Is there any purpose to do 30 min Z2 rides? Maybe 30 min rides including higher zones make more sense? Can you get meaningful adaptations in such short workouts or it is just for sustain what you have? I feel like instead of doing 30 mint Z2 which are fillers between my Z4/Z5 rides, it would be better (just more fun, becasue I dont get any meaningful adaptations anyway) to rest or go running or something. I almost always extend Z2 rides to 90-120 min becasue I feel like 30 min z2 is waste of time. Is it?
I have much bigger power on mtb than road. On the road I have like 315 ftp. On mtb it is like 325. For instance, on the road when I do 4 x 10 min @300 it is RPE 8/10. On my mtb I could do 310 or 315 with the same RPE. The question: If I do hard workouts on mtb, will it give me better adaptations overall, or no? I guess that it will, becasue more absolute power = more work and more work = better adaptations. But this is just my intuition. Power meters are reliable: mtb is mtb assioma, road is road assioma. But maybe adaptations will not carry over to road so easily because on mtb I have other position, so I train doing power in that position, not road one. But, on the other hand, my engine (vo2) is the same on both bikes, it does not matter for it whether it works on mtb or road… so… maybe I should do hard stuff on mtb?
It’s probably just maintenance after a certain level of fitness but 4x30min of Z2 is meaningful in the big picture to me. That is 2 hours per week or an extra 100 hours per year of training.
Yes, as the other guy said, the volume adds up over time. But if you have the time and energy to extend them to 90-120 min then that would be better
Assuming the power meters are consistent, then I’d probably just do the workouts on the bike that you’re going to compete on. But it might also be worth doing some experimenting to see what might be causing the difference. Is it because you’re more upright on the MTB? Modern MTBs tend to have really steep seat angles, maybe you need to be further forward on the road bike, etc.
Firstly, I’d swap the pedals over and see if you’re still stronger on the MTB. If you are, I’d try and work out what positional change you can make to regain the extra 10W on the road bike.
(It might be that that change makes you much worse aerodynamically, so it might not be worth is for rides/races where that matters. But it would be good to know you can get extra Watts by changing position.
30 minutes of Z2 is a kind of a shake-out that can keep your body in routine and help the legs feel better (and still rested) to do work the next day. I would consider this “recovery” rather than endurance though.
I know runners who do lower volume but all of it is at a pretty decent intensity. It works for them. So you could up the intensity for those 30 min… the impact of course is more fatigue for the quality workout that follows it. As mentioned 30 min > 0 and 120 min > 30.
If you are on a TR plan and getting 30 min “endurance” rides check your plan and the time you have available to train. If you up your time availability it may bump up your volume.
30 min Z2 bike vs 30-60 min run.
Often, I have this thought that if 30 min Z2 doesnt give me any meaninful adaptations, but its purpose is to boost recovery, then I like to swap it with running. Just for fun. Alterantively, I always extend 30 min bike to at least 90 min, becasue I feel like 30 min Z2 is a waste of time. Even preparing for a bike ride takes 15 min But TR keeps filling my plan with 30 min Z2 rides. I feel like it is “fake” TSS, meaning that I acumulate target TSS but half of it doesnt give me any adaptations.
I think it is a matter of different posiitons. On my road bike I have very aero position, whereas on mtb I sit more upright. I will work on my bike fit on the road bike. Maybe moving forward e.g., with the seat will help.
But TR keeps filling my plan with 30 min Z2 rides. I feel like it is “fake” TSS, meaning that I acumulate target TSS but half of it doesnt give me any adaptations.