JUMP TO:

BUY NOW:

  • Amazon.com
  • Clever Training
  • Clever Training Europre

Cycling Dynamics for Assioma Power Meter Pedals Released, New Pedal Bodies Too

DSC_3207

Yes, the long and oft talked about day is finally here – Favero has pushed out a firmware update enabling Cycling Dynamics on their popular Assioma power meter pedals. It’s been a multi-year journey that first started in Garmin’s camp, then the ANT+ camp, and then ultimately culminating in the Favero camp. The update is available via the Favero Assioma smartphone app, which you can wirelessly update your pedals from.

Of course, at present this still requires a compatible bike computer to display/record the metrics, and despite ‘Cycling Dynamics’ being an open standard now for a year, only one company has implemented it in their products: Garmin.

And even that has some limitations, which we’ll dive into down below. Still, for those that want these advanced pedaling metrics (or know what to do with them), then your day has arrived.

The Tech Details:

DSC_3209

I suppose I should start off with how you can benefit from a racing or training perspective from Cycling Dynamics. But since that explanation isn’t available from anyone in the industry, I’m going to just explain what is, and isn’t, Cycling Dynamics. First off, let’s start with what isn’t classified as Cycling Dynamics, as these baseline metrics have been around ages in the power meter world and despite occasional attempts by companies to rebrand them otherwise, they’re basically standard issue metrics on ANT+ power meters (more on Bluetooth in a moment):

Power (Total): Your total power being transmitted – e.g. 227w
Power (Balance, left/right): Your power balance between left and right side – e.g. 46%/54%
Cadence: Your pedaling revolutions per minute – e.g. 94rpm
– Torque Effectiveness: How much of the pedal stroke is actually contributing to going forward (versus lifting up on the pedal) – i.e. 74%
– Pedal Smoothness: How smooth your pedal stroke is all the way around – i.e. 82%

All of the above have been around prior to Cycling Dynamics and are available on many power meters and a number of head units. Again, standard issue stuff on the ANT+ side of things. Nitpickers corner note: Technically some power meters transmit torque, but from a user standpoint you see power/watts, not torque.

Next, we’ve got the things defined as ‘Cycling Dynamics’. By and large these mirror the same pedaling metrics that Garmin first introduced years ago with the original Vector pedals. Other players in the industry (most notably Pioneer) have similar metrics to these, in some cases leveraging the same names and other cases with slightly different names and metrics. Here’s the short version (and the long version):

Platform Center Offset: The position on the across pedal spindle (basically if your foot pushes on the right or left edge of pedal)
Power Phase: Where the majority of your power output is within the pedal stroke (phase)
Rider Position: Whether you are seated or standing

If you were to look at what a typical Garmin Vector pedal set would show from a Cycling Dynamics standpoint, here’s what it would show after the fact (you can also view these same stats mid-ride as well):

image

And here’s the greater graph view:

image

Oh, and a summary section in your ride summary:

image

But this isn’t about Vector 3. Which means you may be asking yourself: Is what Favero implemented the same as what Garmin implemented? And the answer is ‘no’ on two different accounts. The first piece to understand is that two years ago Garmin ‘handed over’ the Cycling Dynamics bits to the ANT+ Power Meter Technical Working Group (TWG). Basically the equivalent of giving that team the ‘code’ for cycling dynamics. The ANT+ Power Meter TWG is comprised of all of the industry players for power meters (or those with interests in power meters). This includes boatloads of companies, including Quarq, PowerTap, Favero, Garmin, and even Wahoo Fitness (since they have head units that would capture that data). There’s many more players than just those few, but just to understand it’s not a Garmin-only thing.

Once that hand-off occurred the ANT+ Power Meter TWG then spends ‘some time’ (read: like a year) figuring out how they might want to change that original ‘gift’ from Garmin to include things other companies are planning. For example, Pioneer might have wanted to add in specific metrics that better supported their power meter pedaling metrics. The companies then go back and forth until a true standard is agreed upon. Despite how absurdly long this process usually takes, it’s a core reason why the ANT+ power meter standard is so much more reliable from a spec standpoint than that of the Bluetooth Smart power meter variant.

As a result of that, the spec changed slightly from what Garmin had initially handed over, to what’s been adopted as part of the general power meter ANT+ spec (cycling dynamics isn’t its own thing, but rather just part of the normal ANT+ power meter device profile). As such, it means that what Garmin implemented 5 years ago as part of the original Vector pedals isn’t the same. And in turn, for bike computers and such way back then, those won’t be compatible with the new spec, as Garmin has to update them to handle the new power meter spec.  But more on that in a second.

Again, the quick timeline overview:

August 2014: Garmin introduced Cycling Dynamics to Vector 1
September 2017: Garmin opens up Cycling Dynamics to ANT+ Power Meter Group (and TrainerRoad adds it in beta)
July 2019: Favero adds Cycling Dynamics to their Assioma pedals (this post)

First, let’s talk about what Favero has and hasn’t implemented with their slightly differently branded ‘IAV Cycling Dynamics’, here’s the three main components of cycling dynamics:

Platform Center Offset (PCO): Not implemented on Favero Assioma
Power Phase: Yes, implemented on Assioma
Rider Position: Yes, implemented on Assioma

So in this case, Favero isn’t providing PCO, but is providing the remainder of metrics. Platform Center Offset is typically used in bike fit type situations where you might adjust the cleat positioning slightly to get you more centered. It’s somewhat peculiar that Favero selected not to adopt this, since this is actually one of the aspects that’s had some uptake in terms of usefulness of the greater cycling dynamics suite.

To that end, Favero does have an explanation:

“For the moment, we have decided not to include the PCO Dynamic, since part of the resources that would be used to return
this parameter with such precision as to make it really useful for the analysis of the position of the foot are currently used in
the IAV Power accuracy assurance system.

 

So, even if technically possible, we preferred not to implement this metric. Instead, we kept all the resources employed to
ensure the accuracy of power measurement with any style of pedaling. We believe that this is the best choice and more faithful
to our motto “Ride Hard Facts”.  We certainly do not rule out the implementation of other advanced metrics.”

So, to translate that into simple English: “Our internal hardware doesn’t support it.”

They’re basically saying that the internal bits that would normally do that work are already busy maintaining accuracy, and thus they can’t dedicate that capability to PCO.

Thus, here’s what those same charts look like for the Favero Assioma pedals instead:

image

And again, the graph view. Here you’ll notice that it does record zeros across the board for the red/orange lines of platform center offset, rather than a null figure. By the way, here’s a simple indoor activity showing that data on Garmin Connect in case you want to zoom around, and another outside.

image

And the ride summary section:

image

So which head units support the ANT+ Cycling Dynamics variant that Favero is using? At this point, just newer Garmin units – not the broader list of units that Garmin has supporting the older version of Vector-based cycling dynamics. They are as follows as of today (these may change/be expanded):

– Garmin Edge 520 Plus
– Garmin Edge 530
– Garmin Edge 820
– Garmin Edge 830
– Garmin Edge 1030
– Garmin Forerunner 935
– Garmin Forerunner 945
– Garmin Fenix 5 Series
– Garmin Fenix 5 Plus Series
– Garmin MARQ Series

Additionally: One person has since reported success with a base (non-Plus) Edge 520 and another reported success with an Edge 1000. I have not independently confirmed that or seen those files, but I have requested confirmation from Garmin if those should be working.

Now you may be asking – why not some other older units? Well, as noted – while the name ‘cycling dynamics’ remains the same, the underlying code isn’t. In fact, even Garmin started changing their own Vector pedals last fall to dual-transmit on both the legacy Garmin-only Cycling Dynamics and the newer ANT+ spec Cycling Dynamics (ensuring that if customers had older head units they originally bought for Vector 3 usage, it’d still work just fine).

On one hand, it’d be easy to get mad at Garmin for not updating every older device to support the new ANT+ variant of Cycling Dynamics. But one has to remember, Garmin handed over the spec two years ago. It’s basically taken Favero (or anyone else) that long to adopt it. Had Favero moved quicker two years ago, Garmin likely would have updated older units at that time (since most of the units listed above weren’t even out then). At this point though, that water has kinda passed under the bridge.

And to that end, it’d be just as easy for Wahoo or anyone else  to add it too (Lezyne, Stages, etc…). After all, Wahoo added support for Pioneer’s advanced pedaling metrics last fall, which has the vast majority of the core concepts of Cycling Dynamics. Albeit, it doesn’t sound like Pioneer participated in any of the ANT+ Power Meter TWG meetings around the topic, from talking to them last fall. So they might be the odd man out right now.

I’ve reached out to Wahoo to see if they still plan on supporting the ANT+ variant of Cycling Dynamics, I’ll post back once I hear back.

Oh – and remember this is all only over ANT+. The Bluetooth Smart power meter device profile doesn’t have an equivalent standard on it. Some vendors have done vendor specific things, such as ROTOR and Polar together, but nothing industry standard at this point. Which is also a good reminder to ensure that if you’ve got your Favero Assioma pedals paired to your Garmin, to be sure it’s over ANT+, else you won’t see these metrics over Bluetooth Smart. It lists the pairing type in the sensor settings (it’ll say ‘ANT+ or BLE’).

New Pedal Bodies:

DSC_3191

Oh, this is a quickie – but Favero has also released new pedal bodies for the Assioma lineup. These are just the pedal shell portion, not the entire spindle/etc. There are precisely two differences with them:

1) They’re now painted black (specifically, the springs)
2) The units have a widened tension adjustment range from 8Nm to 20Nm.

The first change was made by Favero to have a “more elegant look”, while the second change was basically made to address concerns that sometimes the Assioma pedals were a bit hard to clip in/out of. While I personally never had that complaint, I’ve certainly seen numerous comments to that effect.

Here’s my holding the new pedal body (left) compared to my well worn older pedal body at right. You basically pop out the spindle of the old body and place it in the new body. You’ll still have the small pod just like before. This is only swapping out the body portion.

DSC_3214

Favero now lists the black pedal bodies (as they are referred as) on their site under accessories, for 49EUR per pedal (so basically 98EUR for the set).

Wrap-Up:

DSC_3210

I suspect for most Favero Assioma users that don’t read this post, they’ll probably never even know to update their firmware on their pedals. But for those that do – you’ve now got some new metrics to play with. Still, even for that subset – I don’t see this as life changing for most people. Just like Garmin Vector’s Cycling Dynamics, I haven’t really figured out how to actually use it from a training and racing standpoint.

Sure, there are some fun tidbits around seated and standing power averages and such – but ultimately the novelty mostly wears off on those bits. I’d have loved to see either Favero or Garmin (or anyone) fully document how to use these metrics in a training standpoint (in terms of specific workouts that do improve your overall strength). TrainerRoad had seemed like they might do that two years ago when they first added Cycling Dynamics into a beta app for Interbike 2017. But their support today wouldn’t likely work for Favero Assioma, since it’s based on the old Vector code and not the ANT+ standard (best I can tell). It’s also limited to the iOS app with an ANT+ adapter. TrainerRoad has indicated they plan no future Cycling Dynamics expansions or functionality (as of publishing, but they are active in the forum on that thread).

Still, it’s a good checkbox sales item for Favero. It’s been two years since the Assioma pedals came out, and they are without a doubt the best value on the market for a power meter pedal – coming in at $649 for the dual-sided Duo, or a bit more than half the price of dual-sided Vector 3 ($999). Really the only complaint left on the Assioma pedals would be aesthetic, in getting rid of the external pod and going to a sleeker looking single-component pedal. I don’t foresee that happening near term, but it gives us something to aim for. Or they could shift directions and focus on another pedal type – but that road is fraught with 3rd party challenges.

In the meantime – go forth and get your pedals updated. I’ve been running the new firmware for about two months now with Garmin head units (since it’s the only one that supports it) without any apparent issues. I haven’t recently tested other head units.

With that – thanks for reading!

Post a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked.
If you would like a profile picture, simply register at Gravatar, which works here on DCR and across the web.

You can click here to Subscribe without commenting

Add a picture

*

206 Comments

  1. Tim

    I’ll record a ride eventually, but after firmware update to 4.04 on my pedals my 935 had a power phase % configuration within the Assioma sensor… implies it supports the new dynamics, I think?

    I can’t say I ever checked for the setting prior though.

    Glad to see new data, bummed that I felt the pedal offset may have been one of the more interesting data items to know (about setting clear placement precisely between shoes mostly). Maybe it’s all useless 🙂

  2. Kai Hinger

    Without the PCO I’ll probably look at this once a month when I’m bored, make zero changes to my training or riding based on it, and keep riding.

    The PCO I probably would have used for a few rides, and then a few rides after changing shoes or cleats to make sure things were still where I wanted them. Without that it seems pretty useless.

    Heck, even the L/R balance, torque effectiveness, and smoothness everybody basically says “Yeah, I don’t know what to do with this information, especially if you’re not injured or rehabbing an injury, but it’s interesting, I guess?”

    Glad the new pedal is just black and looser, considering I bought mine a few weeks ago I’d be upset if it was something big (my pedals are already at the 3/4 max level of tension, and I’ll probably crank them on the track, so looser doesn’t interest me).

    • Daniel

      Well, I fully raptured my patella tendon a few years ago and I definitely look at stats like l/r balance, smoothness and efficiency – I even check them while I do my intervall tranining. But I do that also to make sure that I’m getting the most out of my pedal stroke. And while the poc would be helpful for my bike fitter, I do not have two pieces of wood to not recognize where I’m pushing the most in the pedal. So for me to be able to see the power phase and power peak is actually very useful to get the most out of my training. Will I be looking at it during and after my training? 100%. Will I be looking at it during a race? No.

  3. Martin Feeney

    Thanks Ray. Favero did send out an email this morning so hopefully everyone who registered their pedals will know about the update,

    Is replacing the pedal bodies something I can do? I couldn’t find a quick answer on their web site. I do find the pedals a challenge to unclip, even after tweaking the adjustment.

  4. Joe

    Ray,

    Thanks for the heads up on the new features. I have updated my DUO pedals.

    I don’t agree with you on the aesthetics. Once the pedals are mounted, the pod does not stand out. From a design perspective, packaging the electronics in a hermetically sealed pod with an integrated rechargeable battery is the way to go. I hope that Favero doesn’t change the design and continues to focus on accuracy and reliability instead of aesthetics.

    • Esthetician

      I agree that pod esthetics isn’t a significant issue and it’s a good design choice. It’s not that noticeable installed and even much less so when clipped in. I don’t want a fat spindle or body that decreases cornering clearance, or makes it difficult to replace the body and bearings as a trade-off for subjective esthetics. I have a Garmin and a light on my bars, a bottle and cage on the downtube, a taillight on the seatpost and Assioma pedals on the crank. The latter are probably the least noticeable or obtrusive of all of them.

  5. Michael Prytherch

    Be great if they offered a Shimano compatible body as well, 6 bikes all Shimano, don’t want to have one Look set of pedals

  6. Pascal

    Still in doubt if this is a good moment to buy a Favero powermeter where it is likely that new versions of both Garmin and Favero might be announced end of this year/start 2020 (based on the average lifecycle) and thus I should wait untill next season. Or am I completely wrong on this?

    • Tosin

      I just bought my mom a new Samsung phone last week. The next day, the same phone was $200 cheaper.
      Long story short, it’s never a good time to buy. The only thing I can say is wait till November for the 20% off if you are going to buy then. Otherwise, no other reason to wait.

    • Pascal

      You are definately right and its not about pricing. The only thing I try to prevent is to buy items which are almost at their end of life and since these are available since 2017 the question is somewhat legit imo. I had the same with the 520 I bought in April which is now not supported for cycling dynamics. Dont wanna bump my head twice in 1 year 😉

    • 2020 is too far away for any sort of predictions. But I don’t expect any near-term Favero Assioma replacement. In talking to them, they seem pretty content with the hardware platform they have for this year, and continuing to issues updates via software atop it.

    • Pascal

      Thanks, no indication as far as you know of, I know what to do 😀

    • Ihsan

      Ray,

      Any indication what else they’re planning to add in terms of software? Not knowing what Garmin and PowerTap have in terms of software, I would’ve thought they had quite a bit already.

      Thanks

    • Nothing specific, they just talked about taking feedback from users and being open to additional metrics and implementing them.

    • Mr G

      I e-mailed the company an they say that it ” I can tell you that Assioma will remain our flagship product for quite some time yet!”. So I committed to the purchase.

  7. Duncan Lally

    Cheers Ray! How would we survive without you?!

  8. Greg

    “New Pedal Bodies” – was hoping there will be written “Speedplay pedal” (or Shimano for that matter)… Can get why so many ppl (and all pedal PMs) are on that French plastic junk 😀

    • Pablo

      I don’t specifically know the reason why these companies are using the Look Keo platform, but my guess would be that it was a more simple, less risk option for them for whatever reasons. Having said that, I’ve had both Shimano and Look pedals and I prefer Look. I tried to understand why people were so up on Shimano pedals but I could never see the attraction, even from a longevity standpoint. Plastic or not, my Look pedals lasted longer than my Shimanos.

    • Hexsense

      If not for increased stability of wider platform then at least for decreased stack height.

      Favero Assioma’s total stack height is 17.9mm. It’s pedal for 10.5mm and cleats for 7.4mm.
      Shimano Dura-ace stack height is either 14.6mm or 13.5mm depend on generation.
      Lets take the 14.6mm one then, it’s 9.7mm on the pedal and 4.9mm on the cleats.

      Even if Assioma doesn’t get thinner, changing to SPD-SL cleats would shave the height away by 2.5mm.

    • Meredith

      Power meter pedals use Keo style cleats as they don’t have to pay for that interface design. If they wanted to use Shimano cleats they would have to persuade Shimano to let them license the interface design and that wouldn’t be cheap if Shimano allowed it. This would be the same for other cleat interfaces such as Speedplay.

      It also brings the cost down as every unit they sell has the same cleat interface. If a pedal PM company sold variants with Speedplay, Shimano, and Keo cleat interfaces they would increase costs just by having more SKUs.

    • Michael Prytherch

      I could be wrong but I believe Shimano pedals are no longer patent protected, I know this was the reason many years ago, but loads of people produce compatible cleats and the likes of Boardman produce compatible pedals as well, if course they could be paying a royalty that I’m not aware of

    • usr

      Two observations about the pedal system issue:

      #1 The MTB world is full of SPD compatible pedals

      #2 Nobody has *ever* made a SPD-SL compatible pedal, nor even as a joke, while they were drunk

      #1 tells us that Shimano is unlikely to enforce exclusivity of a pedal system. They are also still pretty much the dominating vendor of SPD pedals, so I don’t think that it is very likely that they are going all “the SPD openness catastrophe must not be repeated with SPD-SL” now, the existence of SPD clones worked out quite well for them.

      #2 tells us that there must be some serious impossibility going on, if it was only “slightly more expensive” or “slightly less mainstream” (doubtful anyways) then there would be at least *some* clones, if not in the powermeter market them at least one of the uncounted noname pedals.

      My guess is that Shimano is licensing some IP (not the actual measurements that define compatibility, but the general principle) from Look that they can’t sublicence to third parties wether they want or not.

      Remember how Garmin even created a dedicated product to make Vector 2 compatible with SPD SL but you still had to buy the entire pedal from Shimano? Surely Garmin and Shimano would rather have shared profits from a single high margin pedal body rather than separate low margin complete pedals plus adapter kit (where much of the customers’ money would go into producing the discarded parts instead of corporate coffers). Unlikely observations suggest unlikely explanations.

  9. Hans

    Hello Ray,
    Do you have news on Iq2?
    Hans

  10. Ingo

    Bought the bePros a while ago and since the assiomas came out, they stopped any further updates… same will happen soon for the assiomas which will be replaced by the assbees or whatever name they will get… stuff gets electrical obsolete every few years and we are left with junk …

    • Tim

      Hopefully you are left with an item that works as well as when you bought it…

      I agree that it would be nice to have endless support and new features, but that’s not economically viable is it?

  11. kaz

    When you talk to Wahoo – could you ask as well about Running Dynamics for Tickr X as they promised you (and later me)

    Promise was on your article (from Wahoo) in April 2017 🙂 (link to dcrainmaker.com)

    I asked again in 2018 / June and was told “It is in the developer queue”

    And then again in Jan ’19 and still same answer “Sorry for the delay. At this point, that is still in the developer’s queue and I don’t have a timeline for an update.”

    Maybe some more pressure can help…

    /k

  12. Raz Alon

    Ray, I have the Assioma pedals, and with the Wahoo Bolt and now with the Roam, the R/L doesn’t work- specifically when you unclip the Right foot, it’s supposed to show 0/100 but the display actually freezes at the last number. The other way around is fine. Did you experience this? Seems a problem with the Ant+ channel that is supposed to pick up the power of each side and transmit via the left pedal. Wahoo punted this to “development”…. but at the same time they claim they support Assioma.

    • Daniel

      I regularly do single legs intervals with the Elemnt Bolt and my Assioma duo. It never crashed and it shows correctly 0/100 and 100/0

  13. Efisio

    Since last update… on assioma and garmin 820 too …can’t see the classic % l/r smoothness.

  14. Peter Hirsh

    Maybe a dumb question, but how do i configure my 820 head unit to show the data as you have in your photo? I only seem to be able to select the numeric values for PP L / PP R etc, but not the graphical representations in the photo.

    • Chris McReynolds

      “Maybe a dumb question, but how do i configure my 820 head unit to show the data as you have in your photo? I only seem to be able to select the numeric values for PP L / PP R etc, but not the graphical representations in the photo.”

      You have to configure the data field in one of your profiles. IIRC, you have to first make it available (though it might be standard on some models) and then choose it in a profile on the head unit. Only then will it be available to rotate through in your screens. It’s been a few years since I did it so it might be that this choice is put in rotation automatically if you connect a sensor with Cycling Dynamics already properly configured. I think your configuration in the pedals themselves should be OK if you’re getting it in your recorded FIT file but check that as well (with a Bluetooth connection and your favorite smartphone) if you have no luck on your head unit.

  15. Jon

    Great update info! Thanks.

    I’m in the market for a pair of pedal based power meters. Do you know if Favero will be shipping Assioma Pedals with the new bodies anytime soon? Or, is the only option to purchase a pair of the older style Assiomas, ones that are in pipeline already, and then additionally purchase new bodies to swap out? Obviously, I’d like to avoid the duplication in cost.

    • Scott Reinemann

      Bought a pair last week from CleverTraining USA and was confused when the springs where black. This post now let’s me know why. So I’d say that at least some stores have the new pedal bodies.

    • Jon Kirby

      Thanks, Scott. I’ll check them out.

    • Joe Blough

      I bought a pair of Assiomas in May and they came with the black springs.

    • Lorenzo Pasquale

      Bought mine (Assioma DUO) on July 7th from link to clevertraining.co.uk with a nice 10% discount (Thank you, Ray!). They sport that “more elegant [black] look” AND the Black Spring.

      (Unfortunately, I didn’t have the time to put them to work. So, for now still sticking to my five-year-old Vectors V1).

      Ciao, Lorenzo

  16. Darrell

    Well, this is very disappointing… Favero has been promising current customers this update for a year, and now it comes without PCO, and it only works on head units that came out in the last year. A lot of Garmin 520, 1000, and other head unit owners are S–t Outta Luck.

    • David Walker

      THe fact that it only works with newer units is due to Garmin and not Favero. The older units do not conform to the Ant+ standard and Garmin has not updated them to do so. So, you need to complain to Garmin.

    • jgpallero

      The problem with the Edge 520 and 1000 is on the Garmin’s side. Favero has implementes the ANT+ standard, but Garmin has not planned to update the 520 and 1000 firmware in order to understand 3rd party implementations of the standard

    • Jonas S.

      I see the metrics on my Edge 1000 as well as my FR935.

    • Darrell

      Well, you can call it CD 1.0 and 2.0 or the Ant+ standard, but Garmin pedals work with older 1000, 520, etc. as well as the newest bike computers. Favero is missing the boat by not not coding in both standards.

    • Favero can’t implement the original Garmin variant, since that’s done privately.

  17. Ihsan

    Interesting. I’ve applied the update and did an indoor ride. Now I have IAV cycling dynamics, but “torque effectiveness” and “pedal smoothness” are not being updated.

    • They get disabled with this update. iirc you can switch those back on again in the sensor profile on your head unit.

    • Elio

      I did my first ride yesterday after the firmware update and was checking the data today and found the same situation: everything fine with cycling dynamics but lacking torque effectiveness and smoothness, so now I know what to do

      thanks

  18. Bob Burbar

    Small typo

    > First off, let’s start with what it’s classified as Cycling Dynamics

    I’m guessing that should be “…with why it’s…

  19. It’s NOT yet an open standard. I just logged in. Nope. ANT+ powermeter profile latest update is 5.0 November 2016. It’s still in Member / developer release which means it’s BETA and not a standard YET. I think this bears pointing out because something is not standardized when only people involved on the powermeter comittee can access it. Will it be? Yes. Is it today No. Was it a year ago. No. When will it be. I’ve heard the little elves say when several third party head units adopt it.

    Until it hits ANT+ adopter level it’s beta only which means not open.

    • And now I eat my own words, updated 2 days after.

      Bicycling power profile 5.1!!!!! HOWEVER
      It lists January But here it shall be known July 24, 2018, over 6 months since the document was finalized was it released

  20. Chris

    Any idea if Garmin will do a firmware update for older head units to make them compatible now that 3rd parties are taking advantage of the new “open” spec?

  21. Dear Garmin

    Thank you for quickly updating the Edge 520 firmware to support the new standard Cycling Dynamics

    A customer

  22. ECKHARD HINRICHSEN

    Hi Ray, thanks for the article. I have Faveros Single sided since about 1.5 years and they have worked great. One doubt: Will cycling dynamics work with single sided meters or just with the Duos? As I am using a Bolt, I would be very interested to know about Wahoo´s plans to support this. BR Eckhard

    • Daniel

      It will work with uno and duo. But as Favero states on their page:

      “Due to bike computers limitations, there could be some anomalies with Assioma UNO (not blameable to the power meter since it adopts the ANT+ standard protocol). Anyways, as soon as the bike computers will adopt the standard these metrics will be visible even with Assioma UNO.”

      The uno is only an approximation anyway because it misses the second sensor to accurately measure the other side – you need two power meters to accurately measure the power phase and power peak

  23. morey

    if the new pedal bodies have a range of 8Nm to 20Nm. what was the prior pedal body’s range? My girlfriend has the set and seems to have to work to get out of them.

    • Chris McReynolds

      “My girlfriend has the set and seems to have to work to get out of them.”

      The pedals definitely behave differently with their own cleats. The easiest cleat to get out of would be the Look Keo red. Try new cleats rather than worn. The supplied red cleats have the same range but the lever going from center to release is steeper than with Look cleats. IOW, there’s a significant zone with no tension on the Wellgo(?) cleats and then the ramp is more extreme. It takes getting used to. That hidden lever is more significant than the spring rating. OTOH, it might not require any change at all but just adjusting mentally to the difference in “new intuition” to kick out.

  24. WattsUp

    Favero previously insisted that the release torque of the pedal could be adjusted from about 11Nm to 22Nm, and that this was in line with ‘other popular pedals’, despite numerous complaints across numerous forums etc about people not being able to clip out in time. Support emailed me a hack that they said might work (untighten the screw until it pokes out a bit then ‘push’ it directly back in) which is pretty clear evidence that they were aware there was an issue.

    This move just confirms they’ve admitted there was an issue with the current version of the pedals.

  25. CG

    Just updated and tested but I don’t get a valid report of standing/seating position, in fact it says most of the time I’m standing while real life is the opposite. Garmin reports 8minutes 46 seconds standing out of 12 minutes when I just tested going out of the saddle for 52 seconds. Already sent a support request to Favero. Fenix 5 running latest firmware and tested indoor on wahoo kickr core.

    • Tomi

      Have you got any reply or found solution for this? I have made now 3 rides with the update and standing/seat time looks very funny. I’m having Edge 520 plus.

    • RobB

      I think something is screwed up with Garmin Connect, the mobile app reports that I’m standing the whole time while the web portal correctly reports that I am seated. Two areas of the Garmin platform are reporting different data.

      I have a 5+, it looks like Garmin has to get to work as position reporting is broken.

    • CG

      Still troubleshooting at favero side. I have sent to them several indoor and outdoor files. Outdoor seems better detecting seating standing time but stills over estimate the standing time in more than 100%. Indoor is absolutely wrong, while doing trainerroad workouts, all the recovery intervals (150W) or any effort below 200W is classified as standing. As soon I hit the ON time of the workout 250W and up it correctly reports as seated.

    • RobB

      Did all of you check the data in both areas of Garmin Connect, the web site and the mobile app?

      I have noticed that the graphs do not match for the same activity, however the web site seems to be correct while the mobile app is always wrong showing the opposite or wildly wrong position in the graph.

      I also noticed that during TrainerRoad if I sit the entire time with no standing portion at all, it will not report the seating/standing times, only the graph will show.

    • Chris McReynolds

      I don’t know if this is helpful but let me offer some of my experiences with the data. I use an FR935 and an Edge 520. Since I started with the Vector 3 (dual) pedals I have not been able to glean useful data from the “standing/seated” parsing. The reason seems to be that when I rise out of the saddle to take a look around, say I’m darting between traffic and so forth, not pedaling, that is counted as standing time. This makes my “average power standing” totally useless. OTOH, the Assioma pedals use “real” rotational velocity rather than the PCO metric. People are confused about that choice and think that it’s BS. It isn’t. Using “real” (parsing actual samples of rotational velocity to go with each torque sample) means that the Assioma doesn’t have to record standing time when the pedal isn’t moving.

      As far as these mysteries where the Assioma seems to be worse I must assume that the drivers/middleware are set up for Garmin’s data structures rather than for the Assioma’s. The Garmin head units do report Assioma data very accurately. I don’t know where you guys are having problems. I’m using only Ant+ and I get my Cycling Dynamics data in Garmin Connect for Android as well as the connect.garmin web site. The only thing that isn’t equal or better on the Assioma pedals (with Garmin head units) is PCO. I can also understand why spikes and dropouts are virtually nonexistant on the Assiomas because, again, their data sampling paradigm is far, far superior. Anyone that thinks CD-PCO is worth all of those Vector 3 problems (not even counting the so-called battery cap problems) doesn’t understand what’s happening on a hardware level with either choice. And if you think that the differences between Garmin and Assioma data reports point to flaws with the Assioma pedals you’re probably wrong.

    • “I don’t know where you guys are having problems.”

      I suspect the main epicenter of problems here is that people are on a rainbows’ worth of firmware versions on more than a dozen different devices, likely spanning years.

      Garmin noted how on certain newer devices (and even Garmin Connect itself), they’ve tried to implement various tweaks to account for the slight differences of Favero Assioma data compared to Garmin Vector Cycling Dynamics data (some of it due to slight tweaks in the standards, and some of it due to just being different). But I suspect some amount of people simply don’t have those tweaks.

  26. Fabio

    as an assioma happy user i think that the pod is one of the pro of assioma because if something bad happen (a crash, or simply something that hits the pedal….) u can only replace the pedal and not all the PM system.

    hope they will be present even in the next version…

  27. usr

    If they can get Zwift to update their client so that it switches the avatar animation based on the measured rider position, Assiomas will sell like hotcake next winter.

    On a slightly more serious note: I do agree that the blackened hardware on the new pedal bodies looks more elegant. The original “silver” wasn’t exactly the apex of polished campagnoloesquity, just bland utilitarian anti-corrosion plating. But in the picture it looks as if the plastic part (“the body of the body”) is now plain black, like the old Bepro. Or is that just factory-clean vs used clean?

    My original Assioma bodies have a subtle “carbony” look, quite unexpected for an injection-molded part, while my Bepros are bland black. Is it back to the Bepro surface? (a part of me might want to stock up on old Assioma then)

  28. Dan G

    “First off, let’s start with what it’s classified as Cycling Dynamics, ”

    — I think that should be “what isn’t classified’

  29. Dan G

    “So, to translate that into simple English: “Our internal hardware doesn’t support it.”

    No. Favero hardware does support it — strain gauges at either end of the internal pedal axle — but they’re using the data for other purposes. That’s why they say “even if technically possible” — it’s technically possible, they could do it, but they’re using the data elsewhere/didn’t spend money developing code to output PCO.

    • Punter

      I also interpreted it this way, that they can do it, they just aren’t doing it right now. I can’t say I understand though… it’s data, it’s not like once you use it for one purpose it’s all used up and you can’t use it for another purpose…

      If the data is being collected, as they say, they really should implement POC.

    • usr

      Those tiny Nordic nRFxx SoC that all our favorite sports sensors are running on are surprisingly powerful, but their computing capacity is not unlimited. The more work you do within the inner sampling loop, the lower you have to set your internal sample rate. Higher sample rate gives higher accuracy, which I guess is particularly true for pedal PM which register the most “non-propulsive forces” of all PM (just just imagine how the strain gauge signal must look when riding the cobbles…). If Favero have already set sample rate as high as possible within their constraints of computing speed, adding more analysis to the loop would eat into accuracy and not wanting to do that is quite reasonable.

    • D

      Then if they are capable of POC Offset, but need computing for more importatnt things, they can make POC Mode, where u’ll get that analyzes (for adjusting cleats), and with less accurate power data, and when cleats are adjusted to switch back POC Off, but more accuracy… So this way will get help in adjusting our position, without loosing accuracy…

    • usr

      Sure, they might do that, but at increased complexity. This not only means additional cost (someone’s got to write that code, the mode switcher, the manual, translations thereof and so on) but more importantly, it increases the likelihood of bugs, makes discovery and fixes of bugs more difficult if they do happen and would still increase the support load even in absence of bugs.

      Basically, reasons in favor of not rocking the boat too hard. I might prefer the other path (I guess I would, if I had a newer Garmin, because I agree that PCO is amongst the less pointless cycling dynamics measurements), but I can easily see the attraction of the path taken. And remember, unlike many other powermeter manufacturers Favero *is* rocking the boat with firmware updates (remember the non-round chainring update?), just maybe not quite as hard as we would like.

    • D

      I totaly understund what’s ur point.. But also im sure u’ll agree that implementing PCO Offset and switching between modes will make chance for less bugs and misfunction vs what they implemented now (and also with no usability compared to PCO Offset from Cycling Dynamics options..) Why do i think like this? They allready have mode where they tested and cleared from the bugs.. Then implementing PCO Offset mode as i sugested will be just toggle between mode cleared from bugs and which is working and mode which will be not so important if there is allready bugs there.. Regarding the manual, fixing and discouvery bugs etc in new feature is more complext since there is now only one mode of working, which can interfere with important things if bugs happening… My idea why they did not implemented PCO Offset is maybe because of complexity of implementing, maybe their hardware not support this, or maybe both… And with this new implementation im considering just as marketing good for both sides.. Favero and Garmin as well.. For Favero since they offer something new and without any momey taken, for Garming, since many users will buy new Garmin model which support this new options, or when the user cant decide between Garmin and someting else, will choose Garming easier.. Im Garmin user in term of Computers, so even some kind of fan 🙂 for both of them, Favero and Garmin, but just sharing my opininon.. Very satisfied in last three years from my EDGE 520, also from Favero pedals in last two years…

    • “No. Favero hardware does support it — strain gauges at either end of the internal pedal axle — but they’re using the data for other purposes.”

      Not really.

      If they can’t do it without giving up accuracy, then no, they don’t have the hardware to do it. What they’re saying is pretty clear cut, they just added some marketing speak. In my opinion, saying that accuracy is ‘another purpose’ is sorta misleading. That’s like saying “We could use the car wheels for another purpose”, ignoring that then the car couldn’t go anywhere. 😉

      I love Favero and everything that they’re doing here. But I think the way they tried to pass of PCO as non-valuable because there hardware can’t do it is a bit…non-cool.

    • Chris McReynolds

      Their UVP relies on using that gyro for IAV Cycling Dynamics. If you want Garmin’s version with IAV Cycling Dynamics you have to make a new circuit. PCO means no “real” rotational velocity (lower sample rate for what we call cadence). And that is why they support non-round chainrings while Garmin does not. It’s not a trivial distinction. They COULD implement Garmin’s data paradigm but chose IAV instead. After using both I’d say that it was a good call. PCO has been useless for me, even in cleat position/fit situations.

    • Yeah, I guess what I’m saying is IAV is nothing more than a (well done) marketing term. The rest of the world just calls it ‘being accurate’. And honestly, accuracy was never really a problem for Garmin pedals (or PowerTap). Battery caps were (for Garmin).

      Now, they are supporting non-round rings where Garmin isn’t. Whether or not that’s a more beneficial feature than PCO that Garmin has (if that’s indeed what’s happening) is debatable, and probably varies from person to person.

  30. Punter

    Just confirming that the new metrics are captured on a Forerunner 935. I did a ride last night and it was all there.

    I do feel a bit sheepish now, because I was quite please with myself last night when I saw that my POC was 0 on both feet. Thought I was the business for being so well centered 🙂

    Now, Wahoo needs to catch up and add these metrics to the Elemnt head units. While they might not offer a lot of usable intel, it does still put Wahoo behind Garmin from a marketing point of view.

  31. RagTag

    Ray – Did you test out the new pedal bodies? If yes, is there a noticeable improvement in uncleating? Is it smoother than the previous generation? Thanks, Ragtag

  32. Hi Ray, thanks for this post! I have the pedals. But know I need to implement the protocol in my own bike computer app Jepster. Bu I have one issue. Where can I find information about the Cycling Dynamics ANT+ Protocol? At the ANT+ website (thisisant.com) I can’t find any information.

    Thanks in advance.

    Best regards,

    Tom

  33. Pietertje

    How awesome would it be if they added a mountainbike pedal body. Swap them around for road, gravel, mountainbike or winter/summer riding.

    Just dreaming…..

  34. jens

    Looks like my edge 520 is capturing the data fine…did a short test with both the FR935 and the 520 same data:
    Can see standing/sitting time, PP

    Groutl

  35. kevw

    With regards to different pedal types it might actually be easier for Favero to provide the measurements of their spindle to allow other manufacturers (shimano, speedplay etc) to manufacture compatible pedal bodies?

  36. Fabio Pires

    Well, my Edge 520 recorded allright the new metrics today. I didn’t tried it “live” but it is showing on my Connect page, FWIW.

    • jgpallero

      I have also a 520 and I can’t see the new metrics in Connect. Is necessary any configuration?

    • Fabio Pires

      Dont know. I just recorded. Maybe it updated just before my ride.

    • jgpallero

      Is your device an Edge 520 or an Edge 520 Plus?

    • Fabio Reis

      An old 520

    • Frederic Carrier

      The compatibility statement are about recording AND displaying. I wonder if older units can just record.
      I would be happy if it could record on a 510 even if it doesn’t display it in real time.
      THen later on, I can analyze it on a PC.

    • Fabio – Do you mind providing a link to a Garmin Connect activity (set as public) to validate? Or, feel free to shoot me the file privately (just my first name @ my domain name).

      Just so I can verify everything?

      Frederic – For the most part, if Garmin were to update older units, the work-effort would be the same to tweak it for recording versus display. However, that said, Garmin did note to me last night that they have made some minor tweaks in recent months to some units to address the fact that Favero was skipping PCO, so it more gracefully displays that omission.

      (Which also shows that Garmin does indeed quietly work behind the scenes far more often than not with their ‘competitors’ to try and smooth out things for consumers.)

    • So a bit of a circle back on this (older units working). I reached out to Garmin, who in turn did some testing as well. And interestingly, there are cases where the Edge 520 (and Edge 1000) will work with the Favero Assioma Cycling Dynamics.

      However, there’s also cases where it won’t work if other brand implement it and don’t exactly match what Favero has done in terms of certain features, transmission/update frequencies/etc. Basically, they said it’s nifty that it’s great that it works, but isn’t officially supported on those specific Edge units.

      I suspect that’s why it may be working for some, and not others. Figuring out the exact right combination of settings that enables it to work is key. I’m travelling the the next few days, but when I get back next week if someone hasn’t already figured out the secret magic decoder ring, I’ll give it a whirl.

    • jgpallero

      Could you plese check which firmware version is running your Edge 520, please?

  37. Danny

    Now I cannot see pedal smoothness and torque effectiveness in Garmin Connect, it disappeared. My R PP starts at 350degree, does anybody know, how should ideal PP look (0 degree)? Unfortunately, there is no documentation regarding cycling dynamics, I tried to google this to find out if my values are common (my TE is 67%, PS 17%), but there is not much to find.

    • Ihsan

      Danny,

      Exactly the same issue I’m having. Torque effectiveness and pedal smoothness disappeared from my data screens and Harmon connect as well.

      As far as what the values are, I am as clueless as you are, but I believe gplama has a u-tube video on them and his numbers (iirc), was 4-5 above what you reported.

    • Danny

      Thanks Ihsan for GPLAMA video, I can see what Shane values are and that mine could be a bit better. There is something wrong with recording new cycling dynamics – I thought that absence of smoothness and effectivenes is caused by Garmin Connect, but it vanished from other platforms – I used cyclinganalytics, which showed these detailed in a graph and now smothness and effectivenes are gone replaced by power phase. Ray can you check that?

    • Ihsan

      Danny,

      Sorry for the delay. Once the pedals are active and connected go to settings, sensor details, cycling dynamics and turn torque effectiveness and pedal smoothness on.

      For some reason, Favero seems to have assigned those into cycling dynamics and toggled them off by default.

    • bdh

      I do not get this. I have read a few people saying ” settings, sensor details, cycling dynamics and turn torque effectiveness and pedal smoothness on”…but…

      When I go to “settings” and click I get : “activity profiles/sensors/extended display/group track/phone/device transfers/regulatory info/system”.

      If I then clicked “sensors” (feel like I am wrong since everyone says “sensor details”) and I get:”Add sensors” and the number assigned to my assioma “37,,,”.

      If I click the assioma sensor (“376,,” something or other) I get :”Enable/Name/Sensor details/calibrate/Remove”

      So, what am I doing wrong? Where are the options like “cycling dynamics” and “torque effectiveness”?

      Thanks in adv.

    • Ihsan

      Click “sensor details” after you’re in Assioma.

      The path is:
      Settings-sensors-Assioma-sensor details.. then iirc there’s cycling dynamics and then toggle buttons for torque/smoothness & pp. sorry not at home so going from memory.

    • bdh

      Sorry, I didn’t finish (I am an idiot). When I click the assioma power meter (\\…I can then see “assioma detains”.

      When I click “sensor details” i can see: “sensor id” and “about” and “calibration prompt”….and that is it.

      (but thanks for the quick comment/help)

    • bdh

      So, there I was typing the last comment and looking at the Garmin 520plus to copy what I saw (under “sensor details”) and when I finished (so I looked at it at least 3x for about a minute—pedals on the whole time and Garmin a few minutes before recognized the pedals). ..anyway, when I finished I looked again and WHAMMO there was “cycling dynamics”. I swear to K that option was not there before.

      My theory is that where I am sitting is just in (out) or range and somehow I held the garmin close enough while I was typing. Sorry for the hassle and thanks.

    • Ihsan

      Hah! The proverbial penny on the 520+ must have dropped late!

    • jgpallero

      Maybe the secret is a specific firmware version? The Edge 520 has been having battery issues and in the past months some firmware versions have been released in order to manage this. Maybe some of these versions include the 3rd party cycling dynamics implementation. My Edge 520 runs the v13 firmware and I can confirm that I haven’t cycling dynamics, no in real time nor in the fit file for post processing

    • Danny

      yes, it takes a few moment to load cycling dynamics in sensor details, I have Edge 1030 and it took about 20 seconds for the first time too, then when I exit cycling dynamics and come back again, I can see it straight away.

    • Danny

      Thanks a lot Ihsan, It worked exactly as you described. Now smoothness and effectiveness are back, thanks to you 🙂

    • Ihsan

      Can’t take credit. :). I read buried somewhere in the comments as well. I believe it was esthetician’s comment that described it first.

    • Frank

      anybody else interested in this? (TE70%, TS20%PwerPhaseARcLength 195°, … see also screenshot)

  38. Robert

    “Platform Center Offset is typically used in bike fit type situations where you might adjust the cleat positioning slightly to get you more centered.”

    To be more exact – there is nothing that says that a PCO of zero (meaning center of effort is aligned with the geometrical center of the pedal) is “better” than any other number. The distance between the 2 pedal axle faces (a.k.a. Q-factor), the lenght of the pedal spindles, the width of your shoes, the amount of clearance your heels have with the cranks – all these affect where the “best” center of effort of your shoes should/can lie. There is nothing magical about PCO=0.

    This said, PCO *is* useful when changing/moving cleats/shoes (to ensure you did not change the offset), and to ensure you are set up similarly on both sides of the crank.

  39. Bill Shepard

    Glad they replaced the bodies. My 100lb wife has has a lot of trouble with this. Adjusted all the way to the stop she would just get stuck. It was bad. When she circled at a stop sign you knew she was stuck. I swapped pedals and she would still got stuck. She is a killer strong Triathlete she just can’t get out of these pedals. Maybe we will buy a set and try it. It is a shame we both have 520 (no plus) and can’t get the new features. I already did the update.

    • Mats

      Something to try that could save you the cost of the new pedal bodies if you think they are to difficult to clip out off.

      Unscrew the small bolt for the axle holding the springs.
      Slide the axle slightly so you can remove one spring.
      Reassemble

      Saw it on favero forum and did it to my wifes pedals yesterday, we went for a ride to test it and she was really happy with the big difference.
      Not sure if it could cause problems later on but then I will buy the new pedal bodies, it’s at least worth a try…

    • Mats

      Trainerroad forum it was…
      link to forum.trainerroad.com

      See post from mar 6th, it has a pic of the result also.

  40. jgpallero

    Three months ago I posted a message in the Garmin Forums asking for Cycling Dynamics from 3rd party vendors support in the Edge 520. Maybe it could be a good idea to post new answers in order to tell Garmin we are lots of users waiting for the feature. This is the message: link to forums.garmin.com

    • kevw

      I did the same for the Edge 1000 (before they “disappeared” the whole Edge 1000 section.

      To be honest though, whilst I would really like this feature added to my Edge 1000 I don’t really feel that Garmin are morally obliged to update the Edge 1000 to add a feature for use with a competitors pedal.

      I suppose the issue is that superficially it looks like it should be super easy to do?

      I have to remember that when I bought my Assioma pedals last year I did so thinking that cycling dynamics was always going to be specific to the vectors and my edge 1000 is getting on for 5 years old now.

    • jgpallero

      Yes, of course Garmin is not obliged (morally or not) to add a feature for use with a competitors pedal, although in this case the problem is that all devices were updated except the Edge 520. But me as a user, when I change my Edge 520 device I will probably buy another vendor device

  41. Tim Vanhaeren

    Been using them for 2 months now. Looks like very consistent powerreadings between rides. Curious about this new data, just because I love numbers.

    I have a bit of an offtopic question though: Have you noticed lower power numbers while using these pedals. It seems it’s reading about 8-9% lower than my previous stages crank.

    It seems to be consistent though, however it takes some time to get used to new and lower numbers. Just curious whether this is a known fact or something is wrong with the pedals.

    • Tim

      My set seems consistently about 2-3% above my Kickr, but of course I don’t know which is correct and would probably trust pedals over a trainer. Also, being a pedal meter vs further in the drivetrain maybe the difference is real and losses in the drivetrain chain/gears?

      I haven’t had a chance to check against my PowerTap wheels, but comparing various rides at “all out effort” I really don’t think I’d see the kind of difference you note.

    • Esthetician

      Mine are within a few Watts of my Cyclops Hammer direct drive trainer. Ideally the Hammer would be some percentage lower since the pedals are before and the Hammer is after the drivetrain. So if the Hammer is right, then the pedals are reading low, but if the pedals are right, then the Hammer is reading high. IDK which is right, but it’s more than close enough for my purposes. I’m about to get a crank spindle left only PM to throw into the mix and compare. I could put the Assioma pedals on the crank and the bike on the Hammer and run the three simultaneously.

      “A man with two watches never knows what time it is.”

  42. Sami

    I turned on Cycling dynamics (Settings, Sensors, Assioma power meter, Sensor Details and so on) and still I’m not getting any new data (neither in my Garmin head unit or in Garmin Connect). I have Edge 820. Other thing is that after this Assioma 4.04 update and Cycling dynamics I had more power meter dropouts than before, actually power dropouts were rare in 3.xx.

    • Avery Abbott

      I was getting some cycling dynamics-related dropouts last night when I did a trainer ride with Assioma Duo 4.04 and Edge 830 (latest). Not sure what’s up with that.

    • To clarify – dropouts of all power related data, or just cycling dynamics data?

    • Avery Abbott

      Dropouts of Cycling Dynamics data. On the 830’s CD screen, I still showed L/R power and combined power, but my PP indicator kept changing to just the right half (perfectly bisecting the circle) whereas my pedaling wasn’t changing and when it was properly reflecting my PP, it only had a tiny sliver on the upper left that was absent.

      The almost-full indication should be correct – I was doing drills at 50 RPM above FTP and focusing on rounding out my stroke.

      I tried moving the 830 to a few other locations just to make sure it wasn’t a signal issue (shouldn’t have been since I was still getting power and cadence) and it made no difference.

      I’ve removed the activity from Connect, but I don’t remember seeing the dead spots when I was reviewing it after exercise, so maybe it’s a hiccup on the current Garmin release on both the 830 and 820? My only other computer is a 510, so I can’t really test much else. The dropouts were usually short (<10 seconds) and my activity was 42 minutes, so the dropouts might have just been covered well enough by the dots on Connect that I couldn't see them. Also possible that maybe the Assiomas aren't transmitting the CD data as frequently as they are the rest of the info? I don't know enough about ANT+ to know if that's plausible or not.

    • Avery Abbott

      No change to firmware versions on either the Garmin or the Assioma pedals, and my last trainer ride had significantly fewer drops. Dunno, must have been a fluke. Data from my race today looks great – no idea what it looked like *during* the race.

      Things I’m learning from having Cycling Dynamics:

      1.) I’m still favoring my left leg (52/48, not terrible, but consistent)
      2.) I mash more during races than during training

  43. Joe Blough

    Tonight I did a ride with my Assioma Duos running the latest firmware and my Garmin Edge 520 (the 520, not the 520 Plus). I turned on a few Cycling Dynamics features on the Garmin screen just to see if it would display anything.

    To my surprise it displayed my power phase for both legs, but nothing else. No PCO, but I wasn’t expecting that, nor any rider position data. Also, it doesn’t seem to display any Cycling Dynamics data on my Garmin Connect page, post ride.

    So it looks like you can at least get power phase data with the Assiomas and the Edge 520, but nothing else.

    • kevw

      Are you certain you are getting power phase data? If it’s the same as what I see on the (unsupported) edge 1000 the power phase graphs are there with the individual power values but the actual power phase indicators just stay it the middle regardless of how i pedal.

    • Brantel

      Mine does exactly that. The power phase graphics are static and don’t do anything.

  44. Shane

    I’m one of those that has had trouble clipping into these pedals. It’s been extremely frustrating. Rarely ever missed a clip on my old Shimano’s, but consistently do with these. I’ve played with tension multiple times and have concluded it’s just the design. Hopefully these new platforms are better because it’s bad enough I’d already written off these pedals and wished I could return them just because of the clipping.

  45. MarekK

    Updated my assioma Uno pedals yesterday. Today they read power levels about 50% of what they should have. I tried calibrating from my edge, within the Android app as well as correcting the crank length parameter (it has reset to 172.5mm). Generally it looked like they were being recognised as a duo but reading only one pedal. Anyway, long story short, they were connected under ble. I removed the shoot from my edge and reconnected as ant+. Don’t recall whether I had origami l originally connected them via ble as I usually default to ant+. All good now.

    • SteffenR

      I had the same problem today – was wondering first, why i got half the Watts i was “putting in” ;).
      Why looking at the settings i also had them connected via BLE. I’ll remove the sensor on my watch and try to reconnect via Ant+. Hope this will fix my issues too..

      Thanks 😉 (i’m not the only one with this problem) ;)=

    • Pietro

      raced just after firmware update yesterday (I know, terrible choice, but skipping the pre-race gear test was not a choice), with Suunto Ambit 3 watch so BLE. Very low readings I spent one third of the race wondering why I was so weak, before understanding that proably I was reading 50% power …

      anyone of you have solved the issue under BLE ? (it worked well on BLE before firmware update).

  46. JohnW

    I had my first ride with the new fw on my Assioma UNO last night.
    It looks like I was getting the new Cycling Dynamics data, but on the Garmin Connect web view (and mobile) I’m not getting the Cycling Dynamics tab with the graphical representation, only the raw data graphs.
    link to connect.garmin.com
    I recorded the ride on both my FR945 and Edge530, neither shows the Cycling Dynamics tab that Ray showed from the Assioma on his ride:
    link to connect.garmin.com

    Is this just me – are others seeing the Cycling Dynamics analysis tab?

    • RobB

      It’s not fully working on my Fenix 5+, only power phases work while seated/standing time shows –:– for both.

      Ray, are you sure the 5+ is officially supported because I have done 3 rides and have never got any rider position info.

    • JohnW

      @RobB – I had the same from my FR945 and Edge530 as well (ride link above), so I don’t think it’s an issue with the F5+
      The ride position graph was shown, but the times were all blank.

    • JohnW

      In case it helps anyone else, I discovered that after reenabling the Torque effectiveness and Pedal smoothness recording in the power meter’s settings on my Edge530, not only did they reappear in my results but the web interface for Garmin Connect now displays the Cycling Dynamics tab and graphical results!

      I’ve no idea why they chose to disable those stats as part of the fw upgrade, but manually reenabling them seems to get the full Cycling Dynamics analysis working in GC.

      Hope that helps others.

    • RobB

      Thank You for getting back to me, after re-enabling those settings does it show the seated/standing times for you now?

      I get all the data including the seated/standing graph and the separate cycling dynamics tab however, the seated/standing time graphic still shows the times as blank.

    • Matt

      Thank you for this, John. I lost my torque effectiveness data, which I am using to try to improve my pedaling efficiency. I have a tendency to let off power way too early, leading to stop-start-stop and wild power fluctuations.

      Cheers for sharing the fix.

  47. Chris McReynolds

    I just got a pair of Assioma pedals and I configured them on Android no problem. I updated them to FW version 4.04 (after registering and pairing the pedals to one another) and then added them as new sensors to my FR935 and “old school” Edge 520. They recorded the power as expected (No PCO, of course). I had more trouble with my Vector 3s recording the Cycling Dynamics meta-data. The Vector 3 problem was eventually traced to the battery cap issue and my pedals did not pair properly every time I restored power. If anyone has trouble with the Assioma pedals on Garmin head units that support any version of Cycling Dynamics I’m going to assume that those with trouble did not pair the pedals with each other properly. I’ve heard they will try to join as one or two “Uno” pedals if that happens. Make sure the pedals are configured properly in Android (or iOS, I assume) for two-channel “Duo” Ant+ mode before you blame differences in CD implementations.

    The one thing I need to find out is how to exploit the extra data that Assioma claims to record under “IAV Cycling Dynamics.” The only thing that I know for certain is that they claim better accuracy. Which makes sense. But I want to see how to also get better reports, if possible.

  48. Matt

    I bought my Assioma pedals last summer and it’s easily the best cycling upgrade I’ve made to my bike. I never have to think about them, other than charging (which happens a lot less frequently than I anticipated). This is coming from Stages, though, where I had to constantly babysit the damn thing – drop outs, battery cover problems, etc. I’ve been on the new firmware about 2 weeks now and have had no issues.

    Very happy to see they continue to update them while also being confident in the hardware part of it. I might update the pedal bodies for next year.

    • RobB

      Yes, I agree, it really is a great product as in the months that I’ve owned them I have not had one issue.

      I’ve also owned the latest version of the Vector 3 with revised battery caps which I returned, Ray and others say they are fixed but I still had spikes and problems on two sets despite lubing the batteries. I just think most people gave up and the ones that remain don’t care and prefer aesthetics over accurate performance.

      If you think about it, this Assioma design is superior anyway as the spindle is thinner and cornering clearance is better, while the pods blend in with the crank arms.

    • kevw

      Whilst i agree with most of what you said I believe that the cornering clearance is actually better on the vectors due to the rounded shape….

      Rather have rechargable battery and accurate data though!

    • usr

      The practical difference is that when you do reach the limits of cornering clearance, you scratch off some injection molded plastic from the Faveros (and enjoy slightly more clearance the next time), whereas on Vector 3 you would be messing with the all-important battery cap that Garmin is apparently struggling to get right even before a violent tarmac rubbing.

    • kevw

      Ha Agreed! – My faveros have slightly improved cornering clearance now but still work fine.

  49. kevw

    So, my first FTP test after upgrading to fw 4 yielded a 5% increase.

    Has anyone noticed readings being higher after the update before I pat myself on the back too much?

  50. Patrice Ducourtioux

    Since the new firmware update, my garmin 1030 no longer displays information about pedaling efficiency.
    Is it better to use other Garmin informations ?

    • Craig Robertson

      You have to activate cycling dynamics once pedals connected to your Edge unit. There was post above showing how to do it. You have to make sure your pedals are connected or it won’t display.

      Settings-sensors-Assioma-sensor

      The new dynamics show up ok on my FR735XT too. 🙂

  51. Frederic Carrier

    Had an issue today using Edge 510 & Assioma Duo with 4.04 (not sure which one is the culprit but I suspect the edge). My power was quite low even after warming up. It felt like a large effort to even reach my FTP; and while I trained a lot last week, I shouldn’t be that tired. I stopped to recalibrate and then looked at the DUO’s settings: Crankarm length was somehow set at 110mm! Changeing it back to 172.5mm solved the issue and perceived effort matched the wattage displayed.
    This is almost a 1.6 ratio and I remember changeing a device setting from imperial to metric – it might be a bug on Duo v4.04 on an interaction between the two devices.
    I suspect my Edge 510 more because a couple weeks back, all 4 fields on a display window showed Cadence: it’s weird when your cadence, your 3sec-pwr, 10sec-pwr and your HR are all at 84.
    My 510 is getting old. A 530 is on order.

  52. Max

    Hi,

    got my new Assioma Uno, updated it out of the box to firmware 4.04, installed with no issues, and then! – it sends normal power numbers to Edge 520, but only half the power to F935. And that’s at the same time, on the same ride – both on screen and in the file. Any ideas? Searched the web, but so far I see “half-the-power” cases were mostly about apps (Zwift / Trainerroad) connected over Bluetooth and a setting in “app compatibility”, not ANT. Reported to Garmin support, and they are looking into it, but no results so far. Anyone had any similar issues and knows how to solve? Thanks!

    • Chris McReynolds

      My guess is that (and I didn’t realize this was possible with the Assioma) you connected to the FR935 in BLE and to the Edge 520 with ANT+ (since it can’t connect to sensors via BLE). The fastest way to check this is to look first at your Edge 520 at the Assioma sensor configuration for the ID. Write it down or keep it handy when you do the same on the FR935. The BLE ID will be different unless you overwrote the default to make them the same. FWIW, it is possible to connect to Vector 3 pedals with Edge 520 in ANT+ and FR935 in BLE in the same work session. From what I recall, the FR935 will try to connect to BLE first if it sees both.

    • Max

      Thanks for the idea, Chris – will check! Do you know if there a way to “force” FR935 not to see a BLE sensor, and to go ANT+ first?

    • Chris McReynolds

      In the Edge you can disable rather than remove. I don’t know what the effect is of removing a BLE sensor from the FR935 in terms of what happens during subsequent startups. However, you really can just ignore it once you toggle past it and configure the ANT+ signal. It won’t bother you after that. Go ahead and remove it and then when you start up a new session again make sure you ignore any power sensor that doesn’t have the same ID that was automatically suggested on the Edge 520. When my FR was new it was on FW version 8.00 or something in that range and the ID # was prefaced with “BLE.” I’m not sure whether it still does that. Right now my Assioma is ID 18228 and my Vector 3 ID is 585718 on both head units.

    • Max

      Thanks again!

  53. RobB

    I have opened a ticket with Garmin in order to attempt to remedy my issues with rider position reporting. Namely, the problem of no seated/standing times and discrepancies in the seated/standing graph on the Connect web portal and the Android mobile app. One platform shows I was seated the whole time while another shows I was standing for the same activity.

    My initial conclusion is that it is simply not supported on older watches as it would be mentioned in the firmware change log if it was added, just like it is for the edge 1030. My stats tab page does not have a third toggle for Position like Ray’s image, and the Cycling Dynamics tab has blank seated/standing times.

    We’ll see what resolution Garmin brings, but it looks like the data is being recorded in the .fit file in a different manner on the older units.

  54. Jeff

    Wow, I guess I got lucky. Reading this post I thought “shoot, new body/spring now that mine are approaching 45 days old…” Then on a whim I go out to the garage and bingo — Clever Training had sent me the new pedals! Kudos to them.

    Coming off DuraAce it took me all of three rides to get used to the pedal/cleat interface, and now I do find myself wondering about my previous commitment to the SPD-SL design. And besides, now my Campag bike has Italiano pedals too — yeah!

    Would love to have pedal offset. I vascilated between Uno and Duo, and went Duo. Glad I did as I regularly have a 45-55 imbalance that I can work on. I’m thinking PCO would help with that too.

    Also looking to see how the power metrics can help me confirm the position of my Rotor Q-Rings.

    All is good in my pedal world. Now if they’d just come out with an SPD and/or a flats body for this spindle it would be the cat’s meow.

    I’m a fan of the design with the electronics in the pod — out of sight, out of mind, and protected.

  55. JRB1

    Interesting article. I am also not sure what the benefits are, but nice to get a split of standing and sitting as well as power achieved in those positions. In regards to the new pedal body, it does appear that the spring is not only black, but a smaller gauge of wire used, hence a wider range of tension setting available. I do have mine set to the easiest right now, so could be quite interested in a set.. Thanks JB

  56. AlexB

    Did anybody figure that pedaling efficiency Assioma was providing prior this firmware upgrade is gone with cycling dynamics update? Does this mean the efficiency data provided before is irrelevant with nee cycling dynamics?

    • Craig Robertson

      Posted a few times above. You have to activate cycling dynamics once pedals connected to your Edge unit. You have to make sure your pedals are connected or it won’t display.

      Settings-sensors-Assioma-sensor

      Didn’t have to activate it before, but now you need to when you have the new firmware. Once activated it shows full details again.

  57. AlexB

    Thanks Craig. I miss stated it. I was thinking of “pedaling smoothness “ data My pedals are connected and i am getting power dynamics data just fine as well as other standard power related data Assioma pedals provide except “pedaling smoothness”. . It shows blank when pedaling. So i am thinking assioma turned this off as it may overlap with new pedaling dynamics data?

    • Ihsan

      Alex,

      They’re both (torque effectiveness and pedal smoothness) an option to turn on/off in sensor settings. activate your pedals, connect your head unit and then head over to the “Settings-Sensors-Assioma-Sensor details” and you will see.

  58. AlexB

    Yep, that option was off after the firmware update. Thanks for the tip!

  59. Brantel

    Not sure how (please share the secret) some are reporting that they have gotten the 520 non plus to work with these new features. I have the latest firmware I. The Edge 520 and cannot figure out anyway to get any of the new metrics to display or to be recorded.

    • kevw

      I’m fairly sceptical about the claims of it working on some edge 520s and 1000s to be honest.

    • jgpallero

      I’ve asked the users about the firmware version in such cases, but anoyne answered…

    • Sorry, just dug through some e-mails.

      So someone did send me in a file showing it working, but they found an interesting observation: It only showed Cycling Dynamics on the Edge 520 *IF* a Forerunner 935 was concurrently connected and recording. If the FR935 wasn’t working, then no Cycling Dynamics on the Edge 520.

      I’ll try and get to the bottom of it tomorrow…

    • kevw

      So am I correct in thinking that the pedals only include the cycling dynamics data in the Ant+ stream if requested by a compatible recording device?

      And it turns out if another recording device has asked the pedals to include the data in the stream then the 520 can display it? Weird.

    • illdie4u

      For me cycling dynamics showed up all of a sudden too. Since yesterday i got the metrics with my 520 (FW 13.0.0.0 and FR935 FW 13.30).
      I weared both units on my rides, but only the 520 was recording.

  60. Steve

    I’m on an original 520 and don’t see the cycling dynamics options under the sensor config, and nothing related showed up on Garmin Connect after completing a ride on the latest firmware. Removed / added back the sensor with the same results. Missing this isn’t enough of a reason for me to upgrade my head unit but it’s another item on the list for why I should upgrade sooner than later.

  61. Andrea Sabba

    Hi Ray,
    any news (“I’ll try and get to the bottom of it tomorrow…”)?

    Thank you
    Andrea

    • Sorry, I got sidebar’d when I had to pull off the Favero Assiomas on my primary bike (still have another set of them on an indoor bike), due to the right pedal being weird all of a sudden (I don’t have time to troubleshoot right now, as I’m in peak testing trainer season).

      That aid, I’ve got another go of the indoor bike tomorrow which does have a happy set of Assiomas on them, and already set aside the Edge 520 for it.

    • Ihsan

      Ray,

      Would the right pedal problems include faster de-charging? Mine seems to develop a case of hungriness after firmware update.

      Thanks

    • No, it was just a wonky right-side 20% higher thing. Not sure if it’s transient or permanent, just don’t have time at the moment to troubleshoot it or ‘lose’ data tests/sets with bad data. 🙁

    • Peter H

      I believe that I have a similar , evolving problem with my right pedal. A little bit ago, I started getting 52/48 on the balance. My right leg has always been stronger, and is slightly longer. If I ever had an off balance setting it was 49/511 or 48/52. Every ride now is at 52/48, even if I intentionally favor the right. After a lot of back & forth with Favero’s CS, I did a static weight test. I had to adjust he right pedal by 1.2%, but I still get 52/48. I borrowed a friend’s Assiomas, and on a long ride with varying terrain, I had 50/50. Favero’s engineers analyzed both data sets and told me that both are correct.

      I am very frustrated, since I have proved that there is a problem with my right pedal, yet I’m told that it is fine.
      I had the same problem with my left a year ago, which eventually ailed and was replaced.

      The only solution offered is for me to send (at my expense) the pedals back to Italy for testing.

      Any advice?

    • I wish I had some advice there, but honestly I don’t know. I haven’t tried troubleshooting mine yet. They’re relaxing on the table for a bit.

    • Peter H

      Thanks, I’m interested to see what you find.
      I used different new pair as a test, and those also came in at 50/50.
      Mine still, regardless of how I ride always report 52/48.
      A friend’s two+ year old pair get me 51/49.
      So:
      Mine 52/48 even after an adjustment post-static weight test
      Friend’s old pair: 51/49
      New: 50/50
      New 50/50.

      I do a zero0offset before every ride, and again after warming up.

      The most troubling part of this is that Favero’s engineers claim that the new 50/50 and my 52/48 are both correct. That can’t be true, only one of them can.

    • Ihsan

      Ray,

      I don’t expect you to, what with the events and changes coming to the family and all, but have you had a chance to check into the pedals power discrepancy issues?

      Just like @Peter H’s pedals, mine developed an 8-10% balance discrepancy overnight.

      I got a new bike two weeks ago, and transferred the pedals to it. I had a bike fit, got new cleats (Look keo bi-material gray (not the “grip”ones) from xpedo cleats), very small cleat position adjustment was made. Right from the start, the pedals were reporting 46-54 power balance, while up until that time it has always been an even split or 49-51. I gave it about 100+ miles or so to see if it is me getting used to the new bike, but it didn’t change.

      I now moved the pedals to the old bike and it still is reading/reporting 46-54 overall balance, going into 45-55 at times.

      Just to rule everything I can out, I’ll go back to Xpedo cleats at their old position (again the position adjustment was very small) and check over a couple of days before contacting Favero for assistance.

      I don’t have any other means (smart trainer, power meter to borrow, etc.) to check what Favero pedals are reporting, but I don’t think I developed an 8-10% power discrepancy overnight.

      Failing everything, I guess I’d like to know if it is possible to damage the pedals by over torquing during installation. I really don’t think I did exceed 40Nm (really difficult without longer leverage than what included 8mm Allen key provides), but I’d like to know if I did..

    • Hi Lhsan-

      Unfortunately I just haven’t had the time to touch them since they found themselves in timeout on the table. With Eurobike and pre/post-EB events, it’s been flat out.

      I completely agree with you that what you’re seeing sounds exactly like what I’m seeing/saw where it just skewed all wonky. Here’s a super clear set showing how horribly out of whack it became: link to analyze.dcrainmaker.com

      Feel free to mention my name (and that set) to Favero – maybe it’ll help push them into replacing your pedals. I doubt it’s an over-torquing thing. Mine just started randomly one day.

    • Ihsan

      No worries at all Ray, I didn’t expect you with the busy schedule around this time :).

      Thanks for the suggestion. After going back to original xpedo cleats and ruling them out, I’ll contact Favero for a solution and I’ll include the set you attached with a couple of my “before-after” rides as well.

      Thanks again!

  62. Ihsan

    Thanks! I’ll have to take look into the battery issues then.

    Ihsan

    • Ihsan

      Definitely something interesting going on. The below is the case after 6 days and 4 hours of riding after charging.

    • james

      i am also seeing high battery drain issues. it was fine while on v3 firmware, and although i upgraded to v4 when it came out, i’ve only been seeing issues since then. last week the right pedal drained really quickly. i charged both back up completely. this week the left pedal drained completely, during a 30 min workout, it went from “yellow” whatever level that is, say 40%, to garmin giving me a “power meter battery low” warning after 10 mins of the workout or so, then after 15 mins of the workout, the left pedal died! this is highly odd.
      i have charged up again and now have turned off cycling dynamics on the garmin to see if that helps.
      link to strava.com

    • MIchael

      Same here. The First Time happened on the right pedal. This Time on the left. I did get 7 Hours out ofthem this charging Cycle. That is a real issue. You cant rely on them because when you get the battery Low Warning it Takes just Minutes and than they die. They wanted to improve battery Management with the update. The opposite did happen for someone users. Or it has nothing to do with the software what i dont hope…

    • Ihsan

      james, Michael,

      For me after completely letting the pedal drain and then charging overnight seems to have solved the issue. Since Aug 18th, both pedals have been discharging at the same rate.

    • james

      well the right pedal now seems better, and has lasted more than a few days. the left pedal however continues to drain quickly. i got 4 days riding in over a long weekend and it was flat shortly after that. so i’ve charged it back up to full again, and will see if it is any better. both have discharged completely now and turning off cycling dynamics didn’t seem to make a difference. if it continues, I am going to raise a support request with favero and see what they say.

  63. Daniel Blackburn

    Any Suunto Ambit 3 users here? I updated my firmware and the pedals have been reading massively too low ever since. Seem to be OK when I hook them up to Zwift so I assume there’s some kind of compatibility issue. I just did 125km ride and got a TSS of 32!!! Help! I’ve sent a support request but no joy yet.

    • Pietro

      the same happened to me, apparently it reads exactly 50 % (I have an Assioma Uno, I discovered it the hard way, in a race just after firmware update, after going wayyy to hard because of the low numbers I was reading …). I have not yet sent a support request as this week was the main holiday season in Italy 🙂

    • Daniel Blackburn

      I *think* I might have fixed it by unpairing and re-pairing the pedals with my watch… Have a go and see if it works for you!

    • Alex

      i just got my pedals last week (UNO version), updated the firmware and pair it and everything and it is showing half the watts too.

      any idea how to resolve this?

    • Alex

      contacted support, they gave me a new firmware 4.05, which should resolve the issue

    • Pietro

      thanks. tried but no success. then contacted Favro support and immediately got version 4.05, which solved the issue.

  64. Andy Garside

    Hi DCR

    I am in the UK and I am interested in buying Assioma pedals, principally on price and because of all the reported issues with Vector 3’s. Currently in the UK the prices are now more or less the same, so then for me it id down to reliability but both you and GPlama suggest the V3s are now issue free. So which should I go for?

    I have a Garmin Edge 1000, and I think you can not get the Assioma version of cycling dynamics to work with the head unit – is that correct? If not then that might push my to the V3s despite my reservations.

    Any help greatly appreciated.

    Cheers.

    • Brantel

      Shane (GPlama) uses his Assioma’s in most of his power meter accuracy comparison/test videos. That should tell you something…..

      Cycling Dynamics….Meh! Nobody even knows what they mean and what they are good for.

    • Either one is fine. You’ll save some cash on Assioma, Vector is prettier. And you’ll probably never use Cycling Dynamics on either. 🙂

      I use a blend of Vector 3 and Favero Assioma for accuracy testing. As noted in this thread elsewhere, I’d been on a run of mostly Favero until one set went sideways last week. So back to Vector 3 on my main test bike, and an extra set of still happy Assioma’s as my swap-in for testing other things.

  65. AlexB

    Hi Andi use Assioma Duo with Garmin 820. For what is worth power dynamics display just fine on my Garmin. U just turn them on in sensor menu once u have pedals paired with it

  66. Chris

    Looks like some of the resellers (Amazon, CleverTraining, bike-components) ran out of Stock for the Faveros. Is it possible that there is a new version on the way? I want to buy a pair of the Assioma Duo and now think about to postpone my investment. Any thoughts on your side?

    • No new products planned.

      But…your comment caught my curiosity. Some poking later…the system now shows the units in-stock. 😉

    • Chris

      Yeah, seems like they updated stock today. Yesterday afternoon they were out of stock. Thank you for your thoughts!

    • Andy G

      I raised a query with you earlier in the thread re. choosing between Favero and Garmin. I have gone for the Favero’s, I ordered last Wednesday and have been told today that they are being dispatched tomorrow.

      Before ordering I contact Favero and asked about the compatibility with an Edge 1000 head unit… the response was:

      “Dear Andy,
      thank you for your kind request and interest in our product.
      I confirm you that at the moment Garmin hasn’t released yet the firmware update of Garmin 1000 that allow to read the standard Cycling Dynamics, but I suppose they will do soon!
      Concerning all the other metrics (Power, Cadence, L/R Balance, TE and PS), they are perfeclty displayed on your Edge 1000.
      I remain at your complete disposal for any further request.
      Best regards,
      Elia Lorenzetto
      FAVERO ELECTRONICS srl

      I then asked… “Are you developing a pod-less version? I would not want to buy and then find in 6 months you have a version with the sensors built into the pedal!”… the reply was:

      “I can tell you that Assioma will remain our flagship product for quite some time yet!”

      So order placed £630 with free shipping for the Duo. A good price I think for a solid bit of kit.

  67. David Sowden

    Are Favero going to bring out an Assioma with MTB Shimano SPD pedals, to suit the existing pod and shaft, as the Shimano SPD Patent expired 4th June 2019

    • I don’t expect anything near term, but I suspect 2020 could be interesting with lots of players, namely starting with SRM and what they announced at Eurobike in that realm.

    • David Sowden

      Thanks for the fast reply!
      The SRMunit looks like it has looked at the Favero pedal as It also has a rechargeable battery and no electronics in the pedal body, but 50% more expensive!

  68. Fabio

    Hi All,

    my assioma has several issues after i ‘ve moved my bike:

    garmin 920 correctly recognize it but calibration fail with 65535 error. no watt detected during activity

    my android app by favero can’t connect to it

    Led seems to blink in a wrong way, during a zwift ride sometimes they were on for several seconds and then completely off.

    Is there an hard reset or something i can do?

    i suppose is not a battery problem, they were full before my 10 minutes travel..and my bie has been far from my paincave only 2 days.

  69. Hi
    since last week I have been unable to view Cycling Dynamics data. Power and cadence are recorded with no issues but somehow in the last 4 rides there are no Cycling Dynamics data. I use a Garmin Fenix 5 plus and/or Strava.
    Did some updates cause the issue?

    • kevw

      By cycling dynamics do you mean pedal smoothness and efficiency? If so then you might have to switch them back on in the sensor menu.

  70. WattsUp

    So I’ve been having battery drain issues on and off almost two weeks. Assioma support no help at all – “Firmware update should fix it” – but the issue showed up *after* the firmware update.

    The last day or two, I have a worse problem – the right pedal refused to connect to anything. The *left* pedal connects fine, so Zwift, SF, TrainerRoad etc. sees the pedals and ‘connects’ – but now power or cadence reading. The left pedal connects to the iPhone Assioma app, but the right does not – unless the battery charger is connected (both pedals read almost full battery btw). Remove the battery charger, right pedal disconnects.

    I’ve contacted support, but they still haven’t fixed the battery drain issue so I’m not keeping my hopes up. I would have hoped to get pedals that last more than a year at least.

  71. Brantel

    I know it does not help those that have battery drain issues but mine have not had this problem since new or after the latest firmware update. Knock on wood! They do have the unexplained LR balance issue where they instantly shifted about 3-5% off where my averages were prior to the update. Also no connection issues.