AeroPod, PowerPod and Newton

Velocomp wrote: ↑Sun Oct 28, 2018 5:57 pm AeroPod transmits slope and wind data. Right now the Connect IQ app for Garmin is the way to read it, but more stuff is coming.

Great, John, so there's an option for this now and perhaps others in the future.

Velocomp wrote: ↑Sun Oct 28, 2018 5:36 pm ...Newton does not transmit slope data but yes, slope is much better than any competitor product.

By any chance do the PowerPod and/or AeroPod have the capability to transmit slope data in addition to power data?

I have a Newton5 with the GT upgrade which allows me to transmit power data to a Garmin head unit. In theory, should the GT upgrade allow me to pair to a non-Garmin GPS head unit (in this case, a Hammerhead Karoo)? The Karoo supposedly has both ANT+ and Bluetooth pairing capabilities, but it's been ...

Hi all - I was going to take the fat bike out this weekend and give the PP a shot. I currently use PowerPod on my road / cx bikes. However - this just leaves my fat bike to set up (I've never tried it yet). I got a new Bluto fork with lockout, so calibration should be easy. I realize CRR value does...

hoosier1981 -- I also have Bud/Lou 4.8 tires installed on my winter fatbike and have been using CRR=0.0211. I'm still evaluating the use of this value now that the bug in the Newton firmware for my unit was fixed, years after I pointed out the bug, and months after the promised delivery of the fix....

Hi all - I was going to take the fat bike out this weekend and give the PP a shot. I currently use PowerPod on my road / cx bikes. However - this just leaves my fat bike to set up (I've never tried it yet). I got a new Bluto fork with lockout, so calibration should be easy. I realize CRR value does...

We are not doing FW development on Newton. However, a bug is a bug, so we will soon issue a FW update for Newton that will correct this problem. Two hours after writing the above post, we have FW518 for Newton ready to go, with the same improvements as PP FW. We will need to wait a week or so for T...

WE FOUND THE CAUSE OF THE PROBLEM!!!! There is an old, obscure limit in the firmware, from 10 years ago, that forces Crr to a crazy value when the user's friction input is too high. With fat bikes and some MTBs, the user friction input is correct but beyond the internal limit of the FW. So, we will...

After resetting the profiles, go to "Edit Profiles" and click the "Extract from Device" button. This will show what is stored in your Newton. All four profiles should say "Empty" in the tilt cal box. All 4 profiles said "Empty" after the four resets, so I was...

After you've reset your profiles, you should see "empty" in the tilt cal window of all four profiles. This is essential. Maybe I'm looking in the wrong place to confirm this. I've reset all four profiles individually as instructed. When I view the profiles listed under "Edit Profiles...

I think we need to start with a "clean slate" for your Newton: 1) Attach your Newton to Isaac 2) Use Isaac to set your Newton to profile 2 (or some other profile that you don't use). "Device/Set Active profile in Newton..." 3) For the profile you have selected, use the command &...

4) Pair up your sensors. BY THE WAY: your speed sensor readings are somewhat erratic. If you're using a magnet-less sensor, put it on the front wheel hub. IMPORTANT: after pairing go into setup, and confirm that your Newton is set to profile "x" (the one you've cleared out). I do have a m...

12) Post the cal ride file and the ride file after profile adjustment. Ok, I follow those instructions to a "T," then post the cal ride and ride file after profile adjustment. I hope to be able to do this soon, but I know that I won't have an opportunity to ride until at least Tuesday, an...

7) Please do a ride with the "ratman" profile, then post the ride file afterwards, making sure that no post-processing of the file is done. Well, I loaded the "ratman" profile, then did the same out&back ride that I've been doing during this testing. I did see a few peculiar...

OK, I simulated a fat bike set up. Here is exactly what I did: 1) I extracted my Newton profile 1. Profile 1 has been calibrated for my road bike (Crr = 0.004) 2) In Isaac I edited my profile 1, using "ratman" parameters (weight and Crr; CdA is irrelevant). I named this profile "ratm...

Very mysterious... For the ride file you posted, there was no post-ride correction of values. So, it isn't post-ride Isaac calculations causing Crr to go negative. And, during the ride, there are no modifications to Crr. So, this really is strange! Please do the following: 1) Import the attached ra...

...One statement made in the thread incorrect: Crr does NOT "go negative" during a ride. What I think was happening is something to do with the calibration of the unit, or perhaps its mounting angle on the bike. I won't be able to tell until I see the ride file. So, I went out yesterday o...

Velocomp wrote: Actually, we expect to be doing some fat bike riding this week!

Ah, being in Florida, the weather is unlikely to be a deterrent to riding. Riding the fatbike should be enjoyable, and perhaps it will yield some interesting new information. I wonder how the trails are in Florida? Have fun!

In re-reading some of the recent posts, I want to add that, like me, many fatbikers are riding their bikes year-round -- not just in snowy conditions, or on the beach (where these bikes made their first appearance). So, to get corrected fatbike CRR values would benefit some of us all 12 months of th...

...if you're out having fun with your fat bike and trying to get an general idea of your power level, your efforts on winter hills, etc. then I think PP, with suitable parameters, would be useful to have on your ride. What we're trying to determine now is recommended setup parameters for fat bikes....

:) We will be doing some testing with fat bikes and afterwards will update our documentation and recommendations as needed. Thanks, I'm happy to hear that you'll be investigating this issue because the "one-size fits all" approach just doesn't make sense. Furthermore, I strongly suspect th...

Final part -- Regarding the "typical" riding surface that a fatbiker might encounter, let me use my own "home course," Washington Valley County Park (aka, "Chimney Rock") in Martinsville, NJ as an example. With rare exception, the trails are covered with disorganized, 1...

Third part -- These CRR values have long been used by Velocomp in their support documentation (I bought my first iBike computer back in about 2009 and seem to recall the same values then), and since they were first offered years before fatbikes were being sold in any reasonable volume (i.e., there m...

Second part -- These CRR values have long been used by Velocomp in their support documentation (I bought my first iBike computer back in about 2009 and seem to recall the same values then), and since they were first offered years before fatbikes were being sold in any reasonable volume, it's safe to...

(Apparently, the iBike Forum software doesn't allow posting above a certain size, so I'm going to need to make the following thoughts across more than one post) I've recently returned to this board and still would like a thoughtful and valid explanation from Velocomp to an issue that I've previously...

The simple answer is, no, in my experience, it doesn't work. Please check your personal messages for details.

The issue may be that, somehow, your calibration data has been corrupted in your profile, forcing the negative Crr to compensate. I'd do a new Device/Setup Newton..., followed by a Best Accuracy cal ride, to see if that fixes things. I've just downloaded the files from my ride today. I began the da...

I'm not sure how you did your cal ride, but there definitely some issues in your profile, namely, a negative value of rolling resistance! Here's what I recommend: 1) Use Isaac "Device/Setup Newton..." to reset the values of your profile 2) On the final step, select "Best Accuracy&quo...

I recently performed a Newton5 calibration ride on Specialized Fatboy through a process much like that described by "nsidrop." The resulting profile produced an identical Crr of 0.0211. From a mathematical standpoint, it seems rather ironic (suspicious?) that the same value was produced in...

"Really? We hadn't heard that." Until now, none of us have heard anything, either. Why should disbelief be surprising? Well, most of the new things we've done we haven't talked about prior to their introduction. That would spoil the fun. ;) Ok -- then I'm sure we'll all be looking forward...