They really do need to start taking Zwifts approach of taking a Vortex, for example, along side a Bkool trainer and seeing what 'handicap' they need to build in on climbs.
Rick et all, I understand the frustration that seems to be growing and how folk are looking at BKool to fix things.
I appreciate that everyone that has paid good money for a BKool trainer should expect a realistic experience whilst using BSim so I say roll on those updates.
However last time I looked Zwift were not selling Turbo Trainers so thier market is to capture as many turbo manufacturers profiles as possible.
If BKool are making good money selling Turbos to use on BSim then that would remain thier main buisness focus.
But as Zwift and other 3rd party PC/Android/Apple based simulators are getting ever popular then BKool are well advised to allow thier trainers to be compatible with those 3rd party apps in order that thier turbos remain attractive.
And that I beleive they have done.
Making 3rd party trainers work well with BSim may not be such a priority buisness target as all they get is profit from subscription. But if that profit margin is high and does not require large amounts of capital outlay to acheve it then of course is makes more sense for them to priorotise this over BKool firmware updates.
I have no idea what BKools buisness stratergy is but they have been reasonably astute to date but the one thing customers always like is to be given is some honest replies and if something is going to take some time just tell us.
So one further thing I would like to say is why are Tacx not making thier Trainers compatible with BSim?
The answer to that may be why BKool do not seem to be trying too hard either.
Edit. PS: I may be a little biased because I am stuck where I am on my Classic as it cannot be updated anymore so I am looking for a new turbo trainer.
But as mine 'still works for me' I am in no great rush to make a 'buisness decision' as my current cashflow is not too good.
To add to that I don't see it as an investment for the future other than to mitigate the possibilty of pending hardware failure which based on its apparent robustness is a low risk.