I think there’s potentially some misinformation here that needs clarifying: 1. FTP is not determined definitively by any of these tests, they are estimates since you’d need lab equipment to test lactate levels to find true ftp. 2. Even 1hr test is an estimate not a true ftp number (although likely the least inaccurate field test) 3. The shorter tests are even less accurate and overestimate ftp for anaerobically strong athletes. 4. Wahoo SYSTM does a better job than Zwift since it evaluates different energy systems using different interval lengths. Zwift bases figures such as power at vo2max off fixed %s of ftp, which are accurate estimates only at population level, not necessarily anywhere close to accurate for different individuals since different people have wildly varying fractional utilisation. It’s also worth nothing that FTP (as reported by a field test) is going to vary from day to day, it’s a functional test and we’re humans not robots - so don’t worry if your FTP falls (or increases) a small amount between tests - it’s just “noise”, you should think of your ftp as a range really rather than a single precise number. One final point - consistency rather than accuracy is probably more important a lot of the time, in that as long as you do workouts within the same platform as you did the ftp test then the workouts are probably “indexed” to the correct power even if it’s not actually your lactate threshold and so will be challenging but doable - you’re more likely to get into trouble using an ftp figure from one platform to attempt workouts in another platform. Sticking to the same platform each time you test (and using the same power meter or turbo trainer) also ensures that you’re comparing like for like 👍
Very true, but probably the best estimate for hobby cyclists, who don’t have access or won’t spend the money for a thorough lab test. I actually did a comprehensive lab test not long time ago and it was astonishingly close to my Wahoo SYSTM 4DP results
Ding! When I first got my Wahoo KICKR Core, the Wahoo Half-Monty showed my FTP at 129 (sad, I know). Few weeks later, I used the Garmin FTP app and it showed FTP at 154. In mid-April, I spent $175 to have a Lactate Threshold Heart Rate test performed in a local lab so I could accurately know my zones and FTP, which was 205. A few weeks later, I tried the Half-Monty again and it showed my FTP lower by FIFTY points! After that, I placed very little value in any FTP test from Wahoo since it was off by a significant number (and nothing changed in my riding habits/training). I may try the Garmin FTP again just for grins however, I'll stick with lab testing for a true number (it's only $175).
Great information! Question for you if I use my Tacx via my Garmin Hedge to complete my FTP test and then I use my Garmin ... it's that ok ? I mean I know that I'm using two different platforms but they both have in common the smart trainer ...
Very useful video. Thanks. When I started measuring FTP I used the 20 minute 'all out' test, but found the correct strategy/pacing for it so stressful I dreaded the next one coming up. Eventually, I swapped to the ramp test and the dread has gone completely because the ramp test effectively removes psychological stress about pacing. The cyclist only has to pedal until they grind to a standstill. It's not about my mental strength or my pacing skill across 20 minutes. It just slowly turns the screw until I can no longer pedal. Far less stressful. Thanks also for the advice about keeping the room ventilated when doing the test. Makes huge sense. Never occurred to me.
That’s one advantage the ramp test has for sure particularly if you use a smart trainer. Glad you found the video and ventilation strategy helpful. I believe it makes a big difference. Thanks for watching 🙏🏼
You can immediately see that you are very professional, understand and know everything, it's really fun to watch and hear your video, you are much better than others
Great video, thank you for taking time to comparing the leading FTP tests. While I have my experiences with all of them, it good to hear an experts view. Great work 👍
There's a series of podcasts to help you plan and get the best results for the ramp and full frontal tests from Wahoo SYSTM. It's really important that you are prepped for the test or your results will be inaccurate.
I have only use Sufferfest/ Wahoo Systm. I hate all FTP tests! Make sure also to have the right fuel for the 1 hour testing. YOu will bonk if you don't have some type of energy.
I think at some point after so many years of cycling, you can sort of guess your FTP. I generally test after long breaks. But yeah FTP testing is no fun at all. Thanks for watching, Ken 🙏🏼
I've done the 1/2 Monty in March and again in August with just 1w difference (I'd expected it had gone down as summer cycling tends to fall into Z2 and I stopped doing weekly intervals)...I'm about to test it again because in the last month I've gone "ketovore" and am in early stages aof fat adaptation, but I know for sure the results are going to be way, way down on the sugar fuelled efforts... I'll report back!
Excellent advise at the very end. If workouts are getting too hard, too easy then it’s time for a FTP test. Testing is training, training is testing. GREAT video. Very well done. 👌🏻👍🏻👏🏻👏🏻
Thank you for another great video- high quality throughout, and great explanations and analysis. Curious what you think of the TrainerRoad AI method of FTP- have you gathered enough data to have an opinion of its accuracy?
It will give you a general estimation of your FTP based on your recent training. I find it to usually underestimates FTP. Still the best way to get a more accurate FTP is to test.
Oh, coincidence ? I'm planning to do an "FTP" test tomorrow. Though, I don't want to do those horrible FTP tests anymore, so I'll use, once again, Xert, to evaluate my "signature". Going for the "Fitness Test for BT v2". It's very hard :-( - but it's also very short :-) The drawback is that it's been a bit optimistic in my case, by the past, when I was training on high intensity intervals and put aside the endurance part. But I guess that it would be quite accurate for someone with a good base. Somewhat similar to what a ramp test would give for the same kind of training. Anyway, concerning your comparison Zwift vs SYSTM... Through the years, I tried both methods, and I prefer SYSTEM hands down. I may consider using it next Winter, if my tablet can cope with it.
I also find FTP testing in SYSTM to be a little better for some weird reason. Maybe all the entertainment and sarcastic jokes they have in there. Even their half Monty which is a much longer version of the ramp test seems a bit more tolerable somehow 🤷🏻♂️
After hip surgery and not riding much over the last 2 years it's as if I am starting from the beginning which is actually a good thing. Prior I had been riding regularly for long distance events for 30 plus years but I think I got stuck with some of my training, thoughts about power and heart rate, and other elements. At 63, the body changes, muscles shrink and endurance is often not like it was when I was 20. Thanks for your videos. This is helping me reassess my riding on many different levels.
Generally, you want to have erg mode off when doing an FTP test. So if using a Garmin Edge, you want to keep it in resistance mode instead of erg mode.
I tried Zwift FTP (shorter) version with Kickr Snap and the power fluctuations were awful. You drop from 200watts to 30-40watts in a second. I don’t think I can trust Zwift results anymore.
It’s normal for power to fluctuate like that. You can turn on 3s average in the Zwift setting to help minimize the fluctuations. You can also turn on erg mode smoothing in the Wahoo app.
I have a Garmin Edge 830 and Wahoo KICKR Core, and have used the Garmin FTP twice now, no problems. In fact, I'd argue the Garmin FTP test is more accurate than Wahoo's Half-Monty, based on lab testing I completed.
