Direct connection to Elite Rizer for up/down movement

As the lucky owner of a brand new Elite Rizer, I’m a bit dissapointed at how it’s NOT really supported by Zwift. I mean, the steering part works great (much like an Elite Sterzo), but there is nothing in the Zwift setup that connects the Climbing feature of the Elite Rizer to Zwift.
The Elite Rizer actually needs to have an Elite trainer, as that will retransmit the gradient to the Elite Rizer.
For my Tacx NEO, it calculates the probable incline from the info that the NEO sends out (power/speed and combines that with rider weight).
It kinda works, but I really wish the Zwift application itself would send out the gradient to the Elite Rizer, which should be easy as it already uses the Elite Rizer for steering.

Bit disappointed too. I am strugling too to understand how the elite rizer app can be parametered to reflect the slope displayed on zwift.
Be careful with your neo2 which is not compatible with up/down movements of your frame on the HT

Did put some nylon washers between the NEO and my frame, adjusted rear deraileur, works fine for now. Am thinking to put some bearings on the axle part of the NEO, but need to source some QR axle components for the NEO (OG).
Still sucks that Zwift can not pair directly with the Riser.
Was also thinking about using an ESP32/RPI to take input from the Zwift log file on my laptop, then emulate a trainer that sends out the gradient (just like the Elite Direto series does). And then connect the Rizer to that

1 Like

I agreed first but because of confusing interaction between Rizer and Zwift in workout mode. Later I figured out what disappointed me most. And I posted a new requests to expand the “I did it” feature for more entertained workouts.

Sorry for an off topic but could you advice me some routes with extreme climbs to test my Rizer for 100%. I’ve not seen climbs > 12% of slope but I’m new with Zwift and indoor cycling at all. I want much more :smiley:

The Radio Tower “bonus climb” at the top of the Epic KOM is very steep, though short. You can manually turn on to it from the top of the Epic KOM, or do a route that goes up it such as Mountain 8.

1 Like

Where do I find it? There is no such route under Watopia folder

Mountain 8 or Mountain Route will take you up there. See for comprehensive details on all Zwift routes.

1 Like

or here: Routes


Hey, can you explain why the Neo2 isn’t compatible with the Rizer? I have a Neo1 and so far do not see an issue.

Because there is no kind of bearing / washer between the bike frame and the neo, so the stronger you will torque the bike on the neo the harder it will be to move up and down the frame and will more or less quickly damage it

Thanks for the swift response!! Where do I find fitting washers (I got quick release)?

And while we are at it: I have everything connected via BT and feel quite a bit of time lag between my steering and avatar‘s steering. And gradient is slow too but I understand that’s due to connectivity and calculation of non-elite trainers ( any solution in sight there?)

If you get this working please post instructions

There has always been a bit of lag for steering. I had a steerzo, now the Rizer and it was the same for both no matter how what hardware I used to run Zwift. I’ve Tested using an Apple laptop, Windows PC, MS Surface pro, Apple TV, iPhone & iPad. Using combinations of direct connection using Bluetooth & Ant+ or connecting devices via companion app.

The Rizer is an incredible piece of hardware and experiencing gradient changes makes Zwift so much more enjoyable (as long as you don’t compare the gradient in the risers app to Zwift). It’s obvious that this isnt going to go away. If anything, I suspect more connected devices will appear in the market. I’m sure the development team at Zwift is hard at work on improving their Bluetooth API’s to handle the future of the IOT. Authoring standards for API’s that control attributes like gradient or windspeed would accelerate 3rd party company’s to make more gear for our pain caves.

If you make it (work), we will buy it… And then we will never have a reason to leave the platform for competitors like Trainer Road, Spinnervals or (:face_vomiting:) Peloton.

The fact that gradient devices like the Rizer are laggy and that the gradient doesn’t quite match is really disappointing. There are times when, on rollers, the Rizer is still going up but in Zwift, I’m already on the decent… 2-3 seconds later Rizer catches up and drops down. This never happens when I am using a Surface pro connected to a Lifefitness or Woodway Treadmill for running. 3% in game running translates perfectly to the incline on the treadmill. I expected the same for the Rizer but that was not the case.

I’m really hoping Zwift enhances their API with a dedicated gradient attribute that can be read by devices like the Rizer, Kicker Climb and whatever else is in the pipe.

If this ever gets to the Zwift product owner, PLEASE give us 2 things:

  1. A method for controlling timing of the gradient. Like a slider bar in the menu that allows us to advance or delay when the gradient signal is sent. That way if we have a device that is a bit slow to respond we can adjust Zwift so it sends the trigger to the device a few seconds BEFORE our avatars get to the virtual hill. This will obviously have to factor in speed too since a -2 second advance might work at 10 kph but it wouldn’t have the same effect of the avatar was going 40 kph.

  2. It would also be good to have a few profiles to chose from that affect what is sent to the device. Something like:

A. “Baseline” 1:1 profile would ensure that a 2% grade in Zwift is a 2% grade signal sent to the device.

B. a moderate profile focusing on increasing the effect of smaller gradients but tapering off as the climbs gets steeper. So the modifier starts at 1:1.5 (2% in game sends a 3% signal to the device) but reduces down to 1:1 for any in-game hill >15%. This way flatter roads would be more fun and big climbs wouldn’t cause kill the effect.

C. The opposite of B, focusing on big climbs over flat roads. It starts at 1:1 but increases to 1:1.5 or more as the virtual climbs get steeper.

D. This one’s odd, but a profile that looks at the selected route and maximizes the climbing devices range of motion would be cool. If the user picks a route that has a virtual gradient range of 1-10%, and their device has a functional range of 1-20%, then the overall modifier should be 1:1.5. If the route has a max of 15%, then the modifier should be 1:1.3 and so on.

Just a few ideas that have been kicking around in my head while pedaling away in Zwift.

1 Like

I ordered these from Aliexpress:
NDS (Non Drive Side), you’ll have to machine off a couple of mm to fit these

DS (Drive Side), here there is no room for the bearings, so I opted for ultra thin washers, use 2 of them and grease between them

@Gordon: Totally agree with your post !!!

@B_I.G.Floor_NEO This is great, I’ll order these tonight

Hey. Could you let me know what size I would need?!

Are you using a standard quick release or a thru axle?

Standard qr for my road bike and 148x12 for my Mountainbike! I really appreciate it!