When Wahoo’s Kickr stormed onto the scene in 2014, there wasn’t much like it. The direct drive smart trainer had a built-in power meter, Bluetooth and ANT+ connectivity, and electromagnetic resistance that could be controlled by an external app or device. Crucially, Wahoo made it an open platform so anyone could build an app or device that automatically adjusted the Kickr’s resistance, and read the Kickr’s power and speed data. When Kickr launched, there were other trainers that had the same features, but nothing put everything together the way the Kickr did.
The Kickr was lonely when it launched, but its popularity pushed competing companies to join the Kickr in the “smart” direct-drive trainer category. Of them, the CycleOps Hammer, Tacx Neo Smart, and Elite Drivo are the Kickr’s most direct competition. These competitors, in turn, prompted Wahoo to update its trainer. Now that I’ve had some time to use the Kickr V2, it’s time to for a full review.
Stats and specs
The Kickr package includes a quick release skewer, 11-speed cassette, disc-brake pad spacer, and cadence sensor. The power meter’s accuracy is claimed at +/- two percent, the flywheel weighs 5.66kg (complete trainer weight: 21.3kg), and the electromagnetic resistance unit provides up to 2,000 watts of resistance, and simulates up to a 20-percent grade. Wahoo claims the Kickr emits just 61 decibels. The warranty is one-year; firmware is updated wirelessly. Adjustable feet level the Kickr on uneven floors.
The competition
I mentioned the Kickr’s main competition above. I haven’t had an opportunity to ride any of those trainers, so I can’t comment on how they compare based on first-hand experience. Based on specs, however, they’re all very close in the significant ways, but the Beelzebub is in the details.
The Neo Smart, notably, has unique features like a motor to “push” and simulate downhills, haptic feedback to simulate road surface features (cobblestones for example), and riding the Neo can generate the power it needs to run most of its functions, so it doesn’t need to be plugged into a wall.
Bike Compatibility
The Kickr’s base is adjustable to match the axle height of 24, 26, 27.5, 29-inch, and 650c and 700c wheel sizes. That means a front wheel lift isn’t necessary to level the bike, however I still used a riser because I found it more comfortable for inside riding.
It comes with an 11-speed-compatible Shimano/SRAM style cassette driver with 11-speed cassette installed (with a small spacer, this driver is compatible with 10-speed cassettes also). Wahoo offers a Campagnolo 11-speed driver body ($70), though I think it’s not necessary: I used Campy 11-speed bikes with the Kickr’s included cassette and experienced no issues.
One note: I found some bikes, regardless of drivetrain, needed small limit screw and/or cable tension adjustments to shift properly on the Kickr (and needed to be adjusted again when the original wheel was reinstalled).
Out of the box, the Kickr is set up for quick release 130mm or 135mm rear spacing (the axle end caps flip). An add-on kit provides 12x142mm thru axle compatibility; 12x148mm Boost compatibility is in the works.
App and device compatibility
One of the Kickr’s greatest triumphs—and still one of its best attributes—is its compatibility with a wide range of apps and devices.
Wahoo currently claims the Kickr is compatible with 20 apps. These range from free smartphone apps, like Wahoo’s Fitness app, to multi-user fitness studio software like PerfPro Studio. The popular stuff is well-covered: Zwift, Kinomap, Bkool, Trainer Road; though Racermate is not.
Wahoo has added ANT + FE-C to the KICKR’s communication roster (it also has standard ANT+ and Bluetooth Smart). ANT+ FE-C (Fitness Equipment – Controls) is a standardised profile for two-way communication between a trainer like the Kickr and an app or device. This type of two-way communication was possible prior to FE-C’s arrival, but this protocol makes everything a lot easier for all the parties involved, which means more parties get involved.
The biggest new feature that FE-C grants to the Kickr is control and communication with cycling computers other than Wahoo’s Elemnt. Now Garmin’s 820 and 520 can control the Kickr: Riders can set the resistance from their Garmin (a watt target, or resistance percentage), and virtually ride one of the previous rides or courses saved in their head unit. While the Garmin tells the resistance unit what to do—increasing and decreasing resistance based on the course selected—the Kickr sends speed and power data back to the Garmin (cadence data requires a cadence sensor).
In use
The Kickr is easy to set up and use. It comes out of its box mostly assembled: Drop the bike on (check the shifting), pair an app or device, do a spindown calibration, and go.
If you haven’t experienced a direct drive trainer like the Kickr, they provide a superior experience to a wheel-on trainer (though direct drive is more expensive). Direct drive trainers feel more positive, more precise, there’s no tyre slip, and they don’t crush your rear wheel bearings.
The Kickr operates quietly enough that you can comfortably watch videos or listen to music; the fan you use to keep yourself cool will emit more noise than the trainer.
The resistance unit offers smooth power changes, and reacts quickly enough that short intervals aren’t wasted waiting for resistance to build. I tried virtually riding some of my usual loops, and the Kickr’s resistance unit felt like it provided an accurate simulation of the difficulty of the climbs and undulations, minus the usual winds. For longer and harder efforts Kickr held resistance precisely. However, I’m no monster, and my output probably doesn’t tax the resistance unit the way a more powerful rider would.
In my testing, the Kickr’s power meter was accurate, consistent, and within a few percent of my on-bike power meters (more on this subject below). I’ve certainly heard that some people have had difficulties with the Kickr’s power meter. Most complaints seem to center on the V1 Kickr (though my V1—one of the earliest samples—was trouble-free as well), and Wahoo did make changes to the V2’s power meter to improve accuracy and reliability.
Finally: The base is stable, but there is a bit of give. I liked this because the movement made higher effort and out of the saddle riding feel more natural.
Power Meter Accuracy
This is an involved subject primarily of concern to riders who are consistently and seriously riding and training with power: If you don’t ride with power outdoors—and never plan to—you can skip this part.
My V2’s power meter has provided consistent data that has been within a handful of per cent (a maximum discrepancy of about four per cent) of my crank and pedal power meters. Note: I do a spindown on the Kickr at least once a week, and zero-offset my power meters before every session.
For competitive riders who are training and racing with power, a handful of percent difference in power data is a big deal. The problem is, any power meter has a plus/minus accuracy range, which you need to consider when comparing the data from two different power meters.
SRM claims +/- one per cent; PowerTap (G3 hub) and Quarq claim +/- 1.5 per cent; Garmin claims +/- two per cent for the Vector 2. Wahoo claims +/- two per cent for the Kickr V2’s power meter. Even a matching set of perfectly functioning SRMs could show a two per cent difference if they were on the opposite edges of their accuracy range; a Wahoo Kickr and Garmin Vector 2 could display up to a four per cent difference.
Here’s my advice for riders looking for the most consistent, and consistently accurate, power data for inside riding with a smart trainer like the Kickr, and outside riding/training/racing: Use one power meter for everything. Install a crank-based power meter like a Quarq Dzero (fits in a lot of bikes; aluminum and carbon arm options; +/- 1.5 per cent accuracy; Bluetooth and ANT+ compatible) on your bike, and use it for all your power-data needs (and don’t forget to zero-offset often). This approach is also recommended by Frank Overton, founder and head coach at FasCat Coaching: “I try not to have mixed data sets from a single athlete—more than one power meter, especially hub [versus] crank based.”
The good news is that many of the apps that are compatible with the KICKR can also pull power data from a secondary power meter like a Dzero. The bad news is Kickr-plus-power-meter crank is a heavy investment in addition to the trainer itself.
Drawbacks
The Kickr needs a power source, and it doesn’t have manual resistance control, so something needs to tell it what to do (Wahoo’s free iOS/Android Fitness app is the cheapest and easiest option). That means it’s not a great option for warming up at a race venue. Also, there’s tons of both electronic and mechanical things inside this thing, which means there’s more that can go wrong versus a simpler, unpowered, dumb trainer.
Problems
The biggest issue I’ve had with the Kickr is occasional dropouts: The watt readings will suddenly go to zero (seemingly always at the worst time, like the middle of an interval), and just as suddenly they’ll pop back up.
These dropouts seem to happen less and less often with every firmware update; keeping the phone/computer as close to the Kickr as possible (or using a USB extension cable to get the ANT+ dongle closer to the trainer) also helps.
Storage
I care about this subject because my house is small, and I don’t have a space I can dedicate to an indoor trainer set up year round. For how powerful and stable the Kickr is, it can tuck out of the way pretty easily. The legs fold in, the resistance unit can be lowered by placing it in the 24-inch wheel position, and the power adapter can be disconnected and wrapped up, resulting in a package that doesn’t take up much space. The new grab handle makes the Kickr easy to lift, carry, and manoeuver into place, though there’s no escaping its nearly 22kg mass.
V1 vs V2
Having spent a lot of time on both the V1 and V2 Kickr, I will say that the differences are more on the micro level and less on the macro level. The biggest difference is the carrying handle (V2’s is WAY better), but the V2 is also a bit quieter, and resistance changes—for example in an interval workout, or when rolling into an uphill in a Zwift map—feel both faster and smoother. V2 is better, but not so much better I see a hugely-compelling reason for V1 users to upgrade to V2.
Copyright © 2016 Rodale Inc.