Download PDF
Int J Sports Med 2017; 38(06): 439-446
DOI: 10.1055/s-0043-101909
Training & Testing
© Georg Thieme Verlag KG Stuttgart · New York

Validity and Reliability of the Garmin Vector Power Meter in Laboratory and Field Cycling

Alfred Nimmerichter
1   Sport and Exercise Sciences, University of Applied Sciences Wiener Neustadt, Wiener Neustadt, Austria
,
Lukas Schnitzer
1   Sport and Exercise Sciences, University of Applied Sciences Wiener Neustadt, Wiener Neustadt, Austria
,
Bernhard Prinz
1   Sport and Exercise Sciences, University of Applied Sciences Wiener Neustadt, Wiener Neustadt, Austria
,
Dieter Simon
1   Sport and Exercise Sciences, University of Applied Sciences Wiener Neustadt, Wiener Neustadt, Austria
,
Klaus Wirth
1   Sport and Exercise Sciences, University of Applied Sciences Wiener Neustadt, Wiener Neustadt, Austria
› Author Affiliations
Further Information

Publication History



accepted after revision 12 January 2017

Publication Date:
01 May 2017 (online)

Also available at
    Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

To assess the validity and reliability of the Garmin Vector against the SRM power meter, 6 cyclists completed 3 continuous trials at power outputs from 100–300 W at 50–90 rev·min−1 and a 5-min time trial in laboratory and field conditions. In field conditions only, a 30-s sprint was performed. Data were compared with paired samples t-tests, with the 95% limits of agreement (LoA) and the typical error. Reliability was calculated as the coefficient of variation (CV). There was no significant difference between the devices in power output in laboratory (p=0.245) and field conditions (p=0.312). 1-s peak power was significantly different between the devices (p=0.043). The LoA were ~1.0±5.0 W and ~0.5±0.5 rev·min−1 in both conditions. The LoA during the 30-s sprint was 6.3±38.9 W and for 1-s peak power it was 18.8±17.1 W. The typical error for power output was 2.9%, while during sprint cycling it was 7.4% for 30-s and 2.7% for 1-s peak power. For cadence, the typical error was below 1.0%. The mean CVs were ~1.0% and ~3.0% for the SRM and Garmin, respectively. These findings suggest, that the Garmin Vector is a valid alternative for training. However, during sprint cycling there is lower agreement with the SRM power meter. Both devices provide good reliability (CV<3.0%).

Key words

SRM - cycling - testing - training - limits of agreement - typical error
 

  • References

  • 1 Bertucci W, Crequy S, Chiementin X. Validity and reliability of the G-Cog BMX Powermeter. Int J Sports Med 2013; 34: 538-543
    Thieme ConnectPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 2 Bertucci W, Duc S, Villerius V, Pernin JN, Grappe F. Validity and reliability of the PowerTap mobile cycling powermeter when compared with the SRM Device. Int J Sports Med 2005; 26: 868-873
    Thieme ConnectPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 3 Bland JM, Altman DG. Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement. Lancet 1986; 1: 307-310
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 4 Bouillod A, Pinot J, Soto-Romero G, Grappe F. Validity, sensitivity and reproducibility of Stages and Garmin Vector power meters when compared with SRM device. 33rd International Conference on Biomechanics in Sports; June 29–July 3 2015; Poitiers, France.
    PubMed
  • 5 Cohen J. The concepts of power analysis. In, Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioural Sciences. 2nd ed. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates; 1988: 8-11
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 6 Duc S, Villerius V, Bertucci W, Grappe F. Validity and reproducibility of the ErgomoPro power meter compared with the SRM and Powertap power meters. Int J Sports Physiol Perform 2007; 2: 270-281
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 7 Gardner AS, Stephens S, Martin DT, Lawton E, Lee H, Jenkins D. Accuracy of SRM and power tap power monitoring systems for bicycling. Med Sci Sports Exerc 2004; 36: 1252-1258
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 8 Harriss DJ, Atkinson G. Ethical standards in sport and exercise science research: 2016 Update. Int J Sports Med 2015; 36: 1121-1124
    Thieme ConnectPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 9 Hopker J, Myers S, Jobson SA, Bruce W, Passfield L. Validity and reliability of the Wattbike cycle ergometer. Int J Sports Med 2010; 31: 731-736
    Thieme ConnectPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 10 Hopkins WG. Spreadsheets for analysis of validity and reliability. Sportscience 2015; 19: 36-44
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 11 Hopkins WG, Schabort EJ, Hawley JA. Reliability of power in physical performance tests. Sports Med 2001; 31: 211-234
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 12 Hurst HT, Atkins S. Agreement between polar and SRM mobile ergometer systems during laboratory-based high-intensity, intermittent cycling activity. J Sports Sci 2006; 24: 863-868
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 13 Kirkland A, Coleman D, Wiles JD, Hopker J. Validity and reliability of the Ergomopro powermeter. Int J Sports Med 2008; 29: 913-916
    Thieme ConnectPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 14 Kitawaki T, Oka H. A measurement system for the bicycle crank angle using a wireless motion sensor attached to the crank arm. J Sci Cycling 2013; 2: 13-19
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 15 Millet GP, Tronche C, Fuster N, Bentley DJ, Candau R. Validity and reliability of the Polar S710 mobile cycling powermeter. Int J Sports Med 2003; 24: 156-161
    Thieme ConnectPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 16 Nimmerichter A, Eston RG, Bachl N, Williams CA. Longitudinal monitoring of power output and heart rate profiles in elite cyclists. J Sports Sci 2011; 29: 831-840
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 17 Nimmerichter A, Williams CA, Bachl N, Eston RG. Evaluation of a field test to assess performance in elite cyclists. Int J Sports Med 2010; 31: 160-166
    Thieme ConnectPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 18 Novak AR, Dascombe BJ. Agreement of power measures between Garmin Vector and SRM cycle power meters. MPEES 2016; 20: 167-172
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 19 Vogt S, Heinrich L, Schumacher YO, Blum A, Roecker K, Dickhuth HH, Schmid A. Power output during stage racing in professional road cycling. Med Sci Sports Exerc 2006; 38: 147-151
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 20 Wooles A, Robinson A, Keen P. A static method for obtaining a calibration factor for SRM bicycle power cranks. Sports Engin 2005; 8: 137-144
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar