-
Thanks for clarifying that NP/AP confusion .. thats what I thought it would be. Whats the point of NP then? Just a 'feel good' metric like calories burnt?
I've only ever tested on Madone. You'll be faster (even on road bike) because aero.
I am lost for purpose when it comes to power; I've achieved what I wanted to this year i.e. the w/kg ratio and be less shit on hills. The question is whats next in context of power.
amey-
What do you want to do better at?
Presuming you want to be better at racing - but what type? Crits/Road Racing/TT/track?
All have pretty different power requirements.Increasing your FTP will be great for doing 25m TT's but might not help a huge amount when Crit racing, where focusing on increasing your power for shorter efforts would likely lead to better results, for example.
-
NP is basically an estimate of the power that you could have maintained for the same physiological "cost" if your power output had been perfectly constant. Certain sessions can result in an NP far higher than an average power figure that you could maintain for that time period.
What next depends on what you want. What are your aims with cycling? I don't have power goals, I have time goals and power is one part of achieving those. Do you want to progress in road racing? Again, power/FTP/w/kg will be a part of that but not the complete answer. Just like power isn't the defining metric of success in TT (thank fuck).
-
No, NP is more useful measure when the effort is not steady state.
danb
umop3pisdn
hippy
Do the test under conditions where NP = AP, i.e steady sustained output without any breaks. Nice flat circular course with no junctions, turns or RABs.
I'm also at 3.5w/kg at the moment (on the TT bike, so probably (/hopefully) higher on the road bike)).