with too. Also a new bike too just to be sure its not the frame… :-p
1 Like
Not even remotely realistic in a consumer market the size of the US.
Right or wrong, that is just the reality of the world.
It is incredible that a company like Shimano is not able to get a Powermeter properly working and then decides to still sell it a a pretty high price. Having not perfect accuracy and some issues with cheap PM is annoying but you can live with that because of the price but if you charge what they do for theirs they basically need to be perfect…
Quite telling that Canyon’s current Dura ace Aeroad has a Rotor crankset and PM on it!
1 Like
If only there were some way to do that.
1 Like
Thats why you can never have too many power meters
Interestingly watching GTN Tech’s video on TT bikes at UAE and the teams that are interested in TT tech (INEOS, Quickstep) are running the 9100 version of the power meter for the TT, less worse than the current gen and more important for TT’s?
I’m aware the 9100 is still junk, in your opinion, if you had to run either the 9100 or the 9200 for a TT which one would you go for?
This is UAE, and being later in the season would’ve thought they’d have more parts if they hard them, but still running the older tech.
Or the TT is of lesser importance so the older stuff is fine.
I reckon this was one of those (rare) times where he had to earn his keep …
1 Like
Just wondering if anyone else can give their experiences on the accuracy with the 9200 powermeter? Similar over-reading with the little ring, etc.? Besides GPLama and DC Rainmaker, I’ve read very little on people’s experience with this powermeter. Thanks!
1 Like
Outside of @gpl and @dcrainmaker, very few people run multiple “validated” power meters concurrently to be able to say if a specific power meter is “accurate” or not. So there reviews are probably the best source out there on power meter accuracy.
2 Likes
If GPL and DCR say the R9200P is inaccurate, why do you need further information from parties who will be less-informed?
2 Likes
I think the only ‘goodies’ that content creators get are beta and rare alpha units to abuse. And once the NDA lapses they are often roasted to a delightful crispy crunch. And how many units would a power meter company have to go through to find that mythical ‘accurate unit’, given the inaccuracies of past products.
That’s why I’ll support a reviewer that will actually buy a ‘civilian’ unit and beat on it too.
(I had the Stages dual installed on my R8100 crankset about a month before it came out that they weren’t very accurate. DOH!, but oh well. It works well enough for me)
Whose opinion besides theirs counts?
Just the fact that Shimano doesn’t seem overly eager to led power meters to reviewers should tell you that their reviews are spot-on.
If you want a power meter, you should opt for something other than Shimano. @gpl was very happy with the Stages dual-sided power meter (I think he tested the DuraAce variant, too lazy to double-check, but I am sure their Ultegra-based power meter works just as well). Otherwise you could go for SRAM Red or Force/Quarq crankset + QuarqDFour + Shimano chainrings or a Rotor crankset with one of their power meters and their chainrings. Or Assiomas if a pedal-based power meter is an option.
That depends on the manufacturer, it seems. Some manufacturers seem to exploit Ray and Shane as beta testers who seem to do some of the testing. However, I don’t think they publish test results/reviews with beta firmware. That wouldn’t be right.
I remember them telling us in some of their videos that their initial unit got replaced (once or twice), and that is part of the story.
They do that for some products, too. @gpl’s first quick test of a DuraAce 12-speed power meter was a customer unit (delivered to a bike shop, he had to keep the wrap on it). Guess what, it was inaccurate.
2 Likes
If they did, that would toast their reputation eventually. It would be such a stupid move. Not to say it would never happen, but yikes, that would be near corporate suicide.
Nothing tests better than shipping a product. Manufacturers can only test the way they think a product is going to be used. Shipping out units for testing my reputable people in the industry gives them a much more realistic opinion on their new stuff. Fly or fail, and that is the time to tweak and re-engineer if possible, or just abandon and try something else. I was a beta tester for some software, and it’s an interesting process.
Agree, in fact, as I’ve argued or pointed out countless times - in almost every scenario where we test power meters, the earlier the worse it is.
And this is really true for all devices. In this day and age, reviewers aren’t getting “special” units that work better or such. Manufacturing and today’s complex algorithms simply don’t support that kind of logic. Can these units be QA’d to ensure they work at a baseline level (like, powering on)? Sure. But I’ve seen virtually no evidence even that occurs half the time - given how many things both @gpl and I find that are broke-ass. I’d say close to 80% of trainers/bikes have notable/concerning issues at launch the last few years, and probably 50-60% of power meters have such issues. Issues that should have been caught.
In any case, for my tests, Shimano provided a new in-box unit to test. Which, as noted, sucked. And then atop that, two different people provided random retail units with their data. Which, equally sucked. That’s all in addition to private feedback from multiple WorldTour teams with issues. Plus Lama’s tests. I mean, at this point, I don’t know what more someone might need. It’s really bad.
As for the new Stages dual-sided DuraAce variant, I’m just woefully behind on getting it all written up. But with something like 4 months of data and a crapton of riding in all sorts of conditions (rain/snow/sun/indoors/etc..) - it’s solid. Zero issues.
4 Likes