login
Smart Trainers: Computrainer vs Kick'r
-
No new posts
 2015-12-20 3:08 PM |
Coach  9167     Stairway to Seven |  Subject: Smart Trainers: Computrainer vs Kick'rI've seen several comments recently from folks who have a computrainer and think it's much better than the kickr. For the record I have both for my coaching business...I purchased the computrainer about 6 years ago and use it primarily to do controlled testing, like lactate tests, on my athletes with or without their power wheel attached so that they can collect data that they can compare to as well. Last month I bought a Kickr for my personal use because what i found was that setting up the computrainer with the wired controller and non-intuitive interface for any of their software (despite course riding being available) made me just choose not to use it at all. I opted for rollers or an old standby fluid trainer that I got 10 years ago when I first started triathlons. So far I've used the Kick'r 4 times and have had a little learning curve setting it up, but overall it's fairly easy, connects to my 920 and I've got a good party going on with getting back to my own training and being a data nerd. My question for those that have said they prefer or chose one or the other is why you have that opinion or made that decision? The reason is two fold...first it may help others making the same decision. Secondly, perhaps I'm missing some features of the computrainer that I've chosen to disregard due to the annoyance factor (how many times can i knock over the controller stand??) Looking forward to what people have to say. |
| 2015-12-20 8:11 PM in reply to: AdventureBear |
| Subject: RE: Smart Trainers: Computrainer vs Kick'r Never used a kick'r so I've got no comparison. But using the CT for probably 4-5 ish years now. I ride two sessions per week and unless there's a race coming up tri bike stays on it and I ride the road bike on weekends. Couldn't be easier for me as it stays set up, the only thing I have to do is turn it on and apply press on force. No set up etc. I run it in ERG mode 99% of the time unless testing. Easy to do my coach's workouts, set the power manually (I know I can write a program to do it, but it's not that hard to press a few buttons), ride the intervals, watch the Walking Dead. It's taken me from a middling MOP cyclist to a FOP cyclist. I love it. There are also I guess third party programs that can control it, but I just use ERG mode with the head unit. I'm not sure I even know how to use the RM software anymore LOL Would I buy it again? Not sure, it was the only thing on the market when I bought. I know DC Rainmaker says there are more economic solutions but I expect my CT to last decades so that won't be an issue. Whatever works for someone is what they should use. |
| 2015-12-21 5:45 AM in reply to: 0 |
Extreme Veteran 5722 | Subject: RE: Smart Trainers: Computrainer vs Kick'r My concern with the Kickr is it's accuracy. I helped a friend set one up. He also had a SRM. His kickr reads 30watts higher and has a slight drift. We know his SRM is correct. There have been multiple reports of this on ST and the local LBS has told me people with PMs and Kickrs are complaining about the discrepancy. Earlier versions of the Kickr apparently did not have this problem. You can control the Kickr with an external PM. However not all software allows this. 3 of the many packages for kickr allow this. TR, wahoo app and perfpro.Having to rely on an external PM for accurate data is a PITA in my opinion. My buddy has his SRM on his tri bike and is not interested in swapping it around to get accurate data on his kickr w/road bike. Nor is he interested in maintaining two FTP and having data that can't be used for PMC charts, TSS analysis etc. A $1000 trainer that is unable to provide accurate data is a non starter for me. His kickr is no more accurate than virtual power. Hopefully Wahoo will resolve this issue although I suspect it's more than a firmware update. I really don't know what I would buy if I had to buy a smart trainer today. On one hand the CT lasts forever so a higher price is not that big a deal for accuracy and quality. But it does need a facelift. Edited by marcag 2015-12-21 6:03 AM |
| 2015-12-21 7:59 AM in reply to: marcag |
Master 2094 | Subject: RE: Smart Trainers: Computrainer vs Kick'r I have a Tacx Vortex Smart and I initially used it with my Powertap G3 simply because I didn't trust a cheap smart trainer. Initially the power was off but after breaking the unit in, the power readings were almost identical. At that point I took off the G3 and put on an old wired unit so I could spot check the numbers. So far, the Vortex is running well. I have a Computrainer and really can't tell much of a difference. I would be very unhappy if I paid the price of a Kickr and the wattage was that far off. |
| 2015-12-21 10:46 AM in reply to: pschriver |
Master 2912 ...at home in The ATL | Subject: RE: Smart Trainers: Computrainer vs Kick'r As a very happy KICKR owner I will actually have to say I agree with Marc. Mine has always been within 5w of my quarq at 200w, but I was a very early adopter (got it the first month they were available) and it does seem from the ST discussion that folks have better luck first gen models than the second (how often does THAT happen??) FWIW my vectors are about 5w off in the other direction from my quarq, so there is that. In all instances I use my PMs to drive the KICKR (trainer road, zwift, wahoo app, etc) and it is rock solid in that setup, so if you already have a pm on the bike you are using then it is a non issue, except for the fact you have to have a $1500+ power meter to control your $1000 smart trainer. Heh. |
| 2015-12-21 1:30 PM in reply to: AdventureBear |
Pro 5892 , New Hampshire | Subject: RE: Smart Trainers: Computrainer vs Kick'r Personally, I'm using CompuTrainers (one for me, one for my wife). So the interface is not the hottest, but the functionality is everything I need (and more). They're also pretty much bullet proof and lasts for years, so the interface is something I'm willing to ignore. I have a riding buddy that just bout a KICKR and loves it. Honestly, you can't really go wrong with their one. |
| 2015-12-21 2:30 PM in reply to: audiojan |
Extreme Veteran 5722 | Subject: RE: Smart Trainers: Computrainer vs Kick'r Originally posted by audiojan I have a riding buddy that just bout a KICKR and loves it. Do you know if he compared his power numbers to another device ? What isn't clear to me is the extent of the problem of inaccurate numbers. Is it all newer devices..50%...10%...? |
| 2015-12-21 8:23 PM in reply to: marcag |
Master 2912 ...at home in The ATL | Subject: RE: Smart Trainers: Computrainer vs Kick'r Marc - 4 of my teammates that have both KICKRs and powermeters (second gen) all have good, solid numbers after warmup and spin down. One of my teammates had a wonky one but wahoo replaced it and she hasn't had any trouble out of the new one. I think the problem is with a small minority of units, but the power of the interwebs tends to magnify the issue with the minority. Wahoo probably could have done a better job of managing that minority. |
| 2015-12-22 7:57 AM in reply to: marcag |
Extreme Veteran 1986 Cypress, TX | Subject: RE: Smart Trainers: Computrainer vs Kick'r Originally posted by marcag Originally posted by audiojan I have a riding buddy that just bout a KICKR and loves it. Do you know if he compared his power numbers to another device ? What isn't clear to me is the extent of the problem of inaccurate numbers. Is it all newer devices..50%...10%...? Marc, the problem was largely mitigated or fixed in a firmware update from earlier this year. The level of b!tching and moaning about it on ST died down to a whimper after that firmware update. Part of that was due to being able to control the KICKR via another PM but a lot of folks tested the KICKR accuracy itself with the new firmware and the numbers were more in line. It had something to do with the way the KICKR software was miscalibrating offset changes in temp. To the original question. I was one of the first KICKR adopters. So I never had an accuracy issue. It was always within a couple percent of my Quarq. I never owned a CT but borrowed one a few times from a friend to try out. Let me preface this by saying I'm more of a techie than most but I thought the CT was an overpriced, overbloated, and technologically inferior piece of . The KICKR is just far superior in every techie and logistical way. I just bought the new Tacx Neo Smart. Kind of a KICKR on steroids. Same direct mount, wireless, BT gadgetry as the KICKR but it has no moving parts so it's almost dead silent. The only noise coming from the Tacx Neo is from the drive train of your bike. So far I love it. It also sways slightly side to side given it a slightly more realistic feel than the KICKR. But it comes at a $400 premium over the KICKR... unless you can get it at 20% off like I did. I sent my KICKR to my brother. |
|
|
|
|
View profile
Add to friends
Go to training log
Go to race log
Send a message
View album
CONNECT WITH FACEBOOK