I have done the full frontal test on Saturday (not the first time, but the last time is more than a year ago).
It gave me a FTP of 250. The auto detected FTP from my Garmin (from riding outside) is 261. The last time I did a ramp test I got a FTP of 263. I thought that the value from the Full Frontal test is probably more accurate, since my rider type is a sprinter.
But yesterday I did the “FTP Progression 1: 5 x 6” Workout and thought that it felt quite easy. Before the last intervall I felt pretty fresh still, so that I set the workout to 103%. I still felt not too bad at the end of the intervall and actually finished in HR Zone 4.
Now I am wondering if maybe I didn’t pace the 20 minutes in Full Frontal well enough and should edit the FTP in my 4DP profile in order to get the best restults from doing the FTP training plan?
Some people test differently to others, especially when it comes to FTP. For example, with the 4DP Full Frontal test, 20 minutes maximal effort is incredibly demanding, especially after that 5min MAP test! Some people find it harder to maintain maximal power for 20 minutes than for example in the Half Monty. If your rider type is more suited to shorter sharper efforts, then testing higher in the Half Monty isn’t uncommon. Out of interest, what were your MAP results for both tests?
Coincidentally, I was going to post on a very similar topic today so thought I would add it to this thread - apologies though if I have slightly hijacked it.
My 4DP FTP is 292 (with MAP 362) - these figures from my last 4DP, undertaken about a year ago (can’t find the date of the 4DP on the new app…). Having recently purchased a power meter for my outdoor bike, yesterday I had my first autocalculation of FTP by my Garmin, which came in at 349.
That surprised me, given it is quite an increase on my 4DP FTP as well as being just shy of my MAP. Additionally, due to work commitments in the past 12 months, there have been a number of fallow period when it has come to training and so I haven’t trained as much/as hard as I would like.
My question therefore is how reliable is that Garmin calculation? From what I’ve seen on the internet it is considered relatively accurate but would be grateful for the considered view, particularly from the coaches.
I suppose one way to see how accurate it is is to do a 4DP and see if I can replicate that figure. Unfortunately, that means having to do 4DP…
I think you need those 4dp numbers. For science.
Outside FTP and power numbers also tend to be higher than your indoor FTP and power numbers for a variety of reasons. Not usually 50w different, tho.
Some of the difference can also be down to the power meter that you’re using. For example, if using a direct drive smart trainer then you lose some power through the drivetrain (not much often) whereas a pedal based power system will generally read higher. Although even then, there can be variances. I have 2 of the same brand power meter, one reads 20watts higher than my KICKR, the other reads 20watts lower. Using the two together and dual recording can give you an idea if there’s a difference between the two. You can then set indoor and outdoor zones depending on the bike you’re using
The MAP value I got from full frontal was 314. The ramp test gave me a MAP of 318.
And I do use a kickr core direct drive trainer, but for the power readings I paired my Favero Assiomas to the SYSTM App. So maybe the difference in FTP really just comes down to the difference of riding indoors and outdoors, or maybe just bad pacing of the 20 Minutes.
But still I am unsure which number I should use in my athlete profile order to train at the right intensity for me when doing the Threshold Block in the app. Or maybe the 10 Watts won’t make much of a difference at all for me? (unlike the 57 Watts of Jimpty )
Maybe we all just have to do a true hour of power
@Coach.Andy.T Grateful for the response.
I fear that is the answer…
@trichter196 Note that in the workout description for FTP Progression 1: 5 x 6 it does say that the workout isn’t super hard as it is a progression.