Your pedals need to be the truth, so that is good news about TR support confirming that your pedals weren’t connected during the ramp test. Thought someone mentioned doing a static weight calibration on the pedals?
If you use powermatch then this is all mostly academic - if that is working then your pedals are the power data source both indoors and out. I do understanding wanting ‘more free watts’ 
As an aside, dual sided pedals help in cases like this, as each pedal is an independent measuring device, and this can help determining what value is ‘right’.
I had a case of one ride where power was drifting towards then end, and from looking at the L/R data, it was clearly one pedal being wonky. This seemed to be an isolated case, as every other time they have matched fairly well.
They did, and I’m avoiding it at all costs. After watching a tutorial it’s a royal pain. Gonna see if I can borrow a bike with a dual sided power meter, then not only could I compare the two, but also check to see if I have an inbalance.
Trying to confirm ‘real’ watts is a slippery slope.
I’m convinced it’s almost impossible to know for certain. What I can add is definitely don’t go the free watts / high reading PM route, if you ever intend to race in the real world. It leads to much disappointment when you discover you’re far weaker than you thought. Relative to other athletes.
If I could start over, I’d want a power meter that under read from day one. Not a ton, say a few percent. You’d only be surprised at how well you performed in the real world.
I’ve excepted that the only way to really know, is to test yourself on long climbs. The longer the better. It clarifies your power output and the accuracy of your scale. Which is another overlooked issue.
When I started, my power meter over read and my scales under read. Which comically, made me quite good at Zwift. Funnily enough I couldn’t replicate my performance in the real world.
Two years later and I’ve finally reached the level I thought I was already at 
Haha, I had this with Virtual Power! First FTP was 320W on a Lemond Trainer.
It’s taken me two and a half years to reach that mark. I’m only now starting to reclaim my Power Curve as “legitimate”
Totally agree. I know what I could hold for 40 min before I started trainerroad a month ago. My guess is I can probably hold 1-5 watts more now. It’s all relative at the end of the day. Only thing I’m really concerned with is knowing my threshold number so I can train/race accordingly.
Most smart trainers have temperature drift issues, except for the Tacx neo 2t, which uses a virtual resistor. Magnets have the physical property that their magnetic force weakens as the temperature increases.
Yep, it’s very important to get threshold right. If that’s what you base your training on.
I’m always very cautious with increasing it. There’s huge risk in over estimating it. It’s not just your FTP that’s up. It’s essentially your entire power curve. Your endurance rides are harder, your intervals are harder, everything is harder.
If you’re one to look at TSS and CTL. All of that is harder to build.
My current tactic is to do 2x15m hill repeats. I keep a eye on my HR response and RPE. That gives me a real world sustainable climbing FTP. The interesting bit is there is huge variation. First there’s day to day variation, which as researched can be up to 10%. Massive.
Then terrain. I cannot sustain my climbing power on the flat. Indoors, I lose 10w or more too. Finally, add in temperature, glycogen status, caffeine etc. FTP really is a moving target.
So, if your power meter isn’t accurate and most importantly consistent, all bets are off.
Personally, I recommend using the same PM for all your training, if possible. Equally, don’t underestimate monitoring your HR. That is what’s actually going on inside you.
Knowing your approx LT1/VT1 HR to power relationship and your LT2/VT2/FTP to power can help zero in on the differences between power meters.
@AussieRider you need to get a third power source to determine if you KICKR or Assioma is at fault.
I had a similar scenario. A friend has Assioma DUO’s that matched his Tacx Neo within 2% on a TR workout. He came around my house, put his bike on my KICKR Core and did the same workout. My KICKR was out by 25%. After much back and fourth with Wahoo, they sent me a replacement.
My KICKR was getting near 2 years old and I had been using TR 3 times a week over that time, so wasn’t new. If I used powermatch the TR data lined up with the Garmin 530 data.
Apologies if mentioned above - TLDR.
How do you determine what you’re LT1/LT2 is?
Yes, next ramp test I’ll switch over to the Assioma’s. Interestingly, the numbers coming from the Kickr reflect what the numbers feel like outdoors on the pedals. For example; Holding 260w on the trainer feels like 260 watts outdoors with the pedals. However using the pedals on the trainer feels significantly harder than 260w.
I do a lot of climbs in the 30-60 min range, so outdoors I have a fair idea of what I can sustain comfortably, or at max effort. However, since joining TR a month ago I’ve limited myself to sticking to Z2/Z3 on those climbs, preferring to focus my intensity sessions on the trainer.
I’m exactly the same! There’s no way I could hold 260w on the flat for 30 min. My heart would explode. Oddly though, since using the trainer I’m starting to feel more comfortable on the flats.
Thanks for your insights!
100% agree. Working on it!
My suspicion as of now, is the pedals are slightly underreporting and the Kickr is slightly over-reporting. Between that and any leg discrepancy I think we make up the 13% delta. Need to do some real-world outdoor testing to confirm.
So you are using powermatch but there is still a discrepancy? Or was it because powermatch wasn’t working/picking up the pedals?
Sorry, its got confusing 
Recording both power meters on a workout showed a 13% delta between the 2. Ie 340w on the kickr equaled 300w on the Assioma’s. I used the Assioma’s and power match during the ramp but TR tech said it wasn’t working (since fixed). I’m not sure if that would have made the ramp harder or easier but I had to quit half way through as it felt like I was several intervals ahead of where I was. I redid the test with the pedals turned off. Next month I will redo the ramp using the Assioma’s and oowermafch to be consistent with outdoors. I assume my relative FTP will then be 13% lower. Does that make sense?
I think so.
If powermatch works, then it should it should put all the issues to bed. I think it should’ve been the first and only issue that needs fixing as it will align your indoor and outdoor power.
Unless I am mistaken.
Yes, the primary issue was while using the pedals for the ramp test I was struggling so hard that I would have probably ended with an FTP of 240 (I bailed at 220) when I know from outdoor data it’s closer to 270, and that was before I did a month of TR training. As mentioned above I will redo the ramp test next month (w/ Assioma data) and if it sets itself at 240-250 then so be it. But I know for a fact it’s at the very least 270.
Accurately measuring ones VT1 - LT1 is complex.
Best done in a lab or with a lactate meter.
It is however a very valuable metric and worth working out. For arguments sake there’s only really two metrics that matter in physiology. Many amateur cyclists are so massively FTP focused that they miss the benefit of knowing their first threshold.
The rudimentary method is simply breathing rate. It’s the point where you can still talk in sentences, but you’re on the edge of that changing. For users of Coggan zones. It’s usually the edge of Z2 and Z3. Although it can be much higher or lower…
Many coaches recommend training at or near this point for endurance work.
The real benefit for amateurs is knowing this point is normally your ceiling for endurance work. Knowing the power you make at this point is very useful, as you can target improving it. Very strong aerobic athletes have a LT1 that gets quite close to LT2. Professional cyclists are a great example of this.
Riders that neglect proper high volume endurance training generally, although not always, have a relatively low LT1 compared to their anaerobic threshold LT2/FTP.
This doesn’t show up on an FTP test, but it really shows up in longer races etc, as strong aerobic performance allows you to be more efficient through the race. Thus being stronger at the finish, when it matters.
Professional road cycling and long distance triathlon are a demonstration of this. The rider / racer best able to preserve glycogen while maintaining a high pace, usually wins the race. All things being equal.
The aerobic engine is the basis of this.
The fascinating part is many think that the only way to move LT1 closer to LT2 is to train at or below LT1. Meaning no amount of sweet spot, threshold or V02 work will solve the problem.
Hence professional endurance athletes across multitudes of sports train high volume at low intensity.
But TR support noted that the peddles/powermatch hadn’t connected/worked correctly, no? Which means the current discrepancy is moot until thats sorted.
Correct. Although I’m not sure it makes a difference. Help me out here because it seriously hurts my head. If powermatch isn’t working and the kickr is reading 13% higher output, but we are using the pedals as the source what is happening? Like would this make the effort harder than if powermatch was working?
Did you get a fix yet?
No. I borrowed a friends bike yesterday with a brand new dual sided shimano power meter. I ran my assioma pedals with it. And you’re not going to believe it but the cranks reported ~10% less than my pedals- that reported ~10% less than the trainer. So a 20%+ delta from trainer to cranks. Also I assumed that my right leg was stronger than my left (have a bad left knee and am right leg dominant) and the cranks said I was 56/44. Which is pretty massive.