Validity and Reliability of the PowerTap P1 and Garmin Vector 2 Power Pedals

James Wright, Simon Jobson

    Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Published conference proceedingConference contribution

    Abstract

    The development of the cycle-mounted power meter has allowed performance (e.g. power output) to be monitored using the athlete’s own bike (Earnest, Wharton, Church and Lucia, 2005, Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research, 19, 344–348). A popular option for amateur cyclists is the pedal-based power meter as they allow the flexibility of transferring between bikes but are also cheaper than the ‘gold standard’ SRM Powermeter. Currently, two of the most common pedal-based power meters are the PowerTap P1 (P1) and Garmin Vector 2 (V2) pedals. The aims of this study were to 1) compare the Lode Excalibur Sport with the P1 and V2 pedals and 2) investigate the test-retest reliability of the P1 and V2 pedals. Following institutional ethics approval, ten participants completed four 5 min sub-maximal cycling bouts (100, 150, 200 and 250 W), a 2 min maximal time-trial and two 10 s maximal sprints. Each participant completed the protocol on four occasions, two using the P1 pedals and two using the V2 pedals. Significant differences were seen between the Lode Excalibur Sport and the P1 pedals at 100 W (100.0±0.0 vs. 100.4±3.8, P = 0.006), 150 W (150.0±0.0 vs. 151.2±2.7, P = 0.006), 200 W (200.0±0.0 vs. 201.6±2.5, P = 0.001), 250 W (250±0.0 vs. 252.2±2.6, P = 0.006) and during the all-out sprints (963.7±111.0 vs. 1026.4±116.2, P = 0.020, ES = 0.55). Significant differences were also seen between the Lode Excalibur Spot and the V2 pedals at 100 W (100.0±0.0 vs. 104.6±4.2, P < 0.001), 150 W (150.0±0.0 vs. 156.3±4.9, P < 0.001), 200 W (200.0±0.0 vs. 207.2±6.0, P = 0.001), 250 W (250±0.0 vs. 261.4±7.2, P < 0.001) and during the all-out sprints (973.9±100.5 vs. 1026.1±95.5, P = 0.018, ES = 0.53). However, no significant differences were seen during the 2 min time-trial between the Lode Excalibur Sport and the P1 pedals (402.7±57.1 vs. 398.8±54.8, P = 0.718, ES = 0.07) or the V2 pedals (400.9±46.2 vs. 402.2±48.4, P = 0.779, ES = 0.03).The coefficient of variation for the P1 and V2 pedals ranged from 0.57–1.28% and 0.73–2.7%, respectively, during the sub-maximal cycling bouts. These results suggest that some care should be taken when using the P1 and V2 pedals during sprint performance. Results also suggest that during sub-maximal power outputs, both the P1 and V2 pedals are reliable.
    Original languageEnglish
    Title of host publicationSport and exercise science: from insight to impact
    Subtitle of host publicationBASES Conference 2018
    Publication statusPublished - 2018
    EventBritish Association of Sport and Exercise Sciences (BASES) 2018 Annual Conference - Harrogate, United Kingdom
    Duration: 28 Nov 201829 Nov 2018

    Conference

    ConferenceBritish Association of Sport and Exercise Sciences (BASES) 2018 Annual Conference
    Abbreviated titleBASES 2018
    CountryUnited Kingdom
    CityHarrogate
    Period28/11/1829/11/18

    Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'Validity and Reliability of the PowerTap P1 and Garmin Vector 2 Power Pedals'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

  • Cite this

    Wright, J., & Jobson, S. (2018). Validity and Reliability of the PowerTap P1 and Garmin Vector 2 Power Pedals. In Sport and exercise science: from insight to impact: BASES Conference 2018