Interesting. Thanks for sharing, Chad. But why just 60?? I thought for sure they’d raise the cap to 75.
I’ve been looking out for some variations after years of blue blocks.
However I still cannot digest the graphics in Zwift (I mean what’s up with all those neon flashing wheels??)
At the same time RGT has gone up too much in pricing considering as it is bundled up with Wahoo which does not offer anything special to me with fake videos and 4DP. The other key issue is that it seems to me that the user base is still very thin and populated by bots.
So it seems I’m stuck again with blue blocks and movies for another winter
Biggest failure for me in Zwift is the lack of real time metrics when not in a workout. (Average power or lap power etc).
The problem with Zwift on Apple TV is the Apple TV remote is terrible, not sure Zwift can fix that on their end!
Route based workouts is a great idea. I spend WAY too much time trying to pick a route that will (hopefully) match up well with the efforts I have in my TR workout that day. Nothing worse than when your recovery intervals fall on all the climbs and your hard efforts are all on descents!
Always excited for new worlds and routes as well. Though I think they should just merge the Paris and France worlds at this point. Its kind of pointless to take up an entire world spot with Paris and its 4 short flat routes.
Thanks for posting this Chad! A big frustration for me is that TrainerRoad does not interface with Zwift or TrainingPeaks. I subscribe to all three and see much value in each one. I would love for TR workouts to push directly to Zwift or to Zwift via TP. Thoughts? Opinions?
Wish they would add a lap button so I could do “hill” repeat workouts!
Yeah, I think it would be nice for many users if TR linked directly with those. Plenty of us do the hack of running both apps with TR driving the workout in ERG, and Z is passive data and used for distraction.
I don’t necessarily love the Z workout player compared to TR, but it’s workable and some people prefer Z’s interface. More options is often better for users, but I can also see why TR might be hesitant to connect so closely. Could be a bridge to losing customers in some cases. But this integration could also be seen to keep others. Tough to know what really would happen between the scenarios.
Can you explain how you’d see this work, vs just finding a spot in Z and doing it like you would outside with U-turns?
I added a link to the official Z release page in the OP at the top.
Be sure to check out the FAQ’s, that add a fair bit of details to what’s coming.
I just don’t see the point of raising the levels to 60. Whilst they might make the gaps between the levels bigger, there’s a lot of users on level 50 already so why not just double that number or make it really high because it probably won’t take people long to hit level 60. I know in the grand scheme of things it doesn’t really matter, but if you’re going to the effort of increasing it, then future proof it.
- How do you know that’s not what they are actually doing with the 60 vs a higher level?
There could be good or terrible reasons that it’s 60 and not 75 or 1000. We simply have no idea what they have planned in the long run.
It’s just a number within some software, so I highly doubt the reasons would be terrible.
Well I guess a lap button wouldn’t really be necessary if they added a 3rd trainer mode option when doing workouts as right now (last time I Z’d anyway) you can only do erg or resistance. I want to be able to do workouts while still “feeling” the terrain changes to more mimic doing an outside workout.
I know there’s workarounds using TR and Zwift together but I really don’t want to complicate my workout.
Having the “3rd mode” or a lap button gives me the pretty graph at the bottom of my Strava activity and on TR where I can see avg power, etc for each interval.
Hope that makes sense
I know… I was being a bit facetious. My point stands that the number is all but random for the limited window we have here. Saying it should have been X instead of Y is just short of a wild guess since we lack any real info behind the decision.
OK, if I understand, you’d like to follow a prescribed workout, but have it in a pure Simulation mode that actually uses terrain for resistance, not the ERG (driving trainer resistance to hit power targets) or Slope (essentially fixed resistance requiring rider to shift and adjust cadence to hit power targets).
I like that concept, and in a loose way, their new “Route-Based Workout” mode may be a step in that direction. Those seem very loose and RPE based, but I could see potential for them to integrate it with actual FTP based power targets while still leaving terrain to drive resistance.
Or in the case of a lap button you could ‘on the fly’ do something like hill repeats or whatever.
The lack of an integrated ‘virtual headunit’ is still one of the most bonkers things about zwift imo.
But you could just use your Garmin and treat Zwift as a place….
With auto braking, I’m never going to break my ADZ decent times ever again or hit 34G on the corners
Sorry to step in but say I’d like to follow a workout in resistance mode, how is this integrated with the course I have chosen?
Does the system ignore the fact that perhaps I’m descending and lets me stick to target watts?