Just In: iBike Newton+ power meter

I'll suspend judgement.

As others have noted, Strava's power algorithm does a pretty good job based on nowt but a GPS track and a map database.

Case in point: I know my LT is 245W sitting on 80-85% max HR (as part of a sports PhD program I had a set of vomit-inducing tests done on a £15k power-bike-thing). When I go out for my monthly benchmark 'flying hour' loop Strava gets the power estimation within a few % every time - compared with my HRM average stats. If I've pushed a bit harder - say 87% - Strava tracks wattage a bit higher. Ditto for going a bit easier. That's irrelevant of wind - purely based on my time over the route.

So don't write it off just yet, because you can't fathom how they've done it. If it was fundamentally flawed they would be up for a class action and a ton of refunds.

One great thing I see here is that given a wind speed sensor and accelerometers are literally a few bucks a piece, the scope for this technology to get radically cheaper real quick is high.

This is April 1st right? Surely not a serious product.

For data measurement that has vary too many variables around to influence the data, that'll give you next to no repeatability as well.
Save the £500 and ride on feel till you can afford a proper power meter, there's a reason they're expensive.

Yawn.

Get a stages.

Tax in NJ is less, just jump on the train from Penn Station!

I agree with the reservations above (and amongst all that, how on earth does it measure individual left/right leg power?) but maybe we're looking at it from the wrong angle. What these guys have really done is look at the power calculations in Strava - made by nothing more than extrapolating the data from the basic feed - and added a load of gizmos to try and qualify the data and reduce the unpredictability. Maybe it's quite good.

That said, I would also think that the price jump to the Stages product (including buying a head unit) would be more than justified. The Newton would need to be half this price to combat that.

As you and the bike weight is required if I go out with 2 full water bottles and drink the contents I have lost 1.5kg of weight during the ride. Then refilling for a longer or hotter ride adds another variable.

As others have said I would be more interested in consistency than absolute accuracy if I ever bought such a product.

It seems flawed on so many levels. What if you had mudguards fitted for example (or loose clothing). They'd increase wind resistance but that wouldn't be picked up by the "iBike".

Very original name too. Who'd have ever thought of sticking a lower-case 'i' in front of the generic noun? Must have taken them *ages* to think up that one.

Seems very silly. It has to estimate your coefficient of drag from the riding position you enter into the system, so it's going to be inaccurate. That's not a big deal, but it's also going to be inconsistent, because my drag is going to change when I ride on the drops/hoods/tops and depending on what I'm wearing. Don't see how you could use this as a training tool, anyone got any ideas?

£599 here, $499 in USA. Anyone going to NYC in the near future?

£599 here, $499 in USA. Anyone going to NYC in the near future?

Does it matter if the reading is correct though as long as it is consistent and the rider does not try and compare between meters.

For training purposes, if you measure your FTP to be 1000watts, obviously wrong, but work according to that on that meter how wrong will you go?

Maybe "net opposing force" would be clearer. When you're freewheeling down hill there's gravitational force that is balancing air and rolling resistance.

I share the above skepticism about how accurate this system can be. To my mind the big advantage of a power meter is that it removes all the other variables from the measurement, rather than just trying to compensate for them.

At this price, the Stages meter seems like a better bet, particularly as I've already got a Garmin and would rather not have another head unit.

Testing power meters isn't so much about accuracy between different devices or methods, as it is about consistency in the same device.

That's what I'd be most interested to see on this.

To my mind there are too many variables and conditions it needs to take into account to be accurate from ride to ride.

You don't use the same position all the time on the bike and it can easily make 20-30 watts difference being on the hoods or down on the drops, or even with hands to the front
in a TT position (which might also shelter the device).

Great if it works, and presumably they didn't get this far without doing a lot of testing.

A lot of people just want a power meter as an expensive toy. This is probably something that would appeal to people who want a general idea of power at lower cost rather than a precise training measure.

"The total opposing force, multiplied by bike speed, equals cyclist power"

But if I'm freewheeling downhill, there's plenty of opposing force (I can feel the wind in my face) and plenty of bike speed, but cyclist power is zero.

@Mat Brett - what about road gradient?

If it only measures "forward acceleration" then that's not good enough.

Seems to need a lot of parameters input by the user to work effectively. Road surface, rider position, height, weight?! Road surface and position alone can vary hugely during a ride, so aren't these going to have a big effect on measurements?

Looks like one disadvantage (unless I'm missing something) is that is wont work on a turbo which is a shame.

Still, looks clever, and hopefully one more competitor will mean prices will come down too.