Regarding the reproducibility of measurements on more stable training phases,
it is not bad at all (recap above). Thus, the Rotor
advances from 4 to 12 watts between 250 and 500 w ROTOR Recording on stabilized efforts between 3 min
and 30s. This difference is explained by the friction losses of the chain
between the 2 means of measurement. But
never more than 2% difference (1 to 3%) between
the 2 means, it remains very good. The same powertap tried this time with ROTOR Recording my
SRM indicates measurement differences between 2.1 and 3.9%, also within 2% difference, so it is quite close between 250 w and
500 w. I always consider the SRM as the reference to base comparisons
on given its high reproducibility on my various buy phone number list field tests.
In addition, it has recently been certified by SRM to an accuracy of +/- 1%.
Below is an example of Rotor
Powertap recording at the same time. We can clearly see the superior smoothing of Rotor (less
variation) but also the problem of delays on short presses.
Powertap Recording
Regarding the slope/calibration of the Rotor Power, you cannot
act on it unlike the SRM. However, there is the possibility to check
thanks to the Rotorpower software that the gauges reliably measure the
power. Using weights to attach
to the pedals you can check all this (not yet tested, ANT+ key
required).
If a drift is noticed, it will have april chang project engineer to be returned!
For changing the batteries
On the other hand, it is very simple, you just have to unscrew the
cover (300 to 400 hours of autonomy) and change them for 10 euros. If we start on
300 hours and compared to the current 1900 hours of SRM, you will have to pay 60 euros for batteries
compared to 180 euros for the German crankset.
I’m deliberately not talking about the left/right clean email analysis and pedaling efficiency functions offered by the SOFT Rotor. I don’t have
enough experience on this to know if it’s reliable and how it’s calculated.
The Rotor document is currently very light on explanations.