Like to see some wattage, HR, avg mph, weight numbers.

Compare numbers with yourself.  That's what matters.  Use it to benchmark and improve.

Avg. speed as a %age of wattage is pretty meaningless too.

x2   Numbers aren't really that comparable.  It would be like comparing Avg HR or LT.  

I understand that comparing numbers is difficult.  But I think it gives you some insight.  Just for myself I see a 10% difference in wattage between my two bikes.  I want to understand this difference better.  And use it to improve. 

Above there is someone averging 189 watts with similiar weight to me getting a decent amount of better speed.  Maybe it is comparing apples and oranges but it does make me wonder and start looking at additional data.  Now the course difference is going to account for some of this.  But at an average watts of 189 or normalized at 199 I would see an average speed of 19 or 20 mph.  Race gear would improve this some but it would seem I have some room for improvement in efficiency.  Like a windtunnel visit and work on technique might generate the results I am trying to achieve.  Maybe the best use of my time is not focusing so much on improving wattage.

I know with one of bikes there is a fit issue or mechnical issue or utilizing different muscle issue.  But something is out of wack.

I think the information also helps me learn and understand the data which will make me a better cyclist. 

Additional data points.  I am 5'11" and the above was on a 25 mile ride.  But most of my rides are pretty similiar in wattage and speed when riding flat courses. 

My primary goal is to increase my wattage by 5-10% over the next 11 months.  I am also considering spending some time in a windtunnel and seeing if I can improve efficiency by 5%.

Ultimately what I want is to improve my avg mph on a particular sprint tri by 1 - 1.5 mph.  I am also doing my first 1/2 IM in May but really just looking at finishing.  Maybe next year I will focus on improving my HIM bike time.

I want to get to the point where I can average 230 - 240 watts for 40 minutes.  You would think with me doing 220 watts for an hour that 230 for 40 minutes would be achievable.

Also looking for tips on training.  I have purchased a couple of books.  But much of the material is really towards longer distance than 14 miles. 

Any help on training to improve wattage for a 40 minute ride would be appreciated.

It will only serve to confuse you (especially at this stage in your learning).  Different bikes, different power meters, different calibrations, different positions, etc, etc.

Work on improving your power on your bike while optimizing your position and you'll go faster.  That's what to focus on.

If you can do 220 for an hour, you are spitting distance from 230 for 40min--maybe even already there.  Work on boosting your threshold (defined as your 1 hour power).  This can be done with long intervals (e.g., 2 x 20' with 2'-5' rest).  When you reach a plateau, shake things up by doing shorter intervals that push your V02max (e.g., 6 x 4' on 2' rest).  Lots of ways to attack it.

x3 plus your weight/power meter/aero fit/bike all make huge difference.

I used to ride with a women who weighed 35-40 pounds less than me, I led she followed but we weren't drafting. We did some hills, rode the same amount of time and same distance. So my power should be higher than hers right? Yah but it wasn't.

See how you do same route, next month.

Invest in the book allen/coggan and program so you can track NP and all those fun graphs.

 PM training rocks!

If you are interested in comparing numbers, you should check out the Coggins "power profile" data.  It provides some perspective on your wattage/kg for 5-second, 1minute, 5minute, and FTP. 

If you use the training peaks software, a graph is automatically computed for you.  If not, here's a link.  I think you can access the charts through this:

http://www.cyclingpeakssoftware.com/power411/profile.asp

Edited to add:  wattage/kg per time interval is a more meaningful way of comparing, but bear in mind that he made the chart by selecting untrained people for the lower end and world-class specialists (e.g., track sprinters for 5s and TT'er for FTP) for the top end.  The ranges in between are descriptive not normative.