Validity and reliability of the PowerTap mobile cycling powermeter when compared with the SRM Device
- PMID: 16320172
- DOI: 10.1055/s-2005-837463
Validity and reliability of the PowerTap mobile cycling powermeter when compared with the SRM Device
Abstract
The SRM power measuring crank system is nowadays a popular device for cycling power output (PO) measurements in the field and in laboratories. The PowerTap (CycleOps, Madison, USA) is a more recent and less well-known device that allows mobile PO measurements of cycling via the rear wheel hub. The aim of this study is to test the validity and reliability of the PowerTap by comparing it with the most accurate (i.e. the scientific model) of the SRM system. The validity of the PowerTap is tested during i) sub-maximal incremental intensities (ranging from 100 to 420 W) on a treadmill with different pedalling cadences (45 to 120 rpm) and cycling positions (standing and seated) on different grades, ii) a continuous sub-maximal intensity lasting 30 min, iii) a maximal intensity (8-s sprint), and iiii) real road cycling. The reliability is assessed by repeating ten times the sub-maximal incremental and continuous tests. The results show a good validity of the PowerTap during sub-maximal intensities between 100 and 450 W (mean PO difference -1.2 +/- 1.3 %) when it is compared to the scientific SRM model, but less validity for the maximal PO during sprint exercise, where the validity appears to depend on the gear ratio. The reliability of the PowerTap during the sub-maximal intensities is similar to the scientific SRM model (the coefficient of variation is respectively 0.9 to 2.9 % and 0.7 to 2.1 % for PowerTap and SRM). The PowerTap must be considered as a suitable device for PO measurements during sub-maximal real road cycling and in sub-maximal laboratory tests.
Similar articles
-
Caveats and Recommendations to Assess the Validity and Reliability of Cycling Power Meters: A Systematic Scoping Review.Sensors (Basel). 2022 Jan 5;22(1):386. doi: 10.3390/s22010386. Sensors (Basel). 2022. PMID: 35009945 Free PMC article.
-
Validity and reliability of the Polar S710 mobile cycling powermeter.Int J Sports Med. 2003 Apr;24(3):156-61. doi: 10.1055/s-2003-39083. Int J Sports Med. 2003. PMID: 12740731 Clinical Trial.
-
Validity and reliability of the G-Cog BMX Powermeter.Int J Sports Med. 2013 Jun;34(6):538-43. doi: 10.1055/s-0031-1301319. Epub 2012 Dec 19. Int J Sports Med. 2013. PMID: 23254482 Clinical Trial.
-
Validity and reproducibility of the ErgomoPro power meter compared with the SRM and Powertap power meters.Int J Sports Physiol Perform. 2007 Sep;2(3):270-81. doi: 10.1123/ijspp.2.3.270. Int J Sports Physiol Perform. 2007. PMID: 19168927
-
Tests of cycling performance.Sports Med. 2001;31(7):489-96. doi: 10.2165/00007256-200131070-00004. Sports Med. 2001. PMID: 11428686 Review.
Cited by
-
Effect of the rotor crank system on cycling performance.J Sports Sci Med. 2009 Sep 1;8(3):463-7. eCollection 2009. J Sports Sci Med. 2009. PMID: 24150012 Free PMC article.
-
The influence of fitness on insulin resistance in obese children.Rev Endocr Metab Disord. 2009 Sep;10(3):189-96. doi: 10.1007/s11154-009-9109-5. Rev Endocr Metab Disord. 2009. PMID: 19479380 Review.
-
Caveats and Recommendations to Assess the Validity and Reliability of Cycling Power Meters: A Systematic Scoping Review.Sensors (Basel). 2022 Jan 5;22(1):386. doi: 10.3390/s22010386. Sensors (Basel). 2022. PMID: 35009945 Free PMC article.
-
Interchangeability between the Data Obtained by Two Powermeters during Road Cycling Competitions: A Case Study.Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2022 Dec 8;19(24):16446. doi: 10.3390/ijerph192416446. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2022. PMID: 36554327 Free PMC article.
-
Impact of primary breast cancer therapy on energetic capacity and body composition.Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2018 Nov;172(2):445-452. doi: 10.1007/s10549-018-4924-6. Epub 2018 Aug 22. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2018. PMID: 30136009 Free PMC article.
Publication types
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources