>>1035733I've got to put this in The Sticky I'm compiling for this thread.
Types:
>Rear Hub-basedPowerTap
>Crankset-basedQuarq, SRM, Pioneer
>Crank-arm basedStages
>Pedal-basedPowerTap, Garmin, etc
>'Other'{heart rate monitors that 'estimate' power based on heart rate|
{comps that sit on your handlebars and 'estimates' power}
Accuracy/Cost:
>Rear Hub-basedGood to Excellent accuracy; medium cost
>Crankset-basedGood to Excellent accuracy; high cost
>Crank-arm basedLow to Good accuracy (because left leg only!); low to medium cost
>Pedal-basedGood to Excellent accuracy; medium-high to high cost
>'Other'Shit-tier to Low accuracy; low cost
Pros/Cons:
>Rear Hub-basedPretty good 'bang for the buck', accuracy/cost
If you want power data from a race you (obviously) have to use this wheel, though, so tradeoff between durability/race-ability on the wheel build
Have to send to manufacturer for any mechanical service (can't do it yourself)
>Crankset-basedCan use ANY rear wheel you want, training or racing
May or may not have to use specific chainrings when rebuilding drivetrain
May or may not have to get power functions recalibrated by the manufacturer when changing chainrings
Upgrading to a better crankset now becomes an expensive proposition
Can be a more expensive option
>Pedal-basedCan use ANY crankset and ANY wheelset
You get separate left/right power data (i.e. detect imbalances in leg strength/power, have a chance to fix it) which is VERY cool
VERY expensive compared to regular road pedals
VERY expensive considering they'll wear out, and may get damaged in a crash (!!!)
??? Unsure if they can be rebuilt, or if they can, if you can do it yourself (or have to send to mfg)
>'Other'Cheapest option
Can transfer easily from bike to bike
Accuracy is (in my personal opinion) a joke; no direct measurement, makes lots of assumptions
(I personally don't consider these sorts of non-direct-measurement devices to be serious training tools)
