Echo vs. Assault Bike // Which is Harder?

[naoiwi]

@shinejesusshine Doh! You're totally right.

But I guess if you wanted to test how different the two bikes measured power you could do a couple rides legs only.

 

[chloejm]

@naoiwi Now this I'd love to see!

 

[st333333]

@chloejm For short sprints echo is harder. It doesn’t start counting ANY cals until 7 seconds in

 

[caleb_m]

@chloejm Wouldn’t it make sense to do a constant work rate test and see what the other parameters look like?

Maybe 10:00 at a constant work rate of 350W and see what RPM and calories looked like. Throw in HR as well for some internal loading measures.

With this design, there is nothing similar to compare aside from 10:00.

 

[gourmetcandy]

@chloejm Best summation I’ve heard is from the HWPO resources “on the assault bike the relationship between rpm and cals in exponential, on the echo it’s linear”

Meaning your cals at 50rpm will be x for both. At 100rpm the echo will be 2x, but the assault bike will be more like 4x or x[sup]2.[/sup] Also the echo bike doesn’t start counting cals right away.

That seems to match my experience. Holding steady I get similar results. But then sprinting 10-20 cals feels way tougher on the echo.

So what I’ve found is sprints I prefer the AB. Anything over 30cal or .5k I’ll take the echo. But i almost exclusively use the echo bike in training. It makes AB feel easier, and I’m pretty sure it’ll be the standard across the board soon