Well I’ve figured out why my V800 wasn’t working with STRYD; but that’s another post (re-pair and bike profiles).
This post shows STRYD’s power calculations compared to those of the Power Runner plugin for Sporttracks. We’re back to using the Suunto AMBIT3 Sport, although the watch makes no difference to the accuracy.
Below is a quick reminder of the last STRYD-post’s close link between power and pace. Probably, unscientifically, at least the STRYD vaguely represents reality. But let’s not argue accuracy yet.
When I’ve done a few tests of bike power meters I find it instructive to compare what you are testing to what should be a really bad way of producing the same sort of data. eg The Favero bePro review, if you are interested, with Favero BePro being a GOOD power meter.
So I used the Power Runner plugin for sporttracks. This probably estimates power from pace/hr/weather/elevation. I’m not too fussed about the details.
So, looking at the above power track, which was from a track session on a non-windy day, I compare it to a power track derived from the Power Runner plugin based on the same TCX file.
Blue is STRYD and the RED calculated track looks very different. I’d venture to say the plugin’s power track looks wrong. Although you can see a semblance of matching paced-reality. (Remember the prior graph shows a good match of STRYD’s power to pace).
Compare again to last night’s rather bizarre run around Parsons Green (below) with lots of very sharp turns. Not very fast, not windy and very flat. You can see power and pace track each other noticeably – as they should – although to a lesser degree than the previous day on the track.
Turning to the plugin, I can’t really see what the plugin is trying to achieve. I would imagine that GPS inaccuracies over short distances are one of the main causes of this obvious inaccuracy.
Conclusions: STRYD probably has the ‘best’ method available for getting power while you run. Whether the best is good enough we shall see; but things are looking OK for STRYD’s accuracy so far.