Power output - Watts ?

Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.
OP
OP
D

dylanparry

Member
They are just called mountain bikes. Not need to prefix it with anything.

I’ve had mountain bikes before but none have been as robust as this one or had tyres that were as “knobbly” and “grippy”. Plus, when I purchased it, it was being sold as a trail or dirt-track mountain bike. ….. so I think I’ll stick to that label. Lol 😃
 
OP
OP
D

dylanparry

Member
Good afternoon,

I am quite happy to make a fool of myself in public so here goes;

The numbers are so generic that a power meter will say, wow that guy is so wrong his is a prat so ignore him, but if you want a starting point and get that it is only a back of a fag packet number and understand that the question is unanswerable!


BikeType (Position)Power Requiredkcal/Hourkcal/Mile
Power And Energy Required To Cycle @ 12MPH
RoadBike_Racer (Tops)61 watts20917
RoadBike_Racer (Hoods)53 watts18115
RoadBike_Racer (Drops)51 watts17615
RoadBike_Racer (TriBars)49 watts17014
RoadBike_Tourer (Tops)87 watts30025
RoadBike_Tourer (Hoods)79 watts27223
RoadBike_Tourer (Drops)77 watts26722
RoadBike_Tourer (TriBars)76 watts26122
Hybrid (Tops)94 watts32327
MountainBike (Tops)124 watts42836

BikeType (Position)Power Requiredkcal/Hourkcal/Mile
Power And Energy Required To Cycle @ 14MPH
RoadBike_Racer (Tops)88 watts30222
RoadBike_Racer (Hoods)75 watts25718
RoadBike_Racer (Drops)72 watts24818
RoadBike_Racer (TriBars)70 watts24017
RoadBike_Tourer (Tops)119 watts40829
RoadBike_Tourer (Hoods)106 watts36326
RoadBike_Tourer (Drops)103 watts35425
RoadBike_Tourer (TriBars)100 watts34625
Hybrid (Tops)126 watts43431
MountainBike (Tops)162 watts55740



BikeType (Position)Power Requiredkcal/Hourkcal/Mile
Power And Energy Required To Cycle @ 16MPH
RoadBike_Racer (Tops)122 watts42126
RoadBike_Racer (Hoods)103 watts35422
RoadBike_Racer (Drops)99 watts34121
RoadBike_Racer (TriBars)95 watts32820
RoadBike_Tourer (Tops)157 watts54234
RoadBike_Tourer (Hoods)138 watts47530
RoadBike_Tourer (Drops)134 watts46229
RoadBike_Tourer (TriBars)131 watts44928
Hybrid (Tops)166 watts57236
MountainBike (Tops)207 watts71244

BikeType (Position)Power Requiredkcal/Hourkcal/Mile
Power And Energy Required To Cycle @ 18MPH
RoadBike_Racer (Tops)166 watts57032
RoadBike_Racer (Hoods)138 watts47526
RoadBike_Racer (Drops)132 watts45625
RoadBike_Racer (TriBars)127 watts43824
RoadBike_Tourer (Tops)205 watts70639
RoadBike_Tourer (Hoods)178 watts61234
RoadBike_Tourer (Drops)172 watts59233
RoadBike_Tourer (TriBars)167 watts57432
Hybrid (Tops)215 watts74041
MountainBike (Tops)261 watts89850



BikeType (Position)Power Requiredkcal/Hourkcal/Mile
Power And Energy Required To Cycle @ 20MPH
RoadBike_Racer (Tops)219 watts75338
RoadBike_Racer (Hoods)181 watts62331
RoadBike_Racer (Drops)173 watts59730
RoadBike_Racer (TriBars)166 watts57229
RoadBike_Tourer (Tops)263 watts90545
RoadBike_Tourer (Hoods)225 watts77539
RoadBike_Tourer (Drops)218 watts74937
RoadBike_Tourer (TriBars)210 watts72436
Hybrid (Tops)274 watts94347
MountainBike (Tops)325 watts111756

BikeType (Position)Power Requiredkcal/Hourkcal/Mile
Power And Energy Required To Cycle @ 22MPH
RoadBike_Racer (Tops)283 watts97544
RoadBike_Racer (Hoods)233 watts80236
RoadBike_Racer (Drops)223 watts76635
RoadBike_Racer (TriBars)213 watts73433
RoadBike_Tourer (Tops)332 watts114252
RoadBike_Tourer (Hoods)281 watts96844
RoadBike_Tourer (Drops)271 watts93342
RoadBike_Tourer (TriBars)262 watts90041
Hybrid (Tops)344 watts118354
MountainBike (Tops)400 watts137563



BikeType (Position)Power Requiredkcal/Hourkcal/Mile
Power And Energy Required To Cycle @ 25MPH
RoadBike_Racer (Tops)403 watts138655
RoadBike_Racer (Hoods)329 watts113245
RoadBike_Racer (Drops)314 watts108143
RoadBike_Racer (TriBars)300 watts103241
RoadBike_Tourer (Tops)458 watts157663
RoadBike_Tourer (Hoods)384 watts132253
RoadBike_Tourer (Drops)369 watts127051
RoadBike_Tourer (TriBars)355 watts122249
Hybrid (Tops)472 watts162365
MountainBike (Tops)535 watts184174

BikeType (Position)Power Requiredkcal/Hourkcal/Mile
Power And Energy Required To Cycle @ 30MPH
RoadBike_Racer (Tops)673 watts231577
RoadBike_Racer (Hoods)545 watts187663
RoadBike_Racer (Drops)519 watts178760
RoadBike_Racer (TriBars)495 watts170457
RoadBike_Tourer (Tops)739 watts254385
RoadBike_Tourer (Hoods)611 watts210470
RoadBike_Tourer (Drops)585 watts201567
RoadBike_Tourer (TriBars)561 watts193164
Hybrid (Tops)755 watts259987
MountainBike (Tops)831 watts286195

Bye

Ian

These charts suggest 124Watts would give me an average on a mountain bike of 12mph. On the Strava app I am averaging 170-ish Watts and my average speed is around 10.5. I am guessing this means that my weight and weight of my bike and the fact it is not a road bike are responsible for this?

Ah well as long as I keep seeing improvements in my time on segments and routes overall, and am enjoying it as well, I guess that is all that matters. Competing against myself not anyone else right! lol. :smile:
 
  • Like
Reactions: C R

Sittingduck

Legendary Member
Location
Somewhere flat
These charts suggest 124Watts would give me an average on a mountain bike of 12mph. On the Strava app I am averaging 170-ish Watts and my average speed is around 10.5. I am guessing this means that my weight and weight of my bike and the fact it is not a road bike are responsible for this?

No - it means the Strava app is just guess work. It will take into account the bike weight you have specified and your weight but is not accurate, really. You should not pay attention to the Strava power numbers - they are misleading as can be seen above. If you want to compare power data get a Power Meter.
 
OP
OP
D

dylanparry

Member
On one uphill segment I achieved a power output of 225. Is this good? I am guessing this is average for the segment, right. My time is pitiful compared to the Strava leader-board, I took 5 minutes to do it, but I am sure none of them are doing it with a heavy mountain bike and weighing as much as me. lol. They are also kitted out in all the skin tight gear, which I am not. lol
 
Flappy clothes will definitely slow you down.

I'd not sweat it though. Cycle more and you'll get fitter and faster.

If you got a road bike and all the gear you'd just end up being faster for the same effort. It never gets easier you just get faster.
 

Sittingduck

Legendary Member
Location
Somewhere flat
On one uphill segment I achieved a power output of 225. Is this good? I am guessing this is average for the segment, right. My time is pitiful compared to the Strava leader-board, I took 5 minutes to do it, but I am sure none of them are doing it with a heavy mountain bike and weighing as much as me. lol. They are also kitted out in all the skin tight gear, which I am not. lol

You did not do 225watts - nobody actually knows what you really did. The only thing you can reliably measure for comparison is time taken over a particular segment. But since you keep asking, no - for 5 mins uphill as a heavier rider, 225w is not particularly 'good' imho. Just ride and do the same segments periodically - you will see improvements as you get fitter/lighter/better equipment/ etc/ etc.

If you want to measure effort and so on without investing in a PM, get a cheap HR monitor - that will at least provide some reliable way to compare effort and perhaps smooth out variables like weather and wind direction to a degree.
 

Dogtrousers

Kilometre nibbler
The strava power value comes from an algorithm, and an algorithm can't guess. So it's better than guesswork.

What it will be is consistent. If you keep things like bike weight and so on constant it will give you a consistent estimate of your power. It may not be accurate - and you should never use it for comparison with values from another source. But it will be consistent with itself, so if you want to measure progress you can compare it against itself. It can be an interesting number but is limited in its application.

Same goes for lots of algorithm derived values like calories, moving speed, total elevation climbed etc. They won't necessarily be accurate but they will be consistent so you can use them to compare with other Strava rides.

But as @Sittingduck says if you really want to know your power output with any accuracy you'd need a power meter, but these are very expensive. Another route would be to use a turbo trainer, or something like a Wattbike in a gym. These will give you a more accurate figure. But - as noted above - you shouldn't compare the Strava algorithm derived values with this.

Alternatively you could go down the route of training with a heart rate monitor. This will measure your effort levels and will probably be just as effective as training with power but is waaaaaay cheaper than a power meter.

If you're really interested in this kind of stuff there are some really good web based calculators that you can enter various parameters into and it will provide the power required for an x kg rider with a drag coefficient of y to ride up a gradient of z at a certain speed. I can't remember the names of any of them but they are easy to find.
I achieved a power output of 225. Is this good?

Asking "is a power output of X good" isn't really a meaningful question. What does "good" mean? What is good for one person may not be good for another. It's a very personal thing. Bear in mind power figures are often given in Watts/kg, where kg is the weight of the rider. Professional racing cyclists often push in excess of 6 W/kg up big climbs. That's a lot

How much did you enjoy the ride? If you enjoyed it, then yes - it's good.
 
Last edited:

freiston

Veteran
Location
Coventry
The strava power value comes from an algorithm, and an algorithm can't guess. So it's better than guesswork.

What it will be is consistent. If you keep things like bike weight and so on constant it will give you a consistent estimate of your power. It may not be accurate - and you should never use it for comparison with values from another source. But it will be consistent with itself, so if you want to measure progress you can compare it against itself. It can be an interesting number but is limited in its application.

Except that there are other variables that the algorithm doesn't take into account. For example, tyre pressure (affecting rolling resistance), wind speed/direction (air resistance) and clothing (more air resistance) - so a slower ride with the wind against you and flappy clothes could require more Watts than a faster ride with the wind behind you but the algorithm will say you outputted more watts on the fast easy ride.
 
OP
OP
D

dylanparry

Member
No - it means the Strava app is just guess work. It will take into account the bike weight you have specified and your weight but is not accurate, really. You should not pay attention to the Strava power numbers - they are misleading as can be seen above. If you want to compare power data get a Power Meter.

Good advice, I am starting to see that it is unreliable the more I learn about it. However, it does show me where I am as far as my progress as the data is fairly stable and I can use it to help motivate myself to keep that level and strive to improve. Self-competition. lol
 
OP
OP
D

dylanparry

Member
The strava power value comes from an algorithm, and an algorithm can't guess. So it's better than guesswork.

What it will be is consistent. If you keep things like bike weight and so on constant it will give you a consistent estimate of your power. It may not be accurate - and you should never use it for comparison with values from another source. But it will be consistent with itself, so if you want to measure progress you can compare it against itself. It can be an interesting number but is limited in its application.

Same goes for lots of algorithm derived values like calories, moving speed, total elevation climbed etc. They won't necessarily be accurate but they will be consistent so you can use them to compare with other Strava rides.

But as @Sittingduck says if you really want to know your power output with any accuracy you'd need a power meter, but these are very expensive. Another route would be to use a turbo trainer, or something like a Wattbike in a gym. These will give you a more accurate figure. But - as noted above - you shouldn't compare the Strava algorithm derived values with this.

Alternatively you could go down the route of training with a heart rate monitor. This will measure your effort levels and will probably be just as effective as training with power but is waaaaaay cheaper than a power meter.

If you're really interested in this kind of stuff there are some really good web based calculators that you can enter various parameters into and it will provide the power required for an x kg rider with a drag coefficient of y to ride up a gradient of z at a certain speed. I can't remember the names of any of them but they are easy to find.


Asking "is a power output of X good" isn't really a meaningful question. What does "good" mean? What is good for one person may not be good for another. It's a very personal thing. Bear in mind power figures are often given in Watts/kg, where kg is the weight of the rider. Professional racing cyclists often push in excess of 6 W/kg up big climbs. That's a lot

How much did you enjoy the ride? If you enjoyed it, then yes - it's good.

Excellent and informative answer. Thank you for this. Yeah I am starting to see it is just useful for comparing to itself. As I am new to it all I am focusing on power output for now like a child with a new toy, I'm sure soon it will shift to how many miles I can do in a week, or how fast can I do a certain route. It's good fun so I am enjoying getting into different aspects of it all. Thanks :smile:
 
OP
OP
D

dylanparry

Member
Except that there are other variables that the algorithm doesn't take into account. For example, tyre pressure (affecting rolling resistance), wind speed/direction (air resistance) and clothing (more air resistance) - so a slower ride with the wind against you and flappy clothes could require more Watts than a faster ride with the wind behind you but the algorithm will say you outputted more watts on the fast easy ride.

I was wondering about the effect of the wind on my last ride as I was going slightly downhill and the wind felt like it was blowing me head on and totally slowing me down. Thanks for the info. :smile:

By the way the maximum tyre pressure recommended for the tyres is 65psi, so I try to set them at exactly that on every ride, sometimes it is 64 or 64.5 though as it can be difficult to set them bang-on 65.
 

roubaixtuesday

self serving virtue signaller
I’ve had mountain bikes before but none have been as robust as this one or had tyres that were as “knobbly” and “grippy”. Plus, when I purchased it, it was being sold as a trail or dirt-track mountain bike. ….. so I think I’ll stick to that label. Lol 😃

You are, of course, absolutely at liberty to label your bike whatever you like.

Just be aware that to call a mountain bike a "track bike" is akin to calling an SUV a "go cart". So you will sow confusion whenever you call it a "track bike"

A "track bike" has no brakes, a fixed gear, slick tyres (sometimes tubular, "tubs") and is designed to be ridden in a velodrome.

eg
 

Attachments

  • RAW-Pre-Cursa-1.jpg
    RAW-Pre-Cursa-1.jpg
    84.6 KB · Views: 2

figbat

Slippery scientist
By the way the maximum tyre pressure recommended for the tyres is 65psi, so I try to set them at exactly that on every ride, sometimes it is 64 or 64.5 though as it can be difficult to set them bang-on 65.
What are you using to set and measure tyre pressure? Again, it is unlikely to be accurate but should be consistent, so it's good you keep on top of it. I'd be surprised at a typical tyre pressure gauge being accurate to 0.5psi though. 65psi is a lot for a "knobbly dirt track tyre", although if you are staying completely on the road then it's probably for the best, but then again if you are staying on the road you would benefit from more road-appropriate tyres.
 
  • Like
Reactions: C R

Dogtrousers

Kilometre nibbler
Except that there are other variables that the algorithm doesn't take into account. For example, tyre pressure (affecting rolling resistance), wind speed/direction (air resistance) and clothing (more air resistance) - so a slower ride with the wind against you and flappy clothes could require more Watts than a faster ride with the wind behind you but the algorithm will say you outputted more watts on the fast easy ride.

Which is why I said "If you keep things like bike weight and so on constant" (I only named bike weight, but yes, there are quite a few) if you wish to use it for comparison.
 
Last edited:
OP
OP
D

dylanparry

Member
Flappy clothes will definitely slow you down.

I'd not sweat it though. Cycle more and you'll get fitter and faster.

If you got a road bike and all the gear you'd just end up being faster for the same effort. It never gets easier you just get faster.

It would also help me cover more miles for the same effort? Might be worth it just to get the mileage in as there are some very nice rides 10-miles plus away from me! Anyone ever been to Llanddwyn Island on Anglesey? Nice!
 
Top Bottom