Cycling and bicycle racing discussion forums.   View New Forum Topics
Today's Forum Topics

Set as homepage


Go Back   Cycling Forums > Tech Corner > Cycling Training
User Name
Password
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read


Welcome to CyclingForums.com

You are currently viewing our website as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions. You will have to register before you can post to this thread.

By joining our free online community you will have access to post new topics, communicate privately with other cyclingforums.com members (PM), respond to polls, upload photos and access other special features like product reviews and classifieds.


could i have a future in this sport?

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 06-07.-2007, 10:29 AM   #16
mnizz
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 8
Default Re: could i have a future in this sport?

Thats crazy, i have a long way to go then lol. Thanks for the help, i knew something was wrong there lol.
mnizz is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 10-07.-2007, 12:30 PM   #17
millzebub
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 62
Default Re: could i have a future in this sport?

It looks like you have an exciting future in cycling to look forward to!! Good luck!!
I also have a question for Wiredued. I have a kurt kinetic and use my cateye computer to track my speed. Is that also accurate with your wattage chart or do you have to use the kurt computer??

Sorry to butt in!!

Quote:
Originally Posted by wiredued
Topography and wind makes outdoor speeds very subjective. If you could get an estimate of your FTP watts per kg you could see where you are on the power profile chart.

http://www.cyclingpeakssoftware.com...rprofile_v4.gif

If you have a Kurt Kinetic Road Machine
http://www.1upusa.com/kurtkinetictrainer.htm
you can get a fairly accurate estimate from a speed to power chart like this. I road for an hour on the KKR at 19.8mph=252watts FTP. 252/89kg=2.83w/kg

17mph=183.33w
17.1mph=185.53w
17.2mph=187.74w
17.3mph=189.98w
17.4mph=192.23w
17.5mph=194.51w
17.6mph=196.80w
17.7mph=199.12w
17.8mph=201.46w
17.9mph=203.81w
18mph=206.19w
18.1mph=208.59w
18.2mph=211.01w
18.3mph=213.45w
18.4mph=215.91w
18.5mph=218.39w
18.6mph=220.89w
18.7mph=223.42w
18.8mph=225.96w
18.9mph=228.53w
19mph=231.12w
19.1mph=233.73w
19.2mph=236.36w
19.3mph=239.02w
19.4mph=241.70w
19.5mph=244.40w
19.6mph=247.12w
19.7mph=249.86w
19.8mph=252.63w......My FTP
19.9mph=255.42w
20mph=258.24w
20.1mph=261.07w
20.2mph=263.93w
20.3mph=266.81w
20.4mph=269.72w
20.5mph=272.65w
20.6mph=275.60w
20.7mph=278.58w
20.8mph=281.58w
20.9mph=284.60w
21mph=287.65w
21.1mph=290.72w
21.2mph=293.82w
21.3mph=296.94w
21.4mph=300.09w
21.5mph=303.26w
21.6mph=306.45w
21.7mph=309.67w
21.8mph=312.92w
21.9mph=316.19w
22mph=319.48w
22.1mph=322.80w
22.2mph=326.15w
22.3mph=329.52w
22.4mph=332.92w
22.5mph=336.34w
22.6mph=339.79w
22.7mph=343.26w
22.8mph=346.76w
22.9mph=350.29w
23mph=353.84w
23.1mph=357.42w
23.2mph=361.03w
23.3mph=364.66w
23.4mph=368.32w
23.5mph=372.01w
23.6mph=375.72w
23.7mph=379.46w
23.8mph=383.23w
23.9mph=387.03w
24mph=390.85w
24.1mph=394.70w
24.2mph=398.58w
24.3mph=402.48w
24.4mph=406.42w
24.5mph=410.38w
24.6mph=414.37w
24.7mph=418.39w
24.8mph=422.44w
24.9mph=426.51w
25mph=430.62w
25.1mph=434.75w......Lance Armstrong FTP maybe
25.2mph=438.91w
25.3mph=443.10w
25.4mph=447.32w
25.5mph=451.57w
25.6mph=455.85w
25.7mph=460.16w
25.8mph=464.49w
25.9mph=468.86w
26mph=473.26w
millzebub is offline  
Reply With Quote

Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump



All times are GMT +10. The time now is 02:34 AM.


Powered by: vBulletin Copyright © 2000 - 2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 2001 - 2006 cyclingforums.com

Links to websites we like:
Pezcyclingnews | Cyclingnews.com | Wine Zone | iinet