Update: The CycleOps Hammer has since been replaced by the Saris H3, though frankly, the only meaningful difference is noise. Here’s the link to my full H3 in-depth review.
It’s Hammer Time.
The Hammer is CycleOps’ answer to the highly competitive high-end direct drive trainer realm. Or said differently, it’s their answer to the KICKR.
It feels like an eternity ago that the Hammer was announced. In reality though, it was a ‘mere’ 7 months ago, in early May, when CycleOps held their media event and announced both the Hammer and Magnus trainers. At the time both were set to ship by summer’s end, but like almost every other trainer company this year, those plans hit a few snags and delays set in.
Still, Hammer is now shipping and slowly becoming available throughout various distribution channels (the Magnus has been shipping a bit longer now, but is also backlogged too).
The Hammer is the first resistance controllable direct drive trainer from CycleOps, but hardly their first trainer. In fact, they had resistance controllable trainers out well before Wahoo and their KICKR. It’s just that in those days the trainers only worked with their respective apps. Here’s a look at those days. But more than that, this trainer is really a step forward for the company in becoming a legit competitive trainer offering again – both in the higher end realm with Hammer, but also the mid-range realm with Magnus. For this post, I’m focusing purely on the Hammer.
As usual, I’ll note that CycleOps sent me the trainer as a loaner to try out. Also like usual, I’ll be sending it back to them upon completion of these trainer reviews. That’s just the way I roll. If you found the review useful, you can pick up the CycleOps Hammer and other gadgets from Clever Training at the bottom of this review. In doing so DCR Readers save 10% and support the site. Plus, you’ll get free US shipping. Win-win!
With that – on to the trainer!
What’s in the box:
First up is cracking open the not-bite-sized box. Though, pretty much par for the course insofar as trainer boxes go. Inside you’ll find the trainer lying on its side looking up at you.
As someone who has unboxed his share of trainer boxes, I appreciate boxes that don’t require you hold them upside and wait for the trainer to slowly slide out the bottom clunking on the floor like a dead body.
Inside, it was wrapped up in plastic. This is another nice touch, in particular for trainers that use foam packing material (this one doesn’t). For example the lower end Tacx trainers use a Styrofoam that easily cracks and splinters into a million pieces, which you’ve got to then painstakingly clean up as it static-clings to your unit. I mean, not that I’ve had to unbox a dozen or so of them or anything.
Here’s what that looks like sans-condom:
Next, inside we’ve got enough power cables to plug in half the neighborhood. Or, half the world. There’s one cable for each country type, along with the power brick that connects to the trainer itself.
There’s also some manual paper stuff. One tip is to take this serial card (which contains your ANT+ ID) and tape it to the outside of the power brick (I’ll show you a pic later), that way you can always remember which cable is which. Another life lesson learned from having too many trainers.
One interesting omission compared to every other trainer out there (especially ones over $800) is the lack of an additional quick release skewer. I suppose many people have an extra one of these floating around, but still, it’s odd. I’d recommend picking up one for $9 or so from Amazon or your local bike shop. You can also just use your existing quick release skewer from your bike, though many people prefer just being able to loosen the skewer on their wheel and move the frame to the skewer on the trainer.
Next you’ll find additional thru-axle adapters, depending on the exact axle type you have on your bike. You do not need to purchase additional adapters or skewers for thru-axle bikes, as it’s included in the box (unlike the KICKR or NEO).
Here’s what all this jazz looks like sitting by itself on a table looking like a lonely puppy:
But, there’s a secret compartment I’ve still yet to show you. But a guy’s gotta have his secrets, right? More on that in a minute.
Setting It Up:
The Hammer is pretty easy to setup. It doesn’t require any assembly of the body itself, though does require you install a cassette on it. As frequent readers know, one of pet peeves in life is that trainer companies (except Wahoo) make you go out and buy a cassette. The cassette itself isn’t that expensive – usually about $50-$60 for the Shimano Ultegra one that I bought half a dozen of each year. But it’s the extra tools you’ll need. Again, these aren’t super expensive either – another $20-25 all-in (a cassette locking tool, wrench, and chain whip). But all in you’re talking in the $70-$85 range more than you expected. Note that Wahoo is the only one that includes a cassette in the price (pre-installed). Of course, you can swap it out for your own.
As such, your first order of business is installing said cassette. It’s easy enough, and will likely take you 5-10 minutes if you haven’t done it before. If you’re a frequent cassette flyer, then you’re likely looking at 2-3 minutes.
When it comes to cassette types, the unit accepts Shimano 8-11 speed cassettes.
Further, on the thru-axle support, it has compatibility for 130mm, 135mm, 142mm, and 148mm axles, which makes it the broadest range of axles supported today (KICKR tops out at 142mm, and NEO at 135mm).
Once your cassette work is done, your beauty awaits:
At this juncture you’ll want to grab that power plug and get things situated. The Hammer does require power to provide resistance. Without it, I’ll just sorta provide very low resistance (under 150w), and a brief higher resistance pushback if you try and sprint. This is akin to virtually all other higher-end trainers except the Tacx Neo.
Finally note that the power adapter works for 110-220v, so you can use it anywhere on earth. And if the space station operates on 110/220v, you can use it there too.
Usage Basics:
Like most trainers these days, the trainer-specific usage is silly simple. That’s in large part because most of the complexity has shifted to 3rd party apps, and going wireless has largely eliminated much of the setup and day to day complexity. With the Hammer, you simply mount your bike and start riding.
Of course, first you might want to deploy the Hammer party trick, which is its hidden front wheel block. When you first get the Hammer, it looks like this – all folded up:
However riding the trainer like that would be pretty darn unstable. Instead, you’ll want to fold out its legs, which unlock via the small yellow buttons along the edges:
You can adjust each leg’s foot, in case you have wonky-ass uneven floors like me.
Once you’ve opened up the legs, you’ll find that secret held inside: The front wheel block.
You can then place this small plate under your front wheel, which can help minimize twisting from the handlebars. Magic!
Now in the event you need to move the unit around, it’s got a handle up top that’s easy to grab:
As noted earlier, along the back is the power port, and below it lists your ANT+ ID. In general you won’t need this unless you have multiple units in the room. But still, it’s super-handy to have. Once plugged in you’ll get a small status LED along the top of the trainer that can be easily seen while riding it.
Of course, the main purpose of buying a resistance controlled trainer is of course the ability to automatically control resistance and power levels. This typically takes two common forms:
ERG Mode: Setting a specific power level – i.e. 225w. In this mode, no matter what gearing you use, the trainer will simply stay at 225w (or whatever you set it to). The Hammer has a maximum wattage set point of 2,000w.
Simulation Mode: Simulating a specific outdoor grade – i.e. 5% incline. In this mode, it’s just like outdoors in that you can change your gearing to make it easier or harder. Wattage is not hard-set, only incline levels. The Hammer has a max simulated incline of 20%.
There are variants of these that different trainer control protocols utilize, but basically everything gets back to one of those two ways of controlling a trainer. From a usage standpoint, different apps will focus on different things. For example, Zwift in regular mode will be setting the incline/grade, while TrainerRoad and Zwift in workout mode will be using ERG to set specific wattages.
When it comes to ‘road-like feel’, it’s always fairly subjective. But essentially people are looking at the inertia and how it feels – primarily when you accelerate or otherwise change acceleration (such as briefly coasting). A key driver of this is the flywheel size. Be it physical or virtual, flywheel sizes tend to be measured in weight. In general, the larger the flywheel size the more road-like feel. The Hammer has an official flywheel weight of 20LBS/9KG which is the highest of any flywheel out there today in a direct drive electronically controlled trainer (by almost double).
As I’ve said numerous times, for me personally, it’s hard to separate the fact that I’m riding indoors from outdoors. It’s still a trainer, and I’m still looking at a wall in front of me. My brain can only turn that off so much. Overall I think the unit’s got a pretty good road-like feel, and it handles well when I crest the top of hills in Zwift, or even feels like soft-pedaling while going down descents. Additionally, rolling into a sprint feels pretty good. Not spectacular, but most trainers don’t feel spectacular – even at this price point.
Now it used to be that you’d use apps by trainer companies to control your trainer. But these days that’s far less common. The vast majority of consumers go with the vast collection of 3rd party trainer apps. Though, CycleOps actually does have a pretty legit training suite, which I cover a bit in the next section.
However, for all apps you should visit my recently released trainer app guide – which covers over 20 different training apps, the majority of which will connect to the Hammer just fine due to the adoption of standards by CycleOps in the Hammer. With that, let’s talk standards.
App & Protocol Support:
The CycleOps Hammer is one of two new trainers this season from CycleOps (the other being the Magnus), and both of which are the first dual-protocol trainers that CycleOps has released. Prior to this they had both ANT+ and Bluetooth Smart versions, but never one version with both protocols combined.
Further, these would be the first trainers that CycleOps has released that supports the ANT+ FE-C standard that was introduced some 18 or so months ago. This would actually make for one of the last of the majors to adopt FE-C. Which isn’t to say that CycleOps ‘had’ to, since they already had opened up their protocol to virtually all apps – so the net difference is pretty minimal for them. Instead, it just makes it easier for newer apps to get these trainers compatible.
In any event, all this means is that it’ll transmit across ANT+ & Bluetooth Smart, while also allowing resistance control across ANT+ & Bluetooth Smart. Resistance control is what enables apps to specify what resistance level the trainer is at, such as wattage and slope.
The CycleOps Hammer supports the following broadcast and control standards:
ANT+ FE-C Control: This is for controlling the trainer via ANT+ from apps and head units. Read tons about it here.
ANT+ Power Meter Profile: This broadcasts as a standard ANT+ power meter (with speed in the case of the Hammer)
Bluetooth Smart Control: This uses the CycleOps variant of BLE control, the same as their other Smart Trainers starting back with the PowerBeam lineup. There is not yet a BLE trainer control standard (soon!); so each company does their own thing.
Bluetooth Smart Power Meter Profile: This broadcasts as a standard BLE power meter, with speed as well.
Note that the Hammer does *not* broadcast cadence across any channels.
Within these standards you can basically control or connect to the Hammer from just about any 3rd party app or device out there. If an app doesn’t support one of these protocols, it probably sucks horribly. Zwift, TrainerRoad, Kinomap and dozens more support these. As do head units like Garmin, Wahoo, Lezyne, Stages, and more. The power of using standards! No pun intended.
In my usage of the Hammer, I’ve utilized it with: Garmin Edge 510, 520, Garmin Edge 820, Edge 1000, Fenix3, Zwift (Workout & Regular Mode on both iOS and PC), CycleOps Virtual Training App (iPad and iPhone), and TrainerRoad.
Still, once calibrated you can do your workout just fine:
I had no problem doing calibration however within the CycleOps Virtual Training (CVT) app, and then using Zwift and TrainerRoad. You can see it showing as an ANT+ FE-C source in the below completed workout.
Note that Zwift has never (oddly) supported calibration of any trainers within their app. This is somewhat ironic given that Zwift is the only app that from an integrity standpoint actually stands to benefit from calibration. All other apps if you don’t calibrate you’re only harming yourself, whereas with Zwift you’re effectively harming other competitors (and/or perhaps yourself too). Still, Zwift sees the trainer just fine and you can otherwise ride it just fine and dandy, be it the desktop via FE-C, or the iOS app.
For example, here I am using the new Zwift iOS with Bluetooth Smart control over Hammer:
While I suspect we’ll see TrainerRoad soon support the Hammer calibration natively, you can see it in process within the CVT app. CycleOps Virtual Training (aka Virtual Training) is actually compatible with virtually every trainer out there, even ones not made by CycleOps. It’s also got about the widest collection of functions in an app. It does real-course videos from around the world, structured workouts, and even replications of various outdoor races/courses. Plus, you can upload your own stuff there too if you have an action cam, allowing you to re-ride it later.
Within the CVT app, you can also save and store the bike settings, as well as trigger that calibration function that I mentioned earlier:
When you do a calibration of the Hammer, it takes a…umm…long-ass-time. 120 seconds to be precise. Actually, it’s slightly more than that, about 136-138 seconds. See, you’ll start by spinning up to speed:
And then you’ll stay at that speed for 120 seconds.
Finally, upon the conclusion of 120 seconds – you’ll stop pedaling and let it coast to a stop. It’s this coasting time that they’re actually measuring. Note that this calibration procedure is exactly the same as the Magnus trainer that also came out from CycleOps this fall.
The good news though is that in talking with CycleOps, they’ll be slicing that calibration period down significantly. In the beta firmware update I tried today, it’s down to 20 seconds for standard ANT+ FE-C calibrations (no matter the app/device), and in an upcoming firmware update they’ll match that on Bluetooth Smart calibrations. They noted that the 120 second calibration period originally came from the older PowerBeam series, and was simply something that hadn’t been tackled yet for the new line. A 20 second calibration is on par with virtually every other trainer out there.
The trainer will remember calibration values from other apps, so you can quickly use the CVT app on your smartphone to set a new calibration value.
Sound Levels:
Measuring the sound of silence. One of the most requested things y’all ask me to do with trainers.
Let’s get this out of the way: The CycleOps Hammer isn’t silent. It’s not like the Neo (which costs $400 more). But it’s not noisy either. It sits in the same ranking as the new Wahoo KICKR (KICKR2) as well as to some degree the Tacx Flux. It’s not as quiet as the Elite Drivo though. You’ll of course hear it in the video below and decide for yourself. Still, it’s better than any of their past units, better than the original Wahoo KICKR.
First however, something to note about noise testing. Someday I’ll write all about trainer sound and noise testing. I’ve learned a lot over the years, and the more I do the more I realize how hopeless it really is to give folks a truly accurate view of the sound levels in videos (let alone measure them). There are a massive number of environmental factors that truly do have a huge impact:
– The room materials (which can make trainers quieter or louder due to echo, noise dampening, etc…)
– The size of the room
– The exact distance of the camera and/or decibel meter
– The mode of the decibel meter
– The type of mics used
– The sound levels of the mics used
– The exact position of the mics relative to different sides of the trainer
– How the mics capture different tones
– How I edited the audio (normalized levels)
– The speed of the trainer
– The cleanliness of the drivetrain on your bike
– The shifting accuracy (tuning) of your bike’s drive train
– Whether or not I remembered to turn on the @#$@# mics
– And other items I’m likely forgetting
Any one of these items can make the entire trainer sound dramatically different. I think I might put together a funny video showing just this some day. Maybe I’ll pretend to be different people on YouTube, just to demonstrate how different I can make a single trainer sound. All of which makes doing repeatable tests over the course of years very difficult. So instead, I’m going to focus on ‘in the now’ type tests by showing two trainers side by side in as close of conditions as possible.
In the meantime, I’m going to continue using my handy dandy decibel meter stoplight (this first video explains how it works, while the second video shows the Hammer):
To demonstrate how this trainer sounds, I’ve stacked it up against the KICKR2 and the Elite Drivo. I go side by side with them in the same space, so you compare them in like conditions. Note that I have a separate video comparing the Tacx Flux, Tacx Neo, and Wahoo KICKR2 – in case that fancies you. But the below video is all about the Hammer.
As you can hear, it’d be hard to pick a distinct winner between the KICKR2 and Hammer when it comes to noise. They’ve virtually identical, with just slight differences in tone.
Accuracy Testing:
Next up we’ll take a look at accuracy, specifically power meter accuracy. The CycleOps Hammer claims a stated accuracy level of +/-3%, which is slightly beyond other trainers in this price ballpark. Some are slightly better at +/-1% or +/-2%, but that wasn’t in the cards here for the Hammer.
In my case I was looking to see how it reacted in three main areas: Zwift, TrainerRoad, and ANT+ FE-C control via Garmin. However, I also validated accuracy in CycleOps’s own CVT app. The actual apps don’t much matter (at all), but rather the use cases are different. In Zwift you get variability by having the road incline change and you being able to instantly sprint. This reaction time and accuracy are both tested here.
Whereas in TrainerRoad I’m looking at its ability to hold a specific wattage very precisely, and to then change wattages instantly in a repeatable way. There’s no better test of that than 30×30 repeats (30-seconds at a high resistance, followed by 30 seconds at an easy resistance). However, my legs and workout structure decided to go with slightly longer 1-minute intervals this time. Not that it matters too much since you see the impact of accuracy shifts in the first 5-7 seconds for these tests anyway.
So we’ll start with TrainerRoad. In TrainerRoad the Hammer is utilizing ERG mode via ANT+ FE-C control. This means that TrainerRoad tells the trainer a given wattage level, and the trainer should hold it. After all, that’s the entire point of ERG mode – very specific wattage levels. Whereas other trainer modes are used when you want to simulate a specific gradient (such as in Zwift…but more about that in a second).
Here’s the workout I selected (requires a TrainerRoad account to view, but it’s shown below in this screenshot):
And here’s the high level data, in this case showing it smoothed at 20s. We see a bit of disagreement between the units, at the higher end, partly because they measure in different places, and partly because of the +/- 3%.
If I look at the early peaks, it seems to hit those pretty close to spot on.
But remember I mentioned smoothing? I do that to make it easy to pick-out accuracy issues, as power data is normally pretty noisy. Except that in the case of ERG mode, it actually shouldn’t be noisy, it should be very ‘tight’. Here’s what it looks like unsmoothed:
Woah, that’s not good. What’s up there? That kind of variability is perfectly normal outdoors, but not indoors in ERG mode. It’s fluctuating +/- 50w or more, a trend I see reflected on the power meters as well. To be clear, it’s *accurate* during those periods, it’s just not holding the wattage set point it should be (i.e. 300w). Instead, it’s like a drunk driver that can’t keep in its lane.
So, I circled back to CycleOps and let them do some digging. A short bit later they came back with a firmware update. They found that in my case the speeds I had used in ERG mode were causing a bug which led to the high variability of the ERG set point, producing the drunk-driver effect. So they shipped over a beta firmware update to address it. Here’s the results of that quick test:
And then below on the Analyzer, both at 0s smoothing (left) and 20s (right) smoothing to match above graph styles:
(Note: You see a few minor dropouts in the graph on the Hammer, this is a case of an ANT+ dropout to that Edge 510, as it doesn’t show on the TrainerRoad data stream. One of the reasons I often duplicate data recording on multiple devices.)
As you can see, now it’s nice and crispy – as it should be. Boom, almost perfect! That firmware update should be released shortly to the public, after they do a few more rounds of testing to ensure this didn’t break anything else. Again, the issue wasn’t that the power wasn’t accurate, but rather that it just didn’t hold the designated ERG point correctly.
You’ll notice a very minor difference above between the first four and last four intervals. I changed my gearing to change speed, since that can impact results. You’ll see the last four are a tiny bit cleaner than the first four. CycleOps says they’ll be tweaking things a tiny bit more over the coming days to get it a bit cleaner. The change mainly impacted how they were using wheel speed previously.
Next, we’ve got Zwift. In Zwift you can either be in ERG mode (workout section), or simulation mode (general Zwift). I tried both actually, mostly because I was curious how Zwift ERG might differ from TrainerRoad ERG. But first, the regular Zwift riding mode wherein I just wandered around Zwift for 45 or so minutes. After which, I plotted the data:
That’s some really beautiful alignment there (shown above at 10s smoothed). Even zooming in on the sprints, it does really well. Keep in mind that max power in a sprint is often a function of how/when it’s recorded by the head unit. So seeing slight variances between units is 110% normal. Note the below data was collected on production firmware, not beta.
Next, a quick look at the Zwift workout mode, from a workout this morning lasting about 30 minutes:
Well then, that looks pretty. Check out that max power – all incredibly close on those short sprints (the above is shown smoothed at 5s). You see a slight bit of difference between the power meters in the first two intervals (at the 5/7 minute markers), but then things settle out really nicely. I’m not terribly worried about that, as settlement in accuracy over the first 8-10 minutes of any trainer is normal – even the ones that say they don’t need to settle usually do. You can click on that link above to dig into this set further as well.
So where do things end up? It seems that in general the accuracy side is pretty good. I had one weird calibration run, which I didn’t fully realize until later on, which resulted in this odd set here. I’m about 90% certain that’s because something went amiss mid-calibration that I suspect is related to a flaky wall outlet I had temporarily plugged it into while filming my sound levels video. It dropped the connection towards the end of the calibration and I’m wondering if it actually set anything at all. Either way, I’ve never had that happen again or before – so I’m considering it an anomaly related to the power issue (since I lost all connectivity to it).
But if I ignore that, and look at successful calibrations, or heck, no calibrations at all, it matches very nicely with the other power meters on the bike. Obviously they’ll need to release that beta firmware update to address the ERG set point, but I don’t have any concerns there. It sounds like they just want a few more days to validate things before releasing it to the wild.
(Note: All of the charts in these accuracy sections were created using the DCR Analyzer tool. It allows you to compare power meters/trainers, heart rate, cadence, speed/pace, GPS tracks and plenty more. You can use it as well, more details here.)
Trainer Comparison:
So which trainer is your best bet? Well, that’s an extremely complex topic. One that I dedicate an entire post on each year as part of my annual trainer recommendations guide. That guide came out a month or so ago, and is available here.
At this point I have ridden every trainer coming out this season, all of which I now have final versions of. Here’s the higher-end versions that compete with the CycleOps Hammer
CycleOps Hammer: Final In-Depth Review (this post, duh)
Elite Drivo: Final Production In-Depth Review
Tacx Flux: Final Production In-Depth Review
Tacx NEO: Final Production Unit ridden for a year, post here
Wahoo KICKR2: Final Production In-Depth Review
When it comes to accuracy, all of these units are pretty darn solid. I’d give slightly higher marks to the Elite Drivo and Tacx NEO, but we’re talking the tiniest of margins there.
If you’re looking for silence, as noted the quietest trainer is simply the Tacx NEO. There’s really no comparison there. The second quietest would be the Elite Drivo, at least because the tone/pitch isn’t as high as the Hammer/KICKR.
When it comes to apps, the Hammer has a slight advantage of Elite in that many apps have previously supported the PowerBeam series on Bluetooth Smart, which means they also work on the Hammer/Magnus. The Wahoo KICKR/KICKR2 has slightly more support on some fringe apps, but for all the big apps it’s a wash.
In any case, I’ve added the CycleOps Hammer to the product comparison tables. For the purposes of below, I’ve compared it to the Wahoo KICKR2, Elite Drivo, and Tacx NEO. But you can make your own comparison tables here, and compare it against any trainers I’ve ridden:
| Function/Feature | CycleOps Hammer | Elite Drivo | Tacx NEO Smart | Wahoo KICKR V2/2016 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Copyright DC Rainmaker - Updated September 11th, 2023 @ 4:51 pm New Window | ||||
| Price for trainer | $1,199USD | $1,199 | $1,369 | $1,199 |
| Trainer Type | Direct Drive (no wheel) | Direct Drive (no wheel) | Direct Drive (no wheel) | Direct Drive (no wheel) |
| Available today (for sale) | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Availability regions | Global | Global | Global | Global |
| Wired or Wireless data transmission/control | Wireless | Wireless | Wireless | Wireless |
| Power cord required | Yes | Yes | No | Yes |
| Flywheel weight | 20lb/9kg | 13.2lbs/6kg | SIMULATED/VIRTUAL 125KG | 12.5lbs/5.7kgs |
| Includes cassette | No | No | Yes (11 Speed SRAM/Shimano) | Resistance | CycleOps Hammer | Elite Drivo | Tacx NEO Smart | Wahoo KICKR V2/2016 |
| Can electronically control resistance (i.e. 200w) | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Includes motor to drive speed (simulate downhill) | No | No | Yes | No |
| Maximum wattage capability | 2,000w | 2,296w @ 40KPH / 3,600w @ 60KPH | 2,200w @ 40KPH | 2500w @ 30MPH |
| Maximum simulated hill incline | 20% | 24% | 25% | 20% | Features | CycleOps Hammer | Elite Drivo | Tacx NEO Smart | Wahoo KICKR V2/2016 |
| Ability to update unit firmware | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Measures/Estimates Left/Right Power | No | Paid option (9EUR) | No | No |
| Can directionally steer trainer (left/right) | No | No | With accessory | No |
| Can simulate road patterns/shaking (i.e. cobblestones) | No | No | Yes | No | Motion | CycleOps Hammer | Elite Drivo | Tacx NEO Smart | Wahoo KICKR V2/2016 |
| Whole-bike physical gradient simulation | No | No | No | |
| Can slide forward/back with movement | With Tacx NEO Motion Plate (Accessory) | |||
| Can rock/tilt side to side (significantly) | No | No | No | Accuracy | CycleOps Hammer | Elite Drivo | Tacx NEO Smart | Wahoo KICKR V2/2016 |
| Includes temperature compensation | Yes | N/A | N/A | Yes |
| Support rolldown procedure (for wheel based) | Yes | N/A | N/A | Yes |
| Supported accuracy level | +/- 3% | +/- 1% | +/- 1% | +/- 2% | Trainer Control | CycleOps Hammer | Elite Drivo | Tacx NEO Smart | Wahoo KICKR V2/2016 |
| Allows 3rd party trainer control | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Supports ANT+ FE-C (Trainer Control Standard) | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Supports Bluetooth Smart FTMS (Trainer Control Standard) | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| WiFi or Ethernet | No | Data Broadcast | CycleOps Hammer | Elite Drivo | Tacx NEO Smart | Wahoo KICKR V2/2016 |
| Transmits power via ANT+ | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Transmits power via Bluetooth Smart | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Supports Multiple Concurrent Bluetooth connections | No, just one | No, just one | No, just one | |
| Transmits cadence data | Yes | No | ||
| Bridging or re-transmission | No | Purchase | CycleOps Hammer | Elite Drivo | Tacx NEO Smart | Wahoo KICKR V2/2016 |
| Amazon | Link | Link | Link | Link | DCRainmaker | CycleOps Hammer | Elite Drivo | Tacx NEO Smart | Wahoo KICKR V2/2016 |
| Review Link | Link | Link | Link | Link |
Again, remember you can create your own comparison tables here and mix and match trainers till your heart’s content.
Summary:
It’s clear that CycleOps/PowerTap have found their stride in the past 12-18 months. Last year they’ve announced and started shipping the popular PowerTap C1 & P1 power meters, and now this year they followed that up with another double – the Magnus and Hammer trainers. All of which support dual-ANT+/Bluetooth Smart connectivity, giving you choices on the apps and devices you use. And most importantly, all are solid products – including the Hammer.
While I would have liked to see CycleOps aim for a slightly higher accuracy rating (+/-2% instead of +/-3%), it appears that in practice they’re already achieving that anyway. And quite frankly, I’m more focused on actuals than theoreticals. The upcoming beta firmware I tested should resolve the outstanding quirks I saw in ERG mode, which will round this out to be a a very solid trainer option.
When looking at the growing flotilla of trainers in the ~$1,200 price range (KICKR/Hammer/Drivo), you’ll find it really comes down to nuances. One might have a slightly different road feel, or a different noise pitch. While another might have barely different accuracy specs or thru-axle support differences. And another may fold up one way vs a different way, or be supported better in one specific application vs another. It’s almost to the point of being a wash between them, if not already one.
With that – thanks for reading!
Found This Review Useful? Or just wanna save 10%? Here’s how:
I’ve partnered with Clever Training to offer all DC Rainmaker readers exclusive benefits on all products purchased. You can read more about the benefits of this partnership here. You can pickup the Hammer trainer through Clever Training using the links below. By doing so, you not only support the site (and all the work I do here) – but you also get to enjoy the significant partnership benefits that are just for DC Rainmaker readers. And, if your order ends up more than $75, you get free US shipping as well.
CycleOps Hammer Trainer (older edition)
Saris H3 Trainer (current)
Saris TD1 Trainer Desk
Saris MP1 Motion Platform Crazy Thing
For European/Australian/New Zealand readers, you can also pickup the unit via Wiggle at the links below, which helps support the site too! With Wiggle new customers get 10GBP (or equivalent in other currencies) off their first order for anything over 50GBP by using code [Currently Disabled] at check-out after clicking the links below.
Saris H3 Trainer (EU/UK/AU/NZ – Wiggle)
And finally, here’s a handy list of accessories that most folks getting a trainer for the first time might not have already:
| Product | Amazon | Note | |
|---|---|---|---|
 | Amazon Basics Fan | Amazon | I've got three $15 fans floating around the DCR Cave (previously Honeywell ones, but seems to be rebranded as Amazon Basics now), and I frequently use them on rides. They work just fine. Sure, they're not as powerful as a Wahoo Headwind, but I could literally buy 20 of them for the same price. |
 | Apple TV 4K 64GB WiFi (2022) | Amazon | There's no better bang for your buck in getting Zwift (or FulGaz/etc) on your big screen TV than Apple TV - it's the primary way I Zwift. |
 | Basic Trainer Mat | Amazon | This is a super basic trainer mat, which is exactly what you'll see me use. All it does is stop sweat for getting places it shouldn't (it also helps with vibrations too). |
 | Elago R1 Apple TV Remote Silicone Case with Strap | Amazon | I use Apple TV for Zwift the vast majority of the time, but also just for watching YouTube/Netflix/etc on the trainer. The Apple TV remote sucks though. This $8 case fixes that, it's a silicone strap that makes it easy to grab, but also has a strap to easily place on the edge of your handlebars. Boom! Note: Not compatible with 2021 Apple TV Edition. |
 | Front Wheel Riser Block | Amazon | Here's the thing, some people like front wheel blocks, some don't. I'm one of the ones that do. I like my front wheel to stay put and not aimlessly wiggle around. For $8, this solves that problem. Note some trainers do come with them. Also note, I use a riser block with *every* trainer. |
 | Indoor Cycle Trainer Desk (RAD/CXWXC/Vinsetto/Conquer/etc...) | Amazon | This desk is both a knock-off of the original KICKR Desk, but yet also better than it. First, it's got wheel locks (so the darn thing stays put), and second, it has two water bottle holders (also useful for putting other things like remotes). I've been using it as my main trainer desk for a long time now and love it. Cheaper is better apparently. Note: Branding varies by country, exact same desk. |
 | KOM Cycling Trainer Desk | Amazon | This is by far the best value in trainer desks, at only $59, but with most of the features of the higher end features. It's got multi-tier tablet slots, water bottle holders, non-stick surface, adjustable height and more. I'm loving it! |
 | Lasko High Velocity Pro-Performance Fan (U15617) | Amazon | One of the most popular trainer fans out there, rivaling the Wahoo Headwind fan in strength but at a fraction of the price. It doesn't have smartphone/ANT+/Bluetooth integration, but it does have secondary outlets. I've been using it, and a similiar European version lately with great success (exact EU variant I use is automatically linked at left). |
 | Tacx Tablet Bike Mount | Amazon | I've had this for years, and use it in places where I don't have a big screen or desk, but just an iPad or tablet on my road bike bars. |
Additionally, you can also use Amazon to purchase the unit (though, no discount/points). Or, anything else you pickup on Amazon helps support the site as well (socks, laundry detergent, cowbells). If you’re outside the US, I’ve got links to all of the major individual country Amazon stores on the sidebar towards the top.
first commnet! but I don’t really have a comment…….
Great work as always Ray
Great review, thanks!!!
Glad to hear that CycleOps is so responsive, and especially glad to hear that they’re changing the calibration step down from 2 minutes! It’s kind of a bear to have to start a workout with what feels like a 2-minute interval!
As always, thanks Ray! Can’t wait to read through this and get the conversation going :)
do u need to calibrate every single time???
I actually haven’t found that to be the case. I did some rides with no calibration and it was just as accurate as those with calibration. Still, as a general best practice I recommend it.
good initial review of the trainer. happy the accuracy is less than the advertised 3%.
personal pet peeves
why your trainer reviews do not mention WARRANTY information. when buying a top end trainer manufacturers should offer a warranty period to complement the high price they charge for them. i believe wahoo/elite/tacx have one year limited warranties on all there products. cycleops??
stability of the trainer. how stable is hamer vs neo/kickr/drivo when doing a full out sprint. is it this bad
link to youtube.com
cheers
I agree about the warranty information. Cycleops web site says lifetime warranty on the frame and 1 year on the electronics. But if I spend >$1,000 US on a trainer, I’d like to think I would be guaranteed to get more than one year out of it.
Generally speaking warranty is based on where you live. For example, in Europe a 2-year warranty is required for consumer goods for EU countries.
The reason I haven’t included warranty in the past is kinda simple: Nobody’s ever asked for it before (ever).
Secondarily, it’s also generally speaking 1 year in the US, and 2 years in Europe. As such, it’s mostly a great equalizer.
As for sprinting tests, I didn’t have problems once I tightened up the screws. Out of the factory I found the screws for the arms were a bit loose, so I just tightened them up and all was good. It’s hard for me to comment either way on that video, since I can’t see what the rider is doing. Meaning, are they going crazy left/right trying to tilt unit, or? Which is to say I can make any trainer do wonky stuff with enough force when out of view of a camera.
thanks Ray. so the euro’s get trainers(neo,flux,drivo) at a lower price + better warranty. nice :(
btw cycleops put up a video on facebook showing the manufacturing of a hammer/magnus. good QA. surprised every trainer is tested before shipping. happy not all usa products are made in asia(wahoo)
link to facebook.com
No, just to clarify – the warranty is based on your country of residence, not actually the vendor.
As for manufacturing in Asia, it’s honestly irrelevant from what I see. What matters is the manufacturing partner a company chooses, and how well they implement quality controls. One can make products in the USA and still deliver crap. Inversely, one can make products in Asia and deliver high quality goods. Apple being a good example in Asia, and I can think of specific examples of USA made products that are less than ideal.
Further to that point. Companies often separate hardware from software in different countries. Or, may be good at one side versus another. That can ruin a beautiful product even if the hardware is perfect or the software is perfect. Two peas in a pod thing and all.
we need shimano to enter this trainer space. as more electronics are added to cycling industry the failure rate will go up.
shimano warranty.
link to bike.shimano.com
link to cycle.shimano-eu.com
notice on dura-ace/xtr premium product the longer warranty period.
i had a di2 battery fail on my 9070 trek. battery was 2 years old. replaced. no drama.
The CycleOps warranty (in the US at least) is:
Hammer and Magnus Indoor Trainer:
Frame: Lifetime (with the typical limitations of being “free of any defects in material or workmanship”).
Electronics: 1 year
Here’s the direct link to the assembly video:
link to facebook.com
The Hammer is covered in the first half while the second half is the Magnus.
I’m guessing SRAM cassettes will work, correct?
Yes, works great with SRAM cassettes.
This video shows the installation process of the cassette onto the Hammer and he does mention that SRAM cassettes are accepted. link to youtu.be
Thanks for the thorough review as always.
bad luck for Zwift on the space station… lol… probably wouldn’t work very well without gravity anyway. The ISS operates at 160VDC with some systems running at 120VDC via DC-DC converters. so no AC anywhere. link to nasa.gov
Ray,
In your opinion, would you say the Hammer is worth the extra cost compared to the KICKR SNAP? I posted the issues I was having with the SNAP in your SNAP review section. The gist of it being that I ended up sending the first unit back for exchange and, having the same issue on the 2nd unit, was about to send it back for a refund when a reader posted a fix that not even Wahoo told me (to upgrade the firmware to a newer beta version). That fixed it (even though I have 3 friends with SNAP trainers running without issue on the older production firmware). Evidently the latest ones manufactured need the firmware fix for some reason (my friends had all purchased theirs at least a year ago).
Anyway, the fix came, of course, AFTER I ordered a CycleOps Hammer (which, BTW, should be here today). I ended up getting both the SNAP and the Hammer at discounts so the difference in cost for me is $420. Is the Hammer worth the extra cost? I doubt I will ever hit 2000 watts (or even the 1500 watts of the SNAP) but I might, rarely, do the 20% incline vs the 12% of the SNAP (there are some 20%+ grades near where I live that I can recreate on the trainer with my Garmin 520). Regarding accuracy–the SNAP matches my Stages power meter pretty well, but there’s no way I’m doing a 10-minute spindown every time I ride to calibrate it (I also have to turn the knob 3.5 times after touching the wheel to get the spindown time under 15 seconds, per Wahoo). I would be willing to do a 20-second calibration every time with the Hammer (but I doubt I would do it every time). The lack of support for Android with the SNAP is also annoying since I don’t have an iOS device (and had to borrow a friend’s iPhone to do the advanced spindown, although I’m guessing I will never have to do that again; just standard spindowns). You already mentioned “road feel” so I’m guessing they both feel similar in that regard, even though the Hammer has a much larger flywheel. I like that, with the Hammer, I don’t have to worry about tire pressure, tire wear, or knob tightness (just get on and ride). The SNAP does hold ERG mode perfectly in Zwift (at least, it ‘reports’ it perfectly; there are no up and down little spikes like my Stages reports but the SNAP, like the Hammer and every other trainer, I think, that reports power, does not have/use an actual power meter).
So, just trying to decide which one to send back or sell. I already have a prepaid shipping label to send the SNAP back so that won’t cost my anything; but to send the Hammer back I would have to pay $50-$60 in shipping. Any thoughts are welcomed and appreciated! :)
If the Hammer only costs you an extra $420, I would be all over the Hammer. I have a greater than 1 year old Snap and the lack of Android and the Spindown pita would be worth the dollars. In fact I have gotten to where I do not calibrate my Snap…if the numbers look reasonable compared to my P1s…I leave it alone. One thing I do now is leave it plugged in. That seems to help power stability.
Thanks, Chris. Yeah, I got the SNAP back in November at the 20% discount for $479 and just recently got the Hammer at 25% off for $899 so there’s the $420 difference. I’m leaning towards keeping the Hammer but still, $420 is a lot. I’m thinking I could keep the SNAP and sell the Hammer and make a little money so, in essence, making the SNAP even cheaper. I’m just not convinced the Hammer is worth the extra money (but I haven’t ridden it yet so I couldn’t tell you).
curiouss where you got the hammer, new, for 25% off….thats an amazing deal, do share!
There were a few deals around Black Friday in the 20-25% off range. You won’t see those again for some time.
when are these “smart” trainers gonna offer an app similar to comutrainer’s/Wattbike SpinScan?
Some already do – such as the Elite Drivo/Kura.
Though, I’d also argue that such metrics that both give aren’t terribly useful in the grand scheme of things. There’s virtually no studies that can prove (or even suggest) that focusing on upstroke and/or balance actually does anything. In fact, there’s plenty of data more recently showing that attempting to influence your pedal stroke/style/balance actually negatively impacts your total power output.
The singular exception to this can be injury recovery (balance/left/right), and some fit metrics, but those fit-related metrics need to be closer in to the power production point, typically done at the pedal (which is why you’ve seen PowerTap partner with folks to provide that higher level data). It simply can’t be done at the trainer with merely a cadence sensor.
yes, power is important, but if only generated from the quads, or hamstrings not good, having SpinScan and muscle use graph can certainly can assist in preventing over use of certain muscles… spread the work load around so one can run a marathon after a long bike ride. instead of having one muscle/group filled with lactic acid.
Ray, do you know what sort of clearance there is for larger cassettes and longer cage derailleurs? I was thinking of going from 11-28 to 11/12-32 and I may get a long cage derailleur to do that. Although a bunch of people say they run an 11-32 with regular cage derailleur.
Hi Marc,
I rode the Hammer this morning with an 11-40 cassette and a medium cage mountain bike rear derailleur. As far as an 11-32 with a regular cage derailleur, that can be hit or miss. Since you plan on doing this, might as well buy the cassette, test, then pick up a new RD if needed!
Thanks for the response. I’ve actually had mine for a few weeks now. Had my road bike on there with the new 11-32 cassette (10sp) and the same regular cage RD I’ve been using. No issues, but definitely a tight fit.
I’ve got an 11sp tri bike that I use too. 11-28 cassette on that one and haven’t had any issues. Hopefully I can make an 11-32 cassette work with the regular cage for this bike too!
So no comment on how responsive the Hammer is in Zwift (for example) when you hit the hills? My understanding is some trainers are slow to ramp up the resistance and you really notice it on the short hills (rollers).
I’m also still hoping you’ll start doing at least some basic testing of torque or max resistance at low speeds which would be more meaningful than the dubious “max simulated grade” figure. I realize you can just gear up since apps like Zwift provide essentially unlimited virtual gearing, but for the sake of comparing one trainer to another I think this would be useful information.
Virtually instant on Zwift, no lag issues. Honestly, I haven’t seen any recent trainers that are slow to respond. Some older Elite ones had that issue, but even that’s been resolved through firmware updates.
As for max-resistance, it’s honestly not something I have the capability to test, as I can’t hit more than about 900-1000w. I’d have to build out some sort of power testing rig. It’s something I’ve looked at doing, but gets more complex. If I were to make something, it’d honestly be more geared towards testing power meters than trainers’ max power, since that’s usually where I see issues as most people can’t hit above 1,000w anyways on trainers.
Good to hear the Hammer is responsive/dynamic in terms of controlling the resistance.
All of these smart trainers rate max power dissipation at fairly high speeds, right, like 20 MPH so I would expect max resistance to be a lot less at, say, 5 MPH. If you can crank out 900W for 10 seconds that should be more than enough to determine if the trainer can effectively simulate a 20% incline for a 200 pound rider. According to bikecalculator.com 500 watts would propel 200 pound rider & 20 pound bike up a 20% grade at 5.27 miles per hour. All that said… I presume the higher end direct-drive trainers like the Hammer, KICKR, Neo, Drivo aren’t going to have any difficulty achieving 500W @ 5 MPH. But how about the SNAP, Magnus, and Flux? Would be interesting to know what they’re really capable of, how they compare. Not a “make it or break it” metric, but maybe a useful data point to add to the mix.
I think you’re confusing real world speed with trainer speed. The 20mph is used as that roughly the speed of the rear wheel when pedalling at around 50rpm in your highest gear. So to simulate hills you usually have to get your rear wheel spinning faster.
The benefit with ano electronic trainer is that you also have a brake so you can get a certain wattage without having to spin the flywheel as fast. But the brake will only be able to provide so much resistance hence why they quote max watts at a given speed as that is a more realistic demonstration of what the unit can do during workouts you’re likely to use it for.
For example, on my KK (Dumb trainer so limited in low cadence watts) the max resistance I can get at 55rpm is around 380w but if I’m doing sprints (i.e. high cadence) I can get 1500w out of it as the rear wheel is spinning so much faster hence the flywheel is adding to the resistance due to its inertia.
I’m not confused at all. I’ve already acknowledged that you can simply shift gears to get more resistance and that apps like Zwift provide you with “virtual” gearing that is basically unlimited.
Mainly, I am questioning the whole concept of “maximum simulated inclined/grade” that manufacturers are publishing for these smart trainers. This is a dubious spec. As it’s directly dependent on rider weight, it’s meaningless to say this trainer can simulate X % grade (without stating what rider weight the figure is based on).
OK, I think I’ve officially beat this horse to death now. ;-)
So I would like to see some kind of well-defined benchmark, metric, or spec that gives the consumer an idea of how much resistance (torque, basically) the trainer can develop at lower speeds. Why does this matter when you can simply change gears? Well, it matters about exactly as much as the dubious “max simulated incline” spec matters. If the ultimate goal of a smart trainer is to simulate real world riding as accurately as possible, the ability to produce realistic “hill climbing” resistance at lower wheel speeds has to be a part of the equation.
Manufacturers are stating max wattage (resistance from the brake) at 20 MPH but few are publishing max wattage at lower speeds. So why not publish max wattage at 10 MPH or 5 MPH? This information could be useful in painting a more complete picture of the trainer’s capabilities and how it stacks up to the competition.
Just to be clear, some manufs do actually specify the rider weight/speed as part of their charts. I know Tacx does on all their public stuff online. In fact, they actually create a little chart showing it.
And I believe Elite also specifies it too.
Thank for pointing that out. I can’t find the Tacx chart, other than stumbling upon a link from another DCR reader that doesn’t “work” (in the sense of getting me to a page that has the chart).
I did find a power vs speed graph for the Elite Rampa, which is EXACTLY what I would like every smart trainer manufacturer to publish. Sadly for the Rampa it’s quite anemic at low speeds. No wonder in the manual for the Rampa their example is a 130 lb rider going 15 MPH in order to simulate 10% slope.
Interesting, looks like Tacx revamped their website, and the nifty graphs that used to be on each product page are now gone. Bummer.
I found some references to them via Google Image search, but can’t seem to figure out where they went to. Here’s a Tacx forum thread that has an image of one of the curves:
link to forum.tacx.com
The text is in French on that screenshot, but it’s pretty easy to discern what’s being shown.
Yes I get the point about gradient, the rider weight should be specified (as Ray says it sometimes is). But what’s the point specifying the max wattage at 5mph? The numbers they quote are surely to g8ve a rough idea of limits, spinning the wheel at 5mph is not, or is no where near a limit of the trainer?! Even in my lowest gear that would mean pedalling at 50rpm. So unless you’re intending on doing a workout solely in your lowest gear that spec is totally irrelevant.
Apologies, think my brain has just clicked i! Your point I guess is specifically about using in something like Zwift where Zwift tells the trainer the grade and it sets it. Hence the need for the slow speed. Apologies, I don’t use Zwift anymore and when I did it was on my KK so Zwift just took the power value and works out the speed from the w/kg. I wasn’t thinking about the fact it sets the grade setting for smart trainers :-)
I actually came here to ask the same question as Bradley. What exactly does “incline” mean? Of the 4 mid-range trainers you mention in your latest trainer roundup, only the Rampa Elite gives any info that one could use to actually figure out max incline (the power vs speed graph). Rampa claims it can simulate a 10% grade, but digitizing their chart and using a little math, I come up with ~5% max grade before I saturate the trainer. I’m 170lbs with a 20lb bike. For a 135lb rider and 16 lb bike, you’d saturate at about 7% grade. 10% is a pipe dream if their chart is correct.
Interestingly enough, as power output increases, so does max grade before saturation. For me, 100W = ~4% grade
200W = ~5% grade
300W = ~5.75% grade
Although Wahoo Kickr doesn’t give any info about incline, you posted in the comments of that review that it can absorb 250W@5mph. That is equal to a grade of ~12% (for me) while Wahoo only claims 10% capability. For comparison, the Rampa can absorb ~85W@5mph, assuming their chart is correct.
At the same time, incline is only important if you want to simulate riding up steep hills while on the trainer (which I’d like to do for a mountain century this spring).
Also, it’d be nice if you could get the manufacturers to give you flyweight inertia instead of weight. Since inertia is roughly related to diameter^4, the actual weight of the flywheel is less important than the effective radius. If I take two cylinders of steel that weigh the same, but one has twice the radius as the other, the cylinder with 2X the radius will have 8X the inertia.
Thought about it some more. The Kikr Snap watts vs. speed is linear from >5mph. So is the Rampa Elite and the Tacx Vortex. Thus, you can compare max incline between products given a certain power at the same speed.
Kickr Snap, 1500W@20mph (~12% grade @250W) – Claims 10%
Cycleops Magnus, 1500W@20mph (~12% grade @250W) – Claims 15%
Tacx Vortex, 950W@20mph (~7.5% grade @250W) – Claims 7%
Elite Rampa, 720W@20mph (~5.75% grade @250W) – Claims 10%
So, the Kickr delivers more than promised, the Tacx is nearly right on, and the Cycleops and Elite claim more than they can deliver.
Appreciate your comments, Jeremy. Did you find a power vs speed graph for the KICKR SNAP? There may be a range of speed over which the wattage is linear for any given smart trainer, but I wouldn’t assume that applies universally or at extremely low or high speeds.
Aloha from Kona,
Bradley
I got the Snap data from this post by Ray: link to dcrainmaker.com
The Snap, Vortex, and Rampa were all linear above 5mph up until their max rating. The only trainer that showed data below that speed was the Rampa, where is was non-linear until it hit 0.
Another review did low-speed testing to see how much a few trainers could take at a slow speed (~7.5mph) link to athletictechreview.com
That reviewer showed the Magnus could only hold 200W vs the Kickr’s 340W. The Vortex was dead last at 100W. These numbers disagree with Ray’s numbers in the first link, as the Snap should be able to hold ~450W at that speed according to the data from Ray and the Magnus should be able to equal the Snap if they both take 1500W@20mph.
Another interesting thing the reviewer did was come up with minimum power available vs speed.
link to athletictechreview.com
link to athletictechreview.com
Interesting discussion —
In layman’s terms does this mean most if not all smart trainers do not accurately support certain training modes under various conditions?
Or simply put — smart trainers are not that smart. Some are dumber than others depending on variables (speed, power, simulated incline, body weight, cadence, etc).
I think “Or simply put — smart trainers are not that smart.” is a bit off the mark.
Mid-range trainers have to ability to simulate a rider and bicycle’s drag profile on a flat ‘road’ up to a level exceeding most cyclists output. They can also simulate going up an incline of varying degrees. Lastly, they can simulate going slightly downhill, depending on the speed.
High-end trainers add the ability to power the roller to simulate steeper downhills and generally have higher incline capabilities. Unless you want to pay for this added improvement, a mid-range trainer will fit bill just fine, IMO.
All the above is for something like Zwift in Simulation mode where you are trying to simulate a bicycle on a road. For TrainerRoad in Erg mode, the whole incline and decline thing is not really applicable. The trainer is set to X watts, and you are in whatever gear needed to do so. There are still some limits though. Pumping put 500W in granny gear will over-power a mid-range trainer and spinning out in 52-23 gear at 100W for a recovery will end up being >150W because you’re above the ‘min’ range. Shift to a reasonable gear and it isn’t an issue.
Glad I’ve got at least 9 months to make my choice now there are so many to chose from :-)
Scratch that, just seen the £ cost and this is more than the Tacx Neo :-/ looks like we lost out on this one :-)
Ray,
Could you add a line to the table about which ones could be used by those of us who like Italian drivetrains. Since you specified, “When it comes to cassette types, the unit accepts Shimano 8-11 speed cassettes.” I’m assuming it can’t be used with Campy cassettes, correct?
According to the Cycleops how to video uploaded yesterday, 11sp Campy setups will work with a shimano cassette because the spacing is the same.
According to the CycleOps video that I watched just now, the Hammer has a Shimano free hub, and 11sp Campagnolo cassettes are compatible with that free hub.
I have a 1st generation KICKR, and a feature I really value is the ability to use my Stages power meter as the source of truth for power. I simply tell the Wahoo Utility the ANT ID of my Stages, and then I’m totally dialed in when comparing road biking vs. training. Do any of the other trainers support this?
Someone correct me if I’m wrong, but I think that is dependent on the softwares capabilities. I believe that’s what TrainerRoad’s power match is for.
Not really… for example, erg mode works off my Stages… So when I erg mode to 200 watts, I’m putting out the exact same effort as if I were on the road putting out 200 watts. Also, if your app is controlling the trainer, it’s hard to have the app talk to another power meter… not impossible, as in “anything can be done in software,” but things really aren’t set up for that use.
Bottom line: I was asking Ray if any other trainers (plus or perhaps because of app functionality) have this feature I value.
Actually, really…
link to support.trainerroad.com
True. You can check others in DC’s recent trainere app review:
link to dcrainmaker.com
Richard,
I have the same arrangement but I’ve stopped using the Stages to control the KICKR with TrainerRoad because it gave me erratic readings. While the KICKR gave me higher watts for any given effort it is at least stable.
In this picture I disabled the Stages about 20 minutes in. You can clearly see the difference.
Do you not have this problem?
Louis
Ignore the first 10 minutes. I believe that was single leg drills. Another problem with left only power meters.
Kickr Gen 1, using the Wahoo Fitness App. Kickr configured to get power from the Stages power meter. Looks ridiculously stable, rock solid, etc. The spikes in the middle were due to me putting erg mode to 400 watts and locking up at a low cadence. (Ouch.)
And, apologies to Marc. Yes, Trainer Road is doing the power match itself. In my configuration, I think (but don’t know for sure) that erg mode is implemented in the KICKR itself.
So…to recap a bit:
A) Wahoo in their KICKR products has the ability to natively connect to an ANT+ power meter and match that power meter.
B) TrainerRoad also implemented this functionality (actually, TR did it first). So did PerfPro. CycleOps
With TR and PerfPro, they’re effectively in a continuous race to correct the power on a second by second basis. Sometimes this works…but not all the time. That’s when you get the wonk you see.
In general, I’d recommend folks instead just figure out if the power really is different – and to some degree focus on that first (figuring it out/calibrating/etc…). Unless we’re talking a dramatic amount, then I’d probably leave the feature off.
Ray,
That is where I’ve ended up. Easy enough to compensate for a known difference.
Louis
I know you state you can’t really detect differences in inertia between layers or find it important but I feel that is a function of erg mode rather than trainer. A neo set in slope mode in tri profile is relatively a joy to use while in erg mode it is horrible. I can hold 30w+ more in slope and even changing profiles within slope mode makes a huge difference if cycling on the tri bars. I went from 20mins tops in hold to indefinite just with the increase in inertia giving to small movers in my legs a break like outdoors.
Give it a try I’ll be amazed if you don’t notice a significant improvement while on tri bars. Not such a big deal in road bikes.
I would like to live in a world where I call a company with a technical issue and “a short bit later they came back with a firmware update.”
You rock, Ray!
They buy the Hammer. The Powertap people have fantastic support. I own 2 Powertap hubs, a set of P1 pedals and now a Hammer. They have always handled any of my questions or problems quickly and effectively. Their support was the deciding factor for me when I went looking for a new smart trainer.
Stage-Right Ray cracked me up at 7:40 of the sound comparison video! :-)
So if you had to choose either the Elite Drivo or the Cycleops Hammer as your only smart trainer, which one would you choose?
Sounds like a typical first-gen immature product with lots of potential problems down the road for customers.
O.k., my case is special:
1) 1st gen BSX customer (no further explanation required)
2) 1st gen P1 customer –> I’m now on my third pair. The two previous pairs had died and got replaced (which is a slow process in Germany. You have to deal with the importer Sportimport. That’s why I’d be cautious to get another product from CycleOps/Saris).
3) 1st gen Wahoo Kickr customer with massive accuracy issues
Delays hitting the market. Firmware bugs. Firmware clearly not mature (120s calibration). These are all not good signs. I’d be cautious.
Hi Ray,
First of all, thank you for (yet another) great review.
A comment on the whole “road feel” aspect of the trainers you test: You tend not to put that much emphasis on that in your reviews, stating that you can never forget that your are indoors, and rightly so. But one thing I have experienced is that my FTP is always significantly lower on a trainer compared to the road by up to 15% or so. Is that something you experience? If so, do you see any differences between different trainers as to how close you can get on your “road-FTP”? That would be a good way to quantify the road feel.
I’m sorry to suggest that you do a full-out FTP test for every trainer review :-)
Cheers
Thomas
The lower FTP is mostly due to less cooling from moving air and not being able to move around as much (both position on bike but also general movement of bike). So it’s more a specific issue of indoor training than a trainer issue if that makes sense?!
Hi Lee,
Sure that’s part of the equation, but with added fans for cooling etc. that is not really an issue. There are quite a few articles about this phenomenon. Sure the lack of the stimuli, cooling and more dynamic position on the bike has an impact, but It seems as if the trainer gives a different type of resistance, lacking what some refer to as “micro-rest” compared to an outdoors ride:
link to home.trainingpeaks.com
I was wondering if the latest generation trainers (I’m on a Tacx Genius) offers any changes on this subject.
It’s actually more of a human issue. You’ll find endless debates on this on Slowtwitch and other cycling/triathlon sites.
What’s interesting though is that while some people have a harder time hitting FTP indoors, others have a harder time hitting it outdoors. I actually fall into that camp, it’s far easier for me to hit various wattage targets indoors on ERG mode than outdoors.
Kinda just like some people’s pee smells after eating asparagus, and others don’t. Roughly.
But even in that article they say the three things to consider are temperature, position and psychology. The first part of the article seems to be more about the impacts on FTP in terms of the accuracy of the trainer.
But the idea of micro rests is interesting. I’ll have to do some reading on that as it’s not something I’ve seen before.
I initially had the same issues with lower FTP. However, once I got the room temperature down to 60F and installed a 30″ fan, this issue went away. Now I can do better indoors since I can do a 20 minute power test with no road variations, turns, cars, etc. I have found that I do slightly better on my Tacx Neo than my old Wahoo Kickr. In both cases, I am using power from my Pioneer power meter on the cranks, so device calibration or accuracy is not a factor. I have concluded that the slight side to side movement that I get on my Neo may be making a tiny difference.
Har! Actually the pee is the same. It’s just some can smell it and others can’t, regardless of who’s pee it is.
I’m having the same issue and was also wondering whether a direct-drive / newer trainer would close that FTP gap a little.
I did the same test protocol a few weeks ago and I got 12,3% higher FTP outdoors. Same power meter, using a fan indoor. That was about 35W for me. I’d like to use my outdoor FTP but since I’m using TR every weekday, those intervals are too hard when using my outdoor FTP. When it would be around 10W, it would be doable.
I’m using a very old Tacx Satori (non-electronic).
Looks good but as someone else says, the cost of this is coming out the same as a Neo.
How do you figure? Are you comparing MSRP to MSRP or “sale prices”? Us vs Euro?
At MSRP in the US, the $1200 Hammer is much less expensive than the $1600 Neo.
In the UK the Hammer is more expensive. Damn Brexit!!!!!
Price related comments in these reviews are becoming less and less meaningful because of market variations. Quick check on wiggle yesterday had the Hammer at 1500 euro vs 1400 for the drivo and 1100 for the Neo. So while an American is asking if the Neo provides 400 dollars more value than the Hammer I’m wondering who in europe could possibly justify paying 400 more for the Hammer.
It’s the core reason I gave up on trying to compare and make price-specific recommendations for Euro folks, or really any currency. Too much changes too quickly. Be it based on currency fluctuations, or even just demand/availability of a product in a given market.
Demand significantly impacts European pricing, because there is no MAP, so retailers won’t tend to discount much until supply catches up.
I can get the Neo for under £1045 (Tacx, via Amazon) and the Hammer for £1080 (SygmaSport). Sort of pushes the Hammer out
Nothing to do with Brexit, its always been the case in the UK.
I was joking about Brexit ;-)
I’d love to see dropout spacing compatibility added to the comparison chart. It would suck to buy a trainer of this pricepoint, only to find out it doesn’t support using your new steed with Boost 148.
Is there a way to calibrate the Hammer (and Magnus) without paying for a monthly service?
You can use the Virtual Training software for free and still calibrate it.
Thanks, that’s good to know. The CycleOps website makes it look like there’s only a subscription service and 2-week trial.
Yeah, they don’t make it very obvious at all.
Would be nice for users to know that it is there and then they can possibly pick up a subscription if the see something they like in the software after calibrating.
So I’m clear, you can still calibrate after the 2-week trial, without paying for the subscription, yes? Or is it that you can just use the trial to do an initial calibration. Thanks.
I feel a little burned by cycleops. I bought an ANT+ power sync several years ago for trainerRoad and sufferfest workouts. Sufferfest has switched to an app based platform that is FE-C and looks like the new TrainerRoad update will not work with Cycleops power sync or pro. Glad to see that cycleops is now opening up their platform, but this slow change leaves trainers that are several years old with very limited options. And, the fact that they took this approach when they had other options seems to reflect the companies philosophy about the market. Am I wrong to expect a 1000 dollar trainer to be functional for more than 5 years?
Ray, you wrote: “Which isn’t to say that CycleOps ‘had’ to, since they already had opened up their protocol to virtually all apps – so the net difference is pretty minimal for them. Instead, it just makes it easier for newer apps to get these trainers compatible.”
Am I wrong about power sync and power pro loosing accessibility?
No, that can’t be. I’ve not heard anything about TrainerRoad pulling PowerBeam/PowerSync support. It’d make no sense. Obviously, they can’t add ANT+ support to iOS sans-dongle, but nothing should regress.
I’ll circle back with them just to validate, but again, can’t see them making any move to reduce their customer base.
link to trainerroad.com
I talked to TR customer support about this and there were no known plans to change. They are supporting PC but not MAC. My 2015 TR app still works, but I’m worried with a few more OS updates it won’t work.
Hey guys,
We continue to support the Powerbeam Pro and Powersync via Bluetooth Smart on all of our platforms, and ANT+ support for both trainers is still supported through our Windows app.
Let us know if you have any more questions!
– Jonathan from TrainerRoad
Johnathan, why did you guys decide to drop Mac support for ANT+?
If you’ve got an original ANT+ only Powerbeam pro the only trainer road app I can get to work is the original original windows version. New windows app detects PowerBeam Pro OK but it’s very unreliable whilst doing a workout (it drops connection frequently and/or at random when starting a block it ramps the power that high that it grinds to a halt).