My read of the situation is slightly different: Apple’s aim isn’t to be dominant in the tri market. To me it is them showing that they are serious about the Apple Watch being a serious sports watch, and they at least want to cover swimming, running and cycling. @dcrainmaker has emphasized in his reviews that Apple is dead serious, and that Garmin et al. should prepare for impact.
For swimming and running it seems that the software on the Apple Watch is already quite compelling. Running power seems to work well (within the constraints of running power). Thing is: I don’t swim and rarely run.
This is the one thing I miss from when I used the Wahoo. The 1030/40 units are vastly superior to previous Garmin units though. I swore I would never go back to
Garmin, but I eventually did because Wahoo was standing still while Garmin was improving.
My only foray into a Garmin bike computer was the 530, and the buttons combined with the interface drove me absolutely mad such that I ended up on Wahoo in the end. Nice to hear regarding the 1030/40 though, I hope competition spurred them to do that and hopefully that continues (including from Wahoo in whatever capacity allows them to).
I also use WahooX as my alternate structured training and have looked at RGT and didn’t like it. To be fair, I don’t like Zwift either. RGT seems like a Zwift knock off and I didn’t understand the move by Wahoo to acquire this platform. I’ve been a fan of the Sufferfest platform for years and still like it and all of the other portions they offer like yoga and strength.
I know nothing about Wahoo’s financials but I thought the RGT move was strange when Zwift dominates that space.
@jasonmayo It is a fair question and the announcement was a surprise to me as well. My guess is that they were trying to add an additional option to their platform for racing or riding a real road or group rides or just doing some of the NoVid workouts that are in SYSTM on a virtual platform and they also probably saw potential synergies with promoting the smaller platform as part of the Wahoo brand.
The magic road feature is pretty good, there is the ability to add your own workouts from a workout creator like TrainingPeaks and I have enjoyed the radio feature when riding with friends. After trying Zwift and then dumping the subscription I didn’t think I would really use another virtual platform but I have actually found it compelling.
The other problem with RGT for me is that one has to pay for the whole ecosystem which, as a current TR user, does not justify the (high for me) monthly price.
Add to that the fact that servers are still half-empty and immediately the interest in the platform goes away.
Is there any wahoo x subscriber here that could give his/her opinion on the development of the platform?
The idea of combining TR and Zwift is the same wahoo had and on paper it makes sense but I’d be curious to see the evolution of the number of users on wahoo’s platform.
I think Wahoo simply saw Sufferfest as a minor player in a massive market and decided to throw money at taking on Zwift. I think people underestimate just how big Zwift truly is.
I’m a subscriber and I would say the development is slow but things continue to evolve. SYSTM has had new workouts added, RGT has had a new road added, syncing of completed workouts across the Wahoo ecosystem was added, pushing SYSTM workouts to their bike computers for outdoor riding was done. It’s not frozen in time.
I’ll explain my own usage and evolution of things that led me to it.
I tried out SYSTM initially for plans but didn’t like how rigid and static it was. Then I tried TrainerRoad and kind of felt the same. Next I moved to Xert and didn’t like how pressuring it felt and the amount of data. I ended up on JOIN as some know and am thoroughly enjoying it there. As a result my Wahoo X subscription from a SYSTM perspective I really only use the strength/mobility part and the odd workout from their library here and there.
For executing my workouts indoors I need something to look at besides Youtube, etc. I tried out the various options with real footage (Bkool, Rouvy) and determined that real footage is a no-go because it makes me nauseous. I gave Zwift a whirl and it worked. I tried RGT and it also worked, and is a lot cheaper (30% cheaper for me). I don’t race and only do group rides occasionally, so RGT fit. I do have a 1 month code for Zwift so maybe I’ll switch for a month and see if it “hooks” me.
Apple will appeal to the “rest” of the tri crew with this.
Mostly with to the person who can afford a pro level bike with pro level wheel and gear.
They have money to drop like crazy.
For mostly the rest of us, Garmin would be the way to go.
But I yes. Apple is making a push that should not be ignore. An if they can make a multi sport watch with 4 days of everyday battery, I say Garmin may be in trouble (specially high end watches)
To me, having seen this play out in another industry, PE firms often seem to cobble together a bunch of underperforming companies into a larger underperforming company. With hope that a bigger sucker comes along and buys them out at some multiple.
I have very rarely seen 2 + 2 = 5, but have not infrequently seen 1 + 1 + 1 + 1 + 1 = 4.
From a distance, that looks like Wahoo’s growth “strategy” to me.
This is one of those days when I am so thankful I made the intentional decision years ago to continue riding my Gen 1 Kurt Kinetic Road Machine (still works like the day it rolled out of the factory TWENTY TWO YEARS AGO) and ride indoors exclusively with TrainerRoad. So simple. So effective.
The bearing play issue only occurred on Wahoo versions of the pedals. I had numerous pairs of speedplay pedals years ago and none ever had bearing problems provided you took five minutes to relube them a couple of times a year. The play occurred when Wahoo re-engineered the bearing system.
Zoom on Wahoo computers is nice. However, a much bigger drawback is only being able to go one direction through the screens. Typically I go back and forth between a couple of screens. When I had a Wahoo computer it drove me nuts to have to cycle through all 6 or 8 screens to get back to the one I wanted. And if I accidentally hit the button once to many time and overshot… another 8 button pushes.
The allure is that it has a critical mass of users. Most people who want to cycle in a virtual environment (as opposed to indoor cycling while watching a movie or listening to a podcast) want a social/competitive aspect to it - racing against or riding with other people. Zwift has far and away the most users - it no longer needs the best physics model, or the best graphics, or the best interface (as anybody who has had to run the Zwift main app and Companion app simultaneously on different devices will attest!). It just needs those things to be good enough to not force people onto other platforms in their droves.
For race warm-ups, especially CX, the Feedback Sports Omnium is my go to. (I don’t trust myself on rollers and you need a pretty flat surface to use them.)
You’ve just explained my stance in a much better way. Thank you.
I use my kit until it fails as it does everything I need. However if a product comes out that it revolutionary or groundbreaking and it fits my needs then I would probably buy it. Nothing that Wahoo currently offers does that so until my current kit fails, I won’t be looking to change anything.
I had a Bolt v1 and it was brilliant until it failed. I got an 830 which added in some vastly superior features - something that Wahoo have still not released a product to rival.
Love some Wahoo products (Bolt, Kickr, Kickr Core) and some acquisitions (speedplay was always my pedal of choice and the power meter version has been excellent thus far)
However, I agree they are at high risk right now. I’m in the market for a new cycling computer and am basically waiting for the 540 - whenever that comes. The Bolt has been great, but there’s nothing compelling about upgrading and the functionality in the 1040 is such that when that trickles down to the smaller form factor of the 800 or 500 lines it will likely outperform anything Wahoo has out. Obviously all speculation, but that’s what all of this is
I was listening to a NPR story on Facebook’s Metaverse plans and laughing about how stupid the idea is of investing huge sums creating an online virtual place populated with avatars where someone is supposed to pay a monthly subscription and spend hours hanging out “there.”
Then I suddenly thought about the several hours a week I spend on Zwift . . . . .
