Abstract
This study aimed to examine the validity and reliability of the recently developed Assioma Favero pedals under laboratory cycling conditions. In total, 12 well-trained male cyclists and triathletes (VO2max = 65.7 ± 8.7 mL·kg−1·min−1) completed five cycling tests including graded exercises tests (GXT) at different cadences (70–100 revolutions per minute, rpm), workloads (100–650 Watts, W), pedaling positions (seated and standing), vibration stress (20–40 Hz), and an 8-s maximal sprint. Tests were completed using a calibrated direct drive indoor trainer for the standing, seated, and vibration GXTs, and a friction belt cycle ergometer for the high-workload step protocol. Power output (PO) and cadence were collected from three different brand, new pedal units against the gold-standard SRM crankset. The three units of the Assioma Favero exhibited very high within-test reliability and an extremely high agreement between 100 and 250 W, compared to the gold standard (Standard Error of Measurement, SEM from 2.3–6.4 W). Greater PO produced a significant underestimating trend (p < 0.05, Effect size, ES ≥ 0.22), with pedals showing systematically lower PO than SRM (1–3%) but producing low bias for all GXT tests and conditions (1.5–7.4 W). Furthermore, vibrations ≥ 30 Hz significantly increased the differences up to 4% (p < 0.05, ES ≥ 0.24), whereas peak and mean PO differed importantly between devices during the sprints (p < 0.03, ES ≥ 0.39). These results demonstrate that the Assioma Favero power meter pedals provide trustworthy PO readings from 100 to 650 W, in either seated or standing positions, with vibrations between 20 and 40 Hz at cadences of 70, 85, and 100 rpm, or even at a free chosen cadence.
Highlights
The use of power meters in cycling has been on the rise in recent years, making accessible, valuable information for training, that was only available with impractical and expensive ergometers [1,2]
Greater power output (PO) produced a significant underestimating trend, especially in graded exercises tests (GXT) seated at 300 W/70 rpm, GXT seated at 350 W/80 rpm, and GXT standing > 450 W (p < 0.05, ES > 0.22), with Favero showing from 1 to 3% lower PO than SRM consistently
The results of this study indicate that the Assioma Favero Pedals are a highly suitable tool for monitoring cycling performance in a wide range of workloads (100 to 650 W) and cadences (70, 85, and 100 rpm), different pedaling positions, and under vibration stress (20, 30, and 40 Hz)
Summary
The use of power meters in cycling has been on the rise in recent years, making accessible, valuable information for training, that was only available with impractical and expensive ergometers [1,2]. Commercial indoor stationary cycle training, cycling treadmills, or rollers are a valid and reliable alternative to recreate outdoor cycling conditions, both for testing [4,5,6] and training [7]. While these tools simulate outdoor cycling, they do not allow recording during real outdoor environments (e.g., missing air drag and downhill sections or increasing dehydration), which may alter the metrics [8,9] and limit to apply the results to real-life situations. There is scarce information about the measurement errors of this commercially available technology
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
